1330 Broadway, Suite 1426 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Tel: (510) 763-1499 

Fax: (510) 763-1599 

www.spra.com 

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

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

A S S O CIATE S

Assessment, Case 

Management, and PostTraining Assistance for TAA 

Participants 

An Occasional Paper Prepared as Part of the 

Evaluation of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program 

Final Report

June 2009

Prepared by: 

Melissa Mack 

Social Policy Research Associates 

in Conjunction with Research Team Members from: 

Social Policy Research Associates 

and 

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. 

Prepared for: 

The U.S. Department of Labor 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

Office of Policy Development 

Evaluation and Research 

200 Constitution Ave., N.W. 

Washington, DC 20210 

DOL Contract No. 

AK-13690000430 

SPR Project No. 1147

CONTENTS 

ASSESSMENT, CASE MANAGEMENT, AND POST-TRAINING 

ASSISTANCE FOR TAA PARTICIPANTS ............................................................. 1

Introduction .......................................................................................................................2

Assessment and Case Management During Rapid Response .........................................6

Assessment and Case Management for Non-Training Customers...................................7

Assessment During Job Search ...................................................................................8

Case Management During Job Search.........................................................................8

Assessment and Case Management During Training.......................................................9

Deciding Between Training and Job Search.................................................................9

Choosing a Training Program.....................................................................................10

Case Management During Training............................................................................14

Post-Training Assistance ................................................................................................15

Conclusions.....................................................................................................................17

APPENDIX A: Definitions ............................................................................................. 19

APPENDIX B: List of Site Visits Conducted.................................................................. 21

APPENDIX C: About the WIA and TAA Co-Enrollment Pilot Project ............................ 23

ASSESSMENT, CASE MANAGEMENT, AND POST-TRAINING 

ASSISTANCE FOR TAA PARTICIPANTS 

In January of 2004, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) awarded Social Policy Research 

Associates (SPR) and its subcontractor Mathematica Policy Research (MPR) a contract for a 

national Evaluation of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Program. The evaluation consists 

of an implementation study, which is examining how the TAA program operates, and a net 

impact study, which is estimating how program services change participants’ employment and 

other outcomes from what they would have been otherwise. This paper, one in a series being 

produced as part of the implementation study, focuses on the assessment, case management, and 

post-training placement assistance provided to program participants. 

The data on which this paper is based is primarily drawn from site visits that field staff 

conducted from mid-2005 through the summer of 2006. The paper also draws on findings from 

an earlier round of site visits, conducted in 2004, as part of the evaluation’s Initial 

Implementation Study, reported in Initial Implementation of the Trade Act of 2002. Across both 

these rounds, site visits were conducted to 48 local One-Stop Career Centers where TAA 

services were being provided, and the state-level offices of the 23 states in which these centers 

are located (these states and local offices are identified in Appendix B). The site visits entailed 

interviews with state and local TAA program administrators (as well as partner programs), fiscal 

and management information system (MIS) staff, One-Stop Career Center directors, and case 

managers. Finally, this also paper draws on finding reported as part of the WIA and TAA Coenrollment Pilot Project, a separate project conducted by SPR that also relates to TAA case 

management issues (a description of this study is provided in Appendix C). 

This paper examines the assessment, case management, and post-training assistance provided to 

TAA participants in the sites visited. It begins with an introduction that includes a brief 

examination of restrictions on the use of TAA funds, which is a chief factor affecting provision 

of these services. It next explores each “stage” of customer participation in TAA—from the 

customer’s initial introduction to the program in Rapid Response, through job search and 

training, to post-training placement services—and examines the extent to which these services 

are provided to TAA participants in that stage. The paper concludes with a discussion of the 

implications of the provision (or lack thereof) of assessment, case management, and post-training 

assistance to TAA participants and to the TAA program. The paper also highlights promising 

1
practices from the sites visited in the provision of assessment, case management and posttraining assistance. Promising practices are shown in bold and italic text. 

Introduction 

It has long been recognized that, although beneficial to the economy as a whole, the expansion of 

international trade might harm some firms and individuals. The concept of “injury from trade” 

first appeared formally in U.S. government policy as part of the Trade Agreements program of 

the 1930s. In the 1940s, “escape clause” provisions in U.S. trade laws and in the General 

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade further formalized and refined this concept. These provisions 

sanctioned the institution of trade barriers if trade-related injuries could be demonstrated clearly. 

Thus, they surrendered some of the potential gains from trade and made extensive trade 

liberalization more difficult. 

TAA represents an alternative strategy. Rather than blocking or reversing trade liberalization, 

TAA seeks to compensate workers and firms that have suffered trade-related injuries and to 

provide them with services that help them adjust to changes in market circumstances. Such a 

program was first instituted in the United States as part of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, 

which offered financial payments and other adjustment services to affected workers. However, 

strict eligibility requirements kept take-up rates low. In subsequent years, ensuing legislation 

and amendments—including the Trade Act of 1974 and the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness 

Act (1988), among others—expanded eligibility guidelines and changed the program’s 

orientation from financial compensation to adjustment through training and reemployment 

services. 

The Trade Act of 2002, which amended the program most recently, was enacted just before this 

evaluation commenced and constitutes the backdrop for the study.1

 This legislation and DOL’s 

accompanying guidance changed the TAA program in several notable ways. Among these, they 

• Expanded the number of workers eligible to receive trade benefits by opening access to 

some “upstream” suppliers of components to primary certified firms and “downstream” 

firms performing finishing operations. 

• Promoted collaboration among programs and partner organizations in the One-Stop 

delivery systems, by: 

 Requiring that Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Rapid Response and core and 

intensive services be made available to workers whenever a petition for TAA 

certification is filed, and 

 

1

 The TAA program has been amended yet again, in the Trade and Globalization Adjustment Assistance Act of 

2009 (TGAAA), a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. TGAAA expands TAA eligibility to 

service workers, relaxes deadlines for enrollment in training, and increases income support, among other notable 

changes. TGAAA was enacted well after data collection for this study occurred and is not referenced further. 

2
 Designating One-Stop Career Centers as the main point of participant intake and 

delivery of benefits and services. 

• Offered new benefits to trade-affected workers, including: 

 A Health Coverage Tax Credit (HCTC) to partially cover health insurance costs, and 

 Alternative TAA (ATAA) to provide payments to older TAA participants who 

become re-employed at wages lower than their previous job’s wages and who do not 

pursue training. 

• Promoted fiscal integrity and performance accountability. 

• Increased the program’s focus on achieving “rapid, suitable and long-term employment 

for adversely affected workers,”2

 by emphasizing: 

 Early intervention services, 

 Improved assessment and reemployment services prior to training, 

 Increased benefits during training to encourage training completion. 

With respect to the objective of achieving “rapid, suitable and long-term employment,” Training 

and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 11-02 makes clear that states should increase the 

focus on “wrap-around services,” including early intervention, upfront assessment, and 

reemployment services. However, the TAA program contains tight restrictions on the use of 

program funding to cover non-training costs. Specifically, only 15 percent of a state’s TAA 

funding can be spent on administration, and administrative funding must be used to cover the 

cost of all non-training expenses, including all staffing costs, even those related to case 

management, assistance in developing training plans and filling out required paperwork, and 

placement services. As a result of this restriction, the TAA program must coordinate with its 

One-Stop Career Center and other workforce investment partner programs to ensure the delivery 

of a comprehensive set of wrap-around services, including assessment, case management, and 

post-training assistance. In fact, TEGL 11-02 plainly suggests co-enrollment as a strategy for 

delivering wrap-around services, noting that “...co-enrollment or multiple-enrollment of tradeimpacted workers in the programs offered in the One-Stop environment, as well as early 

provision of rapid response services, will enhance the workers’ adjustment process and promote 

the most rapid possible return to employment for all workers.”3

 Partners that can provide wraparound services to TAA participants include the Employment Service (ES), the Workforce 

Investment Act (WIA) Dislocated Worker and Adult programs, and other One-Stop Career 

Center partners such as community and technical colleges, adult education (WIA Title II 

providers), Vocational Rehabilitation, and workforce programs designed to serve veterans. 

 

2

 Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 11-02, p. 2. 

3

 TEGL 11-02, page 36. 

3
Of these programs, the WIA Dislocated Worker program is particularly well suited to provide 

assessment, case management, and post-training assistance to TAA participants for two reasons: 

first, because nearly all TAA participants are presumptively eligible for the WIA Dislocated 

Worker program (and the program’s funding guidelines allow wrap-around services to be 

supported as a program expense4), and, second, because WIA’s tiered services structure allows 

for more in-depth services to smaller numbers of program participants than is the case in ES. 

As explored throughout this paper, coordination with partner programs and co-enrollment of 

TAA participants in WIA are indeed critical for the provision of wrap-around services to workers 

enrolled in TAA. Since TAA participants co-enrolled in WIA have access to assessment, 

counseling, case management, and post-training assistance, high rates of co-enrollment are in 

fact a strong indicator that TAA participants are receiving those services. 

Yet, determining how commonly TAA participants are co-enrolled in WIA in the sites visited is 

difficult. Data from the Trade Act Participant Report (TAPR) suggest a wide variation of coenrollment rates across states, from 3 percent to 100 percent, 5

 but, until recently, these data are 

believed to be unreliable.6 The site visits to local areas in 2005-2006 provide another source of 

evidence and suggest co-enrollment levels are on the rise. Of the 44 local sites visited, 7 

reported that they co-enroll in WIA all participants who attend training. An additional 25 

reported that they are committed to co-enrolling all TAA participants in WIA, regardless of 

which TAA services the customer pursues. But even these estimates may be questionable, as 

they are based primarily on staff self-report, not on evidence from the state or local MIS. 

Furthermore, when the research team probed deeply about sub-groups of co-enrollees during the 

WIA and TAA Co-enrollment Pilot Project’s site visits, it became clear that not all states were 

counting customers who receive only a training waiver as TAA participants, meaning that the 

base on which co-enrollment rates were estimated may have been incomplete.7

 

 

4

 As with TAA, local programs in WIA are also limited in what can be charged to administrative activities, and 

WIA’s cap, at 10 percent of total expenditures, is even more severe than TAA’s. But, unlike in TAA, direct 

services such as case management, assessment and placement are considered program expenses in WIA rather 

than administrative expenses. 

5

 Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 TAPR data file includes data for TAA and NAFTA-TAA participants who exited anytime 

from July 2002 through June 2003. 

6

 U.S. General Accountability Office, 2006, “Trade Adjustment Assistance: Labor Should Take Action to Ensure 

Performance Data are Complete, Accurate, and Accessible.” GAO-06-496. 

7

 DOL guidance clarifying that individuals on waivers are required to be counted as participants had either not yet 

been released at the time the site visits were conducted, or states were still responding to it and the change had 

not yet reached the local level. 

4
Regardless of the actual rates of co-enrollment achieved, explicit state policy promoting coenrollment clearly seems to have been important in these sites. For example, the six states 

participating in the WIA and TAA Co-enrollment Pilot Project established a policy requiring 100 

percent co-enrollment of TAA participants into the WIA program, and all available evidence 

suggests that most saw their co-enrollment rates rise steadily.8 A number of other states 

encourage co-enrollment, but do not require it. Policies requiring or encouraging co-enrollment 

of TAA customers in WIA often reflect a state or local area decision to use co-enrollment as an 

important step towards fostering integration of TAA and its One-Stop delivery system partners. 

Similarly, states or localities may believe that co-enrollment is the only way to provide 

customers access to all the wrap-around services they need in order to be successful. National 

Emergency Grants (NEGs) for which states have applied also require co-enrollment of TAA 

participants in WIA. 

Another factor that results in TAA participants being served by WIA is when WIA staff 

administers the TAA program at the local level. Typically, this occurs when the state delegates 

its authority for the TAA program to the Local Workforce Investment Areas (LWIAs), as five of 

the states visited have done.9 In the sites where WIA serves TAA participants, high levels of coenrollment are also common. 

In contrast to the 32 local sites that strive to co-enroll all TAA participants, or at least all training 

participants, in the WIA Dislocated Worker program, 12 other sites practice selective coenrollment. Three reasons for selective co-enrollment were cited. First, some sites co-enroll 

participants if WIA will be paying some portion of the participant’s training costs. This practice 

is particularly common if TAA funds are short or delayed in their availability. Second, selective 

co-enrollment occurs when WIA will be providing a participant with supportive services or 

paying for other training-related expenses that TAA cannot provide, such as licensing fees. 

Third, some sites co-enroll certain participants explicitly to give them access to thorough upfront assessment and counseling that are the focus of this paper. 

Despite these apparent advantages to co-enrollment from the TAA perspective, several factors 

that can adversely affect WIA’s willingness to co-enroll TAA participants include the 

perceptions by WIA staff that: 1) TAA staff do not pay as close attention to performance, or 2) 

TAA participants are less likely to attain positive outcomes. In general, WIA staff appears to be 

 

8

 By the conclusion of the pilot, one state of the six achieved 100 percent co-enrollment, and three others achieved 

rates of between approximately 80 percent and 90 percent. Two of these states saw their co-enrollment rates 

approximately double during the one-year pilot period. For details, see Social Policy Research Associates, 2008, 

“WIA and TAA Co-enrollment Pilot Project: Draft Final Report.” 

9

 These five states are Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, and Texas. Illinois and Kentucky were in the process 

of delegating authority during the project’s data collection. 

5
acutely aware of performance measures when they make the decision to co-enroll or not coenroll TAA participants. Other factors affecting the decision to co-enroll TAA customers are 1) 

the ability of WIA staff to handle a new influx of cases, based on the size and intensity of their 

existing caseloads, and 2) the current degree of coordination that exists between TAA and WIA. 

States and local areas that seek to realize higher levels of co-enrollment as a way to ensure 

customer access to wrap-around services are often required to deal directly with these factors, an 

issue explored in the conclusion of this paper. 

Co-enrollment in ES—accomplished principally through customer registration on state labor 

exchange job matching systems—is so common in the sites visited as to be nearly universal. In 

almost every state in the sample, registration on the state system is a requirement for participants 

to receive their Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Trade Readjustment Allowances (TRA) 

payments. Further, in a majority of states, ES administers and staffs the TAA program. In the 

sites visited, ES is also usually a One-Stop Career Center operator (or partner in a consortium) 

and offers core ES services including job search assistance and local labor market information to 

TAA participants. Yet, assessment, case management, and post-training assistance for workers 

enrolled in TAA are either not provided by ES or tend to be limited or self-directed, as explored 

further in later sections of this paper. 

Assessment and Case Management During Rapid 

Response 

One of the first opportunities TAA and One-Stop Career Center partners have to provide 

assessment and case management to participants is during Rapid Response, typically the first 

stage in the customer’s introduction to One-Stop Career Center services. Rapid Response 

activities generally provide information to dislocated and/or trade-affected workers about the 

services of the One-Stop delivery system, but they can also involve the provision of actual 

services, such as assessment. While case management does not generally begin during Rapid 

Response, assessment is occasionally provided, usually in preliminary ways. 

One of the ways in which a preliminary assessment is conducted during Rapid Response is 

through a survey of workers’ needs and interests. These surveys, provided in some of the sites 

visited, are generally too cursory to function as comprehensive assessments; however, they may 

be considered initial assessments, the results of which allow members of the Rapid Response 

team to refer workers to appropriate One-Stop Career Center partner programs and resources. 

For example, in Huntington Park, California, TAA coordinated with WIA to conduct surveys 

that function as preliminary assessments during Rapid Response sessions to determine 

affected workers’ needs. 

In some cases, direct connections are made between the preliminary activities conducted during 

Rapid Response sessions (such as a worker survey) and more substantive assessments, 

6
counseling, and service planning. In Dayton, Ohio, all workers who attend a Rapid Response 

activity are scheduled for a one-on-one appointment with a One-Stop Career Center staff person 

within one week of the benefit rights interview. In South Carolina, the information the Rapid 

Response team collects from the worker survey—including information about workers’ postlayoff plans, educational attainment, work history, occupational preferences, and training and 

support needs—is passed on to the local ES office director and the WIA area director to guide 

service planning. Thus, while comprehensive assessments are unlikely to occur during Rapid 

Response sessions, preliminary assessments can play a role in directing customers along a path 

of services, in addition to providing information needed to plan for such services. 

One factor affecting the depth of assessments and counseling provided during Rapid Response is 

whether the Rapid Response team establishes an on-site transition center. As indicated in the 

earlier report, Initial Implementation of the Trade Act of 2002, when transition centers are set up 

at the work site as part of Rapid Response, counseling and assessment are more likely to be made 

available immediately to workers. For example, in Chillicothe, Missouri, an automotive 

company allowed the WIA Dislocated Worker program to set up a center on site, and the staff 

there were able to begin working more intensively, including by providing in-depth assessments, 

with workers. In general, the number of on-site centers is small because they are costly to 

establish and few employers have adequate facilities. However, some states have made 

establishing on-site services a priority, to serve workers more thoroughly and quickly. For 

example, North Carolina recently purchased a mobile services unit to establish an on-site 

presence at work sites, and in Oregon, the Rapid Response team always tries to establish 

services on site. 

The degree to which Rapid Response activities include assessment and counseling services often 

is related to the timing of the petition filing and certification. When a petition has not yet been 

filed, or has been filed but is still pending, Rapid Response services are likely to direct workers 

to the One-Stop Career Center to access services.10 Thus, by the time a TAA petition is certified, 

workers may have received substantive services, including assessments and counseling, from 

other programs. 

Assessment and Case Management for Non-Training 

Customers 

Workers who attempt to reenter the labor market immediately after layoff rather than enter 

training may benefit from assessment and case management to guide them in their job search. 

These non-training participants are in the minority in the states visited, making up only about 15 

 

10 For example, in North Carolina, Rapid Response is the primary mechanism that triggers the petition process for 

TAA. 

7
percent of the total population of TAA participants.11 The Initial Implementation Study found 

that assessment and case management for them was rare. Subsequent rounds of visits found a 

more varied picture, as described below. 

Assessment During Job Search 

In six local sites visited, non-training customers receive no assessment or counseling to help 

direct their job search. Two additional sites estimate that 50 percent of non-training customers 

do not receive assessment or counseling. Non-training customers in these sites tend to either 

search for work on their own or use the self-service core services available through the One-Stop 

Career Centers, and they are unlikely to be co-enrolled in WIA. Staff in some of the local sites 

that do not provide assessment or counseling report that non-training customers are less likely to 

ask for assistance because they are looking for quick reemployment and assume they can find it 

on their own. As a result, the services provided to non-training TAA participants seems to be 

more along the lines of job leads and check-ins to make sure the participants are maintaining the 

mandatory work search in order to continue receiving UI and TRA payments. 

In most other local sites, an initial assessment is routine for customers who do not attend 

training. Several sites that routinely provide initial assessments suggest, however, that these 

assessments tend to be less detailed than those provided to customers interested in pursuing 

training, and do not involve counseling. Instead, the up-front assessments provided to nontraining customers tend to occur during orientation to the TAA program, and are thus unlikely to 

entail one-on-one time with a staff person to interpret results. 

Case Management During Job Search 

Case management is almost universally agreed not to be provided by ES staff who often serve 

those TAA participants who are seeking immediate reemployment rather than training. The 

reasons case management is not provided to these non-training participants are various. In part, 

cost constraints preclude in-depth services such as case management to customers. In addition, 

some TAA staff may be overwhelmed attending to the high volume of customers in training, or 

they may feel that non-training customers are not in need of on-going case management. 

Further, if customers engaging in a job search are in need of more in-depth assistance, they have 

access to the staff-assisted core and intensive services available to them through the WIA 

Dislocated Worker program. 

In keeping with this, non-training customers who are co-enrolled in WIA are much more likely 

to be receiving case management. The reason co-enrollees generally have access to case 

 

11 This percentage is reflected at the national level as well. According to TAPR data for FY 2004, only 15 percent 

of program participants nationally do not undertake some kind of training. 

8
management is because, in WIA, case management is considered a program cost (in contrast to 

TAA, in which case management would be considered an administrative cost and limited to 15 

percent of the overall allocation). As a result, funding and staffing levels tend to allow for more 

individualized attention to WIA customers. In addition, the WIA programs are held accountable 

for participant performance outcomes of which staff are usually acutely aware.12 

In answer to why non-training customers are not more commonly co-enrolled, sites indicated that 

such customers are felt not to need the more intensive case management (and other staff 

assistance) that WIA can provide. Further, WIA staff may be reluctant to enroll dislocated 

workers who do not intend to enter training because they assume that the workers’ post-program 

wages will not be high enough to meet average earnings goals and thus will negatively affect 

performance. Alternatively, unwillingness to co-enroll non-training TAA customers in WIA 

may stem from a sense that these customers can be adequately served by other partners, such as 

ES. The impact analysis may shed light on whether non-training customers need the wraparound services available through co-enrollment in WIA as the outcomes of sub-groups of TAA 

participants, including those workers who do not enter training, are examined. 

Assessment and Case Management During Training 

The choice by TAA-certified workers to enter a training program is a critical decision with 

potential implications for the worker’s long-term success in reentering the labor market. In fact, 

rather than being a single decision, the choice to attend training is rather a series of smaller 

decisions, including whether to undertake training at all or to seek immediate reemployment, 

what occupation in which to train, and with what training provider. In making each of these 

decisions, TAA participants may benefit from assessment, counseling, and case management 

services. 

Deciding Between Training and Job Search 

Similar to findings from the Initial Implementation Study, the site visits suggest that assessment 

and counseling are not often used to inform the decision to take up training. The more common 

pattern is for sites to allow customers to determine their own need for training, or to seek staff 

assistance with assessment tools and counseling only if they feel they need it. 

In twelve local sites, however, staff specifically noted that assessment and counseling, 

predominantly conducted by WIA staff, are used to help guide the decision about whether a 

participant should enter training. WIA staff are involved in providing these services for one of 

 

12 The TAA program also has performance measures. In fact, as of Program Year (PY) 2006, TAA accounts 

performance against the same set of common measures as WIA. However, some of the earlier research suggests 

that TAA staff members’ awareness of performance measures was quite limited. 

9
two reasons. First, all but one of the twelve sites claim to co-enroll 100 percent of TAA 

participants in WIA, and WIA staff are the primary guides to the decision to attend training in 

these sites. Second, in five states, WIA staff also serve as TAA staff, because the states delegate 

their authority for the TAA program to the LWIAs. (In general, the sites in which WIA staff also 

serve as the TAA staff tend to be sites in which very high or complete co-enrollment occurs.) 

The process of deciding whether to attend training is generally guided by a formalization of the 

specific criteria that the legislation identifies for determining whether training is appropriate. For 

example, in Elizabethtown, Kentucky, the following three criteria must be met in order for staff 

to concede that training is necessary: 

1. the customer needs training, which, in order to establish, involves a review of 

educational attainment, including any existing certifications or diplomas, and of 

work experience; 

2. there are employment opportunities in the training field at a self-sufficient wage; 

and 

3. the customer has the academic and financial ability to complete the program. 

An interesting observation is that WIA-led assessments and counseling are likely to be provided 

one-on-one, while the use of assessment tools by ES/TAA staff occurs more often in a group 

setting, such as during orientation to the program. 

Choosing a Training Program 

It is quite clear that, in the local sites visited, once customers have decided to pursue training, the 

assessment, counseling, and case management services available to them markedly increase. 

Further, sites that practice widespread co-enrollment of participants into the WIA Dislocated 

Worker program are much more likely to do so at the point a participant decides he or she is 

bound for training. This sub-section explores the degree to which the services are provided at 

this stage of program participation, and who provides them. 

WIA-Guided Training Choice 

In 25 of the 44 sites visited, WIA staff primarily guide a TAA participant’s training choices. 

(TAA staff are still responsible for making sure the training plan is filled out and submitted for 

approval, but the bulk of testing, assessment, and counseling is provided by WIA). As noted 

above, WIA staff act as principle guides in these sites because the TAA program is staffed by 

WIA, or because the state or local site practices very high or total co-enrollment of at least TAA 

training participants into WIA. 

The assessments and counseling that are provided as part of a WIA-led training decision in the 

sites visited appear to be quite rigorous. The process almost always entails the customer’s 

receiving a basic skills assessment, and often incorporates a variety of other assessment tools, 

such as occupational skills assessments, interest inventories, and aptitude tests. In addition, 

10
customers are likely to meet one or more times with a case manager to discuss the results of the 

assessment. 

Another widely used technique that WIA staff use is to require the participants to conduct their 

own research on both training vendors and job openings in the local area. In Lawrence, 

Pennsylvania, for example, TAA participants are required to clip job openings in the field they 

wish to pursue from newspapers, including a job description and wage levels. In other sites, 

participants are required to compare the costs, length of training, and placement rates (if 

available) of several providers offering the same program. 

A final component of WIA-led assessments is a determination of feasibility. This determination 

includes a review of participants’ personal finances in light of expenses, length of training, cost 

of training (if the local area has placed a cap on TAA training expense or if training will be paid 

for by WIA funds), weeks remaining on UI and TRA, and whether or not there are other 

members of the workers’ households that contribute financially. 

Several local sites in which WIA guides the training decision run comprehensive, multi-day 

workshops dedicated to the assessment and training decision process. In Allegheny, 

Pennsylvania, the process begins with several different tests, moves into the school selection 

process using comparative research, some of which is conducted by the customer as 

homework, and ends with one-on-one meetings between customer and case manager to assess 

customer barriers, create a budget, and determine participants’ needs for supportive services 

such as transportation or child care assistance. In Gary, Indiana, WIA staff conduct a four-day 

Life Skills workshop, which includes units on resume writing, interviewing skills, soft skills, and 

motivation. There, the approach is more focused on the eventual employment that participants 

are expected to attain after training than on the choice of training provider, but is required for 

TAA training participants prior to entry into a training program. 

Not all WIA-guided training selection is this rigorous, however. In several sites, customers 

undergo a basic skills assessment and meet with a case manager to fill out a state or locally 

developed individual employment plan, but do not appear to do much else in the way of 

assessment. 

ES-Guided Training Choice 

In seven of the sites visited, TAA participants are guided in their choice of a training program 

and provider primarily by ES staff who are responsible for the TAA program. In these sites, 

WIA may provide assistance if participants are co-enrolled in WIA, but co-enrollment is reported 

to be limited. 

ES-guided assessment and counseling for training selection in these sites can be similar to the 

WIA-guided processes described above. The primary differences between the ES-guided and 

WIA-guided training selection appear to be in the fewer number of assessment tools used, the 

11
lesser amount of time staff spend counseling customers individually verses in large groups, and 

the reliance on other One-Stop Career Center partners and resources to augment and inform the 

training decision. For example, in Spokane, Washington, the Training Research Proposal13 is 

distributed to customers during their orientation to the TAA program and is completed 

primarily by customers on their own time. In another example, in Asheboro, North Carolina, 

ES staff use an interest inventory with participants, but also encourage their customers to seek 

out other One-Stop Career Center workshops in career exploration to help guide their decision. 

ES and WIA Together Guide Training Choice 

In eight of the sites visited, a combination of ES/TAA and WIA Dislocated Worker program 

staff share responsibility for guiding TAA participants through the process of selecting a training 

program. These sites generally break the selection process down into parts and assign parts to 

the different partners to provide, based on available resources, expertise, the extent of coenrollment, and other factors. 

As an example of a site with more prominent WIA involvement, TAA staff in Portland, Oregon, 

report that they assist the customer in filling out a training plan but provide minimal additional 

help, such as by suggesting that participants job shadow someone in their chosen occupation 

before entering training. In other sites, ES/TAA staff say they are very limited in their ability to 

provide career counseling (presumably because it would be an administrative cost that the 

program cannot afford); thus, if a participant appears to need or requests substantial assistance, 

he or she is referred to a WIA case manager. 

Elsewhere, responsibility is more evenly shared. For example, in Lane County, Oregon, TAA 

staff provide some initial career counseling and give customers access to a computerized 

assessment, but rely on co-enrollment with WIA (and WIA staff) to provide more detailed 

assessments as the training choice is being made. Montgomery, Pennsylvania, is conducting a 

pilot program in which both TAA and WIA staff are trained to provide a 30-minute career 

counseling session to any customer, regardless of program affiliation or need; thus, in 

Montgomery, TAA customers making a training decision could see either TAA or WIA staff and 

expect equivalent levels of service. In Knoxville, Tennessee, ES/TAA interviewers begin 

assistance to TAA participants with job search, career exploration, and resume writing. If a TAA 

participant expresses interest in training, he or she is referred to a WIA career counselor. The 

counselor describes the various training programs and conducts assessments. The participant is 

then referred back to an ES/TAA staff person, who provides further counsel on the training 

 

13 Spokane TAA staff developed the Training Research Proposal tool that participants must complete prior to 

obtaining training approval. The tool includes a vocational plan and employment goals, requires the use of labor 

market information to justify training choice, a personal financial summary, and comparison of potential training 

vendors and eventual employers. 

12
decision and reviews it for adherence to the policies of the TAA program. The ES/TAA staff 

then writes the training contract and submits it to the state office for approval. Additionally, this 

staff person works with the WIA counselor to co-enroll the customer and arrange for additional 

funding through WIA when needed (for example, for travel vouchers and funds to cover books 

and supplies). 

In only one site, the process of deciding on a training program is guided by the local community 

college rather than by WIA or by ES staff. 

 Tools Used to Guide Training Choice 

A variety of tools are used to assist TAA participants to determine what training program to 

attend. These tools include: 

• Basic skills assessments, such as TABE, CASAS, or Computer Learning Works 

• Occupational skills assessments such as Work Keys and O*NET 

• Interest inventories that elicit information about job goals, barriers to 

employment, skills needed, occupational interest, and availability for training 

• Training program/provider research, including comparing different programs’ 

costs, length, courses, and pre-requisites 

• Labor market research on occupations of interest or examples of current job 

openings, or projected employment opportunities in different industries

• Personal finance review that includes a budget for the time in training that 

includes the costs of childcare, transportation, and other expenses 

• Aptitude tests such as Countdown by Horizons 

• Work values questionnaires, in which customers consider a training decision in 

the broader context of personal goals

• Meyers-Briggs personality test

• Individual Employment Plan, which includes an exploration of barriers to 

employment and personal employment goals 

• Career counseling session(s) with staff 

The choice of tools used to guide customers may be influenced by a number of different factors. 

For example, the choice may depend on the customer’s stated career goals. In North Aurora, 

Missouri, staff may choose to test for math skills, reading, editing, spelling, grammar, 

memory, or fine motor coordination depending on the occupations the customer identifies 

being of interest. The degree of customer ambivalence or uncertainty about his or her need for 

training can also influence the depth of the assessment process, including how many tools are 

used and how much time staff spend interpreting the results and counseling participants based on 

those results. Staff at some sites say that the assessment process is more detailed for customers 

who do not know whether they want or need to attend training, while assessments for 

13
participants who have a definite idea about what they want are tested primarily to certify that the 

customer has the requisite basic skills to qualify for the training he or she wants to attend. 

When assessments are conducted one-on-one, as they are in many of the sites that co-enroll TAA 

participants in WIA, staff also provide counseling as they interpret the results of the various 

tests. Further, the results of one assessment tool may lead to the selection of one or several 

more. In sites where assessments tend to be provided to groups of customers or are self-guided 

or taken on-line, one-on-one counseling regarding the results of the assessment is unlikely to 

occur unless specifically requested. 

In a few sites, staff reluctance to deny approval of a training program calls into question the 

effectiveness of assessment results. Some staff approve training even if assessment results 

suggest the participant is making a poor choice. The reluctance to deny a training plan may 

occur in situations where participants are selecting a training program the staff believe is not a 

good fit for the participant, or where the projected labor market for the occupation is limited. 

The primary reason for the reluctance to deny training plans is fear of the appeals process. Staff 

expressed their hesitance to deny plans was based on their previous experiences in which 

participants appealed the denial and won the right to attend their selected program. 

Despite occasional instances in which customers retain the implicit power to override staff denial 

of a particular training choice, the more common scenario is one in which staff guide customers 

away from training vendors or programs that are not likely to lead to employment success. For 

example, in situations where basic skills test scores are so low as to preclude a participant getting 

in to the training provider of choice, staff can usually provide evidence to the customer that, 

without remediation, the customer is not likely to get in to the program. This method of guided 

choice is quite common as the model by which case managers counsel customers regarding 

training choices.14 

Case Management During Training 

Once a training program has been chosen and begun, participants may want or need case 

management to help them navigate the program and resolve any challenges encountered in the 

process. There is little evidence that case management during training is provided intentionally 

and routinely when ES/TAA staff are the primary contact. Rather, case management during 

training is more likely to be provided by happenstance as ES/TAA staff collect documentation of 

worker attendance in training, as statutorily required. In general, monitoring of worker progress 

and attendance in training occurs via a requirement that participants provide at least every 30 

 

14 Similarly, this model was used in the Evaluation of the Individual Training Account and Eligible Training 

Provider Demonstration. 

14
days some documentation of their attendance in training. ES/TAA staff in numerous sites 

suggest that they use the occasions of customer visits as opportunities to check in with 

participants about how things are going and to provide guidance if there are problems. Similarly, 

staff say they check in with customers who also may be submitting documentation for 

transportation or subsistence payments. A few sites vary by degree in this practice of checking 

in with customers. Several sites monitor attendance or require reimbursement documentation 

twice a month or weekly, while one site only requires customers to provide their training 

schedules each semester. 

In some sites, customers determine the degree of contact with program staff beyond the standard 

mandatory monthly visit. If a customer is having problems with the training program or has 

other issues that affect his or her attendance, and comes to the program for help, staff will 

respond with assistance. However, some TAA staff suggest that due to limited TAA staff time, 

increased case management with customers who are struggling is more likely to occur if 

customers are co-enrolled in WIA. 

In general, many sites agree that case management during training increases in depth if 

customers are co-enrolled in WIA. Rather than the casual check-in conducted as a result of 

customers’ dropping off documentation, WIA case managers in some sites require formal, 

routine case management meetings with customers. For example, in Aberdeen, North Carolina, 

co-enrolled customers are required to schedule a monthly 30 minute meeting with their WIA 

case manager. 

Post-Training Assistance 

The final stage of program participation is the period during which training is being completed, 

and participants are seeking employment or undergoing probationary periods in their new jobs. 

As participants complete their training programs, they may need job placement assistance and 

additional counseling about re-entering the labor market. Part of the package of reemployment 

services TAA participants are expected to receive is job search and placement services to help 

them reenter the labor market as they complete their basic skills or occupational skills training. 

As the end of training approaches, TAA staff provide some preparatory services to participants 

in some sites. For example, TAA staff in Sheffield, Alabama, suggest that participants use the 

state on-line labor exchange to begin job search as well as to update their resumes to reflect the 

training about to be completed and any accompanying certifications or licenses. However, the 

most common scenario described by TAA staff is that customers reaching the end of training are 

advised to seek out the resources of the One-Stop Career Centers, including the resource room, 

which is equipped with computers that have access to the state job matching system and other 

Internet job search websites, phones, fax machines, and copiers. Customers are also advised to 

participate in workshops such as resume-writing, job search, and interviewing skills and to seek 

15
assistance from One-Stop Career Center or partner program job developers and career 

counselors. 

In large part, TAA staff refer customers completing their training to One-Stop Career Center 

partners because the TAA program itself does not generally have funding for post-training 

placement services,15 and, in fact, the majority of participants are exited from the TAA program 

as soon as their training is over.16 TAA can, however, provide job search and relocation 

allowances for participants seeking or securing employment outside normal commuting distance. 

In almost every site visited, these allowances are rarely used. The most common reason 

suggested for the low take-up rate is that customers are unwilling to relocate for work. 

The sites that primarily rely on WIA to provide post-training assistance are generally the same 

sites that co-enroll most or all of their TAA participants into the WIA Dislocated Worker 

program, and the array of services provided to customers co-enrolled in WIA appears somewhat 

broader than for those individuals not co-enrolled. For example, in Huntington Park, 

California, WIA developed an incentive program (largely to ensure the timely collection of 

follow-up data from customers) that runs during the follow-up period. Customers receive a 

$50 monthly cash payment while they are job searching, may access funds to pay for uniforms 

and tools they need for employment, and receive gift certificates when they demonstrate they 

remain employed at three and six months after initial placement. WIA staff in other sites 

contact participants—generally by phone or letter—during the last semester of training and after 

completion, and advise them to visit the One-Stop Career Center and use the labor exchange to 

job search. Some staff meet in person to provide job search counseling and review participants’ 

resumes. Some sites identify those participants who are likely to be the most difficult to place in 

jobs, and focus their efforts on meeting with those individuals and providing them placement 

services. 

Yet not all sites demonstrate a rich array of post-training placement services, even in those sites 

where customers are co-enrolled in WIA. This lack of comprehensive placement and support 

services after training completion may be due to several factors. First, many sites suggest that 

customers find employment on their own and thus do not seek post-training assistance from 

program staff. Second, many local areas cite the training vendors as a primary source of 

 

15 TEGL 32-04 suggests that placement services should be provided to TAA participants after completion of 

training, but at the time of the site visits TAA staff rarely did so. 

16 Customers are considered to have exited the program when they are no longer receiving program services and no 

further services are planned (see TEGL 28-04). Thus, the fact that a high proportion of TAA participants are 

exited when training ends suggests that many do not receive post-training placement assistance. See R. 

D’Amico, J. Rodecker, and R. West, 2004, Explaining Performance in the TAA Program.

16
placement assistance for customers. Finally, some LWIAs lack a comprehensive follow-up 

program as part of their WIA services.17 

Conclusions 

Some trade-affected workers have access to a variety of assessment, counseling, case 

management, and post-training assistance throughout their participation in the TAA program. 

The specific services that are provided, and their depth, are affected by which program staff 

provide them, in which programs in addition to TAA the worker is co-enrolled, and the stage of 

program participation, from the introduction to program services during Rapid Response, to the 

decision to undertake training, to post-training placement assistance. Other elements that affect 

the provision of these wrap-around services to TAA participants include whether they are 

provided in a group or individual setting, and whether there is a set package of services that staff 

deliver versus a menu of services from which customers can select. 

It seems clear from the data that, in general, customers co-enrolled in WIA receive more in-depth 

assessment, counseling, case management, and post-training assistance. Recognizing that this 

would be so, DOL has in recent years strongly encouraged co-enrollment of TAA participants in 

WIA and other One-Stop Career Center partner programs (see TEGL 11-02). As a reflection of 

this guidance, there has been a gradual shift toward higher levels of co-enrollment in WIA in the 

states visited. In more than half of the states, co-enrollment in WIA increased from Fiscal Year 

(FY) 2003 to FY 2004, according to TAPR data. Further, over half the sites visited in 2005-2006 

articulated a commitment to co-enrolling most or all TAA participants in WIA. Yet, the most 

surprising finding may be that co-enrollment in WIA remains partial in many states and local 

sites. Even states participating in the WIA and TAA Co-enrollment Pilot Project have struggled 

to reach 100 percent co-enrollment of TAA participants into WIA, with only one of the six 

states, in fact, achieving the 100 percent co-enrollment target. 18 This evidence suggests that, 

even with the will to practice total co-enrollment, many obstacles remain. 

 

17 SPR’s technical assistance and training for the DOL-funded WIA Performance Enhancement Project has 

revealed that follow-up and retention services are among the least developed of the WIA services, in large part 

due to concern about spending funds on participants after they exit. 

18 As part of the WIA and TAA Co-enrollment Pilot Project, which was launched in 2005, six states committed to 

co-enrolling all TAA participants in the WIA Dislocated Worker program for the twelve-month duration of the 

pilot, including all of their existing participants and any new participants. Of the six states, only one reached 100 

percent co-enrollment by the end of the pilot period. Three others achieved co-enrollment rates of between 

about 80 and 90 percent, and two reported co-enrollment rates of 40 percent or less. 

17
The reasons for limited co-enrollment, and the challenges faced even by those sites that have 

decided to co-enroll all TAA participants in WIA, are multiple.19 These include: 1) a reluctance 

on the part of state agencies to require local areas to co-enroll 100 percent of their TAA 

participants in WIA; 2) a concern that widespread co-enrollment would greatly increase WIA 

front-line workers’ caseloads (especially in those local areas with the highest degree of trade 

activity); and 3) a concern that trade-affected dislocated workers’ performance outcomes will 

drag down WIA performance. 

There are alternative ways to overcome each of these challenges and concerns. States can 

involve local areas in planning to institute a 100 percent co-enrollment policy, or may choose 

only to encourage high levels of co-enrollment, rather than mandate them. Regardless of 

whether a mandatory policy or guidance is issued, states can provide training to local-area WIA 

and TAA staff on ideal customer flows. Further, to support WIA staff who will receive the brunt 

of new work if large numbers of TAA participants begin to be co-enrolled in WIA, states can 

apply for dual-enrollment NEGs, or make available to local areas portions of the 15 percent 

Governor’s reserve funds, as several co-enrollment pilot states have done. Lastly, existing 

research suggests that the performance gap between TAA participants and WIA Dislocated 

Workers can largely be explained by several factors that have since been addressed by Federal 

guidance, removing performance concerns as an impediment.20 

However, plenty of local sites visited do not practice widespread co-enrollment or even 

encourage it. In these sites, customers determine the level of wrap-around services they receive. 

If customers request additional assistance, the TAA program staff will generally either provide 

the service or, more likely, make a referral to a partner program. Either way, the program staff 

assume the customer gets the services he or she needs. For those customers willing and able to 

ask for what they need, the customer-directed approach taken by many sites may be adequate. 

However, customers who are not able to ask for what they need or who may not realize that they 

could benefit from assessment, case management, or post-training assistance are likely to be lessthan-effectively served by sites that practice this customer-directed approach. 

 

 

19 This issue was explored in some depth in the first Interim Report for the WIA and TAA Co-enrollment Pilot 

Project. For more detail, see “WIA and TAA Co-enrollment Pilot Project: First Interim Report”, SPR, April 

2006. 

20 See both “Explaining Performance in the TAA Program,” SPR, October 2004, and TEGL 32-04 for more details 

on the performance issue. 

18
Appendix A: Definitions 

Case Management 

While no definition of case management appears in the TAA legislation or guidance, WIA 

defines case management as follows: 

“the provision of a client-centered approach in the delivery of services, designed—(a) to 

prepare and coordinate comprehensive employment plans, such as service strategies, for 

participants to ensure access to necessary workforce investment activities and supportive 

services [. . .]; and (b) to provide job and career counseling during program participation 

and after job placement.”21

In the field, case management tends to mean an on-going relationship to a customer in which the 

case manager is the primary point of contact for the program participant. 

Assessment 

The most comprehensive discussion of assessment in a workforce investment context occurs in 

the preface to the WIA regulations, and in the regulations themselves. The preamble discussion 

and the regulations explain that the purpose of assessment is to help individuals and program 

staff make decisions about appropriate employment goals and to develop effective service 

strategies for reaching those goals. Further, while “meaningful service planning cannot occur in 

the absence of effective assessment,” DOL acknowledges that there is neither one specific 

method of assessment nor a single ideal provider. Instead, the key issue is that whatever 

methods are used, the result is sufficient information about an individual's skill levels, motivation 

and interest, and support services needed to enable the program staff to advise participants on 

entering training and ultimately reentering the labor market, and to refer them to sources of 

support. Two levels of assessment are identified by WIA. 

Initial Assessment. WIA defines this as a brief assessment that provides preliminary 

information regarding the individual's skill levels, aptitudes, interests, 

(re)employability and other needs in order for the program to make appropriate 

referrals the One-Stop Career Center and partner programs. 

Comprehensive Assessment. A more intensive examination of educational 

attainment; employment history; basic literacy and occupational skill levels; 

interests; aptitudes; family and financial situation; emotional and physical health, 

including disabilities; attitudes toward work; motivation; and supportive service 

needs in order to inform the development of a person's individual employment 

plan. 

 

21 Public Law 105-220, Title I, Subtitle A, Section 101. 

19
Post-Training Assistance 

Post-training assistance may be the most self-explanatory of the definitions; it entails any service 

provided after a participant completes training. Post-training assistance can include job search 

and placement assistance, supportive services, and follow-up services. 

Counseling 

Although no formal definition of counseling appears in TAA or WIA legislation or regulations, 

the term is used here to refer to guidance provided to participants by program staff to assist 

customers in making decisions. While some of the sites do not distinguish between counseling 

and case management, others suggest that counseling is episodic and often provided at the 

beginning and end of program services, while case management is on-going throughout program 

participation. For greater precision in discussing these topics, counseling refers to distinct 

episodes of guidance provided by program staff, and case management refers to on-going contact 

with program participants. 

 

20
Appendix B: List of Site Visits Conducted 

Site visits were first conducted in 2004 as part of the Initial Implementation Study. These site 

visits focused on states’ progress in implementing the requirements associated with the Trade 

Act of 2002. A second round of sites visits to a larger number of states, and more broadly 

focused, was conducted in 2005 and 2006. Site visits completed as of the writing of this paper 

are shown in Exhibit A-1, along with the estimated percentage of all TAA participants 

nationwide that are represented by these states (the sum across these states is 72.9 percent). 

Additional site visits to these and other states are planned in the evaluation’s subsequent years. 

Exhibit A-1: 

States and Local Offices Visited 

Estimated 

Percent of TAA 

Participants 

Initial 

Implementation 

Site Visit 

Conducted a 

Second 

Site Visit Local Offices Visited 

Alabama 3.5% x x Opelika, Sheffield, Tuscaloosa 

Arizona 1.2% x Phoenix 

California 5.6% x x Huntington Park, Sunnyvale, 

Santa Rosa 

Georgia 3.9% x Rome 

Illinois 3.7% x Arlington, North Aurora 

Indiana 2.4% x Auburn, Gary 

Kentucky 2.5% x x Elizabethtown, Richmond, 

Somerset/Russell Springs, 

Maine 1.0% x Bangor, East Millinocket 

Maryland 0.4% x Baltimore, Hagerstown 

Massachusetts 1.8% x Holyoke 

Michigan 3.6% x x Allegan, Livingstone, Troy 

Missouri 2.2% x Chillocothe, St. Joseph 

Montana 0.2% x Kalispell 

New Jersey 2.1% x Middlesex 

New Mexico 0.4% x Albuquerque, Silver City 

North Carolina 9.4% x x Aberdeen, Asheboro, Wilson 

Ohio 4.0% x x Columbiana, Dayton 

Oregon 2.0% x Lane, Portland West 

21
Estimated 

Percent of TAA 

Participants 

Initial 

Implementation 

Site Visit 

Conducted a 

Second 

Site Visit Local Offices Visited 

Pennsylvania 6.7% x x Lawrence, Montgomery, York 

South Carolina 3.0% x x Greenville, Seneca, SanteeLynches 

Tennessee 4.1% x Knoxville, Mid-South 

Texas 7.0% x Conroe, Richardson 

Washington 2.2% x Spokane, Vancouver 

22
Appendix C: About the WIA and TAA 

Co-Enrollment Pilot Project

In June 2005, DOL contracted with Social Policy Research Associates to conduct the WIA and 

TAA Co-Enrollment Pilot Project. The project consists of: (1) implementation assistance to pilot 

states and local areas, (2) an impact study, based on a difference-in-difference design, to estimate 

the impact of 100 percent co-enrollment of TAA customers into the WIA Dislocated Worker 

program on the pilot states’ performance, and (3) a process study, both to support the 

interpretation of findings from the impact study and to provide a full accounting of how the pilot 

states implemented 100 percent co-enrollment and the challenges they encountered. 

The key questions for the project’s evaluation relate to understanding the context within which 

the TAA and WIA programs operate, documenting program design and operations, and finally, 

estimating individual-level and system-level program impacts. 

A draft First Interim Report was delivered to DOL in April 2006, the second interim report in 

October 2007, and the Final Report in July 2008. 

Site Visits Conducted as Part of the Pilot Project 

Site visits completed as of the writing of this paper are shown in Exhibit A-2. 

Exhibit A-2: 

States and Local Offices Visited 

Local Offices Visited 

Illinois Arlington, Kankakee, 

North Aurora, 

Kentucky Elizabethtown, 

Somerset, Mt. Sterling 

Missouri Chillicothe, St. Joseph, 

North Aurora 

New Jersey Bergen, Cumberland, 

Newark City, 

Pennsylvania Allegheny, Lawrence, 

Montgomery 

Texas Conroe, El Paso, 

Richardson 

 

23