Comment on "Helping Poor Working Parents Get Ahead"

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

The text below is an excerpt from the complete document. Read the entire comment in PDF format.

This paper is a response to New Safety Net Paper 4, "Helping Poor Working Parents Get Ahead: Federal Funds for New State Strategies and Systems" by Harry J. Holzer and Karin Martinson.

Holzer and Martinson are right on in describing both the poor advancement prospects of low-skilled workers and the seriously compromised capacity of the public workforce system to meet the needs of workers or employers because of the steady erosion of federal support for training and employment assistance. (U.S. Department of Labor expenditures on such services have declined from $63 per worker in 1986 to $35 per worker in 2006, without adjustment for inflation.) They are also correct in pointing out that even though we need more research, we presently know enough about what works to effectively invest resources in improving the economic prospects of low-income, low-skilled workers.

A major infusion of new money for workforce programs is desperately needed, and Holzer and Martinson’s proposal for a dedicated funding stream targeted at improving system capacity to advance the economic prospects of low-skilled, low-income individuals has the potential to infuse new life into the public workforce system. CLASP has documented the steady decline in the share of low-income individuals receiving training and intensive services under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) since its enactment. WIA required one-stop centers to serve all workers seeking employment but never provided enough funds to do so except with low-intensity core services, such as job placement, information, and referral services. As a result, much of the on-the-ground capacity to serve populations with barriers to employment has been lost. Most one-stop centers currently are not equipped to serve “hard to employ” individuals; community-based organizations have had to retrench because of lack of resources. Necessary partnerships among public agencies and with the private sector, especially small companies that employ many low-wage workers, also need to be strengthened. While there is growing consensus in the field that the instructional accommodations, partnerships with employers, financial incentives, and support and services strategies that Holzer and Martinson discuss are the right ones, these approaches, unfortunately, are still considered innovations rather than common practice.

(End of excerpt. The entire comment is available in PDF format.)

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site:

Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required.

Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@urban.org.

If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.