Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

References: Federal Register Notice of May 18, 1994. Background: The Department is undertaking a Dialogue to examine the need and options for constructive new directions for programs for the disadvantaged. As indicated in the attached Federal Register Notice, the Dialogue consists of several approaches to obtain a wide spectrum of information related to questions which will be addressed in the Dialogue process. The Federal Register Notice contains a list of broad questions to be addressed. The approach to be used will provide an opportunity for anyone to respond to the questions contained in the Notice. In addition, ETA is conducting a review of currently available studies, surveys and reports, a survey of customer attitudes and a series of small group discussions and town hall meetings across the country. Action: States are requested to provide their input to the questions in the Federal Register Notice and to share the Notice with SDAs and to encourage their input. We hope that States and SDAs will share this announcement with other human resource agencies at the State and local level and will encourage their input. As indicated in the announcement, ETA will conduct small group discussions and town halls in 15 sites across the country. The effective support of State and SDA staff is essential in making these useful for the acquisition of the views of the youth and adult "customer" participants of our system, the employer "customers" and the staff "customers". In addition, we encourage the use of the Dialogue approach in conferences and meetings which are held with JTPA and/or other human resource agency staff. States or others may elect to undertake dialogues within the context of other scheduled activities or to undertake them as separate activities. Staff from ETA Regional Offices are available to assist in any of the activities discussed above.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Background: Program letters, or the five letter series, are considered temporary directives containing instructions or information of a short-term nature which complement one of the five parts of the ES Manual. Rather than rewrite and reissue expiring program letters which still contain relevant information or instructions, the expiration date is extended. Attached is a listing of program letters with extended expiration dates for the above period.

Background: On April 18 and 19, 1994, Secretary Reich held a Low Wage Worker Advocates' Conference in Washington D.C. to assure advocate groups that the Department of Labor (DOL) is interested in serving and protecting the most vulnerable populations. The goal of the Conference was to meet with advocates for workers who are traditionally underrepresented to: (1) hear their expectations of DOL programs, (2) exchange information, (3) stress that the Department wants to work with them, and (4) encourage them to establish contacts with DOL's Regional Offices for further exchanges. Department of Labor Agencies represented in the Conference included the Employment Standards Administration (Wage and Hour and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs), the Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, the Veterans' Employment and Training Service, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration as well as the Employment and Training Administration (ETA). A number of individuals representing groups and organizations that serve as advocates for low wage workers were in attendance. Low Wage Worker Advocate Concerns: During an issue-oriented session on employment and training, representatives from low wage worker advocate organizations raised several important issues and concerns: Populations among the hardest to serve need improved access to the delivery system (through flexible literacy and English language requirements, provision of bilingual front line workers, distribution of multi-language printed information, and greater inclusion in funding decisions). One advocate reported that some Private Industry Councils (PICs) have a policy of not serving anyone who cannot prove mastery of sixth grade level math and English literacy skills. A director for a Chinese workers' center was informed that budget concerns mean that the hardest to serve cannot be helped. An issue was the availability of job training in other languages and of bilingual front line workers. Other advocates questioned why the Department is the only agency not to mandate language access through the translation and distribution of information and materials in other languages. Community groups are not being included in the job training plan process. Community-based organizations (CBOs) represented at the Conference stated that they feel systematically excluded from the job training plan process. They cited: (1) the lack of access to informational documents, (2) the lack of PIC responsiveness to inquiries, (3) the lack of public hearings and other opportunities for public participation, and (4) the lack of time allotted for comments. Necessary supportive services are not being provided. The program coordinator for the Vietnamese Fishermen's Association and for training projects for low income women pointed to the lack of supportive services. She cited the immediate need for funding such items as required physicals, tools, work uniforms, and life skills training when they are prerequisites to jobs. Others suggested that increased supportive services should be mandated rather than limited. Community group proposals for funding to provide services to the neediest need to be given greater consideration. Advocates cited experiences leading to their conviction that the selection process is a closed one in which certain providers are regularly selected and most community organizations are routinely denied funding. Advocates asked for new and creative ways to ensure that funding reaches CBOs which can provide appropriate services to targeted groups. Greater coordination needs to be mandated. Opportunities for connecting job creation projects with job training are missed despite models at the State level, according to low wage worker advocates. They also observed that providers tend to operate in a vacuum and to advertise programs individually, in a fragmented fashion, rather than working to coordinate and centralize their programs and outreach strategies. State monitoring needs to be emphasized. Participants spoke of a lack of accountability between States and Service Delivery Areas (SDAs) and asked for an increased State presence and "ownership" of the use of Federal dollars and of the appropriateness of funding decisions. They requested that States monitor PIC's more closely and work to ensure the openness of the PIC planning process. Discussion: Despite the fact that the JTPA Amendments of 1992 were enacted in large part to ensure that the hard to serve are included among those served by JTPA, this iteration of concerns indicates that some of those groups are not being reached. In addition, although the provision of supportive services has been recognized as a predictor of participant success in JTPA programs, and participants' supportive service needs are required to be considered as a part of their JTPA program participation, it appears that those needs may require greater attention. Finally, community groups need to be regularly included in the development and operation of the JTPA program. Recently a State Job Training Coordinating Council rejected a local job training plan for failure to consult with labor and community-based organizations and failure to provide access to requested documents. Action: The Department believes that actively addressing the advocate's concerns will raise the awareness level of State and local program operators and improve JTPA programs consistent with the goals of the 1992 Amendments. The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) wants to work with States and SDAs to encourage sensitivity to these issues. To follow up on the Secretary Reich's Low Wage Workers Advocates' Conference, ETA will invite advocate groups and organizations to a follow-up meeting at the Department of Labor in Washington D.C. on June 3, 1994. State Liaisons should continue the discussion started at the Secretary's Low Wage Workers Advocates' Conference and work to achieve equitable, collaborative solutions to the concerns of the representatives of low wage workers. Regional Offices will be available to assist State and local efforts to follow up on the Low Wage Worker Advocates' Conference. Advocate concerns should also be addressed in sessions convened relative to the systemwide Dialogue process announced in a Federal Register Notice issued on May 18, 1994.

Background: The UIRR Data Entry System has been operational since 1990. The system is dynamic and is constantly growing and changing as new programs arise or improvements are created. Suggestions have been received from users and many have been implemented. Some suggestions could not be implemented because of requirements of the data base management system that was used to create the UIRR Data Entry System. The National Office is moving in the direction of utilizing personal computers (PCs) to access the SUN equipment. Moving to PCs will have many advantages, one of which is "windowing". Windowing allows the user to pull up different functions without going through traditional menus and to have several applications active on the screen in different "windows" at the same time. Windowing will allow for fewer steps to access any given part of the system and will provide the ability to move easily and quickly from one function to another. The UIRR system will begin to be rewritten in this type of window environment during the fall of 1994. The entire system will be rewritten and tested before any screens are released to the States. Release will not occur before January of 1996. In preparation for this large rewrite, we will be studying the existing system as well as the suggestions that have been received to date but not implemented. Suggestions Requested: We are soliciting suggestions or comments from users that they think would improve the UIRR Data Entry System. We want to hear what is wrong, what is right, and specific suggestions for improvement. Many users have been exposed to multiple pieces of PC software and could comment on what they think works well. There are multiple users in each State and comments from all are welcome. Action Required: Please share this directive with appropriate staff. Any suggestions or comments should be sent to Cindy Ambler, Room S-4519, 200 Constitution Ave. N.W., Washington, DC, 20210 by June 30, 1994. Suggestions will be welcome after this date but will more likely be used in planning the new system if received by that time.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Reference: Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 16-94 Background: RQC is a comprehensive performance measurement system, initiated by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA), to assist State UI managers in evaluating the effectiveness of their Unemployment Compensation (UC) tax operations. The Unemployment Insurance Service (UIS) was assigned the task of RQC design and development. A UIS taskforce was formed comprised of ETA's Office of Regional Management, State UC tax program professionals on Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) assignments, and State administration experts on tax policy and procedures, who provided guidance on RQC design and development in advisory capacities (expert panel). To date, UC tax experts from 18 States have served as advisors and participated in IPA assignments, providing valuable linkages between theory and practice without which RQC could not have reached this final stage of preparing for formal implementation. The IPA and expert panel experience has also provided the participant States a resident source of better understanding the interrelationship of State UC tax programs. With the expiration of current IPA assignments, new opportunities will be available. Current Status of RQC: In addition to the 18 States participating in the design and development of RQC, 52 States have participated in voluntary implementation of RQC. The experience gained in actual applications of RQC measures under varying State rules and procedures gave the RQC Task Force immeasurable guidance and generated a number of modifications in the measurement of tax operations accuracy, timeliness, and completeness. The RQC's next steps involve assisting States and Regions with program implementation, e.g., going on technical assistance trips; developing and delivering any needed training; and ensuring that RQC revisions to reported tax data are understood and that States are able to begin reporting new and revised data elements. State Nomination of Staff to Provide Technical Support in the Development of RQC: The contractual assignments for our present IPAs will end in late summer. Replacements will be needed to assure a smooth phase-in of RQC. The RQC Work Group is seeking individuals with a broad range of expertise in State UC tax operations, some understanding of automation in tax operations and with good writing and analytical skills. The IPA candidates who are selected will participate in developing resolutions to problems and issues uncovered in the voluntary implementation phase of RQC. They will be instrumental in coordinating ETA 581 requirements with RQC Operations Handbook measurement criteria for the phase-in of mandatory RQC. Selected candidates will join RQC in Washington, D.C., on 12 to l8 month assignments, beginning in late fiscal year 1994. An individual serving an IPA assignment with RQC remains a State employee, continuing to draw his/her State salary and benefits. Direction and control, while on IPA assignment, are provided by Federal staff. Salary and relocation/per diem expenses may be paid by the State, the Department of Labor, or shared, depending on the type of arrangements negotiated between the State and the Department. The IPAs are entitled to either (1) the reasonable cost of relocation to and from Washington, DC; or (2) the reasonable cost of living expenses (per diem) while working in Washington, DC. Action Required: State Administrators are requested to: a. Notify appropriate staff of opportunities for IPA assignments, and b. Forward resumes of interested applicants to the ETA Regional Office (RO) within 30 days of this UIPL. Applicant resumes should show work history, describe duties, name and phone number of the applicant's supervisor, and the applicant's phone number.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Background: On the former annual JTPA Title III Worker Adjustment Program Report (WAPR), the instruction for the outcome, "Called Back/Remained with the Layoff Employer," specified use of this outcome when the participant was being recalled by that employer to a permanent job. Until now, this instruction also was used for the DWSPR. More recent experience has indicated that often a participant may be recalled by the layoff employer to a temporary job. The current instruction for this outcome on the Standardized Information Program Report (SPIR), Item 38, only specifies: "Indicate whether the participant was called back or remained with the layoff employer." (Projects funded under the JTPA Title III National Reserve use the SPIR to report non-financial information on participants at termination.) The instruction for this outcome on the DWSPR, Section II, Line 14, is changed to delete the two references to "permanent" job. This DWSPR change will apply only to terminations of participants from the Defense Conversion Adjustment Program (DCAP), the Clean Air Employment Transition Assistance (CAETA) Program, or the Defense Diversification Program (DDP). This action will reflect current experience and provide a single ETA standardized definition for this outcome. Action Required: State JTPA or Worker Adjustment Liaisons are requested to distribute the attached revised page of instructions for the DWSPR to all officials within the State who need such information. A. OUTCOMES The sum of Lines 12 through 16 should equal the entry on Line 11. Line 12. Entered Unsubsidized Employment from Retraining Enter the total number of participants who, at termination, entered full- or part-time unsubsidized employment from Retraining through the end of the reporting period. (These participants may or may not have also received Basic Readjustment Services.) This entry is a sub-breakout of Line 11. NOTE: The entry for Line 12 cannot be greater than the entry for Line 48. NOTE: Unsubsidized employment means employment not financed from funds provided under the grant or the JTPA Program, and includes, for reporting purposes, entry into the Armed Forces of the U.S., entry into employment in a registered apprenticeship program and terminees who become self-employed. Line 13. Entered Unsubsidized Employment from Basic Readjustment Services ONLY Enter the total number of participants who, at termination, entered full- or part-time unsubsidized employment through the end of the reporting period and had received Basic Readjustment Services ONLY, i.e., had not received any retraining. This entry is a sub- breakout of Line 11. NOTE: The entry for Line 13 cannot be greater than the entry for Line 47. Line 14. Called Back/Remained with the Layoff Employer Enter the total number of terminees under the grant who, after being laid off by an employer, were recalled by that employer to a job at the same or another location through the end of the reporting period. Also include terminees under the grant who remained in a job with an employer after receipt of a layoff notice from that employer. This entry is a sub-breakout of Line 11. NOTE: Do not include such terminees in the entry for Lines 12 or 13, above. Line 15. Transferred to Other Training Program Enter the total number of terminees who transferred to and entered training programs funded with JTPA or non-JTPA monies, through the end of the reporting period. Also include in this entry terminees who transferred to and entered programs funded under another grant. This entry is a sub-breakout of Line 11.