[Senate Hearing 111-989]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-989
MODERNIZING THE WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT (WIA) OF 1998 TO HELP WORKERS
AND EMPLOYERS MEET THE CHANGING DEMANDS OF A GLOBAL MARKET
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND
WORKPLACE SAFETY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
LABOR, AND PENSIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
EXAMINING THE WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT OF 1998
__________
JULY 16, 2009
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
51-264 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
TOM HARKIN, Iowa JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
PATTY MURRAY, Washington JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
JACK REED, Rhode Island JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
BERNARD SANDERS (I), Vermont ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma
KAY R. HAGAN, North Carolina PAT ROBERTS, Kansas
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
J. Michael Myers, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Frank Macchiarola, Republican Staff Director and Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety
PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
TOM HARKIN, Iowa JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
KAY R. HAGAN, North Carolina ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming (ex
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts officio)
(ex officio)
Gerri Fiala, Staff Director
Edwin Egee, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
THURSDAY, JULY 16, 2009
Page
Murray, Hon. Patty, Chairman, Subcommittee on Employment and
Workplace Safety, opening statement............................ 1
Isakson, Hon. Johnny, a U.S. Senator from the State of Georgia,
opening statement.............................................. 3
Brown, Hon. Sherrod, a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio,
statement...................................................... 4
Enzi, Hon. Michael B., a U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming,
prepared statement............................................. 5
Oates, Jane, Assistant Secretary of Labor, Employment and
Training Administration, Washington, DC........................ 7
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Kanter, Martha, Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education,
Washington, DC................................................. 11
Prepared statement........................................... 14
McQueen, Clyde, President/CEO, Full Employment Council, Kansas
City, MO....................................................... 25
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Thurmond, Michael L., Commissioner, Georgia Department of Labor,
Atlanta, GA.................................................... 32
Prepared statement........................................... 34
Bender, Rick S., President, Washington, State Labor Council, AFL-
CIO, Seattle, WA............................................... 38
Prepared statement........................................... 40
Kiernan, William E., Ph.D., Director and Research Professor,
Institute for Community Inclusion, Boston, MA.................. 41
Prepared statement........................................... 43
Sarris, Mary W., Executive Director, North Shore Workforce
Investment Board, Salem, MA.................................... 55
Prepared statement........................................... 56
Cooper, Kathy, Policy Associate, Office of Adult Literacy,
Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges,
Olympia, WA.................................................... 64
Prepared statement........................................... 66
Wing, Stephen, Director of Workforce Initiatives, CVS Caremark,
Twinsburg, OH.................................................. 68
Prepared statement........................................... 69
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Statements, articles, publications, letters, etc.:
Senator Kennedy, prepared statement.......................... 78
Response to questions of Senator Murray by:
Jane Oates............................................... 79
Martha Kanter............................................ 93
Clyde McQueen............................................ 102
Michael L. Thurmond...................................... 103
William E. Kiernan, Ph.D................................. 107
Mary W. Sarris........................................... 124
Kathy Cooper............................................. 126
Stephen Wing............................................. 130
(iii)
Response to questions of Senator Enzi by:
Jane Oates............................................... 86
Martha Kanter............................................ 97
Clyde McQueen............................................ 103
Michael L. Thurmond...................................... 105
William E. Kiernan, Ph.D................................. 114
Mary W. Sarris........................................... 125
Kathy Cooper............................................. 129
Stephen Wing............................................. 131
Response to questions of Senator Coburn by:
Jane Oates............................................... 91
Martha Kanter............................................ 101
Consortium for Citizens With Disabilities (CCD).............. 131
Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation
(CSAVR).................................................... 132
National Organization for Competency Assurance (NOCA)........ 142
MODERNIZING THE WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT (WIA) OF 1998 TO HELP WORKERS
AND EMPLOYERS MEET THE CHANGING DEMANDS OF A GLOBAL MARKET
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 16, 2009
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety, Committee
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in
room SD-430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Patty Murray,
chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Murray, Brown, and Isakson.
Opening Statement of Senator Murray
Senator Murray. This hearing of the Subcommittee on
Employment and Workplace Safety will come to order.
Before we begin, I would like to recognize Senator Kennedy
for his leadership on workforce development and the workforce
investment system in particular. We miss him on this committee
and send him our best.
I also want to thank two individuals who took the time to
fly in all the way from my home State of Washington to be with
us today. Kathy Cooper, who is from the Washington State Board
for Community and Technical Colleges, and has done so much in
Washington State to keep our workforce competitive. Also, Rick
Bender, who is the President of our Washington State Labor
Council, AFL-CIO. Rick is a passionate advocate for investing
in our workers and our economy. I thank both of them for being
here.
Throughout my time on this committee, I have had the
pleasure of working with members, from both sides of the aisle,
who are committed to helping workers access the skills,
training, and education needed to be successful in the
workplace. Specifically, I would like to thank Senator Enzi. He
was scheduled to be here this morning, but is in the Finance
Committee working on health care right now, and expects to join
us shortly. I would also like to thank Senators Kennedy and
Isakson, and all of their staffs, for their great bipartisan
work on this important issue.
Helping workers and employers access the information and
services needed to be competitive is a win for everyone. It is
a win for our workers, for our employers, and it is a big win
for our economy. I believe, now more than ever, that building a
competitive and skilled workforce is the issue that will make
or break us as a nation. Where the skilled workers are, the
jobs will follow.
As Rick Bender knows, we are working hard in Washington
State to ensure that our highly skilled and competitive
aerospace workforce, one of our greatest resources, gets the
support they need to compete in the global economy. In the
Puget Sound region, our aerospace industry is the lifeblood of
many of our communities; but, our skilled workforce like
machinists are aging out of their jobs, and we have not done
enough to train the next generation of workers. We need to
think more strategically about how we align our training needs
with our larger economic goals.
Earlier this week, we learned that nearly 330,000 people
are unemployed and looking for work in Washington State. Other
workers are under-employed or have even stopped looking because
they believe that there are no jobs available for them.
Like others in this room, I am very involved in the work we
are doing to reform our health care system. One of the issues
we are working on is that, while many workers are struggling to
find jobs, hospitals and health clinics are having trouble
finding workers with the right skills to fill the open
positions. There are literally thousands of jobs just waiting
for skilled workers to fill them.
We need to do a better job of matching up the skills of our
workers with the needs of our industries. That is why I helped
write the section of the health care bill we passed yesterday
in the HELP Committee, which provides resources to our States,
so they along with key partners can develop a coherent and
comprehensive strategy for training a health care workforce. I
believe that investing in a skilled health care workforce will
benefit all of us. That is why this section makes a number of
investments in recruitment and training of health care workers.
This section will help keep our health care system and it will
help workers get good family-sustaining jobs. In this tough
economic climate, nothing could be more important than
investing in our workers and rebuilding our economic strength.
That is why I joined my colleagues in a bipartisan effort
beginning last fall to modernize and reauthorize the Workforce
Investment Act, the legislative cornerstone of our Nation's
workforce development system.
We have spent hours listening to stakeholders about what
has worked well, what should be eliminated and what ideas they
have for innovative change. I am excited to be here today to
continue that conversation.
The public workforce investment system established under
WIA provides a framework for these conversations to happen at
State and regional levels, that is important because workers
look for jobs and employers hire in their own communities.
It is also important that our States and communities make
strategic connections between their workforce development
efforts and what they teach their young people in High School
classrooms and beyond.
That is why, in addition to reauthorizing the WIA, I am
also re-introducing my Promoting Innovations to 21st Century
Careers Act. The 21st Century Act is a major legislative
proposal to help State and regional leaders increase high
school graduation rates and prepare America's next generation
of highly skilled workers. If we do not take a comprehensive
approach to preparing all of America's workers for the demands
of a competitive and constantly changing economy, many will
continue to fall behind, and that is a price our Nation cannot
afford to pay.
Since last November, I have made it clear that I want to
work with the Administration on workforce development
initiatives. In particular, the modernization and
reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act. This committee
has a long history and wealth of knowledge on this issue. We
hope this Administration will take advantage of this as we work
to modernize and reauthorize WIA. We look forward to a
productive partnership with the Departments of Labor and
Education.
Before I close on my opening remarks, I would like to make
a request of my colleagues, the Administration, and all the
stakeholders who serve workers, job seekers, and employers
every day. Let us work together to reach a consensus and move
forward now. America's working families deserve nothing less.
With that, I want to turn to Senator Isakson, who has been
a great partner on this issue, for his opening statement.
Opening Statement of Senator Isakson
Senator Isakson. Well, thank you, Chairman Murray. I am
delighted to be here today and I appreciate all your hard work
and that of Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi and the others on
workforce investment. Since my election to the Congress 11
years ago, I have worked on workforce investment, first on the
House Education Committee and now in this committee, and I am
just delighted to be here today to talk about the
reauthorization and enrichment of the Workforce Investment Act.
Rather than make a lot of remarks, because we have a number
of people who will testify today, I will reserve just two
comments in my remarks about two of our fine panelists who will
testify today.
First is Secretary Jane Oates, with whom I had the pleasure
of working, I guess, now almost 8 years ago on the No Child
Left Behind Act, when she was the head of Senator Kennedy's
education team. She is a marvelous individual with a background
in teaching and an understanding of the value of education and
is in exactly the right time and place for this Administration.
I welcome you and congratulate you on being here.
Second is Commissioner Mike Thurmond from Georgia. I served
20 years in State government before coming to Washington. I
worked with Mike's sister, Barbara Archibald, when she served
with me on the State Board of Education. I worked with Mike
together in the Georgia House of Representatives. And without
appearing to just brag about a hometown guy because that is
what you are supposed to do, I never knew a finer
representative in the assembly, and I am sure there is no
better commissioner of labor in the United States. The evidence
in that is his accomplishments in two areas.
One is when we gave some latitude for innovation, it was
Mike that really developed the One-Stop shop concept in Georgia
and was aggressive in opening what is now 46 centers in our
State for One-Stop shop services for those seeking employment.
Second, in our unemployment offices, Mike changed the name
and changed the attitude and changed the results. He turned
them into career centers rather than unemployment offices. He
redecorated them into colors that made somebody feel good when
they walked in the office rather than feel depressed.
And the results are the following. In the last fiscal year,
of the people that came in to look for work through the
Department of Labor in Georgia, 66 percent, 296,000, found
employment, and 80 percent of them were still employed 6 months
later. In these economic times, that is a remarkable
achievement which only happens under great leadership, and Mike
is a great leader, and I am delighted he is here today to
testify before the committee.
Madam Chairman, I will reserve the rest of my time for our
testimony.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Senator Isakson.
Senator Brown has joined us. Would you like to give an
opening statement?
Statement of Senator Brown
Senator Brown. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate
that. And Senator Isakson, thank you for your comments.
I appreciate very much this hearing. A special thank you to
Stephen Wing from Twinsburg, OH. Thank you for joining us. He
is representing CVS Caremark on the second panel, and that is
the company that has done terrific things in our State.
Over the last couple of years, I have conducted about 150
roundtables around Ohio and been in each of the 88 counties. I
will gather 15, 20, 25 people around a table, a cross section
of the community, and ask them questions for an hour and a
half. I hear two things consistently from employers.
One is that infrastructure is a significant problem, water,
sewer, highways, bridges, broadband, and infrastructure in
terms of education too.
The second thing I hear repeatedly in almost every
roundtable over the last 2\1/2\ years--and many of these were
before the severe economic downturn--is that employers, whether
they are social service agencies or manufacturing or service
industry or whatever, cannot find the right employees, cannot
find the match-up of skills they need even in a relatively high
unemployment State, from building trades to engineers to
computer operators to manufacturing.
Ohio now has been getting much better with the new
Governor, who has been in office for a couple of years, to
align its education and its job training activities. The adult
education training programs have been brought under the
university system of Ohio. A major player in that, of course,
is our community colleges and our community college system.
That is why I introduced with Senator Murray and Senator
Snowe the Sectors Act to provide grants to industry or sector
partnerships. It is so important that we focus these Federal
WIA dollars on job training, obviously, that leads to
employment better than we have, and that needs to come from the
bottom up. It needs to come from community colleges working
with local businesses, working with local trade unions, working
with the local workforce investment board to decide what does
our community need.
Toledo, OH has more solar energy jobs than any city in
America. The local official, local employers, local unions,
local community colleges and the University of Toledo and
others would like to use those WIA dollars to train workers to
work in that industry or advanced manufacturing in Columbus or
some of the things that they are doing with composites that
lead the country in Dayton. I mean, there are those
opportunities all over, and that is what is so very, very
important.
The last thing I want to mention is a real brief story,
Madam Chair. In light of the President's bold and important
announcement yesterday and the last couple days on community
colleges and how important that is, I was a graduation speaker
at Sinclair Community College in Dayton a couple of years ago,
and the president of the college--we rode in from the airport.
It was a Friday night. There were about 1,000 graduates of the
community college, one of Ohio's best community colleges.
We were just talking away about his speech and my speech,
and he decided at the beginning of this commencement to ask two
questions of the students. And he said keep your eye on the
seven students sitting in the right front row of these 1,000
students in the audience. The two questions he asked was, how
many of you are first in your family to go to college? And
about 40 percent of the students raised their hands of 1,000
graduates, and all seven of the students in the front row did.
And I will tell you who they are in a second. And second, he
said, how many of you were told you are not college material?
And probably a third or a fourth of those students put their
hands up, and four of the seven kids in the front row put their
hands up.
This was a Friday night. The seven students in the front
row had graduated from Dayton public schools on Tuesday night,
and they were first in their family to go to college. Half of
them had been told they were not college material.
That is the challenge we have. That is the great thing
about the community college system, the great thing about what
we can do with workforce investment, why this hearing is so
important and why, as we move forward on developing all this,
it is so important.
I thank the chair for her work.
Senator Isakson. Madam Chairman, could I ask unanimous
consent that the full statement of Senator Enzi be entered in
the record?
Senator Murray. Absolutely. Without objection, we will do
that.
[The prepared statement of Senator Enzi follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Enzi
Chairman Murray and Senator Isakson, I want to thank you
for holding this hearing on this important issue--
reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA).
Dramatic changes have occurred in all of our lives over the
past 10 to 11 years. For example, I have become a grandfather.
Staying in touch 10 years ago meant calling or writing someone
instead of the instant and text messaging of today. Then,
personal GPS systems were not available in cars, so that meant
many of us spent much more time trying to find the way to our
destinations. And ``twittering' now has a totally different
meaning. Well, dramatic changes have occurred in the workplace,
workforce and economy, too.
It has been over 10 years since WIA was first enacted. And
now more than ever is when we need to modernize and strengthen
the system, building on what has worked. America's workers and
employers need to be confident that the workforce development
system will provide the skills that are needed to keep jobs in
America and keep us competitive in the 21st century economy.
Although the Senate has passed a bill to reauthorize the
Workforce Investment Act (WIA) several times over the past 6
years, Congress has not been able to ``get it done.'' However,
reauthorizing WIA is especially important now.
With an unemployment rate of almost 10 percent and a
widening skills gap for our students and workers, we need to
have in place a workforce development system that will meet the
challenges of a global economy and the 21st century workplace.
We need to help workers secure the skills they need for the
jobs being created as our economy comes out of the economic
downturn, and we need to make sure that employers have the
skilled workers they need to be competitive. Workers need
ongoing access to quality education and skills training
programs for the high-demand, high-skill, high-wage jobs of the
future.
I am pleased that we have both the Department of Labor and
the Department of Education with us today to discuss how the
programs they operate contribute to the workforce development
system established through the One-Stop Career Centers. I also
look forward to hearing from the second panel that is made up
of seven practitioners who represent the various constituencies
of the workforce system. Using a modified roundtable structure,
they will discuss their perspective of the workforce system in
response to two questions--what works and what doesn't and how
can we improve the system as we move forward?
We must also find ways that our education and job training
programs can come together so that our young people get the
education and training they need to graduate from high school
and be successful in college and the workforce. For every 100
students entering ninth grade, 68 graduate from high school on
time. Out of 40 who immediately enter college, only 18 graduate
from college on time. Over 275 students drop out of school
every school hour, which costs in lost wages and revenue
approximately $73 million over the lifetime of those dropouts.
Lower earnings translate into less revenue for local, State and
Federal Governments in the form of income, property, and
consumption taxes.
Education and training beyond high school is a prerequisite
for employment in jobs and careers that support a middle-class
life. Individuals with a bachelor's degree earn, on average,
almost twice as much over their lifetimes as high school
graduates. Jobs requiring bachelor's degrees are predicted to
grow 15 percent by 2016, yet the completion rate for students
entering college is low with the United States coming in at
15th among 29 industrialized countries. What this means is that
the number of jobs requiring some form of post-secondary
education or training will grow 60 percent faster than the job
market as a whole, while the number of people with the
necessary knowledge and skills is not keeping pace.
The United States still ranks second among developed
nations in the proportion of workers over the age of 55 with a
post-secondary credential, but we drop to No. 11 among younger
workers, age 25 to 34. For the first time in the history of our
country we face the prospect that the educational level of a
generation of Americans will not exceed that of the workers who
preceded them.
I want to welcome and thank all of the witnesses who are
here today--I look forward to what you have to say. A strong
education and workforce development system is required in order
for our students and workers to be prepared to meet the ever
escalating knowledge and skill requirements of the 21st
century. For this reason I am committed to working with the
Administration and my Senate and House colleagues to put
together a bipartisan bill that reauthorizes, strengthens and
modernizes WIA. We need to act now because our students,
workers, employers and communities expect and deserve more from
us than the status quo.
Senator Murray. With that, we will turn to our first panel.
We have two witnesses today.
Jane Oates is the Assistant Secretary of Labor for the
Employment and Training Administration. She now leads the ETA
in its mission to design and deliver training and employment
programs for our Nation's workers, including programs under the
Workforce Investment Act.
We also have Martha Kanter, who was confirmed on June 19 as
the Under Secretary of Education for the U.S. Department of
Education. She oversees policies, programs, and activities
related to post-secondary education, vocational and adult
education and Federal student aid.
Jane, we will start with you. Both of your testimony will
be submitted in whole in the record, and we look forward to
your comments.
STATEMENT OF HON. JANE OATES, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF LABOR,
EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Oates. Senator, thanks so much to you, to Senator
Isakson for your kind words, and to Senator Brown, I could not
begin without thanking you for that reference to Senator
Kennedy who I share--I wish he was sitting up there, but he
would probably ask me tougher questions than anybody else. So I
should be careful of what I wish for.
It feels very odd sitting on this side of the table. I have
such a history with this committee, and I hope that history
with this committee is testimony to you to the fact that we
will work together. We are committed at the Department of
Labor, and I know my friends at Education share that. We
respect this committee far too much to try to go anywhere else
but here to get the answers that we need and the legislation
that we know is going to be the improvements to the system that
we all care about.
Secretary Solis--a new team that I am very proud to be a
part of--has established the goal of a good job for everyone.
For those of you who have met Secretary Solis, I think you are
probably well aware that she does mean everyone, and that some
of the things that need to be improved in our system are things
that get directly to that point. Many of our clients who face
real barriers to employment have not fully accessed the system.
I hope that we will work together to change that in the
reauthorization.
It is exciting to be talking about workforce now. Those of
us that have been talking about it for the last 11 years felt
like we were the only ones who were interested. Now we have a
President who is very interested in it, an Administration, and
this committee remains interested, as well as our sister
committee in the House. So I believe all the stars are aligned
that we are going to get the best bill possible done as soon as
possible.
The system is being tested. These are hard times for
everyone, but this system is stretched to the limits. I am here
to tell you that after receiving all the State plans on June
30, this system is working and it is working hard. It does not
mean there do not need to be improvements, but there should be
no doubt in anybody's mind that this system is working to
improve the lives of people who, without any fault of their
own, have been displaced.
In addition, it is working hard with youth who face
extraordinary barriers and it is working hard with
disadvantaged adults who had a hard time in a full-employment
economy getting the jobs that they so needed and are having a
more challenging time now.
You know that my past has an equal kind of foot in
education and in workforce, and I think that is exactly where
we need to be moving forward. The idea that education and the
credentials that have been associated with the education world,
both industry-
recognized credentials, associates degree, bachelors degrees
and beyond, are exactly where the workforce system should be
leading.
We should be making sure that when people come to us for
training, they get a portable credential. That means if they
have to move for personal reasons, they are equally able to get
a good job somewhere else because they have a piece of paper
that is recognized that can qualify them for that job anywhere
that they go. I think in the reauthorization, it gives us an
opportunity to make sure we articulate that more clearly.
One of the things that I think all of us have heard in our
listening sessions is that in 1998 we wrote a bill that said
local areas had to partner. In doing that, we did not model at
the Federal level by our own behavior. One of the commitments
that I am here to make to you today is, that is going to
change.
The Department of Education and the Department of Labor
already, since my limited time here, April 30, as an advisor to
the Secretary, have had serious meetings together about how we
move forward not only on creating new ideas but expanding the
opportunities that exist now. And I would point to the UI Pell
Memorandum that went out. We have been working together on
every piece of information we put out to expand the opportunity
for unemployed workers to qualify for Pell using their current
status rather than last year's earnings.
I hope that as we meet with you over the months to come,
the list of joint projects that we work on will continue to
grow, and I know that having Martha here today is a clear
indication that we intend to work hand in hand on everything
regarding WIA implementation.
The Department of Labor does not want to stop with our
partners at the Department of Education. We want to extend
that, as things are developing, with our partners at HHS. We
want to work closely with the Department of Defense, as we are
looking at bringing more technology into the public workforce
system, because Defense has been a high watermark in getting
their soldiers up to speed, allowing them, even in the middle
of battlefields, to continue their education. We need to learn
from them as we look for electronic tools to expand
opportunities for people in the public workforce system.
We all believe that the dual customer approach is one that
we should continue, but we should continue to work on it.
Therefore, you have our commitment that we are going to reach
out to departments like the Small Business Administration to
find ways that our One-Stop Centers can provide all businesses,
but particularly small businesses who hopefully will be the
engine for job growth in the coming months and years, to
provide them with the kind of information that would help them
kind of work through the Federal system the best way that we
can and help them grow their businesses at an accelerated pace.
The reauthorization presents us with many things that we
have heard. We have all heard that the boards need work. We
need to more clearly define roles of States and local boards.
We have all heard that the eligibility system is sometimes
cumbersome and often embarrassing for people to come in and
bring paperwork to prove that they are poor. My staff has heard
me say more times than they would care to admit right now that
someone who is poor should not have to continue to prove it
time and time again. We need to look at youth eligibility and
the eligibility criteria for disadvantaged adults to make it
less embarrassing and more open to those youth and adults who
need our services so dramatically especially in these times.
I was a part of this committee and happily a part of this
committee when we created the Workforce Investment Act, but for
some reason, misperceptions and misconceptions remain. We never
intended a sequence of service, and yet too often I hear from
local areas that people have to go through that sequence of
service. We need to find a way in legislative language to kill
that for good, to make sure that we are clear in articulating
that client needs need to be met without waiting to go through
undue hardship to get to the gold star of job training. And we
need to make sure that work first is only an option if that is
what the client wants. It should not be an operating maxim by a
One-Stop.
I think that we have lots of things that we have heard,
lots of things that you are going to tell us, and we are going
to look forward to sharing those.
I end with my commitment to the members of this committee,
both the members and your staff who have been so kind to me
since confirming me. You have our commitment for technical
assistance for working as a team, and I know that Martha will
echo that as well.
I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Oates follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jane Oates
Good morning, Chairperson Murray and members of the subcommittee.
Thank you for extending the invitation to speak with you about the
reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, or WIA.
Secretary of Labor Solis has established a goal of ``A good job for
everyone.'' The reauthorization of WIA is critical to achieving the
Secretary's goal by helping workers who are unemployed or in low-wage
jobs find a path to middle class jobs, providing them with the skills
and knowledge they need to succeed in a knowledge-based economy.
Helping Americans build the skills to compete for the jobs of the
future is a top priority of this Administration, as President Obama
made clear earlier this week when he announced a new initiative to
transform the opportunities available at our Nation's community
colleges. The Departments of Labor and Education have also taken steps
to make it easier for recipients of Unemployment Insurance to seek
retraining and educational opportunities while the economy recovers.
Our WIA system has been tested in these harsh economic times. WIA
One-Stops are welcoming record numbers of your constituents who are
looking for career counseling, work-related services, and job training.
With the additional funding provided through the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), we are helping more job-
seekers and workers through the workforce system. For example, in your
home State of Washington, Senator Murray, Recovery Act funds are making
it possible to place additional staff where they are needed most to
provide re-employment services to Unemployment Insurance claimants and
other job seekers. Beginning in May 2009, 1,500 new computers are being
installed in job-seeker resource rooms at local WorkSource offices all
over Washington in order to speed up and improve service to out-of-work
Washington residents. Also using Recovery Act resources, the State has
identified over 980 different worksites statewide that will provide
over 5,000 youth with a meaningful work experience during the summer
employment program. These worksites include private, public, and non-
profit employers that are giving youth opportunities that will help
them in choosing a career path in green industries and other high-
demand fields.
Georgia is using Recovery Act funds to re-invigorate its workforce
system and serve the large numbers of workers now seeking its services.
For example, the State is extending the hours of operation at One-Stop
Career Centers and expanding service capacity through the use of mobile
units. Georgia is also using Recovery Act funds to provide individuals
served through the WIA Adult program with additional supportive
services and needs-based payments for items such as emergency rent, car
repairs, eye glasses, and other unexpected needs, to help individuals
remain in the training they need to find a new job.
In Michigan, an established initiative, ``No Worker Left Behind''
combines WIA with other workforce funds to provide any unemployed, laid
off, or low-income job seekers with 2 years of tuition, up to $10,000
total, to attend any Michigan community college, university, or
approved training program after a skills assessment. Participants must
use the funds to pursue a credential in a high-demand occupation or
emerging industry or in entrepreneurship. In addition, the funds
received under the Recovery Act have allowed Michigan to bolster its
services to Unemployment Insurance claimants. The State has added
significant numbers of staff to provide career readiness assessments,
one-on-one career guidance and case management, individual service
strategies, and referrals to training.
However, in each case these services are being provided through a
law enacted over a decade ago, and whose authorization expired in 2003.
Although there is a widespread consensus that WIA needs to be reformed
and re-invigorated, past efforts to do so have failed. With a new
Administration and Congress, we now have an opportunity for a
successful reauthorization of this important law.
The Administration supports the reauthorization of WIA. We believe
WIA reauthorization should create a modernized system that provides
seamless career advancement services for low-skilled adults, at-risk
youth, and dislocated workers and others needing employment, training
and retraining services. This system should embody a dual customer
approach, which meets the needs of both workers and employers, in
developing thriving communities where all citizens succeed and
businesses prosper.
Our approach will be to reach broadly across multiple departments,
including the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services,
to ensure that programs work harmoniously and effectively at the local
level. For example, we believe customers should be able to access any
Federal education and training program, as well as education and
training opportunities provided by community colleges, through the One-
Stop system in a manner that supports the achievement of the
individual's educational and career goals. Services should be available
in person as well as virtually, and the system should make the best use
of technology to reach and serve job seekers and workers. The system
should be accessible to all individuals with disabilities seeking
employment and meet their unique needs. Eligibility determination
processes for the various programs should be simplified and harmonized
to the maximum extent possible, to ensure that individuals can readily
access the services they need. The One-Stop Career Centers should be
able to provide each individual a quick and effective assessment of
skills and the best plan of services given the customer's interests and
skill level. Performance measures for accountability should be designed
to recognize the value-added of services and avoid creating
disincentives to serve participants who have the greatest need for
assistance. And performance information on training programs should be
widely available, so individuals can make informed choices about which
programs best meet their needs.
One criticism that we hear repeatedly is that we have asked local
areas to partner with various stakeholders, and yet inside the Beltway
we are conducting siloed business as usual. We have already begun to
address that in our preliminary interagency discussions. I know that
this Federal-level collaboration will require on-going commitment and
daily effort. I know that the leadership at the Department of Education
shares our genuine commitment to a real partnership. Our hope is that
in working together, we can reduce the burden of duplicative reporting
for local providers and that we can make real progress toward a
seamless delivery system at the Federal level.
We are looking to build on the WIA structure that this committee
created in 1998, and to make improvements based on the lessons learned
over the decade of its implementation. We are committed to working to
support you as you begin the job of drafting that legislation. We hope
to be a valued partner, and we hope that today will be the beginning of
a collaborative process that ends with President Obama signing into law
a re-invigorated WIA that will help put our country back to work.
This concludes my prepared remarks, and I would be pleased to
answer any questions you may have.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Secretary Oates.
Secretary Kanter.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTHA KANTER, UNDER SECRETARY, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Kanter. Good morning, Chairman Murray and members of
the subcommittee. I want to thank you so much for inviting me
on my 15th day as the new Under Secretary.
I am delighted to talk about the reauthorization of the
Workforce Investment Act, having served on the local workforce
investment board for many years in Silicon Valley.
The current economic crisis requires us to think both
strategically and systemically about how we are going to
recommend to you investing Federal dollars so that the WIA
programs will help people obtain the skills that are necessary
for success in post-secondary education and the workforce. I
have been talking to a number of groups over the last week
about the interrelationship between work, family, and education
and also thinking about those interactions across the life of
individuals who become clients to WIA and then become dually
enrolled in education and training.
The Department of Education makes significant contributions
to the effort through our programs for adult, career, and
technical education. I think Senator Brown referenced many of
those great programs. Literacy and English language acquisition
is a huge portion of what we do, thus the need to collaborate
and really integrate those programs not only into careers and
meaningful work, but also into advanced skill levels so that
individuals can ladder up to better jobs over time. Vocational
rehabilitation services for individuals with disabilities have
been a big part of our responsibility, and services for under-
skilled and/or at-risk youth is part of our responsibility.
So the WIA reauthorization gives us a unique opportunity to
better align and integrate the WIA programs within and across
Federal agencies that Jane mentioned, among those HHS, of
course, Labor being the centerpiece in our first effort here.
But DOD has curriculum that I think we can take advantage of to
accelerate learning and success in the workforce. Department of
Energy, of course, is going to be expanding, and Commerce is
another one.
As we look toward reauthorization, we want to really
integrate all of what we do with Labor and the other agencies
and also think about the best impact we can have with States
and localities so that educational and employment outcomes are
transparent and clear for those that we serve. That was one of
the first questions I asked coming on board. What are the
outcomes today and how are we going to measure progress going
forward?
We have to integrate adult basic education and workforce
development more effectively. We have great practices. One is
in Washington State, the Yakima Valley Community College and
the South Central Workforce Council, which had been working
together to enhance adult learners' basic literacy in their
transition to employment. We have some great best practices to
build upon. Through this collaboration, the clients who receive
benefits under TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families,
are assessed. Those with appropriate skills and interests in
allied health are referred to a nurse's assistant certification
training program that the college offers. And this is an
example of a successful program where literacy training is not
only contextual but goal-oriented and embedded, integrated into
career and technical education and employment training. So you
see that interaction, and that is what we want, that level of
success for the clients who are also students.
We have to really identify those best practice models
through the States across the country so that we can integrate
career pathways and connect those individuals who are under-
skilled youth and adults and individuals with disabilities to
the high-growth sectors that Senator Brown mentioned:
manufacturing; solar is huge and growing; energy and health
care, the unmet need that, Senator Murray, you talked about.
We also want to work with the Department of Labor to
recognize and reward progress on both educational and
employment outcomes, as I said, and develop integrated or
linked data systems so that we can measure our progress moving
forward.
With the reauthorization, we have an opportunity to
modernize our literacy training programs, and there are lots of
great examples that we hope to be able to transfer as best
practices to programs like the one I served on and the
community college that I represented for many years. Cutting-
edge technology can efficiently remove barriers and accelerate
the performance of low-skilled adults as long as the faculty
are engaged and working with those programs to best educate
students as quickly as possible so that we can have the goal of
entering the workforce more quickly and then re-entering when
jobs change, as they will continue to do.
We want to talk more specifically about WIA changes, but I
would like to highlight just a couple of target populations
that we would like you to consider as the legislation develops.
The first is youth. Approximately 1.2 million students drop
out of school each year, greatly reducing their earning
potential. And the Department of Education considers this
crisis a high priority, and Secretary Duncan has been talking
about that as he has gone out to communities across the
country.
In the fiscal year 2010 budget request, we support the in-
school program so that we can do a better job of identifying
the students early, helping them stay on track, and developing
strategies with labor and the business community, as well as
community-based organizations so that we can re-engage them
more quickly. The WIA youth programs are essential to this
effort. By giving students real-world work experience and
giving them the skills training and mentors, the youth programs
can get the youth back on track more quickly so that they can
graduate and move on to post-secondary education and the
workforce after graduation.
We look forward to collaborating with Labor about that,
especially the under-prepared youth. When we distribute
employment training funds for summer youth, we would like to
see education be part of that more integrally. And these are
the kinds of things that Assistant Secretary Oates and I want
to work on.
The second is individuals with disabilities, including
youth with disabilities. We want to make sure that the One-Stop
Centers are both prepared to serve those individuals with
disabilities and are physically and programmatically
accessible. We have to ensure that the vocational
rehabilitation system will prepare those individuals with
significant disabilities--you will see a lot of work in that--
for high-quality employment that is geared to what the local
workforce needs, suited to those individuals' abilities and
interests.
We also want to promote early intervention in the
transition process so that youth with disabilities can access
post-secondary education and high-quality employment. Just as
an example, more than half of the students in post-secondary
education are working while they go to school. So the models
really have to change and be more inclusive of both education
and training along the lifetime of the continuum of earning
power and lifetimes.
This will maximize potential for success in a variety of
careers, self-sufficiency for people with disabilities, and
independent living, and is going to build upon the foundation
of the Individuals with Disabilities Act.
Finally, we want to promote evidence-based practices. That
is a language that you will see Secretary Duncan and I talking
about, using research to make decisions that are in the best
interests of the students/clients to get them into the
workforce and with the education and training they need and
really build on the innovation across the country that we are
seeing in many of the local workforce programs that are
integrated with the education programs.
And we would like to find ways to reward States for
experimenting with new service delivery approaches like Jane
had mentioned that can be replicated by other States if they so
wish.
The last population we would like to keep in mind, as we
look at WIA and consider changes to the program, are
individuals with low-English proficiency. About three-quarters
of adults enrolled in courses to improve their English
proficiency were found to have low-beginning to low-
intermediate English literacy skills. And I know this. We
opened up a center this last year and we went from 100 clients
to 400 in one 3-month period. So the demand is tremendous. I
think all of these funds can be used in collaboration to
increase programs that will meet that demand locally. We have
many, many thousands of individuals striving to integrate into,
advance within, and contribute to society and economic
prosperity, but face significant language barriers.
WIA has been successful on a number of fronts, but
alignments and outcomes have been inconsistent, and we know,
working with Jane and the Department, we can do a much better
job there.
We have many opportunities to reform WIA, and we have been
discussing ways to better align our programs, leverage
resources, and ensure that youth and adults receive the
services and support they need, whether students are in school,
out of school, need academic training, need job placement,
social services, or a combination. And it really has to be
client-based.
We look forward to reaching out to the partners across
various agencies and most prominently Labor and look forward to
working with Congress and coming back to this committee for
your guidance and recommendations and bringing to you the best
of what we have across the country in ways that we can work
together to really make WIA ready for the next generation, as
well as getting people back to work right now who need the
services.
I will be available to answer any questions and, just
again, want to thank you for the opportunity to join you this
morning at my first Senate hearing. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kanter follows:]
Prepared Statement of Martha Kanter
Good morning, Chairman Murray and members of the subcommittee.
Thank you for inviting me to speak with you about the reauthorization
of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA). The current economic crisis
shows that we must think strategically and systematically about how
best to invest Federal dollars to ensure that the programs under WIA
assist people in obtaining the necessary skills to succeed in post-
secondary education and the workforce. The Department of Education
makes significant contributions to this effort through our programs for
adult, career and technical education, literacy and English language
training, vocational rehabilitation services for people with
disabilities, and services for under-skilled or at-risk youth. The
reauthorization of WIA provides a unique opportunity to better align
and integrate programs within and across Federal agencies, States, and
localities to improve educational and employment outcomes for those we
serve.
As we look toward reauthorization, we must continue to recognize
the interconnection between adult basic education and workforce
development and provide services accordingly. Many examples exist where
these goals intersect. For example, literacy training must be
contextual, goal-oriented, and embedded into career and technical
education and employment training. We must develop best practices for
integrated career pathways and connect our under-skilled youth and
students with disabilities to high-growth sectors.
One high-growth, high-demand industry toward which programs can
gear their efforts is healthcare. In California there are a number of
examples of hospitals and hospital foundations partnering with high
schools, literacy centers, and community colleges to expand and enhance
training programs for registered nurses, medical lab technicians, and
other in-demand healthcare positions. These programs fund more faculty
as well as tuition, fees, books, and other expenses for students.
Working collaboratively with the Department of Labor, the Department
can help ensure that our students get the skills and jobs they need.
In Illinois, the Instituto del Progreso Latino (IPL) is extending
its certified nursing assistant program and creating a certified
medical assistant program in response to the local labor-market demands
in healthcare. Career pathway programs like the one at IPL link basic
education funding with projects for academic post-secondary coursework,
work-specific instruction, hands-on classroom, and worksite training
supported by others.
Washington State's Yakima Valley Community College and South
Central Workforce Council work together to enhance adult learners'
basic literacy skills and their transition to employment. The project
assessed clients receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) benefits and referred those with appropriate skills and
interests in allied health to a nurse's assistant certification
training program offered by the college.
The Department of Education also has been working with the
Department of Labor to address these interconnected goals in other
areas--for example, in Madison, WI, at Madison Area Technical College
(MATC), one of five sites participating in the Department's Career
Connections initiative. MATC, a recipient of a DOL Community-Based Job
Training grant and a WIRED grant, leveraged these resources to develop
a ``Prep for Success'' course to promote the success of limited
literacy students in Lab Animal Caretaker training and to map career
pathways associated with animal lab science. This collaboration
provides one clear pathway to move under-skilled adults into post-
secondary pathway programs in high-demand, high-growth industries.
We must take these pockets of best practices and turn them into
standard practices to ensure that all students are achieving
educational and employment success.
While we will have many opportunities to talk about specific
changes to WIA, I would like to highlight a few key target populations
that should be considered as we move forward.
The first is youth. Approximately 1.2 million students drop out of
school each year. By dropping out, these students greatly reduce their
earning potential. The Department of Education has made addressing this
crisis a high priority by supporting in-school programs to identify
these students early and help keep them on track, and develop
comprehensive strategies in partnership with businesses and community-
based organizations to re-engage those who do drop out. WIA Youth
programs can be key to this effort. By giving students work experience,
skills training, mentoring--helping them to understand the connections
between school and post-secondary education and work--WIA Youth
programs can help get youth back on track and re-engage them in school
so that they graduate prepared to succeed in post-secondary education
and the workforce.
We are collaborating with our Federal partners to support these
programs in an efficient and effective manner. The Departments of
Education and Labor have been meeting and discussing ways to align
programs, leverage resources, and ensure that youth receive the
services and support they need--whether in school, out of school,
academic, job training, or social services--or a combination of all of
these. We intend to reach out to other Federal partners, including the
Department of Health and Human Services, in these efforts.
The second group I would like to address is people with
disabilities, including youth with disabilities. We must ensure that
WIA One-Stop Centers are prepared to serve people with all disabilities
and that they are physically and programmatically accessible. We must
ensure that the vocational rehabilitation system helps to prepare
people with significant disabilities for high-quality employment,
suited to an individual's abilities and informed choice and to local
workforce opportunities. We must also promote early intervention in the
transition process so that youths with disabilities are prepared to
access post-secondary education and high-quality employment to maximize
their potential for successful careers, self-sufficiency, and
independent living. Investing in WIA services for transitioning youth
with disabilities will build upon the educational foundation of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and increase their
potential for gainful employment and self-support. Finally, we must
promote activities that foster innovation and evidence-based practices
and reward States for testing innovative service-delivery approaches
that can be replicated by other States and service providers.
The final group I would like to address is those with low English
proficiency. About three-quarters of adults enrolled in courses aimed
at improving their English proficiency were found to have ``low-
beginning'' to ``low-intermediate'' English literacy levels. These are
individuals looking to integrate, advance, and contribute to our
economic prosperity, but who face a significant language barrier to
doing so. As we design programs, we must keep this low-English group in
mind.
We have many opportunities for reform through WIA. There are a
number of examples of best practices, but alignment and outcomes have
been inconsistent. We need to recognize and reward progress on both
educational and employment outcomes--and we need integrated data
systems to track our progress as we go. We should also use this
opportunity to modernize our literacy training programs, using
technologies not available during the last reauthorization. Cutting-
edge technology can more efficiently remove barriers and accelerate the
performance of low-skilled adults so they can enter the workforce more
quickly.
The Department of Education looks forward to continuing
collaboration with the Department of Labor and working with Congress to
ensure that the individuals served by our programs have the skills they
need to become full and successful contributors to our Nation's
economy.
I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much to both of you for your
testimony.
I appreciate both of you, in your testimony, speaking to
the need for strong partnerships as we work to make sure that
our workers of today have the skills they need. Whether it is
between State or local, private or business, and the Federal
agencies, everybody has to be working together, and I want to
talk about that a little bit.
Before I do that, let me just start with asking each of you
what the President's vision is for workforce development.
Secretary Oates, let us start with you.
Ms. Oates. When I first came on board, Senator Murray, it
was described to me very briefly that the President is
responding every day to the crisis that is presented in the
economy and that he is going to have a multi-pronged approach
of which WIA reauthorization would be a strong piece.
Obviously, this week we saw his initiative on community
colleges which will be another piece of how do we serve people
better and more efficiently.
Obviously, Secretary Solis' goal of a good job for everyone
comes as a sub-message from the President. I think he wants to
get people back to work. I think he is committed to high-
quality job training. He is committed to doing things that
align the needs of business and growing business with what we
are doing with training, and I think we are going to continue
to see every initiative that comes out in this area being part
of that multi-pronged approach that he spoke about. I think
some of the things like the community college piece are better
articulated right now as there is legislative language on the
House side. I think that legislation will continue to improve,
and it will get to its best form when it comes to the Senate.
That is a little prejudicial statement. There is someone from
the House probably throwing something at me from behind.
But I think that we will continue to see innovative
strategies that will come forward, and I would hope that as
those strategies are developed now, that the political team is
in place in each of the Departments and that the political
teams, as well as the career folks at my Department, as well as
our sister agencies, will be a part of the development of those
ideas. And I sincerely hope from the beginning stages this
committee will be a part of those ideas in the future.
Senator Murray. Secretary Kanter.
Ms. Kanter. Yes. I would just add he said--and President
Obama said it again on Tuesday, and I have been tracking every
time he makes a statement about having the most highly
competitive, highly educated workforce in the world. And to do
that, on Tuesday, he recommended that the community colleges
specifically graduate 5 million more students in the next 10
years.
If you step back from all of that, you will see the
underpinnings of what we have been talking about that are
really consistent with that vision and goal, which is to have
students going through and completing programs, whether it is
the short-term credential that Jane talked about that is
employer-based, provided in a community-based organization, or
whether it is a nursing assistant program that takes a year at
a community college to get us an industry-recognized, hospital-
approved certificate, all of that training is integrated with
getting students the literacy levels in science, mathematics,
and language that are so sorely needed. So the President's
vision really includes educating everyone and having a vision
that everyone in America could have at least 1 year of college
or advanced training.
So we have to look at this broadly because there are great
training programs that may be separate from a college or the
adult ed program in a local high school that are meeting the
workforce the employer needs--solar tech, inspection, just on
and on and on. But I think all of that is to say that we have
to have a more highly trained, highly skilled workforce.
Education plays a role and Labor plays a central role. The
business community needs to be part of the conversation so that
we can move forward and go from 40 percent of Americans, which
the President has said, who have baccalaureate degrees to 60
percent. I came back from UNESCO 2 weeks ago, and Canada has 51
percent of baccalaureate degreed students, individuals across
the country, and we want to go better. We want to have as
highly trained, highly skilled workforce as we can, and the
credentials and degrees and certificates are measures of that
level of training.
So we are thrilled to be working on that agenda. It is
extremely difficult. It is very ambitious. But I do think it is
possible.
Senator Murray. How do you envision the Department of
Education and the Department of Labor working together on this?
Ms. Kanter. Well, first of all, we will have regular
meetings. We are looking at principles that each other is
working on now that we would be bringing back to this
committee. So integrating the policy proposals and our thinking
about really doing a review of everything that we can do
together and what more we can do with what we have. So I have
been looking at the outcomes of adult learners and literacy
levels and how many people have GEDs and what jobs would they
be ready for. And Labor looks at what jobs are out there and
what are the specific skills and training that those
individuals need, and we need to marry that.
So I do not know if you want to add anything.
Ms. Oates. Let me give you a very specific example. I think
Martha is exactly right. We have a literacy problem in this
country, but right now in our current system, you either go for
adult literacy or you go for job training. That has to be
changed immediately, and I-BEST does that very well.
I also think we have to change remedial education because I
think that--and again, this is my foot in your door, and I am
sorry, but I know we agree on this. We cannot say to someone
who wants to be a nurse and goes to a community college and
finds out that it is going to take him or her 2 years of
remedial work before they can take a course that bears credit.
They are going to lose their taste for nursing. We have to
figure out ways together to integrate the contextualized
skills, that you need in the area that you want to be trained
in, with adult basic ed.
If you need to learn sight vocabulary and you want to be a
nurse, there is no reason that your sight vocabulary cannot be
related to the medical profession. We have done that in so many
instances in pockets of excellence. We need to do that across
the country. And I think we do it with a 55-year-old worker the
same as we do it with an 18-year-old potential worker.
Senator Murray. Specifically on health care, some Labor
programs or Education programs are overseen by HHS, Health and
Human Services. How can we help better align those so that we
are not fighting with each other, but we are all working
together?
Ms. Oates. I will start and give Martha a chance to catch
her breath.
I think the first thing is in performance measures. I think
that there are clear performance measures that we could agree
to. I think far too many people at the local area are wasting
their time answering a question one way for me at Labor,
another way for Martha at Education, and another way for Mary
Wakefield at HRSA. I think that is a real problem. We cannot
afford in this economy or ever to waste people's time doing
duplicative, redundant paperwork. So I would say that
performance measures are a real way that we could do that and
reporting requirements.
I think we can also make sure that we are getting the best
geographic spread on what we are doing. I think we all know--I
just came from New Jersey--in every State there are high
performers, people that go after grants from Labor and are
successful, and the same people go after grants from Education.
So they have $3 for every dollar that they need, and they serve
the people. And do not get me wrong, but we are leaving other
community colleges and other community-based organizations out
of the mix because they cannot compete with the star in their
State. And all of us are hit with scarce resources. So
oftentimes we will not fund more than one program in a certain
geographic area.
We need to work together and create a real scatter map
about where in States have we not penetrated at all with
innovative ideas and training. And then we need to agree that
we would work with those folks to build their skills. Whether
they are in urban or rural areas, suburban areas, it does make
a difference. How do we build their skills so that they can
write more competitive grants? And none of us are putting
really any time into that right now.
Senator Murray. I am way over my time, but Secretary
Kanter, if you want to just add a----
Ms. Kanter. Well, I would just add that the integrated data
systems are really essential. So your guidance in terms of
working with States to link up with Federal data that is
already being reported, already being used, that we can better
align. It would be a major investment in infrastructure, but
would be of tremendous benefit to everyone at the local level
who are doing the intakes and doing the tracking and
performance measures on the clients going through whether they
are in education at a community college, in a local community-
based organization over at the Department of Labor. Maybe it is
a person with disability receiving VR services. And all of that
integration is duplicative. So I agree with what Jane said.
The other thing I would add is that the standards for
this--what are the expectations we want for different sectors
of the clients we serve and how quickly can we accelerate. So
your support for innovation and transferring those best
practices to the programs that desperately need more of those
would be of great value to us.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
Senator Isakson, we will turn it over to you.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Chairman Murray.
I have a question for both of you. I was really pleased to
hear Secretary Kanter talk about evidence-based decisions. One
of the biggest battles of the last reauthorization of WIA was
the flexibility at the local level to a certain degree, and the
way we solved that was with five demonstration projects for
States, one of which was Georgia, out of which the One-Stop
shop emerged.
I just wanted to ask both of you if you recognize the
importance of allowing some levels of flexibility at the State
level to encourage innovation and development of new programs
rather than a central government-down approach?
Ms. Oates. Senator, I think we need to let the States have
room for innovation, and I think we need to listen so that
every State does not have to necessarily re-invent the wheel. I
think we have done far too little sharing within States and a
much worse case of sharing State to State. We need to make sure
that the innovative room that we give States produces lessons
learned that we then share, and I think both our Departments
are committed to doing a better job on that.
But I think we would all be in line with you that it is not
a cookie cutter. Georgia is not New Jersey or Massachusetts or
Washington State, and we need to make sure that we recognize
the uniqueness of each of the States and allow them within a
parameter of accountability. I know that you mean that as well.
We need to keep them accountable to whatever measures you are
going to develop in the new reauthorization, but we do not need
to tell them how to get there.
Ms. Kanter. I would just add. I was speaking yesterday to
about 100 people who represent State higher education
officials. These are the people that run the higher education
coordinating councils across the 50 States. One gentleman stood
up and said that 10 States had already agreed to look at common
standards for career and college readiness. I think that is
going to be essential going forward so that, for example, high
school graduation means that you are ready for this level of
career and you are ready for this level of college, instead of
the variation that we have. So I was encouraged that States
already are working together in new collaborative ways, and I
think that is an area where the Federal Government can
encourage that.
Each State is going to have its own unique culture and
history and will have its own best practices. Some may be
easily adopted. Others may not. So I think we have to look
State by State and really see where can we have the greatest
impact at this level, and of course, me being new to this whole
environment, really trying to figure out how can the Federal
Government be the most effective, have the most impact, and
part of that is really looking at what is evidence-based and
how are we using these grant funds, these Challenge Grants, and
all of the other programmatic ways that we can encourage
innovation, how can we then deploy that into delivery models
that will both streamline service to the customers and get more
people educated and into better and better careers going
forward.
Senator Isakson. Thank you.
Secretary Oates, the most compelling and delightful
statement you made in your prepared remarks was about the dual
customer approach of those who seek employment as well as the
employers. Although I am reticent to bring this up with Senator
Brown in the room, I am going to go ahead and do it anyway
because it is a testimony to exactly what you said.
NCR recently decided to move to Georgia, and I was asked to
speak to their executives this past Sunday at Georgia Tech.
They were having a symposium. One of the things that our State
developed through its adult and technical education was a quick
start program where they guarantee training of employees which
ultimately is on the location of an ATM and kiosk construction
facility, that was the deciding factor for the move to
Columbus, GA for that facility.
It was the exact reason why this interagency cooperation is
so important because you want to help people get jobs, but you
have to have those who train people for jobs a part of the
program and the needs of the employer to be part of it.
So I commend you on that, and I will take any comment you
might have about it.
Ms. Oates. Well, the only comment I would make, Senator, is
that you and every Senator on this subcommittee and the full
committee hold me accountable to that because if in a year I
cannot give you new things that we have done to get information
out to all of our One-Stops about how to improve the dual
customer approach, then I should not have this job.
Senator Isakson. Secretary Kanter, last question real
quickly. You talked about individuals with disabilities twice,
which I really appreciate you doing because there are two
things I think we need to look at.
First, is making high-tech assistance available to people
with disabilities. There are a lot of people with disabilities
who are employable with assisted technology, and that gets
missed. There are a lot of things they could do with a computer
for people with MS, people with any number of very restrictive
afflictions, but they can be contributors to society. So that
is one area.
The second area is the public transportation mechanisms in
each of the States, particularly in the major urban centers,
because one of the most difficult problems for a person with
disabilities to be employed is transportation. And the
development of van pools and things of that nature, to be able
to get a person with a disability to work and back again, is an
important part of interagency cooperation and workforce
development.
So I would just encourage both of you to consider when you
are talking about interagency cooperation, do not forget those
catalysts for public transportation. Where it is available, it
can make a big difference.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Senator Isakson.
Senator Brown.
Senator Brown. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I thank you both for your willingness to serve and your
willingness to take on these immense challenges in very
difficult times. This job is harder perhaps than when you first
thought about it.
Just really one question, but I will sort of flesh out for
both of you your thoughts about it. The ARRA money for
workforce investment--the legislation that is coming up with
reauthorization and the dollars that will come with that--how
do you see the whole--I talked about the Sectors Act that
several of us are working on. How do you see the sector-based
strategies fitting into our workforce system? Just give me more
details about how you think that works. How do we provide the
right incentives to existing workforce investment boards, to
employers, to unions, to community colleges, to other
institutions of higher learning to put together these sector
approaches?
Ms. Kanter. One thing that we are emphasizing--and I think
you will see it in a lot of the language that is coming out in
various proposals--is partnerships among the sectors for
improving workforce training, education, and placement into
jobs, and then together, tracking outcomes and hopefully
simplifying the processes to do all of that.
But I think when we encourage collaborative proposals and
Challenge Grants or in special initiatives, that we are getting
people to the table that may have had a sector missing
especially, for example, Senator Isakson mentioned the
vocational rehabilitation. You see in the One-Stops some great
examples of where vocational rehabilitation is actually seated
at the table in the One-Stop, and that is so helpful in terms
of streamlining access for students, making sure the
transportation is there, and really focused around getting that
individual to that next level of success, whether it is
directly into a job, whether it is training and a job at the
same time at an entry level, or laddering up with literacy
skills and other things, child care and other things that that
individual may need.
So I think it is really a question of how we are going to
work together in designing all of the implementation programs
to build upon these pots of funding, whether it is ARRA or the
new initiatives that the President mentioned on Tuesday for
community college Challenge Grants, or WIA, which is the
subject of this great hearing that I am learning so much in.
The other thing we want to do is really work together on
who is at the table in workforce investment. Do we have the
community colleges represented on the workforce investment
boards? Are the partners, are the sectors of health care and
manufacturing and energy represented, those business leaders
locally? And I think we have great experts here to testify on
who is at the table and how they are working together.
But really, those would be my two suggestions going forward
on things that we could really do to ramp up.
Senator Brown. Madam Secretary.
Ms. Oates. Senator, the Recovery Act certainly gave us an
area to start with and that is green jobs. We certainly are
putting out grants now and looking at, cross-sector, what is
green.
Some of the innovative things that States have done even
with summer youth to get kids focused on a sectoral approach,
some again in green, some in allied health, some in the
education sector, all areas, we hope, of continued growth--but
Labor has to do a better job of getting sectors together at a
national level so that we can press down some of the
information to a local level.
If a sectoral approach is going to be the way we go--and I
think actually it has tremendous promise--we need to make sure
from the beginning the varied business components of that
sector are together with the varied educational components,
starting with high school and working through graduate school,
to not only articulate their immediate needs but articulate
their future needs as the sector grows and expands.
But it is not a one-time meeting, and that is somehow
difficult for our system. We think we have a meeting and we
check off the box. It is, indeed, a different kind of
partnership where planning and implementation and evaluation
all have to be done collaboratively. Whether it is the new
manufacturing, whether it is green, whether it is health care,
we have to make sure that we are incenting those kinds of
discussions, continuous discussions, so that the sectoral
approach is the embodiment of continuous improvement linking
employer needs with educational needs on not only the short-
term basis but longer-term as well.
I would throw out there we need line workers in
manufacturing, but we also need engineers. And you are going to
be able to train a line worker in 6 months to a year, thanks to
terrific apprenticeship programs that are operating and
adapting all the time. An engineer--there is really no way to
cut that any shorter than an engineering masters or a bachelors
degree. And we do not want to truncate that. We want someone to
have the full credential.
So we are going to need advance notice on those things, and
I think the sectoral approach is the one way we do have that
continuous and ongoing conversation.
Senator Brown. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
I have a number of questions I am going to submit to you.
We do have a large panel. I want to get to them. I just want to
ask two follow-up questions and turn to Senator Isakson.
I have heard you, Secretary Kanter, this morning, as well
as the President, talk about the goal of 1-year post-secondary
education for everyone. For most of us, we think a 2-year
degree, 4-year degree. But it also means other credentials, a
certificate, a license, a journeyman's card. Can both of you
tell me how your Department defines post-secondary education?
Ms. Kanter. Well, we have been talking about--actually in
the international community, they use the word ``tertiary''
because what that means is that you could get an apprenticeship
training, you could become a journeyman, and that would qualify
for what we call post-secondary education. So I think the
language of how we talk about advanced training--I have been
using the word advanced training after high school, hopefully
leading to the credentials that Jane talked about, the
certificates of achievement which are typical for community
colleges across the country. That is generally a year you
become an automotive technician, a lab tech, a biotechnician,
and so forth, and then moving up to get the associates degree,
the baccalaureate degree, and so forth. But we are looking at
advanced training broadly. I think that is the basic point.
And there are many sectors within the educational
community, whether it is at a community-based organization, a
public community college, or a private school to provide the
training. We want to make sure that the quality assurance is
there. So these are high-quality training programs that lead to
jobs that employers have ready so that we can put people into
those jobs and they are ready for them.
We will be glad to work with the Department of Labor on
clarifying language that you may be requesting.
Ms. Oates. And we want to make sure that it is seen as a
step. So, therefore, if you get a credential, that does not
mean that you are finished, that you move on to an associates
degree and a baccalaureate degree. But we think, too rarely
people who stay for a semester or two contiguous semesters do
not get anything to prove that they have achieved a level of
learning. As Martha said in her testimony, more than half of
the people going to post-secondary education, what we would
have considered community college or a 4-year college, now are
working almost full-time. So we should give them something to
improve their status in the workforce.
Obviously, for us it is apprenticeships, as well as
everything else. We are going to promote that and getting
better articulation on new--in the area of the manufacturing
sector--getting new credentials. This committee's early work
with the National Skills Standards Board, which did not get
where this committee ever intended it to be, did great
groundbreaking work. It just did not get to the finish line. We
need to get sectors to complete that work. I do not know how we
do it without a money incentive.
But I hope that we can do it because there are folks who
are really talented who could take that talent, what they are
learning in an apprenticeship program and translate it, where
appropriate, to credits toward an associates degree. And we
should be doing that more and more.
In my own house, we should be doing it more in programs
like Youth Build and Job Corps and our apprenticeship programs,
but more broadly, we should be encouraging things like dual
enrollment in high schools. I know Martha cares deeply about
that and community colleges. So more kids can graduate with not
only their high school diploma, which is so critical, but also
an advanced certificate.
Senator Murray. Let me ask one final question about a
population I care deeply about, our veterans. A number of men
and women who are coming home have suffered both visible and
invisible wounds of war and will need additional support to get
the necessary skills to move into the workforce.
Can you tell me, are both of your Departments willing to
work with the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs to
make sure that we are coordinating systemwide for these young
men and women? Not for this morning, but I would like both of
you to get back to me about how you think we can be more
responsive to that population in the WIA legislation.
Ms. Kanter. Yes. I can just say that we have had a number
of meetings with the Veterans Administration, specifically
around Federal student aid and how veterans are moving through
that system when they come back to get education and training.
So we look forward to more conversations in that regard. We
want to get everybody back to education and work.
Ms. Oates. We have begun to get our One-Stop operations
aware of the servicemen opportunity colleges so that they can
make sure that they have that information. The Veterans
Administration does a wonderful job, but it is a place where we
do need redundancy. We need to make sure, no matter which door
a returning veteran comes in--because so many now that are
called up to active duty are from places like the National
Guard that do not get the same careful attention from the
military that their full-time veterans would get. So we are
trying to do more, but Senator, this is an area where we are
never going to do enough.
Senator Murray. We have a lot of work to do. There are a
lot of Veterans who have skills they earned in the military
that do not count towards traditional business credentials. So,
you both know, this is a conversation I am going to continue to
have with you.
I thank both of you. We will have questions that will be
submitted for the record for you. And we need to be done by
noon today, so I am going to move our next panel up. But thank
you, both of you.
With that, I ask the second panel to move to the witness
table. As they do that, I want to describe how this very large
panel is going to work this morning.
Each panelist will have 5 minutes to respond to two
questions that the committee has asked them. The first one is
what each of them believes works and should be preserved and
refined in the current workforce system, and what should be
eliminated.
As a former preschool teacher, I know when to stop talking
and wait for everybody to sit down.
[Laughter.]
All right. I will again tell everyone that what we have
done here is asked each one of the panelists to respond to two
questions. The first one is to respond to what they believe
works, how should it be preserved and refined, in the current
workforce system and what should be eliminated. Second, what
innovative policy recommendations they would offer to modernize
WIA.
After the panel completes their remarks, we will have the
opportunity to ask questions. Additionally, I would just let
the witnesses know that, although we do have a short amount of
time, if you would like to respond to any of our questions,
please let us know and we will try and do that within a timely
amount of time.
I am going to introduce the panelists. We have Clyde
McQueen, currently President and CEO of the Full Employment
Council in Kansas City, MO. Michael Thurmond, Commissioner of
the Georgia State Department of Labor. Rick Bender, President
of the Washington State Labor Council in Seattle, WA. Dr.
William Kiernan, Director of the Institute for Community
Inclusion, and Research Professor in the graduate college of
education in the McCormick School of Policy Studies at the
University of Massachusetts in Boston. Mary Sarris is the
Executive Director of the North Shore Workforce Investment
Board. Kathy Cooper is Policy Associate with Washington State's
Office of Adult Basic Education, and Stephen Wing is the
Director of Workforce Initiatives for CVS Caremark.
Thank you to all of our panelists for joining us today. We
look forward to hearing your remarks, and Mr. McQueen, we are
going to begin with you.
STATEMENT OF CLYDE McQUEEN, PRESIDENT/CEO, FULL EMPLOYMENT
COUNCIL, KANSAS CITY, MO
Mr. McQueen. Good morning, Madam Chairman and members of
the committee. Again, I am pleased to be here to address the
reauthorization of this important piece of legislation.
The Full Employment Council serves as the One-Stop operator
and fiscal agent for the Kansas City Vicinity and Eastern
Jackson County Workforce Investment Boards in Missouri. The
regions served by these two policy bodies cover 2,700 square
miles with over 1 million people. We have the largest city in
the State, Kansas City, MO, and we have one of the smallest
counties which has 20,000 people in population.
The current unemployment rate of the city of Kansas City,
MO is 11.6 percent. In the five-county region, the unemployment
rate is 9.6 percent.
Our workforce system has dealt with the ups and downs of
the economies in four basic ways. First, we have been conveners
of partnerships that produce results for workers and employers.
Second, we have been a catalyst for workforce innovation.
Third, we have been leaders or providers of workforce
information to determine where the jobs are for people and
where the people are for emerging employers. And finally, we
have been career navigators for disconnected youth, dislocated
workers, and low-income families.
The local workforce system enjoys an excellent partnership
with organized labor, working with the Greater Kansas City AFL-
CIO and its president, Bridgette Williams, which has led to the
creation of a locally funded pre-apprenticeship training
program called Project Prepare. This serves as a training
effort for low-income women, minorities, and youth to enter
apprenticeships in skilled areas. This partnership has led to
the creation of a local workforce ordinance that establishes a
First Source program targeting KC, MO residents as a first
choice for city construction jobs. It establishes goals for
women and minorities on construction projects and establishes a
construction workforce board to oversee the program. This
partnership has also worked with the local fire fighters union
and the machinists union who are being impacted by the
downsizing of the local overall base.
The system has sector partnership with the Kansas City
Metropolitan Healthcare Council that has generated over $2
million in public and private funding to reduce the shortage of
nurses in the greater Kansas City region. Through this
partnership, the number of nursing students increased by 30
percent, or 300, in a 2-year period.
The Kansas City system established a partnership with 10
regional economic development agencies to form the first
regional business retention council in the State of Missouri.
The BRC in their last 2 years has assisted 367 companies and
saved or added 837 jobs in the process.
Our local education partnerships in the region exist with
community colleges, vocational schools, universities, and
proprietary schools to establish just-in-time, on-demand
training programs to serve businesses and job seekers more
effectively in the region. The local system works in
partnership with the State education agency to certify and
fast-track training courses to meet the immediate regional
skill requirements on a bi-State basis that are needed either
because of economic expansion or economic dislocation in the
area.
We also work as career navigators as we determine career
pathways for disconnected youth, low-income adults, and
dislocated workers. This has been a major focus of the KC local
workforce system, and more recently a partnership of the
workforce investment board, the Kansas City public library, and
the Kansas City Parks and Rec Department will lead to the
development of a 20,000 square foot, $3 million green facility
that will host a youth career center and the Black Archives of
Mid-America.
ARRA stimulus funds were used to provide youth summer
internships, and $1,000 scholarships after the end of their
summer job to attend a community college or vocational school
or a $500 book scholarship to attend a university of their
choice, if they desire.
In addition, over five different course offerings have been
developed that combine education, work readiness, skill
training in each career area.
The One-Stop concept has been the local focal point for the
coordination of the workforce system, creating opportunities
and leveraging funds and programs with one WIB member
contributing over $2 million in a 20-year period.
WIA can be reformed by reducing board size, to reducing
mandated public sector representation, requiring local
partnership agreements only with systems that contribute to the
local workforce system, reducing youth eligibility requirements
to encourage system utilization by at-risk, disconnected youth,
improving State and Federal MIS systems to effectively capture
real-time system productivity, and review performance metrics
to encourage incentive systems to low-skill populations, and
discourage low-cost programming that leaves low-income, basic
skill-deficient populations behind.
An innovation fund could be locally budgeted to encourage
local program innovation.
A training ``smart pass'' that facilitates client referral
of persons presently in HUD, HHS, or DOL programs who are
economically disadvantaged and seek training services.
And finally, a stand-alone summer jobs career intern
program focused on 16- to 24-year-old youth in post-secondary
skill areas.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McQueen follows:]
Prepared Statement of Clyde McQueen
Good Morning, Madam Chairman and members of the HELP Committee.
My name is Clyde McQueen, and I have the privilege of serving as
the Chief Executive Officer of the Full Employment Council, the
Regional workforce agency for the city of Kansas City, MO, and the
surrounding counties of Jackson, Clay, Platte, Cass and Ray. This area
covers 2,700 square miles with a population of 1,091,900 in urban,
suburban, and rural areas.
I am fortunate to be representing the Kansas City Region, where
business, organized labor, community and governmental leadership forge
local partnerships to assist its citizenry. I have served in my career
as an Economic Development Administrator, a State Workforce Development
Director, and Regional Workforce Chief Executive, during every economic
downturn that has occurred since 1978.
I am honored that the Senate has asked me to speak on the
Reauthorization and Modernization of the Workforce Investment Act, as
we face unprecedented challenges and opportunities to develop the
skills of our workforce to compete in the global marketplace of the
21st Century.
In serving this diverse Region of major corporations, small
businesses, Adults in Career transition, or Youth beginning their
career journey, the Kansas City Regional workforce system has achieved
significant successes. These accomplishments have occurred as the
Kansas City Regional workforce system has been:
Conveners of results-oriented partnerships.
Catalysts for innovative workforce strategies that serve
growth industries and generate financial support.
Strategic leadership for the compilation and distribution
of real-time workforce information.
Career Navigators steering through career pathways for
Disconnected Youth, Low-Income Adults, Dislocated Workers and other Job
Seekers in their search for meaningful careers and family-supporting
incomes.
This bi-state Region is home to General Motors (Chevy Malibu
production), Ford (Escape & F-150 truck production), Harley Davidson
(V-Rod production), Garmin (GPS production), H&R Block Corporation,
Cerner (medical records technology), Hallmark Cards and Sprint. There
are at least 24 hospitals and innumerable nursing home facilities in
the area. The most current May 2009 Regional rate of unemployment is
9.6 percent and the city of Kansas City's unemployment rate is 11.6
percent. There are 21 school districts, two State community college
systems, and two major State university systems.
an exemplary organized labor partnership
The Organized Labor partnership is crucial to the local workforce
system in the Kansas City region. We have achieved success with
results, by working closely with the Greater Kansas City AFL-CIO, and
its President, Bridgette Williams, in developing local workforce
projects and programs. This partnership has led to the development of a
pre-apprenticeship program, ``known as Project Prepare,'' administered
jointly by the Greater Kansas City AFL-CIO and the Full Employment
Council. This program targets low-income women, minorities and youth
for apprenticeship opportunities in the various construction trade
unions. We also work closely with the Heavy Highway Constructors
Association, the Builders Association of Kansas City and the Mechanical
Contractors Association. This initiative facilitated the creation of a
Workforce Ordinance that established a First Source agreement, in which
Kansas City residents are given the first opportunity to apply for jobs
created by city-funded or tax-abated construction. In addition, it sets
goals for hiring women and minorities for all construction trades and
apprentice programs. This ordinance provides oversight by a city-
appointed Construction Workforce Board that recognizes superior
performers in this effort, as well as levies sanctions for non-
compliance.
Project Prepare has also been effective in working with the Local
Firefighter's Union to recruit and screen potential applicants to be
trained as cadets for the city of Kansas City, MO, as well as the city
of Independence, MO Fire Departments.
This organized labor partnership has also been effective in working
with employers and their workforce(s) impacted by the economic
downturn. An example of that partnership includes the workers of the
Machinists Union impacted by the American Airline Overhaul Base
downsizing at the Kansas City International Airport. In the previous 4
years, these reductions which have impacted at least 1,000 employees,
the Kansas City Workforce System has worked efficiently with labor/
management transition teams to provide on-site services for Union
members. These services have included the hiring of Union peer
counselors; the establishment of on-site computerized resource rooms to
facilitate easy access to career center services; the implementation of
``Fast Track'' entrepreneurial training programs; and the
implementation of on-demand training for emerging growth industries.
Dislocated Union workers can access the bi-state individual training
account system (ITA) to access multiple training options at community
colleges, universities, vocational schools, and proprietary training
institutions.
This partnership has received over $400,000 in support from the
city of Kansas City; $200,000 in support from the Missouri Department
of Transportation; and significant in-kind support from various
construction trade unions. This partnership has also led to community
dialogue between the unions, construction contractors, city
administrators, community residents, and the Workforce System, and
resulted in developing a common vision and approach for addressing
training and workforce needs in the construction sector, as well as
other skilled occupations.
sector partnership: healthcare/workforce system increases nursing
students and nurse educators
The Kansas City Regional Workforce System, in collaboration with
the Kansas City Metropolitan Healthcare Council, has generated over $2
million in public and private funding to reduce the shortage of nurses
in the Greater Kansas City Region; increase the number of nurse
educators; and increase the training capacity of local schools,
community colleges and other secondary educational institutions.
This local Workforce System/Healthcare partnership led to the
development of a Nurse Preceptor Academy that provide mentors for new
nurses and nursing students; provides financial support to nurses
pursuing masters' degrees to become nurse educators through a $500,000
privately funded bi-state scholarship program administered by the Full
Employment Council; and establishes a bi-state workforce system
protocol that governs how Missouri and Kansas Workforce Systems
interact with Missouri and Kansas Hospital programs in the Region
bordering the State Line. This partnership also increased the number of
nursing students by 30 percent or 300 nurses.
This close association with the Healthcare industry also led to the
first Healthcare online training program in the Region through Truman
Medical Center (Kansas City, Missouri's public hospital), where
licensed practical nurses are trained to become registered nurses on
the hospital premises by Excelsior College of New York. Tuition costs
are funded equally by the Kansas City Workforce System and Truman
Medical Center. This online training program reduces the impact of
childcare and transportation expenses on trainees; increases the number
of registered nurses at the public hospital; and significantly
increases the wages of training graduates.
successful board member partnerships lead in support of the
workforce system
Great Plains Energy/Kansas City Power & Light has maintained a
successful workforce partnership with the Workforce Investment Board
over a span of 20 years. Initially, this partnership was established to
provide summer interns to KCP&L's facility, but has now evolved to
placing persons in their plant operations, such as utility linemen and
responding to other career opportunities resulting from retirements and
transitioning of an aging workforce, and implementation of ``Green''
technologies. In addition to utilizing the career center system for its
corporate workforce needs, Kansas City Power & Light has been a
financial supporter of the local Workforce Investment Board, providing
over $2 million in private funding to support career center programs.
Kansas City Power & Light's Senior Vice-President and Corporate
Secretary, Barbara Curry, also serves as Chairperson of the Workforce
Investment Board. Great Plains Energy/KCP&L has been the community
leader in Workforce/Economic Development partnerships.
The Board members of the Kansas City/Eastern Jackson Workforce
Investment Boards have created the opportunity for the local workforce
system to innovate, and move beyond traditional workforce approaches.
Strategies working with Organized Labor; linking with Economic
Development entities; developing sector-specific initiatives with
manufacturing, healthcare, and bioscience training; developing
innovative training course design and delivery; and innovating fund
development are driven by the Board members who have created
opportunities within their own organizations, affiliates, or
organizational peers.
locally appointed business-led workforce system
The appointment of a Local/Regional Workforce system by local-
elected officials has increased Workforce System responsiveness,
resulting in a more user-friendly Workforce System that meets business
and job seeker needs, as determined by the Board of their respective
Regions. As mentioned previously, the Full Employment Council serves as
the One-Stop Operator/Fiscal Agent for two Workforce Investment Regions
that border each other, yet are unique in their constituent and
employer market. These Boards incorporate similar, but distinct job
training approaches, yet have reduced operational/administrative costs
by using the same operational entity. These Boards, in partnership with
their local-elected officials, have effectively determined structure
and service delivery, budget, strategic priorities, and board size.
This approach has generated substantial local financial support,
and reduced duplicate workforce systems in two regions.
educational partnerships for just-in-time/immediate response training
In the Kansas City Region, we have formed partnerships with 4-year
colleges, vocational schools, proprietary schools, Job Corps and
community colleges to develop a just-in-time/immediate response/
credentialed training system. The foundation of the partnership is the
Missouri Department of Secondary and Elementary Education retained by
the Workforce Investment Boards to verify and certify the curriculum
and training to be provided by potential training vendors. DESE
approval is necessary before training can be assessed by job seekers
enrolled in the local Workforce System. This system enables the Kansas
City Region's job seekers to access training programs that cover both
Missouri and Kansas, including its eight county areas, as long as the
programs meet DESE criteria. Training Providers include proprietary
schools, community colleges, vocational schools, universities and
private training establishments.
The timeframe of semester-based skill training has become
increasingly incompatible with the quarterly business cycles of
employers or the fierce velocity of global competition. Utilizing only
semester-based training compromises the ability to be proactive in
meeting workforce needs required by economic expansion, or respond to
sudden economic dislocation. Therefore, the Region has prodded training
providers to create more on-demand and just-in-time training courses to
respond to the ups and downs of Regional economies.
The Metropolitan Community College of Kansas City responded by
reorganizing its administrative structure to provide immediate response
to on-demand/customized training needs. This realignment has led to
immediate response training courses in Advanced Manufacturing,
Certified Medication Technician, and Welding, to name only a few.
The University of Central Missouri based in Warrensburg, MO, with
local branches in the Region, has responded by providing on-demand
courses in Healthcare, Weatherization, Warehouse/Supply Chain and
Customer Service careers.
In March 2009, the University of Kansas responded by initiating a
course in Bioscience Technician training. Vocational and proprietary
schools have other job-
related fields. This diverse and growing menu of on-demand training in
the total post-secondary training structure increases responsiveness to
Job Seekers and Employers.
economic development partnerships that help existing businesses to be
retained or to expand in their region
Economic Development Partnerships are necessary to provide
assistance to businesses to keep them in the area, or help them to
expand. The Full Employment Council served as the catalyst to form a
Regional Business Retention Council, whose sole purpose is to assist
existing businesses in Retention and/or expansion efforts. The Council
is comprised of the Economic Development Partners on the WIB, as well
as those in the Region.
The Business Retention Council (BRC) is a diverse conglomerate of
Economic Development agencies in the Region that includes:
The Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City;
Clay County Economic Development Corporation;
Lee's Summit Economic Development Corporation;
Independence Council of Economic Development;
Blue Springs Economic Development Council;
The Liberty Partnership for Growth;
The Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce;
Richmond Chamber of Commerce;
Grandview Chamber of Commerce; and
Grain Valley Economic Development Corporation.
Members of the Business Retention Council make on-site visits to
existing businesses to determine their needs in workforce, financing,
marketing, etc., and begin immediately to accommodate their requests. A
Business Retention Coordinator hired by the Full Employment Council,
serves as the primary contact for the Economic Development Agencies and
coordinates the total Workforce System support to the client businesses
in this effort.
In the last 2 years, over 367 businesses have been provided support
and 837 jobs have been retained or added through this effort. Funding
to support this effort for the upcoming year has been provided by the
Governor's 15 percent fund, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act (ARRA) Stimulus fund.
Another critical support agency has been the Manufacturing
Extension Partnership (MEP), a program funded by the U.S. Department of
Commerce in all 50 States, to provide technical support to
manufacturing companies to increase their efficiency, and market
penetration for their products. Missouri Enterprise, the State of
Missouri's MEP program, has provided technical support to over 50
companies identified through the Business Retention Council in areas of
business, such as Energy and Efficiency audits and Supply Chain
analysis. This technical support is highly valued by companies assisted
by the Business Retention Council.
the kansas city workforce system as a ``career navigator'' through
career pathways for disconnected youth, low-income adults, and
dislocated workers
The Full Employment Council has been a catalyst in facilitating and
developing career pathways and employment opportunities for
economically disadvantaged/disconnected youth through enrollment in
universities, community colleges, vocational/proprietary schools, and
apprenticeship programs. The Workforce Investment Board has introduced
the 21st Century Workforce Scholarship program to provide tuition
scholarships in healthcare, manufacturing, and bioscience careers. The
Kansas City Region sponsored the ``Dream It Do It'' campaign to promote
manufacturing careers as viable options for young adults and
successfully raised the visibility of manufacturing careers.
In addition, the Workforce Investment Board has led local efforts
to promote youth employment policy and programs designed to facilitate
employment opportunity and work advancement. In September 2009, a
partnership of the Full Employment Council, Kansas City Public Library,
Kansas City Parks and Recreation Department; and Black Archives of Mid-
America will open a 20,000-square foot LEED-certified ``Green''
facility. This facility will house an education and resource facility
highlighting the historical accomplishments of African-Americans in the
Midwest, and a Youth Opportunity Career Center focusing on education
and career pathways for Low-Income/Disconnected Youth.
This $2.5 million historic facility is locally funded, but was
initially seeded through $300,000 in grants leveraged by the Workforce
Investment Board. This center is adjacent to the Negro Leagues Baseball
Museum and the American Jazz Museum in the 18th Vine Street Historic
Jazz area. This focus on post-secondary training opportunities and
careers for youth was further re-inforced in the Summer Job Program
funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Each high
school or GED graduate that successfully completes the 8-week summer
internship will be provided a $1,000 scholarship to attend a vocational
school or community college, or a $500 book scholarship to attend a 4-
year institution.
The Kansas City & Vicinity Workforce Investment Board has been a
programs catalyst and convener in developing career pathways for low-
income populations such as Project NOW (New Opportunities for Work.)
The Missouri Career Center worked with the University of Central
Missouri and Metropolitan Community Colleges to develop training
courses that combined basic education course work to increase basic
skills or GED certification; skill training courses to acquire a
specific skill credential; and career readiness skills that emphasize
teamwork, conflict resolution, and problem solving. These courses were
provided at accessible community training sites or at local career
centers. These training formats have increased the participation of
basic skill-deficient clients and high school dropouts in job-skill
training programs. This has led to the development of an entirely new
design of coursework for basic skill-deficient persons in customer
service, warehouse/supply chain management; certified medical
technician; certified nurse assistant careers; and will lead to more
and a greater variety of career pathways.
the local workforce system as an ``innovation system''
Innovation, entrepreneurship, workforce development and resource
leveraging are critical in order for the Workforce System to become a
catalyst and convener as has been outlined. The 501c3 status of the
Workforce Investment Boards, and Full Employment Council as the One-
Stop Operator, provides the ability to leverage local public and
private resources as it mobilizes the region to move forward with
different workforce approaches not readily available as an option for
governmental agencies, primarily due to the preference of philanthropy
to support non-profit agencies. This organizational framework has
resulted in 91 percent of the prototype programs undertaken, attracting
private funding and local government financial support. The governor's
15 percent reserve has been the primary seed funding in the majority of
these special initiatives because of its spending flexibility. This
``demonstration'' funding is critical to spurring new program design
and innovation in the local workforce system.
the one-stop career center
The One-Stop Career Center concept has also been an organizational
platform that has led to resource sharing; better job seeker and
business access to program services; and workforce and labor-market
information sharing that enables the local system to more effectively
serve job seekers and employers. This co-location and enhanced customer
information function helps career counselors to use more accurate/real-
time job market data to assist job seekers in making informed training
and career choices. Simultaneously, the assimilation of data relating
to the skill, work histories, and training options of career center job
seekers is of major strategic importance to employers as they determine
how to meet their workforce requirements in the region.
green job innovation
The Kansas City & Vicinity Workforce Investment Board has launched
a number of Green Career initiatives as a result of receiving ARRA
Stimulus funds. Working in partnership with the Metropolitan Energy
Center and the University of Central Missouri, the first curriculum for
career pathways for green jobs was established in the Kansas City &
Vicinity Workforce Investment Board Region. This initial career pathway
begins as a Weatherization Technician; transitions to an Energy
analyst; and culminates in an Energy auditor. The first 12 graduates of
this program as Weatherization Technicians graduated in June 2009, and
10 of them have secured employment in the field. The Metropolitan
Community Colleges in Kansas City, MO have also initiated a number of
new course offerings in Green Careers that will become a part of their
on-demand course offerings. Across the State Line at Johnson County
Community College in Kansas, an Energy Auditor Certification Training
program has been in existence for over a year.
The Full Employment Council is also a Training Agency Designee for
the Green Impact Zone, a special impact area of the 5th Congressional
District, which targets 150 blocks of an area with some of the highest
numbers of unemployment, poverty, and distress in the area. The zone
will have a targeted focus on resources from job training, to housing,
to transportation in a focused effort to reduce unemployment and
economic decline. The Full Employment Council will be a part of the
Community Impact Team to provide intensive assistance to this area.
Despite the success enjoyed by the Local Workforce System, there
are areas of the law that must be changed or eliminated:
1. Public sector board membership must be reduced unless the local
board determines it is a strategic value. Mandated public appointments
increase Board size to sustain a business majority, and make quorum
requirements difficult to achieve.
2. Mandated local partnerships must be eliminated unless the non-
WIA partner also contributes funds to the Local Workforce System.
Presently, the partnership agreements as configured, place all
accountability and funding on the Local Workforce System and minimal
reciprocal accountability from the non-WIA partner.
3. Youth eligibility requirements must be minimized to increase the
services to youth most in need (Low-Income and other barriers to
employment). However, local options for determining eligibility, such
as documentation from a TANF agency or Food Stamp entity could be a
substitute for income information verified through check stubs.
innovation-policy recommendations
1. A local innovations budget. To support maximum 2-year programs
or projects that creates, enhance or expand training options/results
for Low Wage Workers, Disconnected Youth, as sector-based training. The
objective would be to increase training participation, require wage
gains in target populations, or market penetration in specific industry
sectors.
2. Establish a training ``Smart Pass.'' To be used to facilitate
the referral and enrollment of Economically Disadvantaged clients
presently participating in HUD, HHS, or other DOL programs that are
seeking training services. An Electronic Referral from these agencies
would satisfy eligibility and audit requirements for the WIA Program,
for enrollment or referral to appropriate workforce programs.
3. Establish a stand-alone Career/Internship/Summer Jobs program.
Primarily for 16-24-year-old youth, focusing on subsidized employment
experience that leads to a GED/H.S. diploma; enrollment into community
college, vocational school, a 4-year institution with certificate
programs; enrollment into an apprenticeship or employment. This
internship could be available anytime during the year for an 8-12-week
period.
4. Adopt measures that reflect job placement, retention, earnings,
and credential attainment. Discourage measures that encourage low
investment approaches or discourage serving hard-to-place clients.
5. Funding to reflect the reality of a ``Global Skills
Competition''. The United States must skill up its Youth and Adult
populations at an accelerated rate to compete in the world market, and
to make the economic adjustment necessary to arm large and small
business with a skilled and agile workforce. This became evident to me
as I looked at the formula budget that was provided to our Region for
PY2009, leading to a 12 percent decrease in our formula funds. This
decrease was offset by our ARRA budget, which provided needed relief to
meet the 400 percent increase of clients in our system. However, it was
unsettling that in a time when our unemployment rate is 10 percent in
Kansas City, the highest recorded in 25 years, that without ARRA, our
budget would be cut by 12 percent. I would recommend some type of
budget ``fail safe'' mechanism that would act similar to the
unemployment insurance mechanism that would trigger training fund
budget authority when severe economic downturns occur.
In addition, employment and training budget authority has remained
the same since I made the transition to the Workforce Development
System from Economic Development more than 26 years ago, while its
purchasing and programming ability has been severely diminished by the
tremendous tuition increases in the post-secondary training system. We
must strive for a target budget allocation of between $7 billion to $9
billion to compensate for this erosion of purchasing power to the
system.
In closing, I appreciate this opportunity afforded to me to be here
today and look forward to working with you to increase the skills of
our workforce in the present and future.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
Mr. Thurmond.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL L. THURMOND, COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ATLANTA, GA
Mr. Thurmond. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify. I would also like to thank Senator
Johnny Isakson, a longtime colleague, a former member of the
Georgia House of Representatives, and a longtime friend and
supporter of our workforce development efforts in the State of
Georgia.
I am convinced that the philosophy and the funding provided
by WIA can be leveraged to provide critical employment and
training opportunities to the millions of unemployed and under-
employed Americans today.
Since the mid-1930s, jobless Georgians applied for
unemployment benefits and searched for jobs in unemployment
offices whose design and function reflected Depression era
realities. Delivery of employment services to job seekers was
fragmented and confusing because employment services were
provided based on siloed Federal funding streams.
The enactment of the Workforce Investment Act in 1998
provided an unprecedented opportunity for State and local
jurisdictions to develop a more coordinated and efficient
workforce development system.
The Georgia Department of Labor embraced the letter, the
philosophy, and the spirit of this legislation, and with
bipartisan support, we began to design and implement a fully
integrated, comprehensive State workforce development system.
Our primary objective was the coordination of five major
employment and training and income-support programs: the
Wagner-Peyser Act, ES, Unemployment Insurance, Vocational
Rehabilitation, and subsequently, the Workforce Investment Act.
The Workforce Investment Act encouraged service integration
between several federally funded employment and training
programs via a One-Stop Career Center network. Energized by the
flexibility afforded by this act, the State of Georgia charted
a new course focused on improving the quality of service to our
primary customers, job seekers, employers, and economic
developers. Georgia's new workforce development system was
designed to serve a diverse and dynamic customer base, as
evidenced by our adoption of a universal access policy. A
strategic commitment was made to ensure that all persons,
including those with disabilities, would have equal access to
employment, education, and training resources.
Significant investments were made to strengthen the
technological and programmatic linkages between WIA, ES, UI,
and VR programs. The foundation of our system is comprised of
three components: a statewide network of One-Stop Career
Centers and satellite sites; an interactive technological
infrastructure; and professionally trained customer-focused
staff. Although still a work in progress, Georgia's workforce
development system is at the forefront of our State's efforts
to help the more than 480,000 Georgians who are unemployed
today get back to work.
Georgia's WIA-inspired One-Stop network is a cornerstone of
our system. Investments were made not just by the Labor
Department, but by WIA partners as well to establish this
important technological network. Our network consists of 46
full-service designated One-Stops and scores of additional
service access points. As a result, Georgia now has a statewide
system of clicks and bricks, offices, career centers where
unemployed or employed Georgians come to seek service, as well
as Internet access.
The transformation of our department unemployment offices
would not have been possible without the support and
unprecedented financial assistance provided by our State WIA
board. More than $2.5 million was appropriated to help
transform 32 of our 53 unemployment offices into designated
One-Stops. The others now serve as affiliate satellite One-
Stops. Over $2 million was invested in One-Stop grants to
technical colleges, libraries, homeless shelters, and
transition centers to ensure democratic and easy access to all
of our citizens.
My key concern today is that we must finally fully fund
employment services of the Wagner-Peyser Act. More than 80
percent of the Georgians who access employment and training
services through our career centers are served through the
Wagner-Peyser program. In Georgia, we provide an administrative
assessment that supplements Federal funding, but the Federal
funding is much too small.
I would also encourage us to expand our summer and youth
employment programs where a key focus of those employment
programs would be increasing graduation rates. Our Jobs for
Georgia Graduates program had a 95 percent high school
graduation rate this past year.
And finally, this. Thank you for your help in refunding the
summer youth program. In Georgia, 10,000 young people are
working and drawing a paycheck today because of your vote and
support.
And thank you, because I myself--prior to WIA, there was
something called JTTA, and I served in a summer youth program.
I was one of those disadvantaged kids who drew my first
paycheck through a summer youth program. And my daughter, who
is now a sophomore at the University of Georgia--I still show
her my first pay stub. There is something about a job. You get
one job. You seek another one, and more importantly, you seek
another one that pays a higher salary than the previous one
that you had.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Thurmond follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael L. Thurmond
Thank you Madam Chair, Senator Murray, Ranking Member Senator
Isakson, and members of the Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace
Safety, for the opportunity to present testimony on how the Workforce
Investment Act (WIA) of 1998 served as a catalyst for the design and
implementation of a comprehensive workforce development system in
Georgia. More importantly, I am convinced that the philosophy and
funding provided by WIA can be leveraged to provide critical employment
and training services to millions of unemployed and under-employed
Americans.
Since the mid-1930s, jobless Georgians applied for unemployment
benefits and searched for jobs in ``unemployment offices'' whose design
and function reflected Depression Era economic realities. Delivery of
employment services to jobseekers and employers was fragmented and
confusing, because employment and training programs were ``siloed'' by
Federal funding streams.
The enactment of the Workforce Investment Act in 1998 provided an
unprecedented opportunity for State and local jurisdictions to develop
a more coordinated and efficient workforce development system. WIA
provided for enhanced emphasis on customer choice, customer
satisfaction, blended funding streams and integrated service delivery.
The Georgia Department of Labor (GDOL) embraced the WIA philosophy
and letter of the legislation, and began the design and implementation
of a fully integrated, comprehensive, State workforce development
system. Our primary objective was the coordination of four major
employment, training and income support programs: Wagner-Peyser Act,
Employment Services (ES), Unemployment Insurance (UI), Vocational
Rehabilitation (VR) and subsequently, the Workforce Investment Act.
The United States Employment Services program was established under
the Wagner-Peyser Act in 1933 to help millions of jobless Americans
find work during the Great Depression. Two years later, the
Unemployment Insurance program was enacted to provide temporary income
support for unemployed workers. The Vocational Rehabilitation program
was originally intended to help disabled World War I veterans find
work; however its mission was broadened in 1920 to include all persons
with disabilities.
The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 encouraged service integration
between several federally funded employment and training programs, via
a One-Stop Career Center network. Significantly, the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) provides an unprecedented
investment of Federal dollars in America's workforce development
system.
Energized by the increased flexibility afforded by WIA, the GDOL
charted a new course focused on improving the quality of service to our
primary customers--jobseekers, employers and economic developers.
Georgia's new workforce development system was designed to serve a
diverse and dynamic customer base as evidenced by the adoption of a
``Universal Access'' policy. A strategic commitment was made to ensure
that all persons, including those with disabilities, would have equal
access to employment, education and training resources.
Significant investments were made to strengthen the technological
and programmatic linkages between the WIA, ES, UI and VR programs. The
foundation of Georgia's workforce development system is comprised of
three components: (1) a statewide network of One-Stop Career Centers
and satellite sites; (2) an interactive technological infrastructure;
and (3) professionally trained, customer-focused staff. Although still
a work-in-progress, Georgia's workforce development system is at the
forefront of our State's efforts to address the economic challenges
associated with the current recession.
laying the foundation
One-Stop Career Center Network
Georgia's WIA-inspired, one-stop network is the cornerstone of
Georgia's workforce development system. Significant investments were
made by GDOL and WIA partners in the establishment of a statewide
network of One-Stop Career Centers. The network consists of 46 full-
service designated one-stops and scores of additional service access
points. As a result, jobseekers, employers and economic developers have
greater access to a variety of employment services and related
information.
Subsequent to the passage of WIA, a strategic decision was made to
merge all existing GDOL offices into Georgia's one-stop system. The
form and function of the department's 53 ``unemployment offices'' were
redesigned and re-branded as GDOL Career Centers. Dull, depressing
offices are being transformed into spacious, brightly colored, high
tech, high touch One-Stop Career Centers.
The transformation of the department's ``unemployment offices''
would not have been possible without the support and unprecedented
financial assistance provided by Georgia's local WIA boards and staff.
More than $2.5 million were appropriated by 11 WIA areas to help
underwrite the cost of retrofitting GDOL-operated one-stops. Local WIA
boards selected 32 of GDOL's 53 Career Centers as designated one-stops,
while the remaining department offices serve as satellite one-stops.
Over $2 million in WIA one-stop grants were also awarded to technical
colleges, libraries, nonprofit organizations, homeless shelters,
transition centers and mobile service units to finance the development
of an electronic network of satellite one-stops throughout the state.
The WIA philosophy of cooperation, service integration and blended
funding streams also played a key role in Georgia's decision to utilize
UI administrative assessment funds to offset longstanding Wagner-Peyser
budget shorts. State law provides that 8 percent of UI employer taxes
can be invested in helping UI claimants get back to work quickly. In
fiscal year 2009, more than $25 million were appropriated to finance
the hiring of career-center job developers, counselors, administrative
personnel and other employment-related services.
Multi-agency partnerships are playing a key role in providing
support services and connecting customers with employment and training
resources. The location of local agencies and non-profit service
providers in GDOL Career Centers has increased access and improved
service delivery to our customers. An abbreviated listing of our one-
stop partners includes: The Technical College System of Georgia, Local
WIA partners, Experience Works, AARP, Economic Opportunity Authority,
Job Corps, Meals on Wheels, Adult Literacy, Georgia National Guard,
Disabled American Veterans Administration, Community Council on Aging,
Fatherhood Initiative, Georgia Department of Family and Children
Services, Homeless Advocacy Organizations, and Telemon Corporation.
Technology
Prior to the passage of WIA, Georgia utilized a Management
Information System (MIS), to capture related customer data and
employment and training activities. The system was not Web-enabled,
which allowed users access on a limited system network. Although
federally compliant in all areas, the MIS system allowed only for data
collection and reporting, that was restricted to the varying funding
silos.
The WIA mandated greater coordination and unified data collection
by key workforce system partners. Accordingly, GDOL developed a more
comprehensive data system known as the Georgia Workforce System (GWS).
This web-enabled system encompasses data collection, storage and
reporting capabilities for WIA, UI, and Wagner-Peyser services. Web
access introduced enhanced remote participation in the system.
Consistency in the method of collection, data type and reporting
outcomes was significantly enhanced, along with shared use of
information between funding silos and programs. State staff provided
training to local and State workforce partners upon GWS deployment,
with written guidance on new features and developments as needed.
The Georgia Workforce System (GWS) was developed in a Web-enabled,
browser-based environment with reporting capability for WIA, ES, UI and
VR. Customers provide basic demographic information once and
comprehensive records are built, maintained and accessed throughout the
service continuum. Data is housed in a relational database with the
capability of interfacing with external systems.
System components include: a common intake system for key programs
to facilitate the collection of customer information; assessing
customer needs and tracking services and outcomes; system storage of
basic demographic data, including work history, individual assessments,
case management, employment plans and information, documenting the
delivery of other services. An eligible provider list and consumer
report card system required by WIA includes information about and
access to service providers. Management and reporting modules enable
local WIA agencies to meet Federal requirements for performance
accountability as well as the production of quarterly and annual
reports. An employer information system also enables GDOL staff and
partners to document employer services, coordinate job development
visits and provide relevant employer information.
GDOL serves a growing number of customers through its Web site
(www.dol
.state.ga.us) by offering over 800 electronic pages of employment and
training information, including a variety of online services, forms,
publications, and links to additional resources. GDOL also
electronically advertises job fairs, employer seminars and other
events. Additionally, the department provides easy access to a variety
of labor market resources and information for businesses.
A major effort was made to increase accessibility for Georgians
with disabilities by continually improving and expanding our Web-based
services. The Georgia Rehabilitation Online Works (GROW) system allows
staff to provide enhanced case management services to customers with
disabilities. This electronic system creates a record of seamless
service delivery to a targeted population. In addition to case
management, GROW documents assessments, disability determinations,
referrals to other partner agencies, service outcomes and follow-up.
The GWS is supported by trained professional staff that provide
daily support and technical assistance on data management and reporting
issues. The State also provides local systems with critical performance
tools, including WebFOCUS software, through which standard and ad-hoc
data queries help local systems track and manage customer activities
and outcomes. Flexibility of the GWS is evidenced by the recent and
expedient alterations necessitated by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009. The GWS will serve as the primary means to
document the services and positive impacts of Georgia's ARRA
activities.
Human Capital
The successful implementation of WIA is dependent on the
development and enhancement of professional workforce development
staff. Dedicated staff, empowered to build partnerships with other
agencies and employers, are a key component of a successful workforce
development system. Considerable education and training investments
were made to encourage GDOL employees to embrace the holistic
philosophy of integrated service delivery. To achieve this goal,
extensive statewide and local training, including cross-training among
agencies and partners, was developed and provided to all professional
staff.
Ongoing training is conducted to ensure that workforce staff is
able to effectively navigate and help jobseekers, employers and
economic developers utilize the system. Our comprehensive training
program includes: new staff orientation, customer service training,
college intern program, International Association of Workforce
Professionals, Georgia Rehabilitation Association, Executive Commitment
to Leadership program, education assistance program, Georgia Workforce
Conference, Georgia Safety Conference, and the Georgia Employer
Committee Conference. In-service training is provided to address
diversity, use of workforce information and technology, problem
solving, and marketing of department services.
In 2007, the department launched a Learning Management System which
houses the on-line GDOL Learning Center. The Learning Center provides
24/7 universal access to ``knowledge repositories'' which enables
employees to receive ``just-in-time'' training necessitated by changing
marketplace conditions. Self-directed training empowers all employees
with the ability to develop and manage personal learning plans designed
to enhance competency in leadership development, customer service,
technology skills and workforce information. This strategy has helped
eliminate departmental ``training silos'' and created a unified
``learning community'' for the department and partner agencies. The
Learning Center is fully accessible for persons with disabilities who
utilize assistive technology devices.
the service continuum
Georgia's workforce development system provides jobseekers and
employers with a continuum of services that can be customized to meet
individual needs. The three phases of the continuum are: (1) Core
Services, (2) Intensive Services, and (3) Training. Support and
assistance are provided based on a triage approach that enables staff
to direct customers to appropriate employment and training resources.
Core services are available to customers through self-service and/or
staff-assisted support.
Self-Directed Core Services
Self-directed services include: online filing for UI, free Internet
access, job listings, copiers, telephone, fax machines, resource
personnel, language services, language line, forms and other
publications, e-mail, resume software, on-line job applications, word
processing, books and videos, clothes closet, kiddie corner, labor-
market information, career counseling, comprehensive assessments,
testing, workshops on job interviewing, resume writing, job search,
negotiation and conflict resolution, case management and specialized
workshops for veterans, persons with disabilities and rehabilitated ex-
offenders.
Intensive Services
Intensive services are highly structured and offered to customers
who have significant barriers to employment. Services include
comprehensive assessments, adult basic education, internships,
intensive job search, supportive services, trade adjustment assistance,
etc. These services are designed to address targeted populations with
specific barriers to employment, such as rehabilitated ex-offenders,
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families recipients, dislocated workers,
youth, veterans, homeless individuals, vocational rehabilitation, non-
custodial parents and unemployment claimants.
Training Services
Training programs help jobseekers who require skill development or
enhancement services in order to qualify for new employment
opportunities. Services may include occupational skills training, on-
the-job training, entrepreneurial training, job readiness training,
customized training, adult education, etc.
Services for Employers
Employer services include: designated employer interviewing space,
recruitment, screening, interviewing, job order taking, referral of
jobseekers, UI seminars, access to Internet, fax, employer committees,
seminars on immigration law and workplace safety.
summary
Georgia's strategic decision to design and implement a fully
integrated, comprehensive workforce development system has been
effective in helping unemployed Georgians return to work. The Georgia
Department of Labor and our workforce partners were successful in
helping 295,231 jobseekers return to work between July 1, 2007 and June
30, 2008. Although our State, like much of the Nation has been hit hard
by the current recession, 66 percent of those who registered with the
department secured employment. Of those who secured employment, 80
percent were still working 6 months later.
The Georgia Department of Labor and our State workforce partners
have received numerous awards and citations including: the American
Institute Full Employment Award, the National Foundation for
Unemployment Compensation & Workers Compensation's J. Elred Hill, Jr.
Award, USDOL's Large States Awards for Performance Excellence in Tax
Operations and Performance Excellence in Appeals Decisions, Letter of
Commendation from Region 3 Employment And Training Division,
Outstanding Performance Award from the Federal Bonding Program and
national honors for helping non-custodial parents, TANF recipients and
rehabilitated ex-offenders find employment.
The Georgia philosophy of workforce development is simple: WIA, UI,
ES, VR and other employment and training partners must work together to
ensure that jobseekers, employers and economic developers receive the
highest quality of service. More importantly, we are proud to be part
of a national workforce development system that is focused on helping
unemployed Americans get back to work.
recommendations
The following WIA modernization recommendations are submitted for
your consideration:
1. A top priority for WIA reauthorization should be clearly
defining the purpose and mission of the Wagner-Peyser ES program. The
Employment Services program should be fully funded because it is the
backbone of America's workforce development system. Incentive funding
should be made available to States and local jurisdictions to encourage
multi-agency service delivery and coordination.
2. National Youth strategy should emphasize partnering with State
and local dropout prevention programs, such as the highly successful
Jobs for America's Graduates (JAG) Program. Georgia is a proud
affiliate of the JAG program that emphasizes education, training and
career preparation as a dual track for high school students. Notably,
participants in Georgia's 2008 JGG senior class achieved a graduation
rate of 95 percent, 20 percentage points higher than the State's 2008
graduation rate!
3. Invest unspent ARRA stimulus funds in the development of a
national Transitional Jobs Program for WIA, ES, VR and UI customers
that will stimulate private sector job creation and hiring. Georgia
Works is a transitional jobs program that allows UI claimants to
receive 8 weeks of on-the-job training while continuing to receive UI
benefits. During its 6-year history, 60 percent of the trainees have
been hired prior to the expiration of their training period.
Thank you for your service to America, and for your time and
attention.
Senator Murray. Thank you and thank you for that
endorsement. I worked very hard to get that into the economic
recovery package. Rahm Emanuel still does not look at me
without going, I know, summer jobs. So I appreciate that
endorsement. Thank you.
Mr. Thurmond. Thank you so much for what you did.
Senator Murray. You bet.
Mr. Bender.
STATEMENT OF RICK S. BENDER, PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON STATE LABOR
COUNCIL, AFL-CIO, SEATTLE, WA
Mr. Bender. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the
subcommittee, for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the
AFL-CIO, including the more than 400,000 union members I
represent, on how best to streamline the decisionmaking process
involved with the Workforce Investment Act.
Washington State is proud to be in the forefront of
innovation and accountability for our Workforce Training and
Education Coordinating Board, of which I am a labor board
member. We have transformed our system to work for the economy
and the labor force.
Other States are in the process of copying our success, and
we hope this committee will recognize the value of what we are
doing and incorporate it for the Federal system and for the
success of students, job seekers, workers, and employers
nationwide.
I am excited to tell you about Washington State and what we
are doing, but first I want to talk about the core components
we believe must be in place in order to make any workforce
board function at its best, including: first, a publicly
operated employment system; second, adequate funding for worker
training which includes adults, youth and dislocated workers;
and third, equal representation on State and local WIA boards
between business, government, and labor.
A publicly operated employment security program is the glue
between education, industry, and worker retraining.
Only government systems can achieve statewide and Federal
policy integration, as well as equitable distribution of
resources.
The second pillar, funding for adult, youth, and dislocated
worker training is imperative. Job market upheaval requires us
to get more training services to more participants. We must
cast a wider net to get all workers the help they need.
Last, State and local WIA boards must have equal
representation between business, government, and labor. The
financial meltdown revealed a system that relied too heavily on
only one of the three pillars of our society. Chaos ensued.
Workforce investment cannot tilt the balance of power toward
business, nor can it tilt toward government or labor. For
everyone to be truly vested, it must be an equal partnership.
In Washington State, we have that balance and it is working
extremely well. Our State board has nine members: three from
labor, three from business, and three from government. We
believe this model is what makes us stand out across the Nation
and has been the reason for our success.
We developed a road map in Washington State to create a
high-skilled, high-wage workforce by the year 2018, and I have
a copy of that for the committee. (See www.hecb.wa.gov/
research/Issues/documents/documents/HighSkillsHighWages-WTB-
2008.pdf.)
But before this, there was no systemwide accountability for
workforce development in Washington State. Every program was
separate. We could not collect consistent data from agency to
agency. Some programs did not even look at what happened to
their participants once they left. There were no guides for
improvement. Now all this has been changed in Washington State.
We have implemented our Performance Management for
Continuous Improvement program, PMCI. This systemwide framework
provides us increased accountability, improved strategic
planning, more efficient use of resources, and a sense of
shared responsibility among workforce development programs.
These changes improve the credibility of our programs,
enhance the support they receive, and increase our ability to
service the customers.
I will submit a more detailed account of the PMCI system in
my written testimony, but the bottom line is that this system
works in Washington State.
The system helped us build programs that work for students,
adults, and industry, and I would like to give you three
examples.
For students, navigation 101. It is a life skills planning
program for students in grades 6 through 12. It aims to help
students make clear, careful, and creative plans for life
beyond high school while involving both teachers and parents.
For adults, we implemented the I-BEST program. This program
combines adult basic education, reading, writing, and
arithmetic, with job skills training.
And for industry, we have created skill panels to identify
and close worker skill gaps in industry sectors. It allows
partners to anticipate and respond effectively to industry's
changing workforce needs.
These programs are just a sample of the achievements we
have made through accountability and by listening to each
other's needs. We have a strong public overseer in the
Employment Securities Department, and we have equal
representation between business, government, and labor.
We have learned to work within our means through
accountability, but I have to stress the importance of Federal
funding in this endeavor. We suffered many setbacks during the
last Administration, but now because the job market is changing
so rapidly, funding is more crucial then ever. We must invest
in our workforce to keep America safe, secure, and productive.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bender follows:]
Prepared Statement of Rick S. Bender
My name is Rick Bender and I am President of the Washington State
Labor Council, AFL-CIO. Thank you, Ms. Chairwoman, and members of the
subcommittee, for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the AFL-CIO
including the more than 400,000 union members I represent on how best
to streamline the decisionmaking process involved with the Workforce
Investment Act.
Washington State is proud to be in the forefront of innovation and
accountability for our Workforce Training and Education Coordinating
Board, of which I am a labor board member. We have transformed our
system to work for the economy and the labor force.
Other States are in the process of copying our success and we hope
this committee will recognize the value of what we are doing and
incorporate it for the Federal system and the success of students,
jobseekers, workers and employers nationwide.
I am excited to tell you about what Washington is doing, but first
I want to talk about the core components we believe must be in place in
order to make any workforce board function at its best. Including:
First, a publicly operated employment system.
Second, adequate funding for worker training which
includes adults, youth and dislocated workers.
And third, equal representation on State and local WIA
boards between business, government and labor.
A publicly operated employment security program is the glue between
education, industry and worker re-training.
Only government systems can achieve statewide and Federal policy
integration--as well as equitable distribution of resources.
The second pillar, funding for adult, youth and dislocated worker
training is imperative.
Job market upheaval requires us to get more training services to
more participants. We must cast a wider net to get all workers the help
they need.
Last, State and local WIA boards must have equal representation
between business, government and labor. The financial meltdown revealed
a system that relied too heavily on only one of the three pillars of
our society. Chaos ensued. Workforce Investment cannot tilt the balance
of power toward business--nor can it tilt toward government or labor.
For everyone to be truly vested, it must be an equal partnership.
In Washington State, we have balance and it is working extremely
well. Our State board has nine members--three from labor, three from
business and three from government. We believe this model is what makes
us stand out across the Nation and has been the reason for our success.
We developed a roadmap in Washington to create a high-skilled,
high-wage workforce by 2018. And we created the accountability to get
there.
Before this, there was no systemwide accountability for workforce
development. Every program was separate--we couldn't collect consistent
data from agency to agency. Some programs didn't even look at what
happened to their participants once they left. There were no guides for
improvements. Now all this has changed.
We have implemented our ``Performance Management for Continuous
Improvement'' program (PMCI). This systemwide framework provides us:
increased accountability,
improved strategic planning,
more efficient use of resources, and
a sense of shared responsibility among workforce
development programs.
These changes improve the credibility of our programs, enhance the
support they receive and increase our ability to serve customers.
I will submit a more detailed account of the PMCI system in my
written testimony, but the bottom line is--this works.
This system helped us build programs that work for Students, Adults
and Industry.
Examples include:
For Students: Navigation 101.--A life skills and planning
program for students in grades 6 through 12, It aims to help students
make clear, careful, and creative plans for life beyond high school
while involving teachers and parents too.
For Adults: We've implemented the I-Best program.--This
program combines Adult Basic Education (reading, writing and
arithmetic) with job skills training.
For Industry: We have created skill panels to identify and
close worker skill gaps in industry sectors. It allows partners to
anticipate and respond effectively to industry's changing workforce
needs.
These programs are just a sample of the achievements we've made
through accountability and by listening to each others' needs. We have
a strong public overseer in the Employment Securities Department and we
have equal representation between government, labor, and business.
We have learned to work within our means through accountability--
but I have to stress the importance of Federal funding in this
endeavor. We suffered many set backs during the Bush administration--
but now, because the job market is changing so rapidly--funding is more
crucial than ever. We must invest in our workforce to keep America
safe, secure and productive.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
Mr. Kiernan.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM E. KIERNAN, Ph.D., DIRECTOR AND RESEARCH
PROFESSOR, INSTITUTE FOR COMMUNITY INCLUSION, BOSTON, MA
Mr. Kiernan. Thank you, Senator Murray and Senator Isakson.
I would also like to thank Senator Murray for her
recognition of our own Senator Kennedy and his commitment to
the workforce field and certainly employment for all as this
committee has reinforced that commitment.
I was also struck by Assistant Secretary Oates' statement
of the fact that the Secretary's mission is a good job for all,
which we certainly agree with.
I direct the Institute for Community Inclusion, which is at
the University of Massachusetts at Boston. We are a university-
affiliated center on disabilities, which is one of 67 centers
in a national network of the Association of University Centers
on Disabilities. We have a strong interest in the areas of One-
Stop and vocational rehabilitation, and I have brought with me
a person who assisted in the development of the materials,
David Hof, who is a technical assistance specialist who has
worked in One-Stop systems.
What I will try and summarize today is some of the areas
that I feel are important for you to consider, but also in the
detailed report that is submitted is a much more extensive
outline of some of the recommendations.
Let me just touch briefly on the background for the
population that I will be talking about, and those are
individuals with disabilities.
Thirteen to fourteen percent of adults with disabilities
are unemployed. That is 5 percentage points higher than the
average population without disabilities. But more troubling
than that is between 26 to 30 percent of adults with
disabilities are considered as a part of the workforce. That
means that basically three to four individuals out of five
persons with disabilities are not considered part of the
workforce. That does not necessarily bode well for the
Secretary's statement about ``all.'' We have a ways to go in
order to meet that.
Additionally, of the individuals with disabilities who are
working, about one-half are working at or below the poverty
level. So we must seek to get better jobs, good jobs, as the
Secretary has outlined for us.
I would like to offer a few suggestions about the One-
Stops. The One-Stop, really as more of a system than a center,
is a consortium of 17 mandated partners that are there to
develop programs that would assist in some way in supporting
all job seekers.
Today what I would like to summarize very briefly are seven
areas that we think are working, two areas that might be for
consideration of changes or elimination, and four for
innovation.
In the seven areas, certainly one of the strengths of the
workforce system is the universal aspects of the workforce
system. We have seen changes and considerable changes in issues
of physical access, as well as more recently program access of
persons with disabilities in the One-Stop system. We have made
some growth in those areas, some considerable growth. As you
have heard, we still have some room to improve and expand on
the full access of persons with disabilities.
The ongoing contributions of the employment and the
training system are clear. Since its beginning, the supports
through the small grants that, in fact, were mentioned earlier,
but also in the past, they have had a strong commitment to the
disability program navigators. We would like to re-inforce the
idea of continuing the support of that effort that allows
individuals who would work through the One-Stop systems to
guide persons with disabilities and job seekers to more
effectively reach employment outcomes.
Also, the contributions that are made through the Office of
Disability Employment Policy and the demonstration of
customized employment as an effective approach toward assisting
persons with disabilities in reaching employment, but more
particularly in developing and understanding that there has to
be a relationship between the employer and the employee and a
negotiation to lead to good job outcomes for individuals with
disabilities. More particularly in the area of customized
employment of the Office of Disability Employment Policy, we
would like to see an emphasis on looking at some other
nonmandated partners such as Medicaid, CMS, TANF, and SSA in
the partnership discussion.
The measurement effects were talked about very briefly in
the past of looking at measures that, in fact, would document
outcomes effectively and not penalize or put at a disadvantage
individuals with disabilities in the One-Stop system, as
currently appears to happen.
The elimination of the sequencing of services Assistant
Secretary Oates had mentioned. Going from core to intensive to
training is the sequence that we ought to put to rest and get
on with the business of direct access to services.
The clear practices of the voc rehab system--over the last
several years, we have seen some very significant relationships
expanded between the One-Stops and the public vocational
rehabilitation system at a State level in States such as, to my
right, Washington, Alaska, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Michigan,
and Minnesota, and there are more States that, in fact, have
improved their relationships in the public voc rehab system.
More particularly, not at the State level, but at the local
level, there are some examples where the rehab system and the
One-Stop systems are working quite well together. We need more
of that expansion.
A couple of the areas that we think are for elimination.
One is that we think the requirement of the infrastructure
contributions to each of the partners has become a major
impediment to the negotiation of partnerships. We would
recommend that, in fact, the infrastructure be supported
entirely and that the partnerships focus on the relationships
of what professionals, expertise, and resources can be brought
to the table by the 17 mandated and other partners in the
system.
Let me just touch briefly on a few of the areas that I
think are important to consider. One is that with the passage
of WIA, it will also bring the vocational rehabilitation system
and its emphasis on transition. We heard the Deputy Secretary
in Education talking about transition as important. Transition
involves educational systems. It involves a number of partners
that, in fact, are not necessarily mandated. So we would
strongly encourage in the partnership agreements that we look
at both mandated and nonmandated partners in the development of
effective transition programs and the youth programs within
Labor.
The last two elements, I will suggest very briefly. One is
that the One-Stops be considered as employment networks. In
looking at the division in Massachusetts alone, in looking at
the data for the 193,000 persons who went through the system
last year, 7,347 were individuals who had SSI or SSDI
eligibility. They are individuals who could have a ticket. We
could use the ticket to benefit and generate additional
revenues for the One-Stop, if One-Stops were employment
networks.
The collaboration with other entities, including the DD
system, the developmental disabilities system, and the mental
health system in the One-Stops is essential if, in fact, we are
going to have a comprehensive system to serve individuals with
disabilities leading to employment with many of these systems.
Now we are seeing that employment is a central piece of their
mission going forward.
And last, building the capacity of the staff who work in
the One-Stop systems to effectively serve and support
individuals with disabilities can be done through both online
training, staff development, and orientation of new staff.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kiernan follows:]
Prepared Statement of William E. Kiernan, Ph.D.
I am William E. Kiernan, Ph.D., Director of the Institute for
Community Inclusion, a University Center for Excellence in Disabilities
located jointly at the University of Massachusetts Boston and
Children's Hospital Boston. We are 1 of 67 such centers that make up
the nationwide network of University Centers for Excellence in
Developmental Disabilities (UCEDD) that are national leaders in
research, interdisciplinary training, technical assistance, and service
and are supported by the Association of University Centers on
Disabilities. UCEDDs are the national leaders in a constellation of
activities designed to improve employment options and outcomes for
people with developmental and other disabilities. Our center has worked
extensively in supporting the employment of persons with disabilities
and has been involved with supporting the One-Stop Career Centers and
the public Vocational Rehabilitation agencies at the State level in
expanding employment options for persons with disabilities. I am
pleased and honored to have been asked to comment on the
reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act and correspondingly the
Rehabilitation Act.
I have organized my verbal as well as the initial portion of this
written testimony around the two questions that were sent to me by the
committee. Additionally, I am submitting written testimony including
some more specific suggestions as to areas where changes could be made
to strengthen the act as well as areas where modifications might be
made to allow the act to realize its full and intended congressional
intent, that is, providing universally designed, no-wrong door strategy
for all job seekers in the United States.
I would like to begin my written presentation with a brief overview
of employment status of persons with disabilities nationally and the
potential relationship that persons with disabilities have or could
have with the workforce development efforts of this legislation.
Current Status of Employment of Persons with Disabilities: Over the
past decade it has become more apparent that there will be a shortage
of workers to meet employer demands. Even given the current economic
downturn, with the declining birth rate as well as the aging of the
current workforce, most industries are realizing that their growth will
more likely be limited in the long term by the declining labor supply
and not the economy in general. Despite this declining workforce, there
are still populations where the labor force participation rate is quite
low as in the case of persons with disabilities where 7 out of 10
persons with disabilities are not in the labor market. Coupling the
apparent declining labor supply with the low-labor force participation
rate for persons with disabilities (nationally about 36 percent of
working age adults having any disability condition and 27 percent for
those having a mental disability as compared to 70 percent labor force
participation for all working age adults as reported by the American
Community Survey, 2006), there are some clear inconsistencies in both
expectation and perception of this current and potential labor
resource.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the official
unemployment rate for people with disabilities, meaning those who have
lost their jobs and those whom are actively seeking employment, for the
first quarter of 2009 was between 13 and 14 percent, 5 to 6 percentage
points higher than the non-disabled population. Additionally, as was
also reported in the American Community Survey, the BLS reported that
for the same time period only 23 percent of all adults with
disabilities participated in the labor force as compared with 71
percent of the non-disabled population. Correspondingly, for those
individuals with disabilities who are employed their earnings are
considerably less than the earnings for persons without disabilities
(50 to 70 percent less earnings per week for persons with disabilities
as compared to those without disabilities as reported by the American
Community Survey, 2006). Finally, as reported by the Harris poll, of
those individuals surveyed the vast majority who were not working would
be interested in working if the opportunity were to become available
(approximately 7 out of 10 asked).
A future challenge for employers is how to utilize the full labor
force, supporting the older worker who may be acquiring disabilities as
they age, engaging the retired worker, and recruiting from the emerging
workforce of individuals with disabilities and recent immigrants to
advance the economic engine of American businesses in the coming years.
Interesting enough the approaches to supporting the current older
worker as well as the re-engagement of the retired older worker are
more similar than dissimilar to those utilized in accessing the
untapped labor pool of workers with disabilities. Workplace
modifications and accommodations that are universally applicable to the
diverse workforce of today, older workers, workers with disabilities
and immigrant workers, offer promise for employers to have a qualified
workforce in the coming years.
The concept of the One-Stop, that is no wrong door to employment
for all job seekers, is mandated in the Workforce Investment Act. The
intent of the One-Stop was and remains a system that is seamless and
able to support job seekers with a variety of interests, preferences
and needs. Additionally, the One-Stops can and often play a role with
employers as a source of qualified job applicants. The early roll out
of the One-Stops due to initial funding strategies, limited the ability
of the system to be truly comprehensive. The lack of clarity regarding
the role of the collaborators, the emphasis on high volume service and
the mandate to serve all job seekers has resulted in a system that has
considerable potential yet to be realized.
The following section offers recommendations relating to WIA in the
context of the questions posed by the committee following up with more
detailed discussion of elements of WIA that work, those that may need
to be revised, those that are not working and, finally, some
suggestions of innovative practices and recommendations that would
modernize WIA.
response to the committee questions
Recommendations to the committee:
Universal aspects of the One-Stop must be maintained and
re-inforced from physical to program access.
Ongoing contributions of the Employment and Training
Administration to Supporting the Employment of Persons with
Disabilities must be a clear focus of ETA in all programs.
Ongoing contributions of the Office of Disability
Employment Policy (ODEP) must focus on the identification and removal
of barriers for customers with disabilities seeking services through
the One-Stops.
Measurement of effectiveness and impact must not create a
disincentive for One-Stops to serve customers with disabilities.
Elimination of the concept of sequential services, that
is, movement from core to intensive to training, and having direct
access should be adopted.
Clear practices and resource sharing between the One-Stops
and the public Vocational Rehabilitation system leading to increased
employment outcomes for customers with disabilities must be the central
focus of Memoranda of Agreement with WIA.
Linkage with other mandated and non-mandated partners must
be encouraged leading to increased employment options for persons with
disabilities.
Required infrastructure contributions for partners should
be eliminated.
Integration of the employment exchange function with the
One-Stops in all locations must be accomplished.
Comprehensive transition program development leading to
employment outcomes for students with disabilities must be the focus of
the WIA youth services and VR services.
One-Stops should be strongly encouraged to become
Employment Networks.
Collaborations with other entities in assuring access to
One-Stop Services and employment outcomes should be the goal of WIA
with results of policies, programs and outcomes reported in the annual
plan and the annual report of LWIBs and the SWIBs.
Capacity training and staff development addressing
employment of the hard-to-employ, including persons with disabilities,
must be a focus of ETA in the development of the One-Stop system's
ability to serve customers with disabilities.
A. What works should be preserved and/or refined in the current
workforce system and what should be eliminated?
The following section outlines some of the areas that have been
reported or been documented as working as well as those areas that,
with some modifications, could address the universal aspects of the WIA
legislation.
1. What should be preserved and/or refined?
Universal aspects of the One-Stop must be maintained and
re-inforced from physical to program access. Over the past several
years many of the One-Stops have addressed the physical access of the
centers through careful location of the centers in accessible buildings
and locations, having office space that meets the ADA requirements and
equipment and materials that facilitate access by all customers.
Additionally, the enhanced role of the greeter, the front desk, at most
One-Stops is now not only a position that supports new or former
customers obtaining directions and information but also provides
assistance especially in the accessing of information and materials in
the resource areas.
There continues to be room for increased accessibility in the
programs and activities of the One-Stop for persons with disabilities,
non or limited English speaking customers and older customers who may
not be technologically literate. The need to assure that the principles
of Universal Design for Learning and the use of teaching strategies and
materials for adult learners is essential if all customers are to be
served through the One-Stops. Progress has been made in these areas as
seen in examples in States such as Washington, Alaska, Massachusetts
and Wisconsin. All One-Stops should make sure that they meet not only
the physical accessible requirements but the access to programs and
activities as noted in the ADA and in section 188. Assistance from DOL,
through training and technical assistance, to One-Stops would serve to
increase the accessibility in the One-Stops for all customers,
including those having a disability and others who would be considered
harder to serve.
The One-Stops, as opposed to the earlier Employment Service, have a
strong focus on customer service that should be continued. However, it
has been observed that staff can be unsure of the legal parameters
regarding disability inquiries. It is suggested that DOL develop
clearer guidelines and assistance to One-Stop staff on what they can
ask in the way of offering supports and assistance as well as
disclosure. A clearer identification of how a customer can utilize all
of the resources of the One-Stop and what assistance would be most
beneficial can continue to increase the customer focus of all One-
Stops.
Ongoing contributions of the Employment and Training
Administration to Supporting the Employment of Persons with
Disabilities must be a clear focus of ETA in all programs. ETA has
played a central role in increasing the capacity of the One-Stops to
serve customers with disabilities. Projects such as the Work Incentive
Grants and the Disability Program Navigator (DPN) grants have been
effective at increasing the capacity of One-Stops to serve customers
with disabilities. The role of the DPN should be maintained in ETA and
expanded to all of the States. Clarification and consistency in the DPN
role is needed, and the functions of the DPN addressing systemic change
as well as facilitation of access to available services by customers
with disabilities and other hard-to-serve customers in contrast to the
provision of direct services to One-Stop customers. The continuation
and expansion of the DPN is essential in supporting job seekers with
disabilities.
Additionally, ETA should look to assisting One-Stops in developing
more creative Memoranda of Agreement with mandated entities such as the
public Vocational Rehabilitation agencies at the State and local levels
as well as the non-mandated partners such as the State agencies serving
individuals with intellectual disabilities, persons with mental illness
and those who are on welfare. In the coming year an added focus on
schools and youth in transition should clearly be an area of emphasis
for ETA and the One-Stops along with their mandated and non-mandated
partners.
Ongoing contributions of the Office of Disability
Employment Policy (ODEP) must focus on the identification and removal
of barriers for customers with disabilities seeking services through
the One-Stops: ODEP in its short tenure at the Department of Labor has
played a considerable role in increasing the understanding of how
persons with disabilities can be served in the community through the
adoption of the principles and practices of customized employment and
youth services. The demonstration of the effectiveness of customizing
the employer and customer relationship in the workplace has been
accomplished. The integration of these strategies into the One-Stops
will mean a collaborative working relationship between ODEP and ETA in
the coming years.
ODEP, with its focus on policy, can and should play a considerable
role in both the development of effectiveness measures for One-Stops
nationally as well as the identification of policies and practices that
have been effective in linking the mandated and non-mandated partners
together to address the universal design aspects of the One-Stops.
Increasing the capacity of the system through identification of skills,
competencies and certifications of personnel in the One-Stop would
again integrate the policy mandates of ODEP with the activities and
practices of ETA.
ODEP can and has played a role in examining Federal policies and
practices that have facilitated as well as inhibited the employment of
persons with disabilities. This remains an important policy area in
which ODEP can continue to influence other Federal agencies and their
practices such that there is a more cohesive view of both employment,
as the goal for persons with disabilities across all Federal agencies,
as well as to identify ways in which conflicting policies and practices
can be brought into line with the expectations of employment first as
the goal for persons with disabilities.
Measurement of effectiveness and impact must not create a
disincentive for One-Stops to serve customers with disabilities: While
this has been an area of continuous discussion over several years,
there is little progress in the area of identifying clear performance
measures for the One-Stop system. Some of this is reflective of the
nature of the One-Stop in that it is a system and not an individual
program, and thus for the One-Stop there must be collaborations across
multiple agencies addressing the needs of the customers who are seeking
employment. Many of these partner agencies have outcome measures and
most have unique interpretations of what the actual measure means, as
in the case of ``what is employment'' and ``how long should individuals
be followed.'' Care must be exercised so that any measurement of
outcomes does not create a disincentive for the One-Stops to serve
specific sub-populations.
As it currently stands, if the One-Stop does not meet its
performance measures while using WIA funds, there are clear sanctions.
The existing structure can and often has been reported to be a reason
for the low rate of service for persons with disabilities and other
hard-to-serve customer groups. There is a need to develop measures of
effectiveness that reflect the customer diversity while embracing the
mandate of the One-Stop to serve all customers. In some instances the
customer mix will vary depending upon the demographics of the area
served by the One-Stop. Any measurement system must be sufficiently
flexible to accommodate the diversity of the populations served by the
One-Stops as well as be able to provide consistent measures of outcomes
such as employment placements, earnings and job retention among other
variables. The identification of effective outcome measures for WIA is
clearly an area of importance and should be a priority for both ETA and
ODEP with the development of such measures including both mandated and
non-mandated partner input and consideration.
While not a performance measure, the adoption of common intake and
application materials across the One-Stop and its partners would serve
to streamline the application effort for the customer as well as reduce
the costs to the agencies if common data and variables are used for
multiple applications for service. The same would be true for outcome
measures. With some greater consistency in the definition of the
outcomes measures, cross agency reviews may be able to be accomplished
with the outcomes providing more meaningful and useful monitoring as
well as strategic planning. Finally, the development of measures and
processes that do not create disincentives for the One-Stops to serve
the harder-to-serve customers is essential if the mandate of WIA to be
universal, seamless and accessible to all is to be realized.
Elimination of the concept of sequential services from
core to intensive to training and have direct access should be adopted:
Typically services are available to the customer in a sequential
fashion with core services being the first to be offered. The customer
may move from core to intensive and then training as needs become more
clearly identified. Moving through this sequence can serve to add time
to the process that is unnecessary and inefficient. One-Stops staff
should be able to access training for individuals who would clearly
benefit from training and also those who would benefit from more
intensive services rather than having to go through a sequence of
services. The increased flexibility will allow the One-Stop to more
effectively address the needs of persons with disabilities as well as
other hard-to-serve customers and also more clearly focus resources on
the services that will have the greatest impact on reaching the goal of
employment for the customer.
Additionally, with the adoption of a direct access system for
services, One-Stops can also be more targeted in the development of
their partnerships with the public Vocational Rehabilitation system and
other mandated and non-mandated partners. In these instances
collaboratively supporting training leading to employment at the time
of application may be the most efficient use of shared resources for a
customer. Flexibility in the use of One-Stop resources can give the
One-Stop ability to link with other partners in funding and or
supporting services for the customer.
Clear practices and resource sharing between the One-Stops
and the public Vocational Rehabilitation system leading to increased
employment outcomes for customers with disabilities must be the focus
of the Memoranda of Agreement with WIA. While included in WIA, the
relationship of the public Vocational Rehabilitation system is varied
across States and within States. In some States the linkage of the One-
Stop and the VR system has been considerable as witnessed by the
efforts in southwest Washington, Alaska, Wisconsin, Michigan,
Connecticut and Minnesota. In these States there is a clear working
relationship between the two systems. In other States, while there may
not be as clear a relationship at the State level, there are
relationships at the local level with local office of the VR system
where staff of VR are located within the One-Stop on a part-time or
full-time basis. Among other States, where the VR agency is not a guest
or a casual resource at the One-Stops, but has a meaningful
relationship, there have been stronger working relationships between
these two partners. It is clear that there are examples of partnerships
that have demonstrated that these systems can coordinate resources and
direct their focus to increase the employment of customers with
disabilities.
Linkage with other mandated and non-mandated partners must
be encouraged leading to increased employment options for persons with
disabilities. All too often the focus of the partnership has been on
what resources each of the partners can provide to the infrastructure
of the One-Stop. These discussions have sidetracked discussions of the
elements of any agreement to fiscal as opposed to program and resource
sharing. It is felt that if the infrastructure expenses of the One-Stop
are provided then the nature of the partnerships with both the mandated
and non-mandated partners can be upon sharing of personnel, expertise
and fiscal resources directed at assisting customers in accessing
employment.
2. What should be eliminated?
Required core contributions for partners should be
eliminated: As was noted previously, the focus of the partnership
discussions has been upon what resources could be provided for
infrastructure support of the One-Stop. This focus has lead to
considerable debate among the mandated partners and related resistance
on working collaboratively to address a universal and seamless
employment and training system for all job seekers. It is strongly
recommended that adequate financial resources be made available to
cover the basic operating expenses of the One-Stop and that the
elements of the Memoranda of Agreement be directed at defining what
each of the entities will bring in the areas of personnel, expertise,
fiscal and program resources.
Integration of the employment exchange function with the
One-Stops in all locations must be accomplished: As was noted in the
GAO report (One-Stop System Infrastructure Continues to Evolve, but
Labor Should Take Action to Require that All Employment Service Offices
Are Part of the System: GAO September 2007), it is essential that the
One-Stop and the Labor Service Offices be integrated both for
effectiveness in addressing customer needs as well as efficiency in
reducing costs. In those instances where the Labor Exchange is
separate, the Wagner-Peyser resources are typically no longer available
to the One-Stop and thus the WIA resources are needed to support the
Administration and core services of the One-Stop, and are not available
for intensive and training services.
B. What innovative policy recommendations could be suggested to
modernize WIA?
Comprehensive transition program development leading to
employment outcomes for students with disabilities must be the focus of
the WIA youth services and VR services: With the passage of WIA,
transition from school to employment and adult life will become a core
area of responsibility for the public Vocational Rehabilitation system.
The additional stimulus monies available to several State agencies
(Education, Labor and the public Vocational Rehabilitation Agency) are
focused, in part, upon the youth population and assuring that these
youth enter and remain in the workforce. These highly focused resources
are of short duration (about 24 months) but are of sufficient magnitude
that they can significantly impact how transition from school to work
and adult life is addressed in selected communities. Though the
stimulus money is of limited duration, the issue of transition is not
and the additional resources through the Workforce Investment Act, the
Rehabilitation Act, the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act (expanding
volunteer services and service leading to employment) and the soon to
be published Higher Education Act regulations (creating opportunities
for students with intellectual disabilities to complete their
entitlement to education in a post-secondary setting) can become part
of an expanded strategy for establishing a comprehensive transition
service at the State level.
There is clear evidence to show that students with disabilities who
have an employment experience in school are more likely to be employed
in their adult years. Additionally, with the focus on youth in WIA and
the addition of transition from school to employment and adult life,
now part of the Rehabilitation Act, there is a significant opportunity
to revise the way services and supports are provided to youth with
disabilities as they exit school. The integration of service leading to
employment (the Edward M. Kennedy National Service Act), the options
for completing education entitlement services for some youth with
disabilities in a community college, college or university setting, the
use of training resource through community colleges can all serve as a
platform to revise the transition process so that students with
disabilities upon exiting school are directed toward employment and not
non-work options in their adult years. One of the relative strengths of
WIA has been the percentage of young people with disabilities utilizing
the WIA-funded youth services and better integration of such services
with transition activities would be of major benefit.
Partnership agreements including schools, the public Vocational
Rehabilitation agency, One-Stops, Community Colleges, Universities and
community rehabilitation providers can lead to a more robust transition
planning process and the development of programs and services that link
post-secondary settings with community colleges and volunteer services
that may lead to employment for youth with disabilities.
One-Stops are strongly encouraged to become Employment
Networks: The passage of the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Act in
1999, resulted in the creation of the Ticket to Work Act. The Ticket
provides resources to Employment Networks (ENs) to assist persons with
disabilities in accessing and maintaining employment. Over a 5-year
period the Employment Network can share in the SSA revenues saved
through individuals with disabilities entering and remaining in
employment.
In the past One-Stops have shown limited interest in becoming an
Employment Network for the Ticket Program. In the past year significant
changes have been made in the program in terms of financial incentives,
and simplifying the administrative processes, including an expedited
process for One-Stops to become an EN, greatly reducing the complexity
of this process. The ICI in a review of the potential of the Ticket to
generate revenue for the One-Stops in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
found that for customers who were receiving SSI or SSDI benefits from
May 2007 to May 2008, of the 193,868 customers of the Massachusetts
One-Stop system, 7,347 (3.8 percent) were on SSI/SSDI. Iowa did a
similar analysis and found that of the 200,602 One-Stop customers in
2006, about 3,400 (1.4 percent) were Ticket holders. While it's a
smaller percentage than MA, the number is still significant. These two
examples illustrate that there is real untapped potential for an
increase in One-Stop involvement in Ticket, and in turn building the
capacity of the workforce development system to meet the needs of
individuals with disabilities. It is suggested that through regulatory
and policy directives, efforts be made for an enhanced role of One-
Stops in the Ticket program.
Collaborations with other entities in assuring access to
One-Stop Services and employment outcomes should be the goal of the WIA
with results of policies, programs and outcomes reported in the annual
plan and the annual report of the LWIB and the SWIB: The One-Stop could
partner with community rehabilitation providers (CRPs) that have strong
individual job placement programs. These CRPs would come to the One-
Stop Career Centers and meet with individuals identified by the One-
Stop as potentially benefiting from more intensive employment and
training services. The CRP would be responsible for engaging
individuals in direct job placement with the goal of entry into the
workforce and then sustained employment.
Should the One-Stop choose to contract such a service through the
CRP system, a direct benefit to the One-Stops would be the freeing up
of staff to support more customers who can utilize the traditional
career center types of services. If the One-Stop were to choose to
offer the services through their system then the additional resources
necessary would be used to support the hiring and establishment of such
a service through the One-Stop. Regardless of the selection of the
model, contract or expansion of services, the One-Stop would engage the
local public Vocational Rehabilitation system as a partner in this
effort. The target population to be served while having limitations
that could be considered a disability may meet the eligibility
requirements as a person with a disability but not be eligible for
vocational rehabilitation services since the VR system will most likely
be in an Order of Selection. The expertise of the VR system however can
assist in the identification of supports, technology and accommodations
that may be beneficial for the job seeker.
Other partnerships with State agencies such as the Department of
Developmental or Intellectual Disabilities or the Department of Mental
Health would bring in the resources and the customer base served by
these agencies. While non-mandated entities, they could link with the
One-Stops and the CRPs (entities that they currently contract with) to
increase the options for employment of persons who are served by these
agencies. Through the State Employment Leadership Network (SELN), a
joint effort of the ICI and the National Association of State Director
of Developmental Disabilities Services (NASDDDS), eight States have
adopted or are considering the adoption of an Employment First
strategy. This strategy calls for the allocation of agency monies to
address employment outcomes first prior to any other service. The focus
on employment is consistent with the overall direction of the Center
for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), in that, through the Medicaid
Infrastructure Grants CMS is supporting States to move more toward
employment as the outcome for persons with disabilities who are served
by these State agencies. Linking the One-Stops, VR and the State
agencies serving persons with Intellectual Disabilities also brings in
the resource of CMS since, on average, one half of the budgets for
these State agencies are reimbursements received from CMS for services
provided.
Capacity training and staff development addressing
employment of the hard-to-employ including persons with disabilities
must be a focus of ETA in the development of the One-Stop system's
ability to serve customers with disabilities: If the One-Stops are to
be able to continue to expand their capacity to serve customers with
disabilities, then additional staff competencies will need to be
developed addressing disability awareness, screening and assessment,
consumer direction, job development, job accommodations, on-site
supports and marketing to employers. The development of these
competencies can be integrated into the One-Stop staff development
efforts and be available on line. The training of employment training
specialists or job coaches has typically been on a more informal basis.
More recently there has been an increase in the creation of a range of
skills that need to be mastered for staff to be able to assume the
position of an employment training specialist or a job coach. These
training activities are leading to the development of a national
training effort directed at increasing the skills of current staff who
are working in the employment and training field as well as the
creation of a career track for individuals who would be interested in a
career in this area. The competencies that have been identified as
essential for staff who are supporting and training individuals with
disabilities are similar to those that are used to increase staff
skills of those supporting the harder to employ as well as the older
worker. Such a training effort is consistent with the capacity
development efforts in the broader discipline of workforce
professionals and WIA.
DOL can play a leadership role in supporting a national staff
capacity development effort that would increase staff skills and
increase the effectiveness of One-Stop services and other employment
and training services nationally. UCEDDs are exceptionally well-
qualified to provide training to current and future professionals
working with individuals with disabilities.
Finally, we have included as an Attachment A,\1\--Detailed Comments
and Recommendations for WIA--a more detailed presentation of some of
the recommendations for change in the WIA legislation. These are
offered in support of the above comments and are hoped to be viewed as
complimentary to this written statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prepared by: William E. Kiernan, Ph.D., Director and Research
Professor, Institute for Community Inclusion (UCED), University of
Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Blvd, Boston, MA 02115-3393; Tel:
617-287-4311; E-mail: [email protected]; Web: www.community
inclusion.org; and David Hoff, Senior Technical Assistance Specialist,
Institute for Community Inclusion, University of Massachusetts Boston,
100 Morrissey Blvd, Boston, MA 02115-3393.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Attachment A: Detailed Comments and Recommendations for WIA
wia reauthorization comments
The following section presents: (1) an overview of WIA, (2)
background and context, (3) issues that need to be addressed in the
reauthorization, and (4) WIA reauthorization recommendations.
1. introduction and overview
The passage of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) in 1998 resulted
in a revolutionary concept--the idea of universal access to employment
assistance for all job seekers needing help. Language within WIA, and
subsequent regulations (both the general WIA regulations, and the
specific regulations for non-discrimination in section 188) sent a
clear message--that universal accessibility in the ``generic''
workforce system includes serving people with disabilities. In many
ways, this concept of universal access in WIA, and emphasis on serving
people with disabilities, was evidence and another indicator of an
ongoing evolution of full integration of people with disabilities into
mainstream society, side-by-side with all other citizens.
Since the passage of WIA, and the simultaneous development of the
One-Stop delivery system, extensive resources have been spent on
developing the capacity of the One-Stop system and workforce
development system as a whole, to meet the needs of individuals with
disabilities. This has included extensive funding from two DOL
Departments: the Employment and Training Administration (ETA), and
Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP). Along with the Work
Incentive Grants from ETA and Customized Employment Grants from ODEP,
since 2003, through a cooperative effort between ETA and the Social
Security Administration, Disability Program Navigators have been
working in One-Stop Career Centers to guide people with disabilities in
the use of workforce development services. There are currently over 425
Navigators spread across 42 States. The amount spent on capacity-
building grants from ETA and ODEP well exceeds $195 million total from
2000 to 2007, with ETA alone spending more than $115 million through
their Work Incentive Grants and Disability Navigator programs. In
addition to these Federal efforts, State and local funds have also been
used for various capacity-building initiatives. The end result has been
significant increases in the capacity of One-Stop and workforce
development systems to serve people with disabilities.
At the same time, it appears these efforts have not necessarily
been consistent, and local workforce development systems and One-Stop
Career Centers vary greatly in their receptivity and ability to serve
people with disabilities. Additionally, while some data are available
which provide indicators regarding the performance of the workforce
development system in serving people with disabilities, the lack of
strong performance measurement systems for One-Stops has created
challenges in determining the progress that has been made.
2. the workforce development system: background and context
In providing comments on WIA reauthorization, it is critical to
have at least some context for the role of the One-Stop system, which
is the primary means for delivery of workforce development services. It
is important to bear in mind two basic concepts. First, One-Stop Career
Centers are not service delivery agencies in the traditional sense. The
intent of the WIA legislation, and at least somewhat in actual
practice, is that One-Stops are a consortium and collaborative of
multiple publicly funded employment and training programs, that come
together to form the One-Stop. There currently exists 17 federally
funded employment and training programs that are mandated as One-Stop
partners in the WIA legislation, one of them being the public
Vocational Rehabilitation system. Despite misperceptions that WIA
funding and One-Stop funding are the same thing, as will be discussed
in more detail later, only 3 of these 17 partners are funded via
Workforce Investment Act Funds (Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth
Services). The second important factor to consider is the high customer
volume that many One-Stops work with. For example, the two One-Stop
Career Centers in the Metro North area of Massachusetts (just outside
of Boston), serve over 20,000 unique customers per year with
approximately 60 staff. In essence, the One-Stop system is a high
volume, low-level customer contact system, which relies to a great
extent on self-direction. Only a small percentage of customers
(typically less than 10 percent) receive any services beyond the basic
``core'' services that are available to any individual.
One-Stops have been at times criticized for their inability to
respond to individuals needing a high level of 1:1 assistance. Such
criticism may be at times valid (particularly in cases where services
have been refused or accommodations have not been provided). However,
such criticism is also at times misplaced, as One-Stops were never
intended to provide the type of intensive, comprehensive services that
can be typically found by a community rehabilitation provider, and
similar entities, including the level of intensive job development
available at CRPs. At the same time, to address the diversity of needs
and respond to the mandate to be universally accessible to all, the
stronger One-Stop Centers have recognized the need to:
(1) have high quality information and referral systems to handle
the high customer volume they experience,
(2) quickly ascertain a customer's needs,
(3) determine what services within the One-Stop can be used to
respond to those needs, and
(4) identify and engage partners (both formal and informal) to
respond to those needs that are beyond the core capacity of the One-
Stop.
One of the ``best practices'' that has been recognized among One-
Stops, is the ability to develop a strong network of community partners
(often on an informal basis) that can be utilized to respond to
customer needs. In the case of individuals with disabilities, this
includes community rehabilitation providers, public disability groups,
independent living centers, advocacy groups, etc., going well beyond
the mandated partnership with public Vocational Rehabilitation. Some
One-Stops have also partnered with their local Work Incentive Planning
and Assistance programs (funded by SSA), and a few have become
Employment Networks under the Ticket to Work, although participation to
date by One-Stops in the Ticket program has been limited, despite
significant outreach efforts by SSA.
3. issues needing to be addressed
Performance Measurement and Issues: The inability to properly
measure the performance of the One-Stop system is an ongoing issue. At
this point, the only mechanism for measurement of One-Stop performance
is through individual partner and funding stream performance measures
that allows only a partial (although still somewhat informative) look
at the system. A subtext of this lack of a comprehensive performance
measurement system, is the lack of a measurement system for One-Stop
system performance in serving various groups and sub-populations
including people with disabilities. As a result, it is impossible to
truly ascertain the performance and progress of the One-Stop system as
a whole in meeting the needs of people with disabilities.
Wagner-Peyser Data: The performance data that is available, while
limited, indicates both successes and challenges regarding serving
people with disabilities. The Wagner-Peyser data are probably the best
indicator available of overall One-Stop performance. These funds are
used for basic employment/labor exchange services, and track the
largest number of individuals using the generic workforce development
system--and per WIA regulations, are to be delivered within the One-
Stop system.
Analysis by the Institute for Community Inclusion (ICI), indicates
that the percentage of individuals identifying they have a disability
has shown a steady increase over time, from 2.3 percent in 2002 to 3.1
percent in 2005 figure. The more recently available data show a slight
decline: in 2007, 2.8 percent of individuals using Wagner-Peyser
funding were identified as having a disability. As noted in a recent
publication by the Institute for Community Inclusion (ICI) (http://
www.community
inclusion.org/article.php?article_id=233&type=project&id=16),
``In examining and interpreting these data, it is important
to note that these data may not fully reflect the use of these
services by people with disabilities, as it does not include
individuals with non-apparent disabilities who have declined to
identify that they have a disability.''
There are a number of other issues with these data. It first off,
only indicates percentage of use of the system by people with
disabilities, with no outcome data (although outcome data is made
available for Wagner-Peyser participants as a whole). Second, the data
indicate massive variations in the percentage of people with
disabilities using services from State-to-State: from less than 1
percent to over 15 percent. The underlying reasons for this variation
are not clear, but it is concerning and bears further investigation.
WIA Data: The other piece of significant data that is available is
the Workforce Investment Act fund data. These funds are generally used
for training, as well as more intensive services in the workforce
development system. In some cases, WIA funds are also used for core
services. The WIA performance data do provide highly detailed
information regarding performance and outcomes for people with
disabilities. However, only a small percentage of individuals served in
the workforce development system are served via WIA funds
(approximately a million people annually vs. over 13 million via
Wagner-Peyser funding). Therefore WIA performance is not equivalent to
One-Stop performance, although it has been observed that many
policymakers internal and external to the workforce development system,
advocates, and academics often verbally and in writing incorrectly make
this assumption. To re-inforce this point, in 2007, only 58,000
individuals identified as having a disability were served via WIA
funds, while 499,000 individuals were served via Wagner-Peyser funds.
There are three WIA funding streams: Adult, Dislocated Worker, and
Youth. Analysis of these data by the Institute for Community Inclusion
revealed the following: from 2001 to 2007, the percentage of
individuals with disabilities served via WIA Adults funds declined from
9 percent of the total served to 4.2 percent. For WIA Dislocated Worker
funds, the results have varied over this same period, from a low of 3.3
percent in 2005 to a high of 4.6 percent in 2006. In conjunction with
declines in percentage of individuals served, the outcomes for
individuals with disabilities trailed the overall average performance.
(It is important to note that there are significant penalties in terms
of funding losses for not meeting required performance outcomes using
WIA funds.) For Youth funds however, the results are more encouraging.
For WIA Youth with disabilities (ages 14 to 21), the percentage of
individuals served actually increased from about 14 percent to 16
percent from 2001-2004 (although this has since declined to 14.5
percent in 2007). In terms of performance, Older Youth (ages 19-21)
with disabilities slightly lagged the average performance, and for
Younger Youth (ages 14-18), performance was either equivalent or
exceeded the average performance. (Note: Youth with disabilities are
highly eligible for WIA youth services.) These results appear to
indicate that when performance for people with disabilities lags the
general population, their ability to access services decreases, and
when performance for people with disabilities is similar to or exceeds
the general population, their ability to access services increases.
4. wia reauthorization recommendations
Given this context, the following are specific recommendations
regarding reauthorization of WIA:
Performance Tracking and Measurement
Development of One-Stop Performance Measurement System: A
key piece of WIA reauthorization needs to be mandating development of
performance measurement for the One-Stop system as a whole, which
includes measurement of performance in serving people with
disabilities, among other groups.
Clarity of Disability Definition and Tracking of SSI/SSDI
Enrollment Status: Part of the reform of performance measures needs to
include much greater clarity regarding definitions and mechanisms for
measurement, as it appears that the mechanisms for measuring disability
are at best inconsistent making it difficult to have full confidence in
the accuracy of the data. Mandating the collection of SSI/SSDI
enrollment status of individuals being served would assist in this
process, and allow for a much stronger sense of how the system is
performing for individuals with more significant disabilities, and also
allow for greater determination of the potential of the workforce
development system in terms of participation in the Ticket to Work.
Creation of Benchmarks and Targets for Specific
Populations: In conjunction with reform of performance measures, it is
also recommended that statutory language be included in the
reauthorization, which mandates creation of annual benchmarks and
targets for serving specific populations, including people with
disabilities.
Revamping WIA Performance Requirements: Revamping of the
performance requirements for WIA funds is clearly needed. Too often,
concerns over the inability to meet performance standards, is used as
an excuse for not serving people with disabilities. The WIA performance
measures must be modified to account for a wider range of job seeker
needs. Language must also be incorporated into reauthorization that
clearly re-inforces that discrimination against individuals based on
performance measure concerns is not acceptable.
Non-Discrimination and Universal Access
Strengthen Non-Discrimination Language and Monitoring of
Performance for Specific Populations: WIA currently contains
significant language regarding the mandate to serve people with
disabilities that is strongly re-inforced within the section 188
regulations. It is recommended that this language not only be
maintained, but also strengthened to make this mandate clearer. In
conjunction with this, language should be incorporated within WIA, that
more clearly requires monitoring of the performance of meeting the
needs of various populations and sub-groups (including those with
disabilities) and that the demographics of the customers served by the
workforce development system should be reflective of the diversity of
the region being served. This can be re-inforced with creation of
targets and benchmarks contained within the recommendation above
regarding performance measures.
Maintain Universal Access Requirements: One of the key
strengths of WIA, is the concept of universal access to core services,
which allows any individual to access services, without having to meet
eligibility criteria. This should be absolutely maintained in any
reauthorization.
Training Services
Require Use of Universal Design and Learning Principles in
Training: Access to skill development training programs for people with
disabilities has often been limited, particularly for individuals with
more significant disabilities. At the same time, the ability of people
with disabilities to access employment that provides real economic
independence is highly dependent on increasing their skill levels. The
use of universal design and learning strategies in creation and
delivery of curriculum, have proven to be an effective strategy in
increasing the ability of people with disabilities and other groups to
access and fully benefit from classroom instruction and training. It is
therefore recommended, that as an outgrowth of the universal access
requirements of WIA, that language be included in the reauthorization
that requires that training programs be delivered, utilizing universal
design and learning principles.
Strengthen Use of Training Beyond Traditional Classroom
Settings: The current WIA regulations allow for a wide variety of uses
of training funds including but not limited to: occupational skills
training; on-the job training; adult education and literacy; customized
training for an employer who commits to hiring. However, there is a
sense that most training funds are still used for traditional in-person
didactic classroom training, which is not an effective learning
strategy for many individuals, including some individuals with
disabilities. Therefore, in order to ensure that funds that are being
utilized to support the full range of today's learning technology, and
meet the full range of learner needs, it is recommended that language
in the reauthorization more clearly and specifically encourage use of
training funds beyond in-person traditional classroom training.
Explicitly Require Training Programs to Meet Needs of
People with Disabilities: Anecdotal evidence indicates that many
training programs available via the workforce development system have
limited willingness and ability to accommodate for the needs of
individuals with disabilities, despite legal requirements under the
ADA, Rehab Act, and section 188 of WIA to do so. It is recommended that
language be included in WIA reauthorization, that explicitly states and
reiterates that training programs make efforts to proactively consider
and accommodate the needs of individuals with disabilities, and that
re-inforces the right of people with disabilities to participate in
training programs, and receive reasonable accommodations and
modifications as necessary. Language should also be included that
encourages the use of public VR and other disability partners to assist
in supporting individuals in accessing and fully benefiting from
workforce development training programs, in order that individuals
successfully complete such programs, while simultaneously ensuring the
ability of the workforce development system to meet the training
program performance requirements.
One-Stop Partnerships and Role of Disability Partners
Strengthen One-Stop Partnership Requirements: The concept
of multiple partners coming together in a streamlined ``user-friendly''
system as envisioned under WIA makes sense. However, while WIA mandates
a multitude of partners within the One-Stop system, the reality has
been that such partnerships have too often been cursory at best. One of
the more obvious examples have been cases of One-Stop Career Centers
funded by WIA funds, operating separately from One-Stop Career Centers
or State Employment Service offices funded by Wagner-Peyser funds,
which appears to be inconsistent with the intent of WIA. Another
example, where opportunities presented by WIA have not been fully taken
advantage of, is when the partnership with public VR has been
itinerant, consisting of a local VR counselor spending a day per week
(or even less) at a One-Stop with limited interaction with other staff,
which is not the integrated and collaborative partnership envisioned
under WIA. At the same time, qualitative research clearly indicates
that when there have been strong partnerships in place, including those
with public VR, the result has been mutual benefit for all concerned.
Therefore, the partnership mandates within WIA for the One-Stop system
needs to be strengthened, with much clearer parameters regarding the
requirements of partnership, and penalties and sanctions for non-
compliance.
Maintain Public VR as a Mandated Partner: It is highly
recommended that the public Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) system
remain as a mandated partner within the One-Stop system. The leveraging
of resources and mutual benefits that have been observed on an
anecdotal basis and through qualitative research (see reference in
footnote 2 on case studies of MN, KY and ME), have clearly indicated
the benefits of this partnership when properly structured and with the
commitment of all involved.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ http://www.communityinclusion.org/
article.php?article_id=4&type=topic&id=9; http://
www.communityinclusion.org/article.php?article_id=3&type=topic&id=9;
http://www.commun
ityinclusion.org/article.php?article_id=5&type=topic&id=99.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove Partner Infrastructure Contribution Requirement:
Extensive and excessive energy has been spent over the last decade on
the WIA requirement that all partners must contribute to the core
services and infrastructure of the One-Stop system, and this has often
been a barrier and distraction to productive partnerships. To address
this issue, as recommended by a multitude of commentators, it is
suggested that a separate line item be created for core One-Stop
infrastructure, and that this mandate for partnership contributions to
infrastructure be removed and alternative mechanisms for partnership
development be allowed.
Encourage Participation by Other Disability Partners
Beyond VR: Public VR is the only disability specific system that is a
mandated One-Stop partner, and as a result is the only disability
specific system that has a mandate to serve on the local workforce
investment boards that oversee the workforce development system and
One-Stop Career Centers. Given that VR only represents a percentage of
individuals with disabilities, and many people with disabilities
receive employment assistance outside of the VR systems, it is
recommended that language be inserted into WIA which either mandates or
encourages other disability systems be included as members of workforce
boards and/or partner in other ways with the workforce development
system. These would include public intellectual/developmental
disability systems, public mental health system and State and local
school districts. Similarly, language should be included that mandates
or encourages partnership with the Veteran's Administration, which has
a major constituency of veteran's with disabilities, that could benefit
from stronger linkages with workforce development.
Social Security Employment Supports
Strengthen Role with Ticket to Work and Other Social
Security Employment Support Programs: It is recommended that language
be included in WIA that strongly encourages or mandates that One-Stop
Career Centers be Employment Networks under the SSA Ticket to Work
program, which could be a catalyst for increasing services to people
with disabilities. Similar to this, should be language that encourages
linkages with Work Incentive Planning and Assistance (WIPA) Programs,
and other Social Security employment support programs. As noted above,
mandating tracking of the SSI/SSDI status of workforce development
system customers, would assist in such efforts.
Disability Program Navigators
Make Disability Program Navigators Permanent: The
Disability Program Navigator (DPN) system has been a real asset to
people with disabilities in accessing the One-Stop system. In order to
strengthen the DPN system, it is recommended that the WIA
reauthorization include a statutory requirement to maintain the DPN
system, with expansion to all 50 States.
Senator Murray. Thank you.
Ms. Sarris.
STATEMENT OF MARY W. SARRIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTH SHORE
WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD, SALEM, MA
Ms. Sarris. Hello, Senator Murray and Senator Isakson.
Thank you so much for having me today.
And again, I also want to reiterate we miss Senator
Kennedy. We thank him so much for all of his work and know he
is listening to what we are saying and moving forward to make
WIA the best possible program it can possibly be.
Again, I am Mary Sarris, and I am with the North Shore
Workforce Investment Board (NSWIB). We are located about 12
miles north of Boston. We serve 19 cities and towns along the
coast of Massachusetts. Our board is 35 members, a very active
partnership between business, organized labor, the community
college, the State college, several community-based
organizations, and of course, our mandated partners. We are a
very active and involved board and that has allowed us to
become one of three high-performing WIBs in the State of
Massachusetts, and we think has allowed us to be creative,
forward-thinking, and solution-oriented to the problems that we
face on the north shore.
My remarks are basically based on five principles that we
think are critical for WIA reauthorization.
First, is that those decisions that are made closest to the
customer are the best decisions. The opportunity for local
organizations and regional organizations to serve customers
must continue to be stressed under WIA reauthorization.
Second, we believe that WIBs, particularly, for example,
the North Shore WIB, represents that ideal partnership since we
have all members of the community on the WIB and they are all
very active and participatory in the decisions. They are
empowered to make the decisions that make our system work, and
they do take that power and go with it.
Third, we also believe, of course, that WIA must remain an
education and training-focused piece of legislation. As
mentioned before, the infrastructure of the One-Stop system
should be supported under other means, and we should use as
much of our money as possible to educate and train the
workforce.
Fourth, youth services, and I will talk a little bit more
in detail about this. But youth services must be restructured
to better serve our emerging workforce. This group of
individuals, probably a critical aspect of our workforce, is
under a great deal of stress, growing every day, and we must be
able to be creative and innovative as far as serving their
needs and helping them make informed career decisions and
moving into the next phase of their adult life.
Finally, of course, the system must be very accountable. We
believe on the North Shore that there are no secrets, and
everything that we do, all of the funds that we spend, all the
programs that we operate are on our Web site. And we look
forward to our stakeholders participating in helping us make
decisions to make those programs run well.
We see two major strengths with WIA right now.
First, is the Workforce Investment Act has allowed us to
develop expertise in four nonprofit organizations and probably
more than that as well. For WIA vendors that have come to know
and understand what the workforce is and know and understand
how to communicate that information to the young people, they
have learned what our critical industries are. They have
learned what it means to get ready for work, to stay in school,
and we are pleased that our capacity has been increased and
enhanced under WIA through these organizations.
In addition, we have been fortunate that our One-Stop
system has been able to respond to youth. Through the WIA
legislation, we receive about $1 million every year for our WIA
youth programs. In addition, the State of Massachusetts has
been able to provide us with about $500,000 in resources that
allow us to serve as many youth as possible, even those who are
above the WIA eligibility guidelines. Through that, we have
been able to establish a youth One-Stop Career Center within
one of our One-Stops. That center is critical and has done
great work in helping young people.
Of course, the area of challenges. We do believe--it has
been said already--the youth eligibility must be changed. It is
way too complicated, particularly for the type of young people
that we serve. We estimate that about 50 percent of the young
people who come to us do not complete the eligibility process
because it is just too onerous. These are young people who
really need our services, but have a hard time completing all
the documentation. We would like new legislation to support the
opportunity for WIBs to establish their own guidelines, and we
ask you to trust us that we will most definitely serve those
most in need.
We also believe in the presence of a strong summer jobs
program. The stimulus money has provided us with that
opportunity this year, and we guarantee you it is money that is
being put to good use.
As far as modernization of WIA, Secretary Oates and
Secretary Kanter discussed this this morning. We need the
ability to work more closely with our local school districts,
particularly to help kids make informed career decisions about
STEM careers. And we ask that the new WIA provide incentives
for WIBs and local school districts to work together in that
vein.
The rest of my details are in my testimony, and I look
forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Sarris follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mary W. Sarris
introduction
Mr. Chairman and members of the Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions Committee, thank you for the opportunity to participate in
these very important committee hearings on the reauthorization of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998. As a Massachusetts Workforce
Investment Board (MWIB), we are truly fortunate to have Senator Edward
M. Kennedy as a leader in workforce development and committed to
building and supporting a quality workforce system. On the North Shore
of Massachusetts, we are also fortunate to have Congressman John
Tierney as a leading member of the House Committee on Education and
Labor, and another leader and supporter of our work. Finally, we have
Governor Deval Patrick and his Secretary of Labor and Workforce
Development, Suzanne Bump, working hard to support Federal efforts with
State funding as well as helping us at the local level build valuable
partnerships that really make WIA work for our economy.
My testimony is based on five basic premises, which we believe are
critical to our continued success both in the current challenging
economic climate and as we build the 21st century workforce in
Massachusetts and the Nation.
First, those decisions that are made closest to the customer are
the best decisions. When a job seeker, young person or company comes to
the workforce system with an issue or challenge that is unique to that
customer, those providing this service know the community and the
conditions in which these challenges exist and are best situated to
develop the most appropriate response and outcome. WIA reauthorization
must continue to support a locally driven workforce system that
strengthens effective partnerships among business, labor, educators and
community and faith-based organizations to deliver effective workforce
services.
Second, private sector-led workforce boards that create the
strategic community-based partnerships are the best vehicles for
ensuring these quality workforce services for job seekers--both youth
and adults--and companies. This is very hard and challenging work under
the best of economies and local partnerships and collaborations, such
as that envisioned in WIA through a WIB-led system of strong One-Stop
Career Centers is the only way that we can build and sustain a quality
workforce system. We have seen this work on the North Shore of
Massachusetts and in other regions of the Commonwealth where the chief-
elected officials empower the WIB to develop and implement a strategic
vision for the region. We hope that future legislation will strengthen
our ability to make regional decisions with sufficient resources to
make a significant impact on the economy of our region while at the
same time streamlining the administration of the regional workforce
system.
Third, WIA must, in the final analysis, be an education and
training system. Over the past decade, a significant amount of WIA
resources have gone to support important infrastructure requirements of
One-Stop Career Centers. While One-Stops are our primary labor exchange
vehicle for workers and companies, siphoning off training funds to
support infrastructure has decreased our ability to train workers for
careers in emerging industry sectors. We need both a strong One-Stop
system and a vibrant education and training capacity. Wagner-Peyser
funds are most appropriate for the labor exchange functions of our
local system. The continued delivery of employment services by State
merit-based staff in partnership with the local WIA provider will
ensure the greatest flexibility and service options for our customers.
Also, as provided for in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we
need greater flexibility to use training dollars to support worker
skill upgrades through our system of community colleges and vocational
technical schools. Training for both unemployed and incumbent workers
must be part of a renewed commitment to responding to the dual
challenges of the skill shortage and labor surplus problems we are
facing in the current economy.
Fourth, we need a new approach to serving the needs of young people
16-24 years of age. Both nationally and in Massachusetts, the job
market for teens (16-19) and many young adults (20-24-year-olds) has
collapsed in recent years. Nationally, teens did not gain any net new
jobs during the national labor market recovery and expansion from 2003-
2007, and Massachusetts' teens experienced a very similar fate. In the
first 3 months of this year (2009), fewer than 30 of every 100 teens in
the Nation and State were employed. This is a record lows for both
areas. At the national level, the U.S. Congress and the Obama
administration included $1.2 billion in WIA youth monies under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to create both summer
and year-round jobs for economically disadvantaged 14-24-year-olds. A
federally funded summer jobs program for teens has not been in
existence since 2000. At the State level, the Patrick administration
has committed $30 million in Federal and State monies, including WIA
youth months, YouthWorks and Shannon Community Safety Initiatives
monies to help put 10,000 of the State's 14-24-year-olds to work this
summer. We need nothing less than a Teen Employment Marshall Plan to
respond to the crisis of young people.
And, finally, of course, we should be held to strict accountability
and transparency standards that ensure a wise and fruitful investment
of public dollars. On the North Shore we have a belief that there are
no secrets to what we do--all information on the programs we offer and
the outcomes we achieve are available on our Web site and in constant
meetings with our stakeholders and customers. This philosophy must be
prevalent across the Nation so that we can build support and
involvement with all our stakeholders and the general public.
the north shore workforce investment board (nswib)
The NSWIB serves a community of 19 cities and towns located 12
miles north of Boston with a population of close to 400,000
individuals, labor force of over 200,000 and approximately 18,000
businesses. Our unemployment rate is at 8 percent matching the State of
Massachusetts as a whole. As can be expected we are experiencing a
swift downturn economically in conjunction with the State of
Massachusetts and the rest of the country. Last year our unemployment
rate was 4.7 percent with Mass at 4.8 percent.
The WIB consists of 35 members, with private sector representation
from our critical industries including durable goods manufacturing,
health care, construction and banking, along with our emerging
industries of biotechnology and the Creative Economy. Public partners
include the local community and State college, our largest K-12 school
system, the carpenters union and the North Shore labor council, two
community-based organizations, one economic development agency, and of
course the WIA mandated partners. We are a true ``WIA WIB'' in that we
were established concurrent with the implementation of WIA in
Massachusetts and have existed only under this legislation.
The city of Salem is our lead city, and provides strong partnership
services including acting as the WIB's fiscal agent and appointing
authority to the board. Our Mayor, Kimberley Driscoll, is an active
participant in workforce development and regularly engages her fellow
mayors in this process.
The WIB, in partnership with Salem, oversees and charters on a bi-
annual basis, a One-Stop system that includes three One-Stop Career
Centers located throughout our region. In addition, we have a firm
belief in the use of data to drive improvement, so have an active and
we hope responsive labor-market data division that provides information
to the WIB and to other partners as they move their work forward.
Finally, we believe in a sectoral approach to workforce development,
and have several active sector industry partnerships in play reflecting
our critical industries as mentioned above.
Our Strategic Plan has five primary goals, including:
1. Building the capacity of the North Shore Workforce System to
meet labor market needs;
2. Fully engaging the business sector to close the skills gap that
exists between available workers and employers;
3. Enhancing our Youth Pipeline by increasing and aligning
education, training and employment programs;
4. Increasing, strengthening and strategically aligning
relationships with Federal, State, and local partners/stakeholders; and
5. Managing and enhancing available resources to support and grow
operations.
Recently the NSWIB received High Performing WIB status through a
rigorous review process designed by the State of Massachusetts. We
believe this status reflects the strength of our local board and our
ability, as a business-led local entity, to understand what is
happening in our region and to respond appropriately and successfully
to our labor market and economic circumstances. As stated above, we
believe that strong WIBs are possible, a preferred method of service
delivery, and result in quality services to companies and individuals,
and we ask for continued support for this model in the next phase of
WIA--we believe in the business adage that the best decisions are
reached closest to the customer, and hope that this philosophy
continues in WIA's next life.
nswib youth serving system
The Workforce Investment Act provides us with the greatest share of
youth money on the North Shore, totally $962,420 in fiscal year 2009.
As stated above, we are fortunate to have several other youth funding
streams through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts totaling $542,163. In
addition, for the past 4 years we have raised funds privately--
approximately $80,000 per year--to support a very small summer jobs
program which we call F1rstJobs.
These non-Federal funds help support WIA work but also provide us
with the ability to work with teens and other young people who are in
need but do not meet the WIA eligibility guidelines. For example, State
funds include projects such as Pathways to Success by 21, which is a
Massachusetts initiative through which the WIB convenes all youth
serving agencies in our region and works with them to provide seamless
employment and wrap around services to at-risk youth. Through P-21 we
have added freshmen college-level courses to our WIA Out of School
Youth programs, providing WIA youth with the opportunity to leave WIA
not only with a GED but with college credits to make their transition
to college all that much more successful. These sorts of programs are
critical to building the youth workforce system that helps all youth,
including WIA youth, to make the leap into the primary labor market.
Even in the best economy our young people were struggling to
transition into the primary labor market. For the past several years,
in fact since the 1980's, youth employment has been declining for
several reasons, including elimination of many entry-level jobs,
competition with returning retirees, and a perceived or real lack of
employment preparedness in the youth pipeline. In 2008, the teen
employment rate across the country was at 30 percent, the lowest rate
in post-World War II history. For 20-24-year-olds, employment rates in
2008 were nearly 5 percent below those in 2000. In January 2009 young
males were employed at nearly 10 percent lower than in early 2001. This
crisis is even more compelling for low-income youth, who, without
networks and other supports, find it even more difficult to move
successfully into work. We know through research that in-school work
experience leads to higher graduation rates, particularly among black
and Hispanic males and leads to higher employment rates and earnings as
young adults. In addition, labor markets with high teen-employment
rates for males reduces their involvement with the criminal justice
system, and for females results in lower teen pregnancy rates.
In addition, as our local school districts work to increase
graduation requirements so youth are better prepared to enter the high-
skilled work force--a good thing!--we are finding a cohort of youth who
are, under these policies, struggling to graduate--in a way a group of
youth who are caught in the middle of positive policy changes that have
a negative impact on their future due to their current educational
status. As the work world becomes more complex, virtually all young
people (not to mention our adults), are finding it harder to move into
and through this work world and toward careers and economic self
sufficiency. WIA is a large part of the solution to this dilemma, and
has made a huge difference in our region for those most at-risk.
However, the opportunity to modernize WIA to reflect our current
economy and educational and social needs represents a chance to make
WIA even better.
wia successes
WIA funds have been used by four youth serving organizations in our
region to develop the capacity to deliver high quality workforce-
related services to at-risk youth. While these organizations had all
been well-respected in relation to their youth services, their
connection to workforce development and their ability to help at-risk
teens make informed education and career choices has been enormously
enhanced by participating in WIA youth programs. They have learned how
to engage youth in dual goals, including high school equivalency AND
job AND college. As stated above, they have creatively brought in
community college courses as part of their curriculum, and will be
adding computer literacy training as a service for all their students.
WIA has spearheaded this change--and we believe has added a critical
level of quality and sophistication of services in our region.
We have been able to enhance our Career Center's ability to work
with youth. Early on as a WIB our Career Center staff began coming to
the WIB pleading for training and enhanced services for teen and older
youth job development needs. These young customers were coming into the
Centers that did not have programs and services appropriate for their
circumstances. Through a strategic planning effort in cooperation with
our Career Centers, the WIB established as a priority the development
and support of a Youth Career Center (YCC), located in a separate
office within one of our One-Stop's location. This Youth Career Center,
funded through WIA and other youth funds through the State of
Massachusetts and private contributions, has allowed us to
appropriately focus workforce services for this population, including
job readiness workshops, assistance in applying for jobs, and referral
to WIA or other youth programs. The YCC is not seen as separate from
our One-Stops, but an integral part of the One-Stop system, so young
people as they mature easily move between the two, and come to know and
understand these services as available to them at any time in their
work life. In addition, our One-Stop Career Center's Business Services
Unit has developed an expertise in developing jobs for teens as well as
adults, particularly during the summer season where teen jobs are in
such demand.
improvements to wia
WIA should be modified to change youth eligibility and to change
the way we determine eligibility. Current eligibility rules require
stringent documentation, including income tests, academic skills
assessments, previous criminal records, foster care information, and
other documents that are by definition difficult to obtain and
reflective of failure by those we are seeking to obtain them from.
These very steps are demoralizing to the youth we are trying to
enroll--how can we imagine an at-risk youth trying to make positive
changes by enrolling in a quality WIA youth program only to be told
that he or she has to prove their failures in order to begin the
process. These youth are easily turned off by such bureaucracy--in
fact, we estimate that probably only 50 percent of those who begin this
process actually complete it, representing a core of young people
denied service by the system designed to provide these services.
In addition, these rules exclude a large population of needy youth
whose families are struggling at just over poverty level, such as
families who are eligible for free/reduced lunch or other Federal
income-tested programs. These teens are left out of critical growth
experiences in the work world that could prevent them from falling into
great poverty or other at-risk situations.
We do not ask that we lose our focus on serving the most at-risk.
Instead we ask that local WIBs be given the authority, as they are
under the WIA Adult programs, to develop a process that works for the
population we are trying to serve. There are many ways to show need
that are not inflammatory or degrading or difficult and bureaucratic to
obtain. Income proxies from other Federal, State, or local programs
should be allowed. Partnerships and enhanced communication and mutual
responsibility with other youth serving agencies or organizations
should be encouraged so that referrals are made seamlessly and
acceptable documentation received this way. Automatic eligibility,
regardless of income, should be granted for certain risk factors such
as youthful offender status, high school drop-out, teen parent, etc. We
ask you to trust the local level to understand who needs to be served
and how best to document this--we know that this will have an
enormously positive benefit to the youth we are working to serve.
WIA should allow local regions to determine other aspects of
service, such as the in school/out of school balance. Through long
conversations and debates, our Youth Council and WIB determined several
years ago to focus our limited WIA youth funding on our out-of-school
population. While not totally eliminating in-school services (we are
currently at a 37 percent/63 percent in-school/out-of-school ratio) we
recognized a tremendous void in services for the out-of-school
population in our region and have thus targeted our resources
accordingly. The result are three well-run and responsive programs for
out-of-school youth that did not exist in the past, along with two very
strong in-school programs working closely with the local school
districts in keeping at-risk teens in school. Other regions may see
this issue differently, and reverse this structure. In any case, as
mentioned above, we ask that decisions such as these remain with the
local regions, ensuring that local needs are met.
The value of a summer employment program for at-risk youth cannot
be underestimated. While we believe in the full WIA youth program model
for at-risk youth, we also know that large numbers of teens--in fact
the majority of teens at all income levels--cannot find work during the
summer. Summer employment is key to teens' full workforce development
and yet is basically unavailable even in good economic times. We know
this by the number of youth who come to our Career Centers looking for
work--and by the economic challenges that companies face when hiring
youth. We know, for example, that the retail trade, often where a teen
finds the first job, has, in many cases, made strategic decisions to
increase minimum age for employment sometimes to 18 and often to 21. In
addition, they are tapping an age cohort only recently available to
retail, i.e., retirees, to fill the need for temporary and/or part-time
employment. Recent data collected by the Center for Labor market
information at Northeastern University shows that summer employment
nationally and across Massachusetts continues to decline every year,
with of course a major decline expected this summer. We are fortunate
this year that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act allow us to
provide this service to at-risk youth this summer (albeit with the
eligibility challenges as mentioned above). This should become a
standard part of WIA, with priority service to low-income youth and
with the ability of local WIBs to establish other priorities and
documentation requirements. A permanent summer jobs program will be a
very strong and fruitful investment in the lives of these youth AND in
the strength of the youth pipeline.
innovative policy recommendations to modernize wia
In summary, the above issues would result in THREE policy changes
in a new WIA. These include:
1. The opportunity for local WIBs to establish eligibility policies
and procedures around youth service, while retaining the requirement to
give priority to low income, severely at-risk youth.
2. Providing local authority to establish other program priorities,
including the in-school/out-of-school program mix.
3. Allowing a permanent, stand-alone summer jobs program for all
youth, with a focus on serving youth who are at or near poverty or
exhibit other at-risk characteristics.
In addition, other policy suggestions to modernize WIA would
include:
Require secondary and post-secondary institutions to work
closely with the workforce system to better prepare all youth to
consider careers within local and national critical and emerging
industries, most of which have a STEM focus. The workforce system is
often relegated to the fringes of our traditional educational system,
based on the overall American belief that individuals study first, and
then go to work. While we are making progress, we have a long way to go
to ensure that students at all levels see the connection between what
they are learning in school and how it plays out in our high-skilled
work environment. For example, WIA should support the placement of
teachers in summer externships where they practice their area of
expertise in a work environment and then translate this experience into
curriculum and related activities that make STEM real to young
learners. The new WIA should provide incentives and supports to WIBs
that work closely with their local school systems to develop and
implement programs such as this and related curriculum that helps all
youth become excited and committed to careers in STEM fields.
In addition, the new WIA should have incentives/options to
allow local WIBs and the educational system to develop appropriate
transition programs for youth. We know that in too many cases youth are
graduating from high school not prepared to college-level programming,
whether of a certificate or associate/bachelor degree nature. WIBs,
with their diverse membership of business, labor, education, and
community organizations, are the perfect place for conversations around
this challenge to take place--for both the adult and the youth
customer. A modernized WIA would reward those regions that take on this
dilemma and develop solutions that result in a greater transition to
higher education and into high-skilled jobs.
The new WIA should support and expand the ability of One-
Stop Career Centers to provide universal services to all youth within
the community. Currently, due to funding limitations and rules, most
One-Stops find it difficult and/or unallowable to provide these
services. As mentioned above, WIA youth funds are limited to serving
only the most at-risk, and a Youth Career Center should be open to ALL
youth, just as adult One-Stops are open to all adults. We on the North
Shore have been able to establish a Youth Career Center only because of
additional State support for youth. We urge that the new WIA treat
youth as the old WIA treats adults, i.e., individuals who need job-
related services without regard to income or other factors.
The new WIA should adjust performance standards for all
youth, regardless of age, to encourage continued education as well as
job placement upon high school graduation or GED receipt. We need to
focus on helping young people choose a career path that will provide
them with the opportunity to be economically self-sufficient as adults.
These paths in general require additional post-secondary education as
well as work experience. Young people should be encouraged to consider
multiple pathways to reaching their goals, and the new WIA should be
designed to encourage these outcomes.
conclusion
When Congress enacted the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 we were
in a period of strong economic growth and global transition. WIA as
designed at the time was right for transforming the job training system
into the 21st century.
Global transition accomplished, we now face the most significant
economic challenges since the Great Depression. According to the Bureau
of Labor Statistics more than 15 million people are officially out of
work and our unemployment rate is approaching 10 percent. We have to
rethink how we respond to the current labor surplus while at the same
time prepare workers for those industry sectors that remain critical
and/or are emerging, such as green job, high-skilled manufacturing, and
health care.
This will require keeping what worked and taking bold steps to make
the changes that are needed now. We believe Congress should:
1. Continue support for local decisionmaking through WIBs as
partnership among business, labor, education, and community/faith-based
workforce leaders;
2. Provide dedicated funding for the One-Stop Career Center
infrastructure in an effort to maximize training resources under WIB;
3. Create a Teen Employment Marshall Plan to respond to the youth
employment crisis, including simpler and more locally driven
eligibility and other programmatic policies, a permanent summer and/or
year round jobs program, great connections to STEM careers, support for
youth services in our One-Stop system, transition support for youth to
the next steps, and more appropriate performance outcomes; and
4. Insure accountability while at the same time provide maximum
local flexibility in program implementation.
We are at a crossroad and we need to take the best path to
education, train, and put America's youth--and adults--back to work.
Thank you.
______
Attachment.--Profiles of Youth being served by WIA
Below are five vignettes of youth served through the North Shore
Workforce Investment Board's WIA Youth programs. These programs are
offered by four community-based organizations chosen through a
competitive bid process on a bi-annual basis. They include:
Action, Inc. in Gloucester--Compass Program.
Catholic Charities in Lynn and Salem--Youthworks.
My Turn in Lynn--WIA Out-of-School Youth Program.
Girls Inc. in Lynn--Careerpath.
We attach these stories to provide a more compelling picture of the
employment and educational challenges of WIA youth and the creativity
and dedication of our partners as they help these young people overcome
these challenges.
ashley
Ashley entered the Compass program in the fall of 2007 to complete
requirements for her high school diploma. She was an out-of-school,
older youth who only needed a few additional requirements for
graduation. Through our program we set her up with a Credit Recovery
academic plan which included participating in the Composition I course
offered at Compass through North Shore Community College. We began the
enrollment process with the Workforce Investment Board to qualify her
for our programs after her 3-week trial period. This was a complicated
task because of the extensive paperwork required for eligibility. With
out-of-school youth school many times documents are no longer valid
because they are out-dated for WIA eligibility requirements and, many
of our students--including Ashley--do not have their social security
cards in their possession. It is difficult for our students who do not
have transportation and other forms of identification to get a
duplicate card. Ashley's mother is hearing impaired and their only form
of income is her disability check, but getting this documentation is a
long process. Eventually Ashley was approved through WIA in April.
Ashley continued with the program throughout the process and received
her Gloucester High School diploma in June 2008, 3 years after her
anticipated graduation date. She was placed in work experience at
Addison Gilbert Hospital where she got experience and earned her first
ever pay check. Ashley has just completed her first year at North Shore
Community College in the medical administrative assistant program,
making the dean's list. She is looking forward to returning to school
in the fall and getting her associates degree.
chris
Chris was a bit of a ``sad sack'' when he first arrived at the
Catholic Charities GED Program in May 2008. His scores showed that he
would need to make a long term commitment in order to successfully pass
his GED. He participated in the summer employment program by working in
the maintenance department at the Catholic Charities Day Care Center.
The director of the day care often commented on how he managed to paint
himself more than the walls. Slowly, we watched Chris grow. He became a
strong and dedicated student in the fall. He worked hard in class and
was never shy about asking questions. All the staff at the Center got
to know him and would often ask how he was doing. One year after Chris
began the program, he took his GED test in May 2009. Although, he did
not pass the math section, he did successfully pass the other four
tests. He wanted to take the retest in math right away and came to the
program every day during the following month. On June 18, 2009, Chris
graduated with the rest of the class, having successfully passed all
five sections of the GED. Now he is planning to attend Marion Court
College in September and in order to feel more acclimated to the
campus, he is spending this summer's employment opportunity on the
campus working in the grounds keeping department.
iesha
Iesha was 16 when she entered the program, pregnant but very
determined to find a way to put her life back together. She was
considered a ward of the State and was living with an aunt here in
Lynn. She was enrolled in the program in February 2008 and progressed
rapidly toward her GED. While she was in the program, she participated
in the Navigating the Future College Writing class as well as the
Transitions to College Course, earning her four college credits. Within
2 months, she took her GED test and passed. She then participated in
the summer youth employment component and was placed at the CAEP
(College Application Education Program) as a youth mentor. Barely over
17, she gave birth to her son in July. Her plans were to move forward
and she wanted to attend college class over the summer, but reality
taught her that she needed to pace herself and she postponed starting
until September. A referral was made for her to connect up with the
Healthy Families Program to help her with parenting skills and how to
time manage. She enrolled at North Shore Community College in January
2009 and has been attending full-time. During the last conversation
with Iesha, she expressed that she is doing very well and that she is
exactly where she had hoped she would be in her life.
laporscha
Laporscha first entered the program back in February 2008 looking
to get her GED and find a job, eventually entering the field of
criminal justice. Her attendance in the program was remarkable from the
beginning. While attending classes, Laporscha showed a strong interest
in almost everything we had to offer. Her adventure started when she
took part in a focus group sponsored by the Commonwealth Corp on a new
initiative called ``Think Again.'' The program was designed to help
young people make choices while they were in middle school. She was
hooked and wanted to know and do more. We offered to have her enroll in
the Northeast Youth Leadership Program and in July 2008 she spent 3
days and 2 nights at Merrimack College in Andover attending a training
to become a youth leader. While still attending the GED classes, she
also participated in the Navigating the Future/North Shore Community
College, Transition to College course. Using the skills she had
acquired in the training, Laporscha started a work experience placement
as the coordinator for the Think Again Project. The design was to have
her work with and in the local middle schools to help reach young
people thinking about quitting school. She also did a summer youth
employment placement at the Catholic Charities North Day Care Center.
She worked for 7 weeks in the day care helping with feeding, daily
games and activities and assisting the teaching staff. She got a job at
the local Taco Bell and was happy to be bringing in a pay check. All
the while, she was dealing with serious social issues at home that
frequently left her homeless, penniless and with no one to turn to.
Amazingly, Laporscha continued to take advantage of everything the
program could offer to her. By the winter, she made a difficult
decision to go to California to live and work with her grandmother and
her aunt. She left in January 2009 in hopes of finding a new life and a
new direction. With the beginning of spring, Laporscha returned to
Lynn. She called and asked if she could return to the program. Here she
has a sense of direction and meaning and she would like to continue
toward the dreams and goals she first established a year ago. Very few
students take advantage of as many opportunities as Laporscha did, and
hopefully, she will continue to reach out to all we have to offer.
gisell
Gisell came to Girls Inc. from the Dominican Republic during the
summer. If she had stayed in the Dominican Republic, she would have
been entering her senior year of high school. Her first language was
Spanish, so she needed to work on her English. In Lynn she started
school as a junior. The Career Path Program funded by the Workforce
Investment Board changed everything for her. She says, ``I didn't know
the way to get into college, especially here in the United States. They
showed me everything. Every question I had, they answered.'' Gisell
used every resource available. She found the workshops on interviewing
for a job and financial literacy especially valuable--she says these
are good skills for life. She found the weekly Mentor Program that is
part of Career Path was just what she needed to take the many steps she
had to take to reach her academic and life goals. She was matched with
a volunteer mentor from Lynn who supported and encouraged her, and she
found she could make use of the differences in their life experiences.
Gisell was accepted at the college of her dreams! However, she ran into
a major bump in the road. While the college offered her some financial
assistance, she came to realize that she did not want to put her family
into debt. Gisell is very strong-minded, so she was not excited about
making a back-up plan. But she says that the Career Path Coordinator
and Academic Advisor for the Career Path Program helped her to see that
going to another college was not the end of the world and that she
could still reach her long-term goals. They helped her adapt
successfully to her real life circumstances. Gisell is currently doing
well at North Shore Community College and is a member of the Honor
Society. She is struggling with one class. She used connections she
made while in the Career Path Program to continue working with TRIO and
join a study group to help her with the challenging class. Gisell did a
summer internship in Lynn at the community dental center. From this
experience she gained the confidence that she could ``do anything.''
Later she worked weekends at Brooksby Village leading activities for
elders, and they loved her! She also took advantage of a volunteer who
came to Girls Inc. to do a physics project in which she made a wooden
triangle fly using electricity. She also attended an architecture class
taught by a Girls Inc. Board member. Gisell says, ``I never would have
made it to where I am now without Girls Inc. and the Career Path
Program.''
Senator Murray. Well, thank you very much.
Ms. Cooper.
STATEMENT OF KATHY COOPER, POLICY ASSOCIATE, OFFICE OF ADULT
LITERACY, WASHINGTON STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL
COLLEGES, OLYMPIA, WA
Ms. Cooper. Thank you, Chair Murray, Senator Isakson. It is
a pleasure to be here today to bring some perspective from
adult basic education providers in Washington State. I think
you will hear them echo the themes that you have already
discussed this morning.
I would tell you that I bring their great sense of urgency
to this conversation. Adults with skills gaps in basic
education and English as a second language in my State come
from the fastest growing population groups, are under-prepared
for the jobs they have today, and lack the skills for the
programs that could prepare them for the job that will need
them tomorrow. They will make up a significant part of our
future workforce for the next two generations, are one of our
State's richest potential assets, and within the parameters and
supports of the current law, we are able to serve less than 10
percent of the need.
In response to those needs, I am here today to ask you to
focus your modernization in four areas.
The first is to identify the purpose of title II as student
success in post-secondary education and progress along career
pathways. Eighty-six percent of the adults who come to our
program come with the goal of gaining skills to get and keep a
better job. Our research has identified the point at which
these students will have just enough skills and knowledge to
get a family-wage job. We call that the ``tipping point.'' It
is 1 year of college credit and a vocational credential or
certificate. That is the goal for our adult literacy programs,
the minimal goal for every student they serve. It is a goal
worth having for title II, and it is a goal the President has
declared for the country's education system.
The second change that we seek is language that identifies
and supports the expansion of integrated education. As you have
heard this morning, our State's flagship innovation is
integrated basic education and skills training, or I-BEST. I-
BEST puts an adult basic education and professional-technical
instructor in the same classroom at the same time, offering
instruction that integrates job training and adult basic
education. All I-BEST programs lead to vocational certificates
recognized by local employers in demand fields that pay family
wages. Those certificates carry exactly the same credit and are
the same certificates that other college students earn.
I-BEST also provides a full range of student support, but
the most important thing about I-BEST is that it works better
than anything else we have ever done. The latest study
documents that I-BEST students earn an average of 52 college
credits. That is more than the 45 required for the tipping
point, and they demonstrate greater gains than adult basic
education students in traditional classrooms. However, we
cannot continue this level of innovation in the margins. The
new WIA can make room, however, for this success in Washington
and other States.
A third critical area is to ensure that those who need most
education and training will be able to get it by aligning
titles I and II and naming community colleges as partners. Even
in Washington where we have good will and we have good
intentions, we are able to overcome the structural barriers to
jointly serve in any great number those who are most under-
prepared. The new law can align program definitions, allowable
activities, outcome measures, and performance targets that will
drive us to invest in the workers who are currently getting the
least and who need the most and who stand to most contribute to
a vibrant economy.
In my home State, we also know that the community and
technical college system is at the center of moving under-
prepared adults into the skilled workforce. We are heartened to
hear President Obama's support for our system and his inclusion
of adult basic education and integration in his thinking.
The success of the new act will be greatest if each State's
college system is named as a system partner. That new
relationship will result in a more comprehensive education and
training system that can more fully develop the workforce.
Finally, we ask you not to starve the solution. In
Washington, we know what we need to do and we know how to do
it. Meanwhile, Federal resources decrease every year. So we
would ask you to authorize an additional $17 million in
appropriations this year to hold harmless 36 States penalized
when the Department of Education changed their data source.
Washington State alone stands to lose more than a quarter of a
million dollars.
We would ask you to increase next year's appropriation to
$750 million, an investment that would simply allow States to
serve as much as 40 percent of the adults already on waiting
lists.
And finally, we would ask that you target an additional $75
million to help States develop the kind of innovative programs
like
I-BEST that move low-skilled adults further and faster on
career pathways to success.
We are proud of our good work, proud of the accomplishment
of our adult learners, and really applaud your efforts to
create new parameters and support new opportunities. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Cooper follows:]
Prepared Statement of Kathy Cooper
Chair Murray and members of the committee, I am honored to provide
perspective about WIA reauthorization from Washington State's adult
basic education providers. It is a special privilege to have this role
before a committee chaired by Senator Murray--a champion of so many
efforts to support low-income families and economic growth.
You could not have picked a more critical time to modernize the
framework provided by the Workforce Investment Act. Your work will
shape our ability to meet the needs of the emerging workforce and fuel
a revitalized economy.
Despite diligent efforts and significant State level investments,
we are not able to meet the accelerating needs of adult students and
our State's economy within the parameters of the current law. The
populations that adult basic education/English as a second language
programs target are Washington State's fastest growing groups. Almost
all of our students work--often at more than one job. They earn low-
incomes, are under-prepared for today's jobs, and lack the skills to
succeed in traditional education and training programs. This population
will provide the growth in our State's workforce for at least the next
two generations. We are able to enroll less than 10 percent of these
hard-working adults, recognized by President Obama as making up most of
our Nation's talent pipeline.
At the same time, skill levels required from workers continue to
accelerate exponentially. When we talk with employers in Washington
State, they no longer discuss the workforce needed to support a
recovering economy. Instead, they talk about the workforce needed to
fuel a new economy--one in which workers must demonstrate even higher
skills and be much more agile and ready to change.
In response to those urgent needs, I am here today to ask you to
focus on four areas as you reauthorize the Workforce Investment Act
(WIA).
Redefine the purpose of title II as student success in post-
secondary education and progress along career pathways. Eighty-six (86)
percent of the students who enroll in adult basic education in
Washington State come to learn the skills they need to get and keep a
good job. Joint research carried out by the Washington State Board for
Community and Technical Colleges and the Community College Research
Center at Columbia University found that far too few of them ever
complete enough education to make a significant difference in economic
self-sufficiency or to meet employer needs. The research also
identified the point at which students have just enough skills and
knowledge to get family-wage jobs and take the first steps along career
pathways. We call that the Tipping Point--1 year of college credit and
a vocational credential or certificate. It's the goal that our adult
literacy programs have over time for every student they serve and it's
a goal President Obama identified for our national education system.
Drive the creation and expansion of integrated education and dual
enrollment programs that move adult literacy students further and
faster along education and career pathways. In Washington State, the
flagship among these kinds of innovative practices is Integrated Basic
Education and Skills Training or I-BEST.
I-BEST puts an adult basic education and a professional-technical
instructor in the same classroom at the same time. This team offers
instructions that integrates job training and adult basic education for
highly motivated students, whether or not they have a GED or high
school diploma. Their success demonstrates the importance of
concurrent, rather than sequential, learning to accelerate progress for
adults. In fact, all I-BEST programs lead to vocational certificates
recognized by local employers in demand fields that pay family wages.
They are the same certificates earned by other college students and
carry the same college credit. That instruction not only prepares
students for first steps on their education and career pathways, it
also gives them the skills and knowledge they need to succeed at the
next steps. In Washington State, we look beyond mythical career ladders
that have rungs spread too far apart for the reach of most adult basic
education students. Instead, we think about skills as a chain with
links that interlock.
Beyond integrating basic skills and professional-technical
education, I-BEST students also receive a full range of student
support, including advising, counseling, case management and financial
aid. Blending enhanced student services with innovative instruction is
critical to I-BEST success.
The most important thing about the 138 I-BEST programs offered
through Washington's 34 community and technical colleges is that they
work for students and for employers. The Community College Research
Center released a study in May documenting that I-BEST students earn an
average of 52 credits, which is more than the 45 credits needed to
reach the Tipping Point. At the same time, I-BEST students demonstrate
greater gains in their adult basic education/English language skills
than students enrolled in traditional adult basic education classes.
That's only the data part of the story. The rest of the I-BEST
story lives in the success of students and the employers who hire them.
They are students like Harry, who was injured and had to leave the job
he'd held for three decades. He was apprehensive about enrolling in the
manufacturing processes I-BEST program at Lower Columbia College, not
sure he could master the required skills after 47 years away from a
classroom. Eight out of ten students who begin college without a
diploma don't make it. Instead, Harry has a 3.6 GPA, will complete his
certificate in December, and already has an internship job waiting.
The I-BEST story is about Dien, who came to North Seattle Community
College in the fall of 2007 as a recent immigrant from Vietnam. In only
2 years, he enrolled in adult literacy and I-BEST accounting classes,
finished an initial accounting certificate, got a job, completed his AA
degree, and will continue work this fall towards a bachelor's degree in
accounting at Central Washington University.
The success of I-BEST is echoed by Kekebush and her five children.
A refugee from war-torn Eritrea, she developed English skills and
completed her Licensed Practical Nurse certificate in the winter of
2008--part of Renton Technical College's second, 2-year I-BEST cohort.
Like her I-BEST peers, her grade point average was higher than
traditional students in the same classes. She is scheduled to graduate
from the Registered Nurse program at the end of this summer.
Ensure that those most in need of services will get them by
aligning activities, outcomes and partnerships in titles I and II. The
needs of under-
prepared workers and employers cannot be addressed using the current
capacity of either the workforce development or adult basic education
system alone. Gaps in service and unsatisfactory results will not be
resolved at the level of coordination possible within the confines of
the current act. Despite the goodwill of local workforce investment
boards and adult basic education providers in Washington State, we have
not been able to overcome structural barriers.
Current program definitions, allowable activities, outcome
measures, and aggressive targets in title I don't match those in title
II. The mismatch leaves providers from both systems in the same
quandary. They choose between addressing the needs of clients and
communities or hitting performance targets through activities that
serve clients who need the least support. Alignment of the two titles
will allow qualified providers from both systems to leverage each
other's strengths and resources, count shared success, and invest in
workers who will benefit the most.
In addition, community and technical college systems are going to
play a more central role in moving low-skilled adults along education
and career pathways. In Washington, we are learning that the quality of
the relationship between the college and workforce development systems
predict success in both title I and title II. Reauthorization provides
an opportunity to change the parameters of this relationship from a
series of individual contracts between boards and college venders into
a systemic relationship between partners capable of delivering coherent
and comprehensive services.
Don't starve the solution. Faced with increases in both under-
skilled population groups and the skill/knowledge levels required to
recreate a vital economy, we are starving the solution to both
dilemmas. Adult literacy funding continues to decrease across the
country.
Three actions will reverse this trend and allow us to better meet
the demands of workers and the economy. No. 1, authorize an additional
$17 million in the current appropriations bills to hold harmless all 36
States penalized when the Department of Education changed the data
source they use for distribution formulas. In Washington State, we
stand to lose more than a quarter of a million dollars. No. 2, increase
next year's appropriation to $750 million, allowing States to serve 40
percent of those already on waiting lists across the Nation. No. 3,
target an additional $75 million for seeding and scaling up approaches
that integrate basic skills and post-secondary education and training
or which dually enroll students in adult basic education and post-
secondary education and training.
We are proud of the innovative efforts of adult basic education
providers in Washington State and celebrate the success of our adult
learners. As you reauthorize WIA title II, you have the opportunity to
create new parameters and support new opportunities that will make it
possible for us to expand our successful efforts and be joined in
innovation by colleagues across the Nation.
I am happy to take your questions.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
Mr. Wing.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN WING, DIRECTOR OF WORKFORCE INITIATIVES,
CVS CAREMARK, TWINSBURG, OH
Mr. Wing. Good morning, Madam Chairwoman and Senator
Isakson. I am Stephen Wing, Director of Workforce Initiatives
for CVS Caremark. Thank you for inviting me to speak to you
today about CVS Caremark's experiences in the workforce
investment system.
Today, CVS Caremark is the only fully integrated pharmacy
health care company in the United States. It has approximately
215,000 employees across 45 States who demonstrate a shared
passion for customer service and a commitment to creating a
better future of health care in America.
At CVS Caremark, we understand how much a company's culture
impacts its people and ultimately its performance. That is why
we have established a unifying vision that defines our company
and serves as a guide of how we conduct our business every day.
These principles inspire us to go above and beyond our
customers, our clients, and our colleagues.
An integral part of our mission is investment in our
workforce and the communities we serve. The primary focus of
our workforce initiatives is to train, hire, develop, and
retain, and support the lifelong learning of diverse qualified
associates, while adding value to CVS Caremark by establishing
partnerships with local, State, and Federal agencies,
educational institutions, nonprofits, and faith-based
organizations under the umbrella of the workforce investment
system.
In November 1996, we started our first Welfare to Work
program in Akron, OH, in partnership with the Summit County
Welfare Office and the Summit County Employment Service, along
with Family Solutions, a local nonprofit that assisted us in
recruiting four candidates. Since that time, we have hired over
65,000 former welfare recipients, and as of today, 40,000 of
those are still actively employed in career path positions at
CVS Caremark. At that level of retention, 60 percent,
represents a stark contrast to entry-level service jobs in
retail where turnover can easily exceed 200 percent a year.
It is worth noting too that the retention rate for former
welfare recipients is also much higher than the retention level
for other entry-level CVS Caremark colleagues hired from other
sources.
In addition, over half of those former welfare recipients
we have hired have been promoted at least twice. We are excited
to find that people are not just joining us for a job but for a
career.
One of those employees is Debra Autry. Debra is a lead
technician at our East Main Street store in Akron, OH. She was
in our first Welfare to Work program. She started out as a
part-time crew member and worked at two stores so that she
could get full-time status. Debra showed her supervisors very
quickly that she was excellent at customer service and is
dedicated to the stores and, in her 13-year career, has been
promoted four times, completed the entire pharmacy tech program
and received the national certification. We are very proud of
Debra. I remember her telling us about other training programs
that she had participated in while on welfare where she
completed the course and got a certification with no job. With
our training at CVS Caremark, we guarantee a job for all who
pass their training.
Some of the benefits of the partnerships that we have been
able to develop with these organizations--such as in the
workforce system, but the nonprofits and the faith-based
organizations--some of the benefits to CVS Caremark of these
various partnerships include the following: access to quality
job seekers, savings from more effective use of company and
adult education resources, improved work qualities, increased
employee retention, improved customer service, increased
employment promotion rates, support for the well-being and
economic development of the community, and the assistance with
workers' training and educational needs.
In addition to the benefits to CVS Caremark, the benefits
for those involved include: access to good jobs, financial and
other support, and greater awareness and access to community
resources.
In terms of the reauthorization, we believe that ensuring
that existing youth dollars are directed to promote innovation
in education and training for disconnected youth is critical.
Funding for these kinds of programs should be based at least in
part on the success of those models. We also believe that these
kinds of programs should include an articulation of key
elements linked to outcomes to be eligible for the Federal
funding.
And in conclusion, we believe in the workforce investment
system and have seen that it has been very positive and
productive for CVS Caremark. We would want to share that with
other companies and make sure that we get more buy-in from
companies.
I also would recommend that you connect with Corporate
Voices for Working Families and the Institute for Competitive
Workforce at the U.S. Chamber who have great thoughts on the
Workforce Investment reauthorization. I serve on both boards
and I know that they have done a lot of work on this, and I
would recommend that you check with them.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Senator Isakson. We
appreciate this opportunity to tell you about CVS Caremark's
experience within the workforce system and look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wing follows:]
Prepared Statement of Stephen Wing
Good morning Senator Murray and members of the subcommittee. I am
Steve Wing, Director of Workforce Initiatives for CVS Caremark. Thank
you for inviting me to speak to you today about CVS Caremark's
experience in the Workforce Investment system.
First, let me tell you about our company, and our history of
business innovation and leadership. Our corporate history begins with
the opening of our first retail store in 1963. At that time, we were
seen as an innovator in selling health and beauty products at a good
price and in convenient locations. Since that time, we have grown to
nearly 7,000 retail store locations in 45 States and the District of
Columbia. Our groundbreaking efforts have continued in our pharmacy
benefit management and retail health clinic and specialty pharmacy
businesses.
Today, CVS Caremark, as the only fully integrated pharmacy health
care company in the United States, has approximately 215,000 employees
who demonstrate a shared passion for customer service and a commitment
to creating a better future for health care in America. At CVS
Caremark, we understand how much a company's culture impacts its people
and ultimately its performance. That's why, we have established a
Vision, Mission and set of Values that defines our company and serves
to guide our business every day--in the thousands of communities we
serve. These principles inspire us to go above and beyond for our
customers, our clients and our colleagues.
An integral part of our mission is our investment in our workforce
and the communities we serve. The primary focus of our workforce
initiatives is to hire, train, develop, retain, and support the life-
long learning of diverse qualified associates, while adding value to
CVS Caremark by establishing partnerships with local, State, and
Federal agencies, educational institutions, nonprofits and faith-based
organizations under the umbrella of the workforce investment system.
In November 1996, we started our first Welfare to Work training
program in Akron, OH in partnership with the Summit County Welfare
Office, the Summit County Employment Service and Family Solutions, a
local nonprofit that assisted us in recruiting four candidates. Since
that time we have hired over 65,000 people who had been on public
assistance and as of today over 40,000 of them are still actively
employed in career path positions at CVS Caremark. This level of
retention, 60 percent, represents a stark contrast to other entry-level
service jobs in retail where turnover can easily exceed 200 percent a
year. It is worth noting that the retention rate for former welfare
recipients is also much higher than retention levels for entry-level
CVS Caremark colleagues hired from other sources. In addition, over
half the former welfare recipients we have hired have been promoted at
least twice. We're excited to find that people aren't just joining us
for a job but a career.
One of these employees is Debra Autry. Debra is a lead technician
at our East Main Street store in Akron, OH. She was in our first
Welfare to Work training program. She started out as a part-time crew
member and worked at two stores so she could get full time status.
Debra showed her supervisors very quickly that she was excellent at
customer service and dedicated to the success of the store. In her 13-
year career Debra has been promoted four times, completed the entire
pharmacy technician program and received the National Pharmacy
Technician Certification (CPhT). We are very proud of Debra. We knew
she would do well from the beginning of her training because of her
motivation to complete the course and her dedication by being in class
on time everyday. I remember her telling us about other training
programs that she had participated in while on welfare where she
completed the course and got a certificate with no job at the end. With
our training at CVS Caremark we guaranteed a job for all who passed
their training.
Debra's employment with CVS Caremark has not only been life
changing for her but also for her family. Debra's daughter came to work
for CVS and became a shift supervisor and while working has been going
to school to become a registered nurse. She will soon graduate and may
someday be a nurse practitioner for our MinuteClinic. When I heard of
this young woman following in her mother's footsteps, I realized that
our program focus is bigger than just hiring someone. It is about
helping people have the confidence and skills to work. For the company,
it means building a competent, motivated pool of employees.
Because of what we learned and our success during these early days,
our workforce initiatives program has grown and thrived. As such, CVS
Caremark constantly seeks new and innovative ways to improve the
recruitment and retention of its workforce. One approach has been to
liaison our workforce investment programs to a network of local, State,
and national partnerships--with K-12 education, adult education
providers, faith-based and community organizations, and workforce
development agencies to help the company find and train new employees.
We have used the workforce investment system to coordinate the process.
Our Workforce Initiatives team oversees these partnerships and
other programs designed to strengthen CVS Caremark's workforce. In
addition to customized training programs for new and incumbent staff,
the department runs internship programs for high school students and
incentive programs for mature workers.
overview of partnerships
Our department devotes significant time and resources to finding
qualified workers, training them for entry-level positions and helping
employees advance their careers at CVS Caremark. It does this in
partnership with faith-based organizations, workforce development
agencies and private intermediaries all coordinated through the
workforce investment system.
One-Stop Centers
In partnership with local One-Stop Centers, CVS has developed a
training program for new entry-level employees and first-level managers
that simulates on-the-job roles and responsibilities in a replica of a
CVS store. At the seven CVS Learning Centers in six cities, employees
are trained on curriculum developed by the National Retail Federation
(NRF) with an emphasis on customer service and skills that prepare them
for a career path ranging from entry-level to pharmacy assistance and
technician positions. Incumbent workers receive training to help them
move up the career ladder. A recent study found that the learning
centers have a positive impact on employee retention, advancement,
completion of certifications, and sales.
For example, CVS/pharmacy partnered with the District of Columbia
Department of Employment Services to open the South Capitol Learning
Center in Washington, DC in 2001. The Learning Center features a One-
Stop job center for unemployed DC residents and a training center for
CVS employees. CVS offers the ultimate recruitment incentive to local
job seekers that visit the Learning Center--a guaranteed job if they
qualify for public assistance funds and complete one of the on-site
training programs.
The training prepares entry-level employees for their first jobs at
CVS stores and helps current employees improve their skills and obtain
higher-paying jobs within the company. At the training center,
employees learn to use a cash register, develop photographs, shelve
merchandise, and assist in the pharmacy at the center's freestanding
mock store. Program costs are shared by CVS Caremark and the District
of Columbia through public Welfare to Work funds and workforce
investment dollars.
This partnership benefits CVS, the One-Stop Center, unemployed
adults, and the District of Columbia. Since 2000, CVS/pharmacy has
hired 10,000 trainees from the South Capitol Learning Center, enabling
the company to expand its reach in DC. The One-Stop helps with CVS's
recruitment by referring qualified low-income job seekers to the
company's on-site learning center and in turn fulfills its mission of
helping unemployed residents secure employment. While in training,
which includes the pre-employment programs, DC residents receive hourly
wages and part-time benefits from CVS Caremark.
According to the Department of Employment Services (DOES),
``Rebuilding the job center was a centerpiece of the
District's effort to revitalize the area that surrounds it.
Once a rough area, it now features new businesses, renovated
buildings, a new elementary school and several new housing
complexes.''
Partnerships With Faith-based Organizations
Through a successful partnership with the Mt. Lebanon Baptist
Church in Washington, DC, we discovered that faith-based organizations
could play a major role in recruiting qualified entry-level employees.
Together we developed a partnership that would ultimately benefit Mt.
Lebanon, CVS Caremark, and DC residents.
CVS and Mount Lebanon worked together to sponsor a church-based job
fair, during which CVS interviewed 90 adults and hired 40. The job fair
allowed CVS to expand its reach in the DC metro area and hire employees
from the church to staff its new stores. Based on the success of
subsequent recruitment fairs, CVS Caremark has since refined the
church-based job fair model and is replicating it in partnership with
churches in other cities across the country.
In addition to the workforce benefits, CVS employees have the
option of becoming homeowners. CVS Caremark has developed a home
ownership program for employees, called CVS Prescriptions to
Homeownership that provides low-interest loans for inner city
residents. After 2 years, all employees can participate in the
homeownership program. Managers and pharmacists are eligible upon their
start dates.
Mt. Lebanon Baptist Church and the Washington Interfaith Network
both serve as examples of CVS's success in partnering with faith-based
organizations to gain access to a network of potential employees. The
faith-based partnership has also expanded within DC, through the help
of the Washington Interfaith Network (WIN). Through WIN, CVS gains a
vehicle for advertising job openings in the DC area and sponsoring job
fairs at over 60 churches in the area.
Additionally, CVS Caremark recently created a mini-learning center
at Mt. Lebanon--the first faith-based One-Stop Center in the country--
to train qualified low-income residents for entry-level employment at
CVS.
Partnerships With Intermediary Organizations
CVS Caremark has also strengthened its workforce by retaining the
services of WorkSource Partners, Inc. (WSP), an intermediary
organization dedicated to helping companies address workforce
challenges in the Boston region. WSP provides guidance to clients on
both the hiring and placement of new employees and training and
development of incumbent staff, with a particular focus on ``help[ing]
companies cultivate the enormous potential of our community.''
WorkSource Partners approached CVS after learning about the
company's learning center model with the suggestion that CVS promote
its own employees into store managers. In order to do so, however, CVS
needed to provide entry-level workers with remedial skills training
because they did not have the educational skills to complete the tasks.
WorkSource Partners turned to its partners, including the National
Retail Federation and the Ben Franklin Jr. College to design a basic
skills training program. The NRF provided content expertise in the
development of customer service training. Ben Franklin offered guidance
in curriculum development and instruction.
As the intermediary, WorkSource Partners brokers the relationships
between CVS, CVS employees, and the curriculum and instruction team.
Its roles include: marketing the program to CVS employees, offering
career coaching to CVS employees, working with store managers to
identify training candidates, developing training curriculum, and
overseeing the partnerships. Funds for this program were received from
the workforce investment system.
As the training program developed in partnership with WorkSource
Partners shows, CVS did not need to look outside its own workforce to
fill managerial positions. Instead, it provided targeted training to
entry-level employees--customized for various job-tracks--and
encouraged employees to advance their careers within the company.
Other examples of successful models developed in coordination with
the Workforce Investment system are:
Our involvement in a number of initiatives in Cleveland,
Kansas City, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, New York City, San
Antonio, and Indianapolis designed to provide on-ramps to both post-
secondary education and career paths for low-income/low-skilled young
adults. We are excited about our work to develop an employer-driven
alternative pathway for disconnected youth. We think it makes good
business sense, and we believe we will also be helping young people
develop key workforce skills that will help them advance with us, or
move on to other careers.
In our work with Corporate Voices for Working Families, we
participated along with a number of other employers to identify the
barriers to employment for disconnected young adults, leading to the
creation of a model alternative pathway for disconnected youth that
meets the needs of both employers and young adults. Our experience at
CVS Caremark confirms the alternative pathway model, with the most
effective approach for low-income/low-skilled young adults being one
that is holistic, providing integrated skill training (academic,
professional/life skills, and technical job skill), social support
services, mentoring, a work-based learning experience, and post-
secondary academic credits.
Our Pathways to Pharmacy Program (see
www.cvscaremark.com). We are piloting a new program in our Boston and
Detroit markets. The pilot is focused on high school dropouts and
people who have obtained a GED. Working with several partners, we
provide 6 weeks of intensive training in a classroom setting. The
training was designed so that it incorporates critical workplace skills
as well as CVS-specific training. In addition, the young people have a
mentor and social supports to help ensure their success. Following the
classroom training period, the young people apprentice in a CVS store,
where they have the chance to practice what they have learned. At the
same time, the managers have the chance to see what kind of employee
the young person will be before making a hiring decision. In the second
phase of the pilot, once the young person is an employee, we have
designed a set of tools that they can use to continue their skill
development (on-line training and on-the-job training) so that in
conjunction with their manager they can continue on a career path. The
mentor continues to check in with them and help them trouble shoot any
challenges that may arise. We developed this pilot with support from
the Kellogg Foundation's New Options Initiative. Our plan is to work
out the kinks in the first two markets, and roll it out regionally and
ultimately nationally.
Our work with the ``Year Up'' program in Providence, RI.
Year Up is a 1-year intensive training program that serves low-income
urban young adults. They provide 6 months of integrated skill training
along with mentoring and social support. They also partner with a local
community college so that the young people earn college credits through
the program. In the second 6 months, they partner with employers who
provide apprenticeships for the students (see www.yearup.org/locations/
providence.htm). We have had tremendous success in our partnership with
Year Up. We have hired many of the apprentices into jobs in our IT
department, and they are some of our best employees. Our CEO has been
so impressed by the quality of the Year Up apprentices that he has
directed us to find ways to expand the partnership so that Year Up can
provide us with a talent pipeline into jobs beyond the IT department.
benefits of partnerships
Some benefits to CVS Caremark of its various partnerships with
faith-based, One-Stop, and intermediary organizations in coordination
with the workforce investment system include:
Access to qualified job seekers.
Savings from more effective use of company and adult
education resources.
Improved work quality.
Increased employee retention.
Improved customer service.
Increased employee promotion rate.
Support for the well-being and economic development of
the community.
Assistance with worker training and education needs.
In addition to the benefits to CVS Caremark, the benefits for those
involved include access to good jobs, financial and other support and
greater awareness and access to community services.
In terms of reauthorization of the WIA, we believe that ensuring
that existing youth training dollars are directed to promote
innovations in education and training for disconnected youth is
critical. Funding for these kinds of programs should be based at least
in part, on the success of those models. We also believe that these
kinds of programs should include an articulation of key elements
(integrated skill training, social supports, mentoring, post-secondary
credits, and employer-provided apprenticeship/internship, etc.) linked
to measurable outcomes to be eligible for Federal funding. The current
system drives support to local youth programs based largely on
relationships and local inputs, rather than outcomes.
We encourage our emerging leaders to become active members of
workforce investment boards. In many of our major markets we have our
local operation executives participate on local boards. This has been a
``win-win'' for both CVS Caremark and the local WIB. Our managers
become more educated on the community and the WIB gets the expertise of
a business executive. I myself am a member of the Cleveland Workforce
Investment Board.
In conclusion, we believe in the Workforce Investment System and
have seen that it has been very positive and productive for CVS
Caremark, our workforce partners, and our employees. We would advise
other companies considering such programs to contemplate working with
various types of organizations that can address workforce challenges,
including faith-based organizations, public agencies, and private
intermediaries. We would also recommend the development of replicable
training models that can be implemented in a variety of locations and
for a variety of career tracks. Lastly, prospective employers might
consider partnering with adult education providers to develop career
pathways for entry-level employees and provide the necessary training
to advance them along the path.
Thank you Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee. We
appreciate this opportunity to tell you about CVS Caremark's experience
within the Workforce Investment System and look forward to working with
the subcommittee as you consider reauthorization of this important act.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much to all of our witnesses
today. This hearing has provided invaluable insight as we move
forward on reauthorizing WIA. Excellent suggestions from each
and every one of you.
I have a few questions that I am just going to offer up for
anybody who would like to jump in and respond.
For the last 11 years, WIA often has not had the level of
evaluation and reporting that it should. We have heard about
this from several of you. We all want to see stronger
evaluation and greater accountability. I think we all
understand that, we need to improve our collection efforts.
We also want to be sure that we encourage innovation and
risk-taking because nobody knows best. We have heard from the
local stories how important it is to put this encouragement to
good use.
Does anybody have any recommendations on how we strike a
balance between accountability and innovation and still
encourage States--or strike a balance between the
accountability and reporting and still encourage innovation and
creativity at the local level?
Mr. McQueen. I would just say, Madam Chairman, that the 15
percent fund, which was the Governor's fund, has been very
important to the ability to innovate, and we have always then
been able to spin that off into a performance-driven program.
So it really is being able to experiment with the program that
is not as regulated, first tweak it and then spin it over into
a program that is. In every program that we mentioned, the
Governor's 15 percent fund or the discretionary money was
critical. But we did not need it to continue with. We worked it
out and then we were able to spin it off into the system.
Ms. Cooper. I would also suggest, Senator Murray, that an
alignment of some of those accountability measures between
title I and title II would help. We are not only reporting on
the same things, we are reporting on them defined differently,
adults, youth, poverty, and the program year, how long it is,
what the performance outcomes are. And I think that duplication
and the fact that you cannot align those duplicated data make
it harder to really measure success.
Mr. Wing. Senator, I think for accountability, one of the
things that we would suggest is the board membership on the
workforce investment boards. We have a number of our
executives, regional managers, district managers, that are on
boards.
But I think that the innovation--I think to really look at
that and to try to really look at getting great members, I
think you need to look at how you can be risk-taking and still
be accountable. But I think you will find that there are people
in the communities that want to serve and business people that
want to serve. I think you need to look at that so that is what
you create there so that people will want to serve on those
boards.
Senator Murray. Ms. Sarris.
Ms. Sarris. I think that the innovation comes through those
very strong partnerships, and there are resources out there. If
you have strong relationships with the local school districts,
the people who work in the other programs at the local level,
it is amazing how much innovation you really can do within the
letter of the law to make things happen.
Also, the ARRA grant, in allowing us to do group training--
we have used that money to innovate new training programs from
there, with the hope that the successful ones will be moved
onto our approved vendor list and then become part of ongoing
services, I think similar to what Clyde mentioned at the end of
the table. If you try it out with this group training money,
you could run it a couple of cycles, and then it becomes part
of our ongoing system, it gets reported that way. That small
part of ARRA has been, I think, very critical to us and
probably is something we should think about continuing.
Senator Murray. Mr. Kiernan.
Mr. Kiernan. I think the question about performance and
performance measures is complicated because there are 17
mandated partners, each having their own data collection
efforts. One of the things that we want to be careful about is
that some individuals who come in and benefit from the use of
the One-Stop system may take more time, and in fact, the
outcome of their earnings may be somewhat less. And so caution
has to be really raised toward the idea of not just cavalierly
measuring the numbers of persons who go through and the
earnings contributed, so that the measures have to really
reflect somewhat the demographics and the population that is
served and also, to some extent, spending some time looking at
what are the data sets that are already being collected by the
public voc rehab system and several other entities to measure
outcomes.
The piece of it or the innovation, I think, comes really
from being creative about the partnerships and the memorandum
of understanding and how that is defined within the One-Stops
for mandated as well as the nonmandated partners as education
and the developmental disability system and the mental health
system.
Mr. Bender. Senator, I might just comment I do not think
you can have both. I think we showed that with our new
performance system, you can have both accountability but still
allow innovation at the local level. So I think it is important
though, however, that there has to be some type of basic
standard and services that are being met by everybody in the
workforce training system.
Mr. Thurmond. Senator, in Georgia, one of the things we
were able to do--we look at WIA as the program, but it is more
philosophy, and it is the philosophy of cooperation and service
integration. And based on that, we developed a coordinated,
unified data collection system among the four major programs
which is UI, ES, VR, and WIA. And our Georgia workforce system
encompasses the data collection, the storage, reporting
capabilities for all of those programs.
Well, how did that help innovation? One of the things we
had to understand is that among those four programs, you have
to have a common language. We realized that assessment means
four different things for four different programs. And so you
have to have a common language and then an overarching common
goal, which is to help Americans get back to work. Some will
require training, education. Others can do it more directly,
but understanding that the most important thing about this
legislation that Senator Kennedy and others worked on
originally was the fact that we were supposed to move toward
collaboration and integration. And ``collaboration'' is a big
word. It does not mean nothing until money changes hands out on
the front line.
[Laughter.]
Senator Murray. With that, Senator Isakson.
Senator Isakson. Following up on that outstanding insight--
--
[Laughter.]
Senator Isakson [continuing]. Mr. Thurmond, I think about
90 percent of your budget is Federal funds. Is that not
correct?
Mr. Thurmond. That is correct.
Senator Isakson. And we have talked a lot about flexibility
in Federal funds.
In your prepared remarks, you talk about the provision that
you all created in Georgia where you have up to an 8 percent
flexibility unemployment insurance tax to use toward programs
to get people back to work rather than just an unemployment
benefit. That is a flexibility of State funds. Is that unique
to Georgia or is that pretty much pervasive around the country?
Mr. Thurmond. A handful of States actually use an
administrative assessment. Actually we were in the General
Assembly when we passed that in the late 1980s, and because of
the flat line in the funding for employment services, many
States do not have front line staff. They cannot afford it.
That is often missed when we look at getting people back to
work. Many States just cannot do it.
So what we were able to do in Georgia is take that .08
percent of the employer taxes and then invest that in re-
employment services primarily to pay for career counselors, job
fairs, and other resources on the front line.
Without that, States just do not have the resources because
they cannot hire the staff, and that is why many of them went
to telephonic claims filing and electronic claims filing
because we do not have the staff. And I submit to you, in order
for us to really address the 14 million or so Americans out of
work, we are going to have to get some front line resources to
hire some professional staff back out there or partner with
States, similar to what we did in Georgia.
Senator Isakson. That funds most of your employees in your
career centers, does it not?
Mr. Thurmond. A major portion of it, yes, sir.
Senator Isakson. Thank you very much, Commissioner.
Ms. Cooper, I need a little information. You referred to
DOE changing a data source and it costing you a quarter of a
million dollars. Is that right?
Ms. Cooper. Yes.
Senator Isakson. What data source were you referring to?
Mr. Thurmond. They used to distribute money to States based
on the census, and now they are going to use the ACS, the
American Community Survey. And as a result of that, 36 States
are going to experience a disruption in funding.
Senator Isakson. I am sorry. What is the American Community
Survey?
Ms. Cooper. It is the new--every year they figure out sort
of what the census is like, but they do it using a different
set of data. They are able to get more recent data that way,
but it is a different instrument.
Senator Isakson. Thank you for educating me on that. I want
to followup on that later on.
Ms. Cooper. Thank you.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, ma'am.
Mr. Kiernan, I appreciate your commitment to those with
disabilities. You made a reference to three to four out of five
people with disabilities are not included in unemployment
statistics. Is that right?
Mr. Kiernan. That is correct.
Senator Isakson. How would it be publicly available to me
to know what percentage of people with disabilities are
unemployed?
Mr. Kiernan. That same survey we just talked about. The
American Community Survey would give you information with
regard to the numbers of persons who are employed and invested
in the labor force market. Usually for all disabilities, it is
about 36 percent of the population, which means there are 3 out
of 10 or roughly 4 out of 10. For persons with mental
disabilities, which includes intellectual disabilities and
mental health, it is about 25 percent.
Senator Isakson. Was your comment there a suggestion to
merge those statistics with the overall unemployment rate to
have a better reflection of total unemployment?
Mr. Kiernan. The Bureau of Labor Statistics just recently
published some of the unemployment stats for persons with
disabilities as a new initiative. I think that you have to
couple that with the labor force participation rate to get a
true picture of what the labor source looks like for persons
with disabilities.
Senator Isakson. Yes. Ms. Oates is not here, but when we
did No Child Left Behind, we disaggregated every group in
public education, including those with disabilities. And that
was the right thing to do, but there was an unintended
consequence, we also locked them in as one group in
assessments, which has been a huge problem. There are unique
characteristics of people with disabilities that should be
focused on separately than getting merged into the overall
statistics and somewhat lost, if you will.
So I appreciate your bringing that up because it does beg
the question how we might better have available and illuminate
the people with disabilities as a disaggregated group in an
unemployment survey so as to better focus on the unique needs
for them to become employed. I do not know if that is a good
observation or not, but I think that is a better way to do it
than losing them in that overall merger.
Thank you very much to all of you for your commitment to
the workers of America.
Senator Murray. I do have some additional questions for all
of our panelists. We will submit them to you and ask for your
written responses.
Again, this has been excellent for us as we move forward on
our committee's work.
Senator Isakson.
Senator Isakson. Out of deference to Senator Enzi, can we
leave the record open for submission of his questions?
Senator Murray. Yes. I will leave the record open, for any
members who want to submit a statement to the record, for an
additional 7 days.
Again, let me thank all of our witnesses for traveling here
to be with us and participating in this important hearing. We
look forward to your responses to additional questions. Thank
you very much.
With that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Additional material follows.]
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Prepared Statement of Senator Kennedy
An educated workforce is our country's most valuable
resource. America's long-term economic vitality depends on the
creation and maintenance of an effective, accessible, and
accountable system of job training and career development that
is open to all. Disadvantaged adults and out-of-school youth in
particular need the opportunity to develop the job skills that
will enable them to become productive members of the community.
Dislocated workers displaced by the current recession and
continuing rapid technological change deserve the chance to
pursue new careers. Now, more than ever, people of all ages
need opportunities to obtain degrees, credentials and industry-
recognized certificates to engage in family-sustaining
employment. The way in which we respond to challenges in
employment and education today will determine how prosperous a
nation we are in the years ahead.
That's why I commend the Subcommittee on Employment and
Workplace Safety for holding today's hearing on modernizing the
Workforce Investment Act to help workers and employers deal
with the changing demands of a global market. The importance of
well-developed employment skills has never been greater, and it
continues to grow. Even in today's troubled economy,
opportunities still exist for many who enter the workforce with
good academic training and well-developed career skills. But
for those who lack career skills and basic proficiency in
language, math and science, today's economy can be an
intimidating environment for employment.
It's been too long since we've looked at the Workforce
Investment Act. When it first passed in 1998 its goal was to
respond to the challenges of the changing workplace by enabling
men and women to acquire the skills necessary to enter the job
market and upgrade their skills throughout their careers, and
that goal has not changed. But as today's witnesses will
describe, the challenges facing today's workers and our job-
training system have changed, and we must ensure that our
efforts in Congress keep up with the times. We've tried before
to improve this bill, and I'm optimistic that this time, we
will succeed.
In fact, we're already engaged in a bipartisan effort to
improve the act. For nearly a year, we've worked together,
listening to the voices of those in the field and seeking
consensus on an approach that will provide more efficient
training and support services to vulnerable populations,
including out-of-school youth, and encourage greater program
cooperation by business, labor, and education, and by State and
local governments and communities. An important goal aspect of
our goal has been to ensure that the Departments of Education
and Labor coordinate their efforts, so that they can provide
their expertise and combine their resources to achieve the
greatest impact.
This hearing brings together an impressive array of leaders
on these issues, and I thank each of them. Each has made
important contributions to employment opportunities in this
country, and their voices are the kinds of voices we have been
seeking in our listening sessions in recent months.
Mary Sarris has seen the Workforce Investment Act's
effectiveness up close, serving on the North Shore Workforce
Investment Board. I hope that in our committee's bill, we can
reflect her commitment for serving youth more effectively.
Supporting One-Stops as they help youth seek summer employment,
and encouraging them to pursue future educational
opportunities, is vital for improving the services we offer.
In addition, I commend William Kiernan for directing our
attention to the needs of adults with disabilities. I, too,
remember the enthusiasm for the One-Stop Centers when they were
created. I hope, along with Mr. Kiernan, that we can ensure
that these centers serve older and disabled adults well in the
States, and that we can do more to help young adults with
disabilities make the transition to a fruitful work life.
Finally, I particularly commend Undersecretary of Education
Martha Kanter and Assistant Secretary of Labor for Education
and Training Jane Oates. Martha Kanter has devoted her career
to meeting the diverse needs of community college students, and
before coming to the Department, she led one of the most
innovative community college systems in the Nation. Jane Oates
is a long-time friend, having served on my staff for many
years, and is as capable a thinker as anyone I know on these
issues. From 2006 until this year, she was New Jersey's
commissioner for higher education, and she was instrumental in
creating a statewide credit-transfer agreement and a supporter
of extending in-state tuition benefits to all of New Jersey's
students.
This hearing, and the other work we've been doing on these
issues, is part of our major effort to streamline these
programs and invest in our fellow citizens, young and old, in
an effective way. We've conducted a constructive review of all
of the various job training programs to determine what kind of
vocational training we need to meet the challenges we face
today, how best to support adult education programs, and how
best to respond to the changes in our workforce as a result of
new technology and increased needs for retraining.
These are complex issues, but the bill we will introduce
will retain individual choice and quality labor-market
information as its cornerstones, and will also incorporate many
good ideas like those we'll hear today.
Our witnesses are helping to shape a new Workforce
Investment Act that will expand the possibilities offered in
today's system, making it possible for millions more Americans
to obtain the skills they need to compete in the global
economy. And by doing so, we will also enable them to realize
their own individual American dreams. As you can tell, I look
forward to this hearing very much. I wish I could be there in
person.
Response to Questions of Senator Murray, Senator Enzi,
and Senator Coburn by Jane Oates
questions of senator murray
Question 1. Dislocated workers can access various levels of
services based on the reason for their dislocation. What are your
thoughts on how we can better align those services in a way that raises
the bar for all programs?
Answer 1. Currently the public workforce system makes a distinction
between individuals dislocated due to the impact of Federal policy and
foreign trade and those who have become dislocated for other reasons.
The Department has made efforts to better align the programs serving
dislocated workers and provide these individuals with the resources,
services, and training needed to rejoin the workforce. For example, the
Department supports dual-enrollment projects that combine Trade
Adjustment Assistance and Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Dislocated
Worker and National Emergency Grant services to provide a wider array
of ``wrap-around'' services to trade-eligible workers.
We at the Department of Labor (DOL) look forward to further
discussions with the Senator and other members of the committee to
identify ways in which WIA reauthorization can be used to better align
the Federal workforce programs so that they address the needs of
dislocated workers as efficiently and seamlessly as possible.
Question 2. How does the Department define ``post-secondary
education'' or a ``post-secondary education credential?''
Answer 2. The Department has not formally defined the terms ``post-
secondary education'' or ``post-secondary education credential.''
However, Title I of WIA does provide a definition for ``post-secondary
educational institution.'' WIA defines this term to mean ``an
institution of higher education,'' as defined by Section 102 of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 at 20 U.S.C. 1002. The definition at 20
U.S.C. 1002 is provided for the purpose of student assistance programs,
and includes public or nonprofit accredited institutions that award
bachelor's degrees or provide not less than a 2-year program that is
acceptable for full credit towards such a degree; any school that
provides not less than a 1-year program of training to prepare students
for gainful employment in a recognized occupation; proprietary
institutions; and post-secondary vocational institutions.
The Department has interpreted the term ``post-secondary
education'' to include education that takes place at a post-secondary
educational institution. This interpretation includes post-secondary
workforce training that takes place after the completion of the 12th
grade or the award of a GED or other high school equivalent.
Credentials awarded through post-secondary training such as registered
apprenticeships and training leading to industry-recognized
credentials, which may involve both classroom and on-the-job training
or work experience components, also make up the universe of ``post-
secondary education'' for DOL programmatic purposes.
Question 3. What are the Department's principles for WIA
reauthorization?
Answer 3. Both the changing skill demands of the 21st century labor
market and the recent downturn in the economy have posed challenges for
our Nation's public workforce system. In order to increase the skills
and competitiveness of the American workforce, the public workforce
system must become more innovative, adaptive, and responsive to the
needs of workers, businesses, and communities.
A decade after the passage of WIA, reauthorization and reform of
WIA provides an opportunity to introduce innovations, build on
strengths of the workforce system, and address areas of the system that
should be bolstered. WIA reform is an important vehicle for ensuring
that the workforce system helps every American worker find a good job,
including segments of the population with specific, and sometimes
multiple, barriers to employment that the workforce system can help
them overcome.
The Department believes that WIA reauthorization should create a
modernized workforce system that provides seamless career advancement
services for low-skilled adults, at-risk youth, and dislocated workers
and others needing employment, training, and retraining services. The
Department has already started discussing WIA reform with the
Department of Education. Additionally, while the Administration has not
yet put forward formal principles, the Department has held many
listening sessions with stakeholders concerning WIA reauthorization.
Here are some of the ideas we have provided to help frame those
discussions.
Public Workforce System
A dual customer approach is essential because the needs of
workers and employers are both important in developing thriving
communities where all citizens succeed and businesses prosper.
The public workforce system is responsive to labor-market
demand in industry sectors important to the regional economy.
State and local workforce investment boards are strategic,
effective, and efficient in governing and overseeing the workforce
system.
The performance accountability framework for the public
workforce system encompasses measures of both interim and long-term
employment outcomes that account for all customers served and encourage
the system to serve those most in need, and produces meaningful and
readily available performance information for program administrators,
policymakers, and customers.
Customers have the information they need to find jobs that
suit their skills and choose training programs.
The system encourages innovation, emphasizes proven
approaches, and builds knowledge of what works.
The system is fully accessible and available to all
people, including persons with disabilities and those with limited
English proficiency.
Dislocated Workers
All workforce programs for dislocated workers, including
those with disabilities, are integrated and accessible through the One-
Stop system.
One-Stop Career Centers provide each worker with a quick
and effective assessment of skills and the best plan of services given
their interests and skill levels.
All programs for dislocated workers are available to these
workers through both direct in-person services and virtual reemployment
services, including easy-to-use assessments and information on skills
transferable to new jobs in demand, opportunities provided by career
pathway models, and high-quality career counseling supported by real-
time workforce information.
Low-Skilled Adults
The public workforce and adult education systems are
available to adults needing education and training information or
assistance in a manner that supports the achievement of each
individual's educational and career goals.
A customer's eligibility determination is performed once
rather than separately for each program.
Assessments of customers' educational and training needs
are aligned so they can be relied on by other workforce programs,
community colleges, and education institutions; except to the extent
that a separate assessment process is required for determining
eligibility under the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program.
Basic skills programs successfully prepare students to
enroll in education courses, advance to credit bearing classes at 2-
year or 4-year colleges, or enter or reenter the workforce.
Career counseling services reflect best practices in
assisting low-skilled adults and instruction reflects approaches that
have proven successful.
At-Risk Youth
Both compensated work activity, or related strategies such
as internships, and education are emphasized. The former can be an
effective method of engaging youth in the short-term, providing an
initial introduction to employment; while education, especially when
integrated with compensated work activity for at-risk and low-income
youth, can contribute to the success of youth in the labor market.
Emphasis is provided to programs that are ``proven''
(through rigorous evaluation) or ``promising'' (on the basis of a
record with positive outcomes and operation to scale).
Because at-risk youth need local providers that connect
them to resources that address their wide variety of needs, the
workforce system partners with school districts, high schools,
community colleges, local employers, criminal justice systems, and
various social service providers to provide these diverse services.
Performance measures for accountability recognize gains
over time and do not create incentives to select participants on the
basis of anticipated performance success over need.
The workforce system targets in-school and out-of-school
at-risk youth, including those with disabilities. These groups include:
(1) young people in high school who are ``off-track'' and at high risk
of dropping out; (2) youth who have already dropped out; and (3) high
school graduates who do not have college and career ready skills and
who have failed to obtain regular jobs. However, these categories are
fluid, as individuals move in and out of school. Youth who live in
neighborhoods and areas of concentrated poverty should receive
particular attention, as should youth from low-income families,
wherever they live.
A youth's eligibility determination is performed once
rather than separately for each program when permitted by Federal law.
Data related to State certification tests and other
performance measures is shared across departments and programs.
Question 4. What are the Department's current plans for addressing
the lack of systemic evaluation of programs under WIA?
Answer 4. An important part of reauthorization of WIA will be the
identification of strategies that maximize resources, streamline access
to services, and avoid the unnecessary duplication of programs. To
support these efforts, the Department has reaffirmed its commitment to
evaluating its programs and using the findings of these evaluations to
guide the continuous improvement of programs and service delivery. Our
commitment is evidenced by our recent Recovery and Reemployment
Research Conference, which featured findings from many Department-
funded research and evaluation projects and through which we engaged a
broad spectrum of communities, including workforce investment,
research, education, oversight agencies, non-profit organizations, and
public policy makers. The conference proceeding will help inform ETA's
Five-Year Research, Demonstration and Evaluation Strategic Plan for
2009-2014.
In 2008, the Employment and Training Administration commissioned
the Net Impact Evaluation of the WIA Adult, Dislocated Worker, and
Youth Programs--a random assignment evaluation of major programs under
Title I of WIA. The evaluation, which is still in the design stage,
will measure the post-program involvement impacts on employment and
earnings of participants receiving services funded through WIA, as
compared to those receiving services funded through other sources or
those who received no services. The complete evaluation is being
conducted over the course of 7 years. This approach will allow a
sufficient follow-up period to reliably measure post-program impacts,
as well as allow time to accommodate the modernization expected to be
achieved through reauthorization.
Additionally, in December 2008, the Workforce Investment Act Non-
Experimental Net Impact evaluation conducted by IMPAQ International,
LLC, was completed. The study reports results of a non-experimental net
impact evaluation of the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs under
WIA. Statistical methods were used to compare WIA program participants
with groups of individuals who were similar across a range of
demographic characteristics, social welfare benefit receipt, and labor-
market experiences but who either did not receive WIA services or did
not receive WIA training. The overall goal of the evaluation was to
provide information on the long-run impact of the WIA program at both
the local and national level.
The study observed important similarities in the patterns of
estimated impacts. The results for all participants in the WIA Adult
program (regardless of services received) show that participating in
the program is associated with an increase in quarterly earnings of
several hundred dollars. Also, over time WIA Dislocated Worker
participants' earnings overtake those of a comparison group composed of
workers with similar characteristics and work histories. The Department
posted the report on ETA's Research Database available at http://
wdr.doleta.gov/research/.
Question 5. How does the Department envision the President's new
community college initiative interacting with WIA programs and other
efforts the Department has undertaken to support the role of community
colleges in workforce development, including education and training?
Answer 5. As noted by the President, community colleges are the
largest part of our higher education system and are growing rapidly.
Community colleges feature affordable tuition, convenient locations,
flexible schedules, and programs and curriculums targeted to
individuals of various skill and education levels, and have proven
their ability to work with businesses, industry, and government to
create tailored training programs to meet the needs of both workers and
the economy. Additionally, many community colleges have experience
providing Rapid Response services to dislocated workers. Because of
their unique features, community colleges play a key role in a variety
of ways in both the public workforce system and regional economies.
Numerous community college representatives sit on workforce boards,
operate One-Stop Career Centers on their campuses, and offer programs
for low-skill adults to improve their basic skills while acquiring
technical training. Community colleges also are important to registered
apprenticeship programs, providing the conceptual or academic part of
training to apprentices. The role of community colleges was further
strengthened by flexibility built into the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) which facilitated local
workforce boards' ability to contract with institutions of higher
education, including community colleges, as well as other eligible
training providers.
We at the Department are excited about the opportunities that will
be created by the President's community college initiative. The
initiative, designed to meet the President's goal of an additional 5
million community college graduates by 2020, would invest $12 billion
in community colleges over the next decade to provide opportunities for
lifelong learning that will raise the level of education and skills of
America's workforce. This will help to rebuild the Nation's economic
competitiveness and ability to fill the jobs of the future. The
proposal would provide several strategies to strengthen community
colleges nationwide. Through the Community College Challenge Fund
specifically, the Departments of Labor and Education will work in
partnership to jointly administer grants to enable community colleges
to innovate and expand proven reforms. To further increase WIA program
interaction with community colleges, the Department envisions stronger
connectivity and collaboration between the One-Stop delivery system and
community colleges, particularly in the areas of eligibility
determination, referral, assessment, and service planning based on
customers' interests and skill levels. Additionally, the One-Stop
system will link customers to the education and training opportunities
that will be created by the community college initiative.
The initiative will build on the Department of Labor's current
initiatives engaging community colleges as workforce system partners.
Beginning in fiscal year 2005, the Department used Community Based Job
Training Grants (CBJTG) to support community colleges by helping fund
capacity-building, curriculum development, and training in high-growth,
high-demand industries. In his fiscal year 2010 budget, President Obama
introduced the Career Pathways Innovation Fund as an evolution of the
CBJTG. This initiative continues the support to community colleges
provided by CBJTG but focuses on career pathways, sequences of
coursework, education, and credentials leading to a better job in a
particular field. The Department will continue to work closely with the
Department of Education and draw on its experience, particularly with
career pathways, college-and career-ready standards, credit
transferability, longitudinal data system operation, student support
services to implement this initiative.
Question 6. How does the Department plan to use lessons learned
from the ARRA WIA funding to shape its reauthorization principles? What
efforts are the Department making to track and measure the impact of
this funding?
Answer 6. As part of the implementation of the Recovery Act, the
Department embarked on a review of State and Local Workforce Investment
Boards to determine their readiness to implement the Recovery Act along
with their regular formula responsibilities under WIA and other
workforce programs. The readiness consultations, held with 209 local
areas and States across the country during April-May, 2009, provided
ETA with some broad insights regarding the general health of the public
workforce system and reflected the proactive positioning of the system
in the context of WIA reauthorization. Eighty-four percent of State
Workforce Investment Boards reported that they were ready to refine and
develop a vision to use Recovery Act funds to drive change throughout
their workforce systems to meet future workforce and economic
challenges. Ninety-four percent of States signaled readiness in the
area of partnerships and a shared vision with education, labor, civic
and philanthropic institutions to drive regional development
strategies. Ninety-one percent of States have developed policies to
target services to the hardest-to-serve populations. (The full report
can be accessed at http://www.doleta.gov/pdf/National--Readiness--
Report.pdf.)
We are also reaching out to learn about needs for improvement from
the Government Accountability Office and Office of the Inspector
General teams who have been in the field looking at implementation of
the Recovery Act.
Based on discussions with State and local workforce agencies, ETA
is playing a critical role in providing Recovery Act-related technical
assistance for system integration, reemployment, and other reform
principles likely to be mainstays of a reauthorized workforce
investment system.
Consistent with the principles of transparency and accountability,
ETA recognized the need to collect participant and performance
information more frequently to inform policymakers and the public about
the progress of the Recovery Act's implementation and about the labor-
market outcomes achieved for job seekers through the coupling of
Recovery Act and regular formula funds. Beginning May 1, 2009, States
have been reporting monthly on the number of participants served under
WIA Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth programs, and the Wagner-Peyser
Employment Service program and ETA has been making reported information
publicly available on www.recovery.gov. Additionally, to obtain more
robust, real-time information on individual characteristics and
services and to determine the effect of the Recovery Act resources,
States are required to submit WIA individual records on all
participants on a quarterly basis beginning May 15, 2010, a change in
reporting requirements from annual submissions.
ETA has moved swiftly to ensure that evaluation of the
effectiveness of the Recovery Act programs is captured, measured, and
assessed and that knowledge is developed to inform implementation
efforts. One planned evaluation will examine the summer youth
employment opportunities provided through the WIA Youth Recovery Act
funding. This implementation study is based on a selected sample of 20
local workforce investment areas.
Other planned evaluations include a review of State workforce
development and unemployment insurance policy responses to the current
economic recession and the Recovery Act. This project will examine the
types of policy actions States take in their workforce development and
unemployment insurance systems to meet the challenges of the recession.
Plans also include initiating an intensive process study and impact
analysis of grants awarded to prepare workers for careers in healthcare
and other high-growth and emerging industries as well as an evaluation
of the Recovery Act Green Jobs grants.
Question 7. How can adult education services under title II be
better aligned with title I programs to help low-skilled adults persist
on a career pathway toward a family-sustaining career?
Answer 7. Current information and experience suggest that
integrating basic skills training with occupational training can be a
better strategy for serving low-income adults in search of a job.
The current statute divides occupational training and adult basic
education into separate funding streams (title I and title II,
respectively). However, integration of activities is allowed and
encouraged to support these efforts, the Department will identify and
encourage effective and innovative adult learning practices for low-
skilled adults that leverage title I and title II resources. This
increased collaboration and the development of new adult learning
practices will improve the system's capacity to create flexible
delivery models focused on moving low-skilled adults along multiple
learning pathways to post-secondary credentials.
In order to encourage State and local areas to effectively
coordinate title I and title II services, we must support coordination
at the Federal level. Examples of how we can enhance collaboration
include:
1. Encouraging States to align title I and title II resources to
support dual service programs;
2. Revising performance measures to encourage coordination between
programs, especially for those States that have common contracts in
dual service programs. Title I and title II programs are subject to
different outcome measures and reporting requirements, making it
difficult for low-skilled adults to receive both types of services
through one program. As part of reauthorization, Congress may want to
consider aligning progress and outcome measures for title I and title
II programs.
3. Encouraging interagency coordination at the Federal and State
levels that creates a greater role for adult education providers in the
administration of local workforce investment areas; and
4. Rewarding States that achieve strong outcomes through enhanced
collaboration among State agencies administering title I and title II
programs.
Question 8. What recommendations do you have for strengthening the
public private partnerships to support the goals of WIA?
Answer 8. It is now commonly understood that the effective planning
and implementation of workforce development strategies and solutions
requires strategic partnerships that include both public and private
partners. Important partners include the workforce system, economic
developers, business and industry, organized labor, education at all
levels, community-based organizations, and others. One of the most
often-cited challenges to successful collaboration in the context of
strategic partnerships is the need for funding to support the ``coming
together'' of partners. In particular, time and resources are needed to
plan and manage partnership meetings, develop and monitor collaborative
work plans, and evaluate and assess the outcomes of partnerships. In
many cases, individual partners may not have the resources needed for
these purposes.
As we approach reauthorization of WIA, one possible approach to
strengthening public/private partnerships is exploring incentives for
strategic partnerships by using relatively small amounts of resources
targeted to promote collaboration among public/private partners. These
resources could support a local Workforce Investment Board's efforts to
host strategic planning sessions with partners who are not Board
members, in order to target skills training that is transferable across
industry sectors. The resources also could be used by local Boards to
bring together partners that represent a given sector of the local
economy to design or validate a training curriculum for occupation-
specific training. Such an approach may also include leveraging
resources already available through formula programs or other public-
sector or private-sector resources. We at the Department look forward
to an opportunity to further discuss this and other possible approaches
with the Senator and other members of the committee.
Question 9. How can the Department help to improve the
accessibility, both physically and programmatically, of One-Stop
Centers and training programs? What changes should Congress make to the
law to ensure accessibility?
Answer 9. The WIA nondiscrimination regulations require State and
local agencies administering WIA financial assistance to designate
Equal Opportunity (EO) Officers. These agencies and their EO Officers
have an independent obligation to monitor compliance with
nondiscrimination laws by covered entities within their jurisdictions,
and to ensure that any violations--including violations of the
comprehensive access requirements--are remedied. At the departmental
level, ETA and the Civil Rights Center (CRC) share the responsibility
of monitoring the workforce system's compliance with the legal
requirements related to comprehensive access by people with
disabilities.
With the proposed end of the Work Incentive Grant pilot program in
fiscal year 2010, ETA will increase collaboration with CRC and the ODEP
to expand the capacity of the workforce system to provide comprehensive
access and to replicate and integrate the promising practices
identified through the Disability Program Navigator Initiative, which
sought to improve services at One-Stop Centers for job seekers with
disabilities. At the same time, CRC and ETA will continue to identify
where One-Stops and other entities within the service delivery system
do not provide comprehensive access, and will partner with ODEP to
provide guidance on how to ensure comprehensive and universally
accessible environments.
In addition to these efforts, the Department will explore or expand
the following approaches to improve the capacity of the workforce
system to serve individuals with multiple barriers to employment,
including young people and adults with disabilities: training front-
line staff on how to deliver services at One-Stops that are welcoming,
accessible, and customer-friendly, as well as legally compliant;
building on/establishing disability advisory committees that include
representatives from the disability community and vocational
rehabilitation, as well as EO officers, to regularly assess and monitor
comprehensive access of One-Stop Career Centers; and continuing to
conduct legally-required outreach to job seekers with disabilities and
the local agencies/organizations serving them.
The Department remains committed to continuously improving the
accessibility of the One-Stop System and looks forward to working with
Congress during WIA reauthorization to identify strategies and
legislative changes that will improve services to persons with
disabilities.
Question 10. What administrative and policy changes would you
recommend for creating a more coherent, seamless workforce system that
encompasses the provisions under Title I, II, III, IV, and V of WIA and
serves both job seekers and workers, and employers?
Answer 10. As described more fully in my response to question 3,
the Department of Labor believes that WIA reauthorization should create
a modernized workforce system that provides seamless career advancement
services for low-skilled adults, at-risk youth, dislocated workers, and
others needing employment, training, and retraining services. The
Department has already been discussing WIA reform with the Department
of Education and has held many listening sessions with stakeholders
concerning WIA reauthorization.
In order to support a modernized workforce system, the Department
will pursue a number of approaches. One possible approach would be to
align and simplify the eligibility determination processes for the
various programs to ensure that individuals can readily access the
services for which they are eligible and do not have to repeatedly
provide the same information to determine if they are eligible for
different Federal programs.
The Department also recommends aligning performance accountability
measures for programs, and ensuring that these measures are based on
both interim and long-term outcomes and do not discourage services to
those most in need. The Department also sees value in making this
information more readily available [Note: New DOL edit] and the process
more transparent. This information could help customers and others know
how the system is performing and help them make informed choices about
what training will best prepare them for employment.
In addition, basic skills training should be linked to occupational
skills training for those low-skilled adults that have employment
related needs and who can benefit from such programs, with multiple
opportunities for a worker to access further basic and occupational
skills training as he or she progresses along a career pathway.
Question 11. What recommendations do you have for helping
communities, including industry and education partners, become more
engaged in and find value in their local workforce systems?
Answer 11. Strategic public and private partnerships are required
for the effective planning and implementation of workforce development
strategies and solutions. The workforce investment system must be seen
as valuable and employ effective strategies for engaging key partners,
including economic developers, business and industry, organized labor,
education at all levels, community-based organizations, and others.
WIA provided a framework for collaboration through the State and
local board structures. Due to a variety of factors, many boards
struggle to manage two very different statutory roles: (1) to be
strategic and (2) to manage programs. In addition, even as large as the
boards are per the current statute, they cannot bring all the key
partners to the table. Therefore, there is a need for other mechanisms
and resources to help make the connections.
Many Local Workforce Boards and One-Stops across the Nation use
business representatives, generally, in two primary roles: (1) to bring
the business customer to the One-Stop to identify and meet their hiring
needs and (2) to engage more broadly with business and industry and
other strategic partners in the context of industry sector strategies.
Similarly, State and local workforce partners are also actively
engaging their education partners.
Thus, as we approach reauthorization of WIA, the Department
suggests exploring approaches such as statutory incentives or mandates,
for engaging key strategic partners and community leaders as both
customers of the system and strategic partners in workforce
development.
Question 12. How can the Department support an increased awareness
for all potential customers of programs and services available under
WIA?
Answer 12. DOL can support outreach activities on behalf of the
workforce system in a variety of ways. As a Federal agency, DOL has a
broad reach across organizations representing a variety of
constituents, including diverse workers' interest groups, labor
organizations, industry representatives, Federal agencies, foundations
and elected officials. From a national stage, DOL can help these
different organizations navigate the public workforce system, and
better understand how their own constituents can benefit by working
with the system.
Some of the key things that DOL can do to support these efforts
include:
Partner with intermediaries to design and distribute
outreach materials describing the workforce system in a consistent and
recognizable way.
Work collaboratively with Federal partners and national
organizations to co-sponsor learning events for their constituents and
members about the workforce investment system and its assets.
In the context of industry sector strategies, engage
strategic partners in promoting the workforce system and the resources
that can be leveraged as part of a broader strategy.
Make performance information more available, transparent,
and usable for program stakeholders and customers.
Work to increase availability of the workforce system to
various populations through such activities as extended hours for One-
Stop Career Centers, presence of multi-lingual staff, and information
on services provided by programs that are not One-Stop partners.
Continue to work with entities at all levels of the
workforce system to educate them about both their legal obligation to
conduct, and effective strategies for conducting, outreach efforts to
ensure the inclusion of members of both sexes, various racial and
ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and individuals in
differing age groups.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. How will you work together (with the Department of
Education) to make sure youth served in the WIA programs are connected
or reconnected to the larger education system? And, conversely how does
the Department of Education plan to coordinate with WIA programs under
the Department of Labor?
Answer 1. ETA has provided guidance to the WIA Title I Youth
Formula Program that encourages serving hardest-to-serve youth,
including a specific focus on high school dropouts and out-of-school
youth. Strategies for serving disconnected youth must include a strong
academic focus with an opportunity to obtain a high school diploma or
equivalent, transition into post-secondary education, and begin a
career. This requires clear ``on ramps'' or reconnection points that
link to both the traditional education system and multiple education
pathways. ETA will work with the Department of Education on this
priority in the following ways:
Support joint development of community-wide strategies or
blueprints for re-engaging high school dropouts in conjunction with
reform efforts already underway to improve high schools;
Develop a strategy that disseminates to the education and
workforce systems successful ``on ramp'' strategies for reconnecting
out-of-school youth, and provide guidance to both systems on how to
implement such strategies;
Explore new approaches for consideration as part of
reauthorization of WIA and related education legislation, such as the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, for ways to leverage
and encourage stronger connections between education and workforce
systems around reconnecting out-of-school youth; and
Increase out-of school youth enrollments in community
college programs by identifying and promoting best practices and
programs with success in this area.
Question 2. How can we better coordinate the One-Stop system and
the job training provisions of title I with the other WIA titles, Adult
Basic Education and the Vocational Rehabilitation?
Answer 2. Enabling greater coordination among agencies
administering WIA Title I funding is a priority for the Department. DOL
will work with the Department of Education and the programmatic systems
implementing these programs in the following ways:
1. The Department will work with Education to identify and/or
develop innovative and effective adult learning practices for low-
skilled adults. Such practices should leverage WIA Title I and Title II
resources with a goal of creating flexible delivery models that move
low-skilled adults along multiple pathways leading to post-secondary
credentials. A 2-year non-experimental evaluation of the I-BEST program
in Washington by the Community College Research Center at Columbia
University found that students enrolled in programs that integrate
adult education and occupational training were more likely to obtain
certificates than students enrolled in basic education programs
(Jenkins, Dais, Matthew Zeidenber & Gregory S. Kienzl. Educational
Outcomes of I-BEST, Washington State Community and Technical College
System's Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training Program:
Findings from a Multivariate Analysis. May 2009. CCRC Working Paper No.
16: New York). Additionally, initial results from a multi-year, random
assignment study of sectoral training strategies that contextualize
basic education into skills training programs, conducted by Public/
Private Ventures, demonstrate positive impacts on employment outcomes
for program participants (Maguire, Sheila, Joshua Freely, Carol Clymer
and Maureen Conway. Job Training that Works: Findings from the Sectoral
Impact Study. May 2009. Public/Private Ventures. New York).
2. WIA Title I youth programs can be better coordinated with Adult
Education's WIA Title II programs around serving older, out-of-school
youth in need of basic skills. There is some overlap between the
eligibility for WIA Titles I and II. WIA Title I serves youth ages 14-
24 and WIA Title II serves individuals age 16 and older who are not in
school and are past the age of compulsory school attendance in their
State. Programs under both WIA Titles I and II emphasize increasing
basic skill levels, and use the literacy/numeracy gains common
performance measure. The Departments of Labor and Education will work
together to ensure that more WIA Title I youth who are basic-skills
deficient receive basic-skills remediation.
3. There are a number of opportunities to strengthen connections
among the WIA delivery systems, including WIA Title I programs and
Vocational Rehabilitation, for young people and adults with
disabilities, while maintaining confidentiality of medical and
disability-related information. The Department of Labor intends to
build on the lessons learned from the Disability Navigator program,
which ETA plans to share with the workforce system through the
Workforce3One Web site, to enhance these connections at the One-Stop
service delivery level. The Department of Labor will work with the
Department of Education to:
Provide guidance to States and local areas to promote
appropriate co-enrollment in workforce development and vocational
rehabilitation programs, joint staff training, permissible data
sharing, cross-agency referrals, joint staff meetings, and shared
resources, with the ultimate goals of reducing the high unemployment
and underemployment of people with disabilities;
Identify and disseminate service delivery models that
effectively connect and integrate Vocational Rehabilitation services in
One-Stop Career Centers; and
Explore new legislative approaches for connecting and
coordinating services for consideration as part of reauthorization of
the Workforce Investment Act.
Question 3. and 6. What are the roles of the One-Stop Centers in
providing job training and continuing education opportunities for
people with disabilities, particularly youth with disabilities
transitioning from high-school to post-secondary programs? What are the
One-Stops doing to address accessibility issues and specifically for
the One-Stops how are they implementing the 188 Disability Checklist?
Answer 3. and 6. One-Stop Career Centers are required to make
available job training and education opportunities to all customers,
including job seekers with disabilities, in accordance with the non-
discrimination requirements of section 188 of the Workforce Investment
Act (WIA) and its implementing regulations at 29 CFR part 37, as well
as with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (which applies to
all federally assisted-activities). These opportunities must be
provided to customers with disabilities in the most integrated setting
appropriate to the needs of those customers. Comprehensive services
that use an Integrated Resource Team approach to meet the needs of
individuals with disabilities can further these opportunities through
leveraging and coordinating diverse resources that address multiple
barriers to employment such as transportation, housing, or supported
employment needs. Youth with disabilities who are served through the
WIA Youth formula program are counseled and provided guidance by either
the local WIA Youth service provider or the One-Stop Career Center on
continuing education and training services. The need for such services
should be documented and included, to the extent possible under current
confidentiality requirements, as part of an individual service strategy
that addresses the youth's educational and occupational skills needs.
The WIA nondiscrimination regulations at 29 CFR part 37 require
State Governors to submit documents known as Methods of Administration
(MOA) to the Department of Labor's Civil Rights Center (CRC) for
review. The MOA must describe the actions a State will take to ensure
that its WIA Title I-financially assisted programs, activities, and
recipients are complying, and will continue to comply, with WIA Section
188 and its implementing regulations--including the requirements
related to disability. CRC reviews each MOA and, to the extent the
document indicates a deficiency in the State's Equal Opportunity (EO)-
related policies, practices, and procedures, works with the State to
help bring it into compliance.
In addition, all applications for Federal financial assistance
under WIA Title I, including WIA State Plans, must assure that the
recipient will comply with a list of specified nondiscrimination
statutes and their implementing regulations, including Section 188 of
WIA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and other statutes
applicable to recipients of Federal financial assistance. This
assurance is incorporated by operation of law in all documents or other
arrangements (written or unwritten) that make WIA Title I financial
assistance available.
The WIA nondiscrimination regulations require State and local-level
agencies administering WIA financial assistance to designate EO
Officers. These agencies and their EO Officers have an independent
obligation to monitor compliance with nondiscrimination laws by covered
entities within their jurisdictions, and to ensure that any
violations--including violations of the comprehensive access
requirements--are remedied.
While a helpful tool, the WIA Section 188 Disability Checklist was
issued in 2003, well before the Americans with Disabilities Act
Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) made significant changes to the text and
interpretation of Federal disability nondiscrimination laws, including
those applicable to the One-Stop system. The Department of Labor
intends to revise and reissue the Checklist after the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Department's
Civil Rights Center publish final rules implementing the regulatory
changes necessitated by the ADAAA. With the proposed end of the
Disability Program Navigator (DPN) pilot program in fiscal year 2010,
ETA will increase collaboration with CRC and the Department's Office of
Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) to expand the capacity of the
workforce system to ensure that the One-Stop delivery system provides
comprehensive accessibility, and to replicate and integrate the
promising practices identified through the DPN Initiative. At the same
time, CRC and ETA will continue to identify where One-Stops and other
entities within the service delivery system do not provide
comprehensive access, and will partner with ODEP to provide guidance on
how to ensure comprehensively and universally accessible environments.
Question 4. What types of incentives are needed so that more Adult
Basic Education and Perkins Career and Technical students successfully
transition to post-secondary education, occupational and technical
training (including through the One-Stop delivery system), and the
workforce?
Answer 4. We believe that the prospect of higher-paying jobs and
careers provides a strong incentive for students to transition into
post-secondary education programs and attain post-secondary
credentials. As the Department of Labor has implemented workforce
strategies in collaboration with education, business and industry,
organized labor, and other partners, it has been our experience that
``bridge'' programs that support an education pathway have greater
success by making the move to post-secondary education seamless. For
example, a study by MDRC on Career Academies points to a variety of
positive outcomes from the programs, including higher wages and greater
autonomy among participants (http://www.mdrc.org/publications/482/
overview.html).
In addition, learning environments that integrate academic and
occupational skills can lead to an increased number of students
continuing on education pathways into post-secondary education. The
One-Stop system also plays a key role by providing individuals access
to the resources necessary to make informed career choices and
information about the linkages between further education, training, and
good jobs.
The Department of Labor will work with the Department of Education
to identify incentive mechanisms to promote greater use of WIA Title I,
Adult Basic Education, and Perkins Act funding at the State and local
levels to improve successful student transitions to post-secondary
education.
Question 5a. What do we need to do so that the workforce
development system is viewed as an economic development strategy?
Answer 5a. A modernized workforce investment system should position
education and training as critical drivers of a knowledge-based
economy, and function as an essential element of a broad-based economic
development strategy. The Department believes a reinvigorated workforce
investment system will be aligned with the Secretary's goal of a good
job for everyone. To meet this goal, the workforce system must embody a
dual customer approach that ensures that all individuals have pathways
to good jobs, and growing businesses have full access to skilled
workers, including untapped and diverse labor pools. In order to
promote these ideas, it is important that the Department of Labor work
closely with the Department of Commerce to align our efforts in
economic development and workforce development. We need to encourage
economic development funding that incorporates workforce strategies as
a key component of a comprehensive economic development strategy.
Similarly, we need to help State and local workforce system partners be
positioned to play this role in economic development by carrying out
activities such as working to ensure workforce training programs are
providing participants with the skills needed by the local economy. It
will be important to acknowledge this role in the context of WIA
reauthorization and to provide guidance in support of that role.
Question 5b. What types of incentives are needed so that State and
local workforce investment boards align workforce development services
with regional or sectoral strategies to enhance system coordination?
Answer 5b. A number of States and their local Workforce Investment
Boards and One-Stop Career Centers have successfully implemented a
variety of sector approaches that have examined labor market trends,
developed an understanding of specific industry sector workforce needs,
and promoted training that responds to those immediate employer needs
within the identified sectors. Leadership at the State and local levels
is required to emphasize this approach, as well as funding to support
it. It has also required recognition that workers are better served by
service providers that know what skills a given sector needs and
strategies that ensure that workers can attain those skills and related
credentials.
The Department of Labor's recent American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act Solicitation for Grant Applications for State Energy Sector
Partnership and Training Grants incorporated sector strategies into
competitive funding opportunities as an incentive for State and local
workforce investment boards to align workforce development services
with regional or sector strategies. Funding incentives are an effective
way for the Department to bring attention to a new approach, but
supporting replication of these approaches though policy guidance and
technical assistance (without dedicated funding) are other options.
We believe a modernized workforce investment system should require
that training programs be designed and implemented through a range of
Federal, State, local, and private-sector institutions working
collaboratively to encourage the integration of education, training,
and supportive services. This strategic planning process needs to
include key decisionmakers from a range of appropriate institutions to
ensure that workforce development strategies are reflective of State
and local policies and priorities. In addition to planning
requirements, the Department could award incentive resources to States
that take this approach. As we consider reauthorization of the
Workforce Investment Act, we recommend exploring incentives for
strategic partnerships, using relatively small amounts of funding and
other resources targeted to promote collaboration among public/private
partnerships, with a goal of helping partners leverage resources
already available through formula-funded programs.
Question 5c. What can be done to strengthen partnerships with
employers, especially small businesses, to allow them to make
meaningful contributions to the workforce development system?
Answer 5c. Engaging small businesses with the workforce investment
system is an ongoing challenge due to the limited time and resources
small business owners have to commit to activities other than their own
business. Therefore, successful engagement of small businesses requires
carefully crafted strategies that accommodate their needs.
The workforce system must be seen as an important resource to small
businesses by connecting them to relevant information and services.
Presenting One-Stop Career Centers as a key human resource development
asset for small businesses is a first and key step. Industry sector
strategies provide a context for small business engagement as has been
demonstrated by Manufacturing Extension Partnerships across the
country. Another strategy that has been successful over time is for the
Local Workforce Investment Board or One-Stop to provide networking
opportunities for small businesses combined with informational
presentations on key issues, not all of which need to relate to
workforce development, but that successfully engage the small business
owners. Using Chambers of Commerce as an intermediary to engage small
business has also been a successful model. Another successful strategy
has been to encourage integration of Small Business Development Centers
into One-Stop Career Centers to support small business growth.
Having engaged the small business owner as a customer, small
businesses can contribute to the workforce system in a variety of
meaningful ways, including: (1) providing internships, externships, and
hands-on training and, where possible, offering stipends to
participants; (2) connecting small businesses to existing community
college programs designed for entrepreneurs by serving as mentors/
coaches or serving as instructors; (3) having Small Business
Development Centers serve as One-Stop satellites during off-hours of
the One-Stop; and (4) taking advantage of on-the-job-training.
Opportunities to provide further incentives for small business
engagement include:
Exploring both administrative and legislative changes that
encourage coordination and information sharing between One-Stop Career
Centers and Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs). This could
include the exchange of data to track participants who are referred to
SBDCs for entrepreneurship training and policies that require
participation of SBDCs on Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs) or other
governing structures.
In WIA reauthorization, considering incentives for
cluster-based activities, whereby a collection of WIBs is rewarded for
recruiting, training, and placing workers into jobs across a set of
industry competitors. By providing financial incentive, WIBs could
engage these ``pools'' of employers in addressing their needs, which
may be particularly attractive to small businesses that do not have the
resources to act independently to access the workforce system. At the
same time, this would encourage partnership among WIBs that may
consider themselves in competition with one another for the
partnerships with employers.
Question 7. Furthermore, how is the One-Stop system addressing the
concern that One-Stop Centers automatically refer people with
disabilities to the Vocational Rehabilitation system?
Answer 7. This is an important issue, and we are currently
considering the full range of options for addressing it. In part, this
issue is being addressed by promoting greater coordination, to the
extent possible under current confidentiality requirements, at the
local level between the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) and workforce
systems. For example, training One-Stop Career Center staff in the
eligibility requirements of VR services, which in recent years has been
provided through the assistance of Disability Program Navigators
(DPNs), has led to improving the capacity of the staff to determine
which job seekers with disabilities are eligible for and would most
benefit from VR services. Further, integrated resource team approaches,
which have been emphasized in training and technical assistance
efforts, promote the leveraging of expertise and resources of the
respective systems to benefit job seekers with disabilities.
Over the last 2 years, an increasing number of One-Stops and Local
Workforce Investment Boards have become Employment Networks under the
Social Security Administration's Ticket-to-Work Program, so they are
serving customers who are Social Security disability beneficiaries,
rather than referring them to VR. Moreover, because most State VR
agencies are on an ``order of selection,'' under which people with the
most significant disabilities are served first, the VR system often
refers persons with disabilities who are on its waiting lists to the
other programs within local One-Stop systems. More effort is needed to
further educate entities at all levels of the system about their legal
obligations regarding customers with disabilities, eligibility
requirements for the various programs targeted towards customers with
disabilities, and effective service strategies in fully integrated
settings.
At the Federal level, ETA is increasing collaboration with the
Department's Civil Rights Center and Office of Disability Employment
Policy. The goals of this increased collaboration include the provision
of the education discussed above, and the integration of the promising
practices identified through the DPN Initiative into the public
workforce system. The latter integration will ensure that the lessons
and practices learned through the DPN pilot program are continued after
it ends.
questions of senator coburn
Question 1. In both written and verbal testimony, you expressed a
desire to work cooperatively with other agencies like the Department of
Health and Human Services in addition to the Departments of Labor and
Education in attempting to improve job-training programs. Beyond these
three agencies, what other agencies conduct job-training or job-
training related programs that should be included in multi-agency
collaborative efforts?
Answer 1. In addition to the Departments of Health and Human
Services and Education, several other Federal departments and agencies
provide a variety of resources that can support worker reemployment.
State agencies operate employment and training programs under the
Department of Agriculture's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP). The Department of Energy received training funds as part of
their Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) investments.
The Department of Defense provides resources for military spouses and
supports the National Guard's Youth ChalleNGe program, and the
Department of Veterans Affairs provides resources for veterans. This
list is not comprehensive, but includes some of the key agencies with
training resources. The Department believes strongly that increased
cooperation and collaboration among these departments and agencies,
combined with the leveraging and aligning of resources, will result in
higher quality and more comprehensive job training programs.
In addition to programs administered by the Departments of Labor,
Education, and Health and Human Services, the One-Stop delivery system
under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) includes additional partner
programs' employment and training activities carried out by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, work programs authorized
by the Food Stamp Act (administered by Agriculture), and programs
authorized under the National and Community Service Act. The One-Stop
system is based on partnerships that leverage resources to support
comprehensive centers where individuals can find access to, and
information about, the wide array of job training and education
opportunities that exist.
Question 2. In Ms. Oates' verbal testimony regarding performance
measures, she mentioned potential waste that occurs as job training
providers have to submit different performance measure reporting
requirements and related paperwork that differs from agency to agency.
Please provide specific examples of how performance measures and
reporting requirements are duplicative and provide recommendations to
eliminate this duplication for Congress to consider as we reauthorize
WIA. Please also provide information regarding which performance
measures have shown to be useful in evaluating program success.
Answer 2. The definitions of the performance measures for the WIA
Title I programs and the Wagner-Peyser Employment Service differ from
the statutorily-defined measures of the Trade Adjustment Act (TAA)
program, and the WIA Title II program measures, while similar to the
WIA Title I Adult and Youth measures, have different definitions as
well. As a result, service providers must collect different information
for different measures according to funding stream, and program
specific goals and purpose, often for the same individual customer
being served. The Department believes it would be useful to explore how
WIA can support the development of performance measures that will
reflect the success of both job training and education initiatives by
collecting and reporting interim and long-term outcome data from all
participants served and that specifically encourage the system to serve
those most in need. Additionally, the Department believes that the
ultimate purpose of performance data is to help establish goals and
assess whether the workforce system assists its customers, including
individuals from traditionally underserved populations, in finding a
good job.
ETA believes a streamlined performance reporting approach has the
potential benefits of reducing the administrative burden and enhancing
collaboration among service providers, if the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements are similar among funding streams. Previously,
the Department of Labor worked with other Federal agencies to develop a
set of performance measures that included entered employment,
employment retention, and earnings for all adult job training programs
and a set of youth and lifelong learning measures for youth and adult
basic education programs. The Department of Labor implemented this set
of performance measures for its workforce development programs;
however, we understand that statutory constraints and requirements
prevented other Federal agencies from full implementation. ETA
continues to consider streamlined reporting and other proposed
initiatives in collaboration with its partners and stakeholders as it
refines its approach to program performance reporting for the workforce
system and its customers.
The core set of current performance measures for adults and
dislocated workers in WIA Title I and other workforce programs--entered
employment, employment retention, and earnings--provide a good basis
for evaluating the success of these programs. However, there is a lag
in outcome data due to the time period to assess outcomes. For example,
employment retention is measured at 6 months and 9 months after program
completion for WIA Adult and Dislocated Workers programs and the
Wagner-Peyser Employment Service. However, under TAA it is measured 12
months after program completion. While outcome data is essential to
gauging program effectiveness, the collection of further information on
interim progress that could be gathered without a significant lag could
also be beneficial for program management. Such information could
include training received and credentials attained.
In addition to the core set of outcome measures for title I adult
participants, measures of credentials attained and customer
satisfaction with the services received would be valuable measurement
tools. The credential measure can provide insight into training
milestones and the degree to which participants secure portable
credentials (certificate and/or degree) vital to continuing on a career
pathway. The customer satisfaction measure would be useful to assess
the value of the program and to aid in improvement of strategies and
services.
For the WIA youth program, as part of the set of performance
measures referenced previously, States report outcomes for all youth
using the following measures: placement in employment or education,
attainment of a degree or certificate, and literacy and numeracy gains.
An employment/education retention measure for youth is critical as
another measure of effectiveness of the service strategy.
Question 3. During the President's transition he promised to
conduct ``an immediate and periodic public inventory of administrative
offices and functions and require agency leaders to work together to
root out redundancy.'' Please identify what redundancies you have
discovered in existing job-training programs including any you have
uncovered in your current collaborative efforts with other agencies.
Answer 3. An important part of WIA reauthorization will be the
identification of strategies that maximize resources, streamline access
to services, and avoid the unnecessary duplication of programs. To
support these efforts, a strong emphasis on informed decisionmaking is
required. Thus, the Department is strengthening its efforts to conduct
rigorous evaluations of its programs to gather data, inform systematic
and policy decisions, and guide the continuous improvement of programs
and service delivery. The continuous improvement of DOL's programs will
help American workers improve their skills, advance their education,
and secure a good job.
We are also working with the Department of Education and other
Federal agencies to review the current mix of job training investments
to determine if redundancies or inefficiencies exist and develop
strategies to address them.
Question 4. As the unemployment rate continues to climb, making
efficiency in job-training programs a critical necessity, which job-
training or job-training related programs, do you think can be
eliminated because they are ineffective, duplicative, unnecessary, or
have outlived their purpose?
Answer 4. The current design of the workforce system was put in
place in 1998, at a time of full employment (the national unemployment
rate for the year ranged from 4.4 to 4.6 percent that year). Though
designed at a time when economic conditions were better than they are
now, the public workforce system has stepped up to the plate,
performing admirably in responding to the challenges it has faced in
the current recession. In this time of high unemployment, it is
important that the workforce system look carefully at the labor market
and target investments to skills areas that will help workers to attain
good jobs as the economy recovers.
The spirit of WIA embodies streamlining programming and access to
services. We agree that we must consider how the workforce system can
be improved through WIA reauthorization to modernize the system to meet
the needs of today's economy, while continuing to serve those who are
most in need of help securing and retaining good jobs. The Department
has engaged in activities specifically related to modernizing WIA, such
as meeting with stakeholder organizations to gather suggestions about
reforming and improving the workforce system, and looks forward to
further opportunities to share information and work with the Senator
and other members of the committee during WIA reauthorization.
Together, we need to examine ways to improve the delivery of services
through the workforce system, identify and eliminate unnecessary
duplication (such as complex eligibility determination processes across
multiple programs), and maximize the effectiveness of our limited
resources in serving the American workforce.
Question 5. How do your agencies detect fraud in job-training or
job-training related programs?
Answer 5. ETA monitors grantees through six regional offices, each
managed by a Senior Executive Service (SES) Regional Administrator. On-
site monitoring of all grantees is done to the extent that travel
resources allow, and each State grantee receives a comprehensive review
of fiscal and programmatic activity once every 3 years. In addition,
ETA conducts quarterly desk reviews of all active grants using a system
called the Grants Electronic Management System, or GEMS. These desk
reviews consist of standard questions and analysis and are recorded in
the GEMS system along with documentation of grantee-submitted fiscal
reports, performance data, and Federal Project Officer notations. On
the basis of these quarterly reviews, ETA assigns a risk rating to the
grantee (red, yellow, or green). ETA monitors ``at risk'' grants on a
more frequent basis, using standard operating procedures and a
comprehensive Core Monitoring Guide and its supplements. A grantee is
categorized as ``at risk'' based on criteria designed to evaluate the
degree to which Federal staff should provide oversight and technical
assistance to ensure compliance with financial reporting requirements.
Such criteria include the grantee's ability to timely and accurately
submit financial reports, the amount of grant funds awarded, and
whether or not the grantee is a first time ETA grant recipient. During
the course of monitoring, if any suspicion of fraud or abuse is
detected, it is immediately reported to the Region Administrator who
determines if there was intent to misapply funds that would warrant an
Office of the Inspector General (OIG) Incident Report.
ETA is also focusing on strengthening its working relationship with
OIG. Through this strengthened relationship, ETA hopes to research new
approaches that will allow us to proactively identify and correct
problems before they become significant.
Response to Questions of Senator Murray, Senator Enzi, and
Senator Coburn by Martha Kanter
questions of senator murray
Question 1. How does the Department define ``post-secondary
education'' or a ``post-secondary education credential''?
Answer 1. The generally accepted understanding of the term ``post-
secondary education'' is education and training beyond high school.
This could include education from a number of sources, such as at 2-
and 4-year colleges and universities, post-secondary trade and
technical schools (along with community-based training), post-high
school adult education, and registered apprenticeship programs.
Although there is no statutory or regulatory definition of ``post-
secondary education credential,'' again generally, the term is
understood to include both formal degrees and certificates awarded by
traditional institutions of higher education as well as industry-
recognized credentials and certificates based on non-credit training
that takes place either within or outside of a traditional educational
setting.
ED and the Department of Labor (DOL) have begun discussions about
what standards should be used to define industry-recognized
credentials. This joint effort will help inform our decisionmaking when
WIA reauthorization is considered. Also, we want to include industry
stakeholders in the process of helping us define these standards, so
that credentials provide interim performance measures and are portable
and ``stackable'' and are both recognized and used by employers.
We think that the adoption of standards will help workers who seek
credentials, particularly low-skilled workers, obtain employment and
advance in their education and careers. States are not currently
required, under Title II of WIA, to report information on certificates
beyond the secondary level. Expanding and enhancing data collection on
certificates would be useful if there were established common Federal
definitions of certificates and industry-grouped post-secondary
credentials.
Question 2. What are the Department's principles for WIA
reauthorization?
Answer 2. While formal principles have not yet been established, we
believe that WIA reauthorization should aim to ensure that adults
seeking training will find, gain physical and programmatic access to,
and, if eligible, obtain the federally supported services they need,
regardless of their system point of entry. To this end, we must improve
the alignment and integration of adult education and employment and
training services in order to fully meet the needs of the target
populations: the unemployed, the underemployed, and those who need
basic educational training in order to advance in their education and
career goals--including individuals with disabilities.
The Department will continue to have conversations with DOL to
ensure that this overarching principle, anchored in the needs of the
client, guides our work.
WIA reauthorization should ensure that all individuals are served,
including low-skilled adults and individuals with disabilities, and
that clients can gain access to programs and systems in a variety of
ways. Multiple points of entry are needed to ensure that clients can
gain access to services in a manner that best meets their needs. The
One-Stop Centers are one vital point where customers can obtain the
services they need and connect with Federal education and training
programs. Other system-entry points, particularly community colleges
and community-based organizations, must also help workers gain
education and workforce skills, find and sustain employment, and
advance in their careers. Performance and accountability measures must
be aligned and must recognize gains over time if the systems are to
align and customers' needs are to be fully met.
Question 3. How does the Department envision the President's new
community college initiative interacting with WIA programs and other
efforts the Department or the Department of Labor has undertaken to
support the role of community colleges in workforce development,
including education and training? What is the Department's view on the
role of community colleges in workforce development, including
education and training?
Answer 3. Community colleges are central to the workforce system
and to strengthening the economy because they provide skilled workers
who are necessary to meet our Nation's economic and social challenges.
There are nearly 12 million students enrolled in community colleges
across the country. These students are choosing among for-credit and
noncredit classes, developmental courses, career-prep courses, adult
education, core career and technical education, general education
courses, and apprenticeships, in obtaining the instruction and skills
they need to further their education and achieve their career goals.
Community colleges lead the way in preparing graduates in fast-growing
fields such as healthcare. The flexible nature of community colleges
allows them to work with employers and the private sector to address
regional workforce shortages and create tailored training,
partnerships, and apprenticeship programs for specific occupations.
These institutions offer a low-cost and flexible way for students to
achieve their educational and employment goals.
The President's community college initiative, the American
Graduation Initiative (AGI), was announced in July and is included, in
large part, in H.R. 3221, the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act
of 2009, as passed by the House. H.R. 3221 would require that the AGI
be jointly administered by the Department and DOL and is geared
specifically toward strengthening the community college system so that
it can provide education and training critical to advancing America's
workforce. We see this effort as aligning with WIA and will work to
integrate the two authorities on enactment.
Designed to help meet the President's goal of an additional 5
million community college graduates by 2020, AGI, as incorporated in
House-passed H.R. 3221, would provide competitive grants to fund
innovative programs and programs of proven effectiveness that improve
post-secondary completion rates and train workers for skilled
occupations. The two Departments would give priority to applications
focused on serving low-income adults and nontraditional students. Funds
could be used to enhance linkages with various local, State, and
Federal programs, including those funded under WIA, and to focus on
integrated education and training programs and sector-specific
strategies in high-growth and high-need areas. The targeted population
and activities in the AGI grant programs would be in alignment with the
Administration's principles for WIA reauthorization. If the AGI is
enacted, the Department and DOL will seek to ensure that the grants are
implemented in a manner that enables students to achieve maximum
educational and employment gains.
Question 4. How can adult education services under title II be
better aligned with title I programs to help low-skilled adults persist
on a career pathway toward a family-sustaining career?
Answer 4. In addition to the principles discussed above in response
to question 2, we are discussing with DOL several key strategies for
improving the alignment and integration of services provided to low-
skilled individuals under Title I and Title II of WIA, including: (1)
creating incentives to dually enroll clients in education and training
programs that include shared accountability and reporting on employment
and education outcomes; (2) encouraging models of service delivery that
integrate education and training, specifically by targeting resources
so as to connect adult education to post-secondary career pathways in
industry-specific, high-growth areas-and in areas where replacements of
large portions of the sector's workforce are needed; and (3) expanding
the availability of basic skills services to One-Stop clients through
title II providers. This integration and alignment could extend to the
title I youth program for both in-school and out-of-school youth and
include the provision of more comprehensive services to out-of-school
youth enrolled in title II through partnerships with the title I youth
program.
During reauthorization, we also want to look at ways to improve the
alignment of education and workforce services under title II, such as
by requiring States to implement content standards that are aligned
with college-and-career-readiness competencies and to provide for the
development of assessments to measure student achievement against these
standards. We will also look at ways to use innovative literacy
programs, through work-focused education, as a mechanism to assist the
neediest families in moving to economic self-sufficiency.
Question 5. What recommendations do you have for strengthening
public and private partnerships to support the goals of WIA?
Answer 5. Effective public-private partnerships are essential to
maximizing workforce development, job placement, and educational
achievement. The cornerstone of these partnerships is alignment and
integration of standards and expectations of the private sector with
training and educational delivery systems through ED and DOL.
The best-performing public-private partnerships result in
identified sector-specific curricula, standards, and assessments that
are well-informed by industry expectations for workforce performance.
To this end, the Department, in collaboration with DOL, is leading an
effort to define career pathways in 16 general industry sectors,
including healthcare, construction technology, information technology,
and manufacturing. These pathways define the learning expectations of
the industry partners. The learning expectations can be captured in
``stackable'' industry-recognized credentials that reflect increasing
levels of skills. These credentials are valuable for employers looking
to hire workers with a set level of expertise and for workers looking
to improve their earning potential.
Additionally, the creation of broad State and local partnerships
that include not only business and industry partners, but also local
governments, education institutions, agencies, and organizations,
corporations, foundations, and workforce investment boards and
mandatory One-Stop partners under WIA, may help ensure that workers,
learners, and businesses benefit. Clear expectations and accountability
for partnerships will strengthen coordination among these agents,
particularly between the private and public sectors.
State and local Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs) are important to
fostering the types of partnerships necessary to maximize workforce
development, job placement, and educational achievement. Therefore,
WIBs must be strategic, effective, and representative; State and
regional communication and coordination systems will ensure that
workforce training is aligned with State and regional employer needs.
Federal partnerships are also critical to the success of these
efforts. To increase students' job placement and career advancement
success, ED can expand and deepen career pathway efforts by improving
coordination with DOL to encourage State and local partnerships
throughout entities such as educational institutions and training
programs.
In order to facilitate the employment of individuals with
disabilities who are eligible for Vocational Rehabilitation (VR)
services, the Department has supported a number of activities to
increase business and industry's awareness of the services provided
through the VR State Grants. We've supported and participated in
conferences and job fairs offered by business organizations, conducted
forums in four high-growth industries--financial services, hospitality/
retail, technology, and health care--and published the employer
resource Disability 101. Also, the Council for State Administrators of
VR has begun work on the ``Net,'' an online tool to connect VR agency
job developers and employers nationally.
In reauthorizing the Rehabilitation Act, we want to look at ways to
further strengthen collaboration between VR agencies and employers at
the national and State levels.
Question 6. How can the Department help to improve the
accessibility, both physically and programmatically, of One-Stop
Centers and training programs? What changes should Congress make to the
law to ensure accessibility?
Answer 6. One-Stop accessibility is required under Section 188 of
WIA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act; however, there are
anecdotal reports that problems still exist with accessibility of
physical structures, technology, and service delivery. We will work
with DOL to identify if there are approaches that can better ensure
access by individuals with disabilities--both physically (i.e.,
facilities are readily accessible and useable) and programmatically
(i.e., the full array of WIA services is available).
Question 7. What administrative and policy changes would you
recommend for creating a more coherent, seamless workforce system that
encompasses the provisions under Title I, II, III, IV, and V of WIA and
serves both job seekers and workers, and employers?
Answer 7. Improving the alignment and integration of adult
education and employment and training services in order to meet the
needs of clients is one of the Department's overarching priorities for
WIA reauthorization. Several strategies we are considering were
discussed above in response to questions 2 and 4. Additionally,
reauthorization will allow us to examine ways to further strengthen the
accountability provisions, such as establishing local and regional
performance targets; connecting funding to performance; and expanding
the use of longitudinal data systems to track education and employment
outcomes.
Further, we want to look at ways to establish core standards for
adult education instructors and faculty and strengthen the teacher-
quality and professional-development provisions in State plans;
increase the use of technology for classroom instruction and distance
learning; and employ innovative ``platforms'' and evidence-based
learning strategies to enhance the provision of services.
Several ways to improve coordination of programs under title I with
the VR program under the Rehabilitation Act include:
(1) Using a common intake or application process to ascertain basic
information about the individual (though eligibility for specialized VR
services would continue to be made by a qualified VR counselor who
meets the personnel standards).
(2) Co-location of programs funded through WIA within One-Stop
Centers. Anecdotal evidence, gained in monitoring, suggests that in
States where VR program staff are co-located in the One-Stop with title
I staff, (e.g., in Georgia, Minnesota, Wyoming, and Washington),
information sharing and referral can be facilitated.
(3) Training of One-Stop Center staff to work with individuals with
disabilities, including developing a better understanding of the
eligibility requirements of relevant programs, would make the staff
more aware of how to better meet the needs of those individuals and
would increase the likelihood that direct services would be provided
and appropriate referrals would be made to the VR program and other
programs.
(4) Ensuring that One-Stops are fully accessible and available to
individuals with disabilities, in order to promote coordination among
partner programs as well.
Question 8. How can the Department support an increased awareness
for all potential customers of programs and services available under
WIA?
Answer 8. Federal agencies, including ED and DOL, should continue
to work together to ensure that clients are informed of and receiving
services for which they are eligible. Co-location of services within a
One-Stop, enrollment through a common intake process, and the option
for co-enrollment in multiple programs by individuals who come to a
One-Stop could be powerful tools in meeting the needs of those who are
already being served, but who have not sufficiently realized the
potential of the broader workforce system. For example, co-location of
the VR agency staff within the One-Stop Center, where feasible, could
assist in exposing disabled persons to all the available partner
program services, including VR services.
Public-awareness efforts aimed at promoting the services offered by
the workforce, adult education, and community college systems need to
be targeted to the various customers they serve. Strategies to re-
engage youth and adults in educational and career pathways should make
use of technological innovations, including social networking and use
of web portals, to disseminate information more widely. Our efforts
should include: (1) working with high schools to build awareness of
services available to youth; (2) expanding services to incumbent
workers within targeted businesses, especially small- to mid-size
companies that have the need to upgrade the skills of their workers;
(3) using community-based and non-profit organizations to reach new
immigrants, including those with professional skills; (4) expanding use
of technology to reach different client populations, including youth
who have dropped out of school, as well as linking to VR with DOL's Web
sites and online information-sharing to offer as much information as
possible to VR consumers and employers; and (5) highlighting referral
directories and toll-free hotlines that States would support by keeping
current information about publicly-funded local providers; and (6)
providing guidance to States on how to inform students receiving IDEA
services of the available One-Stop services as part of a required
transition plan.
Question 9. How will the Department institute a partnership with
the Department of Labor on WIA and other workforce development
education and training initiatives?
Answer 9. The reauthorization of WIA affords a great opportunity
for the two Departments to work hand-in-hand to assist in the provision
of world-class education and career development opportunities, and
successful job placement, to the full spectrum of Americans--from those
who need basic literacy training to highly-skilled displaced workers
who need to change careers. We have begun to have conversations with
DOL about how to better align our programs and leverage our resources
so as to ensure the best possible outcomes for our clients. The recent
work between DOL and ED to help those who are unemployed enroll in and
pay for post-secondary education, and the work we're committing to do
together under the President's American Graduation Initiative,
demonstrates both the desire and ability of our agencies to work
together in the best interest of clients.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. How will you work together (with the Department of
Labor) to make sure youth served in the WIA programs are connected or
reconnected to the larger education system? And, conversely how does
the Department of Education plan to coordinate with WIA programs under
the Department of Labor?
Answer 1. The Department has a strong commitment to collaborating
with DOL to help better connect or re-connect students with the larger
educational and employment systems. The workforce system should target
both in-school and out-of-school at-risk youth, including those with
disabilities. These groups include: (1) young people in high school who
are ``off-track'' and at risk of dropping out--especially those with
poor literacy skills and mental-health/substance-abuse problems; (2)
those who have already dropped out; and (3) high school graduates with
poor skills who are not enrolled in post-secondary education and
failing to obtain regular jobs. These categories are fluid as
individuals move in and out of school and college and as they may enter
or re-enter one or more of these categories. ED also recognizes that
employment can be a vital component of any high-engagement educational
strategy for at-risk youth. Reauthorization provides an opportunity to
strengthen the connection between DOL's programs and academic skills
development. For example, employment opportunities funded under WIA
Youth could strengthen linkages to an academic component to help ensure
that students are attaining college- and work-ready skills while
participating in meaningful employment.
The agencies could also better align performance measures and
eligibility criteria so as to reduce barriers to participation in WIA
programs for at-risk youth, by instituting performance measures that
recognize gains over time and avoid the selection of participants on
the basis of performance rather than need. Sharing and matching data
related to performance measures across programs and departments will
enhance the agencies' ability to measure the success of educational and
employment strategies. Youth eligibility could be established once,
rather than for each separate program. Certain programs could consider
automatic eligibility for at-risk groups such as juvenile offenders,
homeless individuals, dropouts, and foster youth. Particular attention
could be paid to youth who live in areas of concentrated poverty, both
rural and urban.
The VR program reconnects individuals whose disabilities pose a
substantial impediment to employment to the larger education and
training system by providing educational services to those individuals
as part of their Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE). It is a
frequent user of existing training programs in carrying out an
individual's IPE. For example, 22 percent of individuals of transition
age (14-24 at application) whose service records were closed in fiscal
year 2008 after receiving services from the VR State program were
assisted in the provision of college or university training; 14 percent
received occupational or vocational training; 14 percent received other
miscellaneous training; and about 3 percent received basic academic
remedial skills or literacy instruction independent of the training
period under the above categories.
State VR agencies also help facilitate the transition of youth with
disabilities from high school to post-secondary education and
employment through the provision of transition services both under VR
and IDEA. In addition, they also provide consultative and technical
assistance services to assist educational agencies in planning for the
transition of students with disabilities from school to post-school
activities, including employment. When VR staff visit a school to
consult, they provide information about VR services, employment trends,
and career options with school staff, students with disabilities, and
their families. These consultations would be a good time to provide
information about services available through the One-Stops.
The Rehabilitation Act also requires State VR agencies to have an
interagency agreement in place with each public institution of higher
education (IHE) in the State, including community colleges. These
agreements detail the financial responsibilities of the IHEs and the
State VR agency in the provision of educational support for individuals
with disabilities who are VR participants. These agreements help to
ensure that services to VR participants are coordinated and that the
needs of those individuals are fully addressed as the student
matriculates. The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services, the Office of Post-Secondary Education, and the Office of
Vocational and Adult Education (OVAE) are working to develop model
agreements and to ensure that States and IHEs meet their obligations.
Where practical, greater alignment between the programs that serve
young people with disabilities under IDEA, the Higher Education Act
(HEA), WIA, and the Rehabilitation Act is useful and would streamline
practices and eliminate barriers to participation.
Question 2. How can we better coordinate the One-Stop system and
the job training provisions of title I with the other WIA titles, Adult
Basic Education and the Vocational Rehabilitation?
Answer 2. Multiple points of entry into the One-Stop system (both
locally and through technology) should be available to ensure that
clients can find, gain physical and programmatic access to, and, if
eligible, obtain services in the manner that best meets their needs.
For example, all workforce programs (including those for dislocated and
laid off workers) should be available, coordinated, and accessible
within State and local One-Stop Centers and in partnership with
community colleges and community-based organizations, in order to
provide each individual quick and effective triage, assessment of
skills, and the best plan of services given the customer's interests
and skills. In addition to the principles discussed in response to
Senator Murray's second question, we're looking at the specific
strategies mentioned in the answers to most of these questions.
Co-location can be an effective strategy to facilitate greater
integration of adult education and employment-related services, but the
current financial burden on One-Stop partners often acts as a barrier
to such integration. Adult education providers spend very little of
their local budgets on administrative staff (10 percent) or on rent (3
percent). These providers, working with limited resources, work
diligently to secure in-kind support for physical facilities so that
more monies are available to provide instruction for clients. The
decision to co-locate in a One-Stop often means deciding to sacrifice
instructional time for clients, since One-Stops often require partners
to pay for space.
Question 3. What are the roles of the One-Stop Centers in providing
job training and continuing education opportunities for people with
disabilities, particularly youth with disabilities transitioning from
high-school to post-secondary programs? What are the One-Stops doing to
address accessibility issues and specifically for the One-Stops how are
they implementing the 188 Disability Checklist?
One-Stops should provide people with disabilities physical and
programmatic access to--and, if eligible, the ability to obtain--the
same programs and services that are as available to anyone else. The VR
State Grants program is available to provide additional specialized
services that are not provided by the other One-Stop partners, but are
necessary for individuals whose disabilities pose a substantial
impediment to employment to successfully prepare for and gain
employment.
Implementing a revised WIA Section 188 Disability Checklist and
ensuring effective enforcement of the underlying regulatory
requirements would help individuals with disabilities (including those
transitioning from school to work) participate fully in all One-Stop
programs, by helping ensure consistency of treatment from place to
place. We are told that youth with disabilities who access One-Stop
services often do so through VR, likely because VR is required to be
involved when transition from secondary school is discussed with
students with disabilities receiving IDEA services. Transition services
for all students might be improved by requiring other agencies,
including the One-Stop partners, to be involved with transition
planning for youth with disabilities at the secondary school level.
Minnesota is one example of a One-Stop system with youth programs
designed for individuals with disabilities. RSA and IDEA monitoring
staff observed in a site visit that the State's One-Stop system offered
individuals with disabilities career guidance, individualized
assistance in assessing skills and abilities, and first-hand support in
how to conduct a job search.
Question 4. What types of incentives are needed so that more Adult
Basic Education and Perkins Career and Technical students successfully
transition to post-secondary education, occupational and technical
training (including through the One-Stop delivery system), and the
workforce?
Answer 4. Shared accountability systems that reward education and
employment outcomes for clients who are dually enrolled in title I and
other WIA programs, and establishing common measures across systems
that include long-term goals for low-skilled adults, regardless of
their point of entry, could be created. Enhancing support services
provided to adult basic education participants, such as academic and
career counseling and mentoring, would help provide adults with the
knowledge, skills, and support needed to successfully transition to
post-secondary education. Providing services outside the traditional 8
to 4 workday would also assist adult basic education students.
Creating the opportunity for students to earn college credit while
in high school is an incentive for transition to post-secondary
education for students enrolled in career and technical education
programs. Integral to transition is the availability of academic and
career counseling to students and expanding the availability of career
pathways between secondary and post-secondary education.
Reauthorization could also encourage the development of new models of
service delivery that integrate education and training, specifically by
targeting resources to bridge adult education to post-secondary career
pathways in industry-specific, high-growth and high-need areas.
Creating a ``pipeline'' for low-skilled adults into established post-
secondary career pathway programs will provide an incentive to align
adult education and post-secondary education requirements and prepare
adults to be college-and career-ready.
Reauthorization of title II should address improving the alignment
of education and workforce services to achieve a contextual approach to
work-based learning. Requiring States to implement content standards
that are aligned with college- and appropriate career- readiness
competencies and the development of assessments to appropriately
measure how clients meet these standards will encourage this alignment.
The current effort to establish core standards for workforce- and
college-readiness can also be extended to the adult population and
serve as the framework for contextualized work-relevant curriculum and
instruction.
Question 5. What new programs or strategies will be initiated to
provide individuals, seeking jobs, training, or retraining, with the
necessary background and skills for lifelong learning?
Answer 5. Although the Administration has not yet reached decisions
on what, if any, new programs to recommend as part of the
reauthorization of WIA Titles II and IV, we are exploring certain
issues. The ability to re-engage out-of-school youth and adults in
educational programs leading to college- and career-readiness is
critical to meeting the President's goal of having the highest
proportion of college graduates by 2020.
In addition to working on the WIA reauthorization, we are eagerly
awaiting the enactment of the American Graduation Initiative. We
believe the AGI, if enacted, would provide us with mechanisms for
identifying new and replicating currently successful strategies for
helping youth and adults, at various points in their education and
careers, succeed and advance. Under the AGI, as set out in the House-
passed bill, the Department and DOL would make competitive grants to
increase program and college completion in community colleges, with an
emphasis on preparing students for employment in high-demand industries
and closing the enrollment and achievement gaps for underrepresented
students. The AGI would also encourage States to enact reforms that
make community colleges more responsive to student and workforce needs
and to ensure that they measure and make public, education and
employment outcomes. In addition, ED would expect to see a number of
innovative practices created under the AGI, including an increased
number of institutions that use contextualized and integrated programs
that combine education, training, and ``wrap-around'' support services
tied to occupational or career pathways in critical, growing, and
emerging industries. We would also expect to see the creation of more
dual-enrollment options in order to help older youth and adults
transition successfully into the workforce, post-secondary education
and training systems. WIA could further bolster these efforts and
provide incentives for States to establish career pathway models
connected to post-secondary education.
Another component of the AGI that we believe would help individuals
at different points in their educational and employment histories is
Open Online Education, the Online Skills Training Laboratory, which
would make high-quality higher education and training widely and openly
available. Online courses provide flexibility, which is important to
students and workers who may juggle multiple commitments, including
family and work, or those who live in rural areas without convenient
access to traditional systems of higher or adult education. Software
can tailor instruction to student learning styles and paces and
generate immediate feedback on student learning outcomes and course
effectiveness. We believe that this initiative would be instrumental in
helping students gain the knowledge, skills, and credentials they need
to advance their education and careers.
Question 6. What are the roles of community colleges in providing
job training and continuing education opportunities for people with
disabilities, particularly youth with disabilities transitioning from
high school to post-secondary programs?
Answer 6. State VR agencies frequently refer (and pay for) VR
participants to attend community colleges for job training and
continuing education to help to prepare them to achieve their
particular employment goal. (See response to Enzi Question 1.) In
addition, the State VR agency is required under the Rehabilitation Act
to have an interagency agreement in place with each public IHE,
including community colleges, located in the State. These agreements
detail the financial responsibilities of the IHE and the State VR
agency for providing services to VR participants, and help to ensure
that services are coordinated and that the needs of these individuals
are fully addressed as the student matriculates.
Community colleges are also sources of basic education, either
provided as a free-standing service or as a support, for individuals
who are pursuing academic or vocational programs at the college level,
and, so, are major resources for individuals with disabilities who need
remediation or academic accommodation to complete formal training
programs. As discussed earlier, the AGI would be focused specifically
on strengthening the community college system to improve education and
training, and we see this effort as aligning with WIA and will work to
integrate these two programs.
Question 7. How will the Department of Education partner with the
Department of Labor to address the educational needs of disadvantaged,
disconnected youth who may be in or out of school?
Answer 7. The WIA Title II program serves almost 1 million youth
who have dropped out of school each year. We will work with DOL to
expand educational services to more out-of school youth and the current
partnership with the title I youth program, such as our partnership
with DOL's Youth Vision, to offer more comprehensive services and
employment support than it is currently able to provide. Additionally,
ED is committed to working with DOL on the specific strategies
discussed earlier.
With regard to youth with disabilities, ED and DOL will work
together to ensure that policies are consistent across programs. One-
Stops and employment programs that serve individuals with a
developmental or mental health disability could become more actively
involved in IDEA transition planning, including the development of
IEPs, for students who are also eligible for services under programs
administered by DOL and HHS.
Question 8. From the perspective of the Department of Education
what can be done, internally, to link K-12 school systems with the
workforce system? Externally, how can school systems be incentivized to
partner with the One-Stop system so that more students know about these
important resources?
Answer 8. The Department is committed to improving coordination
between the K-12 school system and the higher education and workforce
systems in order to ensure that students are leaving school with the
skills needed to succeed in college and the workplace. Within the
Department, a key strategy, incorporated in our appropriations, the
Recovery Act, and the AGI, is supporting the development of statewide
longitudinal data systems that will provide data that can be used to
evaluate how well students are prepared for higher education, lifelong
learning, and the workforce. These systems will bring educators closer
to being able to evaluate which programs and pathways effectively
prepare students for employment and provide feedback that enables
educators to improve teaching and learning.
The Department requested and received fiscal year 2009
appropriation language that allows us to provide funds under the
Statewide Data Systems grant program for data systems that include
post-secondary and workforce information; and, under the Recovery Act,
the Department received $250 million to help States build systems that
can include post-secondary and workforce information. The competition
for Recovery Act money is under way.
questions of senator coburn
Question 1. In both written and verbal testimony, you expressed a
desire to work cooperatively with other agencies like the Department of
Health and Human Services in addition to the Departments of Labor and
Education in attempting to improve job-training programs. Beyond these
three agencies, what other agencies conduct job-training or job-
training related programs that should be included in multi-agency
collaborative efforts?
Answer 1. In addition to these agencies, the Department has engaged
in conversations with the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Homeland
Security (DHS) to support both the continuation and the initiation of
multi-agency collaborations. DHS's Office of U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services' Office of Citizenship (USCIS) continues, for the
third year, to provide funds to the Office of Vocational and Adult
Education (OVAE) through an interagency agreement. We are using the DHS
funds to support the development and dissemination of teacher-training
materials for the English Language and Civics program. OVAE
collaborates with DOJ on issues related to incarcerated individuals and
OVAE currently participates in the National Offender Workforce
Development Partnership along with other agencies, including DOJ.
Further, the Department, DOL, and the Department of Energy have entered
into a memorandum of understanding to collaborate on linking our
workforce to job, training, and education opportunities under the
Recovery Act and annual appropriations.
We will also consult on job training with the Social Security
Administration (SSA) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). SSA
administers disability programs and the Ticket to Work program and the
VA funds educational benefits programs and offers vocational
rehabilitation programs through the Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Service and through rehabilitation programs operated in
conjunction with the VA hospital system.
Question 2. During the President's transition he promised to
conduct ``an immediate and periodic public inventory of administrative
offices and functions and require agency leaders to work together to
root out redundancy.'' Please identify what redundancies you have
discovered in existing job-training programs including any you have
uncovered in your current collaborative efforts with other agencies.
Answer 2. The Department is reviewing all currently funded programs
to determine which ones should be continued and which should be
eliminated in fiscal year 2011. The Secretary has pledged to conduct a
line-by-line review to identify programs that duplicate other Federal
efforts, that have proven to be ineffective, or that are too narrow or
small to have a national impact. We are completing that review and have
incorporated the results into our fiscal year 2011 budget submission to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Question 3. As the unemployment rate continues to climb, making
efficiency in job-training programs a critical necessity, which job-
training or job-training related programs, do you think can be
eliminated because they are ineffective, duplicative, unnecessary, or
have outlived their purpose?
Answer 3. The President's fiscal year 2010 budget request includes
the elimination of programs that have proven to be ineffective,
unnecessary, or redundant, or that have outlived their purpose. The
President's fiscal year 2011 budget will reflect a thorough review of
currently funded programs as well as the President's goal of either
fixing or eliminating programs that meet the criteria described above.
In addition, the Department has begun to identify areas of weakness as
well as areas of opportunity in anticipation of the reauthorization of
WIA.
Question 4. How do your agencies detect fraud in job-training or
job-training related programs?
Answer 4. Our program offices monitor the States with regard to
their compliance with programmatic and fiscal requirements in the
statutes, regulations, and OMB circulars. In the course of this
monitoring, if fraud is suspected, the facts are summarized and
provided to the Department's Office of Inspector General. Offices also
receive information from State audits conducted as part of the State
single-audit requirement.
Response to Questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi
by Clyde McQueen
questions of senator murray
Question 1. More often than not, people think of workforce
development as separate from education programs and economic
development efforts. I believe we have to think comprehensively about
how these efforts are connected at the regional, State and Federal
levels. In your experience, how can we encourage these connections in
WIA reauthorization?
Answer 1. We encourage connectivity between workforce, education,
and economic development by insuring that there is legislative
direction in each of the programs funded to coordinate programs,
policies, and projects. Merely placing this in WIA reauthorization
language does not necessarily encourage the other agencies (Education
and Economic Development) to push for program integration. In lieu of
this legislative compulsion for all three areas, these areas can
provide incentives to cooperate through the Governor's 15 percent
funds, a local innovation account, the sole purpose of which would be
to encourage program coordination or regulatory relief through reduced
program regulation when these three programs interact around a common
project. We have had excellent experience with economic development and
education coordination and integration with these types of funding and
regulatory exemptions.
Question 2. What recommendations do you have for branding the
system and increasing awareness among all job seekers, employers and
our communities at-large?
Answer 2. The system should have a national tag line that all
Department of Labor (DOL) career centers and contractors are required
to have displays on their career centers, stationary, and
advertisements. We should have national ``smart'' 1-800 numbers that,
when called, would automatically route the job seeker to the career
center in their area. There should be a ``National Workforce Week''
where, every year, the focus is on developing talent for the future
with events staged at the DOL-funded career centers and the development
of partnerships with community colleges and 4-year institutions of
higher learning.
Question 3. What are the essential partnerships that you believe
local boards must have in their communities to make their work
comprehensive and maximize their effectiveness?
Answer 3. Essential partnerships must include education at the high
schools, community colleges, proprietary schools and 4-year
institutions. Additionally, partnerships should be developed in the
areas of economic development, organized labor, business associations,
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) Programs, Growth Programs
and/or high paying industries, such as healthcare, manufacturing,
industry associations, etc.
Question 4. What are the major barriers you have experienced to
aligning WIA services and building these partnerships? How can
policymakers encourage public and private partnerships and strategic
sector or regional approaches for all local boards in reauthorization?
Answer 4. The major barriers I have experienced in aligning these
services is not as dramatic as it was earlier in my tenure with my
organization. I have found that my tenure has extended my involvement
with economic development, education and sector organizations and has
enabled me to create the type of relationships necessary to execute
these programs. When I did not have this interaction with these
organizations, my job was more difficult. When I was newly appointed,
with no tenure in the organization, it took a while for people in these
systems to feel comfortable with me and my organization. A structural
barrier was that, often, the metrics that governed WIA were not always
compatible (as my partner agencies saw it) with their programmatic
goals and objectives. Public and private partnerships can be encouraged
through incentives such as local demonstration money; regulatory relief
from regulations as an incentive to work with certain industry sectors
or partnership areas, establishing national memorandums for
coordination and integration at the national, regional, State, and
local areas, where appropriate. There should be metrics assigned to
such formal agreements and national regional report cards issued on
their results.
Question 5. In your opinion, what are the appropriate roles for the
State and local boards in WIA? How should those roles be balanced in a
way that promotes respect and collaboration?
Answer 5. The primary objective of State boards is to align State
programs and policies that create a State level plan for workforce
development and coordinate the execution of its plan. State boards
create the policy and coordination framework that sets the operating
parameters that are passed on the local workforce regions for
execution. These broad goals, policy framework and funding establish
the framework against which local and regional workforce programs are
executed. The local boards are charged with developing local and
regional strategies and tactics to execute the States' plan depending
on the unique socioeconomics of each region/locale.
The State board should set metrics of its own regarding how to
align, plan, and execute State level strategies and tactics. Results
should be posted quarterly in the same fashion that the WIB posts its
quarterly results. I think a point of conflict has been that the State
WIB has seen its role as solely oversight of local programs with
minimal attention to what it can do to create more comprehensive
workforce development policy and tactics at the State level.
Question 6. Why do you believe that work experiences for young
people are so valuable?
Answer 6. Work experiences are valuable in helping young people to
develop a work ethic, determine and develop future career choices,
teach financial literacy and develop employer relationships. The
private sector alone does not have the capacity to generate the type of
``try-out'' employment opportunities necessary to develop the work and
skill assets of ``at-risk'' youth.
Question 7. How have you successfully engaged employers in hiring
young people, particularly those that are most at-risk? And, have they
found the experience valuable?
Answer 7. Yes we have successfully engaged employers in hiring at-
risk youth through a combination of publicly subsidized and private
sector employment. Employers have found this to be successful because,
in many instances, they have retained the youth in employment positions
or provided excellent recommendations for them.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. What principles do you recommend for inclusion in a WIA
reauthorization that would encourage communities to design One-Stop
Career Centers that effectively serve workers of all ages and all
abilities?
Answer 1. Language should indicate that all Career Centers should
be ADA accessible and accessible by public transit only if there is a
transit system in the area. Each Career Center should have a designated
youth area or designated external youth office where youth between the
ages of 16-24 can be immediately engaged for program services.
Question 2. What do you recommend to other States and communities
interested in developing a similar program to Kansas City for youth?
Answer 2. In developing programs similar to youth programs in
Kansas City, it is important that there be recognition of youth talent
as a key ingredient to economic development that permeates city and
regional economic development policy. The development of young people
must be viewed as a key economic development strategy to sustain and
expand communities, as opposed to merely a ``social enterprise.''
Response to Questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi
by Michael L. Thurmond
questions of senator murray
Question 1. More often than not, people think of workforce
development as separate from education programs and economic
development efforts. I believe we have to think comprehensively about
how these efforts are connected at the regional, State, and Federal
levels. In your experience, how can we encourage these connections in
WIA reauthorization?
Answer 1. As stated during my testimony at the Senate's Employment
and Workplace Safety Subcommittee, I believe, the Workforce Investment
Act (WIA) of 1998 provided an unprecedented opportunity for State and
local jurisdictions to develop a more coordinated and efficient system.
To advance and expand upon the success of the WIA and to better link
education and economic development to the system, the following
suggestions are offered for your consideration:
We must clearly define this intent in WIA reauthorization
legislation and reinforce this expectation in the way the systems
allocate funds and measure outcomes;
System partners at all levels must fully understand the
role and relationship between education and workforce development on
the Nation's economic development capacity;
Develop common statutory language, goals and performance
outcomes which complements, connects and coordinates the role and
function of education, economic development and workforce development;
Provide incentives to States that align the desired
connections through performance;
Allow flexibility for the broad use of customized
training, incumbent worker training and on-the-job training;
Encourage the use of information systems with shared
portals across programmatic areas to enhance communication between
education, economic development, and workforce development. This would
enhance sharing of customer information and outcomes, facilitate better
marketing of initiatives, and promotion of employment incentives (e.g.
tax and credits).
WIA Reauthorization should include language which
describes a seamless transition of the systems E3 strategy (Economic
Development, Education and Employment) with clearly defined roles and
responsibilities.
Question 2. Overall I think we need to do a better job of getting
the word out about the services available under WIA and at local One-
Stop Centers for workers, employers, educators and the community. What
recommendations do you have for branding the system and increasing
awareness among all job seekers, employers and our communities at
large?
Answer 2. Today's economic crisis requires our Nation to re-think
and retool our efforts in connecting economic development, education
and employment through strategic alignment. National/State/Local
awareness of effective federally funded programs will play a pivotal
role in how we rebound from this crisis.
Any marketing campaign should adopt global business language which
describes the system's purpose, goals and benefits to all stakeholders.
A clear description of how the system is designed to create a skilled
and qualified workforce to meet the existing and emerging workforce
needs is essential.
Branding would enhance the system's universal identity. Wikipedia
defines ``brand'' as the following:
A brand is a name or trademark connected with a product or
producer. Brands have become increasingly important components
of culture and the economy, now being described as ``cultural
accessories and personal philosophies''.
I emphasize the ``increasingly important components of culture and
the economy'' within this definition and would recommend from a Federal
level that the WIA umbrella system adopt a modern brand name with a
business economic driven ``credo'' tag line. A suggestion would be to
use the WIA acronym as a trademark such as ``Workforce In Action''--
Your System, Your Future. Employers tend to support and utilize a
Federal program where they can financially articulate the services to
their bottom line savings. The ``Your System, Your Future'' tag line
addresses today and tomorrow's workforce needs through Education and
Economic Development of high demand jobs.
Effective branding would require that system stakeholders clearly
understand their role, responsibilities and investment in achieving the
system's bottom line--an emphasis on job creation and growth while
building a skilled and trained workforce.
Importantly, the branding process should be developed with a
universal trademark that promotes ownership of the WIA system as a
unified, inclusive workforce system within education, the business
community, the job seeker and the community-at-large.
Finally, the Georgia Department of Labor's (GDOL) branding campaign
history and success may be used as a model for the system. GDOL
established a strong brand identity through the use of a logo (A Job
for Every Georgian and a Georgian for Every Job), tagline (Building a
World-class Workforce) and GDOL footprint and signage which is highly
visible and known through the State. More importantly, GDOL is known
for its effective and responsive service to all customers and for its
emphasis in achieving results.
Question 3a. Your statement describes how the State of Georgia used
the enactment of WIA as a way to make significant changes to the
planning and delivery of workforce services. State and regional
partnerships among agencies and private and public organizations seem
to be a critical contributor to State and regional innovations in
policy and services. How do the multi-agency partners in Georgia work
together to jointly plan, support, and evaluate services and how well
does that process work? How do the partners collaborate within the One-
Stop delivery system? How do the partner agencies and organizations
create linkages with economic development to support State and regional
growth plans?
Answer 3a. The State of Georgia used the enactment of WIA to make
significant changes to the planning and delivery of workforce services
by encouraging customer choice, increasing customer satisfaction and by
integrating services and leveraging various funding streams.
Question 3b. How do the multi-agency partners in Georgia work
together to jointly plan, support, and evaluate services and how well
does that process work?
Answer 3b. In Georgia, partners work in a collaborative and
effective manner through a variety of avenues to plan, support and
evaluate services. This includes State level meetings involving
partners from various agencies including education, economic
development and workforce development. Other efforts include State
board workforce meetings, monthly WIA Director's meetings and regular
One-Stop partner meetings at the local level to discuss: workforce
strategies, referral systems, community resources, ways to leverage
available funding, and opportunities to secure new funding.
In Georgia, 32 of GDOL's 53 career centers are designated One-
Stops, while the remaining offices serve as satellite locations. This
unique arrangement allows for enhanced planning, sharing of resources
and coordination among State and local partners.
Question 3c. How do the partners collaborate within the One-Stop
delivery system?
Answer 3c. In addition to the regular One-Stop partners meetings,
local partners work closely together to develop Memorandums of
Understanding (MOU's) and Resource Sharing Agreements (RSA's) that
document a level of commitment to partner collaboration within the One-
Stop delivery system. These agreements outline service strategies for
co-located staff, referral procedures, shared resources, quality
standards, performance data tracking and outcome requirements.
Question 3d. How do the partner agencies and organizations create
linkages with economic development to support State and regional growth
plans?
Answer 3d. Partner agencies and organizations create linkages with
economic development to support the State/regional growth plans through
the Board's strategic planning efforts, coordination with local and
State economic development partners, and by coordination with State and
local governments. In Georgia, 16 local workforce areas are
administered directly by local governments or regional development
commissions which create an intrinsic partnership between workforce and
economic development efforts and support for local and regional growth.
During the initial implementation of WIA in Georgia, local
workforce areas were given funding to develop regionally-based
strategies related to economic and workforce development. Communities
in Georgia continue to respond effectively to the message of
partnership as a means of achieving goals. With the support of State
leaders, local and regional partners come together on Workforce
Investment Boards, task forces and regional planning boards to develop
creative and attainable solutions to challenges such as educational
attainment, teen pregnancy, provision of transportation and other
employment barriers.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. A number of people with disabilities have claimed that
around the country One-Stops are neither physically or programmatically
accessible. What has Georgia done to improve the programmatic and
physical accessibility of One-Stops for individuals with disabilities?
Based on your experience, what would you recommend to other States to
improve the programmatic and physical accessibility for individuals
with disabilities?
Answer 1. As a result of a legislative action, Vocational
Rehabilitation became apart of the Georgia Department of Labor in July
2001. This move ended the segregation of services for people with
disabilities and put in motion an opportunity for a fully integrated
employment service system for all Georgians. Budgetary and cultural
changes were first addressed. A culture of inclusion was communicated,
adopted and enforced from the top and throughout the organization.
Importantly, we focused on the ability people have as opposed to the
physical, mental and/or emotional ``disability'' of an individual. In
doing so, we established a service delivery system which allowed all
citizens to fully participate in the workforce services offered.
The Georgia Department of Labor/Vocational Rehabilitation (GDOL/VR)
staff members with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Assistive
Technology (AT) expertise provided training and technical assistance to
GDOL Career Centers and One-Stops to enhance customer services and
exceed ADA requirements. We feel other States could benefit from taking
actions similar as to the items below that GDOL/VR implemented at
Career Centers and One-Stops to improve the programmatic and physical
accessibility for individuals with disabilities:
Install appropriate automatic doors and frequently test
them to ensure they continue to be in good working condition.
Provide a front reception or help desk that is a lower
height for better direct interaction with people who use a wheelchair.
Provide more accessible parking spaces.
Train all Career Center and One-Stop staff members to
offer excellent customer service for all customers including those who
have disabilities.
Provide special training on the AT on the accessible
computer(s) and work stations to Career Center staff assigned to
Resource Centers to enable them to assist customers better and ensure
the training is updated as appropriate.
Install accessible work stations with customer-controlled
adjustable heights that are designed to meet the needs of individuals
with a variety of disabilities including visual impairments, extremity
impairments, learning or reading impairments, dexterity impairments,
etc. Examples of the work station accessibility features that GDOL
implemented include:
JAWS--for users who are blind,
MaGIC--for users who have low vision,
WYNN--for users with a learning disability,
OpenBook--for users with vision loss,
Microsoft Accessibility Features--including features
such as Sticky Keys and Filter Keys for users with dexterity issues,
21" Monitors,
Brailed and Large Print Materials--Many of the print
documents at the Career Centers have been converted into grade 2
Braille and 22 point large print. These are regularly updated and
replaced.
Anti-glare Computer Monitor Filter,
Scanner to scan a document and read it aloud to user
with vision loss,
CCTV for users with low vision to read printed
documents,
Trackball or accessible mouse,
TTY,
Headsets for privacy in using AT software--with
disposable covers for sanitization,
Ubi Duo at the Help Desk to facilitate communication
with customers who are deaf, and
FM Listening Devices, Talking Calculators, Franklin
Talking Dictionaries.
We also suggest States incorporate an annual review process similar
to Georgia's to ensure and maintain programmatic and physical
accessibility. Continuous training is necessary for staff to provide
service and coordinate effectively with other internal and external
partners.
For the past year, GDOL advanced its inclusion strategy with an
initiative called ``OASIS.'' OASIS allows for the integration of
customers into the Wagner-Peyser funded activities with an emphasis on
the work first philosophy.
Question 2. How is Georgia working with small businesses and other
businesses that might not have been active participants in the
workforce system in the past, to get them to use it and see it as a
valuable source of qualified workers?
Answer 2. Georgia Department of Labor (GDOL) Commissioner Michael
L. Thurmond created Georgia Work$ (GW$), an innovative training
initiative designed to stimulate job growth and hiring as the primary
strategy for engaging small businesses and other businesses who have
not been active participants in the past.
Georgia Work$ (GW$), a proven Georgia Department of Labor
initiative reduces employer costs associated with recruiting, training
and hiring new employees.
During the past 6 years, GW$ has helped Georgia employers train
and/or hire over 3,000 qualified employees. Participating employers
have reduced their hiring costs by more than 19.4 million dollars.
All Georgia employers willing to provide job specific training to
unemployment insurance (UI) claimants are eligible to participate. GW$
provides a number of competitive advantages, including:
Pre-screened qualified applicants
Up to 6 weeks of pre-employment training
Trainee stipends are fully covered by GDOL
Hiring of trainees at discretion of employers
Workers' compensation coverage provided by GDOL
Benefits to the GDOL and State
1. Protects solvency of UI Trust Fund
2. Stimulates job growth
3. Provides career center staff with a new tool to help job
seekers and employers
Other GDOL business engagement strategies include:
Marketing and education through the local WIB's
comprising 51 percent business membership;
Partnering with Chamber of Commerce and Business leaders
on economic development;
Use of on-the job (OJT) as a method of job placement and
support to small businesses;
Georgia Department of Labor hosts an annual workforce
conference to engage large and small businesses to learn about all of
the workforce development services;
The Rapid Response unit is used to address small
business lay off's and opportunities for job seeker transitioning
services;
Georgia has retained employer committees, with a
membership of over 1,600 employers, as advisors to the career centers
located throughout the State. Participating business members assist the
department in reaching out to businesses in the community; and
Employer Marketing Representatives work with employers
throughout their service area, often in conjunction with Vocational
Rehabilitation Employment Specialists. This ensures that individuals
served by Vocational Rehabilitation have the full range of employment
opportunities available in the community.
Question 3. It has been argued that the One-Stops and State
Vocational Rehabilitation programs are built on different principles.
These differences are highlighted in outcomes measures. Realizing that
it can possibly cost more and take longer for some people with
disabilities to reach their employment goals how should the WIA
performance measures be adjusted to take this into account?
Answer 3. The differences are based in Federal legislation and
regulations. The VR program reporting measures are detailed in the
Rehabilitation Act, Section 106, Standards and Indicators. Standard 1,
Indicator 1.1 requires an equal to or greater number of successful
closures from the prior year for compliance with the indicator. The
requirements for determining a successful closure are found in the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 361.56, requirements for closing
the record of services of an individual who has achieved an employment
outcome. The major requirement that a VR client must be employed for a
minimum of 90 days before a case record may be closed as successful is
significantly different from the WIA requirements. WIA measures the job
retention in the first, second and third quarters after a client
entered employment.
Since the VR and WIA measurements are prescribed by law, only
changes in those laws could adjust them. Other VR requirements that do
not correlate to a WIA outcome are these requirements of VR Performance
Indicators:
1.2--Ratio of successful employment outcomes to non-
successful outcomes,
1.3--Earnings equivalent to at least the minimum wage,
1.4--Percentage of individuals served who with significant
disabilities,
1.5--Ratio of wage compared to State average,
1.6--Percentage of individuals who report self supporting
before and after VR services and successful employment, and
Standard 2--Ratio of minority compared to non-minority
individuals receiving services from the VR program.
A recommendation for WIA performance measures is to allow more
flexibility to adjust performance measures, if necessary, to allow for
full service inclusion. Specifically, reauthorization should encourage
renegotiation of measures with more emphasis on serving all ``hard-to-
serve'' populations.
Response to Questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi
by William E. Kiernan, Ph.D.
I am William E. Kiernan, Ph.D., Director of the Institute for
Community Inclusion, a University Center for Excellence in Disabilities
located jointly at the University of Massachusetts Boston and
Children's Hospital Boston. We are one of 67 such Centers that make up
the nationwide network of University Centers for Excellence in
Developmental Disabilities (UCEDD) that are national leaders in
research, interdisciplinary training, technical assistance, and service
and are supported by the Association of University Centers on
Disabilities. UCEDDs are the national leaders in a constellation of
activities designed to improve employment options and outcomes for
people with developmental and other disabilities. Our Center has worked
extensively in supporting the employment of persons with disabilities
and has been involved with supporting the One Stop Career Centers and
the public Vocational Rehabilitation agencies at the State level in
expanding employment options for persons with disabilities. I am
pleased and honored to have been asked to comment to the written
questions for the record from Senators Murray and Enzi on the
reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act and correspondingly the
Rehabilitation Act.
I have organized my written responses around the 10 questions (four
from Senator Murray and six from Senator Enzi) that were sent to me by
Senator Murray on behalf of the Subcommittee on Employment and
Workplace Safety of the Senate HELP Committee. Additionally, I am
submitting supporting appendices relating to these questions that will
integrate the common areas that were emphasized in my oral and written
testimony of July 16, 2009 and my written responses to these 10
questions submitted on September 18, 2009.
questions of senator murray
Question 1. What policy changes need to occur to make One-Stops
fully accessible--both physically and programmatically--for individuals
with disabilities?
Answer 1. In responding to this initial question on accessibility,
I would like to again remind the subcommittee of our feeling that there
is a substantive difference between the One-Stop system and the One-
Stop Career Centers and that, in order to realize the full intent of
Congress that there be a universally designed and seamless gateway for
all job seekers, one needs to look at both the individual elements of
the system (the 17 partners including the One-Stop Career Centers) as
well as how the collective partners perform with regard to access,
utilization and impact for all job seekers, including job seekers
having a disability. More details on the perspectives of the One-Stop
system and the One-Stop Career Centers are included in my testimony
submitted on July 16, 2009.
That said, the following response reflects a focus primarily on the
One-Stop Career Centers and ways in which there can be a clearer sense
of how accessible and effective they are in serving customers with
disabilities. It is also my feeling, and those of my colleagues who
have assisted in framing these responses, that many of the issues that
are raised in this and the other questions can be addressed though: (1)
clearer interpretation of the current law, (2) more effective
documentation of the nature of the population served and the outcomes
of the service provided and (3) more accountability exercised by DOL in
the functioning of the LWIBs at a local level and the SWIBS at the
State level.
The current legislation and regulations already are sufficient to
address concerns about access to the One-Stop Career Centers by
customers with disabilities. Again as noted in the original testimony
we feel that there has been considerable progress made on both the
physical and program access in the One-Stops though the actual data in
these areas is limited and tends to be more anecdotal in nature. Given
that, much of my response will address the need for data collection at
the One-Stop levels and the requirements for reporting to DOL and the
making of these results available to other interested parties.
From a legislative and policy perspective, there is a need to get a
better handle on how much of an issue accessibility really is (and
creating an ability to measure progress in these areas moving forward),
before promulgating new regulations and or offering new directives.
What would help is better data regarding the use of the system by
people with disabilities, and better use of the existing data. A few
thoughts on this include:
changing the data collection requirements of all customers
including the collection of information on the receipt of SSA benefits
(SSI, SSDI and the combined SSI/SSDI) by customers. These data will
offer some measure of the presence of a disability for the customer and
also offer data for administrative purposes to the One-Stops regarding
the number of customers who may have a Ticket to Work option available.
In those instances SSA revenues would be available should the customer
enter and remain in employment at the required level according to the
Ticket regulations. Such an effort may change some of the role of the
One-Stop Career Center, that is, moving from solely a high volume low
touch service to a high or moderate touch and lower volume service. It
may also impact the nature of the partners' roles in the One-Stop
system creating new ways in which the One-Stop Career Centers may
interact with other partners (those other 16 that are mandated as well
as those that are non-mandated including State Mental Health and
Developmental Disabilities agencies as well as community rehabilitation
provider agencies) and realize greater service and better outcomes for
customers with disabilities.
implementing a new integrated data collection system
(currently in process by DOL), WISPR, which essentially will serve as a
One-Stop performance measurement system. It would seem opportune for
there to be a directive from Congress that requires that WISPR include
a mechanism for measurement of the system's performance in terms of
serving people with disabilities, as a direct sub-set of how
performance is measured for the overall population (including
percentage of people served, mix of services provided, outcomes
realized, etc). The GAO has on several occasions called for better
measures of performance, ones that reflect the demographics of both the
labor market as well as the population of potential job seekers in the
geographic area served by the One-Stop. The integration of this effort
into the developing WISPR system and a clear start date (for full
implementation or implementation on a pilot basis) would be a
reasonable step in gathering data to answer the questions on
accessibility, utilization and impact for persons with disabilities
seeking services through the One-Stop system as well as the One-Stop
Centers.
have Congress direct DOL to develop a scientifically valid
sampling procedure for collecting data on the access, utilization and
impact of the One-Stop system as well as the One-Stop Career Centers
and to integrate these data collection efforts with those that exist
for the public Vocational Rehabilitation system (RSA 911). Such an
effort would give Congress and DOL a view of the impact of the One-Stop
system on customers with disabilities seeking and obtaining employment
through this system. Additionally, this information should be made
available to customers as well as become part of the public reporting
system of DOL on One-Stop and or WIA performance.
In addition to the development of better and more effective data
collection for purposes of offering services to customers in a more
timely fashion, provision of materials for planning at the local level,
documentation of service utilization and measurement of impact at the
local, State and national levels, the development of reporting and
monitoring by DOL and the use of these processes to enhance compliance,
identify areas for increased capacity development efforts and areas for
expansion of services and expertise based upon local needs would be
most appropriate.
To that end the following suggestions are put forth to the
subcommittee:
adopt a streamlined checklist to be completed on at least
a bi-annual basis or some scheduled basis (this is not specifically
required in Section 188). The completion of such a check list will
serve to raise the issue of access as well as report on actual services
(the outcome of increased access should be reflected in an increase in
the utilization of One-Stop services and supports by persons with
disabilities) and give a baseline of data on utilization as well as
outcomes.
Congress to direct DOL to prepare an annual report on the
performance of the One-Stop system in terms of people with
disabilities, using secondary analysis of existing data (WIA, Wagner-
Peyser etc.) as well as some qualitative research/data. Other data
sources such as RSA 911, ACS, SSA data, State DD and State MH data and
other sources (see http://www.statedata.info/about/data--sources.php
for list of relevant data sources in employment and disabilities) could
be accessed to support the current WIA and Wagner-Peyser data. This, of
course, is assuming the no common data elements are identified as noted
in a prior recommendation.
given the wide variation reported in percentage of people
with disabilities using the system from state-to-state (via the Wagner-
Peyser data), Congress may want to consider requiring DOL to either
penalize those States that are in the bottom quartile, or require those
States to develop some type of corrective action plan addressing ways
to increases access, utilization and outcomes for customers with
disabilities. If this effort is to be effective, DOL will need to be
able to offer training and technical assistance to such States in both
the framing of a corrective action plan and its implementation.
Congress could consider enhancing enforcement by the DOL
Civil Rights Center including an annual report to DOL (to be included
as part of the above noted report to Congress) regarding its efforts to
ensure non-discrimination against people with disabilities, including a
summary of complains received and responses made. Such a report may
include the required Section 188 Methods of Administration that are to
be issued by each State's governor with these elements made public
along with the data reported on access and outcomes for customers with
disabilities and an analysis of all stats done by the DOL Civil Rights
Center on issues of compliance.
In facilitating increased access there must be a change in the way
that DOL interprets the allocation of resources for services to
customers including customers with disabilities. The continuation of
the use of funds being `siloed' and not able to be blended across
groups presents a considerable challenge to managers of the One-Stop
Career Centers and in many ways may serve to limit access to services
by many customer population groups. In an effort to create more
flexibility, DOL should, as was noted in my prior response to the
subcommittee, move away from the sequential perspectives of the
services offered, that is having customers move from core to intensive
to training. The capacity to rapidly assess needs of individual
customers and the ability to directly access the level of services
needed will serve to streamline the overall structure for customers
seeking service. The adoptions of flexibility in the allocation of
funds by specific groups as well as the ability to go directly to one
level of service rather than to move through the sequence of services
(core, intensive and training) will offer increased capacity of the
One-Stops to be more responsive to customers with disabilities and for
that matter all customers.
When discussing data and its utilization, it is important to
separate out the data collection efforts that are directed as assuring
that the most appropriate services are identified for a customer and
those that are collected for documentation of effort as well as
administrative and planning purposes. While some variables such as
presence of a disability, sources of financial support and other
service systems accessed will facilitate the accountability, planning
and administration of the program, data on nature of the limitations,
extent of the needs and barriers to employment may be more valuable in
planning for and obtaining services and supports. These latter elements
are useful in the establishment of a plan but will often not be
relevant, effective or even legal to be shared with others including
employers or useful, to any great extent, in planning and
administration.
There should be guidance from DOL on clarifying the distinction
between disability information available and useful to the customer
service part of workforce development services (intake, case
management, support services etc.) which workforce staff should be
encouraged to be ``proactive'' in seeking out for support reasons and
the more privileged information that should be less accessible to
employer marketing staff and certainly generally not accessible to
employers themselves. By the universal access nature of WIA, data in no
instance should be utilized to rule a customer out of the service
streams but rather to get them more effectively and efficiently into
the most appropriate service stream.
Given the increasing concerns about the payment of sub-minimum wage
and the significant presence of persons with intellectual and
significant disabilities in sheltered employment settings, it may be
possible for DOL to further options for persons with disabilities in
sheltered workshops to be served by the One-Stop Career Center as well
as other WIA partners under the dislocated worker provisions. Such an
approach should be considered if, in fact, the funding sources of WIA
remain separated and not able to be blended. Should DOL enforce the
Dislocated Worker provisions as noted below, more individuals with
disabilities who are marginally employed in sheltered employment
settings could be eligible for supports and services under the
dislocated worker provisions. The Dislocated Worker definition already
has a capacity to serve workers with disabilities but those sections
(underlined below) are not often used and DOL may want to consider
reinforcing the sections of the existing definition as a way of
offering additional options for individuals with disabilities.
Dislocated worker.--The term ``dislocated worker'' means an
individual who--(A)(i) has been terminated or laid off, or who has
received a notice of termination or layoff, from employment: (ii)(I) is
eligible for or has exhausted entitlement to unemployment compensation;
or (II) has been employed for a duration sufficient to demonstrate, to
an appropriate entity at a One-Stop Center referred to in section
134(c), attachment to the workforce, but is not eligible for
unemployment compensation due to insufficient earnings or having
performed services for an employer that were not covered under a State
unemployment compensation law; and (iii) is unlikely to return to or
benefit from returning to a previous industry or occupation; (B)(i) has
been terminated or laid off, or has received a notice of termination or
layoff, from employment as a result of any permanent closure of, or any
substantial layoff at, a plant, facility, or enterprise; (ii) is
employed at a facility at which the employer has made a general
announcement that such facility will close within 180 days; or (iii)
for purposes of eligibility to receive services other than training
services described in section 134 (d)(4), intensive services described
in section 134 (d)(3), or supportive services, is employed at a
facility at which the employer has made an general announcement that
such facility will close; (C) was self-employed (including employment
as a farmer, a rancher, or a fisherman) but is unemployed as a result
of general economic conditions in the community in which the individual
resides or because of natural disasters; or (D) is a displaced
homemaker. (10) Displaced homemaker.--The term ``displaced homemaker''
means an individual who has been providing unpaid services to family
members in the home and who--(A) has been dependent on the income of
another family member but is no longer supported by that income; and
(B) is unemployed or underemployed and is experiencing difficulty in
obtaining or upgrading employment.
Question 2. We have heard that an important consideration is staff
development--ensuring that job seekers and workers with disabilities
are treated with respect, provided information to explore career
opportunities, and access to appropriate services when they enter a
One-Stop facility. How should WIA support such professional development
through legislation?
Answer 2. There is a growing recognition of the need for a highly
trained workforce that is knowledgeable about employment and training
as well as job support strategies. There are some competencies that
have been identified by workforce training and disability training
entities that address skill areas in job development, marketing, job
placement and other employment supports for customers seeking
assistance in obtaining and maintaining employment. Trainings are
typically offered in person, on site or through the use of a distance
education platform and often are done on an ``ad hoc'' basis. The
requirements of skill level and competency mastery are seldom part of
the requirement for those working in the employment and training
system. For personnel employed in the public Vocational Rehabilitation
system there is a requirement that all staff are master's prepared and
that there is a national certification that carries with it an
obligation for in-service training over a 5 year period in order to
maintain this national certification. Much of the training offered
relates more to counseling and individual service and less to job
development and placement skill levels.
There is some precedence regarding the need for training of staff
in the One-Stops as stated through the Section 188 regulations.
Currently the regulations require that the Governor's Methods of
Administration ``include a system of policy communication and training
to ensure that personnel are aware of and can effectively carry out
these responsibilities.'' It may be worthwhile for Congress to
stipulate that these requirements be more prescriptive, including
specific competencies and knowledge areas related to people with
disabilities.
At the local level some LWIBs require programs that want to be
considered One-Stops and eligible for WIA supports must have a defined
percentage of staff completing their training in the employment and
training fields. This effort is entirely local and has not yet been
adopted on a statewide or national level. Training at the in-service
level could easily incorporate strategies to support customers with
disabilities. Some training areas might include basic knowledge in non-
discrimination policies and practices, reasonable accommodation,
general disability etiquette, job training and supports for all job
seekers and universal design strategies to support all job seekers.
It would be appropriate for DOL to consider designing and or
adapting training materials that could be made available for LWIBs and
One-Stops to increase the capability of the Centers and the staff in
the system to better understand issues of disability, supports for
customers with disabilities and knowledge about accommodation and non-
discrimination in the workplace. While it may not be the prerogative of
the DOL to prescribe a specific training curricula, the recognition of
the mastery of identified competencies in employment and training, the
documenting of such mastery and the use of in-service training (face to
face, on-line and self instructional) could go a long way in increasing
the capacity of personnel in the One-Stop system and the One-Stop
Centers to support customers with disabilities.
Question 3. How should the legislation address what some argue are
disincentives to serve individuals with disabilities under WIA?
Answer 3. Reflecting legislative and Congressional intent, there is
no disincentive for One-Stops to serve people with disabilities, as it
is a universally accessible system in terms of core services. The issue
may be the misunderstanding by front line staff and local officials in
terms of what is and is not subject to performance requirements. By
strengthening the language in WIA regarding the universal access
requirements to labor exchange services some of the perceived
disincentives could be dealt with.
The basic issue with services funded by WIA Adult and Dislocated
Worker funds (which is only a sub-set of services provided via the One-
Stop system as discussed in my original testimony) is indeed the high
performance requirements and sanctions that result. The data analysis
completed by the ICI indicates that individuals with disabilities do
lag the general population in terms of their performance under WIA, and
over time we have seen a drop off in participation rates (please see
prior testimony submitted on July 16, 2009 at the WIA hearing on this
issue). GAO has recommended systematic adjustment of expected
performance levels to account for different populations and local
economic conditions when negotiating performance. Given this GAO
response, Congress may at least urge some demonstration projects that
deal with ways to address the apparent disincentives in the current DOL
performance measures that create a disincentive for One-Stop Centers to
serve customers who may be more difficult to serve or may not reach the
exit criteria of employment.
Additionally, what is probably more important is for DOL and States
to stress that the performance standards are (1) meant as the
responsibility of the staff and not to be transferred to the customer
and (2) that the standards apply to the system and not to all
individual programs in the system but rather to the aggregate of the
programs in a State. In some instances the standards are viewed as the
requirement or goal for each individual program and thus create a
disincentive for programs serving customers with disabilities who may
take longer to serve and not realize full time employment at the end of
the effort. Considering the performance standards as an aggregate
measure and not applied rigidly to each individual program may be one
strategy that WIA and the State SWIBs can employ to support those
programs that are interested in serving a greater portion of more hard
to serve customers.
We would also suggest that the subcommittee may want to consider
some language that reinforces that specific criteria must be used to
determine eligibility that are not arbitrary in nature, and that
concerns over meeting performance criteria by an individual or group of
customers cannot be used as a reason to deny eligibility. To that end
we would offer the following suggestions. Under the language specifying
criteria for intensive and training services we would suggest that the
following may be added:
Clear, consistent, objective criteria that are in full
compliance with all aspects of the Workforce Investment Act
(including Sec. 188. Nondiscrimation.) and approved and fully
documented by the State and local workforce investment area are
to be used in determining eligibility for intensive/training
services. Subjective criteria are to be avoided, including
assumptions regarding an applicant's ability to meet
performance measurement requirements, which may not be used as
criteria for denial of services.
Additionally, we offer the following suggestions in language
changes under Chapter 6--General Provisions, to address performance
issues and concerns:
SEC. 136. PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM
(e) Evaluation of State Programs.--
(1) In general.--Using funds made available under this subtitle,
the State, in coordination with local boards in the State, shall
conduct ongoing evaluation studies of workforce investment activities
carried out in the State under this subtitle in order to promote,
establish, implement, and utilize methods for continuously improving
the activities in order to achieve high-level performance within, and
high-level outcomes from, the statewide workforce investment system. To
the maximum extent practicable, the State shall coordinate the
evaluations with the evaluations provided for by the Secretary under
section 172.
(2) Design.--The evaluation studies conducted under this subsection
shall be designed in conjunction with the State board and local boards
and shall include analysis of customer feedback and outcome and process
measures in the statewide workforce investment system. The studies may
include use of control groups.
(3) Results.--The State shall periodically prepare and submit to
the State board, and local boards in the State, reports containing the
results of evaluation studies conducted under this subsection, to
promote the efficiency and effectiveness of the statewide workforce
investment system in improving employability for jobseekers and
competitiveness for employers.
Insert the following additional language:
Among the information to be included in this report is
information that specifically addresses the efficiency and
effectiveness of the statewide workforce investment system in
improving the employability of the groups specified in Sec.
136(d)(2)(F), recipients of public assistance, out-of-school
youth, veterans, individuals with disabilities, displaced
homemakers, and older individuals.
(i) Other Measures and Terminology.
Insert the following additional language:
(4) Development of weighted performance measures for difficult
to serve--To ensure that performance measurement accounts for
the needs of individuals with more significant barriers to
employment, the Secretary, after collaboration with
representatives of appropriate Federal agencies, and
representatives of States and political subdivisions, business
and industry, employees, eligible providers of employment and
training activities, educators, and participants, with
expertise regarding workforce investment policies and workforce
investment activities, shall issue regulations and guidance for
the development of performance measure mechanisms for State and
local areas that account for investments in individuals
requiring more effort due to more significant barriers to
employment including but not limited to education and literacy,
lack of basic skills, disability, homelessness, and individuals
who are ex-offenders. These modifications in performance
criteria will be designed to evaluate performance based upon a
number of factors to differentiate degrees of difficulty and
effort required while encouraging and supporting the workforce
development system to focus efforts on the harder to serve.
Question 4. What policy changes are necessary to ensure a stronger
connection between the Vocational Rehabilitation program and other
programs under WIA? How can those programs be better aligned or
integrated to serve the needs of individuals with disabilities?
Answer 4. The overall interaction between public Vocational
Rehabilitation and the One-Stop Career Centers has been evolving over
the past 10 years. The relationship between the two entities in some
instances is one of collaboration and cooperation and in other
instances one of avoidance and non-interaction. In many instances, the
relationship of VR to the One-Stop Career Centers, has been growing
with qualitative data showing the in some settings the VR staff are
central to the operations of the One-Stop and in others the VR staff
have been effective at engaging One-Stop personnel in providing the
core services to VR clients including but not limited to resume
building training, job interviewing skills, interviewing strategies and
marketing skills to meet those needs in the local community, with VR
staff resources then utilized for more focused and intensive disability
specific services.
In establishing the relationship between VR and the One-Stops often
the driver of the relationship is the framing of the MOU with that
document defining the nature of the interaction. By defining the nature
of the relationship based upon the personnel, expertise and fiscal
interactions between the VR and One-Stops, the emphasis is on how these
two elements of the One-Stop system can focus upon the needs of the
customers who have disabilities. If DOL is more able to clarify the
extent of the elements to be included in an MOU, assist in supporting
creative options through the use of the MOU and offer greater guidance
on the aspects that should be covered by the MOU ultimately the
relationship between VR and the One-Stops can be further expanded. Too
often the initial discussions on framing the MOU deal with how fiscal
resources can be accessed to share the infrastructure support needs of
the One-Stop. As was noted in my prior testimony, we would strongly
support that core infrastructure funding for the One-Stops be provided
through DOL and that the elements of the MOU focus on the personnel,
expertise and shared funding that could be used to assist customers
with disabilities served by the One-Stop system.
What would be very useful is to be able to document where the
interactions have been most productive, what the elements to those
relationship are, how each entity interacts around an individual
customer and what strategies they have been able to use to assure the
there is coordination and collaboration across the many employment and
training resources. Ultimately what would be effective would be the
ability of DOL to identify the core elements of a MOU that lead to
better coordination and corresponding better outcomes for job seekers
having a disability.
There are some areas where the VR and One-Stop programs could
logically interact. The newly expanded focus of VR on transition and
the ongoing interest of DOL in youth offers a common area of interest.
The ability for VR and One-Stops to collaborate around the theme of
transition from school to work could be a mandated element in the
development of statewide MOUs. While it is not clear how many youth who
are served through DOL programs have a disability, by the nature of the
eligibility for such service many youth with disabilities would be
eligible for DOL youth services. Modification of the youth services to
consider not just summer but year round programs that are jointly
supported by DOL, VR and local educational entities could significantly
impact the transition process for many youth with disabilities. The
capacity to develop a shared initiative or for DOL to develop a
national initiative in collaboration with the Department of Education's
Rehabilitation Services Administration could serve as a strong
incentive for One-Stops and the local VR offices to collaborate. The
recent emphasis on post-secondary opportunities for youth with
intellectual disabilities and the extensive use of community college
settings by DOL is again an area for potential collaboration and could
also be an area addressed through the State MOU process.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. What happens to individuals eligible for VR services
but who are subject to an ``order of selection policy'' or waiting
list? Typically, people on a State waiting list receive information and
referral services from the VR agency, but what does or should the One-
Stops (including adult education, dislocated workers, and community
colleges) also provide?
Answer 1. The number of VR agencies with waiting lists is
relatively small with the number of individuals on the list also small.
Given this, it would seem that there would be limited impact should
there be a substantial focus on dealing with those individuals affected
by the OOS and relegated to waiting lists in VR. That said, the One-
Stops have been able to offer a range of core services to customers who
have a disability some of which are known to VR and some may not be.
The information and referral supports are available from both VR and
the One-Stops for job seekers. As in the discussion of the role of the
MOU, it is highly likely that through the use of the MOU the core
services and related supports and information could be made available
to customers with disabilities who do not meet the VR Order of
Selection. Correspondingly VR can serve as a technical resource to the
One-Stop in areas such as types of accommodations, utilization of
assistive technologies, strategies for provision of supports in job
placement and consultation on related topics. These same customers who
may not meet the OOS would be able to benefit from the core services of
the One-Stop as well as the information and referral from the public VR
agency.
As was stated in our response to a prior question, the overall
interaction between public VR and the One-Stop Career Centers has been
evolving. The relationship between the two entities in some instances
is one of collaboration and cooperation and in other instances one of
avoidance and non-interaction. Over the past 10 years the relationship
of VR to the One-Stop Career Centers has been growing with qualitative
data showing that in some settings the VR staff are central to the
operations of the One-Stop and in others the VR staff have been
effective at engaging One-Stop personnel in providing the core services
including but not limited to resume building training, job interviewing
skills, interviewing strategies and marketing skills to meet those
needs in the local community, with VR staff resources then utilized for
more focused and intensive disability specific services.
Question 2. Frequently, there is a concern that people with
disabilities seeking services through a One-Stop are immediately
referred to the Vocational Rehabilitation agency. How do we better
equip our One-Stops to address the needs of this population so that
they can receive educational and job training skills needed to be
competitive in the marketplace?
Answer 2. While there is no substantial data on whether there are
immediate referrals of persons with disabilities to the VR system when
they are seeking services at the One-Stops, there are anecdotal
accounts of such happening. Such an automatic referral is not
consistent with the universal access concepts of WIA and is often not
in the best interest of the individual. Should the One-Stop system and
the One-Stop Career Centers be able to directly access the most needed
service (core, intensive or training) then with the adoption of an
initial screening of all job seekers it would be relatively easy for
the One-Stop to direct the customer to the most appropriate services.
Much of this can be clarified through elements of the MOU. It should
also be noted that the VR contribution to the One-Stop is one of
personnel and expertise not necessarily to the customer but to the One-
Stop staff. VR knowledge of disability and disability conditions,
accommodation strategies and local disability specific resources can be
an additional resource to the One-Stop staff. Again such arrangements
should be included as part of the MOU that is developed between the
One-Stop and VR as well as the other mandated and non-mandated partners
of the One-Stop system. As was noted in prior responses to some of the
earlier questions, as DOL requires greater reporting from the SWIBs and
LWIBS (through the SWIBs) about the activities of the One-Stop system,
questions about and data showing the pathway of customers with and
without disabilities through the One-Stop system would certainly be
useful to DOL in both measuring efficiency as well as documenting
trends in service.
The analysis of the MOUs, if they are required to identify and
detail strategies for serving customers with disabilities, will also
offer DOL some indications of how it is anticipated that the system
will serve customers with disabilities. Data on where individuals may
be referred (this could be quantitative or qualitative data depending
upon the requirements established by DOL for reporting activities of
the One-Stop system at the State and local levels) would provide DOL
with a better sense of how often, if at all, customers with
disabilities are automatically referred to VR.
Additionally, we have adapted a decision making guide assembled by
Mr. Joe Marrone of the ICI as a way for VR and One-Stop Centers to
decide when a referral to VR is appropriate or not for an individual
State. While we are not indicating that this is the strategy to be
adopted, it is a reflection of the types of procedures that could be
included as part of an MOU or even just a memo of agreement and
practice clarification from one agency to another as to how to most
effectively utilize the resources of the One-Stop system.
Finally in some cases, referral to VR is what people may need and
thus a direct referral may be appropriate. In general, we would feel
that an automatic referral may not be warranted without at least some
utilization of a triaging process by the One-Stop identifying what
those customers they feel may benefit from VR services and supports
would in fact need. Given this, the subcommittee might want to
strengthen language in WIA, indicating that automatic referral to VR is
not acceptable, and that as people are referred to VR or other
partners, there is an expectation that they may still utilize other
elements of the workforce development system. While not stipulating VR
directly but rather including a procedure to be followed with all
customers to the One-Stop Career Centers prior to a referral to any
other mandated or non-mandated partners there needs to be clear
evidence that both the referral is correct and that the partner has the
capacity to meet the perceived needs of the customer.
Beyond the issue of VR relationships, key to addressing the
education and training needs of individuals with disabilities, is
ensuring that the training providers funded by WIA and accessed by the
workforce development system, offer services in ways that are fully
responsive to the needs of individuals with disabilities. To address
this issue, it is suggested that under the WIA legislative language
address selection of training providers, the following changes be made:
chapter 3--workforce investment activities providers
SEC. 122. IDENTIFICATION OF ELIGIBLE PROVIDERS OF TRAINING SERVICES.
(c) Subsequent Eligibility Determination.--
(4) Considerations.--In developing such procedure, the Governor
shall ensure that the procedure requires the local boards to take into
consideration, in making the determinations of subsequent eligibility--
(A) the specific economic, geographic, and demographic factors in
the local areas in which providers seeking eligibility are located; and
(B) the characteristics of the populations served by providers
seeking eligibility, including the demonstrated difficulties in serving
such populations, where applicable.
Insert the following additional language:
(C) the ability of training providers to respond to the diverse
needs of populations served, including but not limited to
individuals with disabilities, older workers, and individuals
from racial and ethnically diverse backgrounds.
(D) the ability of training providers to apply the principles
of Universal Design for Learning to accommodate learner
differences and meet the diversity of individual training
needs.
Question 3. Youth transition is also an area of significant
concern. How can the One-Stop system help assist with the transition of
youth with disabilities from high-school to post-secondary life?
Answer 3. The research on the development of careers and
occupations for youth, including the DOL longitudinal study of youth
shows that the period from 16 to the mid 20's is a time of exploration
and learning of job skills including the so called soft skills to
employment. The One-Stop system with its partners, including public VR,
needs to offer opportunities for various types of employment, support
for training and education with the emphasis on connection to the
growth and better wage occupations. The One-Stop system needs to stay
connected with youth and young adults longer than just entry into a job
with more focus on entry into industries and occupational areas. The
reinforcement of lifelong learning is also key to future success. This
effort could be easily linked to the youth employment activities of DOL
and also serve as a way of bringing together schools with high growth
job needs in the local communities. The skills and competencies
required for some of these high growth jobs could assist schools in
shaping their curricula to meet the skill demands in some of the labor
marker sectors.
Additionally, the One-Stops may want, along with VR, to develop
MOUs with local educational associations such that the resources of the
One-Stop and VR can be more effectively integrated into the transition
planning processes that schools must engage in for students with
disabilities. There is clear evidence that for those students who are
engaged in employment (off campus employment more than in school
employment experiences) are more likely as adults to be in the real
work setting. Given this well documented phenomena, the role of the
One-Stop and VR in the transition planning and the development of work
experiences for students with disabilities can be considerable.
While the majority of students with disabilities exit school at
around 18 years of age, some remain in school until their 22nd
birthday. The restructuring of the final years of entitlement to
education needs to be a priority for local schools, VR and the One-
Stops. The potential for the development of shared demonstration
projects that facilitate the movement of students with disabilities
from school to post-secondary and employment settings would be an
effective collaboration that could be initiated at the Federal level
through a joint program of the Departments of Labor and Education.
With VR having responsibility for facilitating the transition from
school to work, the increased emphasis from the Corporation for
National and Community Service (CNCS) to have volunteer experiences be
a gateway into employment (part of the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America
Act) and the initiative in higher education for students with
intellectual disabilities (a recent initiative included with the
passage of the Higher Education Act), there are now additional
resources that could be brought into the transition planning and
implementation process. The One-Stops can serve as a realistic resource
for job preparation and resume building while the VR system can work
with the schools to provide the necessary consultation and technical
assistance for students to enter employment while in their high school
years. These jobs should remain with the student upon graduation with
the ongoing support services (if needed) provided by VR and or the
Developmental Disabilities or Mental Health systems. The success of the
transition process for students with disabilities will be the capacity
of the various One-Stop partners and non-mandated partners to share
resources and expertise with the focus on employment as the ultimate
outcome either upon exit from high school or post-secondary school
programs.
One-Stops can help with transition primarily by doing a better job
of partnering with schools. We would thus suggest that the subcommittee
may want to consider adding in language to the legislation that would
encourage a more aggressive relationship with schools and a more active
role in the transition process for youth with disabilities. Most of the
activity relating to youth is undertaken outside the One-Stop system,
and more with youth services (which often are primarily delivered
separately from One-Stops). Some possible language that the
subcommittee could consider is presented below.
chapter 4--youth activities
SEC. 129. USE OF FUNDS FOR YOUTH ACTIVITIES.
(c) Local Elements and Requirements.--(3) Additional requirements.--
Insert the following additional language:
(D) Linkage with IDEA authorized transition services.--When
serving youth with disabilities receiving services authorized
under the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
providers of youth services shall coordinate activities with
the local educational authority, and work collaboratively to
incorporate the WIA youth services into the Individual
Education Plan (IEP) and the transition services incorporated
within the IEP, and act as a participating agency in the
transition process.
(E) Criteria in determining eligibility.--Clear, consistent,
objective criteria that are in full compliance with all aspects
of the Workforce Investment Act (including Sec. 188.
Nondiscrimation.) and approved and fully documented by the
State and local workforce investment area are to be used in
determining eligibility for youth services. Subjective criteria
are to be avoided, including assumptions regarding an
applicant's ability to meet performance measurement
requirements, which may not be used as a criteria for denial of
services.
Question 4. It has been argued that the One-Stops and State
Vocational Rehabilitation programs are built on different principles.
These differences are highlighted in outcomes measures. Realizing that
it can possibly cost more and take longer for some people with
disabilities to reach their employment goals how should the WIA
performance measures be adjusted to take this into account, if at all?
Answer 4. The challenge in development of common performance
measures is that they do not by their nature take into consideration
the local demographics nor the diverse nature of the local population
being served by WIA. The suggestion that was made in my original
testimony asks that DOL convene a group of experts that will come up
with a series of common measures (regression formulae, individual data
elements across partners, new data elements unique to WIA activity--
number placed, earnings, benefits, impact on reduction in public
expenditures etc.) for reporting outcomes and also how those measures
could be integrated into existing data collection efforts across the
WIA partners including those noted in the RSA 911 data collection
activities. I have included in Appendix B the position that was
presented in the full report on July 16, 2009.
What is probably equally important is for DOL and States to stress
that the performance standards are measures of staff function and not
of how customers perform and also that these standards are not used to
eliminate the establishment and or support for programs that choose to
address the needs of harder to serve customers and correspondingly
viewed as not carrying their weight with regard to meeting the DOL
performance standards. In this latter situation it is possible that the
performance standards could be considered as looking at the aggregate
for a State and that within individual programs in the State there can
be considerable variability reflecting differences in both the
demographics of the local economy and the population served.
Also as was noted in our response to question 3 from Senator
Murray, the basic issue with services funded via WIA Adult and
Dislocated Worker funds (which is only a sub-set of services provided
via the One-Stop system as discussed in my original testimony) is
indeed the high performance requirements and sanctions that result. The
data analysis completed by the ICI indicates that individuals with
disabilities do lag the general population in terms of their
performance under WIA, and over time we have seen a drop off in
participation rates. GAO has recommended systematic adjustment of
performance levels to account for different populations and local
economic conditions when negotiating performance. Given this GAO
response, Congress may at least urge some demonstration projects that
deal with ways to address the apparent disincentives in the current DOL
performance measures that create a disincentive for One-Stop Centers to
serve customers who may be more difficult to serve or may not reach the
exit criteria of employment.
Question 5. What can be done within schools to enhance transition
services so that students receive real job training instead of
contracting with sheltered employment providers that eventually hire
the students they support?
Answer 5. The concern about the transition process leading to
placement into sheltered settings is a clear concern. Ongoing data
collection conducted by the ICI has shown that there continues to be on
an annual basis a greater number of individuals with disabilities
entering sheltered employment than integrated employment over the past
decade. In fact, there has not been a single year in the past two
decades of data collection regarding those individuals served by State
Developmental Disability agencies that more individuals have entered
integrated employment than sheltered employment. It is clear and has
been commented on in our response to prior questions, that there is a
need for clarity that the desired outcome of the transition process be
employment in typical work settings. This does not mean that students
with disabilities are to move for high school to employment but that
student goals in the long term whether exiting high school or an
institution of higher education must be entry and advancement in an
integrated employment setting.
The changes in legislative language addressing the issues noted in
this question may be more appropriately addressed in the IDEA
reauthorization. The clear message should be that the transition
outcomes should address post-secondary options and subsequently
employment or direct assistance in entering employment for student with
disabilities who are exiting school and entering adult life, and that
utilizing sheltered work or similar services during the transition
process or as an outcome of the process is not an acceptable outcome.
Some of the strategies noted in our response to question 3 would
also apply to our response to this question. The transition process is
one that will require active student involvement, a clear focus on
employment as the ultimate outcomes and the development of curricula
and school based experiences that prepare the student to be ready to
engage in employment and or post-secondary outcomes upon graduation
(see our responses to question 3 for more detail on the transition
planning and implementation process).
Question 6. Consumers are interested in the possibility of
exploring a self-directed form of vocational rehabilitation services,
similar to self-directed service in the Medicaid Home and Community
Based Waiver program. What are your thoughts and how would you
establish such a program?
Answer 6. Historically the VR legislation and regulations provide a
wide array of options for the design and structuring of VR services
through the IPE process including the option for a consumer to develop
and implement their own plan (IPE). The only agency requirements are
that a VR counselor review and mutually agree with the IPE. The
consumer has broad discretion on how, and through what programs their
services will be provided. The real challenge is how effectively the
existing options are practiced. Funding some research into the
practices and their impact would create interest in the development of
approaches embracing self directed services.
A significant issue in this area of self-directed services is the
individual States comfort with providing financial options under self
directed services. It is not generally under the control of an agency
such as VR but rather with financial and administrative agencies and
thus a single agency is often limited in what it can implement. Thus,
at times the limitations in having a self directed service may be a
reflection of the overall State financial management practices rather
than the interest and capacity of the public VR system.
[Preparation of Responses: The lead author, William E. Kiernan,
would like to acknowledge the very considerable support, guidance and
review of the above responses to each of the questions submitted to
Senators Murray and Enzi by John Halliday, David Hoff and Joseph
Marrone. The recommendations as well as observations made are
reflective of the combined input from the senior author as well as
these ICI senior staff members. Specific questions or areas for
clarification should be sent to: William E. Kiernan, Ph.D., Director
and Research Professor, Institute for Community Inclusion, University
of Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Blvd., Boston, MA 02115-3393; e-
mail: [email protected]; phone:617-287-4311; web:
www.communityinclusion.org.]
appendix a
Subject: Guidance Regarding Referral of a Customer with a Disability
for VR Services
Date: 10/1/04
A. Purpose. To provide guidance to local One-Stop Career Centers
and to the VR agency on how to determine whether it is appropriate for
One-Stop Career Center System to refer a customer with a disability to
the local VR office for assistance.
B. References. The Workforce Investment Act of 1998; 29 CFR Part
37; Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, DOL Training and
Employment Guidance Letter No. 9-02 and (name of State here) DOL Policy
Directive No. 1-04 and Institute for Community Inclusion Policy Brief,
Volt. 3, No. 2: Provisions in the Final Regulations Governing the State
VR Program Describing the Interplay with WIA and TWWIIA (February,
2001).
C. Background. The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) includes
nondiscrimination and equal opportunity regulations for the provision
of services to all customers. Included in those regulations is specific
language regarding the service to individuals with disabilities
specifically:
Individuals with disabilities have a right to use the
services of the One-Stop system.
One-Stop Career Centers must be readily accessible to
individuals with disabilities.
Individuals with disabilities are entitled to reasonable
accommodations and modifications when using One-Stop services.
Individuals with disabilities should not be
automatically referred to agencies providing services for people with
disabilities.
Referral to other programs such as vocational
rehabilitation should be based upon individual need and agreement by
customers.
Collaboration between the VR agency and the WIA administering
agency is intended to produce better information, more comprehensive
services, easier access to services, and improved long-term employment
outcomes. Thus, effective participation of the State VR program is
critical to enhancing opportunities for individuals with disabilities
in the State VR program itself as well as other components of the
workforce investment system in each State and local area. [65 FR 10621,
10624 (February 28, 2000)]
All partner programs (not just the Designated State Unit
implementing the State VR program) have a legal responsibility under
Title I of WIA, the ADA, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act to
serve persons with disabilities. Some individuals with disabilities may
receive the full scope of needed services through the One-Stop system
without accessing the State VR program at all; while others may be
referred to the designated State unit for a program of VR services or
receive a combination of services from the State VR program and other
One-Stop system partners. [66 FR 4425 (January 17, 2001)] Nothing in
Title I or Title IV of WIA or the implementing regulations is meant to
be construed to require designated State units to pay the costs of
providing individuals with disabilities access to the One-Stop system.
In fact, that responsibility falls to the One-Stop system in accordance
with the ADA and Section 504. [66 FR 4425 (January 17, 2001)] In
addition, some individuals who are eligible for VR services may choose
not to participate in the VR program and, therefore, also may be served
exclusively by other partner programs of the One-Stop system. [66 FR
4425 (January 17, 2001)]
Therefore this policy guidance is issued under the premise that the
One-Stop system will endeavor to serve customers with disabilities
through the full panoply of services the One-Stop system offers and
that the customer with a disability is (potentially) eligible for,
whether or not, they may also be (potentially) eligible for other
employment related disability specific services. It is expected that,
while the final decisions regarding which agency services the customer
would choose to access would reside in the customer, as agency policy
the DOL would expect referrals to be made to the State VR agency
primarily as a complement to One-Stop services and NOT as a replacement
for such services. Also, since the VR agency is a partner in each One-
Stop, it is strongly encouraged, that in addition to this policy
directive, each Center develop a local referral protocol under the
statewide parameters outlined below. Several Centers have developed
Employment Planning teams involving VR, WIA staff, and other disability
specific partners and this may be a viable model to continue to expand
in various parts of the State to assist in rendering assistance to
customers with disabilities more effectively, especially in regard to
the collaborative activities envisioned specifically in the areas under
Sections D.4, D.5, D.6, and D.8 below.
As noted in the Policy Directive No. 1-04, previously issued by the
State Department of Labor, One-Stop staff may not make unnecessary
inquiries into the existence of a disability but they may ask whether
an individual has a disability, as long as there is a specific reason
for making such an inquiry and these inquiries are made for all
customers of the system. The One-Stop system may ask whether an
individual has a disability for the following reasons: ``. . . to
determine if the individual is eligible for special services or funding
as a result of the disability . . .''. If using the previous guidance,
Policy Directive No. 1-04, the customer is believed to be a person with
a disability, then the following decision tree process should be used
to determine the feasibility and appropriateness of a referral to the
State VR agency. The information should be used consistently while, at
the same time, recognizing that every situation that staff confront
involves a multitude of factors that must be considered. But applying
the decision making guidelines described below should help in assisting
customers with disabilities more effectively and expeditiously.
D. Guidance:
Below is the decision tree protocol for considering whether a
workforce customer should be referred for VR services. Nothing in the
guidelines below is meant to contravene the Policy Directive No. 1-04
referenced above, which remains fully in effect and is expected to be
adhered to in all respects. This guidance serves as a complement and
supplement to that directive, not as a replacement in any form.
Questions to consider in deciding whether a workforce customer
should be referred to the local office of the State VR Agency for
assistance.
These questions below are developed in a decision tree format and
should be applied in the order described.
(1) Do you know that a customer has a disability? Y/N
If Y, did [s]he self disclose? Y/N
If Y, on a form? Or to you directly? Or to others who
informed you?
If N, what other factors lead you to believe this? How
does this knowledge get incorporated into your decision given the
requirement that it is up to the customer to voluntarily self disclose
disability status and not have that label assigned to him/ her by
external parties?
(Note: It would be useful and all One-Stops are encouraged to
incorporate as part of their general customer orientation several
pieces of disability service oriented information, both in written
material and oral presentations at general orientation sessions. This
should include information about why One-Stops encourage customers to
self identify should they need disability specific assistance, what
disability specific partners and resources might be available to help,
and how customers might self identify and with which staff should they
be encouraged to connect. Where possible it is highly desired that VR
staff participate at some level in presenting a brief description of VR
services to all customers attending orientation sessions.)
(2) Does the customer have a disability that needs some special
accommodations if [s]he is to successfully use workforce services? Y/N
If Y, what leads you to believe this? (Should reference
local resources and info re accommodations here)
(Note: If staff believe an accommodation is necessary and staff
broach the topic, then such staff should explain what leads them to
arrive at this judgment and how such an accommodation might benefit the
customer to derive the full benefit of workforce development services.)
If N, no other action regarding referral to VR is needed
at this time, unless the customer specifically requests such service.
(3) Does the customer believe [s]he needs and desires this
accommodation? Y/N
If Y, what leads you to believe this?
If N, no other action regarding referral to VR is needed
at this time, unless the customer specifically requests such service.
(Note: If the customer believes an accommodation is necessary then
staff should ask the customer what sort of accommodation might be
needed and how such an accommodation might benefit the customer to
derive the full benefit of workforce development services.)
(4) Does the One-Stop Center have the ability to provide this
accommodation service on its own without the assistance of VR? Y/N
If Y, what leads you to believe this?
If N, what leads you to believe this?
(Note: Each One-Stop Center should have in place an MOA regarding
the process in place for assessing and providing needed accommodations.
The One-Stop staff should reference this policy at this juncture.
However, it is also useful for the workforce staff to identify local
resources or experts who may assist the Center staff in examining other
creative problem solving options that have not previously been
acknowledged.)
(5) Does the customer have some more extensive individual support
needs related to his/her disability that should be attended to in order
for the person to successfully attain and retain employment? Y/N
If Y, what information, in addition to the customer's
own statements, leads you to believe this? Have you discussed this
opinion with the customer directly?
If N, why not and what leads you to believe this? Do you
need some assistance from someone else to discuss this with the
customer directly? It is expected that there be both formal (through
Memoranda of Understanding) as well as informal working relations
established with VR and other disability partners in the One-Stop so
that this consultation can be accessed readily and effectively.
(Note: Workforce staff should be clear when identifying the
perceived need for extensive individual support that this judgment is
rendered with the expectation that such support should be expected to
assist the customer in achieving a successful employment outcome and is
not being used to ``screen the person out'' of services.)
(6) Does the customer wish to be referred to disability specialty
services that VR provides? Y/N
If Y, what leads you to believe this? Staff should
provide every opportunity to the customer to continue to use all
appropriate workforce services, especially core and assisted self
service, even while discussing with the customer the possible need of
disability specialty services.
If N, what leads you to believe this? If N, no other
action regarding referral to VR should be undertaken, unless the
workforce staff believe that this additional service is essential and
without it, the customer can not get any further benefit from the other
workforce services available. In that case, it is then incumbent upon
the staff member to explain the rationale for this decision cogently in
a manner that elicits a positive response and agreement to this
referral from the customer, not merely acquiescence.
(Note: Workforce staff should be clear when identifying the
perceived need for disability specialty services that VR provides that
this judgment is rendered with the expectation that such service is
expected to assist the customer in achieving a successful employment
outcome and is not being used to ``screen the person out'' of workforce
services.)
(7) Do you think the person should still consider VR even if [s]he
is not interested? Y/N
If Y, why do you believe this? Do you need some
assistance from someone else to discuss this with the customer
directly? As with question 5 above, workforce staff should have a
collaborative relationship established with disability partners in the
One-Stop or the community at large so that this consultation can be
accessed readily and effectively.
If N, then it is expected that the One-Stop Center will
then seek to provide the service that staff felt the person needed,
which they thought VR should provide. If this service provision is
ascertained to be impractical or impossible without VR assistance, then
it is the responsibility of the workforce staff or supervisors to
clearly explain their rationale and gain the customer's understanding
(and ideally) agreement. This decision should only be rendered after
full discussion with administrative staff at the One-Stop Center and
with the local VR partner personnel.
(8) Will you make the referral directly to VR if the customer
agrees that [she] is interested in VR services? Y/N
If Y, does your One-Stop Center have a regular process
in place to do this? As noted above in question 5 above, each One-Stop
Center is expected to have in place both formal (through Memoranda of
Understanding) as well as informal working relations established with
VR so that this referral can be accomplished effectively and
seamlessly.
If N, why not? Is this because the customer prefers to
do it him[her]self? If so, then workforce personnel should offer advice
to the customer on the most efficacious way to accomplish this self
referral and proactively offer to assist if the customer changes his/
her mind. Furthermore, workforce personnel are expected to ensure that
the customer understands the situation fully, including the ability to
continuing receiving all appropriate workforce services (the preferred
mode) or the process in place to reaccess workforce services without
prejudice at a future time.
(Note: It is not acceptable to suggest the customer self refer to
VR either because of workforce staff's other work requirements or
because staff are not knowledgeable how to arrange such a transition.
In either case, workforce staff are expected to do timely follow up to
make sure the person is connected appropriately and that the customer
is engaged in services that meet the needs assessed.)
(9) If the customer with the disability will be getting assistance
from VR, will the One-Stop Center workforce staff still continue to
serve him/her with other (non VR funded) services? Y/N
If Y, how will this be communicated to and coordinated
with VR staff? Procedures for providing joint services should be fully
explicated in the Memoranda of Understanding between local One-Stop
Centers and the State VR local service offices.
If N, why will the One-Stop Center not continue to
assist the person? Is it because the One-Stop Center does not have any
services the person needs? If so, how did you decide this? Core
services or assisted self service should be feasible alternatives in
almost every instance. It is expected that this assessment is done in
partnership with the affected customer and explained clearly and in
writing if the person requests it. If the customer still seeks One-Stop
Center services, then there needs to be an administrative policy in
place in writing regarding the process for why further services would
not be offered--a situation that should occur infrequently if ever.
Is it because VR is better equipped to deliver all the services
needed? If so, how did you decide this? It is expected that that this
assessment is done in partnership with the affected customer and
explained clearly and in writing if the person requests it. If the
customer still seeks One-Stop Center services, then there needs to be
an administrative policy in place in writing regarding the process for
why further services would not be offered--a situation that should
occur infrequently if ever.
(Note: As noted in question 8 above as well as in Section C of this
document, the preferred mode for the system (and consistent with the
spirit and the letter of the ADA and WIA legislation) is for the
customer to be able to continue to receive all appropriate workforce
services concurrent with participating in VR services wherever
possible.)
[Draft prepared by: Joe Marrone, Senior Program Manager, Public
Policy National Center for Workforce and Disability, Institute for
Community Inclusion, UMASS BOSTON, West Coast Office: 4517 NE 39th
Ave., Portland, OR 97211-8124; tel: 503-331-0687 (home office) or 503-
331-0486 (home); fax: 503-961-7714; e-mail: [email protected]; web:
www.onestops.info.]
appendix b
response to performance measures as presented in july 16, 2009
testimony of william e. kiernan, ph.d.
Measurement of effectiveness and impact must not create a
disincentive for One-Stops to serve customers with disabilities: While
this has been an area of continuous discussion over several years,
there is little progress in the area of identifying clear performance
measures for the One-Stop system. Some of this is reflective of the
nature of the One-Stop in that it is a system and not an individual
program, and thus for the One-Stop there must be collaborations across
multiple agencies addressing the needs of the customers who are seeking
employment. Many of these partner agencies have outcome measures and
most have unique interpretations of what the actual measure means, as
in the case of ``what is employment'' and ``how long should individuals
be followed''. Care must be exercised so that any measurement of
outcomes does not create a disincentive for the One-Stops to serve
specific sub-populations.
As it currently stands, if the One-Stop does not meet its
performance measures while using WIA funds, there are clear sanctions.
The existing structure can and often has been reported to be a reason
for the low rate of service for persons with disabilities and other
hard to serve customer groups. There is a need to develop measures of
effectiveness that reflect the customer diversity while embracing the
mandate of the One-Stop to serve all customers. In some instances the
customer mix will vary depending upon the demographics of the area
served by the One-Stop. Any measurement system must be sufficiently
flexible to accommodate the diversity of the populations served by the
One-Stops as well as be able to provide consistent measures of outcomes
such as employment placements, earnings and job retention among other
variables. The identification of effective outcome measures for WIA is
clearly an area of importance and should be a priority for both ETA and
ODEP with the development of such measures including both mandated and
non-mandated partner input and consideration.
While not a performance measure, the adoption of common intake and
application materials across the One-Stop and its partners would serve
to streamline the application effort for the customer as well as reduce
the costs to the agencies if common data and variables are used for
multiple applications for service. The same would be true for outcome
measures. With some greater consistency in the definition of the
outcomes measures, cross agency reviews may be able to be accomplished
with the outcomes providing more meaningful and useful monitoring as
well as strategic planning. Finally, the development of measures and
processes that do not create disincentives for the One-Stops to serve
the harder to serve customers is essential if the mandate of WIA to be
universal, seamless and accessible to all is to be realized.
Performance Measurement and Issues: The inability to properly
measure the performance of the One-Stop system is an ongoing issue. At
this point, the only mechanism for measurement of One-Stop performance
is through individual partner and funding stream performance measures
that allows only a partial (although still somewhat informative) look
at the system. A subtext of this lack of a comprehensive performance
measurement system, is the lack of a measurement system for One-Stop
system performance in serving various groups and sub-populations
including people with disabilities. As a result, it is impossible to
truly ascertain the performance and progress of the One-Stop system as
a whole in meeting the needs of people with disabilities.
Wagner-Peyser Data: The performance data that is available, while
limited, indicates both successes and challenges regarding serving
people with disabilities. The Wagner-Peyser data are probably the best
indicator available of overall One-Stop performance. These funds are
used for basic employment/labor exchange services, and track the
largest number of individuals using the generic workforce development
system--and per WIA regulations, are to be delivered within the One-
Stop system.
Analysis by the Institute for Community Inclusion (ICI), indicates
that the percentage of individuals identifying they have a disability
has shown a steady increase over time, from 2.3 percent in 2002 to 3.1
percent in 2005 figure. The more recently available data show a slight
decline: in 2007, 2.8 percent of individuals using Wagner-Peyser
funding were identified as having a disability. As noted in a recent
publication by the Institute for Community Inclusion (ICI) (http://
www.communityinclusion.org/
article.php?article_id=233&type=project&id=16), ``In examining and
interpreting these data, it is important to note that these data may
not fully reflect the use of these services by people with
disabilities, as it does not include individuals with non-apparent
disabilities who have declined to identify that they have a
disability.'' There are a number of other issues with these data. It
first off, only indicates percentage of use of the system by people
with disabilities, with no outcome data (although outcome data is made
available for Wagner-Peyser participants as a whole). Secondly, the
data indicate massive variations in the percentage of people with
disabilities using services from state-to-state: from less than 1
percent to over 15 percent. The underlying reasons for this variation
are not clear, but it is concerning and bears further investigation.
WIA Data: The other piece of significant data that is available is
the Workforce Investment Act fund data. These funds are generally used
for training, as well as more intensive services in the workforce
development system. In some cases, WIA funds are also used for core
services. The WIA performance data do provide highly detailed
information regarding performance and outcomes for people with
disabilities. However, only a small percentage of individuals served in
the workforce development system are served via WIA funds
(approximately a million people annually vs. over 13 million via
Wagner-Peyser funding). Therefore WIA performance is not equivalent to
One-Stop performance, although it has been observed that many
policymakers internal and external to the workforce development system,
advocates, and academics often verbally and in writing incorrectly make
this assumption. To reinforce this point, in 2007, only 58,000
individuals identified as having a disability were served via WIA
funds, while 499,000 individuals were served via Wagner-Peyser funds.
There are three WIA funding streams: Adult, Dislocated Worker, and
Youth. Analysis of these data by the Institute for Community Inclusion
revealed the following: from 2001 to 2007, the percentage of
individuals with disabilities served via WIA Adults funds declined from
9 percent of the total served to 4.2 percent. For WIA Dislocated Worker
funds, the results have varied over this same period, from a low of 3.3
percent in 2005 to a high of 4.6 percent in 2006. In conjunction with
declines in percentage of individuals served, the outcomes for
individuals with disabilities trailed the overall average performance.
(It is important to note that there are significant penalties in terms
of funding losses for not meeting required performance outcomes using
WIA funds.) For Youth funds however, the results are more encouraging.
For WIA Youth with disabilities (ages 14 to 21), the percentage of
individuals served actually increased from about 14 percent to 16
percent from 2001-2004 (although this has since declined to 14.5
percent in 2007). In terms of performance, Older Youth (ages 19-21)
with disabilities slightly lagged the average performance, and for
Younger Youth (ages 14-18), performance was either equivalent or
exceeded the average performance. (Note: Youth with disabilities are
highly eligible for WIA youth services.) These results appear to
indicate that when performance for people with disabilities lags the
general population, their ability to access services decreases, and
when performance for people with disabilities is similar to or exceeds
the general population, their ability to access services increases.
4. WIA Reauthorization Recommendations
Given this context, the following are specific recommendations
regarding reauthorization of WIA:
Performance Tracking and Measurement
Development of One-Stop Performance Measurement System: A
key piece of WIA reauthorization needs to be mandating development of
performance measurement for the One-Stop system as a whole, which
includes measurement of performance in serving people with
disabilities, among other groups.
Clarity of Disability Definition and Tracking of SSI/SSDI
Enrollment Status: Part of the reform of performance measures needs to
include much greater clarity regarding definitions and mechanisms for
measurement, as it appears that the mechanisms for measuring disability
are at best inconsistent making it difficult to have full confidence in
the accuracy of the data. Mandating the collection of SSI/SSDI
enrollment status of individuals being served would assist in this
process, and allow for a much stronger sense of how the system is
performing for individuals with more significant disabilities, and also
allow for greater determination of the potential of the workforce
development system in terms of participation in the Ticket to Work.
Creation of Benchmarks and Targets for Specific
Populations: In conjunction with reform of performance measures, it is
also recommended that statutory language be included in the
reauthorization, which mandates creation of annual benchmarks and
targets for serving specific populations, including people with
disabilities.
Revamping WIA Performance Requirements: Revamping of the
performance requirements for WIA funds is clearly needed. Too often,
concerns over the inability to meet performance standards, is used as
an excuse for not serving people with disabilities. The WIA performance
measures must be modified to account for a wider range of job seeker
needs. Language must also be incorporated into reauthorization that
clearly reinforces that discrimination against individuals based on
performance measure concerns is not acceptable.
Response to Questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi
by Mary W. Sarris
questions of senator murray
Question 1. In your testimony, you discuss strong, collaborative
partnerships as a key to developing and sustaining creative services to
help at-risk teenagers and young adults disconnected from school and
work transition into the labor market. What have been the most
beneficial relationships with key stakeholders in the industry and
education community for your Workforce Board in helping young people
prepare for a full range of post-secondary education and training
options and careers?
Answer 1. Sector-led partnerships that incorporate multiple
stakeholders with post-secondary and adult basic education are one way
to prepare young people for careers as well as give them an
introduction to continuing their education. One example of this would
be a program we developed several years ago called TURBO which worked
in the construction trades industry and had adult basic education
providers as well as our local community college participating and
assisting youth in gaining basic skills and work readiness elements to
be hired and then begun a career ladder within the industry. Private
industry within the construction trades were involved in the
development of the curriculum to ensure the basic elements needed to be
successful.
In addition, through funding from the State of Massachusetts, we
have developed a partnership of over 20 youth serving organizations
called Pathways to Success by 21 (P-21). Through P-21 we have
established solid relationships between and among agencies which work
on various elements of youth distress so that true coordination of
services can be provided. For example, through P-21 we surveyed teens
using an Asset model to better understand teen perception of their
strengths and challenges they face, most importantly unstructured time
after school and lack of quality work experience opportunities. This
information helps us develop community-wide solutions including
stepping up efforts for part-time job development. In addition, P-21
partners serving out-of-school youth have come together to offer
college credit courses in GED programs, leading to a surge of interest
in GED attainment and college enrollment. Finally, we have offered
quality training to youth serving staff in P-21 agencies to improve
their overall ability to reach and serve youth.
Another partnership on behalf of youth involves a teacher
externship program, which includes local STEM companies, local public
school systems and their teachers, and Salem State College, the largest
providers of bachelor and master degree education programs. Teacher
externs work for 5 to 8 weeks during the summer in real STEM activities
where they practice their science and math competencies in a high
skills environment. Wrapping around this experience is a graduate level
education course led by Salem State where they work as a cohort to
design curriculum that brings what they learned right into the
classroom, thus enhancing the learning experience for their students
and motivating them to choose STEM careers. While a very new program,
we believe teacher externships are a wise investment of corporate and
public funds, leading to returns in higher high school graduation rates
and an increase in STEM career choices.
Question 2. How are these partnerships important to the
sustainability of North Shore's efforts to provide learning and work
opportunities to young people, particularly those who are struggling to
graduate from high school or have dropped out?
Answer 2. The issues facing youth cannot possibly be overcome
without many stakeholders working together on behalf of these youth. At
the same time, developing relationships in a neutral environment and
growing these relationships into true collaboratives on behalf of youth
is not a natural role for any agency in particular. The Workforce
Investment Board, however, is established to provide this neutral
environment through which services for youth can be vetted, developed,
enhanced, and improved. The WIB provides economic and labor market
information backing up the need for these relationships and provides
the impetus for organizations to come together and change in positive
directions.
The partnerships which focus in on careers and educational pathways
that youth can embrace while they are finishing their GED is one
example. As stated above, here in the North Shore, WIA youth
participants can take college credit courses while simultaneously
working on their GED. This ensures that once they have received their
GED they are not only familiar with the post-secondary education system
but they have already gained ``credit'' and confidence. P-21, led by
the WIB, provided the environment where this innovation came to light
and was made a reality. The same can be said for sector partnerships
such as TURBO and our Teacher Externship project. Permanent positive
impact on youth development can only happen when all agree to work
together toward a common goal, with the WIB operating in a convening
and brokering function.
Question 3. From the North Shore Board's experience, what policy
improvements can you suggest to encourage the sort of partnerships that
help young people successfully transition from school to successful
careers?
Answer 3. We urge you to help develop incentives that encourage
local school districts to work with the workforce development system
toward this transition goal. While our relationships with local school
districts are in some cases strong and in other cases developing, there
is no doubt that schools easily become isolated in their quest to help
students pass standardized tests, while addressing the myriad of social
issues in a less organized fashion. We would urge that Education
policy, along with Workforce policy, provide direction and resources
that support programs such as sector partnerships for youth, P-21, and
teacher externships. For example, States should be encouraged to
include teacher externships as either a required or highly encouraged
route for teacher re-certification. This would elevate the concept of
business involvement in classroom planning to a higher level. In
addition, students who become involved, through career exploration,
internships, or joint projects with companies in sector partnerships
should be able to receive school credit once such involvement is
reviewed and approved by qualified teaching staff. These types of
policies result in stronger relationships between schools and their
communities and more successful outcomes for all students, including
those at risk of leaving school or those in alternative education
programs.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. Some States and localities have boards that excel in
their leadership and performance outcomes. What could be done to
disseminate these best practices to other State and local workforce
boards?
Answer 1. We have participated in the National Business Learning
Partnership (a DOL-sponsored program) which matches up Leaner and
Mentor WIB's from around the country to learn and share. We have
participated three times in this program (once as a learner site
working with a local WIB in Sunnyvale CA, then as a mentor site with a
Council of Governments in Clovis, NM, and most recently again as a
mentor site with Department of Workforce Development in Iowa) and have
learned a tremendous amount form these peer-to-peer experiences. A
continuation and expansion of this program would without a doubt
provide the appropriate forum for best practice dissemination. The cost
of this program revolves primarily around travel between the sites.
Costs such as this could be shared by the U.S. Department of Labor, the
States, and various WIBS participating.
Question 2. An unintended consequence of the enactment of WIA in
1998 has been the creation of local workforce boards with 40 or more
members. The North Shore Workforce Investment Board has an effective
Board. What are the defining characteristics of this board? What
incentives are used to attract the right employer representatives to
serve on the boards, who then take on a meaningful role?
Answer 2. The North Shore WIB consists of 35 members. In regard to
mandated partners, we have several members who represent more than one
partner, for example, one board member represents Wagner-Peyser,
Unemployment Assurance, Rapid Response, and Migrant/Seasonal Farm
workers. This type of state-level organization greatly helps keep WIBs
to a more reasonable membership level.
From a higher perspective, however, the North Shore WIB and our
lead-elected official, Mayor Kimberley Driscoll of the city of Salem,
believe that the WIB provides a vital, strategic function in the
support and development of our workforce as an economic development
activity. The North Shore economy is one that demands and rewards high
skills. This translates into the need for an organization that can
bring this information to the general public, develop resources,
including WIA and non-WIA, and help invest these resources wisely in
educational and community organizations. This is how we see the WIB on
the North Shore.
The Mayor and Board Chair work continuously to ensure that all
board appointments are appropriate to our Strategic Plan. This includes
ensuring that private sector leaders--representing at least 51 percent
of board membership--come from our critical and emerging industries and
have concerns and interests in developing our workforce. They work
closely with local Chambers of Commerce and other business
organizations to find those business leaders who exhibit this level of
interest. Community and public appointments are approached with the
same level of scrutiny.
These companies and community leaders believe that they have
authority AND responsibility to develop and carry out a strategic plan
that meets the needs of the North Shore. They view funding sources,
both WIA and non-WIA, as tools to carry out this plan. The WIB has a
committee structure that allows board members to participate in
whatever specific interest they may have, such as youth pipeline,
skills gap, or partnership development. By combining a concentration on
a specific area with an opportunity to truly participate in decisions
at the full WIB level, board members believe their expertise is of
value and actually makes a difference in their community.
In short, the defining characteristics of the North Shore WIB is a
Mayor who takes the appointing authority seriously, a board chair who
provides the Mayor with the information needed to make strong
appointments, a strategic focus on the workforce needs of the region,
and a structure that mandates participation but also provides full
authority to make decisions over how WIA and non-WIA funds are invested
in our local economy. With this type of philosophy, local business and
community leaders are naturally motivated to participate and find
incentive in the successful implementation of services to job seekers
and companies in our region.
Question 3. How can we create incentives so that State and local
workforce investment boards are actively involved in strategic planning
rather than limited to program operations?
Answer 3. The State of Massachusetts has established a High
Performing Board application process which places emphasis on the
boards ``being'' and ``thinking'' strategically. Through the HPWIB
process, Massachusetts, along with various regional and local
stakeholders, has defined what a successful workforce board looks like.
Part of the application process in Massachusetts is that in order to be
``high performing'' the board needs to have a strategic plan in place
and the ability to track progress on the goals, indicators and
benchmarks in the plan. This is the only way that boards can be assured
that they are truly having an impact on their region, making it a
better place to live, work, and in which to do business.
The successful attainment of HPWIB status provides in and of itself
an incentive to reach this goal. By being identified as high
performing, WIBs become more credible in their communities and across
the State, are sought out for other leadership roles such as
presentations, grant partnership opportunities, and other community
leadership roles. However, additional financial resources to continue
the good work they do are truly appreciated. In Massachusetts, the
State has freed up WIA 15 percent funds in the form of $100,000 grants
to successful HPWIBs. While small in the scheme of overall budgets (the
NSWIB has a budget of about $6 million of which about 65 percent is WIA
funding), this type of grant provides flexibility for boards to
continue their strategic activities, such as developing new labor
market reports and blueprints, attending trainings, etc. We would urge
Congress to codify the Massachusetts High Performing WIB definition
into WIA and to provide resources to WIBs that reach and maintain this
certification.
Response to Questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi
by Kathy Cooper
questions of senator murray
Question 1. The President and others have recognized Washington's
I-BEST program as one of the most innovative approaches to adult
education in the country. The program has shown great results in
helping adult learners achieve learning gains by integrating basic
skills learning with occupational training. What specific barriers do
you encounter in implementing the I-BEST program relating to rules and
requirements under titles I and II of WIA?
Answer 1. The I-BEST program is not a ready fit within titles I and
II as they are currently written and interpreted. This continues to
complicate I-BEST progress and limit our ability to partner with title
I providers.
The purposes of title I do not require offering services
to low-skilled, low-income workers or making investments in the
education and training needed to develop the workforce.
Title I has been interpreted to require a sequence of
service that does not match the needs or schedules of low-income, low-
skilled workers or the structure of I-BEST. In addition, community and
technical colleges and adult basic education providers are not defined
as automatic or priority providers.
The title I accountability system places weight on job
placement and wage levels in short timeframes, incenting service to the
highest skilled and easiest-to-place customers. I-BEST succeeds with
low-wage workers, placing weight on measurable progress along a career
pathway in a high demand field that addresses needs of local employers.
Title I would need to weigh such measurable progress equally to job
placement in order to support I-BEST--a wise course of action in the
long term because I-BEST better develops the emerging workforce as it
meets employer demand.
The success of I-BEST students in adult basic education,
post-secondary education, and progress on career pathways is not a
purpose of the current version of title II.
Current law and policy require that title II instruction
focus only on educational and/or English language gains defined by
Federal levels. They specifically restrict investment of funds for
instruction defined as ``vocational''--which includes how to use a
computer.
While the achievement levels of I-BEST students exceed
that of students in traditional ABE classes, the achievement system
itself focuses too many of our limited resources on documenting
progress within arbitrary levels that change every few years and have
no meaning or relevance to students, employers, or our title I
partners.
Question 2. How do you recommend that the goals of both titles be
better aligned to serve adult learners in WIA reauthorization?
Answer 2. The goals of the title I and title II should not be
identical. It makes little sense for partners in the workforce
development system to duplicate services. Instead the purposes should
be intentionally and specifically complementary.
We recommend title I have a goal to create a comprehensive
workforce development system that meets the skills and needs of
existing and emerging employers at the same time as it supports under-
prepared adults and workers who need to advance to the next level of
education and employment.
The goal we recommend for title II is to provide students
with the skills and knowledge required for success in post-secondary
education and progress on pathways to family-wage jobs. This goal
aligns with the explicit workforce development goal for title I and
reflects the vision from Tipping Point research done here and
replicated nationally. The Tipping Point for self-sufficiency is 1 year
of college credit and a vocational certificate recognized by local
employers.
Question 3. What are the core principles of the I-BEST program that
make it effective and how can other programs emulate and implement
those principles even if their adult education services are not
provided within a State's community college system?
Answer 3.
I-BEST begins with a clearly defined career pathway in a
high demand field that is developed in partnership with local/area
employers. Pathways must have multiple access points for students and
reach as far as a 4-year degree, when possible.
I-BEST projects provide options for short-term training
that typically lasts two quarters, but may be designed for between one
and eight quarters. The initial program on the pathway must result in
college-level credits, a college credential that has meaning in the
local job market, and readiness for a job that pays a family wage.
Instruction integrates adult basic education and
professional/technical skills and is based on an approved set of
integrated learning outcomes.
Instruction is delivered by a team that includes an adult
basic education instructor and professional/technical instructor who
teach as a team at least 50 percent of the time.
Student support services and success strategies are
provided from entities across the college structure and the community.
Each provider has a plan to support students as they
transition to next steps on the pathway, whether students continue
immediately or stop out for a period of employment.
While I-BEST in Washington State benefits from the commitment of
our community and technical college system, all core activities can be
achieved by a variety of partnering entities. In fact, when we created
an I-BEST pilot project targeting out-of-school youth--a difficult
population with whom to succeed, colleges partnered with local
workforce development councils and community-based organizations. These
partners bring expertise in case management, employer engagement, and
community-based resources that proved invaluable to this group.
Question 4. What role should adult education programs play in the
President's community college initiative? How can adult education
providers and community colleges partner to create pathways for low-
skill adults into a post-secondary education program that leads to a
credential of value in the labor market?
Answer 4. Our Nation cannot meet the degree achievement goals set
by President Obama for the community college initiative unless we
address the demographic imperative that already drives the adult basic
education system. Like most of the country, our State knows that the
current number of under-prepared adults is greater than the number of
all the young people who have or will graduate from high school in
classes from 2000 to 2010.
Adult basic education programs open the doorway to educational
achievement for under-prepared adults. Adult basic education must be
clearly included and supported in the initiative in order for it to
succeed with our Nation's fastest growing populations. Whether adult
basic education is provided within a community college system or by
community-based partners, the keys to success are:
A clear purpose of student success in post-secondary
education and progress on pathways to family-wage jobs.
An accountability system that measures and rewards
progress toward that purpose and that matters to adult students and
employers.
Flexibility to design and deliver instruction that leads
to defined outcomes.
Partnerships that leverage State investments.
Adequate Federal funding to address the expanding services
and unmet need.
I-BEST is only one example of the way that college and adult basic
education providers can partner to make good on education's promise of
better skills and better lives. Reflecting I-BEST's documented success,
the new law must create a pocket for innovation, providing funds to
design new programs and support implementation beyond the capacity of
current resources.
Question 5. In your opinion, what should be the overall goal of
adult education services provided by the Federal Government? How should
that goal be reflected in a reauthorized WIA?
Answer 5. The overall goal of the Federal Government's adult
education services should be threefold:
maintain focus on the highest and broadest purposes of the
reauthorized WIA;
distribute resources that support States to meet those
purposes, extending to States maximum flexibility to tailor programs
within the realm of effective practices; and
act as advocates that encourage States to innovate in
order to increase the success of adult basic education students in
post-secondary education and in progressing on career pathways.
To those ends, we specifically recommend that the new law direct
the Federal Government to:
immediately convene a broad spectrum of innovative system
leaders and independent researchers in order to create a much-
simplified accountability system that measures meaningful progress
along education and career pathways;
gather, analyze, and distribute data that States will use
to identify and implement best practices; and
provide support to a third-party research center located
in an organization recognized for independence and validity, charging
that entity to identify evidenced-based practices that increase student
success in post-secondary education and progress on career pathways;
and
distribute dedicated funds for innovation, supported by
waivers from requirements that restrict the innovation critical to
progress.
Question 6. What are some of the lessons you have learned from I-
BEST demonstration projects with young people?
Answer 6. (a) Because I-BEST is a short-term program with tangible
outcomes, includes wrap-around services, and is taught by a team of
skilled instructors, it is an ideal foundation for services to young
people.
(b) Many young people require deliberate guidance to navigate
career exploration, higher education, and the workplace. This includes
skill building in areas termed ``soft skills'' or ``work readiness''
and frequently prioritized by employers.
(c) Intensive and flexible support services must be readily
available at the site of instruction. Barriers to success are
multiple--ranging from a diploma held for unpaid parking tickets to
homelessness and lack of computer access. Without the capacity and
resources to readily respond to such barriers, each issue can stop
students in their tracks.
(d) Employer support must be cultivated in order for successful
completers to be hired.
(e) Partnerships between title I and II providers as well as
between community-based and educational entities are critical. It
continues to ``take a village'' to support young adults who need a
ticket into the middle class.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. How did Washington State work with the reformed Adult
Basic Education program so that staff had the professional development
they needed to teach in a new system? What professional development did
they need and who provided it?
Answer 1. I-BEST professional development is created and delivered
in a partnership between two groups. The first group is made up of
staff from the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges' adult
basic education, information technology, student services and workforce
development offices. The second group is successful college
practitioners with program expertise, experience, insights, advice and
materials in the same four areas. In addition, a college system Center
of Excellence in Education and Training has offered summer institutes
with an I-BEST focus.
I-BEST professional development activities focus primarily in four
areas:
consideration of research and evidence-based practices
linked to student success;
sharing of barriers and best practices;
creating integrated outcomes; and
teaching in teams.
Practitioners identify professional development as a critical
factor to their success. However, limitations in funds that can be used
to support such professional development--notably, the 12.5 percent cap
in ABE leadership dollars--currently curtails our efforts and acts as a
barrier to I-BEST expansion.
Question 2. What are the best strategies for building partnerships
between post-secondary education and workforce development programs to
promote a seamless system for our students and workers?
Answer 2. Clearly, aligned goals and accountability systems are a
necessary foundation for success in building partnerships between adult
basic education and post-secondary providers--whether or not these
providers sit in the same system. Adult basic education providers must
have as their goal to provide students with the skills and knowledge
required for success in post-secondary education and progress on
pathways to family-wage jobs. The vision for the current adult basic
education system cannot continue to stop far short of college-level
skills.
Postsecondary providers must also have a broader goal: to provide
all adults with the skills and knowledge to gain certificates and
degrees necessary to fully meet their academic and employment goals.
Community and technical college systems are leaders in the sea change
from viewing student failure in higher education as a mark of
institutional rigor to creating innovative strategies that ensure a
wider range of students gain the skills and knowledge to take their
place in America's workforce and the middle class.
Washington State is using a range of strategies to assist ABE and
other non-
traditional students in successful transitions through post-secondary
education. The first is a Student Achievement System that provides
financial awards to colleges based on student attainment. Colleges earn
points along a continuum from adult basic education through degree/
certificate attainment. This system provides highest rewards to those
colleges that move ABE students across the entire continuum. The second
effort focuses on student success strategies that include efforts like
building student cohorts, deliberate instruction in how to navigate the
college environment, and mandatory advising. The third provides
additional financial resources to low-income students. Opportunity
Grants are given to low-income students on career pathways in demand
fields and have clearly demonstrated that additional financial support
results in higher rates of retention and achievement. Finally,
Washington State continues to believe that integration--moving two
points on the educational pathway together--is the best way to ensure
that students do not get lost moving from one point to the other. This
year, we will design and fund I-BEST pilots that integrate
developmental education with one or more general education classes
required for 2-year degrees.
Response to Questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi
by Stephen Wing
questions of senator murray
Question 1a. While companies like CVS Caremark are motivated to
contribute to a better society, I know that businesses also have to do
what's good for productivity, growth, and competitiveness.
How has your investment in training and education for workers, even
those who face multiple barriers to employment and your partnership
with the workforce investment system been beneficial to your company's
sustainability?
Answer 1a. We have found that partnering with the workforce
investment system is beneficial in multiple ways, most importantly to
our business is that our retention rates are much higher. The system
has become a branch of our human resources team. The One-Stop system
uses our job descriptions and then recruits individuals that meet those
requirements. Using their pool of potential employees, they pre-screen
applicants so we only see candidates that meet our standards. Everyone
wins in this scenario. The incentive for our hiring locations is that
we get workers who share our core values. We can work with them to
become skilled members of our team and the incentives such as tax
credits and on-the-job training dollars are of great help to those
potential employees.
Question 1b. Have the return on your investment been worth it?
Answer 1b. We strongly believe our investment has reaped multiple
benefits. As we stated in our initial testimony, we have hired over
65,000 former welfare recipients since 1996. We have found that these
individuals have stayed with the company at a much higher rate than
other employees in similar roles. They have received additional
training and have been promoted to new positions. In developing these
partnerships, we have been able to attain a competitive advantage over
our competition by tapping into the workforce system and creating a
trusting relationship.
CVS Caremark not only looks at the Return On Investment (ROI), but
considers how we can give back to the communities we serve. One example
is our new partnership with the local One-Stops where we are going to
give 100,000 free flu shots to the unemployed. We found that over 70
percent of the unemployed this year do not plan to get a flu shot. We
have set up partnerships in 20 key markets and are working with those
local One-Stops to assist in giving out vouchers that can be redeemed
for the shot at a CVS/pharmacy or Minute Clinic. In addition, we will
also have a scheduled day when the shots will be given at the One-Stop
location.
Question 1c. Why do you think other employers don't leverage the
workforce system the same way CVS Caremark has done? How can we change
that?
Answer 1c. There are many misconceptions regarding the system. Most
think that the standards of the centers are poor and that they cannot
supply the people needed for staffing. The University of Virginia
Continuing Education Department is doing a week-long training
conference for workforce investment system participants to learn how to
work with their local businesses. It is an intense program where they
will hear from business executives on what they are looking for in
employees. They are also given projects to present to the entire group
meant to promote discussion on how to work with businesses in finding
new employees and how to work with them when they are displaced. It is
an excellent program and we assist in the sponsorship of it. We suggest
that this concept be enlarged to cover all States and local WIB
participation.
Question 1d. How do we create a more meaningful role for business
in the workforce system?
Answer 1d. One simple thing is to increase the incentives for
companies to participate. The WOTC program and on-the-job training
dollars should be designed to make it easier for companies to
participate. During the mid-1990s we joined the Welfare to Work
Partnership where four charter companies became thousands of companies
and millions of people were hired. Another incentive may be to look at
other targeted groups of individuals such as out-of-school youth and
mature workers. We would be happy to work with the U.S. Department of
Labor to assist in creating a more meaningful role for business.
questions of senator enzi
Question 1. What functions, including strategic planning, would be
incentives for employers to be meaningfully engaged on State and local
workforce boards to produce coherent, effective workforce system that
better serves both employers and workers?
Answer 1. One key area that would make it more meaningful for
business is to get them to be board members on the local workforce
systems. One suggestion is to use the National Association of Workforce
Boards (NAWB) in assisting in recruiting and educating businesses on
how to become a member. Board membership needs to be meaningful
including the ability to make decisions on programs and how monies
should be spent locally.
Question 2. How do we encourage business to partner with the
workforce system through innovative partnerships like the CVS One-Stop
operated here in Washington, DC?
Answer 2. For over 9 years we have worked closely with the One-Stop
system to hire targeted groups of employees. The mock up store gives
the new employee an opportunity to learn the system and go through the
company's training. When they start at the store they have had hands on
training and a higher level of confidence. Thousands of Washington, DC
residents have gained employment through this system. The ROI for this
endeavor has been great and we have seen high retention rates. The One-
Stop and CVS Caremark share costs, rent is free for us, while we supply
the equipment and staff the location with our trainers. We also agreed
to hire 250 new workers that are from a targeted population in the
district each year. In fact we now have six regional learning centers
across the country in partnership with One-Stops. Our seventh center
will open later this year in Washington, DC.
We believe the key to getting business involvement is to be
innovative and train employees to their skill levels. Companies need to
see the value of working in the workforce investment system. We think
the best ways are to show the companies that they can get involved just
as we did. That they are able to do their own training and get quality
new hires. That they can apply for tax credits and On-the-Job Training
dollars that are easily secured. We could also do an Open House and
invite business leaders to come to the center to see the facility in
action and then ask for their feedback and replicate the program within
their company in partnering with the One-Stop.
As stated before, we would be glad to work with the U.S. Department
of Labor on new and innovative ways to work with businesses to get them
to the table. Smaller companies could partner up with larger companies
to maximize the training dollars.
______
Consortium for Citizens With Disabilities (CCD)
workforce investment act reauthorization principles
july 2009
People with disabilities using the workforce investment
system must be thought of as job seekers first. The workforce
investment system should then respond to their needs from this
assumption as it would any job seeker utilizing the system.
The workforce investment system should be reconstructed
using the principles of universal design to ensure that any job seeker
can access the full array of services available.
Training should be enhanced for workforce investment
system staff to respond to differing levels of customer need.
The workforce investment system should be structured
to access and utilize a variety of approaches and strategies to infuse
disability awareness throughout local service delivery systems.
This reauthorization should strengthen the workforce
investment systems commitment to physical, technological and
programmatic accessibility.
People with disabilities must be included in any
categories of priority of service and funds should be dedicated to
meeting those needs. Workforce investment funds should prioritize
targeted at-risk groups.
The workforce investment system should approach each job
seeker as an individual and respond to his or her needs accordingly.
It should provide each job seeker with access to
training needed to meet local labor market needs.
It should utilize strategies such as assistive
technology, supported or customized employment, job restructuring, and
flex arrangements that allow job seekers to maximize opportunities in
the local labor market.
It should provide reasonable accommodations when
appropriate.
A dedicated Federal funding stream should be established
to adequately fund all of the infrastructure costs of our Nation's job
training system.
The role of the workforce investment system in youth with
disabilities transitioning from school to work and community life
should be strengthened.
The workforce investment system should strengthen its
coordination with vocational and educational programs for veterans with
disabilities to ensure that wounded warriors access all services and
benefits to which they are entitled.
The workforce investment system must be held accountable
for its services to people with disabilities. This means that:
The performance measurement system should be
redesigned so as to not create disincentives to serving people with
disabilities.
Reporting requirements must be changed to include data
on services to people with disabilities.
State and local system governance plans should
explicitly outline strategies for serving individuals with
disabilities.
Local systems should engage employment service
providers with expertise in serving people with disabilities.