Task force reviews statewide workforce inventory; state auditor urges clear benchmarks

The Legislative Task Force on Government Efficiency reviewed a newly compiled inventory of the state's workforce programs on Oct. 9, with the State Auditor's Office telling the panel that agencies are providing detailed descriptions but lack consistent performance measures needed to evaluate outcomes.

The inventory, compiled by Legislative Council staff from agency responses and presented by Levi (Legislative Council staff), lists about 80 workforce-related programs administered across roughly 9–10 state agencies. Josh Gallien, State Auditor, told the committee the auditor's office had six days to review the survey responses and that definitions of “workforce program” varied by submitter.

“ If you were expecting this to be full of complex analytics and recommendations, in this presentation, I am sorry to disappoint. Six days is not enough to really go through and evaluate, ” Gallien said, stressing the need for clearer criteria before the auditor's office can run a full performance evaluation.

Why it matters: Committee members said they want to know whether workforce investments are achieving lasting results — not only how much is spent. Legislators and the auditor emphasized the difference between outputs (for example, number trained) and the outcomes policymakers care about (job placement, retention, wage growth and whether workers stay in state). Without agreed benchmarks set up front, audits and policy choices are harder to interpret.

Key findings and agency remarks - Levi (Legislative Council staff) noted Commerce had previously listed many workforce programs on an ecosystem map; when agencies filled out the survey some programs Commerce listed were not identified as “workforce” by the agencies and conversely agencies reported programs Commerce had not listed. The mismatch illustrated the absence of a working definition of “workforce program.” - Dan Cox, Director of Audit Services, explained the office's preferred evaluation approach: set clear criteria and benchmarks up front, then measure inputs→activities→outputs→short- and long-term outcomes. He described that structure as a “logic model” auditors use to evaluate whether appropriations produced desired results. - Katie How, Deputy Commissioner and Workforce Director at the Department of Commerce, described Operation Intern (a wage-match internship grant) and said Commerce has averaged 80% retention of participants in the state's workforce one year after exit, about 70% at two years, and roughly 60% at five years for cohorts where that tracking is available. She also said Commerce received $3 million for Operation Intern in the current biennium and is rethinking program eligibility to broaden access. - Sarah Adi Coleman, Director of Tourism and Marketing at Commerce, outlined the Find the Good Life marketing campaign: about $6 million was appropriated for the 2023–25 biennium; roughly $4.2 million was used for paid marketing. Coleman said the program generated the campaign-scale metrics (more than 2.35 million impressions noted in testimony, 7,767 form submissions or “leads,” and 100 people documented as having relocated after full participation in the program) but that measuring total relocations remains difficult because attribution and follow-up vary.

Discussion and next steps Committee members repeatedly pressed for a cultural and procedural change: require agencies to state expected outcomes and performance metrics when they request funding, and have legislative staff and the auditor verify those metrics. Senator Hogan and Representative Bosch led questions about how auditors and policy staff would use legislative intent or hearing testimony to form evaluation criteria if statutes lack numeric targets.

Josh Gallien and Dan Cox said auditors can evaluate programs against criteria but cannot substitute for policymakers in setting the goals. Gallien: the auditor's office will evaluate against whatever benchmarks the legislature or agencies put in place and present those findings to the Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee.

The committee asked Commerce to refine program definitions and consider which programs should be classified as workforce, and several members encouraged agencies to include employer and participant feedback (for example, internship evaluations by student participants) in future reporting.

Ending Members directed staff to use the survey as a starting point and to return with proposals for (1) a working definition of “workforce program,” (2) standardized lead and lag measures for common program groups (training, internships, incentives, recruitment/retention), and (3) a phased plan for auditor verification and legislative review going forward. The State Auditor's Office and Legislative Council indicated they would support that work.