EMPLOYMENT AND 

TRAINING

Labor's Green Jobs 

Efforts Highlight 

Challenges of 

Targeted Training 

Programs for 

Emerging Industries 

Report to Congressional Requesters

June 2013

GAO-13-555

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-555, a report to 

congressional requesters

s

June 2013

EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING 

Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts Highlight Challenges of

Targeted Training Programs for Emerging Industries

Why GAO Did This Study

Labor received $500 million from the 

Recovery Act to help create, better 

understand, and provide training for 

jobs within the energy efficiency and 

renewable energy industries, 

commonly referred to as “green jobs.” 

Since 2009, Labor has also “greened” 

existing programs and funded 

additional green jobs training grants 

and other efforts. 

In light of the amount of funding 

targeted to green programs within 

Labor, GAO examined: (1) what is 

known about the objectives and 

coordination of Labor’s green jobs 

efforts, (2) what type of green jobs 

training grantees provided and how 

selected grantees aligned their training 

to meet employers’ green jobs needs, 

(3) what is known about program 

outcomes and what challenges, if any,

grantees faced in implementing their 

programs, and (4) what Labor has 

done to assist and monitor its green 

jobs grantees. To conduct this work, 

GAO reviewed relevant federal laws 

and regulations; surveyed selected 

offices within Labor using two 

questionnaires—one for directlyfunded green jobs efforts and one for 

other efforts; interviewed Labor officials

and 11 out of 103 green jobs training

grantees; and analyzed relevant Labor 

documents and data.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that Labor identify 

lessons learned from the green jobs 

training programs to enhance its ability 

to implement such programs in 

emerging industries. Labor agreed with 

our recommendation.

What GAO Found

Of the $595 million identified by Labor as having been appropriated or allocated 

specifically for green jobs activities since 2009, approximately $501 million went 

toward efforts with training and support services as their primary objective, with 

much of that funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

of 2009 (Recovery Act). Because the Recovery Act directed federal agencies to 

spend funds quickly and prudently, Labor implemented a number of highinvestment green jobs efforts simultaneously. As a result, in some cases, 

Recovery Act training programs were initiated prior to a full assessment of the 

demand for green jobs, which presented challenges for grantees. While Labor’s 

internal agencies initially communicated with each other and with other federal 

agencies after the Recovery Act was passed, most Recovery Act grants have 

ended or are winding down.

Labor created its green jobs definitional framework to provide local flexibility, and 

grantees we interviewed broadly interpreted Labor’s framework to include any job 

that could be linked, directly or indirectly, to a beneficial environmental outcome. 

Labor’s training data show most participants were trained in construction or 

manufacturing. While the findings of our site visits are not generalizable, all 

grantees we interviewed said they had worked closely with local employers to 

align their training program with the green skills needs of local employers. Most

grantees we interviewed also told us they had incorporated green elements into 

existing training programs aimed at traditional skills, such as teaching 

weatherization as part of a carpentry training program.

The outcomes of Labor’s green jobs training programs remain uncertain, in part 

because data on final outcomes were not yet available for about 40 percent of 

grantees, as of the end of 2012. Analysis of grantees with final outcome data 

shows they collectively reported training slightly more individuals than they had 

projected, but job placements were at 55 percent of the target. Training-related 

job placement rates remain unknown because Labor’s Office of Inspector 

General (OIG) found these data unreliable. Grantees we interviewed were 

generally positive about Labor’s green job training programs, but most said they 

had faced challenges during implementation, including: (1) a lack of reliable 

green jobs labor market information, (2) insufficient time to meet grant 

requirements, (3) knowledge gaps surrounding green skills and changing energy 

policies, and (4) difficulty placing participants into green jobs, primarily due to the 

overall poor economy.

Labor has provided technical assistance and taken steps to monitor green jobs 

training grantees through on-site monitoring visits and quarterly reviews. During 

these visits and reviews, Labor officials assessed grantee performance, such as 

by comparing reported program outcomes, including job placements, to targeted 

performance levels. However, Labor provided only limited guidance on how to 

document reported job placements. Labor officials required grantees with lower 

than projected performance levels to implement corrective action plans. In 

addition, Labor officials told us they have taken steps to improve the quality of 

grantee reported data, such as by forming an internal workgroup to identify ways 

to improve the technical assistance they provide to grantees on reporting 

performance outcomes.

View GAO-13-555. For more information, 

contact Andrew Sherrill at (202) 512-7215 or 

sherrilla@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Letter 1 

Background 5

Labor Has Focused 9

Its Green Jobs Efforts Largely on Job Training 9

Selected Grantees Broadly Defined Green Jobs and Generally 

Added Green Elements to Existing Training Programs 19

Outcomes of Green Jobs Training Remain Uncertain, with 

Grantees Citing Implementation Challenges 23

Labor Has Assisted and Monitored Grantees, but Has Provided 

Limited Guidance on Outcome Documentation Requirements 31

Conclusions 36

Recommendations for Executive Action 38

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 38

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 40

Data Collection for Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts 40

Selected Grantees and Analysis of Program Outcome Data 42

Analysis of Labor’s Technical Assistance and Monitoring Efforts 43

Appendix II Green Jobs Efforts at Labor for Which Funds Were Reported 

Appropriated or Allocated Specifically for Green Jobs Activities 

since 2009, by Focus Area and Office 44

Appendix III Green Jobs Efforts at Labor for Which Funds Were Not Reported 

Appropriated or Allocated Specifically for Green Jobs Activities 

since 2009, by Focus Area and Office 47

Appendix IV Comments from the Department of Labor 52

Appendix V GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 54

Related GAO Products 55

Contents 
Page ii GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Tables

Table 1: Green Jobs Grant Programs Funded by the Recovery Act 6

Table 2: Examples of Green Job Placement Based on Interviews 

with Selected Labor Green Jobs Grantees 21

Table 3: Lessons Learned Associated with Implementing Grant 

Programs for an Emerging Industry 30

Figures

Figure 1: Key Elements of Labor’s Green Framework for Defining 

Green Jobs 8

Figure 2: Funding for Green Jobs Efforts at Labor since 2009, by 

Office and Focus Area 11

Figure 3: Timeline of Selected Green Jobs Efforts at Labor 14

Figure 4: Green Jobs Training Grantees, by State 16

Figure 5: Green Jobs Training Grantees, by Organizational Type 17

Abbreviations

BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics

CFBNP Center for Faith-Based and 

Neighborhood Partnerships

CoP Community of Practice

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

Energy Department of Energy

ETA Employment and Training Administration

ETP Energy Training Partnership Grants 

GCBG Green Capacity Building Grants

GEMS Grant Electronic Management System
Page iii GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

GGS Green Goods and Services Survey

GJIF Green Jobs Innovation Fund 

GTP Green Technologies and Practices Survey

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

HVAC Systems Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems

ILAB Bureau of International Labor Affairs

Labor Department of Labor 

MOU Memorandums of Understanding

MSHA Mine Safety and Health Administration

OA Office of Apprenticeship 

OASP Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy

ODEP Office of Disability Employment Policy

OFCCP Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs

OIG Officer of the Inspector General

O*NET Occupational Information Network

OPA Office of Public Affairs 

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

OWCP Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs

POP Pathways Out of Poverty Grants

Recovery Act American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

SESP State Energy Sector Partnership and 

Training Grants 

SLMII State Labor Market Information 

Improvement Grants

TA Partnership Technical Assistance Partnership

UI Unemployment Insurance 

VETS Veterans’ Employment and Training Services

WB Women’s Bureau

WHD Wage and Hour Division

WIA Workforce Investment Act of 1998

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-13-555 Employment and Training

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

June 19, 2013

The Honorable Lamar Alexander

Ranking Member 

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

United States Senate

The Honorable Michael Enzi

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Children and Families

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

United States Senate

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) 

provided the Department of Labor (Labor) $500 million in funding aimed 

at training and placing workers into jobs in the “energy efficiency and 

renewable energy” industries,1 commonly referred to as “green jobs.” 

While many of these grants have ended or are currently winding down, 

they were initiated as part of a strategy aimed at moving the United 

States toward greater energy independence and security, and green jobs 

research and training programs were created that were expected to help 

American workers develop the specialized skills they would need to find 

and maintain employment in green jobs. Congress passed the framework 

for this investment—the Green Jobs Act of 20072

—more than 5 years 

ago, and according to Labor officials, funds for green jobs programs were 

not appropriated until the passage of the Recovery Act in 2009.3

 

1 See 29 U.S.C. § 2916(e)(1)(B) for a list of these industries. 

More 

recently, Labor has launched a number of efforts to “green” several of its 

existing programs, and has funded additional green jobs training grants, 

including the $38 million Green Jobs Innovation Fund (GJIF) grant 

program. In total, Labor funded 103 green jobs training grantees through 

the three Recovery Act-funded green jobs training programs and the GJIF 

2 The Green Jobs Act of 2007, which amended the Workforce Investment Act, was 

enacted as part of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). Pub. L. No. 

110-140, 121 Stat. 1492, 1748. EISA concerned, among other things, energy initiatives 

such as increasing fuel economy standards, increasing the production of biofuels, and 

improving appliance and lighting standards.

3 Pub. L. No. 111-5, 123 Stat. 115, 173. 

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

program. In light of the significant amount of funding targeted to green 

jobs training programs within Labor, this review examines:

1. What is known about the objectives and coordination of Labor’s green 

jobs efforts? 

2. What type of green jobs training did grantees provide and how did 

selected grantees align their training to meet employers’ green jobs 

needs?

3. What is known about program outcomes and what challenges, if any, 

did grantees face in implementing their programs?

4. What has Labor done to assist and monitor its green jobs grantees?

In addition, the Recovery Act requires that GAO conduct bimonthly 

reviews of how the act’s funds are used by recipients.4

To address the first research question on the objectives and coordination 

of Labor’s green jobs efforts, we compiled an inventory of Labor’s green 

jobs efforts by requesting information from 14 different offices across

Labor. These 14 offices were selected based on the likelihood of their 

administering a green jobs effort or program.

As part of this 

review, we examined the use of Recovery Act funds along with other 

federal funding.

5

 

4

Pub. L. No. 111-5, § 901, 123 Stat. 115, 191. For a list of our Recovery Act-related 

products, see 

We asked these offices to 

list two separate sets of efforts: (1) efforts where federal funds were 

appropriated or allocated specifically for green jobs activities and, (2) 

efforts where federal funds were not specifically appropriated or allocated 

for green jobs activities, but where the office sought to incorporate green 

elements into either an existing program or ongoing activity. We gathered 

additional information on these efforts through two follow-up 

http://www.gao.gov/recovery. 

5 For the purposes of this report we refer to organizational entities within Labor as offices. 

These entities could include agencies, administrations, bureaus, centers, and divisions. 

Specifically, the 14 offices we identified are: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Women’s Bureau 

(WB), Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Veterans’ Employment and 

Training Services (VETS), Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy (OASP), Bureau of 

International Labor Affairs (ILAB), Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Center for FaithBased and Neighborhood Partnerships (CFBNP), Office of Federal Contract Compliance 

Programs (OFCCP), Wage and Hour Division (WHD), Office of Workers’ Compensation 

Programs (OWCP), Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), and the Office of 

Public Affairs (OPA).
 

Page 3 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

questionnaires and received fully completed questionnaires for nearly all 

efforts.6

Because the majority of Recovery Act funding for green jobs efforts was 

directed toward training programs, we focused much of our review on four 

grant programs—the three green jobs training programs funded by the 

Recovery Act (Energy Training Partnership grants, Pathways out of 

Poverty grants, and State Energy Sector Partnership and Training grants) 

as well as the newer Green Jobs Innovation Fund. To describe the 

characteristics of the 103 green jobs training grantees of these four grant 

programs, we also collected data from the department on the 

characteristics of green jobs grantees, including grantee location and 

organizational type.

To better understand the type of green jobs training grantees provided, 

how grantees aligned their training to meet green jobs needs, and what 

challenges, if any, they faced in implementing their programs, we 

interviewed 11 out of the 103 green jobs training grantees and analyzed 

data provided by Labor. We interviewed grantees in states that had a 

relatively high number of Labor green jobs grant recipients, states where 

grantees or sub-grantees received GJIF funds, and states in different 

geographic regions.7

 

6 For the 14 directly-funded green efforts in our scope, we received 13 completed 

questionnaires and one partially completed questionnaire. We also identified 3 additional 

directly-funded efforts, for a total of 17 efforts. For the second set of green jobs efforts

where funds were not specifically appropriated or allocated for green jobs activities, but 

where the office sought to incorporate green elements into either an existing program or 

ongoing activity, we received completed questionnaires for 46 efforts in our scope and we 

did not survey Labor officials for 2 of the 48 efforts later identified. See appendix I for more 

information.

During our grantee interviews, we collected 

information about the types of green jobs training that were funded by 

Labor’s green jobs training grants and the outcomes of grantees’ 

programs, including green job placement. We specifically asked grantees 

about any challenges they may have encountered as they developed and 

implemented their program, including whether they experienced 

challenges placing participants into green jobs. We cannot generalize our 

findings beyond the interviews we conducted.

7 We visited grantees in California, Illinois, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania, and interviewed 

grantees in Connecticut and Louisiana by phone.
 

Page 4 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

To assess the reliability of Labor’s data on training type and outcomes, 

we (1) reviewed existing documentation related to the data sources, 

including Labor’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) reports, (2) 

electronically tested the data to identify obvious problems with 

completeness or accuracy, and (3) interviewed knowledgeable agency 

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

reliable for limited purposes. Specifically, we determined that training type

data were sufficiently reliable for purposes of reporting out on the types of 

training most frequently provided by grantees. However, based upon the 

OIG’s findings, we determined that the outcome data were not sufficiently 

reliable to determine the success of the programs and that data on the 

extent to which grantees entered training-related employment were not 

reliable enough to report.

To describe Labor’s technical assistance and monitoring efforts, we 

reviewed technical assistance guides and Labor’s Core Monitoring guide, 

interviewed Labor officials, and discussed Labor’s technical assistance 

with selected grantees. We also obtained and reviewed copies of Labor’s 

monitoring reports for green jobs training grantees. In conducting this 

review, we also reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, guidance and 

pertinent Labor reports and procedures. A more detailed explanation of 

our scope and methodology can be found in appendix I.

We conducted this performance audit from May 2012 to June 2013 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.
 

Page 5 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

The Department of Labor oversees a number of employment and training 

programs administered by state and local workforce boards and one-stop 

career centers established under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 

(WIA). The green jobs training programs Labor has overseen were 

created under the Green Jobs Act of 2007, which amended WIA. The 

Green Jobs Act of 2007 was passed as part of the Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007 (EISA),8 which was intended to move the United 

States toward greater energy independence and security and to increase 

the production of clean renewable fuels, among other objectives. This act 

directed the Secretary of Labor to work in consultation with the Secretary 

of Energy to create a new worker training program to prepare workers for 

careers in the energy efficiency and renewable energy industries. 

However, funds for these programs were not appropriated until the 

passage of the Recovery Act in 2009, according to Labor officials.

The Recovery Act appropriated $500 million in funding for competitive 

green jobs grant programs at Labor. The current administration presented 

the green jobs training grant program as part of a broad national strategy 

both to create new jobs and to reform how Americans create and 

consume energy. Specifically, the administration articulated a vision for 

federal investments in renewable energy to involve coordination across a 

number of federal agencies to create new, well-paying jobs for Americans 

and to make such jobs available to all workers.

The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) was responsible for 

overseeing the implementation of the green jobs training programs that 

were authorized in the Green Jobs Act of 2007 and funded through the 

Recovery Act. In June 2009, ETA announced a series of five Recovery 

Act grant competitions related to green jobs, three of which were primarily 

focused on training. All of these programs are scheduled to end before 

the end of July 2013. Table 1 describes these five programs and identifies 

the types of organizations eligible to receive each grant.

 

8 Pub. L. No. 110-140, Title X, 121 Stat. 1492, 1748.

Background 

The Workforce Investment 

System and Green Jobs 

Act of 2007

Green Jobs and the 

Recovery Act
 

Page 6 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Table 1: Green Jobs Grant Programs Funded by the Recovery Act

Program Description Eligible grantees

Training 

focused

Energy Training 

Partnership (ETP) 

Grants

Provided funds so grantees could develop partnerships 

and provide training and supportive services, such as 

registered apprenticeships, that would lead to employment 

for individuals in need of updated training and unemployed 

workers, among others

Private nonprofit 

organizations that are 

either national labormanagement organizations 

with local networks or 

nonprofit partnerships—

either statewide or local

Yes

Pathways Out of 

Poverty (POP) 

Grants

Provided funds to deliver training and placement 

services to individuals seeking pathways out of poverty, 

including unemployed individuals, high school dropouts, 

individuals with a criminal record, and disadvantaged 

individuals living in areas of high poverty by providing 

employment within the energy efficiency and renewable 

energy sectors

Private nonprofit 

organizations that deliver 

services through networks 

of local affiliates, for 

example, or whose local 

affiliates have the ability to 

provide services in four or 

more states or public or 

private local organizations 

such as community 

colleges or faith-based 

organizations

Yes

State Energy Sector 

Partnership and 

Training (SESP) 

Grants

Provided funds for training, job placement, and 

related activities that reflect a comprehensive energy 

sector strategy aligned with the governor’s overall 

workforce vision

State workforce 

investment boards, in 

partnership with local 

officials, employer and 

industry leaders, and 

labor organizations 

Yes

State Labor Market 

Information 

Improvement 

(SLMII) Grants

Provided funds to collect, analyze, and 

disseminate labor market information and to enhance 

the labor exchange infrastructure for careers within the 

energy efficiency and renewable energy sectors

State workforce agencies 

or consortia of the state 

workforce agencies of 

multiple states

No

Green Capacity 

Building grants 

(GCBG)

Provided funds to build the capacity of existing 

Labor grantees to prepare targeted populations for 

employment in green industries and to support 

organizations so that they could bolster the capacity of 

their training programs through the purchase of equipment, 

staff professional development, curriculum development 

and/or adaptation, partnership development, and where 

necessary, the hiring of additional staff

Grantees that had already 

received a grant from Labor 

under specified grant 

programs, such as 

YouthBuild or Women in 

Apprenticeship and NonTraditional Occupations

No

Source: GAO analysis of Labor’s Solicitations for Grant Applications.
 

Page 7 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Between September 2010 and October 2012, Labor’s OIG issued a 

series of three reports related to the department’s Recovery Act green 

jobs programs, including training programs.9 The most recent report 

raised questions about the low job placement and retention of trained 

program participants, the short amount of time for which many 

participants received training, and limitations of available employment and 

retention data, among other things.

Labor has used a broad framework to define green jobs, incorporating 

various elements that have emerged over time as the understanding of 

what constitutes a green job has evolved. As part of the Green Jobs Act 

of 2007, WIA was amended to identify seven energy efficiency and 

renewable energy industries targeted for green jobs training funds.10 In 

addition, beginning in 2009, Labor issued information on 12 emerging 

green sectors as part of a broader effort to describe how the green 

economy was redefining traditional jobs and the skills required to carry 

out those jobs.11

 

9 U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General, Recovery Act: Employment and 

Training Administration Grant Issuance and Monitoring Policies and Procedures for 

Discretionary Grants Including Green Jobs Are Comprehensive but Funding Challenges 

Threaten the Quality of Future Monitoring Activities, 18-10-013-03-390 (Sept. 30, 2010); 

Recovery Act: Slow Pace Placing Workers Into Jobs Jeopardizes Employment Goals of 

the Green Jobs Program, 18-11-004-03-390 (Sept. 30, 2011); and Recovery Act: Green 

Jobs Program Reports Limited Success in Meeting Employment and Retention Goals as 

of June 30, 2012, 18-13-001-03-390 (Oct. 25, 2012).

Most recently, in 2010, the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(BLS) released a two-part definition of green jobs that was used to count 

the number of jobs that could be considered green either because what 

the work produced or how the work was performed benefitted the 

10 These seven industries are (1) energy efficient building, construction, and retrofits; (2) 

renewable electric power; (3) energy efficient and advanced drive train vehicles; (4) 

biofuels; (5) deconstruction and materials use industries; (6) energy efficiency assessment 

serving the residential, commercial, or industrial sectors; and (7) manufacturers that 

produce sustainable products using environmentally sustainable processes and materials. 

11 The Occupational Information Network (O*NET) is overseen by ETA and is the nation’s 

primary source of occupational information. Central to the project is the O*NET database, 

which contains information on hundreds of standardized and occupation-specific 

descriptors. O*NET is being developed under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of 

Labor’s Employment and Training Administration through a grant to the North Carolina 

Department of Commerce. For more information on O*NET’s green economy activities, 

see http://www.onetcenter.org/green.html. 

Labor’s Broad Framework 

for Green Jobs
 

Page 8 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

environment.12

Figure 1: Key Elements of Labor’s Green Framework for Defining Green Jobs

Figure 1 shows the various elements Labor has used over 

time to define green jobs.

a Energy efficient building, construction, and retrofit.

b Energy efficient and advanced drive train vehicle.

c Manufacturers that produce sustainable products using environmentally sustainable processes and 

materials.

 

12 According to BLS’s definition, green jobs are either (1) jobs in businesses that produce 

goods or provide services that benefit the environment or conserve natural resources, or 

(2) jobs in which workers’ duties involve making their establishment’s production 

processes more environmentally friendly or use fewer natural resources. 
 

Page 9 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

During the implementation of its Recovery Act green jobs training 

programs and the newer Green Jobs Innovation Fund (GJIF) pilot and 

demonstration project, which was initiated in 2011 to support job training 

opportunities for workers in green industry sectors and occupations, 

Labor has allowed program applicants to use combinations of the various 

elements to propose the type of training they would provide. For example, 

Labor permitted grantees of the three Recovery Act-funded programs to 

develop their green jobs training programs by focusing on training in the 

seven industries specified by the Green Jobs Act of 2007, or to propose 

strategies for training in sectors or occupations identified as green within 

the Occupational Information Network (O*NET). In addition to these two 

elements, Labor allowed applicants of the more recent GJIF program to 

use the BLS definition. Furthermore, Labor allowed GJIF applicants to 

propose their own definition of green jobs if they were able to support 

their definition with evidence.

According to funding information provided by Labor and our survey of 

Labor’s directly-funded green jobs efforts, most funding for green jobs 

efforts at Labor has been directed toward programs designed to train 

individuals for green jobs, with less funding supporting efforts with other 

objectives, such as data collection or information materials.13 Indeed, 

approximately $501 million (84 percent) of the $595 million identified by 

offices at Labor as having been appropriated or allocated specifically for 

green jobs activities since 2009 went toward efforts with training and 

support services as their primary objective.14

 

13 Focus areas generally fell into 1 of 7 categories provided by GAO: (1) information 

materials; (2) publicity and outreach; (3) technical assistance; (4) partnerships; (5) training 

and supportive services; (6) data collection and reporting; and (7) capacity building.

In total, approximately $73 

million, or 12 percent of the total amount of funding for green jobs 

14 We requested information from 14 different offices across Labor. These 14 offices were 

selected based on the likelihood of their administering a green jobs effort or program.

Labor Has Focused 

Its Green Jobs 

Efforts Largely 

on Job Training

Most Funding for 

Green Jobs Efforts 

Has Been Directed 

toward Training Workers
 

Page 10 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

activities, was reported appropriated or allocated for data collection and 

reporting efforts.

Most of the funding for green jobs efforts was provided through the 

Recovery Act, which funded both training and non-training-focused 

projects at Labor in part to increase energy efficiency and the use of 

renewable energy sources nationwide. In addition to Recovery Act 

funding for green jobs efforts, funding information provided by Labor and 

through our survey of directly-funded green jobs efforts indicate that 

Labor has allocated at least an additional $89 million since 2009 to 

support seven other green jobs efforts that have been implemented by 

five of Labor’s offices (see fig. 2). For a brief description of each of 

Labor’s green jobs efforts for which funds were appropriated or allocated, 

see appendix II.
 

Page 11 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Figure 2: Funding for Green Jobs Efforts at Labor since 2009, by Office and Focus Area

a This figure represents cumulative funding for the program for fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011. The 

amount appropriated or allocated for the program was $7,641,000, $9,641,000, and $9,622,000, 

respectively.

b Since its inception in fiscal year (FY) 2010, through FY 2012, BLS has been appropriated 

approximately $24 million for the Green Jobs initiative. Of this amount, BLS allocated about $4 million 

annually for the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages portion of the Green Goods and 

Services (GGS) survey; about $2 million annually for the Occupational Employment Statistics portion 

and; about $2 million annually for the Green Technologies and Practices (GTP) survey. The 

Employment Projections program was also funded from the same appropriation specifically for green 

jobs activities.

c This figure represents approximately $3.4 million in Recovery Act funding for technical assistance 

provided through the National Governors Association and its partners for green jobs grantees and 

approximately $1.5 million in non-Recovery Act funding for technical assistance for GJIF grantees. 
 

Page 12 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Funding for technical assistance for Health Care Sector and Other High Growth and Emerging 

Industries Grantees is excluded from this funding figure.

d Administrative expenses include funding for three green jobs evaluations: A Labor Market 

Information evaluation ($499,980), a Green Jobs and Health Care Implementation Report ($917,248), 

and a 5-year impact evaluation ($7,992,852).

e Recovery Act contract awards for Job Corps primarily supported capacity building activities, though 

some funding was used for training activities.

f Recovery Act funds were used to fund this effort.

g Trilateral Roundtable: The Employment Dimension of the Transition to a Green Economy (February 

3-4, 2011); this figure represents an expenditure instead of an appropriated or allocated amount.

The Recovery Act directed federal agencies to spend the funds it made 

available quickly and prudently, and Labor implemented a number of 

relatively brief but high-investment green jobs efforts simultaneously. As a 

result, in some cases, Recovery Act training programs were initiated prior 

to a full assessment of the demand for green jobs.15 Specifically, 

Recovery Act-funded green jobs training grantees designed and began to 

implement their green jobs training programs at the same time states 

were developing green job definitions and beginning to collect workforce

and labor market information on the prevalence and likely growth of green 

jobs through the State Labor Market Information Improvement grants, 

which were also funded with Recovery Act funds. Furthermore, BLS 

launched its Green Jobs initiative—which included various surveys 

designed to help define and measure the prevalence of green jobs—after 

many green jobs training programs had begun.16

Labor has made subsequent investments that build upon lessons learned 

through the Recovery Act grant programs. For example, ETA initiated the 

$38 million GJIF program in 2011 to support job training opportunities for 

workers in green industry sectors and occupations. In developing the 

GJIF grant program, ETA considered lessons learned through the 

ETA officials noted that 

BLS’s development of the definition of green jobs was a deliberative and 

extensive process that required consulting stakeholders and the public. 

They also said that BLS’s timeline for defining green jobs differed from 

ETA’s timeline for awarding and executing grants, which was driven by 

Recovery Act mandates.

 

15 Labor provided extensions to the original period of performance for selected grantees in 

each of the five Recovery Act green jobs grant programs (see fig. 3). 

16 According to Labor officials, the BLS Green Jobs initiative was not connected to the 

Recovery Act in any way.
 

Page 13 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Recovery Act grant programs.17 For example, various stakeholders 

including employers, the public workforce system, federal agencies, and 

foundations identified Registered Apprenticeship—training that combines 

job related technical instruction with structured on-the-job learning 

experiences for skilled trades and allows participants to earn wages—as 

a valuable workforce strategy. ETA acknowledged that upgrading basic 

skills, including literacy and math, is critical to ensure job placement and 

suggested that training participants exclusively in green skills is not 

always sufficient. Consequently, ETA required GJIF grantees to 

implement green jobs training programs that would either forge linkages 

between Registered Apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs or 

deliver integrated basic skills and occupational training through 

community-based organizations. Figure 3 shows a timeline illustrating the 

rollout of selected green jobs grants at Labor and the time periods during 

which these grants were active,18

 

17 This grant is included in the $89 million identified by Labor as allocated or appropriated 

for green jobs activities in addition to the Recovery Act-funded programs (see fig. 2). 

as well as the timing of BLS’s efforts to 

collect data on green jobs. With the exception of the GJIF grants, all of 

these efforts will have been completed by July 2013.

18 ETA refers to this time as the period of performance. 
 

Page 14 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Figure 3: Timeline of Selected Green Jobs Efforts at Labor 
 

Page 15 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Grantees from all but six states received at least one of the 103 green 

jobs training grants that were awarded by ETA,19,

20 but grantees were 

somewhat concentrated within certain regions of the country. Specifically, 

most states with three or more grantees were located in the Northeast, 

West, or Midwest regions of the country.21

 

19 In total, ETA awarded 189 green jobs grants with Recovery Act funding, of which 97 

were primarily focused on training. In addition, ETA awarded 6 GJIF training grants for 

green jobs training. The analysis in this section pertains to the 103 training specific green 

jobs grants awarded through the 3 Recovery Act-funded programs primarily focused on 

training (SESP, POP, and ETP) and the GJIF program, which was funded as a pilot and 

demonstration project under WIA. 

Four states and the District of 

Columbia received five or more green jobs training grants: California, 

Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania. Figure 4 shows the number of 

green jobs training grants awarded by state.

20 Over half of grantees provided training through a network of local affiliates or subaffiliates, sometimes within a single state or located in multiple states. Labor officials could 

not provide the exact number or location of such sub-grantees for the three Recovery Actfunded green jobs training programs, so this analysis includes only the location of primary 

grant recipients. 

21 As defined by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Distribution and 

Characteristics of Green 

Jobs Training Grantees
 

Page 16 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Figure 4: Green Jobs Training Grantees, by State

In terms of organizational type, most green jobs training grants were 

awarded to nonprofit organizations and state workforce agencies (see fig. 

5). Specifically, 44 percent of green jobs training grants were awarded to 

nonprofit organizations and 34 percent were awarded to state 

governmental agencies or departments. In addition, 10 percent of 

grantees were organized labor or labor management organizations. ETA 

officials from all six of its regional offices said that in terms of 

organizational type, green jobs training grantees did not differ 

substantially from the types of grantees ETA typically oversees. ETA 

officials said building partnerships had been an important focus of the 

green jobs grants, and indeed ETA’s grant solicitations required, or in 

some cases encouraged, grant recipients, regardless of organizational 

type, to develop partnerships with various stakeholders, such as 

representatives of the workforce system, industry groups, employers, 

unions, the education and training community, nonprofits, or communitybased organizations. Staff from ETA’s regional offices said that some 

grantees developed new and successful partnerships as a result of the 

grants, including partnerships with labor unions.
 

Page 17 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Figure 5: Green Jobs Training Grantees, by Organizational Type

More than half of ETA’s green jobs training grantees implemented their 

grants through sub-grantees, or a network of local affiliates, rather than 

providing training services directly to participants. Grantees that contract 

with sub-grantees or local affiliates to provide services are responsible for 

monitoring and overseeing how all grant funds are used, effectively 

delegating day-to-day oversight responsibility from Labor to the primary 

grantee.22

In addition to Labor’s direct investments in green jobs, several offices at 

Labor have infused green elements into their ongoing activities even 

though funds were not specifically appropriated or allocated for these 

green jobs efforts. In total, of the 14 Labor offices we surveyed, 6 

identified and implemented 48 such efforts (for a list of the efforts, see 

appendix III). Some of these offices added a “layer of green” to existing 

training programs or other activities. For example, according to material 

provided by Labor, most YouthBuild programs have incorporated green 

building into their construction training. Other efforts focused on providing 

 

22 Labor provides oversight of sub-grantees through its monitoring of primary grantees, 

which includes ensuring that primary grantees monitor their sub-grantees and document 

monitoring results. 

Labor’s Efforts to 

Infuse Green Jobs into 

Existing Programs
 

Page 18 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

information materials, forming partnerships, or conducting publicity and 

outreach, among other things. For example, the Women’s Bureau23

created a guide on sustainable careers for women and Labor’s 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration contributed to an 

Environmental Protection Agency publication on best practices for 

improving indoor air quality during home energy upgrades. Further, in 

2010 the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships hosted 

a roundtable discussion about green jobs between the Secretary of Labor 

and leaders from national foundations and discussed how to create 

employment opportunities for low-income populations in the green jobs 

industry.

Although funding for green jobs efforts at Labor has shifted and green 

jobs efforts funded through the Recovery Act are winding down, a few of 

Labor’s ongoing programs or efforts continue to emphasize green jobs or 

skills, and Labor continues to incorporate green elements into existing 

programs by coordinating internally on an as-needed basis. After the 

passage of the Recovery Act, a number of Labor’s offices worked 

together to implement the requirements of the act, and Labor officials said 

that they collaborated on green jobs efforts on a fairly regular basis and 

that more formal green jobs meetings across the department were 

common. For those green jobs efforts where green elements have been 

infused into ongoing activities even though funds were not specifically 

appropriated or allocated for green jobs efforts, offices at Labor indicated 

through our survey that they continue to coordinate on such efforts within 

Labor and across other federal agencies, albeit in a less formal manner. 

For example, according to our survey of these indirectly-funded green 

jobs efforts, for 37 of 46 of the efforts listed in appendix III, offices said 

that they coordinated with others at Labor, and for 30 of 46 of the efforts, 

they reported coordinating with other federal agencies.24

 

23 Ensuring that green jobs would be accessible to women and minorities was identified as 

a significant challenge in the Vice President’s 2009 Middle Class Task Force report, 

Green Jobs: a Pathway to a Strong Middle Class. 

In addition, it is 

likely that coordination on green jobs efforts will continue to occur on an 

ad-hoc basis, especially as funding and priorities within the department 

24 While there are 48 efforts in total, we did not survey Labor officials for 2 of the 48 efforts 

listed in appendix III.

Several of Labor’s 

Offices Coordinate on 

Implementing Green 

Jobs Efforts within 

Labor or with Other 

Federal Agencies
 

Page 19 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

shift. For example, Labor recently reported that due to federal budget 

cuts, BLS has discontinued its reporting on employment in green jobs.

According to a Labor official, after the Recovery Act was passed, Labor 

collaborated with other departments, such as the Department of Energy 

(Energy) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 

to foster job growth for a new green economy. For example, Labor’s 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration worked with Energy on 

retrofitting and safety activities, and Labor also partnered with HUD to 

provide green jobs training and possible employment opportunities to 

public housing residents. In addition, Labor entered into various 

Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) after the Recovery Act was 

passed to collaborate on green jobs-related issues with other federal 

agencies. For example, the Secretaries of Energy, Labor, and the 

Department of Education announced a collaboration to connect jobs to 

training programs and career pathways and to make cross-agency 

communication a priority. While these examples highlight coordination on 

green jobs efforts after the passage of the Recovery Act, little is known 

about the effectiveness of these efforts.

To identify the potential demand for green jobs in their communities, all 

(11 of 11)25

 

25 The number of grantees interviewed and training programs examined totaled 11. 

Therefore, for the remainder of this section, only the relevant count of grantees or 

programs will be presented within parentheses and it can be assumed that the count is out 

of 11. It can also be assumed that the qualifier “all” equates to 11. 

grantees we interviewed had broadly interpreted Labor’s 

green jobs definitional framework to include as green any job that could 

be linked, directly or indirectly, to a beneficial environmental outcome. 

While Labor created its framework to provide local flexibility, the wide 

variation in the types of green jobs obtained by program participants 

illustrates just how broadly Labor’s definition can be interpreted and 

raises questions about what constitutes a green job—especially in cases 

where the job essentially takes the form of a more traditional job (see 

table 2). In general, grantees we interviewed considered jobs green if 

they could link the job to (1) a green industry, (2) the production or 

installation of goods that benefit the environment, (3) the performance of 

services that potentially lead to environmental benefits, or (4) 

environmentally beneficial work processes. For example, in some cases, 

grantees we interviewed considered jobs green because they were linked 

Selected Grantees 

Broadly Defined 

Green Jobs and 

Generally Added 

Green Elements to 

Existing Training 

Programs
 

Page 20 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

to the renewable energy industry, such as solar panel installation or 

sales. Grantees considered other jobs green because the goods being 

produced benefited the environment, such as the pouring of concrete for 

a wind turbine or the installation of energy efficient appliances. In some 

cases the green job was service-based, such as an energy auditor or 

energy surveyor. Finally, other grantees considered jobs green because 

of the environmentally beneficial processes being used, such as applying 

paint in an efficient manner or using advanced manufacturing techniques

that reduce waste. Even for jobs where parts of the work have a link to 

environmentally beneficial outcomes, workers may only use green skills 

or practices for a portion of the time they work. For instance, technicians 

trained to install and repair high-efficiency heating, ventilation, and air 

conditioning (HVAC) systems may in the course of their work also install 

less energy efficient equipment.26

 

26 BLS counts a job as being green if it is held by a worker who spends over half their time 

involved in green technologies and practices. 
 

Page 21 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Table 2: Examples of Green Job Placement Based on Interviews with Selected Labor Green Jobs Grantees

Training focus Green job placement examples

Renewable energy • solar panel installer

• solar panel sales representative

Green construction and retrofitting • construction laborer building an energy efficient home

• laborer inspecting and weatherizing homes

• operator driving heavy machinery on a public rail project

• concrete pourer on a wind-turbine project site

• plumber installing low-flow toilets and water saving fixtures

• hardwood floor layer installing sustainable flooring materials

• worker trained to apply paint in a manner that reduces waste 

and toxic emissions

Electrical work • electrician installing energy-efficient lighting controls

• maintenance advisor on energy-saving appliances and lighting alternatives 

for property managers

Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning 

(HVAC) Systems

• HVAC technician installing high-efficiency furnaces and air conditioning 

units

• worker who conducts energy surveys to educate building owners on costeffective energy efficiency alternatives

• maintenance technician overseeing compliance on EPA emission 

regulations 

General and hazardous waste management • laborer on an environmental clean-up project

• laborer removing hazardous waste from a factory site

Manufacturing • factory line-worker trained to identify opportunities to reduce waste

• machinist using computerized technology that reduces waste 

Other • emergency medical technician trained to perform rescues on wind 

turbine towers 

Source: GAO analysis of information from selected Labor green jobs training grantees.

All grantees we interviewed said they had worked closely with local 

employers to align their training program with the green skills needs of 

local employers. All agreed developing effective relationships with 

employers was crucial to aligning any training program with available 

jobs.27

 

27 Labor has asserted the importance of the involvement of local employers in the 

alignment of employment training programs with jobs. For example, WIA requires that a 

majority of local workforce investment boards be representatives of local businesses. 

GAO has also reported on the importance of linking the workforce investment system with 

employers to meet local labor market needs. See GAO, Workforce Investment Act: 

Innovative Collaborations between Workforce Boards and Employers Helped Meet Local 

Needs, 

Labor’s three Recovery Act green jobs training programs, as well 

GAO-12-97 (Washington, D.C. Jan. 19, 2012).
 

Page 22 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

as the GJIF program, all required applicants to demonstrate how they 

would partner with local employers to develop and implement their 

training programs. Most (9) grantees told us they had assembled advisory 

boards consisting of representatives from local businesses and industry 

associations to help inform them about available green jobs and the skills 

that would most likely be in demand by local employers. Further, all 

grantees said they engaged in ongoing communication with employers to 

stay abreast of changes in the local economy and employer needs, and 

most (10) made changes to their program curricula or tailored their 

training in response to employer input.

Labor’s data show that green jobs training grantees primarily offered 

training in the construction and manufacturing industries. Specifically, 

nearly half of all participants of the Recovery Act-funded green jobs 

training programs received training focused on construction, and 

approximately 15 percent received training in manufacturing. Over 5 

percent of participants in those programs received training in other 

industries that included utilities, transportation, and warehousing. 

Grantees in Labor’s newer GJIF program focused even more heavily on 

construction—approximately 94 percent of participants were trained in 

construction and around 3 percent in manufacturing.

Most grantees (9) we spoke to had infused green elements into existing 

training curricula for more traditional skills. However, the extent to which 

the training focused on green versus traditional skills varied across 

programs and often depended upon the skill level of targeted participants. 

Most (7) of the programs we visited generally targeted relatively lowskilled individuals with limited work experience and were designed to 

teach participants the foundational skills they would need to pursue a 

career in a skilled trade in which green skills and materials can be used. 

For example, those programs typically used their green job grant funds to 

incorporate green skills into existing construction, carpentry, heating/airconditioning, plumbing, or electricity programs. The programs generally 

involved a mixture of classroom and hands-on training and taught 

traditional skills, such as how to read blueprints, use tools, install and 

service appliances, and frame buildings. In teaching these skills, 

however, instructors also showed students the way the processes or 

products used in performing these tasks could lead to environmentally 

beneficial outcomes. For example, participants were taught various ways 

to weatherize a building to conserve energy, to efficiently operate heavy 

machines to save fuel, or to install solar panels as part of a green 

construction project.
 

Page 23 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

In contrast, two programs we visited focused more exclusively on shortterm green skills training to supplement the existing traditional skills of 

relatively higher-skilled unemployed workers. For example, one green 

awareness program taught participants to identify ways to perform their 

work, such as manufacturing, in a more environmentally beneficial 

manner, often by identifying and reducing waste. Another program added 

a component to their comprehensive electrical training program to train 

unemployed registered electricians how to install and maintain advanced 

energy efficient lighting systems. The grantees associated with both of 

these programs, as well as other grantees, noted that employer demand 

for workers with green skills may sometimes be most effectively met 

through short-term training of higher-skilled unemployed workers or 

incumbent workers.

The overall impact of Labor’s green jobs training programs remains 

largely uncertain partly because some individuals are still participating in 

training and are not expected to have outcomes yet, and because final 

outcome data are submitted to Labor approximately 3 months after the 

grant period ends.28

 

28 Labor officials told us that these time frames are based on grantee performance 

reporting requirements.

The most recent performance outcome data for the 

three Recovery Act-funded and GJIF green jobs grants are as of 

December 31, 2012, at which time approximately 60 percent of the 

Recovery Act-funded programs had ended and grantees had submitted 

final performance outcome data. According to Labor officials, complete 

outcome data for the remaining Recovery Act-funded green jobs grantees 

will likely not be available until October 2013 because many grants were 

Outcomes of Green 

Jobs Training Remain 

Uncertain, with 

Grantees Citing 

Implementation 

Challenges 

Outcomes of Green Jobs 

Training Programs Remain 

Largely Unknown Due to 

Data Lags
 

Page 24 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

extended to June 2013. They also said that final performance outcome 

data for the GJIF grant—which is scheduled to end in June 2014—will 

likely not be available until October 2014. Our analysis of data reported 

by Recovery Act-funded green jobs grantees with final outcome data 

shows that these grantees collectively reported enrolling and training 

more participants than they had proposed when setting their outcome 

targets.29 However, their placement of program participants into 

employment lagged in comparison—these grantees reported placing 55 

percent of the projected number of participants into jobs. When final data 

become available for the remaining 40 percent of grantees, the final figure 

comparing reported employment outcomes to proposed targets may 

change.30

Developing a complete and accurate assessment of Labor’s green jobs 

training programs is further challenged by the potential unreliability of 

certain outcome data—particularly for placement into training-related 

employment. In its October 2012 report, Labor’s OIG questioned the 

reliability of the Recovery Act green jobs training programs’ employment 

and retention outcome data because a significant proportion of sampled 

data for employment and retention outcomes were not adequately 

Moreover, it remains to be seen how GJIF grantees’ 

employment outcomes will compare to their projected targets, and 

whether the employment outcomes of this program will benefit either from 

economic changes or lessons learned since the Recovery Act programs 

began.

 

29 Collectively for these grantees, the number of program participants enrolled was 104 

percent of the grantees’ aggregate target level, and the number of program participants 

completing training was 106 percent of the grantees’ aggregate target level. 

30 This analysis of reported outcome data only includes grantees in two of the three 

Recovery-Act funded green jobs training programs because final outcome data were not 

available for any grantees of the third program. Specifically, all grantees that had reported 

final outcome data as of December 31, 2012, were either Pathways Out of Poverty 

grantees or Energy Training Partnership grantees. Almost all grantees for which final 

outcome data had not yet been reported were grant recipients of the State Energy Sector

and Partnership and Training (SESP) grants. Employment-placement outcomes and 

earnings might vary systematically across grant programs due to differences in the 

populations targeted by the grants. For example, Pathways Out of Poverty grantees 

served unemployed individuals, high school dropouts, and other disadvantaged individuals 

within areas of high poverty. In contrast, under SESP grants, various target populations 

were given priority to receive training, such as workers impacted by national energy and 

environmental policy, veterans, and unemployed individuals, among other groups. Other 

individuals, such as entry-level and incumbent workers were also eligible to be served 

through the SESP program.
 

Page 25 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

supported by grantee documentation.31 We reviewed the OIG’s data 

review process and found it appropriate for assessing reliability and 

therefore also consider the data unreliable for evaluating program 

performance.32

Labor officials noted that they have been collecting additional information 

on employment outcomes and wages using state unemployment 

insurance (UI) wage record data on program participants, and will 

continue to do so into early 2015 for the GJIF program.

While outcome data for the ongoing GJIF program are still 

being reported and the OIG did not assess the reliability of this program’s 

data, Labor’s method for collecting these data remains largely unchanged 

from that used for the Recovery Act-funded green jobs training programs. 

Consequently, these outcome data—particularly for placement into 

training-related employment—could also be questionable.

33 Results of their 

most recent analyses of UI data showed that, of the participants who had 

exited at least one of the three Recovery Act-funded green jobs training 

programs between April 1, 2011, and March 31, 2012, 52 percent had 

obtained employment.34

 

31 For their data reliability assessment, Labor’s OIG performed a file review of outcome 

data for eight randomly selected grantees of the Recovery Act programs. They found that 

24 percent of entered employment outcomes were not supported by adequate 

documentation, and that 33 percent of training-related entered employment outcomes 

were not supported by adequate documentation. Most of the documentation problems 

were found with three of the eight sampled grantees. 

Similar analyses provided by Labor showed that, 

of participants who had exited between October 1, 2010, and September 

30, 2011, 83 percent of those who had become employed had retained 

their employment for at least 6 months and had average earnings of 

32 For a complete description of our data reliability assessment process, see appendix I. 

33 GAO previously reported that UI wage records provide a fairly consistent national view 

of the performance of WIA. The report noted that most of the outcome data reported in a 

given program year actually reflect participants who left the program during the prior year,

which limits their usefulness for gauging current program performance. GAO has not 

recently assessed how Labor calculates entered employment rates, job retention rates, or 

average earnings using these data. See: 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).

34 According to Labor, their most recent analyses of Recovery Act green jobs training 

program outcomes using UI wage data are based on data as of December 31, 2012. The 

data contain employment information for program participants who had exited training 

during the one-year period ending March 31, 2012. The data contain job retention and 

earnings information for program participants who had exited training during the one-year 

period ending September 30, 2011. 
 

Page 26 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

around $25,000 for the 6 month period. Results of Labor’s analysis of UI 

wage data for participants of the GJIF program shows that 40 percent of 

participants who had exited between April 1, 2011, and March 31, 2012, 

had entered employment.35

According to Labor officials, once complete, these additional UI wage 

data may provide more definitive information on the extent to which 

program participants entered employment and will be used by the 

department to develop a broader picture of the grant programs’ level of 

success in achieving employment outcomes. Specifically, Labor officials 

said that while there is not a formal process to study the UI data, program 

staff routinely examine these data to identify lessons learned and best 

practices that could be applied to future grant programs. Labor officials 

said the data could be used to compare the green jobs training programs 

against other training programs across the agency, such as those under 

WIA, if resources permit. While Labor officials consider the UI data to be 

more definitive than the grantee-reported job placement data to measure 

overall program outcomes once the grant period ends, they stressed the 

importance of having real-time data to monitor grantee performance 

during implementation.

However, the UI data do not capture whether 

jobs obtained were training-related for either the Recovery Act-funded or 

GJIF programs, so, absent additional relevant information, the extent to 

which grantees placed participants into training-related employment may 

never be reliably known.

While the UI wage record data provide an alternative source of 

information on job placement outcomes, due to a 9-month lag time, these 

data are of limited usefulness regarding program management. 

Specifically, because of the time lag, grantees could not use these data to 

monitor their progress toward meeting program goals in real-time. 

Further, Labor could not use the data to hold grantees accountable for 

meeting grant goals, as all grant periods will have ended before the data 

are complete. Consequently, ensuring the reliability of grantee reported 

outcome data remains vitally important, particularly for grant programs 

 

35 According to Labor, their most recent analyses of the GJIF green jobs training program 

outcomes using UI wage data are based on data as of December 31, 2012. The data 

contain employment information for program participants who had exited training during 

the one-year period ending March 31, 2012. Also according to Labor, relevant UI wage 

data to generate job retention rates or average earnings for participants of the GJIF 

program are not yet available. 
 

Page 27 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

whose primary objective is to prepare workers for attaining employment in 

a targeted emerging industry.

The grantees we interviewed were generally positive about Labor’s green 

jobs training programs, with most speaking optimistically about the 

potential value of the green skills obtained by the program participants. 

Most grantees we met with said that they believe there to be a continued 

national movement towards lowering energy usage—whether due to 

economic, policy, or cultural changes36

However, all grantees noted there have been challenges associated with 

developing and implementing Labor’s green jobs training programs. For 

example, most (8) of the grantees we interviewed said that the lack of 

credible green jobs labor market information had limited their ability to 

identify or predict the level of available green jobs or the demand for 

green skills in their local area. Although state workforce agencies 

received funding to conduct green jobs labor market information studies 

under the State Labor Market Information Improvement grants, most 

resulting data were issued after many Recovery Act training programs 

had already begun. In addition, the BLS surveys were released from 

March 2012 through March 2013, after GJIF grantees had submitted their 

applications outlining their training programs to Labor. Having access to 

—and all projected that the 

demand for workers with green skills credentials will continue to rise. All 

(11 of 11) were of the opinion that possessing green skills in addition to 

more traditional skills provides workers with an advantage as they seek a 

new job or move along a career pathway, and most (10) cited the need 

for training programs that provide nationally or industry-recognized green 

credentials. Two noted that having multiple credentials was particularly 

valuable. Lastly, some (5) grantees mentioned that the benefits of the 

green jobs training, like most job training, may not become apparent 

immediately, but may often be realized later during the worker’s career, 

especially as demand for green skills grows.

 

36 All 11 grantees we interviewed were of the opinion there is a national movement toward 

energy efficiency due to economic changes, whereby industries or singular businesses 

are attempting to be globally competitive partly by reducing energy costs. Ten of the 

grantees were also of the opinion that such a national movement is also being driven by 

policy changes, such as state energy goals, and by cultural changes, such as public 

concern about global warming or public desire for U.S. energy independence. One 

grantee was not of the opinion that such a national movement was being driven by policy 

or cultural changes. 

Grantees Highlighted 

Green Jobs Training 

Benefits and Challenges
 

Page 28 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

the final results of the state labor market information studies could have 

provided Recovery Act grantees with additional insights into their state’s 

economic activity in the energy efficiency and renewable energy 

industries, as well as jobs within those industries when they were 

developing their training programs. Similarly, BLS survey results could 

have provided GJIF grantees with a national snapshot of establishments

that produce green goods and services and the jobs of workers involved 

in green activities, among other information, and may have provided 

grantees with additional context for the development and implementation 

of their green jobs training programs.37

In addition, most (9) grantees we met with said Labor’s green jobs 

training grants did not afford them enough time to both develop local 

partnerships and recruit, train, and place program participants. All 

grantees said developing partnerships can be especially time-consuming 

if such partnerships had not existed prior to the grant award.

Labor officials said the rapidly 

evolving nature of the green industries has resulted in multiple changes to 

employer green job demand information over the course of the grant 

periods, further complicating their attempts to provide labor market 

information for this sector.

38

Furthermore, most (8) grantees mentioned how developing and 

implementing a relatively new type of training, like green skills, can 

require additional time in order to fill knowledge gaps among employers. 

This may be especially true in light of changing state and local energy 

policies. For example, according to the Department of Energy, as of 

March 2013, 29 states have established standards aimed at generating a 

Most (9) 

noted that given how important local partnerships are to developing 

successful training programs, training programs that require such 

partnerships should have longer grant periods than those afforded by the 

Recovery Act and GJIF programs.

 

37 The three surveys launched by BLS are (1) the 2010 and 2011 Green Goods and 

Services (GGS) surveys; (2) the Green Technologies and Practices (GTP) survey; and (3) 

the Occupational Employment and Wages in Green Goods and Services (GGS-OCC) 

program.

38U.S. Department of Labor, Green Jobs and Health Care Implementation Study Final 

Report (Sept. 20, 2012), noted that using pre-existing partner relationships contributed to 

the efficiency of program implementation. Further, the report suggested that requiring 

future grant administrators to identify partners with whom they have had positive preexisting relationships would likely limit the amount of up-front administrative time spent 

working with partners—especially for grants with shorter periods of performance. 
 

Page 29 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

certain percentage of the state’s energy using renewable sources by a 

specified year. Furthermore, many municipalities throughout the country 

are requiring that local construction projects adhere to environmentally 

friendly requirements. However, most (9) grantees we spoke with said 

some employers may not recognize how changing policies will affect their 

businesses. In fact, they believe this lack of understanding may be 

limiting demand for workers trained in green skills. To address this 

problem, one of the grantees we interviewed had developed a 1-day 

training program for local business managers to educate them about how 

they could benefit from the green skills that participants were obtaining 

through the organization’s training program. Most (6) grantees said at 

times during the implementation of their green jobs training program, they 

were, in effect, attempting to simultaneously drive both supply and 

demand for workers with green skills, which took considerable time and 

effort.

In addition, although all grantees we interviewed had engaged with 

employers who had committed their support for the training curriculum, 

they also said this did not always translate into green jobs for program 

participants. Above all, most (9) pointed to the slow economic recovery as 

the reason their predictions—and those made by employers—regarding 

green job growth were not fully realized. For example, one grantee 

explained how the local housing market had not recovered as quickly as 

anticipated, and as a result, demand for workers with green skills—such 

as green construction techniques, weatherization practices, and the 

installation of energy efficient appliances—has been sluggish. In addition, 

most (10) grantees explained that because green skills are often 

intertwined with traditional skills training and the skilled labor industries, 

their programs’ participants were negatively affected by the overall poor 

economy. For example, most grantees (9) noted how their program 

participants, despite their additional layer of green skills training, found 

themselves competing with a high number of unemployed workers who 

were also seeking to regain employment in more traditional jobs such as 

carpentry or electrical work. Most (9) grantees also noted that renewable 

energy sectors, such as solar power, have not grown in their regions as 

was predicted several years ago. Lastly, most (7) grantees we 

interviewed said it is difficult to accurately measure the value of green 

skills training in terms of green job placement. In general, they said this is 

partly because, unlike jobs in other growing industries, like health care, 

there are few distinctly green jobs. One grantee we met with said she 

believes the term “green job” is misleading, and complicates program 

implementation. This grant official said that funding should be directed 

toward supplementing traditional skills training with green skills that can 
 

Page 30 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

be used on any job rather than on preparing workers for specific jobs 

identified as green.

Based on our interviews with grantees of Labor’s green jobs training 

programs, and the descriptions of their experiences implementing those 

programs, we identified several lessons learned that may warrant 

consideration when implementing similar targeted grant programs for 

other emerging industries (see table 3).

Table 3: Lessons Learned Associated with Implementing Grant Programs for an Emerging Industry

Implementing grant programs for an emerging 

industry may require...

Lessons learned based on selected grantees’ experiences implementing 

Labor’s green jobs training programs

...a more nimble approach • Setting realistic outcome goals can be complicated by uncertainty 

regarding the economy and public policies.

• If available labor market information is limited, significant, ongoing 

employer involvement will likely be required.

• Local market conditions may quickly change necessitating modifications 

to training and grant agreements.

• There can be unanticipated challenges to training and placing target 

populations into jobs as the industry continues to evolve.

... longer grant periods • Building effective relationships with employers and key partners can 

require a large investment of time and effort.

• Identifying industry-recognized credentials may require significant 

research.

• If the emerging industry is intertwined with the skilled labor trades, 

preparing low-skilled workers to be job-ready will likely require 

supplemental training and assistance.

... a raised awareness of the 

emerging industry

• Learning about the new industry and staying current requires continuous 

research.

• Consensus on the value of specific job credentials may be lacking.

• Training providers and employers are not always aware about how 

changing policies will affect the demand for new worker skills. 

... more effective measurement of 

program outcomes

• If the industry is defined broadly to allow local flexibility, it may limit the 

comparability of reported outcome data.

• Accurate counting of outcomes is difficult when the definition of the 

industry continues to evolve.

• Training for jobs of the future may result in delayed outcomes if jobs are 

slow to materialize.

Source: GAO analysis of interviews with selected grantees.
 

Page 31 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Labor has provided all green jobs grantees with technical assistance to 

help them implement their grant programs and comply with relevant 

federal laws and regulations. For example, Labor officials have hosted 

technical assistance webinars on topics such as financial management 

and how to engage employers. Labor also maintains a website for each 

green jobs training grant program and a green jobs community of practice 

on its online platform, Workforce3One. In addition, Labor has published 

bimonthly digests for Recovery Act grantees since January 2011 that 

highlight new technical assistance materials and other grant-related 

information. Finally, Labor has compiled and periodically updated a 

technical assistance guide that briefly describes and provides hyperlinks 

for its technical assistance resources, including webinar recordings and 

promising practices. Several grantees we interviewed (4 of 11) reported 

participating in webinars and referring to technical assistance materials 

posted to Workforce3One.

In addition, ETA has funded three separate studies to assess the 

implementation of selected green jobs programs funded by the Recovery 

Act. Specifically, Labor funded a 2-year implementation evaluation that 

examined the implementation of the three Recovery Act-funded green 

jobs training programs and issued both interim and final reports. 39, 40

 

39 The ETP, POP, and SESP grants. The evaluation also examined the implementation of 

the Health Care Sector and and other High Growth and Emerging Industries grant, which 

did not specifically target green jobs.

40 Ted Shen, Eileen Poe-Yamagata, Alan Dodkowitz, et. al., Green Jobs and Healthcare 

Implementation Study: Interim Report, ETAOP 2012-07 (IMPAQ International: May 7, 

2012). Please also see: Michael P. Kirsch, Carolyn Corea, Ted Shen, et. al., Green Jobs 

and Healthcare Implementation Study Final Report, ETAOP 2013-16 (IMPAQ 

International: Mar. 27, 2013).

Labor Has Assisted 

and Monitored 

Grantees, but Has 

Provided Limited 

Guidance on Outcome 

Documentation 

Requirements 

Labor Has Provided 

Various Forms of 

Technical Assistance 

to Support Green 

Jobs Grantees
 

Page 32 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Labor also funded an evaluation of the State Labor Market Information 

Improvement grants and issued a final report and additional related 

products in 2013.41 Finally, Labor has funded an ongoing impact 

evaluation scheduled to be completed in 2016. This study was designed 

to test the extent to which selected grantees of one of the four green-jobs 

training programs overseen by ETA—Pathways Out of Poverty—

improved worker outcomes by imparting skills and training valued in the 

labor market.42

To support its technical assistance efforts to grantees, Labor entered into 

a grant agreement with the National Governors Association, which 

together with two partner organizations formed a Technical Assistance 

Partnership (TA Partnership).43

While Labor provided guidance and technical assistance on how to 

document eligibility for the green jobs training programs, it provided little 

guidance on what documentation grantees were expected to maintain 

regarding program outcomes, particularly with respect to job placement. 

In conjunction with Labor officials, the TA 

Partnership has facilitated monthly conference calls for each grant 

program so grantees can learn from their peers and receive programspecific technical assistance. The TA Partnership has also compiled and 

updated reports that highlight promising practices grantees have 

implemented. Finally, the TA Partnership and Labor officials have held 

annual grantee conferences, which have covered various topics including 

strategies to retain and place program participants and the importance of 

nationally recognized credentials. Several (4 of 11) grantees we 

interviewed mentioned participating in the monthly conference calls and 

annual conferences and said that generally they had been helpful.

 

41 Diane Herz, Elizabeth Laird, Angus Hague, et. al., Investing in Labor–Market 

Information (LMI): Insights from the Recovery Act LMI Grants Final Report, ETAOP 2013-

05 (Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.: Jan. 15, 2013). See also: Jillian Berk, Elizabeth 

Laird, and Brittany English, Investing in Labor–Market Information (LMI): A Summary of 

the State LMI Improvement Grants Final Report, ETAOP 2013-06. (Mathematica Policy 

Research, Inc. Jan. 15, 2013). Finally, see: Elizabeth Laird, Brittany English, Jillian Berk, 

et.al., Practitioner Briefs for the Evaluation of the Labor Market Information (LMI) 

Improvement Grants, ETAOP 2013-17 (Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Jan. 15, 2013). 

42 The evaluation also assesses impacts of selected grantees of another Recovery Actfunded training program, the Health Care Sector and Other High Growth and Emerging 

Industries grant.

43 Specifically, the National Governors Association, Corporation for a Skilled Workforce, 

and Collaborative Economics form the TA Partnership.
 

Page 33 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Specifically, while Labor provided guidance on how to report required 

performance data into its Recovery Act Database, this guidance does not 

specify what documentation, if any, grantees were to maintain for 

reported job placements, including those considered training-related. Our 

Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government provides that 

internal control and all transactions and other significant events should be 

clearly documented and readily available for examination.44

While Labor officials have not issued additional guidance to GJIF 

grantees regarding how to document job placement and retention 

outcomes, they said they have taken other steps that address the OIG’s 

recommendation to improve the quality of grantee reported performance 

data and utilize lessons learned from Recovery Act-funded green jobs 

training programs for other discretionary grant programs. First, ETA 

officials noted that they have formed an internal workgroup focused on 

improving the technical assistance provided to ETA’s discretionary 

grantees about how to report program outcomes. This group hopes to 

issue recommendations in September 2013, and ETA officials believe 

these recommendations will help improve grant application instructions, 

and help ETA refine their reporting systems, among other things. Second, 

ETA officials told us that they had initiated a grant re-engineering project 

in August 2012 to identify common grant management challenges and 

develop strategies for addressing such challenges. For instance, the 

group has discussed ways to improve ETA’s grant solicitation process, 

such as by including clearer expectations and benchmarks for 

performance in its solicitations for grant applications and by taking steps 

to ensure greater comparability of goals across grantees. Labor hopes to 

begin implementing the group’s recommendations for new discretionary 

grant programs in August 2013.

However, in 

its last green jobs report, the OIG found that nearly a quarter of reported 

outcomes were not supported by adequate documentation. One regional 

official noted that sub-grantees may not have known what documentation 

was required and staff in another office said that in some cases primary 

grantees may not have done enough to ensure that the sub-grantees they 

were responsible for overseeing understood documentation requirements.

 

44 GAO, Internal Control: Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, 

GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1 (Washington, D.C.: November 1999). 
 

Page 34 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

ETA monitors most grants, including its green jobs training grants, 

through a risk-based strategy that prioritizes monitoring activities based 

upon grantees’ assessed risk-levels and availability of resources, among 

other factors, and is described in its Core Monitoring Guide.45 Specifically, 

according to officials from all six of ETA’s regional offices, ETA’s federal 

project officers monitor grantees as part of their ongoing duties,46 which 

include calling grantees to offer technical assistance. In addition, ETA’s 

federal project officers perform quarterly desk reviews, during which they 

review financial reports and quarterly performance reports that grantees 

are required to submit.47

The GEMS assessment of each grantee’s risk level is then used by Labor 

to develop its risk-based monitoring strategy, which involves prioritizing 

site visits based on grantees’ assessed risk-levels and availability of 

resources, among other factors.

For the green jobs training grants, these reports 

include information such as the total amount of grant funds spent, the 

number of participants who began or completed training, a timeline for 

grant activities and deliverables, grantee accomplishments, and technical 

assistance needs. During these quarterly reviews, federal project officers 

compare grantees’ reported performance outcomes and spending rates to 

those goals set by grantees in their grant proposals. Based upon their 

review of each grantee’s reported information, federal project officers 

enter information about each grantee into Labor’s Grant Electronic 

Management System (GEMS), which assesses risk and generates a risk 

level for each grantee.

48

 

45 U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Core Monitoring 

Guide (Washington D.C.: April 2005). 

According to regional officials from all 

six offices, nearly all green jobs training grantees received at least one 

on-site monitoring visit, typically about halfway through the period of 

46 Federal project officers have overall responsibility for monitoring the conduct and 

progress of grantees, including conducting on-site visits. Specifically, they are responsible 

for collaborating with the grantees—both in the planning and implementation of the 

program and in the evaluation of activities.

47 Green jobs grantees were required to submit two kinds of quarterly performance 

reports, one that aggregated performance data and the other that described the status of 

program implementation in narrative form. 

48 While the risk level is primarily driven by the grantee’s overall performance and financial 

performance, other factors also affect risk, such as the level of staff turnover at the 

grantee’s organization, loss of key grantee personnel, or other staff issues, according to 

Labor officials. 

Labor Monitored 

Grantees Using a 

Risk-Based Approach
 

Page 35 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

performance. During these site visits, federal project officers assessed 

grantees’ management and performance and documented any 

noncompliance findings and requirements for corrective action, as 

necessary. For example, Labor’s site visit guide includes questions for 

federal project officers to consider about financial and performance data 

reporting systems and performance outcomes.

As a result of its on-site monitoring activities, Labor officials identified and 

required certain grantees to correct a variety of issues concerning the 

management of their grants. Many monitoring reports for the Recovery 

Act-funded green jobs training grants indicated that grantees were not on 

track to meet their performance outcomes. In such cases Labor required 

grantees to submit written corrective action plans that described what 

strategies they would undertake to increase project outcomes and how 

they would ensure that remaining funds would be used in a timely way to 

accomplish project objectives.

Labor officials said that grantees have made significant progress toward 

attaining their goals for beginning and completing training as a result of 

both the grantees’ own efforts and ETA’s technical assistance and 

monitoring efforts. These officials also stressed that while ETA holds 

grantees accountable to adhering to their grant statements of work, 

grantees are not contractually obligated to meet performance outcomes.49

 

49 ETA officials noted that the green jobs training programs were funded through grants 

and not through contracts and that this is statement is true across programs of federal 

assistance. 

Unlike contracts or WIA-funded programs, which can impose sanctions 

for failing to meet projected targets, the accountability mechanisms for 

these green jobs grant programs were more limited. For example, ETA 

officials said that if a grantee does not achieve its placement outcomes, 

this can affect whether the grantee receives a period of performance 

extension for the current grant or, potentially, a future grant from ETA. 

Officials said that they had not withdrawn funding from any grantees for 

failing to meet performance targets for any of the four green jobs training 

programs. However, in some cases ETA officials decided not to grant 

extension requests for grantees reporting poor performance. As a result, 

some grant funds remained unexpended and will be returned to the 

Treasury, as required.
 

Page 36 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

In addition to insufficient progress toward targeted outcomes, the 

monitoring reports of the Recovery Act-funded green jobs training 

grantees identified other noncompliance findings, including insufficient 

monitoring of sub-grantees. For example, a number of monitoring reports 

indicated that primary grantees had not sufficiently monitored their subgrantees. These findings are notable given that such a large percentage 

of grantees implemented their programs through a network of subgrantees. Both GAO and the Department of Justice’s OIG have stressed 

the importance of sufficient sub-recipient monitoring to the grant oversight 

process.50 Other noncompliance findings included grantees lacking 

adequate documentation to show program participants were eligible for 

services or grantees having failed to follow acceptable procurement 

processes. According to officials from all six regional offices, federal 

project officers did not identify any instances of fraud, waste, or abuse 

during their on-site monitoring visits.

The Recovery Act funded multiple, substantial investments in training 

programs targeted to a specific emerging industry—energy efficiency and 

renewable energy. Most of these programs have already ended or are 

currently winding down, although a few of Labor’s continuing programs, 

such as YouthBuild, have incorporated many green elements since 2009, 

and the Green Job Innovation Fund program is scheduled to remain 

active through June of 2014. Despite the sizeable investment in green 

jobs, the green jobs training programs have faced a number of

implementation challenges and final outcomes remain uncertain, 

particularly regarding placement into green jobs. A number of these 

challenges have stemmed from the need to implement the grants quickly 

and simultaneously before green jobs had been defined and more had 

been learned about the demand for green skills. Others, such as 

problems with the reliability of outcome data, can be traced to 

management issues that have compromised Labor’s ability to measure 

the program’s success, particularly regarding placing participants into 

training-related employment. Specifically, because Labor did not establish 

clear and timely guidelines for how to document green job placement 

outcomes, Labor is not able to assess the extent to which the targeted 

 

50 See GAO, Grants to State and Local Governments: An Overview of Funding Levels and 

Selected Challenges GAO-12-1016 (Washington, D.C.: September 25, 2012),.24 and U.S. 

Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, Improving the Grant Management 

Process (February 2009). 

Conclusions 
 

Page 37 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

green jobs training programs placed participants in employment related to 

the training they received.

The challenges for an emerging industry such as energy efficiency and 

renewable energy are substantial. Uncertainty and debate still surround 

the question of what constitutes a green job. Under Labor’s current 

framework, almost any job can be considered green if a link between the 

employee’s tasks and environmental benefits can be made. Indeed, most 

grantee officials we interviewed said that most green jobs they have 

trained participants for are primarily traditional skilled-trades jobs, such as 

carpentry or electrical work. Many have been termed “green” because the 

worker has been trained to be mindful of energy use and reduce waste, or 

has been placed where the worker’s tasks resulted in a product or service 

that benefited the environment, such as a light-rail construction site.

Such an approach provides certain benefits within the context of an 

emerging industry, in that many of the skills workers obtain can be 

transferred to traditional jobs in cases where local demand for green jobs 

falls below expectations. It also may serve to raise general worker 

awareness about energy efficiency and waste reduction, to the benefit of 

the employer or nation. Nonetheless, this emphasis on training that often 

takes the form of traditional skills training with an added layer of green 

may not fully align with the intent of the targeted training funds.

By funding several evaluations of green jobs training and labor market 

information programs, Labor has positioned itself to build upon lessons 

learned through implementing these individual programs. A fundamental 

consideration is whether it is prudent to implement job training programs 

for an emerging industry before more is known about the demand for 

skills and workers. Another consideration is whether it would be more or 

less effective for federally-funded training programs to focus on providing 

valuable green skills and credentials applicable on a wide variety of jobs, 

rather than to devote considerable attention to what is defined as a green 

job.

Even though Labor is scaling back its own green jobs efforts, energy 

efficiency and renewable energy will likely remain a national priority. 

Labor has established a green jobs community of practice on its online 

platform, Workforce3One, which, if maintained and used, can continue to 

facilitate information-sharing among grantees and workforce 

professionals regarding what green skills and credentials employers in 

their communities value most. In addition, the substantial investment in 

energy efficiency and renewable energy made through these grant 
 

Page 38 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

programs also provides Labor an opportunity to identify broader lessons 

learned about the challenges and benefits associated with offering 

targeted training in an emerging industry, which could help inform the 

development of training for other emerging industries in the future. 

Without the benefit of such lessons learned and a continued focus on 

what is needed to address emerging industries, state and local workforce 

entities may grapple with similar challenges in the future.

To enhance Labor’s ability to implement training programs in emerging 

industries, GAO recommends that the Secretary of Labor identify lessons 

learned from implementing the green jobs training programs. This could 

include:

• Identifying challenges and promising strategies associated with 

training workers for emerging industries—through both targeted grant 

programs and existing programs—and considering ways to improve 

such efforts in the future. For example, taking a more measured or 

multi-phased approach could allow the time necessary to better 

determine demand for an emerging industry and establish the 

partnerships needed to properly align training with available jobs.

• Taking steps to ensure training programs adequately document 

outcome variables, particularly for targeted programs where tracking 

training relatedness is of particular interest.

We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Labor. Labor 

provided a written response (see app. IV). Labor agreed with our 

recommendation. Specifically, Labor’s response noted that the 

department has already begun assessing lessons learned from the 

implementation of its green jobs grants. Labor also cited efforts to compile 

lessons learned to inform the design and implementation of future grant 

initiatives, including new approaches to capture program outcomes. Labor 

agreed that documenting outcomes is important and said it will work to 

provide technical assistance to ensure grantees adequately document 

outcomes. Finally, Labor noted the department will continue to collect 

information on employment outcomes and wages and will analyze these 

data once they are complete to provide a more definitive and final picture 

of the extent to which former green jobs training participants entered and 

retained employment. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 39 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of Labor, 

the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and other interested 

parties. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO 

website at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staffs have any questions about this report, please contact 

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

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

page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report 

are listed in appendix V.

Andrew Sherrill

Director

Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 40 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Our objectives were to determine: (1) what is known about the objectives 

and coordination of the Department of Labor’s (Labor) green jobs efforts, 

(2) what type of green jobs training grantees provided and how selected 

grantees aligned their training to meet employers’ green jobs needs, (3) 

what is known about program outcomes and what challenges, if any, 

grantees faced in implementing their programs, and (4) what Labor has 

done to assist and monitor its green jobs grantees. To address these 

objectives, we reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and 

departmental guidance and procedures. We also created a data collection 

instrument and two questionnaires to obtain information from Labor 

officials. In addition, we analyzed data from Labor and interviewed 

selected grantees by phone or in person in five states—California, Illinois, 

Louisiana, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania—as well as Labor officials. We 

conducted this performance audit from May 2012 through June 2013 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.

Our data collection strategy for obtaining information on green jobs efforts 

across Labor consisted of two phases.

First, we created a data collection instrument to obtain information on 

green jobs efforts across Labor. In the data collection instrument, we 

asked offices1

 

1

For the purposes of this report we refer to organizational entities within Labor as offices. 

These entities could include agencies, administrations, bureaus, centers, and divisions.

at Labor to list two separate sets of efforts: (1) efforts 

where federal funds were appropriated or allocated specifically for green 

jobs activities and (2) efforts where federal funds were not specifically 

appropriated or allocated for green jobs activities, but where the office 

sought to incorporate green elements into either an existing program or 

ongoing activity. We distributed the data collection instrument to 14 of 

Labor’s 28 offices: Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

(OSHA), Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Women’s 

Bureau (WB), Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Veterans’ 

Employment and Training Services (VETS), Office of the Assistant 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Data Collection for 

Labor’s Green Jobs 

Efforts
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 41 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Secretary for Policy (OASP), Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB), 

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Center for Faith-Based and 

Neighborhood Partnerships (CFBNP), Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs (OFCCP), Wage and Hour Division (WHD), Office 

of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP), Office of Disability 

Employment Policy (ODEP), and the Office of Public Affairs (OPA). These 

14 offices were selected based on the likelihood of their administering a 

green jobs effort or program. For example, we did not distribute the data 

collection instrument to Labor’s Office of Inspector General, Office of the 

Solicitor, or Office of the Chief Financial Officer.

Second, we used the information we collected on the two separate sets of 

green jobs efforts in the data collection instruments to inform two followup questionnaires. For the first set of green jobs efforts, offices at Labor 

initially identified 16 efforts where funds were specifically appropriated or 

allocated for green-job related activities. For each of the 16 efforts, we 

sent a questionnaire by e-mail. The questionnaire focused on (1) the 

goals and objectives of the green jobs efforts, (2) how green jobs were 

defined for each of the efforts, (3) whether offices coordinated with others 

on these efforts, and (4) funding levels for each of the efforts. We pretested the questionnaire with two respondents from OSHA in December 

and made revisions. We then sent the questionnaires out on a rolling 

basis between January 16 and February 22, 2013. We determined 2 of 

the 16 efforts to be out of scope. Of the remaining 14 directly-funded 

green jobs efforts across five offices (OSHA, ETA, VETS, ILAB, and 

BLS), we received completed questionnaires for 13 and one partially 

completed questionnaire by April 3, 2013. 2

For the second set of green jobs efforts, offices at Labor initially identified 

54 efforts where funds were not specifically appropriated or allocated for 

green jobs efforts, but green elements were incorporated into existing 

programs or ongoing activities. We identified two additional green efforts 

that fall under this category. We sent a brief questionnaire consisting of 

two questions by e-mail in an attached Microsoft Word form. The two 

questions included in the questionnaire were pre-tested as part of the 

more detailed survey mentioned above. All questionnaires were sent on 

We also identified 3 additional 

directly-funded efforts, for a total of 17 efforts.

 

2 We did not receive a completed survey for one of the efforts, but we did receive funding 

information for the effort that was requested in the survey in an e-mail from Labor on April 

3, 2013.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 42 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

January 29, 2013, or on February 22, 2013. We determined 10 of the 56 

efforts to be out of scope. Of the remaining 46 efforts across six offices 

(OSHA, WB, ETA, VETS, ILAB, and CFBNP), we received completed 

questionnaires for all 46 efforts by March 21, 2013. Labor later identified 2 

additional efforts, for a total of 48 efforts.

Because the majority of Recovery Act funding for green jobs efforts were 

directed toward training programs, we focused much of our review on four 

grant programs—the three training- focused green jobs training programs 

funded by the Recovery Act (Energy Training Partnership grants, 

Pathways Out of Poverty grants, and State Energy Sector Partnership 

and Training grants) as well as the newer Green Jobs Innovation Fund. 

To report on the characteristics of Labor’s 103 green jobs training 

grantees, we obtained data from Labor on each training-focused green 

jobs grant administered by ETA. Specifically, we obtained information on 

the grantee’s location, organizational type, and whether or not the grantee 

had sub-grantees.

To better understand the type of green jobs training grantees provided, 

how grantees aligned their training to meet green jobs needs, and what 

challenges, if any, they faced in implementing their programs, we 

analyzed data from Labor and interviewed 11 out of the 103 green jobs 

training grantees between August 2012 and April 2013. We conducted 

site visits in four states and interviewed grantees in two additional states 

by phone. We visited grantees in California, Illinois, Minnesota, and 

Pennsylvania, and interviewed grantees in Connecticut and Louisiana by 

phone. We selected grantees in these states because these states had a 

relatively high number of Labor green jobs grant recipients, grantees in 

these states received GJIF grants, and the states varied in their 

geographic locations. We selected both Recovery Act- and GJIF- funded 

green jobs training grantees, but emphasized GJIF-funded grantees since 

unlike many of the Recovery Act programs, the GJIF program is still 

active.

During each site visit we interviewed Labor’s green jobs training grant 

officials, training providers, local employers, and, to the extent possible, 

program participants. Similarly, during our phone calls we interviewed 

grant officials and in one case employers. During the interviews, we 

collected information about the types of green jobs training that were 

funded by Labor’s green jobs training grants and the outcomes of 

grantees’ programs, including the impact of the training with respect to 

green job placement, or otherwise. We specifically asked grantees about 

Selected Grantees and 

Analysis of Program 

Outcome Data
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 43 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

any challenges they may have encountered as they developed and 

implemented their program, including whether they experienced 

challenges with respect to placing participants into green jobs. In addition, 

we collected information on how local employers were involved in the 

development of the training programs and the green job opportunities 

they were able to offer program participants. We cannot generalize our 

findings beyond the interviews we conducted.

To assess the reliability of Labor’s training type and outcome data, we (1) 

reviewed existing documentation related to the data sources, including 

Labor’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) reports, (2) electronically tested 

the data to identify obvious problems with completeness or accuracy, and 

(3) interviewed knowledgeable agency officials about the data. We 

determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for limited purposes. 

For example, we determined that training type data were sufficiently 

reliable for purposes of reporting out on the industries for which grantees 

most frequently trained participants. We included information about the 

extent to which Recovery Act-funded green jobs training grantees 

collectively reported meeting their enrollment, training completion, and 

entered employment targets for those grantees for which final data were 

available as of December 31, 2012. However, based upon the OIG’s 

findings, we determined that the outcome data were not sufficiently 

reliable to determine the success of the programs. Finally, based upon 

the OIG’s findings, we determined that the data on the extent to which 

grantees entered training-related employment were not reliable enough to 

report, even compared to targeted levels.

To describe Labor’s technical assistance efforts, we reviewed technical 

assistance guides and material posted to Workforce3One, interviewed 

Labor officials, and discussed Labor’s technical assistance with selected 

grantees. To describe and assess Labor’s monitoring efforts, we reviewed 

its Core Monitoring guide, interviewed Labor officials in Washington, D.C. 

and in each of ETA’s six regional offices—Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, 

Dallas, Philadelphia, and San Francisco—and obtained and reviewed 

copies of Labor’s monitoring reports for green jobs training grantees, 

including recipients of Energy Training Partnership, Pathways Out of 

Poverty, and State Energy Sector Partnership and Training grants.

Analysis of Labor’s 

Technical Assistance 

and Monitoring 

Efforts
Appendix II: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Appropriated or 

Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 44 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Training and supportive services 

Office Name of effort Reported description

ETA Energy Training Partnership (ETP) grants Through the Energy Training Partnership Grants, ETA awarded nearly $100 

million to 25 projects. Grantees were to provide training and placement 

services in the energy efficiency and renewable energy industries to workers 

impacted by national energy and environmental policy, individuals in need of 

updated training related to the energy efficiency and renewable energy 

industries, and unemployed workers. Grantees were required to partner with 

labor organizations, employers and workforce investment boards. Grant 

awards ranged from approximately $1.4 to $5 million.

ETA Pathways Out of Poverty (POP) grants In total, Pathways Out of Poverty grantees received approximately $150 

million in Recovery Act funds. The grant aimed to help targeted populations 

find pathways out of poverty through employment in energy efficiency and 

renewable energy industries. Grants ranged from approximately $2 million to 

$8 million and were awarded to eight national nonprofit organizations with local 

affiliates and to 30 local public organizations or private nonprofit organizations.

ETA State Energy Sector Partnership and 

Training (SESP) grants

Through SESP, ETA awarded nearly $190 million to state workforce 

investment boards in partnership with state workforce agencies. The grants 

were designed to provide training, job placement, and related activities that

reflect a comprehensive statewide energy sector strategy including the 

governor’s overall workforce vision, state energy policies, and training 

activities that lead to employment in targeted industry sectors. ETA made 34 

awards that ranged from approximately $2 to $6 million each.

ETA Green Jobs Innovation Fund (GJIF) The Green Jobs Innovation Fund was authorized under the Workforce 

Investment Act to help workers receive job training in green industry sectors 

and occupations and access green career pathways. In total, $38 million in 

grant funds were awarded to six organizations with networks of local affiliates 

to develop green jobs training programs. These programs were required to 

incorporate green career pathways either by forging linkages between 

Registered Apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs or by integrating 

the delivery of technical and basic skills training through community-based 

partnerships.

ETA Job Corps Job Corps is a residential job training program for at-risk youth. The Job Corps

program aims to teach participants the skills they need to secure a meaningful 

job, continue their education, and be independent. Job Corps has instituted a 

number of measures in recent years to “green” its job training programs and 

facilities. Recovery Act funding was used to incorporate “green” training 

elements into the automotive, advanced manufacturing, and construction 

trades at Job Corps centers nationwide and to pilot three new “green” training 

programs at selected Job Corps centers: Solar Panel Installation, 

Weatherization, and SmartGrid technology.

OSHA Susan Harwood Training Grant Program Targeted topic training grant in which applicants propose training based on the 

occupational safety and health topics chosen by OSHA. Alternative Energy 

Industry Hazards and Green Jobs Industry Hazards were included as topics in 

FY 2009 and FY 2010, respectively.

Appendix II: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Appropriated or 

Allocated, by Focus Area 
Appendix II: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Appropriated or 

Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 45 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Training and supportive services 

Office Name of effort Reported description

VETS Veterans’ Workforce Investment Program 

(VWIP) 

VWIP supports veterans’ employment and training services to help eligible 

veterans reintegrate into meaningful employment and to stimulate the 

development of effective and targeted service delivery systems. In FYs 2009 

and 2010, project proposals received priority consideration if they supported 

“Green Energy Jobs” and proposed clear strategies for training and 

employment in the renewable energy economy.

Focus Area: Data collection and reporting

Office Name of effort Reported description

ETA State Labor Market Information 

Improvement (SLMII) grants

ETA awarded approximately $48.8 million in State Labor Market Information 

Improvement Grants to support the research and analysis of labor market data 

to assess economic activity in energy efficiency and renewable energy 

industries and identify occupations within those industries. Grant activities 

included collecting and disseminating labor market information, enhancing 

strategies to connect job seekers to green job banks, and helping ensure that 

workers find employment after completing training. ETA awarded 30 grants of 

between $763,000 and $4 million.

BLS Green Goods and Services (GGS) 

program

This is a survey-based program, covering 120,000 business establishments, 

which provides a measure of national and state employment in industries that 

produce goods or provide services that benefit the environment.

BLS Occupational Employment and Wages in 

Green Goods and Services (GGS-OCC) 

program

This program provides occupational employment and wage information for 

businesses that produce green goods and services.

BLS Green Technologies and Practices (GTP) 

survey

This is a special survey of business establishments designed to collect data on 

establishments’ use of green technologies and practices and the occupations

of workers who spend more than half of their time involved in green 

technologies and practices.

BLS Employment Projections program Green Career Information staff within the Employment Projections program 

produces career information on green jobs including wages, expected job 

prospects, what workers do on the job, working conditions, and necessary 

education, training, and credentials. 

Focus Area: Technical assistance

Office Name of effort Reported description

ETA Occupational Information Network (O*NET) Information that O*NET provided was used to support all

Recovery Act green jobs grantees who were doing green jobs data collection 

and training in the states. These Recovery Act funds to

O*NET were for the specific purpose of focusing occupational research and 

data collection on green jobs on an accelerated pace.

ETA Technical Assistance The Technical Assistance Partnership led by the National Governor’s 

Association supported Recovery Act-funded green jobs grantees.
Appendix II: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Appropriated or 

Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 46 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Other - Capacity building, administrative expenses, information materials, partnerships 

Office Name of effort Reported description

ETA Green Capacity Building Grants (GCBG) In total, ETA awarded $5 million in Recovery Act funds to training programs 

already funded by the Department of Labor to build their capacity to provide 

training in the energy efficiency and renewable energy industries. ETA 

awarded 62 of these grants, with awards ranging from $50,000 to $100,000.

ETA Administrative Expenses ETA used $5 million of the $500 million authorized for the Recovery Act green 

jobs grants for administrative expenses (salaries and expenses). This does not 

include any funds that were retained for technical assistance for these grants. 

Administrative expenses were in part used to fund three separate evaluations 

of Recovery Act green jobs programs: (1) a Labor Market Information 

evaluation, (2) a green jobs and health care implementation report, and (3) a 

5-year impact evaluation.

OSHA Nanomaterials Safe Practice and Handling 

Guidelines 

This guidance was funded by the Recovery Act and is a guidance document 

for R&D workers and employers in the nanotechnology field. 

ILAB Trilateral Roundtable: The Employment 

Dimension of the Transition to a Green 

Economy (February 3-4, 2011)

The U.S. Department of Labor, Human Resources and Skills Development 

Canada and the European Commission brought together U.S., Canadian, and 

European experts representing governments, trade unions, industry, and 

nongovernmental organizations to discuss the transition to the green 

economy. Discussions focused on defining and measuring green jobs, 

establishing effective green jobs partnerships, designing green skills 

development and training, ensuring green jobs serve as a pathway out of 

poverty, and examining the quality of green jobs, as well as the sustainability 

of green jobs investments by governments.

Source: Responses provided by Labor.
Appendix III: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Not Appropriated 

or Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 47 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Information materials 

Office Name of effort Reported description

ETA Office of Apprenticeship (OA) In June 2009, Labor/ETA/OA published a report entitled, “The Greening of 

Registered Apprenticeship: An Environmental Scan of the Impact of Green 

Jobs on Registered Apprenticeship and Implications for Workforce 

Development.” 

More recently, as part of the 75th Anniversary of the National Apprenticeship 

Act in 2012, OA put out a call to sponsors across the county to collect 

Registered Apprenticeship Innovators or Trailblazers. This process identified a 

number of innovative programs across the country, including several specific 

examples of apprenticeship programs with a focus on green efforts.

ILAB OECD Working Party on Employment;

April 11, 2012

Labor officials participated in a technical review of economic research 

presented in “What Green Growth Means for Workers and Labour Market 

Policies: An Initial Assessment.” Subsequently the paper appeared as Chapter 

4 in the 2012 OECD Employment Outlook.

OSHA Green Job Hazards Web-site An OSHA website providing green job safety information on specific green 

jobs, such as green roofing, waste management, wind energy, recycling, 

weatherization, and geothermal industries.

OSHA Workforce Guidelines for Home Energy 

Upgrades

Provided safety information for weatherization jobs in collaboration with 

Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, and National 

Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

OSHA EPA’s Healthy Indoor Environment 

Protocols for Home Energy Upgrades

OSHA worked with EPA in the publication of this guidance which identifies 

critical indoor environmental quality risks and worker assessment protocols, 

and provides guidance to address these issues. 

OSHA Green and Clean: How Hospitals Can 

Protect Patients and Workers by Using 

Earth-Friendly and Sustainable 

Products/Practices

Through OSHA and The Joint Commission and Joint Commission Resources 

(JCR) Alliance, JCR developed an article that discusses the importance of 

adopting sustainable products and practices for cleaning, sanitizing, and 

disinfecting healthcare facilities. The article also provides requirements for 

selecting green cleaning products (January 2013).

WB Why Green is Your Color, Manual Publishing of a manual: Why Green Is Your Color: A Woman’s Guide to a 

Sustainable Career. Designed to assist women with job training and career 

development. 

WB Teleconference Calls and Fact Sheets A series of teleconferences for workforce practitioners about how to connect 

women with green jobs. A fact sheet accompanied each teleconference. 

Appendix III: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts 

since 2009 for Which Funds Were Not 

Appropriated or Allocated, by Focus Area
Appendix III: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Not Appropriated 

or Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 48 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Partnerships

Office Name of effort Reported description

CFBNP Facilitated a partnership between OSHA 

regional office and green jobs grantee

In May 2010, the Deputy Director of CFBNP facilitated a partnership between 

OSHA’s Cincinnati office and East End Community Services in Dayton, OH – a 

Pathways Out of Poverty sub-grantee seeking a training module on safe 

handling of asbestos and lead removal as part of a green jobs training 

program.

ETA Interagency working groups (with Energy, 

Education, and HUD)

Interagency working groups related to clean energy and green jobs in which 

Labor works with the U.S. Departments of Education, Energy, and Housing 

and Urban Development

ILAB March 21, 2012 Anniversary Paper from 

the 2011 Trilateral Roundtable on the 

Transition to a Green Economy

The U.S. Department of Labor, Human Resources and Skills Development 

Canada and the European Commission each contributed two updates on 

promising practices or strategies that were first explored at the Roundtable 

ILAB 2012 G20 Labor and Employment 

Ministers’ meeting, May 17-18, 2012

International labor and employment ministers met to discuss employment 

issues, including green jobs and high youth unemployment rates 

ILAB Participated in OECD’s Employment, Labor 

and Social Affairs Committee meeting that 

discussed a green jobs project

Labor officials participated in the October 13-14, 2011 ELSAC meeting in 

Paris, France. One topic discussed at the meeting was the OECD’s green jobs 

project.

ILAB Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable 

Development input

Labor staff articulated labor and employment priorities to the U.S. interagency 

for inclusion in U.S. government positions for Rio+20, including for the U.S. 

position paper and during negotiations of the Rio outcome document.

ILAB International Labor Organization Governing 

Body 

Labor staff participated in International Labor Organization Governing Body 

discussions on green jobs and sustainable development 

ILAB Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation 

Symposium on Human Capital Policies for 

Green Growth and Employment

The two-day Symposium convened experts from 16 Asia-Pacific Economic 

Cooperation member economies and international organizations to discuss 

sustainable economic development policies. The event was hosted by the 

Department of Education, in partnership with Labor.

ILAB US-Brazil Memorandum of Understanding 

on Labor Cooperation

(March 20-21, 2012)

U.S. Secretary of Labor and her counterpart from Brazil signed a 

Memorandum of Understanding on Labor Cooperation in May 2012. The 

memorandum highlights cooperation in the area of green jobs. 

ILAB Information exchange with officials from 

Brazil’s Ministry of Environmental Affairs 

about U.S. Labor’s Green Jobs Initiatives

The Women’s Bureau Director led a Labor delegation meeting with officials 

from Brazil’s Ministry of Environmental Affairs at U.S. EPA about the definition 

of green jobs, and initiatives in both countries. 

ILAB Inter-American Conference of Ministers of 

Labor, of the Organization of American 

States

The October 2012 conference working group meetings considered green jobs 

in follow-up to the XVII IACML Declaration and Plan of Action adopted by the 

ministers of labor of the Americas in November 2011. The Plan of Action 

called for specific follow-up actions related to green jobs including, inter-alia, 

in-depth exchange of best practices in the region. 

ILAB African Growth and Opportunity Act’s 

African Women Entrepreneur Program

Briefing 

DOL officials met with 47 women leaders from Sub-Saharan Africa under the 

African Growth and Opportunity Act’s African Women Entrepreneur Program,

sharing best practices, perspectives and strategies to train and employ women 

in green jobs. 

OSHA Federal Workgroup on Spray 

Polyurethane Foam

Federal workgroup (EPA, OSHA, NIOSH, CPSC) working with industry groups 

(ACC, CPI, SPFI) on environmental, occupational, and consumer health and 

safety issues with the use of spray polyurethane foam weatherization products 
Appendix III: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Not Appropriated 

or Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 49 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Partnerships

Office Name of effort Reported description

OSHA OSHA/American Wind Energy Association 

Alliance

Presentations by Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety 

and Health to general session, sharing of knowledge, development of 

informational products and participation in quarterly meetings.

OSHA Recovery through Retrofit: 

Meeting 

OSHA and Labor participated in an interagency Recovery through Retrofit 

Working Group comprised of over 80 technical staff members from the 

Departments of Energy, Housing and Urban Development, and Labor; 

Environmental Protection Agency; ,and USD that drafted standards for 

workers who will be involved in retrofitting homes to make them more energy 

efficient. The group met in Denver for a 3 days and a follow-up meeting was 

held in Washington D.C. This is the Vice President’s initiative. As a part of the 

working group, OSHA provided technical advice and input in the worker 

protection aspects of the standards that were drafted. 

OSHA National Alliance with the Professional 

Landcare Network (PLANET)

One of the goals of this Alliance is to participate in PLANET’s Green Industry 

Conference 

Focus Area: Publicity and outreach 

Office Name of effort Reported description

CFBNP Secretary of Labor and CFBNP Hold Green 

Jobs Discussion with Philanthropic Leaders

On December 1, 2010, Secretary of Labor and Assistant Secretary for 

Employment and Training met with leaders from several national foundations 

to discuss significant investments in green jobs programs, as well as effective 

strategies that create employment and advancement opportunities for lowincome populations in the green job industry.

CFBNP Publicity of RecycleForce green jobs 

program for ex-offenders

In 2012, the Director of CFBNP wrote a blog for Fatherhood.gov about an 

Employment and Training Administration’s grantee RecycleForce that provides 

green jobs to ex-offenders.

ETA Job Train’s “Earth Day Every Day 

Campaign” 

Held the week of April 19th-23rd, 2010, the campaign was designed “to raise 

environmental awareness among students and staff and serve as friendly 

reminders to be more energy efficient.” 

ILAB Briefing for Chinese Embassy official Labor staff briefed an official from the Chinese Embassy on Labor green jobs 

initiatives.

ILAB Briefing for Confederation of Venezuelan 

Labor

Washington, DC liaison

Labor staff briefed the liaison on Labor green jobs efforts.

OSHA Small Business Forum: “Green Jobs: 

Safety & Health Outlook for Workers and 

Small Employers” 

A forum on OSHA’s green jobs efforts and workplace hazards associated with 

green jobs.

OSHA Presentation at the Center for Polyurethane 

Industry Annual Conference 

Presentation – “What You Need to Know About the Safe Use of Spray 

Polyurethane Foam (SPF) Briefing on Spray Polyurethane Foam” 

OSHA Participate in NIOSH Going Green 

Workshop

OSHA Team attended as participating partner and Assistant Secretary spoke.

OSHA US/EU Conference Brussels OSHA co-chaired the topic, “OSH in Green Economy” for the conference on 

behalf of the United States. OSHA led the discussions and wrote the 

accompanying white paper. 

OSHA Green Jobs, Good Jobs National 

Conference

OSHA senior staff made presentations at conference on hazards of green 

jobs.
Appendix III: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Not Appropriated 

or Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 50 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Publicity and outreach 

Office Name of effort Reported description

OSHA Green Jobs, Good Jobs, Regional 

Conferences

OSHA personnel made presentations in Atlanta, GA; Los Angeles, CA; 

Philadelphia, PA; and Detroit, MI. 

OSHA Trilateral Roundtable: With Canada and 

European Commission

OSHA participated in: The Employment Dimension of the Transition to a 

Green Economy”. The event brought together experts from government, trade 

unions, industry, and other stakeholders to exchange information, best 

practices, and ideas on preparing workers and employers to meet the 

increasingly complex skill demands of this transition. OSHA made a 

presentation on Green Jobs hazards.

OSHA OSHA Alliance Program Construction 

Roundtable

Roundtable has received presentations from CPWR, NIOSH and Department 

of Commerce on green jobs within the construction industry.

OSHA CleanMed Conference on Worker Safety, 

Patient Safety, Environmental Safety 

First Annual Research Exchange on Advancing Patient, Worker and 

Environmental Safety and Sustainability in the Health Care Sector. OSHA 

presentation on focus on green jobs in relation to the healthcare industry. The 

audience was mainly healthcare workers, employers and researchers. 

OSHA OSHA – NIOSH Infosheet & Posters: 

Protecting Workers Who Use Cleaning 

Chemical

Provides information to employers on practices to help keep workers safe 

when working with cleaning chemicals, including green cleaning products. The 

posters are available in English, Chinese, Tagalog and Spanish. The poster 

includes a section devoted to Green Cleaners.

OSHA Presentation at American Industrial 

Hygiene Conference & Exposition 

Topic: Making Green Jobs Good Jobs – We All Want To, So What is OSHA 

Doing to Make it Happen?

WB Women and Green Jobs Roundtables Discussions at over 30 U.S. locations involving business and community 

leaders regarding emerging employment opportunities in green job fields. 

WB Why Green is Your Color, outreach 

materials 

Posters, mobile marketing displays, postcards, flash drives. 

Focus Area: Technical assistance

Office Name of effort Reported description

ETA Green Jobs Community of Practice (CoP) 

on Workforce3One

ETA designed the Green jobs CoP to serve as a platform for workforce 

professionals and green job thought leaders to discuss and share promising 

practices, to create partnerships for green job workforce solutions, and to 

leverage Recovery Act investments. Specifically, the Green Jobs CoP was 

designed to provide an interactive platform for providing technical assistance 

through webinars, discussion boards, blogs and other online resources to 

workforce professionals, particularly those at the state and workforce 

investment board levels as well as green jobs grantees (including recipients of 

upcoming Solicitation for Grant Applications). 

Focus Area: Training and supportive services 

Office Name of effort Reported description

ETA YouthBuild The YouthBuild program targets out-of-school youth ages 16 to 24 and 

provides them with an alternative education pathway to a high school diploma 

or GED. Most YouthBuild programs have incorporated green building into their 

construction training. As part of this training, participants learn about 

environmental issues that affect their communities and how they can provide 

leadership in this area. 

OSHA Blue-Green Alliance Conference Attended the Blue-Green Alliance conference 
Appendix III: Labor’s Green Jobs Efforts since 

2009 for Which Funds Were Not Appropriated 

or Allocated, by Focus Area

Page 51 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Focus Area: Training and supportive services 

Office Name of effort Reported description

VETS Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program The purpose of this program is to expedite the reintegration of homeless 

veterans into the labor force. These grants are intended to address two 

objectives: to provide services to assist in reintegrating homeless veterans into 

meaningful employment within the labor force, and to stimulate the 

development of effective service delivery systems that will address the 

complex problems facing homeless veterans. The programs’ technical 

assistance guide refers to collecting data on green jobs participants. 

WB Why Green is Your Color, Web-based 

training

Web-based training to help women find and succeed in green jobs. 

WB Green Jobs for Women Pilot Training 

Projects 

Pilot training projects designed to prepare women to enter high-growth, highdemand green jobs. 

Source: Responses provided by Labor.
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Labor

Page 52 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Appendix IV: Comments from the 

Department of Labor
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Labor

Page 53 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training
Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 54 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

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

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

Amy Buck, Meredith Moore, and David Perkins made significant 

contributions to all phases of the work. Also contributing to this report 

were James Bennett, David Chrisinger, Stanley Czerwinski, Beryl Davis, 

Andrea Dawson, Peter Del Toro, Alexander Galuten, Kathy Leslie, Sheila 

McCoy, Kim McGatlin, Jean McSween, Rhiannon Patterson, Karla 

Springer, Vanessa Taylor, and Mark Ward.

Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments 
Related GAO Products

Page 55 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Grants to State and Local Governments: An Overview of Funding Levels 

and Selected Challenges. GAO-12-1016. Washington, D.C.: September 

25, 2012.

Renewable Energy: Federal Agencies Implement Hundreds of Initiatives. 

GAO-12-260. Washington, D.C.: February 27, 2012.

Workforce Investment Act: Innovative Collaborations between Workforce 

Boards and Employers Helped Meet Local Needs. GAO-12-97. 

Washington, D.C.: January 19, 2012.

Climate Change: Improvements Needed to Clarify National Priorities and 

Better Align Them with Federal Funding Decisions. GAO-11-317. 

Washington, D.C.: May 20, 2011.

Recovery Act: Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant

Recipients Face Challenges Meeting Legislative and Program Goals and 

Requirements. GAO-11-379. Washington, D.C.: April 7, 2011. 

Multiple Employment and Training Programs: Providing Information on 

Colocating Services and Consolidating Administrative Structures Could 

Promote Efficiencies. GAO-11-92. Washington, D.C.: January 13, 2011.

Recovery Act: States’ and Localities’ Uses of Funds and Actions Needed 

to Address Implementation Challenges and Bolster Accountability.

GAO-10-604. Washington, D.C.: May 26, 2010.

Recovery Act: Funds Continue to Provide Fiscal Relief to States and 

Localities, While Accountability and Reporting Challenges Need to Be 

Fully Addressed. GAO-09-1016. Washington, D.C.: September 23, 2009. 

Employment and Training Program Grants: Evaluating Impact and 

Enhancing Monitoring Would Improve Accountability. GAO-08-486. 

Washington, D.C.: May 7, 2008.

Workforce Investment Act: Additional Actions Would Improve the 

Workforce System. GAO-07-1061T. Washington, D.C.: June 28, 2007.

Workforce Investment Act: Employers Found One-Stop Centers Useful in 

Hiring Low-Skilled Workers; Performance Information Could Help Gauge 

Employer Involvement. GAO-07-167. Washington, D.C.: December 22, 

2006.

Related GAO Products
Related GAO Products

Page 56 GAO-13-555 Employment and Training

Workforce Investment Act: Substantial Funds Are Used for Training, but 

Little Is Known Nationally about Training Outcomes. GAO-05-650. 

Washington, D.C.: June 29, 2005.

Workforce Investment Act: Employers Are Aware of, Using, and Satisfied 

with One-Stop Services, but More Data Could Help Labor Better Address 

Employers’ Needs. GAO-05-259. Washington, D.C.: February 18, 2005. 

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.

Workforce Investment Act: One-Stop Centers Implemented Strategies to 

Strengthen Services and Partnerships, but More Research and 

Information Sharing Is Needed. GAO-03-725. Washington, D.C.: June 18, 

2003.

Internal Control: Standards for Internal Control in the Federal 

Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1. Washington, D.C.: November 1999. 

(131173)
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.