workforce(partnership( board(meeting(packet(...

Workforce(Partnership(Board(Meeting(Packet(

November(2014(!!Contents!of!This!Packet!!Contents!.................................................................................................................................................................!1!!Agenda!...................................................................................................................................................................!2!!Consent!Agenda!materials!.........................................................................................................................!3:8!!

September!23,!2014!board!meeting!minutes!.....................................................................!3:4!!

October!8,!2014!Executive!Committee!Minutes!....................................................................!5!!November!12,!2014!Executive!Committee!Minutes!........................................................!6:7!!Financial!report!...................................................................................................................................!8!

!Action'and'Discussion:'Review'and'approve'consent'agenda'items.'Individual'items'may'be'removed'from'the'consent'agenda'for'additional'discussion,'if'necessary.''

'Status!of!Transformation!Tasks!...........................................................................................................!9:11!!

Action:'Review'the'report.'There'will'be'an'opportunity'for'questions'on'the'plan'and'our'progress'during'the'meeting.''

!Letter!from!Ken!Daniel,!State!Board!Chair,!regarding!training!expenditure!rate!.......!12:13!State!Policy!3:28:02!–!Training!Expenditure!Monitoring!Policy!........................................!14:17!!

Actions:'Review'the'letter'and'policy.'The'State'Board’s'emphasis'on'this'policy'has'been'a'topic'in'recent'board'meetings,'and'led'in'part'to'the'adoption'of'the'Transformation'Plan.'We'will'provide'an'update'on'this'issue'and'our'response'during'the'meeting.''

!Workforce!Innovation!and!Opportunity!Act!(WIOA)!Readiness!Tool!..............................!18:29!!

Action:'Review'the'completed'readiness'tool.'The'September'board'packet'included'a'blank'copy'of'this'tool.'This'document'was'completed'by'Scott'Anglemyer'based'on'staff'assessment'and'the'results'of'team'discussions'at'September’s'board'meeting.'As'discussed'in'the'September'board'packet,'the'completed'readiness'tool'will'be'used'to'develop'a'WIOA'implementation'plan.'Board'team'discussions'at'the'meeting'will'discuss'aspects'of'this'plan'relevant'to'each'of'the'board'teams.''

'

8040$Parallel$Pkwy,$Ste$112$ Kansas$City,$KS$$66112$ P:$913;287;1116$ F:$913;287;1160$ E:[email protected]$ W:$www.workforcepartnership.com$

A$workforce$with$the$agility$and$resourcefulness$to$sustain$business$growth$and$a$high$standard$of$living.$

AGENDA Local Area III Workforce Partnership Board/Chief Elected Officials Board

Tuesday, November 25, 2014 8:00 A.M. Johnson County Workforce Center

9221 Quivira Road, Overland Park, KS (8:00) Call to order/welcome and introductions (8:05) Testimonials and spotlights (8:20) Consent Agenda September 23, 2014 Workforce Partnership board minutes October 8, 2014 Executive Committee minutes November 12, 2014 Executive Committee minutes Financial report (8:25) Communication with Commerce regarding 40% training expenditure requirement (8:30) Transformation Plan update (8:35) WIOA implementation update (8:40) Team discussions (9:20) Team reports to full board (9:25) Updates and announcements (9:30) Adjournment

Local Area III Workforce Investment Board Minutes September 23, 2014

Local Area III Workforce Investment Board Minutes Johnson County Workforce Center 9221 Quivira, Overland Park, KS

Tuesday, September 23, 2014

WIB Members Present: Trudi Andernacht, David Huston, Steve Jack, Brenda Jones, K.J. Langlais, Leota Marks, Scott Neilan, Don Nelson, Neal Palmer, Maria Rovirosa, Ashley Sherard WIB Members Absent: Rita Adams, Mike Beene, Carolyn Benitez, Isaura Betancourt, Stacie Durkin, Brett Flachsbarth, Mike Fleming, Brady Garren, Judy Gifford, Angela Kaminski, Judy Korb, Dan Lange, Wendell Maddox, Dana Streck, Steve Waddell WIB Staff Present: Jo Adams, Scott Anglemyer, Pam Harris, Trent Howerton CEOB Members Present: Jane Philbrook One-Stop Operator Staff Present: Erich Ulmer, Terri Leisten, Irene Brenon Guests Present: Bill Hill – Concorde Career College, Wallace Vaughn – KS Department of Commerce !Call to Order Trudi Andernacht called the meeting to order. It was determined that the number of members present exceeded the 40% quorum requirement. Members and guests introduced themselves. Testimonials and Spotlights Andernacht introduced Irene Brenon who gave a job seeker testimonial with corresponding video. Brenon described how job seeker “Carly” had a job with Best Harvest Bakeries. This participant had been through a joint program with Department for Children & Families, Kansas City Kansas Community College and Workforce Partnership. The program provided paid training in supply chain and logistics as well as a 6-week work experience placement. She said she has a good wage with good benefits and sees a bright future ahead. Consent Agenda The consent agenda was reviewed. Scott Neilan moved to accept the consent agenda. Dave Huston seconded. Motion passed. Board members then broke into their respective teams to go over the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and various topics.

Local Area III Workforce Investment Board Minutes September 23, 2014

RFP Process Scott Anglemyer explained that the board has two contracts with Dynamic Workforce Solutions – one for the WIA Youth program and one for One-Stop Operator and WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs. He explained how the One-Stop Operator and WIA and Dislocated Worker contract was up for renewal. Much like previous Request for Proposals (RFP’s) the board wants to get the maximum number of proposals and the highest quality of proposals. He explained that this process is designed to create a fair and open competition and with maximum board and CEO member involvement. Anglemyer then went over the process for Request for Qualifications, Request for Proposals, Interviews and approval. He then went over the committees involved and the timeline of the process. Anglemyer then asked for potential committee members to contact him. K.J. Langlais moved to approve the RFP development and process. Don Nelson seconded. Motion passed. K.J. Langlais moved to approve the RFP timeline. Scott Neilan seconded. Motion passed. Transformation Plan Update Anglemyer then gave an update on the Transformation Plan. He said that a lease for the new Wyandotte facility had not been signed, but should be signed soon. He said we were targeting a December 1st move-in date. He also noted that board staff needed to do more work on employer development and sector strategies. He also said that staff was working on a way to certify partners as being part of the workforce system if they were able to provide a portfolio of placement services to job seekers. Brenda Jones then moved that the meeting adjourn. Neilan seconded. Meeting adjourned. !

Workforce Partnership Executive Committee Meeting Minutes

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Committee Member(s) present: David Huston, Brenda Jones, Wendell Maddox, Scott Neilan CEOB Member(s) present: Jane Philbrook Guest(s) present: Irene Brenon Staff present: Scott Anglemyer, Jo Adams and Trent Howerton Scott Neilan called the meeting to order. A quorum was established. Scott Anglemyer went over new board appointments that had not yet been finalized. He noted that he had received some volunteers to serve on the Proposal Review Committee and would send out a follow-up e-mail so that members who did not attend the September board meeting would have a chance to volunteer. Anglemyer then gave an update on the Transformation plan. He noted that the lease was ready to sign for the new Wyandotte County Workforce Center. Anglemyer said one of the next steps was meeting with the Department of Commerce to discuss staffing under the new community model and how it relates to outpost locations. Anglemyer then told Executive Committee members about the State Board meeting coming up at the end of the month. Executive Committee members asked if there was local representation on the State Board. Anglemyer explained that there were some members from the Kansas City area, but that there were no representatives from the Workforce Partnership board. He explained that these appointments were made by the Governor and the State Board is supposed to be the same general make up of the local workforce investment boards. Jane Philbrook said that there should be some sort of advisory committee consisting of representation from each of the local areas to ensure that their interests were taken into account on the State Board. Jane Philbrook said that she had asked Commerce about support for the work ready community idea that a group from Wyandotte county are working on. She said that Mike Copeland had told her that Commerce did not want to participate in ACT’s Work-Ready Communities program because of disagreements about control over the data. Irene Brenon asked about funding and drawing funds. Jo Adams explained that we have not received our funding notices for PY 2014. The next item on the agenda was approval of the draft RFP. Anglemyer advised that while the Executive Committee was an open meeting, any potential respondents to the RFP would have to leave the meeting or risk being disqualified from the RFP process. Irene Brenon (with Dynamic Workforce Solutions) then left the call. Anglemyer then went over aspects of the RFP with Executive Committee members. He went over how it would be publicized, who some of the potential bidders were, the overall process, the timeline and the requirements for board members. Executive Committee members asked if past RFP’s or past comments would be relevant and Anglemyer said they would not be. He then asked for a motion to approve the RFP. Wendell Maddox motioned to approve and publish the RFP. Brenda Jones seconded. Motion passed. Meeting adjourned.

Workforce Partnership Executive Committee Meeting Minutes

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Committee Member(s) present: Trudi Andernacht, David Huston, Brenda Jones, Wendell Maddox, Scott Neilan CEOB Member(s) present: Jane Philbrook Guest(s) present: Terri Leisten, Erich Ulmer Staff present: Scott Anglemyer, Jo Adams and Trent Howerton Trudi Andernacht called the meeting to order. A quorum was established. Scott Anglemyer went over the letter from the Department of Commerce dated October 30th, 2014 regarding not meeting the State Minimum Training Percentage Policy. Anglemyer explained that he had been asked at the last State Board meeting to submit an explanation of why Local Area III had a low training expenditure percentage for the first quarter of PY 2014. Anglemyer noted that he was not expecting this letter and was not expecting to write a Performance Improvement Plan. Executive Committee members asked if any other local areas had not met this policy and if others had received a similar letter. Board staff confirmed that Local Area IV had also not met the State Minimum Training Percentage Policy for the past two years, but yet they did not receive a letter such as this. It was noted that Local Area III actually had a higher training percentage than Local Area IV for PY 2013. Anglemyer asked Executive Committee members how best to respond to this letter. He suggested three categories of responses to the letter that included questioning the legitimacy of the process, mitigating factors and changes the board is making. Executive Committee members asked whom this letter came from and to whom is Workforce Partnership accountable. Board staff explained that the State Board Chair had signed the letter, but it was unclear who actually drafted and wrote the letter. Staff speculated that the impetus for this letter came from the State Board’s Performance Committee, but also noted that Local Area III had not been notified nor asked to attend the quarterly Performance Committee Meeting that usually takes place one week prior to the State Board meeting. Jane Philbrook suggested that rather than challenging the legitimacy of the letter, the response should politely note that Area III had been singled out, and should ask Commerce to clarify the basis for sending the letter. She suggested that the tone should be neither offensive nor defensive. Scott Neilan agreed that the response should not question the legitimacy of the letter’s requirements nor mention the possibility of sanctions. Committee members agreed that the written response should provide the information requested by Commerce while at the same time questions why Local Area III was receiving this letter. Executive Committee members suggested that the response letter should call for a meeting with the Department of Commerce to further discuss this issue. Anglemyer agreed to work at a draft letter to present to Executive Committee. Anglemyer then went over a WIOA readiness tool. He explained that he has been attending a series of webinars this week to gain more information on the requirements of WIOA. Anglemyer noted that on Monday’s webinar it was explained that WIOA greatly limits the amount of funds that can be spent on infrastructure, but that there was significant confusion on this point. Anglemyer has emailed Dennis Cooper regarding this regulation and is awaiting more clarification.

Anglemyer then gave an update on Transformation noting that moving the Wyandotte Workforce Center would be taking place next month. He also noted that having staff assigned to teams was a critical next step. Executive Committee members then discussed the agenda for the next board meeting coming up on November 25th. The agenda will include mentioning the letter from Commerce, a Transformation Plan update and breaking into board teams. Meeting adjourned.

11/19/1412:19'PM

Workbook2Oct'14

Local&Workforce&Investment&Area&III

Consolidated

Expenditures&For&the&Period&Ending&October&31,&2014

Bdgt5YTDRemaining

Actual YTD'Bdgt Variance BalanceWIA'Traditional'Programs

Administration 85,565.65 141,337.02 (55,771.37) 338,445.42Adult 468,965.94 421,376.31 47,589.63 795,162.99Dislocated'Workers 180,011.12 297,736.22 (117,725.10) 713,197.54DW'5'Rapid'Response 22,932.67 21,201.66 1,731.01 72,474.78Youth 293,241.83 446,960.86 (153,719.03) 1,047,640.76Total&WIA&Funds 1,050,717.21 1,328,612.07 (277,894.86) 2,966,921.49

KHPOP'Impact'Study 1,505.04 69,919.02 (68,413.98) 103,373.49HHS'5'KHPOP'Grant'Yr5 11,835.33 52,810.93 (40,975.60) 621,895.87HHS'5'KHPOP'Grant'Yr4 72,828.33 236,990.69 (164,162.36) 282,657.70KDOC'H51B'Grnt5OJT'Engineering 151,597.70 239,845.60 (88,247.90) 567,939.09JCCC'H51B'Grnt5Internships'HIT 2,379.88 95,298.10 (92,918.22) 450,286.11FEC'H51B'Accelerator'Grnt' 22,954.39 45,211.18 (22,256.79) 78,770.76MCC'H51B'Grant'OJT'IT 108,308.31 355,591.12 (247,282.81) 1,758,545.05

Other'Grant'Funds 371,408.98 1,095,666.63 (724,257.65) 3,863,468.07

Total&LAIII&Funds 1,422,126.19 2,424,278.71 (1,002,152.52) 6,830,389.56

Percent&of&FundsODirect&Client&Training

Adult 21.33%Dislocated'Worker 21.53%

Youth 3.43%Other'Grants 41.42%

Changes&in&WIA&Budget&Resources

WIA'Authorization/Budget PY11/FY12 PY12/FY13 PY13/FY14 PY14/FY15Adult 1,327,637.00''''' 1,404,299.00''''' 1,229,509.00''''' 1,193,997.00'''''

Dislocated'Worker 749,500.00'''''''' 1,130,309.00''''' 837,299.00'''''''' 923,716.00''''''''Youth 1,693,387.00''''' 1,600,367.00''''' 1,386,038.00''''' 1,287,267.00'''''

3,770,524.00''''' 4,134,975.00''''' 3,452,846.00'''' 3,404,980.00'''''

'*'note5budget'above'includes'WIA'carryover'from'prior'year'and'WIA'PY14'actual'and'FY15'projected'funding'levels

Status&of&Transformation&Tasks,&October/November&2014&&Previously+Incomplete+Tasks+from+Prior+Months+Task+ Start+Date+ End+Date+ Status+Determine&employer&development&services&

2/14& 3/14& Completed&&

Services&&&&&&&&&&&Employer&development&Refine&workEbased&learning&services&Services&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&WorkEbased&learning&

4/14& 6/14& Completed&

Move&out&of&Wyandotte&Workforce&Center&Facilities&&&&&&&&&&Distributed&

7/14& 7/14& Not&completed&

Train/develop&skills&of&employer&development&staff&People&&&&&&&&&Employer&development&


Tasks+Ending+in+October+Educate/train&staff&on&distributed&model&People&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&Distributed&model&

4/14& 10/14& Completed&

Begin&providing&employer&development&services&Services&&&&&&&Employer&development&


Integrate&employer&development&into&community&model&Services&&&&&Employer&development/Community&

10/14& 10/14& Completed&

Drop/add&services&based&on&self/partner&assessment&Facilities&&&&&&&&&&&Distributed&

10/14& 10/14& Partially&completed&

Ongoing+Activities&Task& Start+Date& End+Date& Status&Educate/train&staff&on&community&model&People&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&Community&model&

4/14& 12/14& On&schedule&

Identify&LV,&JO,&and&additional&WY&outposts&Facilities&&&&&&&&&&&&&&Distributed&model&


Recruit&partners&for&Leavenworth,&Johnson,&and&additional&Wyandotte&outposts&Facilities/Partners&&&&&&&&&&Distributed/New&partner&engagement&


Identify&new&funding&sources&for&workEbased&learning&&&&&&&&&Organization&&&&&&&&&WorkEbased&learning&


Move&staff&into&Leavenworth,&Johnson,&and&additional&Wyandotte&locations&Facilities&&&&&&&&&&Distributed&


Promote&employer&development&services&Services&&&&&&&Employer&development&

10/14& 12/14& Behind&schedule&

&Future+Tasks&

&&Task+ Start+Date+ End+Date+Begin&providing&services&under&community&model&Services&&&&&&&&&&&Community&

1/15& 1/15&

Recruit&partners&to&participate&in&community&model&Partners&&&&&&&&&Community/New&partner&engagement&

1/15& 12/15&

Move&out&of&Leavenworth&Workforce&Center&Facilities&&&&&&&Distributed&

11/15& 12/15&

&&

Deleted+Tasks+&Task+ Start+Date+ End+Date+Conduct&staffing&industry&RFP?&Organization&&&&&New&partner&engagement&

10/14& 1/15&

& &

Discussion+of+Not+Completed/Behind+Schedule/Deleted+Tasks+&&Move+out+of+Wyandotte+Workforce+Center&–&The&moveEin&date&is&set&for&December&8,&2014.&A&lot&of&our&current&efforts&are&directed&toward&completing&the&many&tasks&that&need&to&be&accomplished&to&move&in&on&this&date.&&+Train/develop+skills+of+employer+development+staff&–&Training/skill&development&follows&identification&of&services,&so&most&progress&in&this&area&could&place&only&after&the&further&refinement&of&employer&development&services.&Some&of&that&refinement&will&continue&in&the&next&few&months,&and&should&accelerate&with&the&creation&of&the&boardElevel&position&discussed&in&our&September&transition&report.&Training&will&continue&after&the&boardElevel&position&is&filled.&We&continue&to&reach&out&to&other&organizations,&both&locally&and&nationally,&that&we&believe&can&help&us&further&develop&the&employer&development&concept.&&+Begin+providing+employer+development+services/+Promote+employer+development+services&–&In&some&sense,&this&task&is&mislabeled&because&we&have&always&provided&some&employer&development&services.&&However,&we&have&not&broadened&our&employer&development&activity&yet,&which&will&not&happen&until&further&training&occurs.&This&will&likely&begin&in&earnest&in&the&first&quarter&of&2015.&&&Drop/add+services+based+on+self/partner+assessment&–&This&will&likely&not&be&an&area&that&has&a&discrete&start&and&finish.&We&have&identified&the&types&of&services&that&we&need&to&focus&on,&and&the&types&of&services&that&we&should&rely&on&other&partners&to&carry&out&in&our&stead.&We’ve&had&a&number&of&conversations&with&partners&about&this,&and&we&are&taking&steps&that&will&result&in&a&greater&share&of&our&time&being&devoted&to&the&services&we&provide&uniquely&well.&The&shift&in&services&will&occur&as&a&result&of&these&steps,&but&will&occur&gradually.&Similarly,&we&will&probably&not&completely&drop&any&service,&but&we&will&put&far&less&emphasis&on&some&services.&We&anticipate&that&we&will&consider&this&service&complete&on&our&January&report.&&&Conduct+staffing+industry+RFP&–&This&was&listed&as&speculative&at&best&in&the&Transformation&Plan&(on&the&task&list,&it&was&always&listed&with&a&question&mark).&&If&we&were&to&do&this,&it&probably&would&have&been&done&at&the&same&time&as&our&OneEStop&Operator&RFP.&We&have&decided&to&keep&the&mix&of&services&included&in&the&OneEStop&Operator&RFP&relatively&intact.&&&&&&&

Kansas Department of Commerce Workforce Services

Policy and Procedures Manual Policy Number: 3-28-02 Originating Office: Workforce Services Subject: Training Expenditure Monitoring Policy Issued: July 17, 2007 Revised: October 15, 2009 Policy Committee; October 28, 2009 KWSB Program: Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Purpose: To transmit state policy and guidance on the required minimum percentages local areas must spend on training and training-related services References: WIA Section 112(b) (2) and State Policy Number 3-22-00. Background: Kansas needs to increase customer participation in training services. This policy is designed to set a benchmark for training expenditures and to establish a baseline for future expenditure requirements. Action: All local boards must develop policies to ensure compliance with 40% benchmark of adult and dislocated worker WIA formula funds for training and training-related services. Contact: Questions should be directed to (785) 296-0607, TTY: (785) 296-3487, e-mail [email protected]. Attachment: None.

TRAINING EXPENDITURE MONITORING POLICY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Training Expenditure Monitoring Policy ................................................................................................................ 1

Local Policy Requirements ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Local Area Plan Requirements ............................................................................................................................... 2

1

TRAINING EXPENDITURE MONITORING POLICY

This state policy sets a benchmark that 40% of WIA adult and dislocated worker expended allocation be used for training (excluding obligations). Costs that may be used in calculating compliance with the 40% benchmark must be of direct benefit to the participant and include:

• Occupational skills training, which is training to perform actual tasks and technical functions required by certain occupational fields at any level. Allowable costs include, but are not limited to, tuition, fees, books, and other materials and equipment required for the course.

• Basic literacy training, including but not limited to, adult basic education, GED, GED Test fees and

English as a second language.

• Supportive services that directly benefit participants in training such as child care, transportation, etc. • On-the-job training costs defined as training by an employer provided to a paid participant who is

gaining knowledge and skills while employed.

• Customized training, which is designed to meet the special requirements of an employer who commits to employ an individual on successful completion of the training.

• Short-term courses such as computer software training, welder training, etc.

• Short-term prevocational testing, training and services including, but not limited to, development of

communication, interviewing, punctuality, personal maintenance, professional conduct, and learning skills to prepare individuals for unsubsidized employment or training. Testing must assess academic or skills ability. WORKReady!, WIN, and other skill-development and certification products will apply toward the benchmark. Interest testing, job matching products, such as JobFit, and other non-skills related assessments will not apply.

• Needs-based payments and stipends.

The 40% benchmark will be reviewed quarterly by means of the KANSASWORKS State Board Quarterly Report. To provide a means for improvement, a local area below 35% must submit a brief narrative with the quarterly report explaining why the benchmark was not attained. To provide a means for sharing best practices, a local area exceeding 45% must submit a brief narrative with the quarterly report explaining how the benchmark was exceeded.

2

Local Policy Requirements All local boards must develop and maintain a policy and local operating procedures for the determination of training and training-related costs. Local policy must include, at a minimum, the following items:

1. Methodology that will be used to document direct training and supportive services expenditures. 2. Procedures for entering training-related costs into a participant's record.

3. Procedures for tracking total training and training-related costs, by participant and by local area,

whether or not the payment mechanism chosen is an individual training account.

4. Assurance that participants are not required to apply for or use a loan as a condition of participation in WIA funded training. The participant may incur personal debt to help pay the costs of their training only if they choose to do so after receiving counseling regarding their responsibilities associated with the indebtedness, including loan repayment. Such counseling must be acknowledged in the participant's record.

Local Area Plan Requirements The local board must describe in its plan how 40% of WIA adult and dislocated worker expended allocation will be used for training.

LOCAL READINESS and TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONSULTATION TOOL Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act Implementation

Page 1 of 12

Local WIB: WORKFORCE PARTNERSHIP (KS LOCAL AREA 3) Consultation Date: SEPTEMBER 25, 2014

ETA Staff:

Questions

1=Ready

2=Has a plan; can implement without TA

3=Has a plan; needs TA to implement

4=Not ready and/or planned; needs TA

Readiness Comments/Notes

Practices and Examples Local Governance

How will local leadership shift/select new Board members? 2

Board has several things it needs to accomplish to be fully ready. CEO agreement needs to be revised, as do board’s bylaws to bring them in line with WIOA. Board is leaning toward removing some positions that are required now but won’t be under WIOA, placing them on committees instead. Board will not want to grandfather. Board team is developing a plan for reaching out to labor, disability organizations, and examining current roster for weaknesses, fit with WIOA.

How long has Board been in existence, and how ready is it to assume new functions outlined in WIOA? e.g. sector partnerships, incumbent worker training and transitional jobs, co-location with partners, infrastructure cost-sharing, pay-for- performance contracting

1

Board does not do all of these, but is prepared to do most. Last year board adopted a Transformation Plan which anticipated some of the new WIOA requirements, and it serves as a roadmap which will have us ready for implementation of WIOA. We have experience with most of the items discussed in the question. May need more clarity on cost-sharing and pay-for-performance.

Sector work through WIRED, regional approaches Incentive-based contract with One-Stop operator which incorporates pay-for-performance concepts through incentive structure Satellite offices with partners

How does the Board identify and engage employers and employer associations from key industry sectors, and to what extent are strategies tailored to local and regional economies?

2

Target industry list tailors our outreach, and to a large extent, our recruitment of board members. Realignment of staff into sector communities will both target and increase our level of engagement with employers from key sectors.

Staffing industry summit Target industry list


Page 2 of 12

Questions

1=Ready





Practices and Examples

To what extent has the Board formed partnerships with key industries to adequately carry out the job-driven aspects of WIOA? 2

We have partnerships, but they are more likely on the individual business level, rather than on the sector level. We’ve built a high level of credibility with individual businesses, but haven’t led sectors. We’ve formed some partnerships under region-wide sector initiatives. Our Transformation plan should enhance our ability to form such sector-wide partnerships.

Current work on land surveyors WIRED, sector work through MARC

How is the Board supporting coordination and planning between core programs? 2

Board membership is one way we ensure this, and we’ll continue to keep all core programs involved. Beyond Board membership, we probably do more bilateral work rather than bringing all core programs together. We will be renegotiating MOUs and will use that process to strengthen this coordination and planning.

Discussions with DCF about satellite location Partnerships with TANF on supply chain training, implementation of KHPOP grant A-OK partnership with ABE & TANF

How does the Board disseminate and build on proven or promising practices? 1

We do a good job of examining what we do and learning from what we implement. Our Transformation plan incorporates best practices from other local areas. We do try to disseminate our best practices through workshops at conferences, etc. We’ve led workshops on business services, computer camp, and serving startups.

Computer camp, which continues to evolve Business services prioritization/BARS


Page 3 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






How does the Board promote the effective use of technology to manage, deliver and maximize the efficient use of its programs? 3

We want to do it, have the structure to take advantage of us, but we’re not always sure what is available or what resources we can use to get there. We have a video system in our offices that the state owns, but we’re currently not using due to questions about bandwidth limitations and the cost of additional bandwidth.

To what extent has the Board reviewed its administrative and budget controls to identify adjustments needed to implement provisions of WIOA?

1

Not sure much needs to change under WIOA. If this question pertains to new requirements on expenditure items, we regularly review these items, and they are verified by monitors and auditors. We do constantly review what counts as administration and what counts as program costs. This is a routine part of our attempts to maximize the impact of our funding.

How has the Board reviewed its staffing and contractor staffing levels to identify adjustments needed to implement provisions of WIOA? 1

We’ve done it on both levels. We will be adding a board staff person that will address some sector issues. Transformation Plan has required contractor to examine staffing levels and organization.


Page 4 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






To what extent will outstanding audit findings or monitoring issues affect the Board’s ability to implement provisions of the WIOA, as applicable? 1

No outstanding audit findings. There were recommendations on the latest state fiscal audit, most of which involved strengthening some documentation and changing some forms to remove any question about the propriety of items such as travel costs. We are in the process of implementing these recommendations. Some of the comments and recommendations from last year’s federal site visit have been helpful in directing us to make some changes consistent with WIOA, most notably encouraging us to make our Youth program more career-oriented rather than being focused on initial (entry level) employment.

Local Performance Accountability

How is the Board aligning technology and data systems across the core programs, and where might there be support needed from the State? 4

Since the data system is run by the state, it’s primarily their responsibility. WIA and Wagner-Peyser use a common system, but other core programs do not. We will have to rely heavily on the state to get partners to align their data systems. We’ve not had any conversations with partners about this yet.

How will this alignment support customer activities that include TANF, Voc Rehab, and Adult Basic Education programs? 3

See above. This is more likely to be driven by the state. We are working on aligning some services with these partners. We have plans, but not fully developed plans. Our vision is to have a common platform of minimum level “placement” services. We’re working on an idea we call a “portfolio” that we think will help bring this about.

ABE/TANF partnership through Accelerating Opportunity- Kansas (AOK) with Board of Regents. TANF partnership with community colleges on supply chain training, OJT, and placement


Page 5 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






To what extent does the Board have adequate MIS for collecting, sharing and reporting cross-program information - especially costs of training services?

4

Not completely clear what this is asking. We know the state’s MIS system will have to be updated. Our accounting system should allow us to collect information across programs within our organization, but collecting data across multiple organizations would be a challenge.

How well positioned is the Board to implement the required outcome measures? 3

There are two aspects to this. First is the ability to collect the data. We may need to make some changes, much of which will depend on the state to change its MIS system. In some cases, the appropriate data are collected but not currently reported. The second aspect is whether we’re ready to be held accountable for these measures. Largely, we think we are, but we haven’t spent much time exploring whether these will require service changes. By increasing emphasis on skill development, Transformation will help us perform here. In other areas, we’ll have to examine how this fits with our integration model (especially percentage of participants in training), and the effect of shifting from average earnings to median earnings. Rating of 3 reflects need for more information about the measures.

What indicators and/or system measures beyond those mandated by the statute has the Board implemented or considered? Any assessment of effectiveness of its employer services?

2

We do have some different measures we use for our contractor, which could be adapted to be system-wide measures. We have considered an employer measure and had developed one, but set it aside because our contractor balked at the time commitment required to follow up on job orders.


Page 6 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






How prepared is the Board to develop the required Eligible Training providers Performance Reports? 4

This may be mostly in the state’s hands, due to the new process/policy passed by the State Board. Of course, WIOA implementation will require an update to that policy. It could shift more responsibility to us. We may need to work with AJLA in upgrades to KansasWorks.

Local One Stop System

What level of program alignment for core programs exists to meet the WIOA Requirements for integrated planning and service delivery? 3

There is communication across all programs. WIA and Wagner-Peyser are fully integrated. There is some alignment with ABE, but more is needed. There is a small amount of joint work with TANF. Elements of our Transformation Plan could help: co-location/satellite offices, which require location-specific alignment, and the portfolio idea discussed earlier.

How ready is the Board and its one-stop system for the level of business services and employer engagement activities contemplated in the WIOA? 2

Level of business engagement is already fairly high. It tends to be broader than it is deep, however, and focused on service more than engagement. Board has engaged some businesses through sector work, and has a plan to bring in more businesses for focused dialogues. Community staffing model will both broaden and deepen business engagement.

Staffing industry summit (board) BARS H-1B grants


Page 7 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






How does/will the Board and/or one-stop operator ensure that the partners equitably contribute to infrastructure costs of the center(s)? 3

We’re likely to go a different direction than what WIOA intends, because we don’t believe that WIOA’s infrastructure funding alternative gives us much additional leverage. We currently have equitable cost-sharing among co-located partners, and we expect this to continue. TA needs include clarification on the new funding mechanism.

How will the role of TANF as a one-stop partner be introduced or expanded? To what extent might there be coordination issues? 4

We’ve had some bilateral conversations and have worked on a small pilot together. We’re exploring having the TANF agency hosting some of our staff as a satellite location. The portfolio approach discussed elsewhere could be a way to increase this coordination.

How are any one-stop center co-location issues being addressed? Any accessibility issues?

1

Our satellite/distributed model approach increases access to our services, making them more “accessible.” Beyond that, we anticipate no additional partners co-locating in our centers.

What is the one-stop system capacity to support integrated intake, case management and reporting systems across the key programs?

3

Mixed, at best. WIA and Wagner-Peyser are fully integrated. The portfolio idea could help to further integrate other partners. The capacity is there, and the model of how to do it through WIA/WP integration, which is why we rated this at 3 instead of 4. It could serve as a model for other programs.


Page 8 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






How available is LMI to customers and staff in an easily accessible and user-friendly format? 1

While this can be improved, I think we have a lot of things going for us. Our target industry list is used by staff, shared with partners, and used in consultation with customers. Staff have knowledge of other available resources. Staffing changes will supplement data with deeper qualitative knowledge of labor market conditions.

Detailed target industry list O*NET/KDOL linkages Regional Workforce Intelligence Network (RWIN) Cultivated relationship with media for dissemination of labor market information

Adult and Dislocated Worker Formula Programs

How will local service strategies support career pathways to middle class jobs? 3

Historically we have not been strong on career pathway strategies, but have made small steps in that direction. A strengthened sector pathway approach would help. Our Transformation Plan’s community staffing approach will help us get the understanding of career pathways in our target industries. Our new employer development approach, by emphasizing making jobs good jobs, is designed to help low-income workers more easily reach the middle class. Given our lack of experience, we would benefit from TA in this area. We need to get more involved with labor and also work schools, including better linkages with high school counselors.

KHPOP grant, which has allowed us to take advantage of stackable credentials and multiple, sequenced credentials.

How engaged is the Board or one-stop operator(s) in sector strategies or career pathways policy work?

2 We have participated in sector strategies, but rarely in a leadership role. We have some small scale initiatives underway, and the Board has formed a Labor Market Team that is focused on understanding sectoral needs. Staffing by communities will increase involvement in this area.

WIRED Sector work in partnership with Mid-America Regional Council Beginning work on land surveyor skill shortage with engineering firms


Page 9 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






How will the Board make work-based learning - including OJT and registered apprenticeship - a key element in its workforce strategy? 1

We’ve already strengthened this. We’ve learned a lot from H-1B grants. Transformation plan makes work-based learning our default strategy. We need work on additional forms of work-based learning, especially apprenticeships.

H-1B grants (Earn IT & Learn IT, Engineering, HITECH internships)

How do local service strategies address the needs of long-term unemployed individuals? 3

We have nothing specifically geared toward LTU, but some services that are of clear benefit. Mature Workers roundtable is not designed for LTU, but most participants fall into that category. Employer development also touches on this, because it will work to change potentially discriminatory recruiting practices. Still, we would need some technical assistance to develop programs to address psychological/emotional needs, etc.

Mature workers roundtable serves predominantly long-term unemployed

What services are available to low-skilled customers? 1

We have strong services for low-skilled workers, and our Transformation plan should strengthen them. In particular, we will strengthen our ability to “triage” customers, and determine quickly what their skill levels are.

How prepared is the Board or one-stop operator(s) to ensure that frontline staffs have adequate skills to assist diverse customers - including TANF and people w/disabilities - with job training and placement?

1

Our current contractor, DWFS, emphasizes staff training, including training to serve special populations. DWFS owns Dynamic Works, and uses its menu of courses. Employer development will touch on this, by working with employers to remove barriers placed on hiring non-traditional workers.

Offender Workforce Development Specialist training

Youth Formula Program


Page 10 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






How do local youth service strategies support career pathways to middle class jobs? 2

This has been a weakness, but it is improving. DWFS is introducing a new youth model which will be much more career pathway-oriented. The computer camp is a program that has some promise in this area. It is evolving to become more pathway-oriented.

Computer Camp—identifying IT pathways

How ready is the Board to successfully target at least 20% of Youth formula funds on work-based training activities? 1

We’re not there, but we’ll be ready. DWFS will incorporate this in its new Youth model. We have sufficient experience through H-1B grants, TANF partnership, and other programs.

How ready is the Board to adjust service strategies to ensure 75% of Youth formula resources are used to successfully serve out-of-school youth?

1 We’re there. Currently over 80%

How will the Board’s increased emphasis on services to out-of-school youth impact partnerships with schools and other youth service providers?

1

We’ve been emphasizing OOS for a number of years, and have strong relationships with schools and other youth providers.

Partnerships

How well does the Board broker and leverage coordination among the core program agencies and key stakeholders? 2

Our record has been mixed, but we have a plan, and we know how to do this work. We’ve partnered with some core programs, and not so well with others. We have the capability, but haven’t always used it.

To what extent are adequate information-sharing agreements in place among core programs/agencies (WIA Adult, DW, Youth, NEG, DVR, ABE), other partner programs, and training/service providers? Issues?

3

There aren’t information-sharing agreements, per se. We do have MOUs with all of these partners. Some are co-located and fully integrated, so information is naturally shared. We do have some agreements and some history of cooperation with all of them, but are far from having full information-sharing. At times, partners point to regulations (FERPA, etc.) as ways to avoid this.


Page 11 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






What one-stop partnerships are currently in place, and where might there be issues to address? How does each partner contribute to the system? 2

We have partnerships with all required partners, although some of them are loose, and consist mostly of information and referral. Transformation plan elements create a detailed plan for strengthening these relationships through co-location, non-duplication of core services, etc. The portfolio idea can deepen these relationships.

What strategy does the Board have around regional planning and coordination? With which entities will it be jointly planning? 1

We have a strong record of regionalism, which will continue under WIOA. We have reached out to some of the other regional core partners in the past, but don’t have as strong a record regarding joint planning with them. We have the linkages in place to accomplish this.

WIRED Bi-state grants (H-1B, HGEI, Accelerator etc.) Collaboration through Mid-America Regional Council work – Wal-Mart Foundation grant

How will the Board partner with and incorporate Adult Education and Literacy into the regional planning process and local program design? 2

We have a record of partnership and some joint planning. It’s stronger with KCKCC than JCCC, at least in Adult Ed. That hasn’t extended into region-wide planning.

How will the Board work with Voc Rehab and local education agencies around coordination of pre-employment transition services? 2

The portfolio idea represents a roadmap for coordination on pre-employment transition issues. We have historically had less coordination with VR than with other partners.

Waivers


Page 12 of 12

Questions

1=Ready






For current waivers in place, how might they impact the Board’s WIOA implementation – and Is the Board prepared to track the effectiveness of any continued or new waivers?

4

We’ve not looked at the effect of waivers on our ability to implement, so it’s difficult to answer this question. We’ve not been heavy users of current waivers. We have used the A/DW transfer limits waiver. We understand that will no longer be an issue with WIOA. We are actually concerned that the 100% transfer option will tempt our operator into trying to de-emphasize DW services and training services.

What additional waivers has the Board identified to facilitate stronger WIOA implementation? 1

We have not identified or considered any. Nothing in WIA or WIOA is a barrier.

Miscellaneous

Is there anything not addressed above that ETA should know about the local area’s preparedness to transition from WIA to WIOA? 1

The adoption of our Transformation Plan last fall represents a significant step toward WIOA implemention. While we didn’t adopt it specifically with WIOA in mind, we did anticipate some of the changes that WIOA is ushering in. Other aspects of our plan were designed to address labor market and job search changes, but have the effect of positioning us well for WIOA implementation.

What barriers does the Board see as potential challenges to implementation? 1

The only complication, which might be called a barrier, is the timing of our One-Stop Operator/WIA Adult & Dislocated Worker RFP. We will write it with WIOA in mind, but the contract period will cross both WIA and WIOA time periods, making the RFP and the contract more complicated.

workforce(partnership( board(meeting(packet(...

Documents