Employment Training: Successful Projects Share Common Strategy (Letter
Report, 05/07/96, GAO/HEHS-96-108).
Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the merits of 6 highly
successful employment training programs for economically disadvantaged
adults.
GAO found that successful employment training projects: (1) serve adults
with little high school education, limited basic skills and English
language proficiency, few marketable job skills, and past histories of
substance abuse and domestic violence; (2) only enroll students who are
committed to completing the job training and seeking full-time
employment; (3) ensure that clients are committed to training and
getting a good job, and as a result, require them to sign an agreement
of commitment outlining their responsibilities; (4) provide child care,
transportation, and basic skills training, to enable clients to complete
program training and acquire employment; (5) improve their clients'
employability through on-site workshops and one-on-one sessions and by
developing professional workplace attitudes; (6) have strong links with
the local labor market and use information from the local market to
guide training options; and (7) aim to provide their clients with
training that will lead to higher earnings, good benefits, and overall
self-sufficiency.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: HEHS-96-108
TITLE: Employment Training: Successful Projects Share Common
Strategy
DATE: 05/07/96
SUBJECT: Disadvantaged persons
Employment or training programs
Minorities
Educational programs
Adult education
Vocational education
Career planning
State-administered programs
IDENTIFIER: Project Focus: HOPE (MI)
Encore Program (FL)
JOBS Program
Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program
Pell Grant
Arapahoe County Employment and Training Project (CO)
Project STRIVE (NY)
Reno (NV)
Port Charlotte (FL)
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO report. Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved. Major **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters, **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and **
** single lines. The numbers on the right end of these lines **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the **
** document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the **
** page numbers of the printed 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. **
** **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO **
** Document Distribution Center. For further details, please **
** send an e-mail message to: **
** **
** **
** **
** with the message 'info' in the body. **
******************************************************************
Cover
================================================================ COVER
Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Human Resources and
Intergovernmental Relations, Committee on Government Reform and
Oversight, House of Representatives
May 1996
EMPLOYMENT TRAINING - SUCCESSFUL
PROJECTS SHARE COMMON STRATEGY
GAO/HEHS-96-108
Employment Training Projects
(205292)
Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV
CAT - Center for Advanced Technologies
CET - Center for Employment Training
JOBS - Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training
JTPA - Job Training Partnership Act
MTI - Machinist Training Institute
STRIVE - Support and Training Results in Valuable Employment
TPIC - The Private Industry Council
Vo-Tech - Charlotte Vocational Technical Center
Letter
=============================================================== LETTER
B-266315
May 7, 1996
The Honorable Christopher Shays
Chairman, Subcommittee on Human Resources
and Intergovernmental Relations
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
House of Representatives
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The strength of international competition has highlighted the
importance to the U.S. economy of a skilled labor force to maintain
a high standard of living. In fiscal year 1995, the federal
government appropriated about $20 billion for about 163 employment
training programs,\1 yet large numbers of individuals remain
unprepared for employment. Federally funded employment training
programs are designed to equip individuals with the skills they need
to obtain high-quality jobs. However, congressional and public
confidence in federal employment training efforts has eroded in the
face of concern that the myriad federally funded employment training
programs are characterized by conflicting requirements, overlapping
populations, and questionable outcomes. As a result, legislative
changes have been proposed to address these concerns by consolidating
a large number of federal programs and creating a limited number of
block grants to states.
Regardless of program structure, considerable uncertainty remains as
to how to make employment training initiatives more effective in
helping disadvantaged adults acquire and maintain permanent
employment. In light of this uncertainty, you asked us to identify
the strategies used by employment training projects considered
successful in helping economically disadvantaged adults.
To identify successful employment training projects, we obtained
input from state employment training officials and research groups,
and we researched employment training literature. In developing our
list of projects, we established the criteria for successful projects
as those having outstanding results measured by performance
indicators such as completion rates, job placement and retention
rates, and placement wages. From among about 120 employment training
projects identified, we winnowed down the list on the basis of the
strength of the justification supporting the nomination and other
factors, including the requirement that projects maintain data on
their services and outcomes. From the resulting list, we selected
six projects to visit that provided a variety of geographic
locations, client populations, program sizes, and funding sources.
Table 1 shows the projects we visited and the nomination source and
selection characteristics. We did our work between March 1995 and
March 1996 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. (Further information on our scope and methodology is in
app. I.)
Table 1
Projects Visited, Nomination Source, and
Selection Characteristics
Primary
Nomination Training funding
Project source Location approach sources Client focus
-------------- -------------- ------------ ------------ ------------- --------------
Arapahoe Colorado Suburban Training Job Training JTPA-eligible
County Governor's Job broker Partnership and Aid to
Employment and Training approach Act (JTPA) Families With
Training, Office and Job Dependent
Aurora, Opportunities Children/JOBS
Colorado and Basic clients
Skills
Training
(JOBS)
Center for Nevada State Urban/ Training JTPA and Pell Hispanic, non-
Employment Job Training rural focused grants English-
Training Office mix in three speaking farm
(CET), service- workers
Reno, Nevada related
occupations
Encore\ National Rural Part of Perkins Act Single
, Port Center for larger parents,
Charlotte, Research in comprehensiv displaced
Florida Vocational e on-site homemakers,
Education 1993 vocational and single
Exemplary education pregnant women
Vocational program
Education
Award
Focus: HOPE, Congressional Urban Multilevel State Inner-city
Detroit, testimony training in economic minority
Michigan machining development
grant
Support and New York State Urban Training Private Inner-city
Training Job Training focused on minority
Results in Partnership attitude
Valuable Council rather than
Employment skills
(STRIVE), New
York, New York
The Private SRI's study of Mix of Training JTPA JTPA-eligible
Industry JTPA best urban, broker
Council practices suburban, approach
(TPIC), rural
Portland,
Oregon
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
\1 Multiple Employment Training Programs: Major Overhaul Needed to
Reduce Costs, Streamline the Bureaucracy, and Improve Results
(GAO/T-HEHS-95-53, Jan. 10, 1995).
RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1
The six successful projects we visited differ in size; funding
sources; and participant, or client, characteristics but share a
common strategy designed to enable their graduates to attain
self-sufficiency. Although each project may implement this strategy
differently, the strategy has four key features to help ensure that
participants are successful in obtaining and maintaining employment.
Three of the projects had placement rates above 90 percent--two of
these placed virtually all those who completed their training. The
other three projects placed two-thirds or more of those who completed
their training.
The first key feature of this common strategy is a focus on ensuring
that participants are committed to training and getting a job.
Project officials evaluate participants' readiness upon entering the
projects and nurture participants' commitment throughout the course
of their involvement. For example, at Focus: HOPE in Detroit, all
participants--even those who receive a cash subsidy--are required to
pay a $10 weekly enrollment fee to solidify their commitment to the
project's machinist training.
The second feature is removing barriers that could limit clients'
ability to finish training and get and keep a job. All projects
identify each client's potential needs and then provide, or arrange
for, services to address those needs. For example, Encore! in Port
Charlotte, Florida, serves many women suffering from low self-esteem,
including displaced homemakers and survivors of domestic abuse.
Encore!'s 6-week workshop focuses on building self-esteem so that
these women are ready to enter occupational training or go directly
into a job.
Improving participants' employability skills as part of their
training curriculum is the third feature of the strategy common to
all six projects. Employers want workers who exhibit attributes such
as dependability, promptness, ability to work effectively in groups,
and ability to resolve conflicts appropriately. For example, as part
of their curriculum, participants in both Focus: HOPE and Encore!
are required to clock in each day using a time card and are given
sanctions when they violate time and attendance rules.
The fourth feature is linking occupational skills training with the
local labor market. This linkage allows the project to monitor the
local labor market and make adjustments in course offerings to meet
employer demand. For example, the Center for Employment Training
(CET) in Reno, Nevada, eliminated an electronics course offering
because the local labor market did not absorb its supply of
graduates. Also, Focus: HOPE, a machinist training program, trains
participants on less sophisticated machinery as well as on
state-of-the-art equipment to reflect the range of skills sought by
local employers.
BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2
Employment training projects that target economically disadvantaged
adults can receive funding from a wide variety of sources. A large
number of job training projects are federally funded; states fund
some projects, as well. Other job training projects are funded
privately. Major sources of federal employment training funds
include the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), the Job
Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) program, and the Food
Stamp Employment and Training program.\2 Job training assistance may
also draw resources from higher education, such as Pell grants or
vocational education funding under the Perkins Act. Even when a job
training project receives most of its direct funding from one federal
or state agency, its clients may receive support services from other
sources. For example, a project participant may have training paid
for by JTPA but child care services paid for with JOBS funds.\3
Evaluations of employment training efforts have focused either on a
single funding stream or, less frequently, on individual training
sites. Both types of study are complicated by a large number of
intervening factors. Because differences in client populations and
local economic conditions partially determine the impact of job
training, no uniform standards establish what should be expected from
any job training program or project. As a result, research efforts
have largely focused on determining whether job training is effective
in increasing employment and wages above the level participants could
be expected to achieve without training. Some of these studies
looked at the effect of large-scale federal initiatives operating
across many sites nationwide.\4 A few researchers looked at
smaller-scale efforts, either at one particular site or at several
sites.\5 In addition, other studies examined the effectiveness of
providing or subsidizing certain support services for a specific
clientele who may not be in job training.\6
Although all these studies provide insight into job training
initiatives, little systematic research has been done on the reasons
training projects succeed or fail, especially at the individual
project level. Speculation about project success, either at one site
or across projects, has generally been at a theoretical or conceptual
level and has been limited to one or a few factors rather than a
comprehensive approach. Nonetheless, a few case studies of selected
training projects have pointed to several factors that may influence
the quality of training or the success in job placement at specific
training centers. For example, in 1991 the Department of Labor
studied 15 randomly selected JTPA sites and examined factors that
influenced the quality of training.\7 The researchers concluded that
quality training would generally include (1) basic skills training,
preferably integrated closely with occupational training; (2)
individual case management by project employees; (3) training for
participants in what is expected in the working world; (4)
high-quality classroom instruction; and (5) assurance that the jobs
for which the participants are being trained are available in the
local labor market. Similarly, a study of successful JTPA sites by
SRI International, which also used case studies, concluded that links
to the local labor market are important in facilitating job
placement.\8 In our report on JTPA training for dislocated workers,
we identified links to the local labor market, an individualized
approach to services, and personal support and follow-up as common
themes across eight exemplary projects.\9 Studies of vocational
education programs have found such overlapping themes as school
climate, administration, and leadership, to be important to
success.\10
While we relied partially on these and other studies to guide our
initial case study protocol, our study differs from most previous
efforts in several respects. First, we focused specifically on
services to economically disadvantaged adults; we excluded services
to dislocated workers and youth. Second, while previous studies
focused on a single funding stream, we expanded our focus to include
any successful project regardless of funding source; of the six
projects we selected, one received no JTPA funding, one received
nearly all its funding from JTPA, and the others supplemented JTPA
funding with funds from other sources. Third, because we assumed
that good leadership and management would be essential to any
project's success, we focused on tangible components, or features, of
the program or service delivery, rather than on organizational
structure or dynamics. Finally, instead of narrowing our approach to
a single project phase, such as training or placement, or a single
service delivery method, such as the case management method, we
employed a comprehensive approach to allow us to identify
commonalities across the successful projects we examined.
Figure 1 shows the locations of the projects we visited. The six job
training projects all focus on enabling their economically
disadvantaged participants to obtain employment with benefits that
would allow them to become self-sufficient; however, the projects
vary considerably in the participants they serve and in the specific
services they provide to meet those participants' needs.
Figure 1: Location of Projects
Visited
(See figure in printed
edition.)
The Arapahoe County Employment and Training Division (Arapahoe)
administers JTPA in Colorado's Arapahoe and Douglas Counties; it also
administers the JOBS program in Arapahoe County. Located in Aurora,
Colorado, a suburb of Denver, Arapahoe's job training programs and
services are intended to increase employment and earnings for
economically disadvantaged adults within these counties and reduce
welfare dependency. During 1994, Arapahoe served 541 disadvantaged
adults, with a job placement rate of about 69 percent for those
completing occupational skills training. The project uses a case
management approach, with assessment and follow-up performed in-house
and basic skills and job-specific training provided by area
contractors. (See app. II for a detailed description of this
project.)
Reno's CET, one of more than 30 centers in the nationwide CET
network, is a community-based, nonprofit organization providing job
training to disadvantaged adults, primarily Hispanic migrant
farmworkers. Participants pay tuition for their training and may
receive federal, state, or local financial aid. The Reno CET
provides on-site training in three specific training areas: building
maintenance, automated office skills, and shipping and receiving. It
also provides remedial education and English language instruction.
In 1994, the Reno location served 94 participants and achieved a
92-percent job placement rate for project completers. (See app. III
for a detailed description of this project.)
Encore!, located in Port Charlotte, Florida, prepares single parents;
displaced homemakers; and single, pregnant women for high-wage
occupations in order to help them become self-sufficient. This
project is largely funded by a federal grant under the Carl D.
Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of 1990 and
is strongly linked to the Charlotte Vocational Technical Center
(Vo-Tech). Encore!'s primary components are a 6-week prevocational
workshop and a year-round support system for participants during
their vocational training. The workshop is intended to prepare
participants for skills training. About 99 percent of all Encore!
participants complete their vocational training at Vo-Tech. In the
1993-94 school year, 194 Encore! participants were enrolled at
Vo-Tech. For this same year, the Vo-Tech campuswide placement rate
was 95 percent. (See app. IV for a detailed description of this
project.)
Focus: HOPE, a civil and human rights organization in Detroit, was
founded in 1968 to resolve the effects of discrimination. Its
machinist training program, started in 1981, is intended to break
down discrimination in machinist trades and high-tech manufacturing
industries and to provide disadvantaged adults with marketable
skills. Focus: HOPE has three on-site training levels--FAST TRACK,
the Machinist Training Institute (MTI), and the Center for Advanced
Technologies (CAT). It serves inner-city adults and relies on
federal and state grants as well as on private contributions. For
the 1993-94 year, there were 185 participants in MTI, and 75 percent
completed the program. Of these, 99 percent were placed. (See app.
V for a detailed description of this project.)
Support and Training Results in Valuable Employment (STRIVE) is a
primarily privately funded employment training and placement project
for inner-city adults in New York City who have experienced
difficulty securing and maintaining employment. STRIVE's founders
believe gainful employment is the most critical element to
individuals and families living in disenfranchised neighborhoods of
New York City who hope to achieve self-sufficiency. STRIVE
Central--one of 10 community-based organizations in New York's STRIVE
Employment Group--is located in East Harlem and prepares participants
for the work place through a strict, demanding 3-week attitudinal
training workshop. STRIVE Central provides no occupational training;
however, STRIVE provides a long-term commitment of at least 2 years
to help graduates maintain and upgrade their employment. During
1994, STRIVE Central trained 415 adults and placed 77 percent of
these project graduates. (See app. VI for a detailed description of
this project.)
The Private Industry Council (TPIC) is a private, nonprofit
organization providing employment training services to low-income
residents in the city of Portland, Oregon, and the counties of
Washington and Multnomah. The federal government provides 85 percent
of TPIC's funding through JTPA. TPIC's mission is to promote
individual self-sufficiency and a skilled workforce by eliminating
barriers to productive employment, and the project delivers most
services for disadvantaged adults from three neighborhood centers.
During the 1994 program year, TPIC served a total of 682
disadvantaged adults. Of those completing occupational skills
training, about 77 percent were placed. (See app. VII for a
detailed description of this project.)
--------------------
\2 For a discussion of the broad range of federal training programs,
see GAO/T-HEHS-95-53, Jan. 10, 1995.
\3 For a further discussion of the relationship between JOBS and
JTPA, see JOBS and JTPA: Tracking Spending, Outcomes, and Program
Performance (GAO/HEHS-94-177, July 15, 1994); Job Training
Partnership Act: Actions Needed to Improve Participant Support
Services (GAO/HRD-92-124, June 12, 1992); and Welfare to Work:
Measuring Outcomes for JOBS Participants (GAO/HEHS-95-86, Apr. 17,
1995).
\4 For example, see Job Training Partnership Act: Long-Term Earnings
and Employment Outcomes (GAO/HEHS-96-40, Mar. 4, 1996) and Job
Training Partnership Act: Services and Outcomes for Participants
With Differing Needs (GAO/HRD-89-52, June 9, 1989). See also Larry
L. Orr and others, The National JTPA Study: Impacts, Benefits, and
Costs of Title II-A (Bethesda, Md.: Abt Associates, Inc., Mar.
1994); Abt Associates, Inc., Evaluation of the Food Stamp Employment
Program (Bethesda, Md.: Abt Associates, Inc., June 1990); and
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., International Trade and Worker
Dislocation: Evaluation of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program
(Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., Apr. 1993).
\5 For example, see Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation,
GAIN: Two-Year Impacts in Six Counties--California's Greater Avenues
for Independence Program (New York: Manpower Demonstration Research
Corporation, May 1993).
\6 For example, see Child Care: Child Care Subsidies Increase
Likelihood That Low-Income Mothers Will Work (GAO/HEHS-95-20, Dec.
30, 1994). Also see Mark C. Berger and Dan A. Black, "Child Care
Subsidies, Quality of Care, and the Labor Supply of Low-Income,
Single Mothers," Review of Economics and Statistics, 74(4) (Nov.
1992), pp. 635-42.
\7 U.S. Department of Labor, Improving the Quality of Training Under
JTPA, Research and Evaluation Report Series 91-A (Washington, D.C.:
1991).
\8 Katherine P. Dickinson and others, JTPA Best Practices in
Assessment, Case Management, and Providing Appropriate Services
(Menlo Park, Calif.: SRI International and Social Policy Research
Associates, June 1994). See also Welfare to Work: Most AFDC
Training Programs Not Emphasizing Job Placement (GAO/HEHS-95-113, May
19, 1995).
\9 Dislocated Workers: Exemplary Local Projects Under the Job
Training Partnership Act (GAO/HRD-87-70BR, Apr. 8, 1987).
\10 See, for example, George Wardlow and others, Institutional
Factors Underlying Excellence in Vocational Education (St. Paul:
University of Minnesota, 1990), or a discussion of literature in
George Wardlow and Gordon Swanson, Institutional-Level Factors and
Excellence in Vocational Education: A Review of the Literature
(Berkeley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education,
University of California, 1991).
KEY FEATURES OF JOB TRAINING
STRATEGY SHARED BY SUCCESSFUL
PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3
Although the common strategy may be implemented differently, each
project incorporates four key features into its strategy: (1)
ensuring that participants are committed to training and getting a
job; (2) removing barriers, such as lack of child care, that might
limit participants' ability to get and keep a job; (3) improving
participants' employability skills, such as getting to a job
regularly and on time, working well with others while there, and
dressing and behaving appropriately; and (4) linking occupational
skills training with the local labor market.
PROJECTS ENSURE CLIENT
COMMITMENT TO TRAINING AND
GETTING A JOB
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.1
Each of the projects tries to secure participant commitment before
enrollment and continues to encourage that commitment throughout
training. Staff at several projects believe the voluntary nature of
their projects is an important factor in fostering strong client
commitment. Just walking through the door, however, does not mean
that a participant is committed to the program. Further measures to
encourage, develop, and require this commitment are essential. All
of the projects we visited use some of these measures, such as (1)
making sure participants know what to expect, so they are making an
informed choice when they enter; (2) creating opportunities for
participants to screen themselves out if they are not fully
committed; and (3) requiring participants to actively demonstrate the
seriousness of their commitment.
The initial step the projects take to ensure client commitment is to
reveal the project's expectations to potential participants before
enrollment so that they can make an informed choice about entering
the program. Through orientation sessions, assessment workshops, and
one-on-one interviews with project staff, participants receive
detailed information about project expectations. Project officials
say they do this to minimize any misunderstandings that could lead to
participant attrition. Officials at both STRIVE and Arapahoe told us
they do not want to spend scarce dollars on individuals who are not
committed to completing their programs and moving toward full-time
employment; they believe it is important to target their efforts to
those most willing to take full advantage of the project's help.
For example, at STRIVE's preprogram orientation session, staff
members give potential participants a realistic preview of the
project. STRIVE staff explain their strict requirements for staying
in the project--attending every day, on time; displaying an attitude
open to change and able to take criticism; and completing all
homework assignments. At the end of the session, STRIVE staff tell
potential participants to take the weekend to think about whether
they are serious about obtaining employment, and if so, to return on
Monday to begin training. STRIVE staff told us that typically 10
percent of those who attend the orientation do not return on Monday.
Several of the other projects we visited also create opportunities
for participants to screen themselves out of the project if they are
not fully committed to it. Both CET and Focus: HOPE allow potential
participants to try out their training at no charge to ensure the
project is suitable for them. Focus: HOPE reserves the right to
reject potential participants on the basis of their attitude, but it
does not routinely do this. Instead, staff will provisionally accept
the participant into one of the training programs but put that
participant on notice that his or her attitude will be monitored.
All six projects require participants to actively demonstrate the
seriousness of their commitment to both training and employment. For
example, all projects require participants to sign an agreement of
commitment outlining the participants' responsibilities while in
training, and all projects monitor attendance throughout
participants' enrollment. In addition, some project officials
believe that requiring participants to contribute to training is
important to encouraging commitment. For example, STRIVE project
staff told us that their policy of providing participants with one
daily subway token is designed to emphasize the partnership between
STRIVE and the client by demonstrating STRIVE's support to get the
client to training, but also requiring a contribution from him or her
for the trip home. Similarly, Focus: HOPE requires
participants--even those receiving cash subsidies--to pay a small
weekly fee for their training, typically $10 a week. A Focus: HOPE
administrator explained that project officials believe students are
more committed when they are "paying customers," and this small
payment discourages potential participants who are not seriously
committed to training.
PROJECTS TAILOR THEIR
APPROACH TO REMOVE BARRIERS
TO TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.2
A number of employment training studies emphasize removing employment
barriers as a key to successful outcomes.\11 As indicated by their
client assessments, the projects we visited define a barrier as
anything that precludes an individual from participating in and
completing training, as well as anything that could potentially
inhibit his or her ability to obtain and maintain a job. For
example, if a client lacks appropriate basic skills, then providing
basic skills training can allow him or her to build those skills and
enter occupational training. Similarly, if a client does not have
adequate transportation, he or she will not be able to get to the
training. Because all of the projects we visited have attendance
requirements, a lack of adequate child care would likely affect the
ability of a client who is a parent to successfully complete
training. Moreover, a client who is living in a domestic abuse
situation may find it difficult to focus on learning a new skill or
search for a job.
All six projects we visited use a comprehensive assessment process to
identify the particular barriers each client faces. This assessment
can take many forms, including orientation sessions, workshops,
one-on-one interviews, interactions with project staff, or a
combination of these. For example, at TPIC's assessment workshop,
participants complete a five-page barrier/needs checklist on a wide
variety of issues, including food, housing, clothing, transportation,
financial matters, health, and social/support issues. At the end of
this workshop, participants must develop a personal statement and a
self-sufficiency plan that they and the case manager use as a road
map to address barriers throughout training. Encore! and Arapahoe
have similar processes for identifying and addressing barriers
participants face. Rather than relying on a formal workshop or
orientation process, CET identifies participants' needs through
one-on-one interviews with project staff when a client enters the
project. Throughout the training period, instructors, the job
developer, and other project staff work to provide support services
and address clients' ongoing needs.
All of the projects arrange for clients to get the services they need
to address barriers, but--because of the wide range of individual
participant needs--none of them provides all possible services
on-site. For example, although all six projects recognize the
importance of basic skills training,\12 they arrange for this
training in different ways. Arapahoe contracts out for basic skills
training; CET, Encore!, and Focus: HOPE provide this service
on-site; and TPIC and STRIVE refer clients to community resources.
Only Focus: HOPE provides on-site child care; however, the other
five projects help clients obtain financial assistance to pay for
child care or refer them to other resources.\13 Because some of the
projects we visited attract many clients who have similar needs,
these projects provide certain services on-site to better tailor
their services to that specific population. For example, because it
serves Hispanic migrant farmworkers with limited English proficiency,
CET provides an on-site English-as-a-second-language program.
Likewise, because a major barrier for many of Encore!'s clients is
low self-esteem resulting from mental abuse, physical abuse, or both,
Encore! designed its 6-week workshop to build self-esteem and
address the barriers these women face so that they are then ready to
enter occupational training.
In addition to services provided during training, most of the
projects followed up with clients after they completed training to
ensure that barriers did not reappear or that new ones did not arise
that would affect clients' ability to maintain employment. STRIVE
and CET follow up on a regular basis after job placement to monitor
participants' progress and determine whether additional assistance is
needed to ensure job retention. For example, STRIVE has a commitment
to contact its participants on a quarterly basis for 2 years
following program completion. During these contacts, STRIVE
personnel assess progress and suggest ways that participants can
continue to progress in their job. For 6 months, CET's job developer
makes monthly calls to employers who have hired CET graduates to
troubleshoot any problems that may have arisen and to monitor
progress. The job developer also follows up with graduates for 2
years after program completion.
--------------------
\11 For example, see Job Corps: High Costs and Mixed Results Raise
Questions About Program's Effectiveness (GAO/HEHS-95-180, June 30,
1995); U.S. Department of Labor, Improving the Quality of Training
Under JTPA; U.S. Department of Labor, What's Working (and What's
Not), A Summary of Research on the Economic Impact of Employment and
Training Programs, Jan. 1995; GAO/HRD-92-124, June 12, 1992; and
Gary Orfield and Helene Slessarev, Job Training Under the New
Federalism, ch. 13 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986).
\12 The importance of basic skills training for JTPA-eligible clients
is discussed in U.S. Department of Labor, Improving the Quality of
Training Under JTPA.
\13 Researchers have stressed the importance of obtaining affordable,
quality child care to facilitate employment. For example, see
GAO/HRD-92-124, June 12, 1992; GAO/HEHS-95-20, Dec. 30, 1994; and
Berger and Black, "Child Care Subsidies, Quality of Care, and the
Labor Supply of Low-Income, Single Mothers."
PROJECTS IMPROVE
EMPLOYABILITY SKILLS
ESSENTIAL FOR EMPLOYMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.3
Research confirms the necessity for employability skills, especially
for individuals without work experience.\14 For example, the
Secretary of Labor's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills' 1991
report, What Work Requires of Schools, which included discussions and
meetings with employers, unions, employees, and supervisors, verified
that skills such as taking responsibility, self-management, and
working well with others are required to enter employment. Because
so many of these projects' participants have not had successful work
experiences, they often do not have the basic knowledge others might
take for granted about how to function in the workplace. They need
to learn what behaviors are important and how to demonstrate them
successfully. These behaviors include getting to work regularly and
on time; dressing appropriately; working well with others; accepting
constructive feedback; resolving conflicts appropriately; and, in
general, being a reliable, responsible employee.
Each project we visited coaches participants in employability skills
through on-site workshops or one-on-one sessions. For example, CET
provides a human development program that addresses such issues as
life skills, communication strategies, and developing good work
habits. Similarly, Arapahoe helps each client develop employment
readiness competencies, such as interpersonal relations, a work
ethic, demonstrating a positive attitude and behavior, and
appropriate dress, either through a workshop or one-on-one with
client case managers. TPIC starts working on employability skills
right away when clients attend the required assessment workshop.
This workshop covers employer expectations, self-defeating behaviors,
giving and receiving feedback on one's work, communication and
listening skills, decision-making, work attitudes, time management,
handling conflict on the job, and dealing with difficult people.
Some of the projects we visited also develop employability skills
within the context of the occupational skills training, with specific
rules about punctuality, attendance, and, in some cases, appropriate
clothing consistent with the occupation for which clients are
training.
STRIVE concentrates almost exclusively on employability skills and,
in particular, attitudinal training. This project has a very low
tolerance for behaviors such as being even a few minutes late for
class, not completing homework assignments, not dressing
appropriately for the business world, and not exhibiting an
appropriate attitude. We observed staff dismissing clients from the
program for a violation of any of these elements, telling them they
may enroll in another offering of the program when they are ready to
change their behavior. Project staff work hard to rid clients of
their "victim mentality"--that is, believing that things are beyond
their control--and instill in them a responsibility for themselves,
as well as make them understand the consequences of their actions in
the work place. For example, we observed one client who exhibited
inappropriate behavior in class by consistently rolling her eyes and
tuning out the instructor. The instructor called her attention to
this behavior, but the client denied it. When this client argued
with the instructor about her behavior, he removed her from class to
counsel her, but she persisted in arguing with him. Within minutes,
she was dismissed from the project. Another example of getting
clients to think about consequences at STRIVE is through dress-down
day. STRIVE has a dress-down day to simulate such situations in the
work place and to get a sense of what its clients consider
appropriate dressing down. On one such occasion, a client came to
class wearing a T-shirt with a marijuana leaf pattern on the front of
it. The project instructor called the class' attention to this
client's manner of dress to explain the importance of the image one
creates with dress and the message sent to an employer with an
inappropriate outfit. During the lunch break, the client bought a
more appropriate T-shirt.
--------------------
\14 For example, see U.S. Department of Labor, The Secretary's
Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, What Work Requires of
Schools (Washington, D.C.: 1991); GAO/HEHS-95-180, June 30, 1995;
and John Burghardt and Anne Gordon, More Jobs and Higher Pay: How an
Integrated Program Compares With Traditional Programs (New York:
Rockefeller Foundation, 1990).
PROJECTS LINK OCCUPATIONAL
SKILLS TRAINING TO THE LOCAL
LABOR MARKET
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.4
Five of the six projects we visited provide occupational training,\15
using information from the local labor market to guide their
selection of training options for participants. These projects focus
on occupations that the local labor market will support. Project
staff strive to ensure that the training they provide will lead to
self-sufficiency--jobs with good earnings potential as well as
benefits. In addition, all but one of the six projects use their
links to local employers to assist clients with job placement. While
their approaches to occupational training and job placement differ,
the common thread among the projects is their ability to interpret
the needs of local employers and provide them with workers who fit
their requirements.
All five of the projects that provide occupational training are
selective in the training options they offer clients, focusing on
occupational areas that are in demand locally. For example, CET and
Focus: HOPE have chosen to limit their training to one or a few very
specific occupational areas project staff know the local labor market
can support. Focus: HOPE takes advantage of the strong automotive
manufacturing base in the Detroit area by offering training in a
single occupation serving the automotive industry--machining. With
this single occupational choice, Focus: HOPE concentrates primarily
on meeting the needs of the automotive industry and the local firms
that supply automotive parts. Participants are instructed by skilled
craftspeople--many senior instructors at Focus: HOPE are retirees
who are passing on the knowledge they acquired during their careers.
The machines used in training are carefully chosen to represent those
that are available in local machine shops--both state-of-the-art and
older, less technically sophisticated equipment. Job developers
sometimes visit potential work sites, paying close attention to the
equipment in use. This information is then used to ensure a good
match between program participant and employer.
CET offers three occupational training areas--automated office
skills, building maintenance, and shipping and receiving--on the
basis of the needs of the local labor market. CET previously offered
training in electronics but eliminated this training because the
local electronics industry did not absorb the continual supply of CET
graduates. Because Reno has a considerable number of apartment
buildings and hotels, CET replaced the electronics program with a
building maintenance program. CET uses local industry connections to
keep its curricula current and to help ensure that its clients meet
employers' needs. For example, one CET instructor told us he takes
his classes on field trips to area businesses to help keep his
knowledge current and to give program participants a firsthand look
at the business world.
While offering a wide range of training options, Vo-Tech, which
trains Encore! participants, is linked to the local labor market in
part by its craft advisory committees. These committees involve 160
businesses in determining course offerings and curricula. Vo-Tech
recently discontinued its bank teller program shortly after a series
of local bank mergers decreased demand for this skill. It began
offering an electronics program when that industry started to expand
in the Port Charlotte area. Vo-Tech also annually surveys local
employers on its graduates' skills and abilities, using the feedback
to make changes to its programs. When feedback from local employers
in one occupation indicated that Vo-Tech graduates were unable to
pass state licensing exams, the school terminated the instructors and
hired new ones.
All of the projects we visited assist clients in their job search.
Five of the six projects had job developers or placement personnel
who work to understand the needs of local employers and provide them
with workers who fit their requirements. For example, at Focus:
HOPE the job developers may visit local employers to discuss their
skills needs, since virtually all graduates of Focus: HOPE are hired
into machinist jobs locally. The placement staff working with
Encore! graduates noted that there are more positions to fill than
Vo-Tech graduates. They believe that, because of their close ties
with the community and the relevance of their training program, they
have established a reputation of producing well-trained graduates.
This reputation leads employers to trust their referrals.
--------------------
\15 The sixth site, STRIVE, does not offer occupational training but
uses its connections with local employers to get clients into the
workforce after short-term attitudinal training. Then it offers
continuing assistance to clients for up to 2 years after course
completion.
SUMMARY
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4
While the six successful employment training projects we visited
differ in size, funding sources, and client characteristics, they
share a common strategy to prepare clients for self-sufficiency.
This common strategy--resulting in placement rates of over 90 percent
for three of the projects we visited--incorporates four key features
that include ensuring commitment to training and getting a job,
removing barriers that might limit a client's ability to finish
training and get and keep a job, improving employability skills, and
linking occupational skills training with the local labor market.
Although the projects implement them differently, together these
features help ensure that clients are ready, willing, and able to
participate in and benefit from training and employment assistance
and move toward self-sufficiency.
AGENCY COMMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5
The Department of Labor commented that our report substantiates
findings from its studies of exemplary practices in job training
programs serving disadvantaged adults and dislocated workers. Labor
also said that this information would be useful to practitioners in
the employment training community as the community continues to
improve its programs.
Labor had three suggestions for improving the usefulness of the
report to the employment training community. The first suggestion
was to identify a contact person at each of our case study projects.
We have included this information in the appendixes. Second, Labor
suggested we list all of the projects that were nominated but not
included in our case studies. We agree this would be potentially
helpful to other projects and plan to provide such a list to Labor
for it to disseminate as appropriate.
Last, Labor noted that the leveraging of community resources, along
with the use of community supportive services to enhance the overall
program investment, is also an important feature of projects in
general and should be highlighted as such. While we agree that some
of the projects we visited used community resources extensively and
that this practice enhanced their ability to serve disadvantaged
adults in their programs, not all the projects used this approach.
For this reason, we did not include it as a part of the common
strategy. Labor's comments are printed in appendix VIII.
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Labor; the
Director, Office of Management and Budget; relevant congressional
committees; and other interested parties.
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report,
please call me at (202) 512-7014 or Sigurd R. Nilsen at (202)
512-7003. GAO contacts and staff acknowledgments are listed in
appendix IX.
Sincerely yours,
Carlotta C. Joyner
Director, Education and
Employment Issues
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
=========================================================== Appendix I
We designed our study to identify factors and strategies associated
with successful employment training projects for disadvantaged
adults. To do so, we reviewed the current literature and visited
training projects nominated as exemplary, conducted extensive
interviews, and reviewed training processes. We applied a
standardized process to identify common strategies across projects.
We did our work between March 1995 and March 1996 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.
PROJECT SELECTION STRATEGY
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1
To identify projects to review, we studied the literature and recent
employment training award nominations for projects deemed successful.
We also requested nominations of exemplary employment training
projects from each of the 50 states' and the District of Columbia's
workforce development councils. In seeking nominations, we defined
exemplary projects as those with outstanding results measured by
performance indicators such as participant completion rates, job
placement and retention rates, and placement wages. Because no
nationwide standard exists with which to judge a project's success,
we did not establish a baseline standard for placement rate,
completion rate, or other measure to qualify as an acceptable
nomination. Instead, we asked the nominator to provide a rationale
for the specific nomination--in other words, why the project was
considered successful.
The nomination process identified about 120 successful projects,
including 82 submissions from 32 states and the District of Columbia,
and about 38 projects identified in the literature or as recipients
of national training awards. Finalists were chosen for further
consideration on the basis of how closely they satisfied key
selection criteria. These criteria included focusing on serving
disadvantaged adults, having project service and outcome data
available, and having strong justification supporting the nomination.
We contacted project finalists to collect additional information on
client demographics, funding sources and amounts, services provided,
and outcomes obtained. We selected the projects judgmentally to
provide a mixture of (1) geographic locations, (2) urban and rural
locations, (3) project sizes, (4) targeted populations, and (5)
funding sources.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2
We did our fieldwork using a systematic standardized case study
methodology. To collect the data, teams of at least three people
spent 2 to 5 days at each nominated site. During these project
visits, we interviewed participants, project officials, training
providers, and local employers. Additionally, we toured facilities,
observed project operations, and reviewed a sample of participant
records.
To guide our interviews and observations, we employed a detailed
topic outline. This outline was derived from concepts contained in
the literature and included ways these concepts might be
operationalized in the field. To ascertain relevant concepts to be
investigated in the field, we reviewed numerous publications
examining successful job training practices. We focused our review
on the employment training literature that explored the reasons
particular projects or organizations were viewed as successful,
rather than concentrating on empirical research that measured changes
in earnings or employment. Using the theories and observations that
emerged from this literature, we developed a list of concepts
relating to project operations and structure that included easy
access to services, tailoring of services to client needs, and strong
linkages to the labor market. Applying these concepts to practices,
we developed a list of the ways in which they might be
operationalized in the field. When we were examining, for example,
the concept of easy access to services, we reviewed the projects'
outreach and recruiting strategies, and we looked for clear points of
entry into the project, pathways between programs within the
projects, and a streamlined intake process. For tailoring of project
services, we focused on the types of services the project provided,
how the services were delivered, and how the various services were
integrated into the rest of the project.
As part of the structured methodology, we conducted extensive team
debriefings daily during data collection to record and discuss the
observations of the day and to perform quality control of our data
collection effort. At regular intervals during the data collection
phase, the entire work group met to perform a cross-case analysis of
the obtained data. During this analysis, concepts were assigned
alphanumeric values on the basis of a team rating of that element's
presence or absence at a given project. We also used this method to
evaluate the criticality of that element to site operation. Through
this cross-case analysis, concepts occasionally emerged that
warranted further field testing. Items in our interview guide were
augmented with the newly surfaced concepts and the presence of these
constructs was tested at the remaining projects. For example, the
issue of client readiness/commitment was one of those new concepts
that emerged early in our data collection. At subsequent projects,
when we focused on participant commitment, we examined the structure
of their orientation and other intake and assessment processes as
well as the nature of the periodic interactions between participant
and project staff.
At the end of data collection and scoring, we reviewed the ratings
across the six projects and agreed on the key features essential for
project success. Findings presented in this report represent those
elements considered essential for the projects' success at all six
project sites.
Some limitations exist in this type of case study methodology. Case
studies can provide insights into how a practice works in a specific
context, but findings from a case study cannot necessarily be
extended to training programs generally. Furthermore, because
participation in each of the projects we visited was voluntary, we
did not observe the strategies employed under a system in which
participation would be mandatory.\16 The numerical data we
present--for example, job placement rates--were collected directly
from the projects, and we made no attempt to verify their accuracy
except where data were available from existing federal databases. In
addition, we did not gather evidence to confirm or refute the
validity of the nomination.
--------------------
\16 See Welfare to Work: State Programs Have Tested Some of the
Proposed Reforms (GAO/PEMD-95-26, July 14, 1995).
ARAPAHOE COUNTY EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING DIVISION, AURORA,
COLORADO
========================================================== Appendix II
The Arapahoe County Employment and Training Division (Arapahoe)
administers the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) in Arapahoe and
Douglas Counties in Colorado. Arapahoe has been involved with
employment training for about 20 years since the Comprehensive
Employment and Training Act transferred federal funds and
decision-making authority to the local level. Job training programs
and services sponsored by the Arapahoe/Douglas Private Industry
Council, which includes Arapahoe, are intended to increase
employment, increase earnings, and reduce welfare dependency within
these counties.
Arapahoe uses various resources to develop its participants'
potential to achieve self-sufficiency. These include (1) employment
and training resources, such as the Aurora Job Service and the
Colorado Vocational Rehabilitation Services; (2) educational
resources, such as Arapahoe Community College and Aurora Public
Schools; and (3) community resources, such as the Aurora Mental
Health Center, Aurora Food Stamp Office, and Aurora Housing
Authority. Under a contract with the Arapahoe County Department of
Social Services, Arapahoe administers the Job Opportunities and Basic
Skills Training (JOBS) program for that county and the Food Stamp
Employment and Training Program. Further, Arapahoe leverages federal
funds, using grants from local contributors to enhance its resources.
For example, state and local governments must match federal JOBS
funds--the federal government provides 50 percent of the funding, and
state and local governments provide 30 and 20 percent, respectively.
PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1
During the 1994 program year, Arapahoe served 541 adults. About 80
percent of these participants were dually enrolled in JTPA and JOBS.
A project official explained that about 90 percent of the JOBS
clients are eligible for JTPA and are, consequently, enrolled in both
programs. JTPA participants must meet income eligibility guidelines
established by federal regulations as well as residency and age
requirements. The criteria for JOBS referrals give priority to
people who have been on Aid to Families With Dependent Children for 3
of the last 5 years; those under 24 years old without a high school
or general equivalency diploma or a work history; and people whose
youngest child is at least 16 years old.
About half of the 541 clients were new and the other half were
carried over from the previous year. Approximately 78 percent of
Arapahoe participants in 1994 were receiving public assistance, and
the majority were women (85 percent). Fifty-two percent of
participants were white, 32 percent were African American, 11 percent
were Hispanic, 2 percent were Native American, and 3 percent were
Asian American. A project official estimated that more than half of
Arapahoe's clients need basic skills remediation in order to benefit
from occupational skills training.
PROJECT STRUCTURE
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2
Arapahoe primarily functions as a training broker using a case
management model. Assessment (18 hours) is done on-site and
workshops (35 hours) include a job search skills workshop and a
motivational workshop. All prospective participants attend an
orientation session to learn about services available; Arapahoe staff
emphasize that participation in planned activities is required once a
person chooses to enter the project and is accepted. At an
intermission, attendees are free to leave if they feel the program is
not right for them or if they are unwilling to make a commitment to
training and employment.
Case managers work with each participant to determine which training
is best and to identify and remove barriers to self-sufficiency.
Support services are tailored to individual needs and may include
allowances for transportation, child care, and clothing. Case
managers may also refer clients to other community organizations for
support services. As a result of preliminary assessments, such as a
training readiness survey and interviews, Arapahoe assigns a case
manager to each participant and enrolls participants in a 3-day
assessment workshop. This workshop includes such testing as the
Career Assessment Inventory and the Holland Self-Directed Search.
After the client completes the assessment workshop and an Individual
Service Strategy/Employment Plan, case managers refer participants
for basic skills remediation or begin working with them on a training
plan.
Arapahoe contracts with area schools to provide basic and
occupational skills training. For example, Arapahoe's two
contractors for basic skills training operate on a cost- reimbursable
basis and also report on student attendance and course progress.
Clients study basic skills at their own pace but are required to
attend class for 20 hours each week. Arapahoe also provides clients
with vouchers for occupational skills training in areas where there
is the strongest likelihood of employment and with contractors who
have demonstrated performance in training and job placement. The
vouchers pay for training expenses--beyond basic skills training--not
to exceed $2,500 over a 24-month period.
Case managers are required to keep in contact with clients at a
minimum of twice monthly so that assessment is ongoing and clients
have access to referrals for counseling and support services,
including tutoring. Career counseling is a vital part of Arapahoe's
training model because clients enter the program from diverse
backgrounds and receive training in differing fields of their choice
at different area training facilities. If participants are unsure
about a career, case managers provide them with some job shadowing
experiences. Case managers encourage clients to obtain some form of
credential, such as an associate's degree or a technical certificate.
Arapahoe staff also maintain links with local employers to ensure the
type of training provided will help clients achieve self-sufficiency.
PROJECT OUTCOMES
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3
Arapahoe measures its performance by enrollment statistics, job
placement rates, follow-up employment rates, and follow-up earnings.
For program year 1994, Arapahoe's placement benchmark was about 48
percent, and 57 percent of all adults who left the program (either
JTPA-eligible or dually enrolled in JTPA and JOBS) found employment.
About 69 percent of all participants who completed occupational
training were placed. These job placement rates are calculated on
the basis of the number of clients who obtain unsubsidized employment
of 20 or more hours a week when they leave the program. For all
adults who left the program in 1994, the average placement hourly
wage was $7.09.
For more information on the Arapahoe County Employment and Training
Division, contact Elroy Kelzenberg, Deputy Director, 11059 East
Bethany Drive, Suite 201, Aurora, Colorado 80014, or call (303)
752-5820.
CENTER FOR EMPLOYMENT TRAINING,
RENO, NEVADA
========================================================= Appendix III
The Reno, Nevada, Center for Employment Training (CET), established
in 1987, is a community-based, nonprofit organization providing job
training to disadvantaged adults. The Reno CET is one of over 30
centers nationwide, with the corporate headquarters in San Jose,
California. Its mission is based on the philosophy of
self-determination, and it seeks to promote the development and
education of low-income people by providing them with marketable
skills training and supportive services that contribute to economic
self-sufficiency. The corporate office provides accounting and
administrative support and sets broad policy for the corporation as a
whole.
Because the training offered in a particular skill expands and
contracts with the job market for that skill, CET maintains the
flexibility to readily increase training slots for skills in high
demand or to phase out or decrease training activity for skills whose
demand is less than expected. Each center is locally managed and
chooses the skills training that it will offer. The Reno CET focuses
on three specific training areas that are in demand in the local
labor market: automated office skills, building maintenance
(carpentry, electrical, and plumbing), and shipping and receiving.
Local CETs are funded through tuition charges to participants.
During the admissions process, CET staff evaluate applicants to
determine whether they are eligible for subsidized training under one
of CET's federal, state, or local funding sources. Participants may
receive financial assistance from sources such as Pell grants, JTPA
state funds, the JTPA Farm Worker Program (Title IV), and grants from
the city of Reno.
PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:1
During program year 1994, the Reno CET trained 94 participants. A
project official said that most of CET's participants are minority,
functionally illiterate, welfare recipients. The majority of CET
clients in Reno are Hispanic (80 percent), have reading and math
skills below the eighth grade level (80 percent), and have limited
English proficiency (82 percent). Participants range in age from 21
to 55 years. Roughly half are male. The majority (60 percent) of
participants have, at some time, been migrant farmworkers.
PROJECT STRUCTURE
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:2
In addition to providing on-site training skills, the Reno CET also
provides remedial education, English language instruction, and
citizenship classes. Its curriculum includes job search techniques
and employability and life skills. All participants are ensured help
in finding employment, but they must commit to coming to training
each day, on time, and demonstrate that they can relate well to their
instructors and fellow students. A staff training team meets
regularly to discuss participants' progress in developing job skills.
CET staff administer the Employability Competency System test to all
prospective participants to assess reading and math skills. Tests
are intended to identify participants' strengths and weaknesses
rather than to disqualify participants. CET staff also review
applications to assess an applicant's reading comprehension and
spelling. They work with participants to develop an individualized
instruction and service plan that clarifies participants' vocational
goals and remediation needs as well as required supportive services.
In addition, staff help participants gain access to local
community-based organizations for social services that help overcome
potential barriers to training and employment.
CET teaches basic and vocational skills simultaneously. For example,
participants in the building maintenance program learn math in the
context of rulers and measurement. Training, which simulates the
work environment with industry standards, is organized into different
levels of competency. Participants must pass a test for each level
before progressing to the next. Because the competency levels are
generally independent and self-paced, participants may begin training
at almost any time. Depending on an individual's skill choice,
needs, and abilities, training can generally be completed in about 6
months.
Good work habits--such as punctuality, attendance, reliability, and
job responsibility--are emphasized throughout training. Participants
are not referred to a job unless they have the proper habits and
attitudes to ensure success in their work setting. CET's job
developer gives participants employment assistance and advises them
on curriculum choices, drawing on knowledge of what prospective
employers expect from CET graduates. The job developer also teaches
job search techniques and instructs participants on how to set goals,
complete job applications, develop resumes, list references, and
interview for employment. In addition, the job developer
periodically follows up on participants for a period of 1 month to 2
years after program completion. CET offers lifetime placement
assistance unless the individual has consistently quit jobs or had an
unacceptable attendance record.
PROJECT OUTCOMES
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:3
The ultimate CET goal for each participant is permanent, unsubsidized
job placement with good benefits. The Reno CET goal is to place 90
percent of graduates in full-time, career-level employment. For
program year 1994, the placement rate was 92 percent for those who
finished training. Graduates who obtain any full-time job are
considered successful placements even when the job does not require
the skill in which the graduates were trained.
For more information on the Center for Employment Training in Reno,
contact Marcel Schaerer, Division Director, 520 Evans Avenue, Reno,
Nevada 89512, or call (702) 348-8668.
ENCORE!, PORT CHARLOTTE, FLORIDA
========================================================== Appendix IV
Encore! prepares single parents, displaced homemakers, and single
pregnant women for high-wage occupations in order to help them become
self-sufficient. This project, started in 1986, serves many people
who would otherwise be dependent on welfare or employed in low-wage
jobs. The Charlotte Vocational Technical Center (Vo-Tech)
administers Encore! Vo-Tech's mission is to offer quality vocational
education to Charlotte County residents and to help students obtain
gainful employment. Together, Encore! and Vo-Tech seek to motivate
participants to reach their highest potential by removing barriers
and preparing participants for the competitive world of work.
A federal grant under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied
Technology Education Act of 1990 provides Encore! funds for child
care, transportation, tuition, books, and uniforms for qualified
students training for high-wage, nontraditional occupations, such as
women studying auto technology. Community organizations provide
scholarships to support students for training not covered by this
federal grant, and participants may apply for other financial
assistance, such as Pell grants. Vo-Tech provides Encore!
facilities (a portable building in which the program is housed),
utilities, and supplies. While the Perkins grant covers salary and
staff development costs for the project coordinator, Vo-Tech provides
the project a part-time work-study student aide as well as the
expertise of Vo-Tech faculty and staff.
The local community also supports Encore! The Charlotte County
Medical Society Alliance has "adopted" Encore! and raises money for
the project through such functions as dinners and golf tournaments.
Community members also donate clothing suitable for school, job
interviews, or the work place, which is distributed to participants
at no charge through Carol's Closet, located within the Encore!
project. The Charlotte County Habitat for Humanity program pays
particular attention to the housing needs of Encore! participants.
Additionally, the Charlotte County Board of Women Realtors' nonprofit
DREAM HOUSE program is designed to help Encore! participants achieve
home ownership by helping them renovate and purchase older homes.
PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:1
Encore! participants are generally economically disadvantaged, lack
marketable job skills, have low self-esteem, and have few
employability skills. Because Encore! serves single parents,
displaced homemakers, and single pregnant women, most participants
are female. In the 1993-94 school year, 93 percent of the 194
Encore! participants enrolled at Vo-Tech were female. The majority
of participants (84 percent) were white. Most participants--93
percent--had either a high school or general equivalency diploma.
Eighty-six percent had children under the age of 18.
PROJECT STRUCTURE
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:2
Encore!'s primary components are a 6-week prevocational workshop (48
hours) and a year-round support system for participants during their
vocational training. The workshop, which is held twice a year,
includes assessment, career exploration, self-esteem building, goal
setting, and budgeting; it is intended to prepare participants for
skills training so that they can make the commitment needed to
succeed in training and employment. The Encore! project coordinator
works with participants to identify and address any barriers that may
impede their skills training and job placement.
Encore! participants receive vocational assessment and counseling
from both the project coordinator and Vo-Tech staff. On the basis of
this assessment, participants develop an Individualized Career Plan
and may work to improve their basic skills through Vo-Tech's
self-paced remedial program or begin one of the certificate programs
Vo-Tech offers. Most Encore! participants enter skills training at
Vo-Tech and maintain regular contact with the project coordinator.
Vo-Tech offers a wide range of programs, including business (general
office, clerical, secretarial, accounting, and data); construction
(air/heat/refrigeration, drafting, electrical, and carpentry); health
(dental assisting, patient care assisting, and practical nursing);
and service (auto technology, child care, cosmetology, culinary arts,
electronics, nail technology, and ornamental horticulture). Each
program has a craft advisory board linking the needs of the local
labor market to the program curriculum.
For participants enrolled at Vo-Tech, the Encore! project
coordinator monitors progress through a system of employability
skills points. Participants lose points for absenteeism, tardiness,
and other negative behavior. When a participant's points near a
designated threshold level, the project coordinator provides
supportive counseling to the participant. Vo-Tech also requires each
student to attend employability skills workshops that address job
search skills, resume writing, interview strategies, and getting
along on the job. Other workshops, which students may attend
voluntarily, address time management, stress management, maintaining
a professional image, group dynamics, and the changing world of work.
The major priority of Encore! and Vo-Tech is to help all
participants obtain gainful employment. Vo-Tech emphasizes
employability skills, such as job-seeking and job-keeping strategies,
to foster this goal. Encore! participants also participate in
videotaped mock interviews and obtain help in preparing a
professional resume. Encore! encourages participants to register
with Job Service of Florida, which has stationed a job specialist at
Vo-Tech. Vo-Tech's instructional program, which is competency-based,
has a strong reputation with area employers; consequently, this
reputation also helps Encore! participants obtain employment.
Vo-Tech conducts job placement follow-up with graduates and
nongraduates in accordance with strict guidelines from the Florida
Department of Education. The survey is conducted through a statewide
computer search, mail, and telephone inquiry. Data are assembled by
program area, bound together, and made available to faculty for
analysis. Through Vo-Tech, the Encore! project coordinator also
contacts participants at 1- and 2-year intervals. The project
coordinator said that while most participants are generally still
employed when contacted, they may have moved on to another job.
PROJECT OUTCOMES
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:3
About 99 percent of all Encore! participants complete their
vocational training at Vo-Tech. While Encore! does not track the
job placement performance of its participants separately, for the
1993-94 school year, the Vo-Tech campuswide placement rate was 95
percent. Vo-Tech defines successful placements as obtaining a job,
entering military service, or continuing schooling.
For more information on Encore!, contact Carol Watters, Program
Coordinator, 18300 Toledo Blade Boulevard, Port Charlotte, Florida
33948, or call (941) 629-6819.
FOCUS: HOPE, DETROIT, MICHIGAN
=========================================================== Appendix V
Focus: HOPE, founded in 1968, is a metropolitan Detroit civil and
human rights organization established to resolve the effects of
discrimination and build an integrated society. It serves the
community through several programs, including its machinist training
programs, an on-site Center for Children, Food for Seniors, and a
Food Prescription Program (a commodity supplemental food program
operating through the U.S. Department of Agriculture). Focus: HOPE
also provides employment opportunities at its incorporated,
for-profit companies, which have been developed as a part of the
Focus: HOPE network.
The Focus: HOPE complex is spread across 30 acres and 12 separate
buildings. In addition to a paid staff of about 750, the network has
a roster of about 46,000 volunteers; about a fourth of these
volunteers provide services during any given week. The organization
relies on individual donations and contributions from corporations,
foundations, and trust funds. It also receives grants from the
Departments of Labor, Defense, and Commerce, as well as surplus
machinery used in training from the federal and state governments.
In 1994, the primary funding source for the Machinist Training
Institute (MTI) was state economic development/job training funds.
Participants may receive needs-based grants to cover tuition from a
variety of sources, including Pell grants and JTPA, the city of
Detroit, and machinist trade associations.
Since opening in 1981, Focus: HOPE's MTI has prepared participants
for careers in manufacturing. Its training effort is intended to
break down discrimination in machinist trades and high-tech
manufacturing industries, and to provide disadvantaged individuals
with marketable skills. MTI, qualified as an institution of higher
education, simulates the work place; its curriculum integrates
academics and hands-on experience. In addition to MTI, Focus: HOPE
has two other levels of training: FAST TRACK and the Center for
Advanced Technologies (CAT). FAST TRACK prepares participants for
MTI, and MTI graduates may move on to the CAT program. CAT, a fairly
new program, will have its first graduates in May 1996. These three
levels of programming could, in theory, support a participant from an
eighth-grade skills level to a master's degree in manufacturing
engineering.
PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:1
Focus: HOPE's training programs serve inner-city adults who want to
participate and have the basic skills required to succeed in
machinist training. During the 1993-94 program year, approximately
63 percent of the participants in FAST TRACK were male and 92 percent
were African American; their ages ranged from 17 to 23. Participants
in MTI were also primarily African American males, but were generally
older (26 or 27 years old). Project officials noted that many MTI
participants have a history of low-skill, low-wage jobs, often in the
fast food industry; others are young adults just entering the labor
market with no work history. Because CAT participants have attended
MTI, their characteristics are similar to those of MTI participants.
PROJECT STRUCTURE
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:2
Focus: HOPE's training programs emphasize development of
manufacturing-related skills. Depending on an applicant's skill
level, an applicant may be placed in one of Focus: HOPE's three
progressive training levels: FAST TRACK, MTI, or CAT. These
different levels allow participants to experience machining, become
familiar with the expectations of the program, and decide whether
they are willing to make a commitment to training. The different
levels of training also permit Focus: HOPE staff to assess
participants' potential for success in more advanced on-site
training. At the completion of each level, Focus: HOPE's placement
personnel actively help participants through the job search process.
For example, MTI job development staff visit machine shops to
discover job openings, discuss employer skills needs, and obtain
feedback on graduate performance. Prospective FAST TRACK and MTI
participants are assessed using the Test of Adult Basic Education and
the Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test. Applicants must also pass
a physical examination, including a drug screen. The admission
process also includes interviews with financial aid personnel and
appropriate program managers. These interviews serve to assess
applicants' motivation and likelihood of sustaining a full-time
learning experience. Barriers to successful training are also
addressed. If the applicant is accepted for training, supportive
services, including academic, personal, and financial aid counseling,
are available. Additionally, staff refer participants to other
Focus: HOPE services or other community resources as needed.
FAST TRACK, which begins a new class every 2 weeks, was initiated in
1989 because Focus: HOPE had difficulty recruiting participants with
adequate basic skills for machinist training. FAST TRACK provides
instruction in math, reading, and computer literacy and addresses the
general readiness of high school graduates for meaningful employment
and postsecondary education. FAST TRACK participants must have basic
skills at the eighth-grade level; over an intensive 7-week course,
they may improve basic skills to a 9th- or 10th-grade level.
FAST TRACK was designed not only to boost participants' academic
skills but also to improve employability skills. Participants are
rated in four categories--attendance, cooperation, interpersonal
skills, and work performance. While FAST TRACK graduates are assured
entry into the first level of MTI, project officials told us that
graduates are often able to obtain employment simply because of
improved basic and employability skills. On average, two-thirds who
enter FAST TRACK complete its curriculum.
MTI participants must have at least a 9th-grade reading level and a
10th-grade math level. Participants spend about half their time in
the classroom and the other half on the shop floor. MTI is divided
into three tiers. First, a 5-week (176 hours) "vestibule" program
provides instruction in communication and technical skills. An
additional 26-week basic machining program allows participants to
work from blueprints to produce a finished product. Finally, a
26-week advanced machining program provides selected participants
more instruction. These participants also learn by working for pay
on actual production contracts.
Focus: HOPE's latest training effort, CAT, aims to produce engineers
who can operate more effectively in an agile manufacturing
environment and integrates hands-on training with academic studies in
a production setting. CAT is a national demonstration project, and
its curriculum was developed in conjunction with educational and
industry partners. Currently, CAT's participants are selected from
MTI's advanced machining graduates. In CAT, one of the partner
universities can confer an associate's degree after 3 years, a
bachelor's degree after 4-1/2 years, and a master's degree after 6
years.
PROJECT OUTCOMES
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:3
Focus: HOPE defines successful participants as those who obtain and
hold steady employment that includes benefits. For the 1993-94 year,
of 185 participants in MTI, 139 (75 percent) completed the program.
Of these graduates, 137 (99 percent) were placed in employment at an
average hourly wage of $9.50.
For more information on Focus: HOPE, contact Kenneth Kudek,
Assistant Director, 1355 Oakman Boulevard, Detroit, Michigan 48238,
or call (313) 494-4170.
STRIVE CENTRAL, NEW YORK CITY
========================================================== Appendix VI
STRIVE--the acronym for Support and Training Results in Valuable
Employment--provides participants tools to navigate the current job
market. This employment training and placement project, started in
1985, is for inner-city adults in New York City who have experienced
difficulty securing and maintaining employment. STRIVE staff, many
of whom have lived the client experience and are project graduates
themselves, work to prepare, train, place, and support participants
in obtaining unsubsidized entry-level jobs.
STRIVE Central is one of 10 community-based organizations in New
York's STRIVE Employment Group; the STRIVE model has also been
replicated in Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Boston. The STRIVE network is
primarily privately funded, predominately through a grant from the
Clark Foundation that requires a two-for-one dollar match from other
sources, such as local employers. Services are free to both
employers and participants, and STRIVE officials noted that 90
percent of STRIVE's resources are allocated to direct services.
STRIVE Central, the initial STRIVE site, is located in the basement
of an inner-city housing project in East Harlem and is readily
accessible to members of that community; STRIVE Central has also
opened a satellite location in West Harlem.
STRIVE was founded in response to chronicly high unemployment rates
in East Harlem, the Greater Harlem community, and other
disenfranchised neighborhoods of New York City. Social problems
including homelessness, substance abuse, crime, and teen pregnancies
affect these communities. STRIVE's founders believed gainful
employment is the most critical element to individuals and families
hoping to obtain self-sufficiency and empowerment. STRIVE's mission
is to demonstrate the impact attitudinal training and postplacement
support have on the long-term employment of inner-city adults.
PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix VI:1
STRIVE serves inner-city adults, aged 18 to 40, who are unemployed
and want to work. The project targets services to people whose
difficulty obtaining employment stems primarily from poor attitudes
and inappropriate behaviors. While STRIVE has no income eligibility
requirements, it often serves the most needy--those on public
assistance, single parents, former substance abusers, ex-offenders,
victims of abuse, and high school dropouts. STRIVE encourages
participants to shed the victim mentality, become self-sufficient,
and acquire a solid work ethic.
In 1994, STRIVE Central trained 415 individuals. During 1994, STRIVE
served similar numbers of women (208) and men (207); however, project
officials stated this was an aberration because STRIVE has
historically served more women than men. Most participants were
African American (71 percent), and 16 percent were Hispanic.
Thirty-four percent of participants received public assistance and 33
percent were single parents. Most of the 1994 participants were high
school graduates (64 percent) or had obtained a general equivalency
diploma (18 percent); the rest were high school dropouts.
PROJECT STRUCTURE
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix VI:2
STRIVE's training focuses on the behaviors needed for successful
employment--such as punctuality, the spirit of cooperation, and the
ability to take constructive criticism, and the attitudes that
sometimes impede these behaviors--rather than skills such as typing,
word processing, and data entry. STRIVE prepares participants for
the work place through a strict, demanding 3-week workshop (120
hours) that emphasizes attitudinal training. Each workshop begins
with a "group interaction" session for prospective participants.
This 3-hour orientation session helps applicants determine whether
they are willing to undergo STRIVE's training and also allows
trainers an opportunity to assess the attitudes and abilities of
applicants. For example, trainers call attention to late arrivals by
questioning the reasons for lateness before the whole group. This
could prove to be embarrassing for tardy applicants--their ability to
stay in the program depends on handling that embarrassment in a
professional manner.
Because of the attitudinal issues discussed, and the "no nonsense"
manner in which the issues are dealt with, some of the applicants
decide that STRIVE is not for them and do not return for the training
workshop. Consequently, while STRIVE generally accepts anyone
interested in the program, participants screen themselves out as a
result of the orientation session; participants may also leave at any
time during the 3-week workshop, and some are asked to leave if
STRIVE staff believe that they are not sufficiently committed to the
program or willing to make changes in their lives.
During the intake and application process, STRIVE staff may also make
referrals on the basis of their identification of participants'
barriers to successful employment. For example, applicants may be
referred to STRIVE partners that serve teens only or referred
directly to community services for such problems as mental health
needs, substance abuse, or day care needs. If the applicant does not
seem to have attitude problems but simply needs assistance in finding
employment, the applicant may be referred directly to STRIVE's job
developers, who know about employment opportunities through regular
contact with area employers.
In addition to attitudinal training, STRIVE emphasizes job placement
and postplacement support. STRIVE's job development staff help
participants find employment that offers benefits, skills
development, and opportunities for advancement; however, all
graduates must successfully apply for and obtain their own positions.
No job is viewed as "dead end," because participants often need jobs
that can provide the beginning of a work history as well as a pathway
for advancement. After placement, STRIVE staff continue to work with
clients to upgrade their employment.
STRIVE provides a long-term commitment to program graduates because
graduates often lack such support. Postplacement support includes
assistance with personal and work problems in addition to future
education and career planning. Project staff make individual
contacts with graduates on a quarterly basis for 2 years as well as
regular contacts with employers who hire graduates in order to obtain
feedback on training requirements and/or offer further training
assistance. Moreover, STRIVE graduates can request lifetime
services.
PROJECT OUTCOMES
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix VI:3
STRIVE defines successful participants as those who obtain and hold
steady employment. STRIVE's operational standards are to place, in
unsubsidized employment, at least 80 percent of the individuals who
complete the intensive 3-week training, and for 75 to 80 percent of
those placed to retain employment for at least 2 years. From May
1985 through December 1994, the East Harlem site has helped 2,424
individuals secure employment. According to project officials,
nearly 80 percent of those individuals have maintained employment.
In 1994, STRIVE Central trained 415 persons, 318 (77 percent) of whom
were placed.
For more information on STRIVE, contact Lorenzo Harrison, Deputy
Director, 1820 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10029, or call
(212) 360-1100.
THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL,
PORTLAND, OREGON
========================================================= Appendix VII
The Private Industry Council (TPIC) is a private, nonprofit
organization providing employment and training services to low-income
residents in Portland, Oregon, as well as Washington and Multnomah
Counties. The federal government provides 85 percent of TPIC's
funding through JTPA. TPIC is also a subcontractor for the JOBS
program and dually enrolls participants in both JTPA and JOBS.
TPIC's mission is to promote individual self-sufficiency and a
skilled workforce by eliminating barriers to productive employment.
TPIC delivers most services for disadvantaged adults from three
neighborhood service centers--Northeast Employment and Training
Center, Southeast Employment and Training Center, and East County
Employment and Training Center. These centers, through case
management, provide comprehensive services that remove barriers to
long-term employment and self-sufficiency. According to TPIC
officials, the three centers target certain populations: The
Northeast Center targets African American males and welfare
recipients, the Southeast Center targets the homeless population and
refugees, and the East County Center primarily serves a Hispanic
population and has bilingual English- and Spanish-speaking staff.
TPIC also administers a program that serves older workers, the
Tri-County Employment and Training Program, as well as programs
serving youth.
TPIC's coordinated approach to case management is intended to provide
clients with the basic and vocational skills necessary to obtain and
keep employment. TPIC's training system links all entities involved
in either preparing adults for the workforce or providing
supplemental services that are necessary for a person to become
self-sufficient. These entities include businesses, government
agencies, community colleges and school districts, and
community-based organizations.
PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix VII:1
TPIC targets the JTPA-eligible population--people with barriers to
employment such as ex-offenders, the long-term unemployed, and high
school dropouts. TPIC officials explained that these harder-to-serve
clients generally have multiple barriers to employment and are more
expensive to train. During program year 1994, TPIC's JTPA program
for disadvantaged adults primarily served women (63 percent).
Sixty-one percent of participants were white, 17 percent were African
American, 16 percent were Hispanic, 3 percent were Native American,
and 3 percent were Asian American. Twenty-nine percent of
participants were welfare recipients and 21 percent were high school
dropouts.
PROJECT STRUCTURE
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix VII:2
TPIC provides case management and on-site assessment (36 hours) and
links clients with vocational training opportunities. The three
neighborhood centers follow a similar approach to program delivery.
Each holds a mandatory orientation session, generally twice a month,
during which case managers explain the services provided, the types
of training available, and the links to training. At the
orientation, TPIC staff explain that they maintain a businesslike
environment that demands qualities such as timeliness and drug-free
participation. Case managers work with individuals to assess their
ability to benefit from services. Clients must commit to standards
such as attending class every scheduled day, arriving on time,
following basic rules for good grooming, and abiding by the
guidelines for smoking outside the building. Clients subsequently
screen themselves out of training if they are not willing to abide by
these standards. When appropriate, case managers make referrals to
other community resources for assistance with barriers to employment.
Through the assessment process, which takes 3 weeks, staff help
participants examine their capabilities, needs, and vocational
potential. This objective assessment includes a review of a
participant's family situation, interests, and aptitudes.
Additionally, assessment includes employability skills and contains a
basic work place curriculum that focuses on skills such as problem
solving and conflict resolution. Clients are also required to
develop a self-sufficiency plan and a specific job goal. They must
research labor market information and conduct interviews to gather
information on careers in which they are interested. The Southeast
Center, for example, requires two interviews: one with a person who
does the job the participant is interested in and another with a
school that provides training for that job.
Following assessment, case managers assist participants by connecting
them to training that includes English as a Second Language, basic
skills, vocational skills, on-the-job training, competency training,
work experience, and internships. None of the TPIC sites offers
on-site basic skills or occupational skills training. A project
official estimated that more than half of TPIC participants need some
basic skills training, which may be obtained at a local community
college or elsewhere in the community at no cost, before they can
benefit from occupational skills training.
For skills training, TPIC refers participants to its contracted
skills training and provides tuition assistance--generally no more
than $2,500 for each participant. A project official noted that
clients often come to TPIC with an idea of what skills they want;
during the assessment process, the case manager and job developer
work with these desires but also steer clients to where opportunities
may be or try to broaden their scope. TPIC participants have access
to all job opportunities listed through the state employment office,
and job developers also help participants find employment.
Participants may be involved in a "job club," which further motivates
them and provides job search assistance. TPIC also provides
retention services--following up with both the participants and the
employers.
PROJECT OUTCOMES
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix VII:3
TPIC defines successful participants as those who obtain
self-sufficiency; for this, TPIC has set a specific, minimum starting
wage goal of $7 an hour. All TPIC programs rely on outcome-based
measures to determine program performance. Outcomes for the adult
training employment programs include the number of clients served and
placement, retention, and starting salary rates. During the 1994
program year, TPIC's JTPA program for disadvantaged adults served 90
percent of the participants it had planned to serve--a total of 682.
Of the 355 participants who left during the program year, about 68
percent found employment; however, of those completing occupational
skills training, about 77 percent were placed.
For more information on The Private Industry Council, contact Maureen
Thompson, Vice President, 720 South West Washington, Suite 250,
Portland, Oregon 97205, or call (503) 241-4600.
(See figure in printed edition.)APPENDIX VIII