Front Page
NMJ Search
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House

Investigators think more than one-third of the programs -- more than 200 grants out of 560 that were handed out -- might have failed, at a total cost approaching $230 million.
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
$230 Million in Labor Dept. Grants
Had No Criteria for Success
You'd expect a program to help train workers in new skills would have grades to measure how well the students learned. And you'd expect the program itself to be graded on whether it actually helped those students find employment after they graduated. But that's precisely what a Labor Department jobs program failed to measure for grants it made in 2010 and 2011, auditors say.

Facing rising unemployment nationwide, the Labor Department Employment & Training Administration (ETA) used a discretionary grant program to support schools and businesses that were training workers and helping them find jobs. But an internal investigation revealed that there were few benchmarks for measuring whether the grants were actually helping people find work or achieving their other goals -- and sometimes results were simply not documented.

In fact, investigators think more than one-third of the programs -- more than 200 grants out of 560 that were handed out -- might have failed, at a total cost approaching $230 million.

"The basis used in determining acceptable performance was not defined, documented or consistently applied," said a report by the Labor Department's Office of Inspector General. Evaluations of performance were "subjective, inconsistent and unsupported," investigators said...

Investigators reviewed 38 grants, totaling $839 million handed out between April 2010 and March 2011. That's just under half of the $1.86 billion in discretionary grants distributed by the Labor Department during that time.

Five of the grants reviewed, totaling $3.4 million, were funded as part of the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act, President Obama's legislation designed to help bolster a struggling economy. The Labor Department gave out a total of $92 million in economic stimulus grants during the period examined -- grants that were widely heralded when they were announced.

"These grants will help workers gain access to good, safe, and well-paying jobs, but also help support state energy strategies, to help build a national green economy," said Labor Secretary Hilda Solis in a Web video announcing the grants in early 2010. "These grants are a part of a larger Recovery Act initiative, totaling nearly half a billion dollars, to fund workforce development projects promoting economic growth by preparing workers for careers in the energy efficiency and renewable energy industries."

But, the inspector general's report says, officials did not consistently measure whether those goals were achieved. In fact, all of the grants the IG reviewed had been certified as having performed acceptably, "although achievement of grant goals ranged from 0 percent to 100 percent."

The objective of the grants "is to contribute to the efficient functioning of the US labor market by providing high quality job training, employment, labor market information, and income maintenance services," the IG said. But investigators found that both the stimulus projects and non-Recovery Act projects were completed without any consistent idea if they had helped secure jobs -- yielding no lessons to apply to the next round of grants.

"In the absence of a benchmark to measure grants, performance acceptability was inconsistent and ineffective," investigators said.

ETA even has internal guidelines that grants should be reviewed, and lessons applied to future handouts, but investigators said those policies weren't followed.

The Labor Department declined to comment.


Editor's Note: What's a half a billion dollars when political rhetoric is at stake, eh?!...

The informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a sustaining donation today.

Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. is not supported by any political organization.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by is copyrighted. supports and its goal: the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

The Media © 1998-2014    Content Copyright © Individual authors
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server