# Brief: Senior employment Prepared from Grant Precedent, 2026-10-23; data as of precedent 2026-10-21, measures 2026-10-22. ## Measures funders require ### U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP) #### Hours (in the aggregate) of community service employment - Code: 20 CFR 641.700(b)(1) - Requirement: required - Definition: (a) “Hours of community service employment” is defined as the total number of hours of community service provided by SCSEP participants divided by the number of hours of community service funded by the grantee's grant, after adjusting for differences in minimum wage among the States and areas. Paid training hours are excluded from this measure. - Instrument: 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance - Target rule: Target is negotiated - Source: SCSEP performance measures, 20 CFR 641, 20 CFR 641.700(b)(1); definition 641.710(a), https://www.ecfr.gov/api/versioner/v1/full/2026-10-20/title-20.xml?part=641§ion=641.700 #### The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project - Code: 20 CFR 641.700(b)(2) - Requirement: required - Definition: (b) “The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project” is defined by the formula: The number of participants who exited during the reporting period who are employed in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after the exit quarter divided by the number of participants who exited during the reporting period multiplied by 100. - Instrument: 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance - Target rule: Target is negotiated - Source: SCSEP performance measures, 20 CFR 641, 20 CFR 641.700(b)(2); definition 641.710(b), https://www.ecfr.gov/api/versioner/v1/full/2026-10-20/title-20.xml?part=641§ion=641.700 #### The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the project - Code: 20 CFR 641.700(b)(3) - Requirement: required - Definition: (c) “The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the project” is defined by the formula: The number of participants who exited during the reporting period who are employed in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after the exit quarter divided by the number of participants who exited during the reporting period multiplied by 100. - Instrument: 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance - Target rule: Target is negotiated - Source: SCSEP performance measures, 20 CFR 641, 20 CFR 641.700(b)(3); definition 641.710(c), https://www.ecfr.gov/api/versioner/v1/full/2026-10-20/title-20.xml?part=641§ion=641.700 #### The median earnings of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project - Code: 20 CFR 641.700(b)(4) - Requirement: required - Definition: (d) “The median earnings of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project” is defined by the formula: For all participants who exited and are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after the exit quarter: The wage that is at the midpoint (of all the wages) between the highest and lowest wage earned in the second quarter after the exit quarter. - Instrument: 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance - Target rule: Target is negotiated - Source: SCSEP performance measures, 20 CFR 641, 20 CFR 641.700(b)(4); definition 641.710(d), https://www.ecfr.gov/api/versioner/v1/full/2026-10-20/title-20.xml?part=641§ion=641.700 #### Indicators of effectiveness in serving employers, host agencies, and project participants - Code: 20 CFR 641.700(b)(5) - Requirement: required - Definition: (e) “Indicators of effectiveness in serving employers, host agencies, and project participants” is defined as the combined results of customer assessments of the services received by each of these three customer groups. - Instrument: 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance - Target rule: Target is negotiated - Source: SCSEP performance measures, 20 CFR 641, 20 CFR 641.700(b)(5); definition 641.710(e), https://www.ecfr.gov/api/versioner/v1/full/2026-10-20/title-20.xml?part=641§ion=641.700 #### The number of eligible individuals served - Code: 20 CFR 641.700(b)(6) - Requirement: required - Definition: (f) “The number of eligible individuals served” is defined as the total number of participants served divided by a grantee's authorized number of positions, after adjusting for differences in minimum wage among the States and areas. - Instrument: 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance - Target rule: Target is negotiated - Source: SCSEP performance measures, 20 CFR 641, 20 CFR 641.700(b)(6); definition 641.710(f), https://www.ecfr.gov/api/versioner/v1/full/2026-10-20/title-20.xml?part=641§ion=641.700 #### The number of most-in-need individuals served (the number of participating individuals described in OAA sec. 518(a)(3)(B)(ii) or (b)(2)) - Code: 20 CFR 641.700(b)(7) - Requirement: required - Definition: (g) “Most-in-need” or the number of participating individuals described in OAA sec. 518(a)(3)(B)(ii) or (b)(2) is defined by counting the total number of the following characteristics for all participants and dividing by the number of participants served. Participants are characterized as most-in-need if they: (1) Have a severe disability; (2) Are frail; (3) Are age 75 or older; (4) Meet the eligibility requirements related to age for, but do not receive, benefits under title II of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq. ); (5) Live in an area with persistent unemployment and are individuals with severely limited employment prospects; (6) Have limited English proficiency; (7) Have low literacy skills; (8) Have a disability; (9) Reside in a rural area; (10) Are veterans; (11) Have low employment prospects; (12) Have failed to find employment after utilizing services provided under title I of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act; (13) Are homeless or at risk for homelessness; or (14) Are formerly incarcerated individuals as defined in § 641.140. - Instrument: 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance - Target rule: Target is negotiated - Source: SCSEP performance measures, 20 CFR 641, 20 CFR 641.700(b)(7); definition 641.710(g), https://www.ecfr.gov/api/versioner/v1/full/2026-10-20/title-20.xml?part=641§ion=641.700 ## What you can collect, and how Tier 1 is collected today from your own records. Tier 2 needs one free instrument. Tier 3 needs a partner under a data agreement. A measure that matches no rule has no tier. ### Tier 1: Collect today from your own records #### Hours (in the aggregate) of community service employment - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### The number of eligible individuals served - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### The number of most-in-need individuals served (the number of participating individuals described in OAA sec. 518(a)(3)(B)(ii) or (b)(2)) - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. ### Tier 1 + 3: Collect today from your own records; and Needs a partner under an agreement #### The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project - Collect today from your own records. The outcome sits in a record another agency holds. - You count your own participants; the state wage record confirms the outcome. - Partner route: National: SCSEP post-exit employment and earnings, held by State wage agencies; Kansas Department of Commerce and DOL through CRIS/SWIS. Lag: CRIS-specific delivery lag NR. Measures concern employment in the second and fourth quarters after exit and second-quarter earnings; the observation period itself must elapse. Request: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/cris - Partner route: CA: employment and quarterly earnings, held by Employment Development Department, UI wage records. Lag: EDD says wage abstracts are usually five months behind; a standard abstract covers up to five quarters. Request: https://edd.ca.gov/en/About_EDD/third-party-requests - Partner route: WA: employment and quarterly earnings, held by Employment Security Department. Lag: State-specific event-to-delivery lag NR. Quarterly records; do not treat application acknowledgment as data availability. Request: https://esd.wa.gov/about-us/data-sharing-requests - Caveat: WIOA wage matching is a state obligation, not a subrecipient right. #### The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the project - Collect today from your own records. The outcome sits in a record another agency holds. - You count your own participants; the state wage record confirms the outcome. - Partner route: National: SCSEP post-exit employment and earnings, held by State wage agencies; Kansas Department of Commerce and DOL through CRIS/SWIS. Lag: CRIS-specific delivery lag NR. Measures concern employment in the second and fourth quarters after exit and second-quarter earnings; the observation period itself must elapse. Request: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/cris - Partner route: CA: employment and quarterly earnings, held by Employment Development Department, UI wage records. Lag: EDD says wage abstracts are usually five months behind; a standard abstract covers up to five quarters. Request: https://edd.ca.gov/en/About_EDD/third-party-requests - Partner route: WA: employment and quarterly earnings, held by Employment Security Department. Lag: State-specific event-to-delivery lag NR. Quarterly records; do not treat application acknowledgment as data availability. Request: https://esd.wa.gov/about-us/data-sharing-requests - Caveat: WIOA wage matching is a state obligation, not a subrecipient right. #### The median earnings of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project - Collect today from your own records. The outcome sits in a record another agency holds. - You count your own participants; the state wage record confirms the outcome. - Partner route: National: SCSEP post-exit employment and earnings, held by State wage agencies; Kansas Department of Commerce and DOL through CRIS/SWIS. Lag: CRIS-specific delivery lag NR. Measures concern employment in the second and fourth quarters after exit and second-quarter earnings; the observation period itself must elapse. Request: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/cris - Partner route: CA: employment and quarterly earnings, held by Employment Development Department, UI wage records. Lag: EDD says wage abstracts are usually five months behind; a standard abstract covers up to five quarters. Request: https://edd.ca.gov/en/About_EDD/third-party-requests - Partner route: WA: employment and quarterly earnings, held by Employment Security Department. Lag: State-specific event-to-delivery lag NR. Quarterly records; do not treat application acknowledgment as data availability. Request: https://esd.wa.gov/about-us/data-sharing-requests - Caveat: WIOA wage matching is a state obligation, not a subrecipient right. ### Tier not determined #### Indicators of effectiveness in serving employers, host agencies, and project participants ## What grantees achieved 88 grantees of Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP) reported 7,908 results against targets over 15 periods; the median result was 100% of target (middle half 88% to 112%), and 50% met or exceeded the target. Source: DOL Senior Community Service Employment Program, grantee performance, https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/seniors/pdfs/Grantee%20Copy_PY19EvaluationofGranteePerformance_Revised%202%2010%202021.xlsx. - Kansas (PY2022): Community Service (community-service hours as a fraction of paid hours); promised 0.62, actual 0.5971 (96% of target); unit: rate (fraction). Source: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/seniors/pdfs/PY2022GranteePerformanceEvaluation_Final_6.30.24.xlsx - Oklahoma (PY2010): Service Level; promised 1, actual 1.561 (156% of target); unit: ratio (participants served / authorized positions). Source: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/seniors/pdfs/py_2010_grantee_performance_summary.xls - Maine (PY2015): Service Level; promised 1.533, actual 1.208 (79% of target); unit: ratio (participants served / authorized positions). Source: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/seniors/pdfs/Attachment%201_Grantee_Copy_PY%2015_Evaluation_of_Grantee_Performance_10_29_16_Rev_11_7_16.xlsx - Senior Service America (PY2017): Entered Employment Rate (common measure); promised 0.456, actual 0.417 (91% of target); unit: rate (fraction). Source: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/seniors/pdfs/PY17_Aggregate_and_Individual_Performance.xlsx - Massachusetts (PY2024): Median Earnings 2nd Quarter After Exit; promised 3452, actual 3683 (107% of target); unit: $. Source: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/seniors/pdfs/PY24%20Grant%20Performance%20Assessment.xlsx Program-level figures, not individual grantees: Senior Employment Services reported 35 results against targets over 4 periods; the median result was 63% of target (middle half 58% to 96%), and 26% met or exceeded the target. Source: Illinois Comptroller Public Accountability Reports, https://par.illinoiscomptroller.gov/index.cfm?AgencyNo=601&FiscalYear=2022&ProgramAreaGroupID=3&ProgramID=1&UniqueProgramID=6011. - Department on Aging (FY2025): Total expenditures - state appropriated funds (in thousands); promised $ 5,948.1, actual $ 3,452.6 (58% of target); unit: $. Source: https://par.illinoiscomptroller.gov/index.cfm?AgencyNo=402&FiscalYear=2025&ProgramAreaGroupID=1&ProgramID=20&UniqueProgramID=40220 Program-level figures, not individual grantees: Senior Community Service Employment Program reported 6 results against targets over 2 periods; the median result was 104% of target (middle half 88% to 111%), and 67% met or exceeded the target. Source: OMB PART assessments (ExpectMore.gov archive), https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/expectmore/detail/10002335.2004.html. - Senior Community Service Employment Program (2005): Retention in Employment: Percentage of program participants employed in 1st quarter after program exit who remained employed in the 2nd and 3rd quarters after exit (Note: New Measure; Targets to be determined.); promised 65%, actual 73% (112% of target); unit: %. Source: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/expectmore/detail/10000328.2003.html ## Target-setting language with precedent Each item comes from one funder, one program or one department; none is a government-wide rule. Showing clauses from Labor. - Senior Community Service Employment Program, 20 CFR 641.720(b),(d) (current text): Paraphrase: Targets for program years 3 and 4 are negotiated before the third program year and adjusted by DOL's model. — https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-20/chapter-V/part-641/subpart-G/section-641.720 - DOL Training and Employment Guidance Letter 10-21 (2022): Quote: “if a grantee wishes to negotiate their performance targets” — https://www.dol.gov/node/165731 ## What reviewers penalize These ten weaknesses recur in 17 published reviewer critiques, mostly U.S. Department of Education and NIH. The count is the number of critiques that name it, not a rate, and a reviewer comment is a judgment. - [ ] Attrition or missing-data handling left unresolved (named in 7 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “the applicant did not address how missing data will be handled” U.S. Department of Education, Education Innovation and Research (EIR) Mid-Phase, WestEd, S411B220027, 2022, Technical Review Form, pp. 25, 29. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2022/12/S411B220027_WestEd_TRF.pdf#page=29 - [ ] Comparisons vulnerable to selection, contamination, baseline differences or incompatible data (named in 7 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “may require additional interpretation” National Institutes of Health, NIAID, K01 AI131895 (Rebeiro, Vanderbilt), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 5-6. https://beta.nih.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_media/2026-09/k01-rebeiro-summary-statement.pdf#page=6 - [ ] Feasibility assumptions or fallback arrangements unsupported (named in 6 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “no alternative analysis plan is provided” National Institutes of Health, NIDCD, R01 DC017174 (Heinemann and Cherney), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 3, 5-6. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/sanitized-heinemann-cherney-summary-statement-redacted.pdf#page=5 - [ ] Implementation fidelity, thresholds or mediators inadequately specified (named in 5 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “Mediators are not described.” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Early-Phase, Education Development Center, U411C190275, 2019, Technical Review Form, p. 4. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2019/11/U411C190275-Education-Development-Center-Inc.-TRF-Tier-2.pdf#page=4 - [ ] Measurement tools insufficiently identified, supported or protected against reporting bias (named in 4 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “no detail is provided” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Mid-Phase, Niswonger Foundation, U411B170038, 2017, Technical Review Form, pp. 4-5. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2016/12/U411B170038_TRF.pdf#page=4 - [ ] Targets or success criteria missing, inconsistent or disconnected from the project (named in 4 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “lacks a specific number” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Mid-Phase, ASSISTments Foundation, S411B220024, 2022, Technical Review Form, p. 14. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2022/12/S411B220024_ASSISTments-Foundation-Inc_TRF.pdf#page=14 - [ ] Analysis procedures insufficiently specified for the stated questions or model (named in 4 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “methods of data analysis are not adequately described” National Institutes of Health, NIAID, R01 AI098472 renewal (Gandhi, UCSF), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 4-5. https://beta.nih.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_media/2026-09/2-R01-AI098472-06_Ganhdi_Summary.pdf#page=4 - [ ] Data protection, management or cross-site coordination incomplete (named in 3 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “The data management plan stops midsentence on page 125” National Institutes of Health, NIDCD, R01 DC017683 (Gifford and Camarata, Vanderbilt), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 9-10. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/sanitized-giffordcamarataapplicationsummary-dc017683-01a1.pdf#page=10 - [ ] Feedback collection lacks a specified route into program decisions (named in 2 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “The applicant does not discuss how often the team will review data or implement changes.” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Early-Phase, Orange County Superintendent of Schools, S411C200130, 2020, Technical Review Form, pp. 16, 19. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2020/12/S411C200130-Orange-County-Superintendent-of-Schools-TRF.pdf#page=19 - [ ] Evaluator independence insufficiently explained (named in 1 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “The level of independence is not made clear” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Early-Phase, Research Triangle Institute, S411C220065, 2022, Technical Review Form, pp. 24-25. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2022/12/S411C220065_Research-Triangle-Institute-_TRF.pdf#page=24 ## Protocol skeleton ### Draft text, edit before use Measures: Hours (in the aggregate) of community service employment; The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project; The percentage of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the project; The median earnings of project participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the project; Indicators of effectiveness in serving employers, host agencies, and project participants; The number of eligible individuals served; The number of most-in-need individuals served (the number of participating individuals described in OAA sec. 518(a)(3)(B)(ii) or (b)(2)). Baseline: \_\_\_\_ months from award, using 20 CFR 641.700 core measures of performance. Targets: set from the observed baseline at month \_\_\_\_, or committed now as a change of \_\_\_\_ percentage points from baseline (see the SCSEP precedent above). Missing-data plan (how dropout and missing observations will be handled): \_\_\_\_ Comparison group or baseline (what you compare against and how the groups started): \_\_\_\_ Fallback if recruitment, data access or the first analysis falls short: \_\_\_\_ Fidelity threshold (what counts as full implementation, and how it is measured): \_\_\_\_ Instrument named, with its validity evidence and its rights (license) status: \_\_\_\_ Numeric target for each measure (a number, not a direction): \_\_\_\_ Analysis for each outcome (method, comparison, adjustment): \_\_\_\_ Data protection and data management (who holds identifiable data, where, for how long): \_\_\_\_ Feedback schedule (who reviews the data, how often, and what changes as a result): \_\_\_\_ Evaluator role and independence (who evaluates and how they are separate from delivery): \_\_\_\_ The text is copied or summarized from public documents. It is not legal advice.