Job Corps: Better Targeted Career Training and Improved Preenrollment Information Could Enhance Female Residential Student Recruitment and Retention
Released: 2009-06-22T00:00:00

Letter

Background

Student demographics: To be eligible for Job Corps, interested youths must be at least age 16 and not yet age 25 at the time of enrollment, and they must be considered low income and have an additional barrier to employment. These barriers include being a school dropout, a runaway, a foster child, a parent, or homeless. In program year 2007, the latest year for which data were available, approximately 60 percent of the students were male and 40 percent were female. The student population reflected diversity and approximately 75 percent of the students were nonwhite (see fig. 2).

The percentages for student characteristics were calculated using the total number of students enrolled in Job Corps during program year 2007.

Within the industry areas, the specific career choices at the centers we visited also varied. For example, all 6 of the centers that we visited with health care classes offered training as a certified nursing assistant, but only 1 center offered dental assistant training. In addition, 2 centers offered training as a medical assistant, and 3 offered training as a pharmacy technician. Similarly, the 6 centers with construction trades offered carpentry and facilities maintenance, and 4 offered painting and brick masonry. Only 1 center offered plumbing. The 6 centers with training in the hospitality industry offered culinary arts. (See app. III for a complete listing of career training offerings for each center that we visited.)

Evaluations of Job Corps: Few evaluative studies have been conducted over the years to determine whether Job Corps is cost-effective, and, when these studies have been done, the results have been mixed. In 1982, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., performed a return on investment analysis and concluded that Job Corps returned $1.46 to society for every $1.00 spent on the program. Later, Mathematica conducted another Job Corps study that was based on an experimental design where, from late 1994 to early 1996, nearly 81,000 eligible applicants nationwide were randomly assigned either to a program group, whose members were allowed to enroll in Job Corps, or to a control group, whose members were not enrolled in Job Corps. Mathematica followed its sample members for 4 years after their random assignments. In its report issued in 2001, Mathematica concluded that Job Corps was cost-effective in that the value of the benefits exceeded the costs of the program by about $17,000 per participant over his or her lifetime. Among its conclusions, Mathematica reported that Job Corps substantially increased the education and training services that youths improved these youths’ skills and educational attainment, generated employment and earnings gains, significantly reduced involvement with crime, was cost-effective despite its high costs, and was a good investment.

Mathematica issued a follow-up report in 2006 that examined the results of the 1994- to 1996-study group over a longer period. In this report, Mathematica analyzed earnings and employment rates through 2004. While Mathematica found that some of the program results reported in 2001 persisted, such as improving educational attainments and reducing involvement in crime, overall earnings gains did not persist. Mathematica concluded that the benefits to society of Job Corps were smaller than the program costs, but acknowledged that the results reflect the program as it operated in 1994 to 1996 and not necessarily as it operates today.

Currently, Labor does not have plans to conduct any further long-term evaluation of Job Corps.

Overall, Job Corps Operated at or Near Capacity for Male Residential Students, but Not for Female Residential Students

The Job Corps program has been operating at or near capacity for male residential students, but under capacity for female residential students during the last 3 program years. During those years, Job Corps overall achieved between 95 and 98 percent of the planned enrollment for male residential students, but achieved about 80 percent or less of the planned enrollment for female residential students (see fig. 6).

In general, operating at or near capacity for female residential students has been challenging. The majority of outreach and admissions contractors we surveyed told us that recruiting female residential students was much more difficult during the most recently completed program year than recruiting male residential students. For example, 81 percent of these outreach and admissions contractors told us that recruiting female students into Job Corps was either moderately or very difficult versus 29 percent for male students. In addition, we found that while about 62 percent of the Job Corps centers were operating at or near capacity for male residential students in program year 2007, only about 17 percent of the centers were operating at or near capacity for female residential students. (See app. IV for more information on the planned and actual enrollment for male and female residential students, by center.) Moreover, about one-half of the 117 centers that enrolled female residential students in program year 2007 were below 80 percent of their planned enrollment for female residential students. Several centers achieved one-half or less than one-half of their planned enrollment for female residential students (see table 2).

Operating at less than full capacity represents not only a lost opportunity to provide services to more youths in need of educational or career training, but also represents an inefficient use of resources. Because most of Job Corps’ operating costs are fixed, such as costs for heat, electricity, and staff salaries, these costs are incurred whether a center is full or not. In program year 2007, Job Corps’ operating costs were about $1.5 billion, with a planned enrollment of about 44,000 slots. Thus, on average, a slot costs about $34,000. In program year 2007, Job Corps had about 3,700 unfilled residential slots, about 90 percent of which were planned for female residential students.

One factor affecting centers’ ability to operate at or near capacity is how long students stay in the program once enrolled. Job Corps is a self-paced program, and, as a result, the length of stay for students varies. On average, during program year 2007, Job Corps students remained in the program for about 8 months. Students leave the program for a variety of reasons. In program year 2007, about one-half of the students who left Job Corps were dismissed for violating program policies, such as those related to violence, and drug and alcohol use (discipline), or exceeding the number of unauthorized absences and being considered absent without leave, or AWOL. About 36 percent of the students separated as orderly completions—that is, they completed program requirements and left the ents and left the program as scheduled. (See fig. 7.) program as scheduled. (See fig. 7.)

Nationally, there were some differences between male and female students in the reasons for leaving Job Corps. In program year 2007, a somewhat higher percentage of female students left the program as scheduled having completed program requirements (orderly completion). Furthermore, a higher percentage of female students were dismissed for violating the program’s policy for unauthorized absences, or AWOL, while a higher percentage of male students were dismissed from the program for violating program policies, such as those related to violence and drug and alcohol use (discipline) in program year 2007. (See fig. 8.)

Three Key Factors Affect Job Corps’ Ability to Recruit and Retain Residential Students

Three major factors affect the recruitment and retention of residential students, particularly female residential students, according to Job Corps officials. These key factors include the selection and availability of career training offerings, the availability of complete and accurate preenrollment information, and the quality of center life.

Selection and Availability of Career Training Offerings Play a Major Role in Recruiting Students

The selection and availability of career training offerings in occupations of interest to students play a major role in Job Corps’ ability to recruit students, particularly female residential students. In particular, a large percentage of outreach and admissions contractors (91 percent) and center directors (79 percent) we surveyed cited the availability of particular career training offerings as very important in attracting female residential students to the program. Somewhat fewer officials rated this factor as very important for male residential students. (See fig. 9.)

Providing training in careers that are attractive to women may enable Job Corps to recruit more female students. Many Job Corps officials we interviewed emphasized the importance of centers offering training in a range of careers that are attractive to female students, including training in the health care, business and finance, and hospitality industries. In program year 2007, about 80 percent of the graduates in health care training programs were women. (See fig. 10.)

Many female students told us in focus groups that they were attracted to Job Corps because of the training offered in specific health care occupations, such as certified nursing assistant and pharmacy technician. Figure 11 contains photographs of health care training programs at 2 Job Corps centers that we visited where students practice in classrooms that resemble real-life settings.

The centers we visited that offered a variety of health care training options had relatively higher female enrollment. For example, the 4 centers we visited that were operating above 80 percent of their planned enrollment for female residential students offered a variety of health care training programs. However, the centers we visited that were below 60 percent of their planned enrollment for female students offered few, if any, health care training options. (See table 3.)

Availability of Complete and Accurate Preenrollment Information for Prospective Students Is a Key Factor in Both Recruitment and Retention

Another major factor affecting Job Corps’ ability to both recruit and retain residential students is the availability of accurate and complete preenrollment information for prospective students. Having accurate information prior to enrolling in Job Corps helps students choose the center that they think best meets their needs and helps establish realistic expectations for what it will be like to live and train at the center, according to officials that we interviewed. While accurate and complete preenrollment information is important for all students, regardless of gender, these officials reported that it is especially important to highlight certain aspects of the program, such as the living arrangements, for female students prior to enrollment. Most of the outreach and admissions contractors that we surveyed reported that certain aspects of the living arrangements, such as the condition of the living facilities (about 91 percent) and the number of students per dormitory room (about 74 percent), were very important in recruiting female residential students. A much lower percentage of outreach and admissions contractors reported that living arrangements were very important in recruiting male residential students.

Having realistic expectations helps students adjust to Job Corps. According to officials that we interviewed, such expectations are key to students’ decision to remain in the program. Several officials we interviewed said that students who lack a complete understanding of what it will be like to live and train at a center prior to enrollment will be more likely to leave the program early. According to these officials, complete and accurate preenrollment information on all aspects of the program helps to preclude students from forming false expectations as well as prevents any major surprises when they arrive at a center. Furthermore, we found that the nature of the preenrollment information that students received varied. For example, one official we interviewed told us that he provided potential students with a handout containing detailed information on Job Corps training programs, including employment- related age restrictions for certain careers. Alternatively, another official provided prospective students with more general information on the program and available career training opportunities. In our focus groups, we found that several students did not receive complete and accurate information prior to enrolling in the program. For example, some female focus group participants at 1 center said that they were not told they would be sharing a dormitory room with seven other students. In another focus group, participants commented that they were not provided with complete information about specific center rules, such as cell phone use and acceptable attire. While they had decided to stay in Job Corps, these students acknowledged that the transition was difficult because they lacked realistic expectations.

Preenrollment tours, virtual tours, and center videos can be important tools in establishing realistic expectations of Job Corps life. About 80 percent of the outreach and admissions contractors we surveyed reported that a preenrollment tour and a center video or virtual online tour are at least moderately important in helping female students make a realistic decision about enrolling at a particular center. Some officials we interviewed also said that preenrollment tours are very important because they provide students with an opportunity to see and experience what it is like to live and train at a particular center. Because of key center differences, such as size and appearance, several officials emphasized the importance of showing students the center where they plan to enroll to prevent false expectations. In fact, one center director did an analysis of all students who, from April 2008 through April 2009, left the center within 60 days of enrollment due to either resignation or AWOL separation, and found that about 70 percent of them had not taken a tour of the center. Some officials with whom we spoke acknowledged that center videos and virtual tours are useful recruitment strategies to provide students who are unable to participate in a preenrollment tour with an opportunity to see and experience center life.

The Quality of Center Life Is Important in Student Retention

Once students enroll at a center, the quality of center life—such as a safe environment, consistent enforcement of center rules, and the availability of recreational and extracurricular activities—have a major effect on the retention of students, especially female residential students. In particular, center directors that we surveyed ranked several factors related to center life as especially important in retaining female residential students. For example, over 80 percent of the center directors we surveyed reported that safety, consistent enforcement of the center’s rules, and the condition of the living facilities are very important for retaining female residential students. (See fig. 12.)

Maintaining a safe center environment and consistently enforcing center rules are both important factors in retaining residential students. Over 85 percent of center directors that we surveyed reported that safety was a major factor in the retention of female students in particular. In addition, our focus group participants commented on the importance of feeling safe while at the center. At 1 Job Corps center we visited, focus group participants said that center staff at all levels—including the center director, instructors, security staff, and facility maintenance personnel— work very hard to ensure a safe center environment by addressing student incidents in a timely manner. In our survey, 85 percent of center directors also reported that the consistent enforcement of center rules was very important in retaining female residential students. During our site visits, several officials said that the enforcement of center rules helped to create a center environment where female students felt safe on campus.

Recreational and extracurricular activities are important for male and female residential students, but it is particularly important for centers to have specific activities for female students, according to many officials that we interviewed. To help retain female students in the program, most Job Corps centers we visited developed recreational and extracurricular activities. For example, officials at 1 center we visited said that they offer specific activities that may interest female students, such as volleyball, exercise classes, and talent shows. Female focus group participants at this center told us they appreciated the various types of available activities. Additionally, officials at another center said that they set aside specific days for female students to use the weight room to ensure that male students did not dominate the equipment.

Labor Has Taken Some Steps to Address Job Corps’ Recruitment and Retention Issues, but These Efforts Are Limited in Scope

Labor has made some improvements to career training offerings, preenrollment information, and quality of center life in an effort to address issues related to the recruitment and retention of residential students. However, Labor has not reviewed nationally the training options that centers provide for female students or ensured that students receive detailed preenrollment information.

Labor Has Made Improvements to Career Training Options That Are Attractive to Females, but Has Not Implemented a Nationwide Review

Labor has gradually made more training opportunities available to Job Corps students that are likely to appeal to female students and lead to self- sufficiency. Job Corps began as a predominantly male program in the 1960s, and many of its training providers in the construction area have been involved with the program since the 1960s or 1970s. Over time, the program has increasingly provided training options that are often attractive to female students and result in jobs that are in demand. Many of the additions or expansions of course offerings are generated by individual centers. Centers submit a request to Labor that documents the demand and wages of the occupation and includes, among other things, statements from local employers and information on the local labor market, such as entry-level wages and job availability over the next 5 to 10 years. During program year 2007, Labor approved requests from 26 centers to add or expand their career training offerings, most commonly in the health care area.

Some of the expansion of career training options has come through one of Job Corps’ regional initiatives that were begun as a result of new requirements by Labor. Under Labor’s “New Vision for Job Corps”—an effort that seeks to modernize the program, including its academics and career training options—Labor required each Job Corps regional office to submit a proposal for a regional initiative. These initiatives, or labs, form part of a broad strategy to align training content with industry standards and certifications. (See app. V for a listing of the regional initiatives approved by Labor.) One of Labor’s six Job Corps regions is implementing an initiative focused on developing training paths through additional training and forging employer partnerships, particularly in the automotive and health care industries. This initiative allows students to pursue an incremental course of study that links different centers in certain training areas. For example, a student may enroll in a medical assistant program, and could obtain additional training and certifications in such areas as pharmacy technician or phlebotomist, even if the additional training was offered at a different center. The region is also partnering with an ambulance company to start offering basic emergency medical technician and advanced paramedic training at a few centers. This company plans to hire students who complete the training. As a result, regional officials told us that they expect the initiative to increase both male and female student enrollment and to have a positive impact on graduates’ long-term earnings.

While these initiatives show promise in expanding career training options that will both attract more female students and have better linkages to local employers, they are limited in scope. Labor officials noted that centers and regional Labor offices try to offer a mix of training, including options appealing to women. However, Labor has not been strategic in how it addresses issues related to female recruitment and retention, nor has it examined how the mix of career training offerings nationwide might be a factor. Typically, Labor waits until a center requests to add or expand a career training option before it responds. Labor has not conducted a center-by-center review of career training options at a national level to determine whether centers struggling with female recruitment and retention should modify their career training options to make them more attractive to women. Such a review could identify training gaps and could help centers in their efforts to operate at or near capacity, especially for female students.

Labor Is Beginning to Require More Consistent Preenrollment Information, but More Emphasis Is Needed

Labor has begun to take some steps to ensure that potential students receive consistent information about Job Corps prior to enrollment. Labor’s national office has assumed responsibility for the mass marketing of Job Corps in an effort to efficiently and economically provide a consistent general message about the program. Labor’s marketing contractor has produced print materials along with television and radio advertisements that include a national toll-free telephone number so that interested youths may obtain more information and contact a local outreach and admissions contractor. Some of these national marketing materials specifically target potential female residential students. However, these materials do not describe particular centers in detail.

One of the Job Corps regions has begun to implement an initiative that, among other things, requires outreach and admissions contractors to discuss detailed information with students prior to enrollment. This detailed information covers rules about acceptable student conduct, including policies on smoking and appropriate dress, and about career training opportunities, including industry certifications or advanced training. In addition, outreach and admissions contractors are required to show potential students a video about these rules and to have students sign an agreement to adhere to them. Officials said they believe that this process helps students understand and commit to the rules. Outreach and admissions contractors in this region said that the initiative has made it easier for them to discuss the realities and benefits of Job Corps with potential students and employers. This initiative may help ensure consistent communication of the rules and benefits of Job Corps overall, but it does not provide specific information about life at a particular center, such as the number of students sharing a dormitory room or the available recreational activities.

Job Corps officials generally agree that an effective way for students to have realistic expectations about life at a Job Corps center is for them to visit the center prior to enrolling. This is not always possible, however, and virtual tours or videos of centers of interest can be a valuable means of providing potential students with detailed preenrollment information. Many officials—including center directors, outreach and admissions contractors, and Labor officials—told us they believe having a virtual or video tour of centers would help interested students obtain a more realistic expectation of center life when they are unable to visit the center. Labor’s marketing contractor conducted several focus groups in program year 2008 and found that center-specific virtual or video tours may help reduce students’ false expectations. In addition, Labor’s Advisory Committee on Job Corps confirmed the importance of virtual or video tours, noting that such tours may help increase student retention. In 2009, Labor launched a revamped national Job Corps Web site, allowing individual centers to have links posted to their approved center Web sites. As of March 2009, 72 Job Corps centers had their Web sites approved by Labor, but none of these sites had a virtual tour. While Labor officials acknowledged the value of providing such center-specific information, Labor estimates that the costs of creating a virtual or video tour for every center would total approximately $1 million. Currently, Labor is exploring less costly alternatives.

Labor Has Taken Some Steps to Address Issues Related to the Quality of Center Life

Labor has several efforts under way to improve the quality of Job Corps center life for students. Among these are efforts designed to promote a safe environment. For example, to assess student safety, Labor requires centers to administer a quarterly survey to students to gauge how safe they feel. According to Labor, the department uses the survey results as a way to monitor student safety; recommend corrective action, as needed; and evaluate center operators. In addition, Labor has an initiative with one outreach and admissions contractor to help enforce the program’s policy of zero tolerance of drugs by testing students prior to enrollment and delaying enrollment if they test positive. Labor officials noted that this preenrollment test may initially deter some students from entering the program, but it may also increase student retention by (1) reducing terminations from drug use or violence and (2) improving the safety and learning environment for male and female residential students.

Single parents who participate in Job Corps have unique quality of life needs. Approximately 1 in 10 of the female students in Job Corps in program year 2007 were single parents, and officials noted that these students face an additional barrier to participating in the program due to their need for child care. Labor helps Job Corps centers address this need by allowing centers to establish child care facilities and single-parent dormitories. Also, Labor provides funds for the construction of approved facilities and for their ongoing maintenance and utilities. Twenty-eight centers currently provide on-site child care, most often for children of nonresidential students. Seven centers also have single-parent dormitories for parents and children. One center that we visited has a single-parent dormitory for 32 students, in which a parent in the program typically has a private room and bathroom for herself and her child, along with a kitchen shared with another parent. This center also has a child development center for children age 6 weeks to age 5, with staff to look after children while parents are in academic or training classes during weekdays. While Labor provides some funds for these programs, the department does not provide funds to support the ongoing costs, such as staff salaries or food for the children. Funds for these costs come from different sources, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Head Start, and child care assistance funds. Labor officials noted that providing single-parent dormitories and child care centers is expensive, but is important to the recruitment and retention of female residential students.

Conclusions

Job Corps fills a unique role in preparing economically disadvantaged young men and women to enter the workforce. The services that the program provides to these youths are among the most comprehensive in the federal government—combining academic, vocational, and social skills training in a residential setting where staff are available 24 hours a day. Because of these services, Job Corps is the most expensive federal job training program, with the cost of each training slot averaging about $34,000. Because much of the program’s costs are fixed, program efficiency is compromised when Job Corps centers operate under capacity. Operating under capacity represents a missed opportunity to train students who might benefit from the program. Our findings suggest that, while the program nearly achieves its planned enrollment for males, it is struggling in this area with regards to female enrollment. We found clear consensus among Job Corps officials, outreach and admissions contractors, and students that having career training options attractive to women is key to being able to recruit female students into the program. However, while centers have been adding such training, particularly in the health care area, this approach has not been universal and some centers continue to have difficulty in attracting female students. Labor has not taken a strategic approach to address this problem nationwide. The department may continue to struggle with female enrollment if it does not do a thorough review of career training offerings to determine where adjustments could be made that may enhance the ability of the program to attract women.

Job Corps centers vary widely in terms of facilities; living conditions; and, to some extent, the rules that guide daily life at the center. Officials at all levels affirmed the need for students to have, prior to enrolling in the program, a clear understanding of what it would be like to live and train at a center. These officials told us that students who do not have that opportunity have a more difficult transition and are more likely to leave short of completing the program. Yet, we found that students are not always given the sort of preenrollment information they need to make a good decision. Also, although Labor has taken some steps to encourage outreach and admissions contractors to provide more complete preenrollment information, more could be done to ensure that all students receive consistent and complete information before enrolling. Absent additional steps, Job Corps will likely continue to face difficulty in recruiting and retaining students, particularly female students.

Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve the recruitment and retention of residential students, we recommend that the Secretary of Labor take the following three actions: review the availability and selection of career training offerings at centers—particularly those centers that are experiencing difficulty with female enrollment— and assess whether centers need to adjust their career training options to offer more career training that is both attractive to women and that could lead to careers that will enable women to become self-sufficient; expand current efforts to ensure that outreach and admissions contractors across all six regions consistently provide potential students with complete and accurate information on all aspects of Job Corps, including providing specific information about the center in which the student will be enrolled; and explore the feasibility or cost-effectiveness of developing video or online virtual tours for all centers.

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Labor for review and comment. Labor did not comment on our findings and generally agreed with our recommendations. Appendix VI contains a reprint of Labor’s comments. In addition, we provided drafts to the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior for technical comments, but the departments did not provide any comments.

In its response, Labor concurred in part with our recommendation that it review the availability and selection of career training offerings. Labor acknowledged the need to offer “female friendly” career training programs to increase female enrollment. However, Labor noted that in selecting new offerings, it routinely looks beyond those considered traditional occupations for females as they seek to maximize opportunities that may result in long-term self-sufficiency. We concur with the need to focus training in areas that lead to self-sufficiency and acknowledge the need to offer training in nontraditional occupations for women. However, it is possible to offer training, such as in the health care industry, that is attractive to women and that leads to self-sufficiency. We continue to believe that a more systematic assessment of career training offered at the centers is needed, particularly at those centers that are struggling with female enrollment. Such an assessment would identify whether centers need to adjust their career training options to enhance female enrollment.

Labor concurred with our recommendation to expand current efforts to ensure that outreach and admissions contractors consistently provide potential students with complete and accurate information on all aspects of Job Corps. Labor acknowledged the importance of providing complete and accurate information and identified several ongoing initiatives, including a new national recruitment Web site that contains links to individual centers. We noted these efforts in our report; however, as of March 2009, 50 of the 122 centers were not linked to this Web site. We encourage Labor to continue to expand its efforts to require that each potential applicant is provided with complete and accurate preenrollment information.

While Labor concurred with our recommendation to explore the feasibility or cost-effectiveness of developing video or online virtual tours for all centers, officials did not provide information about the steps they are planning to take to address the recommendation. Labor acknowledged the importance of prospective students being able to tour centers prior to enrolling, but noted that this is not always possible. As we have previously reported, virtual tours provide an alternative to students who are unable to physically tour the center in which they plan to enroll. Labor officials estimated that it would cost approximately $1 million to produce a virtual tour of all centers. In its comments, Labor noted that it is currently exploring less costly options, including a short DVD that will combine an overview of the Job Corps program, while using still photography to highlight information about individual centers. We are concerned that such an approach will not be sufficient to provide a realistic preview of life at a specific center for prospective students who are unable to visit the center. We acknowledge that to produce a virtual tour for each center is not without cost, but stress the importance of assessing the feasibility and benefits, as well as the costs, of such an endeavor before moving forward.

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the relevant congressional committees, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Interior, and other interested parties. The report will also be available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staffs have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-7215 or brownke@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix VII.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

To better understand the recruitment and retention of residential students, we were asked to provide information on the (1) extent to which Job Corps centers are operating at or near capacity for residential students; (2) major factors that affect centers’ ability to recruit and retain residential students, particularly female residential students; and (3) steps, if any, the Department of Labor (Labor) has taken to address the recruitment and retention of residential students. Because nearly 90 percent of Job Corps’ planned enrollment is residential, our review focused on those Job Corps centers that provide educational and career technical training to male and female residential students.

To answer our objectives, we administered two Web-based surveys—one to Job Corps’ outreach and admissions contractors and one to Job Corps’ center directors. We also visited 7 Job Corps centers in six states and 4 outreach and admissions contractors responsible for recruiting residential students for these centers. In addition, we analyzed Labor data identifying planned residential capacity for male and female students and the average actual number of male and female residential students onboard for each of the 122 centers. Furthermore, we interviewed Job Corps officials at the national and regional levels to identify Labor’s current efforts under way to improve the recruitment and retention of residential students.

Web-Based Surveys

To obtain information on the major factors that affect the recruitment and retention of residential students, we administered two Web-based surveys. One survey was sent to the 32 outreach and admissions contractors that had a contract with Labor to recruit male and female residential students for Job Corps during program year 2007. Typically these contractors are responsible for recruiting residential students for centers located in the same state, but several have multiple-state responsibility. We received a 100 percent response rate on this survey, with responses from all 32 outreach and admissions contractors. The second survey was distributed to the 117 Job Corps center directors who were responsible for enrolling and retaining residential students during program year 2007. Of the 117 Job Corps centers contacted, 114 responded to our survey, for a response rate of 97 percent. To field the surveys, we obtained a list and contact information for the 117 Job Corps center directors and 32 outreach and admissions contractors from Job Corps’ national and regional offices. In some cases, we contacted the Job Corps centers directly to determine the appropriate contact information. We collected the survey data from August 2008 to October 2008.

Both surveys contained a section on the recruitment of male and female residential students. We obtained the perspectives of Job Corps center directors and outreach and admissions contractors on the major factors that affect the recruitment of residential students; challenges encountered in recruiting residential students, particularly female students; and successful approaches or center features that may attract residential students to Job Corps. In addition, on the Job Corps center directors’ survey, we included a section with questions related to the retention of male and female residential students. We did not include these questions on the outreach and admissions contractors’ survey, because these officials are not responsible for acclimating and retaining residential students once they are at a particular center. Similar to the section on recruitment, we asked Job Corps center directors about the major factors that affect the retention of residential students; challenges encountered in retaining students, particularly female students; and successful approaches or center features that may retain residential students.

Because this was not a sample survey, it has no sampling errors. However, the practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For example, difficulties in interpreting a particular question, sources of information available to respondents, or data entry and analysis can introduce unwanted variability into the survey results. We took steps in developing the questionnaires, collecting data, and analyzing these data to minimize such nonsampling errors. For example, prior to administering the surveys, GAO survey specialists designed each questionnaire in collaboration with GAO subject matter experts. We also pretested the outreach and admissions survey with 2 outreach and admissions contractors and the center directors’ survey with 2 Job Corps directors. On the basis of the findings from pretests, we modified our questionnaire to ensure that the questions were relevant, clearly stated, and easy to comprehend. To ensure adequate response rates, we sent e-mail reminders and conducted follow-up telephone calls with nonrespondents. When the data were analyzed, a second independent data analyst checked all computer programs for accuracy. Since these were Web-based surveys, respondents entered their answers directly into the electronic questionnaires, eliminating the need to key data into a database, thereby minimizing errors.

Site Visits to Job Corps Centers and Outreach and Admissions Contractors

To further enhance our understanding of the recruitment and retention of residential students, we visited 7 Job Corps centers in six states— Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, and Washington State. We selected these centers because of their geographic variation and to provide a mix of privately and federally operated centers that have varying levels of success in maintaining male and female residential capacity. In addition, we selected the Denison Job Corps Center because it is 1 of 7 centers that has a single-parent dormitory and a day-care center for children of residential students. These living arrangements and supports allow single parents to live at the center with their children while they complete their education and career training. (See table 4 for key characteristics of the Job Corps centers that we visited.) Because a complete and current listing of career training offerings by Job Corps center was not available, we followed up with each Job Corps center director that we visited to ensure we had an accurate list of career training being offered at his or her center.

During our site visits, we toured each center’s facilities and interviewed the center director using a structured interview protocol to obtain his or her views on residential student recruitment and retention. To the extent that center directors’ survey responses were available, we used this information to supplement our discussion and to gain further insight into the major factors and challenges associated with attracting and retaining residential students, particularly female students. We also conducted two focus groups with female residential students at 6 of the 7 Job Corps centers we visited. Each of our focus groups comprised 6 to 10 female residents who had been at the center for at least 60 days. In total, over 100 female residential students participated in our focus groups. For each focus group, we used a series of semistructured questions to learn about the students’ experiences when they were recruited for Job Corps and to obtain their views on the enrollment process and information provided by outreach and admissions contractors. We also asked the students to identify the major factors that were important in their decisions to enroll and stay at the center.

Furthermore, we conducted site visits with the 4 outreach and admissions contractors that are responsible for recruiting residential students to the 7 Job Corps centers we visited. (See table 5 for a list of these outreach and admissions contractors and areas of responsibility.) We interviewed these officials using a semistructured interview protocol to obtain information on their recruitment and outreach efforts and how they balance providing students with their desired center and career training program. We also asked these officials about the major factors and challenges that affect residential student recruitment. To the extent possible, we used officials’ survey responses to supplement our discussion.

Analysis of Labor’s Enrollment Data for Residential Students

We reviewed available Job Corps’ student demographic and administrative data for program years 2006 and 2007 to provide descriptive information on the characteristics of students served, student enrollment and retention, and career training slots and industry areas. Before deciding to use the data, we reviewed prior GAO assessments performed under a previous engagement to determine their reliability. These assessments were based on observing a demonstration of the Job Corps database, interviewing Labor officials to identify data checks in place to ensure the integrity of the data, and reviewing relevant internal control policies and procedures. On the basis of our review of these assessments, we determined that the data for program years 2006 and 2007 were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our review. To determine the extent to which Job Corps centers operate at or near capacity, we analyzed Job Corps’ onboard strength reports that identified the planned enrollment for male and female residential students and the average actual number of male and female residential students onboard for each of the 122 centers. Our analysis covered July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2008—the 3 most recently completed program years (program years 2005 to 2007). We also reviewed student leave and separation data to describe the reasons why male and female residential students left the program. To determine the reliability of the data, we interviewed knowledgeable Labor officials and reviewed prior GAO assessments performed under a previous engagement as we have previously described. These assessments were based on observing a demonstration of the Job Corps database, interviewing Labor officials to identify data checks in place to ensure the integrity of the data, and reviewing relevant internal control policies and procedures. On the basis of this information, we determined that the data for program years 2005 to 2007 were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our review.

Interviews with National and Regional Job Corps Offices

To obtain information on Labor’s efforts to address the recruitment and retention of residential students, we interviewed Labor officials located at the national office and six regional offices—Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia, and San Francisco. Specifically, we asked officials about current efforts under way at the national or regional levels to improve centers’ ability to recruit and retain residential students, particularly female residential students. In addition, we reviewed relevant documentation provided by officials to obtain a better understanding of the purpose and status of these efforts. We also reviewed Labor’s policies governing Job Corps, national marketing materials, and reports on regional initiatives.

We conducted this performance audit from May 2008 to June 2009, 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.

Appendix II: Listing of Job Corps Career Training Offerings in Program Year 2007, by Industry Area

Appendix III: Career Trainings Offered at the Job Corps Centers That We Visited

Cascades

Appendix IV: Percentage of Planned Enrollment in Program Year 2007, by State and Job Corps Center

Average planned center

Civilian Conservation Center.

Center was closed during program year 2007.

Center has only nonresidential students.

Center has male and female nonresidential students, but only female residential students.

Appendix V: Regional Initiatives Approved by the Department of Labor

Develop training paths that allow students to pursue additional training at the

same or another center, especially in the health care and automotive industries. Establish rules that all centers in the region will implement and require outreach and admissions contractors to provide students with detailed information on these rules prior to enrollment.

Offer more recreational and learning activities during evenings and weekends.

Prioritize tutoring for students with tests scores in the lowest quartile to improve academic achievement and retention.

Develop and deploy professional development for staff who help students during unstructured times and influence their retention, such as residential and recreational staff. Enhance coordination between these staff and instructors.

Create a more positive student culture based on shared norms, rather than rules and discipline, through activities such as training of Job Corps staff, peer counseling for poorly performing students, and facilitating group discussions each day for students to address concerns.

Assess student interests and aptitude more thoroughly to select a career training option during the career preparation period. Provide intensive drug counseling for students who test positive for drugs upon entering the program.

Strengthen collaboration between academics and career training in the industry area of health care, such as the vocabulary needed for training. Enroll students in this industry area as a cohort rather than the traditional progression of open- entry, open-exit for each student.

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Labor

Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

Staff Acknowledgments

Dianne Blank, Assistant Director, and Wayne Sylvia, Analyst-in-Charge, managed all aspects of this assignment. Also, Matthew Saradjian and Ashanta Williams made significant contributions to this report in all aspects of our work. In addition, Shana Wallace provided methodological assistance; Stuart Kaufman assisted in the design of the two national surveys; Catherine Hurley analyzed responses from the national surveys; Mimi Nguyen provided graphic design assistance; Jessica Botsford provided legal support; Jessica Orr provided writing assistance; and Sara Edmondson verified our findings.

Related GAO Products

Job Corps: Links With Labor Market Improved but Vocational Training Performance Overstated. GAO/HEHS-99-15. Washington, D.C.: November 4, 1998.

Job Corps: Vocational Training Performance Data Overstate Program Success. GAO/T-HEHS-98-218. Washington, D.C.: July 29, 1998.

Job Corps: Participant Selection and Performance Measurement Need to Be Improved. GAO/T-HEHS-98-37. Washington, D.C.: October 23, 1997.

Job Corps: Need for Better Enrollment Guidance and Improved Placement Measures. GAO/HEHS-98-1. Washington, D.C.: October 21, 1997.

Job Corps: Where Participants Are Recruited, Trained, and Placed in Jobs. GAO/HEHS-96-140. Washington, D.C.: July 17, 1996.

Job Corps: Comparison of Federal Program With State Youth Training Initiatives. GAO/HEHS-96-92. Washington, D.C.: March 28, 1996.

Job Corps: High Costs and Mixed Results Raise Questions About Program’s Effectiveness. GAO/HEHS-95-180. Washington, D.C.: June 30, 1995.