Summary: Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO: (1) identified factors influencing variations in local employment service (ES) office job placement performance; and (2) examined the Department of Labor's (DOL) role in guiding and monitoring state and local ES program performance.
GAO found that: (1) variations in ES performance are related, in part, to differences in state management strategies and local office operations; (2) states that set ES program goals reinforced by awards and that conducted annual on-site evaluations of local office operations had better placement results; (3) local offices that paid more attention to employers' and jobseekers' needs, were extensively involved with the Job Training Partnership Act program, and operated separately from local unemployment insurance offices, had better placement performance; (4) DOL oversight activities include approving state program plans, goals, and descriptions of basic labor exchange activities, conducting on-site program reviews, and analyzing quarterly data on state program activities and performance, but these activities provide little substantive information about how states manage ES programs; (5) without well-defined program goals, federal oversight activities will probably continue to focus on compliance rather than performance issues; and (6) DOL provides little technical assistance to help states operate ES programs efficiently or effectively.
