[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.]