State law should maximize the use of Texas' literacy and adult education funds by consolidating the adult education program administered by the Texas Education Agency with other adult education and training programs at the Texas Workforce Commission.

Background

Passed by the Legislature in 1995, House Bill 1863 included the federal and state adult education programs operated by the Texas Education Agency (TEA) in the consolidation of job training and employment programs. However, Senate Bill 1 continued administration of adult education by TEA, and this provision took precedence over the House Bill 1863 provision moving adult education to the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC). House Bill 1863 also included contingency language requiring the Comptroller to review the adult education program and develop recommendations for the program in relation to the integrated structure of TWC, if the program did not move to TWC.[1]

The Comptroller's December 1995 report recommended transferring TEA's adult education program to TWC.[2] Federal block-grant legislation likely to be reintroduced in the next session of Congress may restrict administration of adult education programs to either the state educational agency or the "current" administrative agency.[3] Thus, the state's option to move the program could disappear if not accomplished in the 1997 legislative session.

Texas' adult literacy problem and workforce implications

In 1994, a comprehensive study of adult literacy in Texas examined a representative sample of more than 2,200 adult Texans age 16 and above. The Texas Adult Literacy Survey revealed that adult Texans who are unemployed, poor or near poor, or on public assistance have significantly lower literacy and educational attainment levels than their fellow Texans who are employed and self-sufficient.

Literacy levels of both employed and unemployed Texans are cause for concern. More than 40 percent of Texas' full-time workforce and 60 percent of the unemployed workforce scored at the two lowest levels of literacy on the five-level National Adult Literacy Survey.

The survey showed that adults who had and those who had not participated in basic skills classes maintained comparable literacy levels. However, program data do not reveal whether participants may have been at a lower level before participating in the basic skills program, nor do they provide specific information on basic skills participants.

One of the clearest conclusions of the Texas Adult Literacy Survey is the relationship between household income and literacy skills. For four of the five levels, median household income jumps about $10,000 per year for each level achieved.[4] The survey results point to the need to raise literacy and educational attainment levels and completion rates for high school equivalency programs, if Texas is to address the problems of poverty, unemployment, and welfare dependency and build a future workforce capable of competing successfully in an international economy.

State funding for adult education and literacy instruction represents less than 2.2 percent of the resources the state spends to train and educate the workforce.[5]

Of the 207,921 participants enrolled in adult basic education classes in 1995, 101,689 were unemployed.[6] Of both employed and unemployed participants, only 5.7 percent went on to job training or further education, 4.2 percent obtained employment, and another 4.4 percent remained employed or obtained job advancement.

Fewer than half of the students complete a multilevel program of instruction; the others are reported to "make progress," which is difficult to quantify since there is no standard assessment for measuring progress across the state. Each program uses its own test or method to determine progress.

The limited data available suggest that a very small proportion of adult education participants receive any direct economic or labor market benefit from this program. The facts that direct investment averages $101 per student and that students receive an average of 55.6 hours of instruction help to explain this limited impact, and suggest the need to better focus the scarce adult education resources on more tangible benefits to participants.

After the Texas Council on Workforce and Economic Competitiveness (TCWEC) required and partly financed the development of a common assessment for adult education and the Texas Literacy Resource Center developed software for an automated management information system, TEA began to provide more meaningful and comprehensive information on adult education programs and student outcomes.

Adult education program officials point to restrictions on federal funds as reasons for limited employment outcomes and the inability to measure and report student outcomes.[7] However, these federal restrictions do not apply to state funds. In 1995, state funds represented about one-third of the $18.5 million in state and federal adult education funds at TEA.[8]

The transfer of the adult education program to TWC also presents opportunities for greater leveraging of resources with Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) education coordination funds, which were transferred to TWC in the House Bill 1863 consolidation, and the $4.4 million for adult education of participants in the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program.

Kentucky moved adult education under a Workforce Development Cabinet several years ago. Kentucky decided to focus the efforts of its K-12 system on school-age children and to align adult education with other programs that serve adults.[9] In Texas as well, the populations in need of adult education overlap significantly with JTPA, JOBS, Food Stamp Employment and Training, and Employment Services clients. Combining the resources of these programs with those of state and federal adult education programs would enable the state to serve more of the eligible participants.

To prevent a disruption of services at the local level if the adult education program is moved to TWC, sufficient time must be allotted for the transition. Specifically, the transfer should come between funding cycles so that adult education funds are in the field before the program is moved at the state level.[10]

Local implications

An important benefit to potential adult education and job training program participants is the integration of adult education services in career development centers, where job seekers are assessed and referred to the appropriate education and training programs. Job seekers with basic skill needs would be more likely to get a referral to literacy or basic skills instruction before receiving job training. In the past, participants needing basic skills have tended to be recycled several times through job training programs without ever having their literacy needs addressed. This practice frustrates the client and wastes scarce resources.

At the local level, consolidation of adult education services would allow Texas' local workforce boards to plan, oversee, and evaluate a more comprehensive system in which adult education funds play a key part.

Recent progress in adult education

The National Literacy Act of 1991 established state Literacy Resource Centers to provide information on literacy programs, practices, and accomplishments to local programs and practitioners. The Texas Literacy Resource Center, housed at Texas A&M University, developed pilot software to enable local program operators to report individual student data, including performance and outcomes information, to TEA. This software, developed to be compatible with other management information systems, is an important step toward assuring accountability and reliability of data.

The National Literacy Act also required state educational agencies to develop yardsticks of program quality for adult education programs. Through a multiyear project that included many public hearings, these indicators were developed to be compatible with TEA's results-based monitoring approach. Later, the State Board of Education adopted a policy developed by an adult education task force that was based on those quality indicators.

Though the development of quality indicators and comprehensive policy sets up a rational process for program improvement over time, TEA did not incorporate objective, quantitative measures or standards that would enable an external observer to assess the program's outcomes or improvements.

TCWEC, created shortly after the quality indicators were developed, was charged with developing a performance and evaluation system for the state's major workforce programs, including the adult education program under TEA. The absence of an automated system for reporting individual student outcomes and progress prevented TCWEC from being able to apply its core measures to the adult education program, except in a 10-county pilot for the software discussed above.

TCWEC also required the adult education community to create a tool to assess progress made by adult students in workforce programs statewide. This ability to measure progress is particularly important in the adult education program because students often increase their skill levels substantially even though they do not always attain employment or even a diploma or General Educational Development certificate as a direct result. Thus, the ability to objectively assess learning progress statewide is critical if Texas is to evaluate its public investment in adult education programs.

Update on key projects

The Texas Literacy Resource Center lacks funding to continue developing the adult education management information system or expand testing of it. TEA has, however, committed $56,400 for the system in fiscal 1997 and is continuing to develop the statewide assessment.[11]

A common assessment for workforce and adult education programs is essential for an accountable and integrated system. TWC is consolidating information systems and developing common eligibility, intake, and assessment processes for major workforce programs under its purview. If adult education programs are excluded from these information systems, the adult education participants may be excluded from the training system that leads to further training and jobs. Job training program participants may miss the opportunity to receive the basic skills instruction they need to achieve their employment goals.

Recommendations

A. State law should be amended to designate the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) as the agency that administers adult education and to transfer state and federal adult education programs from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) to TWC on December 1, 1997.

This transfer would increase the focus of adult education programs on assisting participants in continuing education, job training, or job placement. It would also increase the ability of local workforce development boards to meet the needs of participants with basic skill deficiencies.

Greater economies of scale could be realized by strategically combining adult education funds with other sources of funds. The December 1997 transfer date would ensure that the annual application process to distribute funds to the local level is completed while the transfer is made at the state level, and would give TWC adequate time to incorporate the role of local workforce development boards and career development centers.

B. State law should establish a transition advisory group to be appointed jointly by TEA and TWC, including representatives of the State Board of Education-appointed Adult Education Advisory Committee and new representatives from the workforce development system. This group should advise TWC on transition issues to ensure continuity of services and compliance with federal adult education legislation.

Current providers and stakeholders and those who would be developing policy and operating adult education programs in the future need to have input into the changes made by TWC during the transition. While their recommendations would not be binding, their hands-on experience with adult education programs will be critical to a transition that is void of service disruptions. They could offer advice and insight on timing, funding formulas, and links with other adult education programs. The transition advisory group should be limited to 15 members, eight appointed by the executive director of TWC and seven appointed by the Commissioner of Education.

The following recommendations should be implemented even if the program does not move to TWC.

C. State law should require the agency that administers adult education programs to develop by September 1, 1998, a comprehensive management information system that collects individual student data, including assessment data, and builds on the software already developed by Texas A&M University.

The Texas Education Agency already receives funds for this purpose. This recommendation would ensure that the development of an automated information system is continued and completed. The state needs to assess progress and results of adult education programs and its investment in these programs.

D. State law should require the agency that administers adult education to finalize by December 1, 1997, and implement statewide by July 1, 1998, a standardized, statewide assessment for all workforce development system participants who need literacy instruction, adult basic education, or secondary education leading to an adult high school diploma or the equivalent.

Work on this assessment instrument has been ongoing since 1994. Providing a December 1997 deadline would give the Legislature time to act and for TEA to respond. The July 1, 1998, implementation deadline assures the assessment will be in place for the next program year. At a minimum, the assessment must provide for an initial basic skills screening instrument as well as comprehensive pre- and post-program information on student progress. This standardized assessment should be used to measure basic skill attainment, a core measure in the evaluation system developed by the Texas Council on Workforce and Economic Competitiveness.

Funding for the continued development of this assessment instrument should come from existing discretionary and workforce program evaluation funds at TWC, TEA, and the Texas Council on Workforce and Economic Competitiveness.

A comprehensive information system, core measures, and standardized assessment are essential if the state is to assess its investment in adult education and literacy instruction. Work already underway should be built on to enable the administering agency to develop a common assessment system by December 1, 1997.

Fiscal Impact

No additional funds are required to implement these recommendations.

---

Footnotes

[1] Texas H.B. 1863, 74th Leg., Reg. Sess. (1995), SS11.76(a).

[2] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Texas Workforce Commission: A Workforce Development System for Texas (Austin, Texas, December 1995), p. 124.

[3] Interview with Pavlos Roussos, senior director, and Deborah Stedman, division director, Texas Adult and Community Education, Texas Education Agency, Austin, Texas, July 9, 1996; and reviews of agreements among the House, Senate, and president on this aspect of the block grant legislation.

[4] Lynn B. Jenkins and Irwin S. Kirsch, Adult Literacy in Texas: Results of the State Adult Literacy Survey, produced by Educational Testing Service under contract with the Texas Education Agency (Austin, Texas, May 1994), pp. 10, 63-111.

[5] Texas Council on Workforce and Economic Competitiveness, briefing materials for Intervention Committee, Austin, Texas, April 20, 1995, p. 146.

[6] Texas Education Agency, Texas Adult Education Annual Performance Report, FY 1994-1995 (Austin, Texas), pp. 1-2 and Appendix A.

[7] Interview with Pavlos Roussos and Deborah Stedman, July 9, 1996; and interview with Pavlos Roussos, August 30, 1996.

[8] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Texas Workforce Commission: A Workforce Development System for Texas, p. 120.

[9] Interview with Kevin L. Mason, Kentucky Job Training Coordinating Council, Workforce Development Council, Frankfort, Kentucky, August 26, 1996.

[10] Interview with representatives of the Texas Council for Adult Education Cooperatives: Monroe C. Neff, Houston Community College; Silverio Cuellar, Region XX Education Service Center; and Arnoldo Hinojosa, Harris County Department of Education, Austin, Texas, August 14, 1996.

[11] Interview with Paul Lindsey, associate commissioner for Continuing Education, Texas Education Agency, Austin, Texas, August 30, 1996.