U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration 1 Practicum on DATA VALIDATION.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MONITORING OF SUBGRANTEES
Advertisements

COMMON MEASURES Presented by: Phil Degon Workforce Administration September 2006.
Preparing for Compliance Monitoring Reviews Understanding CMS Protocols Used by Review Organizations January 14, 2009 Presented by: Margaret deHesse, RN,
1 Program and Compliance Management Workshop: UNDERSTANDING PARTICIPATION CYCLES V I R T U A L L Y.
Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Eligibility and Required Documentation.
Services to Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers
Data Collection An overview of how data are collected and used in Washington state.
Final Determinations. Secretary’s Determinations Secretary annually reviews the APR and, based on the information provided in the report, information.
U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration 1 Common Measures and Reporting BINGO!
Promoting a flexible, innovative, and effective workforce system within the State of Michigan. WIA Data Validation FAQs, Tools, Tips, and Tricks Michigan.
1 Program and Compliance Management Workshop: Documentation Desires, Duties, Dilemmas V I R T U A L L Y.
1 Performance Measurement Wagner-Peyser and VETS Reporting For Employment And Training Programs.
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA Data Validation ARRA Performance Accountability Forum San Francisco, California December.
1 NEG Reporting Overview December 9, 2009 Employment and Training Administration U.S. Department of Labor Frances Perkins Building 200 Constitution Avenue,
Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Data
1 Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data (WIASRD) Performance and Technology Office Employment and Training Administration, USDOL
SKIES Data Entry Instructions for WIA Entrepreneurial Training.
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA Simple Ways to Improve Your Reporting Greg Wilson Office of Performance and Technology Employment.
Developing Earmark Grant Performance Measures: Grant Proposal Section 3 Deanna Khemani.
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA Reporting and Data Validation Updates Presenters: Wes Day Barbara Strother Greg Wilson ETA’s.
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration Common Mistakes with WIA.
1 WIA Youth Common Measures Webinar Attainment of a Degree or Certificate January 19, :00 am – 11:00 am.
NYS Integrated Reporting 1 New York State Integrated Reporting Plenary Session USDOL/ETA Performance and Reporting Summit 2007 Phoenix Marriott.
TCRS Concord Project Employer Training. Agenda 2 Topic Objectives Why Are You Here? Project Overview What’s New Your Resources Questions Demonstration.
1 Food Stamp Employment and Training Operating a Volunteer Program July 2009 An equal opportunity employer/program. Auxiliary aids and services are available.
1 Program and Compliance Management Workshop: Data Element Validation—Issues from Federal Monitoring V I R T U A L L Y.
ETA Data Validation July Overall ETA Data Validation Project Goals Develop a comprehensive, systematic data validation system to ensure data integrity.
Welcome to the Common Measures Webinar Press *6 to mute your telephone Please do not put your phone on HOLD In the ‘chat’ box, please enter and send us.
Performance Counts Julian Hardy Lane Kelly. 2 Discussion Topics TAPR Reporting and Related Issues Common WIASRD Errors Data Validation Issues.
Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Data HMIS Lead and Vendor Training Updated 5/22/14.
Changing Perspectives on Workforce System Performance Data Validation Workforce Innovations San Antonio July, 2004.
WIA Administration Program Monitoring. Why Monitor Programs ? 20 CFR (b)(1) and WIA Sections 127 and 132 require the state to develop a monitoring.
1 Changing Perspectives on Workforce System Performance Employment and Training Administration Office of Performance and Technology
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA Back to Basics! Program Reporting U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration.
U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration Keith Rowe ETA – Dallas Region Office Presenter ETA – PROTECH WISPR Quarterly Reports and.
Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Data HMIS Lead and Vendor Training Updated 9/14.
Review of Data Validation Results for PY 2004 We’ve come a long way, baby!
Performance Measurement Under Title 1-B of the Workforce Investment Act Regional Training Richard West Social Policy Research Associates.
Data Validation (DV) What is DV? Who conducts DV Why conduct DV? How is DV done? When is DV? Common Fails Suggestions Expectations.
NYS Swipe Card 0 Common Intake and Case Management New York State Swipe Card Technology by Anthony Joseph Workforce Development & Training Division,
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA 1 Change in Reporting Requirements for the Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record.
Florida’s Experience with Long-Term, Short-Term and Common Measures Mike Switzer Workforce Florida, Inc Commonwealth Lane Tallahassee, FL
PERFORMANCE REPORTING AND ANALYSIS UNIT Short and Long-Term Performance Reporting For the New Workforce System in Florida.
Sacramento Works Student Coordinator Training. What roles will I play? The Student Coordinator role will be to - Provide industry recognized credential.
Bridging the Gap and Maximizing Resources with Partner Programs for Positive Program Outcomes Presented by Mershal Noble and Danielle McNeil.
Adjusting Erroneous Wage Record Match Results. 2 Agenda Background on the use of wage record data for tracking employment and earningsBackground on the.
Labor Exchange Validation July Labor Exchange Reporting ETA 9002 has five sections ETA 9002 has five sections –9002 A & B reports on job seeker.
DOE STAFF DATABASE: Overview of Changes Presenter : Teresa R. Sancho FAMIS 2011 CONFERENCE Tallahassee, Florida June 2011.
Program Performance and Reporting Pacific Northwest TAT Forum April 20-22, 2010 Seattle, Washington.
Improving Eligibility Documents November, Improving Data Collection The State Office of AIDS (OA) is now working with providers to improve the quality.
Workforce Innovations Conference July 2006 Workforce Investment Streamlined Performance Reporting (WISPR) System: “HOT Wiring” State Data for Workforce.
Trade Act Participant Report (TAPR) 2005 Revisions for Implementing Common Measures.
Other Data Issues Improving Data Quality American Institutes for Research February 2005.
Table 5 and Follow-up Collecting and Reporting Follow-up Data Or What’s Behind Table 5? American Institutes for Research February 2005.
107 East Madison Street Caldwell Building, MSC# G-229 Tallahassee, Florida TAA Performance August 2009 An equal opportunity employer/program.
Changing Perspectives on Workforce System Performance Workforce Innovations Conference July 2004 Employment and Training Administration Performance and.
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA 1 Program Performance Accountability Requirements under the American Recovery and Reinvestment.
Performance Reporting Under WIA Title 1B Candice Graham-Young ETA Performance Accountability Team.
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA ARRA Performance Accountability and Updates: What About the Numbers? Karen Staha Office.
Participants will have a knowledge and understanding of priority of service in DOL funded programs.
Data Coordinators Conference – 2014 Laura Marroquin CASEWORKER/JCMS Specialist Everything New Data Coordinators Should Know.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS Common Measures. When did common measures become effective? Common measures became effective for W-P on 7/1/05.
Reporting & Performance Quarterly Performance Reports  Narrative  Performance  Financial.
Employment and Training Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ETA Data Validation Looking Back and Moving Forward Region IV Technical Assistance Forum Retooling.
Common Performance Measures for Employment and Training Programs SC Workforce Development Partnership Conference October 26-29, 2003 Brad Sickles
Data Validation ETA/ASTD Regional Technical Assistance Forum November 2, 2011 San Francisco, CA.
Welcome to Workforce 3 One U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration Webinar Date: 9/30/15 Presented by: Office of Trade Adjustment.
CareerSource Chipola Performance Overview
Technical Assistance Webinar
From Theory to Practice
Presentation transcript:

U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration 1 Practicum on DATA VALIDATION

2 Overview Background & Basics Federal Requirements Issues/Findings from Federal Reviews Exercise: DEV with WIA NEG Record

3 USDOL’s Data Validation (DV) Initiative To support President’s Management Agenda and respond to data quality issues cited by oversight agenciesTo support President’s Management Agenda and respond to data quality issues cited by oversight agencies DV Directives –Eight guidance letters/notices to date Initial Guidance – TEN (5/28/03) TEGL 3-03 and related changes Latest Guidance – TEN 9-06 (8/15/06) All performance-related guidance at

4 How Does Validation Work? Two separate processes required to ensure performance data are reliable –Report Validation –Data Element Validation Report Validation (RV)Report Validation (RV) ensures performance calculations are accurate Data Element Validation (DEV)Data Element Validation (DEV) ensures the data used in the calculations are accurate

5 Understanding the Distinction SCENARIO –A State reports an Adult Entered Employment Rate of 78% based on a numerator of 975 and a denominator of 1250 –The EER calculation is based on percentage of adults not employed at participation who were employed in the 1 st quarter after exit –Other operational parameters apply, such as Transitioning Service Members* are automatically considered not employed at participation and included in calculations *TSM – Within 12 months of separation or 24 months of retirement

6 Data Quality from Perspective of RV For instance, –How do we know the 78% is correct? Does the denominator consist of the “right” exiters (e.g., those not employed at participation)? Are all TSMs included in calculations as required? –In other words, are the calculations correct; did the State follow federal reporting specifications correctly?

7 Data Quality from Perspective of DEV For instance, –How do we know those individuals identified as TSMs were actually within 12 months of separation or 24 months of retirement from the service? –For those “employed in the 1 st quarter after exit,” what if the exit date was actually in a prior quarter? –In other words, were the data used to generate the calculations correct to begin with?

8 The Bottom Line Are the calculations reported by the State accurate based on federal reporting specifications? Are the data used in the calculations accurate? It’s all about Data Quality ! RV DEV

9 Federal Requirements Report ValidationReport Validation –Programs that submit “year-end” aggregate reports must validate their reports prior to submission WIA, Wagner-Peyser, VETS (not Trade) –RV is largely a technical function, performed at state level by IT staff –NOT the focus of this session Data Element ValidationData Element Validation –Pertains to ALL programs (but is minimal in case of LX) –Involves checking data in participant records against allowable source documentation to verify compliance with federal definitions –Elements “pass” or “fail” validation

10 More on DEV ETA provides Data Reporting and Validation Software (DRVS), which generates a sample of participant records to be “inspected” by State staff Except in the case of labor exchange programs (LX or Wagner-Peyser/VETS), DEV is very labor intensive because it involves state staff conducting reviews of a sample of participant records from across the state –Random sample for WIA and Trade Typical sample for WIA might be ~1200 records Typical sample for Trade might be ~150 records –25 records for LX

11 More on DEV (cont’d) For each participant record in the sample, a “DEV Worksheet” is generated that contains the elements selected for validation that apply to the specific participant State Validators use the appropriate federal guidance (e.g., validation handbook) to note allowable source documentation and check the accuracy of each element –Documentation must either MATCH the element or SUPPORT the element Most source documentation is located at the One-Stop level (wage record information stored at State level)

12 Summary States are required to report accurate data and USDOL has oversight responsibility USDOL requires RV and DEV (as applicable) and provides tools to assist, including software –Many states also use the software for reporting, although this isn’t required –User Guides and Handbooks for each program include allowable source documentation for critical data elements Guidance states USDOL will monitor state DV efforts –This has begun!

13 Issues/Findings from Federal Reviews What are some of the key macro- level issues affecting states’ ability to report accurate and consistent data? What are some of the key micro- level issues affecting data quality as per federal reviews?

14 Macro-Level Issues Related to DV Issues affecting State ability to collect and report accurate and consistent data –Flexibility in federal guidance (what, but not how) –Major changes to state management info systems (MIS) –Limited monitoring (state and federal) Issues affecting State experience/compliance with DV –Identifying roles of different unit/staff (TAA in particular) –Communication of expectations and requirements to local areas –Lack of a comprehensive data management strategy (e.g., including monitoring of sub-grantees)

15 Data Element Validation Issues Most Common DEV Issues –State failure to request or ensure complete case files –State staff not validating wage-related information as required –Changes to wage record data not documented –Incorrect, outdated or misapplied definitions of data elements (e.g., employment status at registration was used prior to PY05, incorrect capture of race and ethnicity) –Lack of MIS manuals or data collection guides to assist sub-grantees

16 Data Element Validation Issues (cont’d) –Lack of compliance with federal requirements pertaining to unique identifiers (particularly for those co-enrolled in TAA and WIA) –Quality of case notes varies dramatically –Incorrect and inconsistent dates within files (dates of participation, training, training completion, exit, date of birth) Although Local (sub-grantee) staff have limited control over some areas, there is much that can be done locally to improve the structure and content of case files

17 Exercise Experiencing DEV: WIA NEG Case File [Our thanks to the State of Tennessee]

18 “Setting Up” The Exercise We are conducting PY05 DEV, using PY05 validation policies and instructions What You Have: –Copy of WIA NEG case file with pages numbered (1-61) –DEV Worksheet –Source Documentation Instructions For PY05 validation, instructions were part of TEN 9- 06, dated 8/15/06 PLEASE MAKE NO MARKS ON THE CASE FILE OR THE DOCUMENT CONTAINING SOURCE DOCUMENTATION; THESE MUST BE RETURNED AS IS Only write on the DEV Worksheet

19 “Setting Up” the Exercise (cont’d) About This File –eCase Management and Activity Tracking System or eCMATS is Tennessee’s MIS –Participant is female, single mother, under 30 –National Emergency Grant (NEG) received as result of permanent closure of facility in 2002 –Concurrent enrollment noted (TAA, W-P, Voc Ed., Rapid Response)

20 DEV Exercise Elements to be Validated (exactly as appears on worksheet) 1.DislocationDate 2.ProgramParticipationDate 3.ProgramExitDate 4.NEGProject1 5.FirstCoreServiceDate 6.FirstIntensiveService 7.DateEnterTraining 8.DateExitTraining 9.TrainingService1 10.ExitEmployed1 11.ExitEmployedMatch1 Note: Sometimes you need to “decipher” what the element means (e.g., “ExitEmployed1” actually means employment in first quarter after exit)

21 Data Element: Dislocation Date Called “Date of Actual Qualifying Dislocation” in source documentation The “value” is 12/06/2002 Allowable source documentation –Verification from employer; rapid response list; notice of layoff; public announcement with follow-up cross-match with UI; self-attestation Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

22 Data Element: Program Participation Date Called “Date of Program Participation” in source documentation The “value” is 09/16/2003 Allowable source documentation –State MIS Information Does it Pass or Fail?

23 Data Element: Program Exit Date Called “Date of Exit” in source documentation The “value” is 09/30/2004 Allowable source documentation –WIA status/exit forms, state MIS data, case notes Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

24 Data Element: NEG Project No. Called “National Emergency Grant Project Numbers” in source documentation The “value” is 0160 Allowable source documentation: –Case notes or other file data specifying the particular layoff or emergency the precipitated enrollment. The project number for the grant(s) should be included. Does it Pass or Fail?

25 Data Element: 1 st Core Service Date Called “Date of First Staff Assisted Core Service” in source documentation The “value” is 09/16/2003 Allowable source documentation –State MIS data Does it Pass or Fail?

26 Data Element: 1 st Intensive Service Date Called “Date of First Intensive Service” in source documentation The “value” is 09/16/2003 (same as 1 st core service) Allowable source documentation –State MIS data, case notes Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

27 Data Element: Date Entered Training The “value” is 01/06/2004 Allowable source documentation –Cross match between dates of service and vendor training information, vendor training documentation, state MIS, case notes Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

28 Data Element: Date Exited Training Called “Date Completed or Withdrew from Training” in source documentation The “value” is 03/29/2004 Allowable source documentation –Cross match between dates of service and vendor training information, vendor training documentation, state MIS, case notes Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

29 Data Element: Type of Training Service The “value” is 6 WIA reporting instructions contain codes –1=OJT –2=skill upgrading and retraining –3=entrepreneurial training –4=ABE or ESL in combination with training –5=customized training –6=other occupational skills training Allowable source documentation –State MIS data, case notes Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

30 Data Element: Employed 1 st Qtr After Exit Qtr The worksheet refers to this element as “ExitEmployed1” and the source documentation refers to this as “Employed in 1 st Quarter after Exit Quarter” The “value” is 1, which means YES Allowable source documentation –UI wage records, WRIS, supplemental data sources defined by TEGL17-05, State MIS Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

31 Data Element: Type of Employment Match The worksheet refers to this as “ExitEmployedMatch1,” but the source documentation refers to this as “Type of Employment Match 1 st Quarter After Exit Quarter” The “value” is 1, which means “UI wage records and WRIS” Allowable source documentation –Follow up services, surveys, record sharing and/or automated record matching with other employment and administrative databases, other out of state wage record systems, case notes Does it Pass or Fail and based on what?

32 Thank You! In God we trust. All others must use data. W. E. Deming