TRADE 

ADJUSTMENT 

ASSISTANCE

Changes to the 

Workers Program 

Benefited 

Participants, but Little 

Is Known about 

Outcomes

Report to Congressional Committees

September 2012

GAO-12-953

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
 United States Government Accountability Office 

Highlights of GAO-12-953, a report to 

congressional committees 

September 2012 

TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE 

Changes to the Workers Program Benefited 

Participants, but Little Is Known about Outcomes 

Why GAO Did This Study 

While international trade has benefited 

Americans in a number of ways, it has 

also contributed to layoffs in a range of 

industries. To assist trade-displaced 

workers, Labor administers the TAA for 

Workers program, which provides 

income support, job training, and other 

benefits. The Trade Globalization and 

Adjustment Assistance Act of 2009, 

enacted as part of the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act, made 

substantial changes to the TAA 

program, such as extending eligibility 

to workers in the service sector and 

increasing benefits levels. The Act also 

required GAO to report on the 

operation and effectiveness of those 

changes. Specifically, GAO examined 

(1) the challenges Labor faced in 

implementing the 2009 legislation, (2) 

selected state officials’ assessment of 

the 2009 legislation’s effect on 

participants and state and local 

administrators, and (3) the extent to 

which participants received program 

benefits and services established by 

the 2009 legislation and achieved 

employment outcomes. GAO 

interviewed officials at Labor and in six 

states, selected for having a high level 

of TAA activity and geographic 

diversity. GAO also reviewed Labor’s 

internal controls for investigating 

petitions, which are filed on behalf of 

workers and are the starting point for 

determining their TAA eligibility. GAO 

analyzed participant data on specific 

benefits and services received and 

employment outcomes, as available. 

What GAO Recommends 

GAO is not making recommendations 

in this report. Labor generally agreed 

with the report’s findings. 

What GAO Found 

The Department of Labor (Labor) was challenged to process the substantial 

increase in petitions filed for the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for Workers 

program after related legislation was enacted in 2009. Labor initially had 

insufficient capacity to handle this increased workload, leading to processing 

delays and data recording errors. For example, in the quarter after the 2009 

legislation took effect, Labor took an average of 153 days to process a petition—

nearly four times the statutory limit. Labor responded with corrective action, 

including hiring new staff and adding additional quality control steps for 

processing petitions. Partly as a result of these efforts, processing times fell 

substantially. Moreover, GAO found that Labor’s petition investigation process, 

as of June 2012, generally conformed to best practices for internal controls. 

According to selected state officials, virtually all of the 2009 changes benefited 

participants, and some also helped administrators serve participants. Officials in 

all six states GAO interviewed expressed the view that both participants and 

administrators benefited from the simplified and extended training enrollment 

deadline. Some officials said the new deadline was easier for eligible workers to 

understand and provided administrators with more time to advise participants on 

their training and employment options. Moreover, officials said participants who 

enrolled in training benefited from other program changes, including increased 

training funds, the option to attend training part-time, and a longer period for 

income support. Some state officials said that the additional weeks of income 

support allowed participants to consider longer-term training options, such as 

health care programs. 

Over 107,000 participants received benefits and services as established by the 

2009 law, but little is yet known about their employment outcomes. Nationally, all 

the participants received case management and reemployment services and 

about half enrolled in training, most commonly occupational skills training. Less 

than 8 percent of participants used other benefits. Little is known about 

employment outcomes because nearly two-thirds of the participants were still 

enrolled as of September 30, 2011, and employment and earnings information 

was often not available for those who had exited the program. While this 

information will eventually be available, other factors, including the overall state 

of the economy, affect these outcomes so isolating the effects of the 2009 

legislative changes would be difficult. 

View GAO-12-953. For more information, 

contact Andrew Sherrill at (202) 512-7215 or 

sherrilla@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Letter 1 

Background 4

Labor Faced Initial Challenges in Implementing the 2009 

Legislation and Took Steps to Address Them 12

Nearly All of the Changes Benefited Participants and Some Helped 

Administrators As Well 19

Over 107,000 Workers Received Benefits and Services, but Little Is 

Known About Their Outcomes 27

Concluding Observations 37

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 38

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 40

Appendix II Comparison of Key 2002, 2009, and 2011 TAA Statutory Provisions 43

Appendix III TAA Training Fund Expenditures by State, as of March 31, 2012 49

Appendix IV Comments from the Department of Labor 51

Appendix V GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 53

Related GAO Products 54

Tables

Table 1: Occupational Skills Training Most Frequently Provided to 

Participants in the 2009 Program 30

Table 2: Percentage of 2009 Program Participants Accessing 

Various Benefits as of September 30, 2011 32

Table 3: Selected States 40

Table 4: Selected Localities 41

Contents
Page ii GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figures

Figure 1: Examples of Expanded Eligibility under the 2009 TAA 

Program 6

Figure 2: Increase in the Number of TAA Petitions Labor Received 14

Figure 3: Average Number of Days to Make a Petition Decision, by 

Fiscal Quarter Received 16

Figure 4: Quality Control Steps Added to Labor’s Petition 

Investigation Process Between 2009 and 2011 18

Figure 5: Effects of Changes Made by 2009 Legislation on 

Participants, According to Officials in Six States 20

Figure 6: Effects of Changes Made by 2009 Legislation on 

Administrators, According to Officials in Six States 21

Figure 7: Percentage of Training Funds Expended by Six States, as 

of March 31, 2012 25

Figure 8: Eligibility for Specific TAA Program Benefits Set by Date 

of Petition Filing 27

Figure 9: Participant Demographics for Those Enrolled in the 2009 

Program, as of September 30, 2011 28

Figure 10: Participants Who Enrolled in One or More Training 

Activities, as of September 30, 2011 29

Figure 11: Types of Training Provided to Participants in Program, 

as of September 30, 2011 30

Figure 12: Duration of Training for Participants in the 2009 

Program Who Completed or Withdrew from Training as of 

September 30, 2011 31

Figure 13: Total Time Spent in Program for Those Exiting, as of 

September 30, 2011 35

Figure 14: Few Participants in the 2009 Program Had Information 

to Calculate TAA Performance Measures through Fiscal 

Year 2011 36
Page iii GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance 

Abbreviations 

HCTC Health Coverage Tax Credit 

Labor Department of Labor 

TAA Trade Adjustment Assistance 

TRA Trade Readjustment Allowances 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately. 
Page 1 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

September 28, 2012

The Honorable Max Baucus

Chairman

The Honorable Orrin G. Hatch

Ranking Member

Committee on Finance

United States Senate

The Honorable Dave Camp

Chairman

The Honorable Sander M. Levin

Ranking Member

Committee on Ways and Means

House of Representatives

During the recession of 2007 to 2009, the national unemployment rate 

peaked at 9.5 percent. The U.S. manufacturing sector was particularly 

hard hit by the recession, losing 17 percent of its workforce and reaching 

its lowest employment level since 1941. Further, while international trade 

has benefited Americans in a number of ways, it has also contributed to 

layoffs in a range of industries. Since such trade-displaced workers tend 

to be older, less-educated, and have fewer transferable skills than other 

displaced workers, they often have difficulty finding jobs in other 

industries without additional training.1

The Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for Workers program, which is 

administered by the Department of Labor (Labor), is the nation’s primary 

program assisting workers who have been adversely affected by 

international trade, providing income support, job training, and other 

benefits.2

 

1 See Sarah Dolfin and Jillian Berk, National Evaluation of the Trade Adjustment 

Assistance Program: Characteristics of Workers Eligible Under the 2002 TAA Program 

and Their Early Program Experiences, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., April 2010, a 

report prepared under contract with the Department of Labor.

Since the TAA program was first established at Labor by the 

2 The TAA for Workers program is generally referred to in this report as the TAA program. 

 
Page 2 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Trade Act of 1974, it has been amended a number of times.3 In August 

2002, the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reform Act of 2002 added 

several new benefits to the program.4 In February of 2009, the program 

was reauthorized and substantially amended and expanded by the Trade 

and Globalization Adjustment Assistance Act of 2009, which was a part of 

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.5

Although these changes were set to expire on December 31, 2010, the 

Omnibus Trade Act of 2010 generally extended them through February 

12, 2011.

The legislation changed 

a number of program elements, such as expanding eligibility to additional 

types of workers, extending the benefit period of income support, 

increasing the level of assistance provided for payment for qualified 

health plan premiums, and more than doubling the amount of training 

funding available. To accommodate both the cost of these program 

enhancements and higher program demand driven by the recession, 

Congress increased the overall funding level for the program by about 

$859 million, bringing funding to $1.8 billion in fiscal year 2010.

6, 7 After that date, the program reverted to the pre-expansion 

provisions until October 21, 2011, when the Trade Adjustment Assistance 

Extension Act of 2011 was signed into law.8 This law reauthorized TAA 

and reinstated most of the 2009 program provisions, such as the eligibility 

for service sector workers.9

 

3 Pub. L. No. 93-618, 88 Stat.1978. Trade adjustment assistance for workers was 

originally established by the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, but determinations of worker 

eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance were made by the Tariff Commission rather 

than the Department of Labor. 

However, some benefit levels, such as the 

level of assistance provided for paying for health plan premiums, were 

4 Pub. L. No. 107-210, div. A, 116 Stat. 933, 935-992.

5 Pub. L. No. 111-5, div. B, tit. I, subtit. I, 123 Stat. 367, 367-423.

6 Pub. L. No. 111-344, § 101, 124 Stat. 3612. 

7 Labor considered petitions received on or before February 14, 2011, as eligible for the 

2009 TAA program because February 12, 2011 was a Saturday.

8 Pub. L. No. 112-40, tit. II, 125 Stat. 401, 402-427. The TAA for Workers program is 

codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. §§ 2271 – 2323.

9 In this report, the TAA for Workers program as amended by the 2002 legislation is 

referred to as the 2002 program, the program as amended by the 2009 legislation is 

referred to as the 2009 program, and the program as amended by the 2011 legislation is 

referred to as the 2011 program.
Page 3 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

reduced. The expanded provisions of the 2011 law are set to expire on 

December 31, 2013.

The 2009 Act mandated that GAO report on the operation and 

effectiveness of the changes made by that Act no later than the end of 

fiscal year 2012.10

1. What challenges did Labor face implementing the 2009 legislation?

Accordingly, we addressed three research questions:

2. What effect do selected state government officials say the 2009 

legislative changes had on participants and on state and local 

administrators?

3. To what extent have participants received TAA benefits and services 

as established by the 2009 legislation and what is known about their 

employment outcomes?

To answer the first question, we interviewed officials at Labor to learn 

how the agency was affected by the legislative changes, such as the 

expanded eligibility criteria. We analyzed available data on TAA petitions, 

which are submitted to Labor on behalf of a group of workers for Labor’s 

determination of the workers’ eligibility to potentially receive TAA benefits. 

We also compared determination data for a nongeneralizable number of 

TAA petitions with determination letters published by Labor. In addition, 

we reviewed the internal controls for the petition investigation process. 

We also conducted an on-site review of seven case files. For the second 

question, we interviewed state government officials from six states: 

Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and 

Texas. These states were selected because they had a high fiscal year 

2010 training fund allocation, a high volume of TAA certifications, and 

geographic diversity. We also spoke with select local government officials 

in three of these states (Michigan, North Carolina, and Oregon). Through 

these interviews, we learned how selected state and local officials viewed 

key amendments’ effects on participants and on their administration of the 

program. For the third question, we analyzed Labor’s data on workers’ 

participation in specific activities as well as on their outcomes, as 

available.11

 

10 Pub. L. No. 111-5, § 1894, 123 Stat. 423.

For all research questions, we also reviewed relevant federal 

laws, regulations, guidance and pertinent Labor reports and procedures. 

11 At the time of review, September 30, 2011, was the latest date for which participant 

data were available.
Page 4 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

We assessed the reliability of both petition data and participant data by 

(1) performing manual and/or electronic testing of required data elements, 

(2) reviewing existing information about the data and the system that 

produced them, and (3) interviewing agency officials knowledgeable 

about the data. We determined that the data reported were sufficiently 

reliable for the purposes of our report, with the exception of data on the 

eligibility categories for certified petitions. At the time of our review, we 

had some reliability concerns about the data and, as a result, did not 

include it in our report. See appendix I for additional details on our 

objectives, scope, and methodology.

We conducted this performance audit from May 2011 to September 2012 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

The TAA for Workers program covers workers whose jobs have been 

threatened or lost due to changing trade patterns. While the specific 

services and benefits available through the program have changed over 

time, the primary forms of assistance that have been extended include 

income support and training.

In order for workers to apply for TAA benefits, Labor must certify that their 

separation was trade-affected.12

 

12 Not all workers covered by an approved TAA petition are individually eligible for TAA 

benefits. Individual workers must apply for benefits and eligibility depends on factors 

including the timing and duration of a worker’s layoff. In this report, when referring to 

workers eligible for the TAA program, we generally mean workers who have been certified 

as potentially eligible for the program.

This certification process begins when 

workers or their representatives file a petition with Labor on behalf of a 

group of laid-off workers. The agency then conducts fact-finding 

investigations to determine whether the workers’ jobs were adversely 

affected by international trade. In nearly all investigations, Labor contacts 

company officials to gather information on the circumstances of the layoff. 

This information is the basis for many petition decisions. As needed, 

Background 

TAA Certification Process
Page 5 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Labor may also gather information by surveying the company’s customers 

or examining aggregate industry data.

The TAA statute lays out certain basic requirements that all petitions must 

meet in order to be certified by Labor, including that a significant 

proportion of workers employed by a company be laid off or threatened 

with layoff. In addition, a petition must demonstrate that the layoff is 

related to international trade in one of several ways—for example, 

because the firm shifted production overseas or because increased 

imports competed with its products.

By law, Labor is required to conclude its investigation and either certify or 

deny a petition within 40 days of receiving it. Once Labor reaches a 

decision on the investigation, it notifies the relevant state, which has 

responsibility for contacting the workers regarding Labor’s decision. If the 

workers are certified, the state informs the workers of the benefits 

available to them, and when and where to apply for benefits. If a petition 

is denied, a worker may challenge the decision through an appeals 

process.13

The 2009 legislation made substantial changes to the TAA program, 

including extending eligibility to workers in a greater variety of 

circumstances.

14 For example, the law extended coverage to workers at 

firms that provide services—previously, eligibility was restricted to 

workers in firms producing goods. It also changed eligibility rules for other 

types of workers, such as those whose firms shifted production overseas, 

as shown in figure 1. To reflect this broadened eligibility, Labor more than 

doubled the number of categories by which it could certify a petition.15

 

13 Specifically, workers whose petition has been denied can either request an 

administrative reconsideration of the decision by Labor or can appeal to the United States 

Court of International Trade for judicial review of Labor’s denial.

14 Pub. L. No. 111-5, §§ 1801-1858, 123 Stat. 367-395.

15 Specifically, the number of categories by which Labor could certify a petition rose from 

7 to 17 after the 2009 legislation passed.

2009 Changes to the TAA 

Program
Page 6 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 1: Examples of Expanded Eligibility under the 2009 TAA Program

The 2009 legislation also generally enhanced TAA benefit levels. The 

amount of funding available for training nationally more than doubled—

from $220 million to $575 million for fiscal years 2009 and 2010.16

Further, the legislation increased either the amount or duration of many 

specific benefits and services, which are available to eligible workers 

covered by certified petitions filed between May 18, 2009, and February 

14, 2011. Specifically, these enhanced benefits and services include:17

• Extended deadline for enrollment. The 2009 legislation extended the 

deadline by which workers must enroll in or receive a waiver from 

training to be eligible to receive income-based support to the later of 

26 weeks from the date of TAA certification or the date of separation 

from employment. Previously, the deadline for enrolling in training was 

the later of 8 weeks after TAA certification or 16 weeks after 

separation from employment. The deadline was extended in part to 

 

16 The 2009 law also provided $143,750,000 for the period between October 1, 2010, and 

December 31, 2010.

17 Workers covered by certified petitions that were filed between May 18, 2009, and 

February 14, 2011 remain eligible for the 2009 program provisions even after the new 

legislation passed in October 2011. 
Page 7 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

give laid-off workers more time to search for a job before deciding to 

enroll in training.

• Extended income support. Participants enrolled in full-time training 

who have exhausted their unemployment insurance may receive a 

continuation of income support equal to their final unemployment 

insurance benefit. The 2009 legislation provided that participants may 

receive up to 130 weeks of income support, up from 104 weeks under 

the prior law. For participants who require remedial or prerequisite 

courses, the maximum level of income support increased from 130 to 

156 weeks. Income support was extended in part to enable workers to 

participate in longer training programs.

• Training. Under the 2009 program, participants have additional 

training opportunities beyond those that were available under the 

2002 program. The 2009 legislation authorized training for workers 

threatened with a layoff that has not yet occurred in addition to 

workers who have been laid off. The law also authorized participants 

to attend training part-time, but limited eligibility for income support to 

workers in full-time training.

• Wage supplement. The 2009 legislation increased the income 

eligibility threshold and maximum wage supplement benefit for some 

older workers.18 TAA participants 50 years or older who secure a new, 

lower paying job than their previous trade-impacted job may be 

eligible to receive wage supplements.19

• Job search and relocation allowances. The 2009 legislation increased 

the amount of job search and relocation expenses for which state 

The 2009 legislation 

eliminated the requirement that such workers find employment within 

26 weeks of being laid off. It also allowed older workers receiving the 

wage supplement to participate in full-time training if employed at 

least 20 hours per week. Workers employed on a full-time basis who 

were not enrolled in training maintained their eligibility for wage 

supplements.

 

18 Specifically, the 2009 legislation increases the maximum annual income eligible for a 

wage supplement from $50,000 to $55,000 and increased the maximum supplement from 

$10,000 to $12,000 over 2 years.

19 Under the 2009 legislation, the wage supplement program for older workers is known as 

the Reemployment Trade Adjustment Assistance program, which replaced the earlier 

Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance demonstration program.
Page 8 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

workforce agencies could reimburse eligible participants.20

• Health coverage benefit. The 2009 legislation increased the amount of 

the tax credit TAA participants could receive through the Health 

Coverage Tax Credit (HCTC) program from 65 percent to 80 percent 

of qualifying monthly health plan premiums. The Internal Revenue 

Service administers this program.

Specifically, the 2009 legislation provided that the lump sum of job 

search and relocation expenses would cover 100 percent (up from 90 

percent) of the costs, to a maximum of $1,500 (up from $1,250).

The 2009 legislation also affected Labor’s operations by, for example, 

establishing a new Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance and requiring 

Labor to collect additional information on workers who receive TAA 

benefits and services, as well as data on service sector workers, including 

the service workers’ state, industry, and reason for certification.

Although the changes made by the 2009 legislation were set to expire on 

December 31, 2010, Congress extended them through February 12, 

2011. At that time, the TAA program reverted to provisions as authorized 

by the prior law, the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reform Act of 2002. 

Eight months later, in October 2011, Congress passed the Trade 

Adjustment Assistance Extension Act of 2011, which reinstated many of 

the program provisions established by the 2009 legislation, including 

eligibility for service sector workers.21

 

20 To be eligible for job search and relocation allowances, it must be determined that the 

worker cannot be expected to find suitable employment within the commuting area in 

which the worker resides.

However, this most recent 

legislation also reduced some of the other benefits and services to the 

levels set by the 2002 program, such as scaling back the maximum 

number of weeks of income support from 130 to 104 for participants 

enrolled in basic training and lowering allowances for job search and 

relocation from $1,500 to $1,250. See appendix II for a detailed 

comparison of the 2002, 2009, and 2011 program provisions.

21 The 2011 legislation required Labor, with regard to petitions filed between February 13, 

2011, and October 21, 2011, to automatically reconsider denied petitions using the 2011 

eligibility provisions. The legislation further provided that workers certified under petitions 

filed between those dates who began receiving benefits before December 20, 2011 would 

receive 2002 program benefits, but could apply to switch to 2011 program benefits until 

March 19, 2012. 
Page 9 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

In addition to changes in participant benefits and services, the 2009 

legislation added requirements regarding the allocation of TAA training 

funds to the states. It required Labor to make an initial distribution of no 

more than 65 percent of available funds, holding 35 percent in reserve for 

additional distributions throughout the year, but ensuring a distribution of 

at least 90 percent of funds no later than July 15 of the fiscal year. The 

law specified a number of factors for Labor to take into account in making 

distributions to the states, including factors Labor might consider 

appropriate, and specified that a state’s initial distribution had to be at 

least 25 percent of the distribution it received in the preceding fiscal 

year.22

The 2009 legislation required that, to cover states’ administrative costs 

and employment and case management services, Labor distribute to 

each state an additional amount equal to 15 percent of its annual training 

allocation. States were required to use at least one-third of those 

administrative funds for case management and employment services. 

The 2009 legislation also required that each state be provided an 

additional $350,000 for case management and employment services. 

States have 3 years to expend these federal funds. As such, fiscal year 

2009 funds had to be used by the end of fiscal year 2011.23

State and local workforce agencies play key roles in the petition 

certification process and help workers take advantage of the services and 

benefits available through the TAA program. The agencies assist workers 

and employers in filing petitions and can also file petitions on behalf of 

workers. After a petition is certified, the agencies contact employers to 

obtain a list of workers affected by the layoff and send each worker a 

letter notifying him or her of potential eligibility. The agencies may also 

 

22 In accordance with the specified factors for distribution, Labor allocates the initial 

distribution of funds to states based on (1) the number of workers covered by 

certifications, (2) the number of workers participating in training, (3) the number of workers 

estimated to be participating in approved training during the fiscal year, and (4) the 

amount of funding estimated to be necessary to provide approved training.

23 The 2011 legislation eliminated the provision in the 2009 legislation providing an 

additional $350,000 to each state for case management and employment services and 

specified that 15 percent of a state’s overall allocation of funds should be used for 

administration and case management and employment services. In contrast, the 2009 

legislation provided for an additional amount equal to 15 percent of a state’s training 

allocation for such activities.

TAA Funding

Role of State and Local 

Workforce Agencies
Page 10 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

hold orientation sessions to provide workers with detailed information on 

the TAA program and other services and benefits available. In addition, 

case managers provide vocational assessments and counseling to help 

workers enroll in the program and decide which services or benefits are 

most appropriate. Local case managers also refer workers to other 

programs, such as the Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs under the 

Workforce Investment Act,24 for additional services.

Labor is responsible for monitoring the performance of the TAA program. 

Its primary reporting system, the Trade Activity Participant Report, is 

intended to track information on TAA activity for individuals from the point 

of TAA eligibility determination through post-participation outcomes.25

The 2009 legislation added a new requirement for states to report on all 

participants who are enrolled in the TAA program and not just those who 

exited the program, as required by Labor. As a result of this change, 

Labor revised its reporting system and required states to submit 

additional information to track individual benefits and services provided to 

participants under the new law. In addition, the 2009 legislation required 

states to report on program outcomes for a longer period after 

Prior to 2010, the TAA information was reported only on those who had 

exited the program, as required by Labor. Each quarter, states are 

required to submit data on participants who received TAA program 

services. These data include participant demographics; information on 

services and benefits received, such as case management and 

reemployment services; income support; and participant outcomes such 

as employment status and earnings after program exit. States primarily 

track these outcomes using the Unemployment Insurance wage records. 

Labor uses data submitted by states to report national outcomes on the 

TAA performance measures for each fiscal year.

 

24 The Workforce Investment Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-220, established the Adult and 

Dislocated Worker programs, which authorize grants to states for a broad range of 

employment and training activities including job search assistance, assessment, and 

training for eligible individuals.

25 Under the 2002 TAA program, data reported on participants was less comprehensive 

as states only reported information on participants who had exited the program and not on 

those who were still enrolled.

TAA Performance and 

Reporting Requirements
Page 11 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

participants exit the program.26 Labor reports on the TAA program’s three 

core measures of program performance: entered employment rate, 

average earnings, and employment retention rate. For fiscal year 2012, 

Labor’s performance goals for the TAA program were 59 percent for 

entered employment, $13,248 for average earnings over a 6-month 

period, and 83.2 percent for employment retention.

The TAA for Workers program is one of four trade adjustment assistance 

programs; the other three provide assistance to firms, farms, and 

communities. The Department of Commerce administers a TAA program 

that provides funds for manufacturing and other types of firms to develop 

and implement a business recovery plan. The Department of Agriculture 

administers the TAA for Farmers program, which provided help to 

individual producers of raw agricultural commodities, such as farmers and 

fishermen, to become more competitive in producing their current 

commodity or transitioning to a different commodity. Under a TAA 

program to assist trade-affected communities, Labor awards grants to 

institutions of higher education for expanding or improving education and 

career training programs for persons eligible for training under the TAA 

for Workers program, and the Department of Commerce provides 

technical assistance to trade-affected communities and awards and 

oversees strategic planning and implementation grants. In addition to 

mandating that GAO report on the TAA for Workers program, the 2009 

Act mandated that GAO report on the other TAA programs as well. Our 

report on the Farmers program was issued in July 2012 and our reports 

 

26 The difference relates to the quarters in which performance is tracked. Previously, the 

performance measures were based on the first, second, and third quarters after exit. 

Under the new law, performance is based on the second, third, and fourth quarters after 

exit.

Related TAA Programs
Page 12 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

related to the TAA programs that assist firms and communities were 

issued in September 2012.27

Labor took multiple steps to implement the 2009 legislation after it was 

enacted. For example, it set up the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance 

established by the legislation, which took over administration of the TAA 

program from the Office of National Response. Also, as required by the 

legislation, Labor issued a regulation implementing the new requirements 

for the distribution of training funds to states.28 Agency officials told us 

that they also drafted a regulation on investigation standards, as required, 

but did not publish the regulation because by the time it was ready for 

publication, the 2009 provisions were set to expire.29

 

27 GAO, Trade Adjustment Assistance: USDA Has Enhanced Technical Assistance for 

Farmers and Fishermen, but Steps Are Needed to Better Evaluate Program Effectiveness, 

Also, in accordance 

with the legislation, the agency updated its information technology system 

to collect data on service sector workers and implemented a new 

reporting system for states to collect data on participant activities and 

outcomes. Labor also took implementation steps beyond those 

specifically required by law, such as providing training and technical 

GAO-12-731 (Washington D.C.: July 12, 2012). GAO, Trade Adjustment Assistance: 

Commerce Program Has Helped Manufacturing and Services Firms, but Measures, Data, 

and Funding Formula Could Improve, GAO-12-930 (Washington D.C.: September 13, 

2012). GAO, Trade Adjustment Assistance: One-Time Grants Awarded to Trade-Impacted 

Communities; Program Results Will Not Be Known until after 2013, GAO-12-993 

(Washington D.C.: September 26, 2012). GAO, Trade Adjustment Assistance: Labor 

Awarded Community College Grants in Accordance with Requirements, but Needs to 

Improve Its Process, GAO-12-954 (Washington D.C.: September 28, 2012).

28 75 Fed. Reg. 16,988 (Apr. 2, 2010) (codified at 20 C.F.R. §§ 618.900 – 618.940).

29 Labor officials told us that at this time, the agency does not anticipate publishing 

regulations on eligibility standards for the 2011 legislation before it expires. 

Labor Faced Initial 

Challenges in 

Implementing the 

2009 Legislation and 

Took Steps to Address 

Them 

2009 Legislation Increased 

Volume and Processing 

Complexity of TAA 

Petitions 
Page 13 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

assistance to state workforce agencies and issuing revised guidance on 

program operations.30

Labor’s primary implementation challenge after the 2009 legislation was 

addressing a substantial increase in its workload to process petitions. As 

depicted in figure 2, the number of petitions the agency received in the 

third quarter of fiscal year 2009, when the law took effect in May 2009, 

was more than triple the number received the previous quarter. Multiple 

factors contributed to this increase. According to agency officials, the 

increase in petitions was caused by the 2009 legislation’s expansion of 

eligibility to new categories of workers as well as the economic recession, 

which may have increased trade-related layoffs. Another cause for the 

spike in petitions is that in the months before the law took effect, Labor 

allowed petitioners to withdraw and then resubmit petitions after the 2009 

legislation took effect, so they could take advantage of the new, 

enhanced benefit levels. As a result, an agency official estimated that 

roughly 500 petitions were withdrawn before May 18, 2009, and then 

resubmitted after the law took effect.

According to the state officials we interviewed, this 

assistance was generally both helpful and timely.

 

30 See Department of Labor, Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 22-08

(Washington, D.C.: May 15, 2009).
Page 14 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 2: Increase in the Number of TAA Petitions Labor Received

According to Labor officials, the 2009 legislation generally made it more 

challenging to determine TAA eligibility. As described earlier, the law 

expanded the number of categories for which petitions could be certified. 

Agency officials told us that this expansion complicated investigators’ 

efforts because petitions needed to be evaluated against a greater 

number of eligibility criteria than before. Further, some of the new 

categories presented additional challenges. According to Labor officials, 

the firms identified in service-related petitions tended to be more 

dispersed geographically than manufacturing firms, making it more 

difficult to evaluate certain service-related petitions. For example, in 

cases where the work that was shifted abroad was performed by workers 

in multiple locations, it may be difficult to determine exactly which workers 

had been affected. In addition, some officials said that investigating 

petitions in which workers produce finished articles that contain foreign 

components, such as tubes used in televisions, proved challenging. Labor 

said these petitions often require contact with foreign firms, which can 

present communication challenges—for example, due to differences in 

currencies and time zones. Further, they noted the absence of any legal 
Page 15 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

requirement for foreign companies to comply with Labor’s data requests. 

In contrast to these challenges, Labor officials told us that the 2009 

legislation made some investigations easier. Previously, TAA eligibility 

standards were different for nations that did and did not have a free trade 

agreement or preferential trade relationship with the United States. The 

2009 legislation eliminated this difference, making it more straightforward 

to investigate shifts in production.

Labor initially had insufficient capacity to handle its increased workload, 

and thus, lagged in processing petitions. As described previously, Labor 

is required to process a petition—that is, determine whether to certify or 

deny it—within 40 days. The quarter after the 2009 legislation took effect, 

on average, Labor took 153 days to process a petition—nearly four times 

as long as the statutory limit (see fig. 3). Multiple factors contributed to the 

lag, including an increased volume of petitions, initial staff shortages and 

turnover, and the need for staff to become familiar with the new 

provisions of the 2009 legislation. An official noted that initially, hiring 

proved challenging because the 2009 legislation did not authorize funds 

for implementation. As a result, Labor paid for new hires through the 

agency’s general management funds. Most new staff members were 

hired in July 2009, approximately 2 months after the law took effect.

Labor’s Processing 

Timeliness Adversely 

Affected by Increased 

Petition Volume and Initial 

Staff Shortage
Page 16 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 3: Average Number of Days to Make a Petition Decision, by Fiscal Quarter Received

During our review of TAA data and petition case files, we discovered that 

Labor mislabeled the basis for several certifications in its records, 

suggesting that data reported to Congress may contain inaccuracies. 

These errors were likely caused by the high volume of petitions that 

required processing, staff shortages and turnover, and gaps in internal 

controls. Moreover, as described earlier, the number of categories by 

which petitions could be certified more than doubled after the 2009 

legislation. Labor told us that investigators’ unfamiliarity with these new 

categories may have also contributed to errors. In one instance, Labor 

certified a petition based on imports of goods, but the staff member who 

entered this information into the information technology system 

inaccurately recorded the eligibility category as imports of services. In 

another case, Labor officials acknowledged that a certification based on 

imports of goods was improperly documented as imports of services in 

the petition case file itself. Among other gaps in internal controls, we 

found that a single staff member was responsible for recording the reason 

for each certification in Labor’s information technology system. The errors 

we found do not necessarily indicate that petitions were wrongly 

determined, and we did not examine whether any individual 

determinations were correct. However, the errors indicate that some 

petitions were mislabeled after they were certified. Agency officials 
Page 17 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

acknowledged that both types of errors occurred and told us that they 

were most likely to occur in petitions filed during the first year of the 2009 

program, a period in which approximately 4,000 petitions were processed.

Labor took steps to address its implementation challenges, including 

roughly doubling its staff. In the months after the 2009 legislation took 

effect in May 2009, Labor hired approximately 30 new staff, some on a 

permanent basis and others as temporary hires. Although most new staff 

members were hired in July 2009, agency officials estimate that it takes 

approximately 6 months to fully train a new investigator. As a result, 

officials said the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance reached its peak 

operating capacity in January 2010, approximately 8 months after the 

2009 legislation took effect.31

In tandem with its efforts to increase capacity, Labor took steps to 

enhance its internal controls by adding quality controls to its petition 

investigation process. As shown in figure 4, Labor incorporated these 

controls over approximately 2 years. In December 2009, for example, 

Labor began requiring a senior investigator to review each petition case 

file before and after the determination was reached to ensure the file 

included appropriate documentation. Previously, petitions were subject to 

a single review by the certifying officer. Second, in May 2010, the agency 

created a checklist that specified standard operating procedures and 

accuracy checks for investigations. The final version of this checklist, 

established in the spring of 2011, has specific targets for data entry 

accuracy, timeliness of investigations, customer outreach, and more. 

Finally, in the fall of 2011, Labor began quarterly tests to gauge how often 

these targets were reached. In the first quarter that tests were conducted, 

Labor told us that investigators met the quality control targets 87 percent 

of the time on average, slightly below the agency’s internal goal of 90 

percent.

Labor’s efforts to increase staff were 

hampered by frequent employee turnover. According to Labor officials, 

many staff hired on a temporary basis left the agency when they found 

permanent positions elsewhere, diminishing Labor’s overall capacity to 

process petitions.

 

31 At that time, the office included 61 staff, including 32 full-time staff, 20 temporary staff, 3 

staff detailed from other offices, and 6 contractors.

Labor Took Corrective 

Action to Address 

Challenges in Processing 

Petitions 
Page 18 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 4: Quality Control Steps Added to Labor’s Petition Investigation Process Between 2009 and 2011

It took some time for the benefits of increased staffing and improved 

quality controls to take effect. By the end of fiscal year 2010, petition 

processing times had fallen substantially, although by this time the 

number of petitions Labor received had declined. Moreover, in June 2012, 

we reviewed Labor’s petition investigation process and found that it 

generally conformed to best practices for internal controls.
Page 19 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Further, in September 2012, Labor conducted an internal audit to 

determine how often the basis for a certification was improperly recorded 

in either the petition case file or the agency’s information technology 

system. This review covered the period from May 18, 2009, until May 31, 

2010, when Labor introduced additional quality control steps. Through an 

audit of 351 randomly selected petitions, Labor estimated the error rate to 

be 1.4 percent, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percent. 

According to Labor, this audit suggests that errors were more likely to be 

present in the information technology system than in the petition case file 

itself. Labor concluded that this low percentage of error had a minimal 

impact on the petition data reported in its 2010 annual report to Congress. 

Labor said it has corrected all errors found in its audit findings, and as 

part of new quality control procedures, has established a more frequent 

internal audit system that will identify and correct such errors throughout 

each quarterly reporting cycle.

Participants benefited from nearly all of the 2009 legislative changes, 

some of which also helped administrators better serve the participants, 

according to the state officials we interviewed. For example, the 

expanded eligibility for workers, such as for those in the service sector, 

benefited participants by providing access to program benefits for tradeaffected workers under a wider array of circumstances, such as call 

center employees whose jobs were moved overseas. Figures 5 and 6 

summarize the views of officials in the six states we examined.

Nearly All of the 

Changes Benefited 

Participants and 

Some Helped 

Administrators As 

Well
Page 20 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 5: Effects of Changes Made by 2009 Legislation on Participants, According to Officials in Six States

Note: None of the state officials viewed any change as having a negative effect on participants. The 

changes appear in order of impact on participants from positive to neutral.
Page 21 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 6: Effects of Changes Made by 2009 Legislation on Administrators, According to Officials in Six States

Note: The changes appear in order of impact on administrators from positive to negative.

Both participants and administrators benefited from a simplified and 

extended training enrollment deadline—which must be met to qualify for 

TAA-based income support—according to officials from all six states. 

Previously, eligible workers had to enroll in training within 8 weeks of their 

petition’s certification or 16 weeks of their separation, whichever was 

later. The 2009 legislation extended the training enrollment deadline to 26 

weeks after the later of certification or separation. An official from one 

state told us that the new extended deadline was easier for eligible 

workers to understand since the period of time within which individuals 

had to enroll in training was the same, regardless of whether that period 

began at the date of separation or certification. According to several 

Extended Training 

Enrollment Deadline
Page 22 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

officials we interviewed, the extended deadline allowed participants to 

more fully consider their employment and training options, and therefore 

facilitated better decision making. The longer enrollment period also 

positively affected administrators. Some state officials noted that the 

extension provided case managers with more time to assess participants’ 

skills and abilities and advise them on employment and training options.

In addition to extending time frames for participants, the 2009 legislation 

provided dedicated funding to states for case management and 

employment services, which indirectly benefited participants, according to 

several state officials. Previously, states did not receive funds for case 

management and employment services, and so resources from other 

programs were often used to support TAA participants. Several state 

officials said that dedication of these funds allowed case managers to 

better serve participants. Generally, these funds were used to pay the 

salaries of TAA case managers.32, 33 In some cases, this built capacity, 

such as when the funds were used to hire new TAA staff who provided 

these services. In other cases, the TAA funds replaced funding from other 

sources, for example, when services were provided through the 

Workforce Investment Act, according to several state officials. Officials 

from several states said that the dedication of these funds reduced the 

financial burden the TAA program had previously placed on other 

workforce programs.

Other 2009 program provisions that benefited both participants and 

administrators were related to new authorities allowing state officials to 

waive certain deadlines for eligible workers. The law allowed for the 

application of states’ good cause provisions, which permit state officials to 

 

32According to several state officials, meeting the requirement to spend one-third of their 

administrative funding on case management was not difficult. 

33 Under a rule Labor published on April 12, 2010, states were required, no later than 

February 12, 2011, to use state government employees covered by a merit system of 

personnel administration to perform TAA funded functions undertaken to carry out TAA 

provisions. 75 Fed. Reg. 16, 988 (April l 2, 2010) (codified at 20 C.F.R. §618.890). (The 

Omnibus Trade Act of 2010 extended the initial regulatory deadline of December 15, 

2010, to February 12, 2011. Pub. L. No. 111-344, §102, 124 Stat. 3614.) As a result, 

officials from one state told us that they calculated exactly how many TAA staff they could 

support with the TAA funding and then used funds from other sources to pay non-merit 

staff providing case management.

Dedicated Funding for 

Case Management and 

Employment Services

New Authority to Waive 

Deadlines
Page 23 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

waive deadlines for TAA-based income support and enrollment in 

training. Similarly, it also provided an exception to the training enrollment 

deadline in cases where an eligible worker missed the deadline because 

he or she was not given timely notification of the deadlines. Both 

participants and administrators benefited from these changes, according 

to the officials from five of the six states we interviewed. Officials from one 

of these states told us that the waivers reduced the administrative burden 

of processing appeals from eligible workers who missed the enrollment 

deadline.

Further, several of the changes made by the 2009 legislation benefited 

participants who enrolled in training, according to most of the officials we 

interviewed, including:

• the possibility of receiving income support for longer than previously 

available;

• the option to start training while threatened with job loss (prior to 

actually losing their jobs);

• the flexibility to attend training on a part-time basis; and

• an increase in the amount of training funds available.

According to several officials, the additional 26 weeks of potential income 

support while in training allowed program participants to consider longerterm training options, such as health care, a high-demand profession. In 

addition, officials said that since participants often drop out of training 

after income support expires, this change bolstered training program 

completion. Some officials also said that in some cases, the flexibility to 

attend training part-time may have contributed to higher training 

completion rates. For example, some full-time training participants who 

gained employment before their training program ended opted to finish 

their training part-time. Officials said that without the part-time option, 

such participants would have likely dropped out of training altogether. 

Officials from five states said the shift allowing part-time training had a 

neutral effect on administration. However, officials from one state 

attributed their state’s relatively low part-time enrollment rates to the 

requirement that TAA-based income is contingent upon full-time 

enrollment in training.34

 

34 Only workers enrolled in full-time training are eligible for TAA-based income support. 

Enhanced and Expanded 

Training Benefits
Page 24 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Moreover, according to state officials, the increase in available training 

funds from $220 million to $575 million per fiscal year benefited 

participants. In one state, officials said that having access to additional 

funds increased its statewide caps on training program costs, which 

allowed them to keep pace with higher education institutions’ rising 

tuitions.35 Officials in another state said that receiving these additional 

funds allowed them to train all eligible participants rather than putting 

some on waiting lists for training. Further, a few state officials noted that 

the increased funds for training enabled them to serve an increased 

volume of participants. As shown in figure 7, five of the selected six states 

expended all of their fiscal year 2009 training funds—the only 3-year 

spending period that has expired. Thus far, these states have drawn 

down, on average, 76 percent of the training funds allocated to them for 

fiscal year 2010.36

 

35 It is unclear what relationship exists, if any, between tuition levels and state-specified 

training amounts. Officials from one state we interviewed reported that higher education 

institutions may have raised their tuition levels to match increases in state-specified 

training amounts. 

See appendix III for additional information on state 

expenditures.

36 Data is current as of March 31, 2012, and fiscal year 2010 funds can be drawn down 

through September 30, 2012. 

Increase in Available 

Training Funds
Page 25 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 7: Percentage of Training Funds Expended by Six States, as of March 31, 2012

Note: As of March 31, 2012, neither Massachusetts nor North Carolina had expended any of their 

fiscal year 2011 allocation.

Other changes made by the 2009 legislation, specifically those made to 

the older worker wage supplement and the HCTC programs, also 

benefited participants, according to officials from all six states. First, 

although the 2009 legislation modified the wage supplement for older 

workers in several ways, several state officials said that eliminating the 

employment deadline was most important. A few noted that, prior to the 

changes, laid-off older workers often struggled to obtain employment by 

the deadline of 26 weeks after their layoff. Second, regarding changes to 

the HCTC program, some officials noted that increasing the amount of the 

health care premiums from 65 percent to 80 percent improved 

participants’ ability to afford health care. However, other officials said that 

even with the premium assistance, many TAA program participants could 

not afford to pay for their share of health plan premiums. According to 

some state officials, it is unclear as to whether participation in this 

program increased as a result of the change.

Enhancements to Wage 

Supplement and Health 

Coverage Tax Credit 

Programs
Page 26 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

State officials we spoke to differed on the extent to which they thought 

another change made by the 2009 legislation—the increased maximum 

allowance for job search and relocation expenses—affected participants. 

While some state officials viewed the increase as having a positive effect 

on participants, others noted that the higher benefit amount probably had 

not induced more participants to apply for such allowances. Officials told 

us that few participants have chosen to relocate despite higher 

reimbursement for associated expenses. According to a few officials, 

many participants do not want to relocate for various reasons, including 

being settled in a particular community, not being able to sell their house, 

or not wanting to disrupt their children’s schooling. 

Although some of the changes made by the 2009 legislation helped 

administrators better serve participants, as previous discussed, many had 

no clear effect, according to selected state officials. For example,

administrators said they had not been affected by the change to the 

HCTC program—primarily because it is managed by the Internal 

Revenue Service. In addition, officials from all six states said that the 

increased allowances for job search and relocation had no impact on 

administrators. Officials from one state noted that the change only 

required a minor modification to their processing forms. In contrast, 

officials in two states separately viewed two changes as having a 

somewhat negative effect on administrators. Officials from one state said 

that allowing participants to attend training part-time potentially increases 

the associated administrative burden because some participants switch 

their training attendance status between full-time and part-time, which 

affects not only their training plan, but also their eligibility for TAA based 

income support. According to officials from another state, allowing 

participants in the wage supplement program for older workers to receive 

training in addition to income support made the program more 

complicated to administer.

While the specific changes made by the 2009 legislation generally 

affected administrators in a positive or neutral manner, a few state 

officials noted the more general challenge of concurrently administering 

TAA under various sets of program provisions. Eligible workers generally 

qualify for the benefits and services specified by the TAA legislation that 

is effective at the time their petitions are filed. Thus, after the 2009 TAA 

legislation passed, administrators were not only serving these newly 

eligible workers, but also participants already in the program who 

qualified under the 2002 legislation. When the most recent TAA 

Increased Allowances for 

Job Search and Relocation 

Expenses 

Many Changes Had No 

Effect on Administrators

Challenge to Administer 

TAA under Multiple 

Program Provisions
Page 27 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

legislation passed in October 2011, administrators began to operate 

under a third set of program provisions. Further, because there was a gap 

of several months between when the 2009 legislation expired and the 

2011 legislation passed, workers covered by petitions certified during this 

time may receive benefits and services under either the 2002 provisions 

or the 2011 provisions (see fig. 8).

Figure 8: Eligibility for Specific TAA Program Benefits Set by Date of Petition Filing

TAA provides participants with a variety of benefits and services—some 

were used more than others. As of September 30, 2011, 107,896 

participants received services under the 2009 TAA program.37

 

37 At the time of our review, September 30, 2011, was the latest date for which participant 

data was available. 

As shown 

in figure 9, the majority of these participants were male and most were 

white. Nearly half the participants were age 50 or older and nearly twothirds had a high school education or less.

Over 107,000 Workers 

Received Benefits and 

Services, but Little Is 

Known About Their 

Outcomes 

About Half of the 

Participants in the 2009 

Program Enrolled in 

Training, but Other 

Benefits Were Less Utilized
Page 28 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 9: Participant Demographics for Those Enrolled in the 2009 Program, as of September 30, 2011

Note: In determining the percentages for ethnicity, we excluded participants who did not indicate an 

ethnic group or who identified multiple ethnic groups.

All 107,896 participants who received services under the 2009 TAA 

program received case management and employment services and 

nearly half enrolled in training. Most of the participants who enrolled in 

training had only one training activity, but some enrolled in two or three 

training activities (see fig.10).
Page 29 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 10: Participants Who Enrolled in One or More Training Activities, as of 

September 30, 2011

Participants can receive different types of training, but occupational skills 

training—training in specific occupations typically provided in a classroom 

setting—was the most common type of training provided (see fig. 11). In 

addition to occupational training, participants received other types of 

training, such as remedial training, which includes adult basic education 

and English as a Second Language. These types of training were 

provided less frequently than occupational training.
Page 30 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 11: Types of Training Provided to Participants in Program, as of September 

30, 2011

Note: Other includes on-the-job training, customized training, prerequisite training, and apprenticeship 

training.

Participants in the 2009 TAA program received training in a variety of 

occupational fields, most commonly related to computers, health, and 

production occupations (see table 1).

Table 1: Occupational Skills Training Most Frequently Provided to Participants in 

the 2009 Program 

Occupational field

Number of 

participants

Computer occupations (such as computer support specialist) 3,795

Health technologists and technicians (such as medical records and 

health information technician and licensed practical and licensed 

vocational nurses)

3,767

Other production occupations (such as production worker helper) 3,193

Other installation, maintenance, and repair occupations (such as

heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration mechanic and installer)

2,557

Other health care support occupations (such as medical assistant) 2,159

Source: GAO analysis of Department of Labor participant data.

As of the end of fiscal year 2011, approximately half of the 2009 program 

participants who had enrolled in training were still in a training activity. For 
Page 31 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

those 24,568 participants who completed or withdrew from training, the 

average amount of time spent in training was approximately 43 weeks. As 

shown in figure 12, nearly one-third of these participants spent between a 

half year and a full year in training.

Figure 12: Duration of Training for Participants in the 2009 Program Who 

Completed or Withdrew from Training as of September 30, 2011

While approximately 50,000 participants enrolled in training under the 

2009 program, fewer participants took advantage of several benefits and 

services that were added to, or expanded under, the 2009 program. For 

example, the 2009 legislation added part-time training and pre-layoff 

training for adversely affected incumbent workers.38

 

38 Adversely affected incumbent workers are those who have been threatened with a 

layoff, but have not yet been separated from the company.

The legislation also 

increased the job search and relocation allowances and modified the 

program providing wage supplements for older workers. As shown in 

table 2, fewer than 8 percent of the participants who received benefits 

under the 2009 program used each of these benefits.
Page 32 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Table 2: Percentage of 2009 Program Participants Accessing Various Benefits as of 

September 30, 2011

2009 program benefit 

Number of participants 

accessing benefits

Percentage of all 

participants

Training for adversely affected 

incumbent workers

8,540 7.9

Wage supplement for older workers 5,521 5.1

Relocation allowance 534 0.5

Part-time training 462 0.4

Job search allowance 178 0.2

Source: GAO analysis of Department of Labor participant data.

Note: Not all participants would be eligible to access training for adversely affected incumbent 

workers or receive the wage supplement for older workers.

The wage supplement for older workers and the job search and relocation 

allowances are benefits that have not been widely utilized in the past. For 

example, we previously reported that fewer than 3,500 workers had 

utilized this benefit each year between 2004 and 2006.39 Similarly, not 

many participants have typically received job search and relocation 

allowances. For example, the Congressional Research Service reported 

that fewer than 500 workers received job search allowances each year 

between fiscal years 2006 and 2008, while fewer than 800 received 

relocation allowances during those years.40

While not used extensively, about 13 percent of the 5,521 older workers 

who participated in the wage supplement program also enrolled in 

training—a benefit available to eligible older workers participating in the 

2009 program. Under the 2002 program, workers who participated in the 

wage supplement program for older workers were not eligible to receive 

training.

Based on our prior work on HCTC, we found that participation in the 

program initially increased after the 2009 legislation. HCTC was another 

 

39 GAO, Trade Adjustment Assistance: Changes to Funding Allocation and Eligibility

Requirements Could Enhance States’ Ability to Provide Benefits and Services, 

GAO-07-701 (Washington D.C.: May 31, 2007).

40 Congressional Research Service, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers (TAA) and 

Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA), RS22718 (Washington, D.C.: May 5, 

2011).
Page 33 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

benefit that was enhanced under the 2009 legislation, increasing the tax 

credit covering monthly health insurance premiums from 65 percent to 80 

percent. Because HCTC is administered by the IRS, Labor does not 

collect information on how many TAA participants used this benefit. 

However, we reported in 2010 that during the 6 months after key changes 

in the 2009 legislation took effect, the average monthly participation rate 

for TAA individuals was about 10,000.41 This represented an increase in 

participation compared to the 6 months prior to the passage of the 

legislation.42

Few participants received income support under the TAA program, likely 

as a result of the availability of extended unemployment benefits. As 

previously discussed, the 2009 legislative changes lengthened the 

number of weeks participants could receive income support while enrolled 

in full-time training and provided additional weeks of support for those 

participants simultaneously enrolled in remedial or prerequisite 

education.43

 

41 GAO, Health Coverage Tax Credit: Participation and Administrative Costs, 

However, as of September 30, 2011, only about 8 percent of 

the participants in the 2009 program received income support under TAA. 

On average, participants received this income support for about 21 

weeks. According to Labor officials, the availability of extended 

unemployment benefits may have made many TAA participants ineligible 

for income support payments under TAA. Specifically, because 

participants must completely exhaust unemployment insurance benefits 

before receiving TAA income support, extended unemployment benefits 

provided through the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program 

likely reduced or replaced TAA income support payments in many 

GAO-10-521R (Washington, D.C.: April 30, 2010).

42 Our analysis found that in the 6 months after key changes in the 2009 legislation took 

effect, the average number of TAA eligible individuals increased by 40 percent, and the 

average number of TAA eligible individuals per month participating in the HCTC increased 

by 67 percent.

43 Under the 2009 TAA program, participants could receive up to 130 weeks of income 

support, plus an additional 26 weeks if they are also enrolled in remedial or prerequisite 

education. In total, the number of weeks for which participants could receive income 

support increased by 26 weeks.
Page 34 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

cases.44 These officials also said that, once these extended benefits 

expire, the number of participants receiving TAA income support and the 

average duration of TAA income support may increase substantially.

Little is yet known about the outcomes achieved by participants in the 

2009 program largely because nearly two-thirds of the participants were 

still enrolled in the program as of September 30, 2011. States are not 

required to begin tracking employment outcomes for participants until 

they exit the program. Of the 107,896 participants enrolled in the 2009 

program, approximately 66 percent had not exited the program as of 

September 30, 2011. The one-third of participants who exited the 

program spent an average of about 37 weeks in the program. 

Approximately 76 percent of those exiting were in the program for 1 year 

or less (see fig.13).

 

44 Emergency Unemployment Compensation is a federally funded program that provides 

benefits to individuals who have exhausted regular state benefits. The program was 

created on June 30, 2008, and has been modified several times. Most recently, the Middle 

Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 extended the expiration date of the 

program to January 2, 2013. Pub. L. No. 112-96 § 2122(a)(1), 126 Stat. 163. 

Limited Outcome Data are 

Available
Page 35 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Figure 13: Total Time Spent in Program for Those Exiting, as of September 30, 2011

In addition, little is known about participants’ outcomes because the 

information needed to assess these outcomes was not yet available. For 

the approximately 36,000 participants who had exited the program as of 

September 30, 2011, information to calculate entered employment rates, 

employment retention rates, and average earnings was not yet available 

for many participants. For example, the entered employment rate is 

based on the number of participants who were employed 6 months after 

exiting the program.45

 

45 The entered employment rate is based on the number of participants who were 

employed in the second quarter after program exit. The employment retention rate only 

includes those who were employed in the second quarter after program exit and is based 

on the percentage who were employed in the third and fourth quarter after program exit. 

Yet, as of September 30, 2011, states had reported 

the 6-month employment status on only about 60 percent of the 

participants who had exited the program. Similarly, states reported the 

earnings information needed to calculate the average earnings 

performance measure for only about a third of the approximately 13,000 
Page 36 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

participants who would have been included in the calculation.46

Figure 14: Few Participants in the 2009 Program Had Information to Calculate TAA 

Performance Measures through Fiscal Year 2011

As a 

result, few of the participants in the 2009 program would have been 

included in calculating TAA performance outcomes through fiscal year 

2011 (see fig. 14).

Incomplete outcome data for TAA participants is a longstanding issue. 

The primary data source for outcome information is Unemployment 

Insurance wage records. As we have previously reported, these wage 

records provide a common yardstick for assessing performance across 

states but suffer from time delays.47 We reported on these delays in 2006, 

noting that most of the outcome data reported in a given program year 

actually reflect participants who left the program up to 2 years earlier.48

 

46 The average earnings performance measure is based on those participants earning 

wages in the second quarter after exit and the total amount earned by those participants in 

both the third and fourth quarter after exit.

47 GAO, Workforce Investment Act: States and Local Areas Have Developed Strategies to 

Assess Performance, but Labor Could Do More to Help, GAO-04-657 (Washington, D.C.: 

June 1, 2004).

48 GAO, Trade Adjustment Assistance: Labor Should Take Action to Ensure Performance 

Data Are Complete, Accurate, and Accessible, GAO-06-496 (Washington, D.C.: April 25, 

2006).
Page 37 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Another factor contributing to the unavailability of outcome data for the 

2009 program participants at the time we analyzed the data is that the 

2009 legislation required states to report on job retention and earnings for 

a year after the participant exits the program—an additional 3 months 

beyond what states had previously reported. Labor officials stated that 

they were aware of the lack of outcome information being reported and 

are requiring states to submit updated outcome information by September 

2012.49

Even when employment and earnings information becomes available, 

more information will be needed to assess the effectiveness of the 

changes made by the 2009 legislation. First, Labor uses information on 

employment rates and earnings to compare the TAA program to national 

program goals, but the information is reported on a fiscal year basis and 

combines data for participants under the 2002 and 2009 programs. 

Therefore, these reports will not provide a complete or separate picture of 

outcomes for 2009 program participants. However, Labor officials stated 

that their annual report for fiscal year 2012 would primarily consist of 

2009 participants. Second, a program’s effectiveness cannot be 

determined solely by outcomes because they cannot show whether an 

outcome is a direct result of program participation or whether it is a result 

of other influences, such as the state of the local economy. Labor officials 

told us they have no plans to conduct an impact evaluation of the 2009 

program since the program is no longer in effect. However, Labor is 

conducting a 5-year evaluation study of the 2002 TAA program, which is 

expected to be completed by November 2012. The study will address the 

operation and impacts of the program after the passage of the Trade 

Adjustment Assistance Reform Act of 2002 and will include an impact 

study on participants’ employment-related outcomes, overall and for key 

worker subgroups, and a benefit-cost analysis. 

The 2009 TAA legislation made extensive changes to the TAA for 

Workers program benefitting program participants—training funds were 

more than doubled, new benefits were added, eligibility was broadened, 

and existing benefits were enhanced. This contributed to a substantial 

increase in the number of petitions immediately following implementation 

of the changes in May 2009. Yet, when confronted with the initial surge in 

 

49 This requirement is part of a larger data integrity initiative underway at Labor. 

Concluding 

Observations 
Page 38 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

petition volume and faced with pressure to process these petitions 

quickly, Labor made some errors in recording the reasons why petitions 

were certified. Since that time, Labor has enhanced its quality controls for 

investigating petitions and determined that the data errors we found were 

not widespread. 

In addition, because most participants were still enrolled in the program at 

the time of our review, sufficient information was not available to 

determine whether the program changes contributed to better 

performance outcomes. However, even when outcome data become 

available, it will be very difficult to isolate the effect of the 2009 legislative 

changes because the results cannot differentiate program participation 

from other outside factors, including the overall state of the economy. 

While Labor plans to release the results of its 5-year evaluation study of 

the 2002 program later this year, it will not include a definitive 

determination of the effectiveness of the substantial changes made by the 

2009 legislation. Further, the TAA program was modified again in October 

2011, further complicating any future evaluation of the 2009 program.

We provided officials from the Department of Labor a draft of this report 

for review and comment. Labor provided written comments, which are 

reproduced in appendix IV, as well as technical comments, which we 

incorporated as appropriate. In its written comments, Labor generally 

agreed with our findings. Labor noted that the report validated its efforts 

to improve employment and retention outcomes for trade-affected 

workers, made possible by the expansion of benefits and services under 

the 2009 TAA program. 

We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Labor, relevant 

congressional committees, and other interested parties and will make 

copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be 

available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

A list of related GAO products is included at the end of this report. If you 

or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-7215 or at sherrilla@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
Page 39 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. Other contacts and staff acknowledgments are listed in 

appendix V.

Andrew Sherrill

Director, Education, Workforce, and 

 Income Security Issues
Page 40 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Our objectives were to determine: (1) what challenges Labor faced in 

implementing the 2009 legislation, (2) the effect selected state 

government officials say the 2009 legislative changes had on participants 

and on state and local administrators, and (3) the extent participants 

received TAA benefits and services as established by the 2009 legislation 

and what is known about employment outcomes. To address these 

objectives, we reviewed relevant federal legislation, regulations, and 

departmental guidance and procedures. We also interviewed Labor 

officials and state government officials in six states—Massachusetts, 

Michigan, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas. We also 

interviewed selected local government officials in three of these states 

(Michigan, North Carolina, and Oregon). We obtained and reviewed 

Labor data on petitions, training fund expenditures, and participant 

activities. We conducted this performance audit from May 2011 through 

September 2012 in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the 

audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable 

basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We 

believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

We selected the six specific states because they had a high fiscal year 

2010 training fund allocation, a high volume of TAA certifications, and 

geographic diversity (see table 3).

Table 3: Selected States

State 

Fiscal year 2010 

training fund allocation

Number of 

TAA certifications Labor 

geographical 

Amount region

State 

ranking Number

State 

ranking

Massachusetts $12,056,206 25 71 11 1 

Michigan $83,070,480 1 193 4 5 

North Carolina $28,269,836 6 172 5 3 

Oregon $28,665,642 4 66 14 6 

Pennsylvania $31,056,520 2 212 3 2 

Texas $18,759,147 9 131 6 4 

Source: Department of Labor.

We also spoke with select local officials in three states (see table 4). 

Through these interviews, we obtained state and local officials’ opinions 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Selected States
Page 41 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance 

on what effects key changes made by the 2009 legislation had on their 

administration of the program and on participants. 

Table 4: Selected Localities 

State Local entity 

Michigan Oakland County Michigan Works! Workforce Development Division 

Southeast Michigan Community Alliance Michigan Works! 

North Carolina Forsyth County Job Link Career Center 

Wake County Job Link Career Center 

Oregon Oregon utilizes a virtual model in which all TAA participants receive 

case management via telephone from Salem-based staff 

Source: Department of Labor. 

We analyzed Labor’s data on petitions filed from fiscal years 2007 to 

2011. We assessed the reliability of key data by interviewing Labor 

officials knowledgeable about the data, reviewing related documentation, 

manually and electronically testing the data, and assessing internal 

controls at Labor. During our manual testing of this petition data, we 

discovered Labor made errors in recording the reasons why several 

petitions were certified, although the results of our review are not 

generalizable. We brought this issue to the attention of Labor officials. 

Because we did not know the extent of these errors during the period of 

our review, we did not include information on certification categories in 

this report. In late September 2012, Labor provided us with the results of 

its internal audit, which indicated that this data was reliable. Moreover, we 

determined that information regarding the number of petitions filed, the 

dates petitions were received by Labor, and the dates Labor issued 

determinations were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. 

We also assessed what internal controls were present in Labor’s petition 

investigation process as of June 2012. We compared Labor’s written 

procedures with GAO-published standards for internal controls and 

conducted an onsite review of seven petitions to assess whether Labor 

followed its written procedures when conducting investigations. We 

selected petitions filed from May 2009 to February 2011. They are 

nongeneralizeable and used only for illustrative purposes. The selected 

petitions were diverse with respect to the month/year petitions were 

received; whether petitions were certified or denied; whether petitions 

represented manufacturing or service sector workers; and other factors, 

such as the reason for the layoff (i.e., a shift in production overseas 

versus an increase in imports). 

Analysis of Labor’s Petition 

Data 
Page 42 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

We analyzed Labor’s data on TAA training fund expenditures for fiscal 

years 2009 through 2011, with data current through the second quarter of 

fiscal year 2011 (March 31, 2011). This data included expenditures by 

state for training, administration (inclusive of employment/case 

management), job search and relocation, income support, and the wage 

supplement program for older workers. We assessed the reliability of 

these data by electronically testing for errors and by interviewing

knowledgeable agency officials. Further, we compared these expenditure 

data with fund allocation data published in Labor’s annual reports to 

Congress. Overall, we found that the data were sufficiently reliable for the 

purposes of this report.

We analyzed Labor’s participant data file containing data elements on 

characteristics, activities, and outcomes for TAA participants. We 

conducted our analyses on those participants who were covered by 

petitions filed between May 18, 2009 and February 14, 2011—the dates 

covered by the 2009 legislative changes. We assessed the reliability of 

these data by interviewing Labor officials about the internal controls in 

place to assure the quality of data reported by states and reviewed the 

edit checks Labor established to identify inconsistencies and data errors. 

We also performed electronic testing of individual data elements to 

remove duplicate entries and ensure that the data being entered were 

consistent with instructions provided by Labor to the states. We 

determined that information related to participant characteristics and 

activities was sufficiently reliable to be used in the report. However, our 

testing of the outcome data surfaced issues with information being 

reported on employment status and earnings for participants who had 

exited the program. Specifically, we found that the employment status 

and earnings information for many participants who had exited the 

program was not identified. We believe that reporting outcomes would be 

misleading when two-thirds of the participants in the 2009 program were 

still enrolled as of September 30, 2011, and outcome information for 

many participants who had exited the program was not yet available. As a 

result, we did not include entered employment rates, employment 

retention rates, and average earnings in this report. 

Analysis of Labor’s 

Training Funds 

Expenditure Data

Analysis of Labor’s 

Participant Data
Page 43 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

2002 TAA Program 2009 TAA Program 2011 TAA Program

Period Covered

Petitions filed on or after November 4, 2002, 

and on or before May 17, 2009

Petitions filed on or after February 15, 2011, 

and on or before October 20, 2011

Petitions filed on or after May 18, 2009, and on or 

before February 14, 2011

a

Petitions filed on or after October 

21, 2011, or before December 31, 

2013

b

Petitions filed on or after February 

15, 2011, and on or before October 

20, 2011

GROUP ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

a

One of the following circumstances must 

have contributed importantly to the reason 

for separation or threat of separation for a 

significant number or proportion of the 

workers in a firm or subdivision of a firm:

• the firm’s sales and/or production have 

decreased and imports of articles 

similar to the articles produced by the 

firm have increased; or

• the firm shifted to another country the 

production of articles similar to the 

articles produced by the firm and that 

country has a free-trade or beneficial 

agreement with the United States; or

• the firm has been secondarily affected 

by trade as either a supplier or 

downstream producer for a firm that has 

already been TAA certified based on an 

increase in imports from, or a shift in 

production to, Canada or Mexico and 

the article which was the basis for the 

primary certification was related to the 

parts or processes supplied by the 

secondary firm

One of the following circumstances must have 

contributed importantly to the reason for 

separation or threat of separation for a significant 

number or proportion of the workers in a firm or 

subdivision of a firm:

c

• The firm’s sales and/or production have 

decreased; and

imports of articles or services like or 

directly competitive with the articles or 

services produced by the firm have 

increased; or

imports of articles similar to the article 

into which component parts produced by 

firm are directly incorporated or which 

are produced using services supplied by 

such firm have increased; or

imports of articles incorporating 

component parts produced outside the 

U.S. that are similar to imports of articles 

incorporating component parts produced 

by such firm have increased

• The firm shifted to any other country the 

supply of services or the production of articles 

similar to the services supplied or articles 

produced by the firm or the firm has acquired 

articles or services from a foreign county that 

are similar to articles produced or services 

supplied by such firm; or 

No change, except workers from 

public agencies are no longer 

eligible

Appendix II: Comparison of Key 2002, 2009, 

and 2011 TAA Statutory Provisions
Page 44 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

2002 TAA Program 2009 TAA Program 2011 TAA Program

• a public agency has acquired from a foreign 

country services like or directly competitive 

with services which are supplied by such 

agency;d

• the firm has been secondarily affected by 

trade as either a supplier or downstream 

producer of articles or services for a firm 

affected by trade with any other country, and 

that firm has already been TAA certified; and 

the basis for the primary certification was 

related to the articles or services produced by 

the secondary firm

or

• If a U.S. firm has been determined by the 

International Trade Commission as having 

been adversely affected by international trade 

and the TAA petition is filed within 1 year of 

this determination being published in the 

Federal Register

e

PARTICIPANT BENEFITS AND SERVICES

Trade Readjustment Allowances (TRA)

Up to 104 weeks for workers enrolled in fulltime training

OR

Up to 130 weeks for workers also enrolled in 

remedial training

Up to 130 weeks for workers in full-time training

OR

Up to 156 weeks for workers also enrolled in 

remedial training

Up to 130 weeks for workers in fulltime training, the last 13 of which 

are only available if needed for 

completion of a training program 

and training benchmarks are met

No additional weeks for remedial or 

pre-requisite training

Enrollment Deadlines to Receive TRA

In order to receive TRA, must be enrolled 8 

weeks after certification or 16 weeks after 

total separation, whichever is later

In order to receive TRA, must be enrolled 26 

weeks after certification or total separation, 

whichever is later

No change

Training Waivers

Waivers may be issued because the worker:

1. Will be recalled to work

2. Has marketable skills for suitable 

employment and has reasonable 

expectation of employment in 

foreseeable future

3. Is within 2 years of eligibility for a 

pension or Social Security

4. Cannot participate in training due to a 

health condition

5. Enrollment date is not available

6. Training program not available

Waivers may be issued because the worker:

1. Will be recalled to work

2. Has marketable skills for suitable employment 

and has reasonable expectation of 

employment in foreseeable future

3. Is within 2 years of eligibility for a pension or 

Social Security

4. Cannot participate in training due to a health 

condition

5. Enrollment date is not available

6. Training program not available

All waivers except those issued under the 

“retirement” reason must be reviewed 3 months 

after issued and on a monthly basis thereafter 

Waivers may be issued because 

the worker:

1. Cannot participate in training 

due to a health condition

2. Enrollment date is not 

available

3. Training program not available

All waivers must be reviewed at the 

3 month mark and on a monthly 

basis thereafter
Page 45 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

2002 TAA Program 2009 TAA Program 2011 TAA Program

Job Search and Relocation Allowances

To qualify, workers must be totally separated from their employer and cannot reasonably be expected to find suitable employment in 

commuting area.

• 90 percent of allowable costs, up to 

$1,250

Job Search

• 90 percent of costs, plus a lump sum 

payment of up to $1,250

Relocation

• 100 percent of allowable costs, up to $1,500

Job Search

• 100 percent of costs, plus a lump sum 

payment of up to $1,500

Relocation

• Not more than 90 percent of 

allowable costs, up to $1,250

Job Search

• At state’s discretion

• Not more than 90 percent of 

allowable costs, plus a lump 

sum up to $1,250

Relocation

• At state’s discretion

Training Services

• Under Labor’s regulation, training may 

only be approved on a full-time basis

• Certified workers may not begin 

approved training until they have been 

totally or partially separated from 

adversely affected employment

• On-the-job, customized training, training 

authorized under Workforce Investment 

Act of 1998, remedial education, and 

training paid for under other federal or 

state programs

• Workers may not be determined 

ineligible for unemployment insurance

or TAA benefits because they are 

enrolled in training or left unsuitable 

work to enroll in training

• Training may be approved on a full-time basis 

or part-time basis, although full-time training 

is required for TRA eligibility

• Training may be approved for adversely 

affected incumbent workers before separation

• In addition to other training, registered 

apprenticeship training, prerequisite 

education and training programs and 

coursework at accredited institutions of higher 

education may also be approved for worker 

training

• Workers may not be determined ineligible for 

unemployment insurance or TAA benefits 

because they are enrolled in training, left 

unsuitable work to enroll in training, left work 

that the worker engaged in on a temporary 

basis during a break in training or delay in 

commencement of training or left on-the-job 

training after less than 30 days because it did 

not satisfy TAA requirements

• No change

Re-employment Trade Adjustment Assistance (known as Alternative TAA in 2002)

A wage supplement for workers over 50 providing a portion of the difference between their old and new wages

Established as a demonstration project: 

Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance: 

Requires a separate certification of 

group eligibility

• Workers may not participate in TAAapproved training

• Requires full-time employment within 26 

weeks of separation

• Available only for workers earning less 

than $50,000 per year in reemployment

• Maximum benefit of $10,000 over a 

period of up to 2 years (104 weeks)

• Does not require a separate certification of 

group eligibility

• Workers may participate in TAA-approved 

training and receive employment and case 

management services

• Allows for part-time employment if enrolled in 

training

• Eliminates deadline for reemployment

• Available only for workers earning less than 

$55,000 per year in reemployment

• Maximum benefit of $12,000 over a period of 

up to 2 years (104 weeks)

No change, except:

• Available only for workers 

earning less than $50,000 per 

year in reemployment

• Maximum benefit of $10,000 

over a period of up to 2 years 

(104 weeks)
Page 46 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

2002 TAA Program 2009 TAA Program 2011 TAA Program

Health Coverage Tax Credit

• Tax credit allowed equal to 65 percent 

of an eligible participant’s monthly 

qualifying health insurance premium

• Tax credit equal allowed equal to 80 percent 

of an eligible participant’s monthly qualifying 

health insurance premium 

• Tax credit allowed equal to 

72.5 percent of an eligible 

participants qualifying health 

insurance premium. Provision 

is retroactive to February 13, 

2011, and applies to workers 

served under 2002, 2009 or 

2011 programs 

ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES

Training Fund Amount

• $220 million per fiscal year for workers’

training

• $575 million for fiscal years 2009 and 2010 

for workers’ trainingf • $575 million for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 for workers’ 

training, job search and 

relocation allowances, case 

management and employment 

services, and associated 

administration

Training Fund Formula

g

• No statutory provision

• In practice, Labor initially disbursed 75 

percent of training funds based on a 

state’s accrued training expenditures 

and the number of training participants 

and disbursed to a state no less than 85 

percent of the prior year’s initial 

distribution

• Requires Labor to make an initial distribution 

to states of at least 65 percent of available 

training funds as soon as practicable after the 

beginning of each fiscal year taking into 

account: (1) the trend in numbers of certified 

workers, (2) the trend in numbers of workers 

participating in training, (3) the number of 

workers enrolled in training, (4) the estimated 

amount of funding needed to provide 

approved training and other factors Labor 

determines are appropriate. Requires that 

each state receive initial distribution of not 

less than 25 percent of an initial distribution in 

previous fiscal year. Requires Labor to 

establish procedures for distribution of 

remaining fund but provides that not less than 

90 percent of available funds must be 

distributed by July 15 of each fiscal year

• No change except that these 

requirements now apply to 

distribution of funds for 

training, job search and 

relocation allowances, case 

management and employment 

services and administration
Page 47 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

2002 TAA Program 2009 TAA Program 2011 TAA Program

Employment and Case Management Services

• SERVICES: Labor is required to make 

“every reasonable effort” to provide 

eligible workers counseling, testing, 

placement and supportive and other 

services provided for under any other 

law, including services provided through 

Workforce Investment Act one-stop 

delivery systems through agreements 

with the States, where appropriate

• FUNDING: No statutory provision

• SERVICES: Labor is required to make 

available to eligible workers, either directly or 

through agreements with the States: (1) 

comprehensive and specialized assessment 

of skill levels and service needs, (2) 

development of individual employment plans, 

(3) information on training, (4) information on 

financial aid, (5) short-term prevocational 

services, (6) individual career counseling, (7) 

employment statistics, and (8) information on 

supportive services

• FUNDING: States receive an additional 

amount of funds equal to 15 percent of the 

amount they receive for training and must use 

at least 1/3 of these funds for case 

management and employment services; and 

spend no more than 2/3 of these funds on 

administration

• States also receive an additional $350,000 

yearly for case management and employment 

services

• SERVICES: No change

• FUNDING: No more than 10 

percent of the amount provided 

for training, job search and 

relocation allowances, case 

management and employment 

services and administration 

may be spent for 

administration; and

• not less than 5 percent of the 

amount provided may be spent 

for case management and 

employment services

• Labor may recapture from the 

states funds remaining 

unobligated after 2 or 3 years 

and distribute such funds to 

states in need of funds

Office Responsible for Administering TAA

• No statutory provision. TAA was 

administered under Labor’s 

Employment and Training 

Administration

• Established an Office of Trade Adjustment 

Assistance at Labor, headed by administrator 

reporting directly to the Deputy Assistant 

Secretary for Employment and Training 

Administration

• No change

Data Collection and Reporting

• No statutory provision. In practice, 

states submitted quarterly data reports 

on the characteristics, activities and 

outcomes information for all individuals 

who received TAA services and benefits

• Requires Labor to implement a data system 

by mid-August 2009 to collect information as 

prescribed in the statute, on (1) petitions filed, 

certified and denied, (2) benefits received, (3) 

training, (4) outcomes, and (5) rapid response 

activities as well as any other information 

Labor considers appropriate

• Requires Labor to submit a report to Senate 

Finance and House Ways and Means 

Committees no later than December 15 of 

each year summarizing information collected, 

and including information on distribution of 

funds to each state and any

recommendations with respect to changes in 

eligibility requirements, benefits or training 

funding

• Requires Labor to update its 

data system by October 2012 

to collect additional information 

as prescribed in the statute, 

on: (1) benefits received, (2) 

training, (3) outcomes, (4) 

spending as well as any other 

information Labor considers 

appropriate

• The deadline to submit a report 

to Senate Finance and House 

Ways and Means Committees 

was extended to February 15

Source: GAO analysis of Trade Act of 1974 as amended by 2002, 2009 and 2011 legislation.

a

The 2011 legislation required Labor, with regard to petitions filed between February 13, 2011, and 

October 21, 2011, to consider petitions and automatically reconsider denied petitions using the 2011 

eligibility provisions.
Page 48 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

b

Although the Omnibus Trade Act of 2010 extended the effective date of the expiration of the 2009 

amendments to February 12, 2011, Labor interpreted this to mean petitions filed on or before 11:59 

PM EST on Monday, February 14, 2011, the next business day after February 12, which was a 

Saturday.

c

Suppliers produce and supply component parts directly to other firms, which produced articles that 

were the basis for a TAA certification. Downstream producers perform additional, value-added 

production processes for firms producing articles that were the basis for a TAA certification. If a 

worker’s firm is a supplier, and component parts it supplies to the primary firm accounted for at least 

20 percent of production or sales of the worker’s firm, then the loss of business from the primary firm 

by the worker’s firm is not required to have contributed importantly to the separation or threatened 

separation. 

d

Public agency was defined as a department of agency of a state, local or the federal government or 

a subdivision thereof.

e

See third statement in table note c. 

f

The training fund amount was $143,750,000 for October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010.

g

The training fund amount will be $143,750,000 for October 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013.
Page 49 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Fiscal year 2009 Fiscal year 2010

 

Authorized Expended

Percentage

expended Authorized Expended

Percentage

expended

AK $881,072 $417,387 47 $294,208 $118,839 40

AL $11,057,729 $10,775,197 97 $9,627,476 $5,371,553 56

AR $20,458,583 $13,523,121 66 $15,682,487 $5,827,743 37

AZ $4,097,414 $4,097,414 100 $3,260,329 $1,400,548 43

CA $29,149,155 $29,149,155 100 $17,405,603 $11,293,865 65

CO $4,408,022 $4,408,022 100 $3,610,808 $3,382,426 94

CT $7,874,131 $7,874,131 100 $10,939,232 $10,934,173 100

DC $0 $0 - $0 $0 - 

DE $0 $0 - $823,135 $551,333 67

FL $3,974,236 $3,273,833 82 $2,381,291 $1,018,302 43

GA $18,592,632 $8,578,606 46 $13,549,578 $1,030,398 8 

HI $465,447 $162,104 35 $0 $0 - 

IA $11,784,901 $11,784,901 100 $5,461,537 $5,461,537 100

ID $4,229,928 $4,229,928 100 $12,719,629 $12,081,816 95

IL $22,260,179 $22,260,179 100 $20,358,555 $14,789,904 73

IN $26,014,364 $26,014,364 100 $26,665,015 $25,861,499 97

KS $2,951,445 $1,911,432 65 $1,178,510 $1,018,660 86

KY $15,908,719 $15,908,719 100 $18,337,054 $16,447,886 90

LA $2,769,101 $2,769,101 100 $2,782,637 $1,203,610 43

MA $17,006,838 $17,006,838 100 $12,820,766 $9,454,442 74

MD $2,454,015 $2,454,015 100% $1,137,875 $518,068 46

ME $5,945,139 $5,323,793 90 $4,043,222 $1,425,309 35

MI $55,570,709 $55,570,709 100 $81,984,160 $81,984,160 100

MN $8,566,539 $8,566,539 100 $8,826,628 $8,826,628 100

MO $13,941,423 $13,941,423 100 $17,940,408 $17,940,408 100

MS $6,447,326 $933,023 14 $5,008,604 $336,465 7 

MT $3,147,405 $3,147,405 100 $8,729,454 $8,729,454 100

NC $58,199,987 $34,704,788 60 $48,399,437 $9,924,227 21

ND $722,177 $722,177 100 $413,606 $413,606 100

NE $1,420,917 $1,379,737 97 $1,244,390 $422,037 34

NH $2,210,051 $2,210,051 100 $3,903,295 $3,787,220 97

NJ $7,332,226 $7,332,226 100 $5,513,879 $1,761,671 32

NM $3,297,619 $3,297,619 100 $3,048,975 $3,048,975 100

NV $732,583 $471,912 64 $263,888 $148,313 56

NY $12,521,835 $12,521,835 100 $15,370,985 $12,541,946 82

Appendix III: TAA Training Fund 

Expenditures by State, as of March 31, 2012
Page 50 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

OH $23,742,822 $23,742,822 100 $25,221,843 $25,221,843 100

OK $5,890,639 $3,710,782 63 $4,349,196 $234,303 5 

OR $14,294,376 $14,294,376 100 $24,965,367 $24,965,367 100

PA $31,762,854 $31,762,854 100 $29,083,124 $24,913,905 86

PR $850,934 $796,103 94 $307,296 $229,157 75

RI $4,477,145 $4,477,145 100 $5,814,205 $2,806,366 48

SC $24,184,159 $21,418,512 89 $17,005,487 $2,745,417 16

SD $1,517,234 $1,517,234 100 $4,534,640 $2,928,811 65

TN $14,409,894 $12,238,626 85 $12,315,372 $1,225,861 10

TX $24,841,852 $24,841,852 100 $18,241,477 $11,687,059 64

UT $5,222,047 $5,222,047 100 $3,337,142 $2,563,467 77

VA $16,301,162 $12,984,989 80 $9,860,769 $3,265,235 33

VT $816,876 $816,876 100 $582,242 $582,242 100

WA $14,945,560 $14,945,560 100 $12,661,696 $8,134,309 64

WI $21,160,654 $21,160,654 100 $23,848,795 $23,848,795 100

WV $7,237,945 $7,237,945 100 $4,944,690 $4,220,557 85

WY $0 $0 - $200,000 $62,918 31

Total 598,050,000 537,890,061 90 580,999,997 418,692,634 72

Source: GAO Analysis of Department of Labor Data.

Note: Expenditure data are current as of March 31, 2011. Fiscal year 2010 funds can be drawn down 

until September 30, 2012. Funds include both training funds and job search and relocation 

allowances.
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Labor

Page 51 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Appendix IV: Comments from the 

Department of Labor
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Labor

Page 52 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance
Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 53 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Andrew Sherrill, 202-512-7215 or sherrilla@gao.gov

In addition to the contacts named above, Laura Heald, Assistant Director; 

Kathryn O’Dea, Ellen Ramachandran, and Wayne Sylvia made key 

contributions to this report. Also contributing to this report were James 

Bennett, Jessica Botsford, Susannah Compton, Daniel Concepcion, 

Kathy Leslie, Jean McSween, and Vanessa Taylor.

Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contacts

Staff 

Acknowledgments 
Related GAO Products

Page 54 GAO-12-953 Trade Adjustment Assistance

Trade Adjustment Assistance: States Have Fewer Training Funds 

Available than Labor Estimates When Both Expenditures and Obligations 

Are Considered. GAO-08-165. Washington, D.C.: November 2, 2007.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: Industry Certification Would Likely Make 

More Workers Eligible, but Design and Implementation Challenges Exist. 

GAO-07-919. Washington, D.C.: June 29, 2007.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: Changes Needed to Improve States’ Ability 

to Provide Benefits and Services to Trade-Affected Workers. 

GAO-07-995T. Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2007.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: Program Provides an Array of Benefits and 

Services to Trade-Affected Workers. GAO-07-994T. Washington, D.C.: 

June 14, 2007.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: Changes to Funding Allocation and 

Eligibility Requirements Could Enhance States’ Ability to Provide Benefits 

and Services. GAO-07-701, GAO-07-702. Washington, D.C.: May 31, 

2007.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: Labor Should Take Action to Ensure 

Performance Data Are Complete, Accurate, and Accessible. 

GAO-06-496. Washington, D.C.: April, 25, 2006.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: Most Workers in Five Layoffs Received 

Services, but Better Outreach Needed on New Benefits. GAO-06-43. 

Washington, D.C.: January 31, 2006.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: Reforms Have Accelerated Training 

Enrollment, but Implementation Challenges Remain. GAO-04-1012. 

Washington, D.C.: September 22, 2004.

Related GAO Products

(131087)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

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

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.