The Workforce Investment Act and the
One-Stop Delivery System
David H. Bradley
Specialist in Labor Economics
June 14, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41135
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Summary
The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA; P.L. 105-220), which succeeded the Job Training
Partnership Act (P.L. 97-300) as the main federal workforce development legislation, was enacted
to bring about increased coordination among federal workforce development and related
programs. WIA authorized the appropriation of “such sums as may be necessary” for each of
FY1999 through FY2003 to carry out the programs and activities authorized in the legislation.
Authorization of appropriations under WIA expired in FY2003 but has been extended annually
through the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act (Labor-HHS-ED). Reauthorization legislation was considered in the
108th, 109th, and 112th Congresses. In the 113th Congress, the House passed legislation
reauthorizing WIA.
Workforce development programs provide a combination of education and training services to
prepare individuals for work and to help them improve their prospects in the labor market and
may include activities such as job search assistance, career counseling, occupational skill training,
classroom training, or on-the-job training. The federal government provides workforce
development activities through WIA’s programs and other programs designed to increase the
employment and earnings of workers.
The WIA system provides central points of service by its system of around 3,000 One-Stop
centers nationwide through which state and local WIA training and employment activities are
provided and through which certain partner programs must be coordinated. This system is
supposed to provide employment and training services that are responsive to the demands of local
area employers. Administration of the One-Stop system occurs through Workforce Investment
Boards (WIBs), a majority of whose members must be representatives of business and which are
authorized to determine the mix of service provision, eligible providers, and types of training
programs, among other decisions. Unlike its predecessor, the Job Training Partnership Act
(JTPA), WIA provides universal access to its services. Finally, WIA is oriented toward a work
first approach to workforce development, such that placement in employment is the first goal of
the services provided under Title I of WIA
WIA includes five titles: Workforce Investment Systems (Title I), Adult Education and Literacy
(Title II), Workforce Investment-Related Activities (Title III), Rehabilitation Act Amendments of
1998 (Title IV), and General Provisions (Title V). Title I, whose programs are primarily
administered through the Employment and Training Administration (DOLETA) of the U.S.
Department of Labor (DOL), includes three state formula grant programs, multiple national
programs, Job Corps, and demonstration programs. Title II, whose programs are administered by
the U.S. Department of Education (ED), includes a state formula grant program and National
Leadership activities. Title III of WIA amends the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933, and Title IV
amends the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Title V includes provisions for the administration of WIA.
This report provides details of WIA Title I state formula program structure, services, allocation
formulas, and performance accountability. In addition, it provides a program overview for
national grant programs. It also provides brief overviews of Titles II and IV. Title III of WIA
amends the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933, which establishes the Employment Service (ES), to make
the ES an integral part of the One-Stop system created by WIA. Because the ES is a central part
of the One-Stop system, it is discussed briefly in this report even though it is authorized by
separate legislation (Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933).
Congressional Research Service
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Title I—Workforce Investment Systems .......................................................................................... 2
Brief History of Federal Workforce Development Programs .................................................... 2
Overview of WIA Title I Programs ........................................................................................... 3
Characteristics of WIA Title I Programs ................................................................................... 4
The One-Stop Delivery System and Workforce Investment Boards ......................................... 5
One-Stop Delivery System .................................................................................................. 5
The Employment Service .................................................................................................... 8
Workforce Investment Boards ........................................................................................... 10
State Formula Grant Programs....................................................................................................... 12
Adult and Dislocated Worker Activities .................................................................................. 12
Overview and Purpose ...................................................................................................... 12
Structure—Statewide Activities ........................................................................................ 13
Structure—Local Activities ............................................................................................... 15
Youth Activities ....................................................................................................................... 18
Overview and Purpose ...................................................................................................... 18
Structure ............................................................................................................................ 18
Services ............................................................................................................................. 19
Job Corps ................................................................................................................................. 20
Overview and Purpose ...................................................................................................... 20
Structure ............................................................................................................................ 20
Services ............................................................................................................................. 21
National Grant Programs ......................................................................................................... 21
Native Americans Programs (Section 166) ....................................................................... 21
Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Programs (Section 167) ............................................ 22
Veterans’ Workforce Investment Program (Section 168) .................................................. 22
Demonstration, Pilot, Multiservice, Research, and Multistate Projects
(Section 171) .................................................................................................................. 22
National Emergency Grants (Section 173) ........................................................................ 23
YouthBuild Program (Section 173A) ................................................................................ 23
Funding for Title I Programs and Activities ............................................................................ 24
Allocation Formulas .......................................................................................................... 24
Performance Accountability in Title I ..................................................................................... 27
Negotiating Performance Levels Under WIA ......................................................................... 31
Common Measures and Waivers ............................................................................................. 33
Title II—Adult Education and Literacy ......................................................................................... 33
State Grants ............................................................................................................................. 34
National Activities and Incentive Grants ................................................................................. 34
Title IV—Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998 ...................................................................... 35
Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants .................................................................................... 35
Other Programs ........................................................................................................................ 36
Congressional Research Service
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Tables
Table 1. Required Partners in One-Stop Centers ............................................................................. 6
Table 2. Services Provided to Adult and Dislocated Workers under Title I of WIA ...................... 15
Table 3. Performance Measures for WIA Title I Activities ............................................................ 29
Table B-1. WIA Title I, Appropriations for FY2009 to FY2013 ................................................... 39
Table B-2. WIA Title I, Appropriations for FY2000 to FY2008 ................................................... 41
Table B-3. WIA Title II, Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, Appropriations for
FY2009 to FY2013 ..................................................................................................................... 43
Table B-4. WIA Title II, Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, Appropriations for
FY1999 to FY2008 ..................................................................................................................... 44
Table B-5. Wagner-Peyser Act, U.S. Employment Service Funding, FY2009-FY2013 ............... 45
Table B-6. Wagner-Peyser Act, U.S. Employment Service Funding, FY2001-FY2008 ............... 45
Table B-7. Rehabilitation Act Appropriations from FY2010 to FY2013....................................... 46
Appendixes
Appendix A. Glossary of Selected WIA Terms ............................................................................. 37
Appendix B. Funding for Programs Authorized Under WIA ........................................................ 39
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 47
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 47
Congressional Research Service
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Introduction
The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA; P.L. 105-220) is the primary federal program that
supports workforce development. WIA includes five titles:
• Title I—Workforce Investment Systems—provides job training and related
services to unemployed or underemployed individuals;
• Title II—Adult Education and Literacy—provides education services to assist
adults in improving their literacy and completing secondary education;
• Title III—Workforce Investment-Related Activities—amends the Wagner-Peyser
Act of 1933 to integrate the U.S. Employment Service (ES) into the One-Stop
system established by WIA;
• Title IV—Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998—amends the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, which provides vocational rehabilitation services to individuals with
disabilities, to integrate vocational rehabilitation into the One-Stop system; and
• Title V—General Provisions—specifies components of State Unified Plans and
provisions for state incentive grants.
Workforce development programs provide a combination of education and training services to
prepare individuals for work and to help them improve their prospects in the labor market. In the
broadest sense, workforce development includes secondary and postsecondary education, on-the-
job and employer-provided training, and the publicly funded system of job training and
employment services. Most workforce development occurs in the workplace during the course of
doing business. The federal government provides workforce development activities through
WIA’s programs and other programs designed to increase the employment and earnings of
workers. Workforce development may include activities such as job search assistance, career
counseling, occupational skill training, classroom training, or on-the-job training.1
The focus of this report is on Title I of WIA, which authorizes programs to provide job search,
education, and training activities for individuals seeking to gain or improve their employment
prospects and which establishes the One-Stop delivery system. The programs and services in Title
I are covered in detail in this report, while the programs and services in Titles II, III, and IV are
discussed briefly. Title II of WIA provides funding for adult education and literacy activities. Title
III of WIA amends the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933, which establishes the Employment Service
(ES), to make the ES an integral part of the One-Stop system created by WIA. Because the ES is
1 It is possible to include numerous programs under the general label of “workforce development” or “job training.” For
example, a recent GAO study reported that there are “47 employment and training programs administered across nine
agencies” with a combined appropriation of $33.8 billion, of which $12.2 billion was spent on employment and training
activities (in FY2010). See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Multiple Employment and Training Programs:
Providing Information on Colocating Services and Consolidating Administrative Structures Could Promote
Efficiencies, GAO-11-92, January 2011, p. 5, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1192.pdf. For many of the programs in
the GAO study (e.g., Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Food Stamps), however, the primary focus and the
vast majority of funding are on activities other than training and employment. Likewise, Workforce Alliance identified
16 programs in six federal agencies as “key workforce development programs.” See Gwen Rubinstein and Andrea
Mayo, Training Policy In Brief: An Overview of Federal Workforce Development Policies, The Workforce Alliance,
2nd Edition, Washington, DC, 2007. Although The Workforce Alliance (now known as the National Skills Coalition)
report identified fewer workforce development programs than the GAO study, it also includes several programs (e.g.,
Pell Grants) that are primarily part of the education system, as opposed to the workforce development system.
Congressional Research Service
1
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
a critical part of the One-Stop system, it is discussed briefly in this report even though it is
authorized by separate legislation (Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933). Title IV of WIA authorizes
funding for vocational rehabilitation services for individuals with disabilities.
Following a brief history of federal workforce development programs, there is a discussion of the
provisions and characteristics of WIA Title I programs and services. Next, there is a description
of the One-Stop delivery system and Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs). This section includes
an overview of the Employment Service, whose authorizing legislation (Wagner-Peyser Act of
1933) was amended by Title III of WIA. Following that, the report covers the services provided
by the state formula grant programs and the national programs authorized under Title I of WIA.
The section on Title I concludes with a discussion of funding and performance accountability. The
report then provides a description of the services, funding, and performance accountability
provisions of WIA Titles II and IV. Appendix A provides a glossary of selected key terms in
WIA. Appendix B provides an appropriations history for programs authorized under Titles I, II,
and IV of WIA and under the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933.
Reauthorization legislation was considered in the 108th and 109th Congresses. In both the 108th
and 109th Congresses, the House and the Senate passed different versions of legislation that
would have reauthorized WIA. However, in neither instance did the two chambers reconcile the
differences between the bills they had passed. In the 113th Congress, the House passed, by a vote
of 215-202, H.R. 803—the Supporting Knowledge and Investing in Lifelong Skills Act (SKILLS
Act).2
Title I—Workforce Investment Systems
Title I of WIA provides job training and related services to unemployed and underemployed
individuals. Title I programs are administered by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), primarily
through its Employment and Training Administration (DOLETA). Although WIA authorized the
appropriations of funds for WIA programs through September 30, 2003, WIA programs have
continued to be funded through annual appropriations.
In FY2012, programs and activities authorized under Title I of WIA are funded at $4.9 billion,
including $2.6 billion for state formula grants for youth, adult, and dislocated worker training and
employment activities.
Brief History of Federal Workforce Development Programs
The first major federal funding for training programs in the postwar period started with the
enactment of the Manpower Development Training Act (MDTA) in 1962, although federal
“employment policy,” broadly defined, had its origin in New Deal era programs such as
Unemployment Insurance (UI) and public works employment. Starting with MDTA, there have
been four main federal workforce development programs.3
2 For details on H.R. 803, see CRS Report R42990, Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Reauthorization Proposals in the
113th Congress: Comparison of Major Features of Current Law and H.R. 803, by David H. Bradley and Benjamin
Collins.
3 Except as noted, the material in this section draws on Christopher J. O'Leary, Robert A. Straits, and Stephen A.
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
2
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Enacted in 1962, the MDTA (P.L. 87-415) provided federal funding to retrain workers displaced
because of technological change. Later in MDTA’s existence, the majority of funding went to
classroom and on-the-job training (OJT) that was targeted to low-income individuals and welfare
recipients. Funding from the MDTA was allocated by formula to local communities based on
factors of population and poverty. Grants under MDTA were administered through regional DOL
offices and went directly to local service providers.4
The Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA; P.L. 93-203), enacted in 1973, made
substantial changes to federal workforce development programs. CETA transferred more
decision-making authority away from the federal government and toward local governments.
Specifically, CETA provided funding to about 470 “prime sponsors” (sub-state political entities
such as city or county governments, consortia of governments, etc.) to administer and monitor job
training activities. Services under CETA—which included on-the-job training, classroom training,
and public service employment (PSE)—were targeted to low-income populations, welfare
recipients, and disadvantaged youth. At its peak in 1978, the PSE component of CETA supported
about 755,000 jobs and accounted for nearly 60% of the CETA budget.5 CETA was amended in
1978 in part to create private industry councils (PIC) to expand the role of the private sector in
developing, implementing, and evaluating CETA programs. The composition of PICs included
representatives of business, labor, education, and other groups.
In 1982, changes to federal workforce development policy were made by enactment of the Job
Training Partnership Act (JTPA, P.L. 97-300). Major changes implemented under JTPA, which
provided classroom and on-the-job training to low-income and dislocated workers, include
service delivery at the level of 640 “service delivery areas,” federal funding allocation first to
state governors and then to PICs in each of the service delivery areas (unlike CETA, which
provided allocations directly to prime sponsors), prohibition of the public service employment
component, and a new emphasis on targeted job training and reemployment. With a new
emphasis on training (rather than public employment), JTPA required that at least 70% of funding
for service delivery areas be used for training. Although this percentage was dropped to 50% in
the 1992 amendments to JTPA, the emphasis on training remained.
Overview of WIA Title I Programs
Title I authorizes several state and national programs to provide employment and training services
and establishes the One-Stop system as a means of delivering and coordinating workforce
development activities.
(...continued)
Wandner, “U.S. Job Training: Types, Participants, and History,” in Job Training Policy in the United States
(Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 2004).
4 Although not considered one of the four main job training programs, Job Corps was established during this period.
The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 created the Job Corps program, which is a largely residential educational and
job training program for disadvantaged youth.
5 The growth in employment supported by PSE reflects changes in eligibility criteria that expanded the eligible
population, as amendments were made to CETA to make PSE more of a countercyclical program. Robert F. Cook,
Charles F. Adams, Jr., and V. Lane Rawlins, “The Public Service Employment Program,” in Public Service
Employment: The Experience of a Decade (Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1985), p.
12 and Gordon Lafer, The Job Training Charade (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002), p. 163.
Congressional Research Service
3
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Highlights of WIA Title I programs include the following:
• Administration by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), primarily through its
Employment and Training Administration (DOLETA).
• Three employment and training programs—Youth Activities, Adult Activities,
and Dislocated Worker Activities—funded by federal-to-state formula grants that
are based on measures of states’ unemployment and poverty.6
• Six national programs, including Job Corps, the Native American Program, the
Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Program, the Veterans’ Workforce Investment
Program, Youth Opportunity Grants, and YouthBuild.7
• Demonstration and pilot projects that currently include programs such as the
Reintegration of Ex-Offenders program, the Career Pathways Innovation Fund,
and the Green Jobs Innovation Fund program.
• A system of “One-Stop” centers through which state and local WIA training and
employment activities are provided and in which certain partner programs must
be co-located.
• Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs) responsible for policy and oversight of state
and local workforce investment activities.
• Local discretion in the design of services for WIA participants.
• Universal access to employment and training services for WIA participants.
• An accountability system based on core indicators with state-adjusted levels of
performance resulting from negotiations between each state and the Secretary of
Labor.
• Operation on a July 1-June 30 program year.
Characteristics of WIA Title I Programs
This report provides details of WIA Title I state formula program structure, services, allocation
formulas, and performance accountability. In addition, it provides a program overview for
national grant programs. It is worth noting at this point, however, the elements of WIA that
characterize it as a workforce development system.
• WIA is designed to be a demand driven workforce development system. This
system is supposed to provide employment and training services that are
responsive to the demands of local area employers. The demand driven nature of
WIA is manifested in elements such as Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs), a
majority of whose members must be representatives of business.
6 Note: “Youth” programs in Title I include Youth Activities, Job Corps, YouthBuild, pilot programs, and Youth
Opportunity Grants. These employment service and job training programs for youth are discussed briefly in this report
but are covered in greater detail in CRS Report R40929, Vulnerable Youth: Employment and Job Training Programs,
by Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara.
7 The YouthBuild program was formerly in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) but was made
a part of WIA on September 22, 2006, by the YouthBuild Transfer Act (P.L. 109-281). Youth Opportunity Grants were
last funded in FY2003 and supported program operations through FY2005.
Congressional Research Service
4
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• WIA provides local control to officials administering programs under WIA.
Under the state formula grant portion of WIA, which accounts for nearly 60% of
total WIA Title I funding, the majority of funds are allocated to local WIBs (after
initial allocation from DOLETA to the states) that are authorized to determine the
mix of service provision, eligible providers, and types of training programs,
among other decisions.8
• The WIA system provides central points of service by its system of One-Stop
centers. The concept of a One-Stop center is to provide a single location for
individuals seeking employment and training services, thus making the process
of locating and accessing employment services more efficient and seamless. WIA
requires certain programs to be “partners” in the One-Stop center, either by
physical collocation or other accessible arrangements.
• Unlike its predecessor, the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), WIA provides
universal access to its services. Whereas JTPA provided training services to
individuals who were “economically disadvantaged” or dislocated, WIA provides
core services (discussed below) to any individual regardless of age or
employment status.
• WIA is oriented toward a work first approach to workforce development. That is,
placement in employment is the first goal of the services provided under Title I of
WIA. To this end, WIA established a “sequence of services” (discussed below)
that requires individuals to receive core and intensive services before training is
considered.9 Similarly, there is no minimum established in WIA on the amount
states and local WIBs must spend for training services; JTPA, on the other hand,
required that a fixed percentage of funding be spent on training services.
• WIA provides consumer choice to participants. As explained later in this report,
participants determined to be eligible for training services are provided with
Individual Training Accounts (ITAs), with which they may choose a type of
training and the particular provider from which to receive training.
The One-Stop Delivery System and Workforce Investment Boards
One-Stop Delivery System
Because the initial point of contact for WIA participants is frequently at a One-Stop center, it is
worthwhile to explain briefly the “One-Stop delivery system” established by WIA before
describing the services available at and accessible through the One-Stop centers.10
8 The governor of each state determines the list of eligible providers; however, these decisions are supposed to be made
with the input of local officials.
9 To clarify, WIA does not specify an amount of time one must spend or the number of attempts one must make to gain
employment before moving to the next level in the sequence of services. In a 2001 study, the GAO noted that “WIA
allowed local discretion regarding how individuals would move from one level to the next among those three levels
[core, intensive, and training] of services … and the determination that an individual needs intensive and/or training
services can be made without regard to how long the individual has been receiving core services.” See U.S. General
Accounting Office, Workforce Investment Act: Better Guidance Needed to Address Concerns Over New Requirements,
GAO-02-72, October 2001, p. 10, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0272.pdf.
10 The One-Stop delivery system was established by Section 134(c) of WIA.
Congressional Research Service
5
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
One innovation of WIA was the establishment of One-Stop centers to provide access to
employment and training services. WIA requires each state to establish a One-Stop delivery
system to:
• provide “core” services and access to “intensive” and training services (see
“Local Activities” in the next section for a description of the three levels of
services provided for in Title I);
• provide access to programs and activities carried out by One-Stop partners (see
below); and
• provide access to all labor market information, job search, placement,
recruitment, and labor exchange services authorized under the Wagner-Peyser
Act.11
Each local workforce investment area in a state is required to have at least one physical One-Stop
center in which the aforementioned programs and services are accessible.12 Services may be
collocated or available through a network of affiliated sites or One-Stop partners linked
electronically.
As noted, one of the characteristics of the WIA One-Stop system is the establishment of a central
point of service for those seeking employment, training, and related services. To this end, WIA
requires that certain partner programs provide access to core services in the One-Stop system and
allows additional programs to operate in the One-Stop system. The required partner programs are
listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Required Partners in One-Stop Centers
Program
Program Authorization
Federal Agency
WIA Adult Activities
WIA—Title I
Department of Labor
WIA Dislocated Worker
WIA—Title I
Department of Labor
Activities
WIA Youth Activities
WIA—Title I
Department of Labor
WIA Job Corps
WIA—Title I
Department of Labor
WIA Native American
WIA—Title I
Department of Labor
WIA Migrant and Seasonal
WIA—Title I
Department of Labor
Farmworker
Veterans’ Workforce Investment
WIA—Title I
Department of Labor
Employment Service
Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933
Department of Labor
(29 U.S.C. 49 et seq.)
Adult Education and Literacy
WIA—Title II
Department of Education
11 Enacted in 1933, the Wagner-Peyser Act funded the transformation of state and local employment service offices
into a unified national public labor exchange.
12 A “local workforce investment area” is defined in Section 116 of WIA. These areas are designated by governors and
are based on factors such as consistency with labor market areas and availability of educational institutions. See
Appendix A for a full definition.
Congressional Research Service
6
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Program
Program Authorization
Federal Agency
Vocational Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation Act of 1973
Department of Education
(29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.)
Welfare-to-Work Grants
Social Security Act
Department of Health & Human
(42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5))
Services
Senior Community Service
Older Americans Act of 1965
Department of Labor
Employment
(42 U.S.C. 3056 et seq.)
Postsecondary Vocational
Carl D. Perkins Vocational and
Department of Education
Education
Applied Technology Education Act of
2006 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.)
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Trade Act of 1974
Department of Labor
(19 U.S.C. 2271 et seq.)
Veterans’ Employment/
38 U.S.C. Chapter 41
Department of Labor
Disabled Veterans
Employment and Training
Community Services Block Grant Act
Department of Health &
Activities carried out under the
(42 U.S.C. 9901 et seq.)
Human Services
Community Services Block Grant
Employment and Training
Department of Housing and
Activities carried out by the
Urban Development
Department of Housing and
Urban Development
State Unemployment
Social Security Act of 1935 (Titles III,
Department of Labor
Compensation
IX, and XII) and Federal
Unemployment Tax Act 1939
Source: P.L. 105-220 and Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, “Workforce
Investment Act; Final Rules,” 65 Federal Register 49399, August 11, 2000.
Notes: The list of required partners, including references to the authorizing statutes for each program, is in
Section 121(b)(1)(B) of WIA. There were 18 required partners specified in the legislation. The Welfare to Work
program ended September 30, 2004. In addition, when WIA was first authorized, HUD was responsible for the
administration of the YouthBuild employment and training program. In 2006, YouthBuild was transferred to the
Department of Labor. Today, HUD does not administer any employment and training programs. However, HUD
programs do feature employment and training related requirements, particularly the Section 3 Economic
Opportunities requirement (12 USC 1701u; 24 CFR 135). Under the Section 3 requirement, certain recipients of
HUD funding are required to provide employment and training opportunities to residents of HUD-assisted
housing and other low-income members of the surrounding community. For more information about Section 3,
see http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/section3/section3.cfm.
In addition to the required partner programs listed in Table 1, WIA specifies that One-Stop
centers may incorporate other partner programs, including
• programs for recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
authorized under the Social Security Act;
• any employment and training activities required of recipients under the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (the SNAP, formerly known as the
Food Stamp program) and work programs for those recipients who are able-
bodied adults without dependents;
• programs authorized under the National and Community Service Act of 1990
(e.g., AmeriCorps); and
• other appropriate government or private-sector programs.
Congressional Research Service
7
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
The local WIB must enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with all One-Stop
partners that describes the operation of the One-Stop delivery system in the local area.
Specifically, the MOU must enumerate the services to be provided, specify the division of
operating costs among partners, describe methods of referral of individuals to partner programs,
and indicate the duration of the memorandum and the procedures to amend the memorandum.13
The Employment Service
The Employment Service, which is authorized by the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933 (29 U.S.C. 49
et seq.) is the central component of most states’ One-Stop delivery systems, as ES services are
universally accessible to job seekers and employers and ES offices may not exist outside of the
One-Stop delivery system.14 Although the ES is one of 18 required partners in the One-Stop
delivery system, its central mission—to facilitate the match between individuals seeking work
and employers seeking workers—makes it critical to the functioning of the workforce
development system under WIA.15
Title III of WIA amends the Wagner-Peyser Act to require states to deliver employment services
through the One-Stop system and to add Section 15 (“Employment Statistics”) to the Wagner-
Peyser Act. Section 15 requires the Secretary of Labor to oversee the development, maintenance,
and continuous improvement of a nationwide employment statistics system.
The two major categories of activities performed by the ES are the administration of State Grants
and National Activities.16 Services provided by the ES State Grants include
• labor exchange services (e.g., core and intensive employment services, job search
and placement assistance, labor market information);
• evaluation of programs;
• recruitment and technical services for employers; and
• work tests for the state unemployment compensation system.
As noted, WIA amended the Wagner-Peyser Act to make the ES a central part of the workforce
development system under WIA. To this end, one of the key functions played by the ES is to
deliver many of the “core” services that form what is known as the “sequential service strategy”
13 The division of infrastructure costs has been a source of some problems in the operation of One-Stop centers and has
created a reliance on one or two programs for the majority of funding for these costs. See U.S. Government
Accountability Office, Workforce Development: Community Colleges and One-Stop Centers Collaborate to Meet 21st
Century Workforce Needs, GAO-08-547, May 1, 2008, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08547.pdf; and U.S.
Government Accountability Office, Workforce Investment Act: 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-07-1096,
September 2007, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071096.pdf.
14 An ES office may operate an affiliated site outside of the One-Stop center or be linked to the local One-Stop
electronically.
15 For additional information on the Employment Service, see CRS Report RL30248, The Employment Service: The
Federal-State Public Labor Exchange System.
16 ES National Activities include the Work Opportunities Tax Credit (WOTC), Technical Assistance and Training, and
State Workforce Agencies Retirement System payments. These programs are not discussed in this report because it is
the ES State Grants that provide the majority of funding and the types of services most relevant to the workforce
development system.
Congressional Research Service
8
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
of WIA. That is, Wagner-Peyser Act-funded ES services are available at all comprehensive One-
Stop centers and many affiliated sites. The ES staff often are the first to assist individuals seeking
employment assistance and refer individuals to other programs in the One-Stop system of
partners.17 States provide labor exchange services through three tiers of service delivery:18
• Self-Service. These services, which are typically electronic databases of job
openings, are accessed without staff assistance. Not only are these services
available to job seekers and employers without ES staff assistance, but typically
customers can access these electronic resources away from the local One-Stop
and outside normal business hours (e.g., via the Internet);
• Facilitated Self-Help. Resources of this type are typically available in local One-
Stop offices and include access to self-service tools (e.g., computers, resume-
writing software, fax machines, photocopiers, and Internet-based tools). The
resource room staff interacts with the customers to facilitate usage of the
resources.
• Staff-Assisted Service. These services are provided to customers both one-on-one
and in groups. One-on-one services for job seekers often include assessment,
career counseling, development of an individual service plan, and intensive job
search assistance. One-on-one services for employers may include taking a job
order or offering advice on how to increase job seeker interest in a job opening.
Group services for job seekers include orientation, job clubs, and workshops on
such topics as resume preparation, job search strategies, and interviewing. Group
services for employers may include workshops on such topics as state UI laws or
use of labor market information. Other staff-assisted services that benefit both
job seekers and employers include screening and referring job seekers to job
openings. Staff-assisted services must be provided in at least one physical
location in each workforce investment area.
Programs authorized under Title I of WIA have performance accountability requirements to
measure the employment and wage outcomes for participants. Similar to the Title I programs, the
ES uses three measures of performance: entered employment, employment retention, and average
earnings.19
The vast majority of funds (97%) for Employment Service activities are allocated to states on the
basis of each state’s relative share of the following two factors: civilian labor force (CLF) and
total unemployment.20 Specifically, two-thirds of the ES state funding is allocated on the basis of
17 State merit-staff employees typically deliver ES services in a One-Stop. Staff providing other services at One-Stop
centers are not required to be public employees. In the late 1990s, the DOL granted authority to Colorado,
Massachusetts, and Michigan to run demonstration projects with alternative service delivery. Although there has been
disagreement over whether the Wagner-Peyser Act requires state merit staffing to provide ES services, a U.S. District
Court decision in 1998 (State of Michigan v. Alexis M. Herman, 5:98-CV-16 U.S. District Court (W.D. Mich 1998))
held that it was a permissible interpretation by DOL to require such service delivery.
18 Core and intensive services defined in WIA Section 134(d)(2) and (3) can be delivered through any of the three
methods described here.
19 For additional detail on Wagner-Peyser Act performance measures, see Brent R. Orrell, Training and Employment
Guidance Letter, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, No. 9-08, Washington, DC,
January 14, 2009, http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/TEGL/TEGL07-08.pdf.
20 ES appropriations fund state allotments (discussed above) and National Activities. Because the focus of this report is
on workforce development and the One-Stop system, only the state allotment formula funding is covered in this
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
9
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
the relative share of CLF and one-third on the basis of the relative share of total unemployment.
The remaining 3% of total funding is distributed to states with civilian labor forces below 1
million and to states that need additional resources to carry out ES activities.21
Key features of the state formula allocation for Wagner-Peyser Act state allotments include the
following:
• A reservation for Guam and the Virgin Islands of an amount equal to the
allotment percentage each received in FY1983 (this is reserved prior to state
allocations).
• Provisions for minimum allotments; a state cannot receive less than 0.28% of the
total allocation to all states in a given program year.
• “Hold harmless” provisions such that individual states will not experience large
swings in year-to-year funding for this stream. Specifically, a state may not
receive less than 90% of its relative share of prior year funding.
Of the total allocation to states, 90% may be used for labor exchange services such as job search
and placement assistance, labor market information, and referral to employers. The remaining
10% (Governor’s Reserve) of the state allocation may be used for activities such as performance
incentives and services for groups with special needs.22
Workforce Investment Boards
WIA establishes state and local workforce investment boards (WIBs) as part of the governance
structure for programs that form the workforce development system under WIA. This section
provides information on state and local WIB membership requirements and functions. For both
the state and local WIBs, WIA specifies the composition, but does not specify the number, of
board members. For both state and local WIBs, however, WIA requires that the majority of board
members, as well as the board chairs, be representatives of business.
State WIBs, authorized under WIA Section 111 and established by the governor of each state,
consist of the following required members:
• the governor,
• two members of each chamber of the state legislature,
• representatives of business,
• chief elected officials,
• representatives of labor organizations,
• representatives with experience in youth activities,
(...continued)
section.
21 For formula details, see http://www.doleta.gov/budget/docs/WIAFormDesc09.pdf.
22 For a detailed list of activities, see Sections 7(a) and 7(b) of the Wagner-Peyser Act.
Congressional Research Service
10
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• representatives with experience in the delivery of workforce investment activities
(e.g. executive officers of community colleges),
• lead state agency officials responsible for the “required” One-Stop partner
programs, and
• any other representatives and state agency officials the governor designates.
With the exception of the board members who are from the state legislature, the governor
appoints all representatives on the state WIB. The state WIB is responsible for assisting the
governor in the following activities:
• development of a state plan;
• development and continuous improvement of statewide workforce activities,
including coordination and nonduplication of One-Stop partner programs;
• designation of local workforce investment areas;
• development of formulas for within-state distribution of adult and youth funds;
• development and continuous improvement of state performance measures;
• preparation of annual reports to DOL on performance measures; and
• development of the statewide employment statistics system.
Local WIBs, authorized under WIA Section 117 and appointed by the chief local elected
official(s) in local workforce investment areas, consist of representatives of the following
required organizations or entities:
• business,
• local educational entities,
• labor organizations,
• community-based organizations,
• economic development agencies,
• One-Stop partner programs, and
• any other representatives deemed appropriate by the local elected official.
The local WIB performs multiple functions in carrying out the programs and services authorized
under WIA, including
• development of a local plan for workforce investment activities;
• selection of One-Stop operators and eligible providers of training;
• development of a budget and administration of funding to service providers;
• oversight of all programs for youth, adult, and dislocated workers;
• negotiation of local performance measures with the governor;
• assistance in development of a statewide employment statistics system;
Congressional Research Service
11
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• coordination of WIA workforce development activities with local economic
development activities; and
• promotion of participation of private sector employers in the workforce
development system.
Of the many policies for which local WIBs have responsibility, three in particular illustrate the
important governance role that local WIBs play. One, the local WIB is responsible for developing
an MOU among One-Stop partners (see “One-Stop Delivery System”). Two, the local WIB may
designate or certify the following entities (or consortia of these entities) to serve as the One-Stop
operator: a postsecondary educational institution, an employment service agency, a nonprofit
organization, a for-profit entity, a government agency, and other interested entities. WIA
precludes elementary or secondary schools from eligibility to serve as a One-Stop operator.
Three, the local WIB is responsible for establishing limits on the duration and amount of
Individual Training Accounts (ITAs).
State Formula Grant Programs
As noted, WIA was enacted in 1998 and replaced JTPA as the federal government’s primary
employment and job training legislation. Title I—Workforce Investment Systems—authorizes job
training and related services to unemployed or underemployed individuals.
Funds authorized under Subtitle B of WIA (“Statewide and Local Workforce Investment
Systems”) are allocated by formula and are used for workforce development activities. As stated
in WIA, the purpose of workforce systems is to “increase the employment, retention, and
earnings of participants, and increase occupational skill attainment by participants, and as a result,
improve the quality of the workforce, reduce welfare dependency, and enhance the productivity
and competitiveness of the Nation.”23
The three formula grant programs in Title I—youth, adults, and dislocated workers—authorize
funding for employment and training activities available through the national system of One-Stop
centers and provided by service providers in local communities. The majority of funding for WIA
Title I programs is provided through state formula grants.
Adult and Dislocated Worker Activities
Overview and Purpose
The adult and dislocated worker programs both provide training and related services to
individuals ages 18 and older. The programs are funded through formula grants allocated to
states, which in turn allocate the majority of those funds to local entities. These two programs are
discussed together because the services provided are the same. However, the two programs have
different eligibility criteria and different allocation formulas (see “Funding for Title I Programs
and Activities,” below, for the difference in allocation formulas). Any individual age 18 or older
23 WIA Section 106 states the purpose of all statewide and local workforce investment systems, so this applies to the
youth, adult, and dislocated worker programs.
Congressional Research Service
12
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
is eligible for services funded by the adult activities allocation. An individual is generally eligible
for services under the provisions for dislocated workers in WIA if the person
• has been terminated or laid off, or has been notified of a termination or layoff;
• is sufficiently attached to the workforce, demonstrated either through eligibility
for/exhaustion of unemployment compensation or through other means; and
• is unlikely to return to the previous industry or occupation.
There is some breadth in the definition of a “dislocated worker” under WIA. For instance,
eligibility is afforded in cases of anticipated facility closings and for self-employed workers.
However, the core eligibility requirement is displacement due to termination or facility closing.
There is no eligibility requirement under WIA related to the cause of the dislocation.24 From the
perspective of the individual, however, the classification of “adult” or “dislocated” will not make
a difference in the services received under WIA.
Structure—Statewide Activities
After funds are allocated from DOLETA to individual states by formula, the governor of each
state can reserve not more than 15% of the Adult Activities state allocation, not more than 15% of
the Dislocated Worker Activities state allocation, and not more than 15% of the Youth Activities
allocation for “statewide activities.”25 Specifically, funds in the 15% reserve must be used for
“required” activities and may be used for “allowable” activities. In addition, of the state allocation
for dislocated worker activities, the governor of each state must also reserve not more than 25%
for rapid response activities. In sum, not more than 15% of Adult Activities state allocations, not
more than 15% of the Youth Activities state allocations, and not more than 40% of Dislocated
Worker Activities state allocations are reserved at the state level for statewide activities; the
remainder of these three funding streams are subgranted to local areas within each state.
Required statewide employment and training activities, which are funded by the 15% reserve
funds from each of the youth, adult, and dislocated worker state allocations, include26
• dissemination of the state list of eligible providers of training services (including
performance and program cost information for these providers) and eligible
providers of youth activities;
• evaluations of state workforce investment programs for the purpose of
“continuously improving” state activities to “achieve high-level performance”
within the workforce development system and “high-level outcomes” from the
workforce development system;
24 The definition of a “displaced worker” is in WIA Section 101(9).
25 Youth Activities are included in this section because governors may expend the three 15% funds on statewide
activities for Youth, Adults, and Dislocated workers regardless of the source of the funds. Specifically, WIA (Section
133(a)) requires the governor of each state to reserve not more than 15% of the total state allotment for each of the
three formula grants—Youth, Adult, and Dislocated Workers—to fund “statewide activities.” Governors have the
discretion to pool the three 15% funds and expend the funds on any statewide workforce investment activities
regardless of the source of the funding. For example, funds from the Adult formula grant may be spent on statewide
activities for Youth and vice versa.
26 Required and allowable statewide activities are described in Sections 129(b) and 134(a) of WIA.
Congressional Research Service
13
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• distribution of incentive grants to local workforce investment areas for regional
cooperation, local coordination of activities, and “exemplary performance” on
local performance measures;
• technical assistance to local areas not meeting required performance measures;
• assistance to local areas in establishing One-Stop delivery systems;
• statewide activities and additional assistance to local areas with high
concentrations of eligible youth to carry out program design and program
elements for youth;27 and
• operation of a fiscal and management accountability system in order to report on
and monitor the use of WIA funds.
Allowable statewide employment and training activities include28
• administration of state activities;29
• technical and capacity building assistance to One-Stop operators and partners and
training providers;
• research and demonstration projects;
• implementation of innovative training programs for incumbent workers and
displaced homemakers; and
• assistance in identifying eligible providers of training.
From the 25% reserve from the dislocated worker state allocation, states are required to carry out
rapid response activities to assist workers who have been dislocated in obtaining reemployment
as quickly as possible. A dislocation event is typically defined as a permanent closure or mass
layoffs at a facility or a disaster (natural or otherwise) resulting in mass job dislocation. The
services funded under this reserve may include30
• establishment of onsite contact with employers and employee representatives
immediately after the dislocation event;
• provision of information and access to employment and training programs;
• assistance in establishing a labor-management agreement to determine the
employment and training needs of the affected workers;
• provision of emergency assistance; and
27 The program design and elements are described in Sections 129(b) and 129(c) of WIA.
28 Allowable statewide activities are described in Section 134(a)(3) of WIA.
29 As part of the 15% that states may reserve, up to 5% of the total state formula grant may be spent on program
administration. For example, if the total state formula grant for youth, adult, and dislocated workers is $300 million
($100 million for each funding stream) for a given state, the governor of that state may reserve up to $45 million for
statewide activities (15% of each funding stream). Of this $45 million, up to $15 million (5% of $300 million) may be
spent on administrative costs.
30 Required rapid response activities are described in Section 134(a)(2)(A) of WIA. The term “rapid response activity”
is defined in Section 101(38) of WIA.
Congressional Research Service
14
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• provision of assistance to the affected local community to develop a coordinated
response in seeking state economic development aid.
Structure—Local Activities
Following the reservation of funds at the state level (for the adult and dislocated worker
programs), the remaining funds are allocated to local areas to carry out “required” and
“permissible” training and employment activities.31 At the local level, funds must be used to assist
in establishing a One-Stop delivery system and to provide core, intensive, and training services.
Table 2 provides information on the required local activities for each of the three service levels of
WIA adult and dislocated worker programs.
Table 2. Services Provided to Adult and Dislocated Workers under Title I of WIA
Core Services
Intensive Services
Training Services
Outreach, Intake, and Orientation
Comprehensive and Specialized
Occupational Skills
Assessments of Skills and Needs
Assessment of Skills and Needs
Development of an Individual
On-the-Job
Employment Plan (IEP)
Job Search Assistance
Group Counseling
Combination of Workplace and
Related Classroom Instruction
Labor Market Information
Career Planning
Skil Upgrading
Performance and Cost
Case Management
Entrepreneurial Training
Information for Eligible Training
and Education Providers
Performance Measurement
Prevocational Services to Prepare
Job Readiness
Information for the Local Area
Individuals for Employment or
Training
Information On and Referral To
Adult Education and Literacy in
Supportive Services
Combination with Training
Information on Filing for
Customized Training in Conjunction
Unemployment Compensation
with an Employer
Assistance in Establishing Eligibility
for Financial Aid for non-WIA
Training and Education Programs
Follow-up Services for at least
One Year to Participants Who
are Placed in Unsubsidized
Employment
Source: P.L. 105-220 and Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, “Workforce
Investment Act; Final Rules,” 65 Federal Register 49319-49329, August 11, 2000.
31 Required local employment and training activities are detailed in Section 134(d) of WIA and allowable activities are
detailed in Section 134(e) of WIA.
Congressional Research Service
15
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Sequence of Services
The program for adult and dislocated worker participants in WIA is structured around a sequential
service strategy that consists of three levels of services: core, intensive, and training. Service at
one level is a prerequisite for service at the next level. That is, any individual may receive “core”
services.32
To receive intensive services, WIA requires that individuals be unable, after receiving core
services, “to obtain or retain employment that allows for self-sufficiency.”33 To receive training,
after receiving intensive services, an individual must have been unable to obtain or retain
employment that allows for self sufficiency. Further, to be considered for training, an individual
must also have the “skills and qualifications” to participate successfully in training (as determined
by a One-Stop case manager), choose a training service linked to an occupation in the local area
(or be willing to locate to another area where the occupation is in demand), and be unable to
obtain other grant assistance (e.g., Pell grants) for the training services.
Statutory provisions do not specify an amount of time an individual must spend or the number of
attempts that must be made to gain employment before moving to the next level in the sequence
of services. WIA regulations provide additional guidance on the sequence of services but do not
set time or job application requirements. Specifically, the regulations stipulate that an individual
must receive at least one core service before receiving intensive services and must receive at least
one intensive service before moving to training services. The regulations clearly state that there is
“no Federally-required minimum time period for participation” in core or intensive services
before receiving the next level of service.34
Training—Eligible Providers and Individual Training Accounts
Following the decision of a One-Stop operator to provide an individual with access to training
services, the implementation of training in WIA is built on the concept of consumer choice, which
involves two main components: eligible providers and Individual Training Accounts (ITA).35
Local WIBs are responsible for establishing and overseeing eligible providers of training in the
local workforce investment area. The purpose of having a list of eligible providers, as opposed to
the One-Stop centers contracting directly with a training provider of its choosing, is to provide
choice to “customers” who are accessing WIA services.
32 The workforce development system designed by WIA is premised on universal access, such that an adult age 18 or
older does not need to meet any qualifying characteristics in order to receive core services. However, Section
134(d)(4)(E) of WIA stipulates that in the event funds allocated for employment and training activities are “limited,”
priority is to be given to recipients of public assistance and other low-income individuals for intensive and training
services. It is left to the discretion of the local WIB, in consultation with the state’s governor, to determine this
prioritization.
33 “Self-sufficiency” is not defined in WIA. However, the implementing regulations for WIA (663.230) indicate that
state or local WIBs must set the criteria that determines whether or not employment leads to self-sufficiency. The
regulations do specify that, within this flexibility, employment must pay at least the “lower living standard income
level” as defined in Section 101(24) of WIA.
34 See 20 C.F.R. §663.165 and 20 C.F.R. §663.250.
35 Other training is allowed under WIA that may not involve an ITA, such as on-the-job training or customized training.
Congressional Research Service
16
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
There are two types of provider eligibility: initial and subsequent. For initial eligibility, two types
of entities must submit applications directly to the relevant local WIB, which sets the application
procedures: a postsecondary educational institution that is eligible to receive federal funds under
Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 and offers programs leading to an associate or
baccalaureate degree, or an entity that provides apprenticeship programs registered under the
National Apprenticeship Act.
If entities other than those described above wish to become eligible providers of training, they
must apply to the local WIB (according to a procedure established by the governor of the state),
which then reviews applications submitted at the local level.
In order to attain subsequent eligibility, existing training providers must follow procedures
established by the governor and implemented by the local WIB. WIA does, however, specify
particular information that eligible providers must submit to be considered for continued
eligibility. Specifically, training providers must annually submit the following performance and
cost information to the local WIB:36
• program completion rates for all individuals participating in the program;
• percentage of all individuals completing the program who obtain unsubsidized
employment;
• wages at placement in employment for all individuals participating in the training
program;
• percentage of WIA participants completing the training program and entering
unsubsidized employment;
• retention rates after six months in unsubsidized employment of WIA participants
completing the program;
• wages received after six months in unsubsidized employment of WIA
participants completing the program;
• rates of licensure, certification, or degree attainment of all graduates of the
program; and
• program cost information for WIA participants.
For eligible training providers that serve few participants supported by WIA funds, the
requirement to collect employment and wage data for all students in a training program may serve
as a disincentive to participate in the ITA system.37 As of September 2009, 40 states had received
a waiver from DOLETA to extend the time limit on the period of initial eligibility for training
providers. These waivers were granted on the basis that the burden of providing data for all
36 WIA provides for the collection of additional information but does not require providers to submit this information.
Rather, Section 122(d)(2) permits the governor of each state to determine if providers must submit additional outcome
measures for all individuals (not just WIA-funded) participating in the applicable program. While the statute requires
that states report on outcome data for all individuals (rather than WIA-funded individuals) in a training program, most
states have received waivers for this provision of WIA.
37 See Paul Decker and Irma Perez-Johnson, “Individual Training Accounts, Eligible Training Provider Lists, and
Consumer Report Systems,” in Job Training Policy in the United States, ed. Christopher J. O'Leary, Robert A. Straits,
and Stephen A. Wandner (Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 2004), pp. 204-205.
Congressional Research Service
17
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
students (rather than just WIA-funded students) might encourage training providers to drop out of
the ITA system and thus limit customer choice.38
When an individual is deemed eligible to receive training services, that individual, in consultation
with a case manager, may choose training services from a list of eligible providers (discussed
above). At that point, an Individual Training Account (ITA) is established, from which payment is
made to the eligible training provider for training services. Under WIA’s predecessor, the Job
Training Partnership Act (JTPA), customers entering training were often limited to programs that
local areas decided to fund—a “contracted training” approach.39 In the ITA approach under WIA,
participants are able to purchase training from the list of eligible trainers. Local WIBs have the
authority to set limits on the type and duration of training.40 In addition, local WIBs may choose
to set limits on the amount of an ITA, based on individual circumstances or on an across-the-
board level.41
Youth Activities42
Overview and Purpose
In addition to the formula grants for Adult Activities and Dislocated Worker Activities, WIA
authorizes a formula grant program for Youth Activities (although individuals ages 18 or older are
also eligible for services provided through the Adult Activities program). As specified in the law,
the program has several purposes: to provide assistance in achieving academic and employment
success through activities that improve educational and skill competencies and foster effective
connections to employers; to ensure ongoing adult mentoring opportunities for eligible youth; to
provide opportunities for training, continued supportive services, and participation in activities
related to leadership, citizenship, and community service; and to offer incentives for recognition
and achievement to youth.
Structure
A youth is eligible for the Youth Activities formula grant program if the individual is age 14
through 21,43 is a low-income individual, and has one or more of the following barriers:
38 See http://www.doleta.gov/waivers/pdf/WIA_Waivers_Summary_Sep2009.pdf for a list of states receiving waivers.
39 While contracted training was generally the approach taken under JTPA, some local entities experimented with the
training voucher approach. See Sheena McConnell et al., Managing Customers’ Training Choices: Findings From The
Individual Training Account Experiment, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., Contract No. N-7731-9-00-87-30,
Washington, DC, December 2006, pp. 2-4, http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/
managing_customers_choices.pdf.
40 Training must be for occupations that are in demand in the local area, are in demand in an area to which the trainee is
willing to relocate, or are deemed (by the local WIB) to have “high potential” for sustained demand and growth in the
local area.
41 663 C.F.R. §420.
42 The section on Youth Activities draws from CRS Report R40929, Vulnerable Youth: Employment and Job Training
Programs, by Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara.
43 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5; ARRA) provided additional funding to WIA
Title I programs. In addition, the definition of “eligible youth” was raised from 21 to 24 for Youth Activities funded
through the ARRA.
Congressional Research Service
18
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• deficient in basic literacy skills;
• a school dropout;
• homeless, a runaway, or a foster child;
• pregnant or parenting;
• an offender; or
• requires additional assistance to complete an educational program or to secure
and hold employment. 44
DOLETA provides funding to states based on each state’s relative share of national
unemployment and youth poverty. In turn, the states, in consultation with state WIBs, distribute
85% of funds, also based on unemployment and poverty factors, to local workforce areas that are
designated by the governor.45 The state retains as much as 15% for statewide activities. Local
WIBs, in coordination with their youth councils, competitively award funds to local organizations
and other entities to provide employment and job training services to youth.46
Services
Local programs are responsible for carrying out the purposes of WIA. In addition to assessing the
skills of youth who receive services, local programs must provide the following 10 activities or
“elements” to youth:
• tutoring, study skills training, and instruction leading to completion of secondary
school, including dropout prevention strategies;
• alternative secondary school services, as appropriate;
• summer employment opportunities that are directly linked to academic and
occupational learning;
• as appropriate, paid and unpaid work experiences, including internships and job
shadowing;
• occupational skill training, as appropriate;
• leadership development opportunities;
44 Up to 5% of youth participants in a local area may be individuals who do not meet the income criteria, but have at
least one barrier to employment, some of which are not identical to those listed above. At least 30% of all Youth
Activities formula grant funds must be used for activities for out-of-school youth, or youth who have dropped out or
received a high school diploma or its equivalent but are basic skills deficient, unemployed, or underemployed.
45 Alternatively, a state may distribute to local areas a portion equal to not less than 70% of the funds they would have
received using the employment and poverty factors, with the remaining portion of funds allocated on the basis of a
formula that incorporates additional factors relating to excess youth poverty in urban, rural, and suburban local areas
and excess unemployment above the state average in these areas. Such a formula must be developed by the state WIB
and approved by the DOL Secretary as part of the state plan. Section 128(b)(3) of WIA.
46 Each local WIB is required under law to establish a local youth council (Section 117(h)). Together, the WIB and the
youth council oversee a local youth program funded by Youth Activities. The purpose of the youth council is to provide
expertise in youth policy and to assist the local board in developing portions of the local plan relating to eligible youth.
As specified in the law, the councils must coordinate youth activities in a local area, develop portions of the local plan
related to eligible youth, recommend eligible providers of youth activities to be competitively awarded grants or
contracts, oversee the activities of the providers, and carry out other duties specified by the local WIB.
Congressional Research Service
19
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• supportive services;
• adult mentoring for the period of participation and a subsequent period, for a total
of not less than 12 months;
• comprehensive guidance and counseling, which may include drug and alcohol
abuse counseling and referral, as appropriate; and
• follow-up services for not less than 12 months after the completion of
participation, as appropriate.
Although local WIBs must make all 10 program elements available to youth, each individual
youth does not need to participate in all elements. Further, local programs that receive Youth
Activities funding need not provide all 10 program elements if certain services are already
accessible for all eligible youth in the area; however, these other services must be closely
coordinated with the local programs.47
Job Corps48
Overview and Purpose
The Job Corps program is carried out by the Office of Job Corps within the Office of the DOL
Secretary,49 and consists of residential centers throughout the country. The purpose of the
program is to provide disadvantaged youth with the skills needed to obtain and hold a job, enter
the Armed Forces, or enroll in advanced training or higher education. In addition to receiving
academic and employment training, youth also engage in social and other services to promote
their overall well-being.
Structure
Currently, 125 Job Corps centers operate throughout the country.50 Of the 125 centers, 28 sites are
known as Civilian Conservation Corps Centers, which are jointly operated by DOL and the
Department of Agriculture or the Department of the Interior.51 Programs at these sites focus on
47 Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL)
No. 9-00, January 23, 2001; and Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Training and
Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 18-00, April 23, 2001. Local WIBs are advised to establish ongoing
relationships with non-WIA funded activities that provide services for WIA-eligible youth.
48 The section on Job Corps draws from CRS Report R40929, Vulnerable Youth: Employment and Job Training
Programs, by Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara.
49 Since FY2006, Congress has directed DOL to operate the Job Corps Office in the Office of the Secretary. Federal
regulations established the Office of Job Corps within the Office of the Secretary, pursuant to Secretary’s Order 09-
2006. U.S. Department of Labor, “Establishment of the Office of Job Corps Within the Office of the Secretary;
Delegation of Authority and Assignment of Responsibility to Its Director and Others,” 71 Federal Register 16192,
March 30, 2006. However, the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010” (P.L. 111-117) authorizes the Secretary of
Labor to submit to the House and Senate a plan for the transfer of the administration of the Job Corps program from the
Office of the Secretary to the Employment and Training Administration. The Secretary is then authorized, 30 days after
the submission of the plan, to complete the transfer.
50 U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Job Corps, Budget Justification of Appropriation Estimates for Committee on
Appropriations, FY2012, Volume I, page OJC-14.
51 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
20
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
conserving, developing, or managing public natural resources or public recreational areas. Most
Job Corps centers are located on property that is owned or leased long term by the federal
government.
Job Corps centers may be operated by a federal, state, or local agency; an area vocational
education school, or residential vocational school; or a private organization. Authorization for
new Job Corps centers is specified in appropriations law. DOL initiates a competitive process
seeking applicants that are selected based on their ability to coordinate activities in the workforce
system for youth, their ability to offer vocational training opportunities that reflect local
employment opportunities, past performance, proposed costs, and other factors.
Services
Students may participate in the Job Corps program for up to two years. While at a Job Corps
center, students receive the following services and assistance:
• academic, vocational, employment, and social skills training;
• work-based learning, which includes vocational skills training and on-the-job
training; and
• counseling and other residential support services, including transportation, child
care, a cash clothing allowance or clothing that is needed for participating in the
program, and living and other allowances.
Job Corps centers provide services both on-site and off-site, and they contract some of these
services. Centers rely on outreach and admissions contractors to recruit students to the program.
These contractors may include a One-Stop center, community action organizations, private for-
profit and nonprofit businesses, labor organizations, or other entities that have contact with youth.
Contractors seek out potential applicants, conduct interviews with applicants to identify their
needs and eligibility status, and identify youth who are interested and likely Job Corps
participants. Similarly, centers rely on placement agencies—organizations that enter into a
contract or other agreement with Job Corps—to provide placement services for graduates and, to
the extent possible, former students. Services such as vocational training are sometimes provided
by outside organizations, such as the Home Builders Institute.
National Grant Programs
In addition to state formula grants and Job Corps, WIA authorizes a number of competitive grant-
based programs to provide employment and training services to special populations.52
Native Americans Programs (Section 166)
This competitive grant program provides comprehensive workforce investment activities—
academic, occupational, and literacy—to assist participants preparing to enter, reenter, or retain
52 Three programs/activities authorized by Subtitle D (“National Programs”) are not discussed here: Youth Opportunity
Grants (Section 169), Technical Assistance (Section 170), Evaluations (Section 172).
Congressional Research Service
21
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
unsubsidized employment. Services are provided to Indians, Native Hawaiians, and youth on or
near Indian reservations and in Oklahoma, Alaska, or Hawaii.
Funding authorized under WIA Section 166 is provided through a biennial competitive grant
process to Native American tribes and Native American nonprofit organizations. There are
currently 178 grantees.
Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Programs (Section 167)
This competitive grant program, which is also referred to as the National Farmworker Jobs
Program, provides training and related services (including housing services), and technical
assistance, to disadvantaged migrant and seasonal agricultural workers and their dependents.
Grants are awarded to public, private, and nonprofit organizations. The program was first
authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964.
Funding authorized under WIA Section 167 is provided through a biennial competitive grant
process to community-based organizations and public agencies that assist migrant and seasonal
farmworkers to gain greater economic stability. There are currently 52 grantees for training
grants.
Veterans’ Workforce Investment Program (Section 168)
This program provides workforce investment activities to veterans to enhance services provided
by other providers of workforce services, to provide services not otherwise provided, and to
promote maximum job and job training opportunities. Funding is provided through competitive
grants to states and nonprofit organizations. It has been administered by DOL’s Veterans’
Employment and Training Service (VETS) since FY2001. There are currently 22 grantees.
Demonstration, Pilot, Multiservice, Research, and Multistate Projects
(Section 171)
The purpose of pilot and demonstration programs is to develop and evaluate innovative
approaches to providing employment and training services. Several programs have been specified
funded under the authority of Section 171.53 For example, the Reintegration of Ex-Offenders
program is a competitive grant program that combines two previous demonstration projects, the
Prisoner Reentry Initiative (PRI) and the Responsible Reintegration of Youthful Offenders
(RRYO). PRI, which was first funded in FY2005, supports faith-based and community
organizations that help recently released prisoners find work when they return to their
53 From FY2005 through FY2009, funding for the Community Based Job Training Grant (CBJT) program was
provided from the National Reserve fund. The CBJT was approximately $125 million per year. This competitive grant
program, also known as the Community College Initiative, funded entities to strengthen the capacity of community
colleges to train workers in the skills required to succeed in high-growth, high-demand industries. Community Based
Job Training (CBJT) grants were first funded in FY2005, with funds drawn from the Dislocated Worker National
Reserve. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117) changed the name of this program to the Career
Pathways Innovation Fund but the purpose remained the same as the CBJT program. In addition, P.L. 111-117 changed
the source of funding for the Career Pathways Innovation Fund from the Dislocated Workers’ National Reserve fund to
a separate budget line within DOLETA. However, the President did not request funding for this the CBJT program in
FY2011 and the grants have not been funded since FY2010.
Congressional Research Service
22
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
communities. RRYO, first funded in FY2000, supports projects that serve young offenders and
youth at risk of becoming involved in the juvenile justice system. In FY2008, the Reintegration of
Ex-Offenders program combined the PRI and RRYO into a single funding stream.
National Emergency Grants (Section 173)
From total funding appropriated for the Dislocated Workers Activities program in a fiscal year,
Section 132(a)(2)(A) specifies that 20% is to be used for a National Reserve account, which
provides for National Emergency Grants (NEG) and other services for dislocated workers.54 In
practice, the amount provided for each of these activities is often specified in appropriations
legislation. These NEGs are awarded to states and local WIBs to provide services for eligible
individuals, including dislocated workers, civilian employees of the Departments of Defense or
Energy employed at an installation that is being closed within 24 months of eligibility
determination, or certain other members of the Armed Forces.
Services include job search assistance and training for eligible workers. In addition, NEG funding
may be used to provide direct employment (“disaster relief employment”) to individuals for a
period of up to six months. Finally, NEG funding may be used in some cases for health insurance
coverage.
YouthBuild Program (Section 173A)
In 2007, administration of YouthBuild was transferred from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development to DOL under the YouthBuild Transfer Act (P.L. 109-281). This competitive
grant program is authorized under WIA. The purpose of YouthBuild is to (1) enable
disadvantaged youth to obtain the education and employment skills necessary to achieve
economic self-sufficiency in occupations in demand and post-secondary education and training
opportunities; (2) provide disadvantaged youth with opportunities for meaningful work and
service to communities; (3) foster the development of employment and leadership skills and a
commitment to community development among youth in low-income communities; and (4)
expand the supply of permanent affordable housing for homeless individuals and low-income
families by utilizing the energy of disadvantaged youth.
Services include a range of education and workforce investment activities, including instruction,
skill building, alternative education, mentoring, and training in the rehabilitation or construction
of housing. Notably, any housing unit that is rehabilitated or reconstructed as part of a
YouthBuild-funded project may be available only for rental by, or sale to, homeless individuals or
low-income families, or for use as transitional or permanent housing to assist homeless
individuals achieve independent living. In addition to construction activities, programs offered
within a YouthBuild program can support career pathway training targeted toward other high-
demand occupations and industries.
Youth are eligible for the program if they are (1) ages 16 through 24; (2) a member of a low-
income family, a youth in foster care, a youth offender, an individual with a disability, a child of
54 Specifically, Section 132(a)(2)(A) provides that the 20% set-aside is to be used for four purposes: reservation for
outlying areas (Section 132(b)(2)(A)), dislocated worker technical assistance (Section 170(b)), dislocated worker
projects (Section 171(d)), and employment and training assistance to workers affected by major economic dislocations,
such as plant closures or mass layoffs (Section 173(a)(1)).
Congressional Research Service
23
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
an incarcerated parent, or a migrant youth; and (3) a school dropout. However, youth who do not
meet the income or dropout criteria may also be eligible, so long as they are basic-skills deficient
despite having earned a high school diploma, GED, or the equivalent; or they have been referred
by a high school for the purpose of obtaining a high school diploma. A maximum of 25% of
participants may qualify for eligibility according to these latter criteria.
Funding for Title I Programs and Activities
Allocation Formulas
Funding for the state and local workforce investment activities authorized under Title I—Adult
Activities, Dislocated Worker Activities, and Youth Activities—is allocated by formula. The
funding streams for each of the three sets of activities are allocated from DOL to states by a three-
factor formula based on each state’s relative share of each formula factor. That is, a state’s
“relative share” of any formula factor is calculated by dividing the factor population (e.g., number
of unemployed individuals) in the state by the factor population in the United States as a whole.
After the allocations are made to states, within-state allocations are made based on formulas as
well (see below for details). Finally, WIA allows local WIBs to transfer up to 20% of the local
fund allocation between Adult and Dislocated Worker Activities.55
Adult Activities
Funds for adult employment and training activities are allocated to states on the basis of the
following factors:56
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
total unemployment in areas of substantial unemployment (ASU);
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
excess unemployment; and
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
economically disadvantaged adults.
Key features of the state formula allocation for WIA Adult Activities include the following:
• A reservation for the outlying areas of not more than 0.25% of the total Adult
Activities appropriation (this is reserved prior to state allocations).
• A minimum grant amount equal to 0.25% of the total allocation to all states in a
given program year.57 For example, in PY2009, the state minimum allotment
under the adult funding stream was $2,148,465, which is 0.25% of the total
55 Section 133(b)(4) allows this transfer.
56 See Appendix A for complete definitions of formula factors for all three funding streams.
57 More precisely, WIA Section 132(b)(1)(B)(iv) describes two methods for calculating the minimum annual state
allotments, depending on the total amount allocated to states. The method described in the text is based on a total
annual state allocation of no more than $960 million, which is the dividing point between the two methods. Since
WIA’s enactment, the state allotment for adult activities has not exceeded $960 million, and thus has not triggered the
alternative minimum allotment calculations.
Congressional Research Service
24
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
allotted to all states ($859,386,150). A total of 10 states received this minimum
allotment in PY2009.
• “Hold harmless” provisions such that individual states will not experience large
swings in year-to-year funding for this stream. Specifically, a state may not
receive less than 90% of its relative share of prior year funding nor more than
130% of its relative share of prior year funding.58
After funds are allocated from DOLETA to individual states by formula, the governor of each
state can reserve not more than 15% of the Adult Activities state allocation for statewide
“employment and training activities.” Specifically, funds in the 15% reserve must be used for
“required” activities and may be used for “allowable” activities (see the “Structure—Statewide
Activities” section, above, for Adult and Dislocated Worker activities).
The remainder of the Adult Activities funding stream is suballocated to local areas within the
state on the basis of either
• the same three-factor formula used for state allocations but with substitution of
local area relative share of state total; or
• at least 70% of the allocation by the same three-factor formula used for state
allocations and the remaining allocation by a state-derived formula using
measures of excess poverty and unemployment within the state.
Finally, the within-state allocation requirements include a “hold harmless” provision for local
areas, such that a local area must receive an allocation percentage of not less than 90% of the
average allocation percentage of that area for the two preceding fiscal years.
Dislocated Worker Activities
Funding for the dislocated worker program in WIA consists of two parts: the National Reserve
and state formula grants. From total funding appropriated for the Dislocated Workers Activities
program in a fiscal year, Section 132(a)(2)(A) specifies that 20% is to be used for a National
Reserve account, which provides for National Emergency Grants (NEG) and other services for
dislocated workers.59
Funds for state formula grants for dislocated worker employment and training activities are
allocated to states on the basis of the following factors:
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
total unemployment;
58 In the event that either the 90% or the 130% calculation is less than 0.25% of the total state allocation, the state
would receive the 0.25% minimum.
59 WIA Sections 132(a)(2)(A) and (a)(2)(B) require that 20% of the amount appropriated for Dislocated Worker
Employment and Training Activities be reserved for national emergency grants, dislocated worker projects, dislocated
worker technical assistance, and dislocated worker activities in the outlying areas. The reservation for outlying areas is
not more than 0.25% of the total dislocated worker activities appropriation and is funded from the National Reserve
set-aside. Thus, in PY2009, a total of $3,667,228 (0.25% of $1,466,891,000) was reserved for dislocated worker
activities in the outlying areas, $283 million was reserved for the National Reserve fund, and $1.2 billion was allocated
by state formula grants.
Congressional Research Service
25
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
excess unemployment; and
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
long-term unemployment.
Unlike the Adult funding formula, the dislocated workers’ formula does not contain provisions for
minimum and maximum allotments. Because the dislocated worker formula does not contain
these “hold harmless” provisions, individual states tend to experience large swings in year-to-year
funding for this stream. For example, in PY2009, 16 states received allotments of 75% or less of
their PY2008 allotments. Likewise, in PY2009, 17 states received allotments of at least 125% of
their PY2008 allotments.
After funds are allocated from DOLETA to individual states by formula, the governor of each
state must reserve not more than 15% of the Dislocated Worker Activity state allocation for
statewide “employment and training activities.” In addition, of the state allocation for dislocated
worker activities, the governor of each state must also reserve not more than 25% for rapid
response activities. In sum, not more than 40% of dislocated worker state allocations are reserved
at the state level for statewide activities.
The remainder of the Dislocated Worker Activities funding stream must be reallocated to local
areas based on a state-developed formula that takes into account the following data:
• insured unemployment,
• unemployment concentrations,
• plant closings and mass layoffs,
• declining industries,
• farmer-rancher economic hardship, and
• long-term unemployment.
Youth Activities
Funds for youth employment and training activities are allocated to states on the basis of the
following factors:60
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
total unemployed in areas of substantial unemployment (ASU);
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
excess unemployed; and
• one-third of the funds are allocated on the basis of each state’s relative share of
economically disadvantaged youth.
Key features of the state formula allocation for WIA Youth Activities include the following:
60 See Appendix A for complete definitions of formula factors for all three funding streams.
Congressional Research Service
26
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• A reservation for outlying areas of 0.25% of the total Youth Activities
appropriation (this is reserved prior to state allocations).
• A minimum grant amount equal to 0.25% of the total allocation to all states in a
given program year.61 For example, in PY2009, the state minimum allotment
under the Youth Activities funding stream was $2,269,744, which is 0.25% of the
total allotted to all states ($907,897,792). A total of nine states received this
minimum allotment in PY2009.
• “Hold harmless” provisions such that individual states will not experience large
swings in year-to-year funding for this stream. Specifically, a state may not
receive less than 90% of its relative share of prior year funding nor more than
130% of its relative share of prior year funding.62
After funds are allocated from DOLETA to individual states by formula, the governor of each
state must reserve not more than 15% of the Youth Activities state allocation for statewide youth
activities or “employment and training activities” for adults and dislocated workers.63
The remainder of the Youth Activities funding stream is reallocated to local areas within the state
on the basis of either
• the same three-factor formula used for state allocations but with substitution of
local area relative share of state total; or
• at least 70% of the allocation by the same three-factor formula used for state
allocations and the remaining allocation by a state-derived formula using
measures of excess poverty and unemployment within the state.
Finally, the within-state allocation requirements include a “hold harmless” provision for local
areas, such that a local area must receive an allocation percentage of not less than 90% of the
average allocation percentage of that area for the two preceding fiscal years.
Performance Accountability in Title I
Section 136 of WIA sets forth state and local “performance measures” as part of the
accountability system to be used “to assess the effectiveness of States and local areas in achieving
continuous improvement of workforce investment activities funded under this subtitle, in order to
optimize the return on investment of federal funds in statewide and local workforce investment
activities.” Under WIA, “state performance measures” consist of the core indicators of
performance described in Sections 136(b)(2)(A) and 136(b)(2)(B) and any additional indicators
61 More precisely, WIA Section 127(b)(1)(C)(iv) describes two methods for calculating the minimum annual state
allotments, depending on the total amount allocated to states. The method described in the text above is based on a total
annual state allocation of no more than $1 billion, which is the dividing point between the two methods. Since FY2003,
the state allotment for Youth Activities has not exceeded $1 billion, and thus has not triggered the alternative minimum
allotment calculations.
62 In the event that either the 90% or the 130% calculation is less than 0.25% of the total state allocation, the state
would receive the 0.25% minimum.
63 See CRS Report R40929, Vulnerable Youth: Employment and Job Training Programs, by Adrienne L. Fernandes-
Alcantara for additional information.
Congressional Research Service
27
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
identified by individual states. Below is an overview of the 17 core indicators required by Section
136.
• There are 12 “General Core Indicators of Performance” for employment and
training activities for adults, dislocated workers, and youth ages 19-21. For each
group of participants, core indicators are: entry into employment, retention in
employment, earnings, and attainment of a credential.
• There are three “Core Indicators for Eligible Youth” for youth ages 14-18. These
indicators are: attainment of basic skills, attainment of a secondary school
diploma, and placement and retention in postsecondary education or
employment.
• There are two “Customer Satisfaction Indicators”—one each for employers and
participants.
Each indicator is described in greater detail in Table 3 below. There are some general
characteristics that apply to the WIA performance measure system:
• Standards are established for one program year (a program year runs from July 1-
June 30; for example, PY2009 runs from July 1, 2009-June 30, 2010).
• The standards are typically expressed as a numerical percentage (e.g., entered
employment rate of 60%) or dollar amount ($500 in average earnings).
• The governor of each state establishes performance standards for that state, based
on measures identified in Section 136 of WIA and defined by the Secretary.
• Governors, on the basis of negotiations with the Secretary, may adjust national
standards for state and local areas based on economic and demographic factors
(see section below).
• States and localities may incur sanctions for falling short of the standards.
Congressional Research Service
28
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Table 3. Performance Measures for WIA Title I Activities
Group Measure
Definition
Number of adults employed in 1st
Adults Entered
Employment
Rate
quarter after exit quarter / Number
of adult exiters during the exit
quarter
Number of adults employed in 2nd
Adults
Employment Retention Rate
and 3rd quarter after exit / Number
of adult exiters during the exit
quartera
Earnings in 2nd and 3rd quarter after
Adults Average
Earnings
exit quarter / Number of adult
exiters employed in the 1st, 2nd, and
3rd quarters after the exit quarterb
Number of adults employed in 1st
quarter after exit and received
Adults
Employment & Credential Certificate Ratec
credential by end of 3rd quarter /
Number of adult exiters during the
exit quarter
Dislocated Workers
Number of DW employed in 1st
Entered Employment Rate
quarter after exit / Number of DW
(DW)
exiters during the exit quarter
Number of DW employed in 2nd and
Dislocated Workers
Employment Retention Rate
3rd quarters after exit / Number of
(DW)
DW exiters during the exit quarterd
Earnings in 2nd and 3rd quarter after
Dislocated Workers
exit quarter / Number of DW exiters
(DW)
Average Earnings
employed in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd
quarters after the exit quartere
Number of DW employed in 1st
quarter after exit and received
Dislocated Workers
Employment & Credential Certificate Rate
credential by end of 3rd quarter /
(DW)
Number of DW exiters during the
exit quarter
Number of older youth employed in
1st quarter after exit quarter /
Youth 19-21
Entered Employment Rate
Number of older youth exiters
during the exit quarter
Number of older youth employed in
3rd quarter after exit / Number of
Youth 19-21
Employment Retention Rate at Six Months
older youth exiters during the exit
quarter
Earnings in 2nd and 3rd quarter after
exit minus earnings in 2nd and 3rd
Youth 19-21
Earnings Change in Six Months
quarter prior to participation /
Number of older youth exiters
during the exit quarter
Congressional Research Service
29
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Group Measure
Definition
Number of older youth employed, in
postsecondary education, or
Youth 19-21
Credential/Certificate Rate
advanced training in 1st quarter after
exit and received credential by end of
3rd quarter / Number of older youth
exiters during the exit quarter
Number of basic skills goals attained
+ Number of work readiness skills
goals attained + Number of
occupational skills goals attained /
Youth 14-18
Skil Attainment Rate
Number of basic skills goals set +
Number of work readiness skills
goals set + Number of occupational
skills goals set
Number of younger youth attaining
secondary school diploma or
Youth 14-18
Diploma or Equivalent Attainment
equivalent by end of 1st quarter after
exit / Number of younger youth
exiters during exit quarter
Number of younger youth in
postsecondary education, advanced
Youth 14-18
Retention Rate
training, employment, or
apprenticeships / Number of younger
youth exiters during exit quarter
Weighted average of employer
Employers Customer
Satisfaction
ratings on each of three survey
questions
Weighted average of participant
Participants Customer
Satisfaction
ratings on each of three survey
questionsf
Source: The Workforce Investment Act of 1998, P.L. 105-220, ETA Training and Employment Guidance Letter
No. 7-99 (“Core and Customer Satisfaction Performance Measures for the Workforce Investment System “),
and ETA Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 17-05 (“WIA Title IB Performance Measures and
Related Clarifications,” Attachment D).
Notes: All of the measures for adults, dislocated workers, and youth are authorized in WIA Section
136(b)(2)(A) and the customer service measures are authorized in WIA Section 136(b)(2)(B). The measures in
Table 1 are the current measures, as specified in TEGL No. 17-05. It is noted below where measures have
changed from the original.
a. The numerator for this measure was previously “adults employed in the 3rd quarter.”
b. The universe is adults employed in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd quarters after the exit quarter. This measure was
previously “adult earnings change in six months.”
c. For adults and dislocated workers, credentials are a “national y recognized degree or certificate or
State/locally recognized credential.” Thus, credentials include, but are not limited to, a high school diploma,
a GED or equivalent, post-secondary degrees and/or certificates, recognized skill standards, and licensure or
industry-recognized certificates.
d. This measure was previously “dislocated worker employment retention rate at six months” and only used
3rd quarter employment in the numerator.
e. The universe is DW employed in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd quarters after the exit quarter. This measure was
previously “dislocated worker earnings replacement rate in six months” and “dislocated worker earnings
change in six months.”
Congressional Research Service
30
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
f.
DOLETA uses the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) for questions to address customer
experience with WIA.
In addition to the 17 indicators listed in Table 3, states may identify additional indicators of
performance and identify these in the “State plan” (hereafter, “Plan”) required under Section 112.
It is worth noting that while Section 136 does specify 17 core indicators of performance, some
(e.g., entered employment rate) are identical calculations and only require changing the
populations in the numerators and denominators.
Negotiating Performance Levels Under WIA
For each of the core indicators described above, each state is required to establish a “state
adjusted level of performance.” That is, the “measures” are identified in WIA Section 136, but the
“levels” are determined through negotiation between states and the Secretary of Labor (hereafter,
“Secretary”). In the Plan, states must identify the expected (adjusted) level of performance for
each of the core indicators for the first three program years of the Plan, which covers five
program years.64 In order to “ensure an optimal return on the investment of federal funds in
workforce investment activities,” the Secretary and the governor of each state shall “reach
agreement on the levels of performance” for all 17 indicators identified in Section 136(b)(2)(A).
This agreed-upon level then becomes the “state adjusted level of performance” that is
incorporated into the Plan.65
Section 136(b)(3)(A)(i) of WIA specifies that the state adjusted levels of performance must
• be expressed in an “objective, quantifiable, and measurable form”; and
• show the state’s progress toward “continuously improving” performance.
The negotiation between governors and the Secretary that leads to an agreement on adjusted
levels of performance must be based on the following three sets of factors:
• the extent to which the adjusted levels will assist a state in attaining a high level
of customer satisfaction;
• the comparative levels of performance established in other states, accounting for
differences in economic conditions, characteristics of participants entering WIA
programs, and the services to be provided;66 and
64 For Program Years 4 and 5, each governor must also reach an agreement again with the Secretary for the adjusted
levels of performance. The factors for consideration in the agreement, however, are the same as for the Program Years
1 through 3. In practice, following the first five years of WIA, DOLETA has issued guidance allowing states to submit
modifications to existing five-year plans to extend the plans for one or two years. For example, see Brent R. Orrell,
Training and Employment Guidance Letter, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, No.
7-08, Washington, DC, December 11, 2008, http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/TEGL/TEGL07-08.pdf.
65 Though not discussed here, WIA also requires local performance measures, but these consist of the same core
indicators required for states. The local levels of performance are determined by negotiation between the local
workforce investment board (LWIB), the chief local elected official, and the governor and are supposed to take into
account specific economic, demographic, and other characteristics of locally served populations.
66 Section 136(b)(3)(A)(vi) allows for a process of revisions to state adjusted levels of performance in the event of
“unanticipated circumstances” in a state that result in “a significant change” in economic conditions, characteristics of
participants, and services provided.
Congressional Research Service
31
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
• the impact of agreed-upon levels on promoting “continuous improvement” in
performance.
While WIA itself is not detailed about the process of negotiation, guidance from DOLETA
provides additional information about the process. Specifically, DOLETA Training and
Employment Guidance Letter No. 9-08 (hereafter, “TEGL 9-08”) indicates that states should
negotiate performance level goals “within the context of integrated service delivery, priority of
service, economic conditions, customers served, and workforce solutions that contribute to the
regional economic competitiveness of their state and sub-state areas.”
While DOLETA encourages states to serve “at-risk” populations—including those who are low-
income and have multiple barriers to employment—and to account for the effect that at-risk
populations might have on performance outcomes, it is ultimately at the discretion of the state to
choose the populations it will serve and the adjustments that will be made on the basis of the
populations served. DOLETA does, however, provide information to assist states in proposing
state adjusted levels of performance, including
• past results on the performance measures;
• goals in the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA);
• national distribution of WIA performance outcomes;
• average six months’ earnings for adult and dislocated programs;
• estimates of six months’ average earnings from Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS);67 and
• effects of economic and demographic variables.68
It should be noted that DOLETA provides states with the relevant data for all items listed above.
Furthermore, Attachment VII of TEGL 9-08 provides estimated effects (using a bivariate
regression model) of changes in unemployment and participant characteristics on performance
outcomes. While these effects are estimated using national data, DOLETA suggests that states
might use such estimated relationships to guide decision making about levels of performance.
The DOLETA policy prescribes a process of negotiation that involves three main steps:69
• First, states are to conduct their own analysis of factors affecting levels of
performance and then submit the proposed levels of performance to the DOLETA
Regional Administrator serving the submitting state. States must include a
67 Specifically, DOLETA suggests using the BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data series,
which provides employment and wage information for employees covered by state Unemployment Insurance (UI)
laws.
68 DOLETA provides a more extensive list of such variables in its final regulations for WIA. See
http://www.doleta.gov/usworkforce/finalrule.htm#part666 for details.
69 In practice, there is some concern that the process of setting performance levels is dominated by DOLETA rather
than being an actual negotiation. For example, see Carolyn J. Heinrich and Burt S. Barnow, One Standard Fits All? The
Pros and Cons of Performance Standard Adjustments, Robert M. La Follette School of Public Affairs at the University
of Wisconsin-Madison, La Follette School Working Paper No. 2008-023, Madison, WI, November 18, 2008, p. 30,
http://www.lafollette.wisc.edu/publications/workingpapers/heinrich2008-023.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
32
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
description of the methodology and data used to support the proposed levels. For
PY2009, the deadline for submission of proposed levels was April 15, 2009.
• Second, the DOLETA regional offices are to review the data and methodology
used by the states to determine the levels of performance and will “work with the
state to set mutually agreed-upon levels of performance.” This process may
involve alternative proposals by DOLETA.
• Third, upon reaching agreement on performance levels, the DOLETA Regional
Administrator is to send a letter to the state confirming that the agreed-upon
levels will be reflected as a modification to the state’s Plan.
Common Measures and Waivers
In July 2005, DOLETA implemented a “common measures” policy for several workforce
programs and revised the reporting requirements for WIA Title I programs in an effort to
“enhance the ability of Congress, the Administration, and public officials to assess the
effectiveness and impact of workforce investment programs.”70 Specifically, DOLETA introduced
three adult measures and three youth measures:
• Entered Employment Rate—All Adults,
• Employment Retention—All Adults,
• Average Earnings—All Adults,
• Placement in Employment or Education—All Youth,
• Attainment of a Degree or Certificate—All Youth, and
• Literacy and Numeracy Gains—All Youth.
DOLETA specifically indicated that the common measures were not to supercede the existing
statutory performance reporting requirements for WIA and that states would continue to negotiate
performance goals for the indicators required by WIA Section 136. Despite this, DOL has granted
waivers to 49 states, territories, and the District of Columbia to permit implementation of and
reporting on only common measures rather than the current fuller array of measures in WIA.71
Title II—Adult Education and Literacy72
Title II of WIA is the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA). The stated purposes of
AEFLA are to
1. assist adults to become literate and obtain the knowledge and skills necessary for
employment and self-sufficiency;
70 See DOLETA Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 18-04 for additional rationale.
71 See DOLETA, http://www.doleta.gov/waivers/. The waiver status is based on approved waivers for PY2013.
72 This section was prepared by Benjamin Collins, bcollins@crs.loc.gov, 7-7382. For more information on the Adult
Education and Family Literacy Act, see CRS Report R43036, Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA): A
Primer, by Benjamin Collins.
Congressional Research Service
33
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
2. assist adults who are parents to obtain the educational skills necessary to become
full partners in the educational development of their children; and
3. assist adults in the completion of a secondary school education.73
Title II programs are primarily administered by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) through
its Office of Vocational and Adult Education (OVAE). AEFLA’s authorization of appropriations
expired on September 30, 2003.74 Programs authorized under AEFLA continue to be funded
through annual appropriations. Historical funding levels are available in Table B-3 and Table B-4
in Appendix B.
State Grants
Approximately 95% of annual AEFLA appropriations are allotted to the states via formula
grants.75 States are required to match a portion of their federal grants. Many states contribute well
beyond their required match, though there is substantial variation among the states. Actual
educational services are typically provided by local entities using a combination of full-time, part-
time, and volunteer personnel.
Adult education activities are typically divided into three broad categories:
• Adult Basic Education (ABE), which includes instruction for adults whose
literacy and numeracy skills are below the high school level;
• Adult Secondary Education (ASE), which includes instruction for adults whose
literacy skills are approximately at the high school level, including adults who
are seeking to pass the General Education Development (GED) test; and
• English Literacy (EL), which includes instruction for adults who are not
proficient in the English language.
Performance data are tracked through the National Reporting System (NRS).76 States are required
to report enrollment and educational progress. States must also track outcome data in cases where
a student states an objective beyond educational progress (such as obtaining a high school
credential or entering employment).
National Activities and Incentive Grants
AEFLA sets aside a portion of annual appropriations for national activities and incentive grants.
Specifically, the act reserves 1.5% of the appropriation for National Leadership Activities (NLA),
1.5% for the National Institute for Literacy (NIFL), and 1.72% for incentive grants for states that
73 Section 202 of AEFLA (20 U.S.C. 9201).
74 The General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) provided a one-year extension of the authorization through FY2004.
75 Since FY2000, appropriations legislation has reserved a portion of state grant funds for English Literacy-Civics (EL-
Civics) formula grants to states. This reservation effectively creates two formula grants within the state grants program:
one that allots the set-aside using the EL-Civics formula in appropriations legislation and a second that allots the
remaining state grant funds using the formula in AEFLA.
76 For more information on the NRS, see http://www.nrsweb.org/.
Congressional Research Service
34
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
meet certain performance criteria.77 The actual allotments may vary from these statutory
directives; for example, NIFL has not received funding since FY2009.
Title IV—Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 199878
Title IV of WIA amended the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and authorized appropriations for its
programs. Most programs under the Rehabilitation Act are related to the employment and
independent living of individuals with disabilities and are administered through ED’s
Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA). Several related independent agencies are also
authorized by the Rehabilitation Act.
Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants79
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) state grants account for the large majority of funds appropriated
under the Rehabilitation Act. Since the enactment of WIA, VR state grants have accounted for
between 85% and 90% of the funds appropriated under the act each year.
An individual is eligible for VR services from the appropriate state agency if (1) he or she has a
disability that creates an obstacle to employment and (2) he or she would benefit from VR
services. In cases where a state is not able to serve all eligible individuals, preference is given to
individuals with the most severe disabilities.
Once an individual has established eligibility, the client develops an individualized plan for
employment (IPE) in conjunction with a VR counselor. The IPE includes the individual’s desired
employment outcome and outlines the services necessary to achieve that outcome. Services can
include, but are not limited to, case management, counseling, job training, and supplemental
support services.
Grants are allotted to the states via formula. States are required to match their grants so that no
more than 78.7% of their VR funds are from federal sources. If a state is not able to match its
entire grant, unmatched funds are made available to other states to match.
VR state grants are mandatory spending and the authorization status of the VR state grants
program is different from most other programs that were created or amended by WIA. The
Rehabilitation Act specifies that if authorization for appropriations expires and Congress has not
acted to reauthorize the program, it will automatically be reauthorized for one year and the annual
appropriation will equal the prior year’s appropriation plus an increase equal to inflation. The
program has operated under these automatic authorization provisions since the WIA authorization
expired at the end of FY2003.
77 NLA and NIFL funding are statutorily capped at $8 million each.
78 This section was prepared by Benjamin Collins, bcollins@crs.loc.gov, 7-7382.
79 For more information on the VR State Grants program, see CRS Report R42148, Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to
States: Program Overview, by Benjamin Collins.
Congressional Research Service
35
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Other Programs
Several other formula and competitive grant programs are authorized under the Rehabilitation
Act. These grants are administered by RSA and support the employment and independent living
of individuals with disabilities. The act also authorizes two independent agencies that advocate
for individuals with disabilities. A full list of these authorizations and their recent funding
histories are listed in Table B-7 in Appendix B.
Congressional Research Service
36
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Appendix A. Glossary of Selected WIA Terms
Areas of Substantial Unemployment (ASU)—This concept is used in the Title I state grant
formulas for Youth and Adult Activities. As defined in Sections 127(b)(2)(B) and
132(b)(1)(B)(v)(III), an ASU is “any area that is of sufficient size and scope to sustain a program
of workforce investment activities carried out under this subtitle and that has an average rate of
unemployment of at least 6.5 percent for the most recent 12 months.” States submit potential
ASU designations and DOL approves ASUs once each fiscal year.
Additional guidance from DOLETA defines an ASU as a “contiguous area with a current
population of at least 10,000 and an average unemployment rate of at least 6.5 percent for the 12-
month reference period.”80 If a state has a statewide unemployment rate of at least 6.5%, the
entire state will be designated as an ASU for allocation purposes.81
Economically Disadvantaged—This concept is used in one of the factors for the Title I state
grant formulas for Youth and Adult Activities. For the state formula grants for Youth Activities,
“disadvantaged youth” is defined (in Section 127(b)(2)(C)) as an “individual who is age 16
through 21 who received an income, or is a member of a family that received a total family
income, that, in relation to family size, does not exceed the higher of the poverty line or 70
percent of the lower living standard income level.”82 Similarly, a “disadvantaged adult” is defined
(in Section 132(b)(1)(B)(v)(IV)) the same as a disadvantaged youth with the exception that the
reference individual is age 22 or older. In practice, for both the Youth and Adult Activities
formulas, DOLETA has used the poverty calculations from the 1990 Census (for PY2001-
PY2003) and the 2000 Census (for PY2004-present) for this factor.
Excess Unemployment—This concept is used in one of the factors for the Title I state grant
formulas for Youth, Adult, and Dislocated Worker Activities. For the state formula grants for
Youth and Adult Activities, excess unemployment is defined (in Sections 127(b)(2)(D) and
132(b)(1)(B)(v)(VI)) as the higher of “the number that represents the number of unemployed
individuals in excess of 4.5 percent of the civilian labor force in the state” or “the number that
represents the number of unemployed individuals in excess of 4.5 percent of the civilian labor
force in areas of substantial unemployment in such state.” For the state formula grant for
Dislocated Worker Activities, excess unemployment is defined (in Section 132(b)(2)(B)(iii)) as
“the number that represents the number of unemployed individuals in excess of 4.5 percent of the
civilian labor force in the state.” For example, in a state with a civilian labor force of 100,000 and
an unemployment rate of 8.0% (which would equal 8,000 unemployed individuals), the “excess
unemployment” would be 3,500 (8.0% - 4.5% = 3.5%; 3.5% of 100,000 is 3,500).
Local Workforce Investment Areas (LWIA)—This concept is used in identifying geographic
areas within states that function as administrative units within the One-Stop delivery system.
Section 116 of the WIA directs the governor of each state to designate—in consultation with the
state WIB and with the chief elected local officials in the relevant areas—LWIAs within the state.
80 Jane Oates, Assistant Secretary, Area of Substantial Unemployment Designation under the Workforce Investment Act
(WIA) for Program Year (PY) 2010, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, TEGL No.
4-09, Washington, DC, September 3, 2009, http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/TEGL/TEGL04-09.pdf.
81 Ibid.
82 Poverty level and lower living standard income level are defined in WIA Sections 101(36) and 101(24), respectively.
Congressional Research Service
37
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
WIA requires that each LWIA have a local WIB and a One-Stop center. In designating LWIAs,
the governor is required to take into consideration geographic areas served by educational
agencies and institutions, labor market areas, distances that individuals must travel to receive
services, and the resources available from local areas to help carry out the WIA services. WIA
does allow for “automatic designation” of substate areas as LWIAs under three conditions: a unit
of local government with a population of at least 500,000; an area served by a rural concentrated
employment program grant recipient that was a service delivery area (SDA) under the Job
Training Partnership Act (JTPA); and an area that served as an SDA in a state with a population of
no more than 1.1 million and a population density of no greater than 900 persons per square mile.
Long-Term Unemployment—This concept is used in one of the factors for the Title I state grant
formulas for Dislocated Worker Activities. For the state formula grants for Dislocated Worker
Activities, long-term unemployment is defined (in Section 132(b)(2)(B)(ii)(III)) as the number of
individuals in a state who have been unemployed (as measured by the Census bureau) for at least
15 weeks.
Relative Number/Share—This concept is used in the state grant formulas for Youth, Adult, and
Dislocated Worker Activities. Each formula consists of three equally weighted factors. The
factors themselves are based on the concept of the “relative number” or “relative share” of that
factor compared to the analogous number in all of the states. An example from the Dislocated
Worker Activities formula—based on the factors of regular unemployment, excess
unemployment, and long-term unemployment—will demonstrate this. In the PY2012 state
formula allotments, Nevada had the following factor values:
• Regular Unemployment = 178,314;
• Excess Unemployment = 118,912; and
• Long-Term Unemployment = 117,600.
For each of these factors, Nevada’s “relative share” was calculated by dividing the number of
individuals in Nevada by the number of individuals in all states. For example, Nevada’s relative
share of regular unemployment was 1.25% (178,314/14,259,148); its share of excess
unemployment was 1.63% (118,912/7,299,720); and its share of long-term unemployment was
1.41% (117,600/8,358,500). Multiplying each of these individuals by 1/3 and summing the results
would give Nevada a total share of 1.43% ((1.04%*1/3) + (1.45%*1/3) + (0.98%*1/3)). Finally,
multiplying Nevada’s share, 1.43%, by the total funding for all states ($1,008,151,464) yields
$14,404,698, which Nevada received in PY2012.
Congressional Research Service
38
Appendix B. Funding for Programs Authorized Under WIA
Table B-1. WIA Title I, Appropriations for FY2009 to FY2013
(dollars in thousands)
Program FY2009
ARRA
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
State Formula Grant Programs
$2,969,449 $2,950,000 $2,969,449 $2,660,268 $2,603,315 $2,467,590
Youth Activities Formula Grants
924,069
1,200,000
924,069
825,914
824,353
781,375
Adult Activities Formula Grants
861,540
500,000
861,540
770,922
770,811
730,624
Dislocated Worker Activities
1,466,891
1,450,000
1,413,000
1,287,544
1,232,544
1,203,404
Formula Grants
1,183,840
1,250,000 1,183,840 1,063,432 1,008,151 955,591
National Reserve
283,051
200,000
229,160
224,112
224,066
247,813
Job Corps
1,683,938 250,000 1,708,155
1,706,171
1,702,946
1,613,872
National Programs
Native Americans
52,758
0
52,758
52,652
47,562
45,082
Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers
79,668
0
84,620
84,451
84,291
79,897
Veterans’ Workforce Investment
7,641
0
9,641
9,622
14,594
0
Ex-Offender Activities
108,493
0
108,493
85,390
80,238
76,055
Responsible Reintegration of
0
Young Offenders
88,500
0
0
0
0
Prisoner Reentry
19,993
0
0
0
0
0
Reintegration of Ex-Offenders
0
0
108,493
85,390
80,238
76,055
Career Pathways Innovation Funda 0
0
125,000
0
0
0
Green Jobs Innovation Fund
0
0
40,000
0
0
0
Job Training in High Growth Industriesb 0
750,000
0
0
0
0
Workforce Data Quality Initiative
0
$0
12,500
12,475
6,463
6,126
YouthBuild 70,000
50,000
102,500
79,840
79,689
75,535
CRS-39
Program FY2009
ARRA
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Technical Assistance
0
0
0
0
0
0
Pilots, Demonstrations, and Research
48,781
0
92,999
9,980
6,603
6,259
Evaluation 6,918
0
9,600
9,581
9,563
9,064
Workforce Innovation Fund
0
0
0
124,750
49,906
47,304
WIA Title I Grand Total
$5,313,649
$4,200,000
$5,544,875
$5,145,892
$4,909,236
$4,674,597
Source: Compiled by CRS from the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, (P.L. 111-8), the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 111-5), the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117), Department of Defense and Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10), the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
FY2012 (P.L. 112-74), Department of Labor Congressional Budget Justifications, and DOL Operating Plans (FY2011, FY2012, and FY2013).
Notes: For state formula grant al ocations, see http://www.doleta.gov/budget/statfund.cfm. Job Corps funding includes administration, operations, and construction. The
amount for “National Reserve” under “Dislocated Worker Activities” is included in the “Grand Total” but not in the total for “State Formula Grant Programs.”
a. Prior to FY2010, the “Career Pathways Innovation Fund” (CPIF) was named the “Community-Based Job Training Grant” (CBJTG) program. Funds for the CBJTG
were drawn from the Dislocated Workers’ “National Reserve” and are included in the “National Reserve” amount shown in the table for FY2009 ($125 million).
There was no appropriation for the CPIF (CBJTG) program in the ARRA. In FY2010, the CPIF was not funded out of the “National Reserve” and is reflected as a
separate appropriation of $125 mil ion.
b. Of the $750 million in the ARRA, $500 million was for training workers for employment in green industries. Of the remaining $250 million, a priority was
established for training in health care careers.
CRS-40
Table B-2. WIA Title I, Appropriations for FY2000 to FY2008
(dollars in thousands)
Program
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008
State Formula Grant Programs
$3,472,185 $3,489,997 $3,532,125 $3,083,395 $3,059,662 $3,060,570 $2,986,030 $2,967,256 $2,969,449
Youth Activities Formula Grants
1,250,965
1,377,965
1,353,065
1,038,669
995,059
986,288
940,500
940,500
924,069
Adult
Activities
Formula
Grants
950,000 950,000 945,372 894,577 893,195 889,498 864,199 851,760 861,540
Dislocated
Worker
Activities
1,587,525 1,437,540 1,542,110 1,425,086 1,445,939 1,466,714 1,461,303 1,453,385 1,464,707
Formula
Grants
1,271,220 1,162,032 1,233,688 1,150,149 1,171,408 1,184,784 1,181,331 1,174,996 1,183,840
National Reserve
316,305
275,508
308,422 274,937 274,531 281,930 279,972 278,388 280,867
Job Corps
1,357,776 1,399,148 1,454,241 1,509,094 1,564,294 1,575,774 1,602,868 1,606,855 1,610,506
National Programs
Native
Americans
58,436 55,000 57,000 55,636 54,676 54,238 53,696 53,696 53,696
Migrant
and
Seasonal
Farmworkers 74,195 76,770 80,770 77,330 76,874 76,259 79,252 79,252 79,752
Veterans’
Workforce
Investment
7,300 7,300 7,550 7,377 7,505 8,482 7,425 7,435 7,351
Ex-Offender
Activities
13,907 55,000 55,000 54,643 49,705 69,440 68,746 68,746 73,493
Responsible Reintegration. of
Young Offenders (non-add)
13,907
55,000 55,000 54,643 49,705 49,600 49,104 49,104 54,039
Prisoner
Reentry
(non-add)
0
0
0
0
0 19,840 19,642 19,642 19,454
Reintegration of Ex-Offenders
(non-add)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Community-Based Job Training
Grantsa
0 0 0 0 0
124,000 0 0 0
YouthBuildb
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
49,500
58,952
Technical
Assistance
5,000 15,000 15,000 10,548 2,982 2,958 1,980
480
0
Pilots,
Demonstrations
and
Research 65,095 97,432 130,149 68,015 58,547 85,167 29,700 14,700 48,508
Evaluation
9,098 9,098 9,098 9,234 8,986 7,936 7,857 4,921 4,835
WIA
Title
I
Grand
Total
$5,379,297 $5,480,253 $5,649,355 $5,150,210 $5,157,762 $5,346,754 $5,117,526 $5,131,730 $5,186,387
CRS-41
Source: Compiled by CRS from Department of Labor Congressional Budget Justifications.
a. From FY2006 through FY2008, approximately $125 million per year for the “Community-Based Job Training Grant” (CBJTG) program was drawn from the
Dislocated Workers’ “National Reserve.” Funding for the CBJTG program in FY2005 was drawn from the Dislocated Workers’ “National Reserve” ($125 million)
and from a separate appropriation ($124 million). Prior to FY2005, the CBJTG program did not exist.
b. Prior to FY2007, the YouthBuild program was administered and funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
CRS-42
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Table B-3. WIA Title II, Adult Education and Family Literacy Act,
Appropriations for FY2009 to FY2013
(dollars in thousands)
Program/Fiscal year
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Adult Education State Grants total
$554,122 $628,221 $596,120 $596,120 $563,955
English Literacy and Civics Educationa 67,896
75,000 74,850
74,850
70,811
Incentive Grantsb
9,760 11,035 10,448 10,448 9,964
Net Allocation for Adult Education State
Grantsc 476,466
542,186
510,822
510,822
483,180
National Leadership Activities
6,878 11,346 11,323 11,323 10,712
National Institute for Literacy
6,468 0 0 0 0
WIA Title II Grand Total
$567,468 $639,567 $607,443 $607,443 $574,667
Source: Compiled by CRS Department of Education Budget Justifications, Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2010 (P.L. 111-117), Department of Defense and Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10),
and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2012 (P.L. 112-74). FY2013 figures are from the Department of
Education’s Fiscal Year 2013 Operating Plan.
a. English Literacy and Civics Education grants are reserved from the appropriation for Adult Education State
Grants, at a level specified in the annual appropriations.
b. Incentive Grants are reserved from the appropriation for Adult Education State Grants, at a level equal to
1.72% of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) total, and transferred to the Secretary of
Labor for distribution to states for Title V Incentive Grants under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998
(WIA).
c. Actual Adult Education State Grant al ocations are distributed from the remainder of the appropriation for
Adult Education State Grants after reserving amounts for the English Literacy and Civics Education and
Incentive Grants programs.
Congressional Research Service
43
Table B-4. WIA Title II, Adult Education and Family Literacy Act,
Appropriations for FY1999 to FY2008
(dollars in thousands)
Program/Fiscal
Year
FY1999 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008
Adult Education State Grants total
$365,000
$450,000
$540,000
$575,000
$571,262
$574,372
$569,672
$563,975
$563,975
$563,975
English Literacy and Civics
Educationa
0 25,500 70,000 70,000 70,000 69,545 69,135 68,582 67,896 67,896
Incentive Grantsb
6,622 8,084 9,641 10,166 10,100 10,152 10,071 9,971 9,968 9,765
Net Allocation for Adult Education
State Grantsc
358,378 416,416 460,359 494,834 491,162 494,675 490,466 485,422 486,111 476,461
National
Leadership
Activities
14,000 14,000 14,000 9,500 9,438 9,169 9,096 9,005 9,005 7,000
National
Institute
for
Literacy
6,000 6,000 6,500 6,560 6,517 6,692 6,638 6,572 6,583 6,583
AEFLA Grand Total
385,000 470,000 560,500 591,060 587,217 590,233 585,406 579,552 579,563 577,558
Literacy Programs for Prisonersd
0 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
0
0
0
WIA Title II Grand Total
$385,000
$475,000
$565,500
$596,060
$592,217
$595,233
$590,406
$579,552
$579,563
$577,558
Source: Department of Education Congressional Budget Justifications and H.R. 3293 (H.Rept. 111-220 and S.Rept. 111-66).
a. English Literacy and Civics Education grants are reserved from the appropriation for Adult Education State Grants, at a level specified in the annual appropriations.
b. Incentive Grants are reserved from the appropriation for Adult Education State Grants, at a level equal to 1.72% of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act
(AEFLA) total, and transferred to the Secretary of Labor for distribution to states for Title V Incentive Grants under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA).
c. Actual Adult Education State Grant al ocations are distributed from the remainder of the appropriation for Adult Education State Grants after reserving amounts for
the English Literacy and Civics Education and Incentive Grants programs.
d. The Literacy Programs for Prisoners program was authorized by §601of the National Literacy Act of 1991 (NLA), P.L. 102-73. This literacy program, along with the
rest of the NLA, was repealed by §251(a) of WIA in 1998. Its repeal notwithstanding, however, annual appropriations from FY2000 through FY2005 continued this
program, with funding at the indicated levels. http://www.ed.gov/programs/lifeskills/funding.html.
CRS-44
Table B-5. Wagner-Peyser Act, U.S. Employment Service Funding, FY2009-FY2013
(dollars in thousands)
Program
FY2009
ARRA
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Employment Service Grants to States
$703,576
$396,000
$703,576
$702,169
$700,842
$664,184
Labor Market Information
51,720
0
63,720
63,593
63,473
60,153
Subtotal
$755,296 $396,000 $767,296
$765,762 $764,315 $724,337
Source: Compiled by CRS from the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8), the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 111-5), the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117), Department of Defense and Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10), the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
FY2012 (P.L. 112-74), Department of Labor Congressional Budget Justifications, and DOL Operating Plans (FY2011, FY2012, and FY2013).
Notes: This table does not include funding for Employment Service National Activities.
Table B-6. Wagner-Peyser Act, U.S. Employment Service Funding, FY2001-FY2008
(dollars in thousands)
Program
FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008
Employment
Service
Grants
to
States
$796,735 $796,735 $791,556 $786,887 $780,592 $715,883 $715,883 $703,376
Labor
Market
Information
150,000 120,000 99,350 98,764
97,974 81,662 63,855 52,059
Subtotal
$946,735 $916,735 $890,906 $885,651
$878,566 $797,545 $779,738 $755,435
Source: Compiled by CRS from Department of Labor Congressional Budget Justifications.
Notes: This table does not include funding for Employment Service National Activities.
CRS-45
Table B-7. Rehabilitation Act Appropriations from FY2010 to FY2013
(dollars in thousands)
Program
FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013
Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant
$3,084,696
$3,084,696
$3,121,712
$3,066,192
Client Assistance State Grants
12,288
12,263
12,240
11,600
Training (for personnel)
37,766
35,582
35,515
33,657
Demonstration and Training Programs
11,601
6,459
5,325
5,046
Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers
2,239
1,856
1,262
1,196
Protection and Advocacy for Individual Rights
18,101
18,065
18,031
17,088
Supported Employment State Grants
29,181
29,123
29,068
27,548
Independent Living (IL) Grants
State IL Grants
23,450
23,403
23,359
22,137
IL
Centers
80,266 80,105 79,953 75,772
IL Services for Older Blind Individuals
34,151
34,083
34,018
32,239
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
109,241 109,023 108,817 103,125
Recreational
Programs
2,474 0 0 0
Projects with Industry
19,197
0
0
0
National Council on Disability
3,271
3,264
3,258
3,258a
Access Board
7,300
7,285
7,400
7,400a
Rehabilitation Act Total
$3,475,222
$3,445,207
$3,479,958
—
Source: FY2010-FY2012 from Department of Education budget justifications. FY2013 figures are from the Department of Education’s Fiscal Year 2013 Operating Plan.
Note: Total FY2013 appropriations under the Rehabilitation Act are not available due to incomplete data on the National Council on Disability and the Access Board.
a. These represent the appropriations for the National Council on Disability and the Access Board as per appropriations legislation. Final appropriation numbers for
these agencies are not available. Neither agency was exempt from sequestration under the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25).
CRS-46
The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System
Author Contact Information
David H. Bradley
Specialist in Labor Economics
dbradley@crs.loc.gov, 7-7352
Acknowledgments
The WIA funding tables in Appendix B were prepared by Abigail Rudman, Information Research
Specialist, CRS.
Benjamin Collins, Analyst in Labor Policy, provided support in preparing this report.
Congressional Research Service
47