This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-506T 
entitled 'Employment and Training Programs: Opportunities Exist for 
Improving Efficiency' which was released on April 7, 2011. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

Testimony: 

Before the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education 
and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of 
Representatives: 

For Release on Delivery: 
Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT:
Thursday, April 7, 2011: 

Employment and Training Programs: 

Opportunities Exist for Improving Efficiency: 

Statement of Andrew Sherrill, Director Education, Workforce, and 
Income Security Issues: 

GAO-11-506T: 

Chairman Rehberg, Ranking Member DeLauro, and Members of the 
Subcommittee: 

Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the findings from our 
recent work on fragmentation, overlap, and potential duplication in 
federally funded employment and training programs and our prior work 
on the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA).[Footnote 1] As you 
know, we recently issued two reports addressing fragmentation, 
overlap, and potential duplication in federal programs--one that 
outlined opportunities to reduce potential duplication across a wide 
range of federal programs[Footnote 2] and another that focused more 
specifically on employment and training programs.[Footnote 3] This 
work and our larger body of work in the area will help government 
policymakers address the rapidly building fiscal pressures facing our 
nation's government--pressures that stem, in part, from our mounting 
debt and sustained high unemployment. 

Our work to examine fragmentation, overlap, and potential duplication 
in employment and training programs has a long history. As early as 
the 1990s we issued a series of reports that raised questions about 
the efficiency and effectiveness of the federally funded employment 
and training system, and we concluded that a structural overhaul and 
consolidation of these programs was needed. Partly in response to 
these concerns, Congress passed WIA. The purpose of WIA, in part, was 
to transform the fragmented employment and training system into a 
coherent one, establishing a one-stop system that serves the needs of 
job seekers and employers. Since WIA was enacted, we have issued 
numerous reports that have included recommendations regarding many 
aspects of WIA, such as performance measures and accountability, one-
stop centers, and training, among other topics. 

GAO's work has continued to find fragmentation, overlap, and potential 
duplication in employment and training programs. The area is 
characterized by a large number of programs with similar goals, 
beneficiaries, and allowable activities that are administered by 
multiple federal agencies. Fragmentation of programs exists when 
programs serve the same broad area of national need but are 
administered across different federal agencies or offices. Program 
overlap exists when multiple agencies or programs have similar goals, 
engage in similar activities or strategies to achieve them, or target 
similar beneficiaries. Overlap and fragmentation among government 
programs or activities can be harbingers of unnecessary duplication. 
Given the challenges associated with fragmentation, overlap, and 
potential duplication, careful, thoughtful actions will be needed to 
address these issues. 

My testimony today will discuss (1) what GAO has found regarding 
fragmentation, overlap, and duplication in federal employment and 
training programs, (2) the role that WIA activities can play in 
addressing these conditions, and (3) what additional information could 
help Congress minimize fragmentation, overlap, and duplication among 
these programs. In preparing this statement we relied on our previous 
work in these areas (please see the related GAO products appendix). 
These products contain detailed overviews of the scope and methodology 
we used. The work on which this statement is based was performed in 
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
Those standards require that we plan and perform audits to obtain 
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 
that the evidence obtained provided a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

In summary, for fiscal year 2009, GAO identified 47 federally funded 
employment and training programs administered across nine agencies. 
Almost all of these programs overlap with at least one other program 
in that they provide at least one similar service to a similar 
population, but differences may exist in eligibility, objectives, and 
service delivery. WIA's structure provides the opportunity to reduce 
overlap and duplication because it requires that several of these 
programs provide services through the one-stop system, but they need 
not be on-site. Increasing colocation at one-stop centers, as well as 
consolidating state workforce and welfare administrative agencies 
could increase efficiencies, and several states and localities have 
undertaken such initiatives. To facilitate further progress in 
increasing administrative efficiencies, we recommended that the 
Secretaries of Labor and Health and Human Services (HHS) work together 
to develop and disseminate information about such efforts. Sustained 
congressional oversight is pivotal in addressing issues of 
fragmentation, overlap, and potential duplication. Specifically, 
Congress could explore opportunities to enhance program evaluations 
and performance information and foster state and local innovation in 
integrating services and consolidating administrative structures. 

GAO Identified 47 Federal Employment and Training Programs, and Most 
Overlapped with at Least One Other Program: 

For fiscal year 2009, we identified 47 federally funded employment and 
training programs administered across nine agencies, primarily the 
Departments of Labor, Education, and Health and Human Services (HHS) 
(for a list of programs and agencies, see appendix I).[Footnote 4] 
These programs reported spending approximately $18 billion on 
employment and training services in fiscal year 2009.[Footnote 5] 
Seven programs accounted for about three-fourths of this spending, 
including the WIA Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth programs, which 
spent nearly $6 billion on employment and training services (see table 
1). Most participants received employment and training services 
through one of two programs: Employment Service/Wagner-Peyser Funded 
Activities (Employment Service) and WIA Adult.[Footnote 6] Together, 
these two programs reported serving over 18 million individuals, or 
about 77 percent of the total number of participants served across all 
programs.[Footnote 7] 

Table 1: Seven Largest Programs: Estimated Amount Spent on Employment 
and Training Activities in Fiscal Year 2009 and Estimated Number of 
Participants Served: 

Program (Agency): Rehabilitation Services -Vocational Rehabilitation 
Grants to States (Education); 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: $2,956,743,700; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 979,409; 
Year Served[B]: 2009. 

Program (Agency): WIA Dislocated Worker (Labor); 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: 2,421,340,000; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 671,786; 
Year Served[B]: 2008. 

Program (Agency): WIA Youth (Labor); 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: 2,112,069,000; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 282,426; 
Year Served[B]: 2008. 

Program (Agency): Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) (HHS); 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: 1,777,958,939; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 134,767[C]; 
Year Served[B]: 2008. 

Program (Agency): Job Corps (Labor); 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: 1,775,000,000; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 59,357; 
Year Served[B]: 2008. 

Program (Agency): WIA Adult (Labor); 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: 1,356,540,000; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 5,171,158; 
Year Served[B]: 2008. 

Program (Agency): Employment Service (Labor); 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: 1,203,677,000; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 13,472,624; 
Year Served[B]: 2009. 

Program (Agency): Total; 
Estimated Amount Spent on Employment and Training Activities in 
FY09[A]: $13,603,328,639; 
Estimated Number of Participants: 20,771,527. 

Source: GAO survey of agency officials. 

[A] Estimates may include funds provided by the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). 

[B] Officials provided the estimated number of participants for the 
most recent year for which data were available. 

[C] This number represents the monthly average number of individuals 
receiving TANF cash assistance who were engaged in work activities 
such as subsidized employment, work experience, on-the-job training, 
job search and job readiness assistance, community service, vocational 
educational training, job skills training, and in certain 
circumstances education directly related to employment. It does not 
include the number of individuals engaged in unsubsidized employment. 
Officials were unable to provide an annual estimate. 

[End of table] 

Almost all programs overlap with at least one other program, but 
differences may exist in eligibility, objectives, and service 
delivery. Forty-four of the 47 programs, which include broad 
multipurpose block grants, overlap with at least one other program, in 
that they provide at least one similar service to a similar 
population. Some of these overlapping programs serve multiple 
population groups, while others target specific populations, and some 
programs require participants to be economically disadvantaged. The 
target populations being served by the most programs are Native 
Americans, veterans, and youth. For example, all 8 programs that 
target Native Americans provide seven similar types of employment and 
training services.[Footnote 8] However, some individuals within a 
population group may be eligible for one program, but not another 
because program eligibility criteria differ. One of the programs 
targeting Native Americans, for example, serves only disabled Native 
Americans residing on or near a federal or state reservation, and 
another program serves only Native Hawaiians. 

Some efforts have been made to address overlap in programs and 
services. Officials from 27 of the 47 programs reported that their 
agencies have coordinated efforts with other federal agencies that 
provide similar services to similar populations. For example, Labor 
and HHS issued a joint letter encouraging state-administered youth 
programs to partner together using funds under the American Recovery 
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act)[Footnote 9] to promote 
subsidized employment opportunities. In addition, an official from the 
Department of the Interior reported that the agency works with Labor 
and HHS to coordinate programs for Native Americans. Under law, Native 
American tribes are allowed significant flexibility to combine funding 
from multiple programs.[Footnote 10] Moreover, as part of its proposed 
WIA reforms, the Administration is proposing consolidating 4 
employment and training programs administered by Education into 1 
program.[Footnote 11] The Administration also proposes consolidating 
Education's Career and Technical Education - Basic Grants to States 
and Tech-Prep Education programs, at the same time reducing program 
funding. In addition, the budget proposal would transfer the Senior 
Community Service Employment Program from Labor to HHS. 

Three of the largest programs maintain separate administrative 
structures to provide some of the same services. The Temporary 
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Employment Service, and WIA 
Adult programs provide some of the same employment and training 
services--such as job search and job referral services--to low-income 
individuals, although there are differences between the programs (see 
figure 1).[Footnote 12] The TANF program serves low-income families 
with children, while the Employment Service and WIA Adult programs 
serve all adults, including low-income individuals.[Footnote 13] All 
three programs share a common goal of helping individuals secure 
employment, and the TANF and WIA Adult programs also aim to reduce 
welfare dependency. However, employment is only one aspect of the TANF 
program, which also has three other broad social service goals: to 
assist needy families so that children can generally be cared for in 
their own homes, to reduce and prevent out-of-wedlock pregnancies, and 
to encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. As 
a result, TANF provides a wide range of other services beyond 
employment and training, including cash assistance.[Footnote 14] 

Figure 1: Employment and Training Services Provided by the TANF, 
Employment Service, and WIA Adult Programs, Fiscal Year 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustrated table] 

Program name: Employment Service/Wagner-Peyser Funded Activities (DOL)
Employment counseling and assessment: Secondary service; 
General Equivalency Diploma assistance: [Empty]; 
Development of job opportunities: Primary service; 
Job readiness skills training: Primary service; 
Job referrals: Primary service; 
Job retention training: [Empty]; 
Job search or job placement activities: Primary service; 
Occupational or vocational training: [Empty]; 
On-the-job training: [Empty]; 
Remedial academic, English language skills, or basic adult literacy: 
[Empty]; 
Work experience: [Empty]; 
Other: Primary service[A]. 

Program name: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (HHS); 
Employment counseling and assessment: Secondary service; 
General Equivalency Diploma assistance: Secondary service; 
Development of job opportunities: Primary service; 
Job readiness skills training: Secondary service; 
Job referrals: Secondary service; 
Job retention training: [Empty]; 
Job search or job placement activities: Secondary service; 
Occupational or vocational training: Secondary service; 
On-the-job training: Secondary service; 
Remedial academic, English language skills, or basic adult literacy: 
Secondary service; 
Work experience: Secondary service; 
Other: Primary service[B]. 

Program name: WIA Adult Program (DOL); 
Employment counseling and assessment: Primary service; 
General Equivalency Diploma assistance: Primary service; 
Development of job opportunities: Primary service; 
Job readiness skills training: Primary service; 
Job referrals: Primary service; 
Job retention training: Secondary service; 
Job search or job placement activities: Primary service; 
Occupational or vocational training: Primary service; 
On-the-job training: Primary service; 
Remedial academic, English language skills, or basic adult literacy: 
Secondary service; 
Work experience: Primary service; 
Other: [Empty]. 

Source: GAO survey of agency officials. 

[A] Job search workshops. 

[B] Subsidized employment. 

[End of figure] 

Although the extent to which individuals receive the same employment 
and training services from TANF, the Employment Service, and WIA Adult 
is unknown, the programs maintain separate administrative structures 
to provide some of the same services to low-income individuals. Data 
limitations make it difficult to assess duplication of services, but 
Labor officials estimate that in program year 2008 approximately 4.5 
percent of all WIA Adult participants who received training--about 
4,500 of the nearly 100,000 participants who exited the program--were 
also receiving TANF. However, it is unclear whether the WIA Adult 
participants who self-identify as TANF recipients have received TANF 
employment and training services.[Footnote 15] Nonetheless, the three 
programs maintain separate administrative structures. At the federal 
level, the TANF program is administered by HHS, and the Employment 
Service and WIA Adult programs are administered by Labor. At the state 
level, the TANF program is typically administered by state human 
services or welfare agencies, while the other two programs are 
typically administered by state workforce agencies. At the local 
level, Employment Service and WIA Adult services are generally 
provided through the one-stop centers, while TANF employment and 
training services may be administered through the one-stop or through 
other structures. Federal agency officials acknowledged that greater 
administrative efficiencies could be achieved in delivering these 
services, but also said that other factors, such as the proximity of 
services to clients, could warrant having multiple entities providing 
the same services. 

WIA's Structure Provides the Opportunity to Reduce Fragmentation, 
Overlap, and Duplication: 

Congress passed WIA partly in response to concerns about fragmentation 
and inefficiencies in federal employment and training programs. 
[Footnote 16] WIA authorized several employment and training programs--
including Job Corps and programs for Native Americans, migrant and 
seasonal farmworkers, and veterans--as well as the Adult Education and 
Literacy program.[Footnote 17] WIA replaced the Job Training 
Partnership Act (JTPA) programs for economically disadvantaged adults 
and youths and dislocated workers with three new programs--WIA Adult, 
WIA Dislocated Worker, and WIA Youth.[Footnote 18] The Adult and 
Dislocated Worker programs provide three tiers, or levels, of service: 
core, intensive, and training. Core services include basic services 
such as job search assistance and labor market information and they 
may be self-service in nature.[Footnote 19] Intensive services may 
include such activities as comprehensive assessment and case 
management--activities that require greater staff involvement. 
Training services may include occupational skills or on-the-job 
training. Beyond authorizing these programs, WIA also established one-
stop centers in all local areas[Footnote 20] and mandated that many 
federal employment and training programs provide services through the 
centers.[Footnote 21] 

Thirteen Categories of Employment and Training Programs Must Provide 
Services Through the One-Stop System: 

Under WIA, sixteen different categories of programs, administered by 
four federal agencies, must provide services through the one-stop 
system, according to Labor officials.[Footnote 22] Thirteen of these 
categories include programs that meet our definition of an employment 
and training program, and three categories do not, but offer other 
services to jobseekers who need them (see figure 2). These thirteen 
program categories represent about 40 percent of the federal 
appropriations for employment and training programs in fiscal year 
2010.[Footnote 23] 

Figure 2. Categories of Programs Required to Provide Services Through 
the One-Stop System and Related Federal Agencies: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

One-Stop Center: 

Department of Labor: 
* WIA Adult, Youth, and Dislocated Worker; 
* Employment Service; 
* Trade Adjustment Assistance; 
* Veterans’ employment and training; 
* Unemployment Insurance[A]; 
* Job Corps; 
* Senior Community Service Employment Program; 
* Employment and training for Native Americans and migrant farm 
workers. 

Department of Education: 
* Vocational Rehabilitation Program; 
* Adult Educationand Literacy[A]; 
* Vocational Education (Perkins Act). 

Department of Health & Human Services: 
* Community Services Block Grant. 

Department of Housing & Urban Development: 
* HUD-administered employment programs[A]. 

Source: Agency documents. 

Note: Vocational Education (Perkins Act) programs include the Career 
and Technical Education - Basic Grants to States and Tech-Prep 
Education programs. HUD-administered employment programs include the 
Community Development Block Grant and Housing Choice Voucher Family 
Self-Sufficiency programs. 

[A] Program did not meet our definition of an employment and training 
program in our recent study of multiple employment and training 
programs. 

[End of figure] 

One-stop centers serve as the key access point for a range of services 
that help unemployed workers re-enter the workforce--such as job 
search assistance, skill assessment and case management, occupational 
skills and on-the-job training, basic education and literacy training, 
as well access to Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits and other 
supportive services--and they also assist employers in finding 
workers. Any person visiting a one-stop center may look for a job, 
receive career development services, and gain access to a range of 
vocational education programs. In our 2007 study, we found that a 
typical one-stop center in many states offered services for 8 or 9 
required programs on-site, and one state offered services for 16 
required programs on-site.[Footnote 24] 

In addition to required programs, one-stop centers have the 
flexibility to include other, optional programs in the one-stop 
system, such as TANF, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program 
(SNAP) Employment and Training Program, or other community-based 
programs, which helps them better meet specific state and local 
workforce development needs. The Dayton, Ohio one-stop center, for 
example, boasts over 40 programs on-site at the 8-1/2 acre facility, 
including an organization that provides free business attire to job 
seekers who need it, an alternative high school program that assists 
students in obtaining a diploma, and organizations providing parenting 
and self-sufficiency classes. Under WIA, services may also be provided 
at affiliated sites--designated locations that provide access to at 
least one employment and training program. 

While WIA requires certain programs to provide services through the 
one-stop system, it does not provide additional funds to operate one- 
stop systems and support one-stop infrastructure. As a result, 
required programs are expected to share the costs of developing and 
operating one-stop centers. In 2007, we reported that WIA programs and 
the Employment Service program were the largest funding sources states 
used to support the infrastructure--or nonpersonnel costs--of their 
comprehensive one-stop centers.[Footnote 25] For program year 2005 
[Footnote 26], of the 48 states that could provide funding 
information, 23 states identified WIA programs as the primary funding 
source and 19 states reported it was the Employment Service program. 
In addition, 27 states reported using TANF funds to pay for part of 
their one-stop center infrastructure costs, and 3 states identified 
TANF as the primary funding source. In 2007, TANF was on-site at a 
typical one-stop in 30 states.[Footnote 27] 

Increasing Colocation of Services in One-Stop Centers and 
Consolidating State Administrative Structures May Increase 
Efficiencies: 

One-stop centers required under WIA provide an opportunity for a broad 
array of federal employment and training programs--both required and 
optional programs--to coordinate their services and avoid duplication. 
Although WIA does not require that programs be colocated within the 
one-stop center, this is one option that programs may use to provide 
services within the one-stop structure. Labor's policy is to encourage 
colocation of all required programs to the extent possible; however, 
officials acknowledged that colocation is one of multiple means for 
achieving service integration. We previously reported that colocating 
services can result in improved communication among programs, improved 
delivery of services for clients, and elimination of 
duplication.[Footnote 28] While colocation does not guarantee 
efficiency improvements, it affords the potential for sharing 
resources and cross-training staff, and may lead, in some cases, to 
the consolidation of administrative systems, such as information 
technology systems. Our early study of promising one-stop practices 
found that the centers nominated as exemplary did just that--they 
cross-trained program staff, consolidated case management and intake 
procedures across multiple programs, and developed shared data 
systems.[Footnote 29] Other types of linkages between programs, such 
as electronic linkages or referrals, may not result in the same types 
of efficiency improvements, but they may still present opportunities 
to streamline services. 

Consolidating administrative structures and colocating services may 
increase efficiencies, but implementation could pose challenges. 
[Footnote 30] Florida, Texas, and Utah have consolidated their 
workforce and welfare agencies[Footnote 31] and officials said that 
this reduced costs and improved the quality of services for 
participants, but they could not provide a dollar figure for cost 
savings. Even when states consolidate their agencies, they must still 
follow separate requirements for individual programs. With regard to 
colocating services, WIA Adult and the Employment Service are 
generally colocated in one-stop centers, but TANF employment and 
training services are colocated in one-stops to a lesser extent. 
Efforts to increase colocation could prove challenging due to issues 
such as limited available office space, differences in client needs 
and the programs' client service philosophies, and the need for 
programs to help fund the operating costs of the one-stop centers. 
[Footnote 32] While states and localities have undertaken some 
potentially promising initiatives to achieve greater administrative 
efficiencies, little information is available about the strategies and 
results of these initiatives, so it is unclear the extent to which 
practices in these states could serve as models for others. Moreover, 
little is known about the incentives states and localities have to 
undertake such initiatives and whether additional incentives may be 
needed. 

We recently recommended that the Secretaries of Labor and HHS work 
together to develop and disseminate information that could inform such 
efforts, including information on state initiatives to consolidate 
program administrative structures and state and local efforts to 
colocate additional programs at one-stop centers. As part of this 
effort, we recommended that Labor and HHS examine the incentives for 
states and localities to undertake such initiatives and, as warranted, 
identify options for increasing them. In their responses, Labor and 
HHS agreed with our recommendations. In addition, GAO is currently 
examining innovative one-stop strategies to enhance collaboration with 
employers and economic development partners to better meet local labor 
market needs. 

To the extent that colocating services and consolidating 
administrative structures reduce administrative costs, funds could 
potentially be available to serve more clients or for other purposes. 
For the TANF program alone, GAO estimated that states spent about $160 
million to administer employment and training services in fiscal year 
2009. According to a Department of Labor official, the administrative 
costs for the WIA Adult program were at least $56 million in program 
year 2009. Officials told GAO they do not collect data on the 
administrative costs associated with the Employment Service program, 
as they are not a separately identifiable cost in the legislation. 
Labor officials said that, on average, the agency spends about $4,000 
for each WIA Adult participant who receives training services. 

Congress Needs Better Information on Program Performance to Address 
Fragmentation, Overlap, and Potential Duplication in Employment and 
Training Programs: 

Making informed decisions about where to invest scarce resources 
requires information about what's working and what's not but, despite 
improvements, performance data do not provide a complete picture of 
the employment and training system. Nearly all employment and training 
programs track multiple outcome measures and many programs track 
similar measures--most often an "entered employment" rate (the number 
of participants who found jobs), employment retention, and wage gain 
or change. We have made a number of recommendations regarding the 
performance management systems of the key employment and training 
programs, and Labor has made some progress addressing our concerns. 
However, two issues remain. First, only a small proportion of job 
seekers who receive services at one-stops are reflected in WIA outcome 
data. While customers who use self-services are estimated to be the 
largest portion of those served under WIA, job seekers who receive 
self-service or informational services are specifically excluded from 
performance calculations by the statute. Second, WIA's performance 
measurement system contains no provision for measuring overall one-
stop performance, relying instead on a program-by-program approach 
that cannot easily be used to assess the overall performance of the 
one-stop system. 

Information about the effectiveness of these programs can also help 
guide policymakers and program managers in making decisions about how 
to improve, coordinate, or consolidate existing programs. However, 
little is known about the effectiveness of employment and training 
programs because only 5 of the 47 programs reported that they had 
conducted any impact studies since 2004.[Footnote 33] Impact studies, 
which allow for determining the extent to which a program is causing 
participant outcomes, can be difficult and expensive to conduct 
because they take steps to examine what would have happened in the 
absence of a program to isolate its impact from other factors. 
[Footnote 34] Such studies may not be cost-effective for smaller 
programs, particularly in periods of tight budgets, but strategically 
chosen impact studies can be an important means for understanding 
where efficiencies can be achieved. Labor has been slow to comply with 
a requirement to conduct a multi-site control group evaluation of the 
WIA-funded programs.[Footnote 35] In 2004 and 2007, we recommended 
that Labor comply with the requirements of the law and conduct an 
impact evaluation of WIA services to better understand what services 
are most effective for improving outcomes. Since then, Labor has 
completed a nonexperimental study of the WIA Adult and Dislocated 
Worker programs and also has an experimental design impact study of 
these programs currently under way. The nonexperimental study found 
that the WIA Adult program had positive impacts on average earnings up 
to 4 years after participant entry, but noted that the magnitude of 
this effect could have been due to the selection of applicants with 
greater income prior to participation and better job prospects. The 
study found that the impacts for participants in the Dislocated Worker 
program were also positive, but smaller.[Footnote 36] Labor expects 
that the experimental design impact study currently underway will 
examine impact by funding stream, but will not be completed until June 
2015.[Footnote 37] 

Understanding how well the one-stop system is reducing fragmentation 
through coordinated service delivery would be useful in deciding where 
efficiencies could be achieved, but no study has been undertaken to 
evaluate the effectiveness of the one-stop system approach. While a 
few program impact studies have been done or are underway, these 
studies largely take a program-by-program approach rather than 
focusing on understanding which approaches are most effective in 
streamlining service delivery and improving one-stop efficiency. In 
addition, Labor's efforts to collaborate with other agencies to assess 
the effects of different strategies to integrate job seeker services 
have been limited. We previously recommended that Labor collaborate 
with Education, HHS, and HUD to develop a research agenda that 
examines the impacts of various approaches to program integration on 
job seeker and employer satisfaction and outcomes.[Footnote 38] Labor 
has committed to collaborating with other agencies and has involved 
them in developing inter-agency initiatives for certain targeted 
activities, but has not yet evaluated the effectiveness of the one-
stop system. 

In January 2011, the President signed the GPRA Modernization Act of 
2010 (GPRAMA),[Footnote 39] further amending the almost two-decades-
old Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA).[Footnote 
40] Implementing provisions of the new act--such as its requirement to 
establish outcome-oriented goals covering a limited number of 
crosscutting policy areas--could play an important role in clarifying 
desired outcomes, addressing program performance spanning multiple 
organizations, and facilitating future actions to reduce unnecessary 
duplication, overlap, and fragmentation. Specifically, GPRAMA requires 
(1) disclosure of information about accuracy and validity, (2) data on 
crosscutting areas, and (3) quarterly reporting on priority goals on a 
publicly available Web site. Additionally, GPRAMA significantly 
enhances requirements for agencies to consult with Congress when 
establishing or adjusting governmentwide and agency goals. This 
information can inform deliberations on spending priorities and help 
re-examine the fundamental structure, operation, funding, and 
performance of a number of federal programs. However, to be 
successful, it will be important for agencies to build the analytical 
capacity to both use the performance information, and to ensure its 
quality--both in terms of staff trained to do the analysis and 
availability of research and evaluation resources. 

In conclusion, removing and preventing unnecessary duplication, 
overlap, and fragmentation among federal employment and training 
programs is clearly challenging. These are difficult issues to address 
because they may require agencies and Congress to re-examine within 
and across various mission areas the fundamental structure, operation, 
funding, and performance of a number of long-standing federal programs 
and activities. Implementing provisions of GPRAMA could play an 
important role in clarifying desired outcomes, addressing program 
performance spanning multiple organizations, and facilitating future 
actions to reduce unnecessary duplication, overlap, and fragmentation. 

Sustained attention and oversight by Congress will also be critical. 
Our work highlights two key areas where congressional oversight could 
facilitate progress: 

* Enhancing program evaluations and performance information; and: 

* Fostering state and local innovation in integrating services and 
consolidating administrative structures. 

As the nation rises to meet its current fiscal challenges, GAO will 
continue to assist Congress and federal agencies in identifying 
actions needed to address these issues. Likewise, we will continue to 
monitor developments in the areas we have already identified. 

Chairman Rehberg, Ranking Member DeLauro, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be happy 
to respond to any questions you may have at this time. 

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

For further information regarding this testimony, please contact me at 
(202) 512-7215 or sherrilla@gao.gov. Individuals making key 
contributions to this testimony include Dianne Blank, Caitlin Croake, 
Pamela Davidson, Patrick Dibattista, Alex Galuten, Andrew Nelson, Paul 
Schearf, and Kathleen Van Gelder. 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Federally Funded Employment and Training Programs by 
Agency, Fiscal Year 2009: 

Department of Labor: 
* Community-Based Job Training Grants; 
* Disabled Veterans’ Outreach Program; 
* Employment Service/Wagner-Peyser Funded Activities; 
* H-1B Job Training Grants; 
* Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Project; 
* Job Corps; 
* Local Veterans’ Employment Representative Program; 
* National Farmworker Jobs Program; 
* Native American Employment and Training; 
* Registered Apprenticeship and Other Training; 
* Reintegration of Ex-Offenders; 
* Senior Community Service Employment Program; 
* Trade Adjustment Assistance; 
* Transition Assistance Program; 
* Veterans’ Workforce Investment Program; 
* WIA Adult Program; 
* WIA Youth Activities; 
* WIA Dislocated Workers; 
* WIA National Emergency Grants; 
* WANTO; 
* YouthBuild. 

Department of Education: 
* American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services; 
* Career and Technical Education – Basic Grants to States; 
* Career and Technical Education – Indian Set-aside; 
* Grants to States for Workplace and Community Transition Training for 
Incarcerated Individuals; 
* Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers Program; 
* Native Hawaiian Career and Technical Education; 
* Projects with Industry; 
* Rehabilitation Services – Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States; 
* State-Supported Employment Services Program; 
* Tech-Prep Education; 
* Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions. 

Department of Health and Human Services: 
* Community Services Block Grant; 
* Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Voluntary Agency Matching Grant 
Program; 
* Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Targeted Assistance Grants; 
* Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Social Services Program; 
* Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Targeted Assistance Discretionary 
Program; 
* Temporary Assistance for Needy Families; 
* Tribal Work Grants[A]. 

Department of the Interior: 
* Conservation Activities by Youth Service Organizations[B]; 
* Indian Employment Assistance; 
* Indian Vocational Training – United Tribes Technical College. 

Department of Agriculture: 
* SNAP Employment and Training Program. 

Department of Defense: 
* National Guard Youth Challenge Program. 

Environmental Protection Agency: 
* Brownfield Job Training Cooperative Agreements. 

Department of Justice: 
* Second Chance Act Prisoner Reentry Initiative. 

Department of Veterans Affairs: 
* Vocational Rehabilitation for Disabled Veterans[C]. 

Source: GAO analysis. 

[A] Also known as the Native Employment Works program. 

[B] For the purposes of our study, this program includes several 
programs administered by Interior's National Park Service: Public 
Lands Corps, Youth Conservation Corps, Youth Intern Program, and Youth 
Partnership Program. 

[C] Also known as the VetSuccess program. 

[End of section] 

Related GAO Products: 

Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, 
Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-441T]. Washington, D.C.: March 3, 
2011. 

Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, 
Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-318SP]. Washington, D.C.: March 1, 
2011. 

Multiple Employment and Training Programs: Providing Information on 
Colocating Services and Consolidating Administrative Structures Could 
Promote Efficiencies. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-92]. Washington, D.C.: January 13, 
2011. 

Workforce Investment Act: Labor Has Made Progress in Addressing Areas 
of Concern, but More Focus Needed on Understanding What Works and What 
Doesn't. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-396T]. 
Washington, D.C.: February 26, 2009. 

Workforce Development: Community Colleges and One-Stop Centers 
Collaborate to Meet 21st Century Workforce Needs. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-547]. Washington, D.C.: May 15, 
2008. 

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. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1096]. Washington, D.C.: September 
4, 2007. 

Workforce Investment Act: Additional Actions Would Further Improve the 
Workforce System. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1051T]. Washington, D.C.: June 28, 
2007. 

Workforce Investment Act: Substantial Funds Are Used for Training, but 
Little is Known Nationally about Training Outcomes. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-650]. Washington, D.C.: June 29, 
2005. 

Workforce Investment Act: States and Local Areas Have Developed 
Strategies to Assess Performance, but Labor Could Do More to Help. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-657]. Washington, D.C.: 
June 1, 2004. 

Workforce Investment Act: Labor Actions Can Help States Improve 
Quality of Performance Outcome Data and Delivery of Youth Services. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-308]. Washington, D.C.: 
February 23, 2004. 

Workforce Investment Act: One-Stop Centers Implemented Strategies to 
Strengthen Services and Partnerships, but More Research and 
Information Sharing is Needed. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-725]. Washington, D.C.: June 18, 
2003. 

Multiple Employment and Training Programs: Funding and Performance 
Measures for Major Programs. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-589]. Washington, D.C.: April 18, 
2003. 

Workforce Investment Act: States' Spending Is on Track, but Better 
Guidance Would Improve Financial Reporting. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-239]. Washington, D.C.: November 
22, 2002. 

Workforce Investment Act: Better Guidance and Revised Funding Formula 
Would Enhance Dislocated Worker Program. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-02-274]. Washington, D.C.: February 
11, 2002. 

Multiple Employment and Training Programs: Overlapping Programs 
Indicate Need for Closer Examination of Structure. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-01-71]. Washington, D.C.: October 13, 
2000. 

Workforce Investment Act: Implementation Status and the Integration of 
TANF Services. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/T-HEHS-00-145]. Washington, D.C.: June 
29, 2000. 

Multiple Employment Training Programs: Information Crosswalk on 163 
Employment Training Programs. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/HEHS-95-85FS]. Washington, D.C.: 
February 14, 1995. 

Multiple Employment Training Programs: Major Overhaul Needed to Reduce 
Costs, Streamline the Bureaucracy, and Improve Results. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/T-HEHS-95-53]. Washington, D.C.: 
January 10, 1995. 

Multiple Employment Training Programs: Overlap Among Programs Raises 
Questions About Efficiency. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/HEHS-94-193]. Washington, D.C.: July 
11, 1994. 

Multiple Employment Training Programs: Conflicting Requirements 
Underscore Need for Change. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/T-HEHS-94-120]. Washington, D.C.: 
March 10, 1994. 

Multiple Employment and Training Programs: Major Overhaul is Needed. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/T-HEHS-94-109]. 
Washington, D.C.: March 3, 1994. 

Multiple Employment Training Programs: Overlapping Programs Can Add 
Unnecessary Administrative Costs. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/HEHS-94-80]. Washington, D.C.: January 
28, 1994. 

Multiple Employment Training Programs: Conflicting Requirements Hamper 
Delivery of Services. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/HEHS-94-78]. Washington, D.C.: January 
28, 1994. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] Pub. L. No. 105-220, 112 Stat. 936. 

[2] GAO, Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government 
Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-318SP] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 1, 
2011). An interactive, Web-based version of the report is available 
at: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ereport/gao-11-318SP]. 

[3] GAO, Multiple Employment and Training Programs: Providing 
Information on Colocating Services and Consolidating Administrative 
Structures Could Promote Efficiencies, GAO-11-92 (Washington, D.C.: 
January 13, 2011). 

[4] We defined an employment and training program as a program that is 
specifically designed to enhance the specific job skills of 
individuals in order to increase their employability, identify job 
opportunities, and/or help job seekers obtain employment. We excluded 
certain programs that did not meet this definition, did not provide 
employment and training services, or were components of other 
employment and training programs. We included programs with broader 
missions if a primary purpose of the program was to provide employment 
and training assistance, including multipurpose block grants and 
career and technical education programs. We did not conduct a legal 
analysis in order to identify the programs or to determine their 
objectives, requirements, or goals. 

[5] For information on the amount each program reported spending on 
employment and training services in fiscal year 2009, and the 
estimated amount spent in fiscal year 2010, see [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-92], appendixes II and III. 

[6] For information on the estimated number of participants receiving 
employment and training services, by program, see [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-92], appendix IV. 

[7] Officials provided estimates for the most recent year for which 
data were available. Reported participant numbers for the Employment 
Service program are for 2009, and reported participant numbers for the 
WIA Adult program are for 2008. 

[8] We also found that five of the six programs that target veterans 
provide seven similar types of employment and training services, and 
the five programs that target youth provide seven similar types of 
employment and training services. 

[9] Pub. L. No. 111-5, 123 Stat. 115. 

[10] 25 U.S.C. §3403. 

[11] This is part of the Administration's broader proposal to 
consolidate 9 Rehabilitation Act programs administered by Education 
into 3 programs. Some of these programs do not meet our definition of 
an employment and training program. 

[12] See [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-92]. To 
identify areas of potential duplication across the 47 programs, we 
selected the TANF, Employment Service, and WIA Adult programs for more 
in-depth analysis. We selected these three programs because our prior 
work indicated they had the potential for duplication based on a high 
degree of overlap, and they were also among the largest of the 47 
programs in terms of the amount spent on employment and training 
services. 

[13] The WIA Adult program gives priority for intensive and training 
services to recipients of public assistance and other low-income 
individuals when program funds are limited. 

[14] To reduce dependency, TANF requires many cash assistance 
recipients to participate in work activities such as subsidized 
employment, on-the-job training, or community service. 

[15] Labor's estimate likely understates the number of TANF recipients 
served by the WIA Adult program, as the program collects information 
on TANF receipt only if participants receive intensive or training 
services. Further, HHS officials told us that data are not available 
at the federal level on the total number of individuals who receive 
TANF employment and training services because HHS lacks the legal 
authority to require such reporting. 

[16] Pub. L. No. 105-220, 112 Stat. 936 (1998). 

[17] David H. Bradley, The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop 
Delivery System, a report prepared for the Congressional Research 
Service (Washington, D.C., Jan.10, 2011). According to CRS, WIA also 
amended the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933, which establishes the 
Employment Service, to make the Employment Service an integral part of 
the one-stop system. 

[18] For the repeal of JTPA, see Pub. L. No. 105-220 §199(b)(2), 
(c)(2)(B), 112 Stat. 936, 1059. For the new WIA Adult and Dislocated 
Worker programs, see §§ 131 et seq., 112 Stat. 936, 982. For the new 
WIA Youth program, see §§ 126 et seq., 112 Stat. 936, 971. 

[19] Unlike the JTPA adult program, WIA imposes no income eligibility 
requirements for adults receiving any of its core services. 

[20] Pub. L. No. 105-220 §134(c), 112 Stat. 936, 992. WIA required 
that one-stop centers be established in local workforce investment 
areas in all participating states. States are responsible for 
designating local workforce investment areas, and each state must have 
one or more local areas. As of April 2007, we found that the number of 
local areas in each state ranged from 1 to 50. 

[21] Pub. L. No. 105-220 §134(c)(2)(A), 112 Stat. 936, 993. 

[22] According to Labor officials, although WIA required 17 categories 
of programs to participate in the one-stop system, the Welfare-to-Work 
program has been discontinued, reducing the total to include 16 
categories of required programs. For the purposes of this report, we 
refer to these 16 categories of programs as "required programs." 

[23] Fiscal year 2010 appropriations were reported by federal agency 
officials in GAO's 2010 survey of employment and training programs. 
Because the TANF program is not required to provide services through 
the one-stop system, the appropriations represented by these 13 
program categories do not include appropriations for the TANF program. 

[24] See GAO, 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, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1096] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 4, 
2007). 

[25] See [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1096]. We 
defined infrastructure costs as the nonpersonnel costs necessary for 
the general operation of a one-stop center, including the rental costs 
of the facilities, costs of utilities and maintenance, and equipment 
(including adaptive technology for individuals with disabilities). 

[26] Program year 2005 ran from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006. 

[27] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1096]. 

[28] Specifically, we reported that colocating community college staff 
at one-stop centers can result in these benefits. See GAO, Workforce 
Development: Community Colleges and One-Stop Centers Collaborate to 
Meet 21ST Century Workforce Needs, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-547] (Washington, D.C.: May 15, 
2008). 

[29] See GAO, Workforce Investment Act: One-Stop Centers Implemented 
Strategies to Strengthen Services and Partnerships, but More Research 
and Information Sharing is Needed, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-725] (Washington, D.C.: June 18, 
2003). As part of this study, we visited 14 one-stop centers which 
were identified as exemplary by government officials and workforce 
development experts. 

[30] See [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-92]. 

[31] In Utah, the workforce agency administers the TANF program in its 
entirety; in Florida and Texas the workforce system administers only 
TANF employment and training services. 

[32] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-92]. 

[33] However, agencies may currently have impact studies under way. 

[34] The five impact studies identified by officials generally found 
that the effects of participation were not consistent across programs, 
with only some demonstrating positive impacts that tended to be small, 
inconclusive, or restricted to short-term impacts. 

[35] 29 U.S.C. § 2917(c). 

[36] Carolyn J. Heinrich, Peter R. Mueser, and Kenneth R. Troske, 
Workforce Investment Act Nonexperimental Net Impact Evaluation, Final 
Report, December 2008. This nonexperimental study was a net impact 
evaluation that used a closely matched comparison group design rather 
than a random assignment design to assess the impact of the programs 
on participants' postprogram earnings. 

[37] The WIA impact study currently underway uses a random assignment 
experimental design to assess programs' impacts on participants' post 
program employment and earnings and their cost effectiveness. 

[38] GAO, Workforce Investment Act: One-Stop Centers Implemented 
Strategies to Strengthen Services and Partnerships, but More Research 
and Information Sharing is Needed, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-725]. (Washington, D.C.: June 18, 
2003). 

[39] Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866 (2011). 

[40] Pub. L. No. 103-62, 107 Stat. 285 (1993). 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: