Reference: Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 5-93 (April 11, 1994): "Summer Challenge II: A Program of Work and Learning for America's Youth." Background: As stated in TEGL No. 5-93, the Department of Labor contracted with Brandeis University and Johns Hopkins University to produce several technical assistance guides (TAGs) on various aspects of the summer program. The following worksite supervisor training handbooks, designed to promote the integration of work and learning, were developed containing techniques that incorporate SCANS foundations and competencies on the job: a. Developing Learning-Rich Clerical Tasks b. Developing Learning-Rich Tasks for Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resource Management Action: States are requested to share this information with their Service Delivery Areas as soon as possible.

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.

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: 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.

Background: Training and Employment Information Notice (TEIN) 44-93, dated March 29, 1994, alerted the States of planned layoffs by AT&T, and to efforts by the Alliance for Employee Growth and Development, Inc. (The Alliance) to assist employees affected by the layoffs. The aforementioned TEIN alerted the States that throughout 1994 and into 1995, AT&T will close at least 39 Operator Service Centers in 31 States, affecting several thousand employees. We encouraged the States to work cooperatively with The Alliance representatives. We now have learned that additional closings and layoffs are planned. Information on Additional Layoffs: Attached is a list of four additional AT&T Operator Service Centers that will be closing in the near future, along with closing dates and the numbers of workers that will be affected. The Consumer Services organization within AT&T also is closing seven centers throughout the country starting July 1; those locations are also included on the list. These closings will affect over two thousand additional workers. Action: States should alert local offices and grantees where additional AT&T layoffs will occur and share this TEIN with them. States are asked to continue their efforts to work cooperatively with The Alliance representatives to promote training and job placement efforts for these laid off workers. List of Additional Closing Sites for AT&T Operator Service Centers and Closing Sites for AT&T Consumer Sales and Service Centers

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

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

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

The Department of Labor is issuing updated non-financial reporting requirements for programs funded under Titles II and III of the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA). These instructions update those transmitted via TEIN 5-93 on July 30, 1993. Also, as appropriate, SPIR coding instructions have been updated and edits have been modified. The updated coding instructions and edits have been provided under separate cover. OMB Approval and Reporting Burden: The SPIR reporting requirements have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) according to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as amended, under OMB Approval No. 1205-0321 (expiration date June 30, 1995). Reporting Instructions: The Governor will submit a separate report for each participant who terminates from a JTPA program, as specified in the attached instructions for preparation of the SPIR. a. Highlights of Clarifications/Language Changes to the SPIR Reporting Instructions. While additional codes have been provided in several items, no new data elements have been introduced. These are the highlights of the changes: 1) Language pertaining to the time when reading and math skills may be recorded is included in the General Instructions. 2) Language pertaining to the non-termination of partici- pants in Title II-C/B is included in the General Instruc- tions. 3) Language has been added to Item 3 emphasizing the requirement that a Social Security Number is required on every record submitted. 4) Codes for Title II-B and for Title I, Section 123, (8%) have been added to Item 10. 5) Specific language regarding age eligibility is provided in Item 12. 6) Codes for the JTPA Title IV and for the Trade Adjust- ment Act (TAA) programs have been added to Item 12a. 7) Language about recording the economic disadvantaged status of referrals from other programs to JTPA Title II-C and Section 204(d) programs is provided in Item 13. 8) A statement regarding use of subsidized training wages has been added to Item 22. 9) Language indicating that only occupational skills codes are to be recorded is included in Item 31. 10) A statement that an incentive payment to a partici- pant for excellent attendance in program activities is not reportable on the SPIR has been added to Item 32. 11) Language has been updated in Item 32f. re Needs- related payments for Title III. 12) Additional language has been added to Item 34 covering entry from JTPA into the Peace Corps, VISTA, and other National Service programs. 13) Language has been updated in Item 34b. re Relocated out of area for Title III. 14) Language addressing participant refusals of employer- assisted fringe benefits is provided in Item 35c. Also, explicit reference to a probationary period is now included. 15) Additional language re the number of YECs required for the Adult/Youth Employability Enhancement outcome has been added to Item 36. 16) Clarified language specifying the required period of retention for the Returned to/Remained in School outcomes is provided in Items 36b/c. The definition for Satisfac- tory progress in school has been added to the note for Items 36b/c. 17) Language covering entry from JTPA into the Older Americans Act, Title V, program has been added to Item 36g. 18) Language specifying when the reporting of information in items 35a-f is required has been added to Item 38. 19) Additional clarifying language has been added to Item 38. 20) Language has been added to the instruction for Item 39, code 6, re transfers within a given SDA under Title II. 21) Additional language has been added to the paragraph just prior to Item 40 regarding the treatment of partici- pants coded in Item 12 as 7, Title II-A 5% exempt from performance standards. 22) Guidance on the single 90/30-day period of inactive status, originally appearing in TEIN 3-92, Attachment C, has been provided as Appendix C of this document. Action Required: State Liaisons are requested to distribute the attached instructions to all officials within the State who need such information to administer the SPIR reporting require- ments.

Background: The compliance supplement was updated by OMB to provide better coverage for all Federal funding. Within the U.S. Department of Labor, the Office of Inspector General worked with each program agency to identify important compliance features. OIG provided this information to OMB and it has been included in the supplement. This supplement incorporates the improved features of the Supplement for State and local government audits (loose-leaf format, expanded general requirements section, improved indirect costs coverage and guidance for review of the financial reports). Its format is the same as that of the "Compliance Supplement for Single Audits of State and Local Governments," and it is designed to be used in conjunction with that document. The Questions and Answers document was prepared to provide clarifications and additional practical working guidance to those participating in A-133 audits. Action Required: These documents are provided for your information. You may wish to provide copies to your SDAs and other appropriate entities.