Veterans' Employment and Training Service: Preliminary		 
Observations on Changes to Veterans' Employment Programs	 
(12-MAY-05, GAO-05-662T).					 
                                                                 
The Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training	 
Service (VETS) administers two programs designed to assist the	 
roughly 700,000 veterans who are unemployed in any given month.  
These two programs, the Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program	 
(DVOP) and the Local Veterans' Employment Representative (LVER)  
program, fund employment, training, and job placement services to
veterans. In 2002, Congress passed the Jobs for Veterans Act	 
(JVA), which redefined the roles of DVOP and LVER staff and	 
required that VETS establish a new performance accountability	 
system. This testimony is based on GAO's ongoing work in this	 
area and focuses on three aspects: (1) the separation of DVOP's  
and LVER's roles and responsibilities; (2) VETS' performance	 
accountability system for DVOP and LVER staff; and (3) VETS'	 
system for monitoring DVOP and LVER performance.		 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-05-662T					        
    ACCNO:   A24022						        
  TITLE:     Veterans' Employment and Training Service: Preliminary   
Observations on Changes to Veterans' Employment Programs	 
     DATE:   05/12/2005 
  SUBJECT:   Accountability					 
	     Employment assistance programs			 
	     Federal/state relations				 
	     Performance measures				 
	     Program management 				 
	     Veterans benefits					 
	     Veterans employment programs			 
	     Program goals or objectives			 
	     DOL Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program		 
	     DOL Local Veterans' Employment			 
	     Representative Program				 
                                                                 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-05-662T

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO	Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Committee
on

Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 2:00 p.m. EDT VETERANS'

Thursday, May 12, 2005

                                 EMPLOYMENT AND
                                TRAINING SERVICE

      Preliminary Observations on Changes to Veterans' Employment Programs

Statement of Sigurd R. Nilsen, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income
Security Issues

GAO-05-662T

[IMG]

VETERANS' EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE

Preliminary Observations on Changes to Veterans' Employment Programs

                                 What GAO Found

VETS has established separate roles for DVOP and LVER staff and has
provided policy guidance and training to states explaining these changes.
Under JVA, states now determine how many DVOP and LVER staff they hire,
where to place them within the local workforce areas, and 23 states are
planning to use some part-time DVOP staff. There are indications that
integrating DVOP and LVER staff into the local workforce offices remains
challenging. While VETS has issued guidance on an incentive program to
encourage improved performance, state implementation of the program has
varied, and 11 states do not plan to participate.

VETS has implemented employment measures for DVOP and LVER staff, but a
minimum standard that all states must meet for veterans entering
employment will not be available before 2007. VETS reported meeting
Labor's goal of achieving a 58-percent employment rate for all veteran job
seekers during program year 2003, but fell somewhat short of reaching a
60percent employment goal for disabled veterans. Assessing how well DVOP
and LVER programs are serving veterans may continue to be difficult due to
ongoing concerns about data reliability.

VETS implemented a monitoring system in program year 2004 that relies
primarily on state self-assessments of performance in conjunction with
onsite reviews. It is unclear, however, how VETS staff at the state,
regional, and national levels will use this information consistently to
guide or improve the DVOP and LVER programs. VETS is working with other
Labor agencies to coordinate monitoring and enforcement efforts.

Summary of Performance Outcomes for the DVOP and LVER Programs, Program
Year 2003 All veterans and eligible persons Disabled veterans

Outcome measure Actual Goal Actual Goal

Entered employment rate 58 percent 58 percent 53 percent 60 percent

Rate of retention in employment at 6 months 79 percent 72 percent 77
percent 65 percent

Source: Fiscal year 2004 Performance Budget for VETS and VETS 200 report.

                 United States Government Accountability Office

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to talk about our preliminary observations
on the status of implementation of some key provisions of the Jobs for
Veterans Act (JVA).1 This legislation was passed in 2002 to improve

various aspects of employment, training, and placement services provided
to veterans. The need for such services is growing, given that roughly
700,000 veterans are unemployed in any given month and the number of
service members leaving active duty-estimated by the Department of Labor
(Labor) at 200,000 yearly-is anticipated to rise with more troops
returning to civilian life. Viewing employment services for veterans as a
national responsibility, Congress established the Veterans' Employment and
Training Service (VETS) within Labor to carry out national policy that
veterans receive priority in employment and training opportunities.

Among the programs that VETS administers as part of its responsibilities
to help veterans find employment are the Disabled Veterans' Outreach
Program (DVOP) and the Local Veterans' Employment Representative (LVER)
program. Nationwide, there are more than 2,000 DVOP and LVER staff. The
DVOP staff are responsible for providing outreach to veterans needing VETS
employment services and in offering them a variety of intensive services,
such as career guidance and provision of job development contacts. The
DVOP staff are to give priority of service to veterans who are disabled.
The LVER staff are focused on establishing relationships with area
employers and on facilitating employment, training, and placement services
for veterans. The DVOP and LVER staff are also mandatory partners in the
one-stop center system created in 1998 by the Workforce Investment Act
(WIA) where services provided by numerous employment and training programs
are made available through a single network.

My testimony today addresses the current implementation status of three
aspects of the DVOP and LVER programs that have changed as a result of
JVA: (1) The separation of DVOP's and LVER's roles and responsibilities;
(2) VETS performance accountability system for DVOP and LVER staff; and
(3) VETS system for monitoring DVOP and LVER performance. My testimony is
based on our past reports and ongoing work for this subcommittee and other
congressional committees. We will report on our ongoing work at the end of
the year, as mandated.

1Pub. L. No. 107-288 (2002).

We recently held discussions with national and regional VETS officials and
visited two judgmentally selected states, Washington and Colorado. In
Colorado, we interviewed state VETS officials, and visited the National
Veterans' Training Institute (NVTI) where we interviewed NVTI officials as
well as DVOP and LVER staff from 24 states who were attending training
classes. We also met with officials from various veterans' service
organizations and the National Association of State Workforce Agencies. We
started this work in January 2005, and it is ongoing. Our work is being
conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards.

In summary, VETS has established newly defined roles for DVOP and LVER
staff and has provided this information by issuing policy guidance letters
and conducting ongoing training at NVTI. States have been using the
flexibility that these programs now provide, such as being able to
determine how many DVOP and LVER staff are sufficient to meet their needs,
where to place them within the local workforce area, and how to more
effectively use them to serve local veteran job seekers. Almost half of
the states plan to use JVA's authority to assign DVOP staff on a parttime
basis. However, integrating DVOP and LVER staff into one-stop centers
remains a long-standing challenge. While VETS has issued guidance on the
new incentive program to recognize exemplary service delivery by DVOPs and
LVER staff, 11 states do not plan to participate due to reasons such as
state laws or other policies that prevent individuals from receiving
awards.

VETS has implemented employment measures for DVOP and LVER staff. However,
VETS estimated that it will be at least until 2007 before it has the trend
data needed to establish the minimum standard that all states must meet
for the rate at which veterans enter employment. Using goals negotiated
with the states in the interim, VETS reported that DVOP and LVER programs,
as a whole, met Labor's goal of achieving a 58-percent employment rate for
all veteran job seekers during program year 2003, although the programs
fell somewhat short in reaching a 60-percent employment goal for disabled
veterans. However, assessing how well DVOP and LVER programs are serving
veterans may continue to be difficult due to VETS' ongoing concerns about
the reliability of servicerelated data.

VETS has implemented changes to its system for monitoring state compliance
with the DVOP and LVER programs, and work continues to determine how best
to use the monitoring information to improve program performance. VETS
staff completed their first round of reviewing state plans and
self-assessments of performance in program year 2004. In

addition, VETS staff performed their first round of on-site reviews. It is
unclear, however, how VETS staff at the state, regional, and national
levels will use this information to consistently guide or improve the DVOP
and LVER programs. VETS and the Employment and Training Administration
(ETA) are working together to coordinate monitoring and enforcement
efforts.

                                   Background

VETS administers national programs to (1) ensure that veterans receive
priority in employment and training opportunities from the employment
service; (2) assist veterans, reservists, and National Guard members in
securing employment; and (3) protect veterans' employment rights and
benefits. VETS carries out its responsibilities through a nationwide
network that includes representation in each of Labor's 10 regions and
staff in each state. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for VETS
administers the agency's activities through regional administrators and a
VETS director in each state. The state VETS directors are the link between
VETS and the states' employment service system, to whom the DVOP and LVER
staff--as state employees--directly report, and which is overseen by
Labor's ETA. In fiscal year 2005, VETS requested $220.6 million for all
its programs, including $162.4 million for the DVOP and LVER programs.
States plan to use this funding to support more than 2,100 DVOP and LVER
positions.

In September 2001, we identified some key areas in which VETS could better
serve its clients by providing more flexibility and accountability in its
programs.2 With its passage in November 2002, JVA amended the legislation
that governs the DVOP and LVER programs by addressing many of the concerns
we raised in our prior work. For example, JVA clarified the roles of DVOP
and LVER staff, and gave states greater flexibility in determining how the
staff are used. Under VETS guidance, the DVOP staff's duties now focus on
providing intensive services--with priority given to disabled
veterans--including assessing the veterans' special needs and skills,
developing a plan of action, and coordinating any needed supportive
services, such as training and job referrals. The DVOP staff also provide
outreach activities to locate candidates who could benefit from intensive
services, such as homeless veterans. As stated in VETS guidance, the LVER
staff's duties now include developing regular contact with employers to
promote employment and training for veterans, developing relationships
with community leaders to further promote veterans'

2GAO, Veterans' Employment and Training Service: Flexibility and
Accountability Needed to Improve Service to Veterans, GAO-01-928
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 12, 2001).

VETS Has Implemented Changes to DVOP and LVER Roles and Responsibilities,
but One-Stop Integration Issues Remain

employment, and promoting and monitoring the participation of veterans in
federally funded programs.

The JVA legislation required states to develop plans that include details
of the specific duties required of the DVOP and LVER positions and the
strategy for their integration into the one-stop system. The legislation
also required the establishment of a comprehensive performance
accountability system to measure performance of the DVOP and LVER staff,
using performance measures consistent with those of WIA.3 In addition, JVA
established an incentive program to recognize eligible employees for
excellence in providing veterans services and to encourage the improvement
of services, with 1 percent of each state's annual grant allocation to be
designated for incentive funding. In addition, JVA required VETS to
establish a minimum standard for the rate at which veterans enter
employment, a standard which all states are required to meet. The JVA
legislation further required annual performance reviews of veterans'
services, which VETS uses to monitor the DVOP and LVER programs to ensure
proper accountability.

VETS has taken action to implement the changes to the DVOP and LVER
programs. VETS has issued policy guidance and conducted training on the
DVOP and LVER staff's new roles and responsibilities. In addition, nearly
half the states are taking advantage of JVA's flexibility to employ
part-time DVOP staff. Although VETS has issued guidance on the performance
incentive program to recognize exemplary staff as required by JVA, states
have implemented this program differently, and 11 states do not plan to
implement the incentive program because sometimes it conflicts with the
state's policy if awards are given to individuals. In addition,
integrating DVOP and LVER staff into one-stop centers continues to be
challenging.

3The WIA performance measures include entered employment, retention at 6
months, and customer satisfaction.

VETS Has Provided Guidance and Training to Distinguish DVOP from LVER
Staff Duties and Many States Plan to Use Part-Time DVOP Staff

Through its policy guidance letters, VETS has clarified the DVOP and LVER
staff's new functions, along with new staffing and reporting requirements,
including the use of part-time positions for DVOPs. In addition, shortly
after JVA was enacted, NVTI held a series of implementation seminars
covering DVOP and LVER staff's new roles and responsibilities that were
attended by representatives from all states. NVTI also conducts case
management training aimed at DVOP staff. At the end of its first training
year in October 2004 following passage of JVA, NVTI reported training 282
DVOPs and estimated that an additional 144 would be trained each year in
the future. Similarly, NVTI conducts employer outreach training focused on
LVERs. Because this class is new, NVTI estimates that it will train 264
LVERs by October 2005, and projects that an additional 240 LVERs would be
trained each year.

One of the key changes in the new law gives states the flexibility to
establish part-time DVOP and LVER positions, though this was already
permitted to some extent for LVERs. According to their fiscal year 2005
state plans, 23 states planned to use the new flexibility under JVA to
employ both full-and part-time DVOPs, while 34 states planned to use the
long-standing authority to employ both full- and part-time LVERs. As shown
in table 1, part-time DVOP positions would comprise about 18 percent of
the total DVOP staff and about 44 percent of the total LVER staff.

Table 1: Full-Time and Part-Time DVOP and LVER Positions, Fiscal Year 2005

                                                             Total LVER staff 
           Type of position Total DVOP staff (percentage)        (percentage) 
                  Full-time            1,139 (82 percent)    871 (56 percent) 
                  Half-time              241 (18 percent)    675 (44 percent) 
                      Total           1,380 (100 percent) 1,522 (100 percent) 

Source: GAO analysis of state plans.

Note: Figures include the District of Columbia and exclude Puerto Rico and
the Virgin Islands.

Some states plan to use part-time DVOPs and LVERs extensively. For
example, two states, Maine and Washington, planned to use part-time LVERs
exclusively. In addition, South Dakota plans on having 87 percent of its
DVOPs be part-time, and Vermont plans to have 91 percent of LVERs be
part-time. By contrast, in New Jersey, only 5 percent of DVOPs are to be
part-time and, in Indiana, 6 percent of LVERs are to be part-time.

Not All States Plan to Use VETS has implemented JVA's requirement to
establish a performance Incentive Awards incentive awards program by
issuing policy guidance that lays out criteria

and monetary as well as nonmonetary awards for states to consider in
developing an awards program. According to fiscal year 2005 state plans,
11 states did not plan to use the incentive program due to reasons such as
conflicts with state law or other policies if the awards are given to
individuals. The remaining 40 states planned to implement the incentive
program in various ways. For example, in one state, two DVOPs were awarded
a one-time maximum award of $1,000. In another state, however, top
performing DVOP and LVER staff were given a one-time cash award for as
little as $16. Regardless of their current approach to implementing
incentives, some VETS officials said they would like to see award
eligibility criteria expanded beyond individuals to include entire units.

Challenges Continue with Integrating DVOP and LVER Staff into One-Stop
Centers

Labor officials acknowledge that integration of DVOP and LVER staff into
the one-stop centers has been a persistent challenge. The extent that
implementing changes under JVA will assist in breaking down the barriers
and entrenched cultures that have precluded integration in the one-stop
centers will likely take years. According to the DVOP and LVER staff we
interviewed, integration still varied widely among local areas, depending
on the level of support provided by the one-stop manager for the DVOP and
LVER programs. For example, one DVOP staff told us that the veterans
program is highly integrated with the WIA program in her local one-stop,
with both sharing case management responsibilities. In addition, she
participates in regular meetings with the one-stop partners and attributed
this cohesion to the commitment by her one-stop manager to work
cooperatively with all the partners. In contrast, a DVOP from another
state told us that he was assigned to tasks that prevented him from
serving as many veterans as he would have liked.

In cases where there was poor integration, several reasons were cited by
DVOP and LVER staff we interviewed from various states. One reason was
that other one-stop staff were not educated or trained on serving
veterans. An NVTI official told us that the institute has provided
training to states that have requested it, but was concerned that the
states that were struggling with providing veterans' services were the
very ones that did not request training. Other reasons included the
perception among DVOP and LVER staff we interviewed that there is little
coordination between VETS and ETA to ensure integration among all partner
programs,

New Performance System Implemented for DVOPs and LVERs, but Too Early to
Link Changes to Veterans' Employment Outcomes

adopt uniform definitions of eligible veterans, and consistently give
veterans priority of service regardless of program.4

VETS has implemented some JVA changes to the accountability system related
to the measures used for assessing DVOP and LVER performance, but it
estimates that it will be at least 2007 before it can implement a minimum
standard for veterans entering employment that all states will be expected
to meet. Until the standard becomes available, VETS has used historically
based outcomes in negotiating performance goals with states. In addition,
Labor has established an entered-employment goal of 58 percent for
veterans served through the DVOP and LVER programs. While VETS reported
that the DVOP and LVER programs met Labor's program year 2003 goals for
some measures, concerns about data reliability remain, preventing an
accurate assessment of how well DVOP and LVER staff are performing.

Performance Measures Implemented, but More Time Needed to Establish
Minimum Standard

The performance measurement system for the DVOP and LVER programs has been
in transition over the last several years. Prior to JVA, performance
measures placed more emphasis on process-oriented measures-measures that
simply tracked services provided to veterans, not on the employment
outcomes veterans achieved. In addition, states used different data
sources to report employment-related outcomes, resulting in performance
that was not comparable across states. According to VETS officials, VETS
adopted performance measures, beginning July 1, 2003, that are consistent
with those of WIA, but has not yet specified when it will implement a
system for weighting the measures to provide special consideration for
such groups as disabled veterans, in accordance with JVA's requirements.
Another fundamental change was the use of Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage
records to identify veterans who get jobs rather than the use of
time-consuming follow-up procedures. The current performance standards for
the DVOP and LVER programs apply to various veterans populations,
including disabled veterans. Three measures are based on WIA: (1) veterans
that entered employment; (2) retention in employment at 6 months; and (3)
job seeker satisfaction. In addition, VETS tracks entered employment
following receipt of staff

4ETA has issued guidance on implementing JVA's requirement to provide
priority of service to veterans eligible veterans as it relates to 20
Labor-funded programs that are affected by the requirement. See U.S.
Department of Labor, Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 5-03,
(Washington, D.C.: 2003). ETA officials told us that they also plan to
raise awareness of priority of service through such efforts as promotion
campaigns at one-stop centers.

assisted services and entered employment following receipt of case

5

management.

VETS officials told us, however, that the measures will change again on
July 1, 2005, when VETS will adopt the Office of Management and Budget's

6

new common measures. VETS will retain several existing measures that track
employment following services provided by DVOP and LVER staff.

While the new common measures afford some advantages over existing
measures, the frequent shifts in focus have made it difficult to collect
comparable data that can be used to establish a pattern of performance for

the DVOP and LVER programs and compare outcomes across different time
periods. As such, VETS anticipates that it will take at least until 2007
to collect the necessary trend data to establish the minimum standard for
the entered-employment rate that all states will be expected to meet. In
the interim, states are required to meet performance goals that they
negotiate annually with VETS based on historic outcome levels. For
example, according to VETS, states' program year 2004 negotiated goals for
entered employment ranged from 46 percent to 67 percent for veterans, and
from 41 percent to 65 percent for disabled veterans.

VETS Reports Meeting Nationwide, VETS reported that the DVOP and LVER
programs met Goals, but Data Reliability Labor's goals for the entered
employment rate (58 percent) for all eligible Concerns Remain veterans in
program year 2003, while they fell short of their 60-percent

target entered employment rate for disabled veterans (see table 2).
Similarly, VETS reported that the programs exceeded goals for the rate at
which veterans retained employment 6 months later.

5This measure applies only to the DVOP program.

6The Office of Management and Budget established a set of common measures
to be applied to all federal employment and training programs administered
by the departments of Labor, Education, Health and Human Services,
Veterans Affairs, Interior, and Housing and Urban Development. This set of
measures will allow Labor to sum outcomes across all its programs and
provide a more uniform picture of outcomes achieved. Three common measures
apply to programs serving adults: (1) entered employment; (2) employment
retention; and (3) earnings increase. Although program efficiency was one
of the measures in earlier ETA guidance, the policy has been revised and
states will no longer be required to report on this measure. Instead, ETA
will use existing program management data to report program efficiency at
a national level.

Table 2: Summary of Performance Outcomes for DVOP and LVER Programs,
Program Year 2003

All veterans and eligible persons Disabled veterans

                  Outcome measure     Actual    Goal        Actual       Goal 
          Entered employment rate 58 percent 58 percent 53 percent 60 percent 
             Rate of retention in                                  
           employment at 6 months 79 percent 72 percent 77 percent 65 percent 

Source: Fiscal year 2004 Performance Budget for VETS and VETS 200 report.

Even after the new measures will be adopted, VETS officials remain
concerned about the reliability of data used to assess performance. VETS
officials attribute their concerns about service-related data reliability
to DVOP and LVER staff not understanding the new definitions of the
performance measures, lacking training on entering data into an automated
system, inconsistent registration policies, or simply inputting erroneous
data. In addition, VETS officials told us that some states have known data
reliability issues with their management information systems. While Labor
has established data validation procedures, the reliability of performance
data is an issue that is not fully addressed by Labor's current validation
procedures. For example, all states must certify that their data are
correct using validation software that cross-checks the totals they report
to VETS. However, validation does not extend to the case file level to
ensure that DVOP and LVER staff accurately collect and report data at the
point of service delivery. In comparing the reliability of data on
services to those on employment outcomes, VETS officials believe that
outcome data are more reliable because they are based on Unemployment
Insurance (UI) wage records. However, as we have noted in past work, while
UI wage records are reliable, they suffer from significant time lags,
resulting in at least an approximately 1 1/2- year wait to obtain
information on outcomes.7

7GAO, Workforce Investment Act: States and Local Areas Have Developed
Strategies to Assess Performance, but Labor Could Do More to Help,
GAO-04-657 (Washington, D.C.: June 1, 2004).

Monitoring Systems Evolving to Strengthen Program Accountability

In response to JVA's requirement to monitor the DVOP and LVER programs,
VETS has shifted greater responsibility for monitoring program performance
to the state level, and VETS' monitoring role continues to evolve from
enforcer to partner in achieving state goals. VETS staff completed their
first review of annual state self-assessments in program year 2004 and
have completed their first round of site visits to a random sample of
local offices. However, the extent that this new approach to monitoring
DVOP and LVER performance strengthens program accountability may require
several years of state and VETS experience collecting, reporting, and
using information to improve services to veterans.

First Round of Reviews Completed

Beginning in program year 2004, VETS began reviewing all the state plans
for compliance with program requirements and, for any deficiencies noted
during the review, required states to correct the relevant section of the
plan. In addition, VETS requires states to submit annual self-assessments
to identify best practices, ensure the approved state plan is being
effectively implemented, determine the state's progress toward meeting its
performance goals, and identify areas for technical assistance and
training.

Besides conducting reviews of the state plans and self-assessments, VETS
also conducts annual on-site monitoring reviews of 20 percent of local
offices within each state, and all local offices must be visited at least
once in 5 years. While we do not know how many offices have DVOP or LVER
staff, there are an estimated 1,900 comprehensive one-stop centers and
about 1,600 affiliate one-stop centers around the nation. The on-site
reviews include interviewing personnel who are involved in providing
services to veterans, observing the flow of customers in the lobby, and
reviewing local guidance and plans.

VETS Still Working to Determine How Best to Use Monitoring Information

Now that VETS has completed its first year under the new performance
accountability system, it is unclear how it will use its monitoring
results to improve DVOP and LVER program performance. At the national
level, VETS has developed a system to track corrective actions needed in
states' plans, but has not yet developed a strategy to best meld
performance information from its other monitoring efforts to improve
program performance at the local, state, and regional levels. For example,
VETS officials in two states we visited told us that they use the site
visit results to identify local offices needing targeted technical
assistance. However, one state VETS official told us that because local
offices varied considerably in their performance, he was uncertain whether
the 20percent sample used for site visits would accurately capture areas
most in need of technical assistance. While information on DVOP and LVER
performance is also available through local office reporting, VETS
officials

have not provided a consistent methodology to incorporate and analyze
relative performance among the local offices, states, and regional
offices. VETS and ETA continue to work on issues related to sharing the
results of monitoring efforts, coordinating corrective actions, and taking
a joint approach to enforcement.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I will be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have.
Our remaining work will examine these and other issues in greater depth to
meet our mandated reporting date at the end of the year.

Contact and	For further information regarding this testimony, please
contact me at (202) 512-7215. Key contributors to this testimony were
Lacinda Ayers,

Acknowledgments Jeremy Cox, Meeta Engle, Emily Pickrell, and Stanley
Stenersen.

Related GAO Products

Workforce Investment Act: States and Local Areas Have Developed Strategies
to Assess Performance, but Labor Could Do More to Help. GAO-04-657.
Washington, D.C.: June 1, 2004.

Veterans' Employment and Training Service: Flexibility and Accountability
Needed to Improve Service to Veterans. GAO-01-928. Washington, D.C.:
September 12, 2001.

Veterans' Employment and Training Service: Proposed Performance
Measurement System Improved, But Further Changes Needed. GAO-01-580.
Washington, D.C.: May 15, 2001.

Veterans' Employment and Training Service: Strategic and Performance Plans
Lack Vision and Clarity. GAO/T-HEHS-99-177. Washington, D.C.: July 29,
1999.

Veterans' Employment and Training Service: Assessment of the Fiscal Year
1999 Performance Plan. GAO/HEHS-98-240R. Washington, D.C.: September 30,
1998.

Veterans' Employment and Training: Services Provided by Labor Department
Programs. GAO/HEHS-98-7. Washington, D.C.: October 17, 1997.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

GAO's Mission

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone 	The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: 	Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

To Report Fraud, Contact:

Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: [email protected] Programs Automated answering system: (800)
424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4400Congressional U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street
NW, Room 7125 Relations Washington, D.C. 20548

Public Affairs 	Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548

                           PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
*** End of document. ***