WTEC
Home About Us Contact Us
Search.
Print Print Friendly

Washington Workforce Core Measures


Mandatory federal performance measures are different for each program. Washington's Workforce Board has developed measures that can be used for all major workforce programs to create a systemwide performance measure.

Systemwide Washington Workforce Core Measures for 2011  

Employment -Percentage of former participants who were in employment reported to Employment Security during the third quarter after leaving the program.* 

All 50%
Completers 64%

Earnings -Median annualized earnings of former participants during the third quarter after leaving the program. (Quarterly earnings are the result of hourly wage rates and the number of hours worked in a calendar quarter. Toderive annualized earnings, quarterly earnings are multiplied by four.)

All
$17,928
Completers
$25,010

Skills  -Percentage of participants who obtained an appropriate credential.*

64%

Participant Satisfaction - Percentage of former participants who reported satisfaction with the program as evidenced by survey responses six to nine months after leaving the program. **

92%

Employer Satisfaction - Percentage of employers who reported satisfaction with new employees who were program completers as evidenced by survey responses.***

95%

Results are from program year 2008-2009, with participant outcomes observed in 2009-10.
*Skills (credential) data does not include WorkFirst, ABE and secondary CTE. 
**Participant satisfaction does not include WorkFirst.
***Employer Satisfaction data does not include Worker Retraining, WorkFirst, DVR, and DSB and it combines all three WIA programs as one. 

Employment or Further Education
a. Programs serving adults: Percentage of former participants with employment recorded in UI and other administrative records during the third quarter after leaving the program.
b. Programs serving youth: Percentage of former participants with employment or further education as recorded in UI, student, and other administrative records during the third quarter after leaving the program.

Earnings
Median annualized earnings of former participants with employment recorded in UI and other administrative records during the third quarter after leaving the program, measured only among the former participants not enrolled in further education during the quarter.

Skills
Percentage or number of program participants leaving the program who achieved appropriate skill gains or were awarded the relevant educational or skill credential based on administrative records.

Customer Satisfaction
a. Employer Satisfaction With Former Program Participants: Percentage of employers who report satisfaction with new employees who are program completers as evidenced by survey responses.
b. Former Participant Satisfaction: Percentage of former participants who report satisfaction with the program as evidenced by survey responses.

Return on Investment
a. Taxpayer Return on Investment: The net impact on tax revenue and social welfare payments compared to the cost of the services.
b. Participant Return on Investment: The net impact on participant earnings and employer provided benefits compared to the cost of the services.
----------------------------------------------
To measure employment and earnings, the methodology takes advantage of the UI wage files maintained by ESD (and the equivalent agency in other states). These files hold information on all employment covered by the UI system—approximately 90 percent of all employment. Where available, the UI records are supplemented by other administrative records of employment, such as Department of Defense records.

Criteria for Good Performance Measures
Other things being equal, performance measures are better the extent to which they:

  1. Are outcome measures: Performance measures should be measures of the results for customers as opposed to process
    measures or measures of program outputs.
  2. Promote desired results: Because you get what you measure, measures should be carefully designed to promote behavior and results that are consistent with the desired outcomes.
  3. Are easily explainable to a lay audience: Policy leaders are lay people when it comes to the often arcane subject of performance measures. Keeping it simple is good advice.
  4. Create a level playing field among programs and service strategies: Measures should be designed so that they do not create a bias toward one program or strategy or another.
  5. Are scalable and divisible: Measures should be applicable, to the extent possible, to local institutions, regional areas, and the state. Measures should also be divisible so that results can be understood for subpopulations and service strategies.
  6. Are not easily “gamed”: While there may be no measure that is completely impervious to manipulation, some measures are more susceptible than others.
  7. Are inexpensive: Performance measures are very important for ensuring that taxpayer dollars are wisely used, but policy leaders very reasonably want to minimize the amount of money spent on activities other than direct service to customers, and those include performance measurement.

Core Measures by Program

Systemwide measures in full

 

   
Last Modified 8/21/2014   |   Contact Webmaster   |   Privacy Statement   |   Site Map   |   Employment   |   Access Washington   |   Register to Vote