Executive Summary
The policy context for both welfare programs and employment and training
programs operated by the workforce development system has changed dramatically
in the past few years. The Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996
requires welfare agencies to focus more than in the past on moving welfare
recipients into employment. PRWORA provides funding to welfare agencies
in the form of a block grant, Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), to support efforts to achieve this
objective. The need to move more TANF clients into work activities
and jobs means that TANF agencies need to expand or develop structural and
organizational arrangements that make this possible, including coordinating
with the workforce development system.
The Welfare-to-Work (WtW) Grants Program provides additional funding to serve
welfare recipients, but the resources flow through the employment and training
system, now commonly called the workforce development system. WtW creates
new incentives for the workforce development system to coordinate with the
welfare system on behalf of welfare recipients. The workforce development
system is also changing, moving towards universal access to employment related
services and the use of technology to serve job seekers and employers better.
States and localities are responding to this dynamic environment in different
ways, and their responses reflect historical relationships as well as current
policy objectives. This study builds on earlier research in the area
of service coordination and integration, and provides a current description
of local operational interaction between welfare and workforce development
programs. It is based on a review of the literature and site visits
to twelve localities in six states. The main intent is to add to the
understanding about how welfare recipients receive employment-related
services. The study identifies different approaches to coordination,
the advantages of coordination for clients, and factors that promote and
impede coordination.
States and local sites selected for this study represented a range of
organizational structures, historical experiences, and economic and demographic
variables. Site selection criteria included the proportion of welfare
clients served by the Job Training Partnership/Workforce Investment Act
(JTPA/WIA)(1) system, the current
state structure of the JTPA and welfare systems, urban/rural setting, and
economic conditions. This approach contrasts with studies that focus
on "best practice" sites.
Site visits were conducted between May and August 1999 to:
-
Missouri: Kansas City and Sedalia
-
Ohio: Cleveland, Dayton, and Painesville
-
Oregon: Portland and Salem
-
Pennsylvania: Beaver County and Pittsburgh
-
Rhode Island: Providence
-
South Carolina: Charleston and Manning
Site visits focused on the interaction between welfare and workforce development
programs from the perspective of services receipt for TANF clients who are
required to engage in work activities. Discussions were held with local
TANF agencies and workforce development agencies, including the Employment
Service (ES), JTPA providers (and administering agencies), and WtW
providers. Agency directors, supervisors, and service delivery staff
were included in the discussions. This study did not collect information
from clients. Thus, the descriptions of client flow and service receipt
are developed from discussions with service providers and administrators.
Coordination generally refers to situations where two or more organizations
work together, through a formal or informal arrangement, to meet one or more
goals such as improving the effectiveness and/or cost-effectiveness of programs,
improving access to services, avoiding the unnecessary duplication of services,
and improving performance. There is generally a distinction between
service integration and
coordination. Integration is characterized
by features such as common intake and "seamless" service delivery, where
the client may receive a range of services from different programs without
repeated registration procedures, waiting periods, or other administrative
barriers. In contrast, coordinated systems generally involve multiple
agencies providing services, but clients may have to visit different locations
and re-register for each program to obtain services. Integrated services
are sometimes, but not always, physically co-located.
Overview of Services Provided
The general flow of services for an individual applying for cash assistance
at the welfare office has changed under TANF. Prior to TANF, the typical
sequence of activities was: eligibility screening, intake for cash assistance
benefits, followed by an orientation on work-related program rules and services
for those required to participate in work activities. Under TANF, the
service sequence more often includes orientation for all clients, whether
required to work or not. An individual applying for TANF now is generally
provided with information materials and participates in an individual or
group orientation, which typically addresses eligibility requirements, the
time-limited nature of TANF, the requirement to participate in work or
work-related activities, and the criteria for exemption from work participation
requirements.
As an individual moves from welfare intake into work, s/he may participate
in the following activities and services: intake and eligibility determination;
assessment; pre-employment or work preparation services (e.g., job readiness
training, family life skills, general equivalency diploma (GED) or adult
basic education (ABE) classes, basic skills training, job specific skills
training); job development/placement services (e.g., job search/job club/job
placement, labor market information); work experience; and post-employment
services (e.g., retention services, advancement services). Under TANF,
however, clients are more likely to engage in short-term pre-employment
activities and job search than in skills training and education. In
addition, case management services are provided to the client as s/he moves
through these services.
As discussed below, several key agencies/organizations can be involved in
providing work-related services to TANF recipients: the welfare agency, the
ES, the JTPA/WIA administering agency, the WtW administering agency, community
colleges, and other subcontracted service providers, including community-based
organizations and for-profit service providers.
Organizational Approaches to Coordination
The enactment of TANF — with its emphasis on time-limited receipt
of welfare benefits, "work-first," and moving large numbers of TANF recipients
off the welfare rolls into full-time, unsubsidized employment —
has created an impetus for strengthening coordination between the welfare
and workforce development system.
In order to provide employment services to welfare recipients and help them
move into jobs, state and local welfare agencies can (1) "go it alone" and
provide the full gamut of employment-related services to move TANF recipients
to jobs on their own, or (2) link with the workforce development system to
share some or all of the work-related functions required to move TANF recipients
into jobs. For example, a welfare agency might choose to run a four-week
job readiness workshop for TANF recipients using its own agency staff, at
one of its own agency offices. Alternatively, the welfare agency might
choose to link with a workforce development agency (such as a JTPA/WIA agency)
that may already be running such workshops and refer non-exempt TANF recipients
to the workshop.
In our site visits, we found substantial variation in the extent and scope
of coordination between welfare and workforce development agencies.
In some localities, there were few links between the two systems; in other
localities, the two systems were highly integrated with one another.
For example, the local sites we visited varied substantially in terms of
the numbers of and types of organizations linked, the ways in which coordination
had evolved, the types of work-related services integrated, and numbers of
individuals referred between agencies. Overall, those services most
directly associated with cash assistance, such as eligibility determination
and sanctioning, were the most likely to be kept in-house by the TANF
agency. Orientation, case management, and support services were more
often shared by coordinating agencies. TANF agencies were more likely
to use workforce development providers for more specialized services such
as job skills training, GED preparation, and job development services.
To further illustrate the range of service delivery configurations, we identified
three broad organizational approaches: welfare-centered, shared responsibility
(where work-related services for TANF clients were jointly administered by
the TANF agency and the workforce development agency), and highly
integrated. These are broad classifications, and several variations
were observed within the welfare-centered and shared responsibility
approaches. Five study sites were considered to be welfare-centered,
six sites used a shared responsibility approach, and one site in the study
was highly integrated. The two boxed examples from our site visits
illustrate, from a services receipt perspective, two approaches to providing
work-related services for TANF recipients at different ends of the
spectrum — one featuring the welfare agency as the hub of work-related
services for TANF clients and the other featuring a highly integrated system.
| Charleston: Work-Related Services at the Welfare Office |
-
A new TANF applicant signs in with the receptionist and is assigned to an
orientation session. The TANF agency has 30 days in which to approve
the application for cash assistance, during which time the individual is
conducting a self-directed job search. Following approval for cash
benefits, the client's case is officially opened and s/he meets with a case
manager to develop a plan for work-related services.
-
Next, a client may complete a basic skills assessment. Typically, a
client will then attend two weeks of family life skills and two weeks of
job club before participating in eight weeks of self-directed job search.
All of these activities are directed by welfare agency employees and are
held at the welfare office. The family life skills classes address
a broad range of topics, such as time management, self-esteem, personal and
family health, and family budgeting. Job club addresses job readiness
skills such as resume preparation, interviewing skills, and appropriate workplace
attire and behavior.
-
Job search involves using resources at the welfare office such as help wanted
advertisements from daily newspapers, job requests submitted by employers,
and job listings provided by the state ES. The client is expected to
use these resources and any personal referrals to complete three to four
employer contacts per week.
-
If the client has not obtained a job after completing these activities, the
TANF agency has a variety of other workforce-related classes and training
options that they provide in-house. These include computer-based programs
that help the client identify job interests, learn about skills needed for
particular jobs, and brush up on basic skills. Work experience placements
are also offered. If a TANF client is in need of more specialized services,
such as vocational rehabilitation or substance abuse treatment, the case
manager makes a referral to the appropriate agency.
-
When a client has fewer than 12 months left on cash assistance, s/he is referred
to the WtW program operated by the JTPA/WIA agency at the one-stop career
center. Welfare staff work with the one-stop center to facilitate
communications and problem-solving for individual clients, especially if
questions come up about participation requirements, sanctions, or approved
work activities.
|
| Dayton: Highly Integrated Services at a One-Stop Career
Center |
-
An individual applies for TANF at the One-Stop Career Center, where s/he
is greeted at the center's reception desk. The receptionist refers
the individual to the appropriate provider within the Center based on the
services s/he is requesting. The Job Center is the only location in
the city for welfare eligibility determination and enrollment. If the
individual is in need of TANF, he/she is sent to the welfare agency (i.e.
Department of Human Services, DHS) reception area. Here, the individual
will first meet with a DHS screener, who discusses general types of assistance
available and completes the first few screens of a client record in the welfare
data system. In this county, DHS is merged with the JTPA/WIA agency,
so many of the other services the client receives are also provided by DHS
staff or contractors.
-
After viewing an orientation video, the TANF applicant is referred to one
(of the nine) DHS units housed at the Job Center. During the initial
visit, the individual will meet with a DHS eligibility specialist, a DHS
work activities specialist, and a DHS-contracted (through Goodwill) case
manager. The applicant will also be introduced to the many other types
of services available throughout the Job Center. All of this occurs
in the initial visit, which typically takes 2-3 hours.
-
The DHS eligibility specialist will take the individual through the eligibility
determination process for cash assistance, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and other
types of assistance, and will discuss grant diversion — if it seems
appropriate. Necessary data screens will be completed to determine
eligibility, and the individual receives a listing of documents s/he will
need to submit to DHS before her/his application can be finalized.
-
Next, the TANF applicant meets with a DHS work activities specialist to discuss
TANF work requirements and the various available work assignment options.
The DHS work activities specialist also takes the client to the Job Center's
Job Bank to familiarize the individual with the job search resources available
at the Center (including computerized job listings maintained by the Ohio
Bureau of Employment Services). Following this meeting, the applicant
meets with a Goodwill case manager, who reviews the various types of support
services that are available.
-
The Goodwill case manager tracks the client's progress throughout her/his
involvement in TANF, helping to arrange for support services, serving as
an advocate in securing needed services, and troubleshooting problems as
they arise. In subsequent visits to the Job Center to meet with the
Goodwill case manager, the TANF recipient may access a variety of services
available at the Job Center through the 47 agencies located on-site.
For example, among the services available for job seekers (anyone from the
general public may use Job Center facilities) are: lists of available job
openings; labor market information; information on all local education, training,
and re-training programs; hiring requirements; assistance with job search
skills; resume preparation; free access to a telephone and fax machine; and
typing and word processing tests/tutorials.
-
TANF recipients also take part in the activities that the Job Center hosts
for area employers. For example, the Center screens and tests job seekers,
takes job applications, sponsors job fairs, and provides space for employers
to conduct recruitment and even some job training activities. The Center
also works with employers to customize training programs, link employers
with educational and training facilities, and provide funds for training
of TANF recipients, dislocated workers, and others. Companies come
to the Job Center to recruit workers, including entry-level workers, as well
as high-skilled workers. TANF participants are blended in with other
job applicants from the general public for many recruitment activities conducted
by employers at the Job Center and in referrals of applicants to fill job
openings.
|
Although coordination occurred in different ways, for sites that were able
to achieve a relatively coordinated program, it generally resulted in a variety
of advantages for TANF clients.
-
Referrals to more services and to a wider range of services.
Availability of expanded services is often the result of referral agreements
or contractual relationships between coordinating agencies. For example,
linkages between a welfare agency and the ES bring job listings and labor
market information to welfare clients and introduce welfare clients to a
resource that can continue to serve them as they progress in the job
market. Linkages between a welfare agency and a JTPA/WIA agency may
result in availability of a wider range of employment and training services
for welfare recipients, including increased access to employers.
-
Greater intensity of services to clients. Linkages with other
agencies may reinforce the services that are provided through the welfare
agency. For example, WtW programs may provide more comprehensive or
more intensive job preparation services for those with greater barriers to
employment. Linkages between the welfare agency and community colleges
might enable the welfare agency to more thoroughly assess the abilities and
occupational interests of clients or may provide customized training
opportunities.
-
Simplified referrals. A simplified client referral process might
mean the client faces fewer obstacles when seeking services from another
agency because the agency has already received some basic information about
the client. Coordination tends to make each of the agencies more aware
of services that the other is providing, resulting in more appropriate referrals
of clients. Thus, clients are less likely to be turned away or to find
that the services do not meet their needs.
-
Convenience of having several or all agencies in one location.
In some instances, agencies are co-located in the same building or at a
one-stop. Another approach used in many programs we visited is
out-stationing of staff — i.e., the full or part-time locating
of staff at another agency. Nine of the 12 sites visited in our study
either co-located some services or outstationed workers. Both types
of coordination improve access to services (e.g., clients might be seen the
same day by the other agency) and reduce travel time and other barriers for
clients.
-
Improved case management. When staff of coordinated programs
share information and communicate regularly, they can better understand and
address the client's needs. Several of the sites visited indicated
that staff of partner programs meet regularly to discuss specific client
cases or meet together as a team with clients.
Prior research indicates that there is no single model of coordination and
no method that guarantees coordination. Still, across the sites visited,
there are many common factors that are important in promoting coordination.
Previous History of Coordination
A previous history of working together was often cited as an important factor
in agency coordination. Having worked together on prior initiatives
often meant that agency staff had an awareness of each others' program objectives
and operations and had developed collegial relationships.
-
In many of the sites visited, we found that current organizational
relationships reflect the arrangements that were in place as far back as
the Work Incentive (WIN) program in the late 1960s. For example,
ES continues to be an important partner in work-welfare activities, as noted
in eight of the 12 of the sites visited.
-
In several of the sites, current relationships between the welfare and
workforce development systems build upon the structure established for
administering the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) Training
Program. In Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Oregon, welfare and JTPA
agencies worked together to serve clients in the JOBS program. Local
sites in these states reported that this experience facilitated current
coordination efforts.
Local Economic Factors
A strong economy and low unemployment often lead to high levels of coordination
among welfare and employment and training agencies. The tight labor
market in many locales has created an environment conducive to the placement
of TANF recipients in the workforce. As a result, both workforce
development agencies and employers work more closely with the welfare agency
to employ TANF recipients.
-
TANF clients have become sought after "customers" by some workforce development
programs. Current labor market conditions have forced many employers
to seek out alternative sources, such as WtW and TANF work programs, for
recruiting job applicants. Coordination between welfare and workforce
development agencies provides more customers for the workforce development
agency and the employers they serve.
-
Welfare agencies have expanded their relationships with employers.
As the welfare system has become more employment-focused, welfare agencies
seek out employers in order to create more opportunities to place clients
in jobs — both subsidized and unsubsidized. Some TANF agencies
have found that coordinating with workforce development providers improves
access to employers.
A well-coordinated system and a good economy allow TANF and workforce development
agencies to share in the success of placing clients in gainful employment.
Technology
Technology is having a broad impact on the nature of welfare-workforce system
coordination, in some cases making physical location far less important.
On our site visits, we saw computers being used to access labor market
information, prepare resumes, and assist in career choices and job searches,
at welfare offices, at JTPA/WIA agencies, at one-stop career centers, at
community colleges, and at the offices of private employment and training
contractors.
-
For the client, this results in fewer separate trips and a choice
of locations for some services. For example, a client could check job
listings or prepare a resume while at the TANF office to meet with a case
manager or after attending a work readiness class at the workforce development
agency.
-
For agency staff, technology improves access to information about
the programs and services offered by other agencies and facilitates referrals
of individual clients.
Greater Financial Resources
States and localities have new levels of financial resources available to
fund services for welfare recipients and other needy families. With
declining welfare caseloads, less money is needed for cash assistance.
Since TANF block grant amounts are fixed, welfare agencies have more funds
available for work-related services. WtW grants provide a new source
of funds to meet the often intensive needs of the least-employable portion
of the welfare population. In addition to the availability of TANF
and WtW funding, the good economy in many places has resulted in increased
local resources from tax revenues.
-
Funding is more flexible. For example, there is no limit on
the length of time an individual can be served under WtW, and the welfare
agency can use block grant funds to provide a variety of supportive
services. Welfare and workforce development providers can partner to
fund services such as child care and transportation that may facilitate an
individual's success while enrolled in an employment and training program,
and to provide ongoing follow-up and retention services after an individual
obtains employment.
-
Increased resources encourage cross-agency planning. With greater
financial resources, agencies are more willing to share resources and to
come together for planning purposes. WtW represented a new source of
funding which, in some sites, provided an incentive for joint planning.
-
Increased resources encourage co-location. The availability
of resources has helped to support the creation of one-stop service centers
or has led to the co-location of services in several of the sites visited.
With increased funding, some agencies are more likely to enter into arrangements
that provide space, equipment, or staff services to another agency at a lower
cost, which encourages coordination.
-
Availability of funds stimulates new services. Available funding,
coupled with federal incentives in the TANF and WtW programs, is stimulating
new services such as post-employment support, job retention, and advancement
services. TANF provides strong incentives for welfare recipients to
find immediate work, but the five-year limit on cash assistance also creates
an incentive for building the basic education and occupational skills of
welfare recipients so that they can transition to higher-skilled and higher
paying jobs along a career path. WtW funds can be used for training
or education once a person has begun work, either as a post-employment service
in conjunction with work or as a work-based activity. In response,
some welfare agencies are implementing post-employment training and retention
services and promoting coordination with WtW programs to provide additional
training opportunities and workplace support.
State Initiatives
Some states have taken a pro-active role in improving state-level coordination
and in encouraging local coordination. States have promoted coordination
through state-level organizational decisions, contracting processes, and
initiatives specifically directed towards local level collaboration.
-
State level organizational decisions. Reorganizations of state-level
agencies and organizational mandates that more directly affect local operations,
such as requiring local welfare agencies to have referral agreements with
community colleges or JTPA/WIA agencies may be helpful in avoiding conflicting
policies across programs, minimizing duplication, and sending a message to
local agencies of the importance of coordination.
-
State-level contracts. Several states have used the contracting
process to shape the delivery of services and promote coordination at the
local level. For example, some state welfare agencies contract with
local JTPA/WIA agencies across the state to provide work-related services
for welfare clients.
-
Local coordinating councils. A few states have taken additional
steps to promote local level coordination, by mandating some type of local
interagency coordinating council. While some of these efforts met
resistance at first, consistent support from the state over a period of time
helped agencies to overcome differences.
There are several challenges to coordination that study sites encountered.
Even successful coordination efforts had to overcome obstacles along the
way. These challenges involve programmatic barriers,
logistical barriers, and managerial barriers. An underlying
factor in discussions of challenges to coordination is personality issues.
Personality issues are often the difference between overcoming a barrier
and finding that barrier to be insurmountable to coordination.
Programmatic Barriers
-
Different program goals. One challenge encountered in many sites
is the difference in the philosophies that guide welfare and workforce
development agencies.
-
In response to PRWORA, many welfare agencies have adopted a "work-first"
approach, which supports the work participation and caseload reduction goals
that welfare agencies must meet and reduces the possibility that welfare
clients will exceed the time limit for cash assistance. The focus is
on getting a job quickly and minimizing time on TANF.
-
Workforce development agencies, on the other hand, have historically subscribed
to the human capital investment approach, preferring to train clients for
a better job rather than placing clients in a job with low wages and little
advancement potential. While many workforce development specialists
acknowledge the value of any work experience, even unpaid work experience,
for someone who has never been in the workforce, they encourage clients to
take every opportunity they can for training.
-
Different concepts of coordination. Directors may not agree
on the services that should be provided by each agency. For example,
agencies may disagree on what the one-stop should be — co-location,
sharing staff, or a computer system that facilitates referrals and information
sharing. They may also disagree on who should perform client assessments
(and what that entails), how long clients should be engaged in TANF work
activities before being referred to another agency for services, or what
the definition of "work ready" is.
-
Different performance standards. Since many agencies are held
accountable to performance standards, including the number of job placements,
they may be reluctant to refer clients to another provider and lose the
opportunity to get "credit," or count that client among their successes.
Some performance-based contracts are structured so that agencies are only
paid for job placements — that is, the agency does not get paid
if the client is not placed in a job after completing the job readiness
class. Agencies then have to work out the issue of who should pay for
the class when a client completes the class, but is not able to obtain a
job.
-
Declining welfare caseloads. In the states we visited, caseload
declines ranged from 12 percent in Rhode Island to 65 percent in South
Carolina. The decline in TANF has had three important effects related
to coordination: the number of TANF clients in JTPA has declined; there are
fewer clients either eligible for or seeking work-related services from TANF,
workforce development agencies, community-based organizations, and others;
and, caseworkers in some TANF offices are able to spend more time with each
client.
-
In some cases, this has reduced referrals and interaction between
agencies. Some TANF caseworkers were less inclined to work with other
agencies since they had the time to provide more services themselves.
-
In other sites, because caseworkers had the opportunity to get to know individual
clients better, they were more likely to identify additional services
needed. This encouraged their coordination with other agencies in order
to facilitate access to additional services for clients.
Logistical Barriers
-
Geographical issues. In several sites, coordinating agencies
must contend with different geographical boundaries for their service
areas. Some JTPA/WIA agencies, especially in rural areas, have large
multi-county service areas and must work with several county welfare offices,
each with its own local needs and personalities. In some communities
physical barriers such as rivers and major highways, coupled with inadequate
public transportation systems, preclude single service locations or impede
coordination between agencies that are not in close proximity to each other.
-
Long-term leases and space limitations. Despite their willingness
to co-locate, agencies may be reluctant to actually do so because of lease
and other facility constraints. Many agencies either own their buildings
or are committed to long term leases. In other cases, the space available
for co-location may be too small to accommodate the needs of partner agencies.
-
Confidentiality. Concern about preserving client confidentiality
often hinders agencies' ability to work together to resolve client-specific
issues. It also makes it difficult to either access other agencies'
management information systems that are used to verify program eligibility
or participation in work activities. Several sites have gotten around
this issue by restricting certain data fields based on each agency's
"need-to-know."
-
Incompatible client forms and management information systems.
Programs have developed forms and paperwork specific to their individual
needs. Often, this paperwork, and the management information systems
that were developed from it, is not compatible with the forms and systems
used by partner agencies. Respondents noted that even when they try
to have as much common paperwork as possible, federal and state reporting
requirements still vary considerably by agency.
-
Union rules and civil service regulations. Differing rules and
personnel systems create barriers to integration between various government
agencies and private organizations. Unions may object to integration
of staff between agencies due to fears of job loss and problems resulting
from workers being paid at different wage rates even though they are sitting
next to each other and doing essentially the same work.
Managerial Barriers
-
"Turf" barriers. Perhaps one of the most common barriers is
"turf" issues, including the fear of losing decision-making autonomy and
distrust of other agency administrators or staff. Case managers, and
other staff, may feel that their job security is jeopardized when other agencies
are providing similar services to their clients. Agency staffing needs
and responsibilities are changing. Examples include the reduced staffing
requirements of ES offices due to telephone claims processing for unemployment
insurance and automated access to job postings and labor market information,
and the expanded role of welfare case managers beyond eligibility and benefits
processing. These changes may affect the morale of workers and result
in fewer client referrals to other agencies.
-
System complexity. The availability of multiple resources has
resulted in a proliferation of programs and access points, with many similar
or overlapping services. Several different agencies and community based
organizations within a single jurisdiction may be providing job readiness,
family life skills, and job placement services. This causes confusion
for clients, organizations, and staff as they try to sort through the process
of moving from welfare to work, and may result in fewer referrals or in clients
not following through on appointments.
-
Time commitments. Planning and maintaining service coordination
takes a considerable amount of time and effort from staff at all levels.
In several sites, staff from the welfare and workforce development agencies
serve on inter-agency committees that were formed to address the collaborative
effort. The time dedicated by staff to working on the collaborative
is in addition to the other functions that they perform as part of their
jobs. For example, in Charleston, three teams were created to guide
the operations of the one-stop and all decision making is done by consensus
in an effort to promote a team-building atmosphere. Several sites mentioned
the time-consuming nature of developing procedures for WtW referrals and
for documentation of participation in a work activity when the activity was
provided by an agency other than the TANF agency.
This study provides a snapshot of welfare and workforce system coordination
in a limited number of sites at a point in time where welfare programs are
work-focused and workforce development systems are reorganizing to provide
one-stop services to a broad population. As a result, there is an increased
interest in coordination between welfare and workforce development agencies
and a greater awareness in each other's programs and services. Several
key findings emerged.
Key Lessons Learned
-
Importance of past relationships. Past relationships and
coordination approaches, especially those developed in implementing the WIN
program and the JOBS program, were important factors in current coordination
models and activities.
-
Coordination efforts generally encounter one or more serious barriers
to coordination. Even successful efforts may not be fully
developed — in the sense that one or more other agencies that could
be involved are not involved or are only partially collaborating.
-
Coordination can occur under a variety of organizational
approaches. We found successful examples of coordination in sites
where the welfare office was the dominant provider and service location as
well as in systems that shared responsibility for service delivery across
welfare and workforce development providers. Only one of our study
sites, Dayton, was fully integrated, both physically and functionally.
Different levels of coordination may be appropriate in different communities.
-
Service systems need to fit local conditions. For example, planners
must consider issues of scale — a one-stop with all services in
one location works in Dayton, but may not work in a larger city. In
some localities, a decentralized, neighborhood-based structure may be more
effective.
Implications for the Future
-
Coordination can benefit the hard-to-serve client. It appears
that the ability to access many referral services and take a more holistic
approach to addressing barriers to work is especially important for the
hard-to-serve client. Looking ahead, the increased reliance on technology
may not meet the needs of those clients who require more personal
attention. However, technology may free-up time for providers so that
they can devote more attention to the hard-to-serve. Location, access,
and referral mechanisms need to be considered from both vantage
points — maximizing the effective use of technology and facilitating
the progress of the hard-to-serve.
-
Coordination is a process, not an event. State and local responses
to policy changes in the welfare and workforce development arenas reflect
historical relationships as well as current policy objectives. Coordination
models we observed had evolved over a number of years, and required time
and energy on the part of agency staff over a sustained period.
-
Integration is a means, not an end. Integration should not be
promoted for its own sake, but for the improvements it can bring to service
delivery. Some of the desired service delivery outcomes can be accomplished
in other ways, without a fully integrated system, and in some communities
such alternative arrangements might offer the best solution.
Finally, the nature of underlying relationships has not changed —
those who coordinated historically found it easier to do so with WtW and
other changes — good management and determination still drives
successful coordination. Personality and informal mechanisms continue
to be important factors that determine the success of coordination.
Many of the barriers to coordination (turf issues, differing reporting
requirements, and different philosophies) still exist, and probably always
will. Because of the effort coordination requires and the significant
barriers faced in some communities, systems with more limited coordination
may be more effective in serving clients than poorly managed but technically
more "coordinated" efforts.
Creative approaches are being spawned due to greater resources available
per client, the need to address multiple barriers faced by many who are still
in the welfare system, and the rapid expansion of computer technology and
computer-based labor market information. Combined with the tight labor
market, which is increasing employer involvement, the current environment
offers unprecedented opportunities for partnerships aimed at finding employment
for welfare clients and preparing them for better quality jobs. Policies
that seek to enhance the factors that promote coordination and minimize barriers
will support these efforts.
1. The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998 replaces
the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA). At the time of our site visits,
states had not completed this transition. Therefore, in this report
we refer to the relevant agency as the "JTPA/WIA agency."
[back to text]
Where to?
Top of this page
Main Page of Report
Table of Contents:
Executive Summary
Introduction
Coordination and Service Delivery
Factors that Promote Coordination
Challenges to Coordination
Conclusions
Appendix A: Literature Review
Appendix B: Methodology and Site Selection
Appendix C: Summary of Agencies Providing Work-Related
Services
Home Pages:
Human Services Policy
Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Last updated 02/03/04