As a  nondiscriminatory program, it cannot exclude any individual from  participation. This decentralized  management structure—in which certain oversight responsibilities are  assigned to division offices—is consistent with FHWA’s approach for the  federal-aid highway program in general. State Programs Provide a Range of Different Opportunities for Enhancing Skills and Vary in Their Results

The overall extent that FHWA’s on-the-job program has helped women,  minorities, and the economically disadvantaged reach journey-level status  in the highway construction trades is unclear, primarily because a limited  amount of usable information is available on program results. Depending  on what is available in the state, some trainees participate in the on-the- job training program as part of preexisting training programs—such as  apprenticeship programs—or training that was designed and managed by  the contractor or an industry group (see fig. III for information on the on- the-job training opportunities created by the Recovery Act.) However, using available  data, we nevertheless estimate that several thousand people are trainees  in any given year nationally. FHWA’s Oversight Approach Does Little to Assess Program Results

FHWA has done little to assess its on-the-job training program nationally  and has not determined whether states’ efforts have led to increased  opportunities for workers traditionally underrepresented in the highway  construction workforce. Moreover, FHWA does not attempt to determine  how effective division offices are in their oversight of states efforts. We have reported that federal program standards  that successfully address important and varied aspects of program  performance are key aspects of a results oriented performance  management. FHWA Does Not Assess States’ Results

Although FHWA division offices receive results information from state  transportation agencies annually, the type of information that states  submit does not help determine the overall effectiveness of state  programs. Second, states submit accomplishment information with a wide range of  different output terms and different demographic and trade classification  categories (see fig. FHWA Provides Funding for Activities Supporting Job Training Programs, but Overall Stewardship is Limited

FHWA grants about $10 million each year for supportive services that  directly and indirectly support job training activities. Supportive Services Provide Direct and Indirect Support to Training Programs, but It Is Unclear How Many People Receive Such Services

Currently, FHWA provides about $5 million to $6 million each year for  services that directly support job training programs (through the  discretionary grant program) and about $4 million each year for programs  that indirectly support job training programs (through the discretionary  grant program, summer institutes, and internships). 3). Although states are required to provide  reports on their accomplishments to FHWA division offices, this  information is not typically relayed to the FHWA officials making grant  decisions. Program results are important for making budgetary and programmatic  decisions. Furthermore, agencies  are responsible for ensuring that grantees use federal funds for eligible  activities. However, past performance information is not required of  applicants in the application nor is past performance one of the criteria  scored during funding reviews. Given that many of the activities funded through the program are funded  repetitively, good practices suggest that the use of performance  information can inform and improve recipient selection approaches, even  for a smaller program. Recommendations for Executive Action

To establish accountability for meeting the programs’ goal of increasing  the participation of traditionally underrepresented groups in the highway  construction workforce, we recommend that the Secretary of  Transportation direct the FHWA Administrator to take the following three  actions:     Strengthen criteria—through regulations, guidelines, or other  mechanisms—so that states have a clear understanding of how the  on-the-job training program should be implemented and the results  state programs are intended to accomplish.   For the supportive services program, develop an approach to (1)  evaluate the extent to which grantees have met their proposed annual  goals and (2) integrate the results of this evaluation into FHWA’s  funding decisions for supportive services programs. The Department of  Transportation generally agreed with the recommendations and provided  technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. To do so, we focused on the extent to which (1) states’  implementation of the FHWA on-the-job training program provides  training and career enhancement opportunities for traditionally  underrepresented groups to work on federal-aid highway projects, (2)  FHWA has overseen the program and demonstrated results, and (3) the  supportive services program established by FHWA has assisted state job  training and apprenticeship programs. We also used this data, along with  our interviews with FHWA and state transportation officials, to provide  examples and illustrations of the type of data collected by the states for  these programs, including activities implemented, the financial incentives  and penalties used by states, and the extent to which the American  Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) provided job  opportunities. FHWA Oversight of Job- Training Programs

To assess how FHWA oversees job training programs to determine  program achievement, we reviewed the program standards and outcome  measures required in FHWA’s regulations and program guidance and  compared them to good management practices, such as the assessment  of oversight activities we have identified in other programs. Our calculation represents a very rough estimate of the number of  participants in this program.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) on-the-job training program-- a relatively small part of the federal aid highway program--requires states to implement job training programs to provide traditionally underrepresented groups with opportunities in highway construction. To increase the effectiveness of state job training programs, FHWA grants up to $10 million annually for supportive services, such as job placement assistance. This report examines the extent to which (1) FHWA's job training program enhances training and career opportunities for these groups, (2) FHWA oversees the job training programs, and (3) supportive services provide assistance to these programs. To address these topics GAO reviewed federal legislation, good management practices identified in prior GAO reports, FHWA documents, and proposals and reports submitted by states. GAO conducted an in-depth examination of these efforts in four states, and interviewed a cross-section of FHWA staff, state officials, and industry groups.

What GAO Found

It is unclear the extent to which FHWA's on-the-job training program enables women, minorities, and economically disadvantaged individuals to reach journeylevel status in the highway construction trades, although stakeholders believe it can create some opportunities. FHWA's decentralized management of the program--in which state transportation agencies and FHWA's division offices are generally responsible for program implementation--has led to a wide range of practices. As a result, the types of training opportunities created by the program vary from state to state in terms of, for example, the length of training and the entities involved in providing training. In addition, the extent that state programs focus on creating training opportunities for traditionally underrepresented groups differs. The limited amount of useable information available on program results varies among states. As a result, FHWA does not know how well the program is doing, and GAO could not accurately determine how many trainees participate in the program or the demographics of those trainees; however, GAO estimates that several thousand likely participate in any one year. FHWA's oversight approach does little to assess program results. FHWA lacks clear criteria that articulate what states are supposed to accomplish through their job training programs. While some broad program expectations are stipulated in guidance and regulations, FHWA acknowledges some of these are outdated. Furthermore, FHWA's oversight approach does not determine the overall effectiveness of state programs or measure state progress. For example, although state transportation agencies are required to submit achievement information on an annual basis to FHWA division offices, states submitted this information using a wide range of different output terms and different demographic and trade classification categories. GAO has reported that program criteria are key aspects of results-oriented performance management. Through a separate program, FHWA provides funding for a variety of activities intended to increase the overall effectiveness of the on-the-job training program, but its overall stewardship of the program is limited. FHWA's supportive services program provides grants for locally tailored initiatives, such as skills training, child care, and career awareness events, that directly and indirectly link to job training programs. However, there is insufficient data to determine how effective these efforts have been in enhancing job training opportunities. Although FHWA has articulated the types of data states should collect and report, the agency does not know, and GAO could not determine, the number of participants in the supportive services program or its effect, in part because grantees do not always provide information about their program results. However, GAO estimated that there are about 10,000 people participating in any one year. Furthermore, past performance information is not required of applicants or scored during funding reviews. Given that many grantees are funded repeatedly, good management practices suggest that using past performance information can inform and improve recipient selection approaches. Program results are important for making budgetary and programmatic decisions. Without insight into program activities, FHWA cannot ensure that funding is used effectively.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that FHWA (1) strengthen on-the-job training program criteria, (2) create and implement an oversight approach for its job training program, and (3) evaluate the extent to which supportive services programs have met their goals and use this information to inform future funding decisions. The agency generally agreed with these recommendations and provided technical comments, which were incorporated as appropriate.