The Revolving Door Research Findings on NYCs Employment Services and Placement System and Its Effectiveness in Moving People from Welfare to Work A Research.

The Revolving Door

Research Findings on NYC’s

Employment Services and Placement System

and Its Effectiveness in

Moving People from Welfare to Work

A Research Project by Community Voices Heard - July 2005

Presentation Format

ESP System Overview Research Design Research Findings

– Connecting People to Long-term Employment– Providing Access to Training and Education– Addressing the Needs of a Diverse Population

Conclusion Recommendations Questions & Answers

ESP System Overview

What is an ESP?

Employment Services and Placement

Contracts that NYC’s welfare agency (HRA) has with private for-profit and not-for-profit entities (1999 - 2005)

Provide job readiness and job search assistance to mandated work-ready welfare recipients

ESP System Overview

Why study the ESP System?

Federal government is currently debating expanding work requirements & hours (TANF Reauthorization)

NYC welfare agency is about to establish new employment services contracts (HRA Works)

Limited research has been conducted on work-first programmatic initiatives

ESP System Overview

HRA-Designed Welfare-to-Work Path for Employable Welfare Recipients

WELFAREIndividual applies

for publicassistance at

HRA Job Center.

Skills Assessment &Job Placement

Individual is formallyassessed, taught some jobreadiness skills & assisted

with job search &placement while public

assistance case ispending.

Employment Services& Placement

Individual continues with jobreadiness skills & assistancewith job search & placement.

They are assigned a worksite (WEP) and can be

connected tovocational training.

WORK

Individualfinds job andnever needs

public assistance.

Long-term welfare recipientis assigned to ESP by Job Center

when determined to be work-ready.

WORKIndividual

finds job andcloses publicassistance

case.

ESP System Overview

ESP Program Goals

Job Placement:– Connect Participants with Jobs

Job Retention:– Help People Retain Jobs

Case Closure:– Eliminate People’s Dependence on the

Welfare System

ESP System Overview

ESP Program Structure

Orientation andJob Readiness

35 hours/week for 2weeks at the ESP Site.Assessment done andskills workshops offered.

Ongoing Services &Job Search Assistance

2 days/week (14 hours) at theESP Site doing continued jobreadiness coupled with jobsearch assistance.

Work ExperienceProgram (WEP)

3 days/week (21 hours) at theWEP Site in a City Agencydoing clerical, maintenance,or another type of work.

Job Retention

ESPs continue to trackjob retention at 90 and180 days. Clientsgenerally only come tosite for Metro Cards.

CONCURRENTSCHEDULE

FULL-TIMEESP SCHEDULE

RETENTIONTRACKING

ITA / TrainingVoucher Referral

ESP System Overview

ESP System Summary

9 vendors hold contracts

26 sites operated across city

4,100 individuals referred per month

50,000 individuals referred per year

$130 million allocated for 3 years

ESP System Overview

Performance-Based Contracts

Vendors paid for performance only– Maximum of $5,500 per client served

Payment milestones include:– Job Placement– 13 Week Retention / High Wage– 26 Week Retention / Case Closed

Renewal contracts shifted pay:– from original placement – to 13 week retention & high wage

Research Design

Research Design

Data Source Categories HRA Documents and Meetings

– Proposals, policy directives, curriculum, RFPs, etc.

Client Surveys– 600 clients surveyed at 25 different ESP Sites

Provider Interviews and Material– 19 interviews conducted representing 8 vendors

HRA VendorStat Reports– Monthly performance reports from 2004 reviewed

Client Interviews– 12 in-depth interviews conducted

Research Findings

Connecting People to Long-Term Employment

Job Placement & Retention 8 percent of those

referred to the ESP System are placed in jobs within six months

Of those placed in jobs:

– 35% still hold those jobs six months later

– 29% return to PA– 36% remain

unaccounted for

Job Placement & Retention Relative to Referrals(Based on 3-Month Avgs. from HRA's Dec.'04 VendorStat Report)

(Average = 121)(Average=149)(Average = 346)

(Average = 4144)

(Average = 2305)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Referred to System Net Seen by

System

Placed in Jobs Retain Jobs at 3

Months

Retain Jobs at 6

Months

Connecting People to Long-Term Employment

Scope & Salary of Placements 75 percent of those referred to jobs by their

ESP Sites were referred to positions that paid $8.00 or less

19 percent of ESP clients were referred to part-time positions

Many of the full-time positions were to temporary positions

58 percent were uninformed about work-related benefits available to them

Connecting People to Long-Term Employment

Systemic Problems

1. Conflicts between ESPs and the Work Experience Program (WEP)

2. Lack of Strategic Workforce Development for Welfare Recipients

3. No Coordination between HRA and the Dept. of Small Business Services (SBS)

Providing Access to Training and Education

Job Readiness Preparation

WORKSHOPS PREPARING PEOPLE TO GET JOBS

JOB READINESS WORKSHOP PERCENT EXPOSED

Resume Writing 73 percent Filling in Applications 72 percent Interview Skills 72 percent Job Search Techniques 72 percent Cover Letters 60 percent

Data from ESP Client Survey: Clients in Ongoing Service Stage (N=406)

WORKSHOPS PREPARING PEOPLE TO KEEP JOBS

JOB READINESS WORKSHOP PERCENT EXPOSED

Strategies to Keep a Job 64 percent Computer Basics 54 percent Work Related Benefits 46 percent Financial Literacy / Budgeting 32 percent Stress Management 28 percent

Data from ESP Client Survey: Client in Ongoing Service S tage (N=406)

While most clients of the ESP System were exposed to workshops that prepared them to get jobs, fewer were exposed to workshops that prepared them to retain jobs.

Providing Access to Training and EducationKnowledge of

Education & Training Rights

1 in 3 ESP clients do not know about their rights regarding education and training.

Clients have different information depending on the vendor to which they are assigned.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall AmericaWorks

CUNY Goodwill N-PAC Wildcat

ESP Clients NOT told about Education & Training Rights, by Vendor

(Client Survey, N=320, Ongoing Clients Not in Education & TrainingDifferences by vendor are statistically significant, p < .05, )

Not Told can Attend ABE & TrainingNot Told about Funds (Vouchers)

Providing Access to Training and Education

Education & Training Access 18 percent of ESP clients were able to access vocational

education and training to better prepare them for work.

Clients at America Works were the least likely to be in education and training; N-PAC clients were the most likely.

Education & Training Enrollment of Participants (Client Survey, N=396, Differences by vendor are statistically signficant, p<0.05)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

America Works

CUNY

Goodwill

Wildcat

N-PAC

Overall

Currently In Education & Training Not in Education & Training

Providing Access to Training and Education

Systemic Problems

1. Limitations of Individual Training Account (ITA) Vouchers

2. Performance-Based Contracts Undermine Education and Training

Addressing the Needs of a Diverse Population

Barriers to Employment 61 percent of ESP

clients identify barriers that make it hard for them to get, accept, or keep a job.

While 77 percent of those with barriers say that workers at their ESP are aware of the barriers they face, only 50 percent feel the ESP program is able to help them deal with the barriers.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Say Workers Aware ofBarriers they Face

(N=340)

Say Program Seems Ableto Address Barriers

(N=248)

Capacity of Program to Address Barriers(Client Survey, Those that Identified Barriers)

Addressing the Needs of a Diverse Population

Referred, but Not Served

30 percent of those referred to the ESPs each month Fail to Report (FTR).

14 percent are sent back to HRA each month due to wrong initial referral.

46 percent end up in receipt of a Failure to Comply (FTC).

Percent of those Referred to the ESP System that are Served by It

(Based on 3-Month Averages, HRA's Dec. '04 VendorStat Reports)

2% Still Active/No Job after Six Months

8% Placed in Job

14% Deassigned

due to Wrong Initial Referral

46% Receive Failure to Comply &

Put on Hold or Start Over

30%Fail to Report/ Sanctioned or

Assigned New ESP

Addressing the Needs of a Diverse Population

Failure to Comply (FTCs)

82 percent of people seen by the ESP System are FTCed, rather than placed in a job, by the end of six months.

55 percent of clients had been to more than one job search / job readiness site; the average number of sites attended was 3.

Many clients find themselves in an endless cycle - a revolving door.

Addressing the Needs of a Diverse Population

Systemic Problems

1. Faulty Referral and Assessment Processes and Practices

2. High Propensity to Issue FTCs

3. Performance-Based Contracts Discourage Service Provision

Conclusion

The Revolving Door

Systemic Failure NYC lacks a strategic workforce

development approach for welfare recipients.

WEP fails to prepare people for work and discourages job searching.

The ITA Voucher System discourages enrollment in training.

Education and training providers are neither monitored nor evaluated.

The Revolving Door

Systemic Failure (Cont.)

HRA fails to refer the right people to the right services.

HRA prioritizes sanctioning of clients over addressing their barriers.

The contracting system does not support working with clients with more challenges to employment.

The Revolving Door

What’s Next? ESP contracts expire this year New contracts set to start Oct. 1, 2005 HRA Works will:

– Combine 3 employment contracts into 1– Utilize up to $63 million per year– Serve 12,800 individuals per month

Some potentially positive program changes:– Collapsing of contracts– Having ESPs assign WEP sites– Add incentive pay for reducing numbers of sanctioned clients

More is necessary to address past limitations recognized

Recommendations

Recommendations

To meet the goal of connecting more welfare recipients to long-term employment, city government should:

Coordinate HRA and SBS in Crafting a Single Workforce Development Strategy

Develop Career-Ladder Programs that Reflect Real Labor Market Needs

Create Industry and/or Occupation Employment Services Hubs for Welfare Recipients

Recommendations

To facilitate access to education and training among welfare recipients, city government should:

Eliminate Sanctions and FTCs as Barriers to ITA Voucher Applications

Monitor and Identify Effective Training Programs

Add Payment Milestones that Encourage Placement in Training

RecommendationsTo more adequately meet the needs of a diverse population seeking assistance, city government and HRA should: Develop an Assessment Process that is Broad in

Scope

Establish a Separate Sanction Trouble-Shooting Program

Create Line Item Funds or Additional Milestones for Service Provision

Expand Paid Transitional Jobs into Other City Agencies

Create a Supported Work Program for the Hardest-to-Employ

Recommendations

To ensure that we can really learn what works in moving people from welfare-to-work, city government should:

Contract an Outside Entity to Monitor and Evaluate HRA Works

Questions and Answers