THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS

Assimilating disadvantaged workers in labor markets has been the focus of national policy initiatives for at least two decades. In recent years, public policies have been formulated which will not only provide incentives for the private sector to employ the disadvantaged, but also afford the private sector a larger responsibility in formulating and implementing targeted employment programs. The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) and Target Jobs Tax Credit (TJTC) are two major examples. This paper initially reviews the public and private employment and training efforts between 1962 and 1982. Considerable attention is given to summarizing and evaluating the performance of these efforts, especially in light of recent program initiatives by the Reagan Administration.     

Market forces and private sector processes in government policy: The job training partnership act

This article examines those provisions of the Job Training Partnership Act designed to introduce the presumed efficiency of marketlike forces and incentives into federal employment and training programs. First, the JTPA replaced the administrative system used in earlier training programs (which emphasized detailed federal control and monitoring of the programs at the local level) with a system that, in effect, set a price for a prescribed level of performance and reduced oversight of the training process. Second, the Act gave people in private business some control over programs at the local level. According to available data, JTPA program performance is no different in local areas with a strong private-sector involvement than in areas where that involvement is weak and passive. The performance standards have had an effect, although the relationship between the standards and the goals of the JTPA is ambiguous at best. The article outlines the limitations of a market-oriented system for the administration of public policy.     

ECONOMIC MOTIVES FOR "SOCIAL" PROGRAMS: THE NEW FEDERAL DIRECTION

The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), passed by Congress in 1982, is significant federal employment and training legislation for a number of reasons. Most noticeably, it substantially enhanced private sector and state government roles in the administration of such programs. In order to understand both the programmatic impact of JTPA and its likely consequences on subsequent federal employment and training initiatives, it is necessary to look at the politics of the legislation-especially those interests that are strongly represented through its implementation and those that are not. By doing this, one obtains a better sense of the dimensions of conflict around future employment and training legislation. General guidelines within which Congress should act in subsequent legislative activity are laid out.     

INCREASING THE ECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF SEPARATED, DIVORCED, AND WIDOWED WOMEN OVER AGE THIRTY

Data from the Continuous Longitudinal Manpower Survey and the Current Population Survey were used to estimate the effects of CETA, a governmental jobs program, on the economic well-being of separated, divorced, and widowed women over age thirty. After training, CETA participants had increases in earnings and tended to have higher earnings than comparable CPS respondents. Participants in on-the-job training and public service employment had greater increases than participants in the other CETA programs. CETA enrollees with a high school degree had greater increases in earnings than those who had not completed high school, while whites had greater increases in earnings than non-whites.     

The Impact of Job Training Programs on the Reemployment Probability of Dislocated Workers

The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) of 1982 was enacted with the purpose of helping dislocated workers become reemployed through the provision of job training programs. Using data from the 1984 CPS Displaced Worker Survey, this study analyzes the impact of job training programs on the reemployment probability of dislocated workers. The results suggest that dislocated workers who received classroom training or on-the-job training were more likely to be reemployed. Dislocated workers who received only job search assistance, however, did not benefit from the assistance in terms of higher reemployment probability. In light of the legislative intent of JTPA Title 111 for increasing dislocated workers' human capital, the results suggest that state JTPA agencies should place more emphasis on the classroom training, which provides basic and job skills to dislocated workers.     

IMPLEMENTING PRIVATE SECTOR STRATEGIES IN EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS

This paper examines efforts to increase the role of the private sector in employment and job training programs mandated by the Private Sector Initiative Program (PSIP) and the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA). In particular it will examine whether the emphasis on the private sector participation has led to a greater development of and reliance upon private sector strategies for training and placing the unemployed, as well as an exploration o f the relationship between public and private sector officials involved in program implementation.     

New Federalism Modified: Jobs and Highways in New York

The Job Training Partnership Act of 1982 (JTPA) and the SurfaceTransportation Assistance Act of 1983 (STAA) were intended inpart to stimulate the American economy out of recession. Eachlaw embodied a different approach to that goal and, hence, poseddifferent implementation challenges to the states. JTPA wasintended to decentralize decisionmakingand administration tothe states, and to in volve the private sector in state andlocal decisionmaking processes. Moreover,the level of federalaid was reduced below that available under its predecessor,the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA). STAA wasintended to inject increased federal funds for rebuilding roadsand highways. Its stipulation that states bring their standardsfor truck dimensions and routes into line with new nationalstandards was a centralizing feature of the legislation. Inexamining responses of the states in 1983 to these laws, particularlyNew York, decentralization appeared to be on track in the earlyimplementation of JTPA. The level of involvement of governorsand, to a lesser extent, legislatures was higher than underCETA. The implementation of STAA revealed both decentralizingand centralizing features at work. Participation of the NewYork legislature in deciding how the increased highway fundswere to be spent was much higher than before STAA, but conflictsbetween the national and state governments over the new nationalstandards were resolved in favor of the national government.     

The Job Training Partnership Act: New Federalism in Transition

The Job Training Partnership Act of 1982 (JTPA) constitutedthe most recent, successful attempt by the Reagan administrationto devolve increased domestic program authority to the statesusing the block grant approach. Because of its heavy relianceon the participation of state governments and the private sector,JTPA may prove to be the real "acid test" of the Reagan NewFederalism. This article examines the implementation of JTPAin broad perspective. While preparations for the JTPA programbegan in most states during the early part of 1983, the programdid not really begin its first official program year until 1July 1984. After describing the major features of the act, thearticle focuses on the program's implementation. The analysisis based largely on the results of a nationwide study conductedunder the direction of the authors during 1984. The articleconcludes that, in terms of its legislative provisions and effectiveimplementation, JTPA has proved to be a "quasi-block grant"to the states.     

Toward more valid evaluations of training programs serving the disadvantaged

The author challenges the widespread assumption that the wage effects of federal training programs are reliable and unbiased estimates of productivity effects and social benefits. Evidence is presented that the reputations of government training programs are unreliable and that employers stigmatize those eligible for Targeted Jobs Tax Credit and Comprehensive Employment and Training Act on-the-job training contracts. Graduates of classroom training programs which are known to be funded by the Job Training Partnership Act are likely to be similarly stigmatized. TJTC eligibles are seriously underpaid by employers and job training partnership act graduates may experience a similar fate. Consequently, the true effect of JTPA on the productivity of disadvantaged workers may be considerably larger than its effect on wages. The author describes alternative methods of obtaining estimates of productivity effects of training programs.     

Congress and Reagan's New Federalism

This article analyzes the congressional response to the Reaganadministration's New Federalism proposals in terms of party,region, and constituency during Reagan's first term. While theCongress approved various spending cuts in grants to local andstate governments and in means-tested benefit programs to thepoor, even in 1981 when New Federalism initiatives enjoyed themost success, Congress terminated only one program, CETA publicservice jobs. A stalemate developed in 1982. The Reagan administrationand the congressional Republicans could not impose further majorspending cuts or program terminations, and the congressionalDemocrats could not restore the 1981 cuts or add new aid programs.Although the stalemate continued on New Federalism's dismantlingof aid programs as a grand scheme even into 1985, after PresidentReagan's reelection, Congress continued to approve incrementalcuts in overall spending, and the $200 billion budget deficitremained as a lever to force even greater cuts and program terminationsin the years ahead.     

Intergovernmental Management: Federal Changes, State Responses, and New State Initiatives

This article surveys state responses and new state initiativesin 1983 to three sets of successive federal changes in domesticpolicy. Collectively referred to as the New Federalism, thesechanges include the block grants and accompanying regulatoryreforms of 1981, the changes in Medicaid reimbursement policyof 1982, and the job training and development programs of late1982 and early 1983. Following a brief overview of these changesin intergovernmental management perspective, state responsesin 1983 are examined in three areas—policy development,policy and program management, and service delivery management.     

Congressional allocation of federal funds: The Job Training Partnership Act of 1982

This paper examines the allocation of federal funds to the fifty states through the Job Training Partnership Act of 1982. Targeted at the economically disadvantaged, its allocation formula nevertheless places heavy weights on unemployment measures unrelated to the target group. Evidence is presented that supports the premise that JTPA formula allocations across states reflect political influence. This is the first study to find evidence of a relationship between state representative legislative tenure and federal fund allocations. The importance of a state's political power in influencing federal fund allocations is also revealed.     

PROGRAM COORDINATION IN THE EMPLOYMENT SERVICE: A STATE AND LOCAL POLICY PERSPECTIVE

This paper analyzes the role of coordination criteria in employment and training service delivery within the Job Training Partnership Act system. The evolution of coordination criteria is related to current initiatives in the Employment Service at the state and local levels. An operational set of program outcome measures for monitoring coordination efforts is discussed. This set of outcome measures is formulated in the broad context of stabilizing employment and averting the "structuralization" of unemployment impacts wrought by fundamental economic change in the labor market. The assessment and monitoring of such coordination efforts is discussed.     

JOBS Implementation in 1991: The Progress of Ten States

The Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program (JOBS),enacted by the Family Support Act of 1988, provides an arrayof services intended to increase the earning capacity and labor-forceparticipation of welfare recipients. Because the law gives statesdiscretion in creating JOBS programs, a ten-state, three-yearstudy of JOBS implementation is under way. During federal fiscalyear 1991, the first year in which all states must operate JOBS,most of the ten states made incremental changes to the programsthey had in place before JOBS. They designed their programsto be flexible enough to cope with uncertainty about the typesand availability of service components. As a group, they spentenough to draw down 43 percent of their federal JOBS funds.To obtain education, training, and employment services, statewelfare agencies are contracting with many organizations. Moststate welfare agencies are also obtaining resourcesfrom otheragencies without payment. Although states generally implementedJOBS with little fanfare, they all planned to meet the federalmandates for program participation and targeting of expendituresin 1991.     

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION VERSUS PROGRAM DESIGN: WHICH ACCOUNTS FOR POLICY "FAILURE"?

Many influential implementation scholars now argue that "street-level" bureaucrats, rather than legislators or high-level administrators, make public policy in the U.S. Such authors as Pressman and Wildavsky cite creaming in employment and training programs as an especially clear example of well-meaning programs that fail when implemented. This paper argues that two of the most significant and lasting of these programs, the U.S. Employment Service and the Manpower Development and Training Act, were designed to encourage creaming. The essay asserts implementation scholars overstate the disconnection between program design and program implementation because they assume there is little disconnection between program legitimation and program design. A better conception of design permits one to perceive that these programs were legitimated on the grounds they would serve a large number of constituents, but were designed to do so by serving employers. The combination of these premises made creaming an imperative of program operation, and the implementors who cream remain faith ful to original program strategy. This finding suggests a redirection of policy research toward a more rlgorous analysis of program design and a better understanding of the relationship between legitimation, design, and implementation.     

Social security: a program and policy history

Many of the federal and state programs that provide income security to U.S. families have their roots in the Social Security Act (the Act) of 1935. This Act provided for unemployment insurance, old-age insurance, and means-tested welfare programs. The Great Depression was clearly a catalyst for the Social Security Act of 1935, and some of its provisions--notably the means-tested programs--were intended to offer immediate relief to families. However, the old-age insurance program-the precursor to today's Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance, or Social Security, program-was not designed specifically to deal with the economic crisis of that era. Indeed, monthly benefit payments, under the original Act, were not scheduled to begin until 1942. In addition, from the beginning, the Social Security program has embodied social insurance principles that were widely discussed even before the onset of the Great Depression. The first four decades of the Social Security program were, in general, ones of expansion. In fact, the program was expanded even before it became truly operational. In 1939, amendments added child, spouse, and survivor benefits to the retirement benefits authorized by the 1935 Act. Those amendments also allowed for monthly benefits to begin in 1940. Although the program was not changed substantially during the war years and the initial postwar period, the 1950s were a transformational decade in the program's history: benefit amounts were increased substantially, coverage under the program became close to universal, and a new disability insurance benefit was offered. The 1960s witnessed additional growth in Social Security, but the most important development in social insurance occurred in health insurance, with the creation of the Medicare program in 1965. Legislative actions in the 1970s had profound effects on the Social Security program and, indeed, set the stage for many of today's reform debates. Large benefit increases, a new benefit formula that was erroneously generous, and other changes in the early 1970s created a situation in which annual program costs, as a share of gross domestic product, increased during a 12-year period from about 3 percent to 5 percent. In 1977, amendments to the Act corrected the flawed benefit formula and made other changes in the financing of the system to shore up the program. Thus, the 1970s represent a watershed in the program's history-program growth gave way to increasing concerns about the program's finances. Those concerns were reflected in the amendments to the Act in 1983, which were the last major changes to the program. These amendments, based largely on recommendations from a commission chaired by Alan Greenspan, adjusted benefits and taxes to address pressing near-term financing problems faced by the system. Although the Greenspan Commission focused to a large extent on short-range issues, the resulting reforms have generated large surpluses in the program and the buildup of a substantial trust fund. However, the looming retirement of the baby boomers and several other demographic factors will, according to projections, result in the exhaustion of the trust fund by 2042.     

The Investment Approach to Public Service Provision

The investment approach to public service provision is now receiving considerable attention worldwide. By promoting data‐intensive assessments of baseline conditions and how government action can improve on them, the approach holds the potential to transform policy development, service implementation, and program evaluation. Recently, variations on the investment approach have been applied in Australia to explore the effectiveness of specific programs in employment training, criminal justice, and infrastructure development. This article reviews the investment approach, presents a Public Investment Checklist to guide such work, and discusses three examples. It concludes by considering the implications of investment thinking for the work of policy designers and public managers.     

Exploring the relationship between performance management and program impact: A case study of the job training partnership act

Programs that involve multiple levels of government may suffer from a principal‐agent problem: Lower levels of government may wish to pursue different objectives than the higher level of government that provides funding. One strategy for dealing with this problem is to establish a performance management system where units operating the program are accountable for meeting performance standards and are rewarded or sanctioned depending on how well they perform. Title II‐A of the Job Training Partnership Act provides training for economically disadvantaged adults and has operated under a performance management system since 1983 when the program was established. The federal government's goal for the program is to maximize impact on the employment and earnings of participants, but because control groups are not available for the 640 local programs, proxy measures of performance must be used. In this paper, data from an experiment in 16 sites are used to determine how closely measured performance corresponds to program impact. It is concluded that there is only a weak correspondence between the two measures and that the Department of Labor should avoid making significant rewards or sanctions based on the current performance management system. © 2000 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

Incentive Effects of Expanding Federal Mass Transit Formula Grants

Public subsidies to industries firms incentives to alter their behavior. When calculating the effects of such programs, previous assessments of transit subsidies have not included the effects of these incentives on the firms' output. This article reports the responses of mass transit firms to the federal transit subsidy program and changes the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21) made to that program, as predicted by a structural model of output choice. TEA 21 increases bus service in medium‐sized cities by 6‐8 percent, butincreases service in large cities by only 1‐2 percent. The formula's incentive tier is weak, and the size of the subsidy depends little on whether that output results in increased ridership. The formula could be redesigned to provide stronger incentives to lower cost and increase ridership, thus encouraging a more efficient response from transit firms. © 2001 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.