| [Section C] | [Table of Contents] | [Section E] |
WtW programs are distinct from the TANF work program and traditional employment and training programs in that they emphasize both rapid movement into employment and subsequent advancement toward stable employment at selfsufficiency wages. WtW programs' emphasis on job advancement after early job preparation and placement was absent in at least the early stages of many TANF work programs, especially those with a "work first" focus. On the other hand, WtW programs differ from traditional employment and training programs because they have such a strong employment first philosophy, rather than emphasizing education or training and then work.
The BBA and the implementing DOL regulations stress "employmentbased developmental steps for helping individuals secure and retain unsubsidized employment."1 The BBA, in Section 403(a)(5)(C)(i), restricts activities that can be supported by WtW funds to those that help move eligible individuals into jobs through (1) job creation using public or privatesector wage subsidies; (2) onthejob training; (3) contracts with public or private providers of job readiness, job placement, and postemployment services (including basic education, occupational training, and mentoring); (4) job vouchers for similar services; (5) community service or work experience; or (6) job retention or supportive services, if such services are not otherwise available. Training or education can be provided with WtW funds only after a participant has begun employment or a comparable workbased activity. Congress did not define allowable activities further, instead allowing maximum flexibility for states and localities to design their programs.
The legislative specification of allowable activities suggests that grantees will be pursuing broadly similar strategies, despite the leeway they have to emphasize local concerns and set priorities. The first grantee survey provides information on two general issues about the services and participant activities that grantee organizations are or will be providing with federal WtW funds:
Grantees' reported service priorities and budgetary allocations in large part reflect the thrust of the WtW legislation. Grantees' plans and resource use emphasize rapid preparation for and entry to employment. Their responses to the survey also demonstrate their recognition of the special supports participants are likely to need to succeed and advance.
Consistent with the "work first" thrust of WtW, grantees are emphasizing employment. They are devoting attention and substantial resources to preparing participants to enter employment, as well as to helping them strengthen their skills so they can advance to better jobs and higher wages.
Preparing participants to enter employment and monitoring their progress and problems rank among the most common uses of grant funds. Most survey respondents (93 percent) said they will support assessment and/or case management services with their federal WtW funds (Table D.1). Most also reported plans to provide job readiness and job placement services. Grantee respondents expect the combination of assessment, case management, job readiness preparation, and job placement to consume about 25 percent of their overall WtW funds. These functions are a major cost item, probably because they account for much of the staff time that grantees devote to the WtW programs.
|
TABLE D.1
PROJECTED USES OF FEDERAL WtW GRANT FUNDS |
||
|---|---|---|
| Use of Funds |
Grantees Providing Services with WtW Funds (Percentage)a |
Projected Share of Overall Federal WtW Funds (Percentage)b |
| Basic Employment Services | ||
| Assessment and/or Case Management | 92.9 | 11.2 |
| Job Readiness | 83.5 | 6.6 |
| Job Placementc | 82.8 | 7.5 |
| Participant Work Activities | ||
| Unsubsidized Employment | 65.6 | 3.1 |
| Supported Work Activitiesd | 91.1 | 21.7 |
| Onthejob training | 75.7 | 4.9 |
| Work experience program | 75.4 | 7.6 |
| Subsidized employment | 60.8 | 7.7 |
| in the private sector | 55.9 | 4.2 |
| in the public sector | 52.2 | 3.5 |
| Community service | 48.6 | 1.6 |
| Postemployment Services | ||
| Postemployment Trainingd | 87.1 | 8.9 |
| Occupational skills | 84.3 | 5.4 |
| Basic skills or ESL education | 74.9 | 3.5 |
| Job Retention Servicesd | 86.1 | 8.8 |
| Counseling | 73.2 | 2.5 |
| Workshops/support groups | 61.3 | 1.5 |
| Onsite coaching | 59.5 | 2.3 |
| Mediation with employers to resolve workplace problems | 59.2 | 1.2 |
| Workplace mentors | 51.1 | 1.3 |
| Other Supportive Services | ||
| Transportation Assistanced | 81.5 | 7.0 |
| Direct transportation assistance to individuals | 69.4 | 5.2 |
| Transportation contracts or subsidies to transportation providers | 48.2 | 1.8 |
| Child Care Assistanced | 62.8 | 9.2 |
| Direct assistance to individuals | 43.5 | 1.2 |
| Contracts or subsidies to providers | 41.9 | 8.0 |
| Substance Abuse Treatment | 50.4 | 1.8 |
| Mental Health Services | 39.2 | 1.0 |
| Assistance with Other EmploymentRelated Expenses | 71.9 | 2.0 |
| Other | ||
| Program Administration | 86.1e | 9.6 |
|
Source: National Evaluation of the WelfaretoWork
Grants Program, First Grantee Survey (November 1998February 1999).
a Percentages are of grantee organizations who reported on the services they would provide with federal WtW funds; they represent 95.2 percent of survey respondents. b Estimated share is based on grantees' reported percentages, weighted by each grantee's total federal WtW funding received. c Respondents were asked to distinguish between funds budgeted for job placement services that staff provide and the work activities themselves in which participants are placed. Some grantees, however, may not have been able to make this distinction, and may have reported the placement function as part of what they had budgeted for work activities. d The overall percentages shown for supported work, postemployment training, job retention, transportation and child care exceed the percentages shown for each of their component activity or service types because some grantees offer more than one type. e Although grantees are allowed to devote up to 15 percent of funds to administration, some grantees may have found other resources to cover administrative costs, and be devoting all of their WtW grant to services. ESL = English as a Second Language |
||
Once participants enter employment activities, grantees can help them improve their skills as a way to advance in employment and approach some measure of stable selfsufficiency. Most respondents (87 percent) said they will offer postemployment training in basic skills, occupational skills, English as a Second Language (ESL) training, and other such programs. Most WtW participants will lack a high school credential and have low skills in math or reading, so it is not surprising that about threequarters of the grantees will support basic skills or ESL education with WtW funds, devoting an estimated 3.5 percent of total spending to such instruction. However, a larger share of resources (5.4 percent) appears to be going to occupational skills training. This difference may reflect the higher costs of such training, which often uses more equipment and space than basic skills or ESL classes.
Grantees also devote WtW resources to providing a wide array of job retention services that extend well beyond the examples of postemployment supportive services in the legislation.2 More than half of the survey respondents said they will use WtW funds to support workplace mentors (Table D.1). In addition, many reported that they will provide counseling services, workshops or support groups for WtW participants, onsite job coaching, and mediation with employers to resolve workplace problems. An estimated 9 percent of their overall WtW funds are devoted to all such retention services.
Survey responses make it clear that grantees recognize the serious personal and skill deficits with which many participants will enter employment. This is evident in the emphasis they are putting on placing participants in supported employment. It is also demonstrated by grantees' inclusion in their plans of supportive services to complement services from other available sources.
Supported Work a Major Priority. Most WtW grantees emphasize providing opportunities for their clients to participate in supported work activities, rather than simply placing them in unsubsidized employment. Supported work activities may entail financial incentives that encourage employers to hire people they might otherwise view skeptically, or activities that involve structured worksite training, or both. They include allowable activities such as onthejob training, work experience programs, subsidized employment in either the public or private sector, and community service. While twothirds of survey respondents said they will help WtW clients secure unsubsidized employment, 91 percent will provide such supported employment activities as an interim step towards unsubsidized employment (Table D.1).
Supported work activities account for the largest spending category reported by grantees. Survey respondents project spending an estimated 22 percent of their federal WtW dollars on all supported work activities combined (Table D.1). In contrast, only three percent of their funds were allocated to unsubsidized employment, although almost twothirds of the grantees are providing access to unsubsidized employment. This finding is to be expected, since the major costs of an unsubsidized employment program component are in job preparation and placement services. Supported work activities, in contrast, entail substantial costs for wage subsidies or special supervision and training at the worksite.
Supportive Services Also an Important Element. WtW participants engaged in job readiness or employment activities are allowed to receive appropriate job retention supportive services, if such services are not otherwise available.3 DOL regulations specify that WtWfunded supportive services may include transportation assistance, child care, emergency or shortterm housing assistance, disabilityrelated services, or other supportive services. The first WtW grantee survey asked specifically about plans for most of these types of services: child care, transportation, substance abuse treatment, mental health services, and other needs. Grantees are clearly attentive to the need for supportive services.
Grantees recognize transportation difficulties as a common barrier to employment success for the WtW population. More than 80 percent of respondents indicated that they will provide direct transportation assistance to WtW participants, contract for transportation services, or provide subsidies to transportation providers. The survey respondents will devote an estimated seven percent of their overall WtW funds to providing transportation assistance for WtW participants.
Grantees are likely to spend even more WtW funds on child care services. Almost 63 percent of survey respondents indicated that they will provide direct child care assistance to WtW participants, contract for child care services, or provide subsidies directly to providers. Moreover, they will devote an estimated nine percent of their overall WtW funds (about as much as they are devoting to postemployment training) to such assistance. WtW regulations direct operating entities to ensure that grant funds do not substitute for child care services available through the Child Care Development Fund, TANF funds, or other state or local sources. Respondents' relatively strong emphasis on child care suggests that the child care needs of the WtW target population are perceived as extending beyond the resources generally available at the local level.
Need for substance abuse treatment as a prerequisite for employment is one of the eligibility factors under WtW's hardtoemploy criteria. Thus, it is not surprising that many respondents said they will provide substance abuse treatment with WtW funds (51 percent). A small proportion of overall WtW funds is devoted to these services, however, possibly because WtW funds cannot be used for medical services.4 WtW grantees may be providing nonmedical substance abuse treatment services as part of WtWfunded case management, counseling, support groups, or other components of their programs.
1. References to the DOL regulations allude to the interim final rule on regulations for the WtW grants program and the summary and explanatory text (20 CFR Part 645, RIN 1205AB15, Federal Register, vol. 62, no. 222, pp. 6158861594).
2. Beside education and training services, the only example the WtW legislation provides of allowable postemployment supportive services is mentoring. Nevertheless, DOL's regulations make it clear that these examples are not intended to imply that only educational, training, or mentoring services are allowable as postemployment services under WtW.
3. The BBA's restriction on provision of supportive services was intended to maximize the use of resources available at the local level and focus WtW resources on direct assistance to recipients.
4. Section 408(a)(6) of the BBA, which bars the use of federal TANF funds for medical services, also applies to WtW funds. Therefore, substance abuse treatment services allowed within the WtW legislation only include services performed by those not in the medical profession (such as counselors, technicians, social workers, and psychologists) and services not provided in a hospital or clinic.
| [Section C] | [Table of Contents] | [Section E] |