Workforce Investment Act
Employers Found One-Stop Centers Useful in Hiring Low-Skilled Workers; Performance Information Could Help Gauge Employer Involvement Gao ID: GAO-07-167 December 22, 2006The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) required that many federal workforce employment and training programs for low-income individuals, the unemployed, and other job seekers provide their services through a streamlined delivery system. WIA also promoted greater employer engagement in this delivery system by, among other things, calling for it to help meet employers' workforce needs with services provided through one-stop centers. In 2005, we found that about half of employers were aware of their local one-stop centers. However, questions remained about how employers use them. In this report, GAO addressed (1) the extent to which employers, both large and small, hire their employees through one-stops; (2) the extent to which these employers view one-stop services as useful; and (3) factors that may affect one-stop service to employers. To answer these questions we surveyed employers who had used the one-stop system, visited eight one-stops, and talked to one-stop and Labor officials.
Regardless of size, employers completing our survey hired a small percentage of their employees through one-stops, and two-thirds of those they hired were low-skilled. About 80 employers who could provide estimates reported hiring about 9 percent of their new employees through the one-stops, roughly 1,300 of their 14,500 hires in 2005. They also reported that about two-thirds of those hired were low-skilled workers, in part because they thought the labor available from the one-stop centers was mostly low-skilled. Employers told us they would hire more job seekers from the one-stop labor pools if they had the skills for which they were looking. Employers primarily used only one of the seven services generally available through the one-stop, but they generally viewed whatever services they did use as helpful. Most employers used the centers' job-posting service. Fewer made use of the one-stops' physical space or job applicant screening services. Still, when employers did take advantage of a service, they generally reported that it was useful because it produced positive results, such as reaching more job applicants than would have applied otherwise. When employers reported that they did not use a particular one-stop service, in most cases they either were not aware that the one-stop provided the service, obtained it elsewhere, or carried through on their own. At least three factors may affect one-stops' service to employers. The first of these is the skill set of the labor pool. One-stop officials said that their job candidates generally had either low skills or lacked the specialized skills needed by employers. The second factor cited by one-stop officials is the limited number of staff available to serve employers. Staff at one-stops must serve both employers and job seekers with the staff and funding available to them. The fact that the Department of Labor collects limited information on employer engagement in the one-stop system is a third factor that may affect the level of service to employers. While Labor collects information on employer satisfaction, this measure does not provide information on how employers use the system. Labor has said its new data collection system will include such information, but this remains to be seen.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-07-167, Workforce Investment Act: Employers Found One-Stop Centers Useful in Hiring Low-Skilled Workers; Performance Information Could Help Gauge Employer Involvement
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-07-167
entitled 'Workforce Investment Act: Employers Found One-Stop Centers
Useful in Hiring Low-Skilled Workers; Performance Information Could
Help Gauge Employer Involvement' which was released on December 22,
2006.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
United States Government Accountability Office:
Report to Congressional Requesters:
GAO:
December 2006:
Workforce Investment Act:
Employers Found One-Stop Centers Useful in Hiring Low-Skilled Workers;
Performance Information Could Help Gauge Employer Involvement:
GAO-07-167:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-07-167, a report to congressional requesters
Why GAO Did This Study:
The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) required that many federal
workforce employment and training programs for low-income individuals,
the unemployed, and other job seekers provide their services through a
streamlined delivery system. WIA also promoted greater employer
engagement in this delivery system by, among other things, calling for
it to help meet employers‘ workforce needs with services provided
through one-stop centers. In 2005, we found that about half of
employers were aware of their local one-stop centers. However,
questions remained about how employers use them. In this report, GAO
addressed (1) the extent to which employers, both large and small, hire
their employees through one-stops; (2) the extent to which these
employers view one-stop services as useful; and (3) factors that may
affect one-stop service to employers. To answer these questions we
surveyed employers who had used the one-stop system, visited eight one-
stops, and talked to one-stop and Labor officials.
What GAO Found:
Regardless of size, employers completing our survey hired a small
percentage of their employees through one-stops, and two-thirds of
those they hired were low-skilled. About 80 employers who could provide
estimates reported hiring about 9 percent of their new employees
through the one-stops, roughly 1,300 of their 14,500 hires in 2005.
They also reported that about two-thirds of those hired were low-
skilled workers, in part because they thought the labor available from
the one-stop centers was mostly low-skilled. Employers told us they
would hire more job seekers from the one-stop labor pools if they had
the skills for which they were looking.
Employers primarily used only one of the seven services generally
available through the one-stop, but they generally viewed whatever
services they did use as helpful. Most employers used the centers‘ job-
posting service. Fewer made use of the one-stops‘ physical space or job
applicant screening services. Still, when employers did take advantage
of a service, they generally reported that it was useful because it
produced positive results, such as reaching more job applicants than
would have applied otherwise. When employers reported that they did not
use a particular one-stop service, in most cases they either were not
aware that the one-stop provided the service, obtained it elsewhere, or
carried through on their own.
At least three factors may affect one-stops‘ service to employers. The
first of these is the skill set of the labor pool. One-stop officials
said that their job candidates generally had either low skills or
lacked the specialized skills needed by employers. The second factor
cited by one-stop officials is the limited number of staff available to
serve employers. Staff at one-stops must serve both employers and job
seekers with the staff and funding available to them. The fact that the
Department of Labor collects limited information on employer engagement
in the one-stop system is a third factor that may affect the level of
service to employers. While Labor collects information on employer
satisfaction, this measure does not provide information on how
employers use the system. Labor has said its new data collection system
will include such information, but this remains to be seen.
Figure: Employees Hired through One-Step:
[See PDF for Image]
Source: GAO 2006 survey of business establishments.
[End of Figure]
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends that the Secretary of Labor follow through with plans to
collect information on employers‘ use of one-stop services and develop
a way to measure employer engagement in the workforce investment system
as part of the department‘s performance reporting system. Labor noted
its intent to collect such information.
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-167].
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Sigurd Nilsen at (202)
512-7215 or nilsens@gao.gov.
[End of Section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Employers Hired About 9 Percent of 2005 New Hires through One-Stops,
Two-Thirds of Whom Were Low-Skilled:
Employers Mostly Used Job Posting Services and Generally Reported That
Using Any Service Produced Positive Results:
One-Stop Service to Employers May be Affected by Limited Skills in
Their Labor Pool, Limited Staffing, and the Lack of Employer-Related
Performance Information:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Labor:
Appendix III: Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Related Products:
Table:
Table 1: One-Stop Centers We Visited:
Figures:
Figure 1: Employees Hired through One-Stops:
Figure 2: Comparison of Actual Hiring through One-Stops with Employers'
Perceptions of the One-Stops' Labor Pool:
Figure 3: Proportion of Skilled Workers Hired through One-Stops and
through Private Sector Recruiting Firms:
Figure 4: Percentage of Employers That Used Each One-Stop Service in
2005 and How They Rated Its Usefulness:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
December 22, 2006:
The Honorable Michael B. Enzi:
Chairman:
The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy:
Ranking Minority Member:
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Patty Murray:
Ranking Minority Member:
Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety:
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions:
United States Senate:
In any given quarter, the U.S. economy creates and destroys about 8
million jobs. The resulting dynamic requires that workers find new jobs
and employers hire new workers. Those who are seeking jobs,
particularly the unemployed as well as low-income individuals, can
access federal workforce employment and training programs, many of
which are overseen by the Department of Labor (Labor) through a
streamlined delivery system required by the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (WIA). This system consists of about 1,900 career, or "one-stop,"
centers across the country where programs can provide their services.
WIA also promoted greater employer engagement in this delivery system
by requiring that employers make up the majority of members and lead
local and state workforce investment boards that oversee the one-stop
centers and by calling for these boards to help meet employers'
workforce needs with services provided through one-stop centers. While
the law does not require any one particular service, the centers do
offer services such as job postings, access to training for existing
employees, information about employee resources like day care, or
simply the use of a center's facilities for conducting job fairs or
interviews. Employers can also pay a fee for more customized services,
if they are offered. In addition, the local boards can solicit funding
from employers and others to pursue initiatives in job development and
training.
In 2005, we found that about half of employers were aware of their
local one-stop centers.[Footnote 1] However, questions remained about
how employers were using those one-stop centers. In view of the desire
of policymakers to engage and serve employers of all sizes in the
workforce system, we looked specifically at how some employers make use
of the one-stop centers. We have examined (1) the extent to which
employers, both large and small, hire their employees through one-
stops; (2) the extent to which these employers view one-stop services
as useful; and (3) factors that may affect one-stop service to
employers.
To answer these questions, we conducted a Web-based survey of employers
from our 2005 report who told us they had previously used one-stops,
interviewed 17 one-stop officials from 10 one-stops in 5 states, and
interviewed Labor officials and officials from other organizations with
knowledge of workforce programs. We made an extra effort to contact
small employers but could not reach many of them because of business
closure and employee turnover. The results of our survey represent only
those who completed it and cannot be generalized to the universe of
businesses that have used one-stops. We obtained completed surveys from
113 businesses, which we categorized in three groups by size: 14 small,
48 medium, and 51 large businesses. Geographically these businesses
were located in 36 states and ranged from a large fast food franchise
to a sheet metal fabricator with only 10 employees. We visited 8 one-
stop career centers representing a mix of urban, suburban, and rural
areas in California, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, and
conducted phone interviews with officials in 2 one-stop centers in
Pennsylvania. In some cases, officials from Local Workforce Investment
Boards participated in these interviews. We selected 4 of these states
because they had the most employers that had used one-stop services in
our national survey, and Wyoming for a rural perspective. We performed
our work in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards between December 2005 and October 2006. See appendix I for
details of our methodology.
Results in Brief:
Regardless of size, employers completing our survey hired a small
percentage of their employees through one-stops, and two-thirds of
those they hired were low-skilled. About 80 of 113 employers--those who
could provide estimates--reported hiring about 9 percent of their new
employees through the one-stops in 2005. This amounted to roughly 1,300
of the 14,500 workers they hired in 2005. They also reported that about
two-thirds of those hired through the one-stops were low-skilled
workers, in part because they thought the labor available from the one-
stops was mostly low-skilled. Employers told us they would hire more
job seekers from the one-stop labor pools if they had the skills for
which they were looking.
Employers primarily used only one of the seven services available
though the one-stop, but they generally viewed whatever services they
did use as helpful. Most employers used the centers' job posting
service. Fewer made use of the one-stops' physical space or job
applicant screening services. Still, when employers did take advantage
of a service, they generally reported that it was useful because it
produced positive results. In the case of posting job openings,
employers reported that it resulted in more applicants than would have
applied otherwise. The few employers who used one-stop facilities
reported that doing so increased their visibility when hiring. They
also said that using one-stop services saved them time and money. One
employer, for example, noted that use of the one-stop allowed his
company to avoid renting hotel conference rooms for job interviews when
it was hiring. When employers did not use a particular one-stop
service, in most cases they said that they either were not aware that
the one-stop provided the service, said they obtained it elsewhere, or
said that they carried through on their own.
At least three factors may affect one-stops' service to employers. The
first of these is the skill set of the labor pool. Citing this factor
as one of their top challenges, one-stop officials said that their job
candidates generally had either low skills or lacked the specialized
skills needed by employers. They also said, however, that employers may
perceive the available pool as less skilled than it really is. One-stop
officials cited the limited number of staff available to serve
employers as a second factor affecting their service to employers.
However, few of the one-stops we visited reported having received
private sector funds that could be used to hire more staff, even though
the law allows for charging fees or soliciting money from employers,
and we have identified charging fees as a promising practice. The fact
that Labor collects limited information on employer engagement in the
one-stop system is a third factor that may affect the level of service
to employers. One-stop officials at several centers noted that
performance information generally focuses on services to job seekers
and not employers. While Labor collects information on employer
satisfaction, this measure does not provide information on how
employers use the system. Labor has said its new data collection system
will include such information, but this remains to be seen.
Additionally, while Labor has launched initiatives designed, in part,
to help one-stop centers model approaches to serving employers, the
impact of these initiatives may be limited to those centers selected to
participate in the program or receive program grants. A majority of the
one-stop officials we spoke with reported they were not participants in
Labor's national initiatives such as the High-Growth Job Training
Initiative or the National Business Learning Partnership, and that
these had no impact on their capacity to serve employers.
In this report, we recommend that the Secretary of Labor follow through
with plans to collect information on employers' use of one-stop
services and develop a way to measure employer engagement in the
workforce investment system as part of the Department of Labor's
performance reporting system. In its comments on a draft of this
report, Labor noted its intent to collect such information.
Background:
The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 sought to improve the quality of
the workforce by creating a streamlined delivery system for services
offered by 17 federal workforce development programs. Under WIA, each
program is required to make services available through the one-stop
center system established for each local area. The services available
to job seekers at one-stops include career counseling and referral to
training programs. Although not specified under WIA, the services
available to employers at one-stops include posting job openings,
screening job applicants, assisting with downsizing, accessing labor
market information, providing information on financial incentives and
employee supports,[Footnote 2] training services, and making available
one-stop facilities.
So that the private sector drives the employment and training
activities of the workforce investment system, WIA requires that
business representatives lead and constitute the majority of members on
state and local workforce investment boards. Each local board is
responsible for developing a comprehensive local plan that describes
the one-stop delivery system established in a particular local area.
This plan must identify the workforce investment needs of area
businesses and describe how the board will ensure that one-stop service
providers meet these needs. Although Labor oversees the system, states
and local areas have flexibility to design and operate their local
systems as long as they are not inconsistent with the requirements of
WIA.
Labor has several initiatives that were designed, in part, to help one-
stop centers model approaches to serving employers. The President's
High-Growth Job Training Initiative targets worker training and career
development resources toward helping workers gain the skills they need
to build careers in fields like health care, information technology,
and advanced manufacturing jobs. According to Labor officials, more
than 138 High-Growth Job Training Initiative grants have been awarded
totaling approximately $250 million, as of August 2006. The grants are
awarded to local workforce investment boards that oversee one-stop
centers. The National Business Learning Partnership program was
designed to match high-performing local workforce areas with local
sites that wish to engage businesses more successfully. As part of this
program, a protégé site is matched with a mentor to provide one-on-one
consultation, develop a work plan, and support a transition to a demand-
driven system. In order to participate in the National Business
Learning Partnership program, the workforce investment board overseeing
the local one-stop center must submit an application for the low-
performing one-stop to become a protégé. Not all who apply are accepted
into the program.
While Labor assesses WIA programs through such measures as job seeker
employment rates, average earnings, and job retention, only one measure
for these programs relates directly to employer services: employer
satisfaction. In accordance with an Office of Management and Budget
initiative, Labor also assesses workforce programs with common
measures, which are similar to some of the WIA measures. However, none
relate directly to employer services. To improve the collection of
performance information, Labor is in the process of designing a new
performance reporting system: the Workforce Investment Streamlined
Performance Reporting System, slated for implementation in 2007.
In previous work on employers and one-stops, we found that as a
company's size increased, so did awareness and use of one-stop
services. Employers were more likely to use hiring services--posting
job openings and screening job applicants--than they were to use
training services. In general, employers were satisfied with the
services they received.
Employers Hired About 9 Percent of 2005 New Hires through One-Stops,
Two-Thirds of Whom Were Low-Skilled:
Employers responding to our survey hired a small percentage of their
workers through one-stops in 2005, about 9 percent.[Footnote 3] This
amounted to roughly 1,300 of the 14,500 workers hired by the 80
employers we surveyed who could provide this information. Although some
employers had hired a large percentage of their workers through the one-
stops, most had hired only a small percentage. In a typical case, a
manufacturer hired only 1 of its 21 new hires (5 percent) through one-
stops. In a less typical case, a manufacturer hired 250 of its 1,100
new hires (23 percent) by posting all of its job openings with the
local one-stop center. According to Labor officials, the size and
skills of the local labor pool overall (not just at the one-stops),
along with a wide array of other factors, may affect the ability of an
employer to hire a large percentage of workers from the one-stops.
There were no material differences in hiring patterns for employers of
different sizes.[Footnote 4]
About two-thirds of workers hired through one-stops were low-skilled,
according to the employers who provided us with an estimate.[Footnote
5] Of the approximately 1,300 workers employers hired in 2005, about
900 were low-skilled.[Footnote 6] (See fig. 1.) Employers said they
relied on these workers to fill their entry-level positions. Employers
in the food service industry hired low-skilled workers from one-stops
to fill their cashier and wait staff positions. Another employer, in
the manufacturing industry, hired low-skilled workers for entry-level
positions on the production floor.
Figure 1: Employees Hired through One-Stops:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO 2006 survey of business establishments.
Note: This information cannot be generalized to all employers who use
one-stop services. The numbers used in this graphic are from those
employers who could provide us with estimates, 80 of the 113 employers
who completed our survey.
[End of figure]
Some of the employers completing our survey reported that they had used
one-stops to hire mostly low-skilled employees, in part because they
thought it was mostly low-skilled workers who were available from the
centers. Based on their interactions with one-stops, employers
characterized the labor pool at one-stops as being, on average, 61
percent low-skilled, 26 percent mid-skilled, and just 12 percent high-
skilled. With the exception of high-skilled workers, these percentages
closely mirror the proportion of workers at various skill levels that
they actually hired through the one-stops in 2005. (See fig. 2.)
Although many indicated a willingness to hire more job seekers from the
one-stops, some questioned whether such hires would be qualified. For
example, an employer in Green Bay, Wisconsin, told us that he had a
difficult time filling his open positions for welders and would be more
than willing to hire from the one-stop center if it had qualified job
seekers.
Figure 2: Comparison of Actual Hiring through One-Stops with Employers'
Perceptions of the One-Stops' Labor Pool:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO 2006 survey of business establishments.
Note: This information cannot be generalized to all employers who use
one-stop services. The numbers used in this graphic are from those
employers who could provide us with estimates, 80 of the 113 employers
who completed our survey. Because of rounding, percentages for
employers' perceptions do not sum to 100.
[End of figure]
A greater proportion of the workers that employers hired through
private sector recruiting firms were high-skilled, in comparison to the
proportion they hired in the one-stop. Specifically, 51 percent of the
workers they hired through the private sector recruiting firms were
high-skilled in comparison to 5 percent of the workers they hired
through one-stops. (See fig. 3.) Employers told us they used private
sector recruiting firms either to find employees with specific
expertise and experience or when they had a difficult time finding
employees. For example, a financial services business used private
sector recruiting firms to search for new executives. Another said
these firms were only used when it was not possible to fill an open
position after a reasonable period of time.
Figure 3: Proportion of Skilled Workers Hired through One-Stops and
through Private Sector Recruiting Firms:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO 2006 survey of business establishments.
Note: This information cannot be generalized to all employers who use
one-stop services. The numbers used in this graphic are from those
employers who could provide us with estimates, 80 of the 113 employers
who completed our survey.
[End of figure]
Despite their perceptions of skill levels available through the one-
stops, employers completing our survey seemed willing to recruit from
any source if there were qualified employees available. Many said they
attempted to recruit employees from a variety of sources, including one-
stops, and hired the best applicant from any of such sources. For
example, one said the firm had listed all of its job openings with the
local one-stop, but ended up finding most employees through employee
referral and walk-ins. Another employer that hired through employee
referrals provided a bonus to workers who referred new employees to the
company. In addition to having workers approach them, some employers
also recruited workers directly from colleges and universities. Another
said it used newspapers and the one-stop center and found employees
from both. According to Labor officials, generally the most effective
recruitment strategy is word-of-mouth through friends and relatives.
Employers Mostly Used Job Posting Services and Generally Reported That
Using Any Service Produced Positive Results:
Employers completing our survey primarily used only one of the seven
services generally available though the one-stop, the job posting
service. However, when employers did take advantage of a service, in
general they reported that it was useful because it produced positive
results, such as a pool of applicants larger than would have been
available otherwise. Employers also reported positive experiences in
terms of interacting with one-stop staff, as well as savings in time
and money. Employers who did not use a particular one-stop service
reported that they were either not aware that it was offered, obtained
the service elsewhere, or had carried through on their own.
Employers Often Used One-Stops' Job Posting Service, and Less
Frequently Used Other Available Services:
Of all services offered by one-stops, the one most often used by
employers we surveyed was posting jobs.[Footnote 7] Other services,
such as screening applicants, using one-stop facilities, and using
labor market information, were used less. A small fraction of employers
we surveyed used information about financial incentives, assistance
with downsizing and averting layoffs, or training services.[Footnote 8]
(See fig. 4.)
Figure 4: Percentage of Employers That Used Each One-Stop Service in
2005 and How They Rated Its Usefulness:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO 2006 survey of business establishments.
Note: This information cannot be generalized to all employers who use
one-stop services. To calculate the percentage of employers that used
each one-stop service, we divided the number of employers who reported
using each service by the number of employers who reported using any
service in 2005, 81 of the 113 employers who completed our survey.
[End of figure]
Employers Generally Reported That Using One-Stop Services Produced
Positive Results, with the Exception of Posting Job Openings, where
Results Were Mixed:
Most employers who posted jobs with the one-stop said the service was
useful. However, others found that it did not produce the candidates
they needed. Most of those who used the job posting service said that
it was useful or very useful because it increased the size of the
audience they were able to reach and resulted in a greater number of
job applicants. A company official at one mid-sized medical laboratory
characterized one-stops as a place where "almost anyone would go to
find a job," and said posting jobs with the one-stop enabled the lab to
reach a large and diverse audience. For one small business manager,
posting jobs with the one-stop produced about 900 applications. For
some employers, however, a greater number of applicants, in and of
itself, was not productive. About one-third of employers posting jobs
with the one-stop did not find it to be useful. The owner of a mid-
sized manufacturing company in Wisconsin echoed the experiences of
others in telling us that when he posted a job opening with the one-
stop it did not generate the applicants who had the qualifications he
needed.
Although fewer in number, employers who screened applicants or accessed
labor market information through the one-stop or who used one-stop
facilities said these services were useful. Of those who found
screening services useful, most said that it increased the number of
job seekers with the skills they needed. One large retail company was
able to hire over 500 new employees as a result of prescreening
interviews and background checks performed by the one-stop. In another
case, a mid-sized manufacturing company said the one-stop's screening
service saved the company time by reducing the applicant traffic in the
office. Of those who found it beneficial to use the one-stop centers'
facilities, most said it provided a convenient location for recruiting.
One mid-sized manufacturing firm told us that the one-stop facilities
provided a central location where the employer could accept
applications, conduct testing sessions, and make photocopies of
relevant documents. Another employer told us that using the one-stop's
facilities enabled the company to continue recruiting employees while
the business's building was under construction. Most of those who found
labor market information useful said it helped the firm set wage rates
and comply with prevailing wage requirements.
Although used by few, training services and information about financial
incentives and employee supports were also useful to the employers we
surveyed. Employers that found training services to be useful said it
was because they improved their employee skills.[Footnote 9] For
example, 40 entry-level employees at a large manufacturing firm learned
to read blueprints and acquired other skills highly valuable to the
company through training arranged by the one-stop. According to the
human resources manager, these employees were better positioned for
advancement in their careers as a result. Of those who said information
about financial incentives and employee supports was useful, most
pointed to the fact that it was appropriate to the needs of their
establishment or employees. One small business employer said that his
local one-stop coordinated potential candidates for tax credits and
made his employees aware of programs that could help the company. He
cited these services as one of the reasons his business would be
looking to expand in the area served by this one-stop center.
While few of those we surveyed had used a one-stop's help in downsizing
or averting layoffs, those that did said that they found this service
useful or very useful. Specifically, almost all said the one-stop's
assistance helped them comply with federal laws regarding downsizing
and resulted in more employees finding new employment after downsizing
than would have otherwise occurred. In one case in 2005, one-stop
officials met with a group of about 50 workers laid off by a large
manufacturing firm in Indiana and told the workers about how to access
the one-stop's search assistance and training opportunities. According
to the human resource manager, the one-stop's help spared him from
fielding multiple queries about job search services. In addition, he
said the one-stop staff gave the laid-off employees direction and
encouragement toward new employment opportunities.
Employers Who Used One-Stop Services Generally Reported Positive
Experiences in Terms of Effort, Staff Interaction, Time, and Savings:
Many employers who responded to our survey said that the amount of
effort required to work with the one-stops was reasonable. Most of
those we surveyed said it was easy or very easy to use one-stop
services. Few complained about excessive paperwork or other
administrative requirements associated with one-stop services. Some
employers we interviewed recalled doing very little paperwork.
Employers were also generally positive about their interactions with
one-stop staff. Among those who answered our survey question on staff
interaction, about 70 percent rated staff highly on their
professionalism. The employers we interviewed on our site visits said
that being familiar with one-stop staff was valuable to them and added
that their one-stop contact was professional and responsive. Several
said they felt very comfortable asking their one-stop staff member for
any assistance.
Employers also said that one-stop services had saved them time and
money. Using one-stop facility and screening services allowed employers
to recruit new workers more quickly and efficiently, thereby saving
time. Many employers noted that one-stop services, which generally are
free of charge, had saved them money. One employer said the one-stop's
meeting rooms, high-speed Internet access, photocopying assistance, and
other services helped him save his company almost $2,000. He contrasted
his experience with that of other company franchises that had paid
hotels or others for such services.
For Services They Did Not Use, Employers Reported Either Not Knowing
about Them, Finding Them Elsewhere, or Providing Them on Their Own:
Many of the survey respondents who did not use one-stop services said
it was because they did not know the one-stop offered these services.
On average, about one-quarter of employers who did not use a particular
one-stop service said it was because they did not know it was
available. Employers cited training services and information about
financial incentives and employee supports as the two services they
were least aware of and thus among those used the least.
Some employers looked elsewhere for services that were also available
at one-stop centers. For example, many employers accessed labor market
information from sources other than the one-stops, such as information
available from educational organizations or professional associations.
Also, 35 percent of employers who did not post jobs with the one-stop
reported posting jobs through other outlets, such as through private
sector recruiting firms, newspapers, the Internet, and using word-of-
mouth (other employees). In our discussions with employers, some said
they need to tap all resources available to find qualified employees.
It was also the case that employers did not use some services that
involve activities they generally do on their own. With regard to
training, for example, one employer said that making musical
instruments requires training by a seasoned instrument maker. While
about one-third of employers used screening services, over 70 percent
of those who did not said it was because they do their own screening
internally.
One-Stop Service to Employers May be Affected by Limited Skills in
Their Labor Pool, Limited Staffing, and the Lack of Employer-Related
Performance Information:
At least three factors may affect one-stops' service to employers. The
first of these is the skill set of the labor pool, which some officials
characterized as low or lacking the specialization some employers
requested. Part of the challenge, according to others, is that
employers may perceive the skill level as lower than it actually is.
One-stop officials cited the limited number of staff as a second factor
that affects their service to employers. The fact that Labor collects
limited information on employer engagement in the one-stop system is a
third factor that may also affect one-stops' service to employers.
While Labor has launched initiatives to better meet employers' needs
for workers, such as the High-Growth Job Training Initiative, the one-
stops we visited were not significantly affected by them.
Skills of the Labor Pool May Make It Difficult for One-Stops to Meet
Demand for Skilled Workers:
The one-stop officials we interviewed cited the skills of the labor
pool available through the one-stop as one of their top challenges in
providing employers with qualified applicants. Whether the problem is
that the labor pool is low-skilled, lacks the specific skills, or is
misperceived by employers is difficult to determine. Some officials
cited the low skill level or lack of education in their labor pool,
while others cited the lack of specialized skills needed by employers.
On average, officials estimated that about one-third of their labor
pool was low-skilled, with these estimates ranging from 8 percent to 85
percent. A one-stop official noted that it was difficult to provide
employers with applicants that met employers' minimal requirements for
having at least a high school or general equivalency diploma. Other
officials told us they do not have enough skilled workers to supply the
needs of the businesses in their areas. For example, a one-stop
official explained the difficulty in filling an employer's need for
workers experienced in mixing batches of cosmetics.
When told that employers in our survey used the one-stop to hire mostly
low-skilled workers, some of the one-stop officials we interviewed said
that to some degree employers can misperceive the skills of the one-
stop labor pool. They noted that employers may not see skills as
transferable to their particular needs. For example, a one-stop
official told us that when skilled workers were recently laid off at a
tubing manufacturing company, other local employers viewed them as low-
skilled because the applicability of their skills to other jobs in the
labor market was not readily apparent. Other one-stop officials stated
that employers may characterize the one-stops' labor pool as low-
skilled because high-skilled or professional job seekers do not
necessarily tell employers that they have used the local one-stop
center. According to a one-stop official, high-skilled job seekers are
more likely to say that they found the job posting on the Internet
because they want to convey the impression that they did not need
assistance. In addition, one-stop staff suggested that some employers
may perceive the labor pool as low-skilled because of a lack of
applicant screening by the one-stop. One-stops provide screening
services in varying degrees. In cases where the one-stop did not
screen, employers seeking high-skilled workers may be overwhelmed by
the number of low-skilled job seekers applying for open positions.
A Limited Number of One-Stop Staff Are Available to Serve Employers,
but One-Stops We Visited Generally Did Not Leverage Additional Private
Sector Funding to Increase Staff or Resources:
According to most of the one-stop officials we interviewed, another
challenge they faced was the lack of staff available to serve
employers. Staff at one-stops must serve both employers and job seekers
with the staff time and funding available to them. While some officials
told us that services to employers and job seekers complement each
other, others said that their staff primarily serve job seekers and
serve businesses as a collateral duty. In fact, half of the one-stop
centers we interviewed had no staff dedicated exclusively to serving
employers. One official told us that in addition to serving job
seekers, he went door to door to local businesses in the area to
promote one-stop employer services because he had no staff dedicated to
doing so. The other half of the one-stop centers we visited dedicated
at least one person to serving employers full-time. The fact that
employers expressed satisfaction with one-stop staff would suggest that
at least for them levels of staff weren't an issue. Nonetheless, all of
the one-stop officials we spoke with agreed that if they were provided
with more funding, they would expand services to employers. Some either
said they would use funding to hire additional staff devoted to
employer services or they would increase one-stop service offerings to
employers like training for their incumbent workers.
Although a practice we identified as promising--leveraging private
sector funding--could be used by one-stops to hire more staff, most
officials we interviewed stated that they had not done so.[Footnote 10]
Six of the 10 one-stops we visited did not receive any funding of this
type. The 4 one-stops that did receive private sector funding charged a
fee for services or to use the facility. Each received less than
$10,000 per year, an amount described by some of these officials as
minimal. When asked why they had not received private sector funding,
one-stop officials we interviewed stated several reasons, including
hesitancy to solicit funds in addition to tax dollars already paid by
businesses as well as lack of expertise and knowledge regarding how to
solicit private sector donations.
The Lack of Employer-Related Performance Information That Labor
Collects May Affect How One-Stops Serve Employers:
Labor has limited information about employer engagement in the one-stop
system. Although Labor measures employers' satisfaction, this measure
does not provide information on how employers use the system. Labor
officials told us that they do not rely on this information for any
purpose, and as we previously reported, the information is too general
for states and local areas to use. We recommended, at that time, that
Labor require states to collect and report on employer use of the
workforce system.[Footnote 11] Labor was developing a new data
collection and reporting system that it has since discontinued and
replaced with a new system still under development. Labor officials
told us that their latest data collection system will generate
information on employers' use of one-stop services, and will be
implemented in program year 2007. However, this remains to be seen.
Moreover, it is not clear that Labor will use this information to
measure employer engagement.
Some one-stop officials we spoke with acknowledged that there is a need
for performance measures related to employer services. Officials at
several one-stop centers we visited also recognized that performance
information Labor collects focuses on services to job seekers and not
employers. Several one-stop officials stated that some basic measures
are necessary to tie one-stop staff effort to employer outcomes and
that if Labor were to collect such information, doing so might
influence how they serve employers.
Although Labor does not require that one-stops collect performance
information related to employer services, officials at many of the one-
stops we visited, recognizing its importance, collected such
information. Eight out of the 10 one-stops collected some type of
performance data on their services to employers in order to assess how
well they were serving employers in their local area. This included the
number of new employers using the one-stop services, number of hires,
repeat usage rate, self-service versus staff-assisted services, and
number of on-site recruitments. Officials said they use this
information to plan outreach and to assess progress toward achieving
performance goals. For example, a one-stop official said, "We use the
data to see who is using us and who is not and try to figure out the
reason," which suggests the value of this information for getting more
employers to use the one-stops.
Most of the One-Stop Officials We Interviewed Reported That Labor
Initiatives on Employer Services Had No Impact on Their Capacity to
Serve Employers:
Labor initiatives intended to increase one-stop capacity to serve
employers may have limited reach, at least until greater dissemination
occurs. Two of the 10 local workforce investment boards we visited
received High Growth Job Training Initiative grants, and none
participated in the National Business Learning Partnership program.
According to the officials whose boards received grants, the funding
was helpful because it increased the resources available to help
address the needs of employers. One-stop centers whose local boards did
not receive any program grants told us that the initiatives, which are
intended to disseminate information in general, have not helped them
build their capacity to serve employers. In those cases where a board
did not seek a grant or participate in the programs, any potential
impact may depend on the efforts of local officials to seek out program
information. Labor has taken steps to disseminate findings gained from
the National Business Learning Partnership by publishing case studies
that exemplify various best practices approaches to serving employers.
Officials from Labor also stated that they educate one-stop officials
and others about their initiatives through a Web site.
Conclusions:
WIA promoted greater employer engagement, in part, by calling on the
one-stop center system to help meet employers' workforce needs. While
neither the act nor Labor regulations specify their level or range,
employer services are clearly part of this equation. While there are
many ways that employers might be engaged, our findings raise questions
about the extent to which it is occurring via service to employers.
Although employers we contacted found one-stop services useful, a lack
of qualified applicants, and misperceptions about applicants' skill
levels and a lack of awareness of some services had the potential to
negatively affect their engagement with the system. This is all the
more important because they represent a subset of all employers--those
that actually used the one-stops. The fact that employers hired such a
small percentage of their hires through the one-stop, coupled with the
finding from our previous work that small employers are less likely to
be aware of the one-stop services available to them, could mean that
small employers in relation to large employers are even less engaged in
the system.
Beyond this, there is another and greater indication that employers are
not central to the system, in that Labor has not attempted to measure
their engagement. Labor officials acknowledge that they do not use
their single measure related to employers--satisfaction--but also
acknowledge the importance of having information about employers'
engagement in the system. Without such information, it is not possible
to understand the extent to which employer involvement is helpful to
job seekers or to employers, to know what role employers can play in
achieving success for the one-stop delivery system, or to determine
what, if anything, should be done to improve employer engagement. While
Labor has said that its new data collection system will collect
information on employer use of services, it is not clear if Labor will
use this information to measure employer engagement in the one-stop
system.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To ensure that Labor has a better understanding of the extent that
employers are engaged in the workforce system, we recommend that the
Secretary of Labor follow through with plans to collect information on
employers' use of one-stop services and develop a way to measure
employer engagement in the workforce investment system as part of the
department's performance reporting system.
Agency Comments:
We provided a draft of this report to Labor for review and comment. In
its comments, Labor acknowledged the limited data available on
employers' use of one-stop services and noted its intent to collect
additional employer data through a new performance reporting system
beginning July 1, 2007. While Labor noted that our sample did not allow
for generalizations, it said our report highlighted issues that the
Employment and Training Administration has been engaged in tackling for
the past few years. A copy of Labor's response is in appendix II.
Labor also provided technical comments on the draft report, which we
have incorporated where appropriate.
We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Labor,
appropriate congressional committees, and other interested parties. In
addition, the report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site
at [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
A list of related GAO products is included at the end of the report. If
you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact
me at (202) 512-7215. You may also reach me by e-mail at
nilsens@gao.gov. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix
III.
Signed by:
Sigurd R. Nilsen:
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Our objectives were to determine (1) the extent to which employers,
both large and small, hire their employees through one-stops; (2) the
extent to which these employers view one-stop services as useful; and
(3) factors that may affect one-stop service to employers. To answer
these questions, we conducted a Web-based survey of employers, visited
one-stop career centers, and interviewed Labor officials and officials
from other organizations with knowledge of workforce programs. See
below for more detailed information on each of these aspects of our
research. We performed our work from December 2005 through October 2006
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Survey of Employers:
In order to obtain a list of employers who had used one-stop services,
we built upon a previous survey effort. This previous survey of
employers was conducted in July through October of 2004. During this
previous effort, 1,356 respondents completed surveys. The overall
response rate to this previous survey was 54 percent. On the basis of
an analysis of characteristics of responding and nonresponding
employers, we concluded that the results of the respondents could be
considered as being nationally representative of all employers with
regard to issues such as whether or not they knew about one-stops, knew
about the one-stops in their area, and knew about the services
available at one-stops. In this earlier effort, 466 of the 1,356
business establishments that were surveyed indicated that they were
users of one-stop services.
For this study, a contractor attempted to contact each of these 466
employers and obtain their e-mail addresses for the Web-based survey.
Of the 466 employers contacted, the contractor obtained e-mail
addresses from 178. In some cases employers were unwilling to provide
their e-mail address and in other cases the employers were no longer in
business. We sent a Web-based survey to these 178 businesses and later
attempted to contact an additional 25 small businesses. We received
completed surveys from June through September 2006 from a total of 113
businesses in three size categories: 14 small, 48 medium, and 51 large.
The results of this survey are not nationally representative and cannot
be generalized to the universe of U.S. private sector businesses that
have used one-stops because of the small size of our survey population
and possible response bias. While the 1,356 responding businesses in
the earlier effort were considered representative for the purposes of
our earlier survey, the 466 responding businesses that used one-stops
may or may not have been representative of such businesses nationally.
Businesses that had used the services of one-stops and that had
favorable experiences might have been more familiar and more likely to
be willing to take time and report on their experiences. Conversely,
businesses that had unfavorable experiences might also be more likely
to report on their experiences to make them known. Therefore, the 113
businesses we contacted in this effort may reflect a group of
respondents whose aggregate views may not accurately reflect all
businesses' experiences with one-stops in the country.
For the small businesses we attempted to survey, we could not reach
many of them because of business closure and employee turnover. We
attempted to survey 42 small businesses that had used one-stop services
in the past, but only received completed surveys from 14. In addition
to contacting these employers by phone to encourage their participation
in our survey, we also mailed letters and e-mailed messages in cases
where we obtained their e-mail addresses. We were able to identify 10
small businesses in our sample that were out of business, had sold the
business to new owners, or had new employees that do not currently use
the one-stop centers.
The 80 employers included in our analysis of hiring patterns are those
whose reported total hires in 2005 were within plus or minus 10 percent
of the sum of their hires through one-stops, the private sector, and
other sources. For some of these employers, the number of workers they
reported hiring at three skill levels did not match the number of
workers they hired from each source. For these employers, we compared
results excluding them with results leaving them in. The results were
roughly the same. The comparisons of hiring patterns for large and
medium businesses were assessed by comparing the median values of the
proportion (employees hired through one stop over total hires) using
the nonparametric Wilcoxon Rank sums test.
In addition to survey nonresponse, the practical difficulties of
conducting any survey may introduce other types of errors, commonly
referred to as nonsampling errors. For example, differences in how a
particular question is interpreted, the sources of information
available to respondents in answering a question, or the types of
people who do not respond can introduce unwanted bias into the survey
results. We included steps in the development of the survey, the
collection of data, and the editing and analysis of data for the
purpose of minimizing such nonsampling error. For example, in cases
where an employer gave an answer other than the choices provided, we
reviewed, verified, and then categorized each answer.
Site Visits:
We also visited eight one-stop career centers in four states:
California, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, and by phone
interviewed officials in two one-stop centers in Pennsylvania. We
selected Wyoming for a rural perspective and the 4 other states because
they had the most employers that had used one-stop services in a
national survey we conducted in 2004. In each state we visited two one-
stop centers selected to provide a mix of urban, suburban, and rural
areas. At each one-stop center we visited, we spoke with relevant one-
stop center officials and at least one employer that used the one-
stop's services. In preparation for each site visit, we sent officials
in each one-stop center a list of structured questions that they
answered in advance of our meeting with them. We then used these
questions and responses to guide our discussions with and gain further
clarification from one-stop officials during our site visits. In some
cases, officials from the Local Workforce Investment Boards also
participated.
Table 1: One-Stop Centers We Visited:
State: California;
City: El Centro;
Local board: Workforce Investment Board of Imperial County;
One-stop center: Imperial County One-stop Business and Employment
Services.
State: California;
City: San Diego;
Local board: San Diego Workforce Partnership, Inc;
One-stop center: Metro Region Career Center.
State: North Carolina; City: Charlotte; Local board: Charlotte-
Mecklenburg Consortium; One-stop center: Charlotte JobLinks.
State: North Carolina;
City: Lincolnton;
Local board: Centralina Workforce Development Board, Inc;
One-stop center: Lincoln County JobLink Career Center.
State: Pennsylvania;
City: Norristown;
Local board: Montgomery County Workforce Investment Board;
One-stop center: PA CareerLink Montgomery County-Norristown.
State: Pennsylvania;
City: Philadelphia;
Local board: Philadelphia Workforce Investment Board;
One-stop center: PA CareerLink Philadelphia North.
State: Wisconsin;
City: Green Bay;
Local board: Bay Area Workforce Development Board, Inc;
One-stop center: Brown County Job Center.
State: Wisconsin;
City: Walworth County; Local board: Southeastern Wisconsin Workforce
Development Board;
One-stop center: Walworth County Job Center.
State: Wyoming;
City: Jackson;
Local board: [Note: Wyoming has one state workforce board that oversees
all one-stops];
One-stop center: Jackson Workforce Center.
State: Wyoming;
City: Riverton;
Local board: [Note: Wyoming has one state workforce board that oversees
all one-stops];
One-stop center: Riverton Workforce Center.
Source: GAO.
[End of table]
Interviews with Labor Officials and Others:
We interviewed Department of Labor officials who are responsible for
overseeing the operation of the one-stop system. In addition, we
interviewed employer groups and workforce organizations to determine
perspectives on how the workforce system serves employers. We
interviewed representatives from the following organizations:
* U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Center for Workforce Preparation,
* National Association of Manufacturers' Center for Workforce Success,
* Jobs for the Future, and:
* National Association of State Workforce Agencies.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Labor:
U.S. Department of Labor:
Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training:
Washington. D.C. 20210:
Dec 12 2006:
Mr. Sigurd R. Nilsen:
Director:
Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street, NW:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Dear Mr. Nilsen:
The Department of Labor appreciates the effort made by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to develop data as part of its study on
employer usage of One-Stop Career Centers under the Workforce
Investment Act. We understand that the study was difficult to conduct
due to the limited data sources available to GAO during the process.
While the survey process was the obvious choice for collecting
additional data, the limited sample size and response to the survey
prevent any generalizations to the workforce system as a whole,
particularly given the decentralized nature of the system. It is
important to note that on November 6, 2006, the Department published in
the Federal Register its intent to collect additional employer data
through the new Workforce Investment Streamlined Performance Reporting
system beginning July 1, 2007.
Even with the limited methodology, the report highlights a number of
"legacy" issues regarding the workforce investment system, most
notably: (1) its lack of a demand-driven approach to workforce
investment, that is, seeing employers as important customers who drive
investments and service delivery design in a regional labor market; (2)
not approaching workforce investment with an industry focus
strategically tied to regional economic growth; and (3) not positioning
One-Stop Career Centers as service delivery points in regional
economies designed to provide all individuals access to high quality
career information and lifelong learning opportunities. The Employment
and Training Administration has been very engaged in tackling all of
these issues for the past few years, in particular through the
President's High Growth Job Training Initiative, the Community-Based
Job Training Grants and the Workforce Innovation in Regional Economic
Development (WIRED) effort.
In addition, the Administration has remained steadfast that statutory
reforms are needed as part of Workforce Investment Act reauthorization
to ensure that a greater number of individuals are served and are truly
being prepared for jobs in the current economy as well as into the
future. This in turn will better meet the needs of our nation's
employers and help them remain viable in the global economy. The
President's proposal includes greater flexibility through consolidation
of funding streams and implementation of Career Advancement Accounts
(CAAs), which are self-managed accounts designed to help out-of-school
youth, dislocated workers, incumbent workers and others gain access to
post-secondary education and training to advance their skills and
careers.
If you would like additional information, please do not hesitate to
call meat (202) 693-2700.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Emily Stover DiRocco:
[End of section]
Appendix III: Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
Sigurd Nilsen, (202) 512-7215 or nilsens@gao.gov:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Patrick di Battista, Assistant Director, and Paul Schearf, Analyst-in-
Charge, managed this assignment. Tina Paek and Rosemary Torres Lerma
made significant contributions throughout the assignment. Walter Vance
provided methodological assistance. Susan Baker, Stefanie Bzdusek, and
Cathy Hurley contributed to the administration and analysis of our
employer survey. Susan Bernstein and Susannah Compton helped develop
the report's message. Jessica Botsford and Richard Burkard provided
legal support.
[End of section]
GAO Related Products:
Trade Adjustment Assistance: Most Workers in Five Layoffs Received
Services, but Better Outreach Needed on New Benefits. GAO-06-43.
Washington, D.C.: January 31, 2006.
Workforce Investment Act: Labor and States Have Taken Actions to
Improve Data Quality, but Additional Steps Are Needed. GAO-06-82.
Washington, D.C.: November 14, 2005.
Workforce Investment Act: Substantial Funds Are Used for Training, but
Little Is Known Nationally about Training Outcomes. GAO-05-650.
Washington, D.C.: June 29, 2005.
Workforce Investment Act: Labor Should Consider Alternative Approaches
to Implement New Performance and Reporting Requirements. GAO-05-539.
Washington, D.C.: May 27, 2005.
Workforce Investment Act: Employers Are Aware of, Using, and Satisfied
with One-Stop Services, but More Data Could Help Labor Better Address
Employers' Needs. GAO-05-259. Washington, D.C.: February 18, 2005.
Workforce Investment Act: Labor Has Taken Several Actions to Facilitate
Access to One-Stops for Persons with Disabilities, but These Efforts
May Not Be Sufficient. GAO-05-54. Washington, D.C.: December 14, 2004.
Workforce Investment Act: States and Local Areas Have Developed
Strategies to Assess Performance, but Labor Could Do More to Help. GAO-
04-657. Washington, D.C.: June 1, 2004.
Workforce Investment Act: Labor Actions Can Help States Improve Quality
of Performance Outcome Data and Delivery of Youth Services. GAO-04-308.
Washington, D.C.: February 23, 2004.
Workforce Investment Act: One-Stop Centers Implemented Strategies to
Strengthen Services and Partnerships, but More Research and Information
Sharing Is Needed. GAO-03-725 and related testimony GAO-03-884T.
Washington, D.C.: June 18, 2003.
FOOTNOTES
[1] GAO, Workforce Investment Act: Employers Are Aware of, Using, and
Satisfied with One-Stop Services, but More Data Could Help Labor Better
Address Employers' Needs, GAO-05-259 (Washington. D.C.: Feb. 18, 2005).
[2] This information includes financial incentives that encourage
employers to hire, such as the Work Opportunity Tax Credit and programs
that support employees such as child care and transportation
assistance.
[3] The results of our survey cannot be generalized to the universe of
businesses that have used one-stops and only represent the views of
those who responded to the survey. Our survey respondents are a subset
of respondents to a survey we conducted in 2004. In that nationally
representative survey, 466 employers told us that they had used one-
stop services. We obtained valid e-mail addresses from 178 of these
businesses. In some cases employers were unwilling to provide their e-
mail address and in other cases the employers were no longer in
business. We sent a Web-based survey to these 178 businesses and later
attempted to contact an additional 25 small businesses. We received
completed surveys from June through September 2006 from a total of 113
businesses. Appendix 1 contains additional information on the
limitations of our survey methodology.
[4] We found no significant differences in hiring patterns between
large and medium businesses, and because of the limited number of small
businesses, we did not include them in the analysis.
[5] A low-skilled worker, for the purposes of our survey, is a worker
with a high-school education, its equivalent in training, or less.
[6] Across all sources, including one-stops, 54 percent of those hired
were low-skilled, 26 percent were mid-skilled, and 19 percent were high-
skilled.
[7] Because the number of employers who used a service was often small,
we could not determine if there were material differences in the type
of one-stop service used by employer size.
[8] As would be expected, some services, such as assistance with
averting layoffs or downsizing, are not very often needed by employers.
[9] Training services can be provided at the one-stop center or through
some other entity, such as a community college.
[10] WIA authorizes local boards that manage one-stops to solicit funds
from employers and/or have one-stops offer services for a fee to
employers. We identified this as a promising practice in the following
report: GAO, Workforce Investment Act: One-Stop Centers Implemented
Strategies to Strengthen Services and Partnerships, but More Research
and Information Sharing Is Needed, GAO-03-725 (Washington. D.C.: June
18, 2003).
[11] See GAO-05-259.
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site.
To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon,
go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548:
