Review of Mississippi’s Implementation · –improved quality of the workforce; and, –enhanced productivity and competitiveness of ... •Shift in program responsibility from

PEER

1

The Mississippi Joint Legislative Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review

Discussion of 2009 PEER Report: A

Review of Mississippi’s Implementation

of the Workforce Investment Act

PEER

Briefing Outline

• Background: Description of Workforce

Investment Act (WIA) of 1998 [P.L. 105-220]

• Mississippi’s Implementation of the Act

• Holding the Act Accountable for Results

2


PEER

Background: Description of WIA

3


PEER

Purpose of WIA (global)

• To provide workforce development services to

employers and workers resulting in:

– reduced dependency on public assistance;

– improved quality of the workforce; and,

– enhanced productivity and competitiveness of

the U.S.

4


PEER

Purpose of WIA (individual)

• To increase participants’ occupational skills,

resulting in increased:

– employment;

– employment retention; and,

– earnings

5


PEER

Major Components of WIA

• 3 program areas:

– Adults (age 18 and older);

– Dislocated workers (laid off and unlikely to return to previous

employment); and

– Youth (age 14-18)

6


PEER

Major Components of WIA, cont.

• Provides broader range of services than Job Training

Partnership Act:

– Core service requirements (e.g., outreach, assessment of

skills and needs, job search, placement assistance)

– Intensive services requirements (e.g., comprehensive

assessments, development of individual employment plans,

occupational skills training, on-the-job training, supportive

services such as child care)

• “One-stop-shop:” customers must be able to access

services at a single location in their neighborhoods

• Shift in program responsibility from state to locals7


PEER

Major Components of WIA, cont.

• Creation of state workforce investment boards (SWIBs)

– must develop 5 year strategic plans

– must designate LWIB areas

• Creation of local workforce investment boards (LWIBs)

– required business majority and business chair (over 12,000

employers serve on SWIBs and over 550 LWIBs nationwide)

– businesses help to ensure that the system prepares people for

current and future jobs by training the workforce to meet their

skill needs

– conduct local labor market analyses to understand demand and

trends in the market8


PEER

WIA: Pennsylvania Example

• Sectoral approach used to target WIA resources:

– identify industries with strongest upcoming need

for skilled workers and potential for growth

– train workforce to meet their demands

9


PEER

WIA: Pennsylvania Example, cont.

• Industry Need:

– Manufacturers in Berks County region losing

skilled industrial maintenance workers to

retirement;

– Inadequate pipeline of new entrants;

– Shifting job requirements: need for cross-trained

technicians with more advanced technical skills

10


PEER

WIA: Pennsylvania Example, cont.

• Training Solution:

– Employers partnered with community colleges,

secondary career and technology centers, and

LWIBs to address need for workers skilled in

mechatronics (combines mechanical, electrical

and controls engineering with computer science);

– Developed an advanced manufacturing integrated

systems technician certification program; over

400 workers earned certification

– Later added associate and baccalaureate degree

programs11


PEER

Implementation of WIA in Mississippi

12


PEER

State WIA Administrator

• Governor designated Mississippi’s Department of

Employment Security as the state WIA Administrator

– MDES establishes statewide WIA policies

– MDES monitors the performance of the workforce areas

and submits quarterly and annual progress reports to U.S.

Dept. of Labor (DOL)

– MDES receives federal WIA allocations from DOL and

allocates the funds to the state’s four LWIBs

13


PEER

Mississippi WIA Funding Allocations

14


PEER

Mississippi WIA Funding Allocations, cont.

15


PEER

Mississippi’s WIA Service System

• In 2008:

– 53 Workforce Investment Network (WIN) Job Centers;

– 14 E-WIN access points at public libraries;

– access to Mississippi Online Job Opportunities (MOJO)

from any location with internet access

• MDES functions as the one-stop operator of the

majority of centers

• “One-stop” partners include: Department of

Education, Department of Rehabilitation Services,

and State Board for Community and Junior Colleges

16


PEER

Holding WIA Accountable for Results

17


PEER

WIA Performance Accountability System

• WIA establishes “common measures” for the 3 programs

(adults, dislocated workers, and youth)

• Data collected from Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage

records

• In setting performance goals (negotiated with DOL), the

act directs the state and local areas to take into account

factors affecting performance such as differences in

economic conditions, characteristics of participants, and

services to be provided

• DOL considers a state in compliance if it meets at least

80% of the negotiated performance goal 18


PEER

Common Measures for Adults and Dislocated

Workers

• Entered employment rate: of unemployed

participants: # employed in 1st quarter after exit quarter

• Employment retention rate: of those participants

employed in 1st quarter after exit quarter: # employed

in both 2nd and 3rd quarters after exit quarter

• Average earnings: of participants employed in 1st, 2nd,

and 3rd quarters after exit quarter: total earnings in 2nd

plus 3rd quarters after the exit quarter

Divided by # participants who exit during quarter19


PEER

Mississippi’s Performance on the Common

Measures: AdultsProgram

Year

Entered

Employment

Rate

Employment

Retention Rate

Average

Earnings*

2001 86.9 84.0 3,305

2002 83.5 83.6 2,980

2003 78.4 85.1 2,675

2004 71.9 84.1 2,584

2005 66.8 76.6 2,459

2006 62.4 75.5 9,334

2007 63.5 79.7 9,818

20


* Changed from “increase in average earnings” to “average earnings” in 2006

PEER


Measures: Dislocated WorkersProgram

Year

Entered

Employment

Rate

Employment

Retention Rate

Average

Earnings*

2001 95.4 89.4 95.6%

2002 91.6 86.9 121%

2003 83.5 88.9 122.5%

2004 76.6 87 121.5%

2005 70.3 79.7 $857

2006 63.5 77.5 $10,597

2007 65.9 82.1 $11,148

21


* Changed from “increase in average earnings” to “average earnings” in 2006

PEER

WIA Performance Accountability System:

Common Measures for Youth

• Placement in employment or education

– Of those not in post-secondary education or employment

at date of participation: # of participants employed,

enrolled in post-secondary education or advanced

training/occupational skills training in 1st quarter after

exit quarter

• Attainment of a degree or certificate

– Of those enrolled in education: # participants who attain

a diploma, GED, or certificate by end of 3rd quarter after

exit quarter

Divided by # of participants who exit during quarter 22


PEER

Common Measures for Youth, cont.

• Literacy or numeracy gains

– Of out-of-school youth deficient in basic skills:

# of participants who increase one or more

functioning levels/ # of participants who have

completed a year in the program plus the # of

participants who exit before completing a year

in the program

23


PEER


Measures: Youth

Program

Year

Placement (in

employment or

education)

Attainment (of

a degree or

certificate)

Literacy or

Numeracy Gains

2005 53.6 42.1 38.7

2006 76.4 77.7 14

2007 79.4 70.7 66.6

24


PEER

Increase in Number of WIA Participants

who Entered Employment

• During period of PY 2000- PY 2007:

– 153,783 WIA participants entered employment

• Adults: 78,180

• Dislocated Workers: 69,728

• Youth: 5,875

• The number of WIA participants who became

employed increased from 872 in PY 2001 to

49,174 in PY 2007

25


PEER

Performance Accountability System:

Customer Satisfaction

• Surveys conducted after conclusion of participation

in workforce investment activities

• MDES also hired “mystery shoppers” to evaluate

customer service at the WIN centers, based on:

– Job seeker visits (finding: centers hard to find due to lack

of signage)

– Job seeker calls (majority of centers scored “8” or above)

– Employer calls (majority of centers scored “7” or above)

26


PEER

Limitations to WIA Performance

Monitoring

• Data reported to DOL’s national participant

database, the Workforce Investment Act

Standardized Records Data (WIASARD)

• GAO and DOL expressed concerns about

completeness and accuracy of data in WIASARD

27


PEER

Limitations to WIA Performance

Monitoring, cont.

• Data source (UI) is not available on all workers

• GAO found that states are selecting which

participants they include in their reporting

• Data does not differentiate between effectiveness

of the different services that participants receive

• Common measures do not reflect on the more

global objectives; e.g., improved quality of

workforce, effectiveness of WIA programs in

reducing un/underemployment28


PEER

Mississippi Employment and Unemployment Data

(7/90-7/11)

29


PEER

Mississippi Unemployment Rates (7/90-7/11)

30


PEER

WIA Participants who Entered Employment in

Comparison to # Unemployed

Program Year

Total WIA

Participants who

Entered

Employment

Total Unemployed

Persons

Percentage of

Unemployed

Served

2001 872 64,925 1.30%

2002 5,710 85,701 6.70%

2003 11,171 89,585 12.50%

2004 22,670 82,873 27.40%

2005 31,055 95,227 32.60%

2006 33,131 84,110 39.40%

2007 49,174 81,350 60.40%

Total 153,783 583,771 26.30%

31


PEER

PEER Efficiency Review

• PEER concluded that through more efficient use of

technology (e.g., establishment of call centers,

automated services) MDES has become more

efficient in its delivery of employment services

• From 2000 through 2008, there were:

– 21 fewer service delivery sites;

– 15% fewer MDES employees (539 in 2000 vs. 460

in 2008) providing employment services to

significantly more program participants

32


PEER

PEER Efficiency Review

33


Documents

Review of Mississippi’s Implementation · –improved quality of the workforce; and, –enhanced productivity and competitiveness of ... •Shift in program responsibility from