Better Jobs through Evidence and Innovation Act

Bill: 118-hr-10312
Sponsor: full_name: Rep. Sherrill, Mikie [D-NJ-11]
Introduced: 2024-12-05
Policy area: Labor and Employment
Latest action: action_date: 2024-12-05
text: Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Summaries:

tv_txt: I 118th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 10312 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES December 5, 2024 Ms. Sherrill introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce A BILL To authorize 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 Better Jobs through Evidence and Innovation Act . 2. Evaluations and research (a) In general Section 169 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act ( 29 U.S.C. 3224 ) is amended— (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: (c) Workforce development innovation fund (1) Program authorized (A) In general From the amount made available pursuant to section 132(a)(2)(A) for any program year to carry out this subsection, the Secretary may, on a competitive basis and in accordance with subparagraph (B), award workforce development innovation grants described in subparagraph (C) to eligible entities to enable such entities to— (i) establish, implement, replicate, or take to scale evidence-based, field-initiated innovation programs or services for improving the design and delivery of employment and training services that generate demonstrated long-term improvements in— (I) the performance or impact of the workforce development system; (II) earnings and employment outcomes for jobseekers (including individuals with barriers to employment) and earnings for employers; and (III) the cost-effectiveness of such innovation programs or services, particularly for participants and communities not sufficiently served by existing models such as participants and communities in rural areas; and (ii) rigorously evaluate, through a partnership with a third-party research organization or a third-party researcher, such innovation programs or services for effectiveness in achieving any demonstrated long-term improvements in an outcome described in subclause (I), (II), or (III) of clause (i). (B) Grant awards (i) In general The Secretary— (I) shall award grants under subparagraph (A) on the basis of potential achievements of the innovation program or service proposed by the eligible entity with respect to demonstrated, long-term improvements in an outcome described in subclause (I), (II), or (III) of subparagraph (A)(i); and (II) may award under subparagraph (A) different types of grants described under subparagraph (C) to an eligible entity for separate innovation programs or services that meet the relevant criteria for such different types of grants. (ii) Duration of award A grant awarded under subparagraph (A) shall be awarded for a period determined appropriate by the Secretary. (C) Description of grants The grants described in subparagraph (A) shall, to the extent feasible, include— (i) early-phase grants for an innovation program or service supported by any level of evidence described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of subparagraph (D), for the purposes of funding the development, implementation, and evaluation of such program or service; (ii) mid-phase grants for an innovation program or service supported by a moderate level of evidence or a high level of evidence (as described in clause (ii) or (iii) of subparagraph (D), respectively) for the purposes of funding the operation, expansion, and continued evaluation of such innovation program or service at a single site; and (iii) expansion grants for an innovation program or service supported by a high level of evidence, as described in subparagraph (D)(iii), for the purposes of— (I) funding the operation of such innovation program or service at a single site; (II) expansion or such innovation program or service to another site; and (III) implementation of a multi-site evaluation of such innovation program or service. (D) Level of evidence standards The levels of evidence described in this subparagraph are the following: (i) Low level of evidence An innovation program or service is supported by a low level of evidence if such program or service has demonstrated, through a reasonable hypothesis and credible research findings (such as a correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias), descriptive research (such as a case study), or evidence review and needs assessment, the— (I) ability to achieve positive effects on earnings and employment outcomes for jobseekers (including individuals with barriers to employment) and earnings for employers; or (II) potential to achieve such effect on such outcomes. (ii) Moderate level of evidence An innovation program or service is supported by a moderate level of evidence if such program or service has demonstrated the ability to achieve sizable, but not yet conclusive, positive effects on earnings and employment outcomes for jobseekers (including individuals with barriers to employment) and earnings for employers, through— (I) a well-designed and well-implemented experimental study of such program or service, such as a randomized controlled trial; or (II) a rigorous quasi-experimental study of such program or service capable of drawing causal conclusions about the effectiveness of such program or service. (iii) High level of evidence An innovation program or service is supported by a high level of evidence if such program or service has demonstrated, through replication of studies, the ability to achieve a substantial and statistically significant, positive impact on earnings and employment outcomes for jobseekers (including individuals with barriers to employment) and earnings for employers, through 2 or more well-designed and well-implemented experimental studies of such program or service conducted— (I) at different implementation sites; or (II) through large, multi-site, randomized controlled trials. (2) Technical assistance and evaluation research Of the funds made available to carry out this subsection for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall reserve not more than 10 percent of the funds to— (A) provide technical assistance to eligible entities, which may include preapplication workshops, web-based seminars, support for conducting feasibility studies and other planning activities, assistance with methods and requirements for purposes of evaluation research under subparagraph (D), and support for improving grant implementation and the quality and effectiveness of activities and services funded by grants awarded under subparagraph (A), including the use of administrative data and information to improve outcomes for participants; (B) disseminate information on low-, moderate-, and high-evidence-based practices; (C) fund staffing and other costs related to such activities; and (D) conduct evaluation research regarding activities or services funded by grants awarded under subparagraph (A). (3) Definitions In this subsection: (A) Eligible entity The term eligible entity means an entity that is any of the following: (i) A State workforce development board established under section 101 ( 29 U.S.C. 3111 ). (ii) A local workforce development board established under section 107 ( 29 U.S.C. 3122 ). (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 ( 29 U.S.C. 3221 ). (iv) An institution of higher education (as defined in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 ( 20 U.S.C. 1001 )). (v) A State workforce agency. (vi) An organization— (I) that— (aa) is a community-based organization, a nonprofit organization, or a nongovernment organization; and (bb) serves an underserved population; or (II) that is a national or regional organization that intends to use funds awarded under this Act to make direct grants to an organization described in subclause (I). (vii) A consortium of any entities described in clause (i) through (vi). (B) Field-initiated The term field-initiated , with respect to a program or service, means a program or service in which the elements of the program or service have been developed by practitioners or researchers in the policy area. (C) Innovation program or service The term innovation program or service means a program or service designed to demonstrate innovative and cost-effective ways to augment and improve employment and training services. (D) Well-designed and well-implemented experimental study The term well-designed and well-implemented experimental study means a study that— (i) is replicable; (ii) uses programmatic and control groups that are representative of the type of population served by the program or service that is subject to the study, including by avoiding over-selection of participants who are highly skilled prior to participation for such programmatic group; (iii) uses controls for aggregate shifts that might affect baseline numbers; (iv) does not have problems with attrition of participants from the study; and (v) is conducted in a manner that is consistent with applicable evaluation, data, and privacy standards and practices described in— (I) the guidelines of the Office of Management and Budget entitled Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies (67 Fed. Reg. 8452 (February 22, 2002)) (or successor guidelines); and (II) the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 ( Public Law 115–435 ; 132 Stat. 5529) and the amendments made by that Act. . (b) Conforming amendment Section 132(a)(2)(A) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act ( 29 U.S.C. 3172(a)(2)(A) ) is amended by striking 169(c) (relating to dislocated worker projects), and inserting 169(c) (relating to the workforce development innovation fund), 169(d) (relating to dislocated worker projects), and .