TEGL 12-97 Attachment 6

 

Guidelines for Substitution of Pilot Wage Record-Based Retention Measures in Lieu of Telephone Follow-Up Measures in JTPA Performance Standards for Program Years 1998 and 1999.

 

The following are minimal guidelines for States to follow when opting to use Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage record data in lieu of telephone surveys for pilot employment retention performance measures for Title II-A or Title III. These guidelines provide some uniformity in system wide measurement when States are using different data sources, and also afford States flexibility in defining measures and setting benchmarks which best meet State needs.

The consolidated planning guidance for PY 1998 and 1999 (TEGL 2-97) announced that optional post-program performance measures will be offered for States wishing to use wage records to track employment retention and earnings. These guidelines provide a general outline of the conditions under which DOL will permit optional performance standards based on wage record post-program measures.

  1. Universal Reporting. State agrees to run a match of the records of all terminees to wage records rather than using a sample.

  2. Reporting Elements, Formats and Electronic Media. State agrees to provide data on all terminee matches according to the specified elements, formats and electronic media (similar to current Standardized Program Information Report instructions). In cases of multiple employers in the referenced period, the State may choose either: 1) reporting of multiple records for each terminee; or 2) creation of one record for each terminee that sums the employment data for all employers.

  3. Reporting Deadline. State agrees to report termination data for all terminees by the Department's reporting deadline, August 15th following the subject year (August 15th, 1999, for Program Year 1998). State further agrees to submit a second report of post-program outcomes data for all terminees by the Department's deadline, August 15th of the year following the subject year (August 15th, 2000, for Program Year 1998).

  4. Out-of-State Placements. State agrees to make good faith efforts to obtain and report data on out-of-state JTPA placements, including one or more of the following:

    1. implementing data sharing agreements with a majority of contiguous States;

    2. implementing data sharing agreements with States known to account for a majority of out-of-State JTPA placements; and/or

    3. participating in an operational national data sharing arrangement, if one becomes a functional reality.

  5. Sample Data and Prior Year Data for National Measures. State agrees to conduct a follow-up survey of a statewide sample of 5% of terminees during the pilot period (PYs 1998 and 1999) of the wage record-based retention measures and to report the data according to Department's specifications. States are also requested to provide both wage record and survey follow-up data for a recent year, such as PY 96, if possible. This will help the Department develop mathematically equivalent performance measures, appropriate adjustment methodologies, and summary national performance information. (It will not be possible to develop State level survey-based outcomes from the 5% sample.)

  6. Adjustments to Performance Standards. State agrees to adjust SDAs' performance standards to account for local variations in economic conditions, client characteristics, and non-covered employment.

  7. Title IIA Optional Performance Standards. While it is possible to capture hourly and weekly earnings with follow-up surveys, it is only possible to capture total quarterly earnings using wage records, which must serve as both a proxy measure of employment as well as earnings. The following measures were developed for Title II to accommodate the fundamental differences between the two data sources. Therefore, the State agrees to use the following performance measures as the Secretary's Title II core performance measures in place of follow-up survey-based measures:

    These measures are considered interim and transitional, and are expected to be modified by either requirements in new legislation or further refinement of the JTPA performance standards system. States may also choose to set higher earnings levels for making incentives.

    The Department will issue preliminary baseline performance goals and adjustment models for these pilot wage record-based measures in the near future. The baseline goals and adjustment models will be developed using data from the 1991 wage record-based demonstration projects. Baseline performance levels are being issued as "goals" rather than "standards" since the available data is inadequate for establishing national standards. The 1991 demonstration projects included only 10 states and at that time out-of-state and excluded employment (such as self-employment or non-covered employment) were not included in the project results.

    The adjustment models developed for the PY 1998/1999 pilot measures will take into account the necessary adjustments for out-of-state and excluded employment. National standards will be developed when enough data are available to provide valid and reliable departure points.

  8. Alternative Incentives and Sanctions Policy. State agrees to develop for Departmental approval an alternative incentives and sanctions policy to cope with the lag time in availability of performance data. ETA will develop several optional alternative scenarios for possible State adaptation.

  9. Ability to Manage Programs and Report Performance. States choosing wage records as their data source during the next two-year cycle need to ensure that they will be able to adequately manage their local programs and fully comply with federal reporting requirements.

  10. Other Provisions Deemed Appropriate. The Department and/or the State may include other provisions deemed appropriate.

Revised 6/29/98