Instructions for Submission of State Plans under Title II and Title III of the Job Training Partnership Act for Program Years 1996 and 1997; and 1996 Wagner-Peyser Act, Program Planning Guidance

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Washington, D. C. 20210	CLASSIFICATION Admin. & Mgmt.
	CORRESPONDENCE SYMBOL
	ISSUE DATE February 21, 1996
RESCISSIONS	EXPIRATION DATE

DIRECTIVE

:

TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT GUIDANCE LETTER NO. 04-95

TO

:

ALL STATE JPTA LIAISONS
ALL STATE EMPLOYMENT SECURITY AGENCIES

FROM

:

BARBARA ANN FARMER
Administrator
for Regional Management

SUBJECT

:

Instructions for Submission of State Plans under Title II and Title III of the Job Training Partnership Act for Program Years 1996 and 1997; and 1996 Wagner-Peyser Act, Program Planning Guidance

Purpose. To transmit:
1. Planning instructions for the preparation and submission of the following plans as required by the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA):
2. the PY 1996 Planning and Review Guidance for the Wagner-Peyser basic labor exchange activities; and
3. JTPA and Wagner-Peyser Program Planning Estimates.
References.
1. Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), as amended.
2. JTPA Regulations, 20 CFR 626-629 and 631, published in the Federal Register on September 2, 1994.
3. Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 3-93, dated, January 24, 1994.
4. Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 3-93, Change 1, dated February 16, 1994.
5. Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 8-93, dated April 25, 1994.
6. Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended; 20 CFR Part 652; 20 CFR Part 653, Subpart B; 20 CFR Part 1001; and 38 U.S.C. Chs. 41 and 42.
Background. The Employment and Training Administration is issuing the planning guidance for PYs 1996 and 1997 for Titles II and III of JTPA and PY 1996 planning and review guidance for Wagner-Peyser Act basic labor exchange activities. Simultaneous issuance of planning and review guidance for these programs is intended to facilitate integrated planning and system-building by States. States are advised, however, that programs affected by this planning issuance continue to operate under their current legislative authorizations and implementing regulations. This planning guidance does not affect the policy framework and requirements established by current law and regulations. This planning guidance does not affect the policy framework and requirements established by current law and regulations, nor is it intended to inaugurate preview the policy framework and program requirements that may emerge from new workforce development legislation now pending in Congress.

As the employment and training system moves toward a comprehensive approach to program planning and delivery, States are encouraged to view the current JTPA programs, including Titles II and III and Job Corps, and ETA initiatives, such as School-To-Work Systems and One-Stop Career Centers, as well as the Employment Service (ES), Unemployment Insurance (UI), Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), and the apprenticeship program as components to be integrated into an overall employment and training strategy. By using a holistic approach to program planning, States will be able to maximize the use of diminishing resources to respond effectively to the employment and training needs of their citizens. For example, programs serving out-of-school, at-risk youth can be made part of a State's School-To-Work system. In addition, the Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services initiative for UI claimants can be a vital first step in a comprehensive reemployment strategy which focuses on providing coordinated service interventions to dislocated workers. State and locally operated programs may also enhance services provided to youth by making the linkage with Job Corps and apprenticeship program resources.
Program Emphasis. The training and employment system has an urgent mission:

to ensure that all Americans have the tools to manage their own job lives successfully, and that American businesses have the skilled employees they need.

The services offered through our system are critically needed, especially now in a labor market that offers less and less job security and lower real wages for many Americans. High quality employment transition services can be pivotal for individuals seeking new or better jobs. Training and occupational education are essential for people who want to develop or expand their work skills, and thus increase their long-term opportunities in the job market.

The new realities--the need for integrated employment and training services, potential cuts in federal funding, and the demand for government to prove its value--have implications for States in developing the legally required plans for the next cycle of programs under the Job Training Partnership Act and the Wagner-Peyser Act in managing resources during this period of transition. Specifically, States should consider the following as they fulfill the legislative requirement of developing a State plan:
1. Collaborative Planning During Transition. This planning period offers the employment and training system a unique opportunity to undertake collaborative planning at all levels which will position States and localities well for a new work force development system. Most State employment and training officials are reaching out to stakeholders and bringing them into an active partnership in order to encourage collaborative planning. They have learned that if any stakeholders do not participate in decision-making, support for employment and training programs will deteriorate. Reaching out to all groups, particularly at the local level, should make the transition to a restructured system much smoother. Localities need to be engaged because that is where the training, education, counseling, and information actually occur--where the value is added.
2. Systems Development. A key role for States now and in the future is to enhance the design of systems statewide. Many States are actively engaged in building new approaches such as One-Stop Career Center systems and School-to-Work (STW) systems. One-Stop can serve as the organizing vehicle for transforming the current array of employment and training programs into a coordinated information and service delivery system that provides high quality information and advice to individual decision-makers. School-to-Work systems offer frameworks for redesigning offerings in schools and youth programs, including for out-of-school youth to include both classroom and work-based learning, career pathways, and integrated academic and vocational curricula. Integrating Wagner-Peyser funded services into One-Stop Career Center systems is another key system development task.
3. Improvement in Program Services and Outcomes. Even though it is recognized that funding for employment and training programs is being reduced while at the same time States are moving forward in defining their work force development systems, States and local areas must continue to emphasize the delivery of quality services to each customer and improvement of program outcomes in existing JTPA programs. States should review current strategies to determine which have worked well and which need to be modified so that JTPA's continuing objectives -- lifting disadvantaged persons out of poverty and assisting displaced workers in finding new employment at equal or greater wages -- are met.
  
  In addition, most States can support improvements in local program management and service provider offerings through promoting use of continuous improvement processes. Continuous improvement focuses on understanding and meeting customer needs, changing processes to improve the quality of services, measuring results on a number of dimensions, and using these results to pinpoint problems and develop new improvements. In conjunction with its partners, ETA has recently developed a number of instruments that are being used by State and local practitioners in these efforts, including customer satisfaction measurement instruments developed through ES Revitalization in collaboration with certain States.
4. Funding Levels. In discussions on appropriations, the President and the Secretary of Labor have stressed the need for greater investment to build a better work force and occupational learning system.
  
  Although legislative action could affect program planning and the submission of a plan document at some point in the period covered by the forthcoming biennial planning cycle, States need to continue to plan program operations and consult with all of those who need to be involved in the development of new work force development strategies. In the event that new legislative requirements defining transition activities, including planning requirements, are enacted, new guidance will be issued as quickly as possible.
  
  Although FY 1996 funding levels are not known at this time, ETA is providing preliminary planning allocations at three levels: (1) estimated full-year Continuing Resolution at the 1996 House level; (2) the President's 1996 request level; (3) level determined by taking the midpoint between the House level and the Senate Appropriations Committee 1996 funding mark. States should use the lowest level for planning purposes. We will provide revised allocations as soon as such levels are determined by Congress and the Administration.
Title II and Title III Planning Process for Program Years 1996 and 1997. Our planning objective for Program Years 1996 and 1997 is to encourage inclusive, results-oriented planning while moving in a manner consistent with the consolidation of employment and training programs. To simplify the planning process, we are providing the following options to the State for fulfilling the legislative planning mandates for Program Years (PYs) 1996 and 1997:
1. Option I. Modify plan(s) on an exception basis, submitting a listing of new or changed items;
2. Option II. Submit the previous plan(s) with new or changed items integrated into the body of the text and highlighted.
3. Option III. Submit complete new plan(s).
In addition, States may elect to submit Title III biennial plans (or modifications as described above) as part of the GCSSP, JTP or separately.

The overriding factor in selecting of one of these options is that each State must have a plan(s) that explains how the JTPA funds will be used for the two year period. When submitting the plans, States are requested to provide a full explanation of the option selected. States should also describe how the changes can be identified by the DOL staff reviewing the submission, for example, by bold-faced type, etc. Additionally, all legal requirements included in the OMB approved formats which are attached must be addressed either in the modification or the document which is being modified. It should be noted that the planning instructions contained in the attachments have not been changed to simplify State submittals consistent with the above options.
Plan Submission.
1. Titles II and II. If a State decides to submit the GCSSP and the Title III Plan separately, the GCSSP is to be submitted on or before May 15, 1996 and the Title III State Plan is statutorily due May 1, 1996. Conversely, the inclusion of the Title III Plan with the GCSSP would mean that both must be submitted by the May 1 statutory deadline. Plans may be submitted with traditional hard copies or electronically (see attachment E for instructions).
  
  An original signature of the Governor or authorized designee shall be affixed to each of the copies of the plans submitted. The name of the signer (and the signer's title, if designee) shall be typed below the signature. If a State wishes to submit a completely electronic copy, including signature, an identification number will be provided.
  
  Hard copies of the GCSSPs, JTPs, combined GCSSP and Title III Plans and combined JTP and SSA Biennial Plans are to be submitted to the:
  Office of Job Training Programs
  Employment and Training Administration
  Department of Labor
  200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N 4459
  Washington, DC 20210
  
  Hard copies of the Title III Plans submitted separately should be forwarded to:
  Each State should also submit a copy of the plan the appropriate DOL Regional Office.
2. Wagner-Peyser State plans for Program Year 1996. Each State will prepare an annual plan for Program Year 1996 to provide authorized under Section 7(a), 7(b) and 7(c) of the Wagner-Peyser Act.
  
  States may present their PY 1996 Wagner-Peyser plans in accord with one of the options outlined in paragraph 5 above. However, these options do not affect States' obligation to adhere to federal requirements pursuant to the Wagner-Peyser Act. Further, State Wagner-Peyser plans shall address the PY 1996 planning priorities set out in Attachment F, PY 1996 Wagner-Peyser Planning Guidance, and accompanying documents.
  
  Notwithstanding the format in which the State plan is presented, the State's response to the major areas for Wagner-Peyser planning (i.e., Building America's One-stop System; Labor Exchange Activities, Services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants; Services to Veterans; and Services to Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers) should be identifiable. Likewise, the plan's content should reflect the State Plan Content items in Attachment 1a, State agency Plan Check list.
  
  One signed original and two copies of these State plans should be sent via a letter of transmittal to the appropriate Regional Office by May 31, 1996. If the State decides to include the GCSSP and Title III Plan with the Wagner-Peyser Plan submission, the combined plan must be submitted by May 1, 1996 to the:
OMB Reporting Burden. Public reporting burden for the collection of information for the GCSSP is estimated to average 40 hours per response and the burden for the Title III Plan is estimated to average 20 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the information. Send comments regarding the GCSSP and Title III

Plan burden estimates or any other aspects of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Office of IRM Policy, Department of Labor, N-1301, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (for GCSSP, 1206-0336) and (for Title III Plan, 1205-0273), Washington, D.C. 20503.
Inquiries and Comments. Inquiries regarding the GCSSP or the Title II Statewide JTP should be directed to Barbara DeVeaux or James Wiggins at 202-219-7533: inquiries regarding Title III planning should be directed to Zen Choma or Dorothy Comer at 202-219-5577; inquiries regarding Wagner-Peyser Grants should be directed to Gene Tichenor on (202) 219-5185 or David Balducchi on (202) 219-5257.
Attachments.
1. Guidelines and Instructions for Submission of the GCSSP.
2. Guidance and Instructions for Submission of GCSSP Modifications.
3. Guidance and Instructions for Submission of the Statewide Job Training Plan (JTP).
4. Guidance and Instructions for the Submission of the State Plan for Employment and Training Assistance for Dislocated Workers.
5. Instructions for Submitting Electronic Files.
6. Wagner-Peyser Planning Guidance.
7. JPTA and Wagner-Peyser Planning Estimates.

NOTE: Attachments "A" through "D" and "G" not available to DMS

DIRECTIVE	:	TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT GUIDANCE LETTER NO. 04-95

TO	:	ALL STATE JPTA LIAISONS ALL STATE EMPLOYMENT SECURITY AGENCIES

FROM	:	BARBARA ANN FARMER Administrator for Regional Management

SUBJECT	:	Instructions for Submission of State Plans under Title II and Title III of the Job Training Partnership Act for Program Years 1996 and 1997; and 1996 Wagner-Peyser Act, Program Planning Guidance