PY 1997 Wagner-Peyser state planning guidance
Is this still the rule?
This document has been rescinded. Ezel checks what federal law requires today, under current federal labor law, and answers your situation with citations.
Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 04-95, Change 3 Issue date: February 19, 1997. Rescissions: None. Expiration date printed on the letter: Continuing. To: All State JTPA Liaisons; All State Worker Adjustment Liaisons; All State Wagner-Peyser Administering 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 (PY) 1996 and 1997; and PY 1997 Wagner-Peyser Act Program Planning Guidelines.
-
Purpose. To add paragraph 7c to Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 4-95 and to provide Attachment F1, PY 1997 Wagner-Peyser (W-P) Planning Guidance.
-
Waiver Request. The Department of Labor's Appropriations Act of 1997 (Public Law 104-208) contains three provisions relating to waivers - a general statutory/regulatory authority that applies to all States, a Work-Flex Partnership authority that permits up to six States to be selected for a demonstration program, and a continuation of the existing waiver authority that applies only to Oregon. The existing authority for Oregon impacts on the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA); whereas, the other two authorities impact on both the Wagner-Peyser Act and the JTPA. The general statutory/regulatory and Work-Flex waivers authority(ies) will be discussed in detail in two separate forthcoming TEGLs (currently under review by OMB), including guidance for submittal of applications. The waiver requests must be forwarded to the Secretary of Labor via the appropriate Employment and Training Administration Regional Administrator by the Governor of a State. After the State's waiver request is approved, the Governor may delegate such authority to the operating agency head.
a. Wagner-Peyser Act Waivers and State Plan Submissions. The Department may grant waivers to any of the statutory or regulatory requirements of Sections 8, 9 and 10 of the W-P Act (except for requirements relating to the provision of services to unemployment insurance claimants and veterans, and to universal access to basic labor exchange services without cost to job seekers [Section 105 of Department of Labor 1997 Appropriations Act]). Section 8 of the W-P Act sets forth the requirements relating to the State planning process.
- (1) If the State plans to submit a request for waiver of W-P Act provisions or regulations (applicable to Sections 8, 9 and 10), the State should notify the appropriate Regional Office by April 30 and indicate the statutory or regulatory waiver(s) to be requested. The State should also indicate when its waiver request will be submitted. Regional Offices will make every effort to act upon waiver requests by July 1, 1997, if they are received by April 30. To insure prompt responses, Regional Offices may respond with a partial approval in those instances where a request contains multiple parts and further information or clarification is required. The Regional Offices have the discretion to extend the State's PY 1996 W-P Plan, if necessary, until action is taken on the State's waiver request, or to require State plans in accordance with the timeframe set forth in paragraph 3.a. below. Regional Offices that extend a State's PY 1996 W-P plan in order to complete the waiver application review process or in anticipation of a waiver request that changes the State's process for W-P planning, shall not grant an extension beyond September 30, 1997. (2) Irrespective of any waiver request relating to the State Plan, Program Year 1997 W-P policy objectives set forth in Section F1 of this directive should be considered for inclusion in the final State plan, consistent with Section 7 of the W-P Act; (3) 1997 State Plans must include instructions for the provision of services to unemployment insurance claimants and veterans, and to universal access to basic labor exchange services without cost to job seekers as required in Section 105 of the Department of Labor 1997 Appropriation Act; (4) If the State is not submitting a waiver request to the statutory/regulatory waiver authority for W-P Act (applicable to Sections 8, 9 and 10), the State should submit its entire plan as described below. -
Changes.
a. Add 7c. Wagner-Peyser State Plans for PY 1997. Each State will prepare an annual plan for PY 1997 to provide services and activities within the States as authorized under Section 7(a), 7(b), and 7(c) of the W-P Act.
States may present their PY 1997 W-P plans in accordance with one of the options outlined in paragraph 5 of TEGL No. 4-95. However, these options do not affect States' obligations to adhere to Federal requirements pursuant to the Wagner-Peyser Act. Further, State W-P plans shall address the PY 1997 planning priorities set out in Attachment F1, PY 1997 W-P Planning Guidance of this Change 1. Notwithstanding the format in which the State plan is presented, the State's response to the major areas for W-P planning (i.e., New State Workforce Development Systems; Labor Exchange Initiatives; Services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) Claimants; Service 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 Enclosure A, the State Agency Wagner-Peyser Plan Checklist for PY 1997, which will be used by the Regions in reviewing plans. One signed original and two copies of these State plans should be sent via a letter of transmittal to the appropriate Regional Office by April 30, 1997, or as provided in paragraph 4.a. above.b. Attachment F1 contains the PY 1997 W-P Planning Guidance.
-
Inquiries and Comments. Requests for technical assistance or other inquiries should be directed to the Regional Office. Inquiries regarding this change may be directed to Gene Tichenor on (202) 219-5185, ext. 135 or David Balducchi on (202) 219-5257, ext. 158.
-
Attachment.
Attachment F1: PY 1997 Wagner-Peyser (W-P) Planning Guidance
TEGL 04-95 Change 3 ATTACHMENT F1
PY 1997 WAGNER-PEYSER (W-P) PLANNING GUIDANCE
State Wagner-Peyser Annual Service Plan Framework
- New State Workforce Development Systems. During PY 1997, one of
the Employment and Training Administration's (ETA) high priority goals will be to work with State Employment Security Agencies (SESAs) to continuously ensure that State public labor exchange programs are in a strong position to play an integral role in emerging State workforce development systems. Currently, public labor exchange programs are the centerpiece of most State One-Stop systems. For many customers, State public labor exchange services will be the most sought services provided in the growing network of State One-Stop Career Centers.
The ES Revitalization initiative's emphasis on a strong customer service focus in improving State labor exchange and related programs will continue to enhance SESAs' ability to meet the needs of employers and job seekers in a One-Stop Career Center system. In PY 1997, W-P policy at the Federal level will continue to promote a Federal-State partnership that delivers job finding and employer services through a customer-focused, technology-advanced, increasingly self-serviced, and outcome-driven system. ES Revitalization's customer service values continue to provide a basis for improving labor exchange services to job seekers and employers through electronic and mediated services. States should consider in their plans how public labor exchange services in new State workforce development systems are achieving the requirements of the basic labor exchange program at Part 652.3 of the W-P regulations.
- Labor Exchange Initiatives. Job seekers and employers rely on
ETA and State partners to provide better job opportunities for American workers and higher productivity for employers through a broad range of services that increase the efficiency with which the U.S. labor market operates. States are encouraged to use W-P funds to cooperate and assist the Federal partner in implementing these goals in the following areas:
a. Building an electronic labor exchange network through
America's Job Bank (AJB) and State Job Bank Internet linkages
at local outlets and self-service options where customers can
gain access to those services. States should consider in
their plans improving the prospects of direct employer entry
of job orders and openings through AJB and a system for
claiming credit for placement of applicants against directly entered job orders. Also, States should consider introducing the Talent Bank, integrated into its labor exchange services mix; and, linking its unemployment insurance (UI) continued claim voice response system to its job bank (see item 3. below), and connecting its job bank to voice response units or remote kiosks.
b. Enhancing the capacity of its labor exchange staff and services to play a key system-building role in State workforce development through methodologies which may include procedures and processes such as: reviews of State and local operations; indicators of performance to manage its
operations; approaches to measuring quality of
service and customer satisfaction; entered
employment; and utilization of customer
satisfaction surveys and plans.
c. Cooperating with ETA and National Employer Council (NEC), or other business groups to increase efforts to provide for employer input into the operation of the emerging State workforce development systems and conducting effective employer contact programs to improve customer service.
d. Considering potential impacts of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (welfare reform) on the State's public labor exchange program in areas such as: potential increase, if any, in the number of welfare applicants; impact that such increases may have on local operations and the steps to respond to expanded workloads.
e. Planning for the inclusion of Work Opportunities Tax Credit (WOTC) as part of its strategy for implementing the work requirements of welfare reform and how the WOTC will be linked with other workforce development services to provide WOTC "qualified" jobseekers with a portfolio of workforce preparation resources to enhance their job-finding potential. The plan may provide for developing maximum employer participation in the WOTC program through public information and outreach; how local "points of access" to the program will be created through delegation of WOTC conditional certification authority to participating agencies; or how the program will be made locally accessible through other means.
f. Exploring steps to increase the number of job orders and
openings received; and ways to reduce the transition time of
unemployed workers from unemployment to reemployment.
- Services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) Claimants. The
relationship between the labor exchange and UI programs is long-standing and rooted in their respective legislative evolution and their common financing structure. Moreover, State labor exchange programs provide indispensable help to America's UI claimants who are seeking reemployment services and job leads to reenter the labor market. State plans should consider how States will achieve high standards of customer service and satisfaction for UI claimants. In particular, State labor exchange programs should consider methods to:
o Improve their technological capacity to meet the work test
and feedback requirements of the State UI system, and seek
improved methods to reduce the job search transition time of
cyclical and structural (dislocated) unemployed workers.
o Enhance the scope and depth of labor exchange services to all
UI claimants in need of such services and reemployment
services to profiled and referred UI claimants. Continued
improvement of the Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services
(WPRS) system for UI claimants is a key step of quality
workforce delivery systems. Assisting States in improving
the WPRS system is a major priority of all ETA components,
and in particular, the U.S. Employment Service. State
planning should consider specific steps to accomplish the
continued improvement of the WPRS system, and improving the
quality and scope of labor exchange services to all claimants
and reemployment services to profiled and referred UI
claimants likely to exhaust benefits. Some of the indicators
which may be considered to enhance performance are: State's
UI average duration and exhaustion rates and their
reductions; service plans tailored to the reemployment
services needs of customers; and State's provision of
electronic feedback to the UI component.
- Services to Veterans. State public labor exchange programs
continue to function as the primary source of labor exchange and support activities for our Nation's veterans. As States develop their new workforce development systems, it is important that veterans, particularly disabled veterans, continue to be served in accordance with the applicable provisions of 38 U.S.C. Chapters 41 and 42.
In planning State activities in support of veterans, it is important that States give consideration to the following recommendations made by the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment and Training (ACVET) in their 1995 Annual Report. Both recommendations are geared to the identification of veterans, so that appropriate services can be provided. Particular emphasis is placed on increasing the awareness that many women are veterans.
"The Secretary of Labor add the message 'Are you a man or a woman who has served in the military' at all kiosks and other self service employment centers."
"Encourage State Employment Service offices to post a highly visible sign in waiting areas asking clients to identify themselves as veterans (both male and female), if appropriate."
- Services to Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers (MSFW). Planning
requirements for MSFW activity should be undertaken in accord with regulations at 20 CFR Part 653, Subpart B. The Indicators of Compliance have been updated where appropriate and ETA determination of significant States, significant and bilingual local offices, etc. are hereby incorporated and provided with Enclosure B.
A key element for States' PY 1997 W-P plans is preparing for the transition of MSFW services -- including Monitor Advocate services -- in new States' workforce development systems. In preparing their plans, States should consider how the major functions of the Monitor Advocate program -- the role of the State Monitor Advocate, outreach workers, the complaint system and reporting -- would be transitioned into the new systems; and how the State will achieve high standards of customer service and satisfaction for MSFW customers through workforce development system measures of quality of service and customer satisfaction.
Enclosure A: PY 1997 State Agency Wagner-Peyser Plan Checklist
Enclosure A
PY 1997 STATE AGENCY WAGNER-PEYSER (W-P) PLAN CHECKLIST
State:_________________ State Contact:___________________________
Date Received:_________ Review Completed:________________________
Reviewed by:____________________________________________________
State plans are required to be developed in accordance with the
processes established by the State under 20 CFR 652.4(a). Regional
Offices will make a determination that the State met these
requirements by obtaining documentation that will verify the
existence of public notice of substate distributions and the process
and procedures used for resource distribution.
A. STATE PLAN CONTENT YES NO REMARKS
1 Is there evidence that the State,
including single SDA States, made
public the resource distributions
within 30 days of receipt of
final planning estimates and
fully complied with requirements
in 20 CFR 652.4(a)?
2 Was the State Agency plan sent to
the RA through the Governor or
designee?
3 Is there documentation that the
SJTCC/HRIC certified the State
Agency plan describing activities
under Section 7 (a), (b) and (d)?
4 Is there documentation that the
Governor had the opportunity to
review and comment on the State
Agency plan? (Or was the
delegation to the SESA all
inclusive?)
5 Did the Governor propose any
modification to the State Agency
plan?
A. STATE PLAN CONTENT YES NO REMARKS
6 Has the SJTCC/HRIC certified all
the component plans and the State
plan?
7 Does the State Agency plan
include distinctive descriptions
for all "Basic Program" elements,
i.e., requirements of Section 8
(d) of the Act as well as 20 CFR
652.6(a) (4)?
8 Has a plan been submitted
describing the use of 10 percent
funds under Section 7(b) of the
Act and the use of funds under
Section 7(d)?
9 Does the State Agency plan
conform to one or more of the
three distinctive categories in
Section 7(b) of the Act?
10 Does the plan include how labor
exchange activities will be
incorporated in the development
of the State's One-Stop Career
Center (workforce development)
systems?
11 Does the plan include how the
State intends to build its
electronic labor exchange
network:
a. America's Job Bank
(AJB)/State Job Bank Internet
linkages.
b. Employers' direct job order
entry on the Internet.
c. Talent Bank on the Internet.
A. STATE PLAN CONTENT YES NO REMARKS
12 Are Services to Unemployment
Insurance (UI) Claimants
incorporated in the State Plans?
a. Describe methods to improve
its technological capacity to
meet the work test and feedback
requirements for all claimants.
b. Describe methods to enhance
the scope and depth of
reemployment services to UI
claimants through the Worker
Profiling and Reemployment
Services (WPRS) initiative.
13 Has the RAVT review identified
compliance issues with regard to
service to veterans?
14 Does the State plan include an
overall description of the
activities planned to provide
services to the agricultural
community? Does it specifically
describe or include the following
sections/items?
a. Assessment of need
b. Outreach plan
c. Services provided to MSFWs
d. Services provided to
agricultural employers
e. Integration of services into
States' One-Stop Career Center
systems
f. Monitor Advocate approval or
comments
g. Affirmative Action Plans (for
designated offices)
A. STATE PLAN CONTENT YES NO REMARKS
h. Evidence that JTPA 402
grantees, advocacy groups,
agricultural organizations/
employers, and others were given
the opportunity to comment on the
State plan for Agricultural
Services and local office
Affirmative Action Plans (copies
of correspondence and agency
responses may be included in the
plan or sent to Regional Office
separately with the plan)
15 Is the MSFW portion of the plan
consistent with Enclosure B,
Attachment F1, TEGL No. 4-95?
16 Is the grantee's workplace
covered by an annual Drug-Free
Workplace Certification as
required by 29 CFR Part 98?
17 Has the grantee submitted an
annual certification regarding
lobbying as required by 29 CFR
Part 93?
B. ES COMPONENT PLANS IN DISPUTE
1 If the State Agency plan includes
any ES component plans in
dispute, was documentation
provided on views and
recommendations of all interested
parties (Governor, SJTCC/HRIC,
State Agency, and PIC/CEO) as
required under 20 CFR 652.6(b)?
2 For each ES component plan in
dispute have Regional Office
staff prepared an analysis of the
matter?
Enclosure B: State Plan for Agricultural Services
Enclosure B
STATE PLAN FOR AGRICULTURAL SERVICES
I. Summary of State Plan Requirements. Each State agency, in its State Plan, shall describe the activities planned for providing services to the agricultural community, both agricultural employers and Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers (MSFWs). The plan shall contain the following:
A. Assessment of need. (See Part II)
All States shall prepare a comprehensive assessment of need plan in accordance with Federal requirements at 20 CFR Part 653.
B. Outreach Plan. (See Part III)
All States shall prepare a comprehensive outreach plan in accordance with requirements at 20 CFR 653.107.
C. ES Services Provided to MSFWs. (See Part IV)
All States are to plan to meet at least the minimum requirements for providing services to MSFWs. All States are required to meet at least four of the five equity indicators. Significant MSFW States additionally must meet at least four of the seven minimum service level indicators.
States which expect to have difficulty in meeting the MSFW performance indicators shall describe the nature of the problem and the steps planned to meet the performance indicators.
D. ES Services Provided to Agricultural Employers. (See Part V)
All States are required to describe efforts planned in providing ES services to agricultural employers in both those States with an adequate supply of U.S. workers and those where the supply appears to be inadequate.
E. Other Plan Requirements
- State Monitor Advocate Approval/Comments.
All States are to provide a statement that the State Monitor Advocate prepared or participated in the preparation of the agricultural plan and has been afforded the opportunity to approve and/or comment on the agricultural plan.
- Consideration of Previous Year's Annual Monitor Advocate
Report.
All States are to provide a statement indicating that consideration was given to the State Monitor Advocate’s recommendations as presented in the annual MSFW summary developed under 20 CFR 653.109(t), in the preparation of this plan.
- Affirmative Action Plan Review/Comments.
All States are to provide a statement indicating that, as per 20 CFR 653.111(4)(h), the State Monitor Advocate has been afforded the opportunity to review and comment on the State’s Affirmative Action Plan, which is to be submitted as part of the State plan.
States with designated Significant Affirmative Action Local Offices are required to submit an Affirmative Action Plan in accordance with 20 CFR 653.111.
- Review and comment by JTPA, Section 402 grantees.
All States are to provide information indicating that JTPA, Section 402 grantees, other appropriate MSFW groups, public agencies, agricultural employer organizations and other interested employer organizations, have been given the opportunity to comment on the State Agricultural Services Plan, including any required Significant MSFW local office affirmative action plans. A list of organizations from whom information and suggestions for the plans were solicited, any comments received on the proposed plans and agency responses are to be submitted with the plan.
II. Assessment of need. This assessment of need shall take into account data supplied by JTPA 402 grantees, MSFW organizations, employer organizations, Federal/State Agencies, Migrant Education agency, Department of Agriculture, etc. This assessment of need shall include:
A. A review of the previous year’s agricultural activity in the State.
- Identify each major labor intensive crop activity in
the previous year, indicating the months of heavy activity and the geographic area of prime activity.
B. A review of the previous year’s MSFW activity in the State.
- Estimate the agricultural labor employed in each of
the crops identified in item II.A. Estimate the number of MSFWs involved in each, and indicate crop areas which experienced labor shortages.
C. A projected level of agricultural activity expected in the State in the coming year.
- Identify any changes from last year’s crop
activities as described in item II.A
D. A projected number of MSFWs in the State in the coming year.
- Identify any changes in the numbers of MSFWs involved
in each crop activity as described in item II.A.
III. Outreach Plan. Each State shall prepare a comprehensive outreach plan in accordance with Federal requirements at 20 CFR Part 653. The outreach plan must be based on the actual conditions which exist in the particular State, taking into account the State Agency’s history of providing outreach services, the estimated number of MSFWs in the State, and the need for outreach services in the State.
The five States with the highest estimated year-round MSFW activities must assign full-time year-round staff to outreach activities. These States are designated each year by the Employment and Training Administration. The designations for PY 1997 are provided in Table 5. The remainder of the significant MSFW States must make maximum efforts to hire outreach staff with MSFW experience for year-round positions and shall assign outreach staff to work full-time during the period of highest activity.
Approval by the Regional Administrator will be based on the State adequately addressing the following features of the Outreach Plan:
A. Assessment of Available Resources. This assessment of the resources available for outreach shall include:
- The number of State Agency staff positions to be
assigned to outreach activities. Indicate the fulltime equivalent positions for each local office to which staff are to be assigned, and the number of staff assigned to the State office for this purpose.
Designated significant local offices should assign full-time staff for outreach duties during the peak seasons.
-
Where the number of State Agency staff positions
assigned to outreach activities is less than in the prior year, please explain the reason for the reduction, and the expected effect of the reduction on direct outreach activities. -
Resources to be made available through existing
cooperative agreements with public and private community service agencies and MSFW groups. (States are encouraged to initiate cooperative agreements with 402 grantees for outreach positions.)
B. Numerical Goals. The anticipated results of the outreach efforts to be provided in item A. These goals shall include:
-
The number of MSFWs to be contacted during the
program year by ES staff, listed by local office where outreach staff is assigned, as well as State office. -
The number of staff days (based on 8 hour days) to be
utilized for outreach, listed by local office where outreach staff is assigned, as well as the State office. -
The number of MSFWs planned to be contacted by other
agencies under cooperative arrangements.
C. Proposed Outreach Activities. Describe the outreach efforts to be provided by the ES staff indicated in item B. These efforts shall include those described in 20 CFR 653.107(i-p). Also, describe any coordinated plans and activities with other agencies where possible surplus of workers may exist.
IV. ES Services Provided to MSFWs.
A. Plan Data for the Upcoming Year.
If a State’s estimated plan data for the current year indicates difficulty in meeting equity indicators, minimum service levels, or planned levels of activity, the following items must be included in a narrative plan:
a. A description of the problems;
b. Specific steps planned to meet minimum service levels; and
c. Specific steps planned to meet equity level of services.
Federal regulations at 20 CFR 653.112 require the establishment of performance indicators reflecting equity and the measurement of minimum levels of service. The indicators established by ETA include five ES-controlled indicators to measure equity of service, and seven minimum service level indicators. All States are required to meet at least four of the five equity indicators. Significant MSFW States additionally are required to meet at least four of the seven minimum service level indicators.
The seven minimum service level indicators are listed in Table 3. These standards are set to encourage appropriate service to MSFWs and to assure the continuation of such services. The minimum service levels are established annually.
The standards are set at a level high enough to encourage low performing States to improve their performance, but not so high as to make achievement extraordinarily difficult.
The five equity indicators for all States are:
-
Ratio of non-MSFW to MSFWs referred to jobs.
-
Ratio of non-MSFW to MSFWs for whom service is
provided. -
Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs referred to supportive
services. -
Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs counseled.
-
Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs for whom a job
development contact was made.
B. Significant MSFW Local Office Affirmative Action Plans.
Significant MSFW local offices which are required to develop and submit an Affirmative Action Plan were designated in accordance with 20 CFR 653.111. The designations for PY 1997 of Affirmative Plan offices is provided in Table 2.
The Affirmative Action Plan must include a comparison of the racial and ethnic composition of the workforce and that of the local office staff. When the comparison shows an under-representation of a racial or ethnic
group in the local office, the plan must establish a reasonable timetable with goals to remedy the imbalance.
V. ES Services Provided to Agricultural Employers.
A. Data Analysis
- Previous year’s history (based on PY 95 actual data):
a. Number of agricultural job orders and openings received
b. Number of agricultural job orders filled
c. Percent filled [(b/a) x 100]
d. Number of interstate clearance orders received
e. Number of interstate clearance orders initiated
- Plan for upcoming year (based on estimated data).
a. Number of agricultural job orders expected to be received
b. Number of agricultural job orders projected to be filled
c. Percent to be filled [(b/a) x 100]
d. Estimated number of interstate clearance orders State will receive
e. Estimated number of interstate clearance orders the State will initiate
B. Narrative Description
All States shall provide a description of their efforts in providing ES services to agricultural employers, including both those with an adequate supply of U.S. workers and those where the supply may be inadequate. These efforts should include:
A description on how the State agency plans to provide ES services to agricultural employers.
A description of the process used to identify agricultural employers expected to utilize MSFWs.
A description of the process for linking available workers with the employers, including the cooperation with or the creation of coordinating bodies to assure programs are coordinated and to insure programs respond to local needs. These coordinating groups may consist of organizations such as the Employment Service, 402 grantees, agricultural employers, migrant education groups, migrant health groups, etc.
-
Describe the process on how the State will promote ES
services available to agricultural employers, e.g., participation in employer conferences, development of marketing tools, labor exchange information to employers, recruitment of U.S. workers, etc. -
Where an H-2A program operated in the State in
previous year, explain efforts to increase U.S. worker participation.
VI. Tables to Accompany State Plan for Agricultural Services:
Table 1. Significant MSFW States
Table 2. Significant MSFW Local Offices Affirmative Action Plan Table 3. Minimum Service Level Indicators
Table 4. Significant Local offices and Bilingual Offices, by Region
Table 5. States with the Highest Estimated Year-Round Activities
Tables 1–5
Table 1
SIGNIFICANT STATES FOR PY 1997
TOTAL U.S. MSFW APPLICATIONS 185,252
States MSFW Applications
1. California 35,380
2. Texas 32,166
3. Florida 23,114
4. Washington 14,786
5. North Carolina 14,876
6. Michigan 11,046
7. Puerto Rico 8,530
8. Arizona 8,017
9. Georgia 7,523
10. Oregon 5,725
11. Virginia 4,739
12. South Carolina 4,086
13. Minnesota 4,000
14. Idaho 2,392
15. New Mexico 1,768
16. Ohio 1,730
17. New York 1,483
18. Wisconsin 1,403
19. Colorado 1,063
20. North Dakota 796
21. Pennsylvania 629
Table 2
SIGNIFICANT MSFW LOCAL OFFICES--AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN FOR 1997
MSFW MSFW Cumulative
Significant Offices Region Applications MSFW Applications
1. Edinburg, TX VI 4,674
2. Weslaco, TX VI 4,980 9,654
3. McAllen, TX VI 4,539 14,193
4. Eagle Pass, TX VI 3,306 17,439
5. Sunnyside, WA X 2,863 20,362
6. Exmore, VA III 4,106 24,468
7. Sanger, CA IX 2,355 26,823
8. Oxnard, CA IX 2,756 29,579
9. Brownsville, TX VI 2,516 32,095
10. Yuma, AZ IX 5,356 37,451
11. Yakima, WA X 2,207 39,658
12. Moses Lake, WA X 2,023 41,681
Total MSFW Applications: 189,735 x 20% = 37,947
Federal regulations @ 20 CFR 653.111(b)(1) require that "Affirmative
Action Plan" local offices be designated each year. The local
offices listed above represent the top 20% of MSFW activity
nationally.
Table 3
MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL INDICATORS, PY 1997
Percentage of MSFW's
(1) (2) (3)
Placed on
Significant MSFWs # MSFWs Placed $.50 Long-Term
States (PY 1996) Placed above Hourly Non-ag.
Wage Jobs
Arizona 42.5% 14.0% 3.8%
California 42.5 14.0 4.9
Colorado 42.5 14.0 5.9
Florida 42.5 14.0 6.0
Georgia 42.5 14.0 3.3
Idaho 42.5 14.0 7.3
Michigan 42.5 14.0 3.8
Minnesota 42.5 14.0 3.4
New Mexico 42.5 14.0 3.3
New York 42.5 14.0 6.5
North Carolina 42.5 14.0 5.0
North Dakota 42.5 14.0 4.5
Ohio 42.5 14.0 4.4
Oregon 42.5 14.0 6.2
Pennsylvania 42.5 14.0 8.0
Puerto Rico 42.5 4.5 4.0
South Carolina 42.5 14.0 3.9
Texas 42.5 14.0 8.2
Virginia 42.5 14.0 5.2
Washington 42.5 14.0 3.3
Wisconsin 42.5 14.0 3.5
Acceptable minimum performance levels for the remaining four
indicators are as follows:
(4) Local Office Reviews: One hundred percent of significant MSFW
local offices shall be reviewed by State or Federal staff.
(5) Field Checks: Commencing with PY 95, minimum performance levels
were established by the States per 20 CFR 653.112(c).
(6) Outreach Staff Contacts: Commencing with PY 95, minimum
performance levels were established by the States per 20 CFR
653.112(c).
(7) Complaint Resolution: Commencing with PY 95, minimum
performance levels shall as established by the State per 20 CFR
653.112(c).
Table 4
SIGNIFICANT LOCAL OFFICES AND BILINGUAL OFFICES, PY 1997
REGION I
Connecticut
Hartford
Massachusetts
Fitchburg Lowell*
Holyoke* Springfield*
Lawrence
REGION II
New Jersey
Hammonton
Vineland/Bridgeton
New York
Albion Middleton/Pine Island*
Batavia/Elba Newark
Hudson Riverhead
Kingston
Lockport
Puerto Rico
Aguadilla* Humacao/Fajardo*
Arecibo/Manati* Mayaguez/San German*
Caguas/Cayey* Ponce/Coamo*
Guayama* Bayamon
REGION III
Delaware Virginia
Dover* Exmore*
Winchester
Maryland West Virginia
Chestertown* Martinsburg
Crisfield*
Hagerstown*
Pennsylvania
Gettsburg* Chambersburg*
REGION IV
Florida
Apollo Beach* Naples*
Apopka* Plant City*
Belle Glade* Qunicy*
Bradenton* Sebring*
Fort Pierce* Wauchula*
Homestead* Winter Haven*
Immokalee*
Georgia
Americus* Moultrie/Camille*
Bainbridge* Tifton*
Cordele* Vidalia*
Douglas*
North Carolina
Clinton Mt. Olive
Dunn* Washington
Elizabethtown Wilson*
Hendersonville* Smithfield*
Kenansville* New Bern
Kinston*
South Carolina
Aiken* Spartanburg*
Beaufort* Sumter*
Charleston* Kingstree*
REGION V
Illinois
Danville* Murphysboro/Cobden*
Kankakee* Peoria*
Michigan
Adrian* Hartford*
Bay City* Sparta*
Bear Lake* Traverse City*
Greenville*
Minnesota
Crookston* Moorhead*
East Grand Forks* Owatonna*
Fergus Falls* Willmar*
Ohio
Bowling Green/Genoa*
Fremont*
Wisconsin
Beaver Dam* Wautoma*
REGION VI
New Mexico
Deming* Las Cruces*
Texas
Brownsville* Lamesa
Canutillo McAllen*
Carrizo Springs Muleshoe-Sub. Office
Crystal City* Pecos
Del Rio* Plainview*
Eagle Pass* Raymondville*
Edinburg* Uvalde*
Fabens Weslaco*
Floydada-Sub. Office*
Hereford
Laredo
REGION VII
None
REGION VIII
Colorado
Brighton* Lamar*
Delta* Rocky Ford*
Greeley* Monte Vista
Montana
Sidney*
North Dakota
Grafton*
Utah
Brigham City*
REGION IX
Arizona
Coolidge* Yuma*
Douglas* Maryvale
Wilcox*
California
Blythe* Madera*
Chico Marysville*
Colusa* Mendota*
Delano* Merced*
El Centro* Modesto
Fresno(West)* Oceanside*
Gilroy Oroville*
Greenfield* Oxnard*
Hanford* Porterville*
Hollister* Salinas*
Huron* Sanger*
Indio* Santa Maria*
Lakeport* Stockton
Lamont* Turlock*
Los Baños* Ukiah*
Visalia*
Wasco*
Watsonville*
REGION X
Idaho
Bonner's Ferry* Payette*
Burley* Rexburg*
Canyon County* Twin Falls*
Emmett* Mountain Home
Oregon
Madras* Hood River
Milton-Freewater* Ontario
Woodburn* The Dalles
Washington
Bellingham* Sunnyside*
Columbia Gorge* Tri Cities*
Moses Lake* Walla Walla*
Mount Vernon* Wenatchee*
Okanogan* Yakima*
*Bilingual Offices
Table 5
STATES WITH HIGHEST ESTIMATED YEAR-ROUND ACTIVITIES
These are five States with the highest estimated year-round MSFW
activities:
California Texas
Florida Washington
North Carolina
The States listed above were selected in accordance with 20 CFR
653.107(i). These States must assign full-time, year-round staff to
outreach activities. The remainder of the significant MSFW States
shall make maximum efforts to hire outreach staff with MSFW
experience of year-round positions and shall assign outreach staff to
work full-time during the period of the highest activity.
What does federal law require today?
This guidance has been rescinded. Ezel checks current federal labor law as it stands now and answers your situation with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace