Search

The federal government helps veterans pursue skills needed in the civilian workforce. Veterans Affairs (VA) created Veterans Employment Through Technology Education Courses (VET TEC) to support veterans who enroll in high-technology education programs through VA-approved training providers. The act includes a provision for the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) to assess VET TEC. This report examines the (1) demographic characteristics of participants; (2) employment outcomes of participants; (3) benefits and implementation challenges reported by training providers; and (4) steps VA has taken to improve the VET TEC program. GAO analyzed data on VET TEC participants and reviewed relevant VA documents, federal laws, and regulations. GAO interviewed VA officials and a nongeneralizable sample of approved training providers selected for variation in the number of veterans served and locations. GAO also compared VA's efforts to leading practices for effective pilot design.

This hearing reviewed ways individuals can make federal job training programs more efficient and effective. Such programs are critical to fostering a competitive workforce and assisting unemployed citizens. However, serious concerns about program fragmentation and potential duplication exist that could result in significant waste. This Committee was dedicated to improving job training opportunities by streamlining unnecessary bureaucracy, eliminating duplicative programs, fostering economic development and encouraging the creation of high-skill and high-wage opportunities for workers in the global economy. Members testifying before the committee were: Honorable Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training; Honorable Ruben Hinojosa, ranking member, Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training; and Honorable John F. Tierney, a Representative in Congress from the State of Massachusetts. Witnesses testifying before the committee were: Evelyn Ganzglass, director, Workforce Development Center for Law and Social Policy; Bert "Van" Royal, owner/broker, Magnolia Point Realty, K&V Investment Group, Inc., chairman, WorkSource; Andrew Sherrill, Director for Education, Workforce, and Income Security, U.S. Government Accountability Office; and Larry Temple, executive director, Texas Workforce Commission. (Individual statements contain footnotes, endnotes, and references.)

Among the topics discussed in this hearing were: what constitutes green energy, how workers can best be provided the skills to thrive in green industries, and the future of America's energy and environmental policies. Statements were presented by: Honorable Patty Murray, a U.S. Senator from the State of Washington, opening statement; Honorable Michael B. Enzi, Ranking Member, a U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming; Honorable Sherrod Brown, a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio; Honorable Robert P. Casey, Jr., a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania; Honorable Kay R. Hagan, a U.S. Senator from the State of North Carolina; Honorable Jeff Merkley, a U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon; Honorable Hilda Solis, Secretary of Labor, Washington, DC; Lee D. Lambert, President, Shoreline Community College, Shoreline, Washington; Phillip, C.L. Lou, former student in the Shoreline Community College Solar Design and Installation Program, Vashon, Washington; Dean Allen, CEO, McKinstry Company, Seattle, Washington; Mark Ayers, President, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO, Washington, DC; and Joan Evans, Director, Wyoming Department of Workforce Services, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Additional materials included: Prepared Statement of Senator Kennedy; Prepared Statement of Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC); Prepared Statement of Independent Electrical Contractors (IEC); Letter by the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC); Letter by Dave Freudenthal, Governor, Cheyenne, Wyoming; Response by Secretary Solis to questions of Senator Kennedy, Senator Murray Senator Enzi, and Senator Isakson; Response by Lee Lambert to questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi; Response by Phillip Lou to questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi; and Response by Joan Evans to questions of Senator Murray and Senator Enzi. (Individual statements contain references.)

This paper presents the Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness Subcommittee's fifth hearing in preparation for the reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act. The last time the Workforce Investment Act reauthorized was in 1998. The Workforce Investment Act was designed to streamline and coordinate job training programs. It was supposed to provide a one stop system of workforce development that would serve workers and employers alike. After 11 years, the system is long overdue for an upgrade, and time is of the essence. Members testifying before the Committee were the Honorable Ruben Hinojosa, Chairman, Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness; and the Honorable Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nevada. Witnesses testifying before the committee were: Chris Brooks, director, Bombard Renewable Energy; Chanda Cook, director of community initiatives, Nevada Public Education Foundation; Rebecca Metty-Burns, interim director, division of workforce & economic development, College of Southern Nevada; and Brian Patchett, president and CEO, Easter Seals of Southern Nevada.

The last reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act was in 1998. To say that times have changed would be an understatement. The testimony of this hearing's witnesses shows that people have ideas and tested practices that work. They just need the resources and the sustained commitment to have a world-class workforce development system that works for those starting at the bottom rung of the career ladder as well as for those racing to the top. Members testifying before the committee were the Honorable Ruben Hinojosa, Chairman, Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness and Honorable Paul Tonko, a Representative in Congress from the State of New York. Witnesses testifying before the committee were: Gail B. Breen, executive director, Fulton, Montgomery, and Schoharie Counties Workforce Development Board, Inc.; Nanine Meiklejohn, senior legislative representative, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME); Mario Musolino, Executive Deputy Commissioner, New York State Department of Labor; Tom Quick, human resources leader, power & water, GE Energy Infrastructure; and Joseph T. Sarubbi, executive director, Training and Education Center for Semiconductor Manufacturing and Alternative and Renewable Technologies (TEC-SMART), Hudson Valley Community College.

The Committee on Education and the Workforce, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 27) to enhance the workforce investment system of the Nation by strengthening one-stop career centers, providing for more effective governance arrangements, promoting access to a more comprehensive array of employment, training, and related services, establishing a targeted approach to serving youth, and improving performance accountability, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. This document includes: Title I--Amendments to Title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998; Title II--Adult Education, Basic Skills, and Family Literacy Education; Title III--Amendments to the Wagner-Peyser Act; Title IV--Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; and Title V--Transition and Effective Date.

The purpose of this hearing was to look for answers to the following questions about the workforce of tomorrow: How will tomorrow's workforce differ from today's? What kind of jobs will tomorrow's employers be looking to fill? What skills will tomorrow's workers need to fill those jobs? And, most importantly, what can be done now to be sure that we are ready when tomorrow arrives at our national doorstep? During the meeting, committee members looked to their witnesses to help navigate them through the lessons of the past, current trends, and projected changes in a wide range of employment factors. Statements during this hearing were provided by: Honorable Michael B. Enzi, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; Gary Garczynski, Past President, Home Builders Institute, National Associating of Home Builders; Tamara J. Erickson, Executive Officer, and Member, Board of Directors, the Concours Group, Watertown, MA; Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Director, Center for Employment Policy, the Hudson Institute, Washington, DC; and Jared Bernstein, Director, Living Standards Program, Economic Policy Institute, Washington, DC; and Edward M. Kennedy, a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts. Additional material was presented by Johnny Isakson, a U.S. Senator from the State of Georgia.

The purpose of this hearing was to gather information and hear testimony on three issues: (1) the expansion of the Cancer Research Center in Hawaii; (2) the recently granted legislative authority for Hawaii 3R's to utilize monies in the Native Hawaiian Education funds to repair those public schools to 25 percent or more Native Hawaiian children; and (3) the need to expand certified apprenticeship and journeymen training programs to ensure that we have qualified, homegrown tradesmen and women to meet the demand that will come as a result of the privatization of military housing. Statements were presented by: Senator Daniel K. Inouye; Senator Daniel K. Akaka; Dr. Evan S. Dobelle, president, University of Hawaii; Dr. Carl Vogel, director, Cancer Research Center of Hawaii; Ms. Dew-Anne Langcoan, vice president, Hawaii Pacific Health; Dr. Okamoto, president and CEO, the Queen's Health Systems; Dr. Jonathan K. Cho, a practicing community oncologist; Honorable Ed Case, U.S. Representative from Hawaii; Patricia Hamamoto, superintendent, State of Hawaii Department of Education; Bruce A. Coppa, Chair, Hawaii 3R's Program; Dennis Manalili, principal, Kaimuki High School; Neil Abercrombie, U.S. Representative from Hawaii; Linda Lingle, Governor, State of Hawaii; Donna Kim, vice president, Hawaii State Senate; and Sylvia J. Luke, vice speaker, Hawaii State House of Representatives; Dr. Clyde M. Sakamoto, chancellor, Maui Community College; Ramsey R. Pedersen, chancellor, Honolulu Community College; Lance Inouye, past president, General Contractors Association of Hawaii; Randy Lau, past president, Building Industry Association; Ron Taketa, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, Local 745; Lynn Kinney, Painters, Decorators, Paperhangers and Allied Traders, Local 1791; Glaziers Architectural and Glass Metal Workers Local 1889, AFL-CIO; Hawaii Building and Construction Trades Council; Laborers' Union, Local 368; and Hawaii Operating Engineers J.A.C. Further prepared statements were submitted by: International Association of Heat & Frost Insulators & Asbestos Workers Local 132, Hawaii; Bricklayers & Ceramic Tile Setters Local 1 and Plasterers' & Cement Masons' Local 630; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1186, Hawaii; Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders Union, Local 204; Roofers, Waterproofers & Allied Workers United Union of Roofers, Local 221; United Association of Plumbers and Fitters Local 675; Scott Y. Nishimoto, State of Hawaii Representative, District 21; Pacific Resource Partnership; Americas Promise Hawaii; Joint Venture Education Forum; Drywall Tapers and Finishers Local 1944, AFL-CIO; Carpet Linoleum and Soft Tile Local 1926, AFL-CIO; CRTC, Inc; Iron Workers Local 625 and Iron Workers Shopmen Local 803; John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii; University of Hawaii at Manoa; Joseph Kane, Jr.; and Sheet Metal Workers Union Local 293.

This document includes comments on the adult provisions of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), informed by research conducted with employers, employer organizations, and others on the strengths and weaknesses of the current workforce development system from the perspective of employers and low-wage, low-skill employees. Jobs for the Future is particularly attentive to ways in which the reauthorization process can strengthen the act's relevance to employers. Comments are organized around the following issues: (1) Mix of services, including revisions to increase funds available for training; (2) Employer engagement and services, including provisions to improve employer engagement and the quality of services to employers; (3) Performance measures: advocacy for strengthening of performance measures tied to employment, retention, and advancement goals; (4) Goal and purpose: advocacy for more explicit commitment to advancing low-wage, low-skill employees to family-sustaining wages; and (5) Relationship to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), including better integration of the adult workforce system and the TANF welfare system to collaborate effectively at the state and local levels. [These comments were submitted to the Education and Workforce Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, February 28, 2003.]

Enhanced cooperation in vocational education and training (VET) will be an important contribution toward ensuring a successful enlargement of the European Union. The social partners play an indispensable role in development, validation, and recognition of vocational competencies and qualifications at all levels and are partners in promotion of enhanced cooperation in this area. These main priorities will be pursued through enhanced cooperation in VET: European dimension; transparency, information, and guidance; recognition of competencies and qualifications; and quality assurance. These principles will underpin enhanced cooperation in VET: measures should be voluntary and principally developed through bottom-up cooperation; initiatives must focus on needs of citizens and user organization; and cooperation should be inclusive and involve member states, candidate countries, and the social partners. Follow up of this declaration will include the following to ensure effective and successful implementation of enhanced European cooperation in VET: implementation of enhanced cooperation in VET will be a gradually integrated part of followup of the objectives report; the existing commission working group will continue work to ensure effective implementation and coordination; and the initial focus between now and 2004 will be on concrete areas where work is already in progress. (YLB)

This document launches a wide public consultation with all those involved in and with an interest in the European Union's (EU's) education, training, and youth programs called Socrates, Tempus, Leonardo da Vinci, and Youth for Europe. It is the first step toward preparing the new generation of programs to start in 2007 and will inform the Commission of European Communities's upcoming detailed proposals for such programs. Sections 2-4 set out the context for this consultation, reporting what has been achieved so far in EU programs; what have been the main developments at European level in education, training, and youth policy; and the scope of program action in these fields. Consultees are invited to respond to a series of 13 key questions that are set out in detail in Section 5. They are divided into these three sections: the type of action to be supported through European programs in the period after 2006; the geographical coverage of the programs (which countries should be involved in which actions); and the design and structure of the new generation of programs. Section 6 explains the different ways the consultees can send in their views. The appendix contains a list of 17 web addresses, offering more information about each action or policy mentioned in the document. (YLB)

A study assessed whether the Department of Labor's (DOL's) information on states' Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) spending was a true reflection of states' available funds. The most recent available spending data from DOL and the 50 states were analyzed. Interviews were conducted with state workforce officials in nine states, local officials in at least one area in seven states, and officials at DOL headquarters, five regions, and four national associations. Findings indicated that DOL lacked accurate information on states' WIA spending and obligations, due to reporting inconsistencies. Lacking such comprehensive information, DOL overestimated amounts states had available to spend. WIA funds were spent within the authorized three-year timeframe. Labor established its own spending benchmarks to determine how states managed their spending, to formulate budget requests, and to target assistance efforts, but had not universally shared those targets with states. States wanted more guidance and technical assistance. Factors that affected when expenditures occurred or were reported included lengthy contract procurement, delayed provider billing, and slower spending at the state level. Fluctuating funding levels affected states' and local areas' willingness to make long-term commitments and inhibited their ability to do long-range planning. The three-page report is followed by "Spending Under the WIA," an overview of the congressional briefing. (YLB)

Coordination between Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)-related programs and Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA)'s one-stop centers increased since spring 2000, when WIA was first implemented. Nearly all states reported some coordination between the programs at either the state or the local level. Most often, coordination took one of these two forms: through co-location whereby a client accessed TANF-related programs at the local one-stop, or through referrals and electronic linkages to off-site programs. How services were delivered also depended on state and local preferences and conditions. Despite progress, states and localities continued to report challenges. WIA funds may not be readily used to serve TANF clients in the one-stops because WIA's performance measures may discourage serving clients who may not be successful. Even when officials chose to use the one-stop system to provide TANF-funded services, other challenges remained, largely stemming from infrastructure limitations and different program definitions and reporting requirements. Some local areas found innovative ways to provide TANF services in the one-stops, often focusing their efforts on resolving the issues that had been found in the fragmented employment training system. Early evidence showed states and localities were increasing their efforts to bring services together to fit local needs. (YLB)

A Senate committee hearing received testimony on the implementation of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 in American Indian and Alaska Native tribal communities. The act provided authority for tribal governments to administer welfare programs formerly administered by the states but did not provide funds to develop the infrastructure to administer welfare programs. A panel of researchers from the General Accounting Office and elsewhere reported on an ongoing study of tribal welfare programs, focusing on economic conditions on Indian reservations; changes in the numbers of Indian welfare recipients since the law was enacted; how the law's flexibility has allowed recipients to engage in traditional subsistence activities and self-employment and pursue education and job training; and tribes' lack of administrative experience and necessary infrastructure, such as automated data systems. Written statements and testimony from Senators and representatives of various tribes, American Indian and Alaska Native organizations, and federal and state agencies discussed poverty and unemployment in Indian country, needs of tribal governments for administrator training and technical assistance, the need for financial assistance to develop small businesses, policy and governance problems in relationships between state and tribal programs, the need for "rural/frontier status" for isolated areas, inadequate funding to meet education and job training needs, needs for child care assistance, and descriptions of tribal welfare services. Many witnesses supported a proposed "American Indian Welfare Reform Act." (SV)

This is a congressional hearing on how vocational and technical education and job training work together to better prepare workers for the 21st century workforce and on successful educational and job training activities and initiatives in Indiana (IN). Testimony includes statements from United States representatives (Howard P. "Buck" McKeon and Mark Souder) and individuals representing Tri-State University, Angola, IN (Earl Brooks); Angola High School, Angola, IN (Steve Grill); Economic Development and Community Resource Officer, Cole Foundation and Plastics Technology Center, Angola, IN (Craig Adolph) and a former student (Travis Kenz); Jobworks, Fort Wayne, IN (Steve Corona); Ivy Tech State College, Fort Wayne, IN (Jon L. Rupright); Four County Area Vocational Cooperative, Garrett, IN (Tim Holcomb); Anthis Career Center, Fort Wayne, IN (Ron Flickinger); and Educational Technology Department, DeKalb County Central United School District, Waterloo, IN (Dick Boyd). Appendixes include written statements of the US representatives who presented statements and of the individuals representing the above organizations and institutions. (YLB)

Workforce Investment Act (WIA) and the TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) programs can be coordinated in a number of ways, some of them especially focused on women. For example, research suggests the following: (1) WIA and TANF can be coordinated to improve low-income women's human capital development; (2) many states and localities intend to use the Workforce Investment Act to provide high quality training; (3) research shows that women experience low wages, poor job quality, and continuing poverty following welfare reform; (4) most welfare recipients and former recipients need skill development to get good jobs; (5) job training and education increase earnings and employment; and (6) education and training improves child well-being. Recommendations for the future include expanding state flexibility and allocating resources to provide quality education and training; removing TANF's 12-month limit on vocational education and training; articulating and expanding the types of education and training that can count as work; eliminating the arbitrary 30 percent cap on education and training; and maintaining or increasing levels of funding for training and education through the Workforce Investment Act. (Contains 43 references.) (KC)

This report describes policy cooperation in the Education and Training Area in the European Union (EU) in response to the Lisbon strategy and provides a comprehensive plan to respond to the challenges of the knowledge society, globalization, and the enlargement of the EU. It focuses on these three objectives: (1) improving the quality and effectiveness of education and training systems in the EU; (2) facilitating the access of all to education and training systems; and (3) opening up education and training systems to the wider world. (The following goals should be achieved in education and training by 2010: (1) Europe will be recognized as a world-wide reference for the quality and relevance of its systems and institutions; (2) systems in Europe will be compatible enough to allow citizens to move between them and to take advantage of their diversity; (3) holders of qualifications, knowledge, and skills acquired anywhere in the EU will be able to get them effectively validated throughout the Union for the purpose of career and further learning; (4) Europeans of all ages will have access to lifelong learning; and (5) Europe will be open to cooperation for mutual benefits with all other regions and should be the most-favored destination of students, scholars, and researchers from other world regions.) Includes a timetable to start follow-up work for objectives, a model to be used in the follow-up of quantitative indicators, and illustrative statistical data. (MO)

This Congressional report contains the testimony and documents presented for the record at the second of two hearings on the effects of welfare reform and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant. Other areas receiving particular attention from witnesses included the impacts of education and training on employment patterns and welfare recipients' success in achieving economic self-sufficiency and the adequacy of the education and training authorized under TANF. The oral and written testimony focuses on the work requirements within the welfare reform bill that Congress passed in the 1996 legislation. The oral statements of the following individuals are presented: Howard "Buck" McKeon and Patsy T. Mink, Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives; Lynn A. Karoly, director, Labor and Population Program and Population Research Center, RAND Institute; E. Mona Garland, director, Opportunities Industrialization Center of Greater Milwaukee, Wisconsin Works; LaShunda Hall, former Wisconsin Works participant; Rodney Carroll, president and chief executive officer, The Welfare to Work Partnership, Washington, D.C.; Martha Davis, legal director, NOW-LDEF, New York; and Jennifer Brooks, director, Self-Sufficiency Programs and Policy, Wider Opportunities for Women. The report's eight appendixes contain the written statements submitted by the witnesses. (MN)

This report presents the testimony and submissions given at a field hearing on workforce training in Michigan. Four expert witness statements follow introductory comments from Vernon J. Ehlers and James A. Barcia, United States Congressmen from Michigan. The statement of Bruce P. Mehlman, the assistant secretary of commerce, assesses the ability of the nation to remain competitive in a global economy and the need for increased emphasis in education on technology. The statement of Cindy Ballard, the director of policy, Michigan Economic Development Corporation, reviews workforce development and training needs research in Michigan. The statement of Tim N. Clark, a researcher at Saginaw Valley State University, examines workforce challenges facing small manufacturers in Michigan. The statement of Robert C. Worthington, Sr., a Michigan manufacturer, outlines obstacles facing industries in the state and offers possible solutions from both government and business. Also included are the witnesses' biographies and financial disclosure statements, as well as a transcript of the discussion that followed the witnesses' testimony. (AJ)

This document reports on a congressional hearing on the George W. Bush administration's proposals for welfare reform and legislation to reauthorize the 1996 welfare reform law. Testimony includes statements from United States (US) Representatives John Boehner and Patsy Mink; Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; and Wendell Primus, director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; and Jason A. Turner, visiting fellow, the Heritage Foundation. Appendixes include written statements and testimony of the individuals who presented live statements and testimony; a list of groups that have endorsed H.R. 3113, The TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) Reauthorization Act; and questions from minority members. (YLB)

This report presents the testimony and submissions presented at the first of a series of Congressional hearings on workforce development and reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act. Statements were given by the following individuals: (1) Buck McKeon, U.S. (United States) Congressman from California; (2) John Tierney, U.S. Congressman from Massachusetts; (3) Bruce Stenslie, Director of the Ventura County, California, Workforce Investment Board and Deputy Director of the Ventura County Human Services Agency; (4) Danny Wegman, President of Wegman's Food Markets; (5) Diane D. Rath, Chair of the Texas Workforce Commission and Commissioner Representing the Public, Austin, Texas; and (6) Timothy Barnicle, Co-Director of the Workforce Development Program, National Center on Education and the Economy. The bulk of the document consists of the written statements of these witnesses and a sampling of promising best practices from the nation's Workforce Investment System. (AJ)

A Senate committe hearing received testimony on the proposed "Native American Commercial Driving Training and Technical Assistance Act" (Senate Bill 1344). The Act cites the high unemployment and economic distress among Native Americans, the federal government's obligation to assist Indian tribes with economic development, the high demand and expected increase in demand for commercial truck drivers, and the benefits of a career in commercial vehicle driving. Four grants to provide commercial driver training and certification would be awarded competitively, with the competition restricted to tribally controlled community colleges or universities. Two of these--Fort Peck Community College (Montana) and D-Q University (California)--currently offer commercial vehicle driving programs. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell and speakers representing the American Trucking Association, an American Indian-owned trucking firm, and Fort Peck Community College offered comments and recommendations related to the Act's passage and implementation, and discussed the role of tribally controlled colleges and universities in Native American job training and economic development; the funding needs of tribally controlled colleges; descriptions of current commercial driving programs and certification requirements; and career benefits. (SV)

An evaluation was conducted to assess progress in implementing the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998 (which sought to streamline the delivery of employment and training services) during its first full year ending in June 2001. Data were gathered through contact with 12 national associations representing state and local implementers, visits to 9 one-stop centers in 6 areas in 3 states, and meetings with officials and review of documents from the 4 federal agencies that house the mandatory partner programs. The study found that state and local implementers have faced challenges during the early stages of WIA implementation because of the significant changes to the work force system that WIA introduced. Mandatory partners have wrestled with their concerns about how to participate in one-stops without adversely affecting their respective target populations, violating their own programs' rules, or straining their financial resources. Training providers have struggled to find ways to meet WIA's data collection and reporting requirements, and as a result, have reduced the course offerings they make available to WIA job seekers. Private-sector members of work force investment boards have grappled with their concerns that their input is diluted by staff and committees set up to facilitate board operations. The study recommends that the various federal agencies work together to provide more effective guidance to address the concerns raised by state and local implementers and provide more time for training providers to adjust to the data collection and reporting requirements. (KC)

The Comptroller General of the United States testified before Congress regarding the General Accounting Office's (GAO's) framework for building the information technology (IT) work force to achieve results. The following were among the key points of his testimony: (1) the federal government is facing pervasive human capital challenges that are eroding the ability of many agencies to perform their missions economically, efficiently, and effectively; (2) many parties, including the President, federal department and agency leaders, Congress, the private sector, and academia, will need to work to address the government's human capital problem; (3) human capital issues are having a particular bearing on the IT area inasmuch as the federal government's ability to acquire and use IT successfully will hinge on its ability to build, prepare, and manage its IT work force; and (4) federal agencies must overcome these two basic challenges related to IT human capital: a shortage of skilled workers and the need to provide a broad range of related staff training and development. (The following items are appended: the GAO's human capital framework; examples of federal agencies with human capital challenges; and a list of the responsibilities of selected agencies/organizations and sectors for the addressing human capital challenges.) (MN)

The General Accounting Office (GAO) reviewed the performance measurement system of the Department of Labor's (DOL's) Veterans Employment and Training Service (VETS), which administers programs and activities designed to help veterans obtain employment and training assistance. The GAO review focused on the following items: VETS' proposed performance measures; (2) the data sources VETS proposes to use in its new system; and (3) any other measurement issues that might affect the comparability of states' performance data. The review was based on interviews and discussions with more than 45 officials in 15 states, interviews with VETS officials, and a review of relevant documents. The review established that although VETS' proposed performance measures improve performance accountability over the current system, certain aspects of the new system raise concerns that VETS should address. It is recommended that VETS establish a performance measure that more effectively gauges the success of its staff-assisted services and that it clearly define its target population. The GAO further recommends that VETS eliminate the measure related to the number of federal contractor jobs listed. The following items are appended: a comparison of performance measures used by the VETS, Employment Service, and Workforce Investment Act programs; states' entered-employment rates for veterans in program year 1999; and comments from the DOL. (MN)

This report presents the testimony and submissions presented at one of a series of hearings on welfare reform and reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. The statement by Cynthia M. Fagnoni, managing director of education, workforce, and income security issues at the U.S. General Accounting Office, assesses progress in meeting work-focused TANF goals, paying special attention to the need to emphasize and enhance work-based strategies and the need to foster and facilitate improved management and service delivery by states. The statement by Christine Dever, an analyst in social legislation at the Library of Congress' Congressional Research Service, examines the impact of policies designed to promote work and summarizes what is known about the circumstances of families who have left welfare. The statement by Mark Greenberg, a representative of the Center for Law and Social Policy, discusses the problems faced by families while enrolled in the TANF program and after leaving it. The statement by Robert Rector, a representative of the Heritage Foundation, examines the economic, social, and other effects of welfare on families. Also included are the submissions from the Association for Children for Enforcement of Support, Inc., and the Coalition on Women and Job Training. (MN)

This Congressional report contains the testimony and documents presented for the record of a hearing to gather input regarding the Strengthening Working Families Act of 2001, which was drafted to provide the assistance needed by former welfare recipients and other poor working parents to remain employed and advance in the labor market. The following are among the agencies and organizations represented at the hearing: Goodwill of Acadiana (Opelousas, Louisiana); Center for Fathers, Families, and Workforce Development (Baltimore, Maryland); Welfare to Work Partnership (Washington, DC); Catholic Charities (Alexandria, Virginia); United Way of Southeastern Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania); Child Welfare League of America; M.A.R.C.H, Inc. (Mediation Achieving Results for Children); and Center for Law and Social Policy. The following are among the topics discussed by witnesses: changes in employment levels and poverty levels since passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Reconciliation Act; the need to make sure that working poor families are better off financially than before they started on welfare; the problems that former welfare recipients and other poor workers with families face with regard to affording housing, food, transportation, child care, and health care; the effectiveness of block grants; and the role of work supports and education in boosting job retention and worker advancement. (MN)

This report contains the strategic vision for the Department of Labor (DOL)/Employment and Training Administration's research efforts for the next five years. Section I discusses the scope of the research plan and the development process. Section II is a review of literature concerning functioning of the labor market and identification of areas needing additional research. Section III reviews recent policy changes that will affect employment and training interventions. It identifies potential research topics that would most help DOL implement the Workforce Investment Act 1998 (WIA). Section IV provides a review of recent research, evaluation, pilot, and demonstration initiatives to help implement and improve programs under WIA. It focuses on understanding effectiveness of employment and training interventions designed to aid employers, adult job seekers, youth, and disabled and other special populations. Section V examines alternative methodologies for employment and training research and their strengths and weaknesses. Section VI identifies these nine high priority research topics: understand intermediaries' role in the labor market; identify effective training strategies; develop appropriate assessment tools; evaluate and improve job retention programs and services; develop strategies to promote career advancement; identify effective support services; understand impact of self- directed employment services; improve interventions to assist the hardest-to-serve; and develop the potential of telecommuting. There is a 246-item bibliography. (YLB)

The Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS) administers programs and activities designed to help veterans obtain employment and training assistance. By establishing one-stop centers for employment services, the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) affects how VETS serves veterans. VETS has made some progress and improvements with regard to its current strategic and performance plans. It has revised its mission statement to better focus on the outcomes associated with accomplishing its mission. The plans no longer contain much extraneous information found in past plans. While VETS has improved the form and content of its plans, VETS has not established a consistent set of priorities as to which veterans it intends to target for employment assistance. It has not developed sufficient strategies to address the major and complex challenges it faces, such as how best to incorporate its programs into the workforce development system WIA established. VETS appears to be taking a reactive rather than proactive approach. While VETS recognizes that the establishment of one-stop centers will increase the number of its service delivery points, it has not developed any plans to address how it will provide assistance at all centers. The quality of some VETS' program management data is questionable, and it is unlikely VETS can accurately assess its performance nationally and know whether it improves from year to year. (YLB)

This paper contains a transcript of the testimony of Robert C. Gross, representing state employment services program and unemployment compensation agencies, before the U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources and Education and the Workforce. According to the testimony, the publicly funded work force system has undergone a remarkable transformation into a coordinated approach in which today's work force learns tomorrow's skills and employers can find tomorrow's promising employees. The features of such a coordinated approach, known as a "one-stop system," include the following: (1) everyone can be served and have diverse needs met; (2) customers, service standards, and resources are shared; (3) components relate to each other and to other systems; (4) multiple programs have a single customer interface; (5) clear customer pathways exist from one service to another; and (6) multiple programs share accountability for system performance. Challenges facing the new work force system include funding, reporting, and partnering, but according to Gross, the system is prepared to meet the challenges of the new economy. (KC)

The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) focuses on integrating and streamlining services, requiring that most employment and training services, including those provided under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant, be provided through the One-Stop Center System. States are implementing WIA, but not all will have all steps completed by July 1, 2000. While WIA does not require states to provide all mandatory program services on-site at one-stop centers, states report that many services are. The largest sources of funding to support the one-stop infrastructure and operations are most often WIA-mandated labor programs. A majority of states report at least some relationship between one-stop centers and TANF, an optional program under WIA, at the state or local level. Challenges to implementing an integrated system result from establishing and formalizing WIA-required partnerships; developing the one-stop infrastructure; and integrating program services while responding to multiple federal requirements. Despite challenges, states and localities are developing promising integrated service delivery approaches. Areas critical to successful service integration under WIA are attracting and serving employers; bringing in job seekers; creating a customer-friendly environment for job seekers; providing job seekers with tailored and seamless services; and helping job seekers become self-sufficient. (YLB)

During fiscal year 1999, the Office of Correctional Job Training and Placement (OCJTP) conducted numerous activities related to its primary functions, which are as follows: (1) coordinate federal departments' and agencies' efforts related to correctional job training and placement; (2) provide training to develop staff competencies needed by state and local agencies to assist offenders and ex-offenders in gaining marketable occupational skills and job placement; (3) provide technical assistance related to development of offender employability to state and local training and employment agencies; and (4) collect and disseminate information on offender job training and placement programs and outcomes. The following were among the specific activities conducted by OCJTP within those 4 functions: (1) cosponsored the first national forum for administrators of offender job training and placement services; (2) convened 12 focus groups to elicit recommendations from inmates, ex-offenders, and corrections staff and administrators regarding offenders' employment needs and skills needed by professionals to meet offenders' employment needs; (3) initiated pilot testing of self-directed interactive software to help states replicate a prison industries program developed in the state of Washington; and (4) developed an 120-hour competency-based training program for corrections staff. (Focus group and survey results are appended, along with training participants' self-reported increases in skills.) (MN)

At a hearing in Honolulu (Hawaii), the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations received testimony on health, education, and employment and training programs serving the Native people of Hawaii. In July 1999, a federal government brief filed in a U.S. Supreme Court case established the official legal position of the United States that Native Hawaiians have the same status as other Native people of the United States and that there is a federal trust responsibility for Native Hawaiians. Testimony from state-level administrators outlined the current status of health, housing, education, and job training for Native Hawaiians and proposed recommendations for pending federal legislation: the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Amendments of 1999, the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act, and the Native Hawaiian Education Act. Other testimony described Native Hawaiian health care systems, the Native Hawaiian heart health initiative, the Native Hawaiian Cancer Awareness Research and Training Center, the Hawaii high schools health study, the Native Hawaiian Health Scholarship Program, the practice of naturopathic medicine with Native Hawaiians, the Native Hawaiian Higher Education Program and its outcomes and impacts, programs focused on Hawaiian language and cultural maintenance, family-based early childhood education programs, the Native Hawaiian Center of Excellence (to improve the health of indigenous Hawaiians), comprehensive school-based services, and the Native Hawaiian Special Education Project. (SV)

The Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims of the House Committee on the Judiciary met to hear testimony on the benefits to American workers, businesses, citizens, and legal residents of more educated immigrants in the national workforce. Statements were given by the following persons: (1) Lamar Smith, U.S. Congressman from Texas; (2) William Archey, president and chief executive officer, American Electronics Association; (3) Bebecca Quan Burdette, attorney-at-law; (4) Barry Chiswick, Department of Economics, University of Illinois, Chicago; (5) Stephen F. Clarke, senior legal specialist, Law Library of Congress; (6) James R. Edwards, Jr., researcher and author; (7) Randel K. Johnson, vice president, Labor and Employee Benefits, U.S. Chamber of Commerce; (9) Richard W. Judy, director, Center for Workforce Development, Hudson Institute; (10) Laura Reiff, attorney-at-law; and (11) Kersi B. Shroff, legal specialist, Law Library of Congress. (Eleven appendices contain the written statement of these witnesses and others submitted for the record.) (AJ)

Research on effectiveness of welfare-to-work approaches shows programs that combine approaches--job search assistance and education and training--have better employment and earnings outcomes than either approach alone. Consistent with findings and the work focus of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, states have been revising welfare programs to focus on moving people into employment rather than providing monthly cash assistance. States often expect clients to test the job market for a time before providing other services. Education and vocational training are largely reserved for those who need it to get or keep a job or to advance on a career ladder. As welfare agencies focus more on moving clients into jobs, goals and operations of the welfare system have become increasingly similar to those of the work force development system. The two systems are working more closely to meet needs of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) clients. A review of seven state-sponsored studies and a recent nationwide study show that most adults who left welfare were employed at some time; many have returned to the welfare rolls. As welfare reform continues to evolve, attention should be paid to emerging challenges: develop ways in which systems can help the hardest-to-employ get and keep a job; enhance opportunities for low-wage workers to maintain employment and increase earnings; and develop ways to foster greater collaboration between the workforce development and welfare systems to meet employment needs of TANF clients. (YLB)

A study examined research conducted on the effectiveness of different welfare-to-work approaches. Five evaluations begun in the 1980s with five-year results indicated that programs focusing on rapid employment and job search activities combined with education and training activities more often increased employment and earnings and reduced welfare payments, when compared with programs that focused solely on job search activities or those that placed the greatest emphasis on education. Preliminary results (2-year findings) were obtained from a more recent ongoing evaluation started in 1992--the only evaluation designed explicitly to compare the effectiveness of a rapid-employment approach with an education-based welfare-to-work approach. The results showed that, although each approach has increased participants' employment and earnings, neither approach has proven itself clearly better. The rapid employment approach did cost about half as much per person as the education-based approach. Recent studies of factors affecting cognitive development of children in welfare families indicated a mother's higher level of educational attainment was one factor that may positively affect children's development. A body of research on effects of poverty on children's educational attainment suggested a significant positive relationship between parents' and their children's educational attainment among welfare and non-welfare populations. (Appendixes contain 39 references, study scope and methodology, and comments from the Department of Health and Human Services.) (YLB)

This document records the oral and written testimony from a 1999 Senate Committee hearing on "the forgotten half"--young people who do not continue their education past high school and, in many cases, do not finish high school. Witnesses testified that there is a great need for persons with technical skills to fill existing and projected jobs in the United States, but that young people with the appropriate skills cannot be found. In response to this need, some witnesses suggested that more attention should be paid to high schools when Congress re-authorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Current legislation directs only 8 percent of the funds authorized by the act to high schools, although 28 percent of students are in high school. The witnesses asked for more funding for programs to improve high school teaching in technical areas and for minority and disadvantaged students, and to create innovative programs. Several witnesses profiled the programs in which they are involved, which have been successful in helping low-achieving students to acquire basic and technical skills and to advance to postsecondary education and to higher-wage employment. (KC)

The Colorado Vocational Act of 1970 was adopted by the Colorado General Assembly to provide assistance to local school districts operating vocational education programs approved by the Colorado State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education. The rules detail the requirements and processes for reimbursement of school districts under the 1970 act. The rules are divided into eight main sections: (1) a list of relevant definitions that are contained in the act, including "approved program,""designated area vocational school," and "per pupil operating revenues"; (2) program approval criteria, application and renewal procedures, and evaluation requirements; (3) designated area vocational school approval criteria, application and renewal procedures, and evaluation requirements; (4) credential requirements for teachers; (5) eligible costs, including apportionment guidelines, criteria for equipment and furniture, books and supplies, contracted programs, services provided by instructional personnel, and administration; (6) payment and audit procedures; and (7) appeals processes. (JJL)

This congressional hearing continues the House's oversight of the Department of Labor's (DOL's) Job Corps program, focusing on the fourth element of successful job training, maintaining a vocational curriculum that reflects current and future job opportunities. It reviews findings of a General Accounting Office (GAO) study that found the program performance measures may seriously overstate actual Job Corps performance and gave such examples as definition of those who finish only a portion of a vocational curriculum as completers and questionable, even preposterous, attribution of training-related job placements. Testimony includes statements, letters, and other material submitted for the record by the following; Representatives in Congress from the States of Maine, Connecticut, and New York; National Director, Job Corps; Director, Office of Job Corps, DOL; and individuals representing the GAO; Home Builders Institute; Plasterers and Cement Masons Job Corps Training Program; Potomac Job Corps Center, Washington, DC; and Old Dominion Job Corps Center, Monroe, Virginia.

This document provides an overview of the Workforce Investment Act, which provides the framework for a national work force preparation and employment system designed to meet simultaneously the needs of the nation's businesses and of job seekers wishing to further their careers. The document begins with a brief summary of the act's five titles, which do the following: authorize the new work force investment system; reauthorize adult education and literacy programs; make employment service/job service activities become part of the "one-stop" system and establish a national employment statistics initiative; reauthorize Rehabilitation Act programs and link the programs to state and local work force development systems; and authorize state unified plans and incentive grants for work force development programs. Discussed in the document's remaining sections are the following: the new work force preparation and employment system's key features ("customer focus,""one-stop" approach, empowerment through training accounts, accountability); eligibility and service requirements affecting adults, dislocated workers, and youth served by the system; design and management of the new system (state and local work force investment boards, youth councils); funding; and implementation. Appended is a detailed comparison of the provisions of the Job Training Partnership Act and the Workforce Investment Act of 1998. (MN)

The Department of Labor (DOL) conducts several activities to foster Job Corps' employer and community linkages to ensure the appropriateness of its vocational training to local labor markets and its relevance to employer needs. However, a review by the General Accounting Office (GAO) determined that information reported by DOL on the percentage of Job Corps participants who complete their vocational training and obtain training-related jobs is misleading and overstates program results. Although Job Corps reported that, in program year 1996, 48% of program participants nationwide completed training, the GAO found that only 14% of program participants had actually completed all requirements of their vocational training curricula. The remaining participants counted by Job Corps as completing training had completed only some of the duties and tasks of a specific volunteer training program. According to DOL, 62% of Job Corps participants nationwide found jobs matching their training. At the five Job Corps centers visited by the GAO, however, the validity of 41% of the job placements reported by DOL to be training related was questionable. The GAO also questioned DOL's practice of awarding sole-source contracts to national labor and business organizations for vocational training. (MN)

The Enterprise Florida Jobs and Education Partnership has taken actions to resolve issues raised in a previous report. The legislature has expanded the partnership's work force development (WFD) role; assigned it a role in implementing the state's welfare-to-work program; and established additional incentive funding for WFD program outcomes. The partnership has expanded its evaluation efforts to address requirements in recent legislation. It has developed both baseline measures necessary to determine whether performance outcomes are improving from year to year, as well as expected performance levels necessary to evaluate whether WFD programs are achieving desired outcomes. The partnership's procedures for identifying and eliminating poor performing programs include evaluating the performance of local WFD boards and requiring corrective action when appropriate. Local WFD boards refer clients to community college and school district job training programs. The partnership uses Performance-Based Incentive Funding (PBIF) to encourage community colleges and school districts to provide job training programs that prepare individuals for occupations that meet market demands and provide a living wage. Disadvantaged student outcomes (completion, employment rates, wage levels) show substantial increases since the PBIF program began. The partnership monitors community college and school district PBIF performance to prevent loss of federal funds. (YLB)

This congressional hearing focuses on a General Accounting Office (GAO) examination of the Department of Labor's management of Job Corps recruitment and placement contractors. Its focuses are how the contractors demand and measure success in two of the four strategy areas--client commitment and client placement in a job with long-term potential--and the need pointed out in the study's results for a stronger focus on performance and accountability in both areas. Testimony includes statements, letters, and other materials submitted for the record by the following: Representatives in Congress from the States of Virginia, Tennessee, Connecticut, and New York; Associate Directors, Education and Employment Issues, GAO; Deputy Inspector General and Assistant Inspector General, Department of Labor (DOL); Director, Office of Job Corps, DOL; and individuals representing the Clearfield Job Corps Center; Hubert H. Humphrey Job Corps Center; and David L. Carrasco Job Corps Center. (YLB)

This report recommends passage of the Workforce Investment Partnership Act of 1997. It describes this bill as one that streamlines the current federal job training system, making it more user-friendly, and consolidates the numerous federal job training programs, eliminating confusing and redundant mandates and creating integrated statewide work force development systems. Nine sections are included: (1) background and need for the legislation; (2) history of the legislation and votes in committee; (3) committee views; (4) cost estimate; (5) regulatory impact statement; (6) application of the law to the legislative branch; (7) section-by-section analysis; (8) additional views; and (9) changes in existing law. (YLB)

This congressional report contains testimony pertaining to reauthorization of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, which was drafted to authorize funds for programs covered by the act and consolidate, coordinate, and improve employment, training, literacy, and vocational rehabilitation programs in the United States. Statements were provided by three U.S. senators (Mike DeWine, Ohio; Paul D. Wellstone, Minnesota; Tom Harkin, Iowa) and representatives of the following agencies and organizations: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services of the U.S. Department of Education; Rehabilitation Services Administration; National Institution of Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission; Vermont Association of Business, Industry, and Rehabilitation; National Council for Independent Living; Fairfax Opportunities Unlimited; Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities; Council for State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation; and Arkansas Rehabilitation Services. An appendix constituting approximately 50% of the document contains statements, articles, publications, and letters that were submitted by 18 individuals and representatives of the following agencies and organizations: Council of Organizational Representatives; National Rehabilitation Association; National Industries for the Blind; American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; and American Foundation for the Blind. (MN)

This document reports the oral and written testimony submitted at a Congressional hearing on implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act in the Veterans Benefits Administration's (VBA) educational service and vocational and counseling services. Oral and written testimony was presented by Representative Jack Quinn, chair of the committee, and Representatives Bob Filner and Lane Evans, as well as representatives of the VBA. The testimony focused on the need to evaluate VBA programs in terms of outcomes and how to set up outcome measurements. How to measure these outcomes, what outcomes to measure, and for how long are issues currently being addressed, according to the testimony. (KC)

This congressional hearing examines vocational education, adult education, and job training initiatives in Vermont and the role of these programs in developing work force development legislation. Testimony includes statements from a U.S. Senator and individuals representing the following: Vermont Department of Employment and Training; Vermont State Colleges; Vermont Department of Social Welfare; Agency of Commercial and Community Development; Burlington Technical Center; Career and Lifelong Learning, Vermont Department of Education; Lyndon State College; Vermont Adult Education Board; Executive Team of Central Vermont Adult Basic Education; Welfare to Work Programs, Vermont Department of Social Welfare; Mahoney Hardware; Vermont Science and Education Center; Vermont Heating and Ventilating; Vermont Technical College; Champlain Initiative; Governor's Rehabilitation Advisory Council; School-to-Work, Randolph region; Rutland Economic Development Corporation, Rutland Regional Educational Alliance; School-to-Work, Upper Valley; River Bend Career and Technical Center; Bradford Area Workforce Investment Board; Northern New England Tradeswomen; and Northland Job Corps Center. Other statements are from students, apprentices, and instructors from the Northland Job Corps, Essex Technical Center, and Burlington Technical Center. (YLB)

The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing to assess the success of Public Law 102-477, the Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992. Specifically, the hearing looked at how well the Act is working in terms of enhancing program efficiency, reducing unemployment in Native communities, and improving availability of employment and other services to Native people. The intent of Congress in enacting the Act was to allow tribal authorities to consolidate federal formula-funded programs into a single program, and to achieve efficiencies in that consolidation. The Act allows consolidation of 11 programs of the Department of Labor, Department of Health and Human Services, and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and will be extended to include welfare reform in July 1997. At the time of the hearing, participants included 18 grantees representing 177 federally recognized tribes. Representatives of the BIA testified about the Act's success in reducing administrative burdens on the tribes, the BIA's reluctance to support inclusion of Johnson O'Malley funds in the program, and cash flow problems. Representatives of tribes and intertribal organizations described their programs and discussed program successes in terms of increased tribal involvement, job placements, and intertribal cooperation and decreased costs and paperwork; implications for tribal implementation of welfare reform; and repeated bureaucratic delays in dealing with the BIA. (SV)

This document contains the text of the Employment, Training, and Literacy Enhancement Act of 1997, as amended by committee, including the titles that cover the following: general provisions; employment and training programs for disadvantaged youth; federally administered programs; adult education programs; miscellaneous provisions; the State Human Resource Investment Council; the Wagner-Peyser Act; technical and conforming amendments; effective date and transition provisions; general provisions; vocational rehabilitation programs; research and training; training and demonstration projects; National Council on Disability; rights and advocacy; employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities; independent living services and centers for independent living; special demonstrations and training projects; the Helen Keller National Center Act; and effective date. The document includes section-by-section analysis of the amendments, additional and minority views, and cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office. (KC)

This document reports the oral and written testimony submitted at a Congressional hearing on ways in which the government, business, and industry are working to improve the competitiveness of the U.S. work force through education and training initiatives. Witnesses included the following: U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich; U.S. Department of Education Assistant Secretary David Longanecker; Thomas Bailey, Columbia University Institute on Education and the Economy; Howard Rosen, Competitiveness Policy Council; Howard Samuel, Council on Competitiveness; Stanley Litow, IBM Foundation; Roberts Jones, National Alliance of Business; Leo Reddy, National Coalition for Advanced Manufacturing; and Sanford Weill, Travelers Group, New York. Their testimony focused on the need for national policy initiatives to reform schools and job training to produce a competitive work force with the skills needed for the next century. They suggested earlier emphasis on acquiring skills needed on the job, more focus on career education at earlier grades, and the necessity for employer input into the school mission. Programs that are fulfilling these ideals were described and the necessity for more collaborative efforts was emphasized. (KC)