Workforce Education and Training Policies: Current Federal Reauthorization Proposals Workforce Education and Training Policies: Current Federal Reauthorization

Workforce Education and Workforce Education and Training Policies:Training Policies:

Current Federal Reauthorization ProposalsCurrent Federal Reauthorization Proposals

Job Opportunities Task ForceBaltimore, Maryland

April 23rd, 2003

MissionMission

The Workforce Alliance (TWA) is a national coalition of local leaders advocating for federal policies that invest in the skills of America’s workers– including those who are low-income, unemployed, or seeking advancement– so they can better support their families, and help American businesses better compete in today’s economy.

TWA’s Four-Point PlatformTWA’s Four-Point Platform

• Increase our Nation’s Investment in the Skills of its Workforce

• Expand Access to Education & Training for All Workers

• Measure Policies by their Success in Developing Self-Sufficient Workers

• Promote and Reward Local Innovation

A Very Busy Year A Very Busy Year ……

• Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)– Administration: DONE– House: DONE (HR 4)– Senate: Finance Committee (May-June?); Summer – Fall

* Current Law Extended Until June 30th

• Workforce Investment Act (WIA)– Administration: March Framework; Senate Bill? (May)– House: Education & Workforce Comm (HR 1261); Floor vote delayed– Senate: HELP Committee (May-June?); Fall

• Higher Education Act (HEA) & Perkins Act– Late 2003 / early 2004

• Ongoing Funding Battles– Congress vs. Administration? (FY2004 Budget, Approps)

TWA’s Goals for ImprovingTWA’s Goals for Improving

TANFTANF

• Allow a range of employment-connected education and training activities—including post-secondary education—to count as “work activities”

• Eliminate the 12-month limit vocational education

• Eliminate 30% cap on number of clients engaged in E & T

• Reward states for improving clients’ success in the labor market (employment, retention, earnings gains) vs. for reducing state caseloads– TANF-WIA integration through performance measures (vs. “super

waivers”)

Competing TANF ProposalsCompeting TANF Proposals

Administration & House: HR 4Passed February 2003; same as last year’s bill (HR 4737)

• Further limits on allowable work activities

• Raised required hours of work to 40Highly prescriptive about what to for specific hours each week

• Raised work participation rate to 70% Double of most states

• No More than 4 months education / training

Competing TANF ProposalsCompeting TANF Proposals

SenateLast session’s “Tri-Partisan” Finance Committee Bill

• 30 hours of work, with 24 in “work-focused” activities

• Raised work participation rate to 70%

• Allowed 24 months of vocational education

• Post-secondary as work activity for 10% of caseload; ABE as work activity for up to 6 months

• Employment credit vs. caseload reduction credit

• $200 million Business Link Partnership grants


WIAWIA• Invest in our Nation’s Workforce

– Protect and Expand WIA Funding

• Expand Access to Training (vs. current decreases)– Relieve “infrastructure” vs. “training” competition for limited dollars– Allow for a flexible “array” of services (core, intensive, training) vs. a federally

mandated sequence

• Easier for Effective Training Providers to Participate– Reduce reporting burdens across federal programs, types of clients– common

performance measures (with diverse outcome expectations)– Robust, cross-agency public tracking systems that relieve burdens on individual

training providers


WIAWIA

• State / Local Flexibility to Better Meet Local Conditions– Fewer federal mandates on funding mechanisms (vouchers vs.

contracts), ETP requirements, etc.

– Ability to adjust “performance” for changed local economic conditions

– Federal prescriptions on “who,” but not on “how”

• More Meaningful Opportunities for Engaging Business– WIBs are important, but should not be the only way

– Industry-specific planning efforts / intermediaries– in which business collaborates with training providers, labor unions, public system

Competing WIA ProposalsCompeting WIA Proposals

• Administration: USDOL-ETA White Paper– 10-pager, released March 7th, 2003

– Was to have followed last year’s forums, written comments

• House: HR 1261-- “Workforce Reinvestment and Adult Education Act ”

– Passed out of Committee this week; floor vote in April (?)

• Senate: May - June 2003– Legislative version of Administration’s proposal

– Democratic / Tri-partisan Alternative

USDOLUSDOL / / HouseHouse Proposals Proposals

“Encouraging” Elements…“Encouraging” Elements…

• Relaxed Sequence of Services (???)– USDOL: generally stated– House: “unlikely or unable to obtain suitable employment” (Governor)

• State Flexibility on ETP Lists– Still need to address funding to encourage participation– Tracking WIA clients or all clients (pro and con)

• Separate One-Stop Funding Stream; all agencies contribute– USDOL: not specific; separate line in FY2004 budget request– House: at State level



• New Business Role on Local WIBs (strategy vs. administration)

– Local agencies sit on separate “Operating Committees”

– Agency concerns about being saddled with One-Stop costs, no authority

– Still too limited focus on WIBs vs. industries?

• Common Performance Measures (4 for Adults, across agencies)

– USDOL: employment, retention, earnings gains or credential (unclear)

– House: employment, retention, earnings gains

– BOTH: Efficiency Measure– Another “one size fits all” measure that will force creaming or low-cost / low-skill strategies



• Recognized Need to Better Serve Certain Workers

Incumbent Workers– 10% of Local Adult Dollars (with Governor approval); good, but no new

money

At-Risk / Special Populations– USDOL: “more dynamic performance negotiation process”– House: Incentive Grants to States and Locals; expands “special

populations” to people with disabilites; * New amendments on displaced homemakers; ex-offenders; demonstration program

– BOTH: Other proposal elements could work against serving people with special needs (e.g., Efficiency Measure, Adult Block Grant)


Bad Ideas…Bad Ideas… • Consolidation of Adult, Dislocated Worker and Employment

Service dollars into new $3.1 billion “Comprehensive Adult” block grant– Ignores differences between different types of job-seekers– Pits different types of workers against each other over limited funds– Everyone served by stream for single set of outcome measures

• Transfers too much Authority from Locals to Governors– USDOL: 50/50 funding split; Governor determines allocation formula– House: 50/50 split (but half of Governor’s $ to locals for core services)– USDOL: Governors do local area designation; no appeal to USDOL– State WIB authority over Local One-Stops (allocation; certification)


Bad Ideas…Bad Ideas…

• “State Option” to Block Grant WIA Entirely– USDOL: Governor can choose to scrap WIA system, apply funds

however s/he wants within certain very broad guidelines (e.g. One-Stops); without current statutory protections (e.g., FLSA)

– House: Does NOT include State Option Block Grant Authority

• Personal Reemployment Accounts (PRAs)– USDOL: Part of proposal

– House: Been removed from WIA bill; will be introduced elsewhere? (already passed under “Back to Work Incentive Act”)

USDOLUSDOL / / HouseHouse Proposals ProposalsOther Details…Other Details…

• Changes to State & Local WIB Composition (adult)– USDOL: State WIBs not required business majority; partner agencies

– House: State WIBs retain business majority

– BOTH: Agencies off Local WIB (Operating Committees)

• ITAs to “Career Scholarships” (USDOL only)– Combine public and private dollars

• New Priority for Unemployed Workers– Vs. old “priority” on public assistance recipients

WIA Title IIWIA Title IIAdult Education and Family LiteracyAdult Education and Family Literacy

HR 1261; Dept. of Education expressed priorities (vs. budget request)

• *** Fewer Big Changes than under Title I

• Additional Performance Indicators– Core Indicators: improved basic skills, transition to post-secondary

education, post-secondary credential or equivalent– Employment Performance Indicators: employment, retention, earnings

gains; no efficiency measure

• Additional Emphasis on “Workplace Literacy”– Distinct activity area, along with ABE, ESL and Family Literacy

WIA Title IIWIA Title IIAdult Education and Family LiteracyAdult Education and Family Literacy

• Additional “Eligible Providers”– Qualified faith-based organizations

– For-profit

• Push for Curricular “Standards” (?)– Emphasis on “scientific research-based practices”

– Research on adult vs. K-12 learners???

– Implications for workplace literacy???


HEA / Pell GrantsHEA / Pell Grants• Individual Eligibility: Make it easier for working adults /

part-time students to use Pell Grants– Not “regular students”; don’t make “satisfactory progress”– Cost of Attendance, Expected Contribution

• Program Eligibility: New aid that could be used for non-traditional, employment-focused courses– Expand use of Pell: e.g., shorter-termed courses effective in helping people

advance; distance learning coursesOR

– Create a new title in HEA for programs serving working adults not seeking enrollment in a long-term course of academic study


PerkinsPerkins

• Maintain Funding for Adult Workforce Programs– Administration calling for 24% cut to Perkins; Governors’ option to use

funding for K-12 education

• Differences in Adult vs. High School Programs: – Different measures of “success” (e.g., employment vs. degree completion)

– Reward meaningful labor market outcomes

– Comparable outcome measures with other federal workforce programs (e.g., WIA)

Bush Administration’s Bush Administration’s 2004 Budget Request2004 Budget Request

Program FY ‘02

($ in thousands) ‘03 Approp.($ in thousands)

‘04 Request($ in thousands)

WIA Adult 950,000 900,000 900,000

WIA DW 1,549,000 1,463,770 1,383,040

WIA Youth 1,127,965 1,000,965 1,000,965

TANF 16,500,000 16,500,000 16,500,000

Perkins 1,288,000 1,308,000 1,000,000

Pell 11,314,000 11,439,000 12,715,000

WIA/JTPA Adult, Youth Training (non-Summer Youth) and Dislocated Workers (Inflation-Adjusted)

$-

$500,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$1,500,000,000

$2,000,000,000

$2,500,000,000

$3,000,000,000

$3,500,000,000

$4,000,000,000

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Year

Fu

nd

ing

Lev

el (

2001

Co

nst

ant

$s)

WIA/JTPA Dislocated Worker Assistance

WIA/JTPA Youth Training (40% Rule)

WIA/JTPA Adult (w/60% rule)

Andy Van KleunenExecutive Director

The Workforce Alliance (TWA)1054 31st Street NW, Suite 425

Washington, DC 200007

[email protected]

Washington Office: 202-338-0737

Documents

Workforce Education and Training Policies: Current Federal Reauthorization Proposals Workforce Education and Training Policies: Current Federal Reauthorization