WORKFORCE 

INVESTMENT ACT

Innovative Collaborations 

between Workforce Boards 

and Employers Helped Meet 

Urgent Local Workforce 

Needs 

Statement of Andrew Sherrill, Director 

Education, Workforce, and Income Security

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Employment 

and Workplace Safety, Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, 

U.S. Senate

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT

Thursday, February 16, 2012

GAO-12-419T

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
 

Page 1 GAO-12-419T 

Chairwoman Murray, Ranking Member Isakson, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to discuss collaboration between workforce 

boards, employers, and others. As the United States continues to face 

high unemployment in the wake of the recent recession, federally funded 

workforce programs can play an important role in bridging gaps between 

the skills present in the workforce and the skills needed for available jobs. 

However, there is growing recognition that these programs need to better 

collaborate with employers to align services and training with employers’ 

needs. As you know, the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA)1

envisioned such collaboration by focusing on employers as well as 

jobseekers, establishing a “dual customer” approach. To create a single, 

comprehensive workforce investment system, WIA required that 16 

programs administered by four federal agencies—the Departments of 

Labor (Labor), Education, Health and Human Services, and Housing and 

Urban Development—provide access to their services through local onestop centers, where jobseekers, workers, and employers can find 

assistance at a single location.2 In addition, WIA sought to align federally 

funded workforce programs more closely with local labor market needs by 

establishing local workforce investment boards to develop policy and 

oversee service delivery for local areas within a state and required that 

local business representatives constitute the majority membership on 

these boards.3 Today, about 600 local workforce boards oversee the 

service delivery efforts of about 1,800 one-stop centers that provide 

access to all required programs.4

Despite the vision of collaboration between local employers and the 

workforce investment system, we and others have found that 

collaboration can be challenging. For example, in previous reports, we 

found that some employers have limited interaction with or knowledge of 

 

1

Pub. L. No. 105-220, 112 Stat. 936 (codified at 29 U.S.C. § 2801 et seq.).

2

29 U.S.C. § 2841(b). Although WIA required 17 programs to participate in the one-stop 

system, the Welfare-to-Work program no longer exists, reducing the total to 16 mandatory 

programs.

3

29 U.S.C. § 2832(a) and (b)(4). 

4

In addition to the one-stop centers that provide access to all programs, over 1,000 other 

one-stop centers, known as affiliate centers, provide limited employment and trainingrelated services to job seekers and employers. 

 
 

Page 2 GAO-12-419T 

this system and that employers who do use the one-stop centers mainly 

do so to fill their needs for low-skilled workers.5 My remarks today are 

based on our report, which was released yesterday, entitled Workforce 

Investment Act: Innovative Collaborations between Workforce Boards and 

Employers Helped Meet Local Needs.

6

To answer these questions, we asked officials from five federal agencies

We examined promising practices 

for collaboration between workforce investment boards, employers, 

education providers, and others that have demonstrated positive results. 

Specifically, we examined (1) the factors that facilitated innovative 

collaborations among workforce boards, employers, and others; (2) the 

major challenges to collaboration; and (3) what actions the Department of 

Labor has taken to support local workforce boards in their collaborative 

efforts.

7

 

5

See GAO, Workforce Investment Act: Employers Are Aware of, Using, and Satisfied with 

One-Stop Services, but More Data Could Help Labor Better Address Employers’ Needs, 

and national workforce and economic development experts from 20 

organizations to nominate what they viewed as the most promising or 

innovative initiatives in which local workforce boards collaborated 

effectively with employers and other partners to achieve positive results. 

From over 89 nominations, covering 28 states, we selected 14 initiatives 

in 13 local areas for in-depth review. The criteria for our selection 

included the number of nominations for each initiative, diversity of federal 

funding sources, variety of local unemployment rates, evidence of 

replicability, and geographical diversity, among others. We interviewed 

state and local workforce officials, representatives of educational 

institutions, training providers, economic development officials, 

employers, and others. We also interviewed officials from the 

Departments of Labor and Commerce, as well as representatives of 

workforce associations. We also reviewed relevant federal laws, 

GAO-05-529R (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 18, 2005). This report found that about half of 

employers were not aware of their local one-stops, and that this was more common 

among smaller companies. Also, see GAO, 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.: Dec. 22, 2006).

6

GAO, Workforce Investment Act: Innovative Collaborations between Workforce Boards 

and Employers Helped Meet Local Needs, GAO-12-97 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 19, 2012).

7

In addition to the Departments of Labor, Education, Health and Human Services, and 

Housing and Urban Development, which administer one-stop programs, we also 

requested nominations from the Department of Commerce, which administers key 

economic development programs.
 

Page 3 GAO-12-419T 

regulations, and other documents pertaining to the key federal programs. 

We conducted our work between November 2010 and January 2012 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

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

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

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

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

In summary, workforce board officials and their partners in the 14 

initiatives cited a range of factors that facilitated building innovative 

collaborations. Almost all of the collaborations grew out of efforts to 

address urgent workforce needs of multiple employers in a specific 

sector, rather than focusing on individual employers. The partners in 

these initiatives made extra effort to engage employers so they could 

tailor services such as jobseeker assessment, screening, and training to 

address specific employer needs. In all the initiatives, partners remained 

engaged in these collaborations because they continued to produce a 

wide range of reported results, such as an increased supply of skilled 

labor, job placements, reduced employer recruitment and turnover costs, 

and averted layoffs. While these boards were successful in their efforts, 

they cited some challenges to collaboration that they needed to 

overcome. Some boards were challenged to develop comprehensive 

strategies to address diverse employer needs with WIA funds. For 

example, some boards’ staff said that while their initiatives sought to meet 

employer needs for higher-skilled workers through skill upgrades, WIA 

funds can be used to train current workers only in limited circumstances, 

and the boards used other funding sources to do so. Staff from most, but 

not all, boards also said that WIA performance measures do not reflect 

their efforts to engage employers, and many boards used their own 

measures to assess their services to employers. Labor has taken various 

steps to support local collaborations, such as conducting webinars and 

issuing guidance on pertinent topics, and contributing to a new federal 

grant program to facilitate innovative regional collaborations. Yet, while 

many boards cited leveraging resources as a key to facilitating 

collaboration, Labor has not compiled pertinent information on effective 

practices for leveraging resources and made it easy to access.
 

Page 4 GAO-12-419T 

While the 14 selected initiatives varied in terms of their purpose, sector, 

and partners involved, the boards and their partners cited common 

factors that facilitated and sustained collaboration. These were (1) a focus

on urgent, common needs; (2) leadership; (3) the use of leveraged 

resources; (4) employer-responsive services; (5) minimizing 

administrative burden; and (6) results that motivated the partners to 

continue their collaboration.

With regards to focusing on urgent, common needs, almost all of the 

collaborations grew out of efforts to address urgent workforce needs of 

multiple employers in a specific sector, such as health care, 

manufacturing, or agriculture, rather than focusing on individual 

employers (see table 1). The urgent needs ranged from a shortage of 

critical skills in health care and manufacturing to the threat of layoffs and 

business closures. In San Bernardino, California, for example, some 

companies were at risk of layoffs and closures because of declining sales 

and other conditions, unless they received services that included 

retraining for their workers.8

Table 1: Fourteen Initiatives Addressed a Range of Urgent Employer Needs

In one case, employers in Gainesville, 

Florida, joined with the board and others to tackle the need to create 

additional jobs by embarking on an initiative to develop entrepreneurial 

skills.

Initiative name Workforce boarda Sector focus Needs addressedb

1. ManufacturingWorks Chicago, Illinois Manufacturing Critical skill needs

2. Health Careers Collaborative of 

 Greater Cincinnati

Cincinnati, Ohio Health care Critical skill needs, turnover

3. Entrepreneurship Quests Gainesville, Florida No single sector Need for additional jobsc

4. Advanced Manufacturing Training 

Initiative

Golden, Colorado Manufacturing Soft skillsd

5. Piedmont Triad Global Logistics 

Workforce Initiative

Greensboro, 

North Carolina

Transportation, distribution, 

and logistics

Critical skill needs

 

8

According to Labor, averting layoffs is one of the functions of the workforce investment 

system, and worker training, such as training for workers in new processes or 

technologies, is one of several services that can help employers avoid layoffs. Labor has 

encouraged states to establish criteria to identify the employers and workers for whom 

layoff aversion services may be appropriate. States that seek to use WIA funds to avert 

layoffs must obtain waivers from Labor. See Department of Labor, Training and 

Employment Guidance Letter No. 30-09. 

Several Key Factors 

Supported Initial 

Collaboration and 

Sustained It over Time
 

Page 5 GAO-12-419T 

Initiative name Workforce boarda Sector focus Needs addressedb

6. Center of Excellence in 

 Production Agriculture

Lancaster, Pennsylvania Agriculture Critical skill needs

7. Career Pathways Madison, Wisconsin Multiple Critical skill needs

8. Pre-employment Healthcare 

 Academy

Rochester, Minnesota Health care (long-term care) Turnover, soft skillsd

9. Technical Employment Training San Bernardino, 

Californiae Manufacturing Critical skill needs

10. Manufacturing Sector Layoff 

 Aversion and Business 

 Assistance Initiative

San Bernardino, 

Californiae Manufacturing Imminent threat of layoffs

11. Health Care Sector Panel Seattle, Washington Health care Critical skill needs

12. Michigan Academy for Green 

 Mobility Alliance

Taylor, Michigan (southeast 

Michigan)

Manufacturing Need for upgraded skills to keep 

pace with technological change

13. NoVaHealthForce Vienna, Virginia (Northern 

Virginia)

Health care Critical skill needs

14. Composites Kansas WIRED 

 Initiative

Wichita, Kansas Manufacturing (aviation) Need for upgraded skills to keep 

pace with technological change

Source: GAO.

a

The boards are identified by the city in which they are located. For the initiatives that involved 

multiple workforce boards, the city shown is the location of the lead workforce board. For the boards’ 

complete names, see our report.

b

A single initiative could address more than one common need. The needs shown represent the main 

needs identified by the partners.

c

This initiative addressed the area’s need for new employment opportunities through a strategy of 

promoting self-employment.

d

Soft skills are the nontechnical skills that workers need to function in a job, and include 

competencies related to problem-solving, oral communication, personal qualities, work ethic, and 

teamwork skills.

e

Two initiatives of this board, both in manufacturing, were selected.

According to those we interviewed, by focusing on common employer 

needs across a sector, the boards and their partners produced innovative 

labor force solutions that, in several cases, had evaded employers who 

were trying to address their needs individually. In several cases, 

employers cited the recruitment costs they incurred by competing against 

each other for the same workers. By working together to develop the local 

labor pool they needed, the employers were able to reduce recruitment 

costs in some cases.

Boards also facilitated collaboration by securing leaders who had the 

authority or the ability, or both, to persuade others of the merits of a 

particular initiative, as well as leaders whose perceived neutrality could 

help build trust. Officials from many initiatives emphasized the importance 

of having the right leadership to launch and sustain the initiative. For 
 

Page 6 GAO-12-419T 

example, in Northern Virginia, a community college president personally 

marshaled support from area hospital chief executive officers and local 

leaders to address common needs for health care workers.

Another factor that facilitated collaboration was the use of leveraged 

resources. All of the boards and their partners we spoke with launched or 

sustained their initiatives by leveraging resources in addition to or in lieu 

of WIA funds. In some cases, partners were able to use initial support, 

such as discretionary grants, to attract additional resources. For example, 

in Golden, Colorado, the board leveraged a Labor discretionary grant of 

slightly more than $285,000 to generate an additional $441,000 from 

other partners. In addition to public funds, in all cases that we reviewed, 

employers demonstrated their support by contributing cash or in-kind 

contributions.

In all cases, boards and their partners provided employer-responsive 

services to actively involve employers and keep them engaged in the 

collaborative process. Some boards and their partners employed staff 

with industry-specific knowledge to better understand and communicate 

with employers. In other initiatives, boards and partners gained 

employers’ confidence in the collaboration by tailoring services such as 

jobseeker assessment and screening services to address specific 

employers’ needs. For example, a sector-based center in Chicago, 

Illinois, worked closely with employers to review and validate employers’ 

own assessment tools, or develop new ones, and administer them on 

behalf of the employers, which saved employers time in the hiring 

process. Boards and their partners also strengthened collaborative ties 

with employers by making training services more relevant and useful to 

them. In some cases, employers provided direct input into training 

curricula. For example, in Wichita, Kansas, employers from the aviation 

industry worked closely with education partners to develop a training 

curriculum that met industry needs and integrated new research findings 

on composite materials. Another way that some initiatives met employers’ 

training needs was to provide instruction that led to industry-recognized 

credentials. For example, in San Bernardino, a training provider 

integrated an industry-recognized credential in metalworking into its 

training program to make it more relevant for employers.

Boards also made efforts to minimize administrative burden for employers 

and other partners. In some cases, boards and their partners streamlined 

data collection or developed shared data systems to enhance efficiency. 

For example, in Cincinnati, Ohio, the partners developed a shared data 
 

Page 7 GAO-12-419T 

system to more efficiently track participants, services received, and 

outcomes achieved across multiple workforce providers in the region.

Finally, partners remained engaged in these collaborative efforts because 

they continued to produce a range of results for employers, jobseekers 

and workers, and the workforce system and other partners, such as 

education and training providers. For employers, the partnerships 

produced diverse results that generally addressed their need for critical 

skills in various ways. In some cases, employers said the initiatives 

helped reduce their recruitment and retention costs. For example, in 

Cincinnati, according to an independent study, employers who 

participated in the health care initiative realized about $4,900 in cost 

savings per worker hired. For jobseekers and workers, the partnerships 

produced results that mainly reflected job placement and skill attainment. 

For example, in Wichita, of the 1,195 workers who were trained in the use 

of composite materials in aircraft manufacturing, 1,008 had found jobs in 

this field. For the workforce system, the partnerships led to various 

results, such as increased participation by employers in the workforce 

system, greater efficiencies, and models of collaboration that could be 

replicated. Specifically, officials with several initiatives said they had 

generated repeat employer business or that the number and quality of 

employers’ job listings had increased, allowing the workforce system to 

better serve jobseekers.

While these boards were successful in their efforts, they cited some 

challenges to collaboration that they needed to overcome. Some boards 

were challenged to develop comprehensive strategies to address diverse 

employer needs with WIA funds. WIA prioritizes funding for intensive 

services and training for low-income individuals when funding for adult 

employment and training activities is limited.9

 

9

29 U.S.C. § 2864(d)(4)(E).

The director of one board 

said that pursuing comprehensive strategies for an entire economic 

sector can be challenging, because WIA funds are typically used for 

lower-skilled workers, and employers in the region wanted to attract a mix 

of lower- and higher-skilled workers. To address this challenge, the 

director noted that the board used a combination of WIA and other funds 

to address employers’ needs for a range of workers. Additionally, some 

boards’ staff said that while their initiatives sought to meet employer 

Workforce Boards 

Overcame Some 

Challenges to Address 

Diverse Employer 

Needs and Developed 

Their Own Measures 

to Track Employer 

Engagement 
 

Page 8 GAO-12-419T 

needs for skill upgrades among their existing workers, WIA funds can be 

used to train current workers only in limited circumstances, and the 

boards used other funding sources to do so. Among the initiatives that 

served such workers, the most common funding sources were employer 

contributions and state funds.

In addition, staff from most, but not all, boards also said that WIA 

performance measures do not directly reflect their efforts to engage 

employers. Many of these boards used their own measures to assess 

their services to employers, such as the number of new employers served 

each year, the hiring rate for jobseekers they refer to employers, the 

interview-to-hire ratio from initiative jobseeker referrals, the retention rate 

of initiative-referred hires, the number of businesses returning for 

services, and employer satisfaction.10

 

10These examples are consistent with prior GAO work. In a 2004 report, we found that 

about 70 percent of local areas nationwide reported that they required one-stop centers to 

track some type of employer measure, such as the number of employers that use one-stop 

services, how many hire one-stop customers, and the type of services that employers use. 

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).
 

Page 9 GAO-12-419T 

In order to support local collaborations like these, Labor has conducted 

webinars and issued guidance on pertinent topics, and has also 

collaborated with other federal agencies in efforts that could help support 

local collaboration. For example, Labor is working with the Department of 

Education and other federal agencies to identify existing industryrecognized credentials and relevant research projects,11 and has issued 

guidance to help boards increase credential attainment among workforce 

program participants.12 In addition, Labor has recently worked with 

Commerce and the Small Business Administration to fund a new 

discretionary $37 million grant program called the Jobs and Innovation 

Accelerator Challenge to encourage collaboration and leveraging funds. 

Specifically, this program encourages the development of industry 

clusters, which are networks of interconnected firms and supporting 

institutions that can help a region create jobs. A total of 16 federal 

agencies will provide technical resources to help leverage existing agency 

funding, including the 3 funding agencies listed above.13

While Labor has taken some steps to support local collaborations, it has 

not made information it has collected on effective practices for leveraging 

resources easily accessible, even though many of the boards we 

reviewed cited leveraging resources as a key to facilitating collaboration.

For example, Labor maintains a website for sharing innovative state and 

local workforce practices called Workforce3One, which has some 

examples of leveraging funding at the local level.14 However, the website 

does not group these examples together in an easy to find location, as it 

does for other categories such as examples of innovative employer 

services or sector-based strategies.15

 

11According to the Department of Education, The National Center for Education Statistics 

has convened a federal interagency working group to develop better survey measures of 

the prevalence of industry-recognized certifications and licenses and educational 

certificates in the United States adult population. 

Moreover, although certain 

evaluations and other research reports have included information on 

12See Department of Labor, Training and Employment Guidance Letter No 15-10

(Washington, D.C.: 2010).

13In September 2011, Labor announced the 20 regions that will receive grant funds. Labor 

estimates the grants will result in the creation of 4,800 jobs.

14See www.workforce3one.org. 

15There are 14 “super categories,” on the site, such as apprenticeship, clusters, 

community colleges, entrepreneurship, disability, nonprofit, and youth services. 

Labor Has Taken 

Steps to Support 

Local Collaborative 

Efforts and Address 

Some Challenges but 

Has Not Made 

Information on 

Leveraging Resources 

Readily Available
 

Page 10 GAO-12-419T 

leveraging resources,16

In conclusion, at a time when the nation continues to face high 

unemployment, it is particularly important to consider ways to better 

connect the workforce investment system with employers to meet local 

labor market needs. The 14 local initiatives that we reviewed illustrate 

how workforce boards collaborated with partners to help employers meet 

their needs and yielded results: critical skill needs were met, individuals 

obtained or upgraded their skills, and the local system of workforce 

programs was reinvigorated by increased employer participation. Labor 

has taken several important steps that support local initiatives like the 

ones we reviewed through guidance and technical assistance, and 

through collaborative efforts with other federal agencies. However, while 

Labor has also collected relevant information on effective strategies that 

local boards and partners have used to leverage resources, it has not 

compiled this information or made it readily accessible. As the workforce 

system and its partners face increasingly constrained resources, it will be 

important for local boards to have at their disposal information on how 

boards have effectively leveraged funding sources. In our report, we 

recommended that Labor compile information on workforce boards that 

effectively leverage WIA funds with other funding sources and 

disseminate this information in a readily accessible manner. In its 

comments on our draft report, Labor agreed with our recommendation 

and noted its plans to implement it.

this information has not been compiled and 

disseminated in one location.

This concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to answer any 

questions that you or others members of the subcommittee may have.

 

16For example, see The Urban Institute, Characteristics of the Community-Based Job 

Training Grant Program, prepared for the Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: 2009). 

Also see Public Policy Associates Incorporated, Nurturing America’s Growth in the Global 

Marketplace through Talent Development: An Interim Report on the Evaluation of 

Generations II and III of WIRED, prepared for the Department of Labor (Lansing, Mich.: 

2009), and Social Policy Research Associates, Literature Review: Business/Faith-Based 

and Community Organization Partnerships, prepared for the Department of Labor 

(Washington, D.C.: 2006).
 

Page 11 GAO-12-419T 

For further information regarding this testimony, please contact Andrew 

Sherrill (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 statement. Individuals who made key contributions to 

this testimony include Laura Heald (Assistant Director), Chris Morehouse, 

Jessica Botsford, Jean McSween, and David Chrisinger.

GAO Contact and 

Acknowledgments 

(131150)
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.
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 (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 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: 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.