Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act: Selected States' Planning Approaches for Serving Job Seekers and Employers
Published: 2016-11-15T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Enacted in 2014, WIOA aims, in part, to increase coordination among federal workforce development programs, which are administered primarily by DOL and Education. GAO was asked to review selected states' approaches for addressing certain WIOA provisions in their state workforce plans.
GAO examined 1) approaches selected states have taken to develop plans for implementing career pathways, sector partnerships, and regional planning strategies, and 2) related planning challenges these states have encountered and how they have addressed them.
GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance. GAO also conducted case studies in five states (California, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Pennsylvania). GAO selected these states based on input from national associations about their level of experience with career pathways, sector partnerships, and regional planning strategies, and GAO's review of relevant reports. In these states, GAO interviewed state workforce board officials and agency officials who were involved in developing the state plan. The information GAO obtained provides in-depth examples but is not generalizable to all states. GAO also reviewed state plans and other relevant documentation. In addition, GAO interviewed DOL and Education officials.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Officials in five selected states reported using three main approaches to develop plans for implementing career pathways, sector partnerships, and regional planning strategies under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). GAO selected states that had various levels of experience with these strategies. Specifically, as a condition of receiving funding, federal agencies require state plans under WIOA to include career pathways strategies, which align education, job training, and support services to help job seekers obtain employment. These plans must also include sector partnership strategies, which help employers in an industry address shared goals and hiring needs. In addition, states are required to establish regions, which may be made up of multiple local workforce areas. According to the Department of Labor (DOL), these regions are intended in part to align workforce activities with regional economies. To address these requirements, officials in each of the five states reported:
Building on prior experience to enhance career pathways, sector partnerships, or both strategies . For example, Pennsylvania's state plan proposes building on over 10 years of experience with sector partnerships by increasing technical assistance for them and exploring the development of a certification program for these partnerships.
Increasing the involvement of stakeholders, which uncovered ways to enhance services in most selected states . For example, Ohio officials said they involved the state agency that oversees employment services for individuals with disabilities and advocates for these individuals in planning efforts for the first time, which led them to provide training on disability awareness for staff at all local workforce centers.
Using multiple sources of labor market information, which helped better align career pathways strategies with employer needs in some selected states . For example, Colorado officials said they asked employers to review projected worker shortages in the medical industry over the next 10 years, and employers said they would need more workers over a shorter period of time. Officials used this information to focus their career pathways strategies on preparing individuals to eventually fill the jobs that were projected to have worker shortages.
Officials in four of the states GAO selected reported facing challenges establishing regions due to local areas' concerns, which they addressed by revising regional boundaries or increasing the number of regions and by providing incentives for regional collaboration or innovation. In three states, officials said they revised their regions in response to local concerns. For example, California officials said they redrew regional boundaries after a local area requested that it be assigned to a different region based on commuting patterns, among other factors. In addition, to encourage regional collaboration or innovation, officials in four states reported providing financial incentives. For example, a Kentucky official said the state is using a private grant to fund regional efforts to develop career pathways and sector partnership strategies. Additionally, DOL and Department of Education (Education) officials told us that they plan to support states with related technical assistance.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO is not making recommendations in this report. DOL and Education provided technical comments on a draft of this report, which GAO incorporated as appropriate.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Enacted in July 2014, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act  (WIOA) brought changes to the programs that serve as a foundation for  the nation’s employment and job training system. These programs,  administered primarily by the Departments of Labor (DOL) and Education  (Education), provide a combination of education and training services that  help job seekers obtain employment and advance in the labor market.  Such services include job search assistance, career counseling,  occupational skills training, classroom training, and on-the-job training.  WIOA emphasizes the alignment and integration of these programs. In  addition, WIOA emphasizes that employers are also customers of the  workforce system, and includes provisions that involve them in helping  the system provide the skilled workers they need.
Among other changes, WIOA requires greater coordination of strategic  planning, services, and performance measurement. Specifically, WIOA  includes new requirements for state workforce development plans. State  workforce development boards—whose members include the governor,  representatives from the business and labor communities, and various  state officials—are required to assist in creating these plans, which “unify”  workforce strategies across six programs designated as core by the law.  In addition, WIOA requires that states develop career pathways strategies  to help job seekers obtain employment or education, sector partnership  strategies to engage employers in the workforce system, and regional  planning strategies to coordinate local services. States were required to  submit their first state plans under WIOA to DOL and Education by April  1, 2016, in order to be considered timely.
In light of these developments, you asked us to review states’ planning  approaches for addressing new WIOA requirements. Specifically, this  report examines: (1) the approaches selected states have taken to  develop plans for implementing WIOA provisions related to career  pathways, sector partnerships, and regional planning, and (2) the related  planning challenges, if any, these states have encountered and how they  have addressed them.
To address both objectives, we reviewed relevant federal laws,  regulations, and guidance. To conduct case studies, we selected five  states (California, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Pennsylvania), which  were among those identified by national associations as 1) having  substantial experience developing and implementing career pathways,  sector partnerships, or regional planning prior to WIOA, and/or 2) making  significant changes to implement any of these strategies under WIOA. To  select states that had various levels of experience with these three  strategies, we considered the input we received from national  associations and reviewed relevant reports. In the selected states, we  interviewed officials including the executive leadership of the state  workforce development board, state board members, and state agency  officials—such as officials from the state workforce, human services, or  education agency—who were involved in developing the state plan. The  information we obtained from state officials provides in-depth examples  but is not generalizable to all states. In addition, we reviewed the plans  that these states submitted to DOL and Education by April 2016 and other  relevant documentation, such as documents summarizing the state  planning process and state guidance for local workforce areas. After  reviewing and analyzing information from the states, we asked the state  officials we interviewed to review relevant portions of the draft report for  accuracy. Furthermore, we interviewed DOL and Education officials. See  appendix I for more information on our objectives, scope, and  methodology.
We conducted this performance audit from September 2015 to November  2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
subsections: section_title: Timeframes for WIOA Implementation
paragraphs: WIOA required federal and state officials to build a new framework for the  workforce system over the two years following its enactment. This  framework included the federal regulations implementing the law, and  state plans outlining each state’s overall strategy for workforce  development and how that strategy will meet identified skill needs for job  seekers and employers. All states submitted their first plans under WIOA  to DOL and Education by April 1, 2016, and the federal agencies issued  final regulations in June 2016. Although final regulations were not issued  by the time states submitted their plans, the federal agencies had  previously issued proposed regulations and guidance, and had provided  technical assistance to states. According to DOL and Education officials,  they approved all of the state plans with conditions that each state  needed to address to meet requirements. In July 2016, these plans and  the common performance measures for the six core programs took  effect. (See fig.1.) WIOA requires that states submit unified state plans to  DOL every four years and revisit these plans every two years, submitting  their planned modifications to the relevant federal agencies for approval.
section_title: Requirements for WIOA State Plans
paragraphs: Among other changes, WIOA requires that state workforce development  boards, consisting of the governor, representatives from business and  labor communities, and various state officials, assist in the development  of “unified” state plans covering six core programs. The six programs are  administered by DOL and Education (see table 1).
States were required to submit either unified or combined plans for  implementing WIOA. Unified plans include planning for the six core  programs. Such plans were optional under the prior authorizing law, the  Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). Combined plans include  planning for the six core programs, as well as planning for one or more  additional programs and activities.
In these plans, states are required to include career pathways strategies,  which help job seekers obtain employment or education, and sector  partnership strategies, which engage employers in the workforce system.  States are also required to identify regions that will implement regional  planning strategies to coordinate local services, among other activities.
Career pathways strategies align and integrate education, job  training, counseling, and support services to help individuals obtain  postsecondary education credentials and employment in in-demand  occupations. WIOA defines in-demand occupations as those that  currently have or are projected to have enough positions in an  industry sector to have a significant impact on the state, regional, or  local economy.
Industry or sector partnership strategies organize multiple  employers and key stakeholders, such as education and training  programs, in a particular industry into a working group that focuses on  the shared goals and human resources needs of that industry.
Regional planning strategies allow for strategic planning across  local workforce area boundaries for the purposes of coordinating  services and administrative cost-sharing, among other activities.
Career pathways and sector partnership strategies are often  interconnected. In order to design career pathways programs that train  workers for jobs that employers need to fill, these programs need input  from employers, which can be gained through sector partnerships. DOL  has noted that one of the key elements of developing a comprehensive  career pathways system is to identify industry sectors and engage  employers.
With respect to the requirement that states establish regions, DOL  regulations state that the purpose of these regions is to align workforce  development activities and resources with larger regional economic  development areas and available resources to provide coordinated and  efficient services to both job seekers and employers. This is a change  from WIA, which permitted but did not require regional planning. Under  WIOA, states must designate local workforce areas, draw regional  boundaries, and assign local areas to these regions. In practice, states  need to designate local areas before they can assign them to regions. If  local areas dispute their local area designations, they may appeal them to  the state board, and if the state board denies the appeal, they may appeal  to DOL. In assigning local areas to regions, states are required to consult  local officials and consider labor market and economic development  areas. After states establish regions, local boards are to work together to  develop regional plans that incorporate local plans for each local area in  the region, collect and analyze regional labor market data, develop  regional sector partnerships, and coordinate the sharing of administrative  costs, among other responsibilities.
section_title: Strategic Planning Approaches
paragraphs: In our previous work on leading strategic planning practices, we have  noted the importance of stakeholder involvement, assessing the  environment, and aligning activities, processes, and resources to meet  goals and objectives during the early phases of strategic planning.
Under WIOA, states are required to address all of these aspects of  strategic planning:  Involving stakeholders. WIOA requires that state boards have  diverse membership, which helps involve relevant stakeholders in the  planning process. WIOA also features a “sunshine provision” to  disclose board proceedings and information regarding the state plan.  In addition, as previously noted, states must consult local officials  when establishing regions.
Assessing the environment. The state plan must assess the current  environment in which employment and training programs operate by  including analyses of state economic conditions and labor market  information, among others.
Aligning activities and resources. The state plan must include a  strategy for aligning the core programs, other state or local partner  programs, and other resources available to the state to achieve its  strategic vision and goals.
section_title: Selected States Reported Building on Experience, Increasing Stakeholder Involvement, and Using Multiple Sources of Labor Market Information as Approaches to Develop Flexible Plans
paragraphs: The five states we selected as case studies reported using three main  approaches to develop plans for implementing WIOA provisions related to  career pathways, sector partnerships, and regional planning. Specifically,  states 1) built on their prior experience with career pathways and sector  partnerships, which officials viewed as interconnected, 2) increased the  involvement of stakeholders in the planning process compared to past  efforts, and 3) used multiple sources of labor market information (LMI) to  identify employer needs and draw the boundaries of the new regions  required under WIOA. Officials in each of the five states told us that they  intended their state plans to provide a high-level vision that allows regions  and local areas the flexibility to develop workforce strategies that respond  to specific regional and local needs.
subsections: section_title: All Five States Reported Building on Prior Experience to Expand Their Efforts under WIOA
paragraphs: Each of the five selected states had experience with career pathways,  sector partnerships, or both prior to the enactment of WIOA, and officials  in these states told us that WIOA provided an opportunity to enhance the  strategies they already had in place. In contrast, each of the states had  less prior experience with regional planning. Colorado officials said they  began implementing sector partnerships in 2005 and have incorporated  lessons learned over time, including ensuring that these partnerships are  led by the business community. Under WIOA, Colorado officials plan to  expand and enhance their network of business-led sector partnerships.  They also plan to use these partnerships to help design career pathways  programs by identifying the knowledge, skills, and abilities that employers  are seeking for in-demand jobs. Similarly, Pennsylvania’s state plan  proposes building on over 10 years of experience with sector partnerships  by increasing technical assistance and seeking additional funding for  these partnerships, and exploring the development of a certification  program for such partnerships. In Ohio, officials also said they plan to  further develop their existing sector partnership efforts, including  identifying and disseminating best practices from six pilot partnerships  that they funded with grants in 2014. They also plan to implement two  new career pathways initiatives: an initiative to encourage greater  enrollment of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)  participants in employment and training services, and a new wage  pathway model that provides an alternative to the traditional career  pathway model. According to Ohio officials, this wage pathway model  provides low-income, low-skill youth who are not yet ready to enter a  career pathway program with on-the-job skills training and supportive  services to help them make a successful transition to a career pathway  program and obtain an in-demand occupation.
Officials in four of the five states said their previous state plans under WIA  served as the foundation for their WIOA plans because the new law  supported their existing strategies. For example, California officials said  that WIOA’s shift in emphasis from matching job seekers with open  positions to helping job seekers increase their skills and education aligns  with the state board’s efforts to promote these goals in California over the last five years. Similarly, Ohio officials told us that some of their efforts to  reform their workforce system over the last several years have  emphasized the development and expansion of career pathways and  sector partnerships, which aligns with WIOA’s emphasis on these  strategies.
In contrast to career pathways and sector partnerships, officials in only  three of the five states reported they had some prior experience with  regional planning. In California, Colorado, and Ohio, officials said they  had some type of regional structure in place prior to the enactment of  WIOA, while officials in Kentucky and Pennsylvania said they were  relatively new to regional planning. Overall, officials in each of the five  states said they had less prior experience with regional planning than with  career pathways or sector partnership strategies, and told us that they  have made or will make major changes to implement new regional  requirements under WIOA.
section_title: Most Selected States Reported That Greater Stakeholder Involvement Increased Awareness across Programs or Uncovered Opportunities to Enhance Services
paragraphs: In each of the five selected states, officials reported involving a wide  range of stakeholders in enhancing or developing career pathways,  sector partnerships, or regional planning strategies, and sought their input  in various ways. For example, officials said they included stakeholders  such as state agencies overseeing core programs, state agencies  overseeing other partner programs, local workforce boards, community  colleges, business and industry representatives, labor organizations, and  community-based organizations. According to officials, state workforce  boards sought input from stakeholders in various ways, such as  organizing cross-program or issue area planning committees or  discussion groups, holding statewide or regional meetings, and  conducting focus groups or surveys.
Compared to past planning efforts, each of the five states reported that  they have increased stakeholder involvement in WIOA planning by  engaging existing stakeholders to a greater extent, and four of the five  states also reported involving new stakeholders. Each of the five states  included the six core programs in their plans, as required by WIOA, and  four states developed combined plans that also included other partner  programs (see table 2). According to state officials, some of these core  or other partner programs were involved in previous workforce planning efforts but had greater involvement in the WIOA planning process, while  others were new stakeholders under WIOA. For example, officials in two  states said they involved the state agency overseeing the Vocational  Rehabilitation program to a greater extent under WIOA, and officials in  the other three states said that the WIOA planning process was the first  time they involved this agency in workforce planning efforts.
Beyond the core and other partner programs included in the state plan,  officials in four of the five states reported involving other new  stakeholders in WIOA planning. While they varied by state, these new  stakeholders included state agencies such as Kentucky Adult Education  and the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in California, as  well as organizations representing particular interests, such as a local  chapter of the National Skills Coalition in Colorado and an initiative  supporting better jobs for individuals with disabilities in Ohio. In addition,  these new stakeholders included new members of the state workforce  development board. For example, in Colorado, officials said they sought  new board members with expertise in a variety of areas, including youth  and disability issues. In Kentucky, officials told us they focused on  identifying new members who could represent the interests of the  business community, and that these new members have helped to design  career pathways by sharing their knowledge about the skills and  certifications needed for in-demand jobs.
Officials in two of the five states reported that this increased involvement  from stakeholders enhanced awareness about the roles and services of  other related programs. For example, California officials said that through  the WIOA planning process, state agencies have exchanged detailed  information about their programs, including eligibility requirements, the  types of services they provide, and how they deliver these services. In  Colorado, officials similarly reported that greater stakeholder involvement  led to increased awareness across programs and cross-training of staff.  Specifically, officials said they cross-trained more than 1,000 staff from a  variety of programs on the eligibility requirements for and services  provided by other programs to which they refer job seekers, including the  core and other partner programs in the state plan, as well as the  unemployment insurance program and career and technical education  programs, among others.
In addition, officials in four of the five states—California, Colorado,  Kentucky, and Ohio—reported that involving new stakeholders in the  planning process uncovered opportunities to better serve individuals with  barriers to employment. In Ohio, officials said they involved the state  agency that oversees the Vocational Rehabilitation program and  advocates for individuals with disabilities in planning efforts for the first  time, which helped identify opportunities to better serve these individuals  through the workforce system. For example, these officials said that  including these stakeholders led them to train staff at all of their one-stop  centers on disability awareness. In addition, a Colorado official told us  that involving new stakeholders in the planning process led workforce  programs to assess their efforts to conduct outreach and provide services  to homeless individuals.
Overall, officials in each of the five states reported that the WIOA  planning process reinforced important lessons from past planning efforts  about when and how to obtain stakeholder input. For example, Kentucky  officials noted the importance of having all stakeholders—including the  business community—provide input into the planning process from the  very beginning. Similarly, Colorado officials said they used a transparent  planning process that involved county commissioners, local workforce  boards, and the business community to ensure buy-in and support for the  state plan.
section_title: Some Selected States Reported That Supplementing Traditional Labor Market Information Better Aligned Strategies with Employer Needs and Helped Define Regions
paragraphs: Each of the five selected states consulted multiple sources of labor  market information (LMI), which helped officials in some states better  align career pathways strategies with employer needs, and helped  officials in all five states draw regional boundaries and assign local  workforce areas to those proposed regions. Specifically, each of the five  states reported they supplemented the traditional LMI provided by the  state LMI office with real-time LMI, and three of them—Colorado,  Kentucky, and Ohio—reported validating this information with employers  to confirm its accuracy as they developed their state plans. In these  three states, officials said that validating this information with employers  helped better align their career pathways strategies with employers’  needs. In Colorado, officials said one example is that when they asked  employers to review projections that the state would experience a  shortage of workers in the medical industry over the next 10 years,  employers said they actually would need more workers over a shorter  time period. Officials then used this information to focus their career  pathways strategies on preparing individuals to fill the jobs projected to  have worker shortages by identifying entry-level jobs that could eventually  lead to these higher-level jobs. In Ohio, officials said they surveyed  employers to identify their most urgent workforce needs and incorporated  this information into a searchable online database of in-demand jobs that  guided their planning. According to officials, this information from  employers helped better align career pathways strategies with employers’  needs for workers with certain credentials or certificates.
In each of the five selected states, officials told us they also used multiple  sources of LMI to help draw the proposed boundaries of the new regions  required under WIOA. Specifically, officials in each of the states said they  considered labor market and economic development areas, as required  by WIOA, in addition to a variety of other factors. These factors included  the locations of key industries, commuting patterns, local workforce areas’  existing partnerships across local area boundaries, and where population  centers were located.
section_title: All Five States Reported They Intend Their State Plans to Provide a High- Level Vision that Allows Flexibility in Responding to Regional and Local Needs
paragraphs: Officials in each of the five states told us that they intend their state plans  to provide a high-level vision that allows regions and local areas the  flexibility to develop workforce strategies that respond to specific regional  and local needs. For example, Colorado officials said they intend their  state plan to provide a framework for regional and local entities as they  develop career pathways strategies that are driven by the needs of  regional industries. The state plan references Colorado’s step-by-step  guide for building regional career pathways systems, including goals,  outcomes, and the roles of different partners. Similarly, California officials  described their plan as a broad conceptual framework for building  regional and local partnerships rather than an operations manual. The  plan requires regions to develop customized “regional sector pathway”  programs, which are career pathways programs that help job seekers  attain postsecondary credentials that are valued by employers and  aligned with regional workforce needs.
To implement their state plans, officials in each of the five states said they  have developed, are developing, or plan to develop guidance for regional  and local planning, including guidance on implementing career pathways  and sector partnerships. For example, in September 2016, California  issued guidance for developing regional and local plans which sets the  state’s policy direction for these plans and clarifies the purpose of the  regional plan as compared to the local plan. According to the guidance,  the primary purpose of regional plans is to develop regional sector  pathway programs, while the primary purpose of local plans is to facilitate  job seekers’ access to local services that lead to regional sector pathway  programs. The state plans to provide additional guidance and technical  assistance materials about model regional and local partnerships,  including best practices, as local officials develop and implement these  plans. In two states, officials told us that regional and local plans were  due by June 2016, and in the other three states, officials said they expect  regions and local areas to submit these plans by spring 2017.  Furthermore, officials in all five states said they expect regional or local  plans to address how funding could be shared across programs to  implement career pathways and sector partnership strategies, although  they acknowledged that these decisions will involve further discussions  between state and local partners. Officials in three states said they did not  address cost-sharing issues in their state plans because they believed  that the state plan was not the right vehicle for addressing these issues or  because they did not have sufficient time to make these decisions prior to  the submission deadline.
section_title: Selected States Reported Addressing Challenges in Designating Regions and Creating Incentives for Regional Collaboration
paragraphs: Officials in the selected states reported facing challenges establishing  regions, which they addressed by revising their regional boundaries or  increasing the number of regions and by providing incentives for future  regional collaboration or innovation. As previously noted, a change under  WIOA is that states are required to establish regions, which may be made  up of multiple local workforce areas that are to work together to develop  regional workforce plans. According to DOL, the purpose of these  regions is to align workforce development activities and resources with  larger regional economic development areas and available resources in  order to provide coordinated and efficient services to both job seekers  and employers. In addition, DOL stated that regional partnerships better  support the implementation of sector partnership and career pathways  strategies, and may also lower costs and increase the effectiveness of  service delivery through greater coordination. As previously noted,  officials in each of the five selected states reported that they have made  or will make major changes to implement these new regional  requirements under WIOA, even though three of the states had some  prior experience with regional planning.
To draw proposed regional boundaries and assign local workforce areas  to these regions, officials in the five selected states said they reviewed  multiple sources of LMI and also consulted with local officials. For  example, California officials told us that they developed a draft regional  map in consultation with local workforce boards and state workforce  associations. Officials in Colorado and Ohio said they considered dividing  some local workforce areas into multiple regions in order to reflect  regional labor markets or existing economic development regions.  Colorado proposed this approach in its initial state plan. Specifically,  Colorado officials told us they proposed dividing a large local area that  covers most of the state into four different regions to align with regional  economies. However, state officials said that when DOL conducted an  early review of their state plan during the public comment period before  they officially submitted it, DOL officials advised them that they could not  divide a single local area into multiple regions. (For Colorado’s initial and  final regional maps, see appendix II.) DOL’s final regulations also reflect  this interpretation of WIOA in that they require regions to consist of one or  more local areas. DOL officials explained that if local areas were divided  into multiple regions, they would be required to participate in multiple  regional planning efforts, which could be burdensome. Given that local  areas cannot be split between regions, officials noted the importance of  drawing local area boundaries in order to align them with regional  economies, although they acknowledged that this can be challenging due  to historical and political factors. For example, some local officials may be  reluctant to change local area boundaries that have been in place for  many years.
Despite their efforts to consult local officials when developing proposed  regions, officials in four states said they faced challenges due to local  workforce areas’ concerns about becoming part of a region, including  questions about funding and the possibility that regional priorities could  differ from local priorities. As a result, in three states officials told us they  revised regional boundaries or increased the number of regions in  response to feedback or appeals from local areas. For example, in  California, after the state board received and granted appeals from two  local areas, officials told us they made minor changes to regional  boundaries. Officials said that one local area requested it be assigned to  a different region due to commuting patterns and its existing relationships  with community colleges. Similarly, Colorado officials said that successful  state-level appeals from two local areas led them to revise regional  boundaries and create two new regions. In addition, Ohio officials told  us their initial draft plan included five regions but they ultimately  designated 10 regions after a local area successfully appealed its local  area designation to DOL, and the federal agencies issued final  regulations, both of which affected the overall regional configuration.
In three of the five states, the next step in their regional planning process  is for regions and local areas to develop workforce plans. DOL and  Education officials said they are aware that states have faced challenges  designating regions, and plan to provide states with technical assistance  on implementing other WIOA regional planning requirements. In  addition, the agencies have developed the Innovation and Opportunity  Network, an online community of practice through which they can  facilitate technical assistance, information sharing, and training to help  states, regions, and local areas implement WIOA.
To help ensure that regional planning efforts continue to progress,  officials in four of the five states reported that their states are providing  incentives for collaboration or innovation at the regional level. For  example, California officials said the state is using a portion of the  governor’s discretionary WIOA funding to support the SlingShot initiative,  which aims to build the regional coordination and leadership necessary  for effective regional planning. This initiative supports collaborative  efforts by a broad range of stakeholders within a region to identify and  then work to solve employment challenges. California is also using  discretionary funding to support the Workforce Accelerator Fund initiative,  which aims to better align existing programs to accelerate employment  outcomes for populations with barriers to employment. In Kentucky,  officials said the state is supporting regional collaboration and innovation  by using the governor’s discretionary funding to encourage the  development of regional sector partnerships. In addition, a Kentucky  official said the state is also using a private grant to fund regional efforts  to develop career pathways and sector partnership strategies and ensure  that they help job seekers obtain credentials that are valued by  employers.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Education and the  Department of Labor for review and comment. Both departments provided  technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Education, and other  interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the  GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-7215 or sherrilla@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report  are listed in appendix III.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: We examined 1) the approaches selected states have taken to develop  plans for implementing Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)  provisions related to career pathways, sector partnerships, and regional  planning, and 2) the related planning challenges, if any, these states have  encountered and how they have addressed them. To address both  objectives, we reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance;  conducted case studies in five states; and interviewed federal Department  of Labor (DOL) and Department of Education (Education) officials.
To conduct case studies, we selected five states (California, Colorado,  Kentucky, Ohio, and Pennsylvania), which were among those identified  by national associations as 1) having substantial experience developing  and implementing career pathways, sector partnerships, or regional  planning prior to WIOA, and/or 2) making significant changes to  implement any of these strategies under WIOA. Specifically, we asked  four national associations that represent or have researched the state  entities involved in WIOA strategic planning—the National Association of  Workforce Boards, National Association of State Workforce Agencies,  National Governors Association, and National Skills Coalition—to identify  states that met one or both of our selection criteria. Associations could  recommend states in any of the following six categories: experienced with career pathways strategies; experienced with sector partnership strategies; experienced with regional planning strategies; making significant changes to implement career pathways strategies; making significant changes to implement sector partnership making significant changes to implement regional planning strategies.
To select states that had various levels of experience with these three  strategies, we considered input from national associations and reviewed  relevant reports. Specifically, we considered the number of  recommendations that individual states received, and maximized  representation across the categories in which the states were  recommended. We also considered the number of associations that  recommended an individual state. In addition, we reviewed information  from two National Skills Coalition reports on sector partnerships and state  plans. All five selected states were mentioned in at least one of these  reports.
In the selected states, we interviewed officials including the executive  leadership of the state workforce development board, state board  members, and state agency officials—such as officials from the state  workforce, human services, or education agency—who were involved in  developing the state plan. The information we obtained from state officials  provides in-depth examples but is not generalizable to all states.
In order to gather further information on their planned strategies and  corroborate information from interviews, we reviewed the plans submitted  by these five states to DOL and Education and other relevant  documentation, such as documents summarizing the state planning  process, state board meeting minutes and agendas, state guidance for  local workforce areas, and other reports or materials produced by the  state board. After reviewing and analyzing information from the states, we  asked the state officials we interviewed to review relevant portions of the  draft report for accuracy.
We conducted this performance audit from September 2015 to November  2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
section_title: Appendix II: Changes to Colorado’s Regions after the Department of Labor Reviewed the Initial State Plan
paragraphs: According to Colorado state workforce board officials, they proposed  dividing a large local workforce area that covers most of the state into four  different regions to align with regional economies. However, officials said  that when the Department of Labor (DOL) conducted an early review of  their state plan during the public comment period, before they officially  submitted it, DOL officials advised them that they could not divide a single  local area into multiple regions (see fig. 2). DOL’s final regulations also  reflect this interpretation of WIOA in that they require regions to consist of  one or more local areas.
section_title: Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Danielle Giese (Assistant  Director), Caitlin Croake (Analyst-in-Charge), Jennifer Cook, Adam  Gomez, Drew Nelson, and Paul Wright, along with Susan Aschoff, Holly  Dye, Suellen Foth, Alex Galuten, Farrah Graham, Thomas James, Bill  MacBlane, Dan Meyer, Chris Morehouse, Mimi Nguyen, Michelle Sager,  and Almeta Spencer made significant contributions to this report.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act: Information on Planned  Changes to State Reporting and Related Challenges. GAO-16-287.  Washington, D.C.: March 7, 2016.
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act: Performance Reporting and  Related Challenges. GAO-15-764R. Washington, D.C.: Sept. 23, 2015.
Workforce Investment Act: Local Areas Face Challenges Helping  Employers Fill Some Types of Skilled Jobs. GAO-14-19. Washington,  D.C.: Dec. 2, 2013.
Workforce Investment Act: Innovative Collaborations between Workforce  Boards and Employers Helped Meet Local Needs. GAO-12-97.  Washington, D.C.: Jan. 19, 2012.