HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative: Project Evaluation · 2013. 8. 7. · Unlike other competitive application processes, GTW did not offer funding to participants. All GTW

HOPWAGettingtoWorkEmploymentInitiative:ProjectEvaluation

January 2013

HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative: Project Evaluation

Acknowledgements

With funding from the Office of HIV Housing at the US Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment, the HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative was a joint project ofBuilding Changes in Seattle, WA and the Technical Assistance Program of Victory Programs, Inc.in Boston, MA.

We are grateful for the participation of our enthusiastic teams, which included:

City of Baltimore: D'Andra Pollard, Nancy Strohminger, F.T. Burden, and Irisha Burrell

City of Dallas: Lori Davidson, Don Maison, Janet Smith, and Traswell Livingston

City of El Paso: Thomas Serrano, Skip Rosenthal, Tony Martinez, Annie McAlmon, andAaron Shanker

City of Los Angeles: Cecilia Rosales, Maribel Ulloa, and Mireya Amador

City of New Haven: Kim Fiore, Silvia Moscariello, Subrena Winfield, John Bradley, KaraBenedetto, Kara Capone, Kelly Ann Day, and Jocelyn Antunes

City of Portland: Dawn Martin, Heather Salek, Kristin Kane, Rob Smith, and Katy Byrtus

City of Tucson: Susanna Rodriguez, Beth Carey, Eve Block, Laura Henry, Mary Beth LandisJantzen

State of Oregon: Christy Hudson, Annick Benson, Donna Yutzy, and Linda Drach

For their ongoing support and assistance with the Living and Working with HIV webinar, wewould also like to thank Mark Misrok, President of the National Working Positive Coalition andLou Orselene, Co-Director of the Job Accommodation Network (JAN), a service of the USDepartment of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP).

We would like to specifically acknowledge David Vos, Lauren Deigh and Benjamin Ayers of theOffice of HIV Housing, US Department of Housing and Urban Development; Dylan Orr, SpecialAdvisor at the Office of Disability Policy, US Department of Labor; and Carol Dobak, Chief ofVocational Rehabilitation Program Unit; Rehabilitation Services Administration, for theirongoing commitment and support of this project.

HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative: Project Evaluation

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 1Introduction 4Case Study: Cascade AIDS Project 9Evaluation Findings 10Case Study: International AIDS Empowerment, ARIA 19Case Study: Oregon Health Authority, OHOP 25Lessons Learned and Recommendations 26

HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative: Project Evaluation- 1 -

Executive Summary

The HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative (GTW) was a year-long project focused onproviding technical assistance (TA) to, and building the capacity of, eight participating teams toimprove employment outcomes by bolstering their employment related services. The initiative,sponsored by the Office of HIV/AIDS Housing at the US Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment, was designed to increase HOPWA clients’ economic stability and decrease theirreliance on social services and public benefits by improving access to employment andexpanding options for career development and advancement.

Building Changes (BC) and the Technical Assistance Program of Victory Programs, Inc. (VPI)delivered capacity-building training and TA to these eight teams comprised of HOPWA formulagrantees and project sponsors. GTW did not provide funding for employment services; teamswere expected to re-purpose existing funds or to incorporate employment services into currentjob responsibilities and programming.

The teams began GTW with a range of capacities. Some teams had existing employmentservices programs and/or staff with related expertise while others had planned to develop suchprograms. As a condition of participation in the GTW initiative, each team committed to thefollowing:

Complete and submit an employment services capacity self-assessment; Complete and submit an employment services work plan; Attend a launch meeting in Baltimore in November 2011; Participate in monthly one-on-one TA calls; Participate in a series of topic-specific webinars; and Complete and submit quarterly reports.

FINDINGSCapacity

Each team completed a capacity self-assessment at the beginning and end of the projectperiod, as well as a year-end survey. On the capacity self-assessment, teams rated theiragencies on various internal capacities and expertise. As part of the year-end survey, theyevaluated both their team’s growth and the TA services they received throughout the project.


Capacity Building Achievements Built internal capacity with a program or agency-wide impact (8 teams) Newly incorporated employment services into programming (4 teams) Developed strong buy-in among agency leadership for employment related services (4

teams) Developed strong buy-in among case managers for employment related services (5

teams) “Significant measurable impact” or a “transformational and measurable impact” from

TA services (6 teams)

Outcomes and Challenges

Key Accomplishments and Project Outcomes 463 new clients received employment related services 110 clients obtained employment (FT, PT and seasonal) 79 new or enhanced partnerships helped establish apprentice programs, internships, or

job opportunities

Common Challenges Staffing capacity (6 teams) Time necessary to sustain program (6 teams) Funding (5 teams) The economy (3 teams)

LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

I. VocationalizingLesson: Vocationalizing is an essential first step.Recommendation: Vocationalizing involves embedding employment-related expectations,practice, and service delivery into all facets of program operation and culture. Identify impactand benefits of vocationalizing as well as ways to institutionalize and sustain this effort.Emphasize vocationalizing as an overarching theme throughout all facets of program or agencyoperations.

II. Employment SpecialistLesson: Designating a staff person dedicated to employment is a critical component tosuccessful implementation and sustainability.


Recommendation: Assign, support, and fund a position dedicated solely to providingemployment services. This staff person is able to prioritize employment related work withclients and provide specialized expertise. Continued funding is essential for sustainability.

III. Intake and AssessmentLesson: Employment readiness is critical for client engagement and job attainment.Recommendation: Use vocational assessment tools to gain a better understanding of eachclient’s job readiness, skills, and interests. Implement evidence-based public health models andtechniques, such as the Stages of Change and Motivational Interviewing, to meet clients “wherethey’re at.” Client readiness to enter the workforce is a pivotal factor in successful jobattainment and retention.

IV. Interagency Collaborations and PartnershipsLesson: Building collaborations with mainstream workforce services expands agency capacity toconnect clients with employment services and opportunities.Recommendation: Ensure that designated staffers solidify their understanding of themainstream workforce system. Pursue cross system partnerships to enhance knowledge. Usethe knowledge gained to advocate on behalf of clients. Collaborations and partnerships arenecessary to educate staff on how to effectively link clients to employment services andopportunities.

V. Knowledge of Disability BenefitsLesson: Understanding the impact of earned income on disability benefits improves clientmotivation and diminishes staff and client fear of negative consequences to employment.Recommendation: Ensure that designated staffers have at least a basic understanding of SSIand SSDI rules on the potential impact of earned income on disability benefits. Disseminatebenefit information to agency employees and clients. Knowledge on SSI and SSDI rules willallow staff to address common misconceptions. Understanding the rules will limit concernsabout adverse effects on benefits and will thus encourage employment.

VI. Structured and Individualized TALesson: Structured and individualized TA and training provides essential support and keepsprograms on track.Recommendation: Establish relationships with teams by holding in-person meetings. Fosterparticipation in TA and peer learning opportunities. Ongoing support and structured TA helpsprograms remain focused on their goals.


Introduction

The HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative (GTW) was a year-long project focused onproviding technical assistance (TA) to, and building the capacity of, eight participating teams toimprove employment outcomes by bolstering their employment related services. The initiative,sponsored by the Office of HIV/AIDS Housing at the US Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment, was designed to improve HOPWA clients’ economic stability and decrease theirreliance on social services and public benefits by improving access to employment andexpanding options for career development and advancement. The need for employmentcapacity-building services grew out of the following suppositions:

People Living with HIV and AIDS (PLWHA) live longer and healthier lives due toadvancements in drug regimens;

Some tenants of HIV supportive housing programs have a desire to return to work, butlack the skills or feel overwhelmed by the steps necessary to find a job;

Staff at AIDS Service Organizations (ASOs) may not have the skills or knowledge to assistclients with obtaining a job;

Over the long term, employment-related services may ultimately reduce the cost of HIVsupportive services by increasing financial self-sufficiency; and

Funding for HIV services is limited.

The GTW initiative extended over one year. Between November 2011 and November 2012,Building Changes (BC) and the Technical Assistance Program of Victory Programs, Inc. (VPI) (the“TA providers”) delivered capacity building training and technical assistance to assistparticipating agencies develop their ability to connect clients to employment services, jobtraining and occupational opportunities. The project began in November 2011 with a launchmeeting in Baltimore, MD and concluded with a final webinar on November 1, 2012; inbetween, the TA providers conducted nine webinars and monthly phone calls with each team.

Unlike other competitive application processes, GTW did not offer funding to participants. AllGTW teams initiated or expanded employment related services in addition to their otherfunded program responsibilities, in most cases, without new program staff.


TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND PROJECT START-UP

Outreach and Selection

In June 2011, the TA providers outreached to all HOPWA formula grantees and project sponsorsto solicit proposals for the initiative, which included emails to over 700 grantees and projectsponsors. Nine grantee and project sponsor groups submitted proposals and all were selectedto participate as HOPWA grantee/project sponsor “teams.”

HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative Teams

Grantee Project SponsorsCity of Baltimore AIRS Interfaith Residential ServicesCity of Dallas AIDS Services of DallasCity of El Paso International AIDS EmpowermentCity of Los Angeles Alliance for Housing and HealingCity of New Haven Liberty Community Services & New Haven Home RecoveryCity of Portland, OR Cascade AIDS ProjectState of Oregon n/aCity of Tucson Southern Arizona AIDS FoundationCity of San Juan, Puerto Rico1 n/aThese teams began GTW with a range of capacities. Two teams, Baltimore and Portland, hadexisting employment services programs that they hoped to expand and further develop. TheDallas and New Haven teams had clear and specific plans for employment services or had staffmembers with employment expertise. The remaining teams had little experience withemployment services programs but were committed to developing some type of programmingover the course of the year. All participating teams agreed to the GTW project commitments.

1 The City of San Juan initially participated in the Getting to Work but later discontinued its regular participation.


GTW Project Commitments Complete and submit an employment services capacity self-assessment; Complete and submit an employment services work plan; Attend a launch meeting in Baltimore in November 2011; Participate in monthly one-on-one TA calls; Participate in a series of topic-specific webinars; and Complete and submit quarterly reports.

Capacity Self-Assessment and Work Plan

At the outset, each team completed a capacity self-assessment to identify areas for growth andopportunity during the project period.2 This assessment was modeled after an assessment BCused for another employment services project within the State of Washington called the“Economic Opportunity Initiative.” The assessment required each team to score itself on avariety of areas related to employment services.

Each team selected two to three categories from the capacity self-assessment to focus onduring the GTW project period. These categories formed the core of each team’s work plan forthe year. Each team completed a work plan in consultation with the TA providers to outlinecapacity-building goals, activities and anticipated outcomes. With guidance from the TAproviders, each team planned activities specific to their agency’s existing capacities andresources. Each goal could have more than one outcome and/or activity attached to it.

Outcomes

Outcomes were the specific results of what agencies aimed to accomplish through GTW. Teamsdevised their own outcomes based on the unique services that they would provide. While someteams did in fact develop individualized outcomes at the outset, very few reported on theseoutcomes and some agencies decided after the first or second quarter that their uniqueoutcome measures were no longer applicable. More information on project outcomes can befound in the Evaluation Findings section of this report.

GTW Project Outcomes1. Increase in persons served (required)

a. Total number of clients receiving employment related services this quarterb. Total number of new clients receiving employment related services this quarter

2 The GTW Capacity Self-Assessment is available online here:http://www.vpi.org/tap/webinars/gettingtowork/materials/.


c. Number of new clients receiving job-readiness assessments this quarterd. Number of new clients receiving job skills training this quartere. Number of new clients receiving employment search assistance this quarterf. Number of new clients that obtained employment (FT, PT, seasonal) this quarter

2. Interagency collaborations or partnerships (required)a. Number of new or enhanced partnerships to establish apprenticeship programs,

internships or job opportunities during this quarterb. Of the new or enhanced partnerships, indicate number for Workforce Investment

Boards, Vocational Rehabilitation, and Unions3. Improved effectiveness of services (optional)4. Expansion of services (optional)

Webinars

The TA provider team held eight capacity building webinars and a final wrap up webinar,described in the chart below. Participating agencies were queried for their feedback regardingwebinars; results of this feedback can be found in the Evaluation Findings section of this report.

3 While the City of San Juan team ceased participating in other TA, they continued to listen-in on most webinars.They did not, however, contribute a presentation during the final webinar on lessons learned.

Webinar Topics and Attendance

Webinar Topic Date Teams3 AttendeesVocationalizing 12/15/2011 9 16Vocational Assessments 2/2/2012 9 18Benefits Planning, Part 1 3/8/2012 9 18Benefits Planning, Part 2 3/29/2012 8 18Job Readiness Services 4/26/2012 9 20Living and Working with HIV 5/31/2012 8 15Navigating Mainstream Workforce Systems 7/12/2012 8 13Sustainability: Ensuring your Program’s Long Term Success 9/13/2012 6 10GTW Wrap Up: Team Presentations 11/1/2012 8 19


BC led each webinar, with contributions and logistical support from VPI. Some webinars, suchas Job Readiness Services and Navigating Mainstream Workforce Systems, included briefpresentations from GTW team members. The Living and Working with HIV webinar featuredpresentations from Mark Misrok, the President of the National Working Positive Coalition andLou Orselene, Co-Director of the Job Accommodations Network.

One-on-One Technical Assistance

In addition to regular webinars, each team participated in monthly TA calls with BC. The intentbehind these calls was to check-in on progress towards program goals and outcomes, respondto questions, problem-solve, and brainstorm solutions to challenges. These calls providedregular updates to the TA providers, and as a result, a better sense of the successes andstruggles that participating teams experienced. They offered important additional details andanecdotes beyond what was included in the quarterly report and provided benefit to therecipients in the form of ongoing, individualized TA.

Building Changes provided a total of 56 hours of one-on-one remote technical assistance, whichwas supplemented by email communications between calls. Building Changes shared specificresources, including examples of a program handbook for employment services, jobdevelopment and marketing tools, and examples of vocational assessments.

One-on-one Remote TA Topics Program design and development issues Updates on progress with specific capacity building activities Follow up questions from the webinars, including the impact of earned income on

SSI/SSDI, housing subsidies and food assistance, job placement, and developmentstrategies

Specific questions on accessing local mainstream workforce resources


Case Study: Cascade AIDSProject, Portland, OR

The Cascade AIDS Project in Portland began

the Getting to Work Initiative in the unique

position of having just entered in to a new

HOPWA SPNS contract which included an

agreement to work directly with WorkSystems

Inc. the local Workforce Investment Act

(WIA)/One Stop provider. As a part of this

collaboration, a liaison was assigned to

Cascade AIDS Project and was responsible for

connecting Cascade AIDS Project clients to

services and opportunities provided by

WorkSystems. Cascade AIDS Project clients

were eligible to participate in career planning,

job readiness, and placement services with

WorkSystems. Cascade AIDS Project clients

also had access to paid work experiences, on

the job training opportunities, and funds for

career training. Until the GTW Initiative,

Cascade AIDS Project had been delivering

employment services to clients through a full

time staffer who offered a range of direct

services including vocational assessment, job

search and job placement, but did not access a

One Stop for services.

Though Cascade AIDS Project experienced

success with this previous model, the number of

clients they could serve was limited because

they relied upon one full time staff person to

provide the full spectrum of vocational

services. The new arrangement with

WorkSystems changed the role of the Cascade

AIDS Project employment staffer, who became

responsible for engaging, connecting and

supporting clients while they participated in

mainstream services. This change resulted in

increased service capacity by accessing the full

range of services offered by the local One Stop

with support from the assigned liaison.

Accessing mainstream workforce services was

a common and challenging goal for the GTWteams. In the greater Portland area, a strong

cross-system partnership developed to include

workforce, housing and a range of social

service providers. This collaboration increases

access to mainstream workforce services for

job seekers with complex challenges. Cascade

AIDS Project and its clients have benefited

from this regional commitment to partnership

and inclusion.


Evaluation Findings

At the start of this project, the TA providers worked to establish evaluation goals and identifydata points. Findings from these data are described in detail in this section of the GTW projectevaluation report.

Evaluation Goals To document growth in team capacity To measure project outcomes To evaluate the TA and training provided during the project period

Evaluation Data Sources Two Capacity Self-Assessments Quarterly Reports Mid-year and Year-end Team Surveys Webinar Evaluations

CAPACITY SELF-ASSESSMENTS

As described earlier in this report, each team completed a capacity self-assessment at thebeginning of the project period. Teams rated themselves on five categories of “capacities” fromwhich activities and tasks for the project period were identified and developed. Teamscompleted another capacity self-assessment at the end of the project period, allowing forcomparisons between perceptions of employment services capacity prior to and at the end ofthe GTW initiative.

Every team described an increase in their capacity; the average score increase among allrespondents is 24.25. That every team reported an increase is surprising, as a reporteddecrease in capacity might indicate an increased awareness among team members of therequirements of running an employment services program, rather than an actual decrease incapacity. Some increases were dramatic (e.g. El Paso and Oregon); such increases were seenprimarily among teams that started the initiative without a program or significant capacity inplace. Portland and Baltimore, the two teams with established employment programs, hadcomparatively modest increases of 11 and 11.5 points, but also finished the year with thehighest scores, 97 and 87.5 respectively, out of a possible 125 points. While these scores are


not objective measures of team capacity, they do provide a sense of each team’s perceivedgrowth and accomplishment over the course of the project period.

GTW Capacity Self-Assessment Scores

GTW Team Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Change in ScoreBaltimore 76 87.5 +11.5Dallas 62 81.5 +19.5El Paso 29 85 +56Los Angeles 44 70.5 +26.5New Haven 78.5 94 +15.5State of Oregon 32 70 +38Portland, OR 86 97 +11Tucson 52.5 68.5 +16END OF YEAR SURVEY

At the end of the project period, the teams completed a final survey. The survey was designedto achieve the following:

Evaluate the TA services and their impact on employment services capacity; Identify barriers they anticipate to sustaining their progress; and Identify areas of increased capacity.

The sections that follow will describe areas identified as challenges and areas of growth.

Challenges

The teams identified the following anticipated challenges as they continue to operate theiremployment services programs:

Staff Capacity (6 teams) Time necessary to sustain program (6 teams) Funding (5 teams) The economy (3 teams)


Broader agency-related items were identified less often as challenges than the other items onthe list of choices. These include:

Changing organizational culture and organizational infrastructure (2 teams) Buy-in from leadership (1 team)

Staff capacity and staff time are closely inter-related. Inadequate funding causes substantiallimits to staff resources and support. It is difficult for case managers to prioritize employmentrelated services among all of the work that needs to be done. One survey respondent explainedthat their dedicated part time staffer had other job responsibilities that took priority overemployment services capacity-building. Additional responses are below.

“As the program continues to grow, we will be met with the need for morepersonnel to assist with the future implementation of this program. The biggerthe program gets, the larger the amount of time and resources the agency willhave to invest to assure that [employment services are] sustained.”

“Time and money are huge barriers.”

The economic recession poses further challenges to both identifying additional funding sourcesto support the program and to finding jobs, particularly for low-skilled workers. However,increasing funding is critical to the enduring success of these programs. For long-termsustainability, these programs will need to identify public and/or private sources to ensurestaffing levels can support their program priorities.

Teams identified other challenges in the final survey, including maintaining client engagement.For example, one respondent wrote:

“Some clients/residents are just not interested or motivated to pursueemployment/volunteering/school—perhaps out of fear of failure and steppingoutside of [their] comfort zone.”

Maintaining client engagement is a critical element for success in the long term. The topic ofclient engagement was addressed directly and indirectly in a number of the webinars. Thewebinars touched upon client engagement from different angles, though the overall goal wasto increase client readiness and to decrease fear—fear of trying something new, fear of loss ofbenefits, fear about one’s health.


One team required all of its clients in HOPWA-funded housing to participate in some form ofemployment services, beginning with vocational assessments. In the final webinar, this teamdescribed the positive effects of peer support that clients experience as they participatetogether in pre-employment work activities. However, keeping clients interested inemployment and motivated to keep seeking employment remained a significant challenge. Inthe wrap-up webinar, a few teams described using public health strategies such as MotivationalInterviewing and the Transtheoretical Stages of Change (Prochaska, Norcross and DeClemente,1983) to identify clients who are prepared to take action.4 These teams reported success withsuch strategies that are led by the client, rather than by the staffer, which in turn allows staff tofocus on the clients who are most ready to make change in their lives.

Capacities

In the year-end survey, teams also identified areas of increased capacity gained during theproject period. All eight teams indicated that they built internal capacity, which is consistentwith the increase in the capacity self-assessment scores. More specifically, the teams identifiedareas in which they have grown over the course of the project period.

CAPACITY BUILDING ASSESSMENT

New capacity sustainable at the program level (2 teams) New capacity sustainable at the organization-wide level (3 teams) New capacity with significant organization-wide impact (3 teams) Employment services now included in programming (4 teams) Strong buy-in among agency leadership for employment related services (4 teams) Strong buy-in among case managers for employment related services (5 teams)

At first glance, these ratings may appear low; however, certain agencies that already hademployment services programs did not identify these as areas of growth because their agenciesor programs were already well developed in this area. For those teams establishing newemployment programs, vocationalizing was more critical. These ratings indicate that teams newto employment experienced greater efficacy integrating employment services into their overallservice models among staff and leadership.

4 Additional information on Motivational Interviewing and the Stages of Change model can be found here:http://www.samhsa.gov/co-occurring/topics/training/change.aspx.


SERVICE DELIVERY ASSESSMENT

Many of the teams will likely need to continue to develop their service delivery capacity tosustain buy-in. Five teams indicated that that they have engaged clients who utilizeemployment related services. Five teams indicated that they expanded and/or established newpartnerships with employment related organizations. All eight teams anticipate continuing theiremployment related efforts as the formal project period for GTW ends. One team’s descriptionof how their role regarding employment services in their community has changed is below.

“We are seen as an agency that takes the lead on promoting employment forPLWH and are called upon for guidance by other ASOs.”

QUARTERLY REPORT DATA

Activities

Quarterly reports included information on tasks accomplished during the quarter, requiredoutcomes, individual outcomes (if applicable), and a narrative section.

In the first section, teams reported on their GTW activities. These activities fell into fourdifferent groupings, under the five capacity building categories. These four groups activitiesincluded:

Program Development Collaboration and Community Engagement Organizational Development Evaluation of Effectiveness

All eight participating teams reported each quarter on the first three categories of tasks, thoughsome teams did not make progress in every area each quarter. The final category, “Evaluationof Effectiveness” was an area that just five of the eight teams reported on during the projectperiod. Among the five teams that reported on this category each quarter, not all madeprogress during every quarter.


Outcomes

Outcome: Clients served through GTW by type of service

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TotalTotal number of clients receiving employment relatedservices this quarter 151 274 246 122 N/ATotal number of new clients receiving employmentrelated services this quarter 151 184 73 55 463Number of new clients receiving job-readinessassessments this quarter 115 120 72 106 413Number of new clients receiving job skills trainingthis quarter 23 47 25 4 99Number of new clients receiving employment searchassistance this quarter 88 185 77 57 407

Overall, the number of clients served was high and averaged 115 clients per quarter. Thegreatest total numbers of clients were served during the second and third quarters. However,the largest total number of new clients served happened during the first and second quarters.While some teams were working to get programs set-up and established during the firstquarter, others were energized and began serving clients right away. The number of new clientstapered off in the third and fourth quarters. There could be many reasons for this slow-down,including the following:

Staff conducted outreach to clients early in the project period; Staff may have maximized the number of clients who were open to participating in

employment services; Staff may have reached their limit for the number of clients they were able to serve

effectively.There was a substantial proportion of clients who participated in more intensive employmentrelated services, such as job assessments and job search assistance.

87% of all GTW clients (407) received job search assistance. 89% of all GTW clients (413) received a job-readiness assessment. 21% of all GTW clients (99) received job skills training.


Outcome: Clients who obtained employment

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TotalNumber of new clients who obtained full timeemployment this quarter (FT= > 34 hours/week) 16 4 17 16 53Number of new clients who obtained part timeemployment this quarter (PT= < 34 hours/week) 7 16 11 7 41Number of new clients who obtained seasonalemployment this quarter 0 4 8 4 16Total number of clients who obtainedemployment(including FT, PT and seasonal) 23 24 36 27 110

Initially, the TA providers did not expect the GTW teams to report on the number of clients whoobtained employment until late in the project year. Thus, we were surprised to see that clientswere obtaining jobs in the first and second quarters. The greatest number of jobs obtained wasachieved in the third quarter; this may be due to more fully established programs andrelationships with employers. However, another reason may be due to increased availability ofsummer employment and in particular, a farm-to-table full-time internship program that theBaltimore team was involved with, which accounted for 11 of the 17 total jobs in the thirdquarter. However, the uptick of jobs was reported as full-time, rather than seasonal. This maybe reporting error or it may be that the summer jobs program was considered full-time, as itcould expand to other opportunities.

Approximately 24 percent (110 out of 463) of all participating clients obtained some type ofemployment during the GTW project period. The number of full-time jobs reportedoutnumbered both the part time jobs and seasonal jobs. This is noteworthy since most, if notall, clients receive SSI or SSDI benefits and their benefit amounts would be more significantlyimpacted by larger earning increases.

The Baltimore and Portland teams accounted for the majority of the overall employmentobtained. Unlike the other GTW teams, Baltimore and Portland both had pre-existingemployment programs with dedicated funding.


Clients who obtained employment (Baltimore and Portland GTW Teams)

Team Q 1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TotalsBaltimore 14 5 11 8 38Portland 7 5 12 18 42

Totals 21 of 23totalclients 10 of 24total clients 23 of 36totalclients 26 of 27totalclients80 of 110 total clients

with employment(72% of total clients

with employment)

The following chart documents the breakdown of jobs obtained by all teams where clientsobtained employment during the project period. 5

The GTW teams were fairly successful at establishing partnerships with external organizationsto help build their employment services programs. However, several teams struggled toestablish relationships with mainstream employment service providers, such as WorkforceInvestment Boards or Vocational Rehabilitation. For some, it was difficult to navigate the

5 Two teams, New Haven and Oregon, are excluded here because they did not document any jobs obtained inquarterly reports. However, the Oregon team did not anticipate documenting jobs obtained because of its uniqueproject model.

38

1482

42

4

Number of Clients who ObtainedEmployment through GTWBaltimoreDallasEl PasoLos AngelesPortlandTucson


bureaucracies or make effective connections. None of the teams made connections with laborunions during this process.

Outcome: Interagency collaborations or partnerships developed through GTW

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TotalNumber of new/enhanced partners to establishapprentice programs, internships or job opportunitiesthis quarter 9 35 24 11 79Number of new/enhanced partnerships amongWorkforce Investment Boards 3 3 2 0 8Number of new/enhanced partnerships amongVocational Rehabilitation 2 3 3 2 10Number of new/enhanced partnerships amongUnions 0 0 0 0 0


Case Study: InternationalAIDS Empowerment,El Paso, TXInternational AIDS Empowerment in El Pasobegan the Getting to Work Initiative withvery little programming in place to address theemployment service needs of their clients. Theapproach adopted through this project canbest be described as a highly collaborative,community-focused model designed to deliveremployment services by accessing existinglocal employment programs and opportunities.

International AIDS Empowerment named itsnew program Accessible Resources in Action(ARIA) and developed a Community AdvisoryBoard (CAB) charged with identifying andsecuring education, training, and employmentpartners and opportunities in the El Pasocommunity. Two staff positions were re-purposed and became responsible fordeveloping and operating the CAB.

To date, over 20 different referral andpartnership connections have been made.Examples include:

Project Bravo, which offers employmentservices, adult basic education classes andcomputer classes;

Project Advanced Retraining &Redevelopment Initiative in Border Areas(ARRIBA) which offers educationalopportunities in the healthcare field;

The Department of Assistive andRehabilitative Services (DARS) whichserves adults with disabilities; and

The Upper Rio Grande WorkforceSolutions, the local One Stop foremployment services.

ARIA’s goal is to assist 25 individuals achieveself-sufficiency. In addition to providing acontinuum of community resources, staff hasdeveloped internal programming to engage,prepare and support clients aroundemployment. ARIA created a workstation witha computer and internet access available toclients to use for both job search and computerskill development. ARIA created volunteeropportunities for clients, brought in guestspeakers, and developed a screening andvocational assessment process to match clientswith available employment resources.

The ARIA staff members are not consideredemployment specialists; rather they believetheir community connections will allow themto serve their clients in the employmentservices realm. Their holistic approach extendsbeyond traditional employment services,recognizing that achieving self-sufficiencyincludes integrating vocational issues withhousing stability, wellness and social serviceneeds.


TEAM SATISFACTION WITH TA AND TRAINING

The TA providers asked participating GTW teams to evaluate the TA and Training over thecourse of the project period. Teams evaluated each webinar, completed a mid-year and year-end assessment of TA and Training, and a year-end survey of their capacities. Results fromthese evaluations are presented below.

Webinar Evaluation

The charts below present evaluation findings from the GTW webinars.

Overall rating of webinar effectiveness(Scale of 1-5)

The

obje

ctiv

es w

ere

achi

eved

The

cont

ent w

as r

elev

ant t

o th

ew

ork

of m

y em

ploy

men

t ser

vice

spr

ogra

m/o

rgan

izat

ion

The

subj

ect m

atte

r w

as w

ell

orga

nize

d

The

leve

l of d

iffic

ulty

was

appr

opri

ate

The

leng

th o

f the

web

inar

was

appr

opri

ate

Aver

age

Web

inar

Rat

ing

Sustainability 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.6 4.4Navigating Mainstream Workforce Systems 4.17 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.17 4.37Living and Working with HIV 4.67 4.67 4.67 4.67 4.67 4.67Job Readiness 4.25 4.25 4.27 4.17 4.08 4.2Benefits 2 4.5 4.88 4.63 4.38 4.13 4.5Benefits 1 4.14 4.5 4 3.86 3.5 4Vocational Assessments 4.63 4.5 4 4.13 3.63 4.18Vocationalizing 3.91 4.09 4.09 3.91 3.55 3.91

Average 4.33 4.47 4.32 4.22 4.04 n/a


The ratings for the webinars generally increased over time. The first webinar, Vocationalizing,received the lowest average scores of all of the other webinars. The webinar that received thehighest ranking, Living and Working with HIV, had guest presenters Mark Misrok of the NationalWorking Positive Coalition and Lou Orselene of the Job Accommodations Network. Bringingexternal resources to the training was clearly a benefit for the GTW teams.

Rating of webinar presentations (Scale of 1-5)

Thepresentation

includedvaluable

information

Thepresentation

was wellorganized

Thedelivery

techniquewas

effective

Averagerating bywebinarSustainability 4.2 4.2 4 4.1Navigating Mainstream Workforce Systems 4.5 4.5 4.33 4.4Living and Working with HIV 4.67 4.67 4.5 4.6Job Readiness 4.25 4.33 4.33 4.3Benefits Planning 2 5 4.63 4.63 4.8Benefits Planning 1 4.42 4.28 4 4.2Vocational Assessments 4.375 4 3.71 4.0Vocationalizing 4.09 4 3.9 4.0

Average 4.38 4.32 4.175 n/a

The ratings above pertain to webinar content. Overall, respondent scores reflect that thewebinars addressed important information and that the webinars were well organized. TheBenefits Planning 2 webinar received the overall highest scores for content and delivery,followed by Living and Working with HIV. Similar to the previous set of ratings, the overallscores increased as the webinar series progressed.

The teams also evaluated the webinars in the mid-year assessments. The TA providers tried torespond to feedback, particularly regarding participation. This included incorporating polls intothe webinars and identifying teams to present on a particular best practice, rather than simplyasking for comments and questions in response to presentations. Sample participant commentsare included below.


“We have appreciated the samples shared by staff and other GTWproviders, as well as fact sheets and concrete information about programsand resources shared by the webinar leaders and guest speakers.”

“The information was great, but felt crunched for time and questions.”

“So far this has been a great project and we are proud to be a part of it! Thetechnical assistance and opportunities to learn through GTW have beeninvaluable. It is hard to believe we are more than half way through. Thankyou!”

“Work out technical difficulties. You lose people here.”

“All of what was covered was really valuable!”

“Really, the webinars have been great.”

Technical Assistance Evaluation

The webinars were a regular way of providing group training. Additionally, Building Changes ledmonthly calls with the teams to offer individualized assistance. The eight teams evaluated thisform of TA as well as the trainings in the year-end survey. Results are below.

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

Generally yes Somewhat Generally no

GTW Team TA Assessment:Do Webinars Meet Start-Up Needs?


Rating of the overall effectiveness of training and TA

StronglyDisagree

Disagree Agree StronglyAgreeThe content of the training has been relevant and useful toour agency 3 5The content of the technical assistance has been relevantand useful to our agency 3 5Information, materials and/or resources provided havebeen clear and understandable 2 6The interactions with the BC and VPI staff providingtraining and technical assistance have been constructive 2 6Our participation in the GTW Initiative has been worth thetime and effort 2 6

As presented above, all of the teams agreed or strongly agreed that they had benefitted fromthe overall training and TA, as well as the additional resources offered.

Overall impact of the training and TA on program services and/or organization

No impact

Some, but notmeasurable

impact

Somemeasurable

impactSignificant

measurable impact

Transformationaland measurable

impact

3 3 2Not surprisingly, the impact of the project varied among teams. While all of the teams reportedsome impact from training and TA on their services, the ratings were fairly evenly split among“some measurable impact,” “significant measurable impact” and “transformational andmeasurable impact.” Some of these differences can likely be attributed to the relevance of thetraining and TA to individual teams’ needs; alternatively, some differences may be attributed tocapacity and staffing patterns, buy-in at the organization, and program model.

Factors Contributing to Improved Capacity Adding a part time staff Ability to identify and celebrate success at many levels


The entire process was great and each component helped complete an integral part ofthe picture...Training and TA calls with Nick

In-person launch Webinar on benefits, specifically SSI and SSDI webinar Linkages created through GTW which led to establishing a Community Advisory Board Information on assessments; peer learning; hiring agency clients/handling boundaries,

feedback on common barriers, forms and tools Training and TA, specifically, forms and resources on website, webinars, exchange of

ideas, positive feedback and creative thinking in safe environment

Training and TA Feedback

“I felt very supported through the entire process and found that being apart of this initiative has added much value to both the work I am doing andmy own professional development… One thing I really liked was that theassistance we received was a custom-driven process; where there were nineof us in a cohort, we weren’t all in the same place with regard to programdevelopment.”

“The training, TA, and peer support that we have received was key to thesuccess of this program because it guided us down the path that wouldultimately benefit our clients and community.”

“Enjoyed the technical assistance received from Nick Codd. Appreciated andvalued his insight and objective perspective.”

This quantitative and qualitative feedback supports the premise that structured TA is animportant element for this type of capacity building project. The structure of GTW keptparticipating agencies on track with activities, timelines and quarterly progress reports whilebalancing other operational priorities. Without additional funding to support employmentservices, the majority of the teams were balancing other responsibilities while working to buildcapacity. The goals would have fallen by the wayside for many of the teams were it not for theorganized support provided through this initiative.


Case Study: Oregon HealthAuthorityThe Oregon Health Authority (OHA)implements the Oregon Housing Opportunitiesin Partnership (OHOP) Program and is the soleHOPWA Formula grantee for the OregonBalance of State. The OHOP program involvesabout 160 households; services are deliveredthrough four regional housing coordinators,covering 31 counties including several ruralareas. This large geographic catchment areapresented a clear challenge to service delivery.Additionally, OHA could not pay foremployment services with Ryan WhiteProgram funds. For GTW, OHA focused onincreasing the capacity of its Ryan Whitefunded case management services throughstaff training and development of newemployment oriented tools and procedures.OHA did not have the option of adding or re-purposing staff and needed to incorporate avocational focus within existing services.

To start, OHA vocationalized their casemanagement services, which meantintegrating a focus on employment into thecore services offered to clients. Staffparticipated in training on employmentservices and resources with a particularemphasis on the impact of paid employment onbenefits, including SSI/SSDI, SNAP and housingsubsidies. Of clients that receive casemanagement services, approximately 40percent are on SSI or SSDI, 10 percent receivehousing subsidies, and 17 percent consideremployment as a possible threat to theirstability. As a result of vocationalizing servicesand staff training, case managers are betterinformed about how to counsel clients on

topics such as wages and public assistance. Abenefit planning tool is now part of OHOP’sstandard assessment format.

Through GTW, OHA created a resource guidecovering employment services throughout thestate of Oregon, which is now available forstaff. In addition, a brochure was developed toencourage clients to consider employment anddiscuss vocational opportunities with theircase managers.

In July 2012, OHA made changes to theirassessment format and documentationprotocol used within their CAREWare system,the Ryan White data collection software. Atthis point, vocational questions are now a partof the assessment they do with clients and allemployment referrals are documented inCAREWare. Since making this change, 19referrals have been recorded.

OHA developed an effective approach tooffering access to employment services andopportunities within a large geographic area.It’s not feasible to develop full or part timeemployment positions to serve small numbersof clients scattered across several differentrural communities. The strategy of integratingan employment focus into case managementpositions and supporting staff throughtraining, resource guides and client-focusedbrochures appears to be effective. In addition,incorporating vocational assessment andreferral activities into standard documents andreporting procedures prompts and encouragesstaff to addressthese issues.


Lessons Learned and Recommendations

I. VOCATIONALIZING

Lesson: Vocationalizing is an essential first step .

The vocationalizing model involves embedding employment-related expectations, practice, andservice delivery into all facets of program operation and culture. A major benefit ofvocationalizing is that it is not dependent on an increase in program funding. Vocationalizing atall levels of an agency allows program staff to focus on the work of employment services, whilemanagers and development staff can identify funding sources or re-purpose existing funding.Buy-in throughout the agency is necessary for front-line staff to prioritize employment services.

Recommendations:

a. Identify a championThe champion’s role is to create a vision for employmentservices, ensure that other agency and program staffunderstand the goals of developing an employmentservices program, and create buy-in at different agencylevels, from the Board of Directors, to direct service staff.Buy-in among all stakeholders is an importantdeterminant as to whether the program is able to moveforward, push for additional funding, and allow forprogram growth.

b. Identify impacts and benefits of vocationalizingInitiate conversations with staff about potential impacts.Staff may be concerned about additions to the workloadand this may affect their attitude towardsvocationalization. Staff who will serve as employmentservices specialists may need to re-focus and adapt theirskill sets and priorities. It is helpful to acknowledge thetime and investment needed to learn new skills and todevelop relationships with workforce providers.However, it is also important to highlight the rewards,such as increasing client income and self-sufficiency aswell as personal and social benefits of meaningful employment.

Vocationalizing createsbuy-in at all levels of theorganization and integratesan employment focus intocase management andother direct service rolesrather thancompartmentalizing it.

To vocationalize, an agencybuilds skills and expertiseand expands partnershipsand referral sources so thatclients have improvedaccess to employment andcareer developmentopportunities.


c. Identify ways to institutionalize and sustain vocationalizationIncorporate employment into all aspects of the program and direct service staff roles.Some examples of ways to incorporate employment services include:

Agency annual reports Marketing and fundraising campaigns Agency strategic planning processes Job descriptions Client service plans Case management and case coordination meetings Staff supervision Staff training Data collection and analysis

II. EMPLOYMENT SPECIALIST

Lesson: Designating a staff person dedicated to employment is a criticalcomponent to successful implementation and sustainability.

A member of the Baltimore team, during the final webinar explained, “It’s not enough to referpeople to employment services,” the employmentservices staffer needs to follow up with the client. Thisfollow up is possible when the employment services staffis available to focus on employment services as the firstpriority. For example, both the Portland and Baltimoreteams received funding for employment servicespecialists. These two teams were very successful inobtaining jobs for clients. Conversely, the Los Angelesteam designated a point person for employment servicesin a part-time role. However, this staffer maintained aheavy case load with existing case managementresponsibilities that she was unable to set aside, leavingher unable to prioritize her clients’ employment serviceneeds as much as she would have liked. In Tucson, theteam was unable to identify or re-purpose existing fundsfor a dedicated staff person. Instead, the team designateda point-person, but she took on employment services ontop of her other case management responsibilities. As a

A designated staffer who cantake on employment servicesis essential to success. Thisperson may be different fromthe employment services“champion.” The champion’srole is to create buy-in,whereas the designatedstaffer is responsible for thework of employment services.This person needs to be ableto prioritize employment-related work with clients.


result, this team had to scale back its employment services ambitions.

Recommendations:

a. Designate and fund a staffer for employment services.This designation needs to be meaningful. The assigned staffer must be able to prioritizeemployment services without competing case management concerns. An employmentprogram services staffer helps to ensure the long-term sustainability of a program.

b. Seek funding to support and sustain employment services.Many GTW teams were very creative in seeking out additional funding or sought to re-purpose existing HOPWA funds to support employment services positions. The Portlandteam was awarded a three year HOPWA SPNS grant early-on in the GTW project period;other teams were able to work with their HOPWA Grantees to re-purpose existing funds.While funding does not guarantee success, lack of funding will likely lead to the end of aprogram.

III. INTAKE AND ASSESSMENT

Lesson: Employment readiness is critical for client engagement and jobattainment.

With limited staff resources, it is imperative to identify clients who are ready and willing toengage around work. The Dallas team required all of their clients living in HOPWA fundedhousing to participate in employment or pre-employment services. Later in the project period,they reflected that not all of their clients were willing to engage around employment. ThePortland team changed its approach during the third and fourthquarters, spending more time and energy with clients whoindicated that they were ready to be proactive aroundemployment search. The result in Portland was that more clientsobtained jobs than had in previous quarters, even though theyworked with fewer clients. Targeting the clients who were readyand giving them the support they needed paid off. There aremultiple factors that contribute to a client’s willingness toconsider work. As a result, requiring employment or pre-employment services of all program participants is likely not aneffective use of resources.

Target clients whoare ready foremployment servicesand give them thesupport they need.


Recommendations:

a. Use vocational assessment tools to gain a better understanding of each client’sskills and interests, as well as readiness to enter the work force.The GTW project dedicated a webinar to the use of vocational assessments because theyare necessary to creating effective employment programs. There are many tools available,including those which are posted on the GTW website. When a client is ready to engagearound employment, it is important to understand the client’s skills, interests and strengthsand to work with the client to help them develop a realistic sense of the work world.

b. Use evidence-based public health models, such as the Stages of Change andMotivational Interviewing techniques to meet clients “where they’re at.”Like other issues that HOPWA funded program staff address, such as substance use orpositive prevention, clients’ readiness to make changes in their lives can wax and wane.Some clients may be ready to consider the idea of work, but aren’t ready to take action.Identifying clients who are ready to take action will help free up staff resources—a preciouscommodity—to focus on making progress with those who are poised to do so. However, theintent of this recommendation is not to permanently dismiss clients who signal a lack ofreadiness; rather, staff should revisit the issue with clients at a later date. Staff and clientswill benefit from the use of evidence-based practices, such as the Stages of Change modeland Motivational Interviewing in their approach.6

IV. INTERAGENCY COLLABORATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS

Lesson: Building collaborations with mainstream workforce servicesexpands agency capacity to connect clients with employment services andopportunities.

All of the participating teams pursued partnerships with local workforce providers.7 Workforceproviders offer a spectrum of services for individuals with various needs and barriers toemployment. Based on the quarterly reports, 79 collaborative relationships were establishedwith mainstream workforce resources; among those relationships, eight were with WIBs andten were with vocational rehabilitation centers.

6Additional information on Motivational Interviewing and the Stages of Change model can be found here:http://www.samhsa.gov/co-occurring/topics/training/change.aspx.7 Mainstream workforce providers include Workforce Investment Boards (WIB) and Workforce Investment Act(WIA) services and funds; state vocational rehabilitation services; community and vocational technical colleges;and community based employment and training programs.


However, developing, growing and maintaining these collaborative relationships can be difficultfor AIDS services organizations. To engage these mainstream providers, HOPWA serviceproviders have to navigate unfamiliar systems and gain access to key individuals withincomplicated agency or governmental hierarchies. Furthermore, this challenge can beheightened by stigma around HIV/AIDS and out-of-date information about the disease, medicaladvances, and the changing prognosis for PLWHA. To be effective, providers need to assume anadvocacy and educational role in their work with workforce providers.

Recommendations:

a. Ensure designated staffers have solid understanding of the mainstream workforcesystem.Staffers must learn the mainstream workforce system by developing an understanding ofeligibility criteria, service participation requirements and outcome expectations. Anenhanced understanding of this sector is a key component to being able to effectivelyengage, prepare, and support clients as they participate in mainstream services. ASOs needto develop strategies to effectively match their clients with mainstream services and helpclients achieve training and employment outcomes set by those programs. For example,staff should identify which clients would qualify for state vocational rehabilitation servicesand learn how to refer appropriate participants. Program staff will need to learn about pre-requisites for training and education, including financial aid. Additionally, staff will need towork with clients toward readiness for school and training. The GTW initiative offered awebinar on this topic, “Navigating Mainstream Services,” and provided frequent technicalassistance on strategies to engage mainstream providers.

b. Advocate for clients’ needs and their employability.To establish strong collaborations and referrals arrangements withmainstream providers, ASOs need to be prepared to articulate theunique needs of PLWHA as well as the services offered by theHOPWA system. Unique needs include challenges and issuesexperienced by PLWHA related to employment and job training.HOPWA provides supportive services to clients that can help themto maintain employment, such as housing, case management andhealth services. Additionally, it is crucial to able to describe theincreased employability and earning potential resulting fromimproved treatment and health. By sharing expertise, ASOs canaddress some concerns that workforce providers may have and

To be effective,providers needto assume anadvocacy andeducational rolewith workforceproviders.


begin to build the familiarity needed to engage people living with AIDS in services. The GTWwebinar, “Living and Working with AIDS,” examined this topic.

c. Pursue cross system partnerships.A formalized, contractual partnership can provide opportunities that informal agreementsmay not. For example, The Cascade AIDS Project (CAP) in Portland entered into a HOPWASPNS contract which included an agreement to work directly with WorkSystems Inc., thelocal WIA/One Stop provider. As a part of this collaboration a liaison was assigned to CAP tobe responsible for connecting CAP clients to services and opportunities provided byWorkSystems. CAP clients were eligible to participate in all of the services offered byWorkSystems. As a result of this partnership, CAP was extremely successful at engagingclients and assisting clients to obtain employment. This type of contractual partnershipprovides an opportunity for agencies to access mainstream services supported by crosssystem agreements and collaboration.

V. KNOWLEDGE OF DISABILITY BENEFITS

Lesson: Understanding the impact of earned income on disability benefitsimproves client motivation and diminishes staff and client fear of negativeconsequences to employment.

Most, if not all, of the GTW teams used some type of training forstaff and/or clients on benefits planning. However, many stafftasked with employment services may not possess a basicunderstanding of the rules around benefits, eligibility, andemployment. Fear and misunderstanding are common amongstaff and clients. In response, six teams reported on activitiesrelated to client and staff education around Social Securitybenefits and work. In a quarterly report, the Baltimore teamdescribed a recent experience with a client:

“We continue to see issues with fears around work. One gentlemanwalked away from a job offer that he was well qualified for, optinginstead for the hope of his SSI coming through… Not only do we haveclients fearful of losing benefits, we see poor training at the SSI Officewith explaining Ticket to Work properly, and a lag in reporting on theclient’s part to SSI, putting them at risk of achieving their fears.”

The impact of work onclient benefits, includingSocial SecurityAdministration disabilitybenefits (SSI and SSDI),needs to be de-mystifiedfor staff as well as clients.


GTW Team Success with Increasing Knowledge on Benefits The Dallas team will be incorporating a section on benefits and working into its

Employment Services Resource Guide, which is scheduled to be released February 2013. The Oregon team used Building Changes staff to lead a workshop for case managers on

benefits and returning to work. The Tucson team collaborated on a Benefits Training with a Ticket to Work

representative. Staff members from the El Paso team accompany clients to appointments at the local

Social Security Administration office to develop an individualized map of the interactionbetween benefits and possible return to work. This practice helped each client reducetheir fear around benefits loss and provided a realistic picture of possible outcomesregarding benefits.

The Baltimore team scheduled time for other agency staff to listen to pre-recorded GTWwebcasts, including the webinars on Benefits Planning.

The New Haven team embedded a list of resources regarding work and benefits inexisting email updates to agency staff.

Recommendations:

a. Ensure that designated staffers have at least a basic understanding of SSI and SSDIrules on the potential impact of earned income on disability benefits.The staff does not need to develop a deep expertise in the rules around work. They do,however, need to understand that each client’s situation is highly individualized and thatmany clients may wind up ahead financially, maintaining some of their SSI or SSDI benefits,while also drawing a paycheck. Staff members need to understand the basic rules regardingwork and need to know where to find answers to more detailed questions. This process hasbecome increasingly complicated with the closure of many WIPA offices around thecountry, but further emphasizes the need for staff to have a basic understanding and to beclear on available resources.

b. Disseminate basic information about benefits to other agency staff and clients.Disseminating basic information will help to de-mystify the issue for relevant staff. Thiscomponent of vocationalizing ensures clients receive consistent, accurate informationaround benefits and work. As noted above by one of the GTW teams, obtaining correctinformation can be a challenge, so it is essential for agencies to identify reliable resources.Be sure to exploit existing local resources for benefits information. In addition, agencies can


rely on national resources, such as the Job Accommodations Network, and the resources onthe GTW website.

VI. STRUCTURED AND INDIVIDUALIZED TA

Lesson: Structured and individualized TA and training provides essentialsupport and keeps programs on track.

The GTW initiative provided structured planning, guidance, and accountability to all of theparticipating teams. The structured program helped to keep participating agencies on trackwith their activities and provided guidance for operationalizing employment related services.

As the participant evaluations and surveys reflect, the teams were very appreciative of theongoing training and TA they received over the course of the project period. Teams were verygrateful to have regular calls with Building Changes to discuss their unique set of circumstances,challenges, and successes. Webinar participation was beneficial to participants as well, as itprovided both training and an opportunity for peer learning.

Recommendations:

a. Participate in a structured program, ifavailable.Without additional funding to supportemployment services, the majority of teamswere balancing other responsibilities whileworking to build capacity. The goals would havefallen by the wayside for many of the teamswere it not for the organized support providedthrough this initiative. When teams applied toparticipate, the responsibilities of participatingwere made clear to all teams. However, theongoing support of the TA staff, through regularcheck-in calls, webinars, and reminder emailsmaintained GTW as a priority. Due to thatstructure, teams moved forward with projectgoals and managed to complete their workplans, capacity self-assessments, quarterlyreports and additional surveys requested by TAstaff.

The TA framework for teamsparticipating in GTW helped themidentify priorities and goals whilekeeping them on track with theprogram. There was no specialfunding to support the GTWteams efforts; the staff involvedneeded to accomplish capacitybuilding activities whilecontinuing to manage theirexisting direct services and otherprogram administration duties.


b. Provide individualized TA to teams “where they’re at.”Providing individualized TA focused on the unique needs of each team is important whenprograms or agencies have a wide range of capacities. While the webinars offered broadertraining, they did not address specific issues that individual teams faced. The regular phonecalls provided the TA staff with a more thorough understanding of what was happening ateach team site than what was apparent from the quarterly reports. Additionally, monthlyphone calls allowed the TA staff to problem-solve with teams as necessary. The callsprovided time to focus on a topic and follow up on particular issues and concerns, as well asteam goals. This follow up helped keep teams moving along with their programs.

c. Establish relationships with teams through an initial in-person meeting.The Baltimore launch meeting was a critical first step for the GTW project because it gave allparticipants, including the TA providers, a chance to meet each other in person and begin tobuild a relationship. Meeting all of the teams allowed for more successful TA and training,since the groups knew each other and the TA providers knew the team members.

d. Encourage team participation and peer learning during the webinars.Webinar technology allows for training to multiple sites at a fraction of the cost of in-persontraining. However, it can be a tricky medium. Webinars can be fraught with technologicalchallenges and do not allow for two-way communication as easily as in-person trainingforums. This limits presenters’ ability to measure the audience’s interest andunderstanding. To compensate, the TA providers incorporated participation by organizingbrief presentations from individual teams and conducting online quizzes and polls duringthe webinars to query participants about their opinions or perspectives.

Integrating team participation into these webinars seemed to improve feedback. Forexample:

“I found the quiz to be very helpful in identifying areas that needclarification.”

“The polls kept me engaged.”

Many of the teams presented to the group during one or more webinars. The final webinarfeatured all of the teams presenting on a capacity gained or a best practice. The type ofparticipation varied over the course of the webinar series, but team participation increasedviewers’ interest in what was happening on-screen, provided opportunities for peerlearning, and allowed teams to give feedback about what they were learning.

Documents

HOPWA Getting to Work Employment Initiative: Project Evaluation · 2013. 8. 7. · Unlike other competitive application processes, GTW did not offer funding to participants. All GTW