total: $32,852,412 • adult: $9,852,515 • dislocated worker ... · workforce innovation and...

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) BasicsJune 9, 2017

1. WIOA has 4 main titles:

• Title I- State and Local Boards; Adult, Dislocated Worker, Youth [Higher

Education Coordinating Commission- HECC)

• Title II- Adult and Family Literacy [HECQ• Title III- Wagner-Peyser [Labor Exchange] [Oregon Employment Department)

• Title IV- Vocational Rehabilitation (Department of Human Services)

2. As part of its responsibilities, the Oregon Workforce Investment Board [OWIB]

reviews the annual Title I budget. The Grant Year for Federal Funds is July 1 through

June 30 of each year.

3. In Oregon, the HECC Office of Workforce Investments receives an annual allotment

from the US Department of Labor [DOL) via three funding streams: Adult, Dislocated

Worker and Youth. These funds are used for Employment and Training Activities.

4. This year's total federal allotment is down 10.07% from last year:

• Total: $32,852,412• Adult: $9,852,515• Dislocated Worker: $12722,352• Youth: $10,277,545

5. A majority of the funding is required to go to Local Workforce Development Boards

(LWDBs) via formula. The formula is based on employment and economic data at

the county level and will be reviewed this year by the OWIB as part of its

responsibilities.

6. Prior to the formula being applied the state is allowed to reserve up to:

• 5% of the total funding for Administration- $1,642,618

• 10% of the total funding for Statewide Activities- $2,771,362

• 25% of the Dislocated Worker funding for Rapid Response/Pre-LayoffServices-

$1,908,352

7. The remaining funds, $26,530,080 go directly to the LWDBs.

8. Due to dramatic cuts in local allocations, the state is reserving 10% less in both

Administration and Statewide Activities and 32.52% less in Rapid Response/Pre-

Layoff.

WSI

Incite

NOW

LWP

RWP

CWP

SOWIB

ECWIB

EOWB

Subtotal LWIA's

State Admin (5%)

SWA (Governor's Rsrv

Rapid Response

TOTAL ALLOCATION

Full 5%, Full

Youth

2,216,250

1,676,101

518,913

991,978

967,741

604,011

640,934

1,045,667

588,196

9,249,791

513,877

513,877

10,277,545

Adult

$$2,053,462

1,481,345

414,545

829,861

911,309

559,426

617,360

958,396

548,937

8,374,641

492,624

985,250

9,852,515

10% Adult -

DLW

2,525,643

1,401,749

550,369

749,856

831,787

780,135

571,742

956,466

537,901

8,905,648

636,117

1,272,235

1,908,352

12,722,352

3LW, 5% Youth, 15°

Program Year 2017

6,795,355

4,559,195

1,483,827

2,571,695

2,710,837

1,943,572

1,830,036

2,960,529

1,675,034

26,530,080

1,642,618

2,771,362

1,908,352

32,852,412

%20.68°^

13.88°,

4.52°,

7.83°^

8.25°,'

5.92°,

5.57°,

9.01°,

5.10°,

80.76°,

5.00°,

8.44°,

5.81°,

100.00°,

tapid Response + 2016 High Concentration Youth + 2015 Additional DLW Formula

Program

Year 2016

$$7,622,752

4,504,862

1,657,688

2,504,763

3,053,689

2,187,450

2,012,323

3,401,926

1,850,172

28,795,625

1,826,562

3,081,064

2,828,033

36,531,284

Difference fromGY2016toGY2017

$$ %

(827,397)1

54,333

(173,861)]

66,932

(342,852)]

(243,878)1

(182,287)1

(441,397)1

(175,138)1

(2,265,545)1

(183,944)1

(309,702)1(919,681)1

-11.45°,

1.13°,

-10.97°/1

2.46°^

-12.06°,

-11.80°//

-9.53°/1

-14.180^

-9.96°,'

-8.080/

-10.07°,

-10.05°,

-32.52°,

(3,678,872)1 -10.07°,

2016 Highconcentration

Youth

117,360

71,720

35,240

51,360

28,080

23,520

17,800

30,360

24,560

400,000

(400,000)

AdditionalFY16 DLWFormula

311,960

178,420

65,120

93,940

103,840

99,660

65,780

122,980

58,300

1,100,000

(1,100,000

Fatal Funds(2017 +

AdditionalFunds)

7,224,675

4,809,335

1,584,187

2,716,995

2,842,757

2,066,752

1,913,616

3,113,869

1,757,894

28,030,080

1,642,618

2,371,362

808,352

32,852,412

Difference from Total2017 + Additional

Funds to 2016

$$ %

(398,077)1

304,473

(73,501)]

212,232

(210,932)](120,698)1

(98,707)1

(288,057)1

(92,278)1

(765,545)1

(183,944)1

(709,702)](2,019,681)1

(3,678,872)1

-5.22%

6.76%

-4.43%

8.47%

-6.91%

-5.52%

-4.91%

-8.47%

-4.99%

-2.66%

-10.07%

-23.03%

-71.42%

-10.07%

Worksystems, Inc. (WSI) - Multnomah and Washington counties, City of Portland

Incite, Inc. (Incite) - Marion, Polk, Linn, and Yamhill counties

Northwest Oregon Works (NOW) - Benton, Clatsop, Columbia, Lincoln, and Tillamook counties

Lane Workforce Partnership (LWP) - Lane County

Rogue Workforce Partnership (RWP) - Jackson and Josephine counties

Clackamas Workforce Partnership (CWP) - Clackamas County

Southwestern Oregon Workforce Investment Board (SOWIB) - Curry, Coos, and Douglas counties

East Cascades Workforce Investment Board (ECWIB) - Crook, Deschutes, Gilliam, Hood River, Jefferson, Klamath, Lake, Sherman, Wasco, and Wheeler counties

Eastern Oregon Workforce Board (EOWB) - Baker, Grant, Harney, Malheur, Morrow, UmatillQ, Union, Wallowa counties

Local Workforce Areas & WorkSource Oregon Centers

Oregon’s Labor Market Landscape

Oregon Workforce Investment Board June 9, 2017

Support Business ∙ Promote Employment

Oregon’s Labor Market Landscape • Low unemployment rate

– 3.7% in April, lowest on record.

• Healthy job growth

– 6,600 jobs added in April. Job growth faster than the U.S.

• Unfilled job vacancies

– 50,500 vacancies reported by businesses last winter.

• Numerous high-wage, high-demand openings due to replacement openings and job growth.

Support Business ∙ Promote Employment 2


Rural Oregon had 238,000 jobs in 2016 – about 13 percent of statewide employment.

Defining Rural Oregon by County

Baker

Benton

Clackamas

ClatsopColumbia

Coos

Crook

Curry

Deschutes

Douglas

Gilliam

Grant

Harney

Hood River

Jackson

Jefferson

Josephine

Klamath Lake

Lane

Lincoln

Linn

Malheur

Marion

MorrowMultnomah

Polk

Sherman

Tillamook

Umatilla

Union

Wallowa

Wasco

Washington

Wheeler

Yamhill

Urban or Metro

Rural or Nonmetro

238,000 rural jobs =

180,000 private-sector jobs

+ 57,000 government

jobs


Recovery from the Great Recession has been uneven and 17 of Oregon’s 23 rural counties remain below peak.

Rural Oregon

Urban Oregon

-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

1 7 13 19 25 31 37 43 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 97 103 109

Perc

en

t o

f P

revio

us P

eak E

mp

loym

en

t

Months Since Previous Peak Employment

Rural Oregon Has Not Recovered from the Recession


Jobs in higher-wage construction of buildings, specialty trade contractors, and wood product manufacturing remain more than 20 percent below the level in 2007.

Rural high-wage jobs lost in the Great Recession have not returned.

-9,010

-6,129

-11,374

13,721

10,114

6,016

-15,000 -10,000 -5,000 0 5,000 10,000 15,000

Lower-wage industries

Mid-wage industries

Higher-wage industries

Net Change in Number of Jobs

Rural Oregon Lost Many High-Wage Jobs in RecessionNonmetro Counties Private-Sector

Job Loss and Job Growth*

2Q2009-2Q2016

2Q2007-2Q2009

Source: Oregon unemployment insurance wage records

*after nearly seven years of recovery

+

+

+


Metro Oregon has regained double the number of high-wage jobs lost in recession.

The industries with the fastest employment growth during this expansion tend to be concentrated in metro areas.

-64,430

-71,689

-28,607

113,809

70,790

64,049

-80,000 -60,000 -40,000 -20,000 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000120,000

Lower-wage industries

Mid-wage industries

Higher-wage industries

Net Change in Number of Jobs

Metro Oregon Has Recovered from RecessionMetro Counties Private-Sector

Job Loss and Job Growth*

2Q2009-2Q2016

2Q2007-2Q2009

Source: Oregon unemployment insurance wage records

*after nearly seven years of recovery

+

+

+


-10% -8% -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

Private sector

Professional and business services

Education and health services

Financial activities

Information

Mining, logging, and construction

Manufacturing

Trade, transportation, and utilities

Leisure and hospitality

Public sector

Rural Percentage Point Difference from Urban Industry Employment Concentrations

How Does Rural Oregon Compare with Urban Oregon?

Government and tourism-related jobs are a much larger share of activity in rural Oregon.


Rural jobs account for 10 percent of the total nonfarm payroll in Oregon, but more than one-third of farm wages and salaries.

36%

10%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Farm Wages and Salaries Total Nonfarm Payroll

Farm Wages and Salaries Are Important in Rural OregonNonmetro Share of Oregon's Wages

Source: Oregon Employment Department and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

Farm employment improves resistance to recessions in Oregon’s rural counties.


Rural Oregon had no natural increase in population from 2010 to 2016. The population did grow slowly due to in-migration.

The rural population ages 65+ is growing quickly, while the population of youth under the age of 18 is in long-term decline.

Natural Population Increase by County, 2010-2016Natural Increase = Births - Deaths

Natural Increase

0 to -2,200

1 to 1,000

1,001 to 2,000

2,001 to 25,100


An aging workforce will be a major challenge in some areas as older workers retire.

Workforce Ages 55 and Older by CountyAverage 4Q2015 - 3Q2016, Oregon = 23%

% Workforce 55+

21% to 23%

24% to 25%

26% to 30%

31% to 37%


Rural Oregon is adding jobs and will continue to do so.

Regional Employment Projections 2014-2024

Job Growth (%)

15% or more

10% to 14%

5% to 9%

Less than 5%


More rural jobs will open up to replace retiring workers than due to economic growth.

17%

20%

22%

24%

25%

25%

27%

28%

30%

32%

34%

39%

40%

83%

80%

78%

76%

75%

75%

73%

72%

70%

68%

66%

61%

60%

0% 100%

Southeast Oregon

South Coast

Northeast Oregon

South Central Oregon

Columbia Basin

Northwest Oregon

Douglas County

Rogue Valley

Mid-Valley

Columbia Gorge

Lane County

Portland Tri-County

Central Oregon

Share of Total Regional Job Openings

Most Job Openings Occur Due to Replacement, 2014-2024

Growth Openings Replacement Openings

Growth openings occur due to new or expanding businesses, while replacement openings occur when a worker permanently leaves the labor market.

Nick Beleiciks, State Employment Economist [email protected]

503.947.1267

Gail Krumenauer, Senior Economic Analyst

[email protected] 503.947.1268

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Heather DeSart, Northwest Oregon Workforce

Heather Ficht, East Cascades Workforce Board

Jake McClelland, Southwestern Oregon Workforce Investment Board

OWP Mission is to provide leadership that promotes and advances Oregon’s workforce system.

2014 Present

Redesignation

• Positive Change for Oregon Communities

• Authentic Community Engagement, particularly in rural areas

• Enhanced Accountability for Contracted Providers

• Increased Quality in Customer Service

• Meaningful Sector Initiatives

Localization

Composition

Connections

Under WIOA, LWBs are given many responsibilities: Develop the local workforce plan, focused on meeting the needs of

customers Conduct workforce research and regional labor market analysis Convene community stakeholders, broker services & leverage resources Lead employer engagement efforts and implement effective strategies Provide leadership around efforts to develop and implement career

pathways Identify and promote proven and promising workforce development

practices Develop strategies for using technology to maximize accessibility &

effectiveness Conduct program oversight Negotiate local performance measures Select and oversee one-stop operators and service providers Identify eligible providers of training and career services Coordinate the delivery of core WIOA programs through the one-stops

There as a substantial difference in population density between the Portland, Salem and Eugene metropolitan areas compared to other areas of Oregon.

With the new structure, some challenges.

Increased cost of doing business

Lack sustainability plan in light of diminishing federal funds and lack of competitive funds

Challenges procuring services and/or recruiting staff due to geographics

Despite the positive impacts locally, these responsibilities require resources.

Despite bipartisan support, federal funding declined by $400 million since 2010.

Oregon general fund investments represented 10% of resources available to LWBs the last two years.

Under the changing federal landscape for workforce program funding, we anticipate even larger cuts to formula funds next year. We expect that federal discretionary funds will be significantly reduced and probably eliminated. There will be increase competition for state and local grants among workforce areas.

Local Workforce Development Works

Oregon is a National Leader in Innovation

Local Workforce Boards Make a Difference

Local Boards are Far-Reaching, Responsive and Established Networks

Retain the investment made in this transition

Retain the level of service to communities

LWB work is staff-intensive and important

Advocate for LWBs with Governor and State

Prioritize Local Funding Needs

Support Local Flexibility

Encourage Increased Co-Investment

Appreciation Thank You.

Informed Investments Require Reliable Data

Providing leadership that promotes and advances Oregon’s workforce system and pursuing innovative solutions to complex workforce challenges.

THE CHALLENGE: Oregon’s state agencies utilize independent management information systems, even though they serve many common customers. Agencies often resist discussions regarding improved system-wide data coordination, asserting that security or confidentiality policies prohibit their ability to effectively share data. Agencies include: Oregon Employment Department, Department of Human Services, Department of Corrections, Department of Education, Higher Education Coordinating Commission, Business Oregon, and Bureau of Labor and Industry. NEGATIVE IMPACTS:

Lack of consistent data hinders the ability to assess program effectiveness.

Lack of consistent data results in the duplication of services.

Lack of shared data burdens customers, requiring the same information multiple times.

Lack of consolidated data results in repetitive collection by multiple departments/agencies.

Lack of shared data yields uncoordinated engagement of businesses and business fatigue.

Lack of consistent data impedes the ability to make informed choices and investments.

Lack of coordinated data delays the ability to move people toward self-sufficiency. TAKE ACTION: Improving infrastructure is a large body of work, but it is essential to stay informed and relevant in this time of great technological advancement. We must start now. Conduct analysis of systems capacity and program responsibilities to create a clearer

understanding for policy makers of the scope of need.

Quantify the cost of duplicity of: staff work, services to customers, and agency processes.

Set expectations that empower agencies and departments to be innovative—to lift internal restrictions that impede their ability to share data with other stakeholders.

Hold state agencies accountable to continually improving allocation of resources for data.

Providing leadership that promotes and advances Oregon’s workforce system

and pursuing innovative solutions to complex workforce challenges.

INVESTMENT IN OREGON’S WORKFORCE SUPPORTS

GENERATIONS OF ECONOMIC STABILITY

THERE IS A MIDDLE‐SKILLS GAP For individuals who are unemployed or in low‐wage jobs, education and training beyond

high school and less than a four‐year degree can provide an opportunity to move into

family‐supporting, middle‐skill jobs.

FUNDING IS NOT KEEPING PACE WITH DEMAND Federal funding has dramatically declined yet the need for training has not, making

increased state investments in WorkSource Oregon essential to successfully growing

Oregon’s workforce.

DEVELOPING THE FUTURE WORKFORCE IS PARAMOUNT State‐funded programs for youth summer employment projects, as well as increased

resources for paid internships, can help more effectively connect young people to

education, training and work—filling the pipeline with the qualified, young workers

employers need.

RELATIONSHIPS WITH EMPLOYERS ARE ESSENTIAL TO SUCCESS In addition to the 113 private‐sector businesses that lead Oregon’s Local Workforce

Development Boards, LWBs engage with 927 businesses in high‐growth, living‐wage occupations and industries in local communities as part of state‐funded sector work.

Providing leadership that promotes and advances Oregon’s workforce system

and pursuing innovative solutions to complex workforce challenges.

LOCAL TALENT DEVELOPMENT WORKS

As experts in local talent development, conveners of local businesses, economic development, education, community stakeholders and system partners; neutral brokers of workforce

services; primary investors in workforce development; and evaluators of workforce services;

LWBS Need to Be Funded

By 2020, there will be 1.4 million jobs in computer science and women are projected to fill only 3% of demand. Southwestern Oregon Workforce Board has invested in Girls Who Code, a program providing computer coding skills to young women, preparing them for in‐demand jobs, and closing the gender gap in computer science. Lane County is home to over 400 tech companies, which employ 4,418 people and 1,185 jobs are projected by the year 2024. Led by Lane Workforce Partnership, the Lane Tech Collaborative identifies and addresses issues that inhibit the growth or stability of the industry in the area. The Boards representing the Portland‐Vancouver Metropolitan Area have developed the Columbia‐Willamette Regional Workforce Collaborative which establishes a unified approach to serve industry, support economic development, and guide public workforce investments. It has raised more than $57 million to serve more Oregonians.

The East Cascades Workforce Investment Board has invested in training for three aerospace supply chain manufacturers required to become certified in order to maintain their contracts with customers such as Boeing. The training (funded with state sector funds) is helping retain more than 40 jobs in the Columbia Gorge. In La Grande, the Eastern Oregon Workforce Board has facilitated collaboration among the Education Service District and local businesses, bridging the gap between advanced manufacturers and Career and Technical Education programs throughout rural Eastern Oregon. The advanced textile manufacturing sector identified the need for curriculum to provide entry‐level training into the industry. This training was provided as on‐the‐job training funded by Northwest Oregon Works, resulting in job placement in the industry for training participants.

There are over 8,000 young adults in the Mid‐Valley who are not working and not in school. The Mid‐Valley LWB, in partnership with community businesses and non‐profits, is addressing this problem through the Career Achievement Network (theNET) which connects disconnected young adults with soft skills training and first‐time work experiences.

In the Rogue Valley, Healthcare employer workforce priorities were identified, new career pathways built, and new training capacities created ‐ linking‐up all K‐20 education/workforce partners. Over 3000 CNA’s have been trained since 2013 to meet critical demand. New healthcare occupations training has been developed.


LOCAL WORKFORCE BOARDS BY THE NUMBERS

RESULTS Almost 110,000 Oregonians enrolled in 41 WorkSource Oregon (WSO) centers between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2016. 73% of individuals served in WSO were placed into jobs, with 85% still employed nine

months later.

These workers earned almost $1.1 billion in the first six months after employment.

While Oregon represents only 1.25% of the population nationally, we represent 14% of all job placements nationwide for adults and dislocated workers served under the WIOA Title I program.

Innovative programs such as Back to Work Oregon are working. This Oregon investment has resulted in: A total of 2,552 on-the-job training (OJT) contracts with employers. Of state-funded OJT participants, 81% completed training and retained employment. 470 employers participated in the program statewide.

Of youth served, 76% were successfully placed into employment and/or a post-secondary education program.

DECLINING RESOURCES Despite bipartisan support, federal funding in key workforce and education programming has declined by $400 million since 2010. The number of individuals in training has also declined as a result. Federal funds that support workforce training for adults and dislocated workers were sufficient to provide training to only 2% of Oregonians eligible to receive training through WorkSource Oregon last year. Oregon General Fund investments represented only 10% of resources available to LWBs the last two years. Without additional state funding, even fewer Oregonians and businesses will be helped.


DEMOGRAPHICS

*Characteristics of WSO Adult Enrollments Unemployment Recipients 52,071 48% Ages 18-29 25,202 23% People of Color 26,069 24% Age 55+ 21,795 20% Less than HS Education 13,773 13% Disabled 6,805 6% Public Assistance 44,793 41% Ex-Offender 8,021 7% -Food Stamp Recipients 35,896 33% Homeless 5,123 5% -General Assistance/SSI/SSDI

3,532 3% Limited English Proficient

5,395 5%

-Training and Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

5,365 5% Exhausted Unemployment

2,957 3%

Veterans 8,527 8% *This data is gathered via self-attestation from WSO customers, and under reports actual demographics. 7/1/15-6/30/16

Last year, Local Boards funded workforce services for 2,535 low-income youth, ages 14-21

1 in 5 were in foster care, homeless or runaway

1 in 7 were disabled youth

1 in 8 youth were either pregnant or parenting youth

1 in 10 were ex-offenders

74% of youth enrolled were deficient in basic literacy skills

ONGOING NEED There are 89,469 unemployed Oregonians and 52,314 job vacancies—a growing mismatch between the skills of the workforce and the needs of employers.

607,029 Oregonians live in poverty—32% of them working-age adults. The percentage of Oregon children under 18 in related families who had incomes below the poverty line in 2015 was 20%. Sources for By the Numbers: I-Trac, QualityInfo.org, talkpoverty.org and National Skills Coalition.

total: $32,852,412 • adult: $9,852,515 • dislocated worker ... · workforce innovation and...

Documents