Source: https://www.doleta.gov/wioa/faqs-2016.cfm
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 20:49:44+00:00

Document:
What is the deadline for entering into a Memorandum of Understanding between the Local Workforce Development Board and one-stop partners?
What is the deadline for finalizing infrastructure funding agreements for Program Year 2017?
What are the required elements of an infrastructure funding agreement?
How does the infrastructure funding agreement relate to the overall one-stop operating budget?
What are infrastructure costs?What are the distinctions between "non-personnel" costs and "personnel" costs?
Which WIOA one-stop partner programs are required to contribute toward one-stop infrastructure costs?
Do the infrastructure requirements and methodologies apply to comprehensive and affiliate one-stop centers? Is a separate infrastructure funding agreement needed for each center?
If a required one-stop partner program administered by an entity outside the control or authority of the Governor does not want to contribute toward infrastructure costs, or disagrees on the appropriate amount to contribute, and the State Funding Mechanism is triggered, can the Governor require this program to make a specific financial contribution? Can the program file an appeal?
What are non-cash contributions and how are they valued?
What are third-party in-kind contributions and how are they valued?
1. What is the deadline for entering into a Memorandum of Understanding between the Local Workforce Development Board and one-stop partners?
In order to have a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in place for Program Year (PY) 2017, which begins on July 1, 2017, the Local Workforce Development Board (Local WDB) and one-stop partners must enter into a MOU that aligns with the requirements of WIOA- except for the final infrastructure funding agreement (IFA)- by June 30, 2017.
2. What is the deadline for finalizing infrastructure funding agreements for Program Year 2017?
The U.S. Department of Labor is using the transition authority of WIOA sec. 503(b) to provide an extension for the implementation date of the final IFAs for PY 2017. With this extension, final IFAs must be in place no later than January 1, 2018. However, Governors have the discretion to require local areas to enter into final IFAs at any time between July 1, 2017, and January 1, 2018. During the extension period, local areas may use the funding agreement they used for PY 2016, with any such modifications as the partners may agree to, to fund infrastructure costs in the local area. During the extension period, the regulations at 20 CFR 678.715(c) and 678.510(b) providing for a six month interim IFA shall not apply. This extension does not change the deadline of July 1, 2017, for the rest of the MOU.
While one required component of a MOU is the IFA, the Departments realize additional time is needed for local areas to negotiate and reach consensus on the one-stop partners' contributions for infrastructure costs for PY 2017. Also, States may need additional time to develop and implement the State Funding Mechanism (SFM) that is to be applied to those local areas that are unable to reach a consensus agreement on infrastructure costs in the IFA. In order to implement the SFM, the Governor must be notified of all the local areas in the State that are not able to reach consensus in order to calculate the caps on infrastructure spending applicable to each partner program (20 CFR 678.730(b)(3), 34 CFR 361.730(b)(3), and 34 CFR 463.730(b)(3)). The statewide caps used in the SFM are the aggregate amounts available for each partner program for all local areas in the State that could not reach consensus with respect to funding the one-stop system's infrastructure costs (20 CFR 678.731(b)(5)-(6) and 678.738, 34 CFR 361.731(b)(5)-(6) and 361.738, and 34 CFR 463.731(b)(5)-(6) and 463.738). They are not separate caps for the program in each local area. Therefore, the expectation is that the Governor will establish the notification deadline for local areas unable to reach consensus sufficiently in advance of when the IFA needs to be finalized so the SFM may be implemented, including calculating and applying the statewide caps, if necessary.
3. What are the required elements of an infrastructure funding agreement?
A description of the process to be used among partners to resolve issues related to infrastructure funding during the MOU duration period when consensus cannot be reached.
The Departments also consider it essential that the IFA include the signatures of individuals with authority to bind the signatories to the IFA, including all one-stop partners, CEO, and Local WDB participating in the IFA.
4. How does the infrastructure funding agreement relate to the overall one-stop operating budget?
The IFA contains the infrastructure costs budget, which is one of several integral components of the one-stop operating budget. The other components of the one-stop operating budget are considered "additional costs," which must include applicable career services, and may include shared operating costs and shared services. While each of these components covers different cost categories, an operating budget would be incomplete if any of these were omitted because funding infrastructure costs as well as additional costs is necessary to maintain a fully functioning and successful local one-stop delivery system. Therefore, the Departments strongly recommend that the Local WDBs, one-stop partners, and CEOs negotiate the IFA and additional cost funding together when developing the operating budget for the local one-stop system. The overall one-stop operating budget must be included in the MOU.
Although the local one-stop operating budget contains several different cost components, only failure to reach consensus among the required partners in a local area with respect to the infrastructure cost funding will trigger the implementation of the SFM. This means the SFM will not be triggered due to a failure by the required partners to reach consensus on additional cost funding or by a failure of any additional partners to join the consensus regarding the terms of the IFA. When implementing the SFM to determine partner contributions to cover the one-stop center's infrastructure costs component, the Governor should consider the local area's infrastructure cost needs in light of the additional costs included in the local one-stop operating budget (e.g., applicable career services costs, shared operating costs, and the cost of shared services). This should be done while making the determinations necessary to complete the IFA according to 20 CFR 678.730 - 678.745, 34 CFR 361.730 - 361.745, and 34 CFR 463.730 - 463.745, and should ensure that the infrastructure costs are sufficient to support the services that the one-stop center will provide. However, it is important to note that the Governor's determinations under the SFM pertain only to the infrastructure costs, and not to any of the additional costs components. The Governor's consideration of these other components of the overall local one-stop operating budget is simply to provide a context for the Governor when determining infrastructure costs under the SFM.
5. What are infrastructure costs?What are the distinctions between "non-personnel" costs and "personnel" costs?
Infrastructure costs are non-personnel costs that are necessary for the general operation of the one-stop center, which may include: rental of the facilities; utilities and maintenance; equipment (including assessment-related and assistive technology for individuals with disabilities); and technology to facilitate access to the one-stop center, including technology used for the center's planning and outreach activities. This may also include the costs associated with the development and use of the common identifier (i.e., American Job Center signage) and supplies, as defined in the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR 200.94, to support the general operation of the one-stop center (WIOA sec. 121(h)(4) and 20 CFR 678.700(a), 34 CFR 361.700(a), and 34 CFR 463.700(a)).
Non-personnel costs are all costs that are not compensation for personnel costs. For example, technology-related services performed by vendors or contractors are non-personnel costs and may be identified as infrastructure costs if they are necessary for the general operation of the one-stop center. Such costs would include service contracts with vendors or contractors, equipment, and supplies.
Personnel services include salaries, wages, and fringe benefits of the employees of partner programs or their subrecipients, as described in 2 CFR 200.430 - 200.431 of the Uniform Guidance. For example, allocable salary and fringe costs of partner program staff who work on information technology systems (e.g., common performance and reporting outcomes) for use by the one-stop center as a whole would be personnel costs. The cost of a shared welcome desk or greeter directing employers and customers to the services or staff that are available in that one-stop center is a personnel expense. These costs, therefore, could not be included in infrastructure costs but are included in "additional costs."
6. Which WIOA one-stop partner programs are required to contribute toward one-stop infrastructure costs?
All required partners that carry out their program in the local area must contribute toward infrastructure costs based on their proportionate use of the one-stop delivery centers and relative benefits received. (WIOA sec. 121(b) and 121(h); 20 CFR 678.400, 678.410, 678.415, and 678.700(c); 34 CFR 361.400, 361.410, 361.415, and 361.700(c); and 34 CFR 463.400, 463.410, 463.415, and 463.700(c)). Additional partners, which are any local one-stop partner programs that are not listed as required partner programs, also must contribute to infrastructure costs in the local areas in which they are partners. However, the SFM is only applicable to required one-stop partners. This means that additional partners cannot trigger the SFM by not joining in the overall consensus regarding the terms of the IFA, nor are they subject to the SFM if it is triggered. Although WIOA does not subject the additional partners to the Governor's determination of required partners' infrastructure cost contributions under the SFM, the additional partners must contribute toward infrastructure costs in accordance with the program's proportionate use and relative benefit received, consistent with the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR 200.405.
Native American programs (described in WIOA sec. 166), as required one-stop partners, are strongly encouraged to contribute to infrastructure costs, but they are not required to make such contributions under WIOA. Any agreement regarding the contribution or non-contribution to infrastructure costs by Native American programs must be documented in the MOU. Further, if made, these contributions must be in proportion to the program's proportionate use and relative benefits received, consistent with the Uniform Guidance. The Native American programs cannot trigger the SFM, nor are they subject to the SFM.
7. W Do the infrastructure requirements and methodologies apply to comprehensive and affiliate one-stop centers? Is a separate infrastructure funding agreement needed for each center?
The requirements that govern infrastructure costs apply to each one-stop center in the local delivery system, whether the center is a comprehensive, affiliate, or specialized one-stop center. All one-stop partners, whether they are required partners or additional partners - except as discussed above concerning Native American programs - must contribute to the infrastructure cost funding of the one-stop centers based on proportionate use and relative benefits received. The required one-stop partners must provide access to their programs in the comprehensive one-stop centers and contribute to the infrastructure costs of those centers. Only those one-stop partners that participate in the affiliate one-stop centers are required to contribute to the infrastructure costs for those centers. As with MOUs, the Local WDB may negotiate an umbrella IFA or individual IFAs for one or more of its one-stop centers.
8. If a required one-stop partner program administered by an entity outside the control or authority of the Governor does not want to contribute toward infrastructure costs, or disagrees on the appropriate amount to contribute, and the State Funding Mechanism is triggered, can the Governor require this program to make a specific financial contribution? Can the program file an appeal?
Under the SFM, the Governor has authority to determine the financial contribution of all required one-stop partners toward infrastructure costs in accordance with 20 CFR 678.725 - 678.738, 34 CFR 361.725 - 361.738, and 34 CFR 463.725 - 463.738. For the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) program, the State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) program, and postsecondary career and technical education activities under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act, as specified in 20 CFR 678.730(c)(2), in States in which the policymaking authority is placed in an entity or official that is independent of the authority of the Governor, the determination of the amount each of these programs must contribute toward infrastructure costs must be made by the official or chief officer of the entity with policymaking authority, in consultation with the Governor (see also 34 CFR 361.730(c)(2) and 34 CFR 463.730(c)(2)). Programs may appeal the Governor's determinations of their infrastructure cost contributions - or those determinations made, in certain cases, by the applicable official or chief officer - in accordance with the process established under 20 CFR 678.750, 34 CFR 361.750, and 34 CFR 463.750.
9. What are non-cash contributions and how are they valued?
Non-cash contributions are expenditures incurred by one-stop partners on behalf of the one-stop center and goods or services contributed by a partner program and used by the one-stop center. The value of non-cash contributions must be consistent with 2 CFR 200.306 and reconciled on a regular basis (i.e., monthly or quarterly) to ensure they are fairly evaluated and meet the partners' proportionate share. One way to ensure that non-cash contributions are fairly evaluated is to ensure that the one-stop partners agree on the sources or companies that will be used to assess or appraise the fair market value or fair rental value of non-cash contributions (2 CFR 200.306).
Example 1: For Program Year (PY) 2017, a partner's proportionate use of the one-stop center results in a contribution of $15,000. The partner does not have sufficient cash resources to fully fund its share and wishes to donate to the one-stop center (not for its own individual use) gently used surplus office furniture. The furniture is needed in the one-stop center. The office furniture was purchased in 2015 for $18,500 using unrestricted or non-Federal funds. The office furniture has a current fair market value of $10,000 and a depreciated value of $11,100. In accordance with the requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR 200.306(d), the value of the contribution must be the lesser of the current fair market value or the value of the remaining life of the property as recorded in the partner's accounting records at the time of donation unless approval has been granted, by the Federal awarding agency, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.306(d)(2). The partner would be able to count the $10,000 value as part of its $15,000 contribution and would be required to use additional resources for the remaining $5,000 balance of its share. This one-time contribution is recognized by the partner during the year in which the contribution is made.
Example 2: In the same example as above, the partner does not donate the gently used office furniture but loans it for general use by partners at the one-stop center. The office furniture is on a five-year depreciation schedule. The annual depreciation is $3,700 and the annual fair rental value is $3,500. In accordance with 2 CFR 200.306(i)(4), the partner may count $3,500 as part of its contribution for that year. As with any depreciable asset, an assessment of its fair rental value must be done each year in which the equipment is loaned to the one-stop center. The one-stop partners must determine annually whether the one-stop center still requires the use of the office furniture and that this cost is built into the IFA.
10. Which WIOA one-stop partner programs are required to contribute toward one-stop infrastructure costs?
Third-party in-kind contributions are contributions of space, equipment, technology, non-personnel services, or other like items to support the infrastructure costs associated with one-stop operations. The value of third-party in-kind contributions must also be consistent with the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR 200.306 and reconciled on a regular basis (i.e., monthly or quarterly) to ensure they are fairly evaluated and meet the partners' proportionate share.
There are two types of third-party in-kind contributions: (1) general contributions to one-stop operations (i.e., those not connected to any individual one-stop partner), and (2) those made specifically to a one-stop partner program (20 CFR 678.715, 34 CFR 361.715, and 34 CFR 463.715, and 2 CFR 200.306).
Example 1: For PY 2017, a county government that is not a one-stop partner, has space in a vacant building and would like to donate the space for use as a one-stop center. This in-kind contribution would not be associated with one specific partner, but rather would go to support the one-stop center generally and would be factored into the underlying budget and cost pools used to determine proportionate share. The value of the donated space by a third party must adhere to the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR 200.306(i)(3). The annual fair rental value of comparable space in the same locality, as established by an independent appraisal, is $77,000. As with all non-cash and third-party in-kind contributions, the value at which the space has been appraised is the amount accounted for in the infrastructure budget. The value of the donated space should be assessed again each subsequent year.
The second type of third-party in-kind contribution is a contribution to a specific partner to support that partner's proportionate share of one-stop infrastructure costs. If the contribution was in the one-stop center's budget for infrastructure costs, the partner could then use the value of the third-party in-kind contribution to count toward its proportionate share.
Example 2: An employer provides assistive technology equipment to a VR program located in a one-stop center. The acquisition cost for the equipment at the time of purchase by the employer was $6,800 and, at the time of the donation, the fair market value was assessed as $4,500. If the assistive technology equipment was in the one-stop center's budget for infrastructure costs, the partner could use the fair market value of the donation toward its contribution. The Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR 200.306(g) requires that the equipment is valued at no more than the fair market value ($4,500) at the time of donation.
Example 3: A local literacy foundation wants to donate gently used computer equipment to the local one-stop center to support the infrastructure cost contribution of the designated AEFLA partner program in the local community. Computer equipment is part of the one-stop operating budget. The fair market value of the computer equipment is valued at $9,200 at the time of donation. The AEFLA partner program's proportionate use of the one-stop center is determined to be $12,500. The AEFLA partner program may use the fair market value of this equipment towards its infrastructure cost contribution for that program year. Furthermore, the AEFLA partner program is required to contribute an additional $3,300 in cash, non-cash, or in-kind contributions from its available resources to pay its remaining share.
The question raises several important points about the use of a common identifier, which is required under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) sec. 121(e)(4).
WIOA sec. 121(e)(4) requires each one-stop delivery system to include in the identification of products, programs, activities, services, facilities, and related property and materials, a common one-stop delivery system identifier, in addition to using any State- or locally-developed identifier.
The question also raises the issue of to what materials the requirement applies. The Final Rule at 20 CFR § 678.900, once it takes effect, will require that the common identifier or tag line be used on "all products, programs, activities, services, electronic resources, facilities, and related property and new materials used in the one-stop delivery system," which includes signage and materials printed, purchased, or created by the one-stop delivery system. Neither the common identifier nor the tag line is required to be added to resource room materials distributed to customers, if those materials were not printed, purchased, or created by the one-stop delivery system.
The question also asks to whom or what partners the rule applies. The Departments will clarify this question in subsequent guidance, but in the meantime, States and local areas should take steps to make sure that all one-stop centers, comprehensive and affiliate alike, adopt usage of the "American Job Center" identifier or the tag line "a proud partner of the American Job Center network," in accordance with the timeframe set forth in 20 CFR § 678.900 and below.
The timeframe for adopting the required rebranding varies depending on the type of material. The Final Rule at 20 CFR § 678.900(b) requires that, "As of November 17, 2016, each one-stop delivery system must include the 'American Job Center' identifier or 'a proud partner of the American Job Center network' on all primary electronic resources used by the one-stop delivery system, and on any newly printed, purchased, or created materials." The Final Rule at 20 CFR § 678.900(c) further requires that "As of July 1, 2017, each one-stop delivery system must include the 'American Job Center' identifier or 'a proud partner of the American Job Center network' on all products, programs, activities, services, electronic resources, facilities, and related property and new materials used in the one-stop delivery system." Finally, as the Departments of Labor and Education stated in the Preamble to the Final Rule, "[T]he Departments will not object if the one-stop centers continue to use materials not using the 'American Job Center' branding which are created before November 17, 2016 until those supplies are exhausted."
The WIOA joint final rule was published in the Federal Register on August 19, 2016 at 81 Fed. Reg. 55791, with the rule (20 C.F.R. § 678.900) at page 56022, and the preamble discussion at pages 55919 to 55920. See https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/08/19/2016-15977/workforce-innovation-and-opportunity-act-joint-rule-for-unified-and-combined-state-plans-performance.
Can you tell us more about WIOA's requirements governing the payment of infrastructure costs under the memorandum of understanding (MOU) funding agreements?
Will the specific WIOA requirements governing local agreements for funding the American Job Center infrastructure costs apply in PY 2016?
Did the Departments of Labor, Education, and Health and Human Services collaborate in the development of the WIOA Final Rules?
What is the effective date of the WIOA Joint Final Rule for Unified and Combined State Plans, Performance Accountability, and the One-Stop System Joint Provisions, and the program-specific Final Rules?
Why are the Departments making the Final Rules publicly available now?
1. Can you tell us more about WIOA's requirements governing the payment of infrastructure costs under the memorandum of understanding (MOU) funding agreements?
Each one-stop (American Job Center) partner program's proportionate share of funding the infrastructure costs must be calculated in accordance with the "Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards" (Uniform Guidance), in 2 CFR part 200. Specifically, each partner's proportionate share must be based upon a reasonable cost allocation methodology whereby infrastructure costs are charged to each partner in proportion to its use of the American Job Center, relative to benefits received. Infrastructure costs must also be allowable, reasonable, necessary, and allocable to that partner's program. Funding for infrastructure costs can be provided on a cash, fairly-evaluated non-cash, or third-party in-kind contribution basis.
Cash contributions are made: (1) directly by American Job Center partners to the Local Workforce Development Board or its designee in the American Job Center network to cover infrastructure expenses; or (2) by partners to another entity (usually the American Job Center operator) to cover infrastructure costs of the American Job Center.
Non-cash contributions are also made by American Job Center partners in the local American Job Center network. Non-cash contributions could include donations of goods or services, or the documented value of supporting costs of items owned by a partner program and used in the American Job Center (e.g., the building, if owned by one of the partners).
Example: A partner's proportionate share of the American Job Center operating costs is $15,000. The partner does not have sufficient cash or other resources to fully fund its proportionate share, and wishes to donate (not for its own individual use) gently used surplus computer equipment. The computers are valued (in accordance with the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.306) at $10,000. The partner would be able to use the $10,000 value as part of the resources provided to fund the shared infrastructure costs.
Third party in-kind contributions are made by individuals or entities that are not one-stop partners in the local American Job Center network. These contributions may be made on behalf of a particular partner or to the American Job Center network in general. Third-party in-kind contributions are contributions of space, equipment, technology, non-personnel services, or other like items to support the costs associated with American Job Center operations. Note: While the valuation of non-cash contributions and third-party in-kind contributions is based on Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR § 200.306 (cost sharing or matching), those American Job Center partners with cost sharing or match requirements are subject to their authorizing statutes and implementing program regulations when determining the extent to which any contributions are allowable as match for their respective programs.
2. Will the specific WIOA requirements governing local agreements for funding the American Job Center infrastructure costs apply in PY 2016?
No. The WIOA requirements for the local funding agreements, which are related to specific requirements for how the shared and infrastructure costs of the American Job Center network must be paid by the American Job Center partners, need not be satisfied in the funding agreements for PY 2016. States, local areas, and American Job Center partner programs may continue to negotiate local funding agreements as they have been doing under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) for purposes of PY 2016. However, the local funding agreements must satisfy the requirements of section 121(h) of WIOA for purposes of funding the American Job Center network in PY 2017.
3. Did the Departments of Labor, Education, and Health and Human Services collaborate in the development of the WIOA Final Rules?
Yes. The Departments of Labor (DOL) and Education (ED) (collectively, the Departments) together developed the Joint Final Rule pertaining to State planning, performance accountability, and certain one-stop requirements. The Departments also jointly developed the Information Collection Requests (ICRs) related to State planning and common performance reporting. The Departments collaborated closely with the Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Agriculture, and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on the development of the Joint Final Rule and State planning processes. DOL and ED each developed program-specific final rules and performance ICRs governing program-specific requirements imposed by WIOA that fall under each of their purviews.
4. What is the effective date of the WIOA Joint Final Rule for Unified and Combined State Plans, Performance Accountability, and the One-Stop System Joint Provisions, and the program-specific Final Rules?
The effective date for both the Joint Final Rule for Unified and Combined State Plans, Performance Accountability, and the One-Stop System Joint Provisions (Joint Final Rule) and DOL's Final Rule to implement Titles I and III of WIOA is officially 60 days after the date of publication of the Final Rules in the Federal Register, which is expected shortly. The Final Rules for the "State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program, State Supported Employment Services Program, and Limitations on the Use of Subminimum Wages," the "WIOA Miscellaneous Program Changes," and the "Programs and Activities Authorized by the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (Title II of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act)" will take effect 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, which is expected to be sometime in July.
5. Why are the Departments making the Final Rules publicly available now?
The Departments, in collaboration with other Federal partner agencies, published five Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs) in April 2015. In addition, the Departments and other Federal partner agencies published several proposed ICRs in the summer of 2015 to inform stakeholders of proposed new performance data reporting elements and new State planning requirements under WIOA. As a result of these publications, the Departments received thousands of public comments, which they considered in the development of the Final Rules and ICRs. Given the complexity of the issues raised, the Departments made unofficial versions of the Final Rules, both the Joint Final Rule and the program-specific Final Rules, publicly available in June 2016 while they were under review with the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) so that stakeholders could begin to prepare for implementing changes imposed by the final regulations. These unofficial versions of the Final Rules may vary slightly from the official published documents if minor technical or formatting changes are made during the OFR review process. To support on-going implementation of the requirements of WIOA at the State level while the Final Rules were under development, the Departments provided guidance, notification of information collection requirements, and technical assistance to the States and other stakeholders.
Through a written MOU the one-stop partners must agree on how to cover the infrastructure and other shared costs of the American Job Center network. Each partner program's proportionate share of funding the infrastructure costs must be calculated in accordance with the Uniform Guidance. Specifically, each partner's proportionate share must be based upon a reasonable cost allocation methodology whereby infrastructure costs are charged to each partner in proportion to its use of the one-stop center, relative to benefits the partner program received. Infrastructure costs must also be allowable, reasonable, necessary, and allocable to that partner's program. Funding for infrastructure costs can be provided on a cash, fairly-evaluated non-cash, or third-party in-kind contribution basis.
In the event local areas fail to reach an agreement for funding the American Job Center system in PY 2016, the State funding mechanism will not yet be applicable as the alternative method in PY 2016. The State funding mechanism applies beginning in PY 2017. Therefore, if a local area fails to reach an agreement for funding the American Job Center system in PY 2016, the partners must continue to use whatever process they have been using under WIA to resolve disputes for purposes of funding the American Job Center network during PY 2016.
States must begin developing the "State-funding mechanism" early in PY 2016 so that the State funding mechanism may be implemented in PY 2017, if needed. The State must be prepared to inform local areas with sufficient time to implement both the local mechanism and State-funding mechanism, if applicable, in PY 2017.
1. How did the Final Rules update non-discrimination policies?
The non-discrimination and equal opportunity provisions under Section 188 of WIOA will be implemented under a separate rulemaking process by the Department of Labor. These proposed regulations would update nondiscrimination and equal opportunity provisions to be consistent with current law and address its application to current workforce development and workplace practices and issues. The NPRM was published on January 26, 2016 and the public comment period ended on March 28, 2016. DOL currently is in the process of considering all comments in order to finalize the rule.
Will the Departments continue collaborating to support ongoing implementation of WIOA?
Will the Departments provide training to workforce system professionals to support implementation of the Final Rules?
How do I find the latest Federal guidance on WIOA implementation, technical assistance, and stakeholder engagement?
1. Will the Departments continue collaborating to support ongoing implementation of WIOA?
Yes. WIOA requires ongoing collaboration at the Federal, State, and local levels across employment and training programs, at both the strategic and operational levels. DOL, ED and HHS will continue to support their shared vision for WIOA implementation, engage in joint monitoring and technical assistance, and continue collaborating in the review and approval of State plans and performance management.
2. Will the Departments provide training to workforce system professionals to support implementation of the Final Rules?
Yes. The Departments will provide a range of training opportunities, in both the short and long term, to help States and local areas become familiar with and implement the requirements in the Final Rules. Upon public availability of the Joint Final Rule and the final program-specific rules on the OFR website, the Departments made available fact sheets on the Rules, as well as a general resource guide to assist State and local staff in navigating the Final Rules. Building on the technical assistance already provided, over the next few months, more in-depth, accessible training will be made available. This training will be provided online; at in-person events sponsored by Federal partners, intergovernmental organizations, and State and regional associations; and through Federal Project Officers. The Departments will hold in-person trainings in fall 2016 and in 2017. More information on these trainings will be available shortly.
3. How do I find the latest Federal guidance on WIOA implementation, technical assistance, and stakeholder engagement?
The most current information on WIOA implementation, including links to guidance and information collections on the WIOA Resource Pages, can be found below. In addition, WIOA technical assistance is available on the Innovation & Opportunity Network https:/ion.workforcegps.org.
1. Are there new partners in American Job Centers?
Yes. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), administered by HHS, is now a required partner in the American Job Center, unless the governor opts out. Under WIOA, there continues to be a range of programs required to make their services available through the American Job Center network. These include: Career and Technical Education (Perkins) programs at the postsecondary level, Community Services Block Grant, Indian and Native American programs, HUD Employment and Training programs, Job Corps, Local Veterans' Employment Representatives and Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program, National Farmworker Jobs program, Senior Community Service Employment Program, Trade Adjustment Assistance programs, Unemployment Compensation programs, and YouthBuild. Local boards and chief elected officials may name additional partners to provide services through American Job Centers as partner programs, including libraries, the Ticket-to-Work program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance programs, State or local programs, and others.
1. How does the Joint Final Rule implement the WIOA requirement to designate or certify American Job Center operators through a competitive process?
WIOA requires that all one-stop (American Job Center) operators must be designated or certified through a competitive process. The Joint Final Rule requires the States to follow the same competitive process they use for non-Federal funds, and local areas are to follow the principles of competitive procurement in the "Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards" (Uniform Guidance), in 2 CFR part 200 (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title02/2cfr200_main_02.tpl). In situations in which the outcome of the competitive selection process is the selection of the Local Workforce Development Board itself as the one-stop operator, the Governor and chief elected official must approve the selection. Through the Departments' use of transition authority under section 503 of WIOA, States and local areas will have until July 1, 2017 to competitively select one-stop operators.
Can you explain more about the new WIOA joint performance accountability requirements?
Where can I find the performance ICRs, both for the joint performance reporting and the program-specific reporting?
1. Can you explain more about the new WIOA joint performance accountability requirements?
Grantees must begin the process of collecting data for the WIOA performance accountability requirements on July 1, 2016 (PY 2016). The WIOA performance reporting system, which includes the WIOA Joint Participant Individual Record Layout (PIRL), contains the necessary data elements for reporting on the WIOA performance accountability requirements, including the primary indicators of performance. The system also includes the format for the quarterly reports for programs that collect individual records and the WIOA Statewide and Local Performance Report Template to be submitted by States and other grantees.
We know that the States need time to make modifications to their data systems to fully implement the new performance accountability reporting requirements. We expect States to begin the process of data collection on the WIOA performance accountability requirements on July 1, 2016. However, we recognize that States may not be able to report performance information in the early quarters of PY 2016, and we will provide more specific guidance on this reporting shortly. We anticipate States will be able to report performance accountability data in the State Annual Performance Report for PY 2016 due in October 2017, although we recognize it may be incomplete. We also understand that the inherent lags in data availability mean that we will not have full information on outcomes on all indicators until 2018.
We will release more information soon on how to submit the WIOA performance accountability data. The Departments will provide training on the new performance reporting system. The Departments will provide online resources for training and instructions on how to submit grant performance information. Technical support will also be available.
2. Where can I find the performance ICRs, both for the joint performance reporting and the program-specific reporting?
The ICRs are available at: www.doleta.gov/performance; https://rsa.ed.gov/wioa.cfm; and http://www.ed.gov/AEFLA.
The eligible training provider (ETP) information in the WIOA Common Performance Reporting package did not clarify how States are to report outcomes for ETPs. Can you please explain the process for reporting ETP information to DOL?
What key changes do WIOA and the Joint Final Rule make concerning performance accountability?
How will the increased alignment of performance accountability and reporting provisions benefit the public workforce system and its customers?
Where should I direct questions about the performance accountability and reporting requirements under WIOA?
1. The eligible training provider (ETP) information in the WIOA Common Performance Reporting package did not clarify how States are to report outcomes for ETPs. Can you please explain the process for reporting ETP information to DOL?
The information collection that recently took effect provides definitions for terms for ETP reporting, and performance indicators, which will be used for state submission of the ETP Annual Performance Report required under WIOA sec. 116(d)(4). This information collection established clarity regarding the required data, and the authority to begin the collection of such data. The Departments of Labor and Education will publish a future information collection request detailing the proposed data submission process, data layout, and final form in which the data will be displayed. Therefore, States should be working with their ETPs to begin the collection of this data as defined in the information collection. However, we recognize the information collection for the data submission process, layout, and display will need to be finalized, and States will need some time to implement once these are finalized.
2. What key changes do WIOA and the Joint Final Rule make concerning performance accountability?
3. Can you explain more about the new WIOA joint performance accountability requirements?
Grantees must begin the process of collecting data for the WIOA performance accountability requirements on July 1, 2016 (Program Year (PY) 2016).
The WIOA Common Performance Reporting (Joint Information Collection Request (Joint ICR)) system, which includes the WIOA Joint Participant Individual Record Layout (PIRL), contains the necessary data elements for reporting on the WIOA performance accountability requirements, including the primary indicators of performance. The system also includes the format for the quarterly reports for programs that collect individual records and the WIOA Statewide and Local Performance Report Template to be submitted by States and other grantees. The system also includes the requirements for States to report outcomes on the States' eligible training providers' participants. These particular reporting requirements apply only to the WIOA title I eligible training providers.
We know that the States need time to make modifications to their data systems to fully implement the new performance accountability reporting requirements. We expect States to begin the process of data collection on the WIOA performance accountability requirements on July 1, 2016. However, we recognize that States may not be able to report performance information in the early quarters of PY 2016, and we will provide more specific guidance on this reporting shortly. We anticipate States will be able to report performance accountability data in the State Annual Performance Report for PY 2016 due in October 2017, although the report may be incomplete. We also understand that the inherent lags in data availability means that we will not have full information on outcomes on certain indicators until 2018.
More information will be released soon on the Departments' websites on how to submit the required WIOA performance information and reports. The Departments will provide training on the new performance reporting system, to include online training and instructions on how to submit grantee performance information. Technical support will also be available.
4. How will the increased alignment of performance accountability and reporting provisions benefit the public workforce system and its customers?
We have often heard that different programs working toward different performance accountability measures has been an impediment to the alignment of programs and services at the service delivery level, which is a defining principle of the American Job Center system. Aligning performance accountability and reporting for WIOA's core programs and additional DOL-administered programs reduces that barrier, thereby facilitating alignment of programs and services to support customer-centered service approaches by providing a system of programs and services that best fits the customer's needs.
Additionally, the ability to look across program results, and to look at the data beneath those results, can provide useful management information and can serve as a basis to evaluate and assess how programs and services are impacting a variety of customers. Customers will also have information to better inform their choices when selecting training programs.
5. Where can I find the performance ICRs, both for the joint performance reporting and the program-specific reporting?
www.doleta.gov/WIOA and www.doleta.gov/performance; for the Department of Education programs, the requirements are available at https://rsa.ed.gov/wioa.cfm and http://www.ed.gov/AEFLA.
6. Where should I direct questions about the performance accountability and reporting requirements under WIOA?
www.doleta.gov/performance. Finally, www.doleta.gov/WIOA will continue to be updated to connect to information and resources.
For the Department of Education's adult education programs, direct comments and questions to AskAEFLA@ed.gov and watch www.ed.gov/AEFLA for updates. For the Department of Education's Vocational Rehabilitation program, grantees may contact their State liaison; a listing of State liaisons is located at https://rsa.ed.gov/people.cfm.
How are the Departments of Labor and Education implementing WIOA's performance accountability requirements?
Are the Departments of Labor and Education negotiating levels of performance in PY 2016? If so, will the Departments negotiate levels of performance for all indicators?
For which performance indicators will States have full data available for reporting at the end of PY 2016?
Since full data will not be available for most indicators at the end of PY 2016, why are levels of performance being negotiated for PY 2016?
I have seen familiar terms like "participant," as well as new terms like "reportable individual." I would like more information on what these terms mean; will there be additional guidance on these terms (and others) soon?
Through the previous comment periods of the performance accountability documents, there was some language about utilizing a unique identifier throughout the program year. Can the Departments please elaborate on this?
1. How are the Departments of Labor and Education implementing WIOA's performance accountability requirements?
WIOA provides the statutory framework for the new indicators of performance, reporting requirements, and performance accountability system. The Departments of Labor and Education have worked to interpret and operationalize the statutory requirements.
The Departments worked together to develop joint regulations for performance, which are applicable across WIOA's core programs as well as across DOL-administered programs authorized by WIOA, with certain distinctions based on programmatic requirements.
In addition, the Departments finalized the WIOA Common Performance Reporting Information Collection Request (Joint ICR), which authorizes the collection of performance-related data and information. This Information Collection provides common definitions and calculations to fulfill WIOA's performance accountability and reporting requirements. This Information Collection also provides templates for submission of the State Annual Performance Report for all of the WIOA core programs, the Local Area Performance Report for the WIOA Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth programs, and the data requirements for the Eligible Training Provider Annual Performance Report.
Further, the Departments of Labor and Education each developed program-specific ICRs to collect additional information unique to the Departments' programs. The Department of Labor finalized the Performance Accountability, Information, and Reporting System, through which the following programs will report: WIOA Adult, Dislocated Worker, Youth, Wagner Peyser Employment Service, National Farmworker Jobs Program, Trade Adjustment Assistance, YouthBuild, National Dislocated Worker Grants, Indian and Native American Program, Job Corps, Reentry Employment Opportunities programs, H-1B Technical Skills Training Grants, and Jobs for Veterans' State Grants (JVSG). The JVSG statute requires performance measures for that program to "be consistent with State performance accountability measures" under WIOA. While Trade Adjustment Assistance, H1-B Technical Skills Training Grants, and the Reentry Employment Opportunities programs are not authorized under WIOA, these programs will be utilizing the data element definitions and reporting templates in this collection of information. This system includes several information collection instruments-Program Performance Report, WIOA Pay-for-Performance Report, Participant Individual Record Layout (PIRL), WIOA Data Element Specifications, and Job Openings Report.
The Department of Education developed program-specific ICRs for the State Vocational Rehabilitation Services and the State Supported Employment Services programs. The Adult Education and Family Literacy Act program released its National Reporting System ICR that includes changes to aggregate tables to conform to the WIOA Common Performance Reporting (Joint ICR). The Vocational Rehabilitation program released an updated RSA-911 form to collect required reporting elements and to align with the WIOA Common Performance Reporting (Joint ICR).
The Departments of Labor and Education sought extensive public input when developing the proposed joint regulations and the ICRs, and analyzed all comments prior to finalizing these packages. In addition to these efforts, the Departments will develop further guidance to assist the workforce development system, and will provide ongoing technical assistance to support grantees throughout implementation.
2. Are the Departments of Labor and Education negotiating levels of performance in PY 2016? If so, will the Departments negotiate levels of performance for all indicators?
State Plans that were submitted earlier this year were required to include expected levels of performance for certain primary indicators of performance. Those indicators are the basis for negotiations that the Departments will use to establish negotiated levels of performance, which are incorporated into the approved Unified or Combined State Plan. For all WIOA core programs, all primary indicators of performance that will not be negotiated are designated as baseline indicators for these two years. States were not required to include expected levels of performance for these baseline indicators in the State Plan.
For the WIOA adult, dislocated worker, youth, and Wagner-Peyser programs, the Department of Labor is using transition authority in WIOA sec. 503(a) to extend the negotiation period for those indicators past June 30, 2016; negotiations are to conclude no later than August 15, 2016. For the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act program, the Department of Education completed negotiations on the measurable skill gain indicator by June 30, 2016 based on data currently available; however, negotiations on this indicator in future years will include expanded options reflected in the Joint Final Rule. For the Vocational Rehabilitation State grant program, the Department of Education is using the transition authority to take the time necessary to implement a negotiation process for the first time for this program; therefore, the program will not have negotiated indicators of performance for the first two years of the initial State Plan submitted in spring 2016.
The Department of Labor guidance for negotiations is available at: www.doleta.gov/performance.
The Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education's guidance used during its negotiations with States is available at: www.ed.gov/AEFLA.
3. For which performance indicators will States have full data available for reporting at the end of PY 2016?
States should be able to report full data for the measurable skill gains indicator at the end of PY 2016. Due to the structure of the reporting requirements (the timeframe at which the indicators are measured, as far out as 4 quarters after a participant exits, as well as availability of the wage record information at the State level, which is necessary for reporting on some of the indicators), there will not be full data to report on the other performance indicators in PY 2016. Full data will be available to enable full reporting on outcomes for all indicators of performance in PY 2018.
4. Since full data will not be available for most indicators at the end of PY 2016, why are levels of performance being negotiated for PY 2016?
WIOA sec. 116(b)(3)(iv) requires States to reach agreement with the Departments of Labor and Education on levels of performance for the primary indicators of performance for the core programs for the first two years of WIOA performance reporting (PY 2016 and PY 2017). For the titles I and III programs, the Department of Labor will negotiate those indicators for which sufficient historical (proxy) data were available to develop the statistical adjustment model: employment in the 2nd quarter after exit, employment in the 4th quarter after exit, median earnings in the 2nd quarter after exit (for all DOL core programs except for the youth program), and credential attainment (for the title I core programs). For the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act program, the Department of Education negotiated with States to agree on levels of performance for only the measurable skill gains indicator because baseline data for that indicator was available to the States. For the Vocational Rehabilitation State grant program, the Department of Education is using the transition authority to take the time necessary to implement a negotiation process for the first time for this program; therefore, the program will not have negotiated indicators of performance for the first two years of the initial State Plan submitted in spring 2016. However, the Departments of Labor and Education will only consider outcomes for indicators for which levels of performance have been negotiated and results have been reported for two years in assessing any financial sanction for failure to achieve adjusted levels of performance.
5. I have seen familiar terms like "participant," as well as new terms like "reportable individual." I would like more information on what these terms mean; will there be additional guidance on these terms (and others) soon?
The Joint Final Rule defines "participant," "reportable individual," and "exit." The Departments are developing comprehensive joint guidance regarding the performance accountability system, including applicability of the definitions to that system. Detailed explanations with examples and scenarios will be provided for these terms as well as many others.
6. Through the previous comment periods of the performance accountability documents, there was some language about utilizing a unique identifier throughout the program year. Can the Departments please elaborate on this?
As referenced in the preamble of the final rule, the Departments are asking States administering the WIOA core programs to create a unique identifier per participant within a given program year. For the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) program, additional information is provided in the VR specific ICR. Additional information regarding the use of a unique identifier across DOL-administered programs is provided in the FAQ for DOL-only performance accountability implementation. The Departments encourage States to consider methods in which common unique identifiers can be used across the core programs, but we also acknowledge that this is likely a long term goal.
DOL released two separate information collections - the WIOA Common Performance Reporting package, and the DOL-only Performance Reporting package. Why are these separate, and how do they tie together?
Under WIA, we submitted data in the "WIASRD" format. Does the WIASRD still exist? What is the "PIRL"?
How did the Department of Labor determine which programs to include in the WIOA Performance Accountability, Information and Reporting System?
How do we report on WIA participants who exit on or after 7/1/2016, the effective date for WIOA performance provisions? Are they expected to be reported under WIOA?
How do we report on WIA Adult, Dislocated Worker and Youth and Wagner-Peyser exiters who complete their program before 7/1/2016, but for whom results are not yet available for reporting?
Will we still use the Enterprise Data Reporting and Validation System (EDRVS) for our reporting purposes? How will the other programs listed in the PIRL be expected to report?
The information collections for performance accountability and reporting discuss the use of a unique identifier across DOL programs. Which programs are included in this request, and will DOL be issuing additional guidance on this topic?
1. DOL released two separate information collections - the WIOA Common Performance Reporting package, and the DOL-only Performance Reporting package. Why are these separate, and how do they tie together?
The set of documents labeled "WIOA Common Performance Reporting" includes the common data elements for calculating the primary indicators of performance for the six core programs, as well as the annual performance reports required by WIOA, to be submitted by the States and grantees to the Department of Labor or Education, as appropriate. These data elements are used by both the Department of Labor and the Department of Education core programs for purposes of performance accountability and reporting.
For DOL programs, the WIOA Performance Accountability, Information and Reporting System (i.e., the DOL-only Performance Reporting package) contains the data elements, reporting templates, and specifications required for most of DOL's workforce programs to use for performance accountability purposes. States and grantees of DOL-only funded programs (including both DOL core programs and DOL-funded programs identified above) will submit data files as prescribed in the WIOA Performance Accountability, Information and Reporting System. All of the data elements described in the WIOA Common Performance Reporting package are repeated in the DOL-only Performance Reporting package. DOL will be providing additional guidance regarding this system, including a user's guide.
2. Under WIA, we submitted data in the "WIASRD" format. Does the WIASRD still exist? What is the "PIRL"?
As WIA reporting comes to a close, so does the Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data (WIASRD), which will not be used for WIOA performance reporting after PY 2015 concludes. The Participant Individual Record Layout, or PIRL, will be used for reporting on WIOA participants, beginning 7/1/2016. The PIRL is the data dictionary and scheme for which states and grantees submit quarterly data files. While the PIRL has a form number given by the Office of Management and Budget, it is meant only as the guideline for states and grantees to produce a comma delimited text file, unless the program utilizes a DOL-funded national case management system (e.g., YouthBuild).
3. How did the Department of Labor determine which programs to include in the WIOA Performance Accountability, Information and Reporting System?
Consistent with WIOA's vision for greater alignment of performance accountability and data, the Department of Labor included all programs authorized under WIOA. In addition, the recent reauthorization of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program further aligned the performance accountability provisions of TAA with WIOA, and therefore, DOL included TAA as well. The JVSG statute requires performance measures for that program to be consistent with State performance accountability measures under WIOA. DOL used its discretion to incorporate Reentry Employment Opportunities and its discretionary investments (i.e., H-1B grants) to facilitate alignment in performance accountability and reporting.
At the time of the initial development of the PIRL, the Senior Community Service Employment Program had statutorily defined performance indicators that differed from WIOA, therefore SCSEP was not included at that time. The recent reauthorization of the SCSEP brought greater statutory alignment with the performance accountability provisions of WIOA. Therefore, DOL will work to further align SCSEP reporting with the PIRL, to the extent practicable, through implementation processes, which will include public comment.
4. How do we report on WIA participants who exit on or after 7/1/2016, the effective date for WIOA performance provisions? Are they expected to be reported under WIOA?
WIOA reporting specifications require States to include those participants who exited on or after 7/1/2016 in the WIOA performance reporting, regardless of the date on which participation began. However, the Department will not require states or grantees to retroactively gather information regarding any new PIRL data elements (such as status as "long-term unemployed") for those participants who began before 7/1/2016.
5. How do we report on WIA Adult, Dislocated Worker and Youth and Wagner-Peyser exiters who complete their program before 7/1/2016, but for whom results are not yet available for reporting?
States should retain data on WIA Title I and Wagner-Peyser participants who exited before 7/1/2016, until wage record information is available to conduct the match to produce WIA related outcomes (the end of calendar year 2017), at which time a WIA "closeout report" on all outcomes for WIA exiters not captured in the PY 2015 WIA annual report will be collected. More details on this closeout report will be forthcoming.
6. Will we still use the Enterprise Data Reporting and Validation System (EDRVS) for our reporting purposes? How will the other programs listed in the PIRL be expected to report?
Ushering in the opportunities provided under WIOA, DOL has taken this opportunity to create a more streamlined integrated federal reporting portal. EDRVS will accept the WIASRD and Wagner-Peyser Service layout files through the end of PY 2015 and the WIA close-out report. However, WIOA reporting will be done through the new, more streamlined, reporting portal. This new DOL system will be announced and tested in the coming months, and we anticipate that it will be in place in time for reporting in the first quarter of PY 2016. We acknowledge that States may not have their systems ready to submit their files in the first quarter, and we will work with States to accommodate their schedule.
7. The information collections for performance accountability and reporting discuss the use of a unique identifier across DOL programs. Which programs are included in this request, and will DOL be issuing additional guidance on this topic?
Yes, the information collection requires use of a common unique identifier across the WIOA Adult, Dislocated Worker and Youth programs and the Wagner-Peyser program, and encourages States to expand the use of this identifier across the DOL programs it administers. This approach will provide greater information to policy makers on the dynamics of the workforce system within the State. DOL will be providing additional guidance regarding the creation of unique identifiers and their usage across DOL programs. If the State agency were to submit a unified PIRL file, the onus would be on the State to establish a unique individual identifier across all programs included in that submission, but this is not required at this time.
How does WIOA allow for and incentivize adult education programs to continue to serve adults with the lowest levels of literacy and English proficiency?
How is WIOA changing adult education services for English language learners, particularly for immigrants and refugees?
1. How does WIOA allow for and incentivize adult education programs to continue to serve adults with the lowest levels of literacy and English proficiency?
WIOA repeatedly prioritizes services to individuals with barriers to employment, and the statute lists 14 categories of barriers, including individuals with low levels of literacy and English language learners. In addition, States must consider local providers' ability to serve these individuals, among other considerations. Programs are required to report disaggregated data on these individuals, including the total number of participants in each category served and exited, as well as disaggregated outcome data on each indicator of performance. This data will provide us new insight into the needs of our clients, and may help to surface promising practices for serving particular populations. The goal is to create a seamless, high-quality, and accessible workforce development system that meets the needs of individuals, many of whom may have low levels of literacy or English proficiency. Youth and adults should be able to come to an American Job Center and get the supports and services they need to move toward self-sufficiency and greater economic stability for their family. This law gives each adult education partner the opportunity to leverage the expertise that the other core partners bring to support the community's needs. As local programs become more effective at partnering and being responsive to local needs and equity gaps, we will see the youth and adults we serve achieve outcomes and reach their goals.
2. How is WIOA changing adult education services for English language learners, particularly for immigrants and refugees?
WIOA expands services to English language learners. In addition to requiring that the program of instruction be designed to help English language learners achieve competence in reading, writing, speaking, and comprehension of the English language and mathematics, it also requires that the program of instruction must lead to attainment of a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent and then transition to postsecondary education and training, or employment. It also authorizes an Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program that blends civics instruction with English proficiency training. This new program includes an emphasis on supporting economic self-sufficiency by working closely with the local workforce development system.
How does WIOA strengthen the focus of the VR program on competitive integrated employment?
How does WIOA enhance the provision of VR services to youth and students with disabilities?
1. How does WIOA strengthen the focus of the VR program on competitive integrated employment?
WIOA reinforces the principle that individuals with disabilities, including those with the most significant disabilities, are capable of achieving high quality, competitive integrated employment when provided the necessary services and supports. WIOA amends the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act) to expand VR services designed to maximize the potential of individuals with disabilities and adds new provisions that limit the payment of subminimum wages to individuals with disabilities.
WIOA emphasizes the provision of services, such as customized employment and supported employment (SE) services, to assist individuals with disabilities, including those with the most significant disabilities, achieve competitive integrated employment. WIOA extends the period for the provision of SE services from 18 to 24 months and limits the amount of SE funds that can be used for administrative costs to 2.5 percent, thereby maximizing the benefit of SE services to individuals with the most significant disabilities. WIOA emphasizes the VR agencies' authority to engage with employers to provide work-based learning experiences and identify competitive integrated employment for individuals with disabilities in the job-driven workforce. WIOA also promotes career advancement through graduate degrees, particularly in STEM fields.
WIOA requires individuals with disabilities seeking or continuing employment at subminimum wages with entities holding special wage certificates under section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act to access services, including VR services, which maximize their opportunities to achieve competitive integrated employment. WIOA requires that VR agencies provide these individuals career counseling and information and referral services at specific intervals while they are employed at subminimum wages.
2. How does WIOA enhance the provision of VR services to youth and students with disabilities?
WIOA expands not only the population of students with disabilities who may receive VR services but also the breadth of services that the VR agencies may provide to youth and students with disabilities who are transitioning from school to postsecondary education and employment. WIOA increases opportunities for students and youth with disabilities to practice and improve workplace skills, including internships and apprenticeships. WIOA requires VR agencies to reserve at least 15 percent of Federal VR program funds for the provision of pre-employment transition services to assist students with disabilities transition from secondary school to postsecondary education programs and employment. With the amendments made by WIOA, pre-employment transition services are available to students with disabilities, regardless of whether they have applied and been determined eligible for VR services. WIOA also expands the authority of VR agencies to provide transition services to groups of students and youth with disabilities.
WIOA also requires VR agencies to reserve 50 percent of their Federal SE program allotment for the provision of SE services, including extended services, to youth with the most significant disabilities and expand the use of these funds to allow VR agencies to provide extended services for these youth up to four years. WIOA strengthens coordination between VR agencies and local educational agencies in the provision of transition services provided under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the provision of pre-employment transition services under the VR program.
Our board is preparing to procure the One-Stop Operator for our area. In advance of the issuance of the final rule, what procedure or rules should we follow?
How does the Uniform Guidance Procurement Grace Period impact the the procurement of the One-Stop Operator?
What are the general procurement standards that local workforce development boards should follow when procuring a One-Stop Operator?
1. Our board is preparing to procure the One-Stop Operator for our area. In advance of the issuance of the final rule, what procedure or rules should we follow?
The Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA) requires that all one-stop operators must be designated or certified through a competitive process. [Section 121(d)(2)(A)]. In a previous FAQ issued on July 1, 2015, the Department stated that local workforce development boards are to select a one-stop operator using a competitive selection process no later than June 30, 2017 (https://www.doleta.gov/WIOA/FAQs.cfm).
In the advance of the issuance of a final rule implementing WIOA, local workforce development boards must conduct the procurement of a one-stop operator in a manner consistent with the competitive procurement standards set forth by the Uniform Guidance (UG) [2 CFR §200.317-326]. The UG contains the provisions a Board should follow for procuring a one-stop operator prior to finalization of the WIOA regulations. In the UG at 2 CFR §200.317, States are permitted to use their own procurement policies and procedures when selecting a one-stop operator; however, the WIOA statue requires that a competitive process be utilized when designating or certifying one-stop operators. Some Boards may have already awarded contracts to a one-stop operator prior to July 1, 2015. These Boards may continue their relationship with their existing one-stop operator through their contract end date, among other options outlined in TEGL 38-14. They also have the option to terminate the procurement process initiated prior to July 1, 2015, and initiate a competitive procurement process that is in accordance with the UG. Once the final rule is issued, it will contain further guidance and timeframes for implementation of the WIOA one-stop operator competition requirements, and the Department will provide further written guidance and technical assistance on this topic.
2. How does the Uniform Guidance Procurement Grace Period impact the the procurement of the One-Stop Operator?
On September 10, 2015, OMB issued further clarification on the grace period for updating procurement policies and procedures. For non-Federal entities, which includes most recipients of WIOA funds, there is a two fiscal year grace period for implementation of the procurement standards in the UG (2 CFR §200.317-326) that became effective December 26, 2014. Non-federal entities opting to delay implementation of the procurement standards will need to specify in their documented policies and procedures that they will continue to comply with OMB Circular A-110. The two year grace period begins with the first full fiscal year after the effective date of December 26, 2014. For example, a non-Federal entity with a fiscal year ending June 30th, may opt to use the procurement standards at OMB Circular A-110 until June 30, 2017. On July 1, 2017, which coincidentally is the date when WIOA competitive selection of one-stop operators becomes effective, this non-Federal entity then must adhere to the procurement standards in the UG. When procuring property and services under a Federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements conducted with non-Federal funds as specified at 2 CFR 200.317.
3. What are the general procurement standards that local workforce development boards should follow when procuring a One-Stop Operator?
Local Workforce Development Boards (LWDBs) must have general procurement requirements in place when competitively procuring items or services such as the one-stop operator. All procurement transactions must be conducted using a competitive process ( WIOA section 121(d)(2)(A). The LWDB must document the procurement procedures to reflect the standards outlined in the Uniform Guidance and to ensure fairness and objectivity throughout the process. LWDBs also must maintain written standards of conduct covering individual and organizational conflict of interest. Supporting documentation must be retained to sufficiently record the procurement process and must be made available to auditors, State, and Federal reviewers/monitors. Lastly, LWDBs must conduct oversight to ensure the performance and accountability of the one-stop operator. See additional general procurement standards in the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.318]. DOL will be issuing guidance on this subject and will provide associated technical assistance.
Can you please tell us more about infrastructure costs under the WIOA MOU funding Agreements?
What kind of third party in-kind contributions count towards infrastructure costs?
What are other shared costs?
1. Can you please tell us more about infrastructure costs under the WIOA MOU funding Agreements?
Infrastructure costs can be provided on a cash, non-cash, or third party in-kind basis.
Cash contributions are those cash contributions made by partners to the Local Workforce Development Board to cover infrastructure expenses or cash payments made by partners to another entity (usually the One-Stop Operator) to cover infrastructure costs of the One-Stop center.
Non-cash contributions are also made by partners of the Local Workforce Development Board. Non-cash contributions may include donations of goods or services, or the documented value of supporting costs of items owned by a partner program and used in by the One-Stop center.
Example: A partner's proportionate share of the One-Stop operating costs is $15,000. The partner does not have sufficient cash or other resources to fully fund its share, and wishes to donate (not for its own individual use) gently used surplus computer equipment. The computers are valued (in accordance with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.306) at $10,000. The partner would be able to use the $10,000 value as part of the resources provided to fund the shared costs.
Third party in-kind contributions are made by individuals or entities that are not partners to the Local Workforce Development Board. Third-party in-kind contributions are contributions of space, equipment, technology, non-personnel services, or other like items to support the costs associated with one-stop operations.
2. What kind of third party in-kind contributions count towards infrastructure costs?
There are two types of third party in-kind: general contributions to One-Stop operations (i.e., those not connected to any individual One-Stop partner) and those made specifically to a One-Stop partner program (third party-donor contributions).
Example of General Contributions: A general in-kind contribution could be a city government allowing the one-stop to use city space rent free. These in-kind contributions would not be associated with one specific partner, but rather would go to support the one-stop generally and would be factored into the underlying budget and cost pools used to determine proportionate share. The result would be a decrease in the amount of funds each partner contributes, as the overall budget will have been reduced.
Example of a third party-donor contribution to a one-stop partner program: The second type of in-kind contribution could be a third party-contribution to a specific partner to support One-Stop infrastructure. For example, a business partner provides assistive technology to a vocational rehabilitation program, which then gives it to the One-Stop. So long as the assistive technology was in the One Stop operating budget's infrastructure costs, the partner could then value the assistive technology in accordance with the UG and use the value to count towards its proportionate share contribution. One caveat, however, is that prior to accepting in-kind contributions from a partner (via a 3rd party donor), there would need to be agreement among the partners on cost allocation methodology to ensure that other infrastructure operating costs are sufficiently covered through cash and noncash contributions.
All partner contributions, regardless of the type, must be reconciled on a regular basis, (i.e. monthly or quarterly), to ensure they are fairly evaluated and that each partner program is not required to contribute more than its proportionate share in accordance with the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR part 200.
3. What are other shared costs?
In addition to jointly funding infrastructure costs, One-Stop partners must use a portion of funds made available under their programs' authorizing statute (or fairly evaluated in-kind contributions) to pay the additional costs relating to the operation of the One-Stop delivery system, which must include applicable career services and may include common costs that are not paid from the funds provided for infrastructure through the partner funding agreements.. Shared costs may include the cost of the receptionist located in the one-stop center, (WIOA sec. 121(i)(1)). Shared services costs may include initial intake, assessment of needs, appraisal of basic skills, identification of appropriate services to meet such needs, referrals to other one-stop partners, and business services. Additionally, one-stop partners may jointly fund shared services, (WIOA sec. 121(i)(2)). These shared services costs must be allocated according to the proportion of benefit received by each of the partners.
Will The Workforce Innovation And Opportunity Act (WIOA) Operating Guidance Expire Upon Publication Of The Final Regulations For WIOA?
The WIOA Operating guidance, issued after enactment of WIOA on July 22, 2014, will NOT expire upon the effective date of the final regulations for WIOA. Upon the effective date of the final WIOA regulations, WIOA guidance issued after enactment of WIOA will remain valid and in full effect, unless it is inconsistent with the final WIOA regulations, until rescinded, amended, or replaced. The Departments will continue to issue guidance after publication of the final regulations, which will be complemented by technical assistance to the system, on specific topics covered.
1. When must States submit the first WIOA Unified or Combined State Plan?
WIOA Sections 102(c)(1)(A) and 103(b)(1) require States to submit the initial Unified or Combined State Plan no later than 120 days prior to the commencement of the second full program year after the date of enactment (i.e., July 1, 2016), making the statutory submission date March 3, 2016. However, pursuant to the orderly transition authority in section 503 of WIOA, the Departments of Labor and Education will consider as timely an initial Unified or Combined State Plan that is submitted by April 1, 2016.
1. When will the final regulations for WIOA be published?
The Departments of Labor and Education, in collaboration with other Federal partner agencies, published five Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs) in April 2015. In addition, the Departments and other Federal partner agencies published several proposed new Information Collection Requests (ICRs) in summer 2015 to inform stakeholders of new data elements that would need to be reported under WIOA. As a result of these publications, the Departments received thousands of public comments, all of which must be considered in the development of final rules and ICRs. The Federal agencies have been diligently working on the analysis of all comments in order to develop final regulations, ICRs, and policies that are consistent with the requirements of WIOA, as well as other authorizing laws for the affected programs. Given the complexity of these issues, the Departments are working toward making the final regulations publicly available in June 2016. The Departments intend to provide necessary information about the requirements imposed by WIOA and the forthcoming regulations as soon as possible through guidance, notification of information collection requirements, and technical assistance, and by making the regulations available on their websites when they are sent to the Federal Register.

References: § 678
 § 678
 § 678
 § 678
 § 678
 § 200
 § 200
 §200
 §200
 §200
 §200