Skip main navigation

Outdated or Unsupported Browser Detected
DWD's website uses the latest technology. This makes our site faster and easier to use across all devices. Unfortunatley, your browser is out of date and is not supported. An update is not required, but it is strongly recommended to improve your browsing experience. To update Internet Explorer to Microsoft Edge visit their website.

7.5.1 Overview

Effective date: September 2, 2019 to January 19, 2020

As part of the initial eligibility procedure, the state must deny an institution's request to have a training program included on the ETPL if the institution and/or its training program fail to meet the state's eligibility requirements.1 Once the institution's training program is on the ETPL, the state must terminate eligibility if the eligibility requirements are no longer met2 or the institution commits a substantial violation.3

Eligibility may be terminated, for the reasons outlined above, at any time, not just during the period of continued eligibility.4 When a training program's eligibility is terminated, the program must be removed from the published ETPL.5 The state must specify in its ETPL procedures the individual or entity responsible for denying and terminating eligibility and removing programs from the published ETPL.6 The state should also address how to handle situations where one or more participants are currently enrolled in a training program that must be removed from the ETPL; ideally, the mechanism for handling is done so in a way that results in minimal disruption to the participant.7

Under WIOA, an institution commits a substantial violation when it: (1) fails to meet the state's procedure for timely and accurately submitting required information for annual ETP performance reporting,8 (2) fails to meet the state's procedure for timely and accurately submitting all required information for initial or continued eligibility,9 (3) intentionally provides false information,10 or (4) violates any provision of WIOA Title I or its regulations, including the nondiscrimination and equal opportunity provisions.11 The state's ETPL procedures must take into account exceptional circumstances beyond the institution's control (e.g., natural disasters, unexpected personnel transitions, and unexpected technology-related issues) when determining if an institution committed a substantial violation for failing to timely and accurately submit required information.12 If it is determined that exceptional circumstances existed, then a substantial violation did not occur.13 If it is determined that an institution committed a substantial violation, the institution is prohibited from having its programs on the published ETPL for a minimum of two years and it is liable to repay any WIOA Youth, Adult, and Dislocated Worker Program funds it received during the period of noncompliance.14

  • 120 CFR §§ 680.430(b)(2) and 680.450(a) & (d)
  • 220 CFR § 680.480(a) & (c)
  • 320 CFR § 680.480(b)
  • 420 CFR § 680.430(b)
  • 520 CFR § 680.480(b)(3) and (4); TEGL 41-14, p. 12
  • 620 CFR § 680.480(b); TEGL 41-14, p. 12
  • 7TEGL 41-14, p. 12. See 7.1.6 "Training Program Removal" for DWD-DET's policy.
  • 820 CFR § 680.460(l)
  • 920 CFR § 680.460(l)
  • 1020 CFR § 680.480(b); TEGL 41-14, p. 12
  • 1120 CFR § 680.480(b); TEGL 41-14, p. 12. DOL does not offer guidance on what should constitute a "substantial violation" for failing to comply with "any provision" of WIOA Title I and its regulations, as referenced in 20 CFR § 680.480(b). In the absence of federal guidance, it is DWD-DET's interpretation that 20 CFR Part 683, "Administrative Provisions Under Title I of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act," does not apply to training institutions with respect to their role on the ETPL. The "Administrative Rules, Costs, and Limitations" specified in Subpart B apply only to "recipients" and "subrecipients" of a federal award under Title I of WIOA and the Wagner-Peyser Act. See 20 CFR § 683.200. There is no support in the Act, the corresponding final rules, or TEGL 41-14, that training institutions published on the ETPL constitute either a "subrecipient" or "recipient," as defined at 2 CFR §§ 200.86 and 200.93 in the Uniform Guidance. Likewise, there is no support that ITAs are considered "federal awards" based on the definition at 2 CFR § 200.38. However, 29 CFR 38.4(zz) of the "Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity Provisions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act" defines "recipient" differently than the Uniform Guidance and specifically includes eligible training providers. Therefore, training institutions—with respect to their role on the ETPL—are subject to all provisions of WIOA's nondiscrimination and equal opportunity provisions and noncompliance with any provision constitutes a substantial violation.
  • 1220 CFR §680.460(l)(1); 81 FR 56138
  • 1381 FR 56138
  • 1420 CFR § 680.480(b)