	Background

Among other things, WIOA requires that DOL and Education collaborate  to implement a common performance accountability system for the six  core programs identified in the law (see table 1). 2). Officials in Selected States Anticipate Changes in How They Collect and Report Performance Data, Such As Integrating Data Systems, Though the Full Extent is Not Yet Known

		Programs Vary in How they Currently Collect and Report Performance Data

To store participant data used for federal performance reporting, as well  as for other program management purposes, each WIOA core program in  the states we visited has its own case management data system (see  table 3). A data  sharing agreement governs this process. To collect employment and earnings information for those individuals who  participated in the reporting period, an official with the Title I programs sends participant  Social Security numbers (SSNs) to the New Hampshire Employment Security agency to  match with the state’s Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage records. Core programs in Illinois have not begun integrating data systems and  state officials are currently considering what approach to take related to  integration. New Hampshire

Officials from core programs in New Hampshire said they do not plan to  develop major changes to integrate data systems because their existing,  independent systems are functioning well and such changes would be too  costly. The DOL-administered programs have experience with collecting and  reporting data for employment and earnings indicators, and Title I and  Wagner-Peyser officials in all three states we visited said they expected  few or relatively minor changes to their performance reporting. To report on the new measures, these programs may have to  develop new ways to collect information about employment and earnings  and may need increased access to UI data. Limited Information About Reporting Requirements and the Difficulty of Integrating Data Systems Challenge Implementation in Selected States

		Limited Information on Details of Reporting Requirements Slowed Implementation Planning

Program officials across all three states we visited reported challenges in  the early stages of implementing the requirements of WIOA, in part  because they are awaiting final regulations and seeking more guidance  from DOL and Education. To avoid investing resources in implementing  aspects of performance reporting that might later change with the  publication of final regulations, some states are focusing on other WIOA  efforts, such as working with new program partners and discussing ways  to share participant data efficiently, according to officials we spoke with in  two states and one DOL regional office. DOL and Education have provided some interim guidance in order to  assist states as they await final regulations. In the President’s fiscal year 2016  congressional budget justification for ETA, the agency asked for $37  million under the Workforce Data Quality Initiative, of which $30 million  would be to “help states build integrated or bridged data systems to  facilitate WIOA implementation…  support building state-based wage  data matching infrastructure to enable and/or streamline WIOA  performance reporting.” Similarly, as part of its fiscal year 2016 budget  request for the Adult Education program, Education asked for $1 million  to provide technical assistance to states in the collection of new data  elements and integration of data systems. Aside from cost, state and federal officials also identified other capacity  concerns in this area, including limited staff expertise and antiquated IT  systems. Officials in two of the three states we visited and a DOL regional official  said that concerns over data security may impede states’ efforts to obtain  participant information from core program partners. Limitations on Available Data May Challenge the Quality of Performance Information

DOL and Education intend that WIOA’s common indicators of  performance will, among other things, enable consistent outcome  comparisons across states. For  example, according to OCTAE officials, Adult Education programs in  some states have reported to them that they have difficulty collecting  SSNs due to state privacy laws. Three States GAO Visited Reported No Intrusions into their Data Systems and that they Take Steps to Limit and Safeguard Personal Information Collected

		Three States GAO Visited Reported No Intrusions into their Data Systems, Though Some Officials Cited Other Limited Security Breaches

Officials in all three states we visited reported that they were not aware of  any outside intrusions into the electronic data systems for core WIOA  programs during the years they worked in the programs. However,  officials in Illinois and Texas reported other types of occasional data or  security breaches that resulted in inappropriate exposure of PII for small  numbers of people in limited circumstances. Program Officials in the Three States Reported They Generally Limit the Collection and Use of Personally Identifiable Information

One of the ways that some programs reduce risks associated with the  unauthorized disclosure of PII is to limit what is collected from  participants, including involving participants in consenting to the collection  of information, which is consistent with the Fair Information Practice  Principles. Officials in  the three states we visited reported using various practices in these  areas. Agency Comments

We provided copies of this draft report to the Department of Education  and the Department of Labor for review and comment. The letter highlights DOL’s  work with Education to create a unified vision of WIOA performance  accountability through guidance, technical assistance, and rulemaking. Related GAO Products

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act: Performance Reporting and  Related Challenges. Workforce Investment Act: Additional Actions Would Further Improve the  Workforce System.
Why GAO Did This Study

Enacted in 2014, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act brought numerous changes to existing federal employment and training programs, including requiring DOL and Education to implement a common performance accountability system across the six WIOA-designated core programs.
WIOA includes a provision for GAO to issue an interim and final report on issues related to job training databases and data exchange agreements. This final report addresses (1) changes selected states plan to make in how they collect and report performance information for core programs; (2) challenges these states face related to performance reporting and how they might be addressed; and (3) whether these states have reported breaches to core program data systems and what practices they have to safeguard personal information.
GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and policy guidance; and obtained information on the efforts under way in three states (Illinois, New Hampshire, and Texas) selected in part based on variation in level of experience with sharing data across programs. The views of these officials provide in-depth examples but are not generalizable to all states. GAO also interviewed DOL and Education officials, including selected DOL regional officials and Education state liaisons and area coordinators to obtain perspectives on more states.
GAO makes no recommendations in this report. In its comments on a draft of this report, DOL highlighted its efforts with Education to promote a unified vision of performance accountability.

What GAO Found

To implement the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), the 2014 law governing the nation's employment and training programs, the three states GAO visited are considering performance reporting changes such as integrating data systems and using new data sources. GAO selected states with varying levels of experience sharing data across programs. According to the Departments of Education (Education) and Labor (DOL), WIOA is intended, in part, to improve the consistency of states' performance reporting compared to reporting under the law it replaced, the Workforce Investment Act of 1998. For six core DOL and Education programs, WIOA establishes common indicators of performance in areas such as employment and earnings, and encourages states to integrate data systems related to these indicators. In the states GAO visited—Illinois, New Hampshire, and Texas—efforts to integrate data systems varied. For example, Texas is consolidating programs in one agency and building an integrated data system and Illinois is discussing integration options across the four agencies housing its programs. Officials in all three states expect changes in how they collect and report performance information. Though specific reporting requirements are not yet final, core programs—especially those administered by Education—face substantial changes. For example, Education programs in these states are exploring new ways to collect earnings data, such as adding survey questions or obtaining greater access to unemployment insurance wage records.
Program officials in the three states GAO visited identified challenges to WIOA performance reporting, including:
Limited guidance. Officials in all three states said early implementation was slowed because WIOA regulations are not yet final and certain details about performance reporting are not yet resolved. In the interim, DOL and Education have offered states additional guidance.
Cost and complexity of integrating data systems. Officials in Illinois and New Hampshire said that resource constraints pose challenges to integrating data systems. Among efforts to help defray integration costs, DOL and Education have sought additional federal funding for states.
Data quality concerns. Missing participant data may continue to affect the quality of information states report to federal agencies. For example, some states reported using participant surveys to collect employment data due to challenges with state privacy laws. In addition, federal law generally allows participants to opt out of providing Social Security numbers (SSNs). Officials in the states GAO visited said many participants in one of the Education-administered programs do not provide SSNs, making it harder to match data to track their outcomes and participation in other programs.
Officials in the three states GAO visited reported no intrusions into their data systems in recent years. Officials in two states did report other occasional security breaches that may have resulted in inappropriate exposure of personally identifiable information for small numbers of people in limited circumstances; for example, emails that included participant SSNs. Officials in all three states reported taking steps to limit and protect the participant information they collect, such as monitoring and controlling data access.