[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
WORKFORCE INNOVATION AND OPPORTUNITY
ACT REAUTHORIZATION: EXAMINING
SUCCESSFUL MODELS OF EMPLOYMENT
FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED INDIVIDUALS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
HIGHER EDUCATION AND
WORKFORCE INVESTMENT
of the
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 15, 2021
__________
Serial No. 117-19
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: edlabor.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
44-856PDF WASHINGTON : 2022
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia, Chairman
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina,
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut Ranking Member
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN, JOE WILSON, South Carolina
Northern Mariana Islands GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania
FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida TIM WALBERG, Michigan
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
MARK TAKANO, California ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
MARK DeSAULNIER, California JIM BANKS, Indiana
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey JAMES COMER, Kentucky
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington RUSS FULCHER, Idaho
JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York FRED KELLER, Pennsylvania
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania GREGORY F. MURPHY, North Carolina
LUCY McBATH, Georgia MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut BURGESS OWENS, Utah
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan BOB GOOD, Virginia
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan
HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
MONDAIRE JONES, New York VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
KATHY E. MANNING, North Carolina SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin
FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana MADISON CAWTHORN, North Carolina
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York, Vice-Chair MICHELLE STEEL, California
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas Vacancy
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
KWEISI MFUME, Maryland
Veronique Pluviose, Staff Director
Cyrus Artz, Minority Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT
FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida, Chairwoman
MARK TAKANO, California GREGORY F. MURPHY, North Carolina
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington Ranking Member
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
MONDAIRE JONES, New York JIM BANKS, Indiana
KATHY E. MANNING, North Carolina JAMES COMER, Kentucky
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York RUSS FULCHER, Idaho
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas BOB GOOD, Virginia
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan
ARIANO ESPAILLAT, New York DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina
ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia (ex officio)
(ex officio)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 15, 2021.................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Wilson, Hon. Frederica S., Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Higher
Education and Workforce Investment......................... 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 5
Murphy, Hon. Gregory F., Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Higher
Education and Workforce Investment......................... 7
Prepared statement of.................................... 8
Statement of Witnesses:
Keesling, Gregg, President, RecycleForce Workforce, Inc...... 19
Prepared statement of.................................... 21
Lattimore, Pamela, Senior Director for Research Development,
Division for Applied Justice Research, RTI International... 26
Prepared statement of.................................... 28
Safstrom, Wendi, Executive Director, SHRM Foundation......... 34
Prepared statement of.................................... 37
Scott, Traci, Vice President, Workforce Development Division,
National Urban League...................................... 10
Prepared statement of.................................... 12
Additional Submissions:
Chairwoman Wilson:
Letter submitted by Walmart dated June 25, 2021.......... 97
Harshbarger, Hon. Diana, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Tennesee:
``Second Chances: The Importance of Occupational
Licensing Reform to Arkansas's Criminal Justice Reform
Initiatives,'' ACRE,
February 2019.......................................... 101
Questions submitted for the record by:
Chairman Scott........................................... 124
Takano, Hon. Mark, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California.................................... 125
Banks, Hon. Jim, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Indiana
Response to question submitted for the record by:
Ms. Scott................................................ 126
Ms. Lattimore............................................ 131
Ms. Safstrom............................................. 139
WORKFORCE INNOVATION AND
OPPORTUNITY ACT REAUTHORIZATION:
EXAMINING SUCCESSFUL MODELS OF
EMPLOYMENT FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED INDIVIDUALS
----------
Tuesday, June 15, 2021
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Education and
Workforce Investment,
Committee on Education and Labor,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m.,
via Zoom, Hon. Frederica S. Wilson (Chairwoman of the
Subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Wilson, Takano, Jayapal, Omar,
Leger Fernandez, Jones, Manning, Bowman, Pocan, Castro,
Courtney, Bonamici, Scott (ex officio), Murphy, Grothman,
Comer, Fulcher, Miller-Meeks, Good, McClain, Harshbarger,
Spartz, and Foxx (ex officio).
Staff present: Hana Brunner, General Counsel; Scott
Estrada, Professional Staff; Rasheedah Hasan, Chief Clerk;
Sheila Havenner, Director of Information Technology; Eli
Hovland, Policy Associate; Ariel Jona, Policy Associate; Katie
McClelland, Professional Staff; Richard Miller, Director of
Labor Policy; Max Moore, Staff Assistant; Lorin Obler, GAO
Detailee; Kayla Pennebecker, Staff Assistant; Veronique
Pluviose, Staff Director; Banyon Vassar, Deputy Director of
Information Technology; Cyrus Artz, Minority Staff Director;
Amy Raaf Jones, Minority Director of Education and Human
Resources Policy; Dean Johnson, Minority Legislative Assistant;
Hannah Matesic, Minority Director of Operations; Jake
Middlebrooks, Minority Professional Staff Member; Eli Mitchel,
Minority Legislative Assistant; Maureen O'Toole, Minority Press
Assistant; and Mandy Schaumburg, Minority Chief Counsel and
Deputy Director of Education Policy.
Chairwoman Wilson. The Subcommittee on Education and
Workforce Investment will come to order. Welcome everyone. I
note that a quorum is present. The Subcommittee is meeting
today to hear testimony on ``Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act Reauthorization Examining Successful Methods of
Employment for Justice-Involved Individuals.''
This is an entirely remote hearing. All microphones will be
kept muted as a general rule to avoid unnecessary background
noise. Members and witnesses will be responsible for unmuting
themselves when they are recognized to speak, or when they wish
to seek recognition.
I ask that Members please identify themselves before they
speak. Members should keep their cameras on while in the
proceedings. Members shall be considered present in the
proceedings when they are visible on camera, and they shall be
considered not present when they are not visible on camera.
The only exception to this is if they are experiencing
technical difficulty and inform Committee staff of such
difficulty. If any Member experiences technical difficulties
during the hearing you should stay connected on the platform,
make sure that you are muted and use your phone to immediately
call the Committee's IT director, whose number was provided to
you in advance.
Should the Chair experience technical difficulty I'll need
to stop. If I have to step away to vote on the floor
Representative Pocan, or another majority Member is hereby
authorized to assume the gavel in the Chair's absence.
This is an entirely remote hearing and as such the
Committee's hearing room is officially closed. Members who
choose to sit with their individual devices in the hearing room
must wear headphones to avoid feedback, echoes and distortion
resulting from more than one person on the software platform
sitting in the same room.
Members are also expected to adhere to social distancing
and safe healthcare guidelines, including the use of masks,
hand sanitizers, and wiping down their areas before and after
their presence in the hearing room.
In order to ensure that the Committee's five-minute rule is
adhered to, staff will be keeping track of time using the
Committee's field timer. The field timer will appear in its own
thumbnail picture and will be named 001_timer. There will be no
one minute remaining warning. The field timer will show a
blinking light when time is up.
Members and witnesses are asked to wrap up promptly when
their time has expired. While a roll call is not necessary to
establish a quorum in official proceedings conducted remotely
or with remote participation, the Committee has made it a
practice whenever there is an official proceeding with remote
participation for the Clerk to call the roll and help make
clear who is present at the start of the proceeding.
Members should say their name before announcing they are
present. This helps the Clerk, and also helps those watching
the platform and the livestream who may experience a few
seconds delay.
At this time I ask the Clerk to please call the roll.
The Clerk. Chairwoman Wilson?
Chairwoman Wilson. Chairperson Wilson is present.
The Clerk. Mr. Takano?
Mr. Takano. Mark Takano is present.
The Clerk. Ms. Jayapal?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Omar?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Leger Fernandez?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones. Jones is present.
The Clerk. Ms. Manning?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Bowman?
Mr. Bowman. Mr. Bowman is present.
The Clerk. Mr. Pocan?
Mr. Pocan. Mark Pocan is present.
The Clerk. Mr. Castro?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Sherill?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Espaillat?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Grijalva?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Courtney?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Bonamici?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Chairman Scott?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ranking Member Dr. Murphy?
Mr. Murphy. Dr. Murphy is present.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Stefanik?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Banks?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Comer?
Mr. Comer. Here, Comer's here.
The Clerk. Mr. Fulcher?
Mr. Fulcher. Fulcher's here.
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller-Meeks?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Good?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Harshbarger?
Ms. Harshbarger. Harshbarger's present.
The Clerk. Ms. Spartz?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Letlow?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ranking Member Foxx?
Ms. Foxx. Foxx is here.
The Clerk. Chairwoman Wilson this concludes the roll call.
Ms. Jayapal. How am I recorded? This is Representative
Jayapal.
The Clerk. Chairwoman Wilson, Mrs. Jayapal is not recorded.
Ms. Jayapal. Jayapal is present.
Chairman Scott. How am I recorded? This is Chairman Scott?
The Clerk. Chairman Scott is not recorded.
Chairman Scott. Chairman Scott is present.
The Clerk. Thank you. Chairwoman Wilson this concludes the
roll call.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. Pursuant
to Committee Rule 8(c) opening statements are limited to the
Chair and the Ranking Member. This allows us to hear from our
witnesses sooner and provides all Members with adequate time to
ask questions.
I recognize myself now for the purpose of making an opening
statement. Today we meet with our third bipartisan hearing on
reauthorizing the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act or
WIOA. This hearing will address key priorities to help people
impacted by the criminal justice system re-enter their
communities and obtain rewarding careers.
Each year roughly 640,000 people are released from our
Nation's State and Federal prisons. What happens after their
return determines whether or not these justice-involved
individuals successfully re-enter society. Unfortunately, far
too many are unable to take a critical step in their
transition: finding and keeping a good paying job.
According to one study, just over half of those released
from prison reported any earnings within the first year after
their release. The stigma surrounding the employment of
justice-impacted individuals is one of the forces limiting
their opportunities.
Making matters worse, people who have been incarcerated
often must take additional steps to gain the education, skills,
or work experience the employers are seeking, and they face an
array of additional challenges from mental health needs to
difficulty obtaining housing or transportation. These barriers
have a significant impact on justice-impacted people. Without
access to high-quality jobs they're more likely to be re-
arrested and can fall into an endless cycle of reincarceration.
High recidivism doesn't just hurt these individuals. It
also hurts our Nation as a whole. Research indicates that 83
percent of people released from prison are re-arrested within 9
years. This is a contributing factor to the Nation's high rate
of incarceration along with mandatory minimum sentences, long
sentences for non-violent crimes, and a lack of investment for
prison programs and reentry services.
Today the United States continues to have the highest
incarceration rate in the world with more than 2 million people
behind bars in 2019. According to the Bureau of Institute of
Justice this level of incarceration costs our country as much
as 80 billion dollars every year, accounting to costs to our
communities and the next generation.
By comparison, funding for Title I of WIOA stands at about
3.7 billion annually. If we want, if we really, really want to
break the cycle of costly incarceration we need to reject
dehumanizing policies in favor of investing in opportunities
for these individuals to succeed.
To help combat recidivism the Department of Labor currently
supports the Reentry Employment Opportunities Program, or REO.
This program provides community groups, faith-based
organization, and State and local agencies with grants to offer
reentry employment services, including skills training and
mentoring. These services reach thousands of people each year,
yet we know WIOA could do much more for justice-impacted
individuals.
In fact WIOA has no provisions that specifically authorize
reentry programs. As we reauthorize WIOA, we can make smart
investments in promising approaches that reduce recidivism and
expand employment opportunities for justice-impacted people.
For example, we can ensure that reentry programs offer the full
range of services that are needed to help justice-impacted
people avoid re-arrests.
Behavioral health treatment combined with employment
services, including subsidized employment, is an effective
strategy to reduce recidivism. Mentorship, career navigation,
and job coaching are also critical to helping individuals build
professional relationships and look for jobs in in-demand
industries. Finally, we must capitalize on the rising interest
in hiring justice-impacted workers among employers. That
includes helping people not only find jobs, but also build to
lasting careers.
More subsidized employment and vocational training can help
justice-impacted individuals that are on short-term income and
initial employment experiences. It also can help employers
overcome harmful misrepresentations and misperceptions about
justice-impacted workers.
Subsidized employment can be the first step toward helping
individuals move on to more rewarding careers. Empowering
justice-involved individuals to find high-quality careers
should be a bipartisan issue. It's not only the right thing to
do, its' also a smart thing to do.
Businesses benefit when there is a robust skilled workforce
ready to compete for jobs. With so many justice-impacted
individuals looking to re-enter the labor force every year, we
can make progress toward addressing the worker shortage that so
many employers are concerned about.
Today, with the help of our witnesses we will discuss how
codifying reentry employment opportunities in WIOA
reauthorization would help improve the lives of people across
the Nation and reduce prison populations. We spend so much
money on incarcerating hundreds of thousands of Americans each
year. It's time that we invest in the training and support
services to help individuals find sustainable high-quality
careers that will reduce recidivism and strengthen our
communities.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Wilson follows:]
Statement of Hon. Frederica S. Wilson, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Higher Education and Workforce Investment
Today, we meet for our third bipartisan hearing on reauthorizing
the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, or WIOA. This hearing
will address key priorities to help people impacted by the criminal
justice system reenter their communities and obtain rewarding careers.
Each year, roughly 640,000 people are released from our Nation's
State and Federal prisons.
What happens after their return determines whether or not these
justice-involved individuals successfully re-enter society.
Unfortunately, far too many are unable to take a critical step in their
transition: finding and keeping a good-paying job.
According to one study, just over half of those released from
prison reported any earnings within the first year after release.
The stigma surrounding the employment of justice-impacted
individuals is one of the forces limiting their opportunities.
Making matters worse, people who have been incarcerated often must
take additional steps to gain the education, skills, or work experience
that employers are looking for. And they face an array of additional
challenges, from mental health needs to difficulty obtaining housing or
transportation.
These barriers have a significant impact on justice-impacted
people. Without access to high-quality jobs, they are more likely to be
rearrested and could fall into an endless cycle of reincarceration.
High recidivism doesn't just hurt these individuals, it also hurts
the Nation as a whole. Research indicates that 83 percent of people
released from prison are rearrested within 9 years. This is a
contributing factor to our Nation's high rate of incarceration, along
with mandatory minimum sentences, long sentences for non-violent
crimes, and a lack of investment in prison programs and reentry
services.
Today, the United States continues to have the highest
incarceration rate in the world with more than 2 million people behind
bars in 2019, according to the Vera Institute of Justice. This level of
incarceration costs our country as much as $80 billion every year,
accounting for costs to our communities and the next generation.
By comparison, funding for title I of WIOA stands at about $3.7
billion annually. If we really want to break the cycle of costly
incarceration, we need to reject dehumanizing policies in favor of
investing in opportunities for these individuals to succeed.
To help combat recidivism, the Department of Labor currently
supports the Reentry Employment Opportunities Program, or REO, program.
This program provides community groups, faith-based organizations, and
State and local agencies with grants to offer reentry employment
services, including skills training and mentoring.
These services reach thousands of people each year. Yet, we know
WIOA could do so much more for justice-impacted individuals. In fact,
WIOA has no provisions specifically authorizing reentry programs.
As we reauthorize WIOA, we can make smart investments in promising
approaches to reduce recidivism and expand employment opportunities for
justice-impacted people.
For example, we can ensure that reentry programs offer the full
range of services that are needed to help justice-impacted people avoid
rearrest.
Behavioral health treatment--when paired with employment services,
including subsidized employment--is an effective strategy to reduce
recidivism. Mentorship, career navigation, and job coaching are also
critical to helping individuals build professional relationships and
look for jobs in in-demand industries.
Finally, we must capitalize on the rising interest in hiring
justice-impacted workers among employers. This includes helping people
not only find jobs, but also build toward lasting careers.
Bolstering subsidized employment and vocational training can help
justice-impacted individuals earn short-term income and initial
employment experience. It can also help employers overcome harmful
misperceptions about justice-impacted workers. Subsidized employment
can be the first step to helping individuals move on to more rewarding
careers.
Empowering justice-involved individuals to find high-quality
careers should be a bipartisan issue. It's not only the right thing to
do--it's also the smart thing to do. Businesses benefit when there is a
robust, skilled workforce ready to compete for jobs. With so many
justice-impacted individuals looking to reenter the labor force every
year, we can make progress toward addressing the worker shortage that
so many employers are concerned about.
Today, with the help of our witnesses, we will discuss how
codifying reentry employment opportunities in the reauthorization of
WIOA would help improve the lives of people across the country and
reduce prison populations.
We spend so much money on incarcerating hundreds of thousands of
Americans each year. It's time that we invest in the training and
support services to help individuals find sustainable, high-quality
careers that will reduce recidivism and strengthen our communities.
______
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you again to our witnesses for
being here with us. I now recognize the distinguished Ranking
Member for his opening statement.
Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Chairwoman Wilson. It's nice to see
everybody's full face, and we look forward to everybody coming
back in person and being able to be in all the Committee rooms
together but thank you for convening this bipartisan hearing.
I'd like to welcome, also, the witnesses who are coming to this
Committee. I look forward to working with all of you to help
improve our country's workforce development system.
America is known as the land of opportunity for a reason.
Throughout our Nation's history we have shown a unique ability
to accomplish what we set out to do. Part of the success is
that we are blessed with an industrious citizenry, and part of
the success is attributable to our faith in humanity's ability
to overcome the odds.
We are a nation and a people of second chances. A prison
sentence is not supposed to result in a permanent exclusion
from the world. In fact all corners of society have an interest
in giving incarcerated men and women opportunities to equip
themselves with the skills that they need to succeed outside of
prison.
Steady work performed with care and pride honors the
dignity of an individual and contributes to human flourishing.
Reentry into the workforce is a key element toward realizing
that personal fulfillment. Federal criminal justice policy has
somewhat of a checkered past. We must admit that.
Both Republicans and Democrats are working together now to
solve these difficult problems. In 2018, 9 months before I
joined the House of Representatives, President Trump signed
into law the First Step Act. We are hopeful that this new
legislation will maintain public safety and reduce recidivism
rates.
And in December 2020 Congress authorized Pell grants for
incarcerated students and will provide thousands of people
access to a college education. These may seem like
insignificant changes, but they mean the world to those who
benefit from them. I see no reason why reauthorization cannot
play a small role in building upon this progress.
The Reentry Employment Opportunities Program currently
funded through WIOA currently supports youth and adults
previously involved in the criminal justice system. WIOA
grantees can assist these populations in a variety of ways,
including with mentoring, housing, case management, employment,
and violence prevention services.
We have seen what works over the last 15 years, and I look
forward to hearing from the witnesses how Congress can improve
this funding stream. Current law allows workforce development
boards to use up to 10 percent of their Adult and Dislocated
Worker program funding to help unemployed or inconsistently
employed individuals relocate rewarding, transitional jobs
through subsidized employment.
Some workforce boards have used this flexibility to serve
reentry populations. It is worth exploring what has worked from
local communities. Congress can compile and publicize your best
practices to other workforce boards that may be interested in
expanding their services to incarcerated individuals.
Arrogance prompts us to believe that the Federal Government
alone can support formerly incarcerated individuals. There are
many local service providers, employers, community-based
organizations that all play an indispensable part in
transforming the lives of ex-offenders. and their challenges
cannot be solved just with truckloads of money.
We must leverage the experience of these too often
overlooked partners during WIOA reauthorization. One size fits
all mandates from Congress are precisely the wrong approach.
Our workforce development system should be capable of listening
and adapting to the needs of the local labor market, employers,
and those seeking opportunity.
This reauthorization of WIOA must further encourage local
communities to innovate when their existing operations fall
short. Nobody should feel threatened for trying new evidence-
based ideas, and the pace of technology change demands a nimble
approach to career preparation.
Ensuring people have the necessary skills to find good jobs
is key to sustaining a thriving middle class. As the pandemic
recedes from our lives, overcoming the economic fallout is at
the top of everyone's minds. Our workforce development system
must do a better job of helping all individuals looking to
improve their skills, especially those coming out of the penal
system.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Murphy follows:]
Statement of Hon. Gregory F. Murphy, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Higher Education and Workforce Investment
Thank you, Chairwoman Wilson, for convening this bipartisan
hearing. I'd like to welcome the witnesses to the Committee. I look
forward to working with you to improve our country's workforce
development system.
America is known as the land of opportunity for a reason.
Throughout our Nation's history we have shown a unique ability to
accomplish what we set out to do. Part of this success is because we
are blessed with an industrious citizenry, and part of this success is
attributable to our faith in humanity's ability to overcome the odds.
We are a nation of second chances. A prison sentence is not
supposed to result in a permanent exclusion from the world. In fact,
all corners of society have an interest in giving incarcerated men and
women opportunities to equip themselves with the skills they need to
succeed.
Steady work, performed with care and pride, honors the dignity of
an individual and contributes to human flourishing. Reentry into the
workforce is a key element toward realizing that personal fulfillment.
Federal criminal justice policy has a checkered past, but
Republicans and Democrats are working together to solve those difficult
problems. In 2018, 9 months before I joined the House of
Representatives, President Trump signed the First Step Act into law. We
are hopeful the new legislation will maintain public safety and reduce
recidivism rates. And in December 2020, Congress authorized Pell Grants
for incarcerated students, which will provide thousands of people
access to a college education.
These may seem like insignificant changes, but they mean the world
to those who benefit from them. I see no reason why WIOA
reauthorization cannot play a small role in building upon this
progress.
The Reentry Employment Opportunities (REO) program, currently
funded through WIOA, supports youth and adults previously involved in
the criminal justice system. REO grantees can assist these populations
in a variety of ways, including with mentoring, housing, case
management, employment, and violence prevention services. We have seen
what works over the last 15 years, and I look forward to hearing from
the witnesses how Congress can improve this funding stream.
Current law allows local workforce development boards to use up to
10 percent of their Adult and Dislocated Worker program funding to help
unemployed or inconsistently employed individuals locate rewarding,
transitional jobs through subsidized employment. Some workforce boards
have used this flexibility to serve reentry populations. It is worth
exploring what has worked for local communities. Congress can compile
and publicize their best practices to other workforce boards that may
be interested in expanding their services to incarcerated individuals.
Arrogance prompts us to believe that the Federal Government alone
can support formerly incarcerated individuals. There are many local
service providers, employers, and community-based organizations that
all play an indispensable part in transforming the lives of ex-
offenders, and their challenges cannot be solved with truckloads of
money. We must leverage the experience of these too often overlooked
partners during WIOA reauthorization.
One-size-fits-all mandates from Congress are precisely the wrong
approach. Our workforce development system should be capable of
listening and adapting to the needs of the local labor market,
employers, and those seeking opportunity.
This reauthorization of WIOA must further encourage local
communities to innovate when their existing operations fall short.
Nobody should feel threatened for trying new evidence-based ideas, and
the pace of technological change demands a nimble approach to career
preparation.
Ensuring people have the necessary skills to find good jobs is key
to sustaining a thriving middle-class. As the pandemic recedes from our
lives, overcoming the economic fallout is at the top of everyone's
minds.
Our workforce development system must do a better job of helping
all individuals looking to improve their skills. I am hopeful that a
bipartisan WIOA reauthorization can provide justice-involved
individuals the workforce opportunities they deserve.
______
Mr. Murphy. Thank you Madam Chairman and I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you, Dr. Murphy, and without
objection all other Members who wish to insert written
statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the
Committee Clerk electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5
p.m. on June 29, 2021.
I will now introduce the witnesses. Traci Scott is the Vice
President of Workforce Development for the National Urban
League, where she oversees a variety of programs targeting
different industries and populations, including justice-
involved individuals work. Welcome Traci Scott.
Gregg Keesling is the founder and President of
RecycleForce, an electronics recycling social enterprise in
Indianapolis that employs and provides other support to
justice-involved individuals. Welcome.
Pamela Lattimore is the Senior Director for Research
Development in the Division for Applied Justice Research at RTI
International, where she leads research focused on
understanding crime and related problems.
Ms. Lattimore is an internationally recognized expert on
reentry and her prior experience includes serving as Director
of the Criminal Justice and Criminal Behavior Division of the
National Institute of Justice.
Wendi Safstrom is the Executive Director of the Society for
Human Resource Management (SHRM) Foundation, a non-profit
affiliate of SHRM.
We appreciate all of you for coming today. Thank you so
much. We look forward to your amazing testimony, and we look
forward to hearing all of your experiences and sharing with us.
Let me remind the witnesses that we have read your written
statements and they will appear in full in the hearing record.
Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(d) and Committee practice, each of
you is asked to limit your oral presentation to a five-minute
summary of your written statement. Before you begin, please
remember to unmute your microphone.
During your testimony staff will be keeping track of time
and a light will blink when time is up. Please be attentive to
the time. Wrap up when your time is over and remute your
microphone.
If any of you experience technical difficulties during your
testimony later in the hearing you should stay connected on the
platform, make sure you are muted, and use your phone to
immediately call the Committee's IT director, whose number was
provided to you in advance.
We will let all of the witnesses make their presentations
before we move to Member questions. When answering a question
please remember to unmute your microphone. The witnesses are
aware of their responsibility to provide accurate information
to the Subcommittee, and therefore we will proceed with their
testimony.
I will first recognize Mr. Scott. Welcome Mr. Scott. Ms.
Scott. Ms. Scott, Ms. Scott.
STATEMENT OF TRACI SCOTT, VICE PRESIDENT, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION, NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE
Ms. Scott. Chair Wilson, Chair Scott, Ranking Member
Murphy, Ranking Member Foxx, and Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for this opportunity to testify. My name is Traci
Scott. I am the National Urban League's Vice President of
Workforce Development, and on behalf of Marc Morial, our
President and CEO, I bring you, his greetings.
The National Urban League is a historic civil rights,
community-based organization with a mission grounded in the
belief that a job with a living wage and good benefits is the
key to economic power. We have served the formerly incarcerated
for over 50 years, even before grant money was targeted for
this purpose.
The National Urban League won its first Department of Labor
REO grant in 2005, and has since managed 8 Federal grants for
reentry, serving both youth and adults. Among our clients, 86
percent earned a credential or certificate, 65 percent reported
finding employment.
The program's recidivism rate is lower than 5 percent, well
under the Department of Labor's 22 percent threshold. The
strength of the Department of Labor's REO program is the
opportunity for national and regional intermediaries to compete
for a separate pot of money within the overall program.
National intermediaries play a valuable role implementing
Federal initiatives, providing technical assistance, and
ensuring consistency, scale, and accountability.
We strongly recommend maintaining this component in the
WIOA statute. We submit for the Committee's consideration the
following changes to strengthen the Department of Labor's REO
program, informed by our experience.
The first: Increase the amount of Federal reentry funding
to meet the demand of services. Early release policies as well
as the need for re-skilling, given COVID-19's economic impact,
have increased demand for workforce development services,
particularly in communities of color.
Unfortunately, WIOA funding has not kept pace. Given the
need for, and significant return on investment from REO program
services, we urge you to increase the amount of dollars in the
overall account from 120 million and double the competition
among national and regional intermediaries to 50 and a half
million.
Two: Ensure national and regional intermediaries can
compete for reentry serving both adults and youth. Under the
Fiscal Year 1921 appropriations bill, funding for national and
regional intermediaries is restricted for youth employment
activities. Because justice-involved youth and formerly
incarcerated adults require different services, we recommend
national and regional intermediaries to be allowed the use of
funds to serve adults in addition to youth.
Three: Utilize national intermediaries with recognized
expertise. It is important that national intermediary
organizations receiving Federal reentry funding have nationally
recognized expertise, existing infrastructure, and large
networks of employers and community relationships to ensure
that Federal investments are deployed quickly and effectively.
Four: Additionally, we recommend changes to the program
model to reduce recidivism and increase success for reentry
individuals, including wrap around services. Formerly
incarcerated individuals need support in many areas, including
digital learning, housing, transportation, childcare, and child
support obligations, and reunifying with children.
A national intermediary with wrap around services like the
Urban League can meet these needs in one place, increasing the
likelihood of success for clients. Workforce-centric cognitive
behavior therapy, also known as CBT: Workforce CBT focuses on
helping clients address behavioral challenges related to work,
like managing anxiety during a job search, navigating
professional relationships, and communicating in the workplace.
Pre-release engagement: Allowing community-based
organizations access to correctional facilities so that they
can work with individuals prior to release to co-create an
employment plan would help set up re-entering individuals for
success.
Finally, we recommend diversifying the eligible reentry
serving providers by providing grants so returning citizens can
access programs outside of the higher education system that fit
their needs, and strengthen the connection between reentry and
apprenticeship, so these individuals can earn while they learn.
We appreciate the Subcommittee's interest in authorizing
reentry programming in Federal law. This is an area where there
is much need for investment and reimagining to ensure returning
citizens can re-tool, secure employment opportunities, and
transition back into their communities. I look forward to
answering any questions you might have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Scott follows:]
Prepared Statement of Traci Scott
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much Ms. Scott. And now
we'll hear from Mr. Keesling, welcome.
STATEMENT OF MR. GREGG KEESLING, PRESIDENT, RECYCLEFORCE
WORKFORCE, INC.
Mr. Keesling. Thank you, Chair Wilson and Chair Scott and
Ranking Member Murphy and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank
you for inviting me to testify today. My name is Gregg Keesling
and I'm the President of RecycleForce, a non-profit employment
social enterprise, or ESE, delivering comprehensive recycling
services to businesses in order to provide life-changing
employment opportunities for formerly incarcerated individuals.
Our model is called ABC: any job, better job, career.
You'll find details of the ABC model in my written testimony,
along with a very brief video that I think will give you a good
visual of what we've been doing here in Indianapolis, Indiana,
over the past decade.
But the short version is this. We serve high-risk people
who are coming home from prison and jail. All are under
compliance monitoring and are required to work. We serve this
population because research shows this is where we can have the
greatest impact, both to increase employment, and to preserve
public safety.
Our employment social enterprise employs high-risk
individuals while they are under oversight, and most at-risk of
returning to crime. Though we don't just employ people, we also
provide education, portable and stackable credentials, mental
health and substance abuse treatment, banking assistance,
financial planning, and perhaps most importantly we help
clients stay compliant with criminal justice oversight.
Our credentials are very focused on the type of jobs that
are available for those we employ and transition on. They
include OSHA, certified logistics associates, Powered
Industrial Truck and HAZWOPER 40, among many others. All these
credentials prepare our workers to move into the next phase. As
oversight lessens, and the people have achieved their
credentials, we transition about 60 percent of our workers to
the next phase, the better job, where they work with our
alternative staffing partner, Keys2Work.
This phase is not subsidized employment, but some of the
wraparound services like mental health treatment and compliance
monitoring are grant funded. And from this B section of our
model, employers then hire permanently in good-paying, living
wage opportunities, the career. Again, ABC: any job, better
job, career.
A good example is our local Indianapolis Department of
Public Works, and the AFSCME union. They've already hired 41
people from our program. Our city has done a good job of making
positions available for those under criminal justice oversight.
And because we are the crossroads of America, many logistics
firms have located here, so the logistics firms and their
distribution centers are also big hirers of our folks after the
transitional period.
Wages are way up in this field, and our workers can make
well above $15.00 per hour. We have developed our model with
significant support from DOL and the REO program over the past
decade, including a random control trial the Department funded
known as the Enhanced Transitional Jobs Demonstration, or ETJD.
We are in the early stages of refining our models to serve
out of school justice-involved youth, perhaps the hardest
population of all. But as we do so, we need more rigorous
research including more random control trials. The research and
continued funding can help grow the employment social
enterprise field, like it has helped RecycleForce here in
Indianapolis.
You know, most workforce development professionals do not
consider themselves crimefighters. But in so many ways the
funding the REO program supplies to ESE's like us does just
that. As Father Greg Boyle from Home Boys Industries says,
``Nothing can stop a bullet like a job.''
The people we serve deserve their second chance. We think
our model does that, and also helps preserve public safety.
When you watch our video, which I encourage you to do, you will
meet some of the people who we have helped; people like Rob,
Andrew, and Amanda, all who are moving forward from their past
mistakes.
I urge all of you to move forward with continued funding
for the REO program and to support U.S. DOL and ETA and this
important project by making certain we continue to have
available randomized control trials and research. Thank you
very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gregg Keesling follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gregg Keesling
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much Mr.
Keesling. And now we'll hear from Ms. Lattimore, welcome.
STATEMENT OF PAMELA LATTIMORE, SENIOR DIRECTOR FOR RESEARCH
DEVELOPMENT, DIVISION FOR APPLIED
JUSTICE RESEARCH RTI INTERNATIONAL
Ms. Lattimore. Thank you, Chair Scott, Chair Wilson,
Ranking Member Foxx, Ranking Member Murphy, and Members of the
Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today. My
name is Pamela Lattimore, and I am the Senior Director for
Research Development with the Division for Applied Justice
Research at RTI International.
I'll briefly introduce myself. I have been conducting
research on interventions for justice-involved individuals,
including Federal initiatives such as the Second Chance Act
since I was in graduate school at the University of North
Carolina in the 1980's.
Prior to joining RTI in 1998 I was a visiting scientist,
and then Division Director at DOJ's National Institute of
Justice, where I conducted research on criminal behavior and
oversaw NIJ's corrections research portfolio. To set the stage,
even though we have seen some decline in prison and community
supervision populations over the last several years, there is
still approximately 2 million individuals in our prisons and
jails, most of whom will return to our communities, and nearly
5 million others are currently in our communities on probation
or parole.
These justice-involved individuals, generally lack
education and employment experience, and they often have
challenges, including behavioral health issues such as drug
use. Education and workforce programs offer solution to the
employment and educational needs of those involved in the
justice system, offering transformative opportunities that can
lead to a better life for the individuals and their families,
and safer communities.
Criminologists have posited that desisting from criminal
behavior may require an individual to transform to a self that
believes they can attain a more positive and productive future.
Education is a recognized process for supporting
transformation. All of us in this room owe at least some of who
we are to the education that has been afforded to us.
The return on investment for correctional educational
programs is well documented. A recent study estimated that
every one dollar invested in these programs saves taxpayers
four to five dollars in reincarceration costs in just the 3-
years following program participation.
Others estimate lifetime returns on programs for youth at 8
to 1 and for adults, 18 to 1. I would now like to offer several
suggestions related to program design and research based on my
work for the Committee to consider.
First, program offerings in correctional facilities should
ensure that participants are able to earn stackable credentials
that will lead to living wage employment with career
advancement opportunities. For example, programs that lead to
credentials in construction trades, or commercial driver's
licenses, offer opportunities to earn living wages and respond
to our current national labor shortages.
Second, earning while learning programs should be
encouraged. Most individuals in prisons and jails are eager to
participate in programs, but there is substantial drop-offs in
participation following release. Earned financial support may
be the best route to encourage participation and completion.
Third, robust evaluations are needed that are realistic in
expectation, and supportive of iterative improvement in
education and employment programs.
Fourth, more research is needed on what works for whom, and
how much is needed. And we also need to understand how
education and employment skills fit within the constellation of
overall needs of justice-involved individuals.
Finally, recidivism should not be a primary measure for
assessing education and employment focused reentry programs.
For education programs, first we must look at other outcome
measures, including a program completion, credentials earned,
wages, and the quality of employment.
I'll provide additional details in support of these
recommendations for the record, thank you again for this
opportunity and I am happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Pamela Lattimore follows:]
Prepared Statement of Pamela Lattimore
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. We will
now hear from Ms. Safstrom, welcome.
STATEMENT OF MS. WENDI SAFSTROM, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SHRM
FOUNDATION
Ms. Safstrom. Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Foxx,
Chairwoman Wilson, Ranking Member Murphy, and distinguished
Members of the House Education and Labor Subcommittee on Higher
Education and Workforce Investment. Thank you for the
opportunity to join you today, and for your leadership on the
important issue of second chance hiring.
My name is Wendi Safstrom, and I'm the Executive Director
of the SHRM Foundation. The SHRM Foundation is the non-profit
affiliate of the Society for Human Resource Management, the
world's largest professional society for human resource
leaders.
With more than 300,000 H.R. and business executive Members,
in 165 countries, SHRM sits at the intersection of work and
workers in the workplace, impacting the lives of more than 115
million workers and their families fully every single day. A
pillar of SHRM's work is advancing policy that creates a more
equitable world of work.
The SHRM Foundation amplifies those efforts by inspiring,
educating, and mobilizing H.R. professionals to lead positive
social change in the workplace. We develop and create
strategies and programming designed to help H.R. professionals
provide equitable opportunities to individuals seeking the
dignity of work, including the nearly 70 million Americans,
that is one in three adults, who have a criminal record.
Our Getting Talent Back to Work Initiative, launched in
2019 by SHRM, and now operated by the SHRM Foundation, started
as a call to action by asking employers to publicly pledge to
consider qualified individuals with criminal records for jobs
within their organizations.
And in December 2020, SHRM Foundation relaunched the
initiative to include new tools and resources, including a
self-assessment tool and online educational program for H.R.
professionals, and commenced the launch of marketing,
communications, and peer strategies that better tell the story
and business benefits of hiring individuals with criminal
records.
Getting Talent Back to Work has provided resources to
20,000 users thus far, and it's making a difference. A labor
shortage and a battle for talent is looming. Employers who
embrace second chance hiring could have a significant leg up on
the competition.
A recently released 2021 SHRM research study found nearly
half of business leaders believe their organization should
offer training, guidance, or mentorship opportunities to
workers with criminal records as they begin a return to work.
H.R. professionals understand the business case, the social
imperative, for hiring individuals with a criminal record.
Savings and productivity gains for organizations can be
significant.
The turnover rate for employees with criminal records is 13
percent lower than that for the general population. And
according to SHRM research, 81 percent of business leaders, and
85 percent of H.R. professionals, believe workers with criminal
records before their jobs are about the same or better, than
workers without criminal records.
Second chance hiring can be a key component of an
organization's DE and I strategy. In the U.S. alone the burden
of incarceration is borne disproportionately by black and
Hispanic Americans. When companies do not include hiring people
with criminal records in their organizations it has an
inordinate effect on those applicants who we have found are
likely to have different abilities, different education levels
and economic statuses, making it even more challenging to build
a diverse team.
HR professionals recognize that diverse teams result in
more innovation, faster problem solving, better engagement, and
increased financial performance. And a study in 2019 found that
companies that led in ethnic and cultural diversity had 36
percent more profitability than companies without such
diversity.
Profitable businesses support the livelihoods of the
individuals and the communities in which they work and live.
The SHRM Foundation is beginning to lead the activation of our
Getting Talent Back to Work Initiative, leveraging the
commitments of employers and H.R. professionals who've been
inspired and educated through our programming. Planning is
underway to implement a place-based employment ecosystem, a
pilot program in Charlotte, North Carolina.
SHRM Foundation will partner with the Center for Community
Transitions, a non-profit organization founded to help
strengthen the community and reduce recidivism by providing
people with criminal records and their families the tools and
resources they need to rebuild their lives.
Through this pilot, and by establishing and working with
partners from State and local workforce development agencies,
employers and H.R. professionals, and community-based
organizations will test a framework that can be evaluated and
scaled pending efficacy and outcomes.
And as you consider reauthorizing the Workforce Innovation
and Opportunity Act, I offer three recommendations. First,
evaluate all program providers or grant recipients based on
employment, earnings, and recidivism reduction. Intervention
strategies that have demonstrated promise, such as subsidized
or transitional employment, should be prioritized.
Second, ensure there's a close relationship between
reentry, employment opportunities, supportive programs, and
employers by requiring individuals responsible for candidate
recruitment and initial assessment to be partners in any REO
funded grantmaking.
And third, I encourage Congress to consider making the Work
Opportunity Tax Credit permanent to allow employers to fully
incorporate it into their hiring strategies and to increase the
promotion of the tax credit throughout the workforce
development system. Thank you for your time today, and I look
forward to answering questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Safstrom follows:]
Prepared Statement of Wendi Safstrom
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Under Committee Rule 9(a) we
will now question the witnesses under the five-minute rule. I
will be recognizing our Subcommittee Members in seniority
order.
Again, to ensure that the Members' five-minute rule is
adhered to, staff will be keeping track of time. And the timer
will show a blinking light when time has expired. Please be
attentive to the time. Wrap up when your time is over, and re-
mute your microphone.
As Chair I now recognize myself for five minutes. My life's
work has been centered around black men and boys. Ms. Safstrom,
in your testimony you note that one in three black men have a
felony record, compared with just 8 percent of the general U.S.
adult population.
Regardless of criminal record, black men are less likely
than white applicants to receive a call back from employers to
begin with. Tell me, how can we address employer biases toward
this population, who may face the dual challenge of overcoming
stigma associated with their race and their criminal justice
involvement.
Ms. Safstrom. Exactly what the work and the mission of the
SHRM Foundation is all about in this regard as we really start
getting talent back to workmanship. I think it comes from
making sure that our H.R. professionals are informed and
educated, that they understand the challenges and the barriers
that individuals face in the cycle of poverty and struggles
that they often have within their communities, and how
employment directly relates to helping to break that cycle.
I think that now more so than ever before, identifying and
hiring and retaining top talent with different perspectives,
different skillsets, different viewpoints, will make businesses
even more successful. And as H.R. professionals pay tribute to
the overall business success of their organizations, they're
going to have to start thinking differently, looking at
different populations, leading with empathy, asking informed
questions, and informing themselves, and that's a huge, huge,
priority for sure from the SHRM foundation.
It starts with inspiring H.R. professional to think
differently, to act differently, and then providing them the
tools and resources that they need to educate themselves, so
that they're making informed decisions and recommendations when
it comes to identifying the sources of talent.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. Ms. Scott,
congratulations on the Urban League's reentry program. You have
partial funding from the Department of Education, the
Department of Labor. What does the evidence tell us about
return on investment of reentry employment programs, as far as
your experience?
Ms. Scott. Thank you for that question, Representative. So
while I am not an economist, I do read economists. I know that
incarceration costs the American people $258,000.00 per crime,
and in addition there's $96,000.00 per incarceration cost. It
costs the economy 56 to 57 billion dollars, that's a loss
because of incarceration. By an investment of just $10,000.00
to $15,000.00 a year per participant, we actually end up saving
the economy money, and saving our communities money while
keeping it safer and saving costs on public safety.
Chairwoman Wilson. Tell us about wraparound supportive
services that you have as a part of your program.
Ms. Scott. Thank you so much for this question. Yes. So for
wraparounds, first we need to appreciate the struggles that
reentry adults and youth face. Many of them exit with health
concerns. Many of them exit without any professional or
personal supports. Many do not have any financial standing
alone.
When they leave incarceration, they are given a bus pass
and whatever financial resources are on their person. And yet
they are expected to find housing, to find employment within a
set date based on whatever their conditions of parole or
probation are. Wraparound services in multi-service
organizations are crucial in helping those individuals to not
recidivate.
Being able to connect individuals to public housing, or
housing opportunities, to be able to connect them with health
care opportunities, but then also provide education and skill
development courses, so that they may be able to develop the
employment informed skills that are necessary for their local
market itself, and then also those programs that do provide an
earn and learn, such as apprenticeships, ease the financial
burden of trying to find a livable wage while finding all these
other resources, so that they can focus in on reintegrating
into society, giving back the way they want to give back, and
becoming whole people in their whole communities again.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. Mr. Keesling tell us
what are the criteria to determine individuals at medium to
high risk of recidivism, and how do we help them when we target
WIOA related programing? Very quickly.
Mr. Keesling. OK. Thank you. The IRAS, we have a test here
called the IRAS, information risk assessment return to crime.
So those that are deemed high-risk are then referred to us by
criminal justice oversight'parole, probation, correction'and
they immediately get a job when they start.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. Thank you. And now we
will go to questions from our Members of the Committee. The
first person who will be asking questions today is
Representative Comer.
Mr. Comer. Thank you, Madam Chair. My first question is Ms.
Safstrom. Relationships with employers must be prioritized when
getting vulnerable individuals back into the workforce. I've
seen a success story firsthand in my district in Kentucky. A
reentry program developed by the teaching facility in McCracken
County, and that's Paducah, Kentucky, worked with the regional
employers of the local community college to prioritize an
educational curriculum paired with skills development needed by
local employers.
They've been recognized by the Department of Labor and the
Delta Regional Authority for their efforts. As the economy
reopens, what must be done to mirror this success and bring
employers to the table in reentry efforts, especially as we
consider WIOA reauthorization?
Ms. Safstrom. I think an amplification of what you just
described has to be shared. Again, part of the mission and the
work of the foundation is really to share with all employers,
large, medium, and small employers, how other employers in
other communities are engaging in actually making it work, that
they are formulating partnerships with community-based
organizations, workforce development agencies, and have shared
outcomes in terms of intending to employ those that they are
serving in their local communities.
And part of what we're doing in this pilot that we're
crafting in Charlotte is exactly that. We're working with each
of the organizations within the city of Charlotte. We now have
a vested interest and are critical stakeholders in ultimately
employing this particular population.
Once we've learned what went well, where we could improve,
our goal is to amplify those outputs, making any adjustments
and then pilot and then scale those pilot outcomes to other
communities in other cities. But I'd love to learn more
specifically about what you're doing so we can talk about that
as part of our marketing communications and PR, our
storytelling that goes on at the SHRM Foundation.
Mr. Comer. Great. Be happy to share that with you more in
detail. My last question. Dr. Lattimore, can you give us some
insight on what shortcomings past reentry programs have
experienced and what pitfalls should future programs avoid in
order to support successful reentry and effectively use
taxpayer dollars?
Ms. Lattimore. Yes. Thank you Representative. I'm happy to
address that. I appreciate Ms. Scott's reference to wraparound
services. I think that we all know that many of the individuals
who are justice-involved have a whole range of needs across
mental health, substance abuse, and they come out of prison or
jail with little skills and are faced with trying to get their
lives back together without any support.
And it's real critical I think for us to be able to provide
that support and help them overcome the challenges. And so I
think one of the problems, as I note in my written remarks, is
that often times grant programs, I believe are just too short
to effectively develop, implement, refine a program, and at the
same time conduct a rigorous evaluation to assess what the
outcome of that program is.
Providing background services, identifying all the
providers and those kinds of things, as other panelists who are
actively engaged in doing that do, is hard work and challenging
work, and so making sure that there's adequate time, and
adequate funding to support these wraparound services, I think
is critical. I'm more familiar with the programs that are
funded by the Justice Department, the Bureau of Justice
Assistance, and so many of those grants are 2 years, sometimes
3 years, and that is just not an adequate amount of time to
tackle a really complicated and complex problem.
Mr. Comer. Well great. Hopefully, we could have more
success stories with this moving forward. The biggest problem
in American right now from an economic standpoint is the
shortage of workers, and there's never been a better
opportunity now to get people back into society, back into the
workforce to get people out of poverty and into the workforce
than now, so this is a great opportunity.
Hopefully, we can work together in a bipartisan way. Thank
you Madam Chair and I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much
Representative Comer. I really appreciate your remarks. It's a
breath of fresh air to hear you say what you just said, thank
you so much. And now Mr. Takano of California.
Mr. Takano. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. As you
stated Madam Chair the United States spends at least 80 billion
dollars annually on incarceration, far more than the roughly 4
billion dollars that WIOA Title I workforce development
programs spent, yet an increased investment in employment
services for justice-involved individuals may be cost-effective
to the extent it contributes to lower recidivism and reduced
spending by the criminal justice system.
Ms. Scott, you wrote in your testimony that if 100 formerly
incarcerated individuals are given employment, they would
contribute 1.9 billion dollars in income taxes. Your testimony
recommends increased funding for reentry programs as a part of
a WIOA reauthorization. What would be the impact of this
increased spending?
Ms. Scott. Thank you very much Representative Takano for
that question. I am not prepared to give that information
because I'm not an economist, however the National Urban League
is prepared to respond to you with more qualified responses.
Mr. Takano. Well thank you, thank you. Can you tell me why
is engaging with justice-involved individuals pre-release
important to helping them secure employment upon release?
Ms. Scott. Absolutely. Thank you so very much for that
question. As I mentioned a little while ago, individuals when
they are released are only given transportation off the
premises, and whatever resources they have on their person, or
whatever they had beforehand.
Many individuals who are encouraging a There is a strong
correlation between individuals who are homeless, and those
individuals who are becoming incarcerated, or end up
incarcerated. They find that individuals homeless prior to
incarcerated are 15 times more likely to find themselves
incarcerated.
The unemployment rate for incarcerated individuals is 36
percent, it's 44 percent for African American women. A lot of
that is because they don't have a plan once they are released.
They don't have the social connections. Many of them may not
have stable housing, particularly older reentry individuals
have health issues that have either developed or lingered
during incarceration.
And so when they leave, they don't know the social systems.
They don't know how to enroll in programs, and so being able as
a national intermediary to have access into the correction
facility so that a counselor whom they would meet post-release
is there to create an employment program for them.
That means the person then leaves knowing where they need
to attend, who they need to speak to, and know what their
treatment plan, or their program plan will look like upon
release. It gives them literally a lifeline and a plan so that
they can stay focused on what's most important.
Mr. Takano. Ms. Scott that's an awful lot that you've just
told us, and the details, I'm sure, I mean we can spend a lot
longer on this topic. I'm sure that we have very uneven
programs in terms of their continuity for things like mental
health care, and drug treatment. I mean that probably does not
follow the formerly incarcerated into life outside of being
incarcerated.
But you know even something as basic as getting an
identification card, an ID, is not certain. Many Americans
don't know that that's just not something that a formerly
incarcerated person would have. I know that one State,
Virginia, has taken this on, and California is trying to
actually pass something more comprehensive in terms of making
sure.
You know without an ID you have a hard time getting
employment, securing housing, applying for public benefits,
obtaining insurance, cashing paychecks, opening up accounts
probably domestically, buying or renting a car, applying for a
commercial license whether you're trying to drive a truck or a
car, or getting married.
So that plan you're talking about, just trying to get a
plan together without an ID, and many people don't know this,
that's very uncertain that a former incarcerated person would
even leave with ID. And I'm a little self-serving here because
I want to just mention I have a bill, H.R. 1315, which would
greatly improve or enhance the responsibility of the Bureau of
Prisons to ensure that Federal prisoners leave with an ID.
We also assist the states in making sure that happens. My
time has run out. I just want to make sure that I got that
commercial out there, but Madam Chair I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. We'll make
sure to write down for H.R. 1315, identification for formerly
incarcerated, that is great thank you.
Mr. Takano. Thank you.
Madam Chairman. And now I will hear from our Ranking Member
Dr. Murphy of North Carolina.
Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and just
specifically also thanks to the witnesses today. It's really
been powerful testimony. And this is obviously something that
is a bipartisan issue, things that we can really work on. You
know my personal desire, although it's not the purview of this
Committee, is that we try to get to these young men and women
before they ever get incarcerated.
An investment in them before any of this happened yields as
much or greater results. That's a different issue, one which I
think is actually equally, if not more important, but not the
purview of this Committee. So Ms. Safstrom, I just have one
question for you. An important component of WIOA was the
expansion of pay for performance opportunities in workforce
development.
These programs allow for experimentation and innovation,
while also ensuring that taxpayer dollars are spent on what
works best. How could you tell us paid performance would
enhance work that is done at the Federal, State, and local
level to help support the reentry transition efforts?
Ms. Safstrom. Thank you for that question. I think it will
really encourage creativity. I think it will help foster
innovation. Now, more than ever before perhaps, is the moment
for employers and H.R. professions to contribute ideas, perhaps
to challenge, that have not necessarily been brought to the
forefront.
So I think that, you know, H.R. professionals are very
familiar with accountability for turnover rates, for hiring
rates, for promotions and for retention rates, and so they
understand the notion of pay for performance. So I think the
ability to have those conversations, to talk about that issue
with H.R. professionals, to understand some of the human
capital metrics, and how they can apply to this particular
instance could be very powerful.
Mr. Murphy. Excellent, excellent. Because you know in all
of this, we obviously want the results to be great, but we also
want accountability. We don't want there to be just pouring
money into an empty bucket. We have to have accountability of
what programs work, don't work, and be nimble in moving them,
so thank you for those comments.
Dr. Lattimore, it's always good to have a North Carolinian
on the Committee and thank you for taking the time to share
with us about your important research that you've done on how
society can best serve the reentry population. Let me throw
this at you.
How do you feel the evaluation efforts for government
programs differ from those that are done in the business world?
Are there lessons that can be learned from these differences?
Can government learn from business, and can business learn from
government?
What would you recommend that the Federal reentry program,
how do they incorporate these efforts in their evaluations
based upon what is currently being done in the industry? In
other words, how can the business community help our Federal
Government do things more efficiently and more accurately?
Ms. Lattimore. Thank you for the question, Congressman. And
you actually touched on something that is very near to my
heart, which is I think the primary difference is the extent to
which private businesses engage in performance measurement, and
that that in itself allows them to understand you know their
processes. It allows them to refine their processes, to be more
efficient, to assure that they're getting the outcomes that
they want.
And I came to this based on my efforts over the years to
use administrative agency data to evaluate, you know, federally
funded programs, and have found, and continue to find that the
computer systems and the management information systems that
are part of many of these agencies are woefully inadequate.
And it means that the agencies can't even know what their
own performance is. Even basic things. Like, you know, I'm
working with some jails on some pre-trial work right now, and
even knowing the average length of stay for people being held
pre-trial in jail is'you find out the jail management
information systems don't even have a marker to say that
someone is being held pre-trial.
And you know McDonalds would never not know. They know
exactly how long it takes to do everything. And the best ways
to do those things. So I think that we need to, as an evaluator
it's not self-serving to say that I think that we need to shift
a little bit from talking all the time about evaluation and
point out that a lot of what underlies evaluation is actually
good performance metrics.
And having those kinds of measurement systems in place. And
so I would encourage investment in that along with the
investment in programming.
Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Doctor. And that is critically
important. I'll just say we can't put forth these programs
without accountability and evaluation to know literally what's
best and what works best for the American taxpayer, and for
those in the population that we're serving. I believe my time
is up. Thank you, Madam Chairman, I appreciate the time to
speak with the Committee Members.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you, thank you Dr. Murphy. You
started off speaking my language, prevention, so that sounds
great, and I appreciate that, your comments. And now Ms.
Jayapal from Washington.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you so much Madam Chair and thank you
for your leadership on this issue as well as this Committee.
And I too want to associate myself with the remarks of my
colleague, Congressman Murphy, about how important it is to
invest in people before they're incarcerated, and I actually
think that a lot of what this Committee does is to think about
exactly that.
80 billion a year to keep roughly 2.3 million people
incarcerated in a system that is neither rehabilitative, nor
restorative, is a true waste not only of money, but of human
potential. Too often people are released into communities
traumatized, unhoused, unemployed, and burdened by a criminal
record.
I used to represent, before I came to Congress, in the
State Senate in Washington State, one of the most diverse
districts in our State, and I saw this all the time, and we
worked on this issue all the time. And I want to share the
story today of Erin, who is a constituent of mine who was
referred by King County work release to Neighborhood House,
which is an incredible social service agency in Seattle in
December 2019.
Prior to his incarceration, Erin had many years of
experience in construction and welding. However, upon his
release from incarceration Erin had trouble even landing a
survival job due to his ongoing struggle with chemical
dependence and finding stable housing as he alternated staying
in his car and crashing with friends.
Ms. Scott this sounds like a catch 22 to me. People like
Erin struggle with getting jobs because of unstable housing and
chemical dependence, and yet they need the income stability of
work to help with their recovery and to pay for stable housing.
What is the difference in outcomes related to both recidivism
and employment between programs that offer solely employment
services rather than both employment and social services?
Ms. Scott. Thank you so much Representative Jayapal for
that question, and to bring up this important issue. I think
it's very important for us to continue to focus and appreciate
the myriad of challenges that the reentry community face during
and post release. One of them I believe mentioned is drug and
alcohol addiction.
We know that 60 percent of prisoners struggle with it
during release. We know that 76 percent of them struggle with
mental health and using substance abuse as a means to cope. And
so just that alone is a challenge for someone who's being
released without any supports, without any financial
opportunities, and with little to no skills.
I believe it's 60 percent who are incarcerated do not have
a high school degree, or are high school dropouts, and do not
have a diploma. That is a barrier to identifying and finding
employment, without having access to multi-service, strong non-
for-profits such as the National Urban League and Neighborhood
Works.
An individual is left alone to try to bring together what
they need, to go and find and sign up for health care, to find
an adult basic education program, to sign up for a drug
cessation or recovery program, and instead having one place
where they can go, having a counselor on a case with a case
management structure makes a huge difference in helping them to
stay focused on what they need, and having supports to overcome
the many barriers that they actually have and present with.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Ms. Scott. In fact Erin did get
that support, and he was able to end his chemical dependency,
accept the job with a local manufacturing company and access
housing assistance, but he still is working to get
certification so he can find work in his area of expertise and
with higher wages.
So let's just say Erin finally gets his certification and
his ideal job, Mr. Keesling what are some of the lasting
barriers to employment for people like Erin?
Mr. Keesling. Well, you know, I think for many employers
they have background checks that look at the felony background.
And so while we're doing a much, much better job after the
pandemic and the labor shortage where employers are beginning
to look at their restrictions, it still is there.
And we've launched an expungement process here, but it
takes five to 8 years before you're eligible for expungement,
so during that period of time employers are using the felony
background as a reason for profiling people out, you know. So
it is really a major, major problem, but I'm encouraged that
we're making progress. The labor shortage is really getting
employers that are willing to hire this population, to really
relook at their hiring practices.
Ms. Jayapal. I think that's so important. My time is
expired, but I think this cultural shift that we need employers
to make is so critical, so thank you very much Madam Chair I
yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you. And now Mr.
Grothman Wisconsin.
Mr. Grothman. You got that very good. Thank you. I wish you
were running all my hearings. First question, I guess any one
of you can take it. I am a supporter of something called the
Ozaukee County Jail Literacy back in my district. And I know
the importance of literacy in existing in our society, and they
do a great job.
Could any one of you comment on the percent of people who
are functionally literate when they go out of jail or prison
compared to how they are when they get out and could maybe
there be some correlations between functional literacy and the
ability to operate productively in our society. Do we have any
statistics on that?
Mr. Keesling. We don't have any direct statistics, but we
do see that people's reading levels and comprehension levels
are low. There is a State testing that's done, but I don't have
the details.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Well it's important for people who are
going to be involved in this issue to know the number of people
who are literate and not, because then we can kind of measure
how well they're doing when they get out in society. I don't
know how you function in society if you don't know how to read,
but I think you will find a lot of people in corrections
institutions are not literate.
So I would suggest the four of you look into that. Next
question I have. I always think a strong family background is
important. Do any of you have any information, perhaps Dr.
Lattimore, on family setting? That correlation between adapting
back in society if you're moving back home with a husband or
wife, you're moving back home with parents.
Any comments, or any studies along those lines?
Ms. Lattimore. There has been, thank you for the question.
There have been programs that have focused on family
strengthening. Most women who are incarcerated have children.
Many men also have children, although the burden on the men and
women is very different, and actually you know childcare is
another financial cost, and barrier for women when they get out
of prison.
Mr. Grothman. Right. Do we know the number, for example,
who wind up being married, or living with their parents, or are
there any studies along those lines indicating success or not
success if you are living with a spouse or parents?
Ms. Lattimore. I would have to get back to you on that.
There have been some studies that have been done on that.
That's not something that I right off the top of my head know
the numbers on, but we'd be happy to get those numbers back.
Mr. Grothman. I always feel when we talk about corrections
or criminal justice problems, family background is so
important, and it always bothers me whether it's this, or drug
abuse, or whatever, nobody's got the statistics. And I always
feel like you know one of the reasons for a lot of the societal
problems we have had in the last 5 years is the government kind
of encouraging a broken family.
I wish people who deal on this topic would weigh in and try
to have people get statistics. I'll give you guys another
question. In Wisconsin we have something called the Huber
program, I assume they have similar programs in other states,
in which prior to release you work in the community OK.
Maybe you're let out 8 hours a day or something, and you go
back. But as the result when you leave you have a job already.
Now we recently changed things in Wisconsin so that your final
institution you're in is near your job. So you don't, say it's
at a Federal level, so you don't return to Kentucky, but your
Huber job was in Wisconsin or something.
Can you comment on the percentage of people leaving either
Federal prison, or the State prisons you're familiar with, who
have a full-time job before they leave, and those that don't?
And kind of comment on the importance of that.
Mr. Keesling. I will quickly jump in and say 100 percent of
the people who are referred to us have that job. That's our
model. They have the immediate job. We serve about 300 people
per year, but there are about 8,000 people who need this
service in Indianapolis alone. So where we can expand
employment social enterprises to be able to employ more people
immediately upon release and connect with them prior to release
from prison and jail, we can develop the pathway, but that's
exactly what we do. That's exactly our model, and it's the No.
1 way to reduce crime and get people back connected in the
labor force is to have a subsidized job immediately upon
release.
Mr. Grothman. Well I don't think in Wisconsin it has to be
subsidized. Why would you feel it has to be subsidized?
Mr. Keesling. Because of all the different oversight
requirements. It's very difficult for people to work and still
have to take drug tests. They have to leave regular employers
and find it very difficult, this oversight, people that are
constantly having to leave.
Our workers are able to work about 25 to 30 percent of
their time, but the other is related to oversight requirements.
Mr. Grothman. Yes. I'd familiarize yourself with what goes
on in Wisconsin, because largely in Wisconsin what we call
these Huber jobs are, I don't believe they're subsidized at
all, and it's a way for people to transition right away back in
society. Thank you for giving me another 30 seconds. I
appreciate it.
Chairwoman Wilson. Don't say I never was kind.
Mr. Grothman. No, I know, I know, I owe you. I owe you yes.
OK thanks.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. And now we'll hear from Ms.
Leger Fernandez from New Mexico.
Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you, Madam Chair. And you know
thank you for holding this because I think what we're looking
for is ways in which the Federal Government, and through the
use of WIOA can actually support incarcerated individuals so
that indeed they're able to reunite with their families, and be
part of strong families, but that sometimes there's some extra
help that is needed, and which as our Representative Jayapal
pointed out, would save money in the end.
So I want to focus a bit on women who are involved with the
justice system, and the distinct challenges that they would
have including employment. Ms. Scott, you touched a bit on
that, and also in your testimony you said that often times
mothers must engage with family court, and child protective
services to reunify with the children.
And homelessness is higher for formerly incarcerated women,
especially women of color, than formerly incarcerated men. And
then we know that many of the jobs that are available to the
most justice-involved individuals in construction, have not
traditionally employed significant numbers of women.
So Ms. Scott, could you expand a bit on the unique
challenges that justice-involved women face with obtaining and
maintaining unemployment, and if you have suggestions of what
we in Congress can do to help address those challenges.
Ms. Scott. Thank you so very much Representative Fernandez
for that question and this lead in. Yes. I find that we don't
talk enough about women in reentry, and their challenges. As
mentioned, the largest demographic of homeless and formerly
incarcerated are African American women, and their unemployment
rate is at 44 percent.
A lot of that is because their primary focus is on family
reunification, and so for many mothers coming out and returning
to community, they have to engage with family court. They have
to engage with child protective services. So one of the
challenges that can happen if an individual chooses to find
employment, going to court, adhering to visitation scheduling,
regular drug testing in order to be with your own children do
not always compliment scheduling at work.
The second component is that if you are homeless and you
are a mother, and you have children, you are actually put to
the front of the line for affordable housing. However, that is
an unintended motivation for mothers to focus more on regaining
their children, because that will lead to stable housing;
prioritizing that process over looking for work.
We also should mention an overwhelming number of returning
women have domestic violence as a history. And so without
merely addressing that component, that could become problematic
in the workplace if it is not treated.
It can manifest itself such as conflict in the workplace,
and that's why we recommend cognitive behavioral therapy. And
then of course childcare. And many women, more women,
particularly African American women engage in apprenticeships
than men do, however some of those jobs do not operate during
regularly scheduled jobs, and therefore regularly scheduled
childcare isn't always available for a mother who's working the
third shift.
So I think that there are many things that we should really
look at in the ecosystem to support women.
Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you so much. And I want to
highlight a program in my district at Mesalands Community
College, and when I met with them, they noted that one-third of
their students are incarcerated students from their
correctional facility nearby.
And they said that they're some of their best students. Ms.
Lattimore can you tell me what the research shows on employment
rates being improved after attaining a degree, or a certificate
while incarcerated, and you know, what we need to be doing to
assist in making sure those community colleges build on that
education and connect people with jobs after release.
Ms. Lattimore. Yes. Thank you for that question, and I'm
very happy to hear that we've got a really active community
college-based program for the individuals in your district. I
think where that doesn't happen, where you don't get that
coordination is a missed opportunity, particularly if those
programs can be continued after individuals are released from
prison or jail, and I mean the evidence suggests that
individuals with education, who actually obtained education
during incarceration generally do come out and perform better
than others.
I would like to quickly too also point out that this sort
of relates to your previous question, that women also come out
of prison with much fewer, many fewer family supports, and
support of positive peers than men do. And so the women in
addition to all the challenges that you mentioned before are
facing these additional burdens.
They have additional problems and they're not getting
anywhere near the support that men get when they are released
from prison.
Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you for your answer, and my time
is expired. I yield back Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you very much. And now
Representative Fulcher from Idaho.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking Member,
for putting this on. This is an important topic to me and to my
State as well. We have a very large demographic and where
there's been needs for employment for a long time, dairy
segment, large dairy's, ag sector and what not. Even long
before the current immigration crisis.
I've been looking at ways to try to improve the percentage
of employees that we might have available through incarcerated
channels and what not. But with that a question for Mr.
Keesling to start. My State also is in a unique situation
because there's been this nationwide wave of marijuana
legalization.
And virtually every State that surrounds Idaho has
legalized marijuana, mostly recreational, with the exception of
Wyoming. And we've seen this very significant surge in
incarcerations as a result of that. Have you seen that? Does
that track in other areas from your perspective?
Mr. Keesling. Well certainly in Indiana we may have a
similar, where we're surrounded by states where there's
legalized marijuana. And all the people that come out of prison
are prohibited, they're randomly drug tested on a regular
basis. So what we see happening are these cannabis knockoffs
that can pass the drug test, so people are moving into the
knockoff drugs, also opioids, methamphetamine, cocaine.
That has become the most common drug use that we see, are
the type of drugs that can't be picked up on standard drug
tests. And so it's a really big issue. We're a zero-tolerance
State, Indiana, so that you cannot drink or do any drugs
whatever if you test positive, there's a good chance you're
going to get violated and sent back to prison.
So it is a really major problem, but it's the knockoff
drugs more than the legal drugs, or the legal marijuana coming
in from other states that we're seeing.
Mr. Fulcher. Yes, thank you for that. Shifting gears a
little bit to Ms. Scott. I'd like to clarify on something that
you had said earlier. Your local affiliates do this market
analysis, and I'm interested in that market analysis, and that
process a little bit more. What if that analysis just shows
that the needs are just way different than the available
skillsets, what happens then? Ms. Scott could you help me
clarify that?
Ms. Scott. Sure. So first when we talk about labor, we
encourage all of our Urban League affiliates to consult the
labor market information system to know what are established
employers and needs in their community, and then we partner
with training and education providers to ensure that the skills
that are being developed actually line up with what employers
need.
Mr. Fulcher. But are you able to actually have some
success? That gap is just very, very wide. Are you able to have
some success in bridging it?
Ms. Scott. Yes. Absolutely we do. So an example that we
have, now it's not exclusive for reentry, but it's for all
adults, is that we do have a tech training program. And we
originally went with a traditional training program such as
systems analyst, but we recognize that when you go to different
markets, the techniques are different.
If you go into Seattle, it's coding is what they need. If
you go to the Midwest, it's project management is what they
need. And the thing is, is that's what's very important when
you do have education and skill development programs, that
there's a strong connection between what employers need, what
the market needs, and what the market demands, and then
connecting individuals.
As mentioned earlier there may be some individuals who may
have some skill gaps, that is where multi-service organizations
can help bridge that, so somebody who has low literacy, then we
connect them to an adult basic education literacy program.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you for that. I'm sorry to move so
quickly, but I just have just a little bit left. Quick question
for Ms. Safstrom please. Your organization has been involved in
getting talent back to work. And once they get involved, once
this talent does plug into what would be termed as subsidized
employment, how long do they tend to stay?
Is it truly a transition, or does it tend to be a longer
employment range?
Ms. Safstrom. Thank you for that question. It's not
necessarily subsidized employment. What we're finding overall
is that overall turnover of individuals who have a criminal
record is lower, if not the same as individuals who do not have
a criminal record, and there's been direct research that we've
done both in 2019 and refreshed if you will in 2021.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you for that. I'm out of time. Madam
Chairwoman I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. And now
Mr. Jones from New York.
Mr. Jones. Thank you so much Madam Chair, and I appreciate
your making reentry employment opportunities the focus of
today's hearing. I also want to thank our witnesses for sharing
their perspectives with us all today. As you know the United
States incarcerates more people than any other country in the
world at great cost to our society.
According to one study our country spends 80 billion
dollars a year on incarceration, and up to one trillion dollars
in collateral costs to communities and to families annually.
Unfortunately, we only spend a fraction of that on workforce
development programs that help people gain the skills they need
to obtain good-paying long-term jobs.
A decade ago when I worked at the Department of Justice in
the Office of Legal Policy, we studied how to reduce recidivism
and improve reentry for people leaving Federal incarcerated
settings. Gainful employment was at the top of the list when it
came to the factors that reduce an individual's likelihood to
commit crimes in the future.
Stable employment helps people live with dignity, provide
for their families, contribute to society, and ultimately stay
out of prison. As we consider reauthorization of the Work Force
Innovation and Opportunity Act, it is critical that we include
a permanent program to help formerly incarcerated people return
to the workforce.
Ms. Lattimore, youth, and young adults who are involved
with the criminal justice system face some unique challenges.
In fact no other age demographic is more vulnerable to being
rearrested than those individuals under the age of 25. What
approaches to reentry have shown the most success with this
population?
Ms. Lattimore. Thank you, thank you very much for the
question, Representative. I think we come back to the same
point that we've been talking about today, an opportunity to
get education that leads to a living wage, an opportunity for
career advancement, an opportunity to initiate a process by
which an individual can actually believe.
Many of our youth who are involved in the criminal justice
system come from circumstances where they've never been
afforded the opportunity to get a good education. They don't
have good examples of that, so you know programs that provide
peer support and mentoring, as part of a wraparound service,
education, and employment skills development programs, I think,
are the things that we need to look at when we look at our
youth.
Mr. Jones. And how can we improve the public workforce
system to ensure that DOL funded programs advance projects that
link supportive housing, peer advocacy, and support, and
employment and education programs to justice-involved youth and
young adults?
Ms. Lattimore. Yes, thank you for that question as well.
And I have primarily studied the justice department side of the
criminal justice system perspective, and one thing I think is
important is exactly what you touched on, is that there needs
to be coordination among Federal agencies who have programs
that are impactful for justice-involved individuals, and that's
not just education and labor, it's also SAMSA and HHS, NIDA,
housing, urban development, all of these Federal agencies
provide services and programs, and it would be very nice if
across the Federal Government there could be collaboration and
cooperation among the agencies so that you make sure that the
programs are actually functioning collectively to address
issues that individuals have.
Mr. Jones. Thank you for that. Ms. Scott, people of color
face disproportionate barriers to employment upon release from
incarceration. Your testimony states that formerly incarcerated
African American men have a 35 percent unemployment rate post-
release, and that formerly incarcerated African-American women
had a 44 percent unemployment rate.
And of course we know the COVID-19 pandemic has hit black
and brown communities the hardest across the country. How do
the programming interventions offered by the Urban League
impact educational attainment, employment, and the likelihood
of rearrest? You're muted.
Ms. Scott. Very sorry. Rookie move. So yes. We do know that
education outcomes have a direct correlation on success
reentering society and against rearrest. Every Urban League is
a multi-service organization. So one of the first things that
we do, we recommend every program has, is that we do an
assessment. We assess education outcomes and skillsets. We
assess what talents someone arrives with, and then we connect
them with that program.
And so for an individual, particularly youth, there are
many youth who do not have a high school diploma. We know that
I believe 80 percent have dropped out who end up in our system
from high school. We know that 58 percent do not engage in any
education opportunity while they are incarcerated.
So youth programs should have a dual focus, both education
and/or employment. If it's education, it's to obtain that
certification. It may then lead to an apprenticeship
opportunity, or enrollment in a 2-year higher education
institution. If it is strictly an employment track, obviously
having a high school diploma at minimum is an opportunity to
qualify for an entry level employment opportunity, and also an
apprenticeship.
Mr. Jones. Thank you, Madam, Chair, and thank you to the
witnesses. I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Now we'll hear from Representative
Miller-Meeks.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you, Madam.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you Madam Chair and I think it's
interesting at a time when we're having difficulties with
individuals in the workforce, and every employer I talk to is
having challenges, that approximately 600,000 offenders are
released from prison every year, and recently released
prisoners have a 32 percent unemployment rate. So I think that
this hearing and the testimony of the witnesses is extremely
timely.
One of the things that I've heard from employers in the
past as well is that there's challenges with the legal
community in hiring previously incarcerated individuals. And I
was just wondering if any of the witnesses, but I'll also
direct it to Mr. Keesling. Does the First Step Act, or have you
heard this as well and is there action that we need to take?
Does the First Step Act help in removing some of this legal
liability that employers field in hiring incarcerated
individuals?
Mr. Keesling. I think it's too early for us to know. We
need more research to really know. But you know people who are
released are put under monitoring. We have 4,000 people under
electronic monitoring here in Indianapolis alone.
We're the Silicon Valley of logistics here. And the
distributions are very willing to hire, yet the electronic
monitoring is a cell signal. It's very difficult to get through
the warehouses, so it can be very hard for oversight and
employers to work together to monitor this.
So I just feel that we need better ways to provide
oversight, and for employers to be able to work with criminal
justice oversight, so they can manage people on their work
site. But it's the first step, backward a step, and it's still
very early and we'd like to see more research about it.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you so much. Ms. Safstrom,
relationships with employers must be incorporated throughout
workforce systems if programs are going to accomplish the end
goal of getting individuals back into the workforce. We have
this in Iowa with some of our incarcerated individuals working
in the home building industry.
This allows both the workers and employers to benefit as we
expand the talent pipeline and offer opportunities to more
Americans. As we move through the other side of the pandemic
and hopefully return to a tight labor market, which seems to be
pretty tight already, what must be done to bring employers to
the table in reentry efforts?
Ms. Safstrom. Thank you for the question. I think we have a
tremendous opportunity to engage employers more specifically in
discussions going on with the workforce board level, so that
the workforce development systems, so the community-based
organizations are very much up to speed in terms of where the
labor market is headed, the future of work.
The jobs are ever-changing, and I think increasingly
employers need to be involved in the conversations in terms of
what individuals are trained in, for what roles, for what
industry sectors, and where industry sectors in those jobs are
actually moving in the future.
Not just for today, but certainly to the future, so that
we're well-prepared to rapidly up-skill those individuals so
they continue to stay employed.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you. And you also mentioned that
the work that your organization has been involved in regarding
the national conversation about reentry through your Getting
Talent Back to Work Initiative, and the Second Chance Business
Coalition. Based on your work in this space, how do
transitional jobs or subsidized employment impact outcomes for
the reentry population as opposed to other efforts?
Ms. Safstrom. I think that's a critical element. I mean the
biggest challenge obviously for someone who is transitioning
out of incarceration is to get that first job. And the Second
Chance Business Coalition is really a group of large employers
that are global and focused, but national in nature.
In these particular conversations we're all starting to ask
those very similar questions, and I think as those
conversations continue to move forward that's the perspective,
we'll be able to bring back as Members of the coalition, and
certainly as Members of SHRM.
Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you. And I think you underscored
that this is a collaborative effort between the private sector
employers and government both at the local, State, and the
Federal level, so I appreciate that. Madam Chair and Ranking
Member Murphy, Dr. Murphy I appreciate the opportunity to ask
questions and I yield back my time.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. Now Ms.
Manning of North Carolina.
Ms. Manning. Thank you, Madam Chair, and just a week ago I
was at an event in my community where two gentlemen who have
been incarcerated came up specifically to talk to me about the
importance of reentry programs, and particularly the wrap-
around services and what a difference they made in their
ability to rebuild their lives.
So I really appreciate you holding this hearing today. I'd
like to start with Ms. Lattimore. You mentioned in your
testimony that an emerging trend within criminology is to focus
on identity change as a critical element in justice-involved
individuals, successful transition back to their communities to
attain a more positive and productive future.
And I understand that research indicates the justice-
involved individuals need and benefit from access to mental
health services, including cognitive behavioral therapy which
trains participants to adapt their thinking from destructive
thinking to more positive thinking.
So I'd like to ask you to elaborate on why access to mental
health services particularly CBT, is so important a part of
reentry employment programs.
Ms. Lattimore. Thank you, Congresswoman, for the question.
I would point to some other research that I was engaged in,
well a few years ago, that was focused on looking at traumatic
brain injury among a released cohort of prisoners from actually
South Carolina prisons, but we found a prevalence of traumatic
brain injury to be very high.
It was over, you know, 50 percent or more of the
individuals who were released from prison had experienced at
least one incident that led to traumatic brain injury. And we
know, the neuroscientists known that individuals who have TBI's
are much more likely to be prone to violence, that they also
have cognitive difficulties.
Many of these are untreated, and so I think that cognitive
behavior therapy and other kinds of programs that help
individuals regulate their behavior go a long way to, you know,
a healthier pathway, during the reentry process. And also if
it's acknowledged can improve even actually behavior while
people are incarcerated.
But you have to be in a good place. You have to think that
engaging in a certain activity is going to result in a positive
outcome in order to be able to move forward. The emerging
literature, I mean with cognitive behavior therapy, with
educational programs, there's been some work done on fatherhood
programs, and parenting programs where again that's an identity
transformation, if someone can see themselves as a parent with
the responsibilities that come with parenthood.
But that kind of transformative activity in addition to the
kinds of transformations that can go on with education also
seem to lead people to try to find a way to be successful.
Ms. Manning. Thank you for that. Ms. Safstrom, in 2021, 84
percent of companies in manufacturing, construction, and
utilities have hired justice-involved individuals, the most of
any industries. And these companies' willingness to hire
justice-involved individuals has presented great opportunities.
So how can we engage other industry sectors to increase
their hiring in this population, and what steps could the
public workforce development system take to engage industries
that have not traditionally been major employers of justice-
involved individuals?
Ms. Safstrom. Thank you for that question. The industries
that you mentioned are very heavily involved in apprenticeship,
which is a tremendous vehicle for individuals to either receive
training while they're incarcerated, but certainly to go to
work for an organization who is demonstrating a belief, and not
just giving them that first job, but really putting them on a
career pathway.
So I'd love to see some of the success rates between the
industries that you just described, and the success they have
hiring individuals who have been incarcerated in apprenticeship
programs and see the benefits or the outcomes of those
apprenticeship programs.
And I think just an increased awareness of the WOTC for
other organizations, continuing the conversation, having these
cross-collaborative conversations like we're having and leading
at the Second Chance Business Coalition where there are other
industry segments at the table asking how industries you just
described, how they are doing it, what their approach is, would
really help facilitate learning and systemic change.
Ms. Manning. Thanks very much. Madam Chair I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. And now
Mr. Good of Virginia.
Mr. Good. Thank you, Madam, Chairman, and thank you to our
witnesses for being with us today. My questions will be
directed to Ms. Safstrom in just a moment. But first just to
say that Chuck Colson's prison fellowship program and others
have estimated that nearly 1 in 3 American adults have some
sort of criminal record which represents some 70 million
people.
An astounding statistic and equally alarming, the
employment rate for these individuals is some five times as
high as the general population. However, meaningful employment
is one of the greatest keys to reducing recidivism. As a
Christian I believe in the principles of and the need for
justice, but I also believe in the transformative power of
forgiveness and the second chances that we all desire for
ourselves and our loved ones.
And that our Nation's justice system should have a
restorative focus along with the necessary punitive component.
While I support being tough on crime, and I'm deeply troubled
that we are dangerously failing to address the recent surge in
violent crime that's skyrocketing across our American cities in
the past year, I also strongly support the Trump
administration's historic achievements in negotiating and
signing into law The First Step Act.
So Ms. Safstrom, as we consider reforming our reentry
programs, what were the benefits of, and the lessons learned
from the Trump administration's First Step Act?
Ms. Safstrom. Yes, I'm an expert in the work of the SHRM
Foundation certainly, but not necessarily an expert in that
particular topic, but I'm happy to confer with my colleagues
and get back to the Committee.
Mr. Good. While I think it's clear that the Trump
administration was a leader in this area and again made
tremendous progress in dealing with many of the issues that
we're discussing today with The First Step Act that was passed,
and I don't think that the administration, prior administration
had rightfully given credit to that.
So do we have another one of our witnesses who would like
to speak about what those successes were, and what we can
perhaps improve upon from the First Step Act as we try to
update our programs. Is there another witness that would like
to speak to that?
Mr. Keesling. I certainly hope we will expand the amount of
funding in the REO program because we think employment social
enterprises can benefit and help people as they come home to
get immediate employment. And you know, I'd like to just
quickly comment, you know I wear a gold star. We lost our son
in the Iraq War in 2009.
And traumatic brain injury, then post-traumatic stress, as
we looked at what our soldiers and our son faced, we realize
that those coming home from prison have had more bullets around
them over their head. Our son died by suicide in the Iraqi war
theater on June 19, 2009.
And we think there was this tremendous opportunity to begin
to understand mental health, and how the trauma of prison, the
trauma that communities that people live in are affecting their
brain functioning and the trauma they have to overcome. So we
just feel it's so critically important we help individuals when
they come home.
And we're very happy because June 19th was a very terrible
day for us, but now we've decided it's going to be Juneteenth,
a holiday. Just like our clients have to take something off of
a gun and transition it into something good, that's what we're
going to do as a family.
We're going to take this tragic death of our son on June 19
in 2009 and turn it into a celebration of moving forward. So
thank you for the opportunity to speak about my son and his
service to our country.
Mr. Good. Mr. Keesling thank you for joining into that
question there and for offering your response, and we as a
nation owe a great debt to the service and the sacrifice of
your son, and so many others, and we mourn with you his tragic
passing, and I thank you for sharing that.
So on that note as far as the topic in the First Step Act,
do you have any good metrics to help us in Congress better
understand how successful reentry programs may be from the
perspective of potential employers, just to assess our
investment of resources in again reentry programs?
Mr. Keesling. Well certainly, we've had the EPJD that
Congress authorized, and that research is out there, and our
program had $1.20 return on a dollar investment. Most of that
being that our folks over 30 months earned $6,000.00 more than
the control group.
But RTI is doing tremendous research as are many other of
the research firms out there, so I think it's really critical
that in any reauthorization we continue to have these random
control trials where there's a treatment group, and a control
group and the two can measured against one another.
Mr. Good. One final question. So you're saying that those
who receive support from programs such as these have a, on
average, a $6,000.00 per year higher earning than those who are
on their own re-entering the workforce after having been
incarcerated.
Mr. Keesling. Over 30 months they made $6,000.00 more, and
they had significantly less violent crime that they participate
in.
Mr. Good. OK thank you sir, and I yield back my time
Chairwoman Wilson.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. And now
Ms. Omar of Minnesota.
Ms. Omar. Thank you, Chairwoman, and thank you so much for
convening this important hearing. Formerly incarcerated persons
tend to have high rates of unemployment due to social stigma
and legal barriers. After serving their sentences, justice-
involved individuals are expected to somehow flourish in a
society that rebukes them for existing.
It is clear that we must shift from a criminal legal system
currently based on retribution and punishment to a criminal
justice system that is centered on restoration and
rehabilitation. One way in which we can achieve this goal is to
form a holistic support system in our workforce development
programs for people leaving prison.
This means improving access to wraparound services like
housing, transportation, and childcare. To ensure that formally
incarcerated individuals have a fair and equitable transition
to society, we need to provide them with the sufficient
resources to fully engage and succeed in job training and
stable employment activities.
So my question is to Ms. Lattimore. What has research shown
on the importance of providing access to supportive services in
improving outcomes for reentry employment programs, and what
does it say about mentoring and job coaching, and career
navigation support for these individuals?
Ms. Lattimore. Thank you very much for the question. I
think we've recognized for quite some time that wraparound
services are necessary, and most of the reentry programs that
I've been involved in the evaluation of, offer a range of
services. Now not everyone gets everything they need, but at
least they're provided a range of services.
And I think what we need to know and understand better is
what's the proper sequencing of those services? And we talked
earlier about cognitive behavior therapy, and you know one way
to think about that is to make sure that people are prepared,
you know, sort of mentally and emotionally, to benefit from the
next step, from education.
But it's just speculation on my part, that in some ways
just makes sense, right? I mean you need to be ready for
change, what the substance abuse treatment providers talk a lot
about. And I think with respect to engagement in education
programs, and skills development, and again the transition
process, transformation process into a positive self involves
being ready to do that.
And we really actually know very little about what programs
in what order, and how much. And that's why there needs to be
care taken in the construction of these programs. In my
testimony I talked about a one- or two-year grant period is not
long enough to put together a concentrated program and get to a
point where you'd have a reasonable expectation that they would
be effective.
So I think there's a program at Florida State, research at
Florida State University, they have been working on with
support from the Koch Foundation, that's called the five keys
reentry program model, and it's a wellness-based model that
stresses the importance of, you know, well-being, positive
relationships, and so forth, and then has a, you know, very
strong education component to that.
So I mean, I think that that project has been going on now
for multiple years, and it's still in the pilot stage. If you
think about cancer research for example, we don't jump
immediately to, you know, a few years and we're done with
whatever we're doing, and I think this problem is complex, and
therefore we need to take time to make sure that we're getting
it right.
Ms. Omar. That certainly is true. And so do you think it
would be helpful if a new formal grant was established to
assist the State workforce systems, especially for improving
access to support services?
Ms. Lattimore. I definitely think so. I think that, and I
think that collaboration across the various title agencies to
assure that that happens, rather than, you know, having SAMSA
in their silo and Ed in their silo and so forth, but to really
have a very focused and well-coordinated inter-agency
coordination around these issues, I think would go a long way
to expediting the identification of the successful models.
Ms. Omar. Thank you for your thoughtful response to my
question and for your work. Chairwoman I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Now we'll hear from Ms. McClain from
Michigan, Representative McClain.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you. Dr. Lattimore, similar to how some
individuals are able to obtain their GED and some forms of
education while they're incarcerated, how do skilled trade
programs find job prospects in those reentering society, and
are they able to reach them in advance to their reentry?
Ms. Lattimore. Yes. Thank you for the question, and I will
let some of my colleagues on the panel address how employers go
about actually connecting. But I will stress that my research
has shown, or the research that we've done has shown that
individuals are really anxious to engage in programs while
they're incarcerated.
Mrs. McClain. Yes.
Ms. Lattimore. And then when they get out it's such a
struggle to basically live, that they get disconnected. And you
know one problem with prison-based programs of course is the
prison may be several hundred miles away from their home
community. And so making those connections with between where
someone is going to live and where they're currently
incarcerated can be very difficult. So I think programs that
were mentioned earlier, the program where people have moved
closer to home before release in Florida, has done that also
for example, is important.
And then that in-reach to try to make that linkage. If it's
not with employers, which I think probably would be the best,
but with at least the employment services agencies that are
trying to support these individuals is just critical. I have
despaired in, you know, the results of my research to see how
little programming and services individuals actually get once
they're released.
For me personally, it's just been kind of disheartening.
It's like you try, you talk about a program that's focused on
reentry, and then it's just so difficult because of individuals
struggling with living to keep them engaged in services post
release.
Mrs. McClain. So if I hear you correctly, it's not that
they're not getting the training while incarcerated, there are
programs, and they are getting trained. It's when they get out
there's a lack of willingness to employ them. So the programs
are there, skill trades programs during the incarceration?
Ms. Lattimore. There are some, and it's highly variable.
I'm sure that Traci or Wendi or Gregg could respond to this
from their own experience with their organizations. But you
know the issue is matching the training to the available job
opportunities in the communities that the individuals are going
to return to.
And so many of our, the quality of in-prison programs is
highly variable, and I think you know people could come away
with some basic skills. I like to think about it from the
standpoint that individuals can start their training while
they're incarcerated, strive for education processes while
they're incarcerated with an expectation, as is true for all of
us, that lifetime learning is really something we all need to
do now.
And so to facilitate that is really important. I want to
make one other point related to some of the things that we've
talked about, the difficulties faced by individuals when
they're being released by mentioning something I'm acutely
aware of is that many of these individuals in addition to
facing challenges with respect to housing and transportation
and so forth, come out of prisons, or go on probation with
owing considerable court fees, fines, and the fees and fines
that they're charged.
You know in some places you have to pay $60.00 a month as
someone who's on probation. And $60.00 doesn't sound like a
whole lot to us, but for someone who's struggling to find
employment, to find housing and so forth, it's just yet one
more barrier that individuals face.
Mrs. McClain. So if I hear you correctly what you're saying
is even with a skilled trade, that's not addressing the issue.
We need to address the other issues before we address the
skilled trades issues.
Ms. Lattimore. Well I mean, I think that we need to make
sure, and just because there's some education provided in
prison does not necessarily mean that that education is
actually preparing someone to enter a skilled trade. And there
certainly needs to be much more connection on that point.
That we need to make sure that the skills that are being
taught are actually skills that are marketable in the
community. And we talked about stacked credentials, and we
talked about, you know, career advancement, so I think that
people may be set on that path. But in addition to that the
discussions about wrap-around services and making sure that the
services are properly sequenced, so that people are ready for
treatment, I think, you know, we need to learn a lot more about
that, rather than it being piecemeal.
And again, just to come back to the point, that takes time.
You know it takes more than a 2-year grant program.
Mrs. McClain. It takes time and it takes money, right?
Ms. Lattimore. And it takes money, yes that's right.
Mrs. McClain. OK thank you.
Mr. Keesling. ABC, Better Job, Career.
Ms. Scott. Yes, if I could have one very quick point. The
top three apprenticeship programs in prison are in maid/
housekeeping, and in cooks, and institution and animal
trainers. Not all of those jobs are amenable to all markets,
but if you look at apprenticeships post release, you look at
the top placements for apprenticeships are electricians,
construction, and plumbers. So while there are programs that
are pre-release, they're not connecting to what the market
needs.
Mrs. McClain. There isn't a match. There isn't a match,
exactly, OK. Thank you.
Chairwoman Wilson. We have to adhere to the time. We have
so many Members who have not spoken, and these same questions
are going to be asked, so please let's respect each other's
time. Mr. Bowman, our Vice Chair of the entire Committee, of
New York.
Mr. Bowman. Thank you, Madam, Chairwoman, and thank you to
our witnesses for being here today. Ms. Scott, thank you for
your testimony before the Committee and the work you do to
support justice-involved individuals. I represent New York's
16th District, which includes parts of Westchester County and
the Bronx, where I was a principal.
So I'd like to start off with a question about the people
you serve before they come to you, and before they were
incarcerated, having worked directly with students for the
greater part of my career. I know that students need
counselors, not cops. When there's an increase in law
enforcement present, there is also an increase in interactions
with law enforcement, and those interactions unfortunately are
disproportionately negative, harmful, and potentially deadly
for black and brown students. If you had to estimate how many
individuals in a National Urban League's Reentry Jobs Program
first got involved in the justice system while they were a
student in school, how would you estimate that?
Ms. Scott. Thank you for this question Representative
Bowman. That number I am not prepared in research to do. What I
will add are that those urban communities that are under-
resourced do have an outsized ratio between guidance counselors
and students. It's double what it should be, and it's even
worse in urban communities.
So youth who are engaged and looking for an opportunity do
not have an assigned professional to help lead them into an
opportunity. The second bit, and I'm very grateful that you
bring up the Bronx and some of the more struggling communities
that are in or near New York City, is that we don't talk about
gang involvement, labor trafficking, and sex trafficking.
In that these contribute to high school dropout rates, and
usually precipitate the first engagement that young people have
with law enforcement, and that shapes how they see their
community, the engagement they have that community.
What the National Urban League and its affiliates do, and
that's where we engage with having out of school time programs
that are available, we support summer employment activities
that contribute not only job skill development but needed
income in poverty-stricken communities so that it helps
individuals and families.
Mr. Bowman. Thank you. I also wanted to ask, the school
prison pipeline disproportionately impacts black and brown
students, and it is particularly damaging for students of color
with special needs. What supports have you found to be
especially important in helping individuals find employment
when they may have special needs that have been unsupported for
quite some time?
Ms. Scott. I'm so very glad, it seems like it might be left
field, but it's something we don't talk about. First, when we
do talk about individuals who may have a learning disability or
cognitive diversity in the low-income community, such as Latin
and African-American communities, many go undetected, because
there are no programs, or they cannot afford a simple
assessment.
So those individuals, those young people go through school
having a learning disability, having needs that go unmet. If an
individual or young adult decides to take their high school
equivalency or GED, if they are diagnosed with having a
learning disability, they get extra provisions to complete the
test.
But if they do not have that designation, they do not have
the authority to complete their GED. So the first bit is an
assessment. The second bit is on funding those programs so that
those individuals who are not financially in a place to
privately pay for those services, that it is available to them.
And that also is one of the contributing factors to a young
person engaging in unhelpful anti-social behavior in their
communities.
Mr. Bowman. I don't have enough time. I just had a quick
general question. We could start with Ms. Scott and go all the
way around. How much of your work is driven by ACES, adverse
childhood experiences, and the research related to ACES? Just a
quick go around start with Ms. Scott.
Ms. Scott. Yep. So all of our programs are case management
based, and it all centers on an assessment that actually
includes information for ACES.
Mr. Keesling. I would say 100 percent of those we serve
have been impacted by adverse childhood experiences, like the
trauma that our son went through with his traumatic brain
injury. These are big things that we've got to address.
Ms. Lattimore. Yes, I would agree 100 percent with that. I
think we've encountered almost everyone who goes through our
group, certainly who goes through our prisons. And back to your
question about youth, I will point out that most of the prison
studies that I've done, the average age at first arrest is
somewhere between 15 and 16, so that's pretty young.
Ms. Safstrom. Mental health and wellness in the workplace.
on behalf of human resources officers for the entirety of the
population, has become, as you can imagine, increasingly
important and in fact we're holding a workplace mental health
summit in October, and we've invited. I believe it's Dr. Nadine
Harris, will be coming to speak to us about that program.
Mr. Bowman. Thank you so much Madam Chairwoman. I yield
back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Now Representative Harshbarger from
Tennessee.
Ms. Harshbarger. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member
Murphy, and thank you witnesses for being here. This is very
enlightening. It's extremely important that we talk about this
topic, and I appreciate your work in these areas. Mr. Keesling
I am so sorry about the loss of your son, and I thank you for
his service absolutely.
Ms. Lattimore, just as a side note, I'd love to have more
information on, as a pharmacist, I would love to have more
information on traumatic brain injuries in the incarcerated
public. If you could do that for me.
Ms. Lattimore. Yes, I'd be happy to.
Ms. Harshbarger. Thank you. You know, while we discuss the
importance of developing policies that allow justice-involved
individuals to reenter the workforce, it's important that we
don't support policies that keep them from returning to work,
and occupational licensing is a big impediment for getting
Americans to work, and this is an especially large burden for
justice-involved individuals.
I do have a bill that's called the Freedom to Work Act that
encourages adoptions of less burdensome occupational licensing
barriers, and my question goes to Ms. Safstrom. You represent
human resource leaders, and can you speak to your
comfortability with reducing occupational licensing barriers
that may prevent these justice-involved individuals from coming
back to work?
Ms. Safstrom. Thank you for that question. I unfortunately
can't comment specifically as to those barriers, but certainly
that's something I could take back to my colleagues on the SHRM
side and bring forward to the Committee.
Ms. Harshbarger. Well that would be fantastic because
there's definitely room to roll back these unnecessary
occupational licensing burdens. And it could really get more
Americans back to work, including those who've been involved in
the criminal justice system. And let me tell you a little bit
about what that bill does.
It really directs the Federal Government to identify and
eliminate its policies that encourage the adoption of really
unnecessary occupational licensing barriers at the State level,
and it requires those states to list their plan to reduce those
occupational licensing barriers in their WIOA State plans, so
we should not pass WIOA reauthorization legislation without
including occupational licensing reform, period.
I do not believe this should be a partisan issue. You know,
both the Trump administration and the Obama administration
recognized that these occupational licensing, it was a barrier
to employment, and I encourage everyone, my democratic
colleagues, join me, you know, on this important initiative.
And what I would like to do is reference a 2019 report by
the Arkansas Center for Research and Economics, and it states
that states with the heaviest occupational licensing burdens
have a 12.15 percent increase in recidivism above the national
average, while states with the lowest occupational licensing
burdens have a 2.9 percent decrease in recidivism.
And if it's OK without objection I ask that this report be
entered into the hearing record Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Wilson. So ordered.
Ms. Harshbarger. And, really important, I want to just
thank the witnesses for joining this important discussion and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much, thank you. Now Mr.
Pocan of Wisconsin. Mr. Pocan?
Mr. Pocan. Thank you very much Madam Chair and thanks for
making this issue become such a great bipartisan issue of
support. I appreciate your leadership on that. I served in the
Wisconsin legislature prior to coming to Congress. I was the
ranking dem on the corrections Committee, and actually at the
time the Chairman was Scott Walker before he became Governor.
So I worked on these issues for a long time. One of the
things we did a little after that period when we had Jim Doyle
became Governor, was for the first time ever we had the
secretaries of corrections, human services, and workforce
development sitting down together.
And so prior to that, as you mentioned, some people just
get a bus pass and whatever money they had, and they have to
figure out everything else. We kind of made sure that people
had, if you had mental health issues you had your medications.
We made sure people had an ID, because something as simple as
getting that ID for opening the bank account and everything
else really mattered.
So I guess I'm trying to get an idea how wide of a variety
of different experiences do people have State to State on that,
that very first step of transitioning out, what they're
actually getting from the respective states that they may have
been housed in. And I know, Ms. Scott and Ms. Lattimore, you
both talked about this a little bit, so if you both wouldn't
mind addressing it.
Ms. Scott. Thank you for that question Representative
Pocan. It's a very large question, and so one I'm not prepared
to give, but it's something that we can'we have 91 affiliates,
and so we have quite a robust response that we can provide to
you.
Mr. Pocan. Great thank you.
Ms. Lattimore. And I will say I have probably conducted
research related to prisoner reentry in at least 25 states over
the course of my career, and I can say I mean I agree with Ms.
Scott it's a very complicated question, but there's huge
variability. You know, I mean even something so simple as some
states have halfway houses, and other states don't, right?
Some states have work release, and other states don't, you
know, so even on these big major components of what a lot of
people would think were normal, you see huge variation. And you
know, I commend Wisconsin for beginning to tackle this problem.
I think that that's really important because a bus ticket
really doesn't carry people really far, and so I think that
that's really good.
I mean we can get more details on the variability across
states, but I will just tell you that it's huge.
Mr. Keesling. And Congressman, here in Indiana we actually
had a meeting with our State legislature, and we used Wisconsin
as a model that we hope we could do more of, so thank you.
Mr. Pocan. And I guess, you know, to the three of you who
answered the question, I mean should we have some minimal
standards, right? Because prior to that we didn't, right, we
had that bus ticket and that was it. And clearly, that puts
people at such a disadvantage that very first step out to be
able to do things.
You know as we're looking at this, is there anything that,
you know, you might recommend in this area?
Ms. Scott. Yes, I would. One is access, universal access
meaning state-wide access for not-for-profits to have access to
inmates pre-release. That is just key to being able to create,
to share what resources are available in the community and
create a plan, a post-release plane.
Ms. Lattimore. I would just add that, you know, that a
requirement should probably come with some indication of
funding streams, right? Because you know about most of the cost
of corrections is borne by State and local governments, not the
Federal Government.
And in fact, I think about, somewhere above 90 percent of
the correction cost in this country are actually'the last
number that I had seen was on the order of almost 90 billion
dollars a year on corrections'almost all of that is borne by
State and local governments.
And so I think figuring out how to finance something that
really is urgent, and I believe, you know, I do believe that
you would see cost savings when that's done. I suspect
Wisconsin has in terms of returns to prison, but there are the
upfront costs for that.
Mr. Pocan. I'm sorry go ahead.
Mr. Keesling. Well I will add just the employment social
enterprise movement is growing. We're not even the only one
here in Indiana, and we're making it grow. So having that
funding that allows us to capture this person immediately upon
release from prison, and we can see them prior to release and
build these pathways, and then they move into the alternative
staffing where employers can really begin to see these folks
and get a chance to hire them.
Mr. Pocan. Great, thank you Madam I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Ms. Spartz of Indiana?
Ms. Spartz. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr.
Keesling, for being here today and what you're doing in the
great State of Indiana. I know we have a lot of discussions
about wraparound services and talking about all these different
initiatives that need to be done on a more wholesome and
comprehensive basis, not at hoc and fragmented, but government
is generally fragmented, you know.
And that just is always a challenge. And in the Indiana
legislature when I was State Senator we had a discussion, do we
really need to rethink our criminal justice system in general
because it's just, you know, we are having different issues
we're dealing with, and a lot of us, you know, people dealing
with mental health issues and addiction issues, and everything
else.
So I appreciate what you do, but I have a question for you.
We talked about life-long learning opportunities because we
want people to be able to have second chances, and I think you
know it's very important to do that.
What do you believe, is there a mechanism that you believe
exists for people to do this life-long learning, or what are
the obstacles you see mostly why people go back in criminal
justice system and don't stay, as you know, as a successful
Member of society?
Mr. Keesling. Well I think the most important thing that
people do is to have a job. And so when you have a lot of the
barriers, you know, with your education levels and things like
that, we need to address them, but there are a lot of jobs as
you well know all through central Indiana here, and it's just
beginning to work with employers to be more open, and you know
with our states electronic monitoring and some of the heavy-
handed oversight that happens.
It's very difficult to work continuously with this
monitoring. If you get ordered to a random drug test you have
to go to your employer and ask for the day off. People are left
often when they're under oversight, choosing between keeping my
job and being violated, or quitting my job and try to adhere to
the criminal justice oversight.
So I really feel we've made some really good progress in
Marion County of how we've been able to keep the violations
down. Historically in Indianapolis, I'm doing this work, in the
past 7 out of 10 people who went back to prison each year
didn't commit a new crime, they had a technical rule violation
of their, you know, of their mandates when they reentered.
Today we've been able in Marion County to reduce that down
to 50 percent, still a long way to go, but in the other
counties it's growing dramatically, and we're starting to see a
pretty significant shift of people from other counties into
Indianapolis because there are more jobs, there's more
services, and that's a burden to the resources that we have
available here.
So we'd really like to see the counties work much closer
with justice oversight. You probably know Greg Steuerwald and
the 106 legislation that really hasn't had a chance to fully do
what it can do, and so we would just like to see that expansion
and thank you Congresswoman for giving me these opportunities
from Indiana to talk to you today.
Ms. Spartz. Well thank you very much and Dr. Lattimore
quick question for you. Your kind of looking at different types
of programs and you know we did some evidence-based programs
that work very close with, you know, with some of that retired
judges, or former prosecutors.
What have you seen in some of the evidence-based programs,
what is really working? What is very important to be successful
to let people have the second chances, and what is the biggest
obstacles you've seen?
Ms. Lattimore. Thank you for the question. I think we've
touched on much of it today, and I will repeat what Mr.
Keesling said that, you know, people need jobs, they need work,
and they need the programming that will help them be able to
get their credentials, be able to have an option, opportunity
for a career.
I think that basically pointing a path for individuals so
that they see that there's, you know, that there is a light at
the end of this road that is going to be positive and
productive for them. I believe those are the kinds of things,
and these are exactly the kind of programs that WIOA is focused
on promoting.
And so I mean I think that that is one piece of it. I also
appreciated Mr. Keesling's discussion about technical
violations. I have another project that's looking at community
supervision and changes and reform to community supervision
across the United States, what states are doing to try to
improve that.
Technical violations are a source of that and the length of
time that people are on supervision. Those two things combined
would generate a large number of individuals going back to
prison. So I think we need to be thankful, or thoughtful about
the conditions that are actually imposed, and make sure that
they don't do more harm than good.
Ms. Spartz. Thank you. I actually am working on supervised
release at the Federal level, so thank you very much. I yield
back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. And now
we'll hear from our distinguished Chairman Scott from Virginia.
Chairman Scott. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank all
of our witnesses for their testimony. I first wanted to add to
the list the gentleman from Wisconsin mentioned about the
unnecessary bureaucratic barriers. One is kind of reinState
your Medicaid coverage that gets cutoff when you get out. You
have to sign up, there's a waiting period, and if you have a
chronic disease or something like that, it's just an
unnecessary barrier.
If you can keep your Medicaid active you don't need it
while you're in prison, so you're not filing any medical
charges, but that's just another barrier. There's legislation
that I've introduced to try to fix that. To Ms. Scott: the
Urban League works as a vendor for apprenticeships and reentry.
Can you talk a little bit about the intersection between
reentry and apprenticeships on pre-entry, pre-release programs,
and also whether or not there would be a problem if there is
additional funding for the Urban League to scale up to be able
to serve more people?
Ms. Scott. Thank you so very much Chairman Scott for that
question, great last name by the way. When we do talk about
apprenticeship and re-entry, and I mentioned it a little bit
earlier that we do see racial participation in apprenticeships
differ for those who are currently incarcerated into
apprenticeship programs. For those that do participate I
believe the rate, the exit rate for apprenticeship among
African-Americans I believe is $17.00 an hour compared to their
white counterparts, and that's $26.00 an hour.
And a considerable reason for that is because of reentry.
Of those who are currently incarcerated, enroll in an
apprenticeship program at an entering rate, a salary wage rate
at $47.00. And then when they exit it's at $1.47. Individuals
who are in pre-apprenticeships, sorry in apprenticeships, that
are not incarcerated make considerably more, $36.00 an hour.
So that's the first thing we need to talk about is the
racial wage gap in apprenticeships. The other bit that is
helpful when working with national intermediaries are that
apprenticeships are not just in one space, they are national.
And there are many trade unions, trade associations and
unions that are national, and working with having partnerships
with the National Urban League allows us to connect individuals
to introduce them into an apprenticeship opportunity.
The National Urban League runs its own pre-apprenticeship
program that actually prepares individuals to qualify for
apprenticeship, and that's a barrier itself. You mentioned
driver's licenses, that can be a problem. Obtaining a high
school diploma, that can also be a challenge too, and so
working with intermediaries we're able to do that, to be able
to scale up. It's very easy for us to pop up in any one of our
36 states where the National Urban League is and ensure that
there's a stronger connection to apprenticeships and stronger
readiness for it.
Chairman Scott. Thank you. Mr. Keesling a question came up
earlier about legal liability. Is there a bonding authority
available to businesses that want to protect themselves?
Mr. Keesling. There is the Federal bond, but it's used very
limited. One of the things that we've done in Indiana, we have
passed negligent hire legislation. However, the insurance
companies are not based in Indiana, and so insurance companies
really drive the liability.
Chairman Scott. That sounds like something we need to fix.
Mr. Keesling. Oh thank you. You definitely need to fix
that.
Chairman Scott. OK. Let me ask you another question. We've
talked a lot about the prison programs, are there any programs
for jails?
Mr. Keesling. We're operating one now out of the Marion
County Jail.
Chairman Scott. OK. And Ms. Lattimore, you mentioned the
Florida State program, Koch brothers. Can you say a word about
the need for training in soft skills, as well as the technical
training and whether or not there's a place for funding for the
soft skills training?
Ms. Lattimore. There definitely is and we've talked today
about wraparound services, which of course would include soft
skills training. If you've never interviewed for a job, you
don't know how to interview for a job often, and so it's really
important that people are exposed to that, and that can be done
through a program. It can also be done through mentorship
programs that provide support for individuals.
The program that's being run out of Florida State is an
example of a program that is taking several years to develop,
to try to make sure that it's getting the sequencing of
supports correct. And so I think that, you know, there are
examples out there, and there are jail-based programs all over
the country just to go back to your previous question.
Chairman Scott. Thank you. Madam Chair I yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Now for our distinguished Ranking Member
Ms. Foxx.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you very much Madam Chairman. And I thank
all our witnesses for being here and giving us a lot of useful
information today. Ms. Safstrom, while it's not a provision of
WIOA, I appreciated that you mentioned the value of the Work
Opportunity Tax Credit in your testimony.
If we want to effectively use taxpayer funds, we must
ensure that we are taking into account existing programs and
benefits. This includes not just this tax credit, but also
other programs intended to support reentering citizens like
Second Chance Pell, or those programs operated under the Second
Chance Act. Is there a particular area we can focus on as we
work to reauthorize WIOA that would allow that law to buildupon
the successes of reentry efforts rather than duplicating what
is already being done?
Ms. Safstrom. I think it's going to take a really
intentional look at how responsibility is divided amongst the
different programs that are existing: WIOA, REO, the Second
Chance Act, the Second Chance Pell Act, it's really taking
coordinated effort to understand what areas of responsibilities
fall under those particular types of grants, or employment
funding opportunities.
Ms. Foxx. Yes. It's an example of having too many silos
again.
Ms. Safstrom. Yes.
Ms. Foxx. It's something we've worked on for a long time
trying to get rid of silos that create problems where you go
searching for specific categories to find the funding, and that
has been a real problem in all Federal Government programs. We
don't need all those different programs. We really do need to
consolidate in one area.
Mr. Keesling thank you for the work you do to help all
individuals, in particular, those exiting the criminal justice
system have access to transformative power of the dignity of
meaningful work. We've talked about this in this Committee a
lot, about work being a way out of a lot of problem issues,
drug addiction, and all kinds of things. Programs like
RecycleForce and your Any Job, Better Job, Career model
demonstrate what's possible if we empower local community
leaders in this space.
As we contemplate reauthorization of WIOA, and how to
support re-entry efforts, why is it important to allow for
local flexibility and innovation rather than simply increasing
funding and handing the reins to the Department of Labor?
Mr. Keesling. Well certainly Department of Labor has been
flexible with us, but I think each region has its own labor,
the type of jobs, and the type of credentialling, and preparing
people for the labor force we need to have.
So there is no one size fit all. But you know, here in the
Silicon Valley of logistics, it's a lot different than what
might be happening in San Francisco. So I think that we need
that flexibility, and I'm very happy that the REO program has
provided us that flexibility.
You know we've been working now with them over 10 years,
and I can't tell you, you know, how fun it has been to watch
some of the people transition out and retire. The new blood
that's come on at REO now that is really, really innovative,
and good thinking. We work out of the Chicago regional offices
and our FPO's up there have been just phenomenal, over all of
our grants.
So there's a lot of flexibility. But you're correct that
sometimes a rule that might sound good in one part of the
country often can be, you know, difficult for us in another
part of the country. And so where we can build bridges between
our connections between these silos so we can begin to work
across the various issues that we face would be very, very
helpful to us.
Ms. Foxx. Well thank you very much. And again I want to
thank all the witnesses for being here today and Madam
Chairwoman I'm going to yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. And now
Mr. Castro of Texas.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairwoman. COVID-19 has shed a
light into how critical a role the workforce system plays in
our communities as we've been discussing today. And this is
especially true for justice-involved individuals who face great
challenges in reentering the workforce system.
In my own district of San Antonio, our workforce system
works with a number of community partners to fund FREED, Finish
Recidivism through Education, Employment and Divinity, Texas.
FREED Texas helps those in our criminal justice system have
access to employment and education advisors, life coaches and
front-line advocates with our firsthand experience of the
justice system and who can connect these folks to employers.
It's a rigorous program but it sets them up for success. So
I have a few questions. Ms. Safstrom as my community has shown
local workforce development boards play a large role in
connecting justice-involved individuals and job opportunities.
How have employers who are interested in hiring these folks
worked with the workforce development boards to recruit
justice-involved individuals and support their education?
And what recommendations do you have for how the public
workforce development system can be a more effective partner in
promoting employment for these folks?
Ms. Safstrom. I think there are instances where employers
can do a much better proactive job of reaching out to workforce
investment boards. And asking to become active Members of said
boards, so that they can advise us to the types of industry
sectors, the types of jobs. Not only, again as I mentioned
before, but not only for today, where they see things going for
the future.
And I think that in some instances employers have been very
involved and in other instances not as much as they could, or
would like to, and I think that's part of the education process
that we have on our plate in terms of connecting with our
membership.
We have over 300,000 Members, the majority of them are here
in the United States, and it's connecting with them and
enforcing, reinforcing the importance of those workforce
boards, how those dollars are invested, and how decisions are
made so that we can contribute to those informed decisions.
Mr. Castro. Thank you. That was my only question. I yield
back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you, thank you very much. And now
Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you so much Madam Chair. Thank you,
Chair Wilson, and Ranking Member Murphy, and thank you to the
witnesses for your testimony. We know workforce programs and
registered apprenticeships are often life changing
opportunities.
In northwest Oregon in the district I'm honored to
represent, one of our reginal pre-apprenticeship programs is
called Constructing Hope. They provide formerly incarcerated
individuals with fair pathways in support, access to good
paying jobs in the trades.
They have a community partnership with IBEW Local 48.
Constructing Hope helps place workers who have faced barriers
to employment, help them into high-quality good-paying jobs.
And I've spoken with some of these pre-apprentices. A woman
named Sarah who is a single mom, and she spoke about
Constructing Hope's pre-apprenticeship programs.
She said to me, ``I would never be here providing a better
life for my kids if I stopped.'' And stories like Sarah's
demonstrate that the very aptly named Constructing Hope program
is much more than help with job skills, their building equity
program also addresses some of the disparities that formerly
incarcerated individuals faced, including housing, financial
assistance, obtaining a driver's license and more.
So the work at Constructing Hope is only one example of how
more supportive reentry programs in our upcoming WIOA
reauthorization can help make sure that more justice-involved
individuals have access to good-paying jobs. So Ms. Scott, what
strategies has the Urban League found to be most effective in
helping these justice-involved individuals access good-paying
jobs, and how could expanding that connection between reentry
and registered apprenticeships help?
Ms. Scott. Thank you so very much Representative Bonamici
for that question. What's important is for us to look at the
entire workforce ecosystem, or for jobs that are available.
Often times when we think of reentry we think of construction
jobs, and those jobs are fabulous, but there are other
opportunities and other industries that are available, for
example we have a training program that is in Louisiana.
And working with the reentry individual who served I
believe 20 years in Federal prison. Currently he serves in the
human services industry as a counselor, a housing counselor,
for homeless reentry individuals making $20.00 an hour. We have
another individual in Chicago who is serving 2 years in Federal
prison for trafficking.
Currently he's a forklifter working in the warehouse
industry. So when you have individuals who have strong national
and local partnerships you can then introduce individuals to
different career pathways and uncover employers that are
friendly, that are willing to give a second chance to someone
who wants to reintegrate and to serve their community.
Ms. Bonamici. Terrific. That's really helpful. And Mr.
Keesling I appreciate that your testimony highlights the
importance of wraparound services like mentorship, housing,
mental health counseling, childcare. How do we connect these
support services to your employment and training program, and
have justice-involved individuals access and thrive in stable
and long-term employment opportunities?
Mr. Keesling. As an employment social enterprise we can
embed them. It's just part of our services that we provide, so
they're onsite, we have mental health counselors onsite, we
have the credentialing work onsite, and so we're able to get to
it.
We could always use more money. We're constantly looking
for more partnerships and how we develop. You know, I talked
earlier about the fake drugs that are just sweeping, you know.
We know how to provide treatment for heroin and cocaine, but we
don't know how to provide treatment for these fake drugs that
are being knocked off.
You know, I really wanted to just sort of, you talk about
your concept up there with the union. We've been able to really
in our public works here dramatically open opportunities. And
we see it as a tremendous opportunity as infrastructure, we
hope you will pass that, as we can engage the people that we're
serving in the rebuilding of our country.
And we've got a model here in Indianapolis, the AFSCME
union and the leadership here has just done a phenomenal job.
They've hired 41 to date into the union. We learned this past
week there's 40 more positions that the folks in the B portion
of our model that are now working for the public works in
alternative staffing will have a chance to interview for, so we
know we're going to go up.
We hope we get all 40, we'll see how good our guys and
girls do, but we are very excited about these opportunities,
and we think this model as we work with Secretary Buttigieg,
you know another fellow Hoosier, as we begin to talk about
infrastructure of how we can work with the unions and the
Department of Transportation with this model. Any job, you
know, with the social enterprise, the better job with the
staffing arm, and then the career when the union hired them.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you so much. You know those support
services really matter and yes, we're very excited about the
potential with the infrastructure package that is moving out of
the Committee and hopefully to the floor and get that over the
finish line. There will be a lot of jobs and we want to make
sure that people have the skills to do it, so thanks for doing
your part. I yield back, thank you Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. I remind my
colleagues that pursuant to Committee practice materials for
submission for the hearing record must be submitted to the
Committee Clerk within 14 days following the last day of the
hearing, so by close of business on June 29, 2021, preferably
in Microsoft Word format.
The materials submitted must address the subject matter of
the hearing. Only a Member of the Subcommittee, or an invited
witness may submit materials for inclusion in the hearing
record. Documents are limited to 50 pages each. Documents
longer than 50 pages will be incorporated into the record by
way of an internet link that you must provide to the Committee
Clerk within the qualified timeframe.
But please recognize that in the future the link may no
longer work. Pursuant to House rules and regulations items for
the record should be submitted to the Clerk electronically by
emailing submission to [email protected].
Again I want to thank our amazing witnesses for their
participation and their riveting information that they shared
today. Members of the Subcommittee may have additional
questions for you, and we ask the witnesses to please respond
to those questions in writing.
The hearing record may be held open for 14 days in order to
receive those responses. I remind my colleagues that pursuant
to Committee practice witnesses questions for the hearing
record must be submitted to the Majority Committee Staff or
Committee Clerk within 7 days.
Questions submitted must address the subject matter of the
hearing. I now recognize the distinguished Ranking Member, Dr.
Murphy for closing statement.
Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I share your
comments about this excellent meeting by our Committee Members
and our witnesses. I think it just shows that we have very
fertile ground on which to work to help improve the issue at
hand. So I want to tell you this is something I think that's an
important issue, and as I spoke to earlier, I think prevention
is worth a pound of cure with this.
That said, I think there's some very, very good points that
people brought out on how we're going to take care, hopefully
take care of those who are in prison, and give them a chance
for a life outside of prison, one where they're a productive
Member of society.
So I mentioned in my questioning that we need to do more
about prevention by addressing root causes in the drivers of
criminal behavior. However, as I said we must ensure that
second chances are given to ex-offenders, that is what our
Nation does. I'm encouraged by the bipartisan attitude of the
Committee, and I'm encouraged by the bipartisan spirit and
passage of the First Step Act, shortly before I entered
Congress.
I'm hopeful that we will be able to continue on that
progress and on that path toward reauthorization of WIOA. These
past reentry programs have demonstrated somewhat mixed results.
But we have a chance to learn from their work to improve
implementation, innovation, and opportunity.
Those reentering society and returning to the workforce
deserve programs that are held accountable with high-
performance and positive outcomes. Funding alone cannot solve
this problem. WIOA must buildupon what works, avoid duplicating
existing work, and enable new innovation and experimentation.
Successful reentry has the opportunity to expand the talent
pool for employers so that businesses can be competitive in the
21st Century economy, and I'm hopeful that today's conversation
will move us closer and closer to that goal.
Thank you again witnesses, and I thank you again Committee
Members and thank you Madam Chairman I will yield back.
Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Murphy. I now
recognize myself for the purpose of making my closing
statement. I want to thank the witnesses again for taking the
time to be with us for a third and final hearing on
reauthorizing WIOA. Today's hearing shed a helpful light on the
challenges that justice-involved individuals face to find
employment and building a new life.
As we heard from our witnesses, these barriers to
employment often determine whether justice-involved
individuals, successfully return to their communities, or
return to prison. However, we also established that we can help
break this cycle of incarceration by including reentry programs
in our reauthorization and establishing a stable source of
funding for opportunities to help justice-impacted individuals
succeed.
For example, we can assure that all reentry programs offer
comprehensive supportive services, including mentorship and
behavioral health treatment that justice impacted individuals
need to prevent recidivism.
And we can invest in subsidized employment and vocational
training that will help those individuals build skills toward
rewarding careers, and help employers overcome the stigma
surrounding justice impacted workers.
I look forward to drawing on the valuable testimony that we
received today from our witnesses. You were outstanding. And
throughout our series of hearings as we consider the next steps
toward comprehensively reauthorizing WIOA, codifying evidence-
based reentry practices are among the key priorities we plan to
include in this reauthorization.
Along with addressing worker displacement, supporting life-
long learning, and expanding work-based learning opportunities
for our Nation's youth, these critical steps will help ensure
that all of our Nation's workers have access to the skills and
training they need to stay competitive in our rapidly changing
economy.
Finally, I want to thank Ranking Member Foxx, her staff,
and Ranking Member Murphy for engaging in this bipartisan
process. A series of bipartisan hearings provided each Member
with the opportunity to engage in open and frank discussions
about how we can improve WIOA.
I hope our conversations will provide a strong foundation
for our work ahead. If there is no further business without
objection the Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Additional submission by Chairwoman Wilson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Additional submission by Hon. Diana Harshbarger, a
Representative in Congress from the State of Tennessee
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Questions submitted for the record and the responses by
Ms. Scott follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Questions submitted for the record and the responses by
Ms. Lattimore follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Questions submitted for the record and the responses by
Ms. Safstrom follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Whereupon, at 1:03 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]