Back to Federal guidance
Revised 2009 workforce performance targets
Summary ETA revised guidance for negotiating 2009 WIA and Wagner-Peyser performance goals, published national GPRA targets for additional ETA programs, and explained the regression model behind the revised targets. An attachment provides target data. ETA now lists the change Canceled.
Document
Federal guidance
Agency
U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (ETA)
Document number
TEGL No. 9-08, Change 1
Date issued
June 5, 2009
Status
Withdrawn
ETA lists this change advisory Canceled as of 2026-10-24; its signed letter prints Expiration Date: Continuing and Rescissions: None. It revises TEGL 9-08 without expressly rescinding it.
Status last verified October 24, 2026
Is this still the rule?
This document has been withdrawn. Ezel checks what federal law requires today, under current federal labor law, and answers your situation with citations.
About this page: The full text below is the official document from U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (ETA). Ezel adds the plain-English summary and tracks the document's status. The official source linked on this page is authoritative for any reliance.
Accessible letter PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEGL/2009/TEGL09-08c1acc.pdf
CLASSIFICATION
Performance Goals
EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION
CORRESPONDENCE SYMBOL
ADVISORY SYSTEM
PROTECH/OWI/ONR/OWS/
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
OFLC/ORIT
Washington, D.C. 20210
DATE
June 5, 2009
TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT GUIDANCE LETTER NO. 09-08, CHANGE 1
TO: ALL STATE WORKFORCE AGENCIES
ALL STATE WORKFORCE ADMINISTRATORS
ALL STATE WORKFORCE LIAISONS
FROM: DOUGLAS F. SMALL /s/
Deputy Assistant Secretary
SUBJECT: Revised National Performance Goal Targets for the Government
Performance Results Act (GPRA) to support Negotiating State Performance
Goals for the Workforce Investment Act Title IB Programs, Wagner-Peyser
Act Funded Activities for Program Year 2009
1. Purpose. To inform states of a change in the guidelines for negotiating Workforce
Investment Act (WIA) Title IB performance goals and performance levels for the
Wagner-Peyser Act funded activities for Program Year (PY) 2009. In addition to the
change in guidelines for negotiating performance goals, this document also
publishes the GPRA goals for eleven other programs administered by the
Employment and Training Administration (ETA); and explains the regression model
used for setting the new national targets for the workforce investment program.
2. References. WIA Section 136; WIA regulations at 20 CFR Part 666 and Part 661;
TEGL No. 9-07, “Revised Incentive and Sanction Policy for Workforce Investment
Act Title IB Programs”; TEGL No. 17-05, “Common Measures Policy for the
Employment and Training Administration’s (ETA) Performance Accountability
System and Related Performance Issues;” TEGL No. 11-01, “Guidance on Revising
Workforce Investment Act State (WIA) Negotiated Levels of Performance”; and
TEGL No. 14-08, “Guidance for Implementation of the Workforce Investment Act
and Wagner-Peyser Act Funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 and State Planning Requirements for Program Year 2009.”
RESCISSIONS EXPIRATION DATE
None Continuing
-2-
3. Background. The information in this TEGL supplements the guidance related to
performance negotiations in TEGL 09-08, “Negotiating Performance Goals for the
Workforce Investment Act Title IB Programs and Wagner-Peyser Act Funded
Activities for Program Year 2009.” Additional guidance on WIA State Plans and
performance negotiations for PY 2009 can be found in TEGL 14-08, sec. 18, which
also provides guidance for implementation of WIA and Wagner-Peyser Act funding
provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act).
The intent of this guidance is to provide revised national performance targets
required for the Government Performance Results Act (GPRA), also referred to as
the “GPRA goals.” The targets set as GPRA goals provide information by which
Congress and the Office of Management and Budget evaluate the success of Federal
programs, including those operated by states and localities. This TEGL describes
actions taken to address the effects of the current recession on the GPRA goals over
the next few years. It includes an overview of the methodology used to develop the
regression model used for estimating the reduced “Common Measures” targets for
employment and training programs during the current recession. It also provides
revised targets for the Unemployment Insurance program and other programs
administered by ETA, which are not necessarily subject to state-level negotiations.
The Department of Labor recognizes that labor market conditions are a critical factor
affecting performance of state and local programs. Areas experiencing high
unemployment and declines in job openings are likely to have fewer employment
opportunities for individuals. Consequently, the performance of WIA programs is
likely to be affected by economic conditions, particularly in this period of economic
downturn. The impact of economic conditions on WIA performance led the
Department to develop a regression model that adjusts targets according to these
conditions.
4. Revisions to the National Performance Goals. The revised national performance
targets are based on estimates developed from administrative and economic data
regarding the experience of job seekers within their local labor markets as reported
in Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data (WIASRD) or other data
systems used by the non-WIA programs. Estimation is based upon participants’
experiences in their local labor markets. This approach is more precise than
estimating the individual-local labor market relationships with data aggregated
across disparate geographical areas, such as states or the nation. To measure local
labor market conditions, unemployment rates are collected by local workforce
investment areas (LWIAs) for the WIA and Wagner-Peyser Employment Service
(ES) programs and by county for the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program.
For program years 2008, 2009, and 2010, adjustments to national performance targets
were made using estimates of the effects of unemployment rates on performance
results for the following programs: WIA Adult, WIA Dislocated Worker, WIA
Youth, ES, and TAA.
-3-
For all other workforce investment programs, the national targets are adjusted using
either the WIA Adult or WIA Dislocated Worker estimates, depending on which
program they are most similar to, because detailed participant data are not readily
available for direct estimation. Specifically, the WIA Adult estimates are used for
the Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP), Migrant and
Seasonal Farmworkers-National Farmworker Jobs Program (MSFW-NFJP), Indian
and Native American Program (INA), Work Incentive Grants (WIGs), Reintegration
of Ex-Offenders (Prisoner Reentry Initiative-PRI), and National Emergency Grants
(NEGs). The WIA Dislocated Worker estimates are used to adjust the retention goal
target for Registered Apprenticeship. The WIA Youth estimates are used for the
Reintegration of Ex-Offenders, ages 14-17, and estimates are not applied to the
Community-Based Job Training Grants or YouthBuild because these two programs
are conducting baseline data collection.
The justification for using WIA Adult or Dislocated Worker estimates derives from
the similarity in the characteristics of the participants of these two WIA programs to
the other programs. The Unemployment Insurance (UI) Program uses UI-specific
regression workforce development models and the Office of Foreign Labor
Certification has its specific methodologies to set performance targets. While state
workforce agencies may not be generally involved with these last two programs,
including the estimates in this TEGL allows ETA to systemically publish targets for
most of its programs.
In this round of WIA performance negotiations, states will be required to establish
PY 2009 performance levels for the Wagner-Peyser Act component of the State Plans
at the same time they negotiate performance levels for the WIA Title IB programs by
June 2009. A state can extend its PY 2008 performance levels for the WIA title 1B
programs to PY 2009 or choose to negotiate new performance levels. This guidance
gives states the opportunity to see a larger set of performance goal targets that reach
across all the programs using the common measures. States should also note that
the Department revisits the GPRA targets at the end of every program or fiscal year
to make adjustments. Adjustments to the GPRA targets, based on the infusion of
Recovery Act funds, will be taken into consideration as participants receiving
additional resources begin exiting their respective programs.
5. Addressing Effects of the Recession. When TEGL No. 09-08 was issued, the
Department established preliminary GPRA goals through PY 2010. These goals are
being revised to acknowledge the effects of the business cycle on program
performance. The revisions, based on the regression analysis carried out as part of a
study conducted by the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, allow the
Department to more closely align performance targets with anticipated program
results.
-4-
Study results revealed a strong negative relationship between unemployment rates
and two of the common measures—entered employment rate and retention rate for
the various programs—and the adjustments are statistically significant. The
estimated effects on earnings also revealed a negative relationship with the
unemployment rates, and they vary by program. The magnitude of the impact
differs in part by the average level of earnings for participants in the various
programs.
A negative relationship was also found between unemployment rates and degree or
certificate attainment, as well as literacy and numeracy gains for the WIA Youth
program. While these performance measures may not have the same direct
relationship with the labor market as do the common measures, it is important to
consider the effect of business cycles on the support system of participants. As the
economy weakens and job prospects diminish, it may be more difficult for youth to
find support, leading them to drop out of the program before completing a degree or
certificate.
Performance targets for each of these programs are adjusted for the estimated effects
of the year-to-year change in unemployment rates. Official Fiscal Year (FY) 2010
Budget unemployment rate assumptions are used in the calculations. The
calculations start in PY 2007 (FY 2007 for TAA and Registered Apprenticeship) and
extend through PY 2014. The actual performance rate in PY 2007 is used as the base.
The adjusted target for each year is calculated by multiplying the previous year’s
performance target by the change in unemployment rates times the appropriate
estimate of the effect of the unemployment rate change on the performance goal.
This factor is then added to the previous target. The estimated effects are converted
into percentage changes so that their effect is proportional to the magnitude of the
target, which varies by program. The procedure is repeated for each year to set the
targets.
A downward adjustment factor occurs when the unemployment rate increases from
year-to-year, and an upward adjustment factor is applied when the unemployment
rate decreases. The reference point for the adjustment is PY 2007 for WIA and other
program year programs and FY 2008 for TAA and Registered Apprenticeship. The
regression-adjusted performance targets are considered to be ambitious in light of
the depth of the current recession. Unemployment rate adjusted performance
targets may, in the out-years, be supplemented by an incremental increase to reflect
the vigorous pursuit of positive labor market outcomes for exiters in a recovering
economy.
-5-
The Department will be providing a complete description of the methodology used
to compute the PY 2008 through PY 2010 and FY 2009 through FY 2010 targets for all
the programs using the common measures on the www.doleta.gov/Performance
Web site. The methodology developed by the W. E. Upjohn Institute for
Employment Research is expected to be extended and further documented in the
near future. The Department will also provide the separate methodology developed
by the Unemployment Insurance program on the same Web site.
6. Additional Analysis for Performance Target Setting. The Department will conduct
additional analysis to accomplish the following:
a) Create modeling of workforce performance measures that includes participant
characteristics in the estimation equations. ETA plans to construct a performance
adjustment procedure at the national level that adjusts the national performance
targets for changes over time in the mix of participant characteristics, as well as
unemployment rate. The estimation equation will also include prior work
history, educational attainment, and barriers to entry (proxies by limited English
and disability variables) that affect their ability to find and retain jobs and their
earnings levels.
b) Develop state-by-state and workforce investment board (WIB)-by-WIB
Workforce Investment Act models by June so they can be used to adjust state and
WIB target levels. State (and WIB) performance targets will be adjusted relative
to the national targets in two dimensions. For the state models, the first
adjustment is the difference between a state’s unemployment rate and the
national average. The second is the state’s composition of participants relative to
the national average. Both adjustments can be made using the estimates
obtained from the modeling performed previously with some additional
specifications. The estimates provide the weights that will be used to reflect the
effects of the various factors (unemployment rates as well as individual
participant characteristics) on performance.
c) In 2010, further analysis will enable additional uses of the data for performance
management purposes that will allow local WIBs to identify services that
produce positive outcomes. While the workforce system is dedicated to moving
all eligible individuals into meaningful employment and to advancing their
careers, the system also recognizes that individuals enter the program with
different skills, motivation, and barriers to employment. This recognition points
directly to the need to target resources to meet the individual needs of
participants and to fill the gaps of knowledge, experience, and skills that they
face in seeking employment. Through this value-added contribution, the model
will aid the WIBs in identifying which services assist individuals in overcoming
employment barriers, thus enabling the WIBs to more effectively allocate
resources.
-6-
7. Action Requested. As states and ETA regional offices are negotiating performance
goals for WIA and Wagner-Peyser programs, the revised national performance goal
targets for GPRA may be used as one of several benchmarks by which to gauge their
states’ proposed performance levels in the context of these national system goals.
The revised GPRA performance goals for the Department’s WIA Adult and
Dislocated Workers, Wagner-Peyser, as well as for other programs, are listed in the
Attachment. To see the difference between the original GPRA performance targets
for the WIA and Wagner-Peyser programs, please refer to Attachment 2 of the
original TEGL No. 09-08. More information is available at:
http://www.doleta.gov/Performance/goals/gpra.cfm.
8. Inquiries. Questions regarding this guidance should be directed to the appropriate
Regional Office.
9. Attachment. Government Performance Results Act National Performance Goals for
Employment and Training Programs.
Linked official document 1: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEGL/2009/TEGL09-08c1a1.pdf
-7-
ATTACHMENT
Government Performance Results Act
National Performance Goals for Employment and Training Programs
RESULTS TARGETS*
PROGRAM MEASURE
2007 2008 2009 2010
Entered Employment 70% 66.2% 64.8% 65.6%
Adults Retention 84% 81.7% 80.8% 81.3%
Earnings $13,575 $12,862 $12,597 $12,741
Entered Employment 73% 71.0% 70.2% 70.6%
Dislocated Workers Retention 87% 84.7% 83.9% 84.4%
Earnings $15,188 $14,888 $14,773 $14,837
Entered Employment 64% 60.3% 59.0% 59.7%
Employment Service Retention 81% 78.6% 77.7% 78.2%
Earnings $12,763 $10,708 $10,034 $10,385
Senior Community Service Entered Employment 52% 49.2% 48.1% 48.7%
Employment Program Retention 71% 69.1% 68.3% 68.7%
(SCSEP) Earnings $6,713 $6,360 $6,229 $6,301
Entered Employment 78% 73.8% 72.2% 73.0%
National Farmworker Jobs
Retention 74% 72.0% 71.2% 71.6%
Program (NFJP-MSFW)
Earnings $9,531 $9,030 $8,844 $8,945
Entered Employment 68% 64.3% 62.9% 63.7%
Indian and Native
Retention 76% 73.9% 73.1% 73.6%
American Program (INAP)
Earnings $9,665 $9,157 $8,969 $9,071
Entered Employment 59.6% 56.4% 55.2% --
Work Incentive Grants
Retention 79.6% 77.4% 76.6% --
(WIGs)
Earnings $10,862 $10,291 $10,080 --
Placement 62% 59.4% 58.5% 59.0%
Youth Services Attainment 57% 50.9% 48.8% 49.9%
Literacy 30% 23.2% 21.2% 22.2%
Placement NA TBD TBD TBD
YouthBuild Attainment NA TBD TBD TBD
Literacy NA TBD TBD TBD
Entered
57% 53.9% 52.8% 53.4%
Employment(PRI)
Retention (PRI) 69% 67.1% 66.4% 66.8%
Re-integration of Ex- Earnings (PRI) $10,366 $9,821 $9,619 $9,729
Offenders Recidivism (PRI) 1 15% 22% 22% 22%
Placement 51% 48.9% 48.1% 48.5%
Recidivism Ages14-
16% 16% 16% 16%
172
Recidivism Over 182 17% 17% 17% 17%
Entered Employment 71% 67.1% 65.7% 66.5%
National Emergency
Retention 83% 80.7% 79.9% 80.3%
Grants (NEGs)
Earnings $12,378 $11,728 $11,486 $11,618
NA: Data not available
TBD: To be determined and baseline data collection underway. Targets to be set upon receipt of complete data results.
1
Target based on program goal to reduce the recidivism rate by half of the national rate.
2
Baseline data collected from 3 of 15 grantees.
-8-
RESULTS TARGETS
PROGRAM MEASURE
2008 2009 2010
Entered Employment 69% 65.2% 64.9%
Trade Adjustment
Retention 90% 87.5% 87.3%
Assistance (TAA)
Earnings $14,281 $13,386 $13,319
Entered Employment NA TBD TBD
Retention 84% 81.6% 81.4%
Apprenticeship
Earnings NA TBD TBD
Wage Gains $0.61 $0.61 $0.61
Timely 1st Payments 86.8% 85.7% 85.9%
Unemployment Insurance Detection of Overpayments 56.0% 51.8% 52.8%
(UI) Reemployment 62.5% 59.0% 58.6%
Timely Status Determinations 84.9% 88.7% 90.0%
H-1B 100% 100% 100%
Foreign Labor Certification Permanent Labor 92% 92% 92%
(FLC) H-2A 56% 61% 62%
H-2B 71% 71% 71%
-- Work Incentive Grants are not in the FY 2010 budget. NA: Data not available
TBD: To be determined and baseline data collection underway. Targets to be set upon receipt of complete
data results.
*Targets for entered employment, retention, and average earnings are based on Projected 2010
Budget Unemployment Rates as published in, “A New Era of Responsibility: Renewing America’s
Promise,” February 26, 2009, Table S-8, Comparison of Economic Assumptions.
What does federal law require today?
This guidance has been withdrawn. 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