[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 166 (Wednesday, August 27, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51198-51203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20334]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
Final Methodology for Selecting a Job Corps Center for Closure
and Center Selected for Closure: Comments Request
AGENCY: Office of Job Corps, Employment and Training Administration
(ETA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the U.S.
Department of Labor (Department or DOL) issues this notice to announce
the Final Methodology for selecting Job Corps Centers for closure and
one selected Job Corps center for closure. The Office of Job Corps in
ETA published a proposed methodology for selecting centers for closure
at 78 FR 2284 on January 10, 2013. We received a total of eighteen (18)
public comments in response to this proposal. Based on public comments
received, the Office of Job Corps published a revised methodology for
selecting centers for closure at 79 FR 36823 on June 30, 2014. A total
of eleven (11) public comments were received in response to the second
draft methodology. After reviewing all comments, the Department has
decided to make no changes to the revised methodology. This notice goes
on to describe how the final methodology was used to select Job Corps
centers for closure and how based on the application of the final
closure methodology, the Treasure Lake Job Corps Center in Indiahoma,
Oklahoma, was selected for closure. The methodology is now final, and
the Department is not accepting further comments on the methodology.
However, the Department requests public comment on the selection of the
Treasure Lake Job Corps center for closure.
DATES: To be ensured consideration, comments must be submitted in
writing on or before September 26, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket Number ETA-
2014-0002, by only one of the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
Web site instructions for submitting comments.
Mail and hand delivery/courier: Submit comments to Lenita Jacobs-
Simmons, Acting National Director, Office of Job Corps (OJC), U.S.
Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N- 4459, Washington, DC 20210. Due to
security-related concerns, there may be a significant delay in the
receipt of submissions by United States Mail. You must take this into
consideration when preparing to meet the deadline for submitting
comments. The Department will post all comments received on http://www.regulations.gov without making any changes to the comments or
redacting any information, including any personal information provided.
The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is the Federal e-rulemaking
portal and all comments posted there are available and accessible to
the public. The Department recommends that commenters not include
personal information such as Social Security Numbers, personal
addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses in their comments
that they do not wish to be made public, as such submitted information
will be available to the public via the http://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov will not
include the email address of the commenter unless the commenter chooses
to include that information as part of his or her comment. It is the
responsibility of the commenter to safeguard personal information.
Instructions: All submissions received should include the Docket
Number for the notice: Docket Number ETA-2014-0002. Please submit your
comments by only one method. Again, please note that due to security
concerns, postal mail delivery in Washington, DC may be delayed.
Therefore, the Department encourages the public to submit comments on
http://www.regulations.gov.
Docket: All comments on the selected Job Corps Center for closure
will be available on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. The
Department also will make all of the comments it receives available for
public inspection by appointment during normal business hours at the
above address. If you need assistance to review the comments, the
Department will provide appropriate aids such as readers or print
magnifiers. The Department will make copies of this final methodology
and the selected Job Corps center for closure available, upon request,
in large print and electronic file on computer disk. To schedule an
appointment to review the comments and/or obtain the notice in an
alternative format, contact the Office of Job Corps at (202) 693-3000
(this is not a toll-free number). You may also
[[Page 51199]]
contact this office at the address listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lenita Jacobs-Simmons, Acting National
Director, Office of Job Corps, ETA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-4463, Washington, DC 20210; Telephone
(202) 693-3000 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with
hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone number above via
TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-
(877) 889-5627 (TTY/TDD).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: Established in 1964, Job Corps is a national program
administered by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) in the
Department of Labor (DOL or Department). It is the nation's largest
federally-funded, primarily residential training program for at-risk
youth, ages 16-24. With 125 centers in 48 states, Puerto Rico, and the
District of Columbia, Job Corps provides economically-disadvantaged
youth with the academic, career technical, and employability skills to
enter the workforce, enroll in post-secondary education, or enlist in
the military.
Large and small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and Native
American tribes manage and operate 97 of the Job Corps centers through
contractual agreements with the Department of Labor following
competitive procurement, while 28 centers are operated through an
interagency agreement with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Job Corps also receives annual Construction, Rehabilitation, and
Acquisition (CRA) funding to build, maintain, expand, or upgrade new
and existing facilities at all 125 centers.
Pursuing Performance Excellence
The decision to close any chronically low-performing centers
identified by the final methodology is part of an effort by the
Department to reform and improve the Job Corps program in order to
obtain better outcomes for students. Job Corps is a cost-intensive
training program, and the Department is seeking to ensure that those
resources are used to deliver the best possible results for students.
As part of this strategy, the Department believes it should no longer
invest in centers that have demonstrated chronic low performance.
The Department expects to maintain the overall level of enrolled
students throughout any closure process, and intends to reinvest
savings from closure in serving students at higher-performing centers.
In addition, Job Corps students in a chronically low-performing center
will have the opportunity to either complete their training and
graduate while the center remains open or transfer to higher-performing
centers if additional time is needed to complete their training. The
Department believes it is critical to ensure that the program's
resources are deployed in a manner that maximizes results for students.
It is important to note that the Department, in making decisions on
center closures, will maintain at least one Job Corps center in each
state, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia.
(The Department is in the process of opening new centers in Wyoming and
New Hampshire, the two states currently without centers.) In addition,
the methodology set forth in this notice permits the Department to take
into consideration whether a center's closure would have a
disproportionate impact on students in any one state.
The Department's ambitious reform agenda for Job Corps was
discussed in the June 30, 2014, Federal Register Notice. As part of
this reform agenda, Job Corps continues to undergo a rigorous and
comprehensive review of its operations and management to identify
changes that can be made to improve the program's effectiveness and
efficiency. These changes include, but are not limited to, setting
higher standards for all centers, identifying chronically
underperforming centers, and implementing appropriate corrective
actions, which may include closure.
For the purpose of identifying chronically low-performing centers
as candidates for closure, DOL has defined ``chronically low-performing
centers'' as those that consistently lagged in overall performance over
the past five consecutive program years without evidence of significant
recent performance improvement.
Process for Selecting Job Corps Centers for Closure
On August 14, 2012, the Office of Job Corps hosted a national Job
Corps listening session, via webinar, with the Job Corps community to
solicit input on the methodology factors. More than 100 Job Corps
stakeholders participated in the session and provided criteria-related
suggestions in the areas of performance, geographic location, local
economic impact, contract budgets, facilities, and the time period for
evaluating chronic low performance.
On January 10, 2013, the Office of Job Corps published a Federal
Register Notice requesting public comments on a proposed methodology
for selecting Job Corps centers for closure (78 FR2284). A total of 18
public comments were received, which we reviewed and analyzed. As a
result of this analysis, DOL revised the methodology factors for
selection of Job Corps centers for closure. The Office of Job Corps
also proposed additional considerations for inclusion as factors in the
methodology.
On June 30, 2014, the Office of Job Corps published a second
Federal Register Notice requesting public comments on a revised
methodology for selecting Job Corps centers for closure (79 FR 36823).
The comment period for the June 30, 2014 Federal Register Notice was
open from June 30, 2014 to July 21, 2014.
Eleven public comments were received in response to the revised
methodology for selecting Job Corps centers for closure. The Department
considered these comments when finalizing the closure methodology. The
comments are summarized and discussed below.
Three commenters expressed concern that the proposed methodology
looks at a center's performance relative to other centers rather than
the center's performance relative to its performance goals. The first
commenter noted that low performance remains undefined, stating that
looking at a center's performance relative to other centers could
result in the closure of a center that has met its assigned performance
goals. The two other commenters also expressed concern that a center
could be positively evaluated by the Department yet still be closed due
to its relative performance.
Job Corps' Outcome Measurement System (OMS) has always used
absolute ratings and relative rankings. While we acknowledge the
commenters' concerns, as noted in the previous Federal Register
notices, the commenters' concerns are theoretical in nature and do not
apply to the centers at the bottom of the rankings. The centers at the
bottom of the rankings consistently did not, in fact, meet their
performance goals. Moreover closing a center whose performance
unfavorably compares with other centers, and reassigning the students
to higher performing centers, allows the Department to more efficiently
allocate its resources and maximize student outcomes. We believe that
this approach is fair, as this methodology evaluates every center
against the same measures, goals, and weight structures for every
program year, and is largely based on the OMS, which is well known to
the Job Corps community. Through this methodology, DOL was able to
identify the center that
[[Page 51200]]
consistently demonstrated the lowest performance outcomes (ratings)
from Program Year (PY) 2008 to PY 2012.
DOL received a similar comment stating that performance improvement
should be defined independent of other centers' performance. The
commenter noted that under the methodology a center could meet its
performance goals and still be selected for closure. For the reasons
discussed above, we believe that using a center's relative ranking
rather than absolute performance best accomplishes the Department's
goals of efficiently allocating resources to maximize student outcomes.
Moreover, those centers at the very bottom of the rankings have been
chronically unable to achieve their performance goals, and have
consistently underperformed the average performance of the rest of the
system.
DOL received one comment stating that five years (one two-year
contract term, plus 3 option years) is too short a period to make a
final determination that a center's low performance is chronic and
cannot be corrected and improved. As noted in the June 30, 2014 Federal
Register Notice, DOL selected the five-year performance period because
it is long enough to incorporate both the most recent performance data
and relatively older data; allows enough time to analyze impact of any
Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs); provides a stable basis for
comparison, since the OMS had no significant changes over the past five
years; and relies on published outcomes that are familiar to the Job
Corps community. The Department, in its June 30 notice, also addressed
this concern in responding to a comment that suggested that a ten-year,
rather than five-year, period be used. While noting that different
options were considered in developing the methodology, the Department
stated that a five- year period provides a sufficient basis to assess a
center's performance, and that the stability of the OMS for the
previous five years provides a fair comparison of center performance
that relies upon more recent information. Ultimately, the Department
believes that looking at a five-year period of performance,
particularly when paired with greater weighting of more recent years,
most effectively ensures that Job Corps participants are receiving the
highest quality services while taking an operator's efforts to improve
performance into account. Accordingly, we have decided to retain the
proposed definition of chronically low-performing centers as measured
over a five-year period.
DOL received one comment stating that center performance analysis
must consider the impact and effectiveness of the center's Outreach and
Admissions (OA) and Career Transition Services (CTS) contractors. The
commenter argued that a center's OMS and On-Board Strength (OBS)
ratings could be adversely affected by the performance of the OA and
CTS contractors. This could, according to the commenter, lead to a
situation where a center is selected for closure because of factors
outside of its control.
The Department understands the commenter's concern, and
acknowledges that a center should not be held solely responsible for
factors independent of its operations. In recognition of that concern,
the proposed weight of the OBS factor in the June 30, 2014, Federal
Register Notice was reduced from 20% to 5%. As stated in the June 30,
2014, Federal Register Notice, the Department has determined that OBS
should remain a factor and that 5% is the appropriate weighting. In
addition to OA services, a center's OBS can also be adversely affected
by a center's performance. For example, students may be more likely to
drop out of a center if it has low-quality programs or has poor control
over student discipline on center. With regard to the commenter's
concern about the performance of the CTS contractor affecting a
center's performance, the Department believes CTS is a small factor in
a center's overall performance rating. The Department believes the same
performance factors that the program has historically used over time
are the most transparent and equitable means of evaluating performance
in this circumstance.
Three commenters noted that the Department should consider the
effect of the recent passage of the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act (WIOA) of 2014 on the methodology. The first commenter
noted that DOL now has the tools necessary to improve performance at
Job Corps centers, regardless of location. Two commenters noted that
WIOA expands the ability of the Department to take action necessary to
improve performance at underperforming centers. The second and third
commenters suggested that there may be considerable costs for DOL
associated with the closure of Job Corps centers that may be better
used to improve the performance of the centers slated for closure in
accordance with the recently passed WIOA.
While WIOA contains new provisions that stipulate a specific time
by which a center's operator must change because of underperformance,
the actions available to Job Corps to improve performance at a center
under WIOA are consistent with those in the Workforce Investment Act
(WIA). Waiting until WIOA takes effect on July 1, 2015 rather than
taking action now will adversely affect those students who would
receive a higher quality education and training experience if they had
the opportunity to be served instead by a higher performing center. In
response to the second and third commenters, the Department reiterates
its position that center closure is part of Job Corps' reform agenda,
and centers are being considered for closure solely on the basis of
performance. Cost was not a factor in the proposed methodology for
selecting centers for closure. Moreover, as noted above, the Department
is focused on the longer-term cost-efficiencies that will result from
getting better results for students with the limited federal funds made
available for the program each year. Finally, we note that the Job
Corps reform agenda and WIOA are ultimately focused on improving
performance and achieving better outcomes. The Department believes that
implementing its reform agenda while implementing WIOA will most
effectively achieve the goals of both and lead to the greatest
performance improvements across the Job Corps system. As new
performance data becomes available, the Department will continue to
consider the closure of Job Corps Centers as an option where warranted
and as consistent with applicable law, including the amendments
contained in the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.
One commenter expressed concern that closing centers is not an
effective way to reduce program costs, and that measures to reduce
costs over the past two years had a direct impact on students and the
services provided to them. The mission of the Job Corps program is to
provide economically-disadvantaged youth with the academic, career and
technical, and employability skills to enter the workforce, enroll in
post-secondary education, or enlist in the military. To achieve that
result, it must ensure that centers are performing at the highest
possible level of performance to continue to be funded. Center closure
considerations and the closure methodology are based on performance,
not cost savings. As stated above, closing a center whose performance
unfavorably compares with other centers, and reassigning the students
to higher performing centers, allows the Department to more
[[Page 51201]]
efficiently allocate its resources and maximize student outcomes.
Three commenters expressed concern about the Department's decision
to use data from PY 2011 and 2012. One commenter expressed concern that
actions taken by centers at the behest of DOL during these program
years, such as hiring freezes, could, at least in part, account for
negative performance during that time period. The commenter further
expressed concern that different cuts were imposed on Civilian
Conservation Centers than were imposed on contract centers that almost
certainly impacted their relative performance. The second commenter
noted that the methodology uses data from program years when the
program experienced budget shortfalls necessitating a system-wide
enrollment freeze and a hiring freeze and layoffs at centers. The
commenter believes that use of data from these years will result in a
flawed assessment that does not accurately reflect the performance of
individual centers.
While the methodology uses data from these two program years, which
included the program adjustments identified by the commenters, the
Department does not believe that use of this data is prejudicial. The
impact of the budget constraints and enrollment freeze were spread
evenly and equally across the entire Job Corps system. Despite the
programmatic adjustments that were made by the Department in the
referenced years, the performance results in PY 2012 and PY 2011 were
actually better than PY 2010 on most of the program's performance
measures. Rather than have a negative effect on performance, the
program adjustments were followed by generally better performance
outcomes for the entire system. Students received more concentrated
services and had better outcomes during the period of the enrollment
suspension. In addition, the center rankings did not change materially
during this period.
One commenter stated that while the draft methodology provides
protection for states with only a single center, it is silent with
respect to states that send students outside of their state due to lack
of training slots, and that consideration should be made to centers in
states that enroll significantly higher numbers of students compared to
slot capacity. While the commenter's concern regarding enrollment
relative to slot capacity is reflected in the inclusion of OBS as one
of the primary criteria in the closure methodology, the Department did
not include the number of students from the state as part of the
proposed methodology. DOL expects a center will perform well and
produce good outcomes with the students that it receives, regardless of
the student's state of origin.
One commenter stated that in recent years the Federal government
has made substantial capital investments in the Job Corps program and
its centers through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).
Due to the scale of these construction projects, the commenter believes
that many are just being completed and are not captured in the Facility
Condition Index (FCI) scores. The Department agrees there will always
be ongoing construction projects that will not be reflected in the most
current snapshot of FCI results. The Department believes that the
reduction of the FCI weighting factor from 10% to 5%, as discussed in
the June 30 Notice, balances the importance of the Department's
investments in center facilities with the realization that a center's
FCI score is not entirely under the control of center operators.
Accordingly, the Department has decided not to take further action
regarding the FCI criteria.
Four commenters requested that DOL consider the impact of closing a
center on the local economy and take it into account. The Department
recognizes the beneficial effects of a center's operation on a given
local area, and that closing such a center may affect that local
economy. However, the core mission of the Job Corps program is to train
students to become more employable, responsible, and productive
citizens. The Department's intent is to ensure high-quality training
for America's youth by improving performance of the entire training
system. The center closure methodology is based on the overall
performance of centers considered for closure, and economic impact was
not a factor in determining a center's performance.
Several commenters provided comments related to the operation and
management of individual centers and program budgetary constraints. To
the extent that these comments did not address any changes to the
proposed methodology, they were noted as received but outside the scope
of the requested response to the proposed methodology.
Final Methodology for Selecting a Job Corps Center for Closure
Provided below is a description of the final methodology:
As the Department proposed in both the January 10, 2013 Federal
Register Notice and June 30, 2014 Federal Register Notice, DOL used the
following primary criteria against which all centers were measured:
1. Five-year OMS performance level;
2. Five-year OBS; and
3. Five-year FCI.
After ranking the centers based on the primary criteria, DOL then
applied the following additional considerations:
1. Continued availability of Job Corps services in each state, the
District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico;
2. Sufficiency of data available to evaluate center performance
over five years;
3. Indication of significant recent performance improvement; and
4. Job Corps' continuing commitment to diversity.
1. Five-Year Performance Levels
Given that the Job Corps' performance metrics provide a
comprehensive assessment of center performance, allow for comparison of
performance among centers, and supply enough data for decision makers
to determine trends over time, the OMS performance data are the primary
factor in selecting a center for closure. The Department believes this
approach is the most equitable and transparent for both stakeholders
and the public, as these published performance metrics have driven
center performance and programmatic decisions for over a decade.
The Department used the final closure methodology to evaluate each
center's overall OMS ratings for five full program years to derive a
weighted five-year average performance rating. The final methodology
uses OMS performance data for PY 2008-2012, with recent years receiving
a greater weight than earlier years. Further, the original OMS ratings
for each of the five program years, which exceeded 100% for some
centers, were normalized at one hundred percent (100%) to be consistent
with OBS and FCI. ``Normalized'' means the data has been placed on a
100-point scale. The calculation formula for the final methodology also
contains normalized data for OMS.
The year-by-year weighted structure is as follows:
PY 2012 30%
PY 2011 25%
PY 2010 20%
PY 2009 15%
PY 2008 10%
Total: 100%
The calculation formula for five-year performance for the final
closure methodology is as follows:
[[Page 51202]]
Center's Five-Year Weighted Average Rating x 90% = Overall Performance
Rating
2. On-Board Strength
On-Board Strength is an efficiency rating that demonstrates the
extent to which a center operates at full capacity. The measure is
reported as a percentage, calculated by the actual slot capacity
divided by the planned slot capacity (daily number of students that a
center is authorized to serve). The national goal for OBS is 100% in
order to operate the program at full capacity, maximize program
resources, and fulfill the mission of serving the underserved student
population.
This criterion of the methodology evaluates each center's end of
Program Year OBS rating for five full program years to derive a five-
year average rating. As explained above in the context of OMS data, the
June 30, 2014, Federal Register Notice proposed that the revised
closure methodology would use OBS data from the five-year period of PY
2008-2012. As noted in the June 30, 2014, Federal Register Notice, the
May 31, 2012 PY-COBS report will be used as the basis for assessing
center-level OBS performance for PY 2011. The January 31, 2013, PY-COBS
report will be used as the basis for assessing center-level OBS
performance for PY 2012.
The final closure methodology weights each of the five program
year's OBS data, with recent years receiving more weight to incorporate
performance improvement. Finally, the OBS ratings for each of the five
program years were normalized at one hundred percent (100%) so as to be
consistent with the OMS and FCI data.
The year-by-year weighted structure is as follows:
PY 2012 30%
PY 2011 25%
PY 2010 20%
PY 2009 15%
PY 2008 10%
Total: 100%
The calculation formula for five-year OBS for the final closure
methodology is as follows:
Center's Five-Year Weighted Average Cumulative OBS x 5% = Overall OBS
Rating
3. Facility Condition and Physical Plant
For a program that operates 24 hours per day, seven days per week
and is primarily residential, facility conditions are important. The
quality of Job Corps' residential and learning facilities has a direct
impact on students' experiences and, ultimately, their educational
achievement. Each Job Corps center is a fully operational complex with
academic and career technical training facilities, dining and
recreation buildings, administrative offices, and residence halls (with
the exception of solely non-residential facilities), including the
surrounding owned or leased property on which the center is located.
To properly manage the program's facility and condition needs, Job
Corps uses the FCI and gives each center an annual rating. This rating,
which is expressed as a percentage, accounts for the value of a
center's construction, rehabilitation, and repair backlog, as compared
to the replacement value of the center's facilities. Facility condition
affects the outcomes of the Job Corps program because good outcomes
begin with facilities that contribute to a safe learning environment.
For this factor, the Department evaluated each center's PY 2008-PY
2012 FCI, which takes into account all construction projects completed
over the same five-year period as the other two factors.
As with the performance and OBS criteria, the final closure
methodology applies weights to each of the five program year's FCI
data, with recent years receiving more weight to incorporate any recent
improvement. The year-by-year weighted structure is as follows:
PY 2012 30%
PY 2011 25%
PY 2010 20%
PY 2009 15%
PY 2008 10%
Total: 100%
The calculation formula for FCI for the final closure methodology
is as follows:
Center's Five-Year Weighted Average FCI Rating x 5% = Overall FCI
Rating Ranking Centers for Closure
Applying the factors above yielded an overall rating for each
center. This allowed DOL to create a list that ranked all centers based
on historical performance, with the lowest performing center receiving
the lowest rating. The calculation formula for the final methodology is
as follows:
Overall OMS Performance Rating + Overall OBS Rating + Overall FCI Rating = Overall Rating for
(90%). (5%). (5%). Primary Selection
Factors.
4. Other Considerations Included in the Final Closure Methodology
In addition to the methodology described above, the Department will
utilize the following additional criteria:
a. Job Corps Services in Each State, Puerto Rico, and the District
of Columbia. The Department is committed to providing services in a
broad geographic area. In implementing the methodology, DOL ensured
that it maintained at least one Job Corps center in each state, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, and took
into consideration whether a center's closure would have a
disproportionate impact on the training opportunities for students in
any one state.
b. Sufficiency of Data Available to Evaluate Center Performance.
The centers in Ottumwa, Milwaukee, Pinellas, Denison, Long Beach,
Gulfport and New Orleans are not included for consideration for
closure. For each of these centers, there is not enough OMS data to
evaluate the center's performance over the full five-year performance
period. The reasons for the lack of five years' continuous data for
these centers include: New centers were opened during the five-year
performance period (Ottumwa and Milwaukee); centers were excluded from
OMS evaluation because of their selection as Center for Excellence
(CFE) pilot sites (Pinellas County, Denison, and Long Beach); and
centers were temporarily closed because of damage received during
Hurricane Katrina (Gulfport and New Orleans).
c. Indication of Significant Recent Performance Improvement. The
Department determined that performing in the top half of centers in PY
2013 should be taken as evidence of significant recent performance
improvement. Therefore, a center was removed from closure consideration
if it demonstrated significant improvement in PY 2013, the most recent
full year of performance data.
d. Job Corps' Commitment to Diversity. Job Corps currently serves a
diverse student population and remains committed to serving
disadvantaged youth from all backgrounds. In making final closure
decisions, we considered whether a center's closure would result in a
significant reduction in student
[[Page 51203]]
diversity within the overall Job Corps system.
Job Corps Center Selected for Closure
Chronic underperformance in a center, despite repeated and varied
efforts by the Department to improve its performance, is a circumstance
that cannot be allowed to persist. Closing such a center not only
allows the program to better serve the nation's youth in acquiring
career skills through quality job training, but also results in a more
effective use of the program's resources.
Based on the final closure methodology and the additional
considerations described above, the Treasure Lake Job Corps center has
been selected for closure.
In applying the final closure methodology, the Department first
calculated the five-year OMS performance level, the five-year OBS, and
the five-year FCI and then calculated the Overall Rating for Primary
Selection Factors, as described above. Treasure Lake clearly received
the lowest Overall Rating for Primary Selection Factors and, therefore,
the lowest ranking. After ranking the centers based on the primary
criteria, the Department then applied the additional considerations and
determined that none of the additional considerations prevented the
selection of Treasure Lake for closure. The Department is requesting
public comments on the Treasure Lake Job Corps center's selection for
closure.
The Department will implement the closure process pursuant to the
center closure requirements outlined in the WIA at section 159(g) and
as stipulated in the DOL/USDA Interagency Agreement.
The Process for Closing Job Corps Centers, as Outlined in the Workforce
Investment Act
The Department will ensure that our process for closing Job Corps
centers will follow the requirements of section 159(g) of the WIA,
which include the following:
The proposed decision to close a particular center is
announced in advance to the general public through publication in the
Federal Register or other appropriate means;
A reasonable comment period, not to exceed 30 days, is
established for interested individuals to submit written comments to
the Secretary; and
The Member of Congress who represents the district in
which such center is located is notified within a reasonable period of
time in advance of any final decision to close the center.
This Notice serves as the public announcement of the decision to
close Treasure Lake. The Department is providing a 30-day period for
interested individuals to submit written comments on the decision.
Portia Wu,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training.
[FR Doc. 2014-20334 Filed 8-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FT-P