|DATA VALIDATION||H-1B PARTICIPANTS|
|Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)|
What are the ARRA monthly reporting requirements after June 30, 2011?
What are the requirements for reporting ARRA funded National Emergency Grants (NEGs)?
The Department of Labor announced the one-time availability of up to $75 million in funding for On-the-Job Training (OJT) OJT NEGs funded through ARRA in TEN 38-09. Additional details, as well as, the reporting requirements were provided in TEGL 04-10. In addition, approximately 40 existing NEGs have active ARRA funds that did not expire June 30, 2011.
Per these guidance documents, and in order to satisfy statutory and regulatory recordkeeping and reporting requirements in ARRA, states must report characteristics, services received, and outcomes of participants served with WIA funds, including active NEGs and the OJT NEGs described in TEN 38-09. Such information is critical to determine the success of these investments. The following performance and fiscal reports, including the monthly ARRA reports, were required for ARRA funded NEGs (including the OJT NEGs) through June 30, 2012:
- ETA 9090 - WIA Quarterly Report (OMB Control No. 1205-0420);
- Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data (WIASRD) Quarterly Submission (OMB Control No. 1205-0420);
ETA 9148 - WIA Adults, Dislocated Workers, and National Emergency Grants ARRA Monthly Report (OMB Control No. 1205-0474). This report was required to be submitted to ETA by the 15th of each month (for the previous month reporting period) by each state that received an OJT NEG grant or had an active existing ARRA funded NEG.
Note: As stated above, this report will only be required for states and grantees that received OJT NEG grants or that have active existing ARRA funded NEGs. Furthermore, the requirements associated with ETA form 9148 are different than they were under the previous ARRA reporting periods. Beginning with the July 2011 monthly ARRA report, states and grantees must report only the NEG portion of ETA form 9148. States must leave the Adult and Dislocated Worker sections as they are pre-populated (filled with zeros). The first two reports (July 2011 and August 2011) will be due on the same date as the September report (October 15, 2011).
- ETA 9130 - U.S. DOL ETA Quarterly Financial Status Report (OMB 1205-0461);
- ETA 9104 - NEG Quarterly Performance Report (QPR) (OMB 1205-0439);
ARRA Section 1512 - Quarterly Recipient Report.
Please note, the ARRA recipient report is submitted by direct recipients or designated sub-recipients of ARRA funds to OMB through an electronic reporting system at www.FederalReporting.gov, no later than the 10th day after the end of each calendar quarter. This Recipient Report contains cumulative data on the projects and activities funded by ARRA from the inception of the grant award (jobs created/retained data is quarterly). For additional reporting guidance and references, see TEGL 1-09, Change 1 and 2, Reporting Requirements under Section 1512 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as well as OMB guidance found at www.recovery.gov.
Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data (WIASRD) Quarterly Submission (OMB Control No. 1205-0420)
In addition, the WIASRD must be submitted quarterly on all participants and exiters from ARRA NEGs. In order to evaluate the success of these NEGs, it is imperative that states make every effort to submit the required reports on a timely basis, and that they be accurate and complete.
There are a few important WIASRD elements pertaining specifically to OJT and NEG funding sources that must be completed for OJT NEG participants:
- WIASRD data items 340 and 341 (Type of Training Service #1 and Type of Training Service #2) are the sources for determining which individuals received OJT. A lack of complete data on these WIASRD elements will result in an undercounting and underreporting of the number of individuals who received OJT;
- WIASRD data item 342 (Occupational Skills Training Code) is important because it contains information on the occupation in which the individual was trained. This information facilitates the identification of occupations where OJT most often occurs or where it is the most successful in obtaining better employment outcomes for workforce system customers;
- WIASRD data items 313a, 313b and 313c (1st, 2nd, and 3rd NEG Project IDs) in conjunction with WIASRD data item 326 (Other WIA or Non-WIA Programs) make possible the isolation of individuals who were provided OJT through ARRA-funded NEGs.
What are the reporting requirements for TANF-funded summer employment?
To ease the reporting burden on states, the modified monthly youth participant form (ETA 9149) used in the Summer of PY 2010 is the most convenient method for capturing the required performance data associated with the TANF source of funding in PY 2011.
The columns titled “TANF Waiver Reporting” are to be used by those states that have a waiver to report only the work readiness indicator for youth in summer employment who are co-enrolled in TANF. These states must fill out and submit (via an email to ETAperforms@dol.gov) only the Program-to-Date Column (column d) of the appended modified ETA form 9149 by October 15, 2011. States without the TANF waiver no longer have to report using the Youth ARRA monthly reporting form (ETA 9149).
Youth participants served with regular WIA formula and TANF funds and are covered by the TANF waiver will only be reported in the TANF columns of the supplemental youth report.
Youth participants served only with TANF funds will not be reported in any of the WIA reports.
Can apprenticeship be counted as advanced training?
When a person enters a bona fide apprenticeship program, he/she is counted as entering employment. Apprenticeship should be recorded as unsubsidized employment.
Are exclusions still in place for the original measures?
In TEGL 17-05, can on-the-job training count as advanced training in the WIA youth program?
In Attachment D, Scenario 2 of TEGL 17-05, how has the customer been “determined” eligible for WIA services in this scenario so that she is counted in the Participant count? How do we know that she is legal to work or, if it is a male, registered with the selective service?
How can two programs share the same date of participation when TEGL 17-05 refers to the date of participation as “represents the first day, following a determination of eligibility funded by the program?” If an individual is served in January by Wagner-Peyser funds and begins a WIA funded program in March the date of participation for WIA can not be in January?
What do we do in the case of wage "anomalies"?
Please clarify the credential/certificate changes and requirements effective July 1, 2006 and how they apply to current participants and those after July 1st?
Now that the WIA Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Older Youth Credential measure use the certificate definition, do GEDs, high school diplomas, and college degrees still count under the credential measure?
ETA has recently been asked to clarify whether or not there has been a change in policy related to work readiness certificates counting under the credential measure. For reporting purposes, how should the workforce system account for work readiness certifications?
Will ETA entertain requests for waivers on the work readiness certificates?
Does a Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) certificate or an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) certificate count towards the Attainment of a Degree or Certificate WIA Performance measure?
ETA has received requests to provide specific guidance related to whether or not a CPR or an OSHA certificate counts for the Attainment of a Degree or Certificate WIA Performance measure. While ETA does not typically specify which credentials count and which credentials do not count toward this measure, it is providing clarification for these two specific credentials given the high volume of questions. The CPR certificate and the OSHA certificate do not count for the degree/certificate measure as they do not meet ETA's intent of its credential definition. By definition (found in Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) 17-05, Attachment B and further clarified in TEGL 15-10), a credential must be awarded in "recognition of an individual's attainment of measurable technical or occupational skills necessary to gain employment or advance within an occupation." While a CPR or an OSHA training may provide benefit to participants as they begin to gain general knowledge about occupations and occupational standards, participants are unlikely to gain employment or advance within an occupation based solely upon receiving a CPR or an OSHA certificate.
It is important to note that the goal of the Attainment of a Degree or Certificate WIA Performance measure is not simply to increase the number of credentials attained by participants; the credential should ultimately help participants gain employment or advance within an occupation as a result of attaining occupational credentials. Additionally, while they do not count towards the credential measure, WIA funds can pay for CPR and OSHA training if such training is relevant to the design of the individual's service plan.
Who is responsible for submitting the data validation results for each program?
What happens if a state cannot find a record that has been sampled for validation?
When are the WIA data element validation results due for Program Year 2004?
Will states be sanctioned based on the results of PY2004 validation?
Our state may not be able to complete data element validation by the February 1, 2006 deadline. Can we request an extension?
There are several elements that allow the state to use a Management Information System (MIS) to validate their results. Can you please provide specific examples of acceptable MIS systems? Can a state use its own WIA system to validate elements?
Explain the validation process for the Labor Exchange.
States build two validation files, one for job seekers and one for job openings, according to the record layout specifications in the software user guide.
The job seeker file is imported into the software, and the software generates validation values for the 9002 A, B, C and D and VETS 200 A, B and C reports. If the state uses a system other than DART or the ETA provided reporting/validation software version 1.9, then the state must also import its reported counts for the 9002 A, B, C and D and VETS 200 A, B and C reports. The software then generates a report validation summary, which compares the reported and validation values and calculates a percent difference. The software also generates a 25 record data element validation sample of job seeker records that the state must compare to source document to ensure that the state constructed its validation file correctly, that is, that it included the correct data elements in building the validation file.
The job opening file is imported into the software, and the software generates validation values for the 9002 E report. If the states uses a system other than DART or the ETA provided reporting/validation software version 1.9, then the state must also import its reported counts for the 9002 E. The software then generates a report validation summary, which compares the reported and validation values and calculates a percent difference. There is no data element validation of the job opening records.
Will states be able to electronically submit their validation results directly to the Department of Labor?
What source documents are required for ES data element validation?
Is Trade required to perform report validation?
When is data element validation for the FY 2005 TAPR due?
What are National Farmworker Jobs program grantees required to validate?
Are H1-B participants and participants in “pathways to construction” captured on the WIASRD when they exit services?
Are there certain tests (used to assess literacy and numeracy gains in the WIA Youth Program) determined suitable for use in the National Reporting System that are expiring?
ETA would like states and local areas to be aware of the Federal Register notice (FRN), Tests Determined to Be Suitable for Use in the National Reporting System for Adult Education, published on Monday, August 6, 2012, by the Office of Vocational and Adult Education at the U.S. Department of Education (ED). The FRN can be found at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-08-06/pdf/2012-19143.pdf. The FRN reminds people that a number of tests approved by the National Reporting System (NRS) may expire on February 2, 2013. It explains that the Secretary of Education will allow States a period of time to sunset an expiring test and transition to other tests suitable for use in the NRS. States may use the transition period to select new tests, purchase appropriate inventories of assessment materials, and provide training to staff. Specifically, tests with three-year NRS approvals expiring on February 2, 2013, may continue to be used during a transition period ending on June 30, 2014.
It is possible for tests that were granted the initial three year authorization to provide additional information to ED in order to extend their approval. This NRS assessment review process begins each year on October 1. Which tests will be submitted or whether they will be determined suitable for use in the NRS is unknown. States and local areas should review this FRN and if states and/or local areas are concerned about tests expiring, they can contact the test publisher for more information.
Ther beee hasn much discussion regarding partnering with our sister agency - Adult Basic Education - to help implement the measure successfully. However, they may feel slighted if we request an assessment of a participant who just recently acquired their GED through ABE’s program. It would seem as if programs are questioning the validity of the GED if they were to follow this exercise. Cannot the GED be recognized as an assessment by proxy, especially in light of the fact that it is currently recognized and accepted by USDOL as an obtained credential?
How much success have rural, isolated areas, especially those where timely assessment may not be so readily available, had with implementation of the literacy/numeracy measure? If an assessment can be administered, how can a WIA program help the participant achieve a gain from one educational functioning level to another without a local ABE office or other educational resource in the area?
If a participant refuses to undergo the assessment process, either pre-test or post-test, should services then be denied to a participant based on his/her unwillingness to comply with a program’s attempts to meet the measure? This is likely to occur with older out of school youth. Those who may already have a GED or High School diploma will see the effort as duplicative and may wonder why we are testing these areas?
If we have a youth who is tested as basic skills deficient in math and speaking and they increase an educational functioning level in speaking, is that a positive hit for Literacy/Numeracy?
Are NEG participants included in the WIASRD? If the answer is “yes,” then why does the data validation software kick them out?
If a participant doesn’t have a SSN but you have supplemental data, can you take a positive hit for Entered Employment?
States that use DART don’t have to use the ETA DRVS software to perform Wagner-Peyser Act report and data element validation. Does this apply only to the ETA 9002 and VETS 200 reports?
What is the meaning of intensive services for veterans reported on the VETS 200 reports? What part of WIA intensive services is included in the VETS meaning of the term?
The WIASRD report is based on exiters but are there circumstances where a WIASRD is submitted for someone who has NOT exited?
If an individual is taken out of performance calculations under one of the “global exclusions” conditions, is that person still included in participant counts?
The data in FRED mysteriously changes from the outcomes reported to the outcomes contained on the graphs. What is causing this?
What would happen if a youth received Wagner-Peyser core services, went to WIA three months later, but information on school status was not collected at initial participation?
An issue came up about planned gaps from an MIS perspective and how to do a gap when there has been 60 days of no service, for instance, and then the person gets sick. Would you back-date the gap to the last day of service?
Let’s say that after 60 days of taking care of the family member, the customer says “Gee, my mom is going to need me for another 60 days, but I really do want to finish services with the One-Stop.” In this instance, the One-Stop staff does not have to make any change or take any actions in the MIS, because there is enough room in the initial 180 day gap to accommodate this extra time.
How does citizenship affect eligibility requirements? What about “right to work” and selective service?
Is it acceptable for LVER and DVOP specialists to serve non-veterans and, if so, what are the parameters?
Only half-time DVOP specialists or LVER staff can serve non-veterans. The shared funding of these positions is most effective when the DVOP specialists and LVER staff members collaborate with other workforce professionals in identifying service delivery approaches that meet the needs of all those participating in One-Stop employment services and that observe the priority of service to which veteran participants are entitled.
The key parameter to be observed by half-time DVOP specialists and LVER staff is to see to it that they allocate their effort to veteran and non-veteran participants on the 50-50 basis that matches the funding for their positions. VETS recognizes that professional judgment is required to determine that the split in various measures of activity reflects the “fair-share” allocation to which both funding sources are entitled.
When the funding of DVOP specialist and LVER staff positions is to be shared, VETS encourages state and local program operators to use WIA funds in conjunction with VETS funds. The rationale for that preference is that this arrangement tends to strengthen the involvement of DVOP specialists and LVER staff members in decisions regarding training and positions them to play a constructive role in facilitating priority of service.
I seem to recall some kind of percentage or threshold of non-veterans that could be served by LVERs and DVOPs who are NOT part-time or half-time workers. Can you clarify this?
Veteran status requires 180 days of active duty service. Does the 180 days have to be consecutive?
VETS has programs that involve LVERs and DVOPs physically going into prisons and serving veterans (they can provide services up to 18 months prior to their potential release date). Since these people are incarcerated at participation, do they even count toward performance?
Concerning source documentation for veteran status, although a DD-214 is required, why can't grantees use a letter received from the Veterans Administration (VA) that clearly states date of entry, exit and type of discharge? It could substitute for a DD-214 until one was secured.
States create their extract files for validation in October, using the wage record files available. Sometimes, when they go to validate the wages, the wages in the Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage record system have changed because they have been updated. How should states deal with the dynamic nature of wage records?
How do we access/use FEDES data? For instance, the data are annualized.
What will be the governance structure for the WRIS?
How will WRIS policy be developed and approved?
How will monitoring be performed to ensure proper use of the WRIS data?
States will continue to engage in self-monitoring, using the self-assessment process they used in the past. In addition, periodic on-site monitoring will be conducted by ETA regional offices to ensure data confidentiality is maintained. These reviews will be conducted as part of the ongoing reviews of WIA and UI programs.
A schedule of reviews and the results will be posted on the WRIS section of www.doleta.gov/performance/WRIS.cfm and arrangements will be able to be made to allow interested states to participate in the portion of state reviews that pertain to confidentiality compliance if desired.
Will confidentiality compliance reviews be conducted, and if so, by whom?
Who will decide on what is an appropriate research purpose for which data obtained through the WRIS can be used?
Who will be the WRIS Operations Contractor?
Has the Agreement been reviewed by ETA's UI staff for conformity with UI laws in the Federal-State partnership and the new confidentiality regulations?
How will the Agreement be amended once signed?
Will states be able to electronically submit their validation results directly to the Department of Labor?
States should feel free to submit any questions they may have about WRIS in general, or questions specific to the WRIS Data Sharing Agreement, to firstname.lastname@example.org.
An e-mail response will be sent directly to the individual who posed the question in addition to it being posted to the WRIS FAQs page on ETA's website at: http://www.doleta.gov/Performance/WRIS_FAQ.cfm.
An e-mail will also be sent to everyone who attended the November 28, 2006 webinar on the WRIS Data Sharing Agreement to notify them when new FAQs are posted to the page. It will be important to review the new FAQs when they are posted to see if there is an answer to any questions you posed during the webinar. Unfortunately, in many cases, it isn't possible to identify the specific individuals that posed questions during the webinar, so you may not receive a direct e-mail response to questions you posed during the webinar.
Who will be signing the WRIS Data Sharing Agreement on behalf of ETA?
Under Section V.C.2 of the WRIS Data Sharing Agreement, why was the “Maintaining the confidentiality” language contained in the original agreement changed to “Facilitating the confidentiality” in the new Agreement?
When is data element validation for the FY 2005 TAPR due?
What are National Farmworker Jobs Program (NFJP) grantees required to validate?
Why were amendments to the Consolidated WRIS Data Sharing Agreement recommended by the WRIS Advisory Committee not included in the new Agreement?
Why does the new Agreement last into perpetuity, as opposed to being in effect for a period of 4 years and then being renewed?
Please elaborate on Section IV.D, regarding the Distributed Database Index (DDBI). Will states update the DDBI continuously or quarterly as was done in the past?
What data will be provided to the national grant programs operated by the Department of Labor, such as Job Corps, and how will that be accomplished?
ETA has negotiated an agreement with the State of Kansas, under which Kansas will request Wage Data for program participants of each of the grantees and calculate the common measures and other outcomes on behalf of the national grant program grantees. ETA will receive only a quarterly aggregate outcomes report for each grantee from the State of Kansas.
The process for developing the quarterly aggregate outcomes reports for ETA is as follows: The national grantees will collect and submit to ETA individual records that contain SSNs on those participants that complete the program. ETA will transmit the individual client data to Kansas for matching purposes against the WRIS. Kansas will then populate longitudinal files with appropriate Wage Data to facilitate the production of the quarterly common measures reports. Kansas will calculate the common measures outcomes for each grantee and send a quarterly aggregate performance outcomes report for each grantee back to ETA for dissemination to the grantees.
No individual outcomes or Wage Data will be shared with ETA or any of the national grantees.
How does WIOA strengthen performance accountability and transparency?
Do states and locals have to collect new performance information?
Is a youth considered in-school if they’re in a GED training program that is offered by a private CBO versus a regular school?
For youth, what is the maximum amount of time between eligibility determination and providing the first service?
When do youth follow-up services begin? Is it after WIA exit or exit from all partner services?
What happens if we give a youth their pre-test after the 60 days?
If during the year an out-of-school youth participant acquires a job or enrolls back into school, will this impact a program’s performance with regards to the literacy/numeracy measure? Is there a possibility of excluding the participant from the measure? And if not, why not, since obtaining employment or returning to school are the ultimate goals of the program?
If you have a youth ages 19-21 that is identified as a veteran, do you count the participant in the older youth or the adult performance group?
If a youth has a gap in service and does not return to the program what is the exit date?
What changes have been made to the current 7 youth measures and when will those changes take effect? For instance, will the definition of advanced training/occupational skills training in TEGL 17-05 be applied to the Older Youth Credential Rate and, if so, when?
What is needed to document a youth with a disability?
Do supportive services count as a follow-up service for youth?
When is school status determined and does it change?
What's the relationship between the “date of first youth service” for the Literacy/Numeracy common measure and the “date of participation” for the Younger Youth Skill Attainment Rate?
Let’s say I provide school status information when I become a Wagner-Peyser participant, and I am in high school. Six months later I become a WIA youth and no longer am in high school. Am I considered an in-school or out-of-school youth for WIA? This affects performance and could be significant.
How is the age of youth calculated? In the validation software, it’s calculated based on date of first youth service. The TEGL says the youth’s age is calculated based on the date of participation but the example in the TEGL implies date of first youth service. This relates to Younger Youth Skill Attainment as well.