For Release on Delivery

Expected at 2:00 p.m.

Thursday, June 29, 2000

GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

WORKFORCE

INVESTMENT ACT

Implementation Status and

the Integration of TANF

Services

Statement of Cynthia M. Fagnoni, Director

Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues

Health, Education, and Human Services Division

Testimony

Before the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education,

Training and Life-Long Learning, Committee on Education

and the Workforce; and the Subcommittee on Human

Resources, Committee on Ways and Means, House of

Representatives

United States General Accounting Office

GAO
Page 1 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

Mr. Chairman, Madam Chairman, and Members of the Subcommittees:

Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss our work on the

Workforce Investment Act (WIA) and the integration of services at onestop centers, including those provided under the Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families (TANF) block grant. Two years ago, the Congress passed

WIA to begin unifying a fragmented employment and training system–

creating a new, comprehensive workforce investment system. At its core,

WIA focuses on integrating and streamlining services, requiring most

employment and training services be provided through a single system,

called the One-Stop Center System. The degree to which services are

integrated and the form of service integration have generally been left to

the states and localities to decide. In general, WIA provides for greater

local control and closer coordination among employment and training

programs than before. While several programs are required by the Act to

provide services through the one-stop centers, others have been left to the

discretion of state and local officials, including the TANF block grant

program (a major federally funded assistance program that makes

available to states up to $16.8 billion each year through 2002 to provide

needy families with income support and employment-related assistance).

With the passage of WIA, the nation’s workforce development and TANF

programs now share similar goals–a focus on employment and a

movement toward greater state and local decision-making.

As you requested, my remarks today focus on (1) the status of states’

efforts to implement WIA and the extent to which TANF services are

integrated into the new workforce investment system, (2) the challenges

states and localities have encountered in establishing their integrated

systems under WIA, and (3) service delivery approaches that show

promise in integrating and streamlining services in the one-stop centers.

My testimony is based on a survey we conducted during April and May

2000 of workforce development agency officials in each of the 50 states,

and fieldwork conducted from January to April 2000 in five states that

were early implementers of WIA, with additional visits to several wellestablished one-stop centers in states that were not yet implementing

WIA.1

In summary, while states are making progress implementing WIA, not all

of them will have completed all implementation steps by July 1, 2000,

1 Site visits included Kentucky, Florida, Oregon, Texas, and Utah. Fieldwork also included local visits

to sites in Chicago and Mattoon, Illinois; Baltimore, Maryland; Dayton, Ohio; and Janesville and

Racine, Wisconsin.

Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 2 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

when WIA takes full effect. Frequently delayed are the steps related to

establishing formal agreements between partners at the one-stop centers.

To support the one-stop system required under WIA, states report using

multiple federal funding streams during fiscal year 2000, with the top

funding sources most often coming from Department of Labor programs,

such as WIA, the Employment Service (ES), and Unemployment

Insurance. Although TANF is an optional partner with WIA, linkages

between WIA and TANF are being forged in most states. As states and

localities have attempted to integrate their services under WIA, they report

having confronted several challenges including

• the difficulties of building partnerships with other agencies, as required

under WIA;

• developing the infrastructure to support an integrated program–including

both the physical facilities and the computer systems; and

• developing an integrated approach and responding at the same time to the

requirements of individual federal programs.

Despite these challenges, we found that states are developing integrated

service delivery approaches that show promise, often focusing their efforts

on resolving the issues that had been found in the fragmented employment

training system.

For well over a decade, states and localities have engaged in efforts to

integrate their employment and training programs, often using a structure

called a one-stop center that provides access to many employment-related

services in a single location. With the passage of WIA in 1998, states and

localities are now required to use one-stop centers to provide most

federally funded employment and training services. However, services

funded by TANF, a key program that provides employment, income

support, and other assistance to low income adults with children, are not a

mandatory part of this one-stop center system, and the degree to which

TANF services have been provided through the one-stop centers has

historically varied from state to state.

States and localities have worked to integrate the services of the various

federally funded employment and training programs. Some of these

programs, such as ES, provided services, such as counseling, testing, and

job referrals, to all job seekers without regard to economic or employment

status. But other programs, such as the Job Training Partnership Act

(JTPA), provided services—such as training and job placement

Background

Early Efforts Seek to

Integrate Employment and

Training Services
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 3 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

assistance–only to targeted groups of individuals, such as economically

disadvantaged or dislocated workers. While many of the programs shared

similar goals, their services were rarely coordinated, creating an

environment of confusion and frustration and hampering efforts to help

job seekers get and keep a job.2 In fiscal year 1994, Labor began awarding

One-Stop Planning and Implementation Grants to help states integrate

employment and training services for Labor-funded programs. The key

objectives of this one-stop initiative, aside from integration, were to create

a system that was customer-driven, accountable for its outcomes, and

made its core services available to all job seekers. 3 By 1998, all 50 states

had received at least some implementation grant funds.

When WIA was enacted in 1998, it replaced the JTPA programs for

economically disadvantaged adults and youth, and dislocated workers

with three new programs—Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth–that deemphasize the categorical nature of JTPA and allow for a broader range of

services to be given to the general public.4 The newly authorized WIA

programs provide for three tiers, or levels, of service: core, including basic

services such as job search assistance; intensive, including staff-intensive

services such as assessment and case management; and training for

eligible individuals.5 In addition to the three new programs, WIA requires

states to use one-stop centers to provide many other employment and

training services. In requiring the use of one-stop centers, WIA continues

the key objectives of the one-stop initiative, while also emphasizing state

and local flexibility and a strong role for the private sector in new, local

boards that oversee the program. WIA also extends the one-stop concept

beyond Labor programs, requiring states and localities to form

partnerships with other agencies offering employment and training

2 See for example, Multiple Employment Training Programs: Major Overhaul Is Needed (GAO/T-HEHS94-109, Mar. 3, 1994); The Job Training Partnership Act: Potential for Program Improvements But

National Job Training Strategy is Needed (GAO/T-HRD-93-18, Apr. 29, 1993).

3 Integration is characterized by features such as common intake and “seamless” service delivery. The

customer may receive a range of services from different programs without repeated registration

procedures, waiting periods, or other administrative procedures. Integrated services are sometimes,

but not always, physically collocated.

4 Authorized through fiscal year 2003, WIA’s three new programs had a budget authority of about $3.5

billion in fiscal year 2000.

5 Services are provided sequentially. That is, in order to receive intensive services, clients must first

receive core services; to receive training services, a client must first receive core and then intensive

services. Localities may establish certain activities that lead from participation in core to intensive and

training services. Key to moving from core to a higher level of services is that the services are needed

to help job seekers become self-sufficient.

The Workforce Investment

Act Emphasizes Service

Integration
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 4 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

services. About 17 categories of programs, funded through four separate

federal agencies, are required to provide services through the one-stop

center system under WIA.6 Table 1 shows the programs that WIA requires

to provide services through the one-stop centers (termed mandatory

programs) and the related federal agency.

Table 1: WIA’s Mandatory Programs and Related Federal Agencies

Federal agency Mandatory program

Department of Labor WIA Adult

WIA Dislocated Worker

WIA Youth

Employment Service (Wagner-Peyser)

Trade adjustment assistance programs

Veterans’ employment and training programs

Unemployment Insurance

Job Corps

Welfare-to-Work grant-funded programs

Senior Community Service Employment Program

Employment and training for migrant and seasonal farm

workers

Employment and training for Native Americans

Department of Education Vocational Rehabilitation Program

Adult Education and Literacy

Vocational Education (Perkins Act)

Department of Health and

Human Services

Community Services Block Grant

Department of Housing

and Urban Development

(HUD)

HUD-administered employment and training

WIA does not require that all program services be provided on-site (or

collocated)–they may be provided through electronic linkages with

6 In addition, three other categories of programs are required to provide services through the one-stop

center: Youth Opportunity Grants; demonstration, pilot, multiservice, research, and multistate

projects; and national emergency grants. Because they are of limited scope, we did not include them in

our total.
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 5 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

partner agencies or by referral—but WIA does require that the

relationships and services be spelled out in a Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU). Other key requirements of WIA are that states or

localities must

• submit a 5-year strategic plan to Labor;7

• establish a State Workforce Investment Board to assist the governor in

developing statewide policies on a new Workforce Investment System;

• establish Local Workforce Investment Areas, each with its own Local

Workforce Investment Board to oversee the new system locally;

• establish a comprehensive one-stop center in each local area;8

• negotiate with Labor on the state’s expected level of performance on key

measures (termed performance standards);

• include cost allocation plans in MOUs between the local boards and WIA

partners;

• identify eligible training providers whose performance qualifies them to

receive WIA funds; and

• establish a new training system in which a qualified client can choose

his/her own training from the list of eligible training providers, and pay for

it through a voucher called an Individual Training Account (ITA).

WIA also requires states to report regularly to Labor on specific client

outcomes, including post-employment earnings and retention.

While WIA requires some program elements, many program policies are

left to states and localities to decide, including whether to use the one-stop

center system to provide services to TANF clients. State and local

flexibility is also a key feature of the TANF program, which was created by

the 1996 welfare reform legislation passed by the Congress 2 years before

WIA. Under TANF, states have more flexibility than under its predecessor

7 In order to obtain funds states must have an approved plan in place. Labor is given 90 days to review

the plan. If Labor does not act within 90 days the plan will be considered approved.

8 Each local area must include at least one comprehensive center that must provide services by all

partners under WIA.

The Role of the One-Stop

Centers in Providing TANF

Services Has Varied
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 6 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

programs to determine the nature of financial assistance, the types of

client services, the structure of the program, and how services are to be

delivered. At the same time, TANF established new accountability

measures for states and a 5-year lifetime limit on federal TANF assistance.

These measures heighten the importance of helping TANF recipients find

work quickly and retain employment. As states have used the new

flexibility under TANF and focused more on employment, the importance

of integrating services for those receiving TANF has received increased

attention. To help clients get and retain their jobs, states need to address

problems that interfere with employment, such as child care and

transportation issues and mental and physical health problems. Solving

these problems often requires those who work directly with clients to

draw on other federal and state programs, often administered by other

agencies, to provide a wide array of services. While local welfare agencies

have typically administered TANF, food stamps, and Medicaid, other

programs that provide key services to TANF clients are administered by

housing authorities, education agencies, and state employment services

offices. TANF’s focus on employment requires welfare agencies to work

more closely than before with state and local workforce development

systems.9 Our previous work on pre-WIA programs found wide variation in

the degree to which the welfare and non-welfare programs collaborated to

provide employment and training services. We found that 17 states used

one-stop centers or other traditional employment and training structures

to provide employment-related services to TANF clients, 14 states

separated services for welfare clients by providing these services in a

welfare-dedicated structure, and the remaining 19 states used a

combination of approaches.10

States are making progress implementing WIA, but not all states will have

all WIA implementation steps completed by July 1, 2000. Frequently

delayed are actions related to establishing formal agreements between

partners in the one-stop centers. States report that many program

services—especially those provided by the larger mandatory Labor-funded

programs–are being provided on-site at the one-stop centers. During fiscal

year 2000, the largest sources of funding to support the one-stop

9This is particularly true in administering services funded by the Welfare-to-Work Grants created by

law in 1997 and administered by Labor. Through these grants, Labor is authorized to provide states and

grantees up to $3 billion over 2 years to help welfare clients considered the hardest to employ find

jobs.

10 For further information, see Welfare Reform: States’ Experiences in Providing Employment

Assistance to TANF Clients (GAO/HEHS-99-22, Feb. 26, 1999).

States Show Mixed

Progress in

Implementing WIA
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 7 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

infrastructure and operations were most often the WIA-mandated Labor

programs. The TANF block grant was also often cited as a primary funding

source.

States are making progress implementing WIA, but not all states will have

completed all WIA implementation activities by July 1, 2000, when WIA

takes full effect. States have completed much of the planning necessary to

implement one-stop center systems. For example, all 50 states have

submitted their 5-year WIA plans to Labor, and Labor expects to have all

states’ plans approved for at least transitional implementation by July 1,

2000.11

In addition, by July 1, 2000,

• all 50 states, according to our survey, expect to have established and

convened their State Workforce Investment Board;

• all 50 states will have established their Local Workforce Investment Areas

and have set up their Local Workforce Investment Boards, according to

Labor;

• forty-nine states told us they expect to have established a comprehensive

one-stop center in each local area; and

• all states will have negotiated their performance standards, according to

Labor.

While many elements are in place in most states, some states do not

anticipate having completed other WIA implementation activities by July 1,

2000. For example, our survey found the following:

• Nine states did not expect to complete their cost allocation plans—a key

component of the MOUs between the local area and the other required

partners. Seven other states could not tell us when they will complete their

cost allocation plans.

11 There are five critical requirements that must be completed or in place before Labor can approve

the plan for either full or transitional implementation. States must (1) have negotiated their

performance levels with Labor and incorporated them in the plan, (2) describe in the plan the public

comment process; (3) identify in the plan the entities serving on the state board; (4) identify each local

area; and (5) identify the formula for allocating WIA funds to the local areas. If transitional approval of

the plan is received, Labor will provide full WIA funding to the state as long as the state meets an

established timeline for completing the remaining actions needed for full implementation.

States Are Making

Progress, But Not All

States Will Have

Completed WIA

Implementation Activities

by July 1, 2000
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 8 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

• At least five states do not anticipate being able to make available their

eligible training provider list.

• At least six states do not anticipate having ITAs available for customers to

use to access their training.

Even though WIA does not require states to provide all mandatory

program services on-site at the one-stop centers, states report that many

services—especially for the larger mandatory Labor-funded programs–are

being provided on-site, at least part of the time.12 WIA Dislocated Worker

programs are on-site in the majority of one-stop centers in 40 states, and

WIA Adult and Youth programs and the Employment Service are on-site in

the majority of one-stop centers in 39 states. 13 Other mandatory programs

not funded through Labor are less often found on-site. For example,

somewhat fewer states have Department of Education’s mandatory WIA

programs on-site. Nearly half of the states report that Vocational

Rehabilitation services are on-site in the majority of one-stop centers, and

12 states provide Adult Education and Literacy services at the majority of

one-stop centers (see table 2).

12 These services may only be provided on-site a few days a week through, for example, an

outstationing arrangement under which program staff are assigned to the center according to a set

schedule. In these arrangements, program staff may move from one office to another throughout the

course of a week.

13States that had not yet implemented WIA provided responses on how they deliver services for their

JTPA programs.

Larger Mandatory

Programs Are Often

Collocated at the One-Stop

Centers
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 9 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

Table 2: WIA’s Mandatory Programs and the Number of States Reporting

Services On-Site in the Majority of One-Stop Centers

Mandatory program Number of states

Labor

WIA Dislocated Worker (JTPA title III) 40

WIA Adult (JTPA title IIA) 39

WIA Youth (JTPA title IIB andC) 39

Employment Service (Wagner-Peyser) 39

Trade adjustment assistance programs 35

Veterans’ employment and training programs 35

Unemployment Insurance 29

Welfare-to-Work grant-funded programs 27

Senior Community Service Employment Program 21

Employment and training for migrant and season farm workers 15

Job Corps 7

Employment and training for Native Americans 3

Education

Vocational Rehabilitation Program 21

Adult Education and Literacy 12

Vocational Education (Perkins Act) 6

Health and Human Servicesa

Community Services Block Grant activities 4

HUDb

HUD-administered employment and training 4

Note: Eight states were not able to provide any data on collocation.

a

Department of Health and Human Services.

b

Department of Housing and Urban Development

During fiscal year 2000, the largest sources of funding to support the onestop infrastructure and operations were most often the WIA-mandated

Labor programs.14 WIA was identified by all states as a funding source for

one-stop centers, and one of the largest three sources by 44 states.15 The

Employment Service was also identified as a source of one-stop funding by

nearly all states.16 Other federal funding sources, such as Education’s

Vocational Rehabilitation Program, were sometimes cited as important in

14 States are not required to track one-stop center costs directly–financial reporting is done through

each of the individual programs. Therefore, states could not provide information about the exact

amount of funds used to support one-stop centers.

15 States not yet implementing WIA reported on JTPA funding.

16 The Employment Service (Wagner-Peyser) had a budget authority of about $765 million in fiscal

year 2000.

One-Stop Funding Often

Comes From LaborFunded Mandatory

Programs
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 10 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

funding one-stop centers. The majority of states say they use more than 11

separate sources of funds17 to support one-stop infrastructure and

operations; four states use 20 or more funding sources (see table 3).

Table 3: Mandatory Programs Funding One-Stop Center Infrastructure and

Operations

Mandatory program Number of states using

program to fund

infrastructure and

operations

Number of states

identifying program

as one of three

largest funding

sources

Labor

JTPA/WIA 50 44

Employment Service

(Wagner-Peyser)

49 42

Veterans’ E&T Program 43 1

Trade adjustment assistance

programs

39 0

Unemployment Insurance 39 11

Welfare-to-Work Grants 39 1

One-Stop Implementation Grant 37 18

Senior Community Service

Employment Program

28 0

Job Corps 20 0

Education

Vocational Rehabilitation 37 1

Adult Education and Literacy 29 0

Vocational Education 24 0

HUD

HUD Employment and Training 11 0

Note: We did not require states to provide funding information on Health and Human

Services’ Community Services Block Grant and employment and training programs for

Native Americans and migrant and seasonal farmworkers.

While TANF is an optional program under WIA, a majority of states

reported at least some relationship between the one-stop centers and

TANF at either the state or local level. Forty-three states told us that TANF

is a state-level partner with the one-stop center system developed under

WIA. Often the coordination between the two programs at the state level is

formal, through MOUs or other state-level agreements, but it is also often

informal, such as through sharing program information. At the local level,

17 Includes both mandatory and nonmandatory programs.

TANF Services Are Often

Part of the One-Stop

System
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 11 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

24 states reported providing at least some TANF services on-site at a

majority of their one-stop centers.18 Because low-income families may be

eligible for many other federal welfare-related programs, including food

stamps and Medicaid, these centers sometimes include those services, as

well. In seven of the 24 states, one-stop centers provide TANF

employment-related services and the Food Stamp Employment and

Training Program, along with eligibility services for TANF, food stamps,

and Medicaid. Eight more states reported that a majority of their one-stop

centers have TANF employment-related services in combination with the

Food Stamp Employment and Training Program, but do not have eligibility

services on-site. Another seven include TANF employment-related services

alone without the Food Stamp Employment and Training Program or

eligibility services. 19 In these states, individuals would apply for TANF

cash assistance and other welfare-related services through a separate

welfare system. TANF funds also often contributed to financing one-stop

infrastructure and operations during fiscal year 2000–33 states cited TANF

funds as a source of support and 12 of these states ranked it among their

three largest funding sources.

As states have worked to integrate their services at one-stop centers, and

some have broadened the range of program services they provide at the

one-stop centers to include those funded by TANF, they report facing

several challenges. These challenges result from

• establishing and formalizing partnerships, as required under WIA;

• developing the one-stop infrastructure to support a broader, more

comprehensive one-stop center system; and

• integrating program services while responding to the multiple federal

requirements for these programs.

WIA requires that a broader array of program services be included in the

one-stop system than was often found in earlier one-stop centers, and

18Another 15 states reported no TANF or other welfare-related services are provided at a majority of

one-stop centers, and the remaining 11 did not respond to this survey question.

19Of the 24 states that reported including at least some TANF services at a majority of their one-stop

centers, two other combinations of TANF services were reported–one state had TANF employmentrelated and eligibility services and another included TANF employment and eligibility in combination

with the Food Stamp Employment and Training Program.

Implementing an

Integrated System Has

Presented Challenges

to States and

Localities

Establishing New, More

Formal Partnerships
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 12 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

developing partnerships with the agencies that administer the newly

integrated programs has been problematic for many states. Building new

partnerships was the subject of the largest number of written comments in

our 50-state survey. These partnerships must be formally articulated

through MOUs, including plans for how costs will be shared. The

requirement for stipulating cost sharing has caused widespread difficulties

in states and localities. Many one-stop centers we visited reported that

they had experienced problems determining how partners would share

costs for common expenses, such as administrative staff and utilities. For

example, they told us that funding limitations across program partners and

the lack of guidance from state and federal agencies make it difficult for

them to allocate costs in a fair and proper manner. In addition, states

volunteered that, while in the past local agencies might share resources,

such as staff or telephones in exchange for office space, they can no

longer make these trades under WIA guidelines. Difficulties in allocating

costs have resulted in MOUs being delayed, and states and localities are

struggling to find equitable cost sharing methodologies while still meeting

operational costs and the requirements of the legislation. In addition,

several states reported “growing pains” as they merged cultures across the

various program partners. They attributed these to differences in

managerial style, service delivery philosophy, or administrative rules. Onestop centers have used a variety of mechanisms to overcome these

cultural barriers. For example, the one-stop center in Janesville,

Wisconsin, took active steps to address this cultural challenge by engaging

all of the one-stop center staff in joint planning efforts long before the

center was open to the public.

States have been challenged by the logistical issues involved in designing

and developing an integrated one-stop center system under WIA. Deciding

how to provide services—whether on-site, through electronic linkages, or

by referral—has been complicated, and the decisions sometimes bring

unforeseen consequences. For example, providing employment and

training services on-site to TANF clients might be seen as the best way to

make use of existing resources and expertise. Because TANF clients often

must bring their children with them to receive the services, it’s likely that

the center will need to establish on-site child care facilities. In Provo,

Utah, for example, the one-stop center pursued on-site child care facilities

to help parents better utilize one-stop services and minimize disruptions

for staff and customers. The Provo center contracted with a licensed day

care provider to provide on-site child care services, which, they told us,

have been well-used.

Designing the OneStop Center System

and Its Infrastructure
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 13 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

Once states and localities decided how the one-stop center system would

provide integrated services, they struggled to develop the one-stop center

infrastructure. One of the other major infrastructure challenges

encountered by states has been the development of computer systems to

support an integrated environment. We recently reported that states’

automated systems for welfare reform, for example, have major

limitations, such as the inability to access individual data on TANF

recipients from some of the agencies serving them, including job

assistance agencies.20 One-stop partners face similar challenges in their

inability to share client information and performance data that would, for

example, require customers to complete the same information or take the

same assessment tests separately for each program they use. In addition,

many of the systems that support the various one-stop partners are

incompatible with one another. One location we visited, for instance, had

several computer networks but none of them could communicate with the

other. Over one-third of the states in our survey do not expect to have a

Management Information System in place by July 1, 2000; some do not

know when such a system will be available. Labor has been working to

develop a comprehensive computer system—the One-Stop Operating

System (OSOS)–that states could use to support WIA-required data

collection, but the system is not yet available and, as currently configured,

will support only the Labor-funded mandatory programs. Several states

told us that the system will not be flexible enough to meet their needs.

Labor estimates that between 8 and 12 states may use OSOS when it is

available.

States’ efforts to integrate their programs to provide customers with

seamless service delivery have been affected by the differing requirements

of the multiple federal funding sources supporting one-stop systems. Each

program has restrictions on how its money can be used, and specific

requirements for reporting. While WIA requires the programs to work

together and provides the opportunity for federally funded programs to

integrate services, the way in which the funds are distributed to states

makes it difficult for them to respond to the spirit of the law, according to

state and local officials. For example, states must track and report

administrative costs separately for a number of federally funded programs,

but the definition of administrative cost can differ by program. In addition,

states report that it is difficult to measure and evaluate overall one-stop

center performance because federal measures are established to evaluate

20 See Welfare Reform: Improving State Automated Systems Requires Coordinated Federal Efforts

(GAO/HEHS-00-48, Apr. 27, 2000).

Responding to Multiple

Federal Requirements
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 14 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

each separate program, rather than to evaluate system-wide success. To

address this, some states are developing their own system-wide

performance measures, in addition to those required under the federal

statutes. For example, to measure the degree to which the one-stop

centers are serving employers, Utah’s centers are measuring the

percentage of area employers that are served by the centers.

Despite these challenges, states and localities are designing and

developing integrated service delivery approaches at one-stop centers,

focusing their efforts on resolving some of the longstanding issues

inherent in a fragmented system. In so doing, they have looked to the new

requirements of WIA and focused on a broader range of services to meet

the employment-related needs of the general public. In addition, they have

begun to emphasize simultaneous services to both employers and job

seekers. While no outcome data are yet available on the success of their

work, some of their early efforts show promise for implementing an

integrated workforce investment system.

In designing services at one-stop centers, states and localities have sought

to combine WIA’s emphasis on employment and post-employment services

to the general public with efforts to solve the problems that have existed

in a fragmented employment and training system. For example, in earlier

work, we identified some key problems that exist in a fragmented system,

including (1) frustration for employers because of wasted time responding

to multiple job inquiries for the same openings from several different

government entities; (2) confusion on the part of job seekers and service

providers because there was not a clear entry point or clear path from one

program to another, nor was there ready access to program information;

and (3) frustration for job seekers because programs were not tailored to

meet their needs and because navigating the various programs to get

needed assistance meant completing multiple intake and assessment

procedures.21 To effectively integrate their programs, states and localities

needed to address these issues, while meeting the enhanced client focus of

WIA. We identified the following key areas as critical to successfully

integrating services under WIA:

• Attracting and serving employers in ways that minimize wasted time and

reduce their frustration;

21See for example, Multiple Employment Training Programs: Major Overhaul Is Needed (GAO/THEHS-94-109, Mar. 3, 1994).

Despite Challenges,

States and Localities

Are Developing

Integrated Service

Delivery Approaches

That Show Promise

One-Stop Service Delivery

Approaches Use WIA’s

Customer Focus and Aim

to Reduce Problems

Inherent in Fragmented

System
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 15 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

• Bringing job seekers to the one-stop centers to help them obtain ready

access to employment and program information;

• Creating a customer-friendly environment for job-seekers by reducing

confusion, providing them with a clear entry point and clear path from one

program to another;

• Providing job seeker services that are tailored and seamless, helping them

identify and obtain needed program services without the burden of

completing multiple intake and assessment procedures;

• Helping job seekers become self-sufficient by providing post-employment

services that assist with job retention and advancement.

Fig. 1 charts the processes followed by customers passing through the

system and each of the key areas in which we identified promising

approaches. App. I provides a summary of the promising approaches.

Fig. 1: One-Stop Process, Key Areas of Promising Approaches







 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 16 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

To effectively attract and better serve employers, many one-stop centers

market their services, minimize the burden on employers who use the

centers, and provide employer-focused services. To bring in employers

and to reduce the frustration and confusion that they experienced when

receiving contacts from multiple agencies, the centers we visited in

Titusville and Melbourne, Florida, designated an individual or a team to

serve as the center’s representative for an employer or employment sector,

covering issues related to job listings and placements. In providing

services to employers, centers in Dayton, Ohio, Janesville, Wisconsin, and

in Utah allow employers to use the one-stop facilities to recruit, interview,

and test job candidates. One center in Florence, Kentucky, provides videoteleconferencing facilities so that candidates can be interviewed by

employers who may be located outside the local area. In a small center in

Portland, Oregon, where facility space is limited, a desk is dedicated for

employer use, allowing them to have a presence at the one-stop center and

to recruit, screen, and interview candidates. To help bring in and serve

small businesses, centers in Killeen, Texas, and Eugene, Oregon, are

creating a business-only resource center within the one-stop center with

special resources that include internet services, business-related reference

material, and assistance with business tax questions.

At the same time one-stop centers are attracting employers, they also need

to attract job seekers and make them aware of the centers’ resources. In

our earlier work on multiple employment programs, we found that job

seekers were confused and frustrated by the limited information readily

available on government programs that could help them and on where

they could access this information. 22 The centers we visited found several

ways to address these problems and bring in job seekers. For example, to

help residents identify a site as one of a network of one-stop centers, all

centers in Utah have developed a “franchise look” that includes consistent

signage, interior designs, layouts, color schemes, and logos. To increase

community-wide awareness, centers in Killeen, Texas, and Kanab, Utah,

have become identified as a community resource by providing space, such

as kitchen or banquet facilities or classrooms, for a variety of communitywide events. Other centers bring in customers by targeting services to

younger members of the community, such as high school students. For

example, the center in Racine, Wisconsin, established a youth resource

area with computers and programs dedicated to career exploration. The

22 See, for example, Multiple Employment Programs (GAO/HRD-93-26R, June 15, 1993).

Attracting and Serving

Employers

Bringing in Job Seekers
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 17 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

center worked with the school system and has become a site for school

field trips throughout the primary and secondary school years.

Once job seekers are inside the door of the one-stop center, the next step

is to create a “customer-friendly” environment—one that reduces

confusion and provides a clear entry point to services. One-stop center

operators told us that they try to find ways to avoid the atmosphere of a

government office and the long waiting lines that have symbolized

government transactions, like applying for welfare benefits or

unemployment insurance. Almost without exception, one-stop centers we

visited had an information desk directly inside the front door that was

continually staffed by a receptionist or greeter. Some centers considered

this position key to providing high-quality services to their clients. One

center in Texas assigns only top performers to the information desk and

regards that assignment as an honor.

Many centers, such as Dayton, Ohio, and Killeen, Texas, minimize the

waiting time for services by performing a quick assessment at the

information desk and then refer clients to service areas. One-stop centers

in Utah feature an express desk that serves customers needing quick

services. Instead of having to sit down with a job counselor or case

manager, customers using the express desk can, for instance, obtain bus

passes or electronic benefit transfer cards, or drop off required

documents. Some centers, such as the one in Janesville, Wisconsin, also

use their resource rooms—where they maintain job listings, computers

with internet access, telephones, and fax machines—as the waiting area

for specialized services, thus allowing the customers to use their wait time

to accomplish necessary job search tasks.

Many job seekers can meet all their needs in the self-service resource

room. In fact, Labor officials expect that the majority of customers under

WIA will receive needed services through self-service or with very limited

assistance from staff. However, some clients, like many TANF recipients,

may need more intensive case management services to help them get and

keep a job. Trying to obtain just this type of intensive service has

historically frustrated clients who were left on their own to navigate the

array of federal programs, each with its own intake and assessment

procedures. One-stop centers we visited often found ways to integrate the

services provided by multiple programs, creating a seamless approach to

delivering services.

Creating a CustomerFriendly Environment for

Job Seekers

Providing Job Seekers with

Services That Are Tailored

and Seamless
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 18 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

• Clients in all centers in Utah, for example, see a single case manager for all

intensive services, including TANF services, food stamps, and Medicaid,

despite the program or combination of programs that fund the services. All

case managers in Utah are trained to provide services for every program

offered through the center, minimizing the burden on the client who, in an

unintegrated system, might have had to go through several assessment and

intake processes.

• In Killeen, Texas, where more than one case manager may be involved in a

case, the centers assign a primary case manager who takes the lead to

coordinate most activities and assist the client to navigate the system.

In many locations we visited, the case managers are aware of all the

program services available to serve a client—including support services to

enable a client to attend training or to get or keep a job—and tailor the

services to meet the clients’ needs. In our earlier work, we found tailoring

of services to be a key feature in successful employment training

programs.23

The efforts of the one-stop center do not end once a client gets a job. The

focus of the services provided to clients changes to one of helping the

client retain the job or upgrade skills to get a better job. WIA’s

performance measures track the program’s ability to help clients retain

employment and increase their earnings over time. This post-employment

program emphasis is new for the workforce development system, and

most states and localities we visited were only beginning to develop their

efforts. Most of the promising approaches we identified were being

provided only to current and former TANF clients. For example, Florida

has established Retention Individual Training Accounts, funded with

TANF funds, to provide post-employment training through vouchers to

their TANF clients who have found employment.

We are still a long way from having in place a nationwide comprehensive

workforce investment system that effectively serves both job seekers and

employers, but it is evident that a transformation is underway in how

employment and training services are provided. At this early stage of WIA

implementation, we see states making progress in integrating employment

and training services, a key goal of WIA. The system is starting to unfold,

23 See Employment Training: Successful Projects Share Common Strategy (GAO/HEHS-96-108, May 7,

1996).

Helping Job Seekers

Become Self-Sufficient

Conclusion
Workforce Investment Act: Implementation

Status and the Integration of TANF Services

Page 19 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

new relationships are being established, and, despite the challenges, states

and localities are developing promising approaches in the way they serve

their customers.

Mr. Chairman, Madam Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I

will be happy to respond to any questions you or other Members of the

Subcommittee may have.

For future contacts regarding this testimony, please call Cynthia M.

Fagnoni at (202) 512-7215 or Sigurd Nilsen at (202) 512-7003. Individuals

making key contributions to this testimony included Gale Harris, Dianne

Blank, Ronni Schwartz, Katrina Ryan, and Kathy Larin.

GAO Contacts and

Acknowledgments
Page 20 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

States and localities are designing and developing integrated service delivery

approaches at one-stop centers. While no outcome data are yet available, some of

their early efforts show promise for implementing an integrated workforce

investment system. We identified five key areas that are critical to successfully

integrating services under WIA, and provide illustrative examples of the promising

approaches we identified in those areas.

Key area Example of promising approach

Employers

Attracting and serving employers Establishing a single point-of-contact from the onestop center to a business or business sector

Locating computers/kiosks in chambers of

commerce and other business-related facilities

Providing dedicated facilities on-site for employers

to use in recruiting, interviewing, testing, and training

job candidates

Involving private staffing agencies on-site to

increase the number of jobs available to their jobseekers

Creating a business resource center on-site

including computers that have specialized software

and internet linkages, publications on small business

issues, and a assistance with business tax

questions

Job seekers

Bringing in job seekers Establishing a youth resource area with computers

and programs dedicated to career exploration, and

connecting with the school system so that the area

is the site for school field trips at regular intervals

throughout the primary and secondary school years

Providing space/facilities, such as kitchen/banquet

facilities or classrooms, for community-wide events,

making the community aware of the one-stop as a

resource

Developing a “franchise look,” such as consistent

interior designs, layouts, color schemes, and logos

to make it easier for customers to locate and

recognize the one-stop center

Locating one-stop centers in lowest-income areas or

on bus lines to increase accessibility

Creating a “customer friendly”

environment for job seekers

Establishing an information desk with a

greeter/receptionist immediately inside the front door

to reduce initial client confusion and efficiently direct

clients to services

Minimizing the waiting time for services by

performing initial screening at the front desk and

Appendix I: Examples of Promising

Approaches in Service Delivery
Appendix I: Examples of Promising Approaches in Service

Delivery

Page 21 GAO/T-HEHS-00-145

Key area Example of promising approach

referring customers to service areas

Making the resource room–with its job listings,

computers, telephone, and fax resources–the

waiting area for specialized services

Establishing an “express desk” to collect paperwork

requirements without a wait and using call-in centers

to help determine initial eligibility for TANF

Providing job-seeker services that are

tailored and seamless

When intensive or specialized services are needed,

establishing a single or primary case manager for

clients enrolled in multiple programs to reduce the

burden on clients and staff

Establishing a “value added” referral system, where

case managers would be familiar with other

programs and would provide extra assistance to

assure that the program referral was appropriate

and valuable

Helping job seekers become selfsufficientEstablishing “Retention Individual Training

Accounts” to provide incumbent worker training to

TANF clients by way of vouchers

Linking hands-on training to one-stop center needs

in order to improve access to training

(205507)
Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send

an e-mail message with “info” in the body to:

Info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

Contact one:

Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)

Ordering Information

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in

Federal Programs