golden sierra workforce board executive & finance ... · 6/29/2015 · o letter requesting...

MEMBERS

ANETTE SMITH-DOHRING Sutter Health Sacramento Sierra Region

CAROL PEPPER-KITTREDGE Sierra College

CHRISTINA NICHOLSON Whole Person Learning

DANIELA DEVITT California Employers Association

DAVID DeLEONARDIS Crossroads Diversified Services

ERIC COOPER California Indian Manpower Consortium

JASON BUCKINGHAM Golden Sierra Job Training Agency

JOHN TWEEDT District Council 16

KATHLEEN BURRIS CVS Caremark

KEVIN FERREIRA Sacramento – Sierra’s Building and Construction Trades Council

KIMBERLY PELLOW Brandman University

LAUREL BRENT-BUMB Bumb Construction

MARCY SCHMIDT Placer Co. Business Advantage Network

MARGARITA VALENZUELA Unite Here Local 49 Gaming

MARK FRAYSER Department of Rehabilitation

MARTHA ESCOBEDO Employment Development Department

MICHAEL ZIMMERMAN MTI College

PAUL CASTRO California Human Development

RANDY WAGNER Sierra Economic Development Corporation

RICK LARKEY, Vice Chair North State Building Industry Foundation

ROBERT WARD IBEW Local 340

SHERRI SPRINGER Happy Kids Preschool & Childcare

STEWART SCHURR Doctor PC

TIM COOK Experience Works

TINK MILLER, Chair Placer Independent Resource Services

VIC WURSTEN PRIDE Industries

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY Golden Sierra is an equal opportunity employer/program. Auxiliary aids and services are available upon request.

Special requests for services, aids and/or special formats need to be made by calling (530) 823-4635 (Voice). TTY users please call the California Relay Service at 711.

GOLDEN SIERRA WORKFORCE BOARD EXECUTIVE & FINANCE COMMITTEE

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

Monday June 29, 2015 – 1:00 pm

Roseville Connections 115 Ascot Drive, Suite 180

Roseville, CA 95661

I. ROLL CALL AND INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS

II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (EC & FC) 1-2

III. CONSENT AGENDA (EC)

All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routinein nature and will be approved by one blanket motion.

For Approval

A. Approval of Minutes from January 5, 2015 EC/FC meeting 3-8

B. Approval of Minutes from April 16, 2015 EC meeting 9-14

Informational

C. Review of Minutes from May 21, 2015 WIB Meeting

D. Attendance Log 15

IV. CONSENT AGENDA (FC)

For Approval

A. Approval of Minutes from January 5, 2015 EC/FC meeting 3-8

B. Approval of Minutes from May 20, 2015 FC meeting 16-21

Informational

C. Attendance Log 22

V. PUBLIC COMMENT – FOR THOSE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA

VI. APPROVE 2015/2016 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (EC) MEETINGSCHEDULE 23

Agend Packet - of 35

EC/FC Agenda 2015-06-29

VII. WIOA IMPLEMENTATION

• ACTION MATRIX 24-28

• REVIEW WDB DIRECTIVES

• WIB/WDB MEMBERSHIP COMPOSITION

VIII. K4 EXPENDITURES – STATUS 29

IX. K5 EXPENDITURES – STRATEGY 30

X. REPORT OUT OF TRAINING EXPENDITURES 31-35

• K491016 – July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2015

• K594759 – July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2016

XI. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS/NEW BUSINESS

XII. NEXT MEETING

August 20, 2015 – Joint Executive & Finance, Roseville Connections

XIII. ADJOURNMENT

Agenda Packet - Page 2 of 35

GOLDEN SIERRA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD EXECUTIVE & FINANCE COMMITTEE

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

Monday, January 5, 2015 – 9:00 am


Roseville, CA 95661

Teleconference: El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce

542 Main Street Placerville, CA 95667


Quorum was established and the meeting was called to order by Miller at 9:05 am.

Present (EC): Tink Miller, Rick Larkey, Martha Escobedo, Laurel Brent-Bumb*

Absent (EC): Kevin Ferreira

Present (FC): Tink Miller, Paul Castro

Absent (EC): David Frazier

Guests: Jason Buckingham, Darlene Galipo, Terrie Trombley, Lorna Magnussen, Michael Indiveri, Jenny Wilson*

*teleconferencing from El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce

II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (EC & FC)

Motion to approve agenda by Larkey, second by Castro

Motion approved unanimously by roll call vote

III. CONSENT AGENDA (EC)

All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature and will beapproved by one blanket motion.

For Approval

A. Approval of Summary Minutes from October 23, 2014 EC & FC Special meeting.

B. Approval of Minutes from November 13, 2014 EC Retreat

Informational

C. Attendance Log

Motion to approve consent agenda items A-C by Brent-Bumb, second by Escobedo


Agenda Packet - of 35

IV. CONSENT AGENDA (FC)

For Approval

A. Approval of Minutes from September 18, 2014 FC Regular meeting

B. Approval of Summary Minutes from October 23, 2014 EC & FC Special meeting

Informational

C. Attendance Log

Motion to approve consent agenda items A-C by Castro, second by Miller


V. PUBLIC COMMENT- FOR THOSE ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA

Buckingham announced that Golden Sierra Job Training Agency has established a MemorialAward in the name of Sharon Williams. Ms. Williams had been involved with Golden Sierraprograms and partners for 30 plus years, and passed away last year. Funding for this awardwill not come from WIA/WIOA. Staff will be further defining the eligibility and process for the$500 annual award.

Miller acknowledged Ms. Williams work with the agency and youth.

VI. APPROVE WIA REVISED 14/15 BUDGET (FC)

Trombley referred to page 26 that reflect changes due to adjustments in WIA allocation. Onesignificant change is reflected on line 16 – El Dorado HHS reduction of $108,151; this consistsof $65,000 of unspent youth award recouped by Golden Sierra. This was decided at theOctober 23rd Executive/Finance meeting. In addition, the agency is tentatively holding back$55,000 to allow Golden Sierra to pay El Dorado participant invoices as agreed to by the ElDorado Consortium.

Larkey asked for clarification on the contingency fund line item. Trombley stated that in thepublic sector these funds permit us to function in the first quarter of a new year and allow forcash flow until award is received in October. This is more clearly defined on page 31, Schedule3, lines 66 & 67. Our contingency fund is typically comprised of our 10% admin and a portion ofprogram.

Motion to approve WIA Budget by Castro, second by Miller


VII. APPROVE PROP 39 REVISED BUDGET (FC)

Trombley referred to page 37 that outlines the revision. This adjustment is due to higher thanestimated cost of contracted services for MC3.

Motion to approve Prop 39 Budget by Castro, second by Miller


EC & FC Minutes – 2015-01-05 (revised)


VIII. APPROVE DEI ROUND 2 14/15 BUDGET (FC)

Trombley referred to page 37 that represents a $7,000 award for our DEI coordinator to attendquarterly meetings and assist Round 2 awardees; we have allocated $1,250 for this year, andwill retain the remainder for future years.

Miller stated her disappointment that it was decided not to allow previous awardees anycontinuation funds. This was a great program, and she had hoped that this might become apermanent program under WIOA. Galipo and Miller both agreed that there is stronger languagein WIOA regarding services to persons with disabilities.

Motion to approve DEI Budget by Castro, second by Miller


IX. REPORT OUT OF TRAINING EXPENDITURES

K491016 – July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2015

Buckingham stated that the numbers reported are through November 2014. These are used totrack compliance with the SB 734 required training expenditures.

• Consortium – close to meeting requirement

• Placer – very close to meeting requirement

• El Dorado – behind in meeting requirement. This could be, in part, due to delay in invoicing.This may reflect more accurately once Golden Sierra takes over paying invoices. Brent-Bumb concurred that she anticipates seeing a more accurate reflection with this change.

• Alpine – behind in meeting requirement; however, one contract could bring them intocompliance.

Miller inquired if a meeting with Alpine had occurred. Buckingham stated that the only discussion to date has been regarding Rapid Response and Layoff Aversion. However, broader conversations regarding services should occur soon. Miller encouraged having stakeholder input in this process. Buckingham agreed.

X. WIB MEMBERSHIP (EC)

Miller stated that, based on the WIB bylaws, there are clearly identified attendance requirementsand actions as outlined in your memo on page 44. Miller stated that she had been in closecommunication with Magnussen regarding these attendance concerns.

Miller noted that Burris had legitimate absences, and was in contact with Magnussen. However,Dr. Reed had been unable to commit due to scheduling.

Further discussion occurred regarding Reed’s scheduling conflict, and whether the positonshould be vacated. Magnussen noted that this is a mandated labor seat, and that the appointinglabor organization had been notified of the attendance pattern. Vacating this position wouldrequire a reappointment to comply with current WIA membership requirements. This may not bepractical at this time due to upcoming potential board composition changes under WIOA.



Miller and Buckingham recommended reporting out to Governing Body, but request that they stay the decision to vacate the position based on upcoming WIOA impacts.

Motion to approve notifying Governing Body with recommendations to stay decision by Brent-Bumb, second by Larkey


XI. WIOA IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING

Buckingham referred to the action matrix handout, and provided the following updates:

• Local Area Designation & One-Stop Operator

o Letter requesting designation as Local Area and One-Stop Operator was approvedby WIB & GB, and mailed on 12/21/15.

o State is putting together a directive to outline the application process; however, thisprocess should be informed by the regulations that are still pending release and maybe further delayed.

• Joint meetings with SETA and other local areas - meeting set for late January to discusspartnering under WIOA.

Also in discussions with SETA on activities that would reduce our administrative costs, suchas combined labor market data.

• Convening partners can begin at this stage.

Indiveri recommended collecting current partner metrics to better design data collectionunder WIOA.

Larkey inquired if convening partners would be done at a local or regional level.Buckingham stated that this could occur both ways depending on the partner structure. Heanticipates the first part of the convening process to occur with the core partners,WIOA Title I, Adult Ed, Rehab and Wagner-Peyser. The second round of convening shouldinclude the mandated One-Stop partners and other key stakeholders. Discussions willinclude development of the Memorandum of Understandings (MOU), and discussionsaround contributions via Resource Sharing Agreements (RSA). All parties need to be awarethat contributions are mandatory, but there is also a need to document the entire systemsnot just the One-Stop.

Larkey inquired if Governor Brown was convening these departments to establish how thiswill occur. Buckingham stated that while he is unsure of the Governor’s actions, conveningis one of CWA’s recommendations that have been submitted to the state. Buckingham feltthat cost sharing done by a formula at the state level would be easiest.

Buckingham felt that the initial meeting with the core partners would most likely be regionalin nature, but would be based on WIOA decision making ability by department. Trombleyadded that the state may be waiting for the directives to reference in their communications.Indiveri felt that the state already has their template designed, but are waiting for the federalregulations to ensure that there is no contradiction.



Miller noted that the federal notice and public comment period can be quite time consuming, and they have the authority to extend release dates. Buckingham added that the state process is the same adding another layer to the delay. Buckingham also said that while the release of the regulations can be extended, the WIOA implementation date still remains the same based on the Act.

Buckingham suggested that at the upcoming regional meeting with the Capital Area Investment Zone (CAIZ) [SETA, Golden Sierra, Yolo & NCCC] the recommendation be made for the group to convene the core partners that are regional in nature and begin that conversation. Miller agreed with the suggestion.

Indiveri inquired if this would be independent of the SlingShot project. Buckingham stated that there is a recommendation for the CAIZ steering committee to oversee both SlingShot and WIOA; in addition, there is a design committee for both.

Miller inquired if Buckingham had been in any discussion with Department of Rehabilitation (DOR) regarding youth transition services. Buckingham stated that he had not been in contact with DOR yet. Miller stated that she had a couple of emails regarding this that she would forward to Buckingham. These emails reference public comment period and a public forum surrounding youth transition services specific to WIOA.

• Releasing RFQ to establish vendor list

Magnussen stated that she is working with staff on a wish list of services and hopes to havethe RFQ released by January 16th. Miller inquired how this differs from the ETPL.Buckingham stated that anyone providing training must be on the ETPL; the vendor list is forvendors services such as tutor skills. Magnussen stated that we don’t anticipate the sub-recipient RFQ/RFP to be released until the regulations are available.

XII. DAY AT THE CAPITOL

Buckingham stated that this upcoming event is scheduled for March 4th. This event iscoordinated by CWA as an opportunity for local areas to speak with state elected about whatthe system is doing for their constituents. He anticipates sending a group of 4 to this event;Chair, Vice Chair, Executive Director and Deputy Director. Larkey inquired if a member fromthe Governing Body had ever attended. Miller and Buckingham stated that Supervisor Santiagofrom El Dorado had previously attended. Buckingham noted that there is a possibility of a datechange to March 18th; he will keep the attendees posted.

XIII. NEW BUSINESS/FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

New business: Larkey inquired if the WIB should be doing something in terms of visioning inanticipation of WIOA. Buckingham stated that there should be a conversation to discuss whatthe future of WIOA is going to look like in our region. Buckingham felt that it was up to thisgroup to determine if this should occur at the full WIB or Executive/Finance Committee level.Brent-Bumb asked how this could occur prior to the release of the regulations. Buckinghamagreed that a bulk of the conversation can’t occur until the regulations are released, butconversations can begin with the information we have and what we anticipate it will look like.

Larkey added that he envisions a future conversation with stakeholders to discuss how thisfunding aligns with goals and services for each of our programs.



Castro stated that the draft regulations will clarify some details, but feels that there is enough framework to start these conversations. Some of the conversations, Castro believes, need to occur now include, 1) Youth – 25%, 2) Business Engagement – how do we start dialogue, 3) Adult Ed – how are we going to get them into the One-Stop, 4) data, and 5) industry relatedtraining. Miller added the new enhanced emphasis on apprenticeships.

Buckingham stated that there is an opportunity for the board to grow in this development process. For example; business engagement - how will we measure it. Do we continue to monitor business engagement through the Business Services Committee (BSC), or quarterly convening of employers such as an Employer Advisory Council (EAC) structure. If you use an EAC structure, do you create a new one or utilize an already established model. Brent-Bumb liked the EAC suggestion and stated that the chambers can be very instrumental in this process.

Larkey asked if there are regional chamber meetings. Miller stated that there is a regional Chamber Link, and they are convening a regional event. Buckingham stated that Placer has a Joint Chambers of Commerce and Government Affairs Committee. Brent-Bumb stated that El Dorado also has a Joint Chambers Commission; she also shared that the new Auburn Chamber leadership is anxious to participate in some sort of regional effort. Brent-Bumb feels that The Chamber Link may be too broad, and may not impact our sphere as it applies to employer engagement and apprenticeship. Miller stated that she sees value in both.

Miller referenced the Career Pathways Trust. She mentioned the overlap between sectors and clusters in LWIAs, and that the education stream from K12 up through universities needs to be on board with the same focus. That focus is to provide a trained labor force in these identified sectors and clusters.

Buckingham stated that there is a lot of regional work currently occurring, and to Larkey’s point on visioning, we need to have some awareness of our ultimate vision. The Board should then select 1 or 2 items to work on over the 12 month period, and expand on that during the process.

Larkey suggested inviting other regional efforts to come to the table, and talk about what they are doing. This will help us to identify what is in place, what efforts we can join in on, and where there are gaps. Buckingham noted that the role of the WIB is convener; therefore, bringing partners to the table to discuss coordinating services is in alignment with this role. Buckingham stated that this may be an excellent role for the Regional Executive Committee.

Miller added that another resource is our local employer advisory councils (SPEAC & FEAC) that exist through EDD. These councils are comprised of business owner/operators, fiscal and HR personnel, and would be a good sounding board.

Miller asked Buckingham if this provided him with enough direction for next steps. Buckingham stated that his biggest struggle is the delay in planning while waiting for regulations, but feels that defining our overall vision and establishing priorities would be next steps.

XIV. NEXT MEETING – Joint EC & FC

Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 1:00 pm, Roseville Connections

XV. ADJOURNMENT

Motion to adjourn at 10:08 am by Brent-Bumb

Meeting adjourned



GOLDEN SIERRA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

Thursday, April 16, 2015 – 1:00 pm


Roseville, CA 95661


Quorum was established and the meeting was called to order by Miller at 1:00 pm

Present: Tink Miller, Rick Larkey, Laurel Brent-Bumb, Martha Escobedo

Absent: Kevin Ferreira

Guests: Jason Buckingham, Lorna Magnussen, Michael Indiveri, Kathy Spindola

II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Request to remove Consent Agenda Item B.

Motion to approve as amended by Brent-Bumb, second by Escobedo.

Motion approved unanimously

III. CONSENT AGENDA

All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routinein nature and will be approved by one blanket motion.

For Approval

A. Approval of Minutes from February 25, 2015 EC meeting

For Information

B. Review of Minutes from March 19, 2015 WIB Meeting (removed)

C. Attendance Log

Motion to approve consent agenda items A&C by Brent-Bumb, second by Larkey.

Motion approved unanimously.

IV. PUBLIC COMMENT – FOR THOSE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA

None

EC Minutes 2015-04-16 Agenda Packet - of 35

V. APPROVE GB/WIB AGREEMENT

Buckingham stated there are documents that need to be updated from WIA to WIOA. Thisagreement outlines the responsibilities of the Workforce Development Board and the ChiefLocal Official, which is the Governing Body.

Miller asked if the board would be gaining or losing any responsibilities or functions with the newagreement. Buckingham explained that the board would be gaining five new functions. Hepointed out that this particular document does not lay out in entirety the new functions in the Act.

Brent-Bumb asked if there was any further information on what the new board composition issupposed to look like. Buckingham explained that this document does not cover that informationbut the Act contains it. Buckingham did point out that, while state boards are prohibited fromhaving members serve multiple seats, local board members are able to represent multipleseats.

Larkey asked for clarification on appointment in section V of the agreement. Buckingham statedthat there has to be an outline in the bylaws that defines the terms of appointment. This will nowbe outlined in the bylaws as opposed to the agreement. Larkey inquired if the dispute resolutionwas the rationale as well. Buckingham said that he believed the dispute resolution was in thebylaws but would verify with counsel.

Motion to approve the GB/WIB agreement by Escobedo, second by Larkey.


VI. WIOA IMPLEMENTATION

• ACTION MATRIX

Buckingham explained that the matrix presented has been updated and in the future the latest actions will be in bold for easier comprehension.

The JPA went out to County Counsels on April 1st. There is a 45 day review period, after which time, it will be brought back to the Governing Body. Most likely it will go through the boards of supervisors before it comes to the Governing Body for final approval.

Meetings have started with the core partners to discuss how the new workforce development system that will be implemented.

• UPDATE

Buckingham has been involved with a State board asset mapping group called “Mapping the Field.” This process is being used to develop the State combined plan and should be a helpful template for meeting with partners and writing the local plan.

The staff has met with the Adult Schools and EDD and has pending meetings with the Department of Rehabilitation and Health and Human Services (HHS). HHS is seen as a core partner to the system in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRMs), therefore; they should be involved in the planning process.

Miller inquired if we would have agreements with HHS in each County. Buckingham said that he has not spoken to HHS about this, but had a conversation with the Adult Schools and broached the idea of having one MOU with each County instead of each school. This is not an easy task and we will likely end up having a MOU for each entity.


Larkey communicated that the possible significance of this has to do with integration of resources and staff sharing. He asked if anyone has been discussing this. Buckingham said that there have been discussions with EDD and Adult Schools regarding braided services, in particular with the Adult Schools. It may take special agreements.

Buckingham said that if fees are associated with these arrangements, we will pay them, and if no fees are attached then it becomes part of the resource sharing agreement as contributions to the region’s workforce development system. He feels that we should be documenting all of the resources that are contributing to the success of the system.

• TEN 29-14 WIOA NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING (NPRM)

• WIOA

• WIOA ; JOINT RULE FOR UNIFIED AND COMBINEDSTATE PLANS, PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY,AND THE ONE-STOP SYSTEM JOINT PROVISIONS – NOTICE OF PROPOSEDRULE MAKING

Buckingham stated that the Department of Labor has published five Notices of Proposed Rule Making, (NPRM). The NPRMs are not the regulations, but essentially the comment period for the regulations. The One Stop Operator procurement is an area that Golden Sierra will need to pay close attention to. The rule makings are suggesting that failed procurement be required for the local area to be a One Stop Operator. There is a distinct difference in being a One Stop Operator and operating a One Stop Center. The local board staff can operate career services. We will still have to go through a competitive process to designate our One Stop Operator by July 2017

Indiveri stated that by July 1, 2016, the appointment of the Workforce Development Board must be in place and submitted to the State for their approval and all rules should be in place. State wide and local wide there are major changes ahead which include performance indicators, integration of the One Stop partners into more cost sharing with how the system operates and the roll of the workforce board.

Indiveri stated that a stronger relationship is going to be required from entities that receive the Carl Perkins money and the local workforce board. They are pushing for a labor market analysis that is regional and covers all the partners and all the actors within that region.

Miller commented that people with disabilities may be able to learn better in an environmental setting as opposed to classroom, so the OJT’s would likely be more beneficial for these individuals. Miller asked if there was a specific amount designated for training and Buckingham said that there was not, but that the Board should set goals for OJT expenditures.

Buckingham stated that according to the local area designation roll out, we have two years for local designation, but one year to certify our board. Miller asked if we were close to this composition; Buckingham clarified that the Board is close and that since it will not be required until July of 2016, there is time.

Magnussen also commented that it is only the State board that cannot have multiple representation, but we need to decide if we are going to have a smaller board and designated sectors. Mandated partners are not required to sit on the board.

Indiveri believes we should have the board set prior to 2016 so they can oversee the changes coming up. Larkey’s concern is with the alignment of everyone involved. He feels we need a little more direction and stability in regard to the changes ahead.


https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2015-05530.pdf





Buckingham stated that there are suggested regions which have not been approved at this time; our proposed region has not changed and consists of Sacramento, Yolo, North Central Counties Consortium, and Golden Sierra. Under Partnerships for Prosperity, the local workforce boards and community colleges came together to fund another entity to head up that planning, which is something Buckingham can see happening with Valley Vision and partners, coordinating the efforts in order to develop the regional plan that is required of this group..

LOCAL AREA DESIGNATION

Buckingham stated that the application for local area designation was approved by the WIB on March 19th and submitted to the State partially signed; it was approved by the Governing Body on April 9th and a fully executed copy will be submitted to the State shortly.

• REVIEW WDB DIRECTIVES

Buckingham presented the Workforce Investment Board’s (WIB) active directives as reviewed by Galipo and Buckingham. Buckingham stated that many of these policies are focused on day to day operations and that the Board should be focusing on broad workforce system policy issues, not on the day to day operations. Miller said that the WIB should be involved in the initialization of the policies, but that it should be up to administration to implement them. Buckingham said that recommendations will be made to eliminate some outdated policies. Miller suggested also looking at whether we need a broad policy statement underpinning the procedures that are in place for implementing.

Magnussen handed out the California Workforce Association’s draft analysis of the NPRMS.

VII. UPDATES

• SLINGSHOT

Buckingham explained that we have submitted a draft of SlingShot to the State which includes a three step process, $20,000 for the planning process, the compact design phase for $100,000 and the implementation phase which makes up the remainder of 1 million dollars total. When we proposed this initiative it was based on income mobility for job seekers, enhancing business start-up success and individual outreach with employers. Buckingham explained that the feedback from the State points toward wanting employer advisory councils. We have proposed a blend of this along with individual outreach. The State wants us to develop a compact which is an agreement between each party showing how we are moving forward.

Larkey stated that his associations are willing to reach out to their members. Brent-Bumb also agreed to reach out through the Chamber if needed. Buckingham said that he will communicate this to Valley Vision, who is managing this process.

Miller asked if there was any connection with SACOG. Buckingham said that there may be some connection, but he is not sure to what extent. Miller said they may have information they have already compiled that we may want to consider.

Larkey believes that educating the employer about On the Job Training and letting them know the various ways they can be involved would be helpful. Buckingham agreed and said that he also believes that the employer may be looking for a broker who can go out, find the best service/services for them and bring it back, initiating the best deal for them.


VIII. EVENT DISCUSSIONS:

• NAWB FORUM 2015

Buckingham said that the forum was enlightening and he liked the methodology of convening partners discussed.

Larkey attended the collaboration pre-conference workshop and enjoyed the input and examples that various areas shared. He was particularly impressed with the asset mapping presentation that highlighted Oakland and Long Beach. He also felt that it may be beneficial to invite selected groups here to give presentations to the board.

Indiveri said that commentary on the One Stops talks about getting the staffing in place, establishing your Monday through Friday regular business hours, then looking at staying open a few evening hours or weekend hours. This is because some of the emphasis on the new laws is focused on incumbent workers who want to move up into a higher paying position or accept a better job and are working during the hours that the One Stops are open, therefore, needing off hours to utilize the facilities. It’s also important that the staff working in the One Stops be thoroughly versed in the other partner programs.

Escobedo attended the “Regional Leadership for Market Responsive Business Engagement” workshop. The speakers were from BusinessU and spoke about regionalizing and bringing together the four WIB’s. She said that it was very informational but seemed to be a huge undertaking. She found the conference very informative and came back with a wealth of knowledge.

Miller attended the “Super Circular” pre-conference workshop. The accounting firm that taught the workshop helped write the Super Circular and was extremely knowledgeable. Miller said that there are six sets of policies that are mandated in the new Super Circular which will need to be put in place.

Miller also attended a workshop covering transportation that talked about the potential for employment with the railroad industry due to a large number of people retiring over the next few years. This is of importance since we have Union Pacific Railroad in Roseville.

Indiveri pointed out that the railway industry is not in the base wage file so it would be difficult to track their success.

Brent-Bumb stated that the El Dorado County Economic Development Corporation (EDC2) serves as an advisory board to the provider. Buckingham commented on possibly bringing together the various chambers from multiple counties to discuss business services and what we can do to enhance their efforts.

IX. REPORT OUT OF TRAINING EXPENDITURES

• K491016 – July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2015

Buckingham explained the graph referring to the expenditures of the K4 14/15 awarded monies, showing a 25% training requirement with 20% being the actual expenditure. We are meeting this in every area except a small portion on the El Dorado side. This may be represented a little differently if the agency had already been paying the bills on El Dorado’s behalf. Buckingham stated that because of the transition to the WIOA system the board needs to be mindful in watching the expenditures regarding El Dorado County. The County has just finished spending their K4 monies from last program year. At this time there have been no expenditures reported


on the K5 funds. Yet, we may be awarding the K6 money soon. This means they have two years-worth of funding to spend in a one year transition period. The Board will want to avoid over funding as this guarantees failure.

Larkey suggested putting El Dorado’s K6 money in a pool where others could draw from it, and if El Dorado has spent their K5, they can then use the K6 funding. Buckingham said that this could be an option, along with possibly contracting with an additional entity in El Dorado County for training, meaning that it doesn’t all have to go through the One Stop Center. However, this would have to go through a procurement process.

X. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS/NEW BUSINESS

• WIOA Implementation• K5 14/15• Board Composition

XI. NEXT MEETING

June 18, 2015 – Joint Executive & Finance, Roseville Connections

XII. ADJOURNMENT

Motion to adjourn at 2:55 pm by Escobedo, second by Brent-Bumb.

Meeting adjourned.


Date: 06/19/14 08/21/1410/16/1410/23/13 11/13/14

12/18/1401/05/15

2/19/152/25/15 04/16/15

cancelled EC Joint EC Joint EC ECExecutive Committee Regular Special Retreat Regular Regular RegularTink Miller-CHAIR 1 1 1 1 1 1 100%Rick Larkey-VICE CHAIR 1 1 1 1 1 1 100%Kevin Ferreira 1 1 0 0 1 0 50%Laurel Brent-Bumb 1 1 1 1 1 1 100%Martha Escobedo 1 1 1 1 1 1 100%

Rate


GOLDEN SIERRA WORKFORCE BOARD FINANCE COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING

MINUTES

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 – 11:00 am

Golden Sierra Job Training Agency

1919 Grass Valley Highway, Suite 100 Auburn, CA 95603


Quorum was established and meeting was called to order by Tink Miller at 11:00 am.

Present: Tink Miller, Paul Castro

Absent: None

Guests: Jason Buckingham, Michael Indiveri, Terrie Trombley, Lorna Magnussen, Kathy Spindola

II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Item XI moved below Item IX per Buckingham. EC & FC January 5, 2015 minutes removed per Miller. Item IX is a request for action.

Motion to approve the agenda as amended by Castro, second by Miller.


III. CONSENT AGENDA

All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature and will be approved by one blanket motion.

For Approval

A. Approval of Minutes from January 5, 2015 – FC/EC Joint Meeting (removed)

For Information

B. Attendance Log

Motion to approve consent agenda as amended by Castro, second by Miller.



IV. PUBLIC COMMENT – FOR THOSE ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA

Trombley thanked the Board for their accommodation in adjusting the meeting schedule that allowed the extra time needed by staff to prepare the required material.

V. APPROVE 2015/2016 MEETING SCHEDULE

Motion to approve 2015/2016 meeting schedule as presented by Castro, second by Miller


(addressed Item VII per revised agenda)

VI. APPROVE FY 2015/2016 CONSORTIUM DRAFT BUDGET

(addressed immediately following Item IX per revised agenda)

Buckingham explained that the budget is formatted differently than in previous years. The new format is focused on priority based budgeting.

Trombley [unless otherwise noted] provided the following:

• Executive & Finance Committee will be solicited in the development of a measurement process for our cost centers.

• Schedule numbers no longer match previous budget schedules.

• Adult, Dislocated Worker (DW) and Youth Program funding is overstated by $176,000 based on initial budget assumptions.

• If Rapid Response and Layoff Aversion are extended to allow for WIOA transition, then $200,000 can be carried over.

• $650,000 currently in grant applications; $150,000 already in budget [Buckingham]

• New budget will be comprehensive, new awarded monies will be added to the budget as additional cost centers.

• A consortium comprehensive One-Stop is now listed in the budget due to WIOA requirements. All members of the consortium will share in the cost of comprehensive One-Stop.

• The Agency will manage Rapid Response and Layoff Aversion for the consortium. • $10,000 has been added under Regional Cost Sharing Admin for possible costs related to

regional planning.

• Moving forward the Agency will need to make a clear distinction between monies awarded to serve El Dorado and Alpine Counties as opposed to Alpine County Health and Human services and El Dorado County Health and Human Services due to procurement requirements. [Buckingham]

• Work-Based Learning for Youth: it has not been defined if we can use leverage, or how much of the 20% required can be used for training as opposed to case management.

• A portion of the money from K5 will support the comprehensive One-Stop IT services.

FC Minutes – 2015-05-05-20 Agenda Packet - of 35

Miller inquired as to where the $150,000 non-allocated amount showed on the expense side of the budget. Trombley explained as follows:

o $77,728 will be used for salary and benefits to fund one full-time (FTE) to administer the Disability Employment Accelerator

o $5,000 for media services/outreach events

o $15,000 professional services/employment development

o $35,000 for WEX

o $17,272 for supportive services – in coordination with Department of Rehabilitation.

Miller suggested a break out showing how the money would be allocated if awarded. Trombley agreed to include this in the narrative.

Castro inquired as to where competitive grants would be located in the budget. Trombley explained that they are located under “Estimated Non-Allocation Awards” and “Expenditures Non-Allocation Awards.” The total amount of possible awarded monies is combined, but it was agreed to list each individual grant as a separate line item.

Motion to recommend the FY 2015/2016 Consortium Draft Budget by Castro, second by Miller.


Miller asked where the contingency fund is located in the budget. Trombley explained that it is listed under “Current Year Award Expended in Second Year.”

Buckingham stated that the Agency will recommend new directives at the Executive/Finance Committee meeting in June. The directives may reference the local performance measures of any particular sub-contract that may be of concern.

(Meeting directed back to Item X per revised agenda)

VII. REVIEW EL DORADO K4 EXPENDITURES

Trombley explained the expenditures for the contract with El Dorado County HHS as of April 30, 2015.

Trombley explained that El Dorado requested a budget revision to move unspent indirect administrative monies to their direct training budget. She further explained that there is $40,848 in contracted monies, and an additional $25,135 that is not assigned to a specific contract as of April 30th. The K5 training contracts can be moved into K4 as long as the dates are acceptable. El Dorado has until May 31, 2015, to provide services under K4.

Miller inquired if there was a plan in place to spend the $25,135. Trombley and Buckingham stated that they have been in contact with El Dorado to discuss this. Miller asked if there was any danger of having to return unspent funds. Trombley felt confident that the consortium could absorb and utilize any unspent funds.


Buckingham referred to the graph on page 20 of the packet; he explained that the graph is showing overall enrollment in El Dorado County as increasing. However, a concern is with quarterly enrollment. The first two quarters in 14/15 were showing strong enrollment, with a decline in the 3rd and 4th quarters. There have been no K5 monies expended to date.

Miller asked if conversations had occurred with El Dorado regarding anticipated enrollments and expenditures for May. Buckingham stated that the Agency has been told that the clients are there; however, the system is not reflecting the enrollments. Golden Sierra staff are reviewing the disparity.

Buckingham noted that the process to pay El Dorado bills is in place. Golden Sierra has provided El Dorado with staff training, access to shared drive for policies/procedures & forms, as well as established a courier service. Trombley stated that to date she has not received a participant contract.

Buckingham noted that one year of K5 is already exhausted, and there is still one year remaining on the contract. As previously noted there is currently no K5 expenditures reported. This has been an ongoing conversation of the Executive & Finance Committee; should new monies continue to be awarded with an excessive amount of unspent carryover still in place.

Indiveri explained that a contributing factor is a turnover in experienced staff. The new unexperienced staff are relied upon to train the new incoming workers. Indiveri added that this is very similar to the learning curve when they started up in 2006/2007.

Castro inquired about the role El Dorado County has with procuring the One-Stop Operator. Buckingham explained that it is unclear at this time. The minimum role that has been identified for the One-Stop Operator is coordination; there is no further definition of what coordinate means. The procurement of the One-Stop Operator does not need to be in effect until July 2017.

Buckingham said that there can be a clear separation between the One-Stop Operator and those who provide career services, with the option of combining both.

Castro asked if the concerns regarding El Dorado are being factored into these discussions. Buckingham stated that the next few agenda items will further address this question.

VIII. REPORT OUT OF TRAINING EXPENDITURES

A. K491016 – July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2015

Buckingham explained that as a consortium, Golden Sierra is meeting its requirements. Alpine is a little low, but this could be impacted by one contract. El Dorado is currently low as well. This could be impacted by May data previously discussed. Miller asked if Alpine County was executing any type of outreach or marketing for services. Buckingham said yes, but explained that the outreach doesn’t always draw people to the center

Miller said that there has been past concern from the tribal community; they have communicated that they believe they are not receiving a fair share of the tribal resources. Miller also noted that Alpine County in house support services has always offered their services to the local tribal community. Miller expressed that outreach to the tribal leadership/council might be helpful. Buckingham believes that this message has already been relayed, but felt that ongoing communication could be helpful.


Trombley explained that Golden Sierra and Alpine work together closely to ensure monies are spent in time and in the best interest of the county.

In addition, staff have been working closely with Alpine to assist in client related payments. Trombley noted that Alpine’s K5 contract has also been modified to add $15,000 for them to provide a summer youth program. Buckingham stated that he had recently met with Nichole Williamson and Supervisor Katherine Rakow to discuss their program as it relates to the needs of their community; both agreed that the focus is on youth programs.

B. K594759 – July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2016

Trombley noted that the K5 was a 15% funding /10% leverage spread.

IX. DISCUSS K6 AWARDS

Buckingham explained that Golden Sierra must go through a competitive process in order tocontract for career services. Golden Sierra, under WIA, was able to secure contracts in the pastthrough a mini-consortium. According to WIOA, the mini-consortium model is allowable, butservices must still be procured through a competitive process. The direct award via aconsortium of required partners no longer exists. Buckingham explained that Golden Sierra willimplement the competitive process beginning July 1, 2015, with the anticipated award date inDecember or January. An 18 month contract, with a 12 month recapture clause is anticipated.

Buckingham stated that Youth Services procurement is a little different. The Agency hasawarded contracts in the past via a competitive process. However, we are at the expiration pointof the current RFP, and WIOA has different youth elements. Therefore, Golden Sierra will beimplementing the competitive process for youth following the same timeframe as theprocurement of career services.

Buckingham explained that there is a significant change with the Rapid Response and LayoffAversion services. Provided the agency subcontract out these services, they must also gothrough a competitive process; however, this funding is administered a little differently at theState level. Unlike the allocation funding sources, Rapid Response and Layoff Aversion fundsare provided on a one year basis. Buckingham recommends that the agency retain the RapidResponse and Layoff Aversion money in house. This will allow the Agency to provide theservices to all counties throughout the consortium. Additionally, this will reduce administrativecosts, provide some efficiencies and greater consistency while allowing expansion of theNEXTsuite of business services.

Trombley stated that it makes more sense fiscally as well. Miller asked if this change would beduplicative of the County’s activities in their Economic Development Departments. Buckinghamsaid it would not and that it would be in alignment with these partner activities. Indiveri addedthat based on the NPRMs, the local board will coordinate with local economic developmentactivities that are carried out in the same jurisdiction.

Buckingham stated that no action is required relating to procurement of career and youthservices as they are mandated; however, the action for the board today would be the adoptionof the recommendation to administer Rapid Response and Layoff Aversion services centrally.

Motion to approve retention of Rapid Response and Layoff Aversion services in house byCastro, second by Miller.



Miller asked about career and youth services for the first six months. Buckingham stated that both El Dorado and Alpine have remaining K5 funds to provide services for this period. PRIDE will also be awarded additional funds to provide services. Buckingham added that if the State extends Rapid Response funding in the way they have in the past, El Dorado will have carry over to use during the transition.

(Meeting directed back to Item VI per revised agenda)

X. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS/NEW BUSINESS

• Directives• El Dorado K4 Status

XI. NEXT MEETING – June 18, 2015– Joint Executive & Finance

XII. ADJOURNMENT

Motion to adjourn by Castro at 12:20 pm

Meeting adjourned


Date: 6/19/14 8/21/14 9/18/14 10/16/14 1/5/15 5/20/15 RateCancelled Cancelled FC Only 10/23/15 Joint FC Only

Finance Committee Special Joint/SpecialPaul Castro 1 1 1 1 100%Tink Miller-CHAIR 1 1 1 1 100%

Total 0 0 2 2 2 2Quorum=2


GOLDEN SIERRA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

MEMORANDUM

DATE: June 29, 2015 TO: Executive Committee (EC) FROM: Jason Buckingham, GSJTA Executive Director SUBJ: 2015/2016 Meeting Schedule

Resolution Action Item Information Approval is requested to establish the 2015/2016 Executive Committee meeting schedule. This is in correlation with joint meetings with the Finance Committee. Current schedule for 2014/2015 is 3rd Thursdays of even months; 1:00 pm - 3:00 pm


Upd 5/21/15

WIOA Action Matrix Action Comments Responsibility Status

Action Item = Green WIB GB/CLEO CWIB/ Governor

Establish Local Area Revise JPA to reference WIOA

X • Ongoing – Working with KMTG should be sent to county counsel in late Feb/March

• Out to county counsel for review April 1, 2015 (45 day review period)

• On GB Agenda for review April 9, 2015 Request Designation as Local Area

The Governor is required to designate (initially) local areas who have performed successfully and who have had fiscal integrity for the previous two years. Golden Sierra meets these criteria. No process has been defined but I recommend the WIB, in conjunction with the Governing Body, submit a letter requesting designation.

X X X • Approved by WIB 11/20/14 • Approved by GB 12/15/14 • Mailed 12/21/14 • Draft Directive WSDD-111 released 1/16/15;

Directive WSD14-10 released 2/20/15 (updated 3/9/15)

• Request approval from WIB 3/19/15 • Sent unsigned copy to EDD 3/26/15 • GB approved 4/9/15 • Application sent to state 4/27/15 • Received recommendation for approval letter

5/19/2015 Request approval to remain one-stop operator

According to WIOA each local area is required to have one One-Stop (at a minimum) and that One-Stop must be collocated with EDD staff. Currently, the Golden Sierra region has five centers only one of which is collocated with EDD (Roseville). The designation would eliminate our requirement to competitively procure the operator for the region. This is the most cost effective and efficient scenario.

X X X • Approved by WIB 11/20/14 • Approved by GB 12/15/14 • Mailed 12/21/14 • According to NRPM must be competitively

procured prior to receiving “waiver”. Procurement must be completed by June 30, 2017


Upd 5/21/15

Action Comments Responsibility Status Action Item = Green WIB GB/CLEO CWIB/

Governor

Workforce Board Governance Review WIB Functions for gaps/opportunities

WIB (ADA accessibility policies) X WDB functions to include partnering with Core agencies, systems alignment and setting local

performance indicators Review Bylaws Review bylaws for consistency with

responsibilities and functions of WDB X X • Working with KMTG

• GB Bylaws for review and approval at GB meeting 4/9/15

• WDB Bylaws under review Re-write WIB/Governing Body Agreement

Review current agreement for consistency with WIOA

X X • Working with KMTG • Draft completed – GB Review 4/9/15 • Approved by WDB Exec 4/16/15 • On GB agenda 6/3/15 for approval

Set Qualifications for Director

The WDB will need to set qualifications for the Director. Will probably need to wait for regulations to do so.

X X • Designated to GB since the Agency sets qualifications for and employs Director

Review WIB Directives Current WIB Directives will need to be reviewed and revised or eliminated for accuracy within the new system.

X • Initial Review and Discussion at Exec 4/16/15 • WIA Directives expire June 30, 2015 • New Directives proposed at WDB Exec in June

2015 based on broad policy issues, alignment etc.

Membership Review WIB membership for compliance and strategic direction

Is membership in line with key sectors and new requirements?

X • As required by WIOA and as referenced in WSD14-10, the Governing Body will be required to provide direction to staff to develop and approve a recruitment process that identifies and appoints appropriate members as defined by WIOA and state policy. Must be in compliance by July 2016.

• Membership reviewed, missing one required member (Adult Education) for compliance. Further review and possible restructuring may need to take place to meet requirements of local initiatives.


Upd 5/21/15


Governor

Workforce Board (continued) Structure Review Committee Structure

The WIB should review its committee structure to ensure that it can meet its new role. No youth council is required, new partners included in performance (performance committee), New business engagement metrics, new emphasis on pathways and pathway development, Education and economic development continuous improvement, accessibility…Joint mtgs with SETA? (See initiatives)

X X • Some of this may need to be completed regionally as a part of the regional planning requirements

• Initial recommendations will be proposed for June Executive Committee

Planning/Service Delivery Convene Core Partners to discuss the design of the future system and MOUs

Executive Committee should convene leaders from DOR, EDD, Adult ED to discuss partnering in the new system, MOU’s and Cost Sharing Agreements.

X • Email intro CWA WIOA Overview – 9/23/14 • Letter intro WIOA 10/20/14 • First meetings with EDD/Adult Ed April 2015 • First meetings held with Adult Ed, EDD, HHS

and DOR (April 2015)

• Coordinating round two meetings currently Meet with SETA to Consider Joint Committees and policies with SETA and CAIZ group

WIOA will nearly require a regional planning effort. We may want to have our subcommittees start meeting jointly with SETA

X • Attending SETA Planning Committee late January.

• Meeting cancelled; next meeting in February, • This meeting has not occurred as of May 2015

Review One-Stop locations and service delivery model

Review service delivery. Should all current locations remain one-stops or should we target special projects in certain areas. Should we open population-specific job centers? Other LWIAs have centers that focus on youth only or business only or sectors. Should we reduce the number of physical centers and set-up remote access instead (the community colleges would be a likely host). (Recommendations to GB)

X X • Met with Alpine County on 1/29/15 to discuss program services needs and model.

• Consider new model with one comprehensive site, multiple Affiliate sites and designated access points. Only Affiliate and Comprehensive sites have access to Training money. All sites offer some version of Career Services GS manages the payments of contracts etc.


Upd 5/21/15


Governor

Workforce Board (continued) Planning/Service Delivery Publish RFQ for vender services

Establishing a vendor list for services will greatly enhance our ability to provider services without a full RFP process for each service

X • Working with staff to define services – anticipate release 2/10/15

• Released 2/10/15

Publish RFQ for Training Services and/or One-Stops

Prepare for competitive bid requirement by obtaining lists of qualified/interested sub-recipients

X • In development/ may need to separate “one-Stop Operator” functions from one-stop service delivery (core function = coordination)

• Deadline for completion July 2017. • Do not award “K6” money beginning of program

year 2015. Must develop and complete RFP for Services to be awarded Dec/Jan (2016) for 18 months

• This (K6) implementation plan was reviewed and approved at Finance committee May 20, 2105; approved at WDB May 21, 2015.

Technology How does the WDB want to address the new emphasis on Technology

X

Branding Consider adopting unified Identifier X X • WIOA NRPMs identify One-stop brand as “American Job Centers” do we want to keep local brand? Will state board enforce “America’s Job Centers of California”

Accessibility How will we address accessibility • Could be a function of the one-stop operator if contracted out.

LMID How will we ensure we have proper data for planning – Contract that out

• Save costs by eliminating EMSI and Work closely with LMID consultant


Upd 5/21/15


Governor

Workforce Board (continued) Performance Metrix Review and identify performance metrics for

WIA services or initiatives (i.e. expenditures related to OJT vs classroom training?) Training in critical clusters? Pathway development, apprenticeship enrollment – Business engagement etc.

X • Initial local performance metrics to be proposed to Exec June 2015

Initiatives Brand Initiatives i.e. NEXT, Vital Assets, Youth@Work etc. - maybe reduce committees but have ad hocs that manage the initiatives?

X • Currently Branded “NEXT” for business services/RR

• Working on “Service First” for Veterans • Working on Brand for Persons with Disabilities

(PWD) • Also need youth brand • Implementing centrally administered RR

Services. The RR implementation plan was reviewed and approved at Finance committee May 20, 2105; approved at WDB May 21, 2015.


GOLDEN SIERRA WORKFORCE BOARD

MEMORANDUM

DATE: June 29, 2015 TO: Executive (EC) and Finance Committee (FC) FROM: Jason Buckingham, GSJTA Executive Director SUBJ: K4 Expenditures - Status

Resolution Action Item Information As requested, please find below a Summary Table demonstrating the status of expenditure as of May 31, 2015, for the contract with El Dorado County Health and Human Services Department. This contract will end on May 31, 2015. This update is generated from the May 31, 2015 invoices. Golden Sierra has been expending the returned dollars as grants have expired. El Dorado’s staff has assured us that the Accrued Expenditures will be paid in time for final invoices to be submitted no later than July 7th 2015.

July 1, 2014 through May 31, 2015 - Subgrant Award K491016

Budget

Expended

Accrued

Contracted

Remaining

Returned

Total Contract

$ 1,005,954

$ 841,553

$ 59,320

$ ------------

$

$ 105,081

SB734 Training $ 218,416

$ 146,988

$ 59,320

$ ------------

$

$ 12,108

Adult $ 292,152 $ 263,503 $ 18,267 $ ------------ $ $ 10,382

Adult DWTranser $ 167,026 $ 139,145 $ 18,200 $ ------------ $ $ 9,681 Dislocated Worker $ 167,026 $ 139,601 $ 22,853 $ ------------ $ $ 4,572

Youth- In $ 92,000 $ 68,617 $ ---------- $ ------------ $ $ 23,383 Youth - Out $ 205,897 $ 150,145 $ ----------- $ ------------ $ $ 55,752

Rapid Response $ 81,853 $ 80,542 $ ---------- $ ------------ $ $ 1,311 A budget modification was requested and granted in March 2015. This budget modification transferred $17,544 from Indirect Administration to Direct-Program Training. The $12,108 remaining in the Direct Training category will be expended by Placer County.



MEMORANDUM

DATE: June 29, 2015

TO: Executive (EC) and Finance Committee (FC)

FROM: Jason Buckingham, GSJTA Executive Director

SUBJ: K5 Expenditures - Strategy

July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015 - Subgrant Award K594759

Provider Budget Expended* $ Remaining

% Remaining

Placer County $1,530,551 $1,220,131 $310,420 20%

El Dorado County $943,046 $171,086 $771,960 82%

Alpine County $71,520 $4,857 $66,663 93%

PRIDE $90,000 $86,436 $3,564 4%

Total $2,635,117 $1,482,510 $1,152,607 44%

* Expended as of 5/31/15



MEMORANDUM

DATE: June 29, 2015 TO: Executive Committee (EC) and Finance Committee (FC) FROM: Jason Buckingham, GSJTA Executive Director SUBJ: Direct Training Spending Update

Resolution Action Item Information For your review please find attached the level of spending and allowable leverage for participant direct training within the Adult and Dislocated Worker funding streams for Subgrant award No. K491016 and Subgrant No. K594759 Both the graphed and numeric presentations provide information for the consortium as a whole and each member county’s level of expenditures as of May 31, 2015.


Golden Sierra Job Training Agency Award Period – July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2015

$-

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

$900,000

Golden Sierra Consortium K491016 as of May 31, 2015

5% Leverage

20% BudgetedTraining

ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure

$-

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

Placer County K491016 as of May 31, 2015

5% Leverage


ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure

$-

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

El Dorado County K491016 as of May 31, 2015

5% Leverage


ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure

$-

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

$7,000

Alpine County K491016 as of May 31, 2015

5% Leverage


ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure


Golden Sierra Job Training Agency WIA Allocation Award K491016Award Period - July 1,2013 - June 30,2015

Adult and Dislocated Worker Formula Fund Allocations 2,790,295$

Training Requirement = 25% of Allocation with an Allowable 10% for Leverage 697,573$

Budgeted - Expenditure/Leverage Performance PlanPercent Percent Share of Share of

Target 20% Budget Target 5% Leverage 25% TotalPlacer County 63% 351,577$ 63% 87,895$ 439,473$

El Dorado County 36% 200,901$ 36% 50,226$ 251,127$ Alpine County 1% 5,581$ 1% 1,393$ 6,973$

558,059$ 139,514$ 697,573$

Completed Transactions - May 31, 2015 (Cash/Accrued Transactions)Actual

Expenditures Target Actual Target Supported & Leverage

Obtained Expenditures Obtained Leverage Total

Placer County 105% 370,590$ 287% 252,090$ * 622,680$ El Dorado County 103% 206,306$ 78% 39,351$ 245,657$

Alpine County 6% 344$ 0% -$ 344$

577,240$ 291,441$ 868,681$

Expenditure/Leverage Performance Based on Budgeted Plan as of May 31, 2015Contract

Actual Supported Expenditures LeverageOver/(Under) Over/(Under)

Placer County 19,013$ 164,195$ El Dorado County 5,405$ (10,875)$

Alpine County (5,237)$ (1,393)$

19,181$ 151,927$

* $57,125 of Rapid Response used as Additional Assistance for Training.

Recap of Consortium Performance as of May 31, 2015

Formula Fund Training WIA Expenditures Target 558,059$ 100%Training Expenditures Completed 577,240$ 103.4%Remaining WIA Expenditures Needed/(Exceeded) (19,181)$ 0.0%


Golden Sierra Job Training Agency Award Period – July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2016

$-

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

Golden Sierra Consortium K594759 as of May 31, 2015

10% Leverage


ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure

$-

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

Placer County K594759 as of May 31, 2015

10% Leverage


ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure

$-

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

El Dorado County K594759 as of May 31, 2015

10% Leverage


ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure

$-

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

$7,000

Alpine County K594759 as of May 31, 2015

10% Leverage


ActualLeverage

ActualExpenditure


Golden Sierra Job Training Agency WIA Allocation Award K594759Award Period - July 1,2014 - June 30,2016

Adult and Dislocated Worker Formula Fund Allocations 2,491,934$

Training Requirement = 25% of Allocation with an Allowable 10% for Leverage 622,983$

Budgeted - Expenditure/Leverage Performance PlanPercent Percent Share of Share of

Target 15% Budget Target 10% Leverage 25% TotalPlacer County 62% 231,750$ 62% 154,499$ 386,250$

El Dorado County 37% 138,303$ 37% 92,202$ 230,505$ Alpine County 1% 3,737$ 1% 2,492$ 6,228$

373,790$ 249,193$ 622,983$

Completed Transactions - May 31, 2015 (Cash/Accrued Transactions)Actual

Expenditures Target Actual Target Supported & Leverage

Obtained Expenditures Obtained Leverage Total

Placer County 53% 123,893$ 58% 90,242$ * 214,135$ El Dorado County 0% -$ 0% -$ -$

Alpine County 0% -$ 0% -$ -$

123,893$ 90,242$ 214,135$

Expenditure/Leverage Performance Based on Budgeted Plan as of May 31, 2015Contract

Actual Supported Expenditures LeverageOver/(Under) Over/(Under)

Placer County (107,857)$ (64,257)$ El Dorado County (138,303)$ (92,202)$

Alpine County (3,737)$ (2,492)$

(249,897)$ (158,951)$

* $25,112 of Rapid Response used as Additional Assistance for Training.

Recap of Consortium Performance as of May 31, 2015

Formula Fund Training WIA Expenditures Target 373,790$ 100%Training Expenditures Completed 123,893$ 33.1%Remaining WIA Expenditures 249,897$ 66.9%


golden sierra workforce board executive & finance ... · 6/29/2015 · o letter requesting...

Documents