I 117th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 7347 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 31, 2022 Ms. Sherrill introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor A BILL To reauthorize workforce development innovation grants for the implementation, expansion, and evaluation of evidence-based workforce programs, and for other purposes.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Supporting Jobs through Evidence and Innovation Act . 2. Evaluations and research Section 169 ( 29 U.S.C. 3224 ) is amended— (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: (c) Workforce development innovation fund (1) Program authorized (A) In general The Secretary may award workforce development innovation grants, on a competitive basis, to eligible entities to enable such entities to— (i) create, implement, replicate, or take to scale entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovation programs and services for improving the design and delivery of employment and training services that generate long-term improvements in the performance of the workforce development system, in outcomes for job-seekers (including individuals with barriers to employment), and employers, and in the cost-effectiveness of programs and services; and (ii) rigorously evaluate such programs and services in accordance with this subsection. (B) Description of grants The grants described in subparagraph (A) shall include— (i) early-phase grants to fund the development, implementation, and feasibility testing of an innovation program or service, which prior research suggests has promise, for the purpose of determining whether such program or service can successfully improve the design and delivery of employment and training services that generate long-term improvements in the performance of the workforce development system, in outcomes for job-seekers, and in the cost-effectiveness of such programs and services; (ii) mid-phase grants to fund implementation and a well-designed and well-implemented evaluation of such a program or service that has been successfully implemented under an early-phase grant described in clause (i) or other effort meeting similar criteria, for the purpose of measuring the impact and cost effectiveness of such programs or services, using data collected pursuant to the implementation of such program or service, if possible; and (iii) expansion grants to fund implementation and a well-designed and well-implemented replication evaluation of such a program or service that has been found to produce sizable, important impacts under a mid-phase grant described in clause (ii) or other effort meeting similar criteria, for the purposes of— (I) determining whether such impacts may be successfully reproduced and sustained over time; and (II) identifying the conditions in which such a program or service is most effective. (2) Technical assistance Of the funds made available to carry out this subsection for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall reserve not more than 5 percent of the funds to— (A) provide technical assistance to eligible entities, which may include preapplication workshops, web-based seminars, and evaluation support; and (B) disseminate evidence-based best practices. (3) Definitions In this subsection: (A) Eligible entity The term eligible entity means any of the following: (i) A State board. (ii) A local board. (iii) An Indian tribe, tribal organization, Alaska Native entity, Indian-controlled organization serving Indians, or Native Hawaiian organization that is eligible to receive an award under section 166. (iv) A community-based, nonprofit, or nongovernmental organization serving an underserved population. (v) A consortium of such entities described under clause (i) through clause (iv). (B) Evidence-based The term evidence-based , when used with respect to an activity, strategy, or intervention, means an activity, strategy or intervention that— (i) demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving participant outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— (I) strong evidence from at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented experimental study; (II) moderate evidence from at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study; or (III) promising evidence from at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias; or (ii) (I) demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes; and (II) includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention. (C) Well-designed and well-implemented The term well-designed and well-implemented , as applied to an evaluation study, means a study that is replicable, uses programmatic and control groups that are representative of the type of population served by the program, uses controls for aggregate shifts that might affect baseline numbers, does not have problems with attrition from the program, and takes measures to avoid statistical creaming. (4) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection, such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2023 through 2028. .