Date post: | 24-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | samuel-elliott |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Early Lessons from the Workforce Innovation Fund
October 17, 201310:00–11:00 a.m. (CST)
Purpose
• Provide a general overview Workforce Investment Fund theory and structure
• Hear directly from practitioners who are using Workforce Investment Fund resources to strengthen career pathways and support the completion agenda
• Discover whether currently funded projects offer lessons you can use
• Discuss how to promote and support innovation in your own communities
• Welcome & Introductions
• Overview of Workforce Innovation Fund
• Baltimore County’s ACE Project
• Facilitated Group Discussion
Agenda
• Stephen J. Lynch, Facilitator/WIF National Technical Assistance TeamProgram Director, Jobs for the Future
• Beth Arman, ACE InitiativeDirector of Technical Training, Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC,) Continuing Education Division
• Kent Smedley, ACE InitiativeDean of Workforce Development, CCBC, Continuing Education Division
Presenters
Background of the Workforce Innovation Fund
• Grant Program authorized by the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10)
• Funds support innovative approaches to the design and delivery of employment and training services that generate long-term improvements in the performance of the public workforce system
• One of several Federal grant programs that promote evidence-based design and independent third-party evaluation (like I3 and SIF)
Goals
• More efficient service delivery & better outcomes, especially for vulnerable populations and LTU
• Support system reforms and innovations that promote cooperation across programs and funding streams
• Build knowledge about effective practices through rigorous evaluation
• Take effective practices to scale, and promote increased cost efficiency in the broader workforce system
So Far…
• 26 Projects funded with awards between $1.5m and $12m
▫12 Type A
▫8 Type B
▫6 Type C
▫8 Random Control Theory Studies
▫7 QED Studies
▫11 Outcomes Studies
• Pay for Success round 1 awards to be announced
What They Are Trying to Do
• Increase collaboration• Streamline services
Systems Change
• Data-driven decision-making• Cost-effective servicesTechnology
• Increase economic opportunity for vulnerable populationsJob-Seekers
• Better serve the needs of employersBusiness Customers
Who They Serve
Network of Support
26 Projects
ETA
NEC
3rd Party Evaluators
TA Coaches
Categories of Intervention
ChangeParticipant Services
Business Services
Data & Online Tools
Systems & Policy
Alignment
Cost Efficiency
Serving Specific
Populations
Includes: Primary or Secondary Focus for:
Access to benefits Chicago Cook Workforce Partnership (IL)
Assessment County of Orange (CA)
Case management Utah WS (UT)
Ensuring quality of training Workforce Central (WA)
Outreach and recruitment
Referral to services
Supportive services
Participant Services
Includes: Primary or Secondary Focus for:
Business clients Alachua-Bradford (FL)
Employer engagement County of Orange (CA)
Employers informing training design, delivery and quality
Fulton, Montgomery, Schoharie WIB (NY)
Partnership with employers San Francisco (CA)
Sector strategies West Central Jobs Partnership (PA)
WDB of South Central Wisconsin (WI)
Workforce Initiative Association (OH)
Business Services
Includes: Primary or Secondary Focus for:
Data sharing agreements Chicago Cook Workforce Partnership (IL)
Data integration and management Newark WIB (NJ)
Distance learning and web-based tools Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services (OH)
Leveraging social media Pasco-Hernando WIB (FL)
Real-time labor market information WDB of South Central Wisconsin (WI)
Workforce Solutions (TX)
Data & Online Tools
Includes: Primary or Secondary Focus for:
Coordination across state agencies and policy issues
Baltimore County (MD)City of Los Angeles (CA)
Coordination with non-government partners and privately funded programs
DeKalb County (GA)FMS WIB (NY)Gila River (AZ)
Integrating ABE and skills training with college partners
Illinois DCEO (IL)Metro North REB (MA)
Integrating public workforce system with Adult Ed, Registered Apprenticeship, UI, TANF, colleges
Ohio DJFS (OH)RI Dept. of Labor & Training (RI)Riverside EDA (CA)
Integrating services at a regional level San Mateo (CA)
Strengthening career pathways SkillSource Group, Inc. (VA)
Translating policy to practice WestCentral Jobs Partnership (PA)Worksystems Inc. (OR)
Systems & Policy Alignment
Includes: Primary or Secondary Focus for:
Braided funding Metro North REB (MA)
Cost reduction Newark WIB (NJ)
Implementing performance-based funding Pasco-Hernando (FL)
Leveraging private funding Utah WS (UT)
Procurement and cost allocation strategies
Cost Efficiency
Serving Specific Populations
Includes: Primary or Secondary Focus For:
Disconnected youth Alachua-Bradford (FL)
Entrepreneurship programs City of Los Angeles (CA)
Housing/homelessness DeKalb County (GA)
Limited English skills Riverside EDA (CA)
Lower-skilled adults San Francisco (CA)
Long-term unemployed San Mateo (CA)
Registered Apprenticeship SkillSource Group (VA)
Veterans Three Rivers WIB (PA)Workforce Central (WA)Workforce Solutions (TX)Worksystems Inc. (OR)
Visit: innovation.workforce3one.org
What are the top two barriers to innovation?
1. Set Thinking
▫ It is a natural tendency
2. Fear
▫Many sources, common roots
How do we move past the barriers?1. Creativity
▫Requires Usefulness
2. Confidence
▫Being right and getting results gets the world onboard, so proceed until apprehended
ACE Participants – Baltimore County Lead
•9 Participating WIBs across the country•Baltimore County WIB (BCDED) lead
agency•6 Maryland WIBs•Plus 3 WIBs in
▫Georgia▫Connecticut▫Texas
21
Community College of Baltimore County•Training provider for Baltimore County
▫Working with BCDED (LWIB agency)•4 initial career training programs
▫Dental Assistant▫Construction Pre-Apprenticeship▫Utility Installer▫Logistics Technician
•Potential additional programs▫Certified Apartment Maintenance
Technician▫CDL-B22
Training Format
•Each program has a well-defined career pathway
•MI-BEST instructional format▫Based on I-BEST model from Washington
•Combining Basic Skills/GED or ESOL training with occupational training▫~50% added to occupational instruction
hours•Randomization process to create 2 groups
and test the effectiveness of training23
Process recruitment to training•Marketing to attract applicants•Information and assessment session
▫Math and reading assessments (CASAS)▫Used to determine suitability to move to
next stage – determining eligibility•Complete background check and drug
screen▫Results determine ability to move forward to
randomization phase•3-day workshop (job readiness and team
skills)▫Motivate students toward “learning”
24
25
Process – Continued……
•At end of 3-day workshop▫One-on-one interviews to determine final
eligibility for randomization▫Prior to randomization, a variety of factors
may determine if individual is unfit for ACE training Poor attendance, attitude, excessive social
barriers etc. If so…..not eligible for randomization
•Randomization▫“In” – treatment group and enter ACE
training▫“Out” – control group with business as usual
towards training and seeking employment
26
Lessons Learned
•Selection of programs and target audience▫Is there sufficient job demand, high enough
wages? Rejected Early Childhood Education - wages
▫How long is the training, particularly after adding GED/ESOL, case management, etc.? Rejected Machinist – too long (and therefore
too expensive for grant)▫Are we attracting the right audience?
Construction: ESOL audience was working during the day; non-ESOL didn’t realize program wasn’t for them27
Lessons Learned
•Selection of partners and logistics▫Construction: government agency and
stipends Importance of clear roles and responsibilities Importance of clear information to students
upfront▫Utility installer:
Private company had tried a limited pre-employment training program and realized they needed our help
They have content knowledge, equipment, etc. and are happy to work with us – and we’re happy to work with such an organized partner
28
Lessons Learned
•Schedule▫Time for co-instructors to work together
before program starts Joint planning time (critical in I-BEST!) Learning to appreciate one another’s strengths
▫Intensive is great, but 5 days/week can be too much Especially if students need case management,
meetings with parole officers, etc.▫Match typical work schedule where possible
Manufacturing example Construction example29
Lessons Learned
•Selection Process▫What criteria?
Construction – physical ability Any grant-funded program: ability to work in
U.S.; we have added background check and drug testing
▫Selection at what point? We now use a short “vestibule” to check attendance and work ethic But vestibule should bear some resemblance to
the training, include some hands-on30
THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING!For more information on the Workforce Innovation Fund please visit: innovation.workforce3one.org