State Financed and Customized Training Programs. Research and Evaluation Report Series.
Saved in:
| Title: | State Financed and Customized Training Programs. Research and Evaluation Report Series. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Duscha, Steve, Graves, Wanda Lee, KRA Corp., Silver Spring, MD. |
| Availability: | For full text: http://wdr.doleta.gov/opr/fulltext/document.asp?docn=6062. Available to sensory-impaired individuals upon request (Tel: 202-219-7664; TDD: 800-326-2577). |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 145 |
| Publication Date: | 1999 |
| Sponsoring Agency: | Employment and Training Administration (DOL), Washington, DC. Office of Policy and Research. |
| Intended Audience: | Community; Policymakers |
| Document Type: | Numerical/Quantitative Data Reports - Evaluative |
| Descriptors: | Government Role, Government School Relationship, Inplant Programs, Instructional Student Costs, Job Training, Program Administration, Program Budgeting, Program Costs, State Aid, State Programs, Vocational Education |
| Abstract: | This document describes customized, employer-specific training programs for incumbent workers and new hires operated in 45 states. Unlike federal programs, state programs are economic tools to attract and retain jobs; are employer-, not worker-centered; have few requirements for targeting individuals; and train incumbent workers for new jobs or new job duties. Main issues facing state programs are identified. Following a 17-page narrative are 16 tables that illustrate national budget totals by year; top 10 states in total spending and per capita spending; change in incumbent worker training by state; characteristics of customized training programs, 1998-99; state programs funded by special VI-associated tax and tax increment bonds; state programs where colleges are the only training provider; spending by region; and budget comparisons for 7 regions. A section with state data provides a report for each state that includes 1998-99 budget and per capita spending; year program created; money for incumbent worker training and for new hire training; state overview; source of money; company and trainee targeting; typical training amounts; limits on training or project amounts; state program administration and staff; application process, training project administration, and providers; limits on types of training; and welfare-to-work training. Historical budget detail is provided. No information is provided for Montana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming. Only historical budget detail is provided for New York and Oregon. (YLB) |
| Entry Date: | 2001 |
| Accession Number: | ED448342 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | This document describes customized, employer-specific training programs for incumbent workers and new hires operated in 45 states. Unlike federal programs, state programs are economic tools to attract and retain jobs; are employer-, not worker-centered; have few requirements for targeting individuals; and train incumbent workers for new jobs or new job duties. Main issues facing state programs are identified. Following a 17-page narrative are 16 tables that illustrate national budget totals by year; top 10 states in total spending and per capita spending; change in incumbent worker training by state; characteristics of customized training programs, 1998-99; state programs funded by special VI-associated tax and tax increment bonds; state programs where colleges are the only training provider; spending by region; and budget comparisons for 7 regions. A section with state data provides a report for each state that includes 1998-99 budget and per capita spending; year program created; money for incumbent worker training and for new hire training; state overview; source of money; company and trainee targeting; typical training amounts; limits on training or project amounts; state program administration and staff; application process, training project administration, and providers; limits on types of training; and welfare-to-work training. Historical budget detail is provided. No information is provided for Montana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming. Only historical budget detail is provided for New York and Oregon. (YLB) |
|---|
