	Background

Over the years, Congress has established many employment-related  programs to help people with disabilities obtain jobs. In fiscal year 2005, the grant program was funded at approximately   $37 million. In addition to its duties related to establishing and maintaining a  procurement list of goods and services that must be purchased through  qualified JWOD suppliers, the Committee for Purchase is required to:    establish rules, regulations, and policies to carry out the purposes of  the JWOD program, and to provide that nonprofit agencies  employing individuals who are blind have priority in obtaining  JWOD contracts;    monitor nonprofit agency compliance with Committee for Purchase  inform federal agencies about the JWOD program and encourage  their participation, and, to the extent possible, monitor federal  agencies’ compliance with JWOD requirements; and    study and evaluate its activities on a continual basis to ensure the  effective and efficient administration of the JWOD Act. Three of the Four Programs Have Established Goals and Measures

Federal performance goals and measures have been established for three  of the four programs we reviewed. Education has one goal for the Supported Employment State  Grants program, but the goal only provides an indirect measure of the  program’s performance because the data also include individuals with  significant disabilities who receive supported employment services funded  under state VR programs. According to Education officials,  no formal federal performance goals or measures currently exist for the  Randolph-Sheppard program, but they are under development and  expected to be completed by April 2007. Education Has a Supported Employment State Grants Program Goal That Indirectly Measures Performance

Education has a GPRA goal for the Supported Employment State Grants  program that the department uses to indirectly measure the program’s  performance. The goal of the PWI program is to create  and expand job opportunities for people with disabilities in the  competitive labor market by engaging business and industry in the  rehabilitation process. For example, one measure is the percentage of  individuals served by the program who were placed into competitive  employment. We visited four PWI grantees in the four states and found that these  projects set goals that are consistent with the goals of the PWI program,  such as placing people in competitive employment. One of the plan’s five goals is to  expand employment opportunities. Furthermore, some of the performance measures are not clearly defined  or may be difficult to measure, thus making it difficult to assess  performance. Specifically,  Education has established oversight procedures for the PWI and the  Supported Employment State Grants programs that, if consistently  followed, should provide reasonable assurance of compliance with  relevant laws and regulations. Education relies primarily  on self-reported data for its monitoring of the Randolph-Sheppard program  and does not routinely analyze or report the data it collects. Finally, the  Committee for Purchase has established procedures for monitoring and  overseeing the JWOD program, but has prescribed regulations that  delegate most of the responsibility for carrying out these procedures to  two central nonprofit agencies that are also responsible for representing  the interests of the JWOD nonprofit agencies they monitor, raising  questions about independence. Education Provides Little Oversight of the Randolph- Sheppard Program

Education provides little oversight of the Randolph-Sheppard program. Additionally, Education has not provided clear guidance or policies  regarding when federal agencies may charge fees or commissions to  licensed vendors as a condition of operating a vending facility on federal  property. Postal Service in exchange for  permission to operate vending facilities on the agency’s properties. This  system of compensation may create a disincentive for NIB and NISH to  identify instances of noncompliance that could result in the JWOD  nonprofit agency losing its contract, especially for those JWOD nonprofit  agencies that are generating large volumes of JWOD sales. To obtain additional information about  the performance goals and measures, and determine the extent that the  agencies responsible for these programs have established adequate  procedures for overseeing program implementation and assuring that laws  and regulations are followed, we (1) reviewed federal laws, regulations,  and guidance to determine the programs’ requirements; and   (2) interviewed agency officials at the Rehabilitation Services  Administration (RSA) within the Department of Education, and the  Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled  (Committee for Purchase).
Why GAO Did This Study

Congress has created 20 federal employment-related programs that are aimed at helping people with disabilities obtain jobs. Little is known about the effectiveness and the management of some of these programs. GAO was asked to review four of these programs; the Department of Education (Education) oversees three--Projects with Industry (PWI), Supported Employment State Grants, and Randolph-Sheppard. An independent federal agency, the Committee for Purchase, oversees the fourth, Javits-Wagner-O'Day (JWOD). Specifically, GAO assessed the extent to which (1) performance goals and measures have been established for these programs and (2) the agencies responsible have established adequate oversight procedures. We reviewed program planning and performance information, interviewed agency officials, and visited each of the four programs in four states.

What GAO Found

Three of the four programs have federal performance goals. No federal performance goals or measures currently exist for the Randolph-Sheppard program, which provides opportunities for individuals who are blind to operate vending facilities on federal properties. Without goals, it is difficult to assess the program's performance, but Education officials told GAO they are developing them. Education has a goal and a measure for the Supported Employment State Grants program--a federal grant program that provides job coaching and other support to help individuals with severe disabilities secure jobs. The goal indirectly measures the program's performance because grant funds are mixed with other funding sources to provide supported employment services. Education has also developed one goal for the PWI program--a federal grant program that helps individuals with disabilities obtain competitive employment--that is consistent with the mission of the program. The goal is to create and expand job opportunities for individuals with disabilities in the competitive labor market by engaging business and industry, and one of the measures tracks the percentage of individuals placed in employment in work settings making at least minimum wage. The Committee for Purchase, which oversees the JWOD program--a program that helps to create jobs through the federal property management and procurement systems--first developed federal goals and measures for its fiscal year 2005-2007 strategic plan and has since revised them. The revised measures still have limitations, such as not being clearly defined or being difficult to measure. Education's and the Committee for Purchase's oversight of the four programs has been uneven. Education has established procedures, such as on-site reviews, for the PWI and Supported Employment State Grants programs that, if consistently followed, would provide reasonable assurance that the programs are in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. However, Education conducts limited oversight of the Randolph-Sheppard program. For example, Education does not routinely analyze or report the data it collects from states and has provided little guidance to ensure states comply with laws or consistently interpret program requirements. One area in which Education has not provided sufficient guidance is the circumstances under which federal agencies may charge fees to licensed vendors operating vending facilities on their properties. As a result, vendors in some locations were paying commissions or fees but those in other locationswere not. Finally, the Committee for Purchase delegates most of its oversight responsibilities to two central nonprofit agencies that also represent the interests of the JWOD nonprofit agencies they oversee. This arrangement, as well as the fact that they receive a percentage of the total value of the contracts from the JWOD nonprofit agencies, raises questions about their independence and gives them little incentive to identify instances of noncompliance that could result in the JWOD nonprofit agency losing its federal contract.