[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 127 (Friday, July 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43250-43254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15603]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration


Final Notice of Job Corps Center for Closure

AGENCY: Office of Job Corps, Employment and Training Administration 
(ETA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the U.S. 
Department of Labor (the Department or DOL) issues this notice to 
announce its final decision to close the Ouachita Civilian Conservation 
Center (Ouachita) in Royal, Arkansas. The Office of Job Corps (OJC) in 
ETA published an updated methodology for selecting a Job Corps Center 
for closure and requested comments on the proposed decision to close 
Ouachita at 81 FR 12529 on March 9, 2016. A total of 292 public 
comments were received in response to the proposal to close Ouachita. 
After reviewing all comments, the Department has decided to close the 
Ouachita Job Corps Center.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lenita Jacobs-Simmons, National 
Director, Office of Job Corps, ETA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-4463, Washington, DC 20210; Telephone 
(202) 693-3000 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with 
hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone number above via 
TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-
(877)889-5627 (TTY/TDD).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

I. Closure Criteria

    The Department originally announced its methodology for determining 
whether to close a center based on chronic low performance in the 
Federal Register at 79 FR 51198 on August 27, 2014. The March 9, 2016, 
Federal Register Notice did not alter this

[[Page 43251]]

criterion except for changing the five-year period of data reviewed 
from Program Years (PYs) 2008-2012 to the most recent five years 
available. Comments were not requested on the performance-based 
criteria in proposing the closure of the Ouachita Center.
    The March 9, 2016, Federal Register Notice also added two 
additional criteria for the closure of a Job Corps center: Closure 
based on a joint decision of the Secretaries of Labor and Agriculture, 
as described in a December 2014 report to Congress; and closure based 
on an evaluation of the effort required to provide a high-quality 
education and training program at the center. The Department did not 
use either of these criteria in proposing or evaluating the Ouachita 
Center for closure. Comments were not requested on these closure 
criteria.

II. Background of the Job Corps Program and Process of Selecting a 
Center for Closure

    The Job Corps program, with centers across the country, seeks to 
change lives through education and job training for in-demand careers. 
Job Corps serves at-risk young people who are overcoming major 
challenges, which can include deep poverty, homelessness, or multiple 
foster care placements. The program represents the core American value 
that no matter who you are or where you come from, you should have the 
opportunity to succeed.
    On March 9, 2016, the Department proposed to close Ouachita under 
the chronic low-performance criterion. Using data from PY 2010-2014, 
OJC calculated each center's Overall Rating based on the center's five-
year Outcome Measurement System (OMS) performance level, the five-year 
On-Board Strength (OBS), and the five-year Facility Condition Index. 
Based on this methodology, Ouachita received the lowest Overall Rating 
and, therefore, the lowest ranking of all centers considered. After 
ranking the centers based on the primary criteria, the Department then 
applied the four additional considerations and determined that none of 
those considerations precluded the closure of Ouachita.

III. Summary of Comments and Discussion

    The comment period was open from March 9, 2016, through April 8, 
2016. Two hundred ninety-two public comments were received in response 
to the proposal to close Ouachita. After considering these comments, 
the Department has decided to close the Ouachita Civilian Conservation 
Center due to its chronic low performance. The Department has concluded 
that Ouachita's chronic inability to meet performance goals 
necessitates its closure and the reallocation of these student slots 
and resources to higher-performing Job Corps facilities. The Department 
has also concluded that closing this Center will not reduce the overall 
number of students who can be served in Job Corps.
    The comments are summarized briefly and discussed below.
    Two commenters generally support Job Corps' decision to close the 
Ouachita Job Corps Center. A current student said he was not receiving 
adequate instruction in his trade because his instructor is never 
there. A member of the community commented that the center has been 
going downhill for the past five years; the commenter says that morale 
among the students is low and that there is racism and backstabbing 
among the staff.
    Three commenters requested an extension of the 30-day comment 
period. Section 159(j)(2) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity 
Act (WIOA) provides that prior to the closure of any Job Corps center, 
the Department must establish ``a reasonable comment period, not to 
exceed 30 days, for interested individuals to submit written comments 
to the Secretary.'' The comment deadline of April 8, 2016, reflected 
the 30-day maximum. By statute, the Department could not extend the 
comment period on this proposed closure.
    A large number of commenters generally expressed the view that the 
Department should not close Ouachita because of the effect that closure 
would have on the community. Several commenters urged DOL to maintain 
Ouachita because of recent steps the center has taken to work with 
local schools, with commenters asserting that the program could support 
a new Arkansas state employment initiative. DOL recognizes the 
beneficial effects of a center's operation on its local area, and that 
closing a center may indirectly affect the local economy and the 
broader community. However, the core mission of the Job Corps program 
is to train students to become more employable, responsible, and 
productive citizens. The closure of Ouachita advances this mission by 
allowing OJC to shift these resources and opportunities to higher-
performing centers, thereby improving the performance of the entire Job 
Corps system and ensuring that students have the best opportunity to 
succeed.
    Many commenters expressed their concern that current and future Job 
Corps students will suffer if the center closes. DOL appreciates the 
concern but is confident that disruption to students can be minimized 
while ensuring that current and future students have access to a higher 
performing Job Corps center. All students currently enrolled at 
Ouachita will have the opportunity to complete their training and 
graduate while the center remains open or transfer to higher-performing 
centers in Arkansas or the region. In addition, prospective students 
from Arkansas will continue to be served by the two other centers in 
the state, as well as other centers in the region that offer training 
in the area they wish to pursue. Given Ouachita's chronic poor 
performance, we have concluded that current and future students will be 
better served at higher performing centers.
    Multiple commenters suggested that the decision to close Ouachita 
be delayed. Several urged DOL to provide the center with additional 
resources and give it the opportunity to improve its performance. 
Another commenter suggested that the center be closed down temporarily 
so that the center and its management could be retooled. Other 
commenters suggested that other options and strategies be considered 
before closing the center. Finally, one commenter asked the decision be 
delayed until the Department presents an alternative plan to Congress 
that includes providing direct technical assistance to the U.S. Forest 
Service, which operates the center.
    DOL has concluded that these suggestions will not lead to improved 
center performance and that the resources will be better utilized at 
higher preforming centers. DOL and the Forest Service's parent agency, 
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), have used numerous 
performance improvement tools and strategies at Ouachita over several 
years, including intensive oversight and interventions; however, the 
center has continued to chronically underperform. Ouachita has been on 
a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) for five years. For the last four 
Program Years, the center received more frequent on-site visits, 
audits, and direct technical assistance from DOL and the USDA. During 
the year prior to the proposal for closure, Job Corps and the Forest 
Service made additional concerted, targeted efforts to improve 
Ouachita's performance, including implementing an interagency 
performance improvement team. Even with these efforts, Ouachita failed 
to meet a single OMS goal for on-center measures during PY 2014, the 
most recent complete program year for which data is available. 
Additionally, before proposing Ouachita for closure, the

[[Page 43252]]

Department applied an additional consideration, as discussed in the 
published closure methodology, of whether there had been significant 
recent performance improvements as the center. There had not. This 
prolonged inability to improve performance indicates that additional 
resources and efforts are not likely to be successful and thus should 
not be expended. Balanced against the lost opportunity to current and 
future students to improve their lives by attending a higher-performing 
center, the Department has concluded that closing Ouachita achieves the 
best outcome for the Job Corps program and its students.
    Some commenters complained that Ouachita has not received adequate 
resources or support from DOL and the Forest Service. Some of these 
commenters asserted that the center should not be closed because it has 
been targeted by DOL or the USDA or because it has been poorly managed 
by the Forest Service. Others argued DOL has specifically targeted 
Civilian Conservation Centers (CCCs) for closure, or attributed the low 
performance of Ouachita to problems between the Forest Service and DOL. 
Several said it is incumbent upon the Forest Service and DOL to devise 
a reasonable solution to fix the problem of Ouachita's poor 
performance. Two commenters stated that Ouachita should not be closed 
because it has undergone too many changes in leadership over the last 
several years.
    Neither the Department nor the Forest Service has targeted Ouachita 
for closure, nor has the Department targeted CCCs in general for 
closure. DOL's decision to close Ouachita is based on its chronic low-
performance over the last five years, not on the entity that operates 
the center. The Department has worked, and will continue to work, with 
the Forest Service to improve the CCCs and maintain their important 
role within the Job Corps system. As noted above, DOL and USDA 
cooperated to provide significant resources toward improving Ouachita's 
poor performance. Despite these efforts the center's performance showed 
no sustained improvement, and the Department does not think investment 
of additional time or resources will lead to improved performance at 
the center. Finally, the Department understands the commenters' 
concerns that frequent changes in leadership could affect improvement 
efforts at a struggling center. However, center management failed to 
make substantial improvements even with intensive federal assistance in 
PY2014.
    Four commenters stated that the center should remain open because 
of its historical significance. While DOL agrees that the potential 
historical nature of any building is important, historical significance 
itself is not a reason to keep a center in operation and serving 
students. By law, the possible historical significance of the center 
must be taken into account in determining the future use of the 
property.
    One individual commented that Ouachita should remain open because 
it is one of only six Job Corps centers offering the urban forestry 
trade. Students currently in the urban forestry trade at Ouachita will 
have an opportunity to complete their training at Ouachita or transfer 
to a higher performing center offering the trade. Additionally, each 
Job Corps center regularly evaluates its career technical training 
offerings by reviewing local labor market information to determine in-
demand industry sectors and identify emerging occupations suitable for 
its training program. These regular evaluations and other relevant 
information will determine whether there is a need for another center 
to offer training in the urban forestry trade.
    Another commenter discussed the unique role played by the rural 
CCCs, praising services--including fire suppression and controlled 
burns, among others--that CCCs provide to small communities and the 
skills students learn by aiding in the provision of those services. The 
Department agrees that Job Corps provides valuable services to smaller 
communities. However, the primary mission of the program is the 
education and employment of disadvantaged youth, and the Department has 
determined that continuing to operate Ouachita is not in the best 
interest of students or the program as a whole because of the center's 
chronic poor performance.
    One commenter expressed opposition to the proposed decision to 
close the center because he believes student recruitment is treated 
differently for Forest Service-operated centers than contractor-
operated centers. This commenter also stated that Forest Service-
operated centers are at a disadvantage because they more strictly 
enforce safety rules and Job Corps' zero-tolerance policy, resulting in 
the termination of more students. However, another commenter had a 
contrary view, stating Ouachita staff and leadership are afraid to 
dismiss students from the program in accordance with the zero-tolerance 
policy, even for ``major offenses.'' All Job Corps centers, including 
CCCs operated by the Forest Service, must comply with all requirements 
of the program as outlined in the Job Corps Policy and Requirements 
Handbook (PRH), including compliance with the discipline policy. 
Recruitment procedures and standards also are the same regardless of 
the type of center operator.
    Some commenters alleged that DOL has not done enough to ensure a 
sufficient number of students are recruited for Ouachita, and several 
commenters asserted that the Outreach and Admissions (OA) provider has 
suppressed the center's OBS, either intentionally or through poor 
performance. Some commenters blamed Job Corps' Dallas Regional Office 
for these problems, asserting that the center is low performing because 
Job Corps has not assisted with providing more applicants from Arkansas 
and other states. One commenter complained that the standards for 
maintaining OBS unfairly affected Ouachita because the contractor is 
not recruiting students who are committed to the program and thus leave 
within the first 90 days. This commenter and other commenters 
complained that OBS goals are too difficult with the challenging 
students Ouachita receives. Some commenters stated that the present OA 
contractor for Arkansas operates the Little Rock Job Corps Center, 
which is incorrect.
    Ouachita has received a steady number of referrals of prospective 
students over the last year from the OA contractor currently serving 
Arkansas. For calendar year 2015, Ouachita received referrals of 246 
prospective students from the OA contractor, which resulted in 213 
students enrolling at the center. This is above the OA contract's 
annual goal, which is to facilitate the enrollment of 209 students at 
Ouachita each year. Further, while OBS is part of the chronic low-
performance closure methodology, it is only 5 percent of the 
calculation that determines the center's rank. In contrast, OMS 
performance, which measures the academic and career outcomes a center 
produces for its students, is 90 percent. Thus, while OBS was a factor 
in identifying the center as low-performing, it was not the predominant 
factor. The center's consistent failure to produce the outcomes Job 
Corps expects for its students, as measured through the OMS, was the 
primary factor.
    Ouachita has had a high rate of terminations and an unacceptably 
short length of stay for many students, which is reflected in the 
center's OMS data. In PY 2014, 30.2 percent of Ouachita students left 
the center within the first 90 days, versus only 20.9 percent 
nationally. Even after the performance

[[Page 43253]]

improvement team provided additional technical assistance, the length 
of stay for students remained unacceptably low and the center was not 
able to meet its OMS or OBS goals. Job Corps is a training program for 
at-risk youth, and is designed to help young people who have failed in 
school and who have other challenges to change the direction of their 
lives and become productive participants in the labor force. Many of 
Job Corps' students face challenges in committing to the program and 
complying with program rules, particularly those who have difficulty in 
a structured environment. While some commenters blamed the OA 
contractor for recruiting students who were not committed to the 
program, part of the center's role is to help students transition and 
adjust to center life--and to understand the rewards to sticking with 
the program. A high termination rate is an indication that a center is 
unable to meet this basic but critical element of Job Corps' operation.
    One commenter requested that DOL speed the process of admission to 
a center, noting that four applicants from students at a high school 
were waiting for a placement and asserting that Job Corps ``is a vital 
organization that needs to be saved'' for students who cannot perform 
in school. As stated throughout, the Department is committed to the 
future of the Job Corps program and will maintain current opportunities 
for eligible Arkansas youth to participate, even with Ouachita's 
closure. DOL cannot speak to the specific admissions issues for the 
four applicants referenced in the comment, but it works to ensure an 
efficient process for reviewing applications and admitting qualified 
applicants to the program.
    One commenter asserted that Ouachita's performance was adversely 
affected by the nationwide moratorium on changing trades offered at 
centers that began in 2010. In PY 2010, Job Corps temporarily stopped 
accepting requests for trade changes outside of its ongoing process to 
modernize its Career Technical Training (CTT) program. During this 
process, trade-change requests made by Forest Service centers on PIPs, 
including Ouachita, continued to be accepted. In fact, these centers' 
trade-change requests were processed on an accelerated track. Ouachita, 
however, made no trade-change request.
    Multiple commenters stated that Job Corps must account for the 
different backgrounds and challenges of students at Ouachita. Some 
stated that students arrived at Ouachita with serious medical, mental 
health, and drug problems. Every Job Corps center is expected to 
deliver the best outcome for its students regardless of those students' 
backgrounds. OJC recognizes that Job Corps students enter the program 
with a variety of challenges, including those identified by the 
commenters, but part of a center's role is to identify any challenges 
each student has and develop strategies to address those challenges. 
Ouachita's poor performance demonstrates that it has not adequately 
done so and that is one reason students will be better served at higher 
performing centers. One commenter asserted that Ouachita should not be 
closed given the unique challenges it faces, including a low state 
minimum wage in Arkansas, the poor educational attainment in the states 
from which Ouachita draws its students, the poor economic conditions in 
Arkansas, and the failure of OMS to reflect those challenges. The 
performance data used in the methodology appropriately reflects the 
challenges identified by the commenter. Several of the OMS performance 
goals related to educational attainment and wage attainment are 
adjusted based on factors such as the educational level of the 
enrollees and the characteristics of the local labor market. Therefore, 
these goals are tailored to the economic and educational environment 
surrounding a center, and the challenges faced by students in Arkansas 
and the surrounding area do not explain Ouachita's long-term poor 
performance.
    The same commenter stated that that there is a goal disparity 
between Ouachita and its Career Transition Services (CTS) contractor 
because the career placement goals based on wages and earnings for the 
CTS contractor are lower than the average wage goals for the three 
Arkansas centers that the contractor serves. The commenter stated this 
difference is ``incongruous'' and ``can lead to cross purposes'' for 
the centers and the CTS contractor. However, Job Corps' model-based 
goals for centers and CTS providers are not simply an average of the 
goals of the three centers in Arkansas, but rather are calculated based 
on regression analysis and estimate what impact various factors may 
have on the achievement of the measure in question. The goals for wages 
and earnings are designed to adjust for differences in the background 
characteristics of the students served as well as differences in the 
types of training programs students received and differences in the 
local labor markets where students are expected to find employment. 
There is not perfect overlap in the students served by ArkansasWEN, the 
CTS provider serving Ouachita, and the student population served at 
Ouachita and the other Arkansas centers. In addition, about 15 to 20 
percent of the students served by ArkansasWEN attended centers outside 
of Arkansas and a similar percentage of students attending Arkansas 
centers were placed outside of Arkansas and served by other CTS 
providers. OJC believes it fairly calculated the wage goals for 
Ouachita based on the students it serves, type of training, and labor 
market conditions. Ouachita, like any center, is expected to meet its 
annual performance goals regardless of the goals assigned to other 
centers or service providers. Its chronic inability to do so, despite 
ample assistance from DOL and USDA, supports the decision to close 
Ouachita.
    One commenter questioned whether the Department considered the 
performance of the OA/CTS provider for Ouachita as part of its proposal 
to close the center, given that Ouachita's OMS rating is based in part 
on the performance of the OA/CTS provider. While there is overlap in 
performance metrics applied to center operators and OA and CTS service 
providers, as stated above, each Job Corps center is responsible for 
meeting the performance goals established for that center. As such, the 
Department looked only at the each center's performance over the last 
five years on the 15 OMS performance measures, and it did not consider 
the performance of the OA/CTS provider before making its decision.
    Several commenters noted that Ouachita would not be considered low 
performing under WIOA. The Department maintains that it is not possible 
to make this determination. Job Corps has not yet begun to collect data 
on WIOA performance measures. As such, it is not possible to determine 
which centers will be considered low performing under WIOA, though the 
Department notes that the post-WIOA OMS is unlikely to be significantly 
different than the WIA OMS. Further, given Ouachita's chronic poor 
performance, it would be to the detriment of current and future 
students to continue operation of the center until WIOA performance 
data is available.
    One commenter noted that all three Arkansas centers, including 
Ouachita, are among Job Corps' lowest performers, asserting that the 
Department should not close Ouachita until it deduces why. This 
commenter suggested that under WIOA, both of Arkansas' remaining 
centers, Cass and Little Rock, could be in line for closure due to 
their low performance. As stated in the Additional Criteria for 
potential Job Corps closures, Job Corps aims to maintain a presence in 
all 50 states. The

[[Page 43254]]

Department is committed to making the Job Corps program accessible to 
eligible Arkansas youth, and it will reinvest resources from Ouachita 
to improve the outcomes at its remaining, higher-performing centers, 
including those in Arkansas.
    Several commenters urged DOL to transfer management of Ouachita to 
a private operator. Many of these commenters asserted that DOL is 
legally required to do so by WIOA. Some commenters stated that WIOA 
requires the Department to ``exhaust'' its options prior to closing a 
center. In fact, WIOA does not require the Department to competitively 
select a private entity to operate this center. WIOA sec. 159(f)(4) 
empowers the Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Secretary of 
Agriculture, to competitively select an entity to operate a CCC if 
certain conditions related to the center's performance under the WIOA 
performance measures are met. Division H, title I, section 109 of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, also stated that the Secretary 
of Labor, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, ``may 
select an entity on a competitive basis to operate'' a CCC if it has 
had consistently low performance under Job Corps' pre-July 1, 2016 
performance accountability system or its post-July 1, 2016 performance 
system. Neither of these provisions require the Department to transfer 
management of Ouachita to a private operator--the WIOA performance 
system, as noted above, is not yet in effect, making WIOA sec. 
159(f)(4) inoperative at this point. Furthermore, the language of sec. 
109 grants the Secretary of Labor discretion as to whether DOL will 
competitively select an entity to operate a CCC.
    The Department has determined that the better approach for Ouachita 
is closure. The problems at Ouachita are extensive, and there is 
insufficient evidence that would suggest that a change in operators 
would result in dramatic improvement. Closing Ouachita will allow the 
Department to reinvest its resources into improving its remaining 
centers while maintaining student opportunities to participate in the 
Job Corps program. Importantly, the Department has concluded that 
closing Ouachita will not reduce the number of students who can be 
served in Job Corps. Thus, for the reasons stated above, the Department 
has decided to close Ouachita, not contract it to a private entity.
    One commenter asserted that it is improper to use the most recent 
performance data as a basis for selecting a center to close. The 
commenter referenced the DOL Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) 
February 27, 2015, audit report that some centers did not comply with 
Job Corps' zero-tolerance policy to avoid adverse effect on their 
performance measures. Based on this report, the commenter concludes 
that ``utilizing the [OMS] rating system is a flawed approach'' because 
``those same centers would be willing to fabricate information in their 
books about other matters as well, negating the accuracy of any rating 
system.''
    Nothing in OIG's audit report supports or suggests the conclusion 
drawn by the commenter. There is no evidence or allegation that center 
operators are undermining the OMS system--and in turn, the method by 
which the Department selected Ouachita for closure--by directly 
fabricating or altering performance data. Job Corps conducts regular 
data-integrity audits through a third-party consultant to identify and 
sanction any fraudulent behaviors or non-compliance with Job Corps 
policy and rules. Additionally, before finalizing each year's OMS 
scores and rankings, Job Corps conducts a comprehensive review of the 
performance data to ensure its accuracy. Given these procedures, Job 
Corps has no reason to conclude that performance data has been 
fabricated, and it is confident that the center performance data used 
in the closure methodology accurately reflects each center's 
performance.
    One commenter alleged that an individual from an Idaho Job Corps 
center had sabotaged the Ouachita center so the Idaho center would 
receive more funding. The Department is not aware of any attempts to 
sabotage Ouachita's operation.
    Three commenters stated that every Job Corps Center, including 
Ouachita, benefits youth in need and thus should not be closed. The 
Department's decision to close Ouachita is based on the center's 
inability to efficiently and effectively deliver the best possible 
outcomes for youth in need. The Ouachita Center has performed poorly 
over the last five years, and closing this center will improve Job 
Corps' ability to provide the highest-quality education and career 
technical training to its future and current students, including those 
presently at Ouachita.
    Six commenters criticized the methodology that Job Corps developed 
and applied in determining which center to close. One commenter 
suggested that the OMS used to determine center ranking is itself 
flawed. Three commenters were opposed to the two additional closure 
criteria identified in the March 9, 2016, Notice proposing closure. 
Because the closure Notice requested comments only on the proposed 
selection of Ouachita for closure, DOL considers these comments outside 
the scope of the requested response and will not respond to them here.
    Multiple commenters suggested that the waste of other government 
programs be cut instead of closing the Ouachita Job Corps Center. These 
comments are outside the scope of the requested response and were 
therefore not considered.

IV. Job Corps Center Selected for Closure and the Closure Process

    Based on its application of the updated closure methodology as 
described in the March 9, 2016, Notice, and the Department's 
consideration of the comments received in response to that Notice, DOL 
has decided to close the Ouachita Job Corps Center.
    Job Corps' focus is on managing the performance of its centers in 
order to best to serve students. Overall funding for the program is not 
being reduced, nor is the number of students served. By closing low-
performing centers, Job Corps can shift limited program dollars to 
centers that will better prepare students. As Job Corps finalizes the 
closure of Ouachita, existing students will have the opportunity to 
complete their training and graduate at Ouachita or transfer to other 
Job Corps centers to complete their training and graduate. Prospective 
students in Arkansas will continue to be served by two other Job Corps 
centers in the state and other centers in the region.
    In the coming weeks, DOL will implement the closure process 
following the center closure requirements in WIOA at section 159(j) and 
as stipulated in the DOL/USDA Interagency Agreement.

    Dated: June 27, 2016.
Portia Wu,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Labor.
[FR Doc. 2016-15603 Filed 6-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-FT-P