Negotiating 2018–2019 WIOA performance goals

CLASSIFICATION
   EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION                WIOA/Performance Reporting
               ADVISORY SYSTEM                           CORRESPONDENCE SYMBOL
          U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR                       OPDR-OWI
             Washington, D.C. 20210                      DATE
                                                         February 16, 2018


ADVISORY:       TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT GUIDANCE LETTER WIOA NO. 9-17
                OPERATING GUIDANCE for the WORKFORCE INNOVATION AND
                OPPORTUNITY ACT (WIOA)

TO:             STATE AND LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS IN THE WORKFORCE
                INNOVATION AND OPPORTUNITY ACT
                STATE WORKFORCE AGENCIES
                STATE WORKFORCE ADMINISTRATORS
                STATE WORKFORCE LIAISONS

FROM:           ROSEMARY LAHASKY /s/
                Deputy Assistant Secretary

SUBJECT:        Negotiating Performance Goals for the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity
                Act (WIOA) Title I Programs and the Wagner-Peyser Act Employment Service
                as amended by Title III of WIOA, for Program Years (PYs) 2018 and PY 2019

1. Purpose. To inform States of the guidelines for the negotiation process for the WIOA title I
   programs (Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth) and the Wagner-Peyser Act Employment
   Service program, as amended by title III of WIOA, for PY 2018 and PY 2019. Once
   negotiated levels are agreed upon by each State and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL),
   Employment and Training Administration (ETA), they will be incorporated into the State
   Unified or Combined Plan. This guidance also provides information on the negotiations
   process for the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act programs under title II of WIOA
   and the Vocational Rehabilitation program as amended by title IV of WIOA for PY 2018 and
   PY 2019.

2. References. See Attachment II.

3. Background. WIOA significantly advances the strategic alignment of workforce
   development programs, with particular emphasis on aligning the six “core programs”
   administered by DOL and the U.S. Department of Education (ED) (collectively referred to
   throughout this guidance as the Departments). The six core programs are the Adult,
   Dislocated Worker, and Youth programs, authorized under WIOA title I and administered by
   DOL; the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) program, authorized under
   WIOA title II and administered by ED; the Employment Service program authorized under
   the Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended by WIOA title III and administered by DOL; and the
   Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) program authorized under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of
   1973, as amended by WIOA title IV and administered by ED. Such alignment is advanced
   through mechanisms such as Unified State Plans, which require the States to develop one

 RESCISSIONS                                            EXPIRATION DATE
 None                                                   Continuing

strategic plan for the core programs; Combined State Plans, which may include certain
additional partner programs; and the alignment of performance accountability provisions for
WIOA core programs.

As required by WIOA, the Departments jointly developed aligned definitions of the primary
indicators of performance and created an initial statistical adjustment model. These
performance accountability provisions were finalized through the WIOA Joint Rule for
Unified and Combined State Plans, Performance Accountability, and the One-Stop System
Joint Provisions Final Rule, published August 19, 2016, at 20 CFR Parts 676, 677, and 678
and 34 CFR Parts 361 and 463. They were further interpreted in the WIOA Common
Performance Reporting information collection, OMB Control Number 1205-0526, approved
by the Office of Management and Budget on June 30, 2016; as well as in Training and
Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) 10-16, Change 1: Performance and Accountability
Guidance for Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Title I, Title II, Title III,
and Title IV Core Programs.

Under section 116(b)(2)(A) of WIOA, as well as in the statute’s implementing regulations at
20 CFR 677.155, there are six primary indicators of performance:

   Employment Rate – 2nd Quarter After Exit: The percentage of program participants
    who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the
    program (for title I Youth, the indicator is the percentage of program participants who are
    in education or training activities, or in unsubsidized employment, during the second
    quarter after exit from the program);

   Employment Rate – 4th Quarter After Exit: The percentage of program participants
    who are in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the
    program (for title I Youth, the indicator is the percentage of program participants who are
    in education or training activities, or in unsubsidized employment, during the fourth
    quarter after exit from the program);

   Median Earnings – 2nd Quarter After Exit: The median earnings of program
    participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit
    from the program;

   Credential Attainment: The percentage of those participants enrolled in an education or
    training program (excluding those in on-the-job training (OJT) and customized training)
    who attain a recognized postsecondary credential or a secondary school diploma, or its
    recognized equivalent, during participation in or within one year after exit from the
    program. A participant who has attained a secondary school diploma or its recognized
    equivalent is included in the percentage of participants who have attained a secondary
    school diploma or its recognized equivalent only if the participant is also employed or
    enrolled in an education or training program leading to a recognized postsecondary
    credential within one year after exit from the program;


                                          - 2 -

      Measurable Skill Gains: The percentage of program participants who, during a
       program year, are in an education or training program that leads to a recognized
       postsecondary credential or employment and who are achieving measurable skill gains,
       defined as documented academic, technical, occupational, or other forms of progress,
       toward such a credential or employment; and

      Effectiveness in Serving Employers: Effectiveness of the core programs in serving
       employers.

4. Definitions of Terms Related to Performance Negotiations. These terms align with the
   WIOA Joint Rule.

      Expected levels of performance are the levels of performance for each primary indicator
       of performance for each core program submitted by the State in the initial submission of
       the WIOA Unified or Combined State Plan (State Plan) prior to negotiations.

      Negotiated levels of performance are the levels of performance for each primary
       indicator of performance for each core program, agreed to by the State and the Secretary
       of Labor and the Secretary of Education (the Secretaries) prior to the start of the program
       year. These negotiated levels of performance must be incorporated into the Unified or
       Combined State Plan.

      Adjusted levels of performance are the negotiated levels of performance after being
       revised at the end of the program year using the statistical adjustment model (see below).
       The statistical adjustment model is run before the program year and after the close of the
       program year to account for actual economic conditions and characteristics of
       participants served. The difference between the projected levels of performance,
       estimated by the Departments, before and after the program year will yield an adjustment
       factor. The adjustment factor will be added to the negotiated level of performance to
       determine the adjusted level of performance.

      Actual results are the results reported by a State for each primary indicator of
       performance for each core program. Actual results will be compared to the adjusted
       levels of performance at the close of the program year to determine if the State failed to
       meet the adjusted levels of performance.

      Baseline indicators are certain primary indicators of performance that will be used as
       baseline data to inform the process to determine the negotiated levels of performance in
       future program years. States will not propose an expected level of performance for
       baseline indicators in the State Plan submission for PY 2018 and PY 2019 and will not
       need to come to agreement with the Departments on negotiated levels of performance.
       The selection of a certain primary indicator of performance for the designation as a
       baseline indicator is based on the likelihood of a State having adequate data with which
       to make a reasonable determination of an expected level of performance and such a
       designation may vary across core programs. While the Departments will not use baseline


                                              - 3 -

       indicators in performance calculations and baseline indicators will not be used to
       determine if a State failed to meet its adjusted levels of performance for purposes of
       sanctions, States must collect and report data for all primary indicators of performance,
       including those that have been designated as “baseline.” The performance data reported
       by States for baseline indicators will serve to support negotiations and to continue to
       build and refine the statistical adjustment model in future years.

      Statistical Adjustment Model, required by WIOA sec. 116(b)(3)(viii), and established
       by the Departments, is an objective statistical regression model to be used to make
       adjustments to the State negotiated levels of performance for actual economic conditions
       and the characteristics of participants served at the end of the program year. It also is a
       key factor to be used in arriving at mutual agreement on State negotiated levels of
       performance.

5. The Negotiation Process for PY 2018 and PY 2019. WIOA sec. 116(b)(3)(A)(iv)(II), and
   the implementing regulations at 20 CFR 677.170, mandate that States will reach agreement
   with the Departments on negotiated levels of performance for each of the primary indicators
   of performance for each of the core programs. States and Federal partners will negotiate
   goals for all non-baseline indicators for both PY 2018 and PY 2019, the third and fourth
   years of the State Plan. These negotiated levels are to be submitted as modifications to the
   State Plan.
   The primary indicators of performance to be negotiated for PY 2018 and PY 2019 for core
   programs are:
    Title I Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth programs: indicators for employment in the
      second quarter after exit, employment in the fourth quarter after exit, median earnings in
      the second quarter after exit (for title I Adult and Dislocated Worker programs only), and
      credential attainment rate;
    Title II Adult Education and Family Literacy program: indicator for measurable skill
      gains (to be negotiated with ED); and
    Title III Wagner-Peyser Employment Service: indicators for employment in the second
      quarter after exit, employment in the fourth quarter after exit, and median earnings in the
      second quarter after exit.

   Please note that no levels of performance will be negotiated for the Vocational Rehabilitation
   State grant programs for PY 2018 and PY 2019.

   For ETA-administered programs the PY 2018 and PY 2019 negotiation process will proceed
   as outlined below:
    Each State will submit expected levels of performance in its WIOA Unified or Combined
       State Plan two-year modification based on the State’s analysis of factors that may affect
       performance. Expected levels of performance must be stated to the nearest tenth of a
       percent (XX.X%) or to the nearest whole dollar for median earnings. When the State
       submits the expected levels of performance to ETA, the State must confirm that it has
       made the expected levels of performance available to the public for review and comment.


                                              - 4 -

    For instructions on plan submission, see TEGL 6-17, Modification Requirements for
    Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Unified and Combined State Plans.

   After State Plan submission, the State is required to reach agreement with the respective
    Departments on negotiated levels of performance for the indicators for the two years
    covered by the State Plan modification (i.e., PY 2018 and PY 2019) for each of the core
    programs under WIOA sec. 116(b)(3)(A)(iv)(II). The factors that will be taken into
    account during the negotiation process are described in detail in section 6 of this
    guidance. In addition to these factors, the Departments will use the statistical adjustment
    model as a tool in the negotiation process to modify the State’s expected levels of
    performance to help reach agreement on the negotiated levels of performance, as
    appropriate.

   For the WIOA title I programs (Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth) and the Wagner-
    Peyser Employment Service program, the State will negotiate its performance with the
    appropriate ETA regional office. As part of the negotiation process, the State will be
    asked to provide a narrative rationale for the methodology behind its expected levels of
    performance, considering the factors identified in WIOA sec. 116(b)(3)(A)(v) and further
    described in section 6 of this guidance.

    The regional office will review the analyses used by the State to develop the expected
    levels of performance and work with the State to set mutually agreed-upon levels of
    performance. These are the negotiated levels of performance. Regional offices will take
    into account the factors outlined in WIOA sec. 116(b)(3)(A)(v) described in section 6 and
    those addressed by the State in their methodology.

   Once negotiated levels of performance are agreed upon, the State must incorporate the
    negotiated levels of performance into its Unified or Combined State Plan.

Determining Success in Meeting Levels of Performance: The adjusted levels of
performance, as defined above, will be used to determine performance success or failure.
Determinations of financial sanctions due to performance failure based on adjusted levels of
performance for any overall State program score, overall indicator score, or single indicator
will not occur until at least two full years of WIOA outcome data have been reported and
used in the statistical adjustment model in the negotiation process.

It should be noted that the Departments will not engage in mid-plan or mid-year
renegotiations. Any changes in economic conditions during the two-year period will be
accounted for in the application of the statistical adjustment model at the end of the program
year.

Transition Provisions for Baseline and Negotiated Indicators of Performance: The data
and information that currently are available for each primary performance indicator vary
across indicators and also across the core programs. To ensure the continued transition to the
performance accountability system in sec. 116 of WIOA, for PY 2018 and PY 2019, the
Departments will continue to use the transition authority under sec. 503(a) of WIOA to


                                          - 5 -

designate certain primary indicators of performance as “baseline” indicators in the State Plan
modification submission.

Baseline indicators, by core program title, include:
 Title I: Measurable Skill Gains and Median Earnings (Median Earnings is baseline for
   the Youth program only);
 Title II: All primary indicators of performance EXCEPT Measurable Skill Gains;
 Title III: Credential Attainment Rate and Measurable Skill Gains (Title III programs are
   not required to report on these indicators);
 Title IV: All primary indicators of performance; and
 All WIOA Title Programs: Effectiveness in Serving Employers (outcomes on this
   indicator to be shared across core programs).

For PY 2018 and PY 2019, States are expected to report data as mandated by WIOA. While
some of these measures may be baseline, a State may be subject to sanctions for failure to
submit its WIOA annual report timely or completely.

Use of the Statistical Adjustment Model in the Negotiation Process: Under WIOA, the
statistical adjustment model, established by the Secretaries, will be used to ensure that the
negotiated levels of performance are based on the actual economic conditions and
characteristics of participants. Select labor market factors in the model include differences in
unemployment rates and job losses or gains in particular industries. Characteristics of
participants include indicators of poor work history, lack of work experience, lack of
educational or occupational skills attainment, dislocation from high-wage and high-benefit
employment, low levels of literacy or English proficiency, disability status, homelessness,
ex-offender status, and welfare dependency. The Departments emphasize the critical
importance of the statistical adjustment model in the performance negotiation process under
WIOA in addition to acknowledging that the model will be refined with ongoing use and
application using pertinent data.

The initial statistical adjustment model was developed based on historical data reported by
States against the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) performance measures, which
were used as a proxy for WIOA data. WIOA data were reported by the States for PY 2016 in
October 2017; however, due to the timing of the data availability, limited performance
outcomes were available. Therefore, DOL will continue to use this model, populated with
WIA proxy data, in negotiations with the States on their PY 2018 and PY 2019 expected
levels of performance for the following four indicators for WIOA title I and title III
programs, as applicable: 1) Employment Rate – 2nd Quarter After Exit; 2) Employment Rate
– 4th Quarter After Exit; 3) Median Earnings – 2nd Quarter After Exit; and 4) Credential
Attainment Rate. The statistical adjustment model will be updated and refined as WIOA
outcome data become available for use in future negotiations.

The statistical adjustment model will provide two major functions in performance
negotiations and assessment. First, it is one of the factors used when reaching agreement
with the States on the negotiated levels of performance. It is used to account for the expected
economic conditions and the expected characteristics of participants to be served in the State


                                          - 6 -

   and/or local areas. Second, it will be applied at the close of a program year to the negotiated
   levels of performance to adjust for actual economic conditions experienced and actual
   characteristics of participants.

   DOL will utilize the targets generated from the statistical adjustment model in its negotiation
   process with the States for the non-baseline indicators for this State Plan modification.

   Local Performance Negotiations: In addition to the State negotiated levels of performance,
   States must work with local workforce development areas to establish performance goals for
   WIOA title I programs. The local board, the chief elected official, and the Governor must
   negotiate and reach agreement on local levels of performance based on the State negotiated
   levels of performance. In negotiating the local levels of performance, the local board, the
   chief elected official, and the Governor must make adjustments for the expected economic
   conditions and expected characteristics of participants to be served in the local area, using the
   statistical adjustment model developed at the Federal level as a tool. The statistical
   adjustment model must be used at the end of the program year to adjust negotiated local
   levels of performance in order to reflect the actual economic conditions experienced in the
   local area and the characteristics of participants served. DOL has developed the framework
   for an objective statistical adjustment model that satisfies the WIOA requirements at the state
   level. States must use this model and adapt it to their needs at the local level.

6. Reaching Agreement on State Performance Levels. The WIOA Unified or Combined
   State Plan modifications submitted by March 15, 2018, should contain expected levels of
   performance for the non-baseline primary indicators of performance; this information is the
   first step in the negotiation process. Negotiated levels of performance must be agreed upon
   no later than June 30, 2018.

   The local board, the chief elected official, and the Governor must negotiate and reach
   agreement on local levels of performance based on the States negotiated levels of
   performance no later than September 30, 2018. The State must notify its DOL Regional
   Office that negotiations are complete.

   Negotiation Factors: In reaching agreement on the negotiated levels of performance, States
   and the Secretary of Labor shall take into account the following factors in WIOA sec.
   116(b)(3)(A)(v):

       1.       How the levels involved compare with the State adjusted levels of performance
            established for other States;

   States may use annual WIA performance information (PY 2007-2015) and PY 2016 WIOA
   performance information to inform the determination of expected levels of performance for
   PY 2018 and PY 2019. States also may use recent quarterly performance results to support
   projected performance and service populations.

   Although States should have access to their own historical performance information, various
   tools and resources are available to examine all States’ performance data, including State by


                                              - 7 -

State files (www.doleta.gov/Performance/results/wia_national_performance.cfm); DOL’s
Clearinghouse for Labor Evaluation and Research (CLEAR) (http://clear.dol.gov/); and
VETS’ performance data (http://www.dol.gov/vets/vetoutcomes/index.htm). Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS) data includes employment, industries, counties, and average earnings
(www.bls.gov/cew/home.htm). When using BLS data, or any data source, as a guide, States
should be careful to consider the timeframes covered by employment and wage information
and the relative time periods in which program exiters entered employment and obtained
post-program earnings. For example, when looking at unemployment rates for a given
geographical region, it is important to align the time period to the lagged timing of the
indicator target being established.

    2.      How the levels involved have been proposed using an objective statistical
         adjustment model provided by the Departments.

WIOA sec. 116(b)(3)(A)(v)(II) requires the use of the statistical adjustment model in the
negotiations process. Per 20 CFR 677.170(c), the model is to be based on the differences
among States in actual economic conditions (including, among other factors, differences in
unemployment rates and job losses or gains in particular industries) and the characteristics of
participants, such as indicators of poor work history, lack of work experience, lack of
educational or occupational skills attainment, dislocation from high-wage and high-benefit
employment, low levels of literacy or English proficiency, disability status, homelessness,
ex-offender status, and welfare dependency. States are encouraged to reference Attachment
III for a list of data tools available to identify characteristics of the State’s population and its
economic trends.

    3.      The extent to which the levels involved promote continuous improvement and
         ensure optimal return on the investment of Federal funds.

The Department considers continuous improvement to be a critical factor in the negotiations
process. The Department acknowledges that there are many ways to define continuous
improvement. Continuous improvement may reflect an increase in the level of performance,
a change in service strategy and delivery, or a change in the customers served. The
customers served by the local area may have a significant impact on outcomes depending on
the type of services provided and other factors unique to the population. WIOA emphasizes
serving those individuals with barriers to employment and individuals more at-risk of not
connecting to the labor market. ETA encourages States and local areas to serve individuals
with barriers to employment who need higher levels of service to achieve a positive outcome;
the impact of serving these customers will be accounted for in the adjusted levels of
performance calculated after the program year and will not be used to determine negotiated
levels of performance. Further state and local concerns about achieving program year
indicators of performance outcomes is not an appropriate reason to delay enrolling a
customer in the program. ETA supports efforts that will help States and local areas reach a
wider variety of available workers as they expand their talent pipelines and encourages States
to consider the importance of serving the youth most in need, especially out-of-school youth
(including those who are dropouts, in foster care, homeless or runaways, subject to the


                                            - 8 -

   juvenile or adult justice system, pregnant or parenting, basic skills deficient, or English
   language learners).

       4.       The extent to which levels involved will assist the State in meeting the
            performance goals established by the Secretaries of Education and Labor in
            accordance with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993.

   Throughout the performance negotiations process, States should be aware of the GPRA goals
   the Departments have established and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. The
   Departments will use the GPRA goals as one of several benchmarks by which to gauge their
   States’ proposed levels of performance in the context of these national system goals. GPRA
   is an important mechanism by which Congress and OMB evaluate the success of Federal
   programs, including those operated by States and local areas.

7. Methodology for Assessing Actual Results against Adjusted Levels of Performance. At
   the end of the program year, the negotiated levels of performance for that year will be
   adjusted using the statistical adjustment model, which will factor in data on the economic
   conditions of the State and the populations served by the program(s) during that year. This
   will determine the adjusted levels of performance for the program year against which the
   State’s actual results will be compared.

   For the WIOA core programs, the threshold for performance failure is 90 percent of the
   adjusted level of performance for the overall State program score and the overall State
   indicator score. The threshold for performance failure on any individual indicator for any
   individual program is 50 percent of the adjusted level of performance. Performance on an
   individual measure will be determined based on the position of the outcome (the actual result
   achieved) relative to the adjusted level of performance. An average of this result across all
   indicators for each program will establish the States’ overall program score. An average of
   this result across all of the core programs for each indicator will be used to establish the
   States’ overall indicator score. Further information can be found in the WIOA Joint Rule.

   The overall State score across programs and indicators will ensure that the performance
   accountability system, as articulated in sec. 116 of WIOA, maintains alignment and
   integration across all core programs. This overall score, which will be set at the 90 percent
   threshold for the overall program and indicator scores and balanced with a 50 percent
   threshold on any single indicator for any individual program, will allow a State to account for
   mitigating factors that prevent it from achieving 100 percent of its adjusted levels of
   performance.

   Determination of financial sanctions based on performance will occur only after two years of
   complete data are available for inclusion in the statistical adjustment model and after the
   model has been utilized to set targets for two full program years. Further information on
   performance assessment and the sanctions process will be issued in forthcoming guidance.

   The Departments will continue to exercise their transition authority to provide that sanctions
   will occur only after two years of complete WIOA data are available. During this time of


                                              - 9 -

   transition, the Departments will still provide technical assistance to States and develop
   performance improvement plans with States, if necessary.

8. Action Requested. States are requested to distribute this information to the appropriate State
   and local staff.

9. Inquiries. Questions concerning this guidance should be directed to the appropriate regional
   office.

10. Attachments.
    Attachment I:     Recommended Timeline for the PY 2018 and PY 2019 Negotiations
                      Process
   Attachment II:     WIOA Operating Guidance TEGL References
   Attachment III:    Data Tools for Identifying Characteristics of Participants and Economic
                      Conditions


                                             - 10 -

Attachment (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEGL/2018/TEGL_9-17_Attachment_I.pdf)

ATTACHMENT I

        Recommended Timeline for the PY 2018 and PY 2019 Negotiations Process

          Date                                          Action
                          States formally submit expected levels of performance for the non-
No later than March 15,
                          baseline primary indicators of performance in the State Plan
2018
                          Modification.
                          Regional offices review States’ expected levels of performance and
March 15 through June
                          work with States to arrive at mutually agreed upon negotiated levels
30, 2018
                          of performance.
                          Regional Administrators send approval letters to States regarding
                          the final negotiated levels of performance.
No later than June 30,
2018
                          States enter final negotiated levels of performance for PY 2018 and
                          PY 2019 into State Plan portal.

No later than September   States complete negotiations with local workforce development
30, 2018                  boards and notify DOL Regional Office.

Attachment (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEGL/2018/TEGL_9-17_Attachment_II.pdf)

ATTACHMENT II

                           WIOA Operating Guidance References

   WIOA Sec. 116, Performance Accountability System

   WIOA Sec. 503, Transition Provisions

   WIOA Joint Rule for Unified and Combined State Plans, Performance Accountability, and the
    One-Stop System Joint Provisions Final Rule, 20 CFR Parts 676, 677, and 678 and 34 CFR
    Parts 361 and 463

   TEGL 10-16, Change 1: Performance and Accountability Guidance for Workforce Innovation
    and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Title I, Title II, Title III, and Title IV Core Programs

   TEGL 14-15: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Requirements for Unified
    and Combined State Plans

   TEGL 6-17: Modification Requirements for Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act
    (WIOA) Unified and Combined State Plans

   Required Elements for Submission of the Unified or Combined State Plan and Plan
    Modifications under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (OMB No. 1205- 0522)

   WIOA Common Performance Reporting information collection (OMB No. 1205-0526)

   Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 (Public Law 103-62; 107 Stat.
    285)

Attachment (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEGL/2018/TEGL_9-17_Attachment_III.pdf)

ATTACHMENT III

     Data Tools for Identifying Characteristics of Participants and Economic Conditions

A number of data tools are available to identify characteristics of a State’s population and its
economic trends, including:

•   State Labor Market Information Department Websites
    (http://www.careerinfonet.org/select_state.asp?);

•   StatsAmerica State Profiles (http://www.statsamerica.org/);

•   Census Bureau Population Data (http://www.census.gov/topics/population.html);

•   State Data Centers (https://www.census.gov/about/partners/sdc/member-network.html);

•   Regional Economic Data (http://www.bea.gov/regional/);

•   Business and Economic Data (https://www.census.gov/econ/geography.html);

•   Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages historic data
    (http://www.bls.gov/cew/datatoc.htm);

•   Demographic Narrative Profiles (http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data/data-tables-and-
    tools/narrative-profiles/2016/);

•   Census State Demographic Profiles (https://www.census.gov/2010census/news/press-
    kits/demographic-profiles.html);

•   Disability Data Resources (http://www.dol.gov/odep/pubs/fact/data.htm);

•   Educational Attainment Profiles (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/maped/); and

•   Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data for 2012-forward
    (http://www.bls.gov/cew/apps/data_views/data_views.htm#tab=Tables)