Findings from a Study of 

One-Stop Self-Services: 

A Case-Study Approach 

Final Report 

December 2009 

Prepared by: 

Ronald D’Amico 

Kate Dunham 

Annelies Goger 

Charles Lea 

Nicole Rigg 

Sheryl Ude 

Andrew Wiegand 

Prepared for: 

The U.S. Department of Labor

Employment and Training

 Administration 

Office of Policy Development 

and Research 

200 Constitution Ave., N.W. 

Washington, DC 20210 

DOL Contract Nos. 

AF-11761-01-30 &

 GS10F0281S 

SPR Projects 1142 & 1383 

 

S O CIA L P O L ICY R ESEA R C H 

A SS O CIATE S • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

1330 Broadway, Suite 1426 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Tel: (510) 763-1499 

Fax: (510) 763-1599 

www.spra.com 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
CONTENTS 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ATTRIBUTIONS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... ES-1 

I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... I-1
 

Background ..................................................................................................................... I-2
 

Data Collection as Part of the Evaluation ........................................................................I-4
 

Limitations of the Data Collection and Analysis ..............................................................I-6
 

Overview of this Report...................................................................................................I-9
 

II. WHAT ARE SELF-SERVICES?........................................................................... II-1
 

Self-Services: Theory vs. Practice .................................................................................II-1
 

How Self-Services are Classified ...................................................................................II-3
 

The Client-Flow Process ................................................................................................II-4
 

Criteria for WIA Staff-Assisted Services ....................................................................II-7
 

Reconciling Competing Priorities .............................................................................II-10
 

The Integrated Service Delivery Model ........................................................................II-10
 

Conclusions..................................................................................................................II-12
 

III. RESULTS OF THE LOCAL-AREA SURVEY ..................................................... III-1
 

Survey Administration and Content ...............................................................................III-1
 

Physical Access Points .................................................................................................III-2
 

Customer Flow ..............................................................................................................III-4
 

Tracking Self-Service Usage.........................................................................................III-6
 

Available Self-Services .................................................................................................III-6
 

Local-Area Websites and their Features ..................................................................III-6
 

Services for Individuals.............................................................................................III-8
 

Services for Employers...........................................................................................III-15
 

Strengths, Challenges, and Satisfaction with Services ...............................................III-16
 

Conclusions.................................................................................................................III-20
 

i 
IV. FACILITATING ACCESS TO SELF-SERVICES ................................................IV-1
 

Promoting Public Awareness of Services .................................................................... IV-1
 

General Marketing and Outreach ............................................................................ IV-1
 

Marketing and Outreach to Targeted Populations ................................................... IV-2
 

Methods of Recruitment........................................................................................... IV-3
 

Site Accessibility .......................................................................................................... IV-4
 

Locational Features that Facilitate Access .............................................................. IV-4
 

External Features that Deter Access ....................................................................... IV-8
 

Usability of Resources ................................................................................................. IV-8
 

Layout and Equipment............................................................................................. IV-9
 

Additional Features that Promote Access .............................................................. IV-11
 

Accessibility for Customers with Special Needs......................................................... IV-11
 

Accommodating Disabled Customers .................................................................... IV-12
 

Accommodating Customers with Literacy and Language Barriers ........................ IV-17
 

Accessibility for Customers with Limited Computer Skills ..................................... IV-18
 

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. IV-20
 

Promising Practices in Facilitating Access to Self-Services .................................. IV-21
 

Challenges in Facilitating Access to Self-Services ................................................ IV-21
 

V. CUSTOMER TRACKING SYSTEMS ...................................................................V-1
 

Types of Systems.......................................................................................................... V-1
 

Local Area Tracking Systems ................................................................................... V-1
 

Statewide Tracking Systems .................................................................................... V-6
 

Types of Information Tracked ..................................................................................... V-10
 

Customer Characteristics ....................................................................................... V-12
 

Services Used......................................................................................................... V-12
 

Outcomes and Customer Satisfaction .................................................................... V-13
 

Use of Information That is Tracked ............................................................................. V-14
 

Cost of Tracking Systems ........................................................................................... V-15
 

Conclusions................................................................................................................. V-16
 

VI. WHO USES SELF-SERVICES? .........................................................................VI-1
 

The Characteristics of Self-Services Users .................................................................. VI-1
 

Results from the Customer Survey .............................................................................. VI-6
 

Conclusions.................................................................................................................. VI-9
 

ii 
VII. SELF-SERVICE USAGE ....................................................................................VII-1
 

The Volume of Self-Service Customers ...................................................................... VII-1
 

Overall Numbers Being Served .............................................................................. VII-1
 

Annual Variations in Self-Service Customer Volume.............................................. VII-3
 

Frequency of Use........................................................................................................ VII-3
 

Patterns of Usage ....................................................................................................... VII-6
 

Types of Services Used .............................................................................................. VII-7
 

Results from the Tracking Systems ........................................................................ VII-7
 

Results from the Customer Survey ....................................................................... VII-11
 

Accessibility in Using Services .................................................................................. VII-13
 

General Accessibility Issues ................................................................................. VII-13
 

Accessibility for Customers with Disabilities ......................................................... VII-14
 

Conclusion ................................................................................................................ VII-16
 

VIII. STAFF ASSISTANCE WITH SELF SERVICES................................................VIII-1
 

Staffing the Resource Room ...................................................................................... VIII-2
 

Number of Staff Serving Self-Service Job Seeker Customers .............................. VIII-2
 

Funding of Resource Room Staff .......................................................................... VIII-3
 

Assisting Self-Service Job Seekers ........................................................................... VIII-4
 

Orientation to the Resource Room ........................................................................ VIII-5
 

Providing Ongoing Assistance within the Resource Room.................................... VIII-6
 

Staff Approach to Providing Assistance to Self-Service Customers ...................... VIII-7
 

Referring Self-Service Customers to Partner Services .............................................. VIII-8
 

Other Self-Service-Related Duties ............................................................................. VIII-9
 

Training for Resource Room Staff............................................................................ VIII-10
 

Conclusion ............................................................................................................... VIII-11
 

IX. INFORMATION AND RESOURCES ...................................................................IX-1
 

Assessment and Career Planning ................................................................................ IX-1
 

Challenges in Using Self-Service Assessment and Career Planning 

Challenges in Using Information on Education and Training 

Tools Available ........................................................................................................ IX-1
 

Tools ........................................................................................................................ IX-5
 

Information on Education and Training Opportunities .................................................. IX-6
 

Tools Available ........................................................................................................ IX-6
 

Opportunities ........................................................................................................... IX-9
 

iii 
Labor Market Information ............................................................................................. IX-9
 

Tools Available ...................................................................................................... IX-10
 

Challenges in Using LMI........................................................................................ IX-11
 

Tools to Enhance Pre-Vocational Skills ..................................................................... IX-12
 

Tools Available ...................................................................................................... IX-12
 

Challenges in Using Pre-Vocational Tools ............................................................ IX-15
 

Job Listings and Job Search Assistance .................................................................... IX-15
 

Job Listings............................................................................................................ IX-15
 

Challenges in Using Job Listings ........................................................................... IX-18
 

Training in Job-search Skills .................................................................................. IX-20
 

Other Tools and Resources ....................................................................................... IX-25
 

Employer Self-Services.............................................................................................. IX-26
 

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. IX-28
 

X. EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION .....................X-1
 

Employment Outcomes ................................................................................................. X-1
 

Results Using UI Wage Data .................................................................................... X-1
 

Employment Results from the Customer Survey .................................................... X-10
 

Satisfaction with Services ........................................................................................... X-11
 

Conclusions................................................................................................................. X-12
 

XI. CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................XI-1
 

APPENDIX A: Customer Survey............................................................................... A-1
 

iv 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND ATTRIBUTIONS 

Although this project was carried out primarily by Social Policy Research Associates, we wish to 

acknowledge the assistance of SPR’s survey contractors, Decision Information Resources and 

Washington State University’s Social and Economic Sciences Research Center, as well as the 

project’s consultants, Drs. Burt Barnow and David Greenberg. Many staff at SPR contributed to 

making the project a success, including the authors of this report, but many others assisted with 

data collection and analysis, including Deanna Khemani, Micheline Magnotta, Candiya Mann, 

Jessica Pearlman, Dennis Rojas, Jeffrey Salzman, Richard West, and David Wright. Eloisa 

Dellosa, Colette Duncan, and Eric Engles additionally provided valuable editorial and 

administrative support. We wish to acknowledge as well the contributions and support of DOL 

staff, especially our project officers, Daniel Ryan and Russell Saltz. Their advice and steadfast 

support are much appreciated. 

We are enormously grateful to the administrators and staff from the states and local areas who 

were very gracious in providing administrative data and hosting site visits from research staff. 

These include the LWIAs of Alameda County, Oakland, Richmond, Riverside, Sacramento, and 

San Diego, in California; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and South Plains and Brazos Valley, 

Texas. Special thanks too to the states of Pennsylvania and Texas for supplying Unemployment 

Insurance data. We also wish to thank additional LWIAs who hosted site visits, including 

Boulder, CO; Fulton County, GA; Ouachita Parish and Rapides Parish, LA; Metro South, MA; 

Kansas City, Southeast, and Franklin-Jefferson, MO; Chemung/Schuyler/Steuben and Oyster 

Bay, NY; Westmoreland/Fayette, PA; Trident, SC; Upper Rio, TX; and Olympic, WA. Their 

cooperation is much appreciated. 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

In an effort to expand its reach while containing costs, the public workforce investment system 

has increasingly come to rely on self-services—that is, those tools and resources that customers 

can use on their own or with minimal staff assistance. In an effort to learn more about selfservices, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) funded Social Policy Research Associates (SPR) 

to conduct an implementation and outcomes study of self-services at selected One-Stop Career 

Centers nationwide. Specifically, the evaluation aimed to profile the characteristics of customers 

who use self-services, their motivation for using services, their patterns of usage, and the 

outcomes that follow. Additionally, the evaluation studied the ways that One-Stop Career 

Centers facilitate access to self-services, the staff assistance they provide to customers, and the 

resources and tools they make available. Results described in this report address these questions 

for the small number of case-study LWIAs that participated in the study and cannot be construed 

as generalizing to LWIAs nationwide. 

Background 

Facilitating the matching of job seekers with available jobs so as to improve the efficiency of the 

labor market has long been an important government function. Indeed, its history in the U.S. 

spans many decades. Furthermore, in their broad review of the realms within which government 

action can be justified on the grounds of economic efficiency, the Nobel Prize-winning 

economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and his colleagues conclude that the DOL’s public labor exchange 

functions “seem consistent with the principles for government action.”1 

While the need for public labor exchange services has continued to be recognized, their mode of 

delivery has undergone an important change: self-services have become an increasingly 

important part of the way that job seekers access services, complementing the staff-assisted 

services that tended to predominate in earlier years. A number of factors underlie this trend, 

J. Stiglitz, P. Orszag, and J. Orszag, The Role of Government in a Digital Age (Paper commissioned by the 

Computer and Communications Industry Association, 2004). 

ES-1 

1 
 

 

including dramatic cutbacks in funding in real-dollar terms for the Wagner-Peyser program, a 

technological revolution that has facilitated the development and electronic dissemination of a 

wealth of information to job seekers, and cultural shifts that place emphasis on empowering 

customers to take charge of their own career development strategies. 

Nonetheless, at present little is known about customers’ use of self-service tools and resources, 

including who uses these services, how frequently, for what reasons, and with what effect. 

Indeed, the U.S. General Accounting Office has noted that, by largely excluding self-service 

customers, the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) reporting system can shed little light on the 

experiences of those who likely make up the largest pool of customers of publicly funded 

workforce services.2

 DOL has taken numerous steps in recent years to improve the accuracy and 

comprehensiveness of reporting, and has also funded this evaluation to help fill in gaps in 

available knowledge. 

About the Evaluation 

Key objectives of the evaluation focus on understanding who uses One-Stop Career Center selfservices and characterizing the volume of usage. To shed light on these issues, the evaluation 

targeted local workforce investment areas (LWIAs) that asserted that they had systems in place 

to comprehensively track all customers who accessed self-services on-site and could provide 

basic information about these customers, including, at a minimum, identifying information (such 

as Social Security Numbers, names, and addresses), demographic information, and the dates on 

which services were accessed. To identify such areas, as well as to profile One-Stop Career 

Center self-services nationwide, a Local-Area Survey of One-Stop Self-Services was 

administered to LWIAs in 2003, and again in 2006. 

Based on the survey results, a number of LWIAs were asked to participate in the evaluation, of 

which 23 did so to varying degrees. 

•	 Nine LWIAs in three states provided extracts from their self-service usage data. These 

include six in California, one in Pennsylvania, and two in Texas. Each of these LWIAs 

provided complete data on its self-service users for at least a nine-month period, and 

some provided data for more than a two-year period. These data cover some part of the 

period from May 2004 through December 2006, with the precise period varying from 

LWIA to LWIA. 

U.S. General Accountability Office, Workforce Investment Act: Additional Actions Would Further Improve the 

Workforce System. Testimony of Sigurd Nelson, GAO-07-1051T (2007). 

ES-2 

2 
 

 

 

•	 Eight of these LWIAs as well as 14 others (for a total of 22 LWIAs in 11 states) hosted 

site visits from the research team. All these LWIAs had well developed self-service 

tracking systems in place, and their inclusion enables the study to speak more broadly 

about tracking mechanisms as well as to learn about self-service systems more generally. 

To learn more about customers’ experiences in using self-services, the project team also 

administered a survey of self-service users in five of the LWIAs that supplied tracking system 

data. Because the LWIAs supplied their self-service data extracts at different times, the 

customer surveys needed to be administered at different times as well. Surveys of customers in 

two LWIAs were administered in 2005, and in the three remaining LWIAs in 2007. 

Finally, the evaluation team obtained UI wage data, collected from state UI agencies covering 

self-service users in three LWIAs in two states. Operationally, the project team first received the 

self-service usage data from these LWIAs, extracted the SSNs and transmitted them to the state 

UI agencies, and took receipt of the UI wage data in return. The UI wage data cover at least 

three quarters before and up to four quarters after each customer’s use of self-services, and were 

used to measure customers’ employment and earnings over time. 

As the above description implies, the project has different pieces of data for different subsets of 

LWIAs, and complete data—local-area survey data, self-service tracking data, site visit data, 

customer survey data, and UI wage data—for only three of them. This limited coverage stems 

from the fact that relatively few LWIAs across the nation have comprehensive self-service 

tracking systems in place, and many of those who do have such systems were unwilling to share 

data with the evaluation team due to confidentiality concerns. Moreover, even if the LWIA 

agreed to supply data, state UI agencies were often reluctant to conduct UI wage matching due to 

similar confidentiality concerns. Because of the limited coverage, the findings described in this 

report should be viewed as representing case studies of a selected number of LWIAs rather than 

describing broad, national patterns. 

As an additional qualifier, these are case studies of self-service usage that occurs on-site. The 

availability of many One-Stop delivery system tools and resources via the Internet means that 

many self-service customers may access these services remotely, from their homes, offices, or 

other locations, rather than on-site at a One-Stop Career Center.3 The profiles of customer usage 

No credible estimate exists of the number of customers who access One-Stop self-services through the Internet 

alone (i.e., without also visiting a One-Stop Career Center in person). However, the numbers can be presumed to 

be considerable. For example, just before it ceased operation, America’s Job Bank (AJB) received more than 16 

million visits during each calendar quarter (AJB ceased operation in the summer of 2007), many of whom likely 

accessed services from a remote location. 

ES-3 

3 
and outcomes presented in this report are applicable only to those who access services on-site at 

a One-Stop Career Center. 

Key Findings 

The One-Stop Career Center self-service systems offer an extremely rich menu of service 

offerings and accommodate huge numbers of customers every day who find these services very 

useful. At the same time, the self-service system is under considerable strain. This strain is 

brought about by the large numbers of customers being served and the difficulties they have in 

accessing services without assistance, coupled with the limited funding and staffing that LWIAs 

have available to expand their self-service systems. With this backdrop, key findings of the 

evaluation are listed below, arranged under key topic headings that correspond to the chapters of 

the full report. 

What Is Self-Service? 

Relatively few on-site self-service customers can be viewed as truly self-sufficient, able to 

conduct an efficient and successful job search entirely on their own or with only a brief 

orientation to One-Stop Career Center services. Because of this fact, resource room staff play a 

major helping role that, while limited in scope and intensity, seems absolutely critical and 

obscures what it means to be a self-service customer. 

Recognizing that many customers have extensive needs for assistance, at least one state and a 

number of LWIAs around the country have developed an integrated services delivery model that 

effectively classifies all resource room customers as having received WIA staff-assisted services. 

As part of their functional alignment of ES and WIA services, and motivated in part by a desire 

to be customer-focused, these areas mandate that virtually all visitors to the One-Stop Career 

Centers receive at least an initial assessment, which, in their view, constitutes significant staff 

involvement. Therefore, in these areas, almost no one is classified as receiving only selfservices. 

Findings from the Local-Area Survey 

Nationwide, the infrastructure for One-Stop Career Center self-services is very well developed. 

Virtually all local areas have at least one comprehensive One-Stop Career Center, as WIA 

requires, and one-third of areas have six or more physical access points (i.e., comprehensive 

centers and satellites combined). Furthermore, most local areas make available a broad range of 

self-service informational tools and resources to both job-seeking and employer customers. 

ES-4 
Access to services via the Internet has been growing, and this is now the most common way in 

which self-services are made available. This heavy reliance on the Internet as the medium for 

delivering services means that customers can access most self-services both on-site and off-site. 

Most local areas express satisfaction with their self-service systems, but they note areas for 

improvement as well. Among the strengths they cite are the professionalism and helpfulness of 

their resource room staff, the special expertise that partner programs can provide, the 

accessibility of their services, the appealing physical setting in which services are provided, and 

their resource room’s up-to-date equipment. They recognize notable challenges, however, 

especially that many customers have difficulty making use of self-services because of limited 

computer proficiency or weak literacy skills. For this reason, having the level of resource-room 

staffing needed to assist customers adequately was widely cited as an important remaining 

challenge. Also cited as an important challenge was having a budget adequate to support the 

self-service system. 

Comprehensive systems for tracking self-service customers and resource room visits are not in 

place in the great majority of LWIAs. Although the majority of local areas require self-service 

customers to provide at least basic information about themselves (such as by signing their names 

on a sign-in sheet), the systems used to track self-service usage are still incomplete in most 

LWIAs around the country. Without mechanisms to track who uses self-services and for what 

purposes, the ability of local areas to fine-tune self-services to better meet customers’ needs 

remains limited. 

Facilitating Access to Self-Services 

Referrals from partner agencies and word-of-mouth are the two most common means by which 

customers find their way to the resource rooms. LWIAs generally have limited budgets for 

marketing or outreach, and feel they are already operating at capacity. Therefore, they deem 

extensive marketing neither feasible nor prudent. Although general marketing is minimal, 

LWIAs do conduct more limited outreach to under-served populations. 

LWIAs ensure the accessibility of their One-Stop Career Centers through strategic siting, but 

some areas could do more. To ensure easy access, One-Stop Career Centers are generally 

strategically located in downtown districts or neighborhood hubs, and on or near major public 

transportation lines. However, some centers display poor external signage, offer limited parking, 

or are located in remote areas that cannot easily be reached by public transportation. Additional 

features that would promote accessibility, such as offering evening or weekend hours, are 

uncommon. 

ES-5 
Resource rooms present a professional and inviting setting for self-service customers, but 

centers’ capacities during peak times are strained. Resource rooms generally display similar 

layouts, with a reception and waiting area, rows of computers with each computer in an 

individual cubicle to provide customers some privacy, work tables, telephones, and a library or 

other area for hard-copy materials. In general, the settings are professional and comfortable. 

However, centers can become overly crowded during peak times, leading to somewhat cramped 

conditions and waits for computers. To address the problem of demand for computers exceeding 

supply, centers impose time limits on computer usage, but this deters access. In some instances, 

security is a concern, a problem that some centers have dealt with by hiring security guards. 

Centers make special efforts to accommodate a broad range of customers with special needs; 

while very helpful, these efforts are not always able to overcome the barriers to access that 

customers encounter. All centers have made accommodations to their physical settings and offer 

assistive technology to facilitate access for persons with disabilities. However, resource room 

staff report that assistive technology is rarely used; hence, in some areas the equipment is 

sometimes stored away until the need for it presents itself, and resource room staff are not very 

familiar with its use. The special expertise offered by the Disability Program Navigator or 

Vocational Rehabilitation staff is therefore critical. Other special needs populations include 

those with limited English proficiency, limited literacy, or limited expertise in using computers. 

Some centers make special efforts to accommodate such individuals, such as translated materials 

or workshops given in different languages for non-English speakers and binders with written 

instructions for those lacking computer literacy. However, in most centers these efforts do not 

seem adequate to facilitate access for those with these special needs. In particular, having a 

resource room that is mainly technology-based means that some customers will flounder, 

because the center cannot provide the staff assistance they need. 

Tracking Systems 

Both locally based and statewide tracking systems are in evidence in the sites studied. Each 

system has its own advantages and disadvantages. Statewide systems are especially convenient 

for creating online databases to facilitate matching between job seekers and employers and for 

measuring participants’ employment outcomes. However, because tracking the use of local selfservices is not their primary function, usage data can be absent or incomplete. By contrast, local 

systems are generally more comprehensive in tracking usage, but reliance on them often requires 

additional data entry to support the registration of customers in the state ES job system and 

provides no ready means for measuring employment outcomes. 

ES-6 
Regardless of the system, tracking assists One-Stop Career Center staff in managing center 

resources efficiently and identifying customers in need of staff assistance. Monthly and quarterly 

reports that state and local staff generate from their tracking systems have been beneficial in 

allowing them to understand customer service usage patterns. This information has helped 

centers to schedule services and staff during times when resource room services are most used. 

Furthermore, state and local tracking systems that require customers to provide at least basic 

personal information about themselves—particularly information about disability status, offender 

status, housing status, and the like—help staff better understand customers’ barriers to 

employment, identify those in need of intensive or training services, and expedite referrals to 

partner agencies for appropriate services. 

Notwithstanding its considerable advantages, tracking can be burdensome and costly, and the 

data captured are not always of high quality. Swipe-card or scan-card systems are the 

commonly used methods of tracking and they are not especially burdensome for staff or 

customers to use. Still, some centers report that data entry can be a problem, especially during 

times of heavy center usage, when data entry can become spotty or error-prone. Furthermore, 

information on service usage is inexact (most systems record, at best, the service the customer 

intends to use rather than the services he or she actually uses), service codes are applied 

inconsistently (making the data that is collected difficult to use), and information on outcomes is 

virtually non-existent. Furthermore, tracking systems can be costly to operate, with equipment 

leasing and programming support running from $10,000 to several times that amount per year. 

Citing these limitations, as well as problems with equipment malfunctions and lost swipe cards, 

one LWIA abandoned its tracking system midway through the study. 

Who Uses Self-Services? 

In most LWIAs, the number of customers who only receive self-services is far greater than the 

number who go on to receive WIA staff-assisted services; the high volume of self-service 

customers can sometimes strain the capacity of the system to provide quality services. The ratio 

of the number of self-service users overall to those receiving WIA staff assistance reaches as 

high as 50:1 in some LWIAs. During peak times, waiting lists are developed to regulate 

customer flow, and the amount of time staff can spend answering any one customer’s questions 

is severely constrained. Moreover, customer flow is uneven across a twelve-month period, 

potentially posing additional challenges in the area of resource management. 

In comparison to those who receive staff-assisted services from the WIA adult program, selfservice users as a whole have characteristics that would seem to make it somewhat more difficult 

for them to find jobs. Self-service users tend to be younger or older (less likely to be middleES-7 
aged), have lower levels of education (more likely to be high school dropouts), and have lower 

pre-program earnings. There are also some demographic differences between the two 

populations; in particular, female self-service users are much more likely than their male 

counterparts to go on to receive staff-assisted services. 

Patterns of Usage 

The typical customer uses resource room services just once during a 12-month period, but repeat 

users make up a significant portion of all person-days of usage. About 55 percent of self-service 

customers visit the resource room just once in a 12-month period. At the other extreme, about 

six percent of customers visit more than ten times in a year. But the latter group accounts for 

nearly 40 percent of the resource room’s total number of visits in a year. 

Overwhelming majorities of self-service users use resource rooms to look for a job or access 

other services associated with job search (e.g., preparing a resume), but appreciable numbers 

also have broader aims, such as researching career options or researching training providers. 

Thus, customers access a wide range of the resources that One-Stop Career Centers have 

developed to aid in career development. 

Nearly all services are rated as quite helpful or very helpful by at least half of the customers who 

access them, but the services used most often are the ones that receive the lowest ratings of 

helpfulness. The service with the highest favorability rating was getting help with preparing a 

resume, with 69 percent of customers who accessed this service rating it as quite or very helpful. 

However, only 35 percent of customers used this service. Similarly, 66 percent of those who 

accessed a service focused on improving their basic skills rated the service favorably, but only 10 

percent of customers used this service. At the other end of the scale, looking for current job 

openings—the service used by the most customers (79 percent)—had the lowest helpfulness 

rating, with 41 percent of users rating it quite or very helpful. 

One-Stop Career Centers do a good job of facilitating access, according to the vast majority of 

resource room customers, including those with disabilities. Customers report few problems with 

resource room technology, the centers’ hours of operation, or accessing workshops they would 

like to attend. The biggest complaint was not receiving adequate staff assistance, which was 

mentioned as a moderate or major problem by about 20 percent of customers. 

Staff Assistance for Self-Service Customers 

Most centers have a minimum of one or two staff working in the resource room at all times, but 

staffing arrangements differ. In about half the sites, the resource room is typically staffed by 

ES-8 
those who have this duty as their full-time job. In other sites, rotating, as-needed, or temporary 

staff are used. The latter include participants in the Senior Community Service Employment 

Program (SCSEP), TANF participants, college interns, and WIA youth participants. In the 

largest number of sites, the majority of the resource room staff are funded by WIA or WagnerPeyser. However, other sources of funding for staff can also be important, including the SCSEP 

program, TANF, community colleges, Job Corps, adult education, and others. 

Contrary to the expectation that job seekers would use self-service tools and resources 

independently, most customers need a considerable amount of assistance to use these tools 

effectively. At the very least, every customer receives an orientation to resource room services, 

conducted either informally in a one-on-one session (in most centers) or as a formal group 

orientation session. Additionally, resource room staff provide ongoing one-on-one assistance, 

particularly helping customers with using computers and providing basic job search assistance. 

In assisting self-service customers, many resource room staff try to empower customers to do 

things on their own, not only to give customers a stronger foundation for career development, but 

also to mitigate the challenges posed by often-inadequate staffing. 

Resource room staff see the need for additional staff as a pressing challenge. In many centers, 

center managers wanted more staff to provide general assistance; in a few other centers, they 

cited a need for staff to have specific skills, such as fluency in a language other than English or 

expertise in mental health counseling. The primary reason cited for inadequate staffing was 

decreased funding from both WIA and Wagner-Peyser, which has resulted in staff layoffs or no 

replacement of staff who have left or retired. Low wages, high workloads, and stress were cited 

as contributing to high staff turnover, aggravating problems of inadequate staffing and a general 

lack of experience among resource room staff. 

Resources and Tools 

One-Stop Career Centers provide an array of high-quality publicly-funded and commercially 

developed tools for resource room use. These tools focus on assessment and career planning, 

information about education and training opportunities, labor market information, development 

of pre-vocational skills, job listings and matching, and job search assistance. As a whole, these 

tools are offered in a variety of formats, including electronic delivery and print, and some are 

accessed through workshops. However, electronic resources predominate. 

The rich array of tools available electronically is at once a strength and a challenge. The tools 

and resources available in the resource rooms provide rich information in a readily accessible 

electronic format. However, because many of the resources are available only electronically, 

centers encounter a challenge in providing sufficient assistance to customers who lack computer 

ES-9 
 

 

literacy. Moreover, having so many tools, web pages, and links available can overwhelm 

customers in the job search process: customers are not always sure about which tools are most 

appropriate for addressing their needs and staff are not always available to provide clarity. 

For these reasons, options for self-service delivery and knowledgeable and accessible staff are 

integral to serving customers well. When resources are available in diverse formats and staff are 

accessible, centers are better able to serve customers with diverse needs, learning styles, and 

levels of computer savvy. 

Employment Outcomes and Customer Satisfaction 

Self-service customers generally record lower outcomes on the common measures—the entered 

employment rate, the retention rate, and average earnings—than do customers receiving staffassistance from the WIA adult program. Self-service users record entered employment rates that 

range from a few percentage points lower to 30 or more percentage points lower than WIA 

exiters, depending on the proxy used for measuring the entered-employment statistic and the 

particular LWIA whose performance is being charted. The gap in retention rates between the 

two groups is consistently smaller, amounting to between five and twelve percentage points, with 

self-service customers again recording the disadvantage. Self-service customers also record 

lower average earnings (the sum of earnings in the second and third quarters after receiving 

services) than WIA exiters by about $2,000 in two of the three LWIAs providing data. 

However, the experience of New York State suggests that high performance among self-service 

users is possible. New York State recorded a sharp drop in performance on EER for WIA adults 

when resource room customers became registered in WIA in large numbers. However, the 

state’s performance has since rebounded, suggesting that high performance on the common 

measures is possible for self-service customers. The state’s experience deserves greater scrutiny 

because of its potential for replication elsewhere. 

Customers who find a job after using resource room services usually do not credit the services 

they received as having helped them find the job. Only about 28 percent of respondents in the 

customer survey who had found a job several months after they used resource room services 

rated the center’s services as either quite helpful or extremely helpful to them in finding the job. 

By contrast, 48 percent reported that the services were not at all helpful, and another 24 percent 

reported them as only somewhat helpful. Clearly, finding jobs for the workforce system’s 

customers represents a substantial challenge. 

Ratings of helpfulness using the American Customer Satisfaction Index show that, on average, 

self-service customers rate resource room services as somewhat more favorable than neutral. 

ES-10 
Satisfaction with services receives a score of 66 (on a 100-point scale), how well services 

compare with the ideal receives a score of 59, and whether services meet expectations receives a 

score of 58. A weighted average of the three yields a score of 61. In comparison, customers 

receiving WIA staff-assisted services give a score on the weighted index of 79, according to 

recently published performance results for the WIA program. 

Conclusions 

Overall, the results demonstrate the considerable potential of the self-service delivery system to 

reach large numbers of customers and to facilitate their access to an array of resources and tools 

that can assist them in conducting a job search and exploring career options. Resource rooms 

offer comfortable and inviting environments, and staff are professional and do their best to be 

helpful. The service offerings are rich, and customers generally rate the services they use 

favorably. 

At the same time, the self-service system is under strain. To some extent, this comes about 

because of the sheer numbers of customers seeking services, which can swamp centers’ capacity, 

at least at peak times. But, additionally, there is to some degree a mismatch between the goals of 

and philosophy behind self-services and the reality of the needs of the customers seeking 

services. As one administrator put it, “The people who really can do self-services aren’t coming 

here; they don’t use us. We see the people who have problems.” These problems, for many, 

include poor preparation for work, limited English proficiency, poor literacy skills, and an 

unfamiliarity with or fear of using computers—all factors that make self-services difficult for 

them. Additional resource room staffing might help these customers get more out of selfservices, but funding limitations make this infeasible and, moreover, relying too heavily on staff 

assistance runs against the grain of what self-services are supposed to be about. At the very 

least, One-Stop Career Centers need to do much more to enhance the computer literacy skills of 

their customers for the customers to be able to access electronic resources effectively on their 

own. 

These challenges notwithstanding, self-services have clearly become a fundamental part of the 

public workforce investment system, and their ability to provide access to useful resources and 

information tools for large numbers of customers is substantial. As one customer put it, “Despite 

my objections and criticisms I may have about this place, without it I would not have any hope 

of finding anything. I would also have nowhere to go most days and no purpose. This place is 

truly needed!” 

ES-11 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
 

 

 

 

 

I. INTRODUCTION 

In an effort to expand its reach while containing costs, the public workforce investment system 

has increasingly come to rely on self-services—that is, those tools and resources that customers 

can use on their own or with minimal staff assistance. In an effort to learn more about selfservices, including what resources are available, how they are used, and what outcomes follow 

their use, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) funded Social Policy Research Associates (SPR) 

to conduct an implementation and outcomes study of self-services at One-Stop Career Centers. 

The evaluation, titled Evaluation of One-Stop Self-Services, has focused on on-site use of selfservices and has these major components: 

•	 A survey of local workforce investment areas (LWIAs). 

•	 Site visits to 22 LWIAs in 11 states. 

•	 Surveys of customers of One-Stop Career Center self-services. 

•	 A quantitative analysis of administrative data, including: 

− Data provided by nine LWIAs from their self-services tracking 

systems. 

− Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage data and claimant data provided 

by two states. 

Results from the local-area surveys were described in two earlier reports, and preliminary 

findings from the site visits and analysis of administrative data were described in an interim 

report issued in December 2007.1

 This final report updates and extends those findings by 

describing results from the most recent round of site visits, the customer surveys, and the 

administrative data. 

See R. D’Amico, Findings from the Local-Area Survey of One-Stop Self-Services (Social Policy Research 

Associates, 2003); R. D’Amico, Results from the Second Local-Area Survey of One-Stop Self-Services (Social 

Policy Research Associates, 2006); and R. D’Amico, A. Goger, M. Magnotta, J. Pearlman, D. Rojas, and A. 

Wiegand, Preliminary Findings from a Study of One-Stop Self-Services (Social Policy Research Associates, 

2007). 

I-1 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This chapter presents a background discussion of why self-services have become such a critical 

component of the public workforce investment system. It next describes the study design and 

data collection, and concludes with a description of what follows in subsequent chapters. 

Background 

Facilitating the matching of job seekers with available jobs so as to improve the efficiency of the 

labor market has long been an important government function. Indeed, its history in the U.S. 

spans many decades. First authorized by the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933, labor exchange 

services have been available since then without eligibility restrictions or charge to both 

employers and job seekers. 

The value of public labor exchange services has continued to be recognized even in the recent 

era of privatization and questioning of government involvement in the economy. In their broad 

review of the realms within which government action can be justified on the grounds of 

economic efficiency, the Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and his colleagues 

identify circumstances in which government action seems appropriate (“green-light” principles), 

and others where caution or restraint are in order (“yellow-light” or “red-light” principles). 

Applying this framework, these scholars conclude that the Department of Labor’s public labor 

exchange functions “seem consistent with the principles for government action.”2 

While the need for public labor exchange services has continued to be recognized, their mode of 

delivery has undergone an important change: self-services have become an increasingly 

important part of the way that job seekers access services, complementing the staff-assisted 

services that tended to predominate in earlier years. A number of factors underly this trend: 

•	 Funding for Wagner-Peyser services has steadily declined in real-dollar terms since the 

late 1970s. 3 The Employment Service (ES), funded by Wagner-Peyser, has historically 

been a leader in developing career planning and assessment tools, and the agency 

employed many certified counselors to administer and interpret test results and counsel 

2	 Stiglitz and colleagues start from the premise that the advancement of information technology raises important 

concerns regarding the encroachment of government functions in realms better left to the private sector. 

Accordingly, they delineate ten principles for determining whether or not government action can be justified on 

efficiency grounds. Based on these principles, they concluded that America’s Job Bank—a federally supported 

web site with job vacancy postings (America’s Job Bank has since been discontinued)—was a reasonable and 

appropriate realm for government action. Drawing on their logic, it appears that One-Stop self-service functions 

could be justified on similar grounds. See J. Stiglitz, P. Orszag, and J. Orszag, The Role of Government in a 

Digital Age (paper commissioned by the Computer and Communications Industry Association, 2004). 

3	 David Smole estimates that funding for Wagner-Peyser services declined by about one-third in real dollar terms 

from 1984 to the end of the century. See D. Smole, “Labor Exchange Performance Measurement,” pp. 101-133 

in D. Balducchi, R. Eberts, and C O’Leary (eds.) Labor Exchange Policy in the United States (Kalamazoo, MI: 

W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 2004). 

I-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

job seekers. However, the funding cutbacks in the face of the steady volume of 

customers needing assistance have made such staff-intensive services difficult to sustain. 

•	 The trend among states toward allowing UI claimants to file their claims remotely has 

removed UI operations from local offices, leading to a further shrinkage of outstationed 

employment security staff.4 

•	 The technological revolution has facilitated the development and dissemination of a 

wealth of information accessible to job seekers without staff assistance. Drawing on 

these developments, federal and state investments in electronic informational resources 

have mushroomed.5 

•	 The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) reinforced the promise of self-services as 

a strategy for meeting the public workforce system’s goals by requiring that all LWIAs 

make self-services available as part of their menu of service offerings. 

•	 Cultural shifts, reflected in WIA, have placed greater emphasis on empowering 

customers to take charge of their own career development strategies, while also 

emphasizing the importance of their assuming greater personal responsibility.
 

In light of these developments, self-services have become a critical means for ensuring universal 

access to an array of high-quality resources and information tools that customers can use to make 

informed career decisions. 

Nonetheless, at present little is known about customers’ use of self-service tools and resources, 

including who uses these services, how frequently, for what reasons, and with what effect. 

Indeed, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has noted that, by largely excluding 

self-service customers, the WIA reporting system can shed little light on the experiences of those 

who likely make up the largest pool of customers of publicly funded workforce services.6 

Recognizing this limitation, DOL has taken numerous steps to improve the accuracy and 

comprehensiveness of reporting in recent years. For example, its proposed specifications for the 

new WISPR (Workforce Investment Streamlined Performance Reporting) make clear that states 

should be prepared to submit client-level records for all those who receive self-services or 

4	 For early evidence see J. Salzman, K. Dickinson, R. Fedrau, and M. Lazarin, Unemployment Insurance in the 

One-Stop System (Social Policy Research Associates, 1999). For more recent evidence, see B. Barnow and C. 

King, The Workforce Investment Act in Eight States (The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, 2005). 

5	 N. Ridley and W. A. Tracy, “State and Local Labor Exchange Services,” in Balducchi, et al. (op. cit.). 

6	 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Workforce Investment Act: Additional Actions Would Further Improve 

the Workforce System. Testimony of Sigurd Nelson, GAO-07-1051T (2007). 

I-3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

informational services financially assisted by One-Stop Career Center employment and 

workforce information programs.7 

In the interim, though, information about self-service customers remains quite limited. SPR’s 

Evaluation of One-Stop Self-Services is intended to help fill some gaps. Key research questions 

that the evaluation addresses are these: 

•	 What types of self-service tools and resources are available to job-seeking 

customers and employers? 

•	 How do One-Stop Career Centers facilitate access and ensure that their resource 

rooms—where centers typically locate their on-site self-service tools and
 

resources—can accommodate those with special needs? How are customers 

assisted with self-services? 

•	 How do LWIAs track customer usage of self-services? 

•	 What are the characteristics of customers who use self-services at One-Stop 

Career Centers? What is their pattern of usage? 

•	 What do customers think about their experiences in using self-services? What 

resources and tools do they find most helpful? 

•	 What employment outcomes are associated with self-service usage? How does 

this compare to the outcomes of those who receive staff-assisted services? 

Data Collection as Part of the Evaluation 

As the list of study questions enumerated above makes clear, key objectives of the evaluation 

focus on understanding who uses One-Stop Career Center self-services and characterizing the 

volume of usage. To shed light on these issues, the evaluation has focused on LWIAs that 

asserted that they had systems in place to comprehensively track all customers who accessed 

self-services on-site and could provide basic information about these customers, including, at a 

minimum, demographic information, identifying information (such as Social Security Numbers, 

names, and addresses8

), and the dates on which services were accessed. To identify such areas, 

as well as to profile One-Stop Career Center self-services nationwide, a Local-Area Survey of 

One-Stop Self-Services was administered in 2003 to LWIAs in each of the 50 states and the 

7	 The WISPR was expected to be phased in for program year (PY) 2009, but DOL has delayed its use so that the 

workforce investment system could focus on supporting the implementation of workforce provisions of the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). However, two states, Pennsylvania and Texas, agreed to 

provide WISPR client-level data to DOL on a pilot basis, even though doing so is not yet technically required. 

8	 Social Security Numbers (SSNs) were needed because the evaluation team endeavored to match SSNs with state 

Unemployment Insurance wage files, so that the outcomes of self-service users could be examined. Similarly, 

names and contact information were to be used in conducting a survey of self-service users. 

I-4 
 

 

 

District of Columbia. A follow-up survey was administered to these LWIAs in 2005–2006, to 

profile changes in their self-services systems. 

Based on the 2003 survey results, it was determined that 69 LWIAs could potentially meet the 

data requirements of this study. However, upon further scrutiny, the number of LWIAs deemed 

appropriate dropped appreciably, for the following reasons: 

•	 Tracking was often less complete than first claimed. Although many LWIAs selfreported that they tracked all on-site users, telephone or in-person follow-up 

discussions conducted with these sites revealed that many customers commonly 

eluded tracking. 

•	 Data systems were difficult to use. Some sites maintain only paper records (e.g., 

sign-in sheets), which were deemed too cumbersome to be used by the evaluation 

team efficiently.
 

•	 Confidentiality concerns precluded data sharing. Some LWIAs that otherwise 

would have met the study’s conditions were unwilling to share data due to 

confidentiality concerns.
 

•	 State Unemployment Insurance wage data were unavailable. To meet the full 

objectives of this study, Social Security Numbers of self-services customers were 

to be matched with state Unemployment Insurance wage data so that employment 

outcomes associated with self-service usage could be identified. In some cases, 

an LWIA might have been willing to provide data on its self-service customers, 

but the state proved unwilling to provide UI wage data to match to the service 

data, so the LWIA was dropped from the sample.9
 

Because of these stumbling blocks, only nine LWIAs in three states were both appropriate for the 

study and willing to provide self-service usage data. These included six in California, one in 

Pennsylvania, and two in Texas. Each of these LWIAs provided a complete dump of data for its 

self-service users for at least a nine-month period, and some provided data for more than a twoyear period. These data cover some part of the period from May 2004 through December 2006, 

with the precise period varying from LWIA to LWIA. 

Additionally, we conducted site visits to most of these LWIAs10 and to others that seemed to 

have comprehensive tracking systems in place; the latter were added so that the study could 

provide a more comprehensive look at self-services tracking systems across the nation. These 

additional LWIAs include ones in Colorado, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, New 

York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington. Altogether, then, site-visit data 

9	 In fact, only two states provided UI wage data. A third agreed to do so, but contractual difficulties in negotiating 

data access could not be resolved. 

10	 One LWIA in California that provided self-service usage data (San Diego) was unable to accommodate a site 

visit during the period of the study’s site-visit data collection. 

I-5 
 

 

were collected from 22 LWIAs in 11 states, with the site visits conducted in two rounds: the first 

in 2004 and the second in 2008. These qualitative data are used to complement the quantitative 

data for the nine LWIAs providing self-service usage data. This report focuses on findings from 

the most recent round of site visits, as they provide the most up-to-date evidence, though 

observations from the earlier round are sometimes worked in to communicate a pertinent finding 

or example. 

The project also endeavored to learn more about customers’ experiences in using self-services, 

so the project team administered a survey of self-service users in five LWIAs. These LWIAs 

were among the nine that provided self-service usage data. Because the LWIAs provided their 

usage data at different times, the surveys of customers were administered at different times as 

well so that the survey would be administered shortly after each customer’s usage. Thus, 

surveys of customers in two LWIAs were administered in 2005, and for those in the three 

remaining LWIAs in 2007. Details on the survey administration process are described in the 

appendix. 

Another key data source is UI wage data, which was collected from state UI agencies covering 

self-service users in three LWIAs in two states.11 Operationally, the project team first received 

the self-service usage data from these LWIAs, extracted the SSNs and transmitted them to the 

state UI agency, and took receipt of the UI wage data in return. The UI wage data cover at least 

four quarters before and up to four quarters after each customer’s use of self-services, and are 

used to measure customers’ outcomes and changes in earnings over time. 

Exhibit I-1 summarizes the various data collection activities undertaken as part of this 

evaluation, and it shows which LWIAs and states contributed which of the pieces of data 

described above. 

Limitations of the Data Collection and Analysis 

As Exhibit I-1 makes clear, the project has complete data for only a small number of LWIAs. 

One primary reason for this, as described earlier in this chapter, is that the study design required 

that the universe of LWIAs from which data were to be drawn should be restricted to those that 

had comprehensive tracking systems in place. The results of the LWIA surveys, to be described 

in more detail later in this report, revealed that relatively few LWIAs in the nation met this 

requirement, severely restricting the pool of LWIAs from which we could draw. 

11 We endeavored to collect UI wage data for each of the nine LWIAs that provided us with self-service usage data. 

However, California’s state Employment Development Department declined our request to provide these data, 

citing confidentiality concerns, so we lack these data for the LWIAs in California. 

I-6 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit I-1: 

Data Collection Undertaken as Part of the Evaluation 

Site Visits Self-Service Customer UI Wage 

2004 2008 Usage Data for: Survey Data Data 

California
 

Alameda County √ 9/05 to 12/06
 

Oakland √ 9/05 to 12/06
 

Richmond √ 9/05 to 12/06
 

Riverside √ 10/04 to 9/06 √
 

Sacramento √ 11/05 to 10/06 √
 

San Diego 10/04 to 9/06 

Colorado 

Boulder √

Georgia 

Fulton County √

Louisiana 

Ouachita Parish √

Rapides Parish √

Massachusetts 

Metro South √

Missouri 

Kansas City √
 

Southeast √
 

Jefferson Franklin √

New York 

Chemung/Schuyler √
 

Oyster Bay √ √
 

Pennsylvania 

Philadelphia √ √ 1/06 to 9/06 √ √

Westmoreland √

South Carolina 

Trident √

Texas 

Brazos Valley √ √ 5/04 to 10/06 √ √

South Plains √ √ 5/04 to 10/06 √ √

Upper Rio √

Washington 

Olympic √

I-7 
 

 

 

Additionally, the project team encountered extreme difficulties in getting data extracts prepared 

by the qualifying LWIAs and their applicable state UI agencies. By far the most prominent 

reasons why other LWIAs and states declined to provide data was a concern about releasing 

information with personal identifiers appended, especially given that customers would not have 

provided their consent. 

Further complicating matters, new Federal regulations were issued mid-way through data 

collection that imposed new procedures and requirements on state UI agencies asked to provide 

data to third-party researchers acting on behalf of federal agencies.12 These rules required new 

layers of review and approval, including the requirement that DOL be a party to any data sharing 

agreement, and there simply was not time to work through the implications of these new 

requirements before the study’s data collection drew to a close. 

For all these reasons, the quantitative results on patterns of self-service usage described in this 

report pertain only to the small number of LWIAs that provided data, most of which are in 

heavily urban areas. Therefore, the study’s findings cannot be construed as generalizing to the 

national One-Stop Career Center system. Instead, they provide case-study snapshots of customer 

usage and outcomes in selected LWIAs. 

Interpretation of the findings is further complicated because LWIAs have different operational 

definitions as to what constitutes self-services and, specifically, where the dividing line between 

self-services and staff-assisted services is drawn. Although the WIA legislation makes an 

important distinction between the two—customers classified as receiving WIA staff-assisted 

services are subject to WIA’s performance measures, while those receiving self-services are 

not13—in fact the degree of staff assistance that customers receive in using One-Stop Career 

Center services might really best be thought of as a gradient, an issue that Chapter II of this 

report discusses in more detail. Given this murkiness, LWIAs exercise some discretion in 

classifying services as self-services or not, and this impacts the activities that are the subject of 

this report. 

Finally, the availability of many One-Stop delivery system self-services via the Internet means 

that many self-service customers may access these services remotely, from their homes, offices, 

or other locations, rather than on-site at a One-Stop Career Center. The profiles of customer 

usage and outcomes presented in this report are applicable only to that subset of users who 

access services on-site. 

12 See 20 CFR 603, issued on September 27, 2006 in the Federal Register (pp. 56830-56848). 

13 See the WIA legislation, as well as DOL’s Training and Employment Guidance Letter 17-05.
 

I-8 
Overview of this Report 

With this brief background in mind, the next chapter presents a discussion of what it is that 

LWIAs mean when they describe self-services; this discussion identifies the broad boundaries 

established for this study. Chapter III presents a summary of results from the Local-Area Survey 

of One-Stop Self-Services, which provides a national context regarding the scope and content of 

self-services. Chapter IV next discusses ways in which One-Stop Career Centers facilitate 

access to services, such as marketing center services and accommodating customers with special 

needs. 

Since much of the analysis in this report is drawn from LWIAs that comprehensively track selfservice usage, Chapter V describes the tracking systems used by the LWIAs that provided data. 

Drawing on these data, as well as the customer survey, Chapter VI profiles the characteristics of 

customers who use services, and Chapter VII describes their usage patterns, including what 

services they use and how satisfied they are with them. Chapter VIII uses qualitative data from 

the site visits to describe how customers are assisted with using self-services, and Chapter IX 

describes self-service tools and resources in more detail, including what services are offered and 

in what format. Chapter X then presents outcomes experienced by customers who use selfservices, based on UI wage data and results from the customer survey, and Chapter XI presents a 

summary and conclusions. 

I-9 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
II. WHAT ARE SELF-SERVICES? 

Taken literally, the term “self-services” suggests that customers serve themselves by working 

independently in resource rooms or via Internet connections. Yet, in practice, most customers 

who access self-services at One-Stop Career Centers need some sort of assistance to use the tools 

and resources effectively. This chapter unpacks the self-services concept and explores the 

underlying tensions that local areas struggle with when translating the theory into practice. It 

also describes the effect of the WIA registration process on who remains in the pool of selfservices customers and presents the integrated services model adopted by some LWIAs. 

Considering these topics helps in understanding what is meant by self-service and who gets 

classified as a self-services customer. 

Self-Services: Theory vs. Practice 

With its promise of allowing One-Stop Career Centers to efficiently serve the majority of 

customers with minimal staff assistance, the self-services concept was put forward in WIA as the 

central means by which the public workforce investment system could provide cost-effective but 

widespread access to a wealth of useful information and tools. Self-services would satisfy the 

needs of the universal customer while freeing up staff to work with customers who required staff 

assistance. The regulations define self-services as follows: 

Self-service and informational activities are those core services that are 

made available and accessible to the general public, that are designed to 

inform and educate individuals about the labor market and their 

employment strengths, weaknesses, and the range of services appropriate 

to their situation, and that do not require significant staff involvement with 

the individual in terms of resources or time (20 CFR §666.140 (a) (2)). 

The One-Stop Career Center staff interviewed as part of this study were well aware of the 

regulatory WIA definition of self-services, and they understood the role that the legislation 

intended for them to play in the resource room. They described the theoretical self-service 

customer as one who is “independent,” “self-directed,” and “autonomous.” Further, they 

perceived their own role to be that of facilitator of access to services in the resource room. As 

II-1 
one worker put it, “There has been a philosophical shift from ‘we will do it for you’ to ‘we will 

help you do it yourself.’” 

Yet, when staff spoke frankly about their experiences with customers in the resource room, they 

communicated the feeling that the term ‘self-services’ was something of a misnomer. They 

noted that many customers entering the One-Stop Career Center could not use the resource room 

effectively without a considerable measure of staff assistance. This sentiment is indicative of the 

underlying difficulty of translating the theory of self-services into practice. 

One of the major stumbling blocks that resource room staff encounter in implementing the selfservices concept is that the customers they work with generally have undeveloped skills and 

limited knowledge in a number of important areas. In particular, customers’ lack of computer 

skills was identified as a significant barrier. Many customers are apparently extremely 

intimidated by computers and are resistant to using them without assistance. Confirming this 

notion, many self-service customers interviewed for this study said that they did not have an 

email account until the local staff helped them set one up, and that they were learning how to use 

the computer for the first time. 

Staff are also faced with the substantial task of assisting the large number of customers who lack 

basic skills or adequate language skills. For example, many self-services customers struggle 

with spelling and presentation skills when crafting resumes and cover letters. Individuals for 

whom English is not their first language also appear to require specialized one-on-one assistance. 

For example, at a One-Stop Career Center with a large percentage of monolingual Spanishspeaking customers, staff translate customers’ resumes into English and even write their cover 

letters for them. All of this assistance was, at the time the site visit was conducted, considered 

‘self-service’ by this LWIA. 

Still other customers require motivational or emotional support. For example, some customers 

may visit the One-Stop Career Center because they are directed to by another state agency or 

social service provider, and not necessarily because they are motivated to seek immediate 

employment. Such customers often seek staff members’ help in “meeting the requirements.” 

Others require encouragement to boost their shaky self-confidence. As one site administrator 

remarked, “For people here, it is about hand-holding.” He also said that the high levels of 

substance abuse and domestic violence in his local area make it difficult for many self-service 

customers to be successful in job search without substantial staff follow-through and referral to 

other services. 

II-2 
 

 

 

Thus, consistent with results reported as part of SPR’s earlier Evaluation of the Implementation 

of WIA,

1

 self-service customers are sometimes receiving noteworthy levels of staff assistance, 

and, accordingly, the term “self-services” under-represents to some degree the crucial role that 

staff play in increasing the capacity of customers to function better on their own. 

At the same time, practical constraints severely limit the level of staff support that can be 

provided to resource room customers. Administrators and staff at many of the One-Stop Career 

Centers visited for this study emphasized that the sheer volume of customers that the resource 

rooms handle, and the customers’ considerable needs, severely tax the ability of the centers to 

provide the level of staff assistance that customers need to have a reasonable expectation of 

success in their searches for employment. Thus, resource room staff at many centers limit the 

amount of time they spend with any one customer, or refuse to answer questions beyond basic 

ones, such as how to log on to the state’s ES jobs system. 

Clearly, then, LWIAs encounter a palpable tension between the concept of self-services and the 

reality of their resource room customers’ considerable needs, with resource and staffing 

constraints providing something of a practical brake on the level of service that can be offered. 

How Self-Services are Classified 

As the discussion presented thus far suggests, the degree of staff assistance provided to One-Stop 

Career Center customers constitutes a continuum, with nearly all customers receiving at least 

some staff assistance (e.g., an orientation to resource room tools and resources, help logging on 

to the state’s ES job bank, etc.) and most undergoing an initial assessment ascertaining their need 

for staff-intensive services. This implies that the dividing line between self-services and staffassisted services is inherently ambiguous and difficult to draw. If all resource-room customers 

receive at least some staff assistance, when do they receive so much assistance that calling them 

self-service customers no longer makes sense? 

Earlier studies make clear that LWIAs differ in how they make this judgement,2

 and findings in 

this study confirm this conclusion. For example, in several of the study’s LWIAs, a customer’s 

attendance at one or more workshops (e.g., on job search or interviewing techniques) is required 

before enrollment in WIA staff-assisted services will be considered. In other LWIAs, by 

contrast, all the center’s workshops are themselves classified as staff-assisted services, so 

attendance in any one of them automatically triggers registration in WIA staff-assisted services. 

1	 Social Policy Research Associates, The Workforce Investment Act After Five Years: Results from the National 

Evaluation of the Implementation of WIA (2004). 

2	 Ibid. 

II-3 
DOL’s Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) 17-05 aims to establish some 

uniformity across LWIAs as to what constitutes “significant staff involvement” for purposes of 

defining WIA staff-assisted services. By aiming to limit the amount of staff assistance that can 

be provided to those who remain classified as self-service customers, this guidance has promoted 

somewhat greater uniformity across LWIAs. But some variability nonetheless remains. The 

integrated services model presented later in this chapter provides dramatic evidence of this 

variability. 

The Client-Flow Process 

Who counts as a self-services customer clearly depends on how each LWIA classifies its 

services. Important too is the process an LWIA uses for determining how customers shall be 

pulled out of the self-services pool to receive WIA staff-assisted services, as this determines the 

characteristics of those who remain in the pool. 

In the first instance, of course, the pool of people who receive only self-services is determined by 

who comes into the One-Stop Career Center to access services to begin with. Who makes up this 

pool is in turn influenced by the characteristics of persons in the local workforce area in need of 

workforce development services, where sites chose to locate their centers, and outreach 

mechanisms that sites use to attract customers. Some of these factors are discussed more fully in 

Chapter IV. 

The way in which a local area selects people from this pool and enrolls them into WIA staffassisted services determines the make-up of those who remain a self-service customer. Most of 

the sites visited as part of the study have invested considerable effort in identifying the type of 

customer that they wish to classify as receiving staff-assisted services, since these customers 

constitute the pool that is subject to WIA performance measures (and, until the issuance of 

revised performance instructions for Wagner-Peyser programs in TEGL 17-05, for ES 

performance as well). The categorization of services and the subsequent design of the customerflow process generally occur through a collaborative strategic planning process involving the 

local workforce investment board, the One-Stop operators, and frontline staff. In many cases, 

outside consultants, state staff, or regional DOL representatives are also involved in the local 

program design phase. Once these policies are decided upon, it is up to frontline staff (in most 

areas) to make registration decisions, although these decisions may be subject to approval or veto 

by managers or committees. 

The first step in the planning process is typically for the local area to clarify the service 

categories established by the WIA legislation. The tiered approach to service delivery defined in 

WIA includes three categories of services: core, intensive, and training. Core services include 

“self-services,” the main focus of this report. Staff-assisted core, intensive, and training services, 

II-4 
on the other hand, enable local areas to spend more resources on those who are determined 

eligible and in need of such services. 

Elaborating the tiered structure that is built into WIA legislation, many local areas have further 

refined the categories of services as a way of clarifying service delivery protocols and 

formalizing the decision process. For example, at one One-Stop Career Center, resource room 

staff place all new customers in an initial assessment level of A, B, or C depending on their job 

readiness. Level-A customers are those who appear to be job-ready; once they have been placed 

in this category, they are oriented to the core services available. These customers are considered 

true self-service customers who do not require staff assistance. Level B consists of those 

customers who are unable to use self-services on their own but still may not need WIA intensive 

or training services in order to find a job. Level-B customers are placed into three subgroups: 1) 

customers who lack job searching skills; 2) customers who lack job skills; and 3) customers with 

inconsistent work histories. All three subgroups are referred to the Resource Specialist for oneon-one help in using self-services. Customers placed in Level C are individuals who are 

considered to have the highest need for WIA intensive services or training. 

The next step in the process of making enrollment decisions is for the local area to design a 

customer flow model, a set of protocols that clarifies the process by which customers are sent 

onto service paths that are appropriate for their needs, including WIA services and other OneStop partner services. For WIA programs, the customer flow model is the mechanism for 

selecting customers out of the self-services pool who are eligible and suitable for more intensive 

services. Actual customer flow varies, depending on how the service categories are defined; 

thus, the specific triggers that track a customer in one direction or another may be very different 

from place to place. Yet, at a general level, customer flow processes tend to follow a common 

pattern, which is depicted in Exhibit II-1. 

The essence of this flow is a screening process, during which customers are assessed in their 

suitability and eligibility for WIA staff-assisted services. Respondents that we spoke with say 

that having customers go through the WIA screening process serves multiple purposes. First, it 

ensures that the customer is motivated enough to continue pursuing the opportunities that WIA 

services offer. Second, it provides the customer with a thorough understanding of the 

expectations of the program. Third, it allows staff to test the customer’s skills and better 

understand his or her characteristics and circumstances, thereby making possible a more accurate 

determination of eligibility and suitability. Finally, it allows local areas to keep their caseloads 

manageable within the bounds of their funding allocations. 

II-5 
Exhibit II-1: Typical Customer Flow for Self-Services and WIA Services 

II-6 

Initial Assessment 

Resume screening Brief meeting or interaction with staff One-Stop orientation 

Referral to Partner Services 

Employment services Veterans' affairs Vocational rehabilitation Adult education Supportive services On-site employers Other partners 

Job Search, Self-Services 

ES registration Workshops Resource room activities Internet tools Job fairs, recruitment events Job clubs Other self-service activities 

WIA Orientation 

General informatioInformation about training providers Clear understandinresponsibilities 

Additional Asse

Basic skills Soft skills Pre-program earniCareer goals Barriers-contingensupportive serviceFinancial feasibilitMotivation Interest Assessme

Other WIA Staff

Service

Outcome

Outcome

Outcom
The WIA screening process commonly occurs after an initial assessment phase occurring very 

soon after the customer enters the One-Stop Career Center for the first time. During the initial 

assessment, customers are tracked onto a service path that is seen as being most appropriate 

based on the customer’s needs and the services available. For example, one state recommends to 

all of its One-Stop Career Centers that new customers meet with a resource room staff member 

for a 15-minute “triage” process to determine which services are appropriate and assess the 

customer’s potential for further WIA services. In a local area in another state, frontline staff 

review all new applicants on the state’s employment website (which includes offsite as well as 

on-site customers). Customers who seem appropriate for WIA are then contacted and 

appointments are made to proceed with the WIA screening process. 

A customer may also be tracked to the WIA screening process after spending some time as a 

self-service customer conducting a job search. Often, this occurs when frontline staff realize that 

WIA staff-assisted services may be appropriate for a customer who is having little success 

finding employment with self-services alone. For example, a resource room staff member in one 

local area said that customers are more likely to receive staff-assisted services the longer they 

remain unemployed while still showing persistence in using resource room resources. In a 

similar vein, many respondents said that a customer is often shifted to staff-assisted services 

when staff “happen to catch a customer struggling” in the resource room or during a workshop 

and conclude that the customer may need additional assistance. 

Based on the results of the screening, an enrollment decision is made by frontline staff, 

managers, or a committee, depending on the local area. At one One-Stop Career Center visited, 

a committee of case managers and One-Stop partner agency representatives reviews the WIA 

applications and votes on whether to register each new applicant into staff-assisted services. At 

another One-Stop Career Center, the final decision process is more informal and generally left to 

frontline staff. 

Criteria for WIA Staff-Assisted Services 

The task of delineating exactly which customers are suitable and eligible for WIA staff-assisted 

services is one that is largely left to local areas to decide, although federal and state-level 

influences carry substantial weight in these decisions. Generally speaking, there are three main, 

and often competing, priorities that local areas consider when defining suitability and eligibility 

criteria: 1) serving the customers with the highest need, 2) meeting WIA performance measures, 

and 3) making optimal use of available funds. This sub-section describes how each of these 

priorities has played out in the local areas being studied; it then explores the challenges that local 

areas have experienced in trying to reconcile the priorities’ competing demands. 

II-7 
 

 

 

Serving the Customers With the Highest Need 

One prominent philosophy at the local level for deciding which customers to serve more 

intensively is to target those who need assistance the most. Serving these customers, who are 

usually the hardest to serve, has long been a focus of publicly funded job training and 

employment programs. In fact, the hard-to-serve nature of many program participants is the 

chief reason that economist Joseph Stiglitz concludes that publicly funded job assistance 

represents a legitimate government function.3 

In keeping with this principle, some LWIAs have explicitly targeted the hard-to-serve when 

defining their eligibility and suitability criteria for WIA staff-assisted services. For example, one 

local area has customers select from the following list any barriers that pertain to them: 

−	 I have not attained a high school diploma or GED. 

−	 My family’s income can be considered low based on the chart 

provided. 

−	 I have limited English skills (speaking, reading or writing) 

−	 I have not maintained full-time employment (32+ hour work week) 

for more than 13 consecutive weeks in the last three months. 

−	 My current living situation is not stable or permanent. 

−	 I have a disability (physical, mental, or learning disability) 

−	 I have been arrested and/or convicted of a crime. 

−	 I have received TANF/Cal Works (Welfare-cash aid) one or more 

months. 

−	 I am 55 years old or older. 

Once the customer identifies his or her barriers to finding employment, the local area uses that 

information to make a decision regarding the level of service to provide. To aid its decision, the 

WIB has created clear guidelines specifying that customers with greater than two but fewer than 

five barriers are to be considered suitable for WIA staff-assisted services. 

Meeting WIA Performance Measures 

Because only those customers who receive staff-assisted services are subject to WIA’s 

performance measures, performance—or, more precisely, the fear of poor performance—plays 

some role in determining which customers receive WIA staff-assisted services and, therefore, 

who remains a self-services customer. A promising “high performance” customer under the 

J. Stiglitz, P. Orszag, and J. Orszag, The Role of Government in a Digital Age (Paper commissioned by the 

Computer and Communications Industry Association, 2000). 

II-8 

3 
WIA performance measures must demonstrate the ability to get and keep a job (and, hence, show 

positive outcomes on the entered employment and retention rates) and record high earnings. 

Thus, staff in the One-Stop Career Centers tend to select for WIA staff-assisted services those 

individuals who are motivated, demonstrate reasonable financial stability as a basis for 

undertaking training (if training is being contemplated), and show barriers that are not viewed as 

intractable. 

Optimizing the Use of Available Funds 

The third prominent consideration determining access to WIA staff-assisted services is how the 

selection process fits into an LWIA’s budget. Respondents at most sites mentioned that there 

was a scarcity of funds relative to the need for services, which limited their capacity to provide 

staff-assisted services to all who might benefit. 

In this context, the pressure has intensified on local areas to ensure that their WIA allocation is 

invested wisely. In fact, some local respondents liken WIA training funds to scholarship 

programs that have lengthy application processes. These respondents feel it makes sense to 

sponsor candidates who show the motivation and commitment to stay in their training program 

and get and keep a job, because they are the customers who are most likely to benefit from the 

LWIA’s investment. Furthermore, some of the One-Stop operators and staff who were 

interviewed were excited about being able to assemble a high-caliber pool of workers whom they 

could then market to their employer customers. From this perspective, including more highly 

skilled and experienced workers in its labor pool benefits the public workforce investment 

system’s efforts to expand services to the business community. 

As an example, one One-Stop Career Center ensures that those receiving WIA staff-assisted 

services are well motivated by stringing out the period of enrollment into staff-assisted services 

over a several-week period. To start the process, self-service customers who are interested in 

WIA staff-assisted services undertake a 45-minue intake interview with a WIA counselor. If the 

customer appears suitable for further WIA services, the customer’s application is submitted to 

the LWIA’s WIA administrator for approval. The approval process typically takes two to three 

weeks, during which time the customer is asked to return to meet with the case manager several 

more times to begin developing the Individual Employment Plan; those who consistently miss 

their appointments will have their WIA application cancelled. Staff acknowledge that one 

purpose of drawing out the process in this way it to ensure that customers show sufficient 

motivation to succeed before enrollment in WIA staff-assisted services takes place. Similarly, in 

another LWIA, customers must complete a five-day workshop that covers job search strategies, 

interviewing skills, and resume preparation. Willingness to attend the workshop and consistency 

of attendance become criteria for determining the customer’s motivation level, and thus his or 

her suitability for staff-assisted services. 

II-9 
 

 

 

 

 

Reconciling Competing Priorities 

One reason why many local respondents find the implementation of the self-service concept so 

challenging is that there is an inherent conflict between the need to make wise WIA investments 

and maximize the LWIA’s performance measures on the one hand, and the desire and duty to 

serve those who are truly the most in need of services on the other hand. Reflecting these 

tensions, some have expressed concern that excessive “creaming” is taking place in WIA,4 while 

at the same time, the strong social work mentality that causes line staff to reach out to the very 

neediest customers for registration in workforce programs has also been highlighted.5 

How the balance is struck between these competing priorities causes a tension that is palpable to 

local staff. Clearly, LWIA staff recognize the need to make good investment decisions, yet often 

the very same respondents express reservations about taking this “good investment” approach 

too far, as they are fearful that stricter screening processes allow hard-to-serve self-service 

customers to flounder for lack of more directed assistance. 

The Integrated Service Delivery Model 

New York State and several LWIAs in California have introduced a new service model that 

significantly reconceptualizes the screening process for WIA staff-assisted services. This new 

process classifies all or nearly all resource room users as recipients of WIA staff-assisted 

services. 

In New York, this outcome is the consequence of two decisions made by the New York State 

Department of Labor (NYSDOL). First, NYSDOL mandated in a 2006 directive that all of the 

state’s LWIAs implement a “functional alignment plan,” according to which WIA and ES 

programs should move beyond co-location and coordination to develop a shared customer pool, 

with a single customer flow. Under this plan, all ES customers become WIA customers, and 

vice versa. Second, the state issued a directive mandating that virtually all One-Stop Career 

Center customers must be provided with an initial assessment focused on determining whether 

the customer is job ready or needs career development services.6

 Further, the state made clear 

4	 For example, see the U.S. Government Accountability Office, Workforce Investment Act: Additional Actions 

Would Further Improve the Workforce System (2007), and B. Barnow and C. King, The Workforce Investment 

Act in Eight States (2005). 

5	 Heckman, Smith, and Taber, cited in J. Heckman and J. Smith (2004) “The Determinants of Participation in a 

Social Program: Evidence from a Prototypical Job Training Program,” Journal of Labor Economics (22). 

6	 This guidance was promulgated in the state’s Workforce Development System Technical Advisory #08-4. To be 

precise, the only One-Stop Career Center customers not provided with an initial assessment are UI claimants 

who are work-search exempt. Respondents we spoke with estimate that such customers account for about two 

percent of all workforce system customers. 

II-10 
 

________ 

 

that, in accordance with its interpretation of TEGL 17-05, an initial assessment is deemed to be a 

staff-assisted service, which means that virtually all One-Stop Career Center customers are 

considered to have received a WIA staff-assisted service. Even though self-service still exists as 

a category of service, almost no customers in the state, practically speaking, are classified as 

receiving only self-services (that is, self-services in the absence of also receiving WIA staffassisted services). Exhibit II-2 shows what this new policy has meant for the volume of WIA 

staff-assisted customers in this state in recent years. 

Exhibit II-2: 

Number of Customers in New York State Receiving 

WIA Staff-Assisted Services, by Program Year 

Number of 

Adult Exiters 

2003 33,357 

2004 33,136
 

2005 31,990
 

2006 305,423
 

2007 382,593 

Note: The numbers tabulated are drawn from the Workforce Investment Act 

Standardized Record Data (WIASRD) supplied by DOL and represent those who exited 

from the WIA adult program after having received a WIA staff-assisted service. Data 

for PY 2007 are preliminary. 

Twelve LWIAs in California, including several that are in the study’s site-visit sample, have 

adopted similar policies as part of California’s pilot “integrated service delivery system.” As in 

New York, this initiative stemmed from an effort to streamline service delivery and better 

coordinate customer services, and specifically to systematically improve the coordination of 

WIA and ES services and achieve improved customer outcomes and more efficient and effective 

customer service. Components of the integrated service delivery model include the following: 

•	 An integrated customer flow that sets clear parameters for a service delivery 

process with a sequence of demand-driven universal services that does not 

emphasize program eligibility. 

•	 A commitment to and process for an integrated customer pool, so that all OneStop Career Center customers are registered simultaneously in the performance 

measures calculations of both WIA and ES (and other programs, such as the 

Trade Adjustment Assistance program, if applicable). 

•	 Integrated staffing that provides services to the integrated customer pool. 

II-11 
Furthermore, as in New York, developing a customer-focused workforce development system 

means that all center customers receive an initial skills assessment, which is construed as 

meeting the definition of “significant staff involvement” as described in TEGL 17-05. One 

California LWIA participating in this pilot, Sacramento’s Employment and Training Agency, 

estimates that the number of customers receiving WIA staff-assisted services will jump from 

about 3,000 per year to more than 30,000 per year as a consequence of its adoption of this policy. 

Conclusions 

This chapter has made clear that provision of One-Stop self-services is fraught with considerable 

tension. Many resource room customers are found to have substantial difficulty navigating a 

center’s self-service tools and resources on their own because of limited computer literacy, basic 

skills deficiencies, or other reasons. Consequently, relatively few can be viewed as truly selfsufficient, able to conduct an efficient and successful job search entirely on their own or with 

only a brief orientation to One-Stop Career Center services. Because of this fact, resource room 

staff play a major helping role that, while limited in scope and intensity, seems absolutely critical 

and obscures what it means to be a self-service customer. 

At the same time, resource constraints do place an upper limit on the amount of staff assistance 

that resource rooms can reasonably provide as part of the WIA self-services tier, and limit as 

well the number of customers who can move on to WIA staff-assisted services. A number of 

LWIAs, however, aim to transcend this constraint by mandating an integrated services delivery 

model that effectively requires all resource room customers to receive at least an initial 

assessment, which, in the LWIAs’ view, causes virtually all customers to be classified as having 

received WIA staff-assisted services. 

II-12 
 

 

 

III. RESULTS OF THE LOCAL-AREA SURVEY 

One component of the evaluation’s data collection was a survey of the nation’s local workforce 

investment areas designed to provide snapshots, in two points in time, of self-service tools and 

resources that LWIAs make available. The survey also served to identify LWIAs that track selfservice usage. Findings from this two-part survey were detailed in two separate reports 

previously submitted as part of the evaluation. In this chapter, we summarize these findings, 

thus providing a broad look at self-services nationwide and establishing the context for the 

results to follow. 

Survey Administration and Content 

The research team assembled a mailing list of chief contacts at each LWIA from various sources, 

including directories maintained by the National Association of Counties and the National 

Association of Workforce Boards. These contacts were typically local workforce investment 

board executive directors or WIA administrators. The mailing list covered all of the nation’s 

local workforce areas, excluding those in Puerto Rico and other territories—a total of 580.1 

Instructions included with the survey directed the recipient to either complete the survey or 

forward it to another person in the local area, such as the One-Stop Career Center operator, who 

might be better able to respond to the survey’s questions. Respondents were also offered the 

option of completing the survey electronically, through the Internet. 

In keeping with the project’s design, the survey was administered two times, approximately 2.5 

years apart. The initial administration (also referred to as “round one,” or “the 2003 survey”) 

commenced in early March 2003 and concluded in June 2003, and the second administration 

(also referred to as “round two,” or “the 2006 survey”) commenced in early October 2005 and 

A major objective of the survey was to identify local areas that track self-service usage, so that site visits could 

be conducted to some of them. Because local areas in outlying territories were deemed inappropriate for site 

visiting, they were excluded from the sampling frame, leaving about 580 local areas. The precise number 

differed for the round-one and round-two surveys, because the composition of the nation’s LWIAs changed 

slightly in the intervening years (e.g., some LWIAs consolidated). Additionally, some LWIAs in Louisiana were 

heavily impacted by Hurricane Katrina just before the round-two survey was launched, and these were removed 

from the sampling frame for the second survey administration. 

III-1 

1 
concluded in early 2006. Each administration of the survey followed a common sequence—a 

hard-copy version of the survey was mailed to the targeted respondents, along with a cover letter 

explaining the purposes of the effort and asking for cooperation. Several weeks later, a reminder 

postcard was sent to nonrespondents, followed by a second mailing of the survey several weeks 

later. Thereafter, e-mail reminders, followed up with telephone calls, were sent to prompt 

respondents to return a completed survey if they had not already done so. Respondents had at 

least three months to complete and return each survey. 

Completed surveys from 400 local areas were received in round one, for a response rate of just 

under 70 percent, and from 431 local areas in round two, for a response rate of 76 percent. The 

tabulations presented in the remainder of this chapter are based on these returns. An analysis of 

nonresponse shows that the local areas that provided data reflect the diversity of local areas 

across the nation as a whole. 

The survey itself covered five major topic areas: 

•	 Number of physical access points, including comprehensive and satellite centers. 

•	 Customer flow, including whether customers need to spend a required amount of 

time using self-services before advancing to staff-assisted services. 

•	 Local-area tracking systems, including whether local areas track information 

about customers who use self-services and their satisfaction with services. 

•	 Self-services available to job-seeking customers and employers, and in what 

format the services are available.
 

•	 Overall satisfaction with self-services, challenges in developing self-service tools, 

and plans for improvement. 

Findings pertaining to each of these major topic areas are presented in the sections below. For 

the most part, the focus of this chapter is on results from the round-two survey, since these are 

the most recent. However, in some cases results from both rounds are presented so that changes 

over time can be seen. 

Physical Access Points 

The WIA legislation and conforming regulations stipulate that each local area shall have “at least 

one comprehensive physical center ... that must provide the core services specified in WIA,” but 

notes that such centers may be supplemented by satellite or affiliated sites (20 CFR §662.100). 

Exhibit III-1 provides information on what configurations of centers local areas were using, as of 

the round-two survey. 

As the table shows, all local areas but one had at least one comprehensive center, in keeping with 

the legislation. The predominant situation was to have only one comprehensive center (40 

III-2 
 

percent of local areas) or a few of them (another 51 percent). Only about 8 percent had six or 

more comprehensive centers. 

Looking at areas’ networks of access points—comprehensive and satellite centers combined— 

the picture of physical access expands. Only about 10 percent of local areas have just one 

physical access point, whereas more than 30 percent have six or more access points. Indeed, 

some local areas have very extensive networks encompassing 30 or more access points. 

Exhibit III-1: 

Percentage of LWIAs with Various Numbers of One-Stop Centers 

Comprehensive 

Centers Satellites Total 

None 0.2% 28.2% 0.0% 

One center only 40.2 19.9 9.8 

2 to 5 centers 51.4 38.0 57.3 

6 to 10 centers 5.7 10.5 24.6 

11 centers or more 2.4 3.4 8.4 

Note: Data are drawn from the round-two survey. 

A primary determinant of the number of physical access points is the geographic scope of the 

service area. In general, local areas with geographically larger service areas have more access 

points. For example, the Alabama Workforce Investment Area can boast of 37 access points (23 

comprehensive centers and 14 satellites, according to the round-two survey), a number that 

seems appropriate given that this LWIA serves most of the State of Alabama. Similarly, 

population size seems to be important, with more heavily populated areas having more access 

points. 

However, factors other than geographic scope and population size clearly come into play. For 

example, the population per access point ranges from a low of about 50,000 in some LWIAs 

(relatively many access points per person) to a high of more than 200,000 persons in others 

(relatively few access points per person). A regression analysis (not shown here) reveals that 

population size and land area together explain only about one-third of the total variation in the 

number of access points. Clearly, some local areas make a concerted effort to disburse access 

points widely and find this strategy is financially tenable, while others emphasize a more 

concentrated service delivery structure. 

There is also some evidence of a mild retrenchment in the number of access points over time, 

particularly in the number of satellite centers. As shown in Exhibit III-2, the average number of 

access points per LWIA dropped from 6.2 in round one to 5.4 in round two, a change brought on 

almost entirely by a fall-off in the number of satellite centers (from an average of 3.3 to an 

III-3 
average of 2.6).2

 Thus, while the number of comprehensive centers is holding steady, LWIAs 

may be finding it difficult, or at least not cost-effective, to maintain extensive networks of 

satellites.3 

Exhibit III-2: Average Number of Centers per LWIA, 

2003 and 2006 

7
 

6
 

5
 

4
 

2003

3

2006

2

1

0

All Centers Comprehensives Satellites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Customer Flow 

The legislation and implementing regulations specify a hierarchy of services that, to some 

degree, dictates the flow of customers through the One-Stop delivery system. In keeping with 

2	 Examining change over time is complicated by the fact that different LWIAs answered the survey in each year. 

Thus, changes over time calculated by comparing round-one and round-two univariate distributions could 

represent either true change over time or artifacts of the compositional differences in the sample (i.e., that data 

from different LWIAs are being tabulated in each year). However, the conclusions are virtually identical when 

this tabulation is restricted to LWIAs that answered both rounds of the survey. Thus, compositional differences 

in the sample can be ruled out as an explanation. The role of compositional differences was examined 

throughout this paper whenever change over time is being reported, and can confidently be ruled out as an 

explanation. 

3	 Results from other sources are somewhat at odds with this conclusion. For example, in a 2007 report, GAO 

concluded that, over the four years prior to 2007, the number of comprehensive One-Stop Career Centers 

declined somewhat, while the number of satellites increased slightly. (See U.S. Government Accountability 

Office, 2007, 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). GAO’s 

findings may be at odds with the ones reported here possibly due to differences in what is classified as a 

comprehensive versus satellite center. Elsewhere, in its own review based on a 2007 survey, DOL finds that the 

average LWIA reported having 2.8 comprehensive centers and 3.1 satellites or affiliates; the former figure 

matches exactly what is reported here, while the latter figure is somewhat higher. (See D. Ryan, 2009, Size, 

Structure and Services of Local Workforce Investment Areas, Draft Report). 

III-4 
 

 

 

this hierarchy, customers are expected to receive at least one core service before receiving 

intensive services, and at least one intensive service before receiving training. Thus, core 

services—which are comprised mainly of self-services—constitute the entry point into the OneStop Career Center system. 

However, WIA allows for substantial state and local flexibility as to how these basic provisions 

are implemented. As a result, local areas display a range of policies regarding the amount and 

type of services that customers must use at one service level before advancing to the next. 

Previous research shows that most local areas are very customer-focused and thus allow 

customers to move through service tiers as rapidly as the customers’ specific circumstances 

warrant. However, others establish set durations during which customers must remain in one 

service tier before advancing to the next.4 

Exhibit III-3 demonstrates that, at least with respect to how readily customers move from selfservices to staff-assisted services, similar flexibility prevails. Only about 11 percent of local 

areas require customers to spend a specific minimum amount of time using self-services before 

they are eligible for staff-assisted services; of those that do, the required durations range from a 

few hours (about 62 percent) to as long as a few weeks (8 percent). 

Exhibit III-3: Requirements in Self-Services before 

Customers Can Move to Staff-Assisted Services 

(percent of LWIAs with the requirement) 

Require Minimum 

Time in Self-Services
 

Require Types

 of Self-Services 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
 

Social Policy Research Associates, with contributions from TATC Consulting, The Workforce Investment Act 

After Five Years: Results from the National Evaluation of the Implementation of WIA (2004). 

III-5 

4 
As the exhibit also shows, requiring that customers use specific types of self-services or informational services before being eligible for staff-assisted services is somewhat more common, 

with about 32 percent imposing this requirement. Among the LWIAs of this type, the most 

commonly required services were conducting a job search, registering with the state’s job bank, 

or attending an orientation session. 

Tracking Self-Service Usage 

TEGL 17-05 defines a participant of the workforce system as someone who “is determined 

eligible to participate in the program and receives a service funded by the program in either a 

physical location (One-Stop Career Center or affiliate site) or remotely through electronic 

technologies.” In keeping with this definition, ETA Form 9091, the Workforce Investment Act 

Annual Report, elicits information on the number of customers who use self-services without 

moving on to staff-assisted services. Similar reporting expectations are established for WagnerPeyser programs, as is made clear in the instructions for the ETA 9002 Report. 

Despite this expectation, the results from the survey (see Exhibit III-4) show that many local 

areas have not implemented comprehensive tracking systems that include data on users of selfservices. Although requiring customers to provide their names is relatively common, only about 

one-third of LWIAs require all or most self-service customers to provide their SSNs or identify 

what services they intend to use. Less common still are requirements that customers provide 

their demographics (e.g., race, gender, etc.), reasons for using services, or work history; these 

data are requested by between 15 percent and 25 percent of LWIAs. 

Available Self-Services 

The survey asked local areas about the tools and informational resources they make available to 

individual self-service customers and to employer customers, whether on-site or on the Internet. 

The results derived from these questions are described in three parts below. 

Local-Area Websites and their Features 

Electronic resources are clearly meant to be a key element of self-services in today’s One-Stop 

delivery system. As is discussed in a subsequent chapter, the state website is typically the focal 

point of these efforts, with its job matching system and access to labor market information and 

other tools and resources. Yet local areas often have their own websites that customers—both 

individuals and employers—can access. As shown in Exhibit III-5, 78 percent of local areas 

have such a web presence. 

III-6 
Exhibit III-4: Percentage of LWIAs Tracking Information for On-Site 

Self-Services Customers

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 

2003 2006 2003 2006 2003 2006 2003 2006 2003 2006 2003 2006 2003 2006 2003 2006 2003 2006 

OutcomesWork HistoryReasons 

Demographics What Used SSN Phone Address Name 

III-7
Exhibit III-5: Percentage of LWIAs with

 a Local Website 

21.9%
 

Yes 

No 

78.1% 

As Exhibit III-6 reveals, nearly all of these local-area websites have the same basic components, 

including links to the state website and to other self-service resources, and information about the 

hours of operation and location of the One-Stop Career Center. 

Exhibit III-6: Percentage of LWIAs Whose 

Own Website Has Various Features 

Link to state website 

Hours of operation 

Directions to center 

Links to other 

self-service tools 86.8% 

86.8% 

88.8% 

92.4% 

80% 85% 90% 95% 100%
 

Services for Individuals 

The WIA legislation and implementing regulations authorize a variety of services designed to 

improve customers’ access to job and career information and enhance their job-seeking skills. 

These resources can be made available on either a self-service or staff-assisted basis, and those 

that are made available as self-services can be delivered in a variety of formats. This section 

describes the extent to which local areas are embracing these possibilities. 

Services Offered for the Job Seeker 

As illustrated in Exhibit III-7, a wide array of career planning and job search services is available 

in virtually all local areas. For example, all or nearly all of the local areas provide job search 

III-8 
III-9

75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 

Resumes for employers to view

Suppressed job listings

Tools to help develop job skills

Career information delivery

systems

Basic skills assessments

Unsuppressed job listings

Training in interviewing techniques

Career assessments

Career planning

Labor market information

Info on eligible training providers

Resume writing assistance

Job search assistance

Exhibit III-7: Percentage of LWIAs Offering Various Services
 

assistance, resume-writing assistance, information on eligible training providers, labor market 

information, career planning tools and career assessments, training in interviewing techniques, 

and access to job listings, among other things. Even the least frequently offered service— 

resumes posted for employers to view—is still offered by an appreciable majority of LWIAs. 

Moreover, a comparison of results from the round-one (2003) and round-two (2006) surveys 

shows access has increased somewhat over time for virtually all services. 

The survey also asked local areas if the services they provided were delivered on a self-service 

basis or with staff assistance. As is evident from Exhibit III-8, most local areas offer many of 

these services in both ways. For example, 80 percent or more of local areas offer job search 

assistance, resume writing assistance, information on training providers, labor market 

information, and access to unsuppressed job listings both as a self-service and as a staff-assisted 

service. In fact, very few local areas provide any of the services listed in this table in only a selfservice format; in other words, if the service is provided on a self-service basis, it will typically 

be offered with staff assistance as well. 

Exhibit III-8: 

Percentage of LWIAs Offering Services on a Self-Service or Staff-Assisted Basis 

Both Self-Service Self-Service Staff-Assisted 

& Staff-Assisted Only Only 

Job search assistance 93.3% 1.7% 5.1 

Resume writing assistance 88.8 1.7 9.6 

Info on eligible training providers 84.5 5.2 10.2 

Labor market information 90.0 5.5 4.5 

Career planning 58.4 2.7 37.6 

Career assessments 60.5 3.9 34.2 

Training in interviewing techniques 57.2 3.8 37.6 

Unsuppressed job listings 82.8 8.0 7.0 

Basic skills assessments 43.6 3.6 50.4 

Career information delivery systems 76.9 5.3 14.1 

Tools to help develop job skills 69.8 4.4 21.2 

Suppressed job listings 50.3 4.6 39.6 

Resumes for employers to view 73.5 8.6 6.1 

Note: Percentages summed across a row equal the percentage of LWIAs that offer the service, shown in the 

preceding exhibit. Services are listed in the order in which they appear in that exhibit (i.e., in decreasing order 

by the percentage of LWIAs offering the service) 

III-10 
However, the reverse is not always true—many local areas offer some of these services only on a 

staff-assisted basis (i.e., not also as a self-service). For example, although 44 percent of local 

areas offer basic skills assessment in both self-service and staff-assisted formats, a greater 

percentage (50 percent) offer this service only on a staff-assisted basis, presumably because they 

feel that self-assessment of basic skills is difficult or unreliable. Other services also provided 

only on a staff-assisted basis by an appreciable number of local areas are access to suppressed 

job listings (40 percent of local areas), career planning (38 percent), training in interviewing 

techniques (38 percent), and career assessments (34 percent). As Chapter II noted, however, 

different LWIAs may offer the same service in identical ways but classify it differently, with 

some classifying it as a self-service and others as a staff-assisted service; thus, the differences 

across LWIAs implied by the data in Exhibit III-8 may represent as much classification 

differences as substantive differences in what is provided or how. 

How Self-Services Are Delivered 

For each service provided on a self-service basis, the survey asked about the format of delivery. 

Did the local area deliver the self-service using hard-copy materials, electronically via on-site 

computers only, over the Internet, or as part of a workshop classified as a self-service? The 

results from these queries, tabulated in Exhibit III-9, show that self-services are typically 

delivered in multiple ways. For example, 63 percent of local areas offer self-service resumewriting assistance via print materials, 58 percent offer it via on-site computers, 61 percent offer it 

through the Internet, and 69 percent offer it through a workshop. The offering of a broad range 

of resources in diverse formats is striking and suggests that local areas are making self-services 

accessible to clients with a variety of preferred learning styles. 

Of additional note in this exhibit is the wide variety of self-services that are delivered over the 

Internet and are thus accessible from remote locations (as opposed to only on-site). In fact, overthe-Internet is the most prevalent self-service delivery mode for almost every one of these 

services, and in many cases it outpaces other delivery modes by a considerable margin (though, 

as noted, many of these tools and resources are also available as a staff-assisted service). 

Exhibit III-10 also shows that the use of the Internet as a delivery mode increased for most of 

these services from 2003 to 2006. The percentage of LWIAs offering Internet access to career 

planning resources, for example, increased from 60 percent in round one to more than 70 percent 

in round two. 

III-11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit III-9: 

Percentage of LWIAs Offering Self-Services in Various Formats 

(among those providing the service as a self-service) 

Workshops 

Electronic Internet (as a selfHard-Copy (only on site) Accessible service) 

Job search assistance	 59.5% 41.2% 75.4% 60.1% 

Resume writing assistance	 62.7 57.6 61.3 68.9 

Info on eligible training providers 57.7 38.9 89.2 20.9 

Labor market information	 72.3 41.8 93.6 34.4 

Career planning	 64.5 47.4 71.0 52.8 

Career assessments 59.8 56.6 64.3 46.1 

Training in interviewing techniques 58.9 38.0 48.1 77.4 

Unsuppressed job listings 66.6 46.3 86.4 14.6 

Basic skills assessments 54.8 54.7 45.7 43.2 

Career information delivery systems 46.8 44.9 70.2 34.9 

Tools to help develop job skills 60.3 47.7 64.6 56.9 

Suppressed job listings 53.4 46.5 76.8 10.7 

Resumes for employers to view 29.0 37.3 85.4 12.2 

Note: Sums of percentages across the rows exceed 100 percent, because LWIAs offer these services in multiple 

formats. 

Similarly, Internet access to most other self-service tools increased as well, though typically by a 

smaller margin. Meanwhile, the use of most other delivery modes has barely changed at all.5 

Reflecting a broader societal transformation,6

 local areas have clearly embraced the Internet as a 

way to provide wide access to self-services, both on-site and remotely. 

5	 Only the change over time in the use of Internet delivery is shown in this exhibit. However, results not shown in 

this chapter suggest that there has been almost no change in the percentages of LWIAs using hard-copy materials 

or workshops as a delivery mode for self-services, while on-site electronic modes have declined very slightly. 

6	 Social Policy Research Associates, Technology-Based Learning Strategies (Report prepared for the U.S. 

Department of Labor, 2006). 

III-12 
III-13

Exhibit III-10: Change over Time in Percentage of LWIAs Making Tools

Available through the Internet

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 

Basic skills assessments

Training in interviewing techniques

Resume writing assistance

Career assessments

Tools to help develop job skills

Career information delivery systems

Career planning

Job search assistance

Suppressed job listings

Resumes for employers to view

Unsuppressed job listings

Info on eligible training providers

Labor market information
DOL had a particular interest in learning more about the sources of data used by local areas for 

providing labor market information. Thus, the survey asked respondents to provide an openended answer to the question “What are the key sources of Labor Market Information provided?” 

Of the 237 responses that were provided, a great majority (about 67 percent) specified the state 

labor market information website, either alone or in combination with something else. Federal 

sources of information, such as O*NET, America’s Career InfoNet, or the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, were also sometimes mentioned, as was proprietary software such as Choices. Finally, 

a small number of local areas mentioned that they relied on data developed locally by such 

organizations as the local workforce investment board or chamber of commerce. 

The survey also used an open-ended question format to determine which career information 

delivery systems were being used. Choices was cited most often, but frequently mentioned as 

well were Eureka, CareerScope, Discover, Career Information Systems, and a variety of state 

and federal resources, such as Texas’s OSCAR, North Carolina’s Careers, and, as a federal 

resource, O*NET. 

Areas Identified for Improvement 

Overall, the results presented in this section suggest that One-Stop Career Centers across the 

nation are clearly demonstrating their commitment to making a broad array of resources and 

tools available to the job-seeking customer, and are doing so in a wide variety of electronic and 

other formats to ensure easy accessibility. Yet many would like to do still more. When we 

asked them in an open-ended question what additional self-services they would like to add for 

individuals, nearly 100 LWIAs offered responses. About one-half of those who provided a 

response mentioned a specific tool or resource that they felt their center was lacking. Among the 

many diverse things suggested in this category were online orientations, better assessment tools, 

tutorials on the use of computers, self-help basic skills software, information on starting a 

business, and data on the performance of eligible training providers. Another much smaller 

group mentioned specifically the need to expand their technological capabilities, such as by 

establishing a better tracking system for self-service usage, implementing touch-screen access to 

services, acquiring better electronic interfaces, or developing more powerful job-matching 

systems. A third group of respondents expressed the need for more resources for expansion of 

their overall capabilities, which included adding more staff, adding new centers, extending hours 

of operation, or, as one frustrated respondent put it, having “more of everything.” Finally, one 

individual expressed the sentiment that the basic-skill and computer-skill levels of the selfservice customer were generally so poor that the LWIA did not think it useful to focus on 

expanding self-service resources at all (a theme discussed elsewhere in this report). 

III-14 
 

 

 

Services for Employers 

The workforce system has increasingly come to recognize employers as making up an important 

class of customer. As a consequence, it has endeavored to develop more and better services and 

tools for them. This point is demonstrated by Exhibit III-11, which shows the percentage of 

LWIAs offering various services to employers, as of the time of the round-two survey. As the 

chart makes clear, services to employers in the activity realms asked about are indeed 

widespread, with nearly 100 percent of LWIAs offering the opportunity for employers to post 

jobs and access information on the labor market or tax credits. The percentages of local areas 

offering other types of services are only slightly smaller. Like services for job seekers, then, 

services for employers are diverse and widely available. 

Exhibit III-11: Percentage of LWIAs Offering 

Various Services to Employers
 

Job postings 

Labor market information 

Information on tax credits 

Job applicant search 

Job applicant screening 

Individualized job matching 

Information on UI 

Information on labor laws 

90% 95% 100%
 

As has been noted in other contexts,7 however, many employers prefer a personalized approach 

to the services they receive, which usually implies that some level of staff assistance will be 

made available. Thus, as Exhibit III-12 shows, nearly all local areas offer these services with 

some measure of staff assistance, either only in this format or with a self-service option. Thus, 

See, for example, Social Policy Research Associates, Business as Partner and Customer under WIA: A Study of 

Innovative Practices (Report prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor, 2004). 

III-15 

7 
 

as is the case with services for individual customers, only a small percentage of local areas 

deliver employer services solely in a self-services format. 

The survey asked LWIAs if they would like to provide additional services to employers, and 

about 30 percent said yes. Many took this opportunity to express the desire to provide better 

employer services in general, such as better electronic interfaces or increased job matching 

capabilities; others mentioned the desire to add a specific service or resource, such as job fairs, 

an on-site interviewing room, or workshops on specialized topics. 

Exhibit III-12: 

Percentage of LWIAs Offering Services on a Self-Service or Staff-Assisted Basis 

Both Self-Service Self-Service Staff-Assisted 

& Staff-Assisted Only Only 

Job postings 89.1% 1.4% 9.0% 

Labor market information 87.4% 3.8% 8.1% 

Information on tax credits 75.7% 1.7% 21.7% 

Job applicant search 70.8% 1.4% 25.4% 

Job applicant screening 55.3% 1.0% 40.7% 

Individualized job matching 50.4% 2.2% 41.9% 

Information on UI 66.9% 7.9% 19.1% 

Information on labor laws 70.8% 8.1% 15.0% 

Note: Percentages summed across a row equal the percentage of LWIAs that offer the service, shown in the 

preceding exhibit. Services are listed in the order in which they appear in that exhibit (i.e., in decreasing order 

by the percentage of LWIAs offering the service). 

Strengths, Challenges, and Satisfaction with Services 

In addition to eliciting information on specific aspects of the implementation, design, and 

delivery of self-services, the survey asked several self-evaluative questions. It gave respondents 

the opportunity to rate their satisfaction with the self-services provided by their centers, to 

identify the major strengths of their self-service systems, and to describe the challenges they 

encountered in implementation. 

Touching on the first of these topics, Exhibit III-13 shows that LWIAs are overall quite satisfied 

with the self-services they provide to job seeking customers, with more than 70 percent 

expressing satisfaction. In contrast, they are much less satisfied with the self-services they 

III-16 
provide to employers, with only a bare majority of LWIAs expressing satisfaction. The degree 

of satisfaction in both categories was only slightly more favorable in 2006 than in 2003. 

Those expressing disappointment with their self-services for job seekers mentioned several areas 

for improvement. A group of about one-third of those LWIAs expressing dissatisfaction 

mentioned the need for general infrastructural improvements, such as better or upgraded 

hardware and software, a tracking system for capturing self-service usage, or more space for the 

resource room. Those in another slightly smaller group mentioned some specific service that 

they would like to add or improve, such as being able to offer more workshops or 

Exhibit III-13: Percentage of LWIAs Expressing 

Satisfaction with Self-Services 

53.3% 

71.0% 

54.2% 

72.0% 

0% 20% 40% 60% 80 

Satisfied with 

self-services

 to employers 

Satisfied with 

self-services

 to job seekers 2006 

2003 

more frequent orientations, improving tools available for customers to conduct self assessments, 

or having better resources for educational development. Another 30 percent of respondents 

mentioned that they would like to improve their staffing to help resource room customers, 

generally by having more staff available to assist customers but, in a few cases, by improving 

staff training or capability, such as by adding bilingual staff. Finally, a handful expressed the 

general desire to continually improve; as one respondent put it, “there is always room to 

improve.” 

Suggested ways of improving self-services for employers were generally less specific. The 

largest category of respondents—about one-half of the total—expressed the general sentiment 

that the center needed to do more. Among those in this group, general responses such as “we 

need more space,” “we need to do more,” and “we need a dedicated Business Resource Room” 

predominated. Another group of about one-quarter of respondents mentioned the need to 

conduct better outreach to employers, to increase awareness and usage among business 

III-17 
customers, or simplify access. Others volunteered that the concept of self-services was not 

particularly applicable to businesses, because they generally wanted and needed personalized 

attention. Likely for this reason, some respondents specifically mentioned that their greatest 

need was for additional staff to work with business customers. 

Despite these perceived needs for improvement, respondents were generally proud of their selfservice systems, as the satisfaction ratings described above attest. When they were asked, 

respondents also had no difficulty identifying the strengths of their self-services, with many 

mentioning multiple attributes. 

The most commonly cited strength, mentioned by nearly half of all respondents, was the quality 

or availability of staff—specifically the ability to assist customers when needed. Typical 

responses among this group drew attention to the professionalism and helpfulness of their staff 

when assisting self-service customers who were struggling; it was also frequently mentioned that 

staff contributed by partners had very valuable expertise to lend. Some took this occasion to 

remark how critical it was to have staff available to assist self-service customers who often had 

difficulty using resource room computers or other resources on their own. 

Another one quarter of respondents identified as their primary strength the overall accessibility 

and appeal of their self-service resources. Within this group, some mentioned that the physical 

layout of their resource rooms presented an inviting and professional atmosphere with ample 

space to meet peak customer flows. Others within this group mentioned that their network of 

comprehensive centers and satellites ensured that services were physically accessible to 

customers in far-flung service areas, or that adaptive technology ensured accessibility for 

customers with disabilities. Still others in this group pointed out that many of their services were 

accessible around the clock via the Internet. 

Another group of about a quarter drew attention to their state-of-the art equipment. Very often 

these respondents boasted that their computer equipment had recently been upgraded or that their 

software was customer friendly and easy to use. 

Still another one quarter of respondents mentioned some specific service or services of which 

they were especially proud, including things like peer support groups for job seekers, an elegant 

job matching system, workshops on a variety of topics, and software to boost computer literacy. 

Also classified in this category were LWIAs that noted, simply, that they had a wide variety of 

high quality tools and resources available. 

III-18 
 

 

 

Having adequate staffing 

Having an adequate 

budget 

Accommodating those 

with poor computer skills 

Having adequate space 

Accommodating those 

with limited English 

Knowing when to transition 

to staff-assisted services 

A Substantial 

Challenge 

A Moderate 

Challenge 

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
 

Finally, about 12 percent of respondents mentioned that their self-service systems improved the 

efficiency of their delivery of services generally, in that some customers could work 

independently, freeing staff to focus on those who needed personalized, staff-assisted services.8 

While recognizing and celebrating their strengths, respondents were also forthcoming when 

asked to describe the challenges they encountered in developing their self-service systems. 

These results are tabulated in Exhibit III-14. While LWIAs are proud of the staff assistance they 

can provide, as the above discussion attests, the exhibit shows that having adequate staffing was 

also identified as the single most important challenge. In fact, about 90 percent of LWIAs 

mentioned this as at least something of a challenge, and more than 40 percent mentioned it as a 

substantial challenge. Clearly, providing adequate staff assistance constitutes one of the greatest 

difficulties currently facing the self-services system. 

Exhibit III-14: Percentage of LWIAs Identifying Various 

Challenges to Self-Services Implementation 

Another possibly related challenge was having an adequate budget to support self-services; this 

was mentioned as a problem by about 80 percent of respondents, and as a substantial problem by 

about one-third. Just short of these levels in severity is the challenge of accommodating 

customers with poor computer skills, followed by having adequate space for resource rooms and 

The sum of percentages exceeds 100 percent because about one-third of respondents mentioned multiple
 

strengths that straddled categories. 

III-19 

8 
accommodating customers with limited English proficiency. Finally, mentioned as somewhat of 

a concern by about 40 percent of respondents is the challenge of knowing when to transition a 

customer from self-services to staff-assisted services. 

Conclusions 

The enactment of WIA in 1998 placed new demands on the public workforce investment system 

by creating the expectation that all local workforce areas provide an array of high-quality core 

services to the universal customer. Results from the two rounds of the Local-Area Survey show 

that local areas have risen to the challenge. 

To begin with, the infrastructure that has thus far been developed to provide customers with 

access to self-services is impressive. Virtually all local areas have at least one comprehensive 

One-Stop center, as WIA requires, and one-third of areas have six or more physical access points 

(i.e., comprehensive centers and satellites combined). Furthermore, most local areas make 

available a broad range of self-service informational tools and resources to both job-seeking and 

employer customers. For example, 80 percent or more of local areas provide job search 

assistance, resume-writing assistance, information on training providers, labor market 

information, and job listings on a self-service basis. Those that do offer these things typically 

provide access in a variety of formats, such as hard-copy listings, electronically, and through 

workshops not requiring WIA registration. Furthermore, access to these services via the Internet 

has been growing, and this is now the most common way in which self-services are made 

available, suggesting that customers can access these services not only on-site but also remotely. 

Self-services for employers are similar diverse, with opportunities for employers to post job 

openings, conduct job matching, and research the local labor market and labor laws. 

In light of these offerings, most local areas express satisfaction with their self-service systems, 

especially those for job-seeking customers, and are quite proud of their accomplishments. They 

boast in particular of the quality and availability of resource room staff, who assist customers as 

needed. They laud their staff members’ professionalism and helpfulness, and appreciate the 

special expertise that partner staff provide. Similarly, they are proud of the accessibility of their 

services, and drew attention to the extensive network of comprehensive One-Stop Career Centers 

and satellites, which offer widespread access to high-quality resources in an appealing and 

professional atmosphere. 

Nonetheless, important challenges remain. To begin with, local areas note that many customers 

have difficulty making use of self-services, mostly because of their limited computer proficiency 

or weak literacy skills. For this reason, having the level of resource-room staffing needed to 

assist customers adequately was widely cited as an important remaining challenge. Also cited as 

important challenges were having an adequate budget to support the self-service system and 

III-20 
serving customers with weak computer-literacy skills. Further, some core services, such as basic 

and occupational skills assessments, seem not to lend themselves to self-service delivery. For 

these reasons, staff-assisted services clearly must retain an important role. 

Additionally, although the majority of local areas require self-service customers to provide at 

least basic information about themselves, the systems used to track self-service usage are still far 

from adequate. Without mechanisms to track who uses self-services, for what purposes, and to 

what effect, local areas’ efforts to fine-tune self-services to better meet customers’ needs will 

remain limited. 

These challenges notwithstanding, self-services have clearly become a fundamental part of the 

public workforce system, and its potential for facilitating access to useful resources and 

information tools for large numbers of customers is substantial. 

III-21 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
 

 

IV. FACILITATING ACCESS TO SELF-SERVICES 

Universal access, a major principle of WIA, means that any individual who seeks to advance his 

or her career should be able to access information on job vacancies, career options, student 

financial aid, and relevant employment trends, and receive instruction on how to conduct a job 

search, write a résumé, or interview with an employer.1

 To promote universal access, One-Stop 

Career Centers have adopted the following three strategies: 

1.	 Promoting awareness of the services that are offered at the One-Stop Career 

Centers 

2.	 Locating sites so that they are easy to find and get to 

3.	 Making the resource room navigable and the resources usable 

This chapter explores the approaches used by the One-Stop Career Centers in this study to 

implement these three strategies. It also discusses the accommodations centers make to serve 

customers with special needs, including those with physical disabilities, limited English 

proficiency, low literacy, and limited computer skills. The focus is on the centers visited in the 

round-two data collection. 

Promoting Public Awareness of Services 

Little marketing is conducted specifically for resource rooms and self-services. Instead, outreach 

is conducted on either a broad level to customers coming into the center (regardless of the level 

or specificity of services they are eligible for or desire to use) or is specifically targeted at subpopulations. 

General Marketing and Outreach 

When LWIAs conduct general marketing, they most commonly use the following methods: 

•	 Print Advertising. Most centers have developed brochures that describe the 

array of services, resources, and programs accessible through the One-Stop
 

Rules and Regulations. Federal Register. Friday, August 11, 2000. Vol. 65, No. 156, p. 49294. 

IV-1 

1 
delivery system. Brochures are either sent as mailers or deposited in strategic 

locations for potential customers to pick up. 

•	 Videos. Some local areas, such as Trident, have developed videos designed to 

promote the local One-Stop delivery system to job seekers and employers. 

•	 Advertisements in Public Media. Many One-Stop Career Centers choose to 

advertise in public media sources such as radio, television, billboards, and 

newspapers. 

•	 Presentations and Special Events. Several centers indicated that they attract 

job seekers by participating in job fairs and business expos, and by giving 

presentations to potential customers. One center, for example, has created 

extensive linkages with high school and college students through presentations at 

their institutions.
 

However, the use of these means of advertising is limited for two primary reasons. One 

explanation for this relative lack of promotion is the limited availability of financial resources 

that can be used for such efforts. In five LWIAs, outreach was the first item reduced when 

budgets had to be cut. Another reason for limited marketing is that center staff perceive that they 

could not accommodate the larger customer base that outreach would create. Three centers 

reported that they were reluctant to conduct large-scale marketing efforts out of concern that 

their centers were already at full capacity and could not adequately serve larger numbers of 

customers. The centers noted that only if more funding for staff and space expansion became 

available could they accommodate more customers and contemplate more outreach. 

A strategy that some centers use to compensate for their limited marketing is to conduct morefocused advertising. One center began to focus outreach entirely on the services it provides after 

a customer survey revealed that many customers come to the One-Stop Career Center without 

knowing what is actually offered. This center has also focused its advertisements more 

narrowly, directing them to particular geographic areas or towards populations with high 

unemployment. Another center reported that keeping its website current and appealing is its 

priority now, since this can be done at relatively low cost. 

Marketing and Outreach to Targeted Populations 

Although self-services are not typically singled out in advertising campaigns, specific 

populations that might be served by them are. All of the centers in this study conduct some form 

of outreach to attract individuals from specific population groups into the resource room. Target 

populations include demographic groups with a high number of unemployed or underemployed 

workers, particularly underrepresented or underserved groups, or populations who are eligible 

for special programs, such as dislocated workers. 

Another example of marketing efforts directed toward specific populations is the practice of 

preemptively reaching target groups before they reach the point of actually needing the center’s 

IV-2 
services. Oakland hands out flyers to parolees in halfway homes before they are fully 

reintegrated and to members of youth organizations before they graduate from school. 

Methods of Recruitment 

Given that marketing is not common, how do One-Stop Career Centers attract customers to their 

resource rooms? Two methods predominate: (1) partner referrals and linkages, and (2) word-ofmouth. 

Referrals and Linkages with One-Stop Partners 

All centers have established referral linkages or co-location agreements with partners that 

encourage participants in specialized programs to use the resources and tools available in the 

resource room. Centers rely on these partner programs and agencies to advertise the services and 

tools the resource room has to offer and refer their clients. Examples of referring partners 

include, but are not limited to, WIA partners and government agencies, such as TANF and Food 

Stamps programs, and community organizations. Referrals are also made during Rapid 

Response orientations held on- or off-site. A major additional source of outreach is ES, which 

sends letters to UI claimants to inform them that they are expected to report to the center for an 

appointment with a case manager and orientation. After the orientation, customers are typically 

instructed to use the resource room. 

Word-Of-Mouth and Reputation 

One of the most cost-effective means of recruiting customers is word-of-mouth. Every One-Stop 

Career Center included in this study mentioned word-of-mouth as a significant source of 

customers. For example, one One-Stop Career Center administrator mentioned that when he 

began his tenure as a new hire there were only 38 active cases. Without an advertising budget, 

he had to count on word-of-mouth to increase the number of customers. To make sure existing 

customers provided favorable reports to their friends and acquaintances, he turned over 

ineffective staff and instilled a culture of customer service and customer-oriented care. Within 

six months the number of customers had increased to 226. As one administrator noted, “people 

like to talk,” and when they have good things to say, it creates a self-perpetuating system of 

advertisement: people go to the center, they learn about the services, they tell other people of 

their positive experience, and more people come to the center to continue the cycle. 

Many centers also benefit from having had a long-term presence in an area. Some have been 

providing various forms of career assistance for years or were the places individuals went to file 

for Unemployment Insurance. Consequently, they are known in the community as places to 

receive job assistance. More generally, in areas with high unemployment or frequent layoffs, the 

typical resident is generally familiar with the public workforce investment system or knows 

someone who is. In these areas, many people are generally aware of the local One-Stop Career 

IV-3 
 

 

Center, even if they are not necessarily familiar with the self-directed services the resource room 

has to offer. 

Site Accessibility 

In an effort to maximize physical accessibility and visibility, most centers in this study have 

located their sites where they can be easily found and visited by a large number of customers. 

Others are less geographically accessible and offer lessons about characteristics that deter access. 

Locational Features that Facilitate Access 

The majority of One-Stop Career Centers are easily accessible because they have one or more of 

the following features: 

•	 Location near Public Transportation Facilities. All comprehensive One-Stop 

Career Centers in this study were located within close proximity to public 

transportation. Some centers located themselves near other widely used services 

and popular areas where public transportation was already established. However, 

the experiences of other LWIAs show that it is possible for a One-Stop Career 

Center to draw public transportation to it. For example, when Trident was 

choosing a location for its center, administrators found a large building in a 

business park that they were interested in, but it was not on any bus routes. The 

executive director of the LWIA negotiated with the local transportation authority 

and the business park to reroute major bus lines into the parking lot. Customers 

are now dropped off at the front door, and, in exchange, bus drivers use the far 

end of the expansive parking lot for break periods. 

•	 Adequate Parking. An appropriate quantity of parking spaces is necessary for 

customers to easily access the One-Stop Career Center by car. The majority of 

centers have dedicated parking with sufficient spaces designated for disabled 

access.
 

•	 Location in the Center of the Urban Area. Some One-Stop Career Centers 

operate in central locations with high visibility and easy access. The Richmond 

One-Stop Career Center, for example, is roughly in the center of the city, close to 

city hall and major public transportation hubs. Another study found that some
 

LWIAs prefer a strategy of having fewer but more centralized centers, because it 

allows more partners to be co-located and more services to be provided at each 

single location.2

 Besides downtown areas, good centralized locations for OneStop Career Centers include those in close proximity to strip malls, the 

Department of Labor building, and county seats. 

•	 Location in Neighborhood Centers. In contrast to choosing a few, centralized 

locations, another approach to facilitating access is to locate centers within 

K. Dunham, A. Goger, J. Henderson-Frakes, and N. Tucker, Workforce Development in Rural Areas: Changes in 

Access, Service Delivery, and Partnerships (Social Policy Research Associates, 2005). 

IV-4 

2 
 

neighborhoods. This way, customers do not need to travel long distances to 

receive services, and centers can more easily cater to the needs of the local 

community. Usually this strategy entails having a greater number of centers than 

would be the case if centralization were the priority. 

Sacramento offers an example of the neighborhood approach. When researching where to locate 

One Stop Career Centers, the LWIA contracted a consultant to provide demographic data from 

all communities in Sacramento County. The consultant also held public hearings around the 

county to create community discussions and get feedback about the best locations at which to 

open One-Stop Career Centers. 

Philadelphia’s CareerLink system also exemplifies the neighborhood approach, with its four fullservice access points around the city as well as a number of satellites that provide most 

customers with a relatively local site at which they can access services. To illustrate how this 

approach works in practice, Exhibit IV-1 maps this LWIA’s comprehensive and satellite centers 

relative to the number of unemployed persons in the population. This display shows that access 

points are generally proximal to the largest concentrations of the unemployed, suggesting that 

decisions about where to locate centers were strategically made. (One exception might be for 

unemployed individuals in the western reaches of this LWIA’s service area, who seem to need to 

travel a further distance to access services than others.) 

Similarly, a map of the location of the LWIA’s comprehensive centers relative to where the 

centers’ customers reside was also plotted. The patterns, shown in Exhibit IV-2, suggest the 

following: 

•	 Centers do seem to be strategically located, in that most customers come from
 

high unemployment areas (see Exhibit IV-1) and reside in proximity to the center 

from which they sought services. 

•	 Notwithstanding the above, customers are clustered much more tightly around 

some centers (e.g., the “South” comprehensive center) than others (e.g., 

“Northeast”). Furthermore, some centers seem to attract customers from further 

away, even when another center may be nearer to them. In particular, the “North” 

center, which is the largest, oldest, and best-known center, attracts the most 

customers from other areas of the LWIA. 

•	 Some customers, though a relatively small proportion, apparently reside outside 

this LWIA’s boundaries. 

IV-5 
Exhibit IV-1: 


CareerLink Centers Relative to the Unemployed Population 

 

  


  
      

Exhibit IV-2:































 













































 





































  





































































































































































































 







  

























































 













 





 

















 









































































































































































































 





































































































 



 







































































 













































 











































 























 



























 























  

























































 



















 





































































































































 

















 





























 







 













 













































































































 



 













































 



















































 

 

























































































 





  















 

































    





 















 













































 















































































 







































 































































 











































  



































 

































































 























































































































































































































  























































  









  















 

 



































































 



























 















































































































 







































 

























































 



























































 













 

 











































 









 



























 





















































































































































































































































































































  









 





























 

















 











































































 









































































 































































































































 

















  























































 



















































































































































 









































































































 























   





































 





 















 









































 



















































 











 











 













































 































































 









































 









 



































































 









































  



















 























 





















































  







 



 





















 

















 























































 











































  





























 





















 











































 















 

























  





 















































































 





 





























 



































  















 































 







  













 













 













 















 





























































 



 







  





















































 





























 













 







































































 

























   



 









  



















  





 











  

 













 























 















































 

































































































 













 





























 















































 



























































































 















































 















































































 























 





 





 















































 





























































































 































 



















  







  



 







  

 

















 





























 





















 









































 









































 



























 















 





 









































 



















































 

 

















  



 

















 

 





 







 







 



































 



























 



























 





























 





  



































 















 



 











 









 











 





























































































































































 



















































  













 















  



































 





 



























 

























































  





















































 









  



















 













































 













 





















 

 











































 











































 





















































 

 





















































 





















 









































 























 



 























 













 

























 







  















































































 













































































 













































  

































 























 













 



















 























 







 



 





















 









































  





































 







 











 







































 

  

























 





































 











 



















 











































 



































































 























 



















 





 





























 















































 















 

























 









































































 





















  















 









































































 









































 













 



 

















































 



 





 

 











 





























































 

































































































 











 

























































 







 



























































































 

















 













 







 



































 

































 











 

















 































 























  























 











 









































 

















 

















   























 

















 





















































































 





 















































































































































 

 



  



























































 



























 





































 







































































 







 

 







 











































 











 

































 

























 







 

 













 









 

















 















  























 



















 



















































 



















  





















 

















 









 







 

 











 











































































 



















 













































 



  





















 

































































 















 









































 















 















































 





 



















 





























 































 











  



 

 























  

 

























































































































































































 













 



















 





























   









































   





















 

















































 





















 











 





 



































































































































































 































 







































   



















 



















 













































 







 













  

















































 







 



































































 



 

















 



















 





































 











 



























































 



























































 















































 







 

























  





















 









































 















  





 





































 























































 















 































































 



















 

































    















 





















 





 















 





































































































 











  

















































 



















 



















































 









 













































































































































 



















 







































 































































 























 





















 











 















































 



  







 

























































































 











































































 



































 







































































 











































 





















































































 





























 





 











 











































































 

























 



 













 



 



 



  











 













 



































 





 







 





















































 



 





 



















 

 

































 









































 











 

 

















































 



 



























































  























 



  







  











 





  



 





 





















 



 











































 







































 









 

















  



 











 





 







































 





 







































 























 













 

 

























  









 































































































 



























































 

























































































































 















  



























































 























  

  































































































 





























 



































































 



















 













 

































































  





































 

















 

 





 























 



































 









 



































































 



































 



























 

































































 































   





























      















 



































































  







  



















 





 



   















 







 































   





















 





 













 



 





















 





 

















































 











 

  



































































 

















 







































































  





 















 



















   













 

















  





















 





 

























 



 

















 



















 





















































  







 





































 













































































 













 































 

 





 

 

 































 









 















































































  



















 









































 













































 























 



































 













 





















































 





















 































 





































































 





 









 





























 

















































































 

































 



























 











 

















 

































 



 































 































































































  







































































 



























 

































  







































































































































































































  









 

















































 



















 





































































































 























































































































 









































































































































 



















 





  





 





























































 



























































































 



 



























































































  





 































 



















































































































  

























































 







































































































































































































































































































 





































 



























 



























  













 







 







 



   











 













 































































































































































 





















 























































 































 































 





































































































































 























































































































   

































































 



























 





























  



 



 























  







































































 

 





























 













































































 









 





















































 



























 

























































































  























 



















 





















 















 







 





















  





















































 



 



 









 







 





 























































  











 









 



 





 





 











 







    



























 

















  































  

















  









































  









 











 









 

















































 





























 













 











  







 









 











 













 































 















































 













 



















 







































 

























 

























 





















































 



























































 





































 



























































 









 

























































 



























 

































 









 

















































 

















 











 























































 























































 





























































































































































































  





 























 































































































 























 





































 



















































































 

















 









































 

































































































 







 

































 





































































































  



 

 









































































































































































































 















































































































 



































 



























































































 

































































 





























 

























 































 

















































  













































































 













































































































 

























 

 

















































































 























 





























































































































 



































 



























 

















































 



























































































 



























 		 

	 		




 	

	

	





	





	

	

	


	

	



	

	





	

		 	





	



  		
  

	

 


	
	


  	  


	
  
	
  
	
  

 
	
  

	
 !"#	$ %&	
' ()) *	  	 	

' +,,,) 	&	
 
	
  !)		# 	 
 -	' -	) +,,+ . /&) +,,0)



!



  
 

 

These findings, taken together, suggest that conflicting considerations—particularly ease of 

access counterbalanced by the apparent desire to seek services in known and familiar locations— 

come into play in determining which centers customers will use. 

External Features that Deter Access 

Not all locations are easily accessible or incorporate the features listed above. In fact, a small 

number of One-Stop Career Centers in the study have features that would seem to restrict access, 

such as poor signage, limited parking, and out-of-the-way locations. 

•	 Limited Visibility. Limited visibility from the street is a potential access barrier 

for customers, as is the lack of easy-to-see and clearly marked signage. Seven 

centers had limited signage or were hidden from the main street behind other 

buildings. This makes it difficult for drivers to know when to turn, and leaves 

customers on foot wandering to locate the entrance. Because they lacked 

adequate signage directly on the building, three centers were difficult to find 

without an exact address. 

•	 Limited Parking. Limited parking presents another barrier to drivers and 

disabled customers. Two One-Stop Career Centers had a limited number of 

disabled parking spaces, which seemed insufficient to meet customer needs based 

on the estimated number of disabled customers that use the center. One One-Stop 

Career Center had no dedicated parking at all, leaving customers with vehicles to 

rely on limited street parking or expensive private garages. 

•	 Remote Locations. One-Stop Career Centers in business parks or at a distance 

from urban centers cannot be easily reached by pedestrians or public 

transportation users, and they are less likely to become known by potential 

customers. While less-than-ideal siting is unavoidable in some cases, three 

locations appeared to be further than necessary from settings that customers might 

already frequent. 

•	 Limited Transportation Options. Centers in more rural areas often are not 

accessible by regularly scheduled public transportation, which can discourage 

access for some customers. (As a remedy, authorities in one rural LWIA arranged 

for on-demand van services, although this option is more expensive and can be 

less reliable than regular-route public transportation.3

) 

Usability of Resources 

Once customers enter the resource room, the services and resources offered must be easily 

accessible and usable. In an effort to promote usability, centers have developed an array of 

features to assist customers, including an appealing physical layout and modern equipment. 

Dunham, K., Goger, A., Henderson-Frakes, J., and N. Tucker, op.cit. 

IV-8 

3 
Additional features of resource rooms, such as extended hours or childcare service, can also be 

helpful. 

Layout and Equipment 

An appealing physical layout of the resource room was a commonly cited strength, mentioned by 

one-quarter of all respondents in the 2006 local-area survey (see Chapter III). Among those who 

cited this strength, a significant portion mentioned that the physical layout of their resource 

rooms presented an inviting and professional atmosphere with ample space to meet peak 

customer flows. 

While the resource rooms visited for this study varied in size and in the details of their physical 

arrangements, they typically exemplified these strengths. They also shared similar components. 

For example, upon entering the resource room, customers usually encounter a desk where 

resource room staff orient customers to available services. In addition, since computers are the 

focal point of self-directed services, all resource rooms contain a significant number of 

computers. Computer stations are typically arranged in rows, either along a wall or in a row of 

desks in the middle of the room. Cubicles or hutches are the most common way to ensure 

customers’ privacy while they use computer stations. 

Other common elements include workstations or tables for customers to sit at, phone stations for 

them to make free local calls for employment-related purposes, phone and/or computer stations 

dedicated to provide UI access, and a library or other hardcopy document area. Exhibit IV-3 

shows one example of a resource room layout that shares common elements with others in this 

study. 

Having state-of-the-art equipment was also mentioned as a key strength by respondents to the 

local-area survey. Very often, these respondents boasted that their computer equipment had 

recently been upgraded or that their software was customer friendly. Conversely, of the LWIAs 

that expressed dissatisfaction with their current self-services, one-third mentioned the need for 

general infrastructural improvements, such as better or upgraded equipment, more space, or 

improved tools. 

IV-9 
Exhibit IV-3: 

Sample Resource Room Layout 

Regardless of design or layout, every resource room in this study contained the following 

elements. Each element has the potential to either facilitate or deter access to services, 

depending on how it is managed or implemented. 

•	 Computers. Considering that the majority of resources and tools in the resource 

room are available electronically on computers and the Internet, adequate access 

to computers is very important. Most centers had acceptable numbers of 

computers, although many indicated they would like more if they had additional 

funding and space. Wait times for computers were generally reported as minimal 

overall. However, during peak times a waitlist does develop at many centers, 

causing centers to establish policies that place a time limit on computer usage 

when others are waiting. Given the emphasis placed on computer-based 

resources, customers wanting this tool can do little while waiting for a work 

station. 

•	 Workspace. In the spirit of continuous improvement, resource room staff report 

they could serve their customers better with more space. While some centers 

have benefited from remodeling their resource rooms to be more comfortable and 

spacious, not all have been able to do so. Cramped space, lack of privacy, 

crowded furniture that impedes access for the disabled, and customer demand that 

IV-10 
causes congestion at times are major limitations to the adequacy of some 

facilities. 

•	 Noise level. Despite varying levels of customer usage and density, none of the 

resource room staff complained of persistently high noise levels. Disturbances 

are occasionally reported, but there are no consistent challenges. However, 

customers can sometimes get loud when talking on the telephones and distract the 

rest of the resource room. 

•	 Privacy. Lack of privacy when using resource room telephones is the largest 

complaint from customers. This issue may be irresolvable, however, because 

usually phones are located with minimal privacy so resource room staff can 

monitor conversations to ensure they are business-related. 

•	 Signage. In most centers, signage is adequate to provide customers with a quick 

orientation to services. However, improvements often seemed called for. In 

some LWIAs, signs in the reception area, above computers or equipment, or on 

the walls either are absent or tell customers only what not to do, instead of 

displaying directions or instructions. 

Additional Features that Promote Access 

In addition to the standard features noted above, the following features were used by a limited 

number of One-Stop Career Centers to broaden their customer bases. These special features not 

only increase the number of people who can use the centers, but attract customers to the center in 

the first place. 

•	 Extended Hours of Operation. The transition to comprehensive One-Stop 

Career Centers expands potential customer profiles to include those who already 

have jobs but are looking to secure better ones. Centers that provide services only 

during traditional business hours limit the number of working individuals who can 

access the resource room. A limited number of centers have extended hours 

during evenings and weekends to provide times during which customers who 

cannot visit the center during regular business hours can use the resource room. 

At the same time, a number of other centers discontinued the practice of having 

extended hours as a result of low customer volume and a reluctance of some staff 

to work non-traditional hours. 

•	 Childcare. Many One-Stop Career Centers provide additional services to 

increase the accessibility of the center for customers with young children. Three 

One-Stop Career Centers either provide childcare or have a representative onsite 

to register eligible customers for childcare subsidies or nearby childcare services. 

Two centers do not provide childcare but allow children in the resource room and 

supply crayons and toys to keep them occupied. 

Accessibility for Customers with Special Needs 

In keeping with the principles of universal access, the One-Stop delivery system seeks to provide 

services to all individuals regardless of employment status, language ability, skill sets, family 

IV-11 
 

 

 

 

 

responsibilities, or physical ability. Under WIA, all job seekers are welcome, which entails 

providing certain accommodations for customers with disabilities, language barriers, and poor 

computer skills. 

Accommodating Disabled Customers 

As part of serving a diverse population, special provisions are necessary for customers with 

disabilities. Federal law requires that all One-Stop Career Centers comply with the Americans 

with Disabilities Act (ADA), which includes considering ADA accommodations when designing 

the centers. Efforts to meet these requirements, and go beyond them, include designing the 

center and the resource room with disabled customers in mind, making physical 

accommodations, providing assistive technology and alternative formats, and supporting 

customers with staff assistance. Most efforts are focused on providing adaptive equipment and 

offering strong referral or co-located linkages with organizations having a focus on serving 

customers with disabilities. 

Physical Accommodations in Facilities 

As mentioned above, centers in this study are required by law to meet basic ADA requirements 

regarding physical accessibility in their buildings. Additional accommodations can also be made 

to improve access for customers with mobility impairments. These physical accommodations 

include the following: 

•	 handicapped parking in close proximity to entrances 

•	 an adequate number of handicapped parking spaces4 

•	 curb cuts and external walkways easily navigable by people using wheelchairs or
 

crutches
 

•	 automatic or button-controlled doors 

•	 doorways wide enough to accommodate wheelchairs5 

•	 door thresholds and door mats easily navigable by wheelchairs 

•	 signs at non-accessible entryways or doors directing customers to accessible 

entrances
 

•	 accessible restrooms6 

•	 alternatives to stairs or steps, such as ramps or elevators 

4	 Defined as one designated handicapped space per 25 non-designated spaces. 

5	 Defined as a minimum of 32 inches wide. 

6	 Defined as having stalls with minimum dimensions of 36 inches by 69 inches, sink height of 34 inches, and 

faucets workable with a closed fist. 

IV-12 
 

 

 

•	 gradual ramps at an appropriate grade 

•	 a five-foot-long level landing at the bottom of every ramp, or after 30 feet of ramp 

•	 six feet of sturdy railing on every ramp7 

•	 elevators sized to accommodate wheelchairs8 

•	 braille and/or raised instructions on elevator buttons and door jambs, and to 

identify floors 

•	 visible and audible door opening/closing and floor indicators on elevators 

•	 elevator call buttons at 42-inch maximum height 

Despite ADA requirements, not all facilities are equal in their attempts at facilitating access to 

individuals with disabilities. High registration counters, cramped or over-crowded rooms, outof-reach equipment, and heavy manual doors are some examples field staff encountered that 

would seem to impede access. 

Older buildings and strict lease agreements can impede efforts to make centers and resource 

rooms physically accessible. In one LWIA, the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) representative 

reported that interactions with leasing agencies are very complicated in regard to building 

modifications. For example, multiple One-Stop Career Centers had heavy doors that were not 

easily opened, but the centers were unable to replace them due to building and lease regulations. 

Furthermore, leasing companies that rent out One-Stop Career Center facilities can be slow to 

update their facilities to facilitate access, and sometimes it takes multiple letters of request before 

they comply. Accommodations external to the center itself, such as curb cuts to facilitate 

wheelchair access, can be especially difficult, since they may entail dealing with city 

governments, which can often be a slow process. 

Providing Resources in Alternative Formats 

All centers provide some level of adaptive equipment that enables customers with hearing, 

vision, or mobility impairments to access self-service resources. These types of assistive 

technology and accommodations include the following: 

•	 alternate formats for applications, brochures, and written materials (Braille, large 

print, disk copies, tapes) 

•	 screen magnification software (e.g., Zoomtext) 

•	 screen reader for computers (e.g., JAWS) 

•	 assistive computer input technology such as alternative keyboards and mice 

7 Railing must be 34 to 38 inches in height. 

8 Must include enough space for a motorized wheelchair and have 32-inch-wide doorways. 

IV-13 
• computer instructions written in sixth-grade language 

• Braille instructions on fax machine, copy machine, etc. 

• TTY (used to type messages rather than using voice over a telephone line) 

• computer workstations accessible to wheelchairs 

• fax, copy, and printer equipment positioned low enough for wheelchair access. 

Providing alternative formats and resources improves access to self-services for those who would 

otherwise not be able to use the resource room without staff assistance. However, in many of the 

centers, assistive technology is rarely used and therefore stored to save space when not needed. 

Funding for such equipment is also limited and in some LWIAs it is distributed among centers so 

that not all resource rooms contain the same equipment. VR staff at one center added that it is 

not practical to have all assistive technology in all centers in more rural areas, because the need 

for these devices is low and the budget for them can be spent on other, more-utilized areas. 

Furthermore, most disabled customers do not use the resource room until they meet with a VR 

representative first; thus, resource room staff feel they have time to prepare and make 

accommodations when necessary. 

Staff-Assisted Accommodations 

Despite the presence of physical and technological accommodations, many customers with 

disabilities require some staff assistance to navigate and use the resource rooms. Staff provide, 

or are at least trained to provide, the following accommodations: 

• sign language interpreters 

• assistance with assistive technology 

• assistance as a sighted guide 

At the same time, most staff report that they have limited experience providing assistance to 

customers with disabilities and that there is a limited need for such assistance. They report that 

few customers with physical impairments come into the resource rooms, and fewer do so without 

a VR counselor or companion. Arguably, however, usage would increase if centers were found 

to be better prepared. 

Assisting Customers with Cognitive Impairments 

Assisting customers with cognitive impairments represents one of the greatest challenges to 

promoting access among individuals with disabilities. Cognitive disabilities are categorized as 

those involving memory, perception, problem solving, and conceptualizing. They range from 

mild learning disabilities to severe retardation, and therefore functional limitations vary widely. 

Serving customers with cognitive impairments is challenging because of this variability, the 

often “invisible” nature of the impairments, and the reluctance of customers to disclose their 

IV-14 
 

 

impairments or be referred to special services. Furthermore, there are few assistive devices for 

people with cognitive impairments. 

No centers in this study provide explicit accommodations to customers with cognitive 

impairments, beyond referrals to VR. Some assistive equipment meant for other special-needs 

customers—such as screen enlargers, resources for those with limited English proficiency, or 

voice-read-out software—may be of help, but providing adequate staff assistance is the greatest 

challenge. Of the staff that commented on their engagement with customers with cognitive 

impairments, all expressed a dearth of training. Only one center reported receiving safety and 

crisis training, which contained a module on mental and emotional emergencies but nothing on 

assisting customers with utilizing self-services. 

Training Staff to Provide Assistance to Customers with Disabilities 

Training for resource room staff on serving customers with disabilities has the potential to 

increase awareness and sensitivity to the unique issues that this population faces. However, staff 

with training and experience in serving customers with disabilities is not a standard feature in the 

resource rooms visited. 

Vocational Rehabilitation offers free training for workforce staff, but not every One-Stop Career 

Center has taken advantage of this service. Two centers took advantage of an online Disability 

Navigator9

 training that provides instruction on issues of access, how to work with clients with 

disabilities, and how to handle legal issues. But only one center reported regular, monthly 

professional development on how to work with people with disabilities (this center, however, is 

operated by an organization focused on delivering services to people with disabilities). 

Additionally, three One-Stop Career Centers mentioned receiving training from ES that 

contained a module on working with customers with disabilities. 

Compounding the issue of limited training is the effect of high staff turnover, which makes it 

difficult to keep trained staff in the resource rooms. Often, staff receive training in assistive 

technology or on how to assist customers with disabilities, only to move on to another job 

without transferring this knowledge to the replacement. 

Role of Vocational Rehabilitation 

Vocational Rehabilitation broadly provides services and advocacy to individuals with 

disabilities, to help them prepare for and access suitable employment. Each state is responsible 

for the administration of its Department of Vocational Rehabilitation or equivalent, and is guided 

by a number of federal acts including the Workforce Investment Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and 

the Americans with Disabilities Act, among others. VR typically provides employment services 

The Disability Program Navigator is described later in this chapter. 

IV-15 

9 
 

 

and counseling, arranges for services for individuals to get to work, and provides training and 

technical assistance to employers regarding disability employment issues. Within the One-Stop 

delivery system, VR also provides staff training to partners. 

In order to assist customers with disabilities, resource room staff make referrals to VR. In all 

cases, the referral process was noted as very informal. Staff members usually make a simple 

phone call, send an email, or walk to the office if VR is co-located. A sentiment that was 

repeated by respondents at multiple centers was that the relationship with VR was as functional 

as it needed to be, meaning that a strong collaboration was not necessary. Multiple VR staff who 

were interviewed mentioned that it is not common for a disabled customer to use the resource 

room prior to meeting with a VR representative. Very commonly, in fact, VR staff will 

accompany customers with disabilities in the resource room at least the first time to orient them 

to the services, thus reducing the burden on regular resource room staff and further facilitating 

access to expert assistance. 

One VR representative did express a desire for greater cooperation between VR and the resource 

room, citing the need for better job placement for VR clients and services to employers. In areas 

with more disabled customers, VR expressed the importance of solid communication and regular 

partner meetings. 

Role of the Disability Program Navigator 

Funded by the Department of Labor and the Social Security Administration, the Disability 

Program Navigator (DPN) serves as a resource to the staff of a One-Stop Career Center in 

promoting comprehensive services to people with disabilities through the One-Stop delivery 

system. Responsibilities of the DPN include: 

•	 facilitating seamless and comprehensive services for individuals with disabilities 

in the One-Stop Career Center 

•	 serving as a resource for One-Stop Career Center staff 

•	 improving linkages to employers 

•	 fostering interagency collaboration to address issues of access10 

The DPN program has limited funding, and therefore not all One-Stop Career Centers in this 

study have this position. The centers with a DPN were in various stages of implementation, 

ranging from having just received funding to hire a DPN staff member to involving the DPN in 

10 Department of Labor, E.T.A. (07/30/2009). Disability Program Navigator Initiative. Retrieved 08/25/2009, from 

Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration: 

www.doleta.gov/disability/onepagers/DPN_FACTSHEET_March2009.pdf 

IV-16 
such activities as assessing the One-Stop Career Center for accessibility, managing referrals, and 

delivering workshops. 

Accommodating Customers with Literacy and Language Barriers 

Limited English-proficient customers, non-native speakers, and customers with limited literacy 

present challenges to One-Stop Career Centers and require additional resources, staff assistance, 

and alternative modes of delivering services. Although such customers may be skilled workers, 

their language challenges can prevent them from fully utilizing the resource room without 

assistance. This section discusses the challenges these customers face in using self-services and 

the accommodations the One-Stop Career Centers in this study have made to serve them. 

Limited English Proficient 

Approximately 60 percent of LWIAs nationwide identified accommodating customers with 

limited English abilities as a moderate to substantial challenge (see Chapter III). As populations 

of non-native English speakers and the foreign-born labor force in the U.S. grow, One-Stop 

Career Centers in certain regions must adjust to provide adequate access to self-services for 

customers who speak and write languages other than English. This can be costly, because it 

entails providing translation services, duplicative resources in alternative languages, and 

bilingual staff. 

Despite limited financial resources and other barriers, centers have used the following 

approaches to facilitate access for limited English-proficient customers: 

•	 Translated materials. Resources rooms provide translated materials, including 

information on partners and referral services, instructions to help navigate 

services, and who to ask for help. Also prevalent were various resources, such as 

online job searches, websites, fraud abuse hotlines, LMI data, flyers, and printed 

materials, written or presented in languages other than English. 

•	 Non-English Workshops. Centers provide workshops in multiple languages, 

primarily Spanish, on résumé development, interviewing, and computer skills. 

General orientations and tours are also provided. 

•	 Referrals and further assistance. Despite efforts to make accommodations, 

many customers need further language development to be successful in their 

career development. Referrals to English as a Second Language (ESL) classes 

and Adult Education are available in most locations. 

•	 Alternative language services. Centers provide varying levels of language 

services to assist customers in the resource room. Some centers employ bilingual 

resource room staff who are available for customers. Other centers without fulltime bilingual staff in the resource room are able to borrow bilingual staff from
 

other departments or partners on demand. 

IV-17 
•	 Remote translation services. Some centers without bilingual staff take 

advantage of telephone translation services available in an extensive list of 

languages. 

In spite of these efforts, comprehensive language support in the resource rooms was lacking 

overall, and not a standard practice. For example, at least one center had no arrangements for 

speakers of languages other than English, and two had limited resources for languages other than 

English and Spanish. 

Given these limitations, centers able to make greater accommodations became a magnet for those 

needing language assistance to obtain employment. For example, customers at one center 

reportedly drive from areas served by other One-Stop Career Centers to use the bilingual staff at 

the center, based on the center’s positive reputation. 

Limited Literacy 

Since most services in the resource room require basic literacy, individuals with very low 

literacy are not helped by having access to translated materials or materials worded using simple 

language. Resource room staff can assist customers with basic literacy in navigating resources, 

but do not have the time to assist those with more limited abilities or to help them improve their 

abilities. 

Basic resource room accommodations for those with limited literacy include materials written at 

a sixth-grade reading level, color-coded signs to designate services and departments, one-on-one 

assistance, and computer-based literacy improvement software. One resource room staff 

member said that customers with low literacy usually discretely ask for these services 

themselves. Beyond these accommodations, most centers feel that customers without a 

functional level of literacy require additional services and cannot fully benefit from self-services 

at One-Stop Career Centers. Fortunately, they are almost always eligible for programs in which 

they can receive additional services. Consequently, resource room staff make referrals to Adult 

Education, free literacy courses offered in the community, and General Educational 

Development (GED) programs. 

Accessibility for Customers with Limited Computer Skills 

Computer skills are essential for accessing all that the resource room has to offer, as discussed 

earlier in this report. Moreover, staff view learning how to operate a computer as an 

empowering process, giving customers both confidence and valuable job skills. This section 

describes the tools and resources available to assist customers with limited computer skills. 

Customer Readiness for Using Computers 

Although the level of computer literacy that is required to use computer-based and online 

resources is fairly basic, resource room staff across the country report significant numbers of 

IV-18 
customers are not even at this level because they are too intimated by or do not know how to use 

computers at all. In fact, as customers navigate self-services, the most common request for 

assistance is with using the computers. A One-Stop Career Center in California estimates that 

one in ten customers lack proficient skills to use the computer themselves. At the other extreme, 

a One-Stop Career Center in Texas estimates that 90 percent of customers need assistance with 

the computers. Of the LWIAs surveyed as part of the 2006 local-area survey, nearly 80 percent 

of respondents reported that accommodating those with poor computer skills was a substantial or 

moderate challenge, indicating that this is indeed a significant challenge for resource room staff 

(see Chapter III). Resource room staff attribute the lack of computer skills among some 

customers to low educational attainment, limited skill requirements in past jobs, and age. 

Types of Assistance 

One-Stop Career Centers used a number of means to assist customers with limited computer 

skills, including providing printed instructions, one-on-one staff assistance, workshops, and 

referrals. The type of assistance given varies, depending on the customer’s existing level of 

computer skills, the type of tool the customer is using, the policies for delivering customer 

assistance, and often the philosophy of the resource room staff. 

•	 Printed instructions. To reduce the amount of staff time invested in teaching 

customers to use computer-based self-service tools, centers make use of written 

instruction. The details of these instructions vary from simple lists to extensive 

help. South Plains has developed an entire binder of step-by-step instructional 

materials written in simple language with computer screen images to help 

customers navigate through numerous self-service tools. Resource room staff 

commented that it is easier to demonstrate in person the use of a tool, but the 

written instructions are particularly helpful for repeat customers who simply need 

technical reminders. 

•	 Informal staff assistance. Typically, staff assistance on the computers is
 

integral to orienting the majority of customers to the tools and resources that are 

available. Without staff assistance, computers would most likely be underutilized; this is one reason it is common for staff to spend time helping customers 

with computer access. At the same time, resource constraints severely limit the 

amount of one-on-one assistance that can be provided in the resource room, 

leaving many customers without adequate support. 

•	 Orientations or classes. One-on-one staff assistance is time consuming. Some 

of the local areas consolidate instructional efforts by offering basic computer 

skills courses. Some One-Stop Career Centers provide free computer courses, but 

referrals are also made to Adult Education or to free courses offered by partners. 

•	 Computer tutorials. Computer-based support is a common method of assisting 

customers with limited computer skills without increasing staff workloads. With 

limited staff assistance, customers can be directed to computer-based and online 

courses or tutorials that teach them basic skills. In the local-area survey, a 

IV-19 
 

 

number of LWIAs mentioned having software designed to boost computer 

literacy as the specific service of which they were proudest. 

•	 Non-computer resources. Despite assistance, some customers choose not to 

use computer-based resources. Libraries, booklets and guides, printed 

information off the Internet, newspapers, and hard-copy LMI data are the 

resources most frequently offered to these individuals. Many of the One-Stop 

Career Centers have tools that are only available in hard copy, not online. For 

example, many have only hard-copy handouts for youth, partner materials, job 

leads, books, and some assessment tools like the Wunderlich11 assessment. Still, 

this set of tools is not as comprehensive as those available online. Additionally, 

most hard-copy resources need continual replacement as they become outdated, 

which can be time consuming, expensive, and a drain on resources. An interview 

with a customer revealed that he did not feel the hard-copy materials applied to 

him, because they are geared towards lower-skilled workers and he was a college
 

graduate. Space and budget constraints limit the diversity of hard-copy materials 

that are provided, whereas the Internet presents no such constraints. 

Many staff explained that it is important for them to provide assistance using an approach that 

will empower customers to use self-service tools on their own. This approach is particularly 

important because as customers learn how to use most self-service tools they simultaneously 

develop general computer skills, which are often desired by employers. Additionally, 

empowering customers to use tools on their own helps them build confidence in themselves and 

their ability to acquire skills independently. 

Assisting customers with poor computer skills is likely to become even more important, at least 

in the near term, as services become more dependent on computers. Many One-Stop Career 

Centers reported that they were in the process of moving their resources online or had a goal of 

an online resource room. One center is trying to implement a paperless resource room and wean 

customers off hard-copy resources entirely. They have even moved the fax and copy machines 

out of the main room. 

Conclusion 

Even though a major goal is for customers to use self-services with minimal staff assistance, 

resource rooms must make a variety of accommodations in order to be accessible to the universal 

customer. Ensuring that all job seekers, including those with special needs, have access to the 

services available means making sure they can physically locate and access the center itself, and 

that they have the ability to use the tools and resources once they have arrived. This study has 

revealed some common challenges to ensuring access to a diverse customer base, as well as 

11	 The Wunderlich assessment is a standardized test used to assess the aptitude of prospective employees for 

learning and problem solving. 

IV-20 
promising practices that assist the universal customer in seeking employment using self-directed 

services through the One-Stop delivery system. 

Promising Practices in Facilitating Access to Self-Services 

The One-Stop Career Centers in this study use a variety of methods to attract customers, orient 

them to services, and assist them in utilizing self-service tools and resources. Particular 

strategies and practices of note are detailed below. 

•	 Prioritizing customer service. A One-Stop Career Center director said that his 

center tries to serve the customer in every possible way and he encourages staff to 

be creative and attentive. He believes that keeping a nicely kept and professional 

office is important. Resource room staff in another center stressed how important 

it was to take time to listen to clients who are underemployed, which builds their 

confidence to successfully find a new job. When a staff commits to treating 

customers in a friendly and positive way, it creates an environment where people 

feel comfortable and confident, and this is reflected in the reputation of the center 

in the community. 

•	 Creating a One-Stop managers’ network. One WIB administrator felt that one 

of the center’s best practices is to treat the One-Stop Career Center managers as a 

network and have them meet every other month to exchange ideas. The One-Stop 

Career Center staff of this administrator also meet once per quarter to discuss best 

practices and challenges. This helps them feel comfortable asking each other for 

assistance and sharing information regarding best practices in facilitating access 

to self-services. 

•	 Using the Disability Program Navigator. Oyster Bay found that the Disability 

Program Navigator increased coordination on behalf of persons with disabilities. 

Having a DPN on staff opened lines of communication between VR and other 

partners and increased opportunities to collaborate and serve these individuals. 

•	 Forging extensive partnerships. Brazos Valley found that a strong practice for 

its area is to house a large number of programs and services that are highly 

utilized by its customers for the purpose of eliminating barriers to employment. 

Having these partners onsite allows the center to better serve its customers and 

understand their needs because they do not have to send them to different places 

within the community. 

Challenges in Facilitating Access to Self-Services 

A number of challenges remain in facilitating access to the tools and resources that support a 

self-directed approach to gaining employment. Some barriers to achieving that goal are listed 

below. 

•	 Under-utilization of services. Respondents stated that many customers come to 

the One-Stop Career Center through word-of-mouth, thinking they know what is 

available and what program they are interested in. It is difficult to convince these 

customers to take advantage of the other free resources that will help them obtain 

IV-21 
or retain employment. Other customers are intimidated to use a computer or 

afraid to ask for assistance. Having a resource room that is mainly technologybased means that some customers flounder, because the center cannot provide the 

assistance that is needed. Further, it is difficult to assist customers with special 

needs if they do not self-identify. 

•	 Misconceptions among the public. Sometimes clients have difficulty 

understanding the difference between the new One-Stop delivery system and the 

former UI office or the Department of Human Services. Respondents stated that 

people seeking UI benefits will ask resource room staff numerous questions 

regarding UI eligibility. Such misperceptions of the function of the One-Stop 

delivery system result in a larger influx of individuals who are not seeking job 

search services, leaving resource rooms overcrowded and already strained staff 

busier. 

•	 Customers with barriers to employment. Resource room staff commonly 

serve customers who have barriers to employment that they are not trained to deal 

with, such as poor hygiene, mental health problems, emotional disorders, etc. 

They often function as counselors even though they are not trained to do so. 

•	 Security. As a result of a more diverse customer base, some centers have 

experienced an increase in incidents in which customers have threatened staff 

members and engaged in fights. 

•	 Funding inadequate for proper staffing. A clear challenge to delivering selfservices is being able to have an adequate level of staffing. Funding limitations 

cause many centers to get creative with staffing, which can result in high 

turnover. One One-Stop Career Center had to lay off some staff and reduce the 

hours of others due to lack of funding. That center is also reducing hours of 

operation to further reduce costs, which further hurts customers. An administrator 

in a different LWIA stated that, while the need for services seemed greater, her 

budget was half what it was seven years ago. Providing good customer service is 

key, not only for effective service delivery but also for establishing a positive 

reputation in the community that can spread through word-of-mouth; yet many 

centers are challenged to provide adequate staff assistance because funding is too 

limited. 

•	 Serving customers with disabilities. While it appears that One-Stop Career 

Centers do an adequate job of physically accommodating customers with 

disabilities, the most significant challenges in serving this population require 

more than self-directed services. Coordination with VR and community 

organizations is essential to ensuring that customers with disabilities have a wide 

selection of services, staff are properly trained to assist them, and employers are 

educated on accommodations. 

IV-22 
V. CUSTOMER TRACKING SYSTEMS 

SPR’s survey of local area self-services, described in Chapter III, suggests that, as of early 2006, 

LWIAs nationwide had a limited capacity to comprehensively track customers who access selfservices. Although some progress had been made since the survey was first administered in 

2003, as of 2006 only 33 percent of LWIAs required all or most on-site self-service users to 

provide their SSNs. Less common still were requirements that customers provide their basic 

demographics (24 percent), reasons for using services (22 percent), or work histories (17 

percent). Thus, data from the 2006 survey of local-area self-services suggest that LWIAs are far 

from having implemented comprehensive tracking systems for self-service customers. 

Because they have comprehensive tracking systems in place, the LWIAs participating in this 

study are, in this respect, exceptional. For the most part, these LWIAs request that self-service 

users provide, at a minimum, their SSNs and basic demographics, and they also generally record 

every time the customer uses self-services on-site at the One-Stop Career Center’s resource 

room. The processes and systems used to capture this information vary among the local areas, 

however, and each system to some degree presents constraints and challenges. This chapter 

describes and compares these systems. It begins by describing the tracking mechanisms being 

used, and then describes the information these systems are capturing. The chapter concludes by 

providing an overview of the costs, benefits, and limitations of the systems. 

Types of Systems 

To capture self-service usage among self-service customers, LWIAs are using both local tracking 

systems and statewide systems. Local systems are the more common of the ones studied, but 

statewide systems seem to be on the rise; in fact, one LWIA has abandoned its local tracking 

system in favor of a statewide system since the beginning of the study. These two types of 

systems are described below and summarized in Exhibit V-1. 

Local Area Tracking Systems 

Twelve LWIAs visited during round two reported using locally managed data systems to capture 

self-service usage information. Although the specific tracking mechanisms vary, the general 

processes are the same. Thus, in each of these LWIAs a customer who visits the resource room 

V-1 
 

 

 

for the first time is required to complete a registration form that elicits the customer’s name, 

address, SSN, basic demographics, and, in some LWIAs, additional information such as barriers 

to employment or work history. Following registration, on-site customers receive a membership 

card with a personal identification number either imprinted on the card or encoded in a magnetic 

stripe or bar code. Each time customers return to the center, they are required to scan or swipe 

their card, or provide a membership number for staff at the reception desk to key in. 

Exhibit V-1: 

Methods of Tracking 

Local System Statewide System 

California 

Alameda County scan card 

Oakland scan card 

Richmond scan card 

Riverside scan card 

Sacramento scan card 

Colorado 

Boulder Connecting CO 

Georgia 

Fulton County paper 

Massachusetts 

Metro South MOSES 

New York 

Oyster Bay swipe card OSOS 

Pennsylvania 

Philadelphia swipe card (discontinued) CWDS 

South Carolina 

Trident swipe card 

Texas 

Brazos Valley swipe card 

South Plains swipe card 

Washington 

Olympic keypad entry SKIES 

For example, in California, the Alameda County, Oakland, Richmond, Riverside, and 

Sacramento LWIAs each use the SMARTware Client Tracking and Case Management System, 

which uses bar-code technology similar to that used at grocery store checkout counters. 

SMARTware was developed by California’s Shasta County LWIA; Sacramento (along with 

three other LWIAs) purchased the system from them in 2000. Since then, a number of other 

California LWIAs have purchased the necessary licensing fees to join a consortium of 

SMARTware users. In each LWIA, SMARTware works similarly: the front-desk staff scans the 

customer’s card when the customer enters the One-Stop Career Center, and then scans one or 

more bar codes to track a specific activity or service the customer anticipates using during his or 

V-2 
 

 

 

her visit. Each LWIA can determine for itself what activities it wants to track, such as attending 

an orientation, attending a workshop, preparing a resume, or searching for a job. 

Other LWIAs, such as Brazos Valley and South Plains in Texas, and Trident, South Carolina, 

use swipe cards, which work similarly. A customer registers and is assigned a card during the 

first visit to the center, and swipes the card during each subsequent visit. Typically, the 

receptionist at the greeting area also keys in a code denoting which service the customer intends 

to use.1 

In another model, Olympic, Washington, uses a keypad data-entry system. As part of this 

system, customers who enter the resource room key in their SSNs at a resource room computer, 

and then designate on a pop-up menu the services they intend to use that day. Choices include 

job search, career planning, skill building, resources (phone, fax, copier), and UI. Drawing from 

this data system, workforce center staff run standard monthly reports, including ones showing 

total visits at each center,2 service usage, and an unduplicated count of customers per month. 

Although a majority of the LWIAs visited thus utilize real-time electronic data entry to capture 

self-service usage, one LWIA (Fulton County) is using a resource room sign-in sheet as its 

tracking method. This process requires a customer to complete the sign-in sheet each time he or 

she visits a One-Stop Career Center. Customers are asked to provide basic identifying 

information (e.g., SSN, date of birth, address, etc.), and check off, from a comprehensive list, all 

the services they plan on utilizing. Resource room staff later enter this data into a spreadsheet 

for analysis. Although this method is somewhat time-intensive, the area’s One-Stop operator is 

adamant about the importance of tracking customer usage (to both promote sound program 

management and ensure accountability) and has found the tracking system useful in fine-tuning 

the LWIA’s service system. For example, based on a report generated from the tracking system 

data, the One-Stop operator noted that a large number of the area’s customers had limited 

English proficiency, and on that basis made the strategic decision to hire more bilingual staff. 

Other LWIAs reported using the sign-in-sheet method at some of their satellite centers. For 

example, although Brazos Valley uses swipe cards to track self-service usage at its 

comprehensive One-Stop Career Center, it uses sign-in sheets at its six satellites. Exhibit V-2 

provides a copy of the form it uses. 

1	 However, one LWIA tracks only the date and time of the visit and nothing about the services. 

2	 The Olympic Workforce Development Area maintains two comprehensive centers and two satellite offices, each 

of which was using the tracking system. 

V-3 
Exhibit V-2:

Example Resource Room Sign-In Sheet 

V-4
 

 

While using scan or swipe cards would seem to be less burdensome than having customers sign 

in on paper, all locally based methods have their limitations. Among these are cost and 

cumbersomeness. For example, Philadelphia once used a swipe card system, but abandoned it in 

favor of a statewide tracking system (described below), because its experience with swipe cards 

was less than favorable. Among the problems Philadelphia cited were the following: 

•	 The swipe-card system it used was expensive to operate (leasing the equipment, 

buying supplies, etc.). 

•	 The scanning equipment broke down frequently. 

•	 Customers frequently lost their cards, which then needed to be replaced. 

•	 Staff found the process of scanning cards and keying service codes to be 

burdensome.
 

•	 Due to equipment failures and data-entry errors, data quality was not that good. 

•	 There was some redundancy with the information captured in the state’s ES 

tracking system, at least for the many customers who logged onto this system
 

while in the resource room. 

In light of the above problems, the local workforce investment board decided not to renew the 

contract of the vendor supplying the scanning equipment when its term expired. 

Among other endemic problems, all the local tracking methods only very imperfectly capture 

information about the services that customers use. Either they do not record service information 

at all (the case in one LWIA), or they record only the services customers intend to use when 

checking in at the reception desk or logging in on a computer. Clearly, customers may use 

services in addition to the ones they initially intend to use or even change their minds entirely 

about how to use their time in the resource room; when this occurs, the services actually used are 

not captured. Furthermore, as will be clear from the analysis presented in Chapter VII, services 

are not coded in a consistent way across LWIAs and very often not even within an LWIA. As a 

consequence, making sense of the service usage data that is tabulated can be quite challenging. 

Finally, it is not uncommon for customers to provide bogus identifying information when signing 

in. Even visual inspection makes it clear that a not inconsiderable number of customers provide 

invalid SSNs when applying for a swipe card. Obviously, this undermines the ability of LWIAs 

to match the tracking database to state UI wage systems for purposes of measuring customers’ 

employment outcomes.3 

Customers of the One-Stop delivery system—whether self-service customers or those receiving staff-assisted 

services—are generally not required to provide their SSNs as a condition of receiving services. Further, LWIAs 

that track the SSNs of self-service users encounter the considerable obligation of ensuring that these data are 

V-5 

3 
 

 

Despite these shortcomings, staff from all the LWIAs being profiled here expressed confidence 

in their ability to successfully and accurately capture at least basic information about each 

customer’s visit. They could, at a minimum, provide an accurate count of the number of 

customers who visited and, for the most part, profile these customers’ characteristics and 

frequency of usage accurately. Staff noted that they were aggressive in having each customer 

record his or her visit in the tracking database and that they would not permit anyone who had 

not done so to enter the resource room. The one exception to this generalization is that selfservice customers at Olympic are captured in that LWIA’s tracking system only if they use a 

computer during their visits (the vast bulk of customers) and not just the fax or phone (a very 

small number). 

Statewide Tracking Systems 

Of the fourteen LWIAs visited during round two, five use a statewide tracking system, either 

solely or as a companion to a local tracking system. These systems are Internet-based and 

capture information on resource-room users, who are generally required to log on to the system 

before accessing services. 

Oyster Bay, New York, provides a clear example of comprehensive tracking using a statewide 

system. This LWIA uses the One-Stop Operating System (OSOS) to track customer usage. As 

described in Chapter II, the State of New York adopted a functional alignment plan, according to 

which every ES participant is co-enrolled in WIA, and vice versa. Furthermore, nearly all OneStop Career Center customers are to meet with a case manager, who is to conduct an initial 

assessment of each customer’s need for additional services. According to the state’s 

interpretation of TEGL 17-05, this meeting constitutes “significant staff involvement” and thus 

causes the customer to be registered in OSOS as a WIA participant. Thus, OSOS serves as a 

comprehensive tracking system for resource room customers primarily because of the state’s 

policy that there is, practically speaking, no such thing as a customer who receives only selfservices. 

Metro South, in Massachusetts, provides another example of a statewide tracking system that can 

claim to be comprehensive. The State of Massachusetts designed its system, known as the 

Massachusetts One-Stop Employment System (MOSES), so that it would have the capability to 

track all those who access services at any of the state’s One-Stop Career Centers. In this context, 

“self-services” was viewed as another category of service receipt that MOSES was to have the 

functionality to track. A customer entering a center for the first time is asked to complete a 

registration form, which entails providing basic demographics and identifying information. In 

kept secure if they are maintained as part of a local database. On the other hand, having SSNs makes it possible 

for LWIAs to match against state UI wage files, providing a means for them to track customers’ outcomes. 

V-6 
return, the customer is provided an ID number, which he or she uses at check-in during each 

subsequent visit. Not all LWIAs across the state might do this as diligently, but Metro South 

staff are confident that they record the ID number of every customer entering the center. Thus, 

the system acts like the swipe-card systems in use elsewhere, except that MOSES is Internetbased and was developed and is maintained by the state. 

The statewide systems used by other LWIAs seem less comprehensive. Olympic’s WorkSource 

perhaps comes the closest to being comprehensive. Although this LWIA uses keypad entry in a 

local system to capture resource room visits (as was described above), it also increasingly relies 

on a statewide data entry system. As part of this system, first-time users complete the 

WorkSource Customer Registration Form (see Exhibit V-3), and staff input information from the 

form into the state Services, Knowledge, and Information Exchange Systems, known by its 

acronym, SKIES. 

In addition to tracking resource-room customers’ characteristics, SKIES facilitates the queuing 

of customers to meet with a case manager, through the system’s Request for Services (RFS) 

screen. As part of this feature, the reception desk attendant asks the reason for the customer’s 

visit. If the attendant determines that the customer should speak with a case manager, an entry to 

that effect is made in the SKIES RFS module. For their part, One-Stop Career Center staff 

monitor the RFS screen on their desktop computers and can identify if a customer is waiting to 

speak with a case manager, when the customer arrived, and to which case manager the customer 

was assigned. The staff member designated to assist the customer will then approach the front 

desk and escort the customer to a private area for a consultation. 

A further feature of SKIES is that it interfaces with the state’s TAXIS system, which holds UI 

wage data. State staff can easily query TAXIS to identify which core service customers entered 

employment. 

These advantages notwithstanding, the extent to which SKIES comprehensively tracks on-site 

self-service users is questionable. One of this LWIA’s administrators estimated that 95 percent 

of WorkSource self-service customers are entered into SKIES, but case managers estimated the 

percentage to be closer to 65 percent. Given this uncertainty, Olympic plans on using both 

SKIES and its local tracking system indefinitely—the former for its greater functionality and 

ability to track outcomes, and the latter because it more reliably tracks resource room usage. 

Philadelphia’s statewide tracking system also has limitations from the standpoint of 

comprehensively tracking self-service users. As noted, the Philadelphia LWIA was initially 

using a local, swipe-card system for tracking resource-room usage, and was included in the sitevisit sample for this reason. However, as noted, it abandoned this system due to its high cost and 

technical glitches, and has fallen back on a statewide tracking system, the Commonwealth 

V-7 
Exhibit V-3: 

WorkSource Customer Registration Form 

V-8
 
 

Exhibit V-3 (continued) 

V-9
 
 

Workforce Development System (CWDS). CWDS was phased in at the start of 2007 and serves 

as the major gateway to One-Stop Career Center services. As part of their orientation, new 

customers enroll in CWDS by providing their identifying information (name, address) and basic 

demographics. During each subsequent visit, a customer can sign in using his or her Keystone 

ID and password, and can access different modules on CWDS to create a resume or conduct a 

job search. However, Pennsylvania does not require customers to provide their SSNs 

at enrollment into the CWDS (SSN is an optional field). Moreover, customers could access 

services without going through CWDS during their subsequent visits to the resource room, and, 

in that case, their usage would not be captured. 

The Boulder, Colorado, LWIA uses the statewide Connecting Colorado ES registration system. 

First-time self-service customers in Boulder are required to register in Connecting Colorado, 

which elicits users’ identifying information (including SSN) and basic demographics. In fact, 

any individual who wants to search for jobs using Colorado’s ES job matching system is 

requested to provide identifying information, including SSN, before proceeding, regardless of 

whether that person is conducting a job search on-site at a One-Stop Career Center or remotely. 

Whether these statewide systems can reasonably be construed as comprehensively tracking onsite self-services users depends on whether first-time users are required to register in the state 

system as a condition of proceeding to the resource room (as in Boulder and Philadelphia), and 

whether SSNs must be provided as part of the registration process (required in Connecting 

Colorado, but not in Pennsylvania’s CWDS). Even with these requirements, the statewide 

systems are generally better at tracking customers (i.e., who visits) than they are at capturing data 

about each customer’s visit (e.g. timing of visit) to the resource room, unless, as in Metro South, 

customers must log on to the statewide system every time they visit the center, regardless of the 

purpose of their visits. On the other hand, an advantage of the statewide systems is their ability 

to track remote usage, and not just usage that occurs on-site. 

Types of Information Tracked 

As Exhibit V-4 shows, the tracking systems that states and LWIAs are using allow them to 

collect and track a wide range of data on customers, including each customer’s characteristics, 

service usage, satisfaction, and, in two LWIAs, employment outcomes. In most cases, this 

information is used to guide program management decisions or satisfy local workforce 

investment board or state reporting requirements. The following section summarizes the various 

types of information that states and local areas are collecting and tracking. 

V-10 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit V-4: 

Types of Information Tracked Alameda County Boulder Brazos Valley Fulton County Metro South Oakland Olympic 

Oyster Bay PhiladelphiaRichmondRiversideSacramentoSouth PlainsTrident 

Identification & Contact 

Name 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Mailing Address 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Phone Number 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Email Address 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Social Security Number 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Demographics/Background 

Date of Birth 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Race/Ethnicity 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Education 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Gender 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Language Proficiency 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Head of Household 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Family Income 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Citizenship Status 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Veteran Status 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Valid Driver’s License 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Barriers 

Public Assistance 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Offender Status 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Disability Status 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Housing Status/Homeless 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Employment History 

Employment Status 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Previous Employer/Position 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Eligible for UI 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Certificates/Skills 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Employment Objectives 

Career Interest 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Desired Salary 3 3 3 3 3

Shift Preferences 3 3 3 3 3

Location Preferences 3 3 3 3 3

How Heard About Us? 3 3 3 3

Services 

Date/Time of Use 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Purpose/Service Desired 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Outcomes 

Employment 3 3

Satisfaction 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

V-11
 
 

Customer Characteristics 

As the exhibit makes clear, all the LWIAs attempt to track a significant amount of customer 

information: 

•	 identifying information, such as name, address, and SSN 

•	 basic demographic and background characteristics, including education, gender, race, and 

ethnicity 

•	 potential barriers to employment, such as public assistance recipiency, being an exoffender, or having a disability 

•	 employment history, including current employment status (usually) and (in most LWIAs) 

also information about previous positions held and salary 

Less common, but still widespread, is the requirement that customers supply information about 

their employment objectives, including career interests and desired salary. 

Based on this review, the list of items being tracked indeed appears impressive. Moreover, staff 

report that the information collected can be beneficial in making program management decisions, 

because it informs them if a customer may be in need of additional services from a One-Stop 

Career Center partner. However, in actuality, some of the customer tracking information is 

explicitly identified to the customer as optional at the time registration occurs. For example, 

Philadelphia’s CWDS requires a customer to provide only his or her name, address, date of birth, 

citizenship status, and gender. In other LWIAs, the data extracts provided to the research team 

show that many of the fields have significant amounts of missing data, regardless of whether 

they are explicitly classified as optional or not. For example, in Sacramento, which has one of 

the most sophisticated tracking systems examined, at least 40 percent of self-service customers 

are missing information on their current employment status, educational status, household 

income, offender status, language proficiency, and work history, among other items. In most 

other LWIAs, the extent of missing data is comparable or even worse. Clearly, LWIAs place a 

premium on expediting the enrollment process, to ensure that their customers can access services 

without undue delay, and, thus, require only a bare minimum of information at baseline. 

Services Used 

Apart from their ability to track basic demographics and provide unique customer counts, 

tracking systems, especially local systems, are particularly strong in being able to identify when 

services were accessed. This extends to recording not only the date when initial registration 

occurred, but also, through the various methods described earlier in this chapter, identifying the 

date and time of each subsequent visit to the resource room. Such tracking provides site 

administrators with the ability to tally the volume of usage (e.g., overall, by center, by day of the 

week or time of day) and frequency of usage (e.g., how many customers are repeat users). Local 

V-12 
systems also typically record the reason for the customer’s visit or the services he or she intends 

to access. The service categories used are to a large degree idiosyncratic to each LWIA, but 

common ones used include the following: 

•	 Orientation to the One-Stop/resource room, in which staff explain the tools and 

resources available to customers during their initial entry
 

•	 Interest in and/or referrals made to partners, such as receiving information about 

Veterans’ services, Vocational Rehabilitation, housing, youth programs, WIA, 

education or other training providers, and the filing of UI claims
 

•	 Job-seeking and resource room services, such as using the computers, fax 

machine, copier or telephones; preparing a resume; accessing LMI; using assistive 

technology; or looking up job listings 

•	 Group activities, such as job clubs, employer presentations, job fairs or 

workshops on topics such as job readiness, job search strategies, and computer 

skills
 

•	 Assessment, testing, and career guidance services, including self-assessments, 

such as completing career interest inventories or taking a typing test 

Outcomes and Customer Satisfaction 

For most LWIAs visited for this study, tracking the employment outcomes obtained by selfservice customers is uncommon. The exceptions are two of the LWIAs relying on state tracking 

systems. Oyster Bay, New York, is tallied in this category; but, as mentioned, since it moved to 

the functional alignment plan, virtually all of its resource room users become registered as both 

ES and WIA participants for whom tracking outcomes on the programs’ required performance 

outcomes is mandatory. The other LWIA that reports tracking employment outcomes is 

Olympic, Washington, which uses a linkage between the state’s SKIES system and the state’s UI 

wage system to determine outcomes for self-service customers, at least those who are entered 

into SKIES. 

Other LWIAs request that self-service customers contact them when they have obtained 

employment, and one even provides its customers with a postage-paid card for this purpose. 

However, in actuality, notification is extremely spotty. 

LWIAs more commonly collect customer satisfaction data, consistent with results from the localarea survey described in Chapter III, which showed that 70 percent of LWIAs ask job seekers 

about their satisfaction with self-services. The LWIAs visited are using a variety of methods for 

conducting the surveys, including telephone or mail surveys of samples of customers or, more 

commonly, hard-copy surveys distributed to customers in the resource room. 

The customer satisfaction surveys that One-Stop Career Centers conduct generally have a 

number of questions and statements related to the center’s different levels of service (e.g., 

V-13 
location, staff competencies, computers, workshops, etc.). The surveys typically use a scale 

system (e.g., 1–5) that asks customers to rate their overall experiences at the center and the 

various services received. Results from these surveys are then entered into the local area’s 

tracking system or an Excel spreadsheet, and each service or question asked is tallied and given a 

numerical rating. 

The surveys typically ask self-service customers a range of questions about their visits to the 

resource room, with questions falling into three common categories: 

•	 Customer experiences. These questions typically ask if job seekers were satisfied 

with the resource room’s services, if their expectations were met, if the services 

were ideal or relevant to their needs, if they would recommend the One-Stop 

Career Center to others, and if they are likely to use services in the future.
 

•	 Customer impressions of the facilities and staff. These questions may inquire 

about the facilities themselves (e.g., accessibility, cleanliness, functionality of 

equipment, etc.), the staff (e.g., availability, level of knowledge, helpfulness, etc.), 

and timeliness of services. 

•	 Helpfulness of specific services. These questions often ask about self-assessments, 

resume assistance, job-search and job-listings tools, computer/Internet, 

information on training, UI information, community services, and equipment 

(e.g., fax machine, copier, telephones, software etc.). 

In addition to these three main areas of questions, some customer satisfaction surveys also ask 

customers for their demographic information, such as the customer’s gender, race and ethnicity, 

education, and employment status. A number of satisfaction surveys also question customers 

about the purpose of their visits and the numbers of times they visited the center, and most also 

include a section that allows customers to provide written comments or recommendations. 

Use of Information That is Tracked 

Of the LWIAs participating in this study, seven reported sharing self-service usage information 

among state and local staff and partners. Staff from these seven LWIAs reported producing 

reports on a monthly or quarterly basis that provide self-service information (e.g., disaggregate 

customer characteristics, service usage, etc.) to One-Stop Career Center staff, the local workforce 

investment board (WIB), or partners and state staff. For instance, Sacramento reported 

generating quarterly reports for WIB and career center staff that provide local area and centerspecific fiscal-year trends in customer counts, services, and customer visits. In addition, this 

report provides the percentage changes in customer numbers, visits, and services, as well as 

fiscal-year trends and breakdowns by age, gender, race/ethnicity, education status, and other 

characteristics (e.g., disabled, veteran, ex-offender, seasonal farm worker, etc.). Here, as in 

other LWIAs, the reports are used to make strategic decisions regarding resource allocations. 

V-14 
 

 

Similarly, the analysis of customer satisfaction data has been shown to be useful. In some 

centers, staff reported that the One-Stop Career Center manager will schedule staff meetings if 

the survey shows there are specific issues that need to be addressed. In one center, the center 

manager has reportedly met with staff members individually if customers specifically mentioned 

them in a survey. Elsewhere, center administrators report comparing their customer satisfaction 

results to those of organizations and businesses using the American Customer Satisfaction 

Index.4 By using this index, the LWIA determines its percentile ranking and areas needing 

improvement. 

In addition to sharing self-service information among local staff, a few LWIAs in one state have 

the ability to directly upload self-service information from their local tracking system to the 

state’s tracking system. For instance, Sacramento staff reported that they upload data from their 

tracking system to the state’s Job Training Automation (JTA) system. Specifically, all customer 

information (demographic, eligibility, and service-related) that is entered in to the SMARTware 

automated case management system (the local tracking system) can be automatically uploaded to 

JTA by Sacramento information technology staff. This practice has alleviated double-data entry 

for local staff, and has allowed information to be easily shared throughout the state. 

These examples clearly demonstrate the efficiency advantages of local-level tracking and the 

importance of analysis for system management. Other LWIAs, however, report difficulty in 

generating reports that they find useful and are thus making scant use of the data they have been 

collecting. 

Cost of Tracking Systems 

While customer-tracking systems are useful in allowing LWIAs to identify and report selfservice users of public workforce development services, implementing and maintaining these 

systems can be costly. Not all LWIAs in the study were able to provide estimates of the cost of 

maintaining and operating their tracking systems, but a few were able to provide some useful 

information. 

In California, Sacramento maintains the SMARTware system used by seven LWIAs throughout 

the state. Sacramento staff reported that the total annual cost to manage the SMARTware system 

is roughly $100,000, which pays for the contract programmer and network engineer. These 

individuals are responsible for managing the system, which includes completing upgrades and 

providing technical support to local One-Stop Career Center staff. 

The American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) is an indicator of customers’ satisfaction with the quality of 

the products and services they purchase. 

V-15 

4 
 

 

Other LWIAs utilizing the SMARTware system defray some of these expenses. Sacramento 

determines each LWIA’s share based partly on the LWIA’s population size and Sacramento’s 

experience with other LWIA users. LWIAs can receive additional charges if they request that 

Sacramento provide a host server or tailor the SMARTware system for their specific area. 

Consequently, the cost that each LWIA pays to use the SMARTware system varies considerably. 

Exhibit V-5 shows these amounts for selected areas. 

Exhibit V-5: 

California LWIA SMARTware Cost Allocation 

Amount 

Alameda County $68,000 

Oakland $74,000 

Riverside $50,000 

New York’s Oyster Bay was also able to provide an estimated cost for operating DataFlex, its 

local tracking system. This figure is $10,000 per year. The primary cost of the system comes 

from developing scan cards for customers to use and making any necessary programming 

changes. The Workforce Partnership (TWP)5 contracts with a local software consultant for these 

services, and this individual is paid a one-time fee each year. Similarly, Trident, South Carolina, 

estimated the cost of its swipe-card system at about $7,000 per year. 

Conclusions 

As discussed throughout this chapter, states and LWIAs are using various types of tracking 

systems to capture information about self-service users and usage. While many LWIAs are 

using their own tracking systems to capture self-service information, a number are also using 

statewide systems. Statewide and local tracking systems each have their own advantages and 

weaknesses. Statewide systems are especially convenient for creating online databases to 

facilitate matching between job seekers and employers and measuring participants’ employment 

outcomes. However, because tracking the use of local self-services is not their primary function, 

usage data can be absent or incomplete. By contrast, local systems are generally more 

comprehensive in tracking usage, but reliance on them often requires additional data entry to 

support the registration of customers in the state ES job system and provides no ready means for 

measuring employment outcomes. 

TWP is a consortium of local governments funded by WIA that provides services throughout the Oyster Bay 

area. 

V-16 

5 
Regardless of the system, however, One-Stop Career Center staff mentioned a number of 

benefits to the systems they use, including the ones below. 

•	 Assist One-Stop Career Center staff in identifying customers in need of staff 

assistance. When state and local tracking systems require customers to provide a 

range of personal information during their initial visit—particularly information 

about disability status, offender status, housing status, and the like—staff are 

better able to understand customers’ barriers to employment, identify those in 

need of intensive or training services, and expedite the referral to a partner agency 

where a partner’s services are appropriate. Also, the existence of this kind of 

information has lead to the hiring or training of resource room staff with 

specialized expertise that matches the needs of resource room customers. 

•	 Assist One-Stop Career Center staff in managing customer flow. Monthly 

and quarterly reports that state and local staff generate from their tracking systems 

have been beneficial in allowing them to understand customer service usage (e.g., 

number of customer visits, services used, etc.). This information has allowed a 

number of One-Stop Career Centers to schedule services and staff during times 

when resource room services are most used. 

•	 Assist the redesign of resource rooms and self-services. A number of OneStop Career Centers have redesigned their resource rooms or improved service 

tools and resources based on customer usage data and results from customer 

satisfaction surveys. 

•	 Allow the upload of information from the local tracking system to the state 

tracking system. At least one LWIA has the ability to automatically upload 

customer information (e.g., demographics, eligibility, services received, etc.) to 

the state’s WIA tracking system. This is a benefit to local staff because it 

eliminates the need for duplicate data entry, and it provides state staff with swift 

and accurate information regarding self-service usage. 

At the same time, a number of limitations also were apparent: 

•	 Tracking is time-consuming and expensive. Tracking self-service usage can be 

cumbersome, and is especially burdensome during times of heavy center usage. 

Moreover, purchasing or leasing scanning or swipe card equipment imposes a 

financial cost that many LWIAs may be reluctant to bear, especially during times 

when funding for WIA and ES has been shrinking in real-dollar terms. 

•	 Customers lose swipe/scan cards. A number of staff mentioned that customers 

frequently lose their cards, which then need to be replaced. This adds to the 

expense and burden. 

•	 Data entry can be spotty and error-prone. Especially to the extent that data 

entry is perceived as burdensome and staff are pressed for time given their other 

obligations, data entry can be inaccurate or may be skipped altogether. 

•	 Information on service usage is inexact. Generally, the tracking systems record 

the services that customers report intending to use rather than the services actually 

used. Furthermore, service codes are applied inconsistently across LWIAs and 

V-17 
often even within each LWIA. Thus, service usage data are often of questionable 

value. 

•	 Information on outcomes is virtually non-existent. Unless the LWIA can 

easily link its local tracking database to a state system, or comprehensive tracking 

occurs on a statewide system to begin with, LWIAs have limited ability to record 

the employment outcomes attained by self-service users. 

•	 Tracking remote self-service usage is largely absent. While local systems are 

successful at capturing on-site self-service usage, they are unable to capture 

remote usage because registration on state job-matching systems is not required 

for all self-service customers. Thus, the comprehensive tracking of remote 

services is largely nonexistent. 

•	 Consortium or state approval is required in order for changes to the MIS to 

occur. In some cases, LWIAs are a part of a consortium of LWIAs that utilize a 

common local tracking system. This poses challenges for LWIAs wanting to 

tailor the tracking system to meet their specific needs, because no changes to the 

system are made unless all partners of the consortium agree. LWIAs that use a 

statewide tracking system are similarly constrained, in that an individual LWIA 

cannot readily tailor features of the statewide system to its local needs. 

Clearly, the LWIAs studied as part of this project have demonstrated the practicality of 

comprehensive tracking and are convinced of its value, but, in light of the drawbacks mentioned, 

others may be reluctant to follow suit. 

V-18 
 

 

 

 

 

VI. WHO USES SELF-SERVICES? 

As Chapter IV makes clear, LWIAs use varying means to make potential customers aware of 

One-Stop Career Center services and to make the centers themselves as easy to locate and visit 

as possible. As a result of these efforts, who ends up using self-services and why do they do so? 

This chapter addresses these questions by drawing on quantitative data from multiple sources: 

•	 data extracts from the self-services tracking systems provided by nine LWIAs, 

including six in California, one in Pennsylvania, and two in Texas1
 

•	 WIASRD data, provided by DOL, from which those who received WIA staffassisted services in these nine LWIAs were extracted
 

•	 customer survey data from five of these LWIAs, including two in California, one 

in Pennsylvania, and two in Texas2
 

•	 UI wage data provided by Pennsylvania and Texas, covering self-service users in 

the LWIAs that submitted self-services tracking data in these states
 

A general description of these data sources was presented in Chapter I, as were the caveats in 

interpreting the data. Because the project’s data come from non-representative LWIAs around 

the nation, this chapter adopts a case-study approach, in that findings are presented for each 

LWIA separately, rather than being aggregated across them. 

The Characteristics of Self-Services Users 

This chapter begins by profiling the demographic characteristics of self-services users. As 

shown in Exhibit VI-1, there is substantial variability across LWIAs, but some common patterns 

emerge as well. 

1	 For convenience, throughout this chapter the six LWIAs in California are identified as CA-1 through CA-4, with 

CA-3 representing a combination of three LWIAs that submitted data jointly; the one LWIA in Pennsylvania is 

identified as PA-1; and the two in Texas are identified as TX-1 and TX-2. All six California LWIAs and the one 

in Pennsylvania are in large metropolitan areas, while the two in Texas are largely rural. See Chapter I for 

further details. 

2	 As described in the Appendix, the customer survey data were weighted for nonresponse. 

VI-1 
 

 

•	 The majority of self-services customers in all LWIAs can be described as middleaged, but substantial numbers are younger and older. Indeed, 30 percent to 40 

percent are younger than age 30, and about 10 percent in most LWIAs are ages 55 

or older. 

•	 The genders are remarkably balanced across all these LWIAs, with about equal 

numbers of male and female customers. 

•	 The racial and ethnic composition of customers is quite variable among these 

LWIAs, however, as we might expect given the compositional differences of 

communities across the country. African-Americans predominate among selfservices customers in one of the LWIAs being profiled, Hispanics in another, and 

whites elsewhere. 

•	 The educational distributions also appear to be quite discrepant. Although the 

substantial amount of missing data on this item for self-service customers in some 

LWIAs means that inferences must be tentative, it appears that those with some 

college make up as much as 40 percent of self-service users in some LWIAs, but 

only about 15 percent of customers elsewhere. At the other extreme, as few as 19 

percent and as many as 30 percent are high school dropouts. 

Other information about the characteristics of self-services users is quite spotty, a function of the 

fact that LWIAs’ tracking systems are idiosyncratic with respect to the items they capture. But 

the evidence that is available shows that veterans make up six to nine percent of users, and those 

with a disability make up a small but not insubstantial number. Those with no pre-program 

earnings (measured as the average of earnings in the second and third quarters prior to the selfservices registration date) make up about 30 percent to nearly half of self-service users in the 

three LWIAs whose states provided UI wage data. However, these latter figures must be 

interpreted with caution because of the likelihood that an appreciable number of customers gave 

faulty Social Security Numbers at registration, thus inflating the incidence of zero earnings 

tabulated in this table.3 

To put these numbers in context, it is useful to know how the characteristics of self-services 

customers as a whole compare to that portion who go on to receive WIA staff-assisted services. 

Chapter II described the criteria by which LWIAs winnow the pool of self-services customers to 

determine who receives staff-assisted services, balancing the desire to serve those most in need 

with a recognition that sometimes the very neediest are not likely to benefit from more intensive 

services. Exhibit VI-2 shows how these considerations play out, at least with respect to the 

LWIAs in the study’s sample. In this exhibit, a plus sign (+) denotes that WIA adult 

Both Pennsylvania and Texas conducted UI wage matches on behalf of the study team, using the SSNs for selfservice users that we supplied to them. 

VI-2 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_________________ 

 

 

Exhibit VI-1: 

Characteristics of Self-Services Users in Selected LWIAs 

CA-1 CA-2 CA-3 CA-4 PA-1 TX-1 TX-2 

Age 

Less than 22 14.3% 14.6% 14.2% 23.2% 10.5% 13.7% 16.3% 

22 to 29 19.1 22.0 19.0 21.5 21.6 30.3 27.0 

30 to 44 33.6 35.0 33.7 31.3 35.0 36.1 33.8 

45 to 54 20.9 18.1 21.3 16.3 21.0 14.2 15.9 

55 or older 12.1 10.4 11.9 7.8 11.9 5.7 7.0 

Gender 

Female 48.2 49.7 50.0 49.8 50.7 51.1 55.8 

Male 51.8 50.3 50.0 50.2 49.3 49.0 44.3 

Race/Ethnicity 

American Indian na na 1.4 2.6 1.0 0.3 0.3 

Asian/Pacific Islander na na 22.5 12.5 2.8 0.2 0.3 

African-American na na 33.3 27.5 63.3 17.1 40.0 

Hispanic na na 20.4 24.7 15.4 45.5 14.6 

White na na 22.4 32.7 17.5 36.9 44.9 

Education 

Less than HS grad 19.6 na 18.9 30.6 16.2 23.8 20.3 

HS grad or equivalent 63.0 na 40.2 54.6 51.5 51.1 54.5 

Some college 17.4 na 41.0 14.8 32.2 25.2 25.3 

Is a Veteran na 8.9 6.1 7.2 8.9 na na 

Has a disability na na 3.8 8.2 3.0 na na 

Employed at Intake 

Employed 14.2 na na na na na na 

Not employed 85.8 na na na na na na 

Is a TANF Recipient na na na na 13.4 na na 

Is a UI Claimant na na na na 36.0 na na 

Pre-Program Earningsa 

None na na na na 47.1 31.1 28.7 

$1 to $2,499 na na na na 19.8 33.7 39.4 

$2,500 to $4,999 na na na na 13.6 19.7 19.2 

$5,000 to $7,499 na na na na 9.9 9.9 8.5 

$7,500 or more na na na na 9.7 5.6 4.3 

Note: Information for self-service customers is taken from a data file provided by each LWIA, representing an 

extract from its tracking system for self-services users. These data cover various periods of time across the 

different LWIAs, ranging from May 2004 to December 2006. Each LWIA provided data for at least a twelvemonth period within this interval. Missing data is prevalent for some items, so estimates can be unreliably 

measured. All numbers are percents. a Pre-program earnings is measured as the average of earnings in the second and third quarters prior to the selfservices registration date. These data come from a match with UI earnings records provided by the LWIAs’ 

respective states. 

VI-3 
 

 

 

 

 

registrants4 are more likely than self-service customers to have the characteristic in question, a 

minus sign (–) denotes that WIA adult registrants are less likely to have the characteristics, and a 

zero (0) denotes that there is no significant difference between the two. 

Across the LWIAs profiled in this fashion, a number of patterns can be seen: 

•	 Compared to self-service customers, WIA adult registrants are often less likely to 

be young (less than age 22) or age 55 and above, and are often more likely to be 

middle-aged. 

•	 Female self-service customers are usually much more likely to become WIA adult 

registrants than their male counterparts. 

•	 There are a few differences between the two groups across race and ethnic 

categories, but these vary by LWIA. Overall, Hispanics are somewhat underrepresented among WIA registrants in comparison to self-services users, as are 

whites, and Asian-Americans are somewhat over-represented, but this is not true
 

everywhere. 

•	 In comparison to self-service customers, WIA registrants are generally better 

educated. Almost uniformly, WIA adult registrants are less likely than self-service 

customers as a whole to be high school dropouts and are, in at least several LWIAs, 

more likely to have at least some college. 

•	 Although evidence is sparse, veterans are less likely than self-service customers in 

general to become WIA registrants (perhaps because they enroll in Veterans’ 

Employment programs rather than WIA), as are those with a disability (who, 

similarly, might be referred to Vocational Rehabilitation, rather than WIA, for 

staff-assisted services). 

•	 Based on UI wage matching, it appears that those with zero pre-program earnings 

are less likely than self-service customers in general to become WIA registrants, 

though this finding could be an artifact of a relatively high number of self-service 

users supplying faulty SSNs. 

Note that these comparisons are between self-service customers and those who use received 

staff-assisted services in the WIA adult program. Those who receive staff-assisted services in 

the WIA dislocated worker program tend to be older and more highly educated than those served 

in the adult program,5

 so restricting the comparisons in the exhibit to WIA adult registrants tends 

to lessen differences in comparison to self-services users, at least along some dimensions. 

4	 In the several years after the enactment of WIA, registration in WIA was defined to consist of those who 

received WIA staff-assisted services. However, TEGL 17-05, issued in 2006, makes clear that even those who 

receive only self-services funded by WIA should be included in WIA’s data system, and, in that sense, can 

become “registered” in WIA (though, still, only those who receive staff-assisted services are subject to WIA’s 

performance measures). Nonetheless, in the discussion to follow, we use the term WIA registrants to refer to 

WIA participants who receive staff-assisted services, because these are the only ones included in the WIASRD. 

5	 Social Policy Research Associates, PY 2006 WIASRD Data Book (2008). 

VI-4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_____________ 

 

Exhibit VI-2: 

Significant Differences Between Self-Service Customers and 

WIA Registrants, Across LWIAs 

CA-1 CA-2 CA-3 CA-4 PA-1 TX-1 TX-2 

Age 

Young – 0 – – + – + 

Middle-aged + 0 + + 0 0 0 

Older 0 0 + – – – – 

Gender 

Female + 0 + + – + + 

Male – 0 – – + – – 

Race/Ethnicity 

Asian/Pacific na na + + 0 0 0 

African-American na na 0 0 + – + 

Hispanic na na – – – + 0 

White na na 0 0 – 0 – 

Education 

HS dropout – na – – – – – 

HS graduate – na 0 + + 0 + 

Some college + na + 0 0 + 0 

Is a Veteran na 0 – – – na na 

Has a disability na na + – – na na 

Is employed at intake – na na na na na na 

Is a TANF Recipient na na na na – na na 

Is a UI Claimant na na na na – na na 

Pre-Program 

Earnings 

None na na na na – – – 

$1 to $2,499 na na na na + + + 

$2,500 to $4,999 na na na na 0 0 0 

$5,000 to $7,499 na na na na 0 0 0 

$7,500 or more na na na na 0 0 0 

Note: The exhibit tabulates whether, in comparison to self-service users, WIA registrants are more likely to have the 

characteristic in question (+), less likely to have it (–), or neither (0). An ‘na’ in the cell indicates that the item 

is not captured in that LWIA’s self-services tracking system. Differences are assessed at the .05 level, using a 

simple t-test (which assumes independence of the samples). Information for WIA registrants refers to those 

who received WIA staff-assisted services and is taken from the PY 06 WIASRD, covering those who exited 

from the adult program in this LWIA during a period nearly identical to the period covered by the LWIA’s 

self-service usage data. Note that highest grade completed is only available for WIA registrants who received 

intensive or training services. 

VI-5 
 

 

Results from the Customer Survey 

Results from the customer survey, available in five LWIAs, provide a bit more information about 

the background characteristics of self-service users as well as their reasons for accessing 

services. 

As Exhibit VI-3 shows, a substantial proportion of self-services customers are not native English 

speakers. This is true especially in selected California LWIAs, where a third fit this description. 

Also noteworthy is that appreciable numbers—about ten percent in most LWIAs—identify 

themselves as having a disability. Thus, the sorts of accommodations LWIAs make to facilitate 

access for those with special needs, as was discussed in Chapter IV, are clearly important to 

many. 

About 80 percent of self-service users are not employed, and, conversely, about 20 percent have 

a job at the time they access services. Consistent with this statistic, searching for a job is by far 

the predominant reason customers give for accessing services, and is typically the primary reason 

as well. Nonetheless, many customers have additional or other goals in mind, such as learning 

job-search strategies, finding information about careers, and researching training opportunities. 

In keeping with the historical linkage between ES and UI, at least 10 percent also identify 

accessing UI as a reason for their visits.6 

Since most self-service customers identified finding a job as the main reason for visiting the 

One-Stop Career Center, not surprisingly the vast majority of customers were actively engaged 

in job search when they first accessed services. In most LWIAs, well over half had first started 

looking for work fairly recently (within the previous one to five weeks), but many had been 

engaged in job search for considerably longer. Thus, from 13 percent to almost 30 percent had 

been looking for work for more than 10 weeks when they first accessed services. 

Reasons for beginning the search for a job included having lost or quit a previous job (from 38 

percent to nearly one-half), wanting to find a better job (from 10 percent to 16 percent), and 

returning to the workforce (10 percent to 14 percent). Appreciable numbers of customers cited 

other reasons, but their verbatim responses (such as “needed a job,” “had bills to pay,” “hours 

were being cut at existing job,” and “moved back to town and needed a job”) show that the 

reasons they gave typically could have easily fallen into one of the other categories. 

Before the move to have UI applicants apply for benefits through state call centers, customers applied for UI at 

ES offices. Since many One-Stop Career Centers are former ES offices, community members still think of the 

centers as places to go to access UI. For historical background, see J. Salzman, K. Dickinson, R. Fedrau, and M. 

Lazarin, Unemployment Insurance in the One-Stop System (Social Policy Research Associates, 1999). 

VI-6 

6 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_________________ 

Exhibit VI-3: 

Customer Characteristics and Reasons for Accessing Services— 

Results from the Customer Survey
 

CA-2 CA-4 PA-1 TX-1 TX-2 

Is English your first language? 

Yes 63.5% 67.6% 88.5% 90.1% 95.0% 

No 36.5 32.4 11.5 9.1 5.0 

Have a disability 

No 91.3 85.0 89.2 89.9 91.0 

Yes, but not a substantial barrier 4.3 4.4 6.1 6.1 6.1 to employment 

Yes, and a substantial barrier 4.4 10.6 4.8 4.0 2.9 

Employment status at enrollment 

Employed 22.6 20.9 18.0 22.1 16.3 

Not employed 77.4 79.1 82.0 77.9 83.7 

Reasons for accessing services (multiple mentions allowed) 

Search for a job 86.0 79.1 82.2 83.6 87.8 

Learn job search strategies 22.8 18.7 21.5 13.6 15.5 

Find information on careers 23.1 36.3 25.3 22.4 18.6 

Learn about training opportunities 12.1 15.9 22.9 13.9 13.3 

Get Unemployment Insurance 12.5 10.6 12.4 17.5 18.6 

Get training for a job 9.1 8.9 13.0 11.7 9.8 

Get info on employment for those 

with disabilities 1.3 3.1 1.3 2.2 1.6 

Other 9.6 15.1 6.0 8.7 11.9 

Reasons for accessing services (main reason) 

Search for a job 82.8 79.1 78.4 83.1 87.8 

Misc other reasons 17.2 20.9 21.6 16.9 12.2 

Looking for work when accessed services 

Yes 93.7 84.8 88.1 87.4 92.9 

No 6.3 15.2 11.9 12.6 7.1 

Weeks spent looking for work when first accessed servicesa 

1 to 2 weeks 28.7 19.7 21.1 39.0 41.2 

3 to 5 weeks 28.3 32.1 34.3 31.6 25.3 

6 to 10 weeks 23.3 20.1 27.5 15.9 15.1 

11 weeks or more 19.8 28.2 17.1 13.5 18.4 

Why started looking for work (multiple mentions allowed) a 

Lost or quit previous job 37.9 40.1 45.5 45.3 48.2 

Job about to end 16.0 9.7 11.5 5.2 5.1 

Have a job but want a better one 15.2 16.0 12.8 12.6 10.1
 

Return to workforce 10.0 13.4 10.1 14.4 12.0
 

Other 26.8 29.4 23.2 27.3 30.6 

Note: All numbers are percents. Results are from the Customer Survey, administered to self-services customers in 

five LWIAs in the several months after customers accessed services. See appendix for details. a

 Restricted to those who were looking for work when they first accessed services. 

VI-7 
     

   

   

   

     

     

In contrast to the image of resource rooms attracting only customers seeking low-skilled jobs, 

Exhibit VI-4 suggests that appreciable numbers of customers are relatively highly skilled. Thus, 

although clerical, services, helper, or sales and cashier positions are the most commonly cited 

positions sought, about 25 percent of customers seek executive or managerial positions or jobs in 

skilled or semi-skilled trades. 

Exhibit VI-4: 

Positions that Self-Services Customers are Seeking 

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Other or not sure

Clerical and administrative

Services

Helpers and laborers

Sales, incl. cashier

Executive, managerial, or professional

Mechanics and skilled trades

Machine operators

Technical

Note: Results are restricted to those who were looking for a job at the time they accessed self-services and 

are aggregated across the LWIAs in which the customer survey was administered. 

Finally, the survey asked customers how they heard about the workforce services that the center 

offered. The results from this question are tabulated in Exhibit VI-5, which shows that having 

heard about the center from an acquaintance, family member, or friend was the most common 

source of information, mentioned by 44 percent of customers across these five LWIAs. Having 

been referred by another program was the next most common response, mentioned by 22 percent 

of customers; by far the most common referral source given by those who wrote in a response 

was UI, but other mentions included Food Stamps, the parole office, and the welfare office, 

among others. Most other methods for becoming aware of the services were much less common; 

these included seeing an ad or hearing a radio or TV announcement, mentioned by 9 percent. 

Customers had the opportunity to write in other sources of knowledge; it was common for them 

to mention that they knew about the workforce services because they had used them before or 

that “everyone in the neighborhood knows where their office is,” a response that likely builds off 

the fact that many One-Stop Career Centers have a long-established presence in the communities 

they serve from their time in years past as ES and UI offices. 

VI-8 
         

         

             

   

   

I      heard a presentation

Through the Internet

Some other way

I saw an ad or heard an announcement

I was referred by another program

An acquaintance or family member told me

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
 

Exhibit VI-5: 

How Did you Hear About the Services 

Conclusions 

Results from the tracking databases provided by selected LWIAs around the country show that 

self-services customers are a diverse lot. Although most are middle-aged, appreciable numbers 

are younger or older. Educational distributions are similarly diverse; although those with a high 

school degree predominate in most LWIAs, dropouts make up more than 30 percent of the 

customer mix in some areas, and those with some college can be as common. Furthermore, 

results from the customer survey show that many customers have unique needs, such as having a 

disability or a language barrier that may need to be accommodated. Similarly, although looking 

for a relatively low-skilled job may be the most common objective that customers express, others 

access services with reasons other than job search in mind (such as to access training or find 

information about careers) or are seeking work that demands a higher level of skills. Clearly, 

then, resource rooms must be prepared to accommodate customers with very diverse needs. 

Qualitative data collected during the site visits make clear the complicated, often times conflicted 

decisions that LWIAs make regarding which self-service customers should advance to WIA 

staff-assisted services. Optimizing the use of available funds to achieve high performance is 

clearly an important consideration, but so too is reaching out to those who seem to be most in 

need of more intensive services. Because of the ways these decisions play out in the LWIAs that 

provided tracking-system data, those who receive WIA staff-assisted services are less likely than 

self-services customers as a whole to be very young or to be high school dropouts. This finding 

implies that those left behind in the pool of self-service users have somewhat greater barriers to 

employment on average. 

VI-9 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
 

 

VII. SELF-SERVICE USAGE 

Anyone who has visited a One-Stop Career Center’s resource room knows that it can be a hub of 

activity, with customers being oriented to services, using computers to check job openings or 

write resumes, talking with counselors, and so on. But what more can be said about what they 

are doing? On how many different days do customers access services and over what span of 

time? What types of services do they access most commonly? How satisfied are they with the 

services they receive? This chapter provides answers to these and other similar questions, using 

data from two sources: extracts from the self-service tracking systems provided by nine LWIAs 

and the customer survey administered in five LWIAs. The chapter describes, in turn, the volume 

of self-service customers, patterns of self-service usage, the services used, and customer 

satisfaction with those services. Consistent with the case-study approach of this report, results 

from the tracking system data are presented independently for each LWIA, using the naming 

convention introduced in the preceding chapter. However, to present the results from the 

customer survey, data are aggregated across LWIAs, partly because small cell sizes on some 

items make LWIA-specific estimates unreliable, but also to protect the identity of LWIAs when 

presenting results that could be construed as sensitive or confidential.1 

The Volume of Self-Service Customers 

This section begins the investigation of usage by describing the volume of self-service customers 

in each LWIA that contributed data and shows how customer volume varies over the months of a 

calendar year. 

Overall Numbers Being Served 

The tabulations presented in the preceding chapter suggest some interesting differences between 

self-service customers in general and those who receive WIA staff-assisted services. But how 

In fact, variance across LWIAs in the results from the customer survey is quite modest; i.e., most findings on 

service usage and satisfaction with services drawn from the customer survey are very consistent across LWIAs. 

VII-1 

1 
 

big are the relative sizes of these two groups? Put differently, how many of those who access 

self-services at a physical location go on to become users of WIA staff-assisted services at that 

same LWIA? The data focused on in this chapter provide a means for providing an estimate. 

Self-service usage files provided by the study’s sample of LWIAs do not identify which selfservice customers also accessed staff-assisted services, so this ratio cannot be calculated directly. 

However, a reasonable proxy can be calculated as the number of new self-services customers 

during a specified time period in comparison to the number of WIA exiters during a similar 

period. Assuming the inflow into WIA (i.e., the number of new WIA staff-assisted customers) 

approximately equals the outflow (i.e., the number of WIA exiters)—a reasonable assumption 

for programs neither expanding nor contracting—the number of new self-service users compared 

with the number of WIA exiters should provide a reasonably accurate estimate of the ratio 

needed. Exhibit VII-1 presents these results. 

As is evident, the number of customers who only receive self-services is far greater than the 

number who go on to receive staff-assisted services.2

 In fact, in none of the LWIAs that 

provided data is the ratio of the former to the latter less than 8:1, and in some LWIAs the ratio is 

 

 

The exhibit shows the number of WIA exiters during a 12-month period, as calculated from the PY 05 

WIASRD. The number of self-service-only customers is estimated as the number of new self-service customers 

during a 12-month period minus the number of WIA exiters. In general, all figures are measured for the 12 

months from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006, but somewhat different timeframes are used for some of the 

LWIAs, due to limitations of data availability. 

2 

VII-2 
 

 

 

 

 

as high as 50:1. Clearly, then, from the standpoint of sheer volume, self-service customers 

predominate by far. If one assumes that self-service remote users make up another appreciable 

part of the One-Stop delivery system customer base, then the disparity between self-service 

customers and those who receive WIA staff-assistance becomes even more marked. 

Annual Variations in Self-Service Customer Volume 

At most sites, the volume of on-site self-service usage is large but also uneven across a twelvemonth period, potentially posing serious resource management challenges for One-Stop Career 

Centers. Exhibit VII-2 shows this unevenness of use by tabulating person-days of usage by 

month.3 Although each LWIA has its own peculiarities, in general person-days of usage are flat 

during the first half of the calendar year, fall slightly in September, rebound a bit in the fall, and 

drop again by the end of the year. 

Frequency of Use 

Regardless of these ups and downs over the course of a year, the volume of self-service usage 

during a month is considerable in most of these LWIAs. For this reason, it may be helpful for 

LWIAs to be aware of how customers vary in their frequency of service use, since repeat users 

may put different demands on the system than one-time users. Using the data that LWIAs 

provided on each day of use for each person for a consecutive 12-month period, the number of 

separate days of use per person can be counted. Exhibit VII-3 reports these results and suggests 

that, at least in these LWIAs, one-time users predominate.4 On average about 55 percent of 

customers visited the One-Stop Career Center only once during this year-long period, with the 

3	 Specifically, each person counts for as many days as he or she used self-services during the month. Different 

months of data are available for the different LWIAs. Service data are not available at all for CA-1. 

4	 For each of these LWIAs, daily usage data for 12 consecutive months were obtained, typically from October 

2005 to September 2006. Results shown represent the percentage of customers who accessed services just once 

during the period, or two, three, or more times. Arguably, the beginning of this 12-month period represents the 

end of a spell of participation for some participants, and the end of this period represents the beginning of a spell 

of participation for others, so the number of repeat visits for both would be undercounted. As a sensitivity test, 

this tabulation was repeated after restricting the analysis to those whose first activity date was within months two 

through eight of the 12-month period. Doing so reduced the percentage of one-time users by only two or three 

percentage points. 

VII-3 
Person-Days of Service 

25,00020,00015,00010,000

5,000

0

Jan-05 Mar-05 May-05 Jul-05 Sep-05 Nov-05 Jan-06 Mar-06 May-06 Jul-06 Sep-06 Nov

______________ 

Exhibit VII-2: Person-Days of Service, by Month, for Selected LWIAs 

Note: Each self-service customer counts as many times as the number of separate days they used self-services during the month. Thus, these 

usage. 
 

 

 

 

 

figure as low as 45 percent in one LWIA and as high as 79 percent in another. Two-time users 

made up another 16 percent on average, and three-time users made up 7 percent.5 

Exhibit VII-3: Customers’ Days of Usage 

During a 12-Month Period, by LWIA
 

Presumably, some customers visit only once or a few times because those visits satisfy their need 

for services. For example, they might in a visit or two get an important job lead, receive a 

referral to other services, or satisfy requirements for meeting with a case manager as a condition 

of UI eligibility. By contrast, others might visit only once because an unfavorable experience 

causes them to conclude that further visits are not worth the time and effort. Still others might 

satisfy their need for more help by using self-service tools and resources remotely after an initial 

visit orienting them to the center’s services. 

However, although infrequent use predominates, at the other extreme, about 13 percent of 

customers use services more than five times in the year, and a small number of customers use 

services much more frequently than that, with a few percent in each LWIA accessing services 21 

or more times during the year. 

Frequency of use can also be calculated from the customer survey, and this source gives a somewhat different 

impression, with only 37 percent of respondents reporting that they visited the center only once or could not 

remember going at all. This discrepancy suggests that respondents to the customer survey tend 

disproportionately to be more frequent users. 

VII-5 

5 
 

 

The result is that a relatively small number of customers can account for a significant proportion 

of a resource room’s customer traffic. For example, as Exhibit VII-4 shows, about six percent of 

all customers use services eleven or more times in a year, but they account for nearly 40 percent 

of all person-days of usage. At the other extreme, one-time customers (54 percent of the total) 

account for just 17 percent of all person-days.6 

Exhibit VII-4: 

Percent of Customers and Person-Days, 

by Days of Usage in a Year 

Percent of Percent of PersonCustomers Days of Usage 

Used services: 

Just once in a year 54.2% 16.7% 

2-5 times in a year 33.1 28.7 

6-10 times in a year 6.9 16.1 

11-20 times in a year 3.7 16.6 

21 times or more 2.0 22.0 

Patterns of Usage 

As a way of learning more about customers’ patterns of usage, the time elapsed between first and 

last use was calculated. These results are tabulated in Exhibit VII-5 and show that time elapsed 

can be considerable. As this exhibit shows—and as already described, above—appreciable 

numbers of customers use services only once, so for them there is no time elapsed. Many others 

use services a few times but over a relatively short (e.g., one-month) period. At the other 

extreme, the time elapsed between first and last use exceeds 100 days for about 13 percent of all 

users. Some of those in this latter group use services only a few times (with a long time lag 

between use), while others use services very often over a long period of time. 

Total person-days of usage is calculated as the sum of the number of customers multiplied by each customer’s 

days of usage in a 12-month period. The exhibit represents the sum across all the LWIAs contributing applicable 

data. 

VII-6 

6 
Types of Services Used 

As part of their tracking systems, several of the LWIAs being profiled record the services each 

customer uses (or, at least, the services the customer intends to use) during each visit. 

Information on service usage was also collected as part of the customer survey. Both of these 

data sources are used in this section to profile which services are used and with what frequency. 

Results from the Tracking Systems 

Each LWIA uses its own set of codes, in some cases representing hundreds of separate service 

activities, though usually a much smaller number of codes accounts for the vast bulk of all 

activity. In an effort to impose some coding uniformity across these LWIAs, their codes were 

classified into a manageable number of categories. Although it is not always clear where to 

place certain activities (some straddle the boundary between categories, for example), this 

categorization gives a general sense of the types of activities in which most self-service 

customers engage. The following list describes the categories and the types of activities included 

in each one: 

•	 Orientation to Rapid Response Services. These codes represent activities that 

provide an orientation to One-Stop self-services and/or enrollment into the data 

system. The following are among the various specific activities included in this 

VII-7 
category (using actual codes from the LWIAs’ tracking systems): “orientation to 

center services,” “tour center,” “orientation in Spanish,” “group orientation,” 

“one-on-one orientation,” and “new application.” 

•	 Orientation to Other Services. These activity codes represent explanations of, 

referrals to, or help with enrollment in other programs, including those of OneStop Career Center partners (such as UI) or education and training providers. 

Specific activities included are the following: “WIA enrollment orientation,” “UC 

registration,” “adult literacy information,” “information on training providers,” 

“program performance information,” “domestic violence,” “clothes closet,” 

“referral—mental health services,” “referral—transportation,” and so on.
 

•	 Job Assistance. This broad category, which predominates nearly everywhere, 

encompasses a range of separate activity codes, including “job search assistance,” 

“labor market information,” “resume assistance,” “job fair,” “internet job search,” 

“create/modify resume,” ”CalJOBS,” “review job posting,” and similar entries. 

•	 Assessment and Guidance. Part of the power of self-services is that customers 

can take the initiative in assessing their skills and interests and use the 

information that results to make career choices, sometimes with a modicum of 

staff assistance. This category captures these activities, which include 

“assessment, computer,” “self assessment,” “staff assessment,” “reading-math 

testing,” “career guidance,” “typing test,” “identify employment barriers,” 

“identify skills,” and “career assessment,” among others.
 

•	 Workshops. Most of the activities described above are generally carried out by 

customers working individually. But group activities, such as workshops and job 

clubs, are also a big part of self-service offerings in many LWIAs, as Chapter VIII 

will describe. Thus, included under this category are “Spanish Job Search 

Workshop,” “Jump Start Your Job Search,” “Resume Workshop,” “Acing the 

Interview,” “Computer Basics 101,” “Dress for Success,” “Learn how Money 

Works,” “Career Decision Making Workshop,” “Transferable Skills Workshop,” 

“Work Readiness Workshop,” and many others. As is apparent, many of these 

workshops focus on assisting customers with carrying out a successful job search, 

but others cover topics not directly related to employment, including financial 

literacy and basic computer applications. 

•	 Miscellaneous and Unspecified Activities. A final category encompasses activity 

codes that represent unspecified self-service activity (such as “core services,” 

“counselor appointment,” “faxing/copying,” or “used resource room)” or 

something that is otherwise hard to classify. 

Using this scheme, the tens of thousands of service activities that individual self-service 

customers received in each LWIA during a 12-month period were classified. Exhibit VII-6 gives 

a sense of the sheer volume of activities that are captured by these LWIAs. Before classification 

in the broad categories defined above, overall about 776,000 service activities were recorded for 

112,000 customers, for an average of about seven services per customer. Because, as was noted 

earlier in this chapter, most customers access services on only a few separate days at most, the 

VII-8 
 

 

 

 

substantial volume of services derives from two factors: (a) the large number of self-service 

customers that these LWIAs accommodate in a year, and (b) the fact that many customers are 

recorded as accessing multiple services during each visit. 

Exhibit VII-6: 

Volume of Self-Services and Services per Person 

in a 12-month Period, in Selected LWIAs 

Number of Number of Service 

Self-Service 

Customers 

Services they 

Accessed 

Services per 

Person 

Categories 

per Person 

CA-2 18,469 221,815 12.01 2.96
 

CA-4 55,611 292,319 5.26 1.60
 

PA-1 23,811 223,976 9.41 2.69
 

TX-1 4,567 9,619 2.11 1.34
 

TX-2 10,224 28,890 2.83 1.13
 

TOTAL 112,682 776,619 6.89 2.00 

Note: Only these LWIAs provided data that could be used for this tabulation. 

As a comparison of the two columns on the right side of the exhibit reveals, however, many of 

the multiple services that a customer receives are within the same broad category. In terms of an 

overall average, the seven services the average customer accesses during a year fall within an 

average of just two separate service categories. 

Of course, the number of services recorded for each individual, as well as the number of 

categories in which they fall, depend largely on the details of each LWIA’s tracking system, such 

as what coding categories it uses and how narrowly it defines service activities. For example, in 

one LWIA a person’s visit to a resource room could be coded as “core services” (one service in 

one category), while in another LWIA that same type of visit could result in coding showing the 

accessing of multiple services, such as “job search assistance,” “resume assistance,” “self 

assessment,” and “fax/copier’ (four services in three categories). 

With that limitation in mind, Exhibit VII-7 shows the types of service categories that customers 

most often use in these LWIAs. This exhibit makes the variability in how LWIAs classify 

activities very apparent. One LWIA (CA-2) makes frequent use of the miscellaneous category, 

even for customers who received other specific services. This LWIA also appears to be more 

VII-9 
Assessment/Guidance 

Received Job Assistance 

Received Orientation to 

Other Services 

Received a RR Orientation 

Other or unspecified 

Attended a Workshop 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 

Percent of Customers 

Exhibit VII-7: Types of Services Used by Self-Service Customers 
diligent in recording the resource-room orientations that occur—based on the qualitative findings 

to be presented later in this report, most customers appear to receive at least a basic orientation to 

the resource room, so the fact that only a minority are coded as having received one, except in 

CA-2, suggests more about the variability of coding than anything else. 

Notwithstanding the fact that coding is neither consistent nor comprehensive across LWIAs, it is 

apparent from the exhibit that almost everywhere job search assistance predominates.7 Other 

activities are also frequently recorded—receiving an orientation to other services, assessment and 

guidance, and workshops—but they do not occur on the scale of job search assistance. 

Results from the Customer Survey 

The customer survey provides a separate source of information about customers’ usage of 

services and, additionally, their rating of the helpfulness of the services they used. These results 

are tabulated in Exhibit VII-8. 

Consistent with findings reported in Chapter VI regarding the reasons customers access OneStop Career Center services, overwhelming majorities of self-service users report that they used 

resource rooms to look for a job (79 percent) or access related services associated with job 

search, such as learning job search techniques (49 percent), posting a resume (47 percent), 

developing a resume (35 percent), or learning how to interview for a job (25 percent). But 

appreciable numbers have broader aims as well, such as researching career options (38 percent), 

researching training providers (29 percent), or conducting a self-assessment of career interests 

(17 percent). Thus, in keeping with the effort of One-Stop Career Centers to develop a broad 

range of tools useful for furthering career development, customers have accessed a wide range of 

the centers’ resources. 

Ratings of the helpfulness of the services accessed are mixed. On the one hand, nearly all 

services are rated as quite or very helpful by at least half of the customers who accessed them. 

Furthermore, some services are rated favorably by as many as two-thirds of all users. On the 

other hand, appreciable percentages find the services at best only somewhat helpful. 

Furthermore, the services rated most favorably tend to be the ones used by the fewest customers. 

Thus, getting help with preparing a resume had the highest favorability rating, with 69 percent of 

customers who accessed this service rating it as quite or very helpful, but only 35 percent of 

customers used this service. Similarly, 66 percent of those who accessed a service focused on 

improving their basic skills rated the service favorably, but only 10 percent of customers used 

VII-11 
 

 

 

 

_________________ 

 

 

this service. At the other extreme, looking for current job openings—the service used by the 

most customers (79 percent)—had the lowest helpfulness rating, with only 41 percent of users 

rating it quite or very helpful. 

Exhibit VII-8: 

Services Used and Helpfulness of Services 

Helpfulness Rating from Those Using Service 

Pct Using 

Service 

Not at all 

helpful 

Somewhat 

helpful 

Quite 

helpful 

Very 

helpful 

Look for job openings 79.0 17.8 40.7 26.2 15.4 

Learn job search tips 49.1 9.5 37.6 33.2 19.7 

Post resume 46.7 21.2 32.8 24.0 22.1 

Research employers 41.6 10.2 36.7 33.1 19.9 

Research career options 38.4 13.2 39.0 30.8 17.1 

Help to file a UI claim 37.9 20.0 20.5 28.3 31.3 

Learn about other services 35.8 10.5 33.1 35.6 20.9 

Help with resume 34.5 5.9 25.0 35.4 33.8 

Research jobs likely to grow 33.9 8.7 37.3 31.1 23.0 

Research training providers 28.9 13.6 34.6 29.9 22.0 

Learn how much jobs pay 27.1 8.5 35.7 35.9 20.0 

Learn how to interview 25.3 7.9 29.5 33.9 28.7 

Info on student financial aid 17.3 19.6 26.0 28.4 26.0 

Assess career interests 17.0 13.4 30.9 33.3 22.4 

Improve occ skills 16.9 8.2 27.1 37.7 27.1 

Assess basic skills 12.8 16.0 31.5 29.3 23.2 

Improve basic skills 9.5 9.0 24.8 35.3 30.8 

Note: All numbers are percents. Ratings of helpfulness are restricted to those who accessed the service in question. 

Results are from the customer survey administered to self-services customers in five LWIAs in the several 

months after customers accessed services. 

The survey also asked customers if there were other services they would have liked to have used 

but which were not offered. About 18 percent of respondents answered in the affirmative. 

Those who answered this way gave a variety of responses for what they felt was lacking. One of 

the most common additional services that customers would have liked, mentioned by about 35 

And where it does not, as in TX-1, it might be because the miscellaneous category was so often used instead. 

VII-12 

7 
percent of those who gave an answer, was training. A few of them mentioned that they wanted 

training in a specific field (e.g., truck driving, nursing, the computer field), but most expressed a 

general interest in undertaking training to upgrade their job skills. Some mentioned that they had 

heard that WIA funded training, and they wondered why it was not offered to them. 

Another common category represents those who found some element of the services they had 

received to be lacking. For example, about 13 percent of those who provided a response 

mentioned that they would have liked greater staff assistance. As one respondent put it, “Talking 

to real people would have been a plus; pointing at a computer ... is rather off-putting.” Another 

felt that he could have gotten a job more quickly “if someone would have worked with me.” 

Another 23 percent complained about other elements of the services they received, mentioning 

such problems as long waits to use a computer or not really being sure what services were 

available or how to use them. 

Others—about ten percent of those who gave an answer—mentioned that they would have liked 

services geared specifically to people like them, such as seniors, those seeking higher-skilled 

jobs, or ex-offenders. Another seven percent mentioned some specific service that was lacking, 

such as child care, housing assistance, entrepreneurship training, or direct access to apply for UI. 

Finally, about ten percent mentioned, simply, that they wanted more help in finding a job. 

Although the list of additional services desired is broad, these responses come only from the 18 

percent of survey respondents who mentioned that they would have liked to have used an 

additional service that they were not offered, and thus they represent the perspective of a 

minority. 

Accessibility in Using Services 

Based on qualitative site-visit data, Chapter IV described the efforts that One-Stop Career 

Centers are making to promote accessibility. The customer survey casts additional light on this 

issue. Specifically, data from the customer survey show how customers in general and 

customers with disabilities perceived the accessibility of the services they used. 

General Accessibility Issues 

The survey asked customers if they thought specific aspects of resource room operations were 

impediments to their use of services. Exhibit VII-9 tabulates the results from this question, and 

these results suggest that the efforts that centers are making to facilitate access are, on the whole, 

successful. 

VII-13 
Exhibit VII-9: 

Customer Ratings of Problems in Using Services 

For example, only small percentages of customers—about 10 percent to 15 percent—expressed 

the view that moderate or major problems with technology, lack of computers, or restricted 

center hours impaired their usage of services. The most troublesome aspect of service delivery, 

though cited as a significant problem by only 20 percent, was the lack of support from staff. 

Receiving inadequate staff assistance is cited as a problem by some despite the fact that 88 

percent of customers received staff help in some way. Exhibit VII-10 shows that, most 

commonly, this help took the form of assistance provided at the help desk (cited by 62 percent), 

but also common were having staff explain what self-service tools were available (48 percent), 

where they could be accessed (46 percent), or how they could be used (45 percent). 

Accessibility for Customers with Disabilities 

Accommodating customers with disabilities has been a critical goal of the public workforce 

investment system and is one supported by federal legislation and statute. For example, Section 

188 of WIA imposes the requirement that programs and activities offered as part of the One-Stop 

delivery system must be made accessible to persons with disabilities. Further, as noted earlier in 

this report, DOL has made a number of resources, such as the Disability Program Navigator, 

available to One-Stop Career Centers to help them serve customers with disabilities more 

effectively. What do the results from the customer survey tell us about how those with 

disabilities assess these efforts? 

VII-14 
 

 

 

Exhibit VII-10: 

Types of Staff Assistance Received 

This investigation is hampered by, first, the small number of LWIAs for which we have survey 

data, and, second, by the fact that few customers who were surveyed in these LWIAs self-report 

that they have a disability.8 As shown in Exhibit IV-11, only 77 of the 1,457 customers who 

answered this question reported having a disability that constitutes a substantial barrier to 

employment, with another 105 having a disability that is not a substantial barrier. 

Exhibit VII-11: 

Number and Percent of Survey Respondents with a Disability
 

N of cases Percent 

No, does not have a disability 1,457 88.9 

Yes, but this condition is not a 105 6.4 substantial barrier to employment 

Yes, and this condition is a 

substantial barrier to employment 77 4.7 

The survey asked “Do you have a long-lasting physical, mental, or emotional condition that creates difficulty in: 

(a) remembering or concentrating, (b) dressing, bathing, or getting around inside the home, (c) going outside the 

home alone to run errands, (d) seeing or hearing, (e) working at a job?” The question’s wording was suggested 

by DOL’s Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP). 

VII-15 

8 
 

 

_____________ 

These limitations notwithstanding, in general the results indicate that the One-Stop Career Center 

resource rooms accommodate these customers quite well. As Exhibit II-12 shows, 

overwhelming majorities of customers with a disability—even those whose disability is a 

substantial barrier to employment—report that they did not experience problems in accessing the 

centers’ services and that they were satisfied or very satisfied with the accommodations 

provided. 

Exhibit VII-12: 

Problems in Accessing Services for Customers with a Disability
 

Those for whom Those for whom 

Disability is Not a Disability is a 

Substantial Barrier Substantial Barrier 

Was accommodating your disability a problem 

when you accessed services? 

Not a problem 84.0% 79.7% 

A small problem 7.4 6.8 

A moderate problem 1.2 5.1 

A major problem 7.4 8.5 

How satisfied were you with the center’s ability 

to provide appropriate accommodations? 

Very satisfied 25.4 27.8 

Satisfied 50.8 40.7 

Unsatisfied 7.5 18.5 

Very unsatisfied 16.4 13.0 

Note: Tabulation is restricted to customers who reported that they had a disability. 

Conclusion 

This chapter makes clear that a vast volume of customers use One-Stop Career Center selfservices at physical locations in the LWIAs being profiled, swamping those who receive WIA 

staff-assisted services. Indeed, in some LWIAs, the number of customers who become new 

users of self-services is 50 or more times greater than the number who exit from WIA after 

having received staff-assisted services. Apart from sheer volume, marked seasonal variation in 

customer flows would seem to pose some difficulty for LWIAs from the standpoint of resource 

management. 

This chapter also shows that the vast majority of customers use self-services at a physical 

location just once or a few times during the year, while, at the other extreme, a small number of 

VII-16 
customers are extremely heavy users, recording 21 or more separate days of usage during a 12-

month period. This very small group of heavy users accounts for a considerable proportion of all 

person-days of usage. 

With regard to patterns of usage, the time elapsed between first and last use of services during a 

12-month period can be considerable. Obviously, very frequent users show a long interval 

between first and last usage, but even many infrequent users use services once and then not again 

for many months. 

Although the categories used by these LWIAs to characterize what customers were doing during 

their visit to the resource room are often times very broad (e.g. “used core services”), it seems 

clear that use of job search services predominates. Thus, in most of the study’s LWIAs with data 

of this type, about 80 percent of all self-service customers accessed job search services, such as 

reviewing job listings, accessing resume writing assistance, attending job fairs, and the like. 

Other common services include receiving a referral or orientation to other programs, such as to 

WIA, Unemployment Insurance, mental health services, drug counseling, and the like; obtaining 

career advice, either through online assessment instruments or with a modicum of staff 

assistance; and attending workshops on a variety of topics related to life skills or getting and 

keeping a job. However, the crudeness with which services are characterized in some LWIAs 

and the inconsistency in the way services are recorded across them makes comparisons difficult. 

The preponderance of resource room activities focused on job search is evident as well from the 

customer survey. According to these results, 79 percent of customers visited the center to look 

for jobs, and appreciable numbers as well were aiming to improve their job search techniques 

through such activities as learning job search tips (49 percent) or getting help with preparing a 

resume (35 percent). But, reflecting the diversity of tools and resources that resource rooms 

offer, others had broader goals in mind, such as researching career options (38 percent), 

researching training providers (29 percent), or assessing career interests (17 percent). In general, 

customers are satisfied with the services they received, with majorities rating them as quite or 

very helpful. However, looking for a job, the service used by the greatest proportion of 

customers (79 percent), had the lowest helpfulness rating, with only 42 percent rating it as quite 

or very helpful. 

Difficulties with accessing services seem not to be a cause of the mixed helpfulness rating. In 

fact, customers generally report that the centers’ hours of operation were appropriate to their 

needs, computers were adequate, and resources were not too difficult to use. Even customers 

with disabilities reported few problems with access. 

VII-17 
Overall, these results demonstrate the considerable potential of the self-service One-Stop system 

to reach large numbers of customers and to facilitate their access to an array of services. Clearly, 

America’s workforce is taking advantage of the opportunity that resource rooms offer, though 

the effectiveness of the services they access remains unclear. 

VII-18 
VIII. STAFF ASSISTANCE WITH SELF SERVICES 

Previous chapters have reported two important findings about staff assistance of self-service 

customers in One-Stop Career Center resource rooms: (1) most customers report that they 

received some help from resource room staff, and (2) most staff feel that many customers need 

this assistance to use self-services effectively. The present chapter examines this staff assistance 

in greater detail. It covers the role that various One-Stop Career Center partners play in 

providing staffing for self-services, the specifics of how job-seeker customers are assisted in the 

resource room, the referral of customers to partners that can provide additional services, and the 

training that resource room staff receive to help them perform their jobs more effectively. 

Because One-Stop Career Centers are locally organized and managed, the staffing of the 

resource rooms varies not only by local workforce investment area, but also by center. 

Consequently, the unit of analysis in this chapter is the individual One-Stop Career Center. 

Twenty-five of these centers were visited as part of the round-two site visits. These centers are 

identified in Exhibit VIII-1. 

Exhibit VIII-1: 

One-Stop Career Centers Visited for this Study 

State LWIA One-Stop Career Centers 

California Alameda County Berkeley (North Cities); Fremont (Tri-Cities) 

California Oakland Downtown Oakland; East Oakland 

California Richmond Richmond 

California Riverside Hemet; Riverside County 

California Sacramento Franklin; Hillsdale 

Colorado Boulder Boulder; Longmont 

Georgia Fulton County North Fulton County 

Massachusetts Metro South Norwood; Marlborough 

New York Oyster Bay Massapequa; Hicksville 

Pennsylvania Philadelphia North Philadelphia; Northwest Philadelphia 

South Carolina Trident Trident 

Texas Brazos Valley Brazos County; Washington County (satellite) 

Texas South Plains Lubbock; Plain View 

Washington Olympic Clallam County; Kitsap County 

VIII-1 
 

Staffing the Resource Room 

This section of the chapter explores how each center allocated staff to assist customers with selfservices. Topics include the number of staff assigned to work in the resource room, the status of 

these staff members (dedicated, rotating, part-time, or on-call), and the sources of funding used 

to support them. 

Number of Staff Serving Self-Service Job Seeker Customers 

As Exhibit VIII-2 shows, 17 centers reported having a minimum of one or two staff working in 

the resource room at all times. In 13 of these centers, at least one of these staff people worked in 

the resource room on a full-time basis, usually serving as the person who staffed the help desk. 

In three centers, one of the dedicated, full-time staff people assigned to the resource room was a 

security guard. 

Exhibit VIII-2: 

Minimum Number of Staff in Resource Room
 

Staffing Pattern One-Stop Career Center 

One staff + other staff assisting as needed 

or serving part-time 

Berkeley; Boulder; Clallam County; Hemet; 

Longmont; North Philadelphia; Riverside; 

Washington County 

Two staff (second staff person often 

receptionist) + other staff assisting as 

needed or working part-time 

Fremont; Kitsap County; Lubbock; Massapequa; 

North Fulton County; Plain View; Richmond; 

Northwest Philadelphia; Trident 

Three staff + other staff assisting as 

needed or working part-time East Oakland; Franklin; Hicksville; Hillsdale 

Four or more staff + other staff assisting as 

needed or working part-time 

Brazos County (five staff); Downtown Oakland 

(seven staff) 

In addition to having dedicated staff, 13 centers reported also using rotating staff in their 

resource rooms. These were staff from one or more on-site center partners who were assigned to 

work rotating shifts in the resource room in addition to their other duties. In most of these 

centers, rotating staff were used to assist dedicated resource room staff; only three—Hillsdale, 

Franklin, and Northwest Philadelphia—reported using rotating staff exclusively. 

While the primary reason for using rotating staff was to assist dedicated resource room staff in 

providing general assistance to customers, rotating staffing was also a means for providing 

customers with access to specialized expertise. For example, in the North Fulton County OneStop Career Center in Georgia, WIA career advisors alternated daily shifts in the resource room 

to provide self-service customers with access to career counseling. 

VIII-2 
 

 

 

 

At least 15 centers further supplemented their resource room staffing by using part-time staff. 

These part-time staff were commonly Senior Community Service Employment Program 

(SCSEP) or Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) participants, college interns, or 

WIA Youth program participants. Typically, these staff worked part-time in the center as part of 

a required program activity to gain job skills, and were not allowed to work more than about 20 

hours per week.1 

When resource room usage was high, another 13 centers reported that one or more One-Stop 

Career Center staff who were not regularly assigned to work in the resource room would assist 

with serving self-service customers. For example, in the Kitsap County One-Stop Career Center, 

the resource room often became very busy after the center’s workshop for UI recipients. At 

these times, the center’s manager would call “all hands on deck” and direct all available center 

staff to assist in the resource room. 

The addition of these rotating, part-time, and as-needed staff was one possible reason why it was 

observed during the site visits that more than half of the resource rooms had staff-to-customer 

ratios of 1:10 or better, despite the small numbers of dedicated resource room staff reported in 

Exhibit VIII-2.2

 However, some centers had ratios as high as 1:20. 

Funding of Resource Room Staff 

In 17 centers, the majority of the resource room staff were funded by either WIA 

Adult/Dislocated Worker program funds (nine centers) 3 or Wagner-Peyser funds (six centers). 

In two other centers, resource room staff were funded by an equal mix of WIA and WagnerPeyser funding. 

In the remaining centers, funding from other sources was at least as important as the funding 

from WIA and/or Wagner-Peyser. In two of these centers, SCSEP was the other major funding 

source used to support resource room staff; in these cases, SCSEP participants, who were paid by 

the program to work part-time in the resource room, were among the resource room’s chief staff. 

(In addition to these two centers, five other One-Stop Career Centers in the study also had one or 

more SCSEP participants staffing their resource rooms at the time of the site visits, and three 

others reported having had SCSEP participants work in their resource rooms in the recent past.) 

1	 The programs that provided these workers are discussed in more detail in the next section. 

2	 Another obvious reason would be low customer volume, which was certainly a factor in some of the centers 

serving more rural areas, such as the centers in Kitsap and Clallam counties in Washington and in Longmont, 

Colorado. 

3	 In addition to regular, permanent staff, two of these centers used WIA Youth Program participants as part-time 

staff in their resource rooms. These youths did so as a subsidized work experience activity through the program. 

VIII-3 
In two of the One-Stop Career Centers in which WIA- or Wagner-Peyser-funded staff were a 

minority, the primary source of support for resource room staff was the TANF program. In one 

of these centers, the resource room staff were regular employees of Sacramento County’s TANF 

program. At a One-Stop Career Center in another LWIA, two resource room staff were TANF 

participants for whom part-time work at the 

center was considered community service 

employment. Two other centers also reported 

having had either TANF staff or participants 

working in their resource rooms. 

At three centers, local colleges supplied staff in 

the form of interns or volunteers who worked 

part-time in resource rooms to gain work 

experience and skills, often as part of a 

required internship component of their 

academic programs. For example, at the time 

of the site visit, the Kitsap Career Center had 

two interns from Western Washington 

University’s Human Services Program. 

Other sources of support for resource room 

staff included the following: 

•	 California National Guard (Fremont 

and Downtown Oakland). 

•	 Local high schools (Downtown 

Oakland). 

•	 Adult education (Richmond). 

•	 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (Brazos County). 

•	 Job Corps (Franklin). 

•	 Childcare agencies (Brazos County). 

Assisting Self-Service Job 

Seekers 

Resource Room Staffing Examples 

In the Fremont, California, One-Stop Career 

Center, one full-time, dedicated staff person 

employed by the California National Guard 

was assigned to work in the resource room, 

along with a full-time security guard. These 

dedicated staff were assisted by three WagnerPeyser-funded staff who served two- to fourhour rotating shifts in the center’s resource 

room, as well as a SCSEP participant who 

worked 20 hour per week. 

In the Hicksville, New York One-Stop Career 

Center, the resource room had three dedicated 

Wagner-Peyser-funded staff, two of whom 

worked at the help desk and the other as the 

receptionist. A WIA-funded staff person also 

assisted as needed. 

In the Hillsdale One-Stop Career Center in 

Sacramento, California, there were no 

dedicated resource room staff. Instead, all 

center staff spent at least one three-hour shift 

per week in the resource room, ensuring that at 

least two staff were available to help selfservice customers at all times. 

In addition to providing ongoing assistance, all of the centers included in this round of the study 

also provided first-time job-seeker customers with an orientation to resource room services and 

VIII-4 
 

 

 

made referrals to One-Stop delivery system partners.4 This section describes these three forms of 

customer assistance. 

Orientation to the Resource Room 

In all One-Stop Career Centers visited for the study, customers using the resource room for the 

first time received some kind of orientation, either immediately or within a week of their first 

visit. In 15 centers, these orientations consisted of one-on-one informal meetings between the 

new customer and a resource room staff person.5

 During these informal orientations, new 

customers typically received a brief tour of the resource room, as well as written documentation 

on center rules and hours, instruction on how to use the computers, recommended job search 

websites, a schedule of self-service workshops or upcoming employer recruitment sessions, and 

an introduction to other available services. Some centers also provided information on how to 

conduct a job search, develop a resume, and draft a cover letter, and some provided the hours and 

locations of other One-Stop Career Centers in the area. 

In three of these centers, customers could also receive orientation information through an 

electronic medium. For example, in the Hemet center, customers could watch a continuously 

looping orientation video, and in the Brazos and Washington County centers, customers could 

utilize a computer-based orientation. 

In the other centers, formal orientations were required of all new customers. In most of these 

centers, these were group sessions that lasted 30 minutes to an hour and were held anywhere 

from twice a day to two times a week, depending on customer volume and staff availability. 

During these orientations, customers typically learned about center services (including WIA 

Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs), self-service tools, center rules and hours of operation, 

conducting a job search, developing a resume, and interview skills. These sessions were 

sometimes conducted by resource room staff and sometimes by other center staff. 

In all of these centers, customers could not use the resource room until they had attended an 

orientation. However, in the Franklin One-Stop Career Center, where orientations were held just 

twice a week, resource room staff sometimes provided “emergency” one-on-one orientations for 

customers who needed to use services immediately. 

In the two centers visited in the Boulder LWIA, formal one-on-one orientations were required. 

These sessions typically lasted 20–30 minutes and were conducted by Wagner-Peyser-funded 

4	 This section will not cover referrals to WIA staff-assisted core, intensive or training services, as this topic was 

covered in Chapter II. 

5	 In five of these centers, formal, group orientations were also offered, but not required. 

VIII-5 
 

 

employment advisors. During these meetings, employment advisors determined each customer’s 

veteran status and eligibility for unemployment compensation; assessed needs, barriers, and 

skills; and discussed the customer’s desired salary and location for employment. Employment 

advisors also provided customers with written materials on the local labor market, the center’s 

code of conduct, available self-service workshops, and job search websites and hotlines. 

Several of the centers that offered only informal, one-on-one orientations at the time of the site 

visit had previously required formal, group orientations. Respondents at these centers gave 

several reasons for changing their mode of delivery. One reason mentioned was that staffing 

cuts had made it difficult for resource room staff to devote enough time to developing and 

facilitating formal orientations on a daily basis. Respondents at two centers also noted that a low 

volume of customers made group orientations impractical. 

Providing Ongoing Assistance within the Resource Room 

In all of the centers, customers could use the resource room as often as they chose after receiving 

an orientation. In most centers, each time a customer returned, he or she first had to check in 

with a resource room staff person, who would record the visit and the planned activities in the 

center’s MIS.6

 Following this check-in, resource room staff usually directed customers to the 

equipment or resources they wanted to use, often a computer with Internet access. 

According to resource room staff, many of these customers typically needed at least some oneon-one assistance each time they visited, with some requiring a significant amount of help from 

staff. The most common type of assistance was providing help using resource room equipment, 

particularly computers. Most commonly, staff showed customers how to do the following tasks: 

•	 access and navigate the Internet 

•	 cut and paste 

•	 open an email account 

•	 register or log on to the state’s Internet job matching system 

•	 use computer software and applications such as tutorials, resume creation
 

programs, and assessments 

•	 upload resumes 

•	 fill out online job applications 

More information on the systems and processes used to capture information about resource room use was 

provided in Chapter V. 

VIII-6 

6 
In addition, in centers such as the Fremont One-Stop Career Center, where customers were not 

allowed to do copying themselves, resource room staff assisted customers with using other 

equipment such as the copy and fax machines. 

Resource room staff also provided one-on-one assistance with job-search-related activities such 

as filling out hard-copy job applications and preparing cover letters and resumes. Sometimes 

this assistance was provided on the spot—such as through the Hillsdale and Franklin centers’ 

“10-minute resume critique.” However, in other cases, customers prepared draft materials and 

then gave them to staff for review. As an example of this system, the Downtown Oakland 

Career Center had a box where customers could leave their resumes to be critiqued. 

Another common activity for resource room staff was to field questions about UI. Because no 

staff directly connected with UI worked in any of the resource rooms included in the study, 

resource room staff could provide only basic information, such as telling customers that they 

must register on the state’s Internet job-matching system to be eligible for benefits. For all other 

questions, resource room staff generally directed customers to call the state’s UI hotline on one 

of the center’s phones. In the East Oakland Career Center, resource room staff were also able to 

provide additional assistance by patching calls directly to live UI staff, enabling customers to 

avoid the state’s automated UI phone system. 

Often, the primary resource room staff members who provided this on-going, one-on-one 

assistance were the ones assigned to the help desk. While in a few centers these staff members 

remained at the help desk most or all of the time, in most centers help desk staff spent a 

significant amount of their time roaming the resource room, looking for customers who needed 

help. Thus, it was easy for customers who needed assistance to get a staff member’s attention, 

either by raising a hand, calling out, or walking up to them. In the East Oakland One-Stop 

Career Center, customers could also request assistance from roaming staff by putting a sign atop 

their computers. However, in centers with relatively unfavorable customer-to-staff ratios, 

resource room staff were often either stuck at the help desk signing customers in or busy helping 

other customers, so customers had to obtain assistance by standing in line at the help desk. 

Staff Approach to Providing Assistance to Self-Service Customers 

Resource room staff tended to adopt an approach to providing one-on-one assistance to selfservice customers that focused on empowering customers and helping them deal with their sense 

of helplessness. Staff at six centers specifically mentioned trying to help customers in a way that 

did not encourage their continued dependence on staff assistance but instead had the goal of 

supporting customers to do things on their own. For example, a resource room staff person from 

the Trident Career Center said he would not create a customer’s resume, even if that was what 

the customer wanted. Instead, he would encourage the customer to create the resume on his or 

VIII-7 
her own but offer to critique it when it was done. He adopted this approach deliberately to help 

customers overcome their sense of ineptitude and boost their self-confidence. Along the same 

lines, a staff person from the Downtown Oakland Career Center said that she tries to be 

respectful and not patronizing of customers. 

Resource room staff from four centers also specifically talked about how they sometimes had to 

take on the role of a mental health counselor. For example, the lead resource room staff person 

in Richmond said she often had to “play psychologist” because “sometimes customers just need 

someone to listen to them talk about how they feel about losing their job.” Resource room staff 

from the East Oakland Career Center similarly said that an important part of their job was to be 

empathetic and flexible toward customers, helping them to calm down and move beyond the 

anger they might feel about losing their jobs. 

Referring Self-Service Customers to Partner Services 

An important service provided by resource room staff is to refer self-service customers to other 

programs and agencies—usually One-Stop delivery system partners—for more intensive 

services. In all 25 centers, these referrals generally took place at some point after the customer 

began using self-services, but in at least nine centers resource room staff noted that they made 

referrals during intake if a brief assessment revealed both likely eligibility and need. For 

example, in the Kitsap County Career Center, any new customer who needed more than 10 

minutes of assistance the first time he or she used the resource room was referred to a WagnerPeyser-funded staff person. 

Resource room respondents reported that some agencies received more referrals than others. The 

agencies receiving the most referrals are listed below, in order of how often they were mentioned 

by respondents. Most of these agencies are mandated One-Stop delivery system partners. 

•	 Job Corps and other youth programs such as YouthBuild and WIA Youth 

Services
 

•	 Adult Basic Education agencies, for GED and/or literacy services 

•	 community or technical colleges 

•	 SCSEP & other senior services programs 

•	 TANF agencies 

•	 veterans’ agencies, particularly those providing Veterans’ Employment and 

Training Services 

•	 agencies providing specialized assistance to ex-offenders 

•	 Employment Service offices, when such staff were not co-located at the center 

•	 disability agencies other than VR 

VIII-8 
A few center respondents also reported that they sometimes made referrals to other partners, 

such as mental health or substance abuse treatment providers, computer training providers, Food 

Stamps agencies, the Trade Adjustment Assistance program, child support agencies, health care 

providers, the National Farmworker Jobs Program, private staffing firms, child care agencies, 

higher education providers, and housing services. 

At about half the centers, staff made these referrals merely by providing customers with the 

name and address of the referral partner. A more formal process was used in the Clallam, 

Kitsap, and Trident Career Centers, where staff typically called or emailed referral partners to let 

them know a customer was being referred, and in the Lubbock Career Center, where staff set up 

appointments for customers with on-site partners. Two additional centers filled out referral 

forms that were sent to the referral agency. For example, North Fulton County used this 

approach when resource room staff referred self-service customers to providers of job readiness, 

computer, or literacy training. 

Other Self-Service-Related Duties 

Respondents noted that, in addition to providing ongoing assistance to customers, center staff 

had other duties related to providing self-services, such as enforcing center rules. For example, 

most centers had time limits on computer use, and resource room staff had to enforce those 

limits. Centers also typically had rules requiring the appropriate use of computers and phones, 

and prohibiting other behavior such as cell phone use. In some centers, respondents noted that 

enforcing these rules absorbed a significant amount of resource room staff time. 

Another duty of some center staff was to prepare and facilitate workshops for self-service 

customers. As will be discussed in Chapter IX, a number of centers offered at least one 

workshop for self-service customers. While sometimes the curricula for these workshops were 

developed elsewhere, in many cases center staff had to develop them from scratch or at least 

customize them to fit the needs and requirements of their center. In addition, center staff had to 

facilitate these workshops, which were often provided on a weekly or biweekly basis. 

Finally, the preparation and updating of resource room materials also required time from center 

staff. For example, most resource room respondents noted that they regularly printed out hardcopy job listings and announcements from the Internet and put them into binders or posted them 

on bulletin boards. In addition, many respondents also reported reorganizing and updating all 

resource room materials on an annual or biennial basis. In centers that served large numbers of 

limited-English-proficient customers, such as Longmont and Richmond, center staff said they 

spent time translating key materials into languages other than English. 

VIII-9 
 

 

 

Training for Resource Room Staff 

Due to the wide variety of services provided by resource room staff, and the large proportion of 

their number who are rotating and part-time, training for resource room staff would seem to be 

particularly important. Indeed, all centers reported that they provided at least some type of 

training for resource room staff. The most common form of training (noted by seven centers) 

consisted of informal, on-the-job training in which experienced staff provided information on 

resource room duties to new staff. 

In addition, resource room staff were typically included in broader One-Stop Career Center staff 

trainings on a variety of topics. The most common of these topics was how to use electronic and 

Internet-based tools. For example, in 11 centers, staff reported receiving training on how to use 

their state’s Internet-based job matching system. In both the Franklin and Hillsdale Career 

Centers in Sacramento, staff also received training on how to assist customers in creating 

resumes using newly purchased resume development software. 

Seven centers reported providing training to resource room staff on how to provide good 

customer service, particularly to special needs customers.7 Trainings for One-Stop Career Center 

staff were also reported on a variety of other topics: 

• partner services, such as WIA and Wagner-Peyser 

• cardiopulmonary resuscitation 

• workshop facilitation 

• resume development 

• analysis of labor market information 

• providing employment readiness and job-search or job-placement assistance 

• communications skills 

• conducting triage assessments 

• sexual harassment and the filing of harassment grievances 

• Global Career Development Facilitator Certification8 

7	 Note that training on working with disabled customers was described in Chapter IV. 

8	 The Global Career Development Facilitator project was initially developed in 1997 through a collaborative 

arrangement between the Center for Credentialing and Education, Inc.(CCE), the National Career Development 

Association (NCDA), and the National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee (NOICC). Since that 

time, the Global Career Development Facilitator (GCDF) curriculum was developed, offering country-specific 

standardization and recognition to career development professionals. Specific career areas include career group 

facilitator, job search trainer, career resource center coordinator, career coach, and labor market information 

resource specialist, among others. 

VIII-10 
• career coaching 

• dealing with domestic violence 

Conclusion 

Contrary to the expectation that job-seeker and employer customers would use self-service tools 

and resources with little assistance, One-Stop Career Center respondents asserted that most 

customers need a considerable amount of assistance from resource room staff to use those tools 

effectively. Most centers had, on average, two resource room staff to provide this assistance, 

usually funded by WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs, Wagner-Peyser, or SCSEP. 

However, because a majority of centers also used part-time, rotating, or as-needed staff in their 

resource rooms, staff-to-customer ratios were as favorable as 1:5 in some centers—but as high as 

1:20 in others. 

All of the centers had a similar customer flow for self-services. New customers had to fill out 

applications or intake forms and were then provided with an orientation. In most centers, these 

orientations were informal, one-on-one sessions with resource room staff and included a tour of 

the center and a review of center rules and procedures. After orientation, customers could use 

the resource room as often as they liked, and were assisted by staff who either roamed or were 

assigned to the help desk. 

Resource room staff provided numerous types of ongoing, one-on-one assistance to job-seeker 

customers, particularly help using computers and basic job search assistance. Customers 

indicated their need for assistance in one of these areas by approaching staff, raising their hands, 

calling out, or standing in line at the help desk. In assisting self-service customers, many 

resource room staff tried to empower customers to do things on their own, and others felt that 

they needed to take on the role of mental health counselor for customers. Resource room staff 

also referred self-service job-seeker customers to a number of One-Stop system partners, usually 

by giving the customer the name and address of the partner. 

In addition to helping customers one-on-one, center staff also spent time enforcing resource 

room rules, developing and facilitating self-service workshops, and updating, organizing, and 

translating resource room materials. They participated in training sessions for staff, the most 

common of which took the form of on-the-job training and workshops on how to help customers 

in using electronic self-service tools. 

Respondents noted a number of challenges related to staffing self-services. The most commonly 

cited challenge (noted by respondents at ten centers) was under-staffing of the resource room. 

While in most centers respondents wanted more staff to provide general assistance, in a few 

others, center managers cited a need for these staff to have specific skills. For example, the 

manager of one center said he required an additional staff person who could facilitate self-service 

VIII-11 
workshops, while another specifically sought to hire a security guard to deal with a spate of 

recent security problems in the resource room. A third One-Stop Career Center manager wanted 

to hire a mental health counselor to deal with self-service customers with severe mental health 

problems. Respondents from a fourth center wanted more staff who could speak both Spanish 

and English, a need echoed by customers in two other centers. 

The primary reason cited for the lack of needed staff was decreased funding from both WIA and 

Wagner-Peyser, which resulted in staff layoffs or no replacement of staff who left or retired. 

Respondents cited the low wages paid to center staff as contributing to high staff turnover, which 

worsened problems of inadequate staffing and a general lack of experienced staff. 

The lack of adequate staffing for resource rooms meant that customers were often left on their 

own even though they needed and wanted help. As one resource room staff person put it, “Selfservices is a misnomer. Customers need services and help. But we just aren’t equipped to 

provide it.” Customers interviewed at three centers echoed this sentiment by saying that they 

had not received as much assistance as they needed. As one of these customers remarked, “I felt 

like I was on my own because of the lack of assistance. Staff need to provide more help.” 

A number of center respondents also asserted that inadequate staffing resulted in resource room 

staff who are exceptionally busy—so busy at one center, in fact, that staff reported often 

skipping lunch—and this level of workload has left staff feeling stressed and frustrated. This 

might have been the reason why another One-Stop Career Center manager reported that 

motivating resource room staff was a challenge. 

As discussed, one way that some centers have tried to deal with the lack of staff in the resource 

room is to require most One-Stop Career Center staff to serve rotating shifts. However, the three 

centers that rely solely on rotating staff noted that there are some challenges with such 

arrangements. For example, some respondents from these centers said that rotating staff have 

difficulty gaining a high level of comfort and expertise in working with resource room tools and 

self-service customers. In addition, they noted that rotating staff were often distracted or pulled 

away from the resource room by their other duties. A third challenge noted by one center 

manager was the difficulty of creating a sense of teamwork among staff from different agencies 

who spent only certain shifts working together. 

Another way that centers have tried to deal with the lack of funding for staff is to use participants 

and volunteers from SCSEP, TANF, local colleges, and the WIA Youth Program to serve as 

part-time staff in the resource room. However, these staff, while costing centers nothing, 

typically have little or no prior customer service experience and limited work experience. 

Indeed, they are assigned to One-Stop Career Centers to gain such experience so that many can 

eventually find unsubsidized employment. 

VIII-12 
Centers tried to overcome the limited experience and educational backgrounds of resource room 

staff by providing training. However, the most common type of training provided to resource 

room staff was informal, on-the-job training from a more experienced resource room staff 

member, which is unlikely to lead to substantial skill increases very quickly. 

Although centers also provided some training on other topics, such as using electronic tools and 

customer service, for a number of reasons this type of formal training was not provided as often 

as center managers would have liked. First, respondents at five centers reported that a lack of 

funding limited the number of trainings they could provide. Respondents at the Downtown 

Oakland and Trident Career Centers specifically noted that they would like to provide their 

resource room staff with additional training on dealing with difficult customers, but lacked the 

funding to do so. Even for those centers that did have funding for training, finding time for staff 

to participate in training was a challenge mentioned by four centers. 

Consequently, due to the use of rotating and part-time staff, the limited amount of training 

provided, and high staff turnover, resource room staff as a group often had relatively limited 

skills to provide assistance to self-service customers. Because resource room staff commonly 

help customers use center equipment, provide job search assistance, and even provide counseling 

to customers in crisis, their lack of experience and formal training in these areas means that the 

assistance they offer is not as effective as it would be with better qualified staff. 

VIII-13 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
IX. INFORMATION AND RESOURCES 

This chapter reviews the types of information and self-directed resources available to customers 

seeking services at the One-Stop Career Centers studied. These resources include a wide range 

of tools designed to assist customers with varying interests and skill levels throughout the entire 

job search process. Additionally, the chapter examines self-service tools designed for 

employers. In addition to examining the tools and materials available overall, the chapter also 

documents the extent to which these resources are available in hard-copy or electronic form 

within each site, because this provides a useful assessment of the degree of computer literacy 

required of self-service customers. 

Although customers make use of self-directed tools and services for a variety of reasons, most 

visitors to the One-Stop Career Centers are seeking employment. Given this fact, the 

organization of this chapter generally follows the path that a typical job-seeker might take: it 

begins with tools that assess skills and interests, continues with information on education and 

training opportunities as well as the labor market generally, moves on to tools designed to 

strengthen pre-vocational skills or to enhance one’s job search skills, and concludes with the job 

listings and matching available at each of the centers. For each of these categories, the chapter 

describes the materials and resources available to customers, notes the formats in which they are 

offered, and describes the challenges noted by staff and customers in using the resources. 

Assessment and Career Planning 

All the centers included in our sample offer customers self-service options for individualized 

assessment and career planning. First these tools are described, and then the challenges 

customers face in using them are discussed. 

Tools Available 

Despite the fact that the services to be discussed in this section are categorized as self-service, 

staff noted that various forms of staff intervention play a key role in job-seeker career planning. 

As an example, some One-Stop Career Center staff administer assessments in individual or 

group settings using online or hard-copy tools. In several sites, staff are available to help 

customers interpret their assessment results. 

IX-1 
 

 

 

Nevertheless, in each site there are tools available for use that are categorized as self-service. 

These include resources developed by state or federal agencies and those developed by private 

vendors. In the majority of sites, self-service offerings include both electronic and hard-copy 

resources; most sites also offer a variety of workshops that introduce universal customers to 

career assessment resources. 

Publicly-funded tools. Many of the centers rely on assessment tools that have been developed 

publicly, primarily by their states, but in some cases by the federal government. Four states in 

our sample—Georgia, New York, South Carolina, and Texas—have developed online 

assessment and career planning tools that are used by the centers in those states, and are 

available for remote use. The resource tools in this category include the following: 

Exhibit IX-1: 

State-developed Assessment and Career Planning Tools 

State Name of Tool Overview of Functions 

Georgia Georgia Career This site includes an online assessment tool that helps to match one’s work 

Information preferences and life priorities to occupations, and provides a skills assessment 

Center website for customers. 

New JobZone An online portal that is part of several tools that provide online job search and 

York career planning to job-seekers. JobZone provides information on 900 

occupations matched with relevant and content-based information based on 

each customer’s interests and assessed level of skills. Similarly, New York 

offers Career Zone, an online tool in which customers can click on a job title 

from any of six major categories and be linked to other job titles that require 

similar skills and interests. 

South South Carolina’s 

Carolina Virtual One-Stop 

System 

An online virtual tool that includes an extensive section on career planning, 

which includes projections, trends, tips on how to get a job in a specific 

industry, and how to receive more training if needed. Under Job Seeker 

services, website users can choose a link called, “10 Steps”, to explore 

specific steps that job seekers can follow on the path to a new job. 

Texas OSCAR An online assessment tool that is a product of the Texas Workforce 

Commission’s Career Development Resources. This system allows selfservice customers to assess work importance, value, and interest. For 

example, the Work Importance Locator can help job seekers learn more 

about their work values by ranking six work values in their order of 

importance. Their resulting score can then be matched with occupations with 

which their work values would be consistent. 

In addition to these state-funded assessment tools, customers in Philadelphia make frequent use 

of the federally-funded (U.S. Department of Labor) Career Voyages web site. This site includes 

Career Compass, which provides a brief assessment of occupational interests and identifies highgrowth and high-wage industries, as well as America’s Career Resource Network’s CareerDecision-Making Tool, which provides a more detailed assessment as well as career guidance. 

IX-2 
Commercially-developed tools. In addition to state tools, privately developed and sponsored 

assessment products also are used widely in job seeker career planning through the One-Stop 

Career Centers. Clearly the most widely used of these resources is the Choices tool, which was 

noted as the main assessment and career planning tool in seven of the LWIAs. Choices is a 

career exploration tool that allows users to determine which employment areas they would like to 

pursue. Choices contains interest inventories, data on transferable skills, and an aptitude test. 

Customers can take the aptitude test and instantaneously receive their results; these results are 

then matched to occupations that fit best with these aptitudes. With the list of matching 

occupations, users can follow links to more information on specific careers that fit with these 

occupations, information on the demand for these occupations within their local and state labor 

markets, and specific job listings for these occupations. As an interactive program, Choices can 

be self-administered, used for individualized counseling, or delivered in a group environment. 

Staff encouraged the use of Choices because it offers several functions and feedback options for 

customers seeking the most appropriate career path. Customers appreciated the thorough 

printouts of current skill levels and descriptions of how these skills can be transferred to other 

professions. Additionally, Choices enables customers to create a career portfolio. Once 

customers complete an aptitude and skills assessment, they can choose a career of interest and 

the Choices system will list all available college majors that can train for the chosen position. 

For most customers, having this list can alleviate some of the work of researching which majors 

will prepare for specific careers. If a customer is uncertain about which occupation or education 

provider to choose, Choices allows him or her to compare two careers or two schools side-byside. 

Although Choices is the most commonly used tool across the centers in our sample, other 

privately developed resources are available as well. Sacramento, in particular, provided a wide 

array of self-service resources for assessing career interests and aptitudes. In addition to 

Choices, Sacramento offers Prove It, which focuses on personality traits, biographical history, 

and problem solving abilities; the Picture Interest Career Survey, which identifies occupational 

interests by using pictures of people to create a profile of an individual’s potential career and job 

matches; Ideas, which helps customers determine their areas of greatest vocational interest; the 

“Quick Guide” Skill Review, which includes 12 questions related to Reading for Information, 

Locating Information, Applied Mathematics, and others that can guide an individual toward 

potential careers; and the WorkKeys Skills and Personal Skills Assessments, which provide indepth employability skills assessments or personality characteristics that can be linked to 

potential careers and employment opportunities. 

In addition, at least two of the centers use ACT’s Discover Online Career Planning, which uses 

comprehensive, developmental guidance to help customers identify their strengths and build a 

IX-3 
career plan based on their personal strength profile. This system offers thorough, current 

databases of occupations, college majors, schools and training institutions, and financial aid and 

scholarships. 

Still other centers list a variety of online sources that are available for career assessment, such as 

WorkforceExplorer.com, CareerInfonet.com, and CareerOneStop.com. Several centers similarly 

provide links for customers to access career assessment tools offered through O*NET. O*NET’s 

assessment functions enable customers to search occupations by their skill sets. Even though 

these links are available to customers, however, staff reported that use of them was fairly 

minimal, and there was no means for documenting whether or how often customers accessed 

these resources. 

The Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) is also available online in several of the sites. This 

test assesses individuals’ reading and math skill levels and, thus, provides a tool for matching 

their basic skills to occupations. Staff in each of the sites in which this test was available, 

however, noted that because of the time required for completing the test (3 to 4 hours) it is rarely 

used by self-service customers. 

Although most of these resources are available electronically, such that customers can directly 

link their skill or other assessment information to specific career options, all One-Stop Career 

Centers also offer books, pamphlets, and one-page handouts on self assessments for career 

planning. For example, South Carolina offers hard-copy documents that assist customers in 

brainstorming their ideal job, salary needs, and qualifications. Several sites also offer books on 

career exploration, such as What Color is Your Parachute? And a number of sites provide 

customers with pamphlets or flyers designed to help assess skills and interests. In Oyster Bay, 

for example, customers have access to a large number of pamphlets, with titles such as 

“Assessing Your Job Skills: Where Do I Stand,” “How to Choose a Career: A Guide to SelfAssessment,” and “Identifying Your Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities.” 

Staff in each of the sites felt that the online resources were vastly superior to the hard-copy ones, 

because of their interactivity and superior ability to link customers directly to specific 

occupations or industries for which their skills and interests are a suitable match. Despite this 

preference, however, hard-copy materials are available because some self-service customers 

simply are not comfortable using the interactive and electronic tools available to them. 

Workshops. All One-Stop Career Centers studied also offer workshops that include a 

discussion of assessment and career planning, although typically there is little actual planning 

that occurs during these workshops; instead, customers are encouraged to use the electronic or 

hard-copy assessment tools described above. In at least two sites, however, there are workshops 

heavily devoted to career assessment. For example, at Oyster Bay, workshops focus on selfassessment, career exploration, and transferable skills. These workshops provide job seekers 

IX-4 
with an opportunity to learn more about what they enjoy doing, conduct an inventory of values, 

interests, and strengths, and identify skills that are transferable to new industries and 

occupations. Two separate sessions are available, one entitled “Self Assessment and Career 

Exploration” and another entitled “Transferable Skills.” 

Similarly, as part of a five-day workshop offered in Oakland, participants take part in a daylong 

session entitled “Preparing for Your Job Search” that focuses on career and skills assessment, 

goal-setting, and completing applications for employment. In these workshops, customers 

complete assessment tools and brainstorm about skill areas and how these link to occupations of 

interest. 

Challenges in Using Self-Service Assessment and Career Planning 

Tools 

Career planning and assessment tools can provide invaluable insight into a customer’s work 

ethics, career interests, skills, and talents. Using information gleaned from self-administered 

career planning assessments, customers can identify relevant occupations and specific local 

employment opportunities that match their interests and skills. And, to the extent these tools are 

available online, they allow the universal customer access from anywhere with an Internet 

connection. Despite this broad access and potential utility, however, staff and customers 

identified a number of factors that limit the comprehensive use of these tools by self-service 

customers. 

•	 Lower-skilled workers appear to experience difficulty accessing and navigating 

through links while more computer-literate job seekers use the systems more 

seamlessly. Several of the assessment software programs are not user friendly; 

thus, customers need assistance using online tools. One-Stop Career Centers also 

note that youth used the Internet assessment programs more often than adult job 

seekers did, perhaps because of their greater facility with computer technology. 

•	 Most customers need staff assistance to interpret career assessment results and to 

make accurate and realistic career decisions.
 

•	 Detailed software assessments require too many hours to complete. Lengthy 

assessments can discourage customers from using them. Shorter assessments are 

easier to complete, but may be less reliable and informative. 

•	 Customers may not understand which software programs are best suited to their 

needs. Although staff at many sites provide recommendations on which types of 

self-assessment and career planning programs best suit customers, other sites 

provide little guidance. 

Thus, although career assessment and exploration tools can serve as useful occupational planning 

guides for customers of One-Stop Career Centers, typically these assessments are most beneficial 

when complemented with some type of staff assistance and guidance. Therefore, customers 

IX-5 
using these tools with little to no staff assistance may not receive a full overview of how their 

skills and interests can be best matched to occupational choices or employment opportunities. 

As a result, although customers have access to a variety of assessment tools, most centers noted 

that they do not heavily market the use of online or hard-copy assessment tools. Instead, staff 

feel the need to provide assistance through individualized career planning and one-on-one 

interpretation of assessment results. 

Information on Education and Training Opportunities 

As noted above, customers often access career assessment and planning tools to identify 

occupations that match their interests. For many of these customers, such occupations require 

additional education or training. Thus, an important component of self-services is the ability to 

gather information about potential education and training providers in a customer’s local area. In 

addition to documenting these self-service resources, the study discovered challenges to their use 

as well. 

Tools Available 

The One-Stop Career Centers we visited offer customers access to a range of information on 

available providers and opportunities. This section describes the tools and resources available to 

self-service customers for obtaining information on these education and training opportunities. 

Electronic resources. As implied above, electronic access to information on education and 

training providers is often “bundled” with career assessment and planning tools, thereby enabling 

customers to obtain descriptive information about their skills and interests, link this information 

to specific careers or employment opportunities, and obtain information on education and 

training programs offering programs of study relevant to these occupations. As an example, the 

Choices program not only is a commonly used assessment tool, but it also contains lists of 

schools throughout the country and provides direct links to a variety of education programs 

offered at four-year colleges and technical schools. Thus, some access to information on 

education and training providers is provided as part of a package with the assessment tools 

described above. 

Easily the most common source of information on education and training opportunities and 

providers is the Eligible Training Provider List (ETPL), a list that identifies providers that have 

been approved by each state as eligible for providing training services under WIA. Although 

each state, under WIA, is required to compile its list, the information for each approved provider 

can vary substantially across states. States’ ETPL systems usually include a search feature (see 

Exhibit IX-2 for an example) linked to a provider database with extensive information on local 

providers, including their performance with prior cohorts of participants, an exhaustive list of the 

IX-6 
training or education programs they offer, and even a schedule of when certain courses or 

opportunities are available. For example, in the California sites customers can access the online 

Vendor Performance Report, which provides information on providers’ performance, including 

the percentage of participants that completes training, the percentage that obtains employment 

following training, certification rates, post-program earnings information, and other key 

outcomes of interest. In other cases, however, the state ETPL contains less information, instead 

focusing primarily on listing the eligible providers, thereby leaving further research about them 

to the individual customer. In at least eight of the centers, customers could fill out a brief online 

application and assessment, and then retrieve descriptive information concerning occupations 

and available programs of study at these providers. 

Other electronic tools for accessing information on education and training providers are less 

common. In a few sites, such as Oakland and Alameda County, self-service users had access to 

direct electronic links to other local training providers, even if these were not on the ETPL, as 

well as links to information on financial assistance for education. In these sites, customers could 

thus identify training providers that were outside the list of “approved” providers on the ETPL 

and simultaneously investigate possible mechanisms for paying for these programs (since WIA 

funds could not be used for such training). 

Similarly, in at least four sites, customers can access electronic information concerning 

apprenticeship programs in their area. In each case, customers can follow an electronic link 

directly to an apprenticeship website. 

Printed materials. In addition to online offerings, all One-Stop Career Centers in the sample 

provide customers with at least some hard-copy information concerning educational and training 

providers. Typically, sections of a resource room are devoted to materials on education and 

training providers. Included in these sections are materials such as course catalogues for local 

universities, colleges and technical schools, brochures or flyers for these schools and other 

training providers, posters advertising GED preparatory courses, hard copies of the state’s ETPL, 

and pamphlets summarizing occupational areas that are in high demand in the current (and 

projected) economy. Although in several sites these materials were clearly organized and 

arranged (either alphabetically by provider or grouped according to type of provider or area of 

training) and appeared current, in a number of other sites these printed materials were not 

arranged in any systematic fashion, and were not up-to-date. In three sites, these printed 

materials were not clearly marked or visible in the resource room and, thus, customers were 

largely unaware of their presence unless they knew to ask about them. 

IX-7 
Exhibit IX-2 

Example of how to find eligible training providers in Pennsylvania and Texas 

In Pennsylvania, a job seeker can access education and training information via the state 

Commonwealth Workforce Development System. The system includes a module to research 

eligible training providers and their WIA-approved programs of study. The system does not 

require the customer to have a login name or password to search for basic criteria. To conduct 

an adequate search, customers must first specify, at minimum, the geographic area in which 

they wish the search to be conducted (either county, city, or zip), and whether they are 

searching for a provider or a program of study. Optionally, customers can limit the search to 

programs that are Pell-eligible, or to programs that offer an apprenticeship program. 

Information available about courses of study includes the following elements: 

•	 Location 

•	 Program description 

•	 Cost 

•	 Length 

•	 Start and end dates 

•	 Whether certificates are awarded 

•	 Performance information, as required by WIA (though information is not 

available for all programs) 

In Texas, once customers register into Work In Texas, the homepage typically offers a very 

extensive range of providers, including specific workshops and courses that they offer. 

Although customers retrieve information on hundreds of educational and training providers, 

customers who visit the Brazos Valley One-Stop Career Center most typically enroll at Blinn 

College to take courses and training because of its close proximity and variety of programs 

offered. Therefore, staff noted that convenience to the center played an important role in 

which schools customers choose for education and training opportunities. 

Workshops. Some One-Stop Career Centers go beyond merely offering online or printed 

resources and materials concerning education and training opportunities in the resource room. 

Leveraging local community partnership resources for self-service customers is one way centers 

make a variety of vendor services available. For example, as a partner to the Fremont One-Stop 

Career Center, a Hayward Adult School representative provides workshops for customers on 

how to obtain assistance in getting a GED or a high school diploma. In Oakland, local education 

providers occasionally provide workshops summarizing their courses, areas of study, and how 

these link to available employment opportunities. Further, staff in Oyster Bay provide a 

workshop on training and educational opportunities within the community, although they do 

warn customers that they must be determined eligible for these programs. Hence, the workshops 

IX-8 
and information about the programs are provided to self-service users, but the programs 

themselves are of course limited to those receiving more intensive services. 

Challenges in Using Information on Education and Training 

Opportunities 

Although all One-Stop Career Centers provide some information on education and training 

opportunities to their self-service customers, there remain several challenges to accessing or 

successfully using these resources. 

•	 Centers often lacked substantial hard-copy marketing resources for private 

schools and community colleges. Although the ETPL provides some information 

on these programs, this information is not always complete nor does it focus on 

some areas of interest to customers, such as accessibility by public transit. 

Several centers had an average of only one or two providers’ information 

available in print form. Typically, resources came from those programs that were 

closest in proximity to the center, thereby limiting the variety of programs 

customers could choose from only to those that were nearby. 

•	 Materials in several center libraries were outdated (more than twenty years old) 

and unorganized, and were thus rarely used by customers. 

•	 Visibility of education and training provider resources occasionally was quite 

poor. At one center, a customer stated he was unaware of available providers or 

that he could be eligible for a training program. Providing handouts and other 

information about education and training providers, or making them highly visible 

in the resource room, could improve customers’ knowledge and use of these tools. 

•	 Significant variability in the comprehensiveness and awareness of the ETPL 

system. As noted above, states vary in the comprehensiveness of the information 

available through the ETPL. As a result, customers in some states have easy 

access to a formal ranking system of providers on this list, while those in other 

states must navigate more carefully to obtain comparative information on provider 

performance. Further, a few centers’ staff members stated that they encourage 

customers to enroll in one program over another, often because they are more 

familiar with the recommended program. Ensuring that the state’s ETPL system 

effectively and easily provided access to provider rankings and performance 

would give customers greater and more systematic information on which to make 

their education or training decisions. 

Labor Market Information 

All sites offer individual customers access to a variety of labor market information (LMI) in both 

electronic and printed form. Most typically, electronic LMI was available through a statedeveloped web page or links to various local, state, and national sponsored websites. Resource 

libraries also contain sections devoted to LMI, which include both reference materials and 

IX-9 
narrative reports and publications on labor markets. Most centers also provide workshops that 

touch on LMI at least briefly. These are discussed below. 

Tools Available 

All centers provide access to state-developed online systems that provide labor market 

information. For example: 

•	 At the Trident center, customers use computers in the resource room to retrieve 

LMI through a link on the main page of the state website. Through this link, 

customers can review the latest South Carolina report on the analysis of current 

trends in the state’s population, economic growth, workforce, wages and income, 

and traditional and emerging industries. Job seekers can find various types of 

jobs through three separate links: hot jobs, fastest growing jobs, and jobs with 

good opportunities and wages that do not require a college degree. Customers can 

also access a major source of occupation information through O*NET OnLINE at 

http://online.onetcenter.org/. 

•	 The Oakland center offers customers a handout with instructions on how to 

retrieve LMI from the California EDD website, which contains information on job 

titles and descriptions, trends, job growth outlook, training requirements, skills 

and qualifications, and demand occupation information. 

•	 The Sacramento center produces a publication each year called the Occupation 

Outlook and Training Directory for the Sacramento region. The publication 

contains information on more than 200 occupations and 400 types of schools and 

training programs. The publication contains county profiles in detail and a 

directory of county training providers. Training providers include adult education 

programs, private schools, apprenticeship programs, and occupational programs. 

Occupational profiles include information on wages and benefits, employment 

trends, and employment requirements. 

•	 The Oyster Bay center offers a variety of ways to access LMI. The main resource 

for customers to access labor market information is the state-developed website, 

which provides information on trends in economic growth, workforce, wages and 

income, and traditional and emerging industries. Additionally, the centers offer 

pamphlets, including one titled How to Access Local Labor Market Information 

and another Jobs with a Future. They also give customers a handout with some 

basic labor market information located in the resource room. 

•	 The Philadelphia One-Stop site offers most of its labor market information 

through the Commonwealth Workforce Development System (CWDS) through a 

link to the Center for Workforce Information and Analysis. The LMI this site 

provides includes: wage information, state and county economic and labor force 

summaries, targeted industry clusters (nine clusters that Pennsylvania has targeted 

for growth), a high priority occupation list, and projected demographic trends. 

IX-10 
A number of key factors were cited as playing a role in whether customers would access LMI 

and find it useful to their job-seeking efforts. LMI is more likely to be used and found helpful 

when the following are true: 

•	 LMI is up-to-date. 

•	 LMI websites are easy to navigate. 

•	 Workshops clearly identify the importance of conducting LMI research and 

demonstrate best practices and strategies for research. 

•	 Staff are competent in the use of LMI and interpretation of data and concepts. 

•	 LMI’s relevance to customer goals and interests is made clear. 

•	 LMI materials are clearly visible in the resource room. 

•	 Staff are cognizant of customer assessment of tools and how often customers 

conduct LMI research. 

Along these lines, the “user-friendliness” of LMI and the extent to which it adapts to the specific 

needs of the customer base strongly influence customer use. Because of this, some sites have 

made consistent efforts to make the LMI more accessible to the universal customer: 

•	 Several centers provide a handout of instructions to customers on how to research 

LMI. In some cases, customers receive the handout in the introductory 

orientation, while in others it is posted near the computer stations. These 

instructions include a step-by-step guide on how to retrieve LMI websites and 

how to obtain specific geographic information. 

•	 The Fremont center hosts a Basic Internet for Job Seekers workshop in which 

staff teach customers how to access and research LMI. Customers report that they 

find the workshop useful. 

Challenges in Using LMI 

As the above examples attest, One-Stop Career Centers make a number of resources available to 

the universal customer. However, using these resources effectively is difficult and many 

customers need assistance navigating labor market information websites and determining which 

print materials will best suit them. Most centers’ staff members have the ability to show 

customers how to access websites with available LMI. Nevertheless, staff have a difficult time 

interpreting information and results accurately for job seekers. With limited staff proficiency on 

how to understand labor market information resources, self-service customers need to be able to 

analyze searches in order to effectively use the information with little or no staff assistance. Due 

to lack of staff competency in LMI research, several centers had recently provided staff training 

on interpreting labor market information and its relevance for customers’ job search. 

In addition, as a part of general workshop offerings, most centers offer workshops to the 

universal customer that touch on LMI. In most cases, these workshops provide general 

IX-11 
 

information with LMI as one of several topics discussed. In general, the workshops, as well as 

orientations for new customers, acquaint job seekers with center services and other community 

and social services, teach customers the basics of LMI research techniques, and encourage the 

use of LMI. 

Among other barriers to effective use of LMI at One-Stop Career Centers are the following: 

•	 The geographic aggregate data is not always specific enough to be useful for those 

seeking careers within a limited geographic area. 

•	 Data are not always up-to-date. 

•	 Limited computer literacy hinders certain clients from accessing appropriate 

information without staff assistance. 

•	 Job search is the primary reason customers visit the One Stop and many do not 

see the value of LMI in this effort. 

Tools to Enhance Pre-Vocational Skills 

When a customer has been recently laid off, completed a degree or certificate, or is merely 

considering a change in occupation, assessing his or her pre-vocational skills can be integral to 

making a sound career decision. To make an informed decision about a career track or 

educational goal, a customer may conduct self-assessments of her skills or interests, as described 

above. Customers who realize that they have limitations or deficiencies in pre-vocational skills 

may then wish to access tools and resources that are designed to strengthen these skills. 

Prevocational skills are those that are important for any job, but are not focused on a specific 

vocation. Included in these skills are resume preparation and interviewing, basic skills such as 

math or reading, knowledge of and experience with typing and computers, and an understanding 

of what will be expected on a job, among others. All of the One-Stop Career Centers we visited 

offered their customers access to at least some pre-vocational skills training, though they varied 

widely both in the types of pre-vocational skills tools that were available and in the format in 

which they were offered. 

Tools Available 

Among the most common forms of pre-vocational skills training offered at the centers were selfpaced typing courses and introductory workshops on using computers. Overwhelmingly, the 

most consistently offered tool was the Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing course, which allows 

customers to learn typing skills at their own pace. Nearly every site visited made this tool 

available to self-service users interested in learning to type or strengthening their existing skills. 

Also, next most common were either self-paced computer tutorials or workshops designed to 

provide customers with basic computer skills. For example, Fulton County provided workshops 

IX-12 
for customers focused on using the mouse and navigating folders. Additionally, this site 

provided self-paced tutorials for Microsoft software programs, including Word and Excel. 

Similarly, Oakland offered a multi-day basic computer skills workshop, including discussions of 

computer systems, hardware, software, and memory, information on creating documents and 

saving files, strategies for accessing online help and searching the Internet (specifically job 

search engines), and an overview of email. This site also provided a workshop on QuickBooks 

and Microsoft Excel. Oyster Bay offers workshops in basic computers, and introductory and 

intermediate-level courses on Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, and Mail Merge. 

Further, Oyster Bay uses the Prove It! software, a proprietary system designed by Kenexa. This 

software provides over 900 skill and behavioral assessments for clerical, software, technical, call 

center, and other occupations. The software then points the customer to areas in which they are 

deficient, and then provides self-paced instruction in those areas to enable customers to remedy 

deficiencies. This software also allows customers to take pre- and post-tests to “prove” that they 

have the requisite skills necessary for a variety of jobs. 

A number of centers also provided some information on how to enhance basic skills, including 

math, reading, or English language skills. As described above, all sites had some information 

about specific providers of education and training services. One-Stop Career Center staff noted 

that customers can get better services and training if they attend local community colleges and 

specialized training schools, as well as literacy programs, such as Trident Literacy Association in 

South Carolina, or the Literacy for Every Adult Program in Richmond, California. While the 

centers offer general training through workshops, specialized training providers can focus more 

time and attention on specific pre-vocational skill preparation. Several of these programs offer 

specialized classes on: 

• GED preparation 

• Basic computer skills 

• Basic internet for job seekers 

• English as a Second Language (ESL) 

The Riverside site offers some training in these basic skills to self-service customers. 

Specifically, the center offers a “Skills Lab,” a workshop to assist those with limited basic 

reading and math skills. This workshop is led by a representative from the state’s Department of 

Education, and is available to the universal customer. Additionally, the Riverside site has 

developed an innovative concept for enhancing pre-vocational skills called the Product Box, 

which is described more fully in Exhibit IX-3. 

IX-13 
Exhibit IX-3 

One Stop Career Centers that Offer Unique Pre-Vocational Tools 

The Riverside center offers job resources, specifically pre-vocational opportunities, to 

customers in their “Product Box,” located on the county website. The Product Box is a link of 

all Riverside electronic services, information about services at the One-Stop Career Centers, as 

well as links to local, county, and national websites with related resources. Under the “Product 

Box,” “Education/Skill Upgrade/Vocational Opportunities” is one of the main links available to 

website users. Under this link, categorical links pop up with web pages routing to Career 

InfoNet, Free Education on the Internet, School, College and Library Finder, and Spanish 

Lessons. Each link directs customers to specific websites. Although substantial information 

exists under the pre-vocational portion of the product box, the sites are extremely dense; thus, a 

customer may have difficulty navigating through the voluminous information. This website 

feature was only days new to the center at the time of the visit; thus, no feedback was yet 

available. 

Another example of an electronic resource that provide self-service customers with access to 

pre-vocational information is the Metrix Learning system. NY Wired for Education developed 

this system to make clients more employable by allowing them to acquire more job skills in an 

efficient manner. NY Wired uses the O*NET job titles (approximately 1,100 listed) to help 

customers develop a plan. First, job seekers select a job title that they desire to obtain, and then 

take a self-assessment. The system provides the customer with a focused training that includes 

how they can address a skill gap. Customers can then create a personalized development plan 

that includes a job preparedness assessment and five to ten learning courses from a catalogue of 

over 6,000 courses. 

Sacramento offers customers KeyTrain, an electronic training system available in all its OneStop Career Centers, which provides educational training in reading and math. Sacramento also 

offers financial literacy courses to its customers. This course includes modules on cash 

management, financial planning, basics of banking, and creating a financial plan. 

A number of other sites provided workshops to the universal customer on job readiness, 

including discussions on preparing resumes, interviewing techniques, appropriate dress habits, 

punctuality, demeanor, and other pre-vocational skills. Staff noted that these workshops were 

almost always heavily attended, and customers indicated that they found them to be helpful. 

As one example, Oakland provides a five half-days workshop designed to strengthen its 

customers’ pre-vocational skills in a number of areas. Among the topics in the five sessions 

IX-14 
are “Knock their Interview Socks Off,” which focuses on interviewing, dressing for success, 

and workers’ rights, and “Resumes that Get Attention,” which focuses on drafting both sound 

resumes and quality cover letters. Similarly, Sacramento offers soft skills training 

workshops, which focus on communication, office politics, problem solving, and time 

management. 

Challenges in Using Pre-Vocational Tools 

The primary challenge identified to customers’ use of tools designed to enhance their prevocational skills was that many customers do not believe they need to strengthen these skills. 

Thus, customers opt not to conduct assessments of their pre-vocational skills, or even, despite 

assessments that may indicate that developing these skills would be beneficial, customers remain 

uninterested in them. Given that these customers are self-service users, staff have very little 

interaction with them in which to encourage them to develop these skills. 

A second challenge is that many of the tools focusing on pre-vocational skills require a 

significant investment of time. Because so many customers in the centers are seeking 

employment as soon as possible, often they feel that they do not have sufficient time to 

strengthen their pre-vocational skills. Hence, even if they see a need to do so, often customers 

opt not to work on these skills because of a perceived lack of time. 

Job Listings and Job Search Assistance 

Because most customers using One-Stop Career Centers are doing so because they are in 

search of employment, it is unsurprising that, across all One-Stop Career Centers studied, job 

listings and job search assistance are used far more heavily than all other tools and services. 

Both on-line and onsite job listing services provide customers with a way of finding both 

potential employers and jobs for which they may be suited, and job search assistance can 

enhance their ability to find and secure employment. The next section describes the job listing 

tools that One-Stop Career Centers offer their customers, including any limitations of these 

listings. The subsequent section describes job search assistance tools that customers can 

access. 

Job Listings 

Most One Stop Career Centers offer an orientation to job listing and job search services; 

typically, a staff member will conduct this orientation via a scheduled workshop or a one-on-one 

IX-15 
 

 

orientation.1 The orientation offers customers guidance on how to start conducting a job search 

via the state job matching system, which remains a primary source of job listings for all centers. 

Since several of the state websites are not easy to navigate due to an overwhelming amount of 

information and links or due to customers’ lack of computer proficiency, staff members provide 

information on registering for a username and password, conducting a basic job search, and 

finding tools most relevant to the customer’s needs. One-Stop Career Centers see a large number 

of customers come through their doors simply to use the state job listing system, making the 

orientation a useful introduction to this online portal. 

Exhibit IX-4 identifies the state job listing system that is used in each of the One-Stop Career 

Centers, and the basic functions that each offers. In all but two cases, staff at the centers 

recommend their state’s job listing database as the primary source for available employment 

opportunities. As can be seen in Exhibit IX-4, state job matching and listing systems vary in 

functionality. However, customers can, at a minimum, search, save, and apply to jobs on-line. 

In addition, in many cases these state-developed websites provide links to other potential sources 

of job listings that customers can access. For example, CWDS (in Philadelphia) provides links 

to other job listing websites, including Monster, USAJOBS, Job Web, and CareerNet. Work In 

Texas has links that lead to government-supported job search engines, including one from the 

Brazos Valley local website (bvjobs.org). There are also links to other private job searching 

tools, including careersite.com, hireability.com, career.com, bigjobs.net, and hotjobs.com. 

In addition to these direct links on state-developed websites, most of the One-Stop Career 

Centers also provide easy access for customers to alternative, generally privately-funded 

websites, such as Monster, CareerBuilder, and others. Although the specific links provided 

varied across the thirteen sites, in each there was an icon on the computers in the resource room 

that enabled individuals to link directly with these alternative job listing websites. Although 

there was no consensus across sites, nor even within them, in general staff thought that providing 

customers with as many resources as possible was better than limiting their options in any way. 

In this way, customers could try the various websites themselves and determine whether one was 

easier for them to navigate or provided better matches for their searches. 

A one-stop orientation also covers resource room policy and procedures, available workshops, social service 

programs, and additional WIA services. During the orientation, customers receive handouts with information on 

topics such as resume writing, interviewing skills, and local One-Stop Career Center directions, hours, and 

locations. Then, they briefly hear about WIA intensive/training services and how to make an appointment with a 

counselor for more intensive services. 

IX-16 

1 
 

 

 

 

Exhibit IX-4: 

Primary (State-Developed) Websites Used for Job Listings 

One-Stop(s) Basic Functions 

CalJOBS Oakland 

Riverside 

Sacramento2 

A customer can search, categorize and save job 

postings in the state. 

CWDS Philadelphia A customer can create a resume based on one of 

three template résumés in the system – experience, 

skill, or education. Customers can use the module, 

“Browse for Jobs,” to search and save jobs for later 

viewing. When viewing or when they are ready to 

apply, the customer can click “Apply Now,” which 

sends their resume to the employer on file. 

Connecting Colorado 

(CC) 

Colorado A job seeker can enter her/his skills and 

qualifications. The database creates job matches 

based on these skills and sends an email to the job 

seeker and employer when skill matches are found. 

JobZone Oyster Bay A job seeker can conduct an online job search. The 

system provides information on 900 occupations 

matched with the latest labor market information 

from the NY Department of Labor. 

Georgia Career 

Information System 

Fulton A customer can use the job match function, access 

tools to conduct skills assessment or the ETPL, set 

up a portfolio and learn tips for interviewing. 

Go2WorkSource Olympic A job seeker can job search and match, build and 

post a resume, and access labor market 

information. 

SConestop.com South Carolina A job seeker can conduct a job search, use a 

resume builder, access information on educational 

providers, financial aid training, the labor market, 

and upcoming career center events. 

Work In Texas Brazos Valley 

South Plains 

A customer can job match (even when he or she is 

not logged on). The system generates notices to 

alert them to potential job opportunities. Customers 

can browse thousands of job postings including all 

state agency jobs, refer themselves to open 

positions, complete résumés and/or state 

applications and maintain them online. 

Although Alameda and Richmond customers use CalJOBS, One-Stop staff mentioned that CalJOBS was not the 

most used job-matching tool. 

IX-17 

2 
Even though each of the centers in the sample offers customers online job listings as a self 

service, all also provide at least some listings in hard-copy as well. Offering customers tools in 

print form enables job seekers who are not comfortable performing a job match via the Internet 

the option to access job listings in a more traditional way. Although centers typically focus on 

engaging the customer in searches using web-based tools, the centers in our sample offered 

numerous other means of accessing available jobs, as described below. 

•	 Job Flyers. At the Richmond site, staff place flyers in plastic holders on lobby 

walls, allowing customers to access local community job announcements. There 

are roughly 20 sleeves with ample copies made of each job announcement. 

During the site visit, job listings for commercial driver, care assistant, contract 

worker, cleaning laborer, and tutor were noted. 

•	 Handouts with Website URLs. Many of the centers created handouts 

highlighting popular job search and match websites. For example, in Olympic, 

Washington, customers receive a printed list of about 50 job search sites, 

including city, county and state job websites. At Brazos Valley, Texas, staff 

provide job seekers with a list of websites entitled “Most Wanted Internet Sites” 

that identifies 20 different job search websites, which include Craigslist, Monster, 

Indeed, CareerBuilder, and Jobing. In some centers, customers receive these 

copies during the initial orientation. At other centers, these handouts are available 

near the resource room computers. 

•	 Job Binder and Job Board Postings. In all One Stop Career Centers, selfservice customers have access to job listing binders or job board postings that 

they can use as an alternative to searching for jobs online. While all centers 

offered this resource, centers typically varied on the quality of jobs, hourly 

wage/salary, posting date, field or sector, and quantity of listings. Nearly every 

site visited affirmed that the job search binders were popular among both frequent 

self-service computer users and nonusers. Several sites whose customers used job 

list binders often updated postings and typically included jobs from a variety of 

occupational fields. 

Challenges in Using Job Listings 

Several of the centers in our sample rely on their state online job matching systems as central 

components of their service-delivery systems. However, a number of customers interviewed 

during our site visits indicated that the state websites they used fell short of expectations in 

several ways. Most tellingly, these job seekers stated that they experienced a higher employer 

response rate and had greater success obtaining jobs when they used alternative job matching 

websites, job boards, or job listing binders. Some of these customers also complained about the 

difficulty in using the state job websites. The key concerns customers (as well as several staff) 

voiced in using state-developed job listing sites are identified below. 

Difficulty of navigation. For customers with low levels of computer literacy, accessing state joblistings online was difficult. For this reason, these customers used online resources less often. 

IX-18 
Staff at five centers in the study mentioned that they similarly struggled with navigating through 

web pages and inputting information into correct fields. Further, completing most steps, 

including creating a profile or conducting a job search, was time-consuming and quite complex, 

especially for individuals who are novice computer users. The site visitor in Philadelphia had 

significant difficulty in navigating the state-run website, noting that simply logging in required 

multiple steps, substantial data collection, and a significant amount of time. Similarly, customers 

in Riverside indicated that CalJobs was quite difficult to navigate and thus found it less useful 

than other job listing websites. 

Poor job-matching functionality. Several staff complained that the state job-matching system 

missed potential clients because of the variability of word use for skills and position titles. For 

example, if employers enter Welder as the desired employment position and a customer inputs 

Metal Engineer or Tradesman on his or her resume, there will not be a match despite the fact that 

the individual may be well qualified for the position. Staff and customers in Texas, especially, 

noted that the job matching component of the state system was very picky, and was unlikely to 

return a match unless an individual’s skills were an exact match to a particular listing. 

Consequently, such issues often required staff intervention to ensure customers obtain 

information on opportunities that are a good match for their skills and experience. Staff in the 

California sites similarly noted that the CalJOBS system had very limited job matching 

functionality. Thus, these sites felt that job matching was severely lacking in the state system. 

Low user success rate. At least three sites found the success rate for job matches using the state 

system to be low. Some of this could be attributable to incomplete or inaccurate completion of 

application fields by low literacy customers. But staff felt that the systems themselves were not 

comprehensive in their ability to match job-seekers with available jobs that matched their skills. 

Another reason for a low success rate may have been that some state-developed websites 

targeted certain fields and skill levels that were a poor overall match to the skills of those 

accessing the listings. Of course, this is one purpose of the job matching function – to limit the 

matches to those who are well qualified for the available employment. Nevertheless, it is of 

concern if there is a general mismatch between the types of jobs that are included in the state job 

listing system and the types of job-seekers using that system. Finally, at least four sites 

mentioned that customers occasionally provide incomplete online applications or do not enter the 

information into the correct fields, which results in a low response rate from employers. Though 

again this may be viewed as a reasonable result of the job matching process, if the computer 

literacy levels of job-seekers are insufficient to the requirements for job matching, it is also 

perhaps a reflection on the requirements themselves. 

Onerous requirements. In some sites, the state job listing system had relatively onerous 

requirements for customers before they could fully access the listings or other services available 

IX-19 
through the website. As an example, CalJobs requires that customers post their resume to the 

site before they can access job listings. South Carolina staff and customers complained that they 

needed to complete multiple fields of data before they could use the system to search for 

available jobs. Often, customers complained, any slight error in data entry would prevent them 

from being able to access the system. Similarly, as described above, the CWDS in Philadelphia, 

required users to navigate multiple screens, many of which were somewhat confusing or vague, 

before granting access to job listings. 

Each of the challenges described above can be met to some degree by providing some level of 

staff assistance in the job listing and matching process. Even though all centers provide 

orientations and introductory training on the state-developed systems, staff found that many 

customers still need some level of staff assistance when they use the systems. Often as a result 

of these challenges, customers preferred other job-match and list websites to the state-developed 

system. Craigslist reigned as the most popular public access job-matching website across almost 

every center in the sample, with other notable websites used including Monster, Hot Jobs, 

CareerBuilder, Indeed Simply Hired, and Jobing. 

Training in Job-search Skills 

Strong job search skills are crucial for customers looking to obtain employment: job seekers are 

far better situated to find and secure employment if they are aware of and can enact basic 

strategies for searching for suitable employment. This is especially true in a self-service context, 

as the onus is on job-seekers themselves to conduct the search. Therefore, One-Stop Career 

Centers generally offer a variety of hard-copy materials—including books, pamphlets, and 

instructional guides—computer software, audio/visual materials, and workshops to help 

customers conduct effective job searches. 

Hard-Copy Materials. All One-Stop Career Centers offer dictionaries, thesauruses, and “How 

To” resume books. Centers with an updated and organized selection of books see frequent 

customer use of these library materials. For example, Oyster Bay offers a number of job search 

books in its resource room library, including up-to-date books on developing résumés and cover 

letters, strategies for job search, and tips for interviewing. Other centers offer similar types of 

books, though it is clear that some sites are more careful to regularly update these selections so 

that the materials are current and targeted to changes that have occurred in job searching in 

recent years (i.e., using Internet-based resources). 

Also, One-Stop Career Centers make other hard-copy resources available to customers to help 

manage the job search process. Most of these materials walk clients through a step-by-step 

process of how to conduct a job search or develop a resume and cover letter. Exhibit IX-5 

includes three examples of the types of hard-copy tools centers provide to customers. 

IX-20 
Exhibit IX-5 

Handouts and Worksheets on Improving Job Search Skills 

•	 In Trident, staff make hard-copy job search planners available for customers to 

plan and track the job search progress, brainstorm ideal jobs, and calculate salary 

needs. A number of hard-copy resources are available, including information on 

non-verbal communication during interviews, managing the stress of job 

searching and family during times of unemployment, dressing for an interview, 

and writing follow-up thank-you notes to interviewers. Documents on special 

considerations for job applicants who are women, individuals re-entering the 

workforce after a long period of unemployment, older workers, minorities, exoffenders, and people with disabilities are available for reference. 

•	 South Plains posts state-sponsored job search flyers on the resource room walls, 

which provide customers with basic information on how to conduct quality job 

searches. 

•	 Oyster Bay places sample copies of résumés in the resource room. Additionally, 

a number of pamphlets and one-page double-sided flyers related to developing 

résumés and cover letters are available on resource-room bookshelves. The OneStop Career Center staff also developed a checklist that customers could use to 

assess their résumés. 

Computer Software. The One Stop Career Centers make available software that can enhance 

customers’ job search prospects, including most notably software that simplifies the process of 

writing a strong resume. This software may include state-developed resume-building templates, 

Microsoft Word resume templates, and the WinWay software package. Perhaps because of its 

automated features, which almost eliminate the need for typing, the WinWay package is the most 

popular of the resume-building tools across the sample sites. Nevertheless, the CWDS, used in 

Philadelphia, offers its own resume-building tools, and provides three separate templates for 

creating a resume online, including an experience template (best for those with significant work 

experience), a skills template (allowing job seekers to highlight their set of skills), and an 

education template (focused on educational experience and training). Notwithstanding this 

flexibility, some customers and staff complain that there is little way to further customize these 

resumes once created. 

Audio/Visual Materials. Most self-service customers require at least some staff assistance 

when trying to create a resume or conduct a job search. Staff note that some clients will attend a 

workshop to gain expertise on how to access a job search website; others will attempt to follow 

instructions on a resource room handout; and still others will use a resume-software program or 

watch a video on improving job search skills. Many customers find audio/visual materials to be 

IX-21 
 

especially helpful in learning about strategies for improving their job search skills. As a result, 

nearly all the One-Stop Career Centers in our sample provided such materials for customers’ use. 

As one example, in Fulton, the resource room library carries a number of DVDs and VHS tapes 

that focus on job search strategies, which include the following: 

• Interviewing: Getting Good Answers to Tough Interview Questions 

• Getting a Job Using Traditional Methods 

• Getting to Know What an Employer Wants 

• Getting and Using Your Resume, Cover Letter, Portfolio 

• Getting Job Leads From the Internet and Telephone 

• Getting a Job Using Non-Traditional Methods 

• Making Decisions and Being Assertive 

• From Pink Slip to Pay Check: The Road to Reemployment 

• Social Skills at Work: Keys to Success 

Other sites offered similar resources, though the number of options and the extent to which they 

were recently produced varied across the sites. In many of the sites, the audio/visual materials 

were not prominently displayed within the resource room. In such instances, staff reported their 

use was much less frequent, and customers often were not aware that they were available. In two 

of the sites, the media center in which customers would use such materials shared space with 

staff meeting rooms. Hence, often the room was unavailable to customers. In these sites, too, 

the materials were less frequently used. Generally speaking, then, audio/visual materials were 

more likely to be used in cases in which they were up-to-date and prominently displayed, and a 

sufficient space was dedicated to their use. 

Workshops. Apart from the publications and materials listed above, centers provide job 

seekers with workshop opportunities to enhance their job search skills and to transition to a 

self-directed job search. Staff at each of the centers in the sample reported that such 

workshops were among the most effective means for helping customers find suitable 

employment. 

Centers generally provide an introductory orientation workshop that briefly covers job search 

tips and informs job seekers about other, in-depth job search workshops offered. These 

subsequent workshops typically focus on specific elements of the job search process, including 

developing a customized resume, writing cover letters, enhancing job search techniques, 

conducting mock interviews, and negotiating salary information, as well as a host of other topics 

geared towards their job search needs. 

Exhibit IX-6 identifies some examples of the types of job search workshops offered by the 

centers in our sample. As the examples demonstrate, workshops represent a critical component 

IX-22 
for self-service users in learning about job search strategies and strengthening their skills in this 

area. Overall, however, most One-Stop Centers offer the full array of tools and resources 

described in this section, enabling customers to enhance their job search skills using tools that 

are most appropriate or accessible to them. Thus, customers can pick and choose from the hardcopy materials, computer software, audio/visual materials, and workshops to gather information 

and strategies for improving their job search skills. 

Exhibit IX-6: 

Examples of Job Search Workshops
 

Description/Topics Length Schedule 

Brazos Valley Job Search Assistance workshops focus on 

how to start looking for a job, including 

examining a customer’s own experiences and 

needs. From this, customers learn what 

areas they may need to strengthen to be 

competitive for employment. 

2 hours Once per week 

Oakland Separate components of the overall Job 

Search workshop focus on: 

• Preparing for your Job Search 

• Knock their Interviewing Socks Off 

• Résumés that Get Attention 

• Finding the Jobs 

• Getting and Keeping a Job 

4 hours 

per day 

5-day workshop 

series 

Olympic Job Hunter Workshops are offered in seven 

different modules, and customers can identify 

those that would be most useful for them. 

Modules include: 

• Orientation and Job Search Preparation 

• Knowing Yourself 

• Skills and Abilities Analysis 

• The Job Market 

• Effective Job Search 

• Applications and Resumes 

• Interviewing 

3-3.5 

hours per 

module 

7 modules 

Oyster Bay Résumé writing workshops provide job 

seekers with an opportunity to learn more 

about developing a resume and tools for 

preparing one’s resume. Other workshops 

include “Marketing You!” and “Networking.” 

2.5 hours Multiple times per 

week 

IX-23 
Exhibit IX-7 shows one example of a center that offers multiple mechanisms through which 

customers can enhance their job search techniques. As can be seen in this exhibit, customers can 

access numerous tools and resources, in a variety of formats. Often, they may initially access 

these services independently, but typically they eventually require at least some staff assistance. 

Although a customer might be able to sign up for a workshop unassisted, staff regularly help and 

coach customers during these seminars, thus blurring the fine line between what is considered a 

self-service and a staff-assisted service. 

Exhibit IX-7 

Linking Career Exploration and Job Search in Sacramento 

The One Stop Career Centers in Sacramento provide a variety of tools to assist customers in 

their job search process. Sacramento offers a large number of workshops, including: 

Customized Resume Preparation, Job Seeker Resources, How to Get a State Job, Job Search 

Tips and Strategies, What’s Keeping You Down, Dress for Success, How to Interview When You 

Have Something to Hide, and The Interview ‘Green Light’ to Employment, among others. The 

centers also provide a weekly seminar called Job Talk, in which a professional or human 

resource representative will present information concerning jobs in a particular occupation or 

industry, as well as what employers in that industry are seeking when they post employment 

openings. 

In addition to available workshops, customers also have access to WinWay for creating 

resumes, and Microsoft tutorials for creating resumes and cover letters. Hard-copy materials 

are voluminous and include books on resume preparation, job search skills and strategies, 

effective interviewing, and choosing occupations. The centers also offer numerous flyers that 

describe the job search process, as well as how to strengthen one’s resume or cover letter. 

Similar materials are available in DVD or VHS format. 

While allowing customers to pick and choose which format works best for them, Sacramento 

approaches customer job search from a “tailored coaching” stance, indicating that most users 

require some staff assistance in their job search. Staff at both centers offer basic job counseling 

and career counseling from a one-on-one or group format. Career Center Job Coaches help 

customers to address employment barriers, and assess needs and potential, as well as set 

realistic goals. Career counseling also includes customized employment events, such as job 

fairs and seminars, to meet a specific group demand. 

IX-24 
 

 

 

 

Other Tools and Resources 

All One-Stop Career Centers also offer self-service customers general office resources such as 

telephones, printers, copy machines, fax machines, and VCRs and/or DVD players. In addition, 

several centers provide customers with a number of specialized resources designed to address the 

issues that hinder some customers with personal challenges from attaining employment. These 

resources focus on addressing barriers that impede customers from gainful employment, such as 

expunging a criminal background or obtaining government financial assistance. These resources 

can be offered in a number of ways, such as pamphlets, informational binders, one-page flyers, 

guide books, workshops, clubs and organizations, and referrals to outside vendors as a way to 

address customer challenges. Exhibit IX-8 identifies several specialized content areas in which 

One-Stop Career Centers had developed or made available tools for use by self-service customers. 

Exhibit IX-8: 

Specialized Content Areas Among One-Stop Career Centers 

Center 

Entrepreneur 

-ship 

Prisoner Reentry Financial 

Literacy 

Social 

Services 

Older 

Workers 

Alameda 

County 

3 3 3 3

Boulder 3 3

Brazos Valley 

3 3 3 3

Fulton 

3 3 3 3

Oakland 

3 3 3 3 3

Olympic 

3

Oyster Bay 

3 3

Philadelphia 

3 3

Richmond 

3 3 3 3

Riverside 

3 3 3 3

Sacramento 

3 3 3 3 3

South Plains 

3 3 3 3

Trident 

3 3 3 3 3

IX-25 
Centers typically tried to be responsive to their customer base by offering tools and 

resources that focused on the specific challenges or characteristics of their customers. For 

example, if a site had many customers who were mothers, then they offered a Women, 

Infants, and Children seminar on applying for government benefits for families. Similarly, 

the Oakland center, which serves a large population of re-entering offenders, sponsored a 

Department of Corrections Re-Entry liaison to spend time onsite. The Re-Entry Liaison 

works with offenders (and their families) re-entering the workforce after release from 

incarceration. The courts or parole agents usually refer clients to the Liaison, who can offer 

assistance with obtaining transitional housing, job referrals, reading and math tutoring, and 

information on apprenticeship, GED preparation, and substance abuse programs, and assist 

clients in obtaining a state ID/driver’s license. 

Further, although most One-Stop Career Centers cater resources to their target population, every 

site provided some level of social service resources and information that was outside the general 

scope of workforce preparation. Centers often were able to offer these resources as a result of 

developing partnerships with outside agencies, such as the Senior Community Service 

Employment Program (SCSEP). 

Employer Self-Services 

The discussion thus far in this chapter has focused on tools and resources available to job-seeker 

customers, who represent by far the most numerous customers of One-Stop Career Centers 

across the country. In recent years, however, centers have increasingly viewed the employer as a 

primary customer of services, and have worked to build relationships with employers in their 

communities in an effort to increase the number that regularly avail themselves of center 

services. In this section, we describe the self-service options for employers across all One-Stop 

Career Centers. As will be seen, however, many of the services described as self service in fact 

involve staff assistance, and in most sites staff insist that employers vastly prefer staff-assisted 

services. 

The primary self-services that One-Stop Career Centers have developed or offer to their 

employer customers include: 

• Access to a database of job seekers 

• Labor market information 

• Information on labor laws in their state or locality 

• Conference room or office space for rent 

Although these services are considered by most centers to be self-services, most admitted that 

they in fact require some form of staff assistance. For example, the Fulton center makes a space 

IX-26 
at the center available for hiring fairs. However, most employers call in to consult with center 

staff regarding logistics, scheduling, and adequacy of resources. Staff might also have to 

intervene to set up furniture and office equipment. Thus, despite the fact that this is considered a 

self service, employers accessing it prefer the staff support and personal interaction when 

arranging such events. Similarly, though centers provide employers with access to a database of 

job-seekers, the vast majority of employers prefer not to access this database themselves but 

would rather that Career Center staff play a screening role by sifting through the database to find 

strong matches for an employment opening. Hence, this self-service, too, generally involves 

staff assistance. 

Indeed, during the site visits, we learned that virtually all employer services tend to involve at 

least some staff assistance. As One-Stop Career Centers have learned this, in most cases these 

centers created business teams to manage and oversee the business or employer services 

component of the center. Most frequently (in 10 out of the 14 LWIAs in the sample), One-Stop 

Career Centers created two-person business teams. In these sites, one staff member spends most 

of his or her time in the field meeting with employers while the other works at the center 

conducting administrative tasks. In other centers, business services were comprised of a three 

(or more) person team that shared responsibilities between business services and other center 

services. Finally, in one site (Richmond), the business service “team” consisted of one staff 

person who initiated and developed a business outreach program through the facility. 

The most frequently used “self service” among employers is to place job orders for online job 

matching. As a result, business services teams routinely will train employers on how to use this 

function during the first interaction. Despite providing this training in how to use these services, 

however, many centers noted that they prefer posting job orders for employers since so many of 

them incorrectly fill out the online forms. Issues typically include: incorrect wording of the 

advertisement; identifying inaccurate requirements for the position; and leaving fields missing or 

incomplete. Further, in most states, employer-entered jobs are not regularly purged from the 

state-developed system, while inactive staff-entered jobs are purged every 90 days. 

Given the general lack of interest on the part of many employers, many One-Stop Career Centers 

do not even emphasize self-services to them, instead preferring to simply offer them staff 

assistance. Indeed, eleven LWIAs in the sample reported not emphasizing self-services to 

employers. In these sites, staff felt there were distinct advantages to focusing on staff assistance 

instead. Specifically, when business-services teams work directly with employers, it allows 

them to develop relationships and market services. Centers greatly value these relationships with 

employers because employers provide job leads and on-the-job training to customers. 

IX-27 
Conclusion 

Self-services were created largely to allow customers to direct their own job search efforts, by 

providing them with an array of tools and resources that would help them seek and obtain 

employment. Because there is a wide array of tools available, nearly all centers provide an initial 

orientation to these resources. But centers vary considerably in the level of effort they devote to 

orienting customers to using self-services. For example, although some centers provide printed 

guides for using self-service technologies, such as how and where to access job listings, labor 

market information, and resume making software, other centers provide customers with little, if 

any, relevant information. For centers at which ample staff assistance was available to provide a 

detailed orientation to the resources, customers expressed appreciation for the knowledge and 

information provided. 

One-Stop Career Centers provide an array of publicly-funded and commercially-developed tools 

that focus on assessment and career planning, information concerning education and training 

opportunities, labor market information, pre-vocational skills, job listings and matching, and job 

search assistance, as well as some self-services designed to enable employers to access services 

independently (though employers rarely accessed services without significant staff assistance). 

And these tools and resources are offered in a wide variety of formats, including electronically, 

in hard-copy, and through workshops, confirming a finding from the local-area survey described 

in Chapter III. Most One-Stop Career Centers sought to provide a balance between hard-copy 

materials and electronic tools, but the actual use of online and computerized resources far 

outweighed that of print materials, even though customers often required staff assistance to 

navigate the electronic resources. 

In general, across each of the primary areas in which tools and resources were offered 

electronically or online to customers, there were two primary challenges: 

•	 Customers who lacked basic computer literacy required significant staff 

assistance to use or interpret the tools. 

•	 Too many tools, web pages, and links overwhelmed customers in the job search 

process. Customers were not always sure about which tools were most 

appropriate to address their needs, and staff were not always available to provide 

clarity. 

In addition to electronic offerings, customers had access to a wide array of hard-copy or 

audio/visual materials. However, the number of offerings, their quality, and the degree to which 

they were up-to-date varied markedly across the centers. In many centers, there were a large 

number of hard-copy materials, most of which were very current; in other sites, there were 

relatively few such materials, some of which were long out-of-date. Further, the locations of 

these materials were not always well marked, and thus customers were not always aware of their 

IX-28 
existence as a resource. Customers in some centers were able to use hard-copy tools and 

resources more effectively than customers in other centers because those centers provided hardcopy tools characterized by the following: 

•	 High visibility of audio/visual resources and other sources of hard-copy 

information included in the resource room library or other discrete areas of the 

One Stop Center 

•	 Clear and noticeable handouts and posters with information on numerous service 

tools and up-to-date instruction on how to use these tools
 

Centers also routinely provided workshops on a variety of topics, enabling self-service customers 

an opportunity to interact with staff and gather information in still another format. These 

workshops were largely seen as valuable and informative, and were generally very well attended. 

Centers varied widely in the number of workshops available and the number of topics covered, 

but all sought to provide some workshops in an effort to reach customers who might need staff 

interaction and assistance to succeed in their job search efforts. For workshops to meet 

customers’ needs, it was particularly important that they be offered at various times and on 

various days of the week so as to cater to job seekers’ different schedules. 

Across the wide variety of tools, resources, and formats of self-service information, at least two 

common strategies emerged as critical for being able to reach a wide number of customers and 

provide them with helpful information. This chapter detailed the critical importance of these two 

strategies: 

•	 Variability in self-service tools and formats. Given the wide range of customers’ 

skills and needs, the need for various formats and a wide range of self-service 

materials is integral to serving the universal customer. The range of customer 

computer literacy has widened considerably, as both those with extensive 

computer experience and those with none at all are utilizing One-Stop Career 

Centers. Thus, it is critical to offer an array of formats from which customers can 

obtain information. 

•	 Having knowledgeable and accessible staff. The presence and ready availability 

of staff with knowledge about the range of tools and resources is critical, because 

even those individuals classified as self-service customers require some staff 

assistance. Hence, one cannot assume that so long as tools and resources are 

available, customers will be able to navigate them on their own. Rather, 

significant staff assistance is often necessary to help customers use and interpret 

the tools effectively. 

Overall, then, One-Stop Career Centers provide a broad number of self service tools in a number 

of formats to customers with broadly varying skills and abilities. Though customers generally 

appreciate these tools, most can make full use of them only when staff are available to provide 

guidance and assistance. 

IX-29 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
 

 

X. EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES AND CUSTOMER 

SATISFACTION 

Given the limited amount of attention that staff are able to provide, how well do customers fare 

in obtaining employment and how satisfied are they with the services they receive? Put 

differently, how effectively can customers use One-Stop Career Center self-services to achieve 

their employment objectives? 

This chapter first describes employment outcomes for self-service users drawn from UI wage 

matching that was conducted of self-service customers in three LWIAs in Texas and 

Pennsylvania.1 It next presents findings from customer survey data for customers in these same 

three LWIAs and two others. In interpreting the findings, note that they cannot be construed as 

representing the impacts of self-services, since the study does not have a measure of what 

customers’ outcomes would have been in the absence of their having used One-Stop Career 

Center services. Further, an indeterminate number of customers may have gone on to use WIA 

staff-assisted services, or services from another One-Stop Career Center partner, so these 

findings may not represent the outcomes associated with the use of self-services alone. 

Employment Outcomes 

Employment outcomes can be measured both from the matching with UI wage data, which took 

place for three LWIAs in two states, and the customer survey, carried out for self-service 

customers in five LWIAs. These results are described below. 

Results Using UI Wage Data 

UI wage data provide the most rigorous estimate of the outcomes experienced by self-service 

users in the three LWIAs whose states conducted wage matching on the study’s behalf. In using 

the state wage data, each customer’s date of first use of services was noted and a wage history 

was created, covering the three calendar quarters prior to the quarter in which the customer used 

To mask the identity of the LWIAs, they are labeled as LWIA-1, LWIA-2, and LWIA-3 throughout this chapter. 

X-1 

1 
 

 

 

 

services (denoted preearn3 to preearn1), the quarter in which the service occurred (denoted 

preearn0), and the four quarters after the quarter of service (denoted postearn1 to postearn4).2 

Exhibit X-1 plots these trajectories as means for each LWIA. Consistent with the earnings dip 

that has long been noted among those seeking publicly funded workforce investment services,3 

self-service customers see their earnings decline in the several quarters preceding their use of 

services. Earnings rebound steadily in the subsequent four quarters, surpassing pre-program 

levels by quarter two or three. This pattern repeats itself for customers in each of the three 

LWIAs that supplied data. 

Exhibit X-1: 

Earnings Trajectory for Self-Service Customers in Three LWIAs 

$4,000

$3,500

$3,000

$2,500

$2,000 LWIA‐1

$1,500 LWIA‐2

$1,000 LWIA‐3

$500

$0

2	 The service usage file supplied by the LWIAs covered all those who used self-services anytime from January 1, 

2006 to December 31, 2006, in the one Pennsylvania LWIA that supplied data, and anytime from September 1, 

2004 to October 30, 2005 in the two Texas LWIAs. Operationally, the study team sent the states’ UI agencies 

the SSNs of all self-service customers extracted from the usage files the LWIAs supplied. The states sent back 

all quarters of earnings for these individuals from the second quarter of 2005 through the second quarter of 2007, 

in Pennsylvania, and from the fourth quarter of 2002 through the second quarter of 2007, in Texas. Using the 

service usage files, the customer’s first date of service receipt was determined, and the wage history covering the 

three calendar quarters before and four quarters after the quarter of service use was created. Note that customers 

could have accessed services some time before the service date used as the benchmark (i.e., during a period prior 

to the service usage extract the LWIAs provided), so that what is measured as pre-program earnings could be a 

period of service receipt for some. Similarly, services could have continued after this date, and, to the extent 

they do, post-service earnings are measured for a period when services may still be occurring. Sensitivity 

analyses were conducted to test for the implications of this possibility. 

3	 O. Ashenfelter, “Estimating the Effects of Training Programs on Earnings.” Review of Economics and Statistics 

(1978; Vol 6, pp. 47-57). 

 X-2 
$4,000

$3,500

$3,000

$2,500

$2,000 LWIA‐1

$1,500 LWIA‐2

$1,000 LWIA‐3

$500

$0

 

 

 

 

One concern about the UI wage matching of SSNs derived from LWIA tracking systems is that 

many customers at registration supply a false SSN. To the extent this occurs, average earnings— 

whether measured pre-program or post-program—will appear artificially low, because those that 

did not supply a valid SSN will have no chance of showing earnings in the state’s UI wage 

system. 

To test the prevalence of the problem of customers’ supplying false SSNs, and its impact for the 

earnings trajectories, the results in the preceding exhibit were rerun after including only those 

that appear with non-zero earnings at least once in the UI wage files the states provided.4 These 

results are displayed in Exhibit X-2 and show an earnings profile with a generally similar shape 

though with a somewhat more pronounced earnings dip. 

Exhibit X-2: 

Earnings Trajectory for Self-Service Customers in Three LWIAs 

After Excluding Those Not Appearing in the UI Wage File 

This represents nine quarters of earnings in Pennsylvania and 19 quarters of earnings in Texas. Note that 

customers are excluded only if they have no earnings in any quarter from among all the quarters of earnings the 

state supplied (even quarters prior to the third quarter pre-program or after the fourth quarter post-program). 

This represents 29.5 percent of all customers in the Pennsylvania LWIA and 9.8 percent and 17.0 percent in the 

two Texas LWIAs. The higher rate of exclusions in Pennsylvania is no doubt partly or largely caused by the fact 

that this state supplied only nine quarters of earnings data for each individual, while Texas supplied 19 quarters 

of data. However, these rates of exclusion suggest an upper bound on the extent to which customers supply false 

SSNs. 

X-3 

4 
 

 

 

 

UI wage data were also used to proxy the calculation of the common measures. As defined by 

TEGL 17-05, these measures can be summarized as follows: 

•	 Entered Employment Rate (EER), calculated as the number employed anytime in 

the first quarter after the exit quarter divided by the number not employed on the 

date of program participation. 

•	 Retention Rate, calculated as the number employed in both the second and third 

quarters after the exit quarter divided by the number employed in the first quarter 

after the exit quarter.
 

•	 Average Earnings, calculated as the sum of the earnings in second and third 

quarters after the exit quarter divided by the number employed in the first, second, 

and third quarters after the exit quarter. 

The self-service tracking data, in conjunction with state UI wage data, allow these measures to 

be calculated, if only approximately. 5 A major limitation is that the base of EER, as it is 

officially defined, excludes those employed when they first accessed workforce services, but no 

direct indicator of this is available. As a proxy, whether the customer is employed anytime in the 

calendar quarter when he or she first accessed services is used. The results for EER measured in 

this way are shown in the first column of Exhibit X-3, labeled ‘Not Employed in Service Qtr’ 

and shows that EER measured in this way ranges from about 29 percent to 37 percent for selfservice customers. 

As before, to weed out those self-services customers who supplied bogus SSNs, these tabulations 

were re-run after excluding those who did not show earnings in at least one quarter for any of the 

quarters of wage data the states supplied. Results after this exclusion, displayed in the exhibit’s 

next column, show that the estimated EER increases to between 36 and 42 percent, a jump of 5 

to 10 percentage points in each LWIA. 

By way of comparison, the third column in the exhibit shows the EER measured for WIA 

adult participants who received staff-assisted services and exited WIA during times 

comparable to when the self-service customers in these same LWIAs were accessing 

In calculating these measures, each customer’s last use of services in the data extract provided by the LWIA was 

identified. Those whose last service date was less than 90 days before the last date covered by the data extract 

were excluded from the calculations, on the grounds that they could not be assumed to meet TEGL 17-05’s 

definition of an exiter. The numerator of EER represents those with positive earnings in the quarter after the 

calendar quarter during which their last service occurred, with the base restricted in various ways, as described in 

the text. Retention was calculated as those with positive earnings in both the second and third quarters after the 

quarter of last service, divided by those with positive earnings in the first quarter after the quarter of last service. 

Finally, average earnings was calculated as the sum of earnings in the second and third quarter after the quarter 

of last service, divided by those with positive earnings in the first three quarters after the quarter of last service. 

 X-4 

5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

services.6 Obviously, comparisons across LWIAs are not appropriate, since each one operates 

in a unique economic environment and serves a customer base with unique characteristics. 

But comparisons within each LWIA show that WIA performance on EER is considerably 

higher than it is for those receiving just self-services—at least 20 percentage points higher in 

one LWIA and nearly 50 percentage points higher in another. 

But these comparisons are not quite fair. To proxy the restriction that EER, as it is officially 

measured, excludes from the base persons employed when they started receiving services, the 

tabulations for self-service customers surely over-correct, by excluding those who were 

employed anytime in the quarter they received services. Undoubtedly, this means that some 

customers who were not employed when they first accessed services but who got a job later 

within the same calendar quarter—arguably, the customers for whom self-services were most 

effective—are being excluded. To arrange for a fairer comparison, then, the final columns 

measure—both for self-service customers and WIA adult exiters—the percentage who were 

employed in the first quarter after their exit quarter, regardless of their employment status at 

intake. 

Exhibit X-3: 

EER and Entered Employment in the Quarter after Exit for 

Self-Services Customers and WIA Adult Exiters 

WIA StaffAssisted 

LWIA-1

EER Employed in 1st

 Quarter 

Self-Service Customers Self-Service Customers 

Not Employed 

in Service Qtr 

Excludes Zero 

Earners 

WIA StaffAssisted All Excludes Zero 

Earners 

28.5 38.4 85.8 51.0 58.2 

36.8 41.6 74.1 72.8 75.1 

29.7 36.2 56.9 62.0 66.7 

87.8 

LWIA-2 81.5 

LWIA-3 67.0 

These results show entered employment rates for self-service customers that are much closer to 

those for WIA exiters, at least in two of the three LWIAs. When self-service customers with 

non-zero earnings in at least one quarter are the focus, the gap narrows still further, to less than a 

percentage point in one LWIA, though in one LWIA the gap remains large. Thus, although it is 

The WIA performance as calculated here does not quite adhere to the official definition of the common 

measures, in that the latter would take into account supplemental data for measuring EER and retention (but not 

average earnings) and would exclude some exiters who had received a global exclusion (that is, persons who 

were eliminated from the calculations due to a health or medical condition or some other extraordinary 

circumstance). To make the comparisons to those receiving self-services as comparable as possible, neither 

supplemental data nor global exclusions were used in measuring WIA performance in this exhibit, since they 

cannot be used in measuring the performance of self-service customers. 

X-5 

6 
 

 

 

 

 

difficult with the data at hand to project what achievements self-service customers would attain 

on the EER common measure, it is clear that significant numbers do obtain employment, even if 

a gap between their achievement and that of WIA customers remains. 

Next, Exhibit X-4 turns to the retention rate, which can be measured for self-service customers 

much more precisely.7 These results show a small but still noteworthy gap in performance 

between self-service customers and WIA adult exiters, amounting to between 5 and 12 

percentage points. Thus, retention might be somewhat more problematic for self-service 

customers, but the difference between them and WIA participants is not dramatic. 

Exhibit X-4: 

The Retention Rate for 

Self-Service Customers and WIA Adult Exiters 

Self-Service Customers WIA Adult Staff-Assisted 

LWIA-1 74.0	 79.0
 

LWIA-2 77.7	 89.3
 

LWIA-3 78.8 84.1 

Finally, Exhibit X-5 shows similar results for the computation of the average earnings measure.8 

Again, comparisons across LWIAs are not appropriate, due to the uniqueness of each LWIA’s 

economic context. But comparisons within LWIAs show that, for two of the three, the average 

earnings of self-service customers are considerably lower than they are for those who exited 

from WIA after receiving staff-assisted services, with average earnings 15 percent to 25 percent 

lower for the former group. The earnings distributions for these same two LWIAs show that 

self-service customers in both are substantially more likely to have low earnings and less likely 

to have high earnings. The third LWIA, identified as LWIA-3 in the chart, stands out as being 

different, in that the average earnings of self-service customers is higher than it is for their WIA 

counterparts, and the earnings distributions for the two groups are quite similar. 

Overall, then, self-service customers demonstrate somewhat lower performance on the entered 

employment rate and the retention rate, and, for two of the three LWIAs being profiled, on 

7	 Following TEGL 17-05, the calculation of the retention rate includes in the base only those who were employed 

in the first quarter after the exit quarter. This can be measured for self-service customers from UI wage data. 

This restriction further serves to exclude those with bogus SSNs (i.e., who do not appear at least once in the UI 

wage file). 

8	 There is no need to explicitly weed out self-service customers with a bogus SSN because, as with the retention 

rate, the base for average earnings restricts the measurement of this outcome to those with positive earnings, and, 

hence, inclusion in the UI wage file. 

 X-6 
 

 

 

 

 

average earnings as well.9 This implies that counting self-service customers in the calculation of 

the common measures for WIA can be expected to depress WIA performance at least somewhat. 

Exhibit X-5: 

Average Earnings for Self-Service Customers and WIA Adult Exiters 

Self-Service Customers WIA Adult Staff-Assisted 

LWIA-1 

Average Earnings $10,570 $12,637 

Distribution 

Less than $5,000 20.6% 14.0% 

$5,000 to $9,999 33.5 23.7 

$10,000 or more 45.9 62.3 

LWIA-2 

Average Earnings $9,071 $12,021 

Distribution 

Less than $5,000 27.8% 11.9% 

$5,000 to $9,999 36.1 34.3 

$10,000 or more 36.1 53.7 

LWIA-3 

Average Earnings $9,889 $8,858 

Distribution 

Less than $5,000 24.2% 28.3% 

$5,000 to $9,999 35.3 30.2 

$10,000 or more 40.5 41.5 

The experience of New York State provides additional evidence that resource room customers 

might depress common measures performance in the short-run, but also suggests that achieving 

high performance may nonetheless be possible. Recall from the discussion in Chapter II that this 

state adopted a functional alignment plan, which had the effect of causing nearly all WagnerPeyser customers served at any of the state’s One-Stop Career Centers (most of whom could be 

classified as receiving self-services) to be co-enrolled in WIA. What effect did this policy 

change have on this state’s WIA performance? 

Based on WIASRD data, Exhibit X-6 shows that this state’s performance on EER did take a 

significant dip at about the time the functional alignment plan was adopted, in early 2006. 

However, encouragingly, the state’s EER performance rebounded in subsequent quarters and 

Note that the tabulations for self-service customers include those who eventually go on to receive WIA staffassisted services, so the disparities in performance between those who receive only self-services and those who 

receive WIA staff-assisted services is actually somewhat larger than implied by these exhibits. 

X-7 

9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

     

   

     

Exhibit X-6: 

EER: New York State and National (Less New York) Performance, 

by Calendar Quarter of Exit 

90%
 

80%
 

70%
 

60%
 

50%
 

40%
 New York EER
 

30%
 

20%
 National Less New
 

10%
 York State

0%

even came to surpass its earlier levels.10 By comparison, the EER performance in the rest of the 

nation remained nearly constant during the time plotted in the exhibit, suggesting that New 

York’s dip and then subsequent rebound in performance was not reflective of any national 

macroeconomic trends. 

Calendar Quarter of Exit

Results for the retention rate (presented in Exhibit X-7) and average earnings (Exhibit X-8) are 

even more encouraging from the standpoint of demonstrating that high performance is not 

necessarily incompatible with serving self-services customers. For both these outcomes, New 

York State shows no dip associated with the adoption of the functional alignment plan, and, in 

fact, its performance on both outcomes shows that a sharp upturn occurred in the quarters 

following the plan’s adoption. 

10	 The trend in the number of exiters in New York State reflects the effect of the functional alignment plan. From 

the first quarter of calendar year 2005 through the second quarter of 2006, the number of WIA exiters included 

in the base of EER fluctuated from 63,000 to 78,000. In the third quarter of 2006, just after the functional 

alignment plan was introduced (the state’s technical advisory announcing this plan, Technical Advisory 06-3, 

was issued in March, 2006), the number in the base of EER jumped to 45,727 and rose still further in subsequent 

quarters, reaching about 90,000. Another important state directive, Technical Advisory 08-4, required that 

virtually all One-Stop Career Center customers should receive an initial assessment, which, with Technical 

Advisory 06-3, would qualify them as having received WIA staff-assistance. This directive was not issued until 

June 2008. Therefore, the full effect of these two important policy dictums cannot be determined with the 

WIASRD data at hand. 

 X-8 
     

     

     

New York Retention

Rate

National Less New

York State

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

Calendar Quarter of Exit

     

     

       

New York Average

Earnings

National Less New York

State

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

Calendar Quarter of Exit

Exhibit X-7: 

Retention Rate: New York State and National (Less New York) Performance, 

by Calendar Quarter of Exit 

Exhibit X-8: 

Average Earnings: New York State and National (Less New York) Performance, 

by Calendar Quarter of Exit 

. 

X-9 
Paid    sick leave

Retirement benefits

Health insurance

Paid vacations

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Employment Results from the Customer Survey 

The customer survey provides additional information about the employment outcomes of selfservice customers, and, in particular, the role they see that the One-Stop Career Center services 

played in helping them obtain a job. 

The rate at which survey respondents are employed is broadly similar to the entered employment 

results presented earlier in this chapter, with about 52 percent reporting that they were employed 

at the time the survey was conducted. Those who were employed were asked which of several 

types of fringe benefits they receive. Exhibit X-9 shows that receipt of fringe benefits is not 

uncommon, with about 60 percent of those employed receiving paid vacations and health 

insurance, and about half receiving paid sick leave and retirement benefits. 

Exhibit X-9: 

Percentage of Those with a Job who Receive Fringe Benefits 

Respondents who started a new job were also asked how helpful the workforce center’s services 

were in helping them get this job. As Exhibit X-10 shows, about 28 percent found the center’s 

services either quite or extremely helpful to them in finding their new jobs. By contrast, 48 

percent reported that the services were not at all helpful, and another 24 percent reported them as 

 X-10 
 

 

 

47.5%      

23.8%

14.9%

13.8%

Not at all helpful

Somewhat helpful

Quite helpful

Extremely helpful

only somewhat helpful.11 These figures are remarkably constant across the five LWIAs whose 

self-service users were surveyed. Clearly, finding jobs for the workforce system’s customers 

represents a substantial challenge. 

Exhibit X-10: 

How Helpful Were Workforce Services in Helping You Find Your Current Job 

(Respondents are those with a job at the time of the survey) 

Satisfaction with Services 

Chapter VII presented customers’ appraisals of the helpfulness of each of the specific services 

they accessed, such as for preparing a resume, learning about education and training providers, 

researching career options, and the like. The customer survey also asked general questions about 

customers’ assessment of the services they received, using the sequence of three questions that 

make up the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), with each coded on a scale ranging 

from 1 to 10: 

•	 What is your overall satisfaction with the workforce services? (A score of 1 denotes 

“very dissatisfied” and a score of 10 denotes “very satisfied.”) 

•	 Considering all of the expectations you may have had about the workforce services, to 

what extent have the services met your expectations? (A score of 1 denotes “falls short 

of expectations” and a score of 10 denotes “exceeds expectations.”) 

11	 Note that the survey was administered from 2005 to 2007 and thus at a time when the economy was much better 

than it is as this report is written (the current national unemployment rate is nearly 10 percent). On the one hand, 

this means that jobs were somewhat more plentiful than they are at present, and, hence, jobs were easier to 

obtain. On the other hand, self-service users at a time of general economic prosperity likely represent a pool of 

customers with greater barriers to employment. 

X-11 
     

   

   

   

Satisfaction with Services

Services Compare to Ideal

Services Meet Expectations

Self‐Service Customers

WIA National Summary

Overal Index

0 20 40 60 80 100 
 

 

 

 

•	 Now think of the ideal program for people in your circumstances. How well do you think 

the workforce services you received compare with the ideal set of services? (A score of 1 

denotes “not close to ideal” and a score of 10 denotes “very close to ideal.”) 

Using the guidance published in TEGL 1-07, each of the three items was individually recoded to 

represent a score on a scale of 0 to 100, and then the three were combined into a composite index 

using the TEGL’s formula weights for each state’s customers.12 Results for each item, and the 

composite index, are displayed in Exhibit X-11, and suggest that, on a 100-point scale, 

customers’ appraisals are somewhat more favorable than neutral. The composite index shows a 

score of 60.7. In comparison, PY 06 results from the WIA National Summary for WIA 

participants show a score of 78.8.13 

Exhibit X-11: 

ACSI Results for Self-Service Customers 

in Comparison to the PY 06 WIA National Summary
 

Conclusions 

Overall, implications regarding the outcomes of self-service customers are mixed. On the one 

hand, UI wage matching conducted against the self-service tracking files submitted by three 

LWIAs suggests that self-service customers generally record somewhat lower outcomes on the 

12	 Following the TEGL, each of the three items was transformed using the following formula: 

(raw score – 1)/9 * 100. The overall index is then devised by weighting the three individual items using the 

aggregate weights reported in the TEGL. See TEGL 1-07, at: 

http://www.doleta.gov/performance/TEGL01-07_ACSI-Scores.pdf 

13	 The WIA results are only available for the aggregate index, and are posted on DOL’s website, at: 

http://www.doleta.gov/performance/results/AnnualReports/annual-report-06.cfm 

 X-12 
common measures than do those who receive WIA staff-assisted services. Moreover, customers 

who obtain a job after they use services for the most part do not credit the services they accessed 

as having been helpful to them in finding the job, with only about half viewing the services as 

even somewhat helpful and the remaining half viewing them as not helpful at all. Finally, ACSI 

results from the customer survey show that customers’ ratings are only somewhat more favorable 

than neutral, with customers giving a score of 65 (on a 100-point scale) regarding their 

satisfaction with services, 58 regarding whether their expectations were met, and 59 regarding 

whether the services match their ideal. 

On the other hand, it seems equally true that a substantial number of customers are being helped 

to find employment, and some possibly considerably so, at least judging by their own evaluations 

of the services they received. Further, resource rooms arguably hold out the best hope for 

desperate job seekers who cannot access other, more intensive services. In the words of one 

customer, “Despite my objections or criticisms I may have about this place, without it I would 

not have any hope of finding anything. I would also have nowhere to go most days, and no 

purpose. This place is truly needed.” Finally, New York State’s experience since it adopted the 

functional alignment plan suggests that high performance on EER and the other common 

measures is not necessarily incompatible with serving large numbers of customers with light 

touch One-Stop Career Center services; thus, its experience clearly merits further scrutiny for the 

lessons it might hold. 

X-13 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
XI. CONCLUSIONS 

One-Stop Career Centers provide an extraordinarily rich set of tools and resources to assist the 

self-service customer conduct a job search, prepare a resume, explore career opportunities, 

research the labor market and education and training providers, and enhance job seeking skills. 

Findings presented in this report show that LWIAs have taken steps to present a professional and 

inviting atmosphere to their self-service users and locate their centers strategically—e.g., in 

downtown centers and neighborhood hubs, with good access to public transportation. 

Furthermore, they facilitate access for customers with special needs, such as by making assistive 

technology available to customers with disabilities and, in some cases, translating materials into 

Spanish or other languages for customers with limited English proficiency. 

The tools and informational resources themselves are remarkable for their richness and variety. 

Tools to help customers prepare a resume and assess their career interests and skills are available 

everywhere, as are informational resources about labor market trends and education and training 

providers. State ES job matching websites are of course always available, but many other job 

listing services are routinely bookmarked and are widely used. The Internet is the most common 

medium used for deploying these resources, facilitating access broadly and from diverse 

locations. At the same time, most One-Stop Career Centers also provide at least some hard-copy 

materials, which is helpful to customers who prefer to access information in this way. 

Workshops on selected topics are also commonly offered, providing customers with the 

opportunity to gain practical advice on how to hone their job search skills. 

Findings show that staff assistance is critically important for most customers, who need at least 

an orientation to resource room services and, very often, at least some subsequent one-on-one 

help to have their questions answered. The staff who provide this assistance count as a 

significant strength of the resource rooms studied, as they demonstrate professionalism and 

dedication in the work they do. 

Taken together, the One-Stop Career Centers’ strategies to promote accessibility, the rich 

informational resources and tools available, and the availability of professionals to provide 

assistance ensure that high quality career development services are widely available to the 

universal customer throughout the nation. The rapid and full development of self-service 

XI-1 
systems to this mature stage since the widespread adoption of the self-service concept in the 

One-Stop Career Center context a little more than a decade ago truly represents a remarkable 

accomplishment. 

At the same time, One-Stop Career Center self-service systems are under some strain. The sheer 

volume of customers seeking services in the face of funding shortfalls that preclude a marked 

expansion of infrastructure represents a significant challenge in its own right. Additionally, 

many of the customers seeking on-site self-services have attributes that make it difficult for them 

to use the available resources and tools effectively on their own—many have weak literacy 

skills, limited English proficiency, and, very commonly, are uncomfortable with using 

computers. Given that so many of the resource room’s resources are only available 

electronically, the latter factor represents a significant concern. Of course, staff are available to 

provide assistance, but limits on the time they have to devote to any one customer mean that 

some users will continue to struggle and perhaps abandon their career development efforts 

altogether. Clearly, One-Stop Career Centers need to do much more to enhance the computer 

literacy skills of their customers for many of them to be able to access electronic resources 

effectively on their own. 

To some degree, then, there is a mismatch between the philosophy behind self-services and the 

reality of the types of customers that resource rooms tend to attract. As one local-area 

administrator put it, “The people who really can do self-services aren’t coming here; they don’t 

use us. We see the people who have problems.” Key elements of this juxtaposition—the 

undeniable strengths of the One-Stop Career Center self-service system, coupled with limitations 

of many self-service customers to conduct an efficient job search using electronic resources on 

their own—are summarized in Exhibit XI-1. 

The challenges of the self-service system notwithstanding, most customers achieve reasonably 

good employment outcomes after using self-services and express considerable appreciation for 

the help they received. For example, in the three LWIAs with applicable data, outcomes for selfservice customers on the entered employment rate, the retention rate, and average earnings 

generally fall between 75 percent and 95 percent of the outcomes achieved by those who 

received WIA staff-assisted services from the adult program, and in some LWIAs their outcomes 

are even better. Furthermore, at least half of the customers who use a service rate it as quite or 

very helpful, and customers appreciate the resources and tools that resource rooms offer. As one 

customer put it, “Despite my objections or criticisms I may have about this place, without it I 

would not have any hope of finding anything. I would also have nowhere to go most days, and 

no purpose. This place is truly needed.” 

XI-2 
• Every LWIA has at least one 

comprehensive center and one-third of 

them have six or more physical access 

points 

• Centers are strategically sited to 

provide ready access to target 

populations 

• Services via the Internet are prevalent, 

facilitating access to services both 

onsite and remotely 

• Assistive technology is available for 

customers with disabilities 

• Customers rate access very favorably 

• Centers are crowded during peak times, 

when waiting lists often develop for 

computer use 

• Extended hours (evening or weekend 

hours) are uncommon, impairing access 

for those already employed but looking 

for a better job 

• Most staff are unfamiliar with use of 

assistive technology, forcing reliance on 

VR or DPN staff, who may not always be 

available 

• Access is impaired for customers who 

have limited English proficiency, low 

literacy skills, or are unfamiliar with using 

computers 

Staffing • Staff demonstrate professionalism and 

are dedicated to helping customers 

having problems 

• Staff with specialized expertise, such as 

VR or DPN staff, can be called upon 

when needed 

• Flexible staffing arrangements—such 

as use of on-call staff or temporary staff 

(e.g., SCSEP participants)—provide 

additional staff assistance while 

keeping resource room costs in check 

• Staffing shortages limit the amount of 

time staff can spend with the many 

customers who are struggling 

• Staff often feel stressed and overworked, 

leading to high staff turnover and burnout 

• High staff turnover and use of rotating or 

part-time staff mean that many staff lack 

high degrees of expertise 

• Bilingual staff and those trained to deal 

with customers suffering serious 

emotional distress are often lacking 

 

 

Exhibit XI-1: 

Summary of Strengths and Areas for Improvement 

in One-Stop Career Center Self-Services 

Strengths Areas for Improvement 

Accessibility 

Resources & 

Tools 

• A rich array of self-service informational 

tools and resources is available 

• Some tools are available in diverse 

formats (e.g., hard-copy, electronically, 

etc.), helpful for customers with diverse 

learning styles 

• Nearly all services are rated as quite or 

very helpful by at least half of the 

customers who use them 

• Many services are only available 

electronically, posing a serious barrier for 

customers with limited computer 

experience 

• Access is difficult for customers with 

special needs, such as those with limited 

literacy or English proficiency 

• Services used most often receive the 

lowest ratings of helpfulness 

• The very richness of the tools available 

can be overwhelming for customers not 

always sure about which tools are most 

appropriate to address their needs 

• Customers’ ratings of helpfulness using 

the ACSI are only somewhat more 

favorable than neutral 

XI-3 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
APPENDIX A: 

Customer Survey 
This page intentionally left blank. 

Insert blank page here when making double-sided copies 
APPENDIX ON THE CUSTOMER SURVEYS 

As part of the Evaluation of One-Stop Self-Services, randomly sampled customers were to be 

interviewed to learn about their reasons for accessing services, their satisfaction with the services 

they received, and the outcomes they obtained after their service usage. This appendix describes 

the process of administering the survey. 

Background 

We planned to interview customers from each of the nine LWIAs that provided individual-level 

data from their self-services tracking systems, but were able to do so for only five of them— 

three LWIAs provided their self-service tracking data too late to make it feasible to select 

customer samples and administer a survey in the project’s remaining period of performance, and 

one LWIA provided tracking data but only on the condition that it be stripped of personal 

identifiers, making the subsequent administration of a customer survey infeasible. 

The five LWIAs that did provide tracking data did so at greatly different times; one group of two 

LWIAs (Group A) first provided data in early 2005, and a second group of three LWIAs (Group 

B) did so in the spring of 2006. Because we wanted to learn about customers’ experiences with 

using resource room services shortly after the service usage occurred, the customer surveys were 

therefore administered to the customers in the two groups of LWIAs at different times as well. 

The numbers released for interviewing from the first group of two LWIAs was 3,958 and from 

the second group of three LWIAs was 1,350. 

The survey administration procedures followed a similar sequence for customers in each of the 

two groups of LWIAs. Sample members were first sent an advance letter alerting them that a 

survey would soon be arriving and eliciting their cooperation. Shortly thereafter, a hard-copy 

version of the survey was sent, along with a postage paid envelope for the respondent to use in 

returning the completed survey and an accompanying letter explaining the purposes of the data 

collection and providing a web link for completing the survey on line should the customer prefer 

that mode of administration. Reminder postcards were mailed to nonrespondents two weeks 

later, followed by a second copy of the survey two weeks after that to those who still had not 

A-1 
 

 

 

 

 

1 

responded. Thereafter, the contact information for remaining nonrespondents was transmitted to 

one of SPR’s two subcontractors, Decision Information Resources (DIR) and the Washington 

State University Social and Economic Sciences Research Center (SESRC), who were to attempt 

to complete the interview by phone, using Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) 

procedures. Phone interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, as necessary. Due to the 

project’s budget constraints, no incentive payments were planned as an inducement to have 

respondents complete the survey, but some were offered midway through the survey process to 

boost response rates, as is described below. 

Response Rates 

Surveys of customers in the first group of LWIAs (Group A) were administered in 2005, 

beginning with a mail-out and followed by an attempt at telephone contact for nonrespondents. 

Returns from the mail administration of the survey were disappointing, with a response rate of 

only 18 percent, as Exhibit A-1 shows. The telephone survey contractor was able to complete 

the survey for only 11 percent of the nonrespondents, for an overall response rate of just 27 

percent. 

In light of the extremely disappointing response rates attained among customers from the Group 

A sample, SPR sought and obtained approval from the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) to offer a pre-paid incentive in the amount of $2 to those in Group B. We considered the 

option of offering a much more sizable post-completion incentive, or a combination of pre- and 

post-payments (i.e., a small pre-payment followed by a larger payment upon return of a 

completed survey). However, the project’s budget constraints precluded our offering any but the 

modest pre-paid incentive amount.1 

There is some debate in the literature about the relative efficacy of pre-payments versus post-completion 

payments when used as incentives in mail or telephone surveys. Arguments in support of pre-payments are 

based on the theoretical foundation of social exchange theory, which posits that pre-payments establish the 

expectation of reciprocal exchange, and, hence, induce survey cooperation (D. Dillman, Mail and Internet 

Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, 2007). Further, a meta-analysis of the 

relevant literature concluded that pre-payments can be effective even when only incidental or token amounts are 

paid as incentives, and, in fact, can be just as effective as much more sizable post-completion incentive payments 

(E. Singer, R. Groves, and A. Corning, “Differential Incentives: Beliefs about Practices, Perceptions of Equity, 

and Effects on Survey Participation,” Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 63, 1999). However, the research is 

equivocal, as in other studies SPR and its partners have found that very sizable post-completion incentives are 

required to boost completion rates above 50 percent. For example, in SPR’s National Evaluation of the Trade 

Adjustment Assistance Program, Mathematica Policy Research (MPR), SPR’s survey contractor, administered a 

telephone survey of dislocated workers using three different payment schemes: (a) a $25 post-payment only, (b) 

a $2 pre-payment followed by a $25 post-payment upon survey completion, and (c) a $5 pre-payment and a $20 

post-payment upon survey completion. The second incentive scheme yielded the highest response rate, and the 

first scheme the lowest, demonstrating the efficacy of pre-payments. However, none of the three schemes 

yielded a response rate above 45 percent, so SPR and MPR obtained OMB approval to use $50 and $75 postpayments for some groups, and their use boosted response rates to about 60 percent. 

A-2 
The response rates were much higher among those in Group B, with 31 percent completing by 

mail (as opposed to 18 percent for Group A) and another 18 percent completing by phone, for an 

overall response rate of just under 50 percent. Potentially, some or all of the improvement could 

be due to the use of the pre-payments, but alternative explanations cannot be ruled out. For 

example, locating information provided by LWIAs in Group B might have been much more 

reliable than the locating information provided by LWIAs in Group A. In fact, an inability to 

locate respondents was much more likely to be given as the disposition code for Group A survey 

members, suggesting that contact information for customers in Group A’s LWIAs was more 

deficient. At the same time, the lower rate of refusals and the lower prevalence of encountering 

unavailable respondents in Group B suggest that the pre-payments were at least somewhat 

effective. 

Exhibit A-1: 

Response Rates for Two Groups of LWIAs 

Group A Group B 

Number Percent Number Percent 

Total mail-out 3,958 100.0% 1,350 100.0% 

Total completes 1,061 26.8 652 48.3 

Completed by mail or web 711 18.0 416 30.8 

Completed by phone 350 8.8 236 17.5 

Nonrespondents 2,897 73.2 698 51.7 

Cannot locate 1,548 39.1 390 28.9 

Unavailable/answering machine 416 10.5 223 16.5 

Refusals/unable to complete 534 13.5 84 6.2 

Deceased 0 0.0 1 0.1 

Regardless of which group is considered, a primary reason for non-response seems to be that the 

contact information provided by the LWIAs was erroneous or out of date. Social Security 

Numbers (SSNs), also provided in the data extracts provided by the LWIAs, were used by both 

of SPR’s survey contractors in an attempt to locate survey members when the contact 

information the LWIAs provided proved to be in error, but these SSNs in many cases were 

believed to be bogus. Outright refusals, by contrast, were relatively uncommon as a reason for 

survey non-response. 

A-3