Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

References: UIPL 3-95, 5 U.S.C. 8521(a)(1) and 20 CFR Part 614. Background: On December 6, 1994, UIPL 3-95 was issued to all State Employment Security Agencies (SESAs) formally transmitting a new consolidated list of acceptable narrative reasons for separation, except those for "inaptitude," and instructions for their use in determining individual eligibility for UCX benefits. The military services began to use exclusively the consolidated list of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation shortly after October 1, 1993. Since the issuance of UIPL 3-95, the Department of Labor (DOL) has received several inquiries from SESAs regarding the effective date of the new instructions for using the consolidated list of acceptable narrative reasons for separation that was contained in UIPL 3-95. UIPL 3-95 states that the new consolidated list of acceptable narrative reasons for separation is effective for all separations from military service on or after December 6, 1994, the date of the directive. Since the DOL did not provide for a retroactive application of the consolidated list in UIPL 3-95, some SESAs are assuming that UIPL 25-83 and Changes 1-12 are controlling for the period October 1, 1993, to December 5, 1994. The DOL has reconsidered its position concerning the effective date of UIPL 3-95 in light of several factors. First, there is some confusion among the SESAs regarding which list of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation is to be used for the October 1, 1993, through December 5, 1994 period. Second, the military services began to use exclusively the consolidated list of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation shortly after October 1, 1993 (some military separation centers continued to use the old lists applicable to each branch of the military for a brief period after October 1, 1993). Third, when the DOL amends the consolidated list of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation to include those dealing with "inaptitude," the effective date of the amended list may predate the issuance date of UIPL 3-95. The contents of this directive will also be issued as a Change 1 to ET Handbook No. 384, Second Edition. Revised Effective Date: SESAs shall use the Attachment to this Change 1 to UIPL 3-95 containing the revised consolidated list of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation for determining UCX eligibility for all separations from the military services on and after October 1, 1993. SESAs should note that due to the retroactive effective date of the Attachment to this Change 1 to UIPL 3-95, the DOL has determined that the narrative reason for separation, "Intradepartmental Transfer," is "acceptable" for UCX qualifying purposes for separations from the military services on and after September 1, 1994. Implementation.: SESAs shall follow the operating instructions in section 4. of this directive. In addition, SESAs shall also follow the instructions contained in UIPL 25-83 and Changes 1-12 to UIPL 25-83 for the period from October 1, 1993, to December 4, 1994. For separations from the military services occurring between - October 1, 1993 through December 4, 1994, the lists of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation in both UIPL 3-95 and UIPL 25-83 and Changes 1-12 to UIPL 25-83 will be utilized by the SESAs in determining UCX eligibility for ex-servicemembers who do not complete their first full term of service. For separations from the military services occurring after December 4, 1994, the SESAs shall only use the list of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation in UIPL 3-95 (and any future changes thereto) in determining UCX eligibility. It is possible that an ex-servicemember was denied UCX eligibility during the October 1, 1993 through December 4, 1994 period because the SESA utilized only one of the lists of "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation during this period. If the SESA had followed the operating instructions contained in this directive, the SESA would not have denied the ex-service member's UCX claim. SESAs shall redetermine these UCX denials. In such case, the DOL has determined that it would be inconsistent with Federal law to apply the State law redetermination time limitations to UCX claims that were denied due to SESA actions inconsistent with the operating instructions contained in this directive. The authority for the retroactive application of this change to UIPL 3-95 is contained at 20 CFR 614.9(a). In order to implement the redetermination requirement noted in this section 5., the SESAs shall take the actions contained in section 6.c. of this directive. Specifically, the announcement shall indicate that the time period permitted for these redeterminations shall be the time period for redetermination permitted in the applicable State's UI law, and this time period for redetermination begins with the date the announcement first appears in a newspaper of general circulation and in appropriate media. Action Required: SESAs are required to: a. Distribute the contents of this directive and the attachment to all appropriate staff members. b. Destroy the Attachment to UIPL 3-95 and utilize the Attachment to this Change 1 to UIPL 3-95. c. Announce in a newspaper of general circulation, and in appropriate media, the application of the operating instructions contained in this directive and their effect on UCX eligibility. The announcements shall include mention of the authority under 20 CFR 614.9(a) to issue redeterminations of previously denied UCX claims. This announcement should indicate that ex-servicemembers separated on and after October 1, 1993 and before December 5, 1994, whose UCX claims were denied because their narrative reason for separation was not on a list of the "acceptable" narrative reasons for separation previously used by the SESAs may file for a redetermination of the denial. d. Take appropriate actions to redetermine all UCX claims with respect to which the decisions on ex-servicemember's eligibility are inconsistent with the operating instructions in this directive.

References: (a) The Job Training Partnership Act as amended (b) Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 9-92 Background: This year's summer jobs program, called "Summer Challenge: A Program of Work and Learning for America's Youth," will provide immediate jobs and academic enrichment to thousands of economically disadvantaged youth between the ages of 14 through 21. The program for 1993 offers new opportunities to mount academic enrichment activities and establish quality work experience in a wide variety of work sites. On February 24, 1993, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) issued a report of an audit conducted on the 1992 summer program which found, with few exceptions, that SDAs managed successful work experience programs for youth. The OIG attributed this success, in large measure, to the finding that participants were orderly, busy, involved in productive work, interested in the work being performed, and closely supervised. The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) concurs with this assessment and is committed to ensuring that meaningful jobs are again provided in this year's program. Consistent with that effort, this Training and Employment Information Notice (TEIN) contains information to help facilitate local level linkages between SDAs and public and private non-profit agencies and organizations. It also provides suggested steps that SDAs can take to develop new work sites through partnerships with community groups. National Level Coordination: Representatives from ETA have met with several national organizations to discuss the roles these organizations can play in providing work sites and other services in support of the "Summer Challenge". Each of these organizations has been provided background information on the program and a directory of local SDA directors with whom they can establish contact at the local level. These organizations are enthusiastic about participating in the "Summer Challenge" and are willing to cooperate and assist the SDAs in any way possible. Meetings have been held with the following organizations: -- The USDA Forest Service -- U.S. Public Health Service -- National Association of Service and Conservation Corps -- The National Collaboration for Youth -- North American Association of Summer Sessions -- American Association of Museums -- U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development -- Habitat for Humanity International -- Green Thumb, Inc. and other Senior Community Service Employment Program Sponsors - U.S. National Park Service The above organizations and the services they can provide are described in Attachment I. In addition, the Office of Personnel Management (OPIUM) is issuing a Federal OPIUM Bulletin to all Federal agencies explaining the "Summer Challenge" and encouraging the agencies to become involved in the program by providing quality work sites and, where possible, academic enrichment activities. Local Linkages: The purpose of the meetings with the listed organizations was to determine the most appropriate process for them to use in establishing linkages at the local level with the "Summer Challenge" program. ETA emphasized that local planning and program design decisions are made by Private Industry Councils and SDA administering agencies. The organizations understand that the key to involvement at the operating level is to initiate contact with individuals at SDAs to work out arrangements. To facilitate the linkage process, each of the organizations were provided a directory of SDAs containing names, addresses, and telephone numbers. All of the organizations will offer work sites and, where possible, academic enrichment, or facilities for providing academic enrichment activities. To increase the number of work sites to accommodate the enrollment expected in the 1993 program, SDAs may need to reach out to community groups and non-profit agencies that have never participated in summer programs. The Children's Defense Fund in Washington, D.C., in consultation with ETA, developed the suggestions outlined in Attachment II. The suggestions illustrate the kinds of outreach efforts and new partnerships that can be an important part of effective SDA strategies for meeting the "Summer Challenge". Action: State JTPA liaisons are requested to distribute this TEIN, and all materials that will arrive under separate cover, to all SDAs in the State.

References: 20 CFR 602; Federal Register Notice, March 26, 1990, 54 FR 11112; UIPL 13-93, January 12, 1993; and Benefits Quality Control State Operations Handbook, ET Handbook No. 395. Background: The final rule to establish the Unemployment Insurance Quality Control program is found at 20 CFR Part 602. Effective October 5, 1987, QC programs in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have selected weekly random samples of UI benefit payments for investigation under the mandatory program. 20 CFR 602.21(g) provides that each State shall: Release the results of the QC program at the same time each year, providing calendar year results using a standardized format to present the data as prescribed by the Department; States will have the opportunity to release this information prior to any release by the Department. The notice of procedures for the release of BQC data for the UI program was published in the Federal Register on March 26, 1990, at 54 FR 11112. Date of Record: The Department has established close of business (c.o.b.) April 30, 1995, as the date of record for State databases for computation of the error rates for the CY 1994 Annual Report of BQC data. All information in the Annual Report will be based on CY 1994 BQC cases that have been signed off by the QC supervisor by c.o.b. April 30, 1995. States must not reopen any CY 1994 BQC cases after this date until they have reviewed the computations of the error rates and have reconciled any differences between the State and National databases. Any data analysis supporting the Annual Report must be run on the database as it exists at c.o.b. on April 30. If States make any further changes, their data and results will differ from the data and results of the National Office. These differences will then have to be reconciled. Annual Report Software: As described in UIPL 13-93, the software which produces the Annual Report excludes Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) program eligibility option cases from the rates calculations. It also excludes cases which do not meet the definition of the BQC population, for example, interstate or supplemental payments. These cases are coded "9" in data element c1. The software adjusts the population dollars paid to exclude any EUC and code "9" cases. The CY 1994 footnote look-up table can be found in Attachment 1, pages 2 and 3. For cases with a reopen code of "3" (the State has changed the data in a previously closed case), the reopen date is used in determining the appropriateness of footnotes concerning time lapse requirements. The States may run the Annual Report software as soon as all cases are completed. The National Office will produce an Annual Report for each State, based on the CY 1994 BQC cases as of c.o.b. April 30, 1995. Annual Report Format: The Annual Report format is shown in Attachment 1. It is divided into three main sections. Quality Control Data o Total Dollars Paid in Population Total UI benefits paid to the population of UI claimants who comprise the sampling frames for all weeks in CY 1994 for which the State pulled a BQC sample, adjusted to exclude EUC program eligibility option cases and other UI payments that do not meet the definition of the BQC population. o Sample Size Total UI payments selected during CY 1994 (BQC batches 9401 through 9453) and completed (QC supervisor sign-off) by c.o.b. April 30, 1995, excluding EUC program eligibility and other cases that do not meet the BQC population definition. This is the number of BQC sample cases from which the rates and sampling errors (confidence intervals) are estimated. o Proper Payments The weighted ratio estimate of total dollars properly paid to total dollars paid expressed as a percentage. o Overpayments The weighted ratio estimate of total dollars overpaid to total dollars paid expressed as a percentage. o Underpayments The weighted ratio estimate of total dollars underpaid to total dollars paid expressed as a percentage. o 95% Confidence Interval A confidence interval, expressed as +/- a percentage, will be constructed for each of the three estimated rates. The actual rate is expected to lie within 95 percent of the intervals constructed from repeated samples of the same size and selected in the same manner as the BQC sample. Footnotes The footnotes that will appear on State BQC Annual Reports to describe certain conditions that affect the data are described in Attachment 1, pages 2 and 3. Narrative States are invited to supply a narrative analysis that will accompany their Annual Report. The Department will include this narrative in the digest of State Annual Reports that it will prepare (see section 10, below). The narrative may include, but is not limited to, a discussion of State laws and how they affect error rates, an explanation of circumstances that led to some degree of inaccuracy in the reported error rates, and proposed or actual corrective action strategies. State narratives must be received in the National Office no later than June 9, 1995. States not planning to submit a narrative should notify the National Office by June 9, 1995, that no narrative will be submitted. The procedures for preparing and transmitting the Annual Report narrative to the National Office are described in Attachment 2. Supplemental Data: In order for the SESAs to interpret the data in the Annual Report and provide narrative explanations of the data, the Department recognizes the need for additional information on cause and responsibility. The software that produces the BQC Annual Report will also generate a separate report consisting of up to 16 responsibility categories and up to 6 cause categories. Responsibility and cause data will be reported as percentages of UI dollars overpaid. The format for this report is shown in Attachment 3. In order to provide States with the greatest flexibility in interpreting the data, all possible responsibility codes and broad cause categories can be generated. States can combine categories which contain few sample cases, where appropriate. No sampling errors will be computed because the publication of these percentage rates is not mandatory by the State. States should be aware that some of these percentages are based on small numbers of BQC sample cases and may have relatively large sampling errors. The Department may publish such data in the technical appendix, along with additional analysis where appropriate. Comment Period: BQC Annual Reports produced by the Department of Labor will be transmitted to each State on May 12, 1995. Each State should review its Annual Report and if there are any comments submit them to the National Office (Attn: TEUQS, Andy Spisak) by May 31, 1995. SESA comments will be discussed and reconciled by June 9, 1995. Public Release by SESA: As summarized from the Federal Register notice of March 26, 1990: Each State will release the required data annually through established channels for disseminating State performance data. In accordance with established State procedures, the data must be provided to those who normally receive performance/evaluation data and to anyone else who requests it. It is no longer necessary to publish a notice of availability. States must release their Annual Reports by June 30, 1995. If a State fails to release data in accordance with these procedures, the Department, in its annual review of State QC operations as specified in 20 CFR, Part 602, Section 602.31, will take appropriate action. Federal Release of Data: The Department will announce the availability of QC program data for CY 1994 through a notice published in the Federal Register on or about July 31, 1995. The Department's publication will be a digest prefaced by background information on the Quality Control program, and a brief discussion of how the error rate estimates are computed. Readers will be discouraged from comparing results among States. Each State's section, including its Annual Report and narrative, will be displayed separately. State sections will be ordered alphabetically to discourage ranking and comparisons. The name of the State official designated by the State as its Annual Report contact will also be published. For CY 1994, the Department will continue the practice begun with CY 1989 data of publishing certain analytical information on aspects of the BQC findings. If the Department determines that a State has failed to follow the prescribed QC methodology -- regarding sample selection, data collection methodology, or case completion timeliness -- to such an extent that the data are not reliable, the Department will publish an explanation of the major deficiency in lieu of an Annual Report for that State. Also in accordance with instructions in the Program and Budget Plan, ET Handbook No. 336 (11th edition, change 2), States will be required to address these areas by submitting corrective action plans for the upcoming fiscal year. Key Dates: The following is a summary of key dates for the public release of CY 1994 BQC data. 4/30 States check BQC databases and resolve any database problems. 4/21 States submit any request for waiver of time lapse requirements, along with supporting analysis, to appropriate Department of Labor ETA Regional Administrator. 4/30 Date of record for State BQC databases for Annual Report purposes. Cases closed by supervisors after this date will NOT be included in the Annual Report. States should not reopen any CY 1994 cases to change the database after this date until their Annual Report is finalized and any analysis for the release of the data or the narrative is completed. 4/30 Department of Labor electronically transmits the modified Annual Report software and footnote look-up table to each State's Sun computer. 5/12 Department of Labor sends Annual Reports to the State Administrators over signature of Mary Ann Wyrsch, Director, UIS. 5/15-5/31 States review Annual Reports, including footnotes, and provide comments to Department of Labor. 6/1-6/9 Department of Labor and States discuss and reconcile comments in collaboration with Department of Labor Regional Offices. 6/9 States provide name of contact persons to appropriate Department of Labor ETA Regional Administrator. States provide narratives or notice of waiver of narrative comments to Department of Labor National Office. 6/30 States release CY 1994 BQC Annual Report and send copy of the release to the appropriate Department of Labor ETA Regional Administrator. 7/14 States send copies of any press releases and/or newspaper articles relating to the Annual Report released by the SESA for CY 1994 to the appropriate Regional Administrator. 7/31 Department of Labor publishes notice in the Federal Register announcing the availability of BQC data. Action Required: State Administrators are requested to: a. provide copies of these guidelines to the appropriate staff; b. ensure that annual report narrative comments or notice of waiver of such comments is transmitted to the Department of Labor National Office by c.o.b. June 9, 1995; and c. ensure that the following items are supplied to ETA Regional Administrators: (1) any request for a waiver of time lapse requirements by c.o.b. April 21, 1995; (2) the name, location, and telephone number of a contact person to whom interested parties can write or call with questions or inquiries about the State's annual release of BQC data by c.o.b. June 9, 1995; (3) a copy of the State annual BQC data release by June 30, 1995; and (3) copies of State releases of BQC data, any press releases and/or newspaper articles relating to the Annual Report released by the SESA for CY 1994 by July 14, 1995.

Background: Based on an inquiry from the Department of Labor (DOL), Service Delivery Areas (SDAs) have provided information on educational training packages and vendors previously used for Title II-B of the Job Training Partnership Act Summer Youth and Employment Training Programs. The lists were compiled by Regions (i.e., the types of educational curriculum and the names of vendors used by the SDAs in a region), and, in most cases, contain a brief description of the curriculum components, and a SDA contact person. The lists are for informational purposes only and do not represent endorsement of these educational training packages or vendors by DOL. Action: States are requested to share this information with their SDAs as soon as possible.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

References: Job Training Partnership Act, as amended; JTPA Regulations 20 CFR Parts 629 and 630 published in the Federal Register on September 22, 1989; JTPA Interim Final Regulations published in the Federal Register on December 29, 1992; and Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 9-92, Policy Framework for the 1993 Summer Youth Employment Program Supplemental Appropriation: "Summer Challenge: A Program of Work and Learning for America's Youth." Background: The Employment and Training Administration recognizes that the anticipated addition of supplemental funds to the summer program may require the modification of already procured service and supply contracts and/or the addition of other service providers and suppliers. The expectations contained in TOGGLE 9-92 for expanded and enriched academic instruction will necessitate new or modified arrangements with education providers. This TEIN is one in a series of specially identified summer guidance and information issuances. Procurement: In procuring supplies and services for the CY 1993 summer program, every effort should be made to use existing competitive procurement processes in keeping with the intent of the JTPA Amendments as well as State and local efforts to improve cost effectiveness. However, in implementing the expected new features of this year's summer program, the Governor may declare an "exigency" for purposes of procuring supplies and services on an expedited basis, including sole-source justification and documentation where necessary. Sole-source justification and documentation may cite this TEIN and the time constraints associated with this national JTPA program initiative as the basis for expedited or non-competitive procurement. Effective use of cost/price analysis procedures will be necessary for these expedited or non-competitive procurements to be certain that supplies and/or services are provided at a fair and reasonable price. For example, an academic enrichment package purchased "off-the-shelf" would qualify as a fair and reasonable price if it can be shown that the package is sold at this "price" to the general public. Additionally, the State should ensure that existing Federal and/or State procurement requirements are complied with such as the following: -- "Selection of Service Providers" at Sec. 107 of the Act (pre-1992 Amendments). -- Applicable certifications and assurances such as Lobbying (29 CFR Part 93), Debarment and Suspension (29 CFR Part 98), and the new Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity Requirements of JTPA (29 CFR Part 34.20, see new assurance at 29 CFR 34.20 (a)). The State is reminded that the transition provision at 20 CFR 627.904(k) of the Interim Final JTPA regulations (December 29, 1992) requires the use of current rules and regulations (September 22, 1989) for the II-B summer program. This provision extends to procurements undertaken during the entire course of the CY 1993 summer program. Action: States are requested to bring this information to the attention of the Service Delivery Areas as quickly as possible.

References: The Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended (P.L. 97-300); 20 CFR 652; TEGL No. 4-94. Background: The Secretary of Labor is issuing final planning allotments for each State's share of PY 1995 funds for basic labor exchange activities. These allotments (Attachment I) are based on the FY 1995 appropriation of $845,912,000 and are distributed by the statutory formula described in Section 6 of the Act. The allotments are also being published in the Federal Register. The data used are Calendar Year 1994 averages of civilian labor force (CLF) and number of unemployed individuals. Section 6(b)(4) of the Act authorizes the Secretary of Labor to reserve up to 3 percent of the total fund availability to assure that each State will have sufficient resources to maintain statewide employment service (ES) activities. The set-aside for distribution through an administrative formula for PY 1995 is $24,791,040. The 3 percent distribution is included in the total final allotment. The set-aside was distributed in two steps to States whose relative share of resources declined from the previous year. In Step 1, those States with a CLF below one million and that are also below the median CLF density were held harmless at 100 percent of their prior year relative share of resources. The remainder was distributed in Step 2 in pro rata shares to all other States that lost in relative share from the prior year but did not meet the size and density criteria for Step 1. Differences between preliminary and final planning estimates are caused by the use of Calendar Year data as opposed to the earlier data used for preliminary planning estimates and postage savings related to U.S. Postal Service changes in methodology of calculating charges and improved mail management practices. Postage costs incurred by States during the conduct of ES activities are billed directly to the Department of Labor by the U.S. Postal Service. The States' final allotments do not include $19,544,000 of the total amount available, which is withheld for the payment of the States' ES penalty mail costs. Action: State planning activities are to be guided by the process described in the Wagner-Peyser Act, Federal Regulations at 20 CFR Part 652, and planning guidance provided by ETA Regional Offices.

Reference: Employment Security Manual (ESM), Part V, Section 3670-3693, Field Audit Function (ETA Audit Policy); Core Revenue Quality Control, Operations Handbook. Background: The role of the field auditor in administering a compliance program under State UC laws requires a high degree of technical knowledge covering State and Federal employment taxes and acquired investigative skill. Depending on individual State approaches to auditor training, acquired knowledge and skills are often reflected in varying degrees of auditor productivity and inconsistent audit quality. The need for a broader approach to field auditor development, beyond their own State UC law and rules, has frequently been expressed by State UC tax managers at National and multi-Regional Tax Conferences and has also been recommended by Federal and State auditors. The variables in payroll control, employer-employee relationships and remuneration for individual services cannot be monitored efficiently unless the auditors' education includes background familiarity with the larger arena of Federal employment tax laws and the inter-relationship of similar but unique State UC tax programs. State UC Tax Field Auditor Training Program: A field auditor training program which focuses on issues beyond a single State's UC law and rules, is nearing completion. The program, developed under a cooperative agreement with the Indiana Department of Employment and Training Services (IDETS), will provide States a special supplement of broad based instruction that will complement existing State UC tax compliance training for UC field tax personnel. The training program will: (A) Provide State UC compliance staff with a working knowledge of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act and other related Federal employment tax applications; (B) explain ETA audit policy provisions and the Federal interest in UC audit performance; (C) encourage interstate cooperation in compliance efforts; (D) improve professionalism in audit performance and report integrity, and discuss Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) and their application in payroll and tax compliance audit applications; and (E) raise the level of auditor awareness of outside influences on employment tax administration, through tax avoidance, employment practices and legislation. Development: Many State UC tax experts have participated in the program design and development. All States were surveyed for input as to their existing policy on field audit operations, auditor training programs and desired subject matter for supplemental training. A workshop comprised of experienced UC tax compliance experts from twenty-five States representing each of the ten ETA regions, reviewed options resulting from the survey and provided guidance on desired or needed training and audit program development. Design: The training program under development is structured to be folded into existing State training with an introduction to Federal employment tax law, ETA policy on UC auditing, meeting State quality control requirements and the inter-dependence of the States' UC tax programs. Subject matter will be broad based and include, but not be limited to: (A) The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) and related employment tax provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and Social Security Act referred to in FUTA; (B) the inter-relationship of Federal and State roles in unemployment tax programs and the value of inter-State cooperation; (C) an explanation of Generally Accepted Auditing Standards to the extent they apply to payroll and the limited financial auditing practiced in UC tax compliance audits; (D) all elements of current ETA audit policy (ESM, Part V, Sections 3670-3693 (as revised) and the proposed Revenue Quality Control audit quality requirements; (E) working relationships often designed to circumvent standard employment classification tests; (F) examples and explanations of special provisions in Federal and State laws that either extend or restrict worker coverage and employer tax liability; (G) trainee introduction to the central office processes for which he/she provides support, such as, status, cashiering, employer accounting, delinquency/collections, computer services available to the auditor; and (H) instructions for setting up and closing out of an audit assignment. This includes making the appointment, the entrance interview, closeout interview, auditor's report and the central office review. The training program for State UC tax auditors will be in stand- alone modules that may be used, in the whole as a phase of, or to complement training for State tax staff, or in parts to supplement existing State training formats. As a complement to State training programs, the modules will focus primarily on expanding the trainees' knowledge of outside factors and audit approaches that contribute to the overall effectiveness of their State tax compliance programs. Each stand alone training module will have a trainee and a corresponding trainer section. The training modules package will consist of: (A) A supervisory executive summary to provide SESA management with a training program overview; (B) an instructor's manual that follows each module and training unit, with desired results to exercises and options available to auditors in coverage issues; (C) a student manual with text and exercises designed to carry a trainee step-by-step through each module; (D) video instruction to enhance trainee understanding of the subject matter; and (E) all texts and printed material on floppy disks in a flat ASCII format. Trainer and student manuals for each unit will include test exercises to familiarize trainees with application of the procedures and principles covered in that unit. These test exercises will help instructors measure trainee comprehension of the training material. All modules will contain transparency and flip chart masters for use in group training sessions. The complete training program package will be made available to each State in reproducible units. Program Delivery: Three Train-the-Trainer sessions have been scheduled for State staff who are responsible for auditor training and/or performance in their respective States. Such individuals should attend one of the three sessions that have been scheduled as follows: May 18-21, Atlanta, Georgia June 15-18, Denver, Colorado June 22-25, Indianapolis, Indiana The Indiana Agency and its contractor, The White River Training Company, will provide you directly with specifics on the training sessions. Hotel accommodations will be provided by the contractor. Trainers will be responsible for transportation, meals and other travel expenses. Attending a Train-the-Trainers session is essential to the success of the program because it will provide State trainers with specific knowledge and skills to deliver the program and guidance to develop related State-specific material for their auditor training programs. The Train-the-Trainers sessions will also enhance State trainers' knowledge of Federal and multi-State employment tax interface that they may not have exposure to in their own programs. Action Required: State Agency Administrators are requested to: (A) Provide the information in this Directive to their UC Directors and/or appropriate tax managers and training officers; (B) select individuals to be responsible for implementation and integration of the program into their auditor training program; and (C) assure that individuals who will be conducting the training attend one of the three train-the-trainer sessions.

References: Training and Employment Information Notice (TEIN) No. 49-93, Capacity Building Strategy Paper; and TEIN No. 11-94, "Consultation with our Customers." Background: TEIN No. 11-94, dated November 4, 1994, discussed the Employment and Training Administration's (ETA) intention to conduct an extensive "consultation process" to strengthen our understanding of the technical assistance and training needs of the Nation's employment and training system. ETA is committed to the continuous improvement of employment and training staff capabilities as a key intervention in improving the quality of services provided to participant and employer customers. One activity of the consultation effort is the administration of a broad-based, system-wide survey to assess the capacity building and technical assistance needs of employment and training staff. The Department ofLabor systematically gathers information on the capacity building and technical assistance needs of its partners in order to achieve continuous improvement and provide high quality services to its primary customers -- the participant and the employer. To that end, this survey, along with other components of the capacity building effort, will obtain information needed to help design staff training programs which will help unify the current employment and training system; be flexible enough to meet local developmental needs; reach the hands- on service provider level; and ultimately improve the quality of services that our customers receive. Survey Instruments: Working with National and Regional Office staff, the Technical Assistance and Training Corporation (TATC), the contractor engaged to assist in this effort, developed the survey instruments for this project. Approved by the Office of Management and Budget, the surveys will be completed by State and local program directors and staff of the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), the U.S. Employment Service (ES/UI), the One-Stop Implementation States, the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program, and other Federal, State and local employment and training initiatives. There are two different survey forms: Program Directors/Managers Form - These surveys will be completed by Program Directors or Managers, Assistant/Deputy Directors or Managers, Supervisors of Front-Line Staff, or Contract Manager/Monitors. Front-Line Staff Form - These surveys will be completed by Intake/Outreach workers, Case Managers, Counselors, Teachers, Instructors, or Trainers, Job Developers, Job Placement specialists and other staff who interact directly with participants and employers. TATC will mail survey packets directly to State and local Program Directors and will include a sampling plan for local distribution. All individual responses will be kept completely confidential; only summary results will be reported. Each packet will also contain "stamped" return envelopes for mailing the completed surveys back to TATC (each survey will have its own return envelope). Participation in this survey effort is voluntary, however, cooperation in completing the survey is greatly appreciated. The results of the survey will be used to establish priorities for the use of ETA resources and to create a capacity building system that addresses the long-range developmental needs of a customer- focused employment and training network. Survey results will be formatted by Regions, States and programs within States and will include information on common needs across programs, effectiveness of current training methods, and information on best practices and program models. The results will be widely distributed. Action: Recipients of this TEIN are requested to inform Directors and Program Administrators of Service Delivery Areas, Substate Areas, One-Stop Career Systems, and Employment Service/Unemployment Insurance programs of the upcoming survey and strongly encourage their participation in this system-wide effort. A copy of this TEIN will be sent by the Department of Health and Human Services to each State JOBS Director.