The Department of Labor recognizes the important role that program
evaluations serve in helping us achieve our mission and strategic goals.
Objective reviews and audits by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and
the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), along with evaluations by
independent contractors are a critical source of information about the
effectiveness of our programs. They also help us identify the need for
corrective actions.
During the past year, the audits and evaluations described below have
helped to ensure that our goals are reasonable and our strategies for achieving
those goals are effective. While all of these audits and
evaluations have their own unique focus and content, they all contribute to our
common efforts to foster growth and encourage innovation.
The audits and evaluations listed below are categorized by the DOL
strategic goals they support.
GOAL 1: A PREPARED
WORKFORCE |
1. Issue: The use of WIA funds and tracking
WIA outcomes |
Program Area: ETA WIA
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1A
Increase the employment, retention, and earnings of individuals registered
under the WIA adult program. Goal 04-1.1C Increase the
employment, retention, and earnings replacement of individuals registered under
the Workforce Investment Act Dislocated Worker Program. |
Report Title: Substantial Funds Are Used for
Training, But Little Is Known Nationally about Training Outcomes
(GAO-05-650)
Date Completed: June 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: WIA funds used for
training need to be clearly identified and tracked. |
Findings:
1. Questions were raised about how WIA funds are being used and
how much is being spent on training.
2. Contributing to the concern about the use of WIA funds is the
lack of accurate information about the extent to which WIA participants are
enrolled in training activities. |
Recommendations:
1. Determine the extent to which WIA funds are used for
training.
2. Determine how local workforce boards manage the use of
Individual Training Accounts (ITA).
3. Determine what is known at the national level about outcomes of
those being trained. |
Actions Taken:
1. DOL standardized the definition of 'participant exit' for
purposes of assessing program performance across all programs implementing
common measures. States began implementing these changes as of July 1,
2005. The revised reporting requirements will facilitate better
information about outcomes for all training programs.
2. Through the newly revised Workforce Investment Act Standardized
Record Data (WIASRD), DOL will be able to capture information on all
participants who receive training in each program year, not just those who exit
the program.
3. ETA implemented a data validation initiative in PY 2003.
ETA provides the states with software, handbooks, training and technical
assistance to validate annual reports and provides a sampling mechanism to
review a select number of files from each program for manual review. |
Actions Remaining:
1. States will be required to validate annual reports and perform
data element validation once a year to improve the quality of the data used to
compute performance reports.
2. ETA will develop acceptable error rates for each program.
|
Expected Completion:
1. This is an ongoing initiative.
2. PY 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-650.
|
2. Issue: Comprehensive access to the WIA one-stop
system for persons with disabilities |
Program Area: ETA WIA
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1A
Increase the employment, retention, and earnings of individuals registered
under the WIA adult program. |
Report Title: 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)
Date Completed: December 2004
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: The WIA one-stop system may
need to alter information tracking systems and relationships with
disability-related agencies in order to meet comprehensive access
requirements. |
Findings:
1. ETA, OASAMs Civil Rights Center (CRC) and ODEP have taken
several actions to ensure comprehensive access to one-stops, but these efforts
may not be sufficient.
2. DOL has not developed a long-range plan for how it will carry
out its oversight and enforcement responsibilities beyond 2005.
3. The information DOL publishes on employment outcomes for people
with disabilities is limited.
4. The performance measurement system may result in customers
being denied services because local areas may be reluctant to provide
WIA-funded services to job seekers who may be less likely to find
employment. |
Recommendations:
1. DOL should develop and implement a long-term plan for ensuring
that the WIA one-stops comply with the comprehensive access requirements.
2. DOL should use the expertise of staff from CRC, ETA, and ODEP
to ensure comprehensive access within the one-stop system. |
Actions Taken:
1. In a letter signed by the chief executives of CRC, ETA and
ODEP, DOL responded that the agencies will develop a comprehensive, long-term
strategic plan to address the One-Stop systems provision of services to
people with disabilities, beginning with the development of an overall
framework for the plan.
2. CRC, ETA and ODEP have instituted a workgroup which has met
consistently since January 2005. The Rehabilitative Services
Administration, Social Security Administration and Veterans' Employment and
Training Service have also begun to participate in the development of the
plan.
3. DOL has articulated the mission of the workgroup developing the
inter-agency work plan as to promote excellence in service delivery for people
with disabilities in the One-Stop Career Center system. By promoting
excellence, DOL seeks to:
- Ensure that people with disabilities have equal opportunity to
benefit from the programs and services available through the system;
- Promote meaningful and effective career opportunities for
people with disabilities.
The multi-year strategic plan will include a
coordinated implementation strategy that will:
- Identify, coordinate, and maximize the use of agency
resources;
- Ensure compliance with applicable disability-related statutes
and regulations; and
- Promote quality in service delivery for people with
disabilities.
4. The workgroup has completed a draft of the initial framework,
which will soon be placed into Departmental clearance and forwarded to
GAO. Given the breadth of the workgroups mission, the plan
will be developed in phases. |
Actions Remaining:
1. The workgroup will develop a white paper proposing policies and
strategies for Phase I of the work plan for approval by agency heads. The
approved policies and strategies will be translated into a work plan.
2. Monitoring progress and updating the plan.
|
Expected Completion:
1. February 2006
2. Implementation, monitoring and strategic planning will be
ongoing. |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-54.
|
3. Issue: Increasing employer use of the
workforce system one-stops |
Program Area: ETA WIA
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1A
Increase the employment, retention, and earnings of individuals registered
under the WIA adult program. Goal 04-1.1C Increase the
employment, retention, and earnings replacement of individuals registered under
the Workforce Investment Act Dislocated Worker Program. Goal 04-4.1A
Build a demand driven system by increasing accessibility to
workforce information |
Report Title: Employers Are Aware of, Using, and
Satisfied with One-Stop Services, but More Data Could Help Labor Better Address
Employers Needs (GAO-05-259)
Date Completed: February 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: Better information on
employers use of the WIA one-stops would help ETA manage its resources
and improve service. |
Findings:
1. Awareness of local one-stops increases with employer size:
about half of small, two-thirds of medium, and three-quarters of large
employers know about their local one-stops.
2. Employers primarily use one-stop services to help fill job
vacancies.
3. Three-quarters of employers who use one-stops are satisfied
with the services they receive.
4. Most employers who use one-stop services would likely use them
again; about one-third of employers who are aware of one-stop services, but
have not used them, would consider using them in the future.
5. Many employers choosing not to use one-stops do so because they
either rely on other resources or do not have enough information about the
services offered.
6. DOLs employer satisfaction measure does not provide
enough information on the services employers use. |
Recommendations: DOL should require
States to collect and report on employer use of the workforce system. |
Actions Taken:
1. DOL proposed a comprehensive, streamlined reporting system for
12 different programs, which included a component for an employer record that
proposed collection of information on workforce services assessed by
employers.
2. Based on comments received during a recent Federal Register
Notice comment period, DOL is currently conducting a feasibility study for
incorporating such a component in our reporting system. This is expected
to be completed during FY 2007.
3. Through recently revised guidance for the WIA and Wagner-Peyser
Act two-year strategic plan and the WIA, Wagner-Peyser, and Senior Community
Service Employment Program unified plan, States were required to describe how
they will actively engage businesses to inform service delivery approaches for
all customers. The planning guidance also emphasized workforce information as a
critical component of a demand-driven workforce system, and the role businesses
play in providing labor market information and in identifying high-growth,
high-demand jobs. |
Actions Remaining: Results of the feasibility
study will be reviewed and based on study findings, decisions will be made on
the final reporting design and implementation schedule. |
Expected Completion:
1. December 2007 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-259.
|
4. Issue: Obtaining good performance
information on the WIA programs |
Program Area: ETA WIA
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1A
Increase the employment, retention, and earnings of individuals registered
under the WIA adult program. Goal 04-1.2A Increase entrance and
retention of youth registered under the WIA youth program in education or
employment. Goal 04-1.1C Increase the employment, retention, and
earnings replacement of individuals registered under the Workforce Investment
Act Dislocated Worker Program. |
Report Title: Labor Should Consider
Alternative Approaches to Implement New Performance and Reporting Requirements
(GAO-05-539)
Date Completed: May 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: Rushed implementation of the
new reporting system could negatively affect data quality and compromise the
potential benefits of proposed changes. Unless DOL ensures that data collection
is done in a consistent manner, the information will not be comparable on a
national level. |
Findings:
1. While many states supported streamlined reporting, 36 states
indicated that implementing ETAs reporting system, as proposed, would be
very burdensome.
2. DOL has underestimated the magnitude and type of changes the
reporting system would require and the resources states would need to implement
it.
3. The use of common measures could increase the comparability of
outcome information across programs and provide a more complete picture of the
one-stop system, but states will face challenges in making the required
changes.
4. One of the common measures will replace the current WIA
earnings measures for dislocated workers, which may be a disincentive for
serving this population.
5. States have very little time to make changes before they must
begin data collection and reporting.
6. DOL has not provided guidance in a timely manner for states to
implement changes. |
Recommendations:
1. Consider alternative approaches to reach the goals of the new
reporting system, including (a) ongoing consultations with key stakeholders,
(b) implementing changes in phases, and (c) pilot testing and evaluating
changes before full implementation.
2. Help states and local areas develop the capacity to track all
jobseekers in a consistent manner using one-stop services.
3. Use the first year of implementation as a test phase and work
with states to identify promising practices in collecting and reporting this
data; provide technical assistance to states that do not have this
capacity. |
Actions Taken:
1. As an alternative approach, DOL implemented revised reporting
requirements on current Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data
(WIASRD). States began implementing these changes as of July 1, 2005 and
collecting baseline data during PY 05. This move was intended to
facilitate the reporting of common performance measures across DOLs
employment and training programs.
2. Through the newly revised WIASRD, DOL will be able to capture
information on all participants who receive training in each program year, not
just those who exit the program. DOL cited past consultation with
stakeholders, and will continue to consult with and provide technical
assistance to representatives of the State and local workforce system.
3. DOL is conducting a feasibility study in three States and two
local areas to examine the changes needed at the state and local levels to
meeting the proposed data collection requirements as originally proposed in the
July 2004 Federal Register. This will be completed during FY
2007. |
Actions Remaining: ETA is continuing to work
with State agencies to develop a more complete reporting system that will
provide greater comparability and understanding of performance information by
using the same definitions for the measures, and enhanced information about all
services provided. |
Expected Completion:
1. This will be an ongoing action. |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/new.items/d05539.pdf.
|
5. Issue: The quality and outcomes of
programs in the nations apprenticeship system and DOLs
oversight |
Program Area: ETA Apprenticeships
Performance Goal: Goal 05-1.1A
Strengthen the registered apprenticeship system to meet the training needs of
business and workers in the 21st Century. |
Report Title: Labor Can Better Use Data to
Target Oversight (GAO-05-886)
Date Completed: August 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: DOL will need to improve
oversight of apprenticeship programs. |
Findings:
1. Labors monitoring of programs it directly oversees has
been limited. In 2004 Labor reviewed only four percent of programs in the
23 states where it has direct oversight.
2. Limited staff constrained DOLs ability to do more
reviews.
3. DOL has not employed its database to generate information
indicative of program performance, such as completion rates.
4. Labor does not regularly review council-monitored states or
collect data from them that would allow for a national picture of
apprenticeships.
5. Formal reviews by DOL have been infrequent and not necessarily
useful. |
Recommendations:
1. Labor should better utilize its database for oversight
particularly for apprenticeship programs with expected future labor
shortages.
2. Labor should develop a cost effective strategy for collecting
data from council-monitored states for selected occupations.
3. Labor should conduct is reviews of apprenticeship activities in
states that regulate their own programs on a regular basis to ensure that state
activities are in accord with those requirements set forth by federal law, and
offer substantive feedback. |
Actions Taken:
1. The Department concurs with GAOs recommendation on better
utilizing the database. ETA will use its existing data resources, as well
as data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), to identify occupations with
skill shortages to help ETA better target Apprenticeship program performance
and oversight activities.
2. In order to have the most complete national apprenticeship data
possible, efforts underway have resulted in two additional State Apprenticeship
Agency (SAA) states agreeing to participate in Registered Apprenticeship
Information System (RAIS). State of Kentucky started using RAIS in June
2005, and North Carolina is currently in the process of converting to RAIS.
3. ETA staff conducted and completed 14 SAA state reviews and 13
project reviews, including the District of Columbia during Fiscal Year 2005.
4. The Department agrees with the recommendation, and plans to
offer substantive feedback to states after reviews.
5. ETA instituted an Apprentice Electronic Registration process
for RAIS in October 2004. This new feature is offered to SAA states as a
cost-effective measure to improve data integrity and efficiency of
apprenticeship data collection because the sponsor will enter the data.
ETA has been in negotiations with five SAA states since this process went
on-line. |
Actions Remaining:
1. ETA will seek input from DOLs Advisory Committee on
Apprenticeship regarding industry labor shortages. ETA will expand its
use of the Registered Apprenticeship Information System (RAIS) indicators along
with implementation of WebCEO, a data mining tool.
2. Encouraged by early successes of Kentucky and North Carolina,
ETA expects that other states will join RAIS. Targeted resources are
being utilized to make this a priority for the Department.
3. The Departments goal is to complete the remainder of
reviews in SAA states.
4. Final reports of the SAA reviews will provide additional
feedback and technical assistance. |
Expected Completion:
1. End of FY 2007
2. End of FY 2007
3. End of FY 2006
4. End of FY 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-886.
|
6. Issue: Understanding what supports the
workforce development system needs to provide universal access to services for
people with disabilities. |
Program Area: ODEP
Performance Goal: Goal 05-1.1B
Provide national leadership to increase access and employment opportunities for
youth and adults with disabilities receiving employment, training, employment
support services by developing, testing and disseminating effective
practices. |
Report Title: Case Study Research: How
People with Disabilities are Served through the Workforce Development
System
Date Completed: September 2005
Conducted By: Academy for Educational
Development (AED) |
Program Impacts: The study will document the
actual challenges faced and strategies employed by 12 state and local workforce
development systems (case study sites) in serving people with
disabilities. The identification of effective practices will be
nationally disseminated. |
Findings:
1. Leadership: Sites reported the need for effective and
active Local Workforce Investment Boards (LWIB). It is critical that
leadership at the LWIB level set the tone and direction for serving people with
disabilities.
2. Strategies of planning and support: Support from the
disability navigator grant and other support agencies is critical in serving
people with disabilities. However, there may be a caveat to this additional
support. In many sites, the Navigators are being seen as the primary referral
point for persons with disabilities.
3. Collaboration: While many sites reported positive
experience with the collaboration of their partners, vocational rehabilitation
appears to be the most problematic. In some cases, the One-Stops continue
to view VR as the automatic referral for people with disabilities.
To the extent of this belief, it is difficult for professionals to see the need
to increase their capacity to work with people with disabilities. Another area
of challenge in collaboration is the exchange of data. The sites reported that
confidentiality requirements often prevented them from sharing information.
4. Accessibility and Assistive Technology: Many sites have
made strides in making their facilities and equipment more accessible. The
staff received training in how to use assistive technology equipment. The
primary area of improvement needed is accessibility to programs. There is
little evidence of widespread efforts to make all available programs accessible
to people with disabilities.
5. Human Resources: Sites noted the need for
additional training and skill-building in the areas of connecting people to
resources, improving administrative skills, and communicating effectively with
people with disabilities.
6. Data and Quality Assurance: The sites reported
that the accountability system does not require data that accurately identifies
all of the people with disabilities served. In addition to data collection, the
sites experience a tremendous pressure to provide positive outcomes to satisfy
the performance measures. This has caused an unintentional notion among the
sites which encourages the pre-screen of people with disabilities
in order to select those that will satisfy the performance measures. |
Recommendations:
1. Review all current LWIB professional development curriculums
and training activities for LWIB members. Develop a national curriculum
for LWIB members which require training on how to serve people with
disabilities.
2. Define the role of Navigators. Clearly state that they are to
provide consultative services to other staff and not to provide direct services
to customers.
3. Initiate efforts to bring to scale the similar support services
deemed to be effective.
4. Develop and disseminate concise descriptions regarding
Vocational Rehabilitations order of selection process for serving
individuals with disabilities to WIA partner agencies.
5. Develop the capacity of all WIA and other agencies within the
workforce development system, both at state and local levels, to work
effectively with individuals with disabilities.
6. Develop federal policy that allows for the sharing of
information only for the purpose of improvement in service delivery.
7. Require all sites to carry out a comprehensive review and, if
necessary, modification of their operating procedures to ensure
accessibility.
8. Continue professional development for staff, in regard to
effectively communicating with individuals with disabilities and skills such as
resource mapping, cross-agency collaboration and service delivery, and
disability etiquette.
9. Increase the scope of training providers to other disability
specific organizations and agencies such as Independent Living Centers, Parent
Training and Information Centers, and educational facilities.
10. Implement a pilot data collection project designed to collect
data that would present a more comprehensive profile and an accurate count of
individuals with disabilities being served.
11. Develop and pilot alternative performance measures that are
enhanced to allow for the complexities of serving individuals with
disabilities. |
Actions Taken: No actions taken.
|
Actions Remaining:
1. Since the report is newly completed, the program
is now beginning to review the recommendations and determine the next
steps.
2. ODEP will provide a briefing to the interagency workgroup
composed of ODEP, ETA, and OASAMs Civil Rights Center.
3. The interagency workgroup will determine how to use the
information from the report as they develop a strategic plan to increase
accessibility of workforce development programs, as recommended in a 2005
report from GAO. |
Expected Completion:
1. December 2005
2. December 2005
3. June 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained from Richard L. Horne, Ed.D, Supervisory Research
Analyst, ODEP, 200 Constitution Ave., NW, Room S-1303, Washington, D.C.
20210; (202) 693-7880. |
7. Issue: The need for a web-based tool to
help transitioning service members find civilian employment |
Program Area: VETS
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1D
Improve employment outcomes for veterans who receive One-Stop and homeless
veterans program services |
Report Title: Feasibility Assessment of a
Web-Based Career Guidance Tool for Transitioning Military Service Members
Date Completed: June 2005
Conducted By: Personnel Decisions Research
Institute |
Program Implication: Since no single existing
web-based tool meets the needs of transitioning service members and veterans,
it will be necessary to customize a tool that will include career tips, a
search function and details on civilian occupations. |
Findings:
1. There is a need for a career guidance tool for transitioning
service members.
2. It is feasible to design a tool that would meet the specific
career information needs of key groups.
3. It is feasible both from a content and a technology
standpoint to develop and implement such a tool. |
Recommendations:
1. It is important to produce and implement a useful product that
serves the needs of key stakeholders as quickly as possible, with features
requiring longer-term research and development added later.
2. To build a successful tool, it is critical to have a solid
understanding of service members needs and to gather feedback from them
at several points in the development process.
3. Develop strategies to promote the use of the Career Guidance
Tool.
4. The tool must be maintained and updated; regular data updates
from the Defense Management Center will be critical for developing and
maintaining search capabilities. |
Actions Taken: Findings have been shared with
the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs |
Actions Remaining: Review with other agencies
to determine next steps. |
Expected Completion: June 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained by contacting Veterans Employment and Training
Service, FPB S-1325, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20210, or by
calling 202-693-4700. |
8. Issue: A new performance accountability
system for the Disabled Veterans Outreach Program (DVOP) and the Local
Veterans' Employment Representative (LVER) |
Program Area: VETS
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1D
Improve employment outcomes for veterans who receive One-Stop and homeless
veterans program services |
Report Title: Preliminary Observations on
Changes to Veterans' Employment Programs (GAO-05-662T)
Date Completed: May 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: More work needs to be
done to implement a minimum standard for veterans entering employment that all
states will be expected to meet. Until the standard becomes available, it
is difficult to assess how well DVOP and LVER staff are performing.
|
Findings:
1. VETS has established newly defined roles for DVOP and LVER
staff as required by the Jobs for Veterans Act (JVA) and provided guidance and
training.
2. Almost half of the states plan to use JVA authority to assign
DVOP staff on a part-time basis.
3. Integrating DVOP and LVER staff into one-stop centers remains a
long-standing challenge.
4. VETS has implemented changes to its system for monitoring state
compliance; work continues to determine how best to use the monitoring
information to improve program performance. |
Recommendations: None made. |
Actions Taken:
1. Findings discussed at the VETS National Office level and with a
special VETS workgroup that addresses DVOP and LVER issues.
2. VETS has committed to set a national minimum performance
level under the new Common Measures.
3. VETS has initiated a review of its grant based measures
system.
4. VETS anticipates a revamped set of measures during PY 2005.
|
Actions Remaining:
1. VETS plans to conduct a nationwide study of DVOP/LVER programs
in order to develop programmatic initiative recommendations for better
integration into one-stop centers. |
Expected Completion:
1. September 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-662T.
|
9. Issue: Assessing the effectiveness of the
Homeless Veterans Reintegration Project (HVRP) |
Program Area: VETS
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1D
Improve employment outcomes for veterans who receive One-Stop and homeless
veterans program services |
Report Title: Job Retention Goal Under
Development for DOLs Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program
(GAO-05-654T)
Date Completed: May 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: In order to assess the
effectiveness of HVRP prior to reauthorization, the program needs to be able to
develop and implement a goal for employment retention. |
Findings:
1. DOLs expenditures for HVRP grants have increased from
$9.5 million in fiscal year 2000 to over $18 million in fiscal year 2004.
2. DOL estimates that it will expend over $20 million each year on
HVRP grants in 2005 and 2006.
3. DOL has not developed a performance goal for a job retention
measure and has not provided the Congress with statutorily required reports on
program effectiveness. |
Recommendations:
1. Because employment retention is crucial to the overall success
of transitioning veterans from homelessness, it is important that DOL continue
to develop a realistic performance goal for employment retention to assess the
success of HVRP. |
Actions Taken:
1. VETS is collecting and analyzing retention data for HVRP during
PY 2004.
2. VETS has informed HVRP grantees of the need to place homeless
veterans in jobs with maximum employment retention potential. |
Actions Remaining:
1. VETS will use the retention data that is being collected to
establish a baseline for future performance targets and tracking.
2. VETS will issue guidance for implementing the new performance
targets. |
Expected Completion:
1. July 2006
2. July 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-654T.
|
10. Issue: Meeting the needs of service
members leaving the military |
Program Area: VETS Transition Assistance Program
(TAP)
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1D
Improve employment outcomes for veterans who receive One-Stop and homeless
veterans program services |
Report Title: Enhanced Services Could
Improve Transition Assistance for Reserves and National Guard (GAO-05-544)
Date Completed: May 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: The program needs to
determine when and where to offer the TAP for members of the Reserves and
National Guard, especially since they have been called to active duty in
greater numbers than at any time since the Korean War. |
Findings:
1. The federal agencies have taken actions to improve TAPs
content and increase participation.
2. TAP faces challenges serving Reserve and National Guard members
because of their rapid demobilization.
3. DOL is assessing its employment workshop curriculum using focus
groups and survey data.
4. DOL provides some workshops and briefings overseas.
5. DOL has pilot programs in three states that will offer
employment workshops after members return home. |
Recommendations: DOD, in
conjunction with DOL and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs should
determine what demobilizing Reserve and National Guard members need to make a
smooth transition and explore options to enhance their participation. |
Actions Taken: DOL is participating in
a DOD led effort to determine the best way to provide services to Reserve and
transitioning National Guard members. |
Actions Remaining: Collaborating with the
Department of Defense in order to report back to Congress. |
Expected Completion:
1. December 2005 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-544.
|
11. Issue: Developing baseline values for
efficiency and earnings gain measures for veterans |
Program Area: VETS
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.1D
Improve employment outcomes for veterans who receive One-Stop and homeless
veterans program services |
Report Title: Developing Efficiency and
Earnings Gain Measures
Date Completed: September 2005
Conducted By: SRA International, Inc.
|
Program Impacts: Obtaining and analyzing data
on the post-program earnings experiences of veterans served by the Labor
Exchange will enable VETS to establish baselines and future targets for program
performance. |
Findings:
1. Developing baseline values for efficiency measures had to avoid
potential double counting of veterans because both a DVOP and an LVER serve the
same veteran.
2. Job seeker data were not available prior to PY 2002 to identify
veterans served by DVOP or LVER.
3. A number of states appear to have different strategies and
thresholds for reporting who received staff-assisted services, a key tracking
variable.
4. Data suggest a positive baseline value for veterans served by
DVOP or LVER, but it is difficult to say precisely what that positive value
should be.
5. Additional analyses, perhaps conducted by States, can provide
further insights. Selection of zero as the baseline value for average
earnings gains may not change, but one could select it with greater
confidence. |
Recommendations:
Good candidates for efficiency measures are:
1. Cost per individual who received a staff-assisted service (all
participants).
2. Wagner-Peyser cost per individual who received a staff-assisted
service (non-veteran).
3. DVOP/LVER cost per veteran who received a staff-assisted
service.
4. Cost per individual who entered employment (all
participants).
5. Wagner-Peyser cost per individual who entered employment
(non-veteran).
6. DVOP/LVER cost per veteran who entered employment.
|
Actions Taken:
1. Background information from the study was utilized in deciding
on an efficiency measure for the DVOP/LVER program.
2. "Cost per veteran participant" has been adopted for immediate
implementation as the efficiency measure for the DVOP/LVER program. |
Actions Remaining: Once a Common
Measures definition is adopted, VETS will use the studys findings on
"earnings gain" measures to establish baselines. |
Expected Completion:
1. September 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained by contacting Veterans Employment and Training
Service, FPB S-1325, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20210, or by
calling 202-693-4700. |
12. Issue: The compliance of Job Corps
contractors with laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to
operating costs |
Program Area: ETA Job Corps
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.2B
Improve educational achievements of Job Corps students and increase
participation of Job Corps graduates in employment and education. |
Report Title: Performance Audit of Job Corps Center
Operating Costs (OIG 03-05-004-03-370)
Date Completed: March 2005
Conducted By: OIG |
Program Impacts: ETA is taking steps to
ensure that Job Corps Centers financial reports accurately reflect
operating costs and expenses. |
Findings:
1. Overall, Job Corps contractors are complying with laws,
regulations, and Job Corps policies and procedures related to center operating
costs.
2. Three areas of noncompliance that related to specific
contractor operations were identified:
- Inadequate accounting systems
- Discrepancies between the ETA-2110 and the Public Voucher
- Compensation in excess of statutory limitations.
3. At several centers, journal entries were unauthorized,
inadequately supported or incorrectly recorded. |
Recommendations:
1. ETA should require the contractor for the North Texas Job Corps
Center (JCC) to:
- refund $786,977 because these costs were not shown to be
reasonable and allowable
- use a current cost method to prepare the ETA-2110 financial
report
- take the necessary steps to ensure there is support for the
amounts reported on the ETA-2110.
2. ETA should ensure that:
- financial reports and billings by the former contractor for the
Homestead JCC are accurate and complete
- Homestead JCC staff receive training on how to accurately
prepare the monthly ETA-2110
- controls are implemented so that all future submissions are
properly reconciled to the Public Voucher and the books of account.
3. ETA should require the contractor for the Treasure Island JCC
to refund $38,235 paid in excess of Executive Level II compensation limits.
4. ETA should ensure that each center has written policies and
procedures related to the preparation, documentation, recording, and approval
of all journal entries made to the centers books of account and that
corrective actions are taken by the five JCCs to address the deficiencies
reported. |
Actions Taken:
1. Job Corps was reimbursed by North Texas Job Corps Center for
costs that were unreasonable. The Dallas Regional Office is working with
the center operator for North Texas JCC to use current cost methods to prepare
financial reports.
2. A trainer was also brought in to the North Texas Job Corps
Center from an outside source to train and work with center to bring them into
compliance.
3. The Contracting Officer for Homestead JCC now requires that
center operator implement controls to ensure all future submissions are
properly reconciled to the Public Vouchers and the books of account.
4. The National Office of Job Corps is currently developing online
and video training for all center operators to utilize with staff on financial
reporting, particularly the 2110 financial reports. There will be
specific emphasis to make sure that the Homestead JCC takes part in the
training.
5. Job Corps was reimbursed by Treasure Island Job Corps Center
for costs paid to the Center Director in excess of Executive Level II
compensation.
6. The Regional Office Contracting Officers and Project Managers
for the five centers noted now require that the operators have written policies
and procedures for the preparation, documentation, recording, and approval of
all journal entries made to the centers books of account and that
corrective actions be taken. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Online training will be conducted with centers to assure proper
preparation of the ETA-2110. |
Expected Completion:
1. December 2005 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.oig.dol.gov/public/reports/oa/2005/03-05-004-03-370.pdf.
|
13. Issue: The reliability of
performance outcomes reported by center operators and Career Transition
Services (CTS) providers |
Program Area: ETA Job Corps
Performance Goal: Goal 04-1.2B
Improve educational achievements of Job Corps students and increase
participation of Job Corps graduates in employment and education. |
Report Title: Job Corps Performance
Measurement Outcomes Report (OIG 09-04-004-03-370)
Date Completed: September 2004
Conducted By: OIG |
Program Impacts: Job Corps has implemented
procedures to correct management control weaknesses. |
Findings:
1. Job Corps management controls over performance data reliability
do not adequately address the increased financial risk created by the May 2002
implementation of performance-based contracting.
2. Job Corps did not effectively validate reported performance
outcomes during onsite assessments conducted by Job Corps Regional Offices.
3. Job Corps written procedures do not require regional
staff conducting onsite assessments to test the validity of reported
performance outcomes. |
Recommendations:
1. Test performance outcomes data reported by center and Career
Transition Services providers during each onsite review using statistical
sampling methodologies.
2. Retain records that document the testing performed and the
basis for any conclusions.
3. Take appropriate actions to recover any overpayments made to
the contractor as a result of misreported performance data. |
Actions Taken:
1. Job Corps has taken steps to amend the Program Assessment Guide
to include mandatory activities for testing the validity and reliability of
performance outcome data.
2. Job Corps has developed and is testing a documentation system
in support of the performance data evaluation testing model.
3. Job Corps is working to establish procedures and parameters for
recovery of identified overpayment made to a contractor as a result of
misreported performance data. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Finalization of the documentation system and training of
Federal and Regional staff.
2. Finalization and implementation of procedures and parameters
for recovery of identified overpayments. |
Expected Completion:
1. October 2005
2. January 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.oig.dol.gov/public/reports/oa/2004/09-04-004-03-370.pdf
|
14. Issue: Status of the BLS Consumer
Price Index (CPI) information security program |
Program Area: BLS Consumer Price Index
System
Performance Goal: Goal 05-1.3A
Improve information available to decision-makers on labor market conditions,
and price and productivity changes. |
Report Title: Federal Information
Security Management Act Audit of the Consumer Price Index System
(OIG-23-05-005-11-001)
Date Completed: March 2005
Conducted By: OIG |
Program Impacts: Effective controls over
information systems are essential to ensuring the protection and availability
of Federal government economic indicator data. Under the Federal
Information Security Management Act, OIG evaluated the effectiveness of the
management, operational and technical security controls of the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) System. |
Findings:
1. The CPI contingency plan is in draft format and has not been
tested. |
Recommendations:
1. Finalize, approve, and distribute the contingency plan to
key personnel.
2. Make sure that all recovery team members are aware of
their roles and responsibilities for system recovery.
3. Ascertain that the equipment necessary to support the CPI
contingency plan is purchased and placed into the recovery facility.
4. Test the Continuity of Operations Plan in accordance with DOL
and National Institute of Standards and Technology requirements. |
Actions Taken:
1. BLS has made progress toward finalizing and approving the
CPI Contingency Plan. The plan has been completed sufficiently to allow
for testing. Updates are made to the plan when additional information is
presented.
2. Equipment necessary to support the CPI contingency plan
has been purchased and placed into the recovery facility.
3. The CPI Continuity of Operation Plan testing under their
current technical testing plan has been completed. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Once the CPI Contingency Plan has been finalized and
approved, it will be distributed to key personnel.
2. Training for recovery team members will begin by the end
of the fiscal year. |
Expected Completion:
1. December 2005
2. September 2005 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Division of
Management Systems, Room 4080, 2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, Washington, DC
20212, or by calling 202-691-7628. |
GOAL 2: A SECURE WORKFORCE |
15. Issue: The impact of DOL compliance
assistance strategies |
Program Area: ESA WHD
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.1A
American workplaces legally employ and compensate workers.
|
Report Title:Findings from Employers Pocket Guide on
Youth Employment: YouthRules! Telephone Survey
Date Completed: December
2004
Conducted By: Westat |
Program Implication: Identifying cost effective ways
of providing employers with information on youth employment rules impacts WHD's
ability to ensure safe workplaces for young workers and to educate employers of
the youth employment laws. |
Findings:
1. The information contained within the evaluated compliance
assistance publication was not relevant to the majority of businesses in the
census because they did not employ young workers.
2. Those who read the brochure found it valuable and thought it
offered good compliance tips.
3. A small percentage of employers who where mailed the guide
hired workers younger than 18 years and reported reading the guide. |
Recommendations: None made. |
Actions Taken:
1. Evaluation findings were communicated throughout the
organization.
2. WHDs field offices were encouraged to rely less heavily
on non-targeted mass mailings as a form of compliance assistance, and directed
to incorporate alternative methods of outreach into local initiatives during
the annual planning phase. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Work completed; no additional actions planned at this
time. |
Expected Completion:
NA |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained from Wage-Hour Division, Employment Standards
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, FPB S-3502, 200 Constitution Ave.,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210, or by calling 202-693-0051. |
16. Issue: The impact of DOL compliance
assistance strategies |
Program Area: ESA WHD
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.1A
American workplaces legally employ and compensate workers.
|
Report Title: The Fair Labor Standards Act:
Executive, Administrative, and Professional Exemptions Seminar
Evaluation
Date Completed: May
2005
Conducted By: Westat |
Program Implications: Identifying cost effective
ways of educating employers about the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) affects
WHDs ability to ensure workers receive fair and legal compensation.
Developing clear, useful compliance materials promotes compliance and an
accurate understanding of the law. |
Findings:
1. The seminar was informative and prompted attendees to perform
additional research on overtime security laws.
2. Most respondents reported learning some new information
on all topics covered by the seminar.
3. Over 75 percent reported being satisfied with the seminar.
|
Recommendations:
1. Strengthen the seminar by increasing the number of examples
presented and broadening the topic coverage.
2. Offer two versions of the presentation introductory and
advanced.
3. Ensure availability of prompt email and telephone responses to
questions regarding the seminar.
4. Ensure the Web site is up-to-date regarding the exemption
rule. |
Actions Taken:
1. WHD considered possible future improvements to the FairPay
Seminar, which would include industry specific examples of compliance issues as
new policies are defined or clarified or as new compliance problems are
identified through the agencys compliance efforts.
2. WHD verified that the FairPay Web site is up-to-date and that
email and telephone reply process were in place.
3. WHD has developed and disseminated through the organization
abridged versions of the seminar. |
Actions Remaining: No additional actions planned at
this time. |
Expected Completion: NA |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained from Wage-Hour Division, Employment Standards
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, FPB S-3502, 200 Constitution Ave.,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210, or by calling 202-693-0051. |
17. Issue: Budget and performance
integration |
Program Area: ESA WHD
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.1A
American workplaces legally employ and compensate workers.
|
Report Title: Budget and Performance
Integration Model Evaluation
Date Completed: October 2004
Conducted By: ICF Consulting |
Program Implications: Refining a model to integrate
WHDs budget and performance will improve cost effective management of
resources. |
Findings:
1. WHD is in the early stages of a successful budget and
performance integration effort and the basic processes used by the WHD budget
and performance integration model are appropriate, given the constraints under
which they operate.
2. The current WHD budget/performance integration model uses a
proportional distribution methodology to map non-investigative time and
resources to WHD program goals. This is based on the assumption that the
distribution of total costs is similar to the investigator hours
distribution, determined by the database. In the absence of an activity-based
cost system, this is a reasonable approach to allocate non investigative time
and resources, but does not accurately reflect total costs required to achieve
performance goals.
3. The current WHD model does not take full advantage of the
capabilities of spreadsheet technology and may not utilize all of the actual
data currently collected and available from existing systems. |
Recommendations:
1. Include output measures in the model, in order to calculate
unit costs for activities.
2. Use enhanced unit-cost data by calculating the fully loaded
unit costs and direct unit costs of output measures, in order to determine if
resources would be better spent on one performance goal or another.
3. Use object class codes to improve the precision of the
allocation process.
4. Distinguish direct costs from other costs in the model to
consider the impact of shifting resources from one performance category to
another to meet performance goals.
5. Calculate regional costs and track performance throughout the
year against the budget to better evaluate performance at the regional
level.
6. Document the mechanics of the model and the data relationships
to ensure that information is available to enable others to understand the
mechanics of the model and the distribution approach.
7. Incorporate links and formulas in the model's spreadsheets to
reduce data entry time and errors.
8. Identify all contract costs and collect staff travel time;
assign them across all performance goals.
9. Incorporate the results of the DOL Cost Analysis Manager (CAM)
survey into the model.
10. Explore the advantages/disadvantages of using: (a)
dollar-weighted labor hours, (b) three-year averages, and (c) a correction step
in the model. |
Actions Taken:
1. Evaluation findings were communicated throughout the
organization; some recommendations are still under consideration, such as using
three-year averages, distinguishing between direct and other costs, and
calculating fully loaded unit costs and direct unit costs of output
measures.
2. Incorporated output measures into the model to calculate unit
costs for activities. All of the output measures developed for CAM are
incorporated into the performance budget and can be identified in the "Summary
of Performance and Resource Levels" table.
3. Used major object class codes to improve the precision of the
allocation process.
4. Incorporated the results of the CAM survey into the
model. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Document the mechanics of the model and the data relationships
to ensure that information is available to enable others to understand the
mechanics of the model and the distribution approach.
2. Incorporate links and formulas in the models spreadsheets
to reduce data entry time and errors.
3. Improve the output measures in CAM to more accurately reflect
unit costs. |
Expected Completion:
1. March 2006
2. March 2006
3. October 2005 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained from Wage-Hour Division, Employment Standards
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, FPB S-3502, 200 Constitution Ave.,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210, or by calling 202-693-0051. |
18. Issue: Assessing the connection between
the UI program and reemployment services |
Program Area: ETA UI
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.2A
Make timely and accurate benefit payments to unemployed workers, facilitate the
reemployment of Unemployment Insurance claimants, and set up Unemployment tax
accounts promptly for new employees. |
Report Title: Better Data Needed to
Assess Reemployment Services to Claimants (GAO-05-413)
Date Completed: June 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Implications: Although there are
program specific tracking systems in place, there is no single, comprehensive
database that tracks the extent to which all claimants are receiving
reemployment services (including self-services) and the outcomes of those
services. |
Findings:
1. Little data are available to gauge the extent to which UI
claimants are receiving reemployment services or about the outcomes they
achieve.
2. Information is generally collected on a program-by-program
basis or is focused on a single category of claimants. This does not allow for
a comprehensive, nationwide understanding of claimants' participation in the
broad range of reemployment services provided through federal programs nor do
they move states in the direction of having the data they need to better manage
their systems. |
Recommendations:
1. As part of the development of the ETA's Management Information
and Longitudinal Evaluation (EMILE) system, the Department should work with
states to develop a plan for considering the feasibility of requiring states to
collect more comprehensive information on UI claimants' use of reemployment
services and the outcomes achieved by claimants, including the length of time
claimants receive UI before they are reemployed. |
Actions Taken:
1. Developed a performance measure of the extent to which UI
beneficiaries become reemployed.
2. Funded 21 States to conduct in-person Reemployment and
Eligibility Assessments (REAs) with UI beneficiaries.
3. Requested additional funding for REAs in the FY 2006
budget. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Issue instructions to States for reporting reemployment
data.
2. Incorporate the reemployment measure into the performance
measurement system.
3. Collect information from nine States on the results of the
REAs.
4. Seek authority to collect data from all States funded for REA
activity. |
Expected Completion:
1. September 2005
2. April 2006
3. May 2006
4. February 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05413.pdf
|
19. Issue: Gaining a better understanding of
the UI program |
Program Area: ETA UI
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.2A
Make timely and accurate benefit payments to unemployed workers, facilitate the
reemployment of Unemployment Insurance claimants, and set up Unemployment tax
accounts promptly for new employees. |
Report Title: Unemployment Insurance.
Information on Benefit Receipt (GAO-05-291)
Date Completed: March 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Implications: The UI program,
administered by ETA in partnership with states, plays a critical role in
ensuring the financial security of Americas workforce. |
Findings:
1. About 38 percent of workers born between 1957 and 1964 received
UI at least once between 1979 and 2002, with almost half of these individuals
receiving UI benefits more than once.
2. Another 39 percent of this age group of workers were eligible
to receive UI benefits, but never did so.
3. Nine percent of all workers in this age group are estimated to
have been unemployed at least once, but were never eligible for UI benefits,
mostly because of the conditions under which they separated from their
jobs.
4. UI receipt varied by industry and occupation. |
Recommendations: None made. |
Actions Taken: NA |
Actions Remaining: NA |
Expected Completion: NA |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05291.pdf.
|
20. Issue: Difficulties obtaining
workers compensation benefits for exposure to Agent Orange |
Program Area: ESA OWCP
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.2B
Minimize impact of work-related injuries. |
Report Title: Limited Information is
Available on the Number of Civilians Exposed in Vietnam and Their Workers
Compensation Claims (GAO-05-371)
Date Completed: April 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Implications: Meeting the needs of
civilian federal employees exposed to Agent Orange during the Vietnam war may
require changes to the (a) ways claims are processed, (b) dissemination of
information to claimants, and (c) legislation. |
Findings:
1. Claimants faced many difficulties and delays because of a lack
of readily available information on how to file a claim, their Vietnam era
employers, and their exposure to Agent Orange.
2. Claimants faced processing delays caused by employers,
insurance carriers, and DOL.
3. Both DOL and private insurance carriers had difficulty
identifying the number of claims they had received, largely because they do not
assign a unique code to Agent Orange claims that would enable easy
identification. |
Recommendations:
1. DOL should enhance its processing and management of claims,
including improving the information used to track claims.
2. DOL should maintain better information on the insurance
carriers it licenses.
3. DOL should provide better information to claimants to use in
filing claims. |
Actions Taken:
1. The Longshore Case Management System (LCMS) was changed in
March 2005 to record a unique nature of injury code for Agent Orange claims, as
well as requiring that a country code for Vietnam is entered for each Agent
Orange case. The accuracy of the data entry will be subject to the
performance measures and standards currently in place.
2. The case management system for FECA is also being modified to
accommodate the new identifiers.
3. The Cleveland district office, where all special claims are
processed, has been notified of the intent to use this new identifying
information.
4. The Longshore Program Web site has been enhanced to direct
potential claimants to the existing Defense Base Act (DBA) question and answer
web page where the information and forms for submitting claims are already
available at www.dol.gov.esa/owcp/dlhwc/DBAFaqs.htm.
The DBA Frequently Asked Questions section has been specifically updated with
reference to claims arising from Agent Orange exposure in Vietnam.
5. Regarding the specific recommendation that information be
posted on Vietnam era contractors, please see the GAO findings on the lack of
surviving records with regards to Vietnam era employment records. In view
of this, we agree to preserve information we still have on Vietnam era
employment. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Most of the claims activity and records pertaining to
"Vietnam era employers" predates the automation of the Longshore Case
Management System (LCMS) by many years. The GAO reported that, "most
agency records maintained during this period were not computerized, and because
so much time has elapsed, many paper records have been destroyed and many
agency personnel knowledgeable of the period are no longer working at these
agencies." The GAO also documented similar difficulties common to the private
insurance companies which had provided the coverage under the DBA.
Nevertheless, the Longshore Program has already committed to more closely
enforce the coverage card submission requirement. An evaluation of the
Longshore database is underway and enhancements to Longshores data
capacity will result from that study. |
Expected Completion:
1. FY 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-371.
|
21. Issue: Cost to the government of
insurance coverage purchased under the Defense Base Act (DBA) |
Program Area: ESA OWCP
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.2B
Minimize impact of work-related injuries. |
Report Title:Defense Base Act Insurance: Review
Needed of Cost and Implementation Issues (GAO-05-280R)
Date Completed: April 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Implications: DOL administers the DBA
and must ensure that workers compensation benefits are provided to
employees of government contractors working at U.S. defense bases overseas.
|
Findings:
1. The number of employees required to be covered under DBA while
working in Iraq is significant. The State Department reported over 150,000
Iraqis were performing work in Iraq on U.S. government-administered
projects.
2. Conditions in Iraq, such as mixed-funding sources for contracts
and language barriers, have led to complications in implementing DBA.
3. Challenges include clarifying when DBA applies, providing
adequate and accurate information to companies and workers, monitoring
compliance, and processing claims.
4. There is confusion among federal agencies and contractors over
DBA.
5. The Department of Labor is limited in the actions it can
directly take for non-complying contractors.
6. Processing claims has been slowed by difficulty obtaining
medical and personal information because of conditions in Iraq and the need to
respect local customs. Attorneys involved in DBA issues also report difficulty
obtaining necessary documentation, including contracts and marriage records, to
file and report claims. |
Recommendations:
1. GAO suggests that Congress consider requiring the Director of
OMB to determine, in coordination with DOD, DOL, the State Department, and the
U.S. Agency for International Development, current and future needs, options,
and risks associated with DBA insurance.
2. The agencies involved in the coordinated effort should identify
necessary actions, including legislative changes. |
Actions Taken:
1. The Department of Labor has express a willingness to work with
any other agencies on matters of DBA coverage should Congress determine that an
interagency initiative is required. |
Actions Remaining:
1. To be determined by congressional action. |
Expected Completion:1. Determined by
congressional action. |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/new.items/d05280r.pdf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24. Issue: Providing timely
information on private pension and other employee benefit plans |
Program Area: EBSA and PBGC
Performance Goal: Goal 05-2.2C
Enhance Pension and Health Benefit Security. Goal 05-2.2D Improve
service to pension plan customers. |
Report Title: Government Actions Could Improve the
Timeliness and Content of Form 5500 Pension Information (GAO-05-491)
Date Completed: June 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: DOL will need to coordinate
with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and PBGC to overcome processing delays
and the lack of critical information on multiemployer plans. |
Findings:
1. Statutory reporting requirements, processing issues, and
current DOL practices affect the timeliness of the release of Form 5500
information about private pension plans, resulting in a three year lag.
2. Form 5500 is filed 98 percent of the time in a paper format.
These take more than three times as long as electronic filings to process and
have twice as many errors.
3. The release of Form 5500 information in the research file is
further delayed because DOL waits until all filings for that plan year are
processed, which can take up to two years.
4. Form 5500 still lacks key information that could better assist
DOL, IRS, and PBGC in identifying and tracking all plans over
time and monitoring multiemployer plans.
|
Recommendations:
1. Require electronic filing of Form 5500.
2. Modify DOL processing methods to improve timeliness, reduce
errors, and maximize efficiency.
3. Evaluate ways to speed up the release of the research file,
including making interim information available prior to the final release to
the public.
4. Modify Form 5500 to collect additional information on
multiemployer pension plans. |
Actions Taken:
1. The Department of Labor, the IRS, and PBGC are working to
implement a mandatory, wholly electronic system for the receipt and processing
of Form 5500 data to improve timeliness and reduce errors.
2. PBGC is actively pursuing actions to obtain much of the
multiemployer data mentioned by GAO. A decision, however, has not yet
been made to add these questions to the Form 5500. |
Actions Remaining:
1. DOL, IRS, and PBGC will continue to work to implement
electronic Form 5500
processing |
Expected Completion:
1. Work will continue throughout FY
2006. |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-491.
|
GOAL 3: QUALITY WORKPLACES |
25. Issue: Improving performance monitoring
and the selection of cases for inspection |
Program Area: OSHA
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.1A
Reduce work-related fatalities. Goal 05-3.1B Reduce work-related
injuries and illnesses. |
Report Title: Safety in the Meat and Poultry
Industry, while Improving, Could Be Further Strengthened (GAO-05-96)
Date Completed: January 2005
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Impacts: Program performance could be
better assessed and inspections could be targeted more effectively if changes
are made to data systems. |
Findings:
1. The meat and poultry industry still has one of the highest
rates of injury and illness of any industry. The most common injuries are cuts,
strains, cumulative trauma, and injuries sustained from falls, but more serious
injuries, such as fractures and amputation, also occur.
2. Evidence suggests that OSHAs efforts have a positive
impact on injury/illness rates in meat and poultry plants.
3. OSHA could improve its selection process for inspection by
considering plants injury and illness rates over time.
4. It is difficult to assess the effectiveness of OSHAs
efforts because the agency does not assign a unique identifier to each plant,
making it hard to compare the data on injury/illness rates with information
collected through inspections. |
Recommendations:
1. OSHA should consider adjusting its criteria for selecting
plants for inspection and audit to include those that have had large reductions
in their injury and illness rates over time.
2. OSHA should change the way it collects data on plants in order
to make it easier to measure the impact of its programs. |
Actions Taken:
1. OSHA has solicited public comments on its Site Specific
Targeting (SST) program; we are currently reviewing comments from industry
associations, employers and safety and health professionals. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Upon completion of the review of the SST comments, OSHA will
consider expanding the criteria for SST inspections in the meatpacking
industry.
2. OSHA will consider expanding data-collection efforts for
multiple years for trend analysis, inclusion of recordkeeping submittals to
capture contract workers illness and injuries, linking the IMIS and other data
processing systems to come up with unique identifiers. |
Expected Completion:
1. April 2006
2. FY 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-96.
|
26. Issue: Identifying Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratories (NRTL) to perform safety testing/certifications.
|
Program Area: OSHA
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.1A
Reduce work-related fatalities. Goal 05-3.1B Reduce work-related
injuries and illnesses. |
Report Title: OSHA Correctly Denied ED&Ds
Incomplete NRTL Application (OIG 05-05-002-10-001)
Date Completed: March 2005
Conducted By: OIG |
Program Impacts: Changes to Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratories (NRTL) review and audit procedures will improve
OSHAs process of selecting organizations to conduct safety testing and
certification. |
Findings:
1. OSHAs decision to deny Education Design and Development,
Inc. (ED&D) NRTL recognition was justified because ED&D did not meet
all the elements required for recognition.
2. OSHAs records adequately supported its decision to grant
recognition to several organizations ED&D alleged were given recognition
inappropriately.
3. OSHA permitted some applicants to self-certify they were
independent and did not verify these statements.
4. OSHA did not appropriately handle ED&Ds application
in two areas, but these deficiencies did not adversely affect the outcome of
the application. |
Recommendations:
1. OSHA should make independence review a mandatory part of
application reviews and periodic audits.
2. Modify current policy to ensure that all areas related to an
NRTLs recognition are reviewed at least once during each five-year
recognition period.
3. Review two NRTLs current business practices to ensure
conformance with the independence requirement.
4. Ensure that incomplete applications are closed.
5. Maintain a log of contacts with the applicants and NRTLs.
6. Develop procedures to acknowledge all requests for
feedback. |
Actions Taken:
1. OSHA is revising and supplementing its procedures for verifying
an NRTLs independence.
2. OSHA is developing procedures to ensure review of NRTLs
recognition requirements every five years.
3. OSHA procedures will be adhered to ensure that incomplete
applications are closed.
4. OSHA is now using a phone log for tracking substantive contact
with NRTL applicants and will develop tracking tools to capture all contacts
with applicants or other parties.
6. OSHA is augmenting its current controls for acknowledging all
requests for feedback. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Final implementation of new policy and revised procedures for
reviewing independence and other areas.
2. Review of the independence of two NRTLs.
3. Final implementation of chronological log referred to in
Actions Taken #4.
4. Final enhancements to procedures for feedback request
acknowledgement, referred to in Actions Taken #5.
5. Review of two specified NRTLs for independence are
planned. |
Expected Completion:
1. March 2006
2. September 2006
3. September 2006
4. September 2006
5. September 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.oig.dol.gov/public/reports/oa/2005/05-05-002-10-001.pdf.
|
27. Issue: Evaluation required by Section
610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and Section 5 of Executive Order 12866
|
Program Area: OSHA
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.1A
Reduce work-related fatalities. Goal 05-3.1B Reduce work-related
injuries and illnesses |
Report Title: Regulatory Flexibility
Act Review of the Occupational Safety and Health Administrations Ethylene
Oxide Standard.
Date Completed: March 2005.
Conducted By: OSHA |
Program Impacts: Regulatory review indicates
the ethylene oxide standard has been effective in reducing exposures and
achieving health benefits. |
Findings: OSHA determined that the
Ethylene Oxide standard should be continued without change. |
Recommendations:
1. As a result of the review and comments received, OSHA will
enhance its compliance assistance materials on the subject. |
Actions Taken:
1. OSHA has initiated a review of its guidance materials in order
to enhance compliance assistance information |
Actions Remaining:
1. Development and publication of clarified guidance material.
|
Expected Completion:
1. December 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the
complete report can be obtained at http://www.osha.gov/dea/lookback.html#Completed%20Lookback%20Reviews
|
28. Issue: The impact of OSHAs Voluntary
Protection Programs (VPP) |
Program Area: OSHA
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.1A
Reduce work-related fatalities. Goal 05-3.1B Reduce work-related
injuries and illnesses |
Report Title: Evaluation of the
Voluntary Protection Program
Date Completed: September 2005
Conducted By: The Gallup Organization
|
Program Impacts: This report provides OSHA
with models and formulas to project the participation benefits of the Voluntary
Protection Program (VPP). With this information, OSHA is able to measure
VPPs value accurately, demonstrate the programs benefits, and
promote program growth. |
Findings:
1. The draft study indicates that VPP sites may have a leveraging
effect in their dissemination of safety and health knowledge through outreach
and mentoring conducted by the sites to other establishments in like
industries, both within their own corporations and outside.
2. The draft study measured injury and illness rates at the
respondent VPP sites and documented overall reductions from the time of the
early decision and inception phase to full participation in the VPP
process. These data will be available to OSHA for further analysis, in
response to the GAO recommendation that OSHA obtain data on VPP sites for
analysis.
3. The draft study documented a model and provided data from a
limited number of responding sites, estimating the costs and benefits of
VPP. This model could be used as the basis for a broader sampling and
in-depth evaluation of the national program. |
Recommendations:
1. OSHA should continue to use and build upon the data gathered
for this evaluation to strengthen the data analysis capabilities for the VPP
and other voluntary programs. |
Actions Taken:
1. Preparations are being made to disseminate the study to VPP
managers for analysis and opinion.
2. Information from the study will be presented to companies
expressing interest in the program. |
Actions Remaining:
1. OSHA will consider broader uses of the studys models and
formulas for future standardized assessments of VPP effectiveness. |
Expected Completion:
1. 4th Quarter, FY 2006. |
Additional Information: A copy of the
complete report can be obtained at http://www.osha.gov.
|
29. Issue: Providing services to and
tracking injury, illness, and fatality rates for independent
contractors |
Program Area: MSHA
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.1A
Reduce work-related fatalities. Goal 05-3.1B Reduce work-related
injuries and illnesses |
Report Title: Evaluation of the Mine
Safety and Health Administrations Efforts to Deliver Services and Support
to Miners Working for Independent Contractors
Date Completed: September 2005
Conducted By: Research Triangle Institute
(RTI) |
Program Impacts: The increased use of
independent contractors by mine operators creates unique workplace safety and
health challenges. Consequently, MSHA is seeking ways improve the
delivery of its enforcement, educational, and technical support activities at
independent contractor operations. |
Findings:
1. Mine operators may use independent contractors to lower their
costs and liability, and increase staffing flexibility.
2. Fatality rates for contractor employees are higher.
However, accidents and non-fatal injuries may be underreported in some cases,
and there is incomplete information on contractor employee work hours at the
mine level.
3. Contractor work on mine property is transient and temporary in
some cases, and some independent contractors may have multiple mine
identification numbers. These factors, combined with the lack of
contractor employment data by mine site, limits MSHAs ability to provide
compliance and educational assistance to independent contractors and accurately
measure program impacts. |
Recommendations: None made. |
Actions Taken: MSHA is developing plans
to improve its ability to obtain more accurate data on the hours worked by
independent contractors and for delivering support and services to independent
contractors. |
Actions Remaining:
1. MSHA will respond to the GAO recommendation to collect hours
worked by independent contractors at the mine-specific level.
2. MSHA will develop a plan to improve services to independent
contractors. |
Expected Completion:
1. FY 2006
2. FY 2006 (MSHA revised Strategic Plan) |
Additional Information: A copy of the
complete interim report can be obtained from the Mine Safety and
Health Administration at 1100 Wilson Boulevard Street, 21st Floor,
Arlington, VA 22209-3939 or by calling 202-693-9607. |
30. Issue: Selecting establishments for
compliance reviews |
Program Area: ESA OFCCP
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.2A
Federal contractors achieve equal opportunity workplaces.
|
Report Title: An Evaluation of
OFCCPs Equal Opportunity (EO) Survey
Date Completed: March 2005
Conducted By: Abt Associates Inc. |
Program Implication: Targeting establishments that
are most likely to be involved in systemic discrimination should improve the
cost effectiveness of efforts to increase regulatory compliance. |
Findings:
1. Four main predictor variables seem to be related to the
presence or absence of system discrimination:
- whether the establishment reported more than 200 full-time
employees
- the ratio of average tenure among minority employees to average
tenure among non-minority employees
- the absolute value of the difference between the proportion of
female employees and the proportion of male employees in EEO-1 Category 3
(technicians)
- the ratio of female-to-male tenure ratio to the median of those
ratios in the establishments comparison group.
2. The model fits the data reasonably well and has acceptable
predictive ability, although alternative approaches are possible.
3. Systemic discrimination was found in only about 3 percent of
establishment reviewed; thus screening on the basis of the predicted
probabilities would be expected to produce large numbers of false
positives.
4. The ability to use a model and data from the Equal Opportunity
(EO) Survey may be strengthened by more extensive cleaning of submitted
data. |
Recommendations:
1. OFCCP could select a stratified random sample of establishments
for compliance reviews.
2. Data provided by contractors at the desk audit stage of the
review could be used to develop specified data elements.
3. Over several years, OFCCP could accumulate a substantial amount
of data, consisting of the compliance reviews and corresponding data elements
similar to those collected by the EO Survey.
4. This approach has the advantage of collecting more accurate and
more pertinent data than provided by the current EO Survey. |
Actions Taken:
1. Based on the final report, OFCCP prepared a document,
summarizing the findings from the Abt report and outlining options for the next
steps. |
Actions Remaining:
1. Potential interactions with the compensation analysis
initiative and the finalization of the applicant issue will be considered and
next steps determined. |
Expected Completion:
1. December 2005 |
Additional Information: More information may
be obtained from the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Employment
Standards Administration, Department of Labor, FPB N-3402, 200 Constitution
Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20210, 202-693-1109. |
31. Issue: Finding a data system to support
timely information and interagency cooperation |
Program Area: ESA OFCCP
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.2A
Federal contractors achieve equal opportunity
workplaces. |
Report Title:Evaluation of the OFCCP Prototype
Construction Contractor Information System (CCIS)
Date Completed: November 2004
Conducted By: ERG |
Program Implication: A secure web-based information
system for construction contractors would improve the cost effectiveness of
OFCCPs information collection and reporting on construction awards.
|
Findings:
1. There is strong evidence that the prototype CCIS can be
implemented nationally to establish a universe of construction contractor
information based on the best available data.
2. CCIS would provide OFCCP with a solid foundation for
implementing a methodology that supports neutral selection of construction
contractors for compliance review.
3. Using the GSA's Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation
(FPDS-NG) as a data source raises some difficulties that would need to be
resolved.
4. To accomplish national implementation, OFCCP would need to
fully integrate the system with data sources and prepare for an expanded user
community.
5. Estimated startup costs for implementation of the national CCIS
are in the range of $165,000-$210,000.
6. Estimated first-year operating costs are in the range of
$60,000-$70,000. |
Recommendations:
1. In the short term, OFCCP could implement CCIS using F.W. Dodge
data only. Even though Dodge data include fewer data elements that
FPDS-NG, OFCCP already has routine access to these data.
2. In the longer term, it appears that CCIS would be most useful
if tied into the evolving FPDS-NG and related E-Government initiatives.
|
Actions Taken:
1. The structural framework for a database system has been
completed.
2. Start up and operational costs have been determined.
3. The prototype is currently under review. |
Actions Remaining:
1. OFCCP will not develop and disseminate guidance to District and
Regional offices regarding the use of sources for selecting construction
contractors for compliance evaluations until decisions are made on the
prototype CCIS.
2. Additionally, the proposed meeting with GSA to discuss the
feasibility for accessing FPDS-NG contract information has been pushed back to
the end of FY 2005. |
Expected Completion:
1. September 2005
2. September 2005 |
Additional Information: More information may
be obtained from the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Employment
Standards Administration, Department of Labor, FPB N-3402, 200 Constitution
Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20210, 202-693-1109. |
32. Issue: The employment needs of National
Guard and Reserve members returning from active duty |
Program Area: VETS
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.2B
Reduce employer-employee issues arising from service members military
obligations conflicting with their civilian employment. |
Report Title: Survey of USERRA Issues
for Returning Military Members
Date Completed: October 2004
Conducted By: K.W. Tunnell Company, Inc.
|
Program Implication: Identifying patterns of
difficulty experienced by Guard and Reserve members returning from active
service will assist VETS in meeting the statutory Uniformed Services Employment
and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) requirements. |
Findings:
1. There is considerable evidence that the protections of USERRA
work most of the time; many employers make considerable efforts to be
supportive.
2. There are some problem areas and these are increasing as more
Guards and Reservists are called to active duty; over 40 percent of respondents
reported difficult gaining assistance with USERRA issues.
3. There needs to be a systematic approach and multiple briefings
on job issues prior to active duty.
4. VETS staff members are often asked informally to answer
questions and resolve complex issues, such as pension and health care benefits,
for which they need additional training. |
Recommendations:
1. Implement and monitor an Annual Briefing Plan, identifying how
every customer will be briefed several times each year.
2. VETS should extend the briefing materials and consider using a
briefing evaluation form.
3. Improve the USERRA Web site with deeper content on specific
issues.
4. Provide a one-stop telephone hotline with experts on specific
issues, such as pensions, health insurance, and training. Customers need to
know that ongoing information and assistance is always available; all customers
should know how to access such information and assistance.
5. Provide training and information support for VETS field
personnel and state agency representatives. |
Actions Taken:
1. VETS is closely monitoring Guard and Reserve mobilizations and
demobilizations in each State.
2. Nationwide mobilization and demobilization schedules are being
consolidated monthly.
3. VETS is delivering USERRA briefings to affected Guard/Reserve
members at either mobilizations or demobilizations or both, as time and
resources permit. The consolidated schedules help Regional and
Headquarters staff plan the briefings.
4. The VETS Web site was enhanced during FY 2005 with the addition
of the Electronic Form 1010 an online function available to the public
which references USERRA information. This enhancement enables anyone to
directly file an official USERRA claim online and open a USERRA case with
VETS.
5. VETS field personnel are receiving information on complex
issues from qualified USERRA practitioners in their State, or in other States,
other Regions, or VETS Headquarters. |
Actions Remaining:
1. All other recommendations are still pending consideration and
possible action. |
Expected Completion:
1. FY 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at the Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS),
Room S1316, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, Washington, D.C.
20210, or by calling Keenan Torrans at 202-693-4731 |
33. Issue: The trends and patterns found in
55 mid-term and final evaluations of DOL-funded projects implemented
by the International Labor Organizations International
Program on the Elimination of Child Labor (ILO-IPEC) |
Program Area: ILAB
Performance Goal: Goal 05-3.3A
Contribute to the elimination of the worst forms of child labor internationally
|
Report Title: Comparative Assessment of ILO-IPEC
Evaluation Reports Since 1995
Date Completed: April 2005
Conducted By: Academy for Educational
Development |
Program Impacts: The design, implementation,
and monitoring of new and ongoing child labor-elimination projects can be
enhanced through a synthesis of findings and recommendations of past project
evaluations. |
Findings: This assessment synthesized
finding and recommendations from the 55 evaluation reports. |
Recommendations:
1. Use national rather than international staff as main
project implementers in the future.
2. Give more attention to sustainability of projects in
their design and implementation.
3. Remove bureaucratic overload by reducing the number and
frequency of progress reports. |
Actions Taken:
1. ILAB is pressing grantees to first consider national staff
before proposing international experts as key project personnel. In cases
where international experts are proposed, ILAB will request that grantees
justify their choice. ILAB is taking this action not only to improve the
cost efficiency of projects, but also to build local capacity to eliminate the
worst forms of child labor and promote project sustainability.
2. The greater the government involvement and commitment, the
greater the chance that project successes will be sustained after the project
ends. ILAB is, therefore, giving funding priority to projects in
countries where governments are involved and committed
to the project objectives. ILAB is taking particular note of instances
where governments contribute financial or in-kind support to the projects.
3. ILO-IPEC plans to update ILAB regularly on the status of
project sustainability efforts through a separate section of upcoming technical
progress reports.
4. ILAB will address the issue of sustainability at all
grantee meetings in Fall 2005 and Winter 2006.
5. ILAB has reduced the reporting frequency for its child
labor projects from quarterly to semi-annually for low-risk grantees.
|
Actions Remaining:
1. ILAB will continue to work with ILO-IPEC on these
recommendations from the evaluation reports and on future recommendations.
|
Expected Completion:
1. ILAB will continue to work with ILO-IPEC. |
Additional Information: A complete copy of the
report can be obtained from ILABs International Child Labor Program at
GlobalKids@dol.gov or by calling
(202) 693-4843. |
GOAL 4: A COMPETITIVE WORKFORCE
|
34. Issue: Identifying contractual
responsibilities and action of contractors assisting with researching the
impact of the proposed and final overtime rule |
Program Area: ESA WHD
Performance Goal: Goal 05-4.2A
American workplaces legally employ and compensate workers.
|
Report Title: Fair Labor Standards Act:
Labor Made Key Decisions in Studies of Updated Overtime Rule and Contractor
Provided Support
Date Completed: June 2005
Conducted By: Government Accountability Office
(GAO) |
Program Implications: Reports on the cost/benefit
analysis of WHDs new overtime security rule. |
Findings: GAO found that CONSAD Research
Corporation, in accordance with its contract, provided DOL with technical and
analytical support and that DOL made all of the key decisions in estimating the
impact of the updated overtime rule. |
Recommendations: None made. |
Actions Taken: NA |
Actions Remaining: NA |
Expected Completion: NA |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05580r.pdf.
|
35. Issue: The implementation of Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) reforms, changes in the demand for TAA training, and program
effectiveness |
Program Area: ETA TAA
Performance Goal: Goal 05-4.1B
Increase the employment, retention, and earnings replacement of workers
dislocated in important part because of trade and who receive trade adjustment
assistance benefits. |
Report Title:Reforms Have Accelerated Training
Enrollment, But Implementation Challenges Remain (GAO-04-1012)
Date Completed: September 2004
Conducted By: GAO |
Program Implication: DOL needs to monitor the
new TAA provisions and proposed legislation if there is a negative impact.
|
Findings:
1. Most workers are enrolling in services more quickly than in
prior years. DOL reduced its average petition-processing time from 107
days to 38 days.
2. Due to a new deadline for enrolling, some workers may be
negatively affected because it does not always leave enough time to assess
workers training needs.
3. States reported challenges implementing some new provisions of
the TAA Reform Act.
4. Demand for TAA training increased substantially in fiscal year
2002, prior to the implementation of reforms. However, States have struggled to
meet this higher demand with available TAA training funds, even though funds
available doubled nationally between fiscal years 2002 and 2003. Most
states have responded by using other Federal employment and training resources.
|
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the implementation of certain provisions of the TAA
Reform Act and propose legislative changes if:
- The new training enrollment deadline is negatively affecting
some workers, or
- The eligibility criteria for the new wage insurance provision
are resulting in denial of services to some older workers who could benefit
from them.
|
Actions Taken:
1. DOL has convened a summit of select States to discuss TAA
Reform Act implementation issues.
2. DOL is conducting a review of implementation and
post-implementation issues to gauge whether there has been positive change over
time, with a particular focus on the collection of information relating to the
training enrollment deadline as well as the eligibility requirements for the
wage insurance program for older workers, known as the Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) program. |
Actions Remaining: The Department will utilize
the information gleaned from all of the activities discussed above, as well as
information provided in the GAO report, as we move forward on the development
and implementation of a work plan to address these issues. |
Expected Completion:
1. December 2006 |
Additional Information: A copy of the complete
report can be obtained at
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d041012.pdf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|