TEGL 03-26 governs the federal Workforce and Labor Market Information Grants to States. Local Boards are not the grantee, but they are a named audience because the products funded through WIGS should function as decision infrastructure for planning, training strategy, sector work, employer services, and career pathways.
Source + trust record
Source checked as of September 18, 2026. Primary authority: USDOL TEGL 03-26.
Check result: TEGL 03-26 is active and provides PY 2026 Workforce and Labor Market Information Grant guidance to states. The page’s use of LMI as an input to local program and training decisions is Workforce Wonkery interpretation, not a federal program-approval rule. This AI-assisted brief does not receive human legal or compliance review. Official sources control.
WDB decision strip
| Status | Action | Primary owner | Timing | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACTIVE · CONTINUING GUIDANCE | USE LMI AS DECISION INFRASTRUCTURE | Strategy + LMI + Planning Leadership | PY 2026 | Planning · Training · Sectors · Career pathways · Employer strategy |
The bottom line
This is not a new Local Board reporting mandate. It is the federal operating framework behind state LMI products Local Boards depend on.
The useful local response is to make labor-market evidence consistent, visible, and decision-relevant. LMI should help a Board decide where opportunity exists, where risk is rising, where training supply is misaligned, and where additional employer or community validation is needed.
Six decisions LMI should improve
| Decision | What the evidence should answer |
|---|---|
| Local / Regional Plan | Which industries and occupations are growing, declining, central to the region, or facing structural change? |
| Training investment | Are wages, openings, growth, credentials, and employer demand strong enough to justify public investment? |
| Career pathways | Where are the entry, advancement, credential, and wage steps? |
| Employer services | Which occupational shortages, skill needs, or industry changes deserve a coordinated response? |
| Equity + access | Which communities, occupations, and geographies face persistent unemployment, low wages, or limited access? |
| Training supply | Where does regional program capacity appear insufficient, inaccessible, excessive, or poorly aligned to actual openings? |
The evidence rule: LMI narrows the question, it does not make the decision
A strong occupational projection may establish market opportunity, but it does not prove a new program is needed. A WDB should still validate annual openings, wages, current training supply, employer hiring practices, credential requirements, commuting patterns, job quality, learner access, and college/provider feasibility.
A practical WDB evidence standard
| Evidence | Minimum question |
|---|---|
| Wages | Does the occupation provide a realistic pathway to economic mobility? |
| Openings | How many jobs become available each year, and why? |
| Growth / decline | Is the occupation expanding, stable, or structurally shrinking? |
| Employer validation | Are employers actually hiring and what skills/credentials do they use? |
| Training supply | How many seats/completers already exist relative to realistic demand? |
| Access | Can local learners reach, afford, schedule, and complete the pathway? |
| Confidence | Is the data recent, local enough, methodologically appropriate, and stable enough for the decision? |
Operational considerations for WDBs
- Identify the LMI sources used in major board decisions and make source, vintage, geography, and limitations visible.
- Use one repeatable evidence framework across plans, sector priorities, training strategy, and provider conversations.
- Ask state/regional LMI partners for products that answer a real management question, not another dashboard.
- Reconcile differences among state LMI, BLS, proprietary tools, college data, and employer-reported demand before presenting a single figure as definitive.
- Use confidence labels when small geography or occupation estimates are unstable.
Watch out
- Do not describe TEGL 03-26 as a Local Board grant or new local report.
- Do not use one metric as a training strategy.
- Do not assume statewide demand represents a local labor market.
- Do not create false precision from small-sample or modeled estimates.
Source authority
Primary source: USDOL TEGL 03-26 — PY 2026 Workforce and Labor Market Information Grants to States.
Status: Active continuing guidance issued August 24, 2026. TEGL 03-26 directly governs WIGS grantees. The local evidence standard above is a WPU implementation tool. Source checked September 16, 2026.