Oregon Workforce Investment Board · Chemeketa Community College Winema 4001 Winema Place NE, Salem 97305 Building 48, Room 202 A&B . Oregon at Work Quality Jobs – Skilled Workers

Oregon Workforce Investment Board

December 6, 2013 1:00 – 4:00 pm

Primary Meeting Location:Chemeketa Community College Winema 4001 Winema Place NE, Salem 97305 Building 48, Room 202 A&B

Oregon at Work Quality Jobs – Skilled Workers

Contributing to a strong state economy and local prosperity

Satellite Site in Eugene via Blackboard Collaborate:Oregon Community Credit Union2880 Chad DriveEugene, OR 97408

Satellite Site in Portland via Blackboard Collaborate:Portland State University-Market Center Building1600 SW 4th Ave Portland Gold Room, 5th Floor

Table of Contents

Agenda ........................................................................................................................................... 3

November 8, 2013 OWIB Minutes ............................................................................................... 4

Rechartering Criteria ................................................................................................................ 12 a. Motions ......................................................................................................................................................... 13b. Executive Order ............................................................................................................................................ 14c. OWIB Criteria .............................................................................................................................................. 19d. LWIB Criteria ............................................................................................................................................... 22

Workforce System Redesign ..................................................................................................... 25 a. Motions ......................................................................................................................................................... 26b. Workforce System Redesign Work Group recommendations ....................................................................... 28c. What stays the same (11-19-13) table .......................................................................................................... 60d. Recommendation by action status table ........................................................................................................ 62e. Workforce System redesign timeline ............................................................................................................ 64

2013 OWIB Year in Review ...................................................................................................... 65

Committee Reports .................................................................................................................... 67

2

Oregon Workforce Investment Board Public Meeting Agenda

December 6, 2013 1:00 pm to 4:00 pm

1. Welcome by Chair Pryor

2. Governor Kitzhaber

3. Break (to take photo of OWIB with Governor for website)

4. Public Comment

5. Consent Agenda

6. Action Item: Rechartering Criteria for OWIB and LWIBs

a. Presentation – Agnes Balassa, Governor’s Workforce Policy Adviser and OWIB

Member

b. Discussion by OWIB members

c. Motions/Vote

7. Action Item: Workforce System Redesign Work Group Recommendations

a. Presentation - TBD

b. Discussion by OWIB members

c. Motions/Vote

8. OWIB Year in Review – Tracey O’Brien, Governor’s Workforce Policy Coordinator and

OWIB Executive Staff

9. Chair Pryor Remarks

10. Adjournment

3

Primary Meeting Location:Chemeketa Community College Winema 4001 Winema Place NE, Salem 97305 Building 48, Room 202 A&B

Satellite Site in Eugene via Blackboard Collaborate:Oregon Community Credit Union 2880 Chad DriveEugene, OR 97408

Satellite Site in Portland via Blackboard Collaborate:Portland State University-Market Center Building1600 SW 4th Ave Portland Gold Room, 5th Floor

Oregon Workforce Investment Board Minutes Salem, Chemeketa Community College November 8, 2013

Attendees:

Agnes Balassa, Alan Unger, Barbara Byrd, Barbara Rodriguez, Carol Lamon, Claire Spanbock, Dacia Johnson, Dave Baker, Erinn Kelley-Siel, Frank Wall, Gerald Hamilton, Jessica Gomez, Karen Goddin, Ken Madden, Laura McKinney, Lisa Nisenfeld, Lori Luchak, Marvin Revoal, Maureen Fallt, Megan Helzerman, Rep. Michael Dembrow, Rosie Pryor, Rep. Diane Rosenbaum, Stephaine Taylor, Susan Brown

Staff: Tracey O’Brien

Absent:

Art Paz, Cheryl Roberts, Jesse Gamez, Joe Webber, Kate Wilkinson, Rep. John Huffman, Sen. Larry George

Meeting called to order at 12:31 p.m.

Board Chair Pryor opened the meeting and OWIB members introduced themselves. Chair Pryor welcomed new member Frank Wall.

Consent Agenda

Madden made the motion to approve the consent agenda, Unger seconded and it passed unanimously.

Rechartering of the OWIB and LWIBs pursuant to Executive Order

Balassa introduced draft versions of the OWIB and LWIB charters. With new additions in bold, she noted the charters have a greater focus on labor market information, along with a set of operating principles. The LWIB charter provides a bigger focus on LWIBs’ convening function and outlines the expectations of that function. There is a focus on labor market expertise, in parallel to OWIB charter, as well as a greater focus on investment and accountability. Balassa said staff is gathering input and drafting up criteria that will indicate when the charter requirements are fulfilled. The criteria are to be completed by December 31, 2013, and OWIB and LWIBs will be rechartered by June 30, 2015. Balassa noted no action is required at this meeting, but she is continuing to request feedback on the documents. The charters will be finalized at December OWIB meeting.

Commissioner Unger asked about the role of business in LWIBs and if that is reflected in the charters. Balassa stated that LWIB provided feedback on the charters to clarify that one of their roles was as investors because they bring the needs of businesses into the system, and then seek additional resources to fulfill these needs.

4

Chair Pryor inquired to the process of LWIB feedback. Balassa indicated she had received feedback at October 25th Oregon Workforce Partnership (OWP) meeting that included adding investor role, as well as the challenges of coordinating activities across a large system where LWIBs do not always have influence. She is in the process of describing in the charter what LWIBs have direct control over versus their convening role. The charter will be discussed again at November 15 OWP meeting.

Recommendations by Workforce System Redesign Work Group Work Group Presentation

Tracey O’Brien introduced list of team members involved in the work group. Barry Pack, DAS Senior Policy Advisor, provided an overview of other statewide transformation efforts, such as health care and education, and how the workforce system transformation fits in alongside it. All the transformation efforts start with a broad policy goal set by the state, then delivery occurs at local community level in order to maximize outcomes. In the middle is the appropriate level of governance needed to assure accountability. The Governor is interested in designing flexibility into the system, as well as coordinating efforts regionally and at statewide level.

O’Brien outlined the stakeholder engagement feedback plan and process. OWIB’s task is to listen to this feedback, ask questions, then decide at December meeting whether to endorse the recommendations to the Governor. Balassa thanked the interagency work group on behalf of the Governor for all their hard work on delivering the recommendations. She said the team was thoughtful and made sure the recommendations were representative of the Governor’s vision, as well as what is able to be accomplished at this time.

Nisenfeld explained the lack of common outcome measures within the workforce system that causes fragmentation. The recommendations for shared vision, system outcomes, and measures begins to address this, and examine outcome measures within the lens of current workforce. The recommendation is to start with a scorecard to measure progress throughout the system, with focus on whole system, including OED, Vocational Rehab, JOBS, etc. The score card will give a citizen eye’s view about workforce investments. The next step will be to work with local partners to take the same metrics down to local level, and also look at specific demographic segments of the population. The recommendation are about looking at programs, then reporting results and progress. She emphasized the intent is not to punish when outcomes are not met, but about adding accountability into the system by identifying issues and then fixing them.

Parker discussed recommendation #6 around Integrating Service Delivery. She reminded OWIB that in 2008 they charged the LWIBs and OED to integrate service delivery within WorkSource. This recommendation is meant to address the fact that integration does not occur at the state level, even though it’s being asked for at the local level. Combining workforce development into OED will mean local level, both WorkSource and LWIBs, will receive less conflicting information from two separate agencies – CCWD and OED. She noted that every meeting with LWIB Directors deals with difficulty of integrating and aligning WIA and OED programs. A consolidation would allow the local level to better

5

work together, serve people in more streamlined manner with less friction, and less energy spent in trying to fix a problem where there is a relatively simple fix.

Humelbaugh and Hamilton discussed the recommendations around Defining Governance and Accountability Structure. Hamilton said that state coordination is critical to providing better alignment and authority across the state. Humelbaugh notes this builds off of previous OWIB discussions around enhanced authority and re-chartering process. This recommendation is trying to expand OWIBs role across overall workforce system, not just WIA Title I-B, and covers OWIB responsibilities that need to be better defined. The recommendation about strengthening the roles of LWIBs is to make it clear that LWIBs are conveners of local public/private partnerships, since they understand the local labor market, and are, or will soon be, neutral brokers of workforce services.

Kelley-Siel discussed the recommendations around Enhancing Support for Service Delivery. The intent of these is to spring board off successful best practices around the state, and take successful pilot projects to scale, while also leaving room for innovation. We want to encourage local innovation and the piloting of new models. These recommendations also address the need for better systems that track, report, and streamline the customer experience.

Public Comment

Chair Pryor opened the discussion up for Public Comment, reiterating that OWIB wants to make changes in order to do business differently and create better outcomes for Oregonians.

Jordana Barclay, Executive Director of the Oregon Workforce Partnership, expressed overall support of the recommendations on behalf of the Partnership. She expressed the need for continued clarity from OWIB on the performance compacts, as well as a stronger focus on business customer needs. Barclay expressed concerns on the initial scope of the agency consolidation, but strongly endorsed the need for one lead workforce agency. In order to fulfill OWIB’s goal of an aligned, integrated, efficient, and effective system that produces better outcomes, local integration needs to be reflected at the state level.

Kathy Wilkins is HR Manager for Willamette Graystone, as well as president of Oregon Employer Council, and an LWIB member. She said it is not clear where business has been involved during the stakeholder process and wants there to be business input from the Employer Council. She stated the system needs to serve the needs of both businesses and job seekers. She expressed concerns about the disconnect between LMI data and OWIB’s direction, as she feels the recommendations do not directly address the lack of qualified applicants that businesses face.

David Rives, President of American Federation of Teachers Oregon, represents over 12,000 teachers in the state. AFT has concerns about transferring the oversight of WIA Title IB to a non-educational agency. He said it is important to maintain the educational integrity of what community colleges oversee, including training, assessment, curriculum development. He noted the critical role that CTE plays in Oregon reaching the “middle 40” of the 40/40/20 goals, and that education needs to be involved in these key decisions.

6

Mary Spilde, President of Lane Community College, noted the community college presidents support the recommendations that focus on streamlining, efficiency, and accountability. They do have reservations about the recommendation to separate workforce development and community colleges. Community colleges have benefited from strong partnerships with the LWIBs, and the alignment between community colleges and workforce has produced closer coordination between job training and education. They believe a move to OED will create a new silo for WIA programs, and result in a looser connection between workforce and education. She stated that retaining workforce programs with the community colleges provide a vital link that is critical for Oregon to reach its 40/40/20 goals.

Connie Green, President of Tillamook Bay Community College, stated that the recommendations do not acknowledge the role community colleges play in the “middle 40”, and only makes small mention of the OEIB. With the creation of the HECC, it is critical policies are looked at jointly. She also stated that the findings do not provide a cost benefit of the changes recommended, nor mention the need of maintenance of effort for match. The community colleges believe the recommendations are not consistent with the Governor’s approach to tight-loose relationships, and feels that the community colleges were not involved in providing input into the process.

Peter Angstadt, President of Rogue Community College, stated that employers come to them to ask for help and they are able to give them results. He encouraged the OWIB to look at the needs of employers throughout this process.

John Wykoff, Legislative Director for the Oregon Community College Association, stated the Association supports the changes proposed in terms of governance and coordination. They are concerned about the consequences of moving Title IB from CCWD. He noted there are still some unresolved questions remaining from the education system re-organization, and believes this cuts off the conversation before many of these have been determined. He said this move will have a profound effect on the culture of CCWD and HECC, and it is critical that higher education, community colleges, and workforce development stay aligned. He said it is important to have the capacity to make these links, and it will be harder for higher education to focus on elements of workforce development.

OWIB Member Q&A

Chair Pryor ended Public Comment period and asked Board members for their initial feedback. Taylor said her concerns about the inclusion of Vocational Rehabilitation into the workforce agency and about serving special populations are reflected in the recommendations, since she is a member of the Work Group. Johnson echoed Taylor’s comments, and wants to ensure that sufficient resources are protected to serve all those who are able to work.

Rep. Rosenbaum expressed concern about the short February session and wants to be sure there is time to adequately address all the issues in the recommendations. Fallt noted the effort it takes to align supply and demand, and likes the phased approach of the report. She wants OWIB to be mindful of the cultural issues in aligning different departments, and to give time to the education voices. Commissioner

7

Brown wanted a clearer understanding of the relationships between the colleges and workforce, but understands the change is to move the system beyond just WIA focus.

Baker wanted to see apprenticeship better included in this workforce discussion, as well as focus on employers. Goddin echoed the comments about engaging businesses, but reminded the group this will be a multi-phase process. Businesses want efficiency and alignment, but they do not care about state structures. They want the systems to deliver results.

Wall asked if the recommendations could be implemented without the agency consolidation, or if they all had to be implemented jointly. A discussion followed about the funding mechanisms of the various agencies and programs. Several OWIB members requested additional information about the amount of funding being discussed for consolidation and its impact on CCWD as an agency.

Revoal expressed support for the changes proposed. He is excited for the conversation to be leading to change after many years of discussion, and stated the system needs change. Luchek had questions around agency alignment and how that would affect established relationships with the community colleges. She remarked that addressing the skills gap is most important to businesses. Madden agreed with many of the previous comments about supporting the creation of a system that works. He stated a battle with the community colleges could be a distraction that should not have to occur. Rodriguez wants to ensure business are involved, and that their customer viewpoint is reflected in the outcome scorecard. Nisenfeld responded that the business customer outcomes inclusion in the report is a certainty.

Helzerman discussed how CTE programs overlap between both education and workforce, and wondered if workforce is moved out of CCWD, would CTE lose its workforce focus. She also noted that Perkins funding was not mentioned in the report. Kinney stated there was a missing dialogue with higher education system. She liked how the recommendations were adjusted based on stakeholder feedback. She noted that they will need to balance making significant change without overbalancing the system.

Gomez supports the outcome scorecard and being able to measure progress. She wondered if moving Title IB into OED would stop innovative practices that are currently happening. Rep. Dembrow noted that Oregon is a national leader in moving towards a tighter linkage between workforce and education. He said it is important that workforce be front and center with the HECC. He wants to be practical about getting the changes needed through Legislature in the short session. Commissioner Unger supports having one agency and noted that the Regional Solutions Teams have one lead that moves things forward, and workforce needs the same.

Wall views the recommendations as an environmental scan of the system and says that the closer we can go move resources as close to the customers as possible, the better. He stated these recommendations are a great step towards achieving that. Nisenfeld emphasized that the report is solely about the management of the workforce system, and nothing else. She expressed concerns about misunderstandings about what is and what is not included in the consolidation. She noted the biggest

8

change under this process is about making delivery of services and products more relevant to customers. She asked if we pursue leaving system the way it is, we should ask how well it has served us.

Hamilton stated there is still work to be done in relation to governance among OEIB, HECC, and OWIB. Kelly-Siel noted the group had general agreement about the “what”, but discussion still needed on the “how”. She said this is a difficult process to have in midst of multiple system transformation efforts, but it is about vertical and horizontal levels of change. Spanbock expressed concern that there is not alignment, and ultimately, in her role she needs to address the health care workforce shortage.

Chair Pryor wondered why the community colleges expressed being cut off from input process, as there were three community college representatives on the work group. She noted that terms like governance do not having meaning for businesses, and that it is really about having the skilled workforce.

Balassa appreciated the conversation and feedback, and tried to fill in knowledge gaps the members expressed. She clarified that OWIB is not charged with overseeing the community college system, but rather the workforce system. Though community colleges are critical partners in the workforce system as training providers, the system encompasses other avenues, such as getting individuals ready for training, as well as getting business input into the system. Workforce staff must have a multitude of tools available to assist customers, which could be training, or certifications, or other options. She emphasized that the recommendations are not taking any money from the colleges, as the money being discussed goes to the State or LWIBs.

Rosie asked for presentation of what is included in the recommendations. Balassa asked members of the work group to provide the details. She started the presentation by confirming that business feedback received at listening sessions she facilitated focused on the fact that state structure does not interest them, they just do not want multiple people knocking on their door. She noted that workforce is in the space between economic development and education. OWIB’s role is to strategically connect the dots, which requires the oversight of resources. She clarified the recommendations are about expanding OWIB responsibility to include oversight of the resources in OED. These resources are integrated at the local level, since WIA Title IB and OED programs are being delivered at co-located, integrated WorkSource center. The recommendations are needed to get the state to line up.

Balassa outlined the various state-level oversight boards, including the Higher Education Coordinating Commission, Oregon Business Development Commission, and the Oregon Education Investment Board. She acknowledged that OWIB’s relationship with these other boards still needs to be discussed. Once the system management conversation is finalized, OWIB will be in a better position to have a conversation about its relationship with other boards. At this point, OWIB is not clear about what resources it oversees.

Humelbaugh outlined the current workforce system structure and resource flow. WIA Title IB funds – approximately $32 annually statewide – are distributed from federal level to CCWD, then to LWIBs via formula, then to customers. Title II Adult Basic Skills (approximately $5 million annually) follows same route from federal level to CCWD, then distributed to community colleges via formula. State Legislature

9

also provides $465 million biennially to CCWD for the community colleges, which are for local level services. Humelbaugh noted that the consolidation recommendation is strictly focused on moving the Oregon Youth Conservation Corps and WIA Title IB streams into a new lead agency. No other funding streams would be affected.

Hill reviewed current Oregon Employment Department structure. Title III Wagner-Peyser funds – between $2.5 and 3 million – used to operate employment services/labor exchange are distributed from Department of Labor to OED. State SEDAF fund provides additional $37 million, approximately. The funds OED receives stay within the agency and to deliver customer services. CCWD provides policy and oversight to the system, while OED provides the delivery. The work group recommendation marries the policy and the delivery, enhancing connections. Balassa noted the recommendations change OWIB’s focus from WIA Title IB to a much bigger workforce picture, which will also include OED. Nisenfeld said that with this increased partnership, OED gets access to training for its participants, while WIA Title IB gets capacity to do additional activities. Integration’s purpose is to combine resources so that customers have a greater menu of options.

Rep. Dembrow asked for specifics on what would change, and if community colleges would lose their role as service providers. Balassa answered that the WIA staff and funds would move to OED, but the community colleges will still be able to bid on WIA service provider contracts as they currently do. OWIB’s role would grow from overseeing WIA Title IB by adding OED workforce programs and accompanied resources. She agreed there is a need for a longer term mechanism to be put in place so that the community colleges and OED can speak the same language. She reminded the group that OWIB does not govern the community colleges’ investment and mission in workforce training.

McGough provided a system viewpoint from LWIB level. He reminded OWIB that LWIBs are statutorily required to exist. He emphasizes the LWIBs have put in tremendous effort to maintain college as system partners and will continue that. The LWIB role is to coordinate the various system resources at the local level, but also bring in additional resources. He noted that the value of the system does not just come from paying for training, but in many other ways, such as resume development, preparing individuals for work, etc.

Kelly-Siel asked what CCWD would look like physically and fiscally if Title IB is removed. Balassa said that is still being worked out, and some of it falls into the education redesign conversation. Gerald acknowledged there will be some pain in the agency separation, as many positions are funded through multiple funding streams. Gomez said the agency consolidation makes sense, and the other issues can be resolved along the way. She said this needs to happen for the other recommendations to happen, since streamlining resources is where we get efficiencies.

Madden inquired as to which recommendations could move forward independent of agency realignment. Balassa stated the recommendations around outcome measures and focusing on disadvantaged populations could proceed. She cautioned that without the realignment, we would lose capacity to fund the for innovation function, which is what would fund the next phases of system redesign.

10

Balassa indicated that the work group could provide a more formal graphic representation of the state structure and resource streams just discussed so that there is an understanding of the various scenarios prior to December meeting. Chair Pryor asked that any additional information or questions the Board has to be directed to O’Brien.

Meeting adjourned at 4:40 pm.

11

Action Item: Recharting Criteria Attached documents:

1. Motions 2. Executive Order 3. OWIB Criteria 4. LWIB Criteria

12

Rechartering Recommended actions:

OWIB Criteria

Recommended Action: The OWIB recommends that the Governor adopt the OWIB rechartering criteria. LWIB Criteria

Recommended Action: The OWIB recommends that the Governor adopt the LWIB rechartering criteria.

13

14

15

16

17

18

FUNCTIONS WHICH OWIB WILL BE CHARTERED TO PROVIDE

CRITERIA TO BE MET BY JUNE 30, 2105

Serve as the primary board for Oregon’s workforce system with structure to assure stakeholder input informs OWIB decisions.

OWIB has an approved plan to

- integrate the boards and commission that will sunset and those that continue to exist as a result of the redesign.

- Solicit input from a wide array of stakeholders prior to making decisions.

Work with the Governor to set the vision for Oregon’s workforce system.

- Develop a single, unified state plan

- Recommend the duties and responsibilities of state agencies to implement the federal Workforce Investment act, to avoid conflicts of interest and to capitalize on the experience developed by workforce partners who are efficient and effective at meeting the requirements of the Act

- Create procedures to avoid unnecessary duplication among workforce investment activities, other related programs, and other federal training programs.

- Identify outcomes for Oregon’s workforce system and create accountability for results.

- Develop and continuously improve activities carried out through statewide workforce system.

The OWIB has been reviewed and if necessary updated its Strategic Plan to addresses all of these requirements.

OWIB integrated new common outcome measures using a balanced score card approach as part of the Strategic Plan.

Coordinate the development of policy with the Oregon Education Investment Board/Higher Education Coordinating Council and the Oregon Economic Development Commission

OWIB has agreements in place with OEIB/HECC and the OEDC that clarify shared policy making areas and procedures to manage these jointly.

Assure that workforce services help those who are OWIB has an annul calendar that includes periodic review of system

19

chronically unemployed and underemployed find jobs with pathways to higher incomes.

outcome data related those who are chronically unemployed and underemployed, set goals and make recommendations for improvements as needed, and a plan to issue a biennial report regarding the workforce outcomes for those who are chronically unemployed and underemployed.

Enter into workforce performance compacts with Local Workforce Investment Boards and state agencies, evaluate outcomes of local workforce program performance compacts & remediate if necessary, and periodically recommend improvements to outcomes or rewards for achievement.

OWIB has entered into performance compacts with each of the Local Workforce Investment Boards and those agencies that administer workforce program.

Establish a process and criteria for the chartering and periodic re-chartering of Local Workforce Investment Boards

OWIB has finalized new charters for Local Workforce Investment Boards, and has adopted criteria to assure that these boards meet the expectations set forth in their charters/

Provide guidance, direction, and approval for local unified workforce plans.

OWIB has a process for issuing guidance and criteria for approving plans.

Advise Governor on the designation of Local Workforce Investment Areas in accordance with WIA.

OWIB has a process to advise to the Governor for the re-designation of local boundaries when needed.

Assist in the development and continuous improvement of a statewide labor statistics system, publish labor market data and system outcomes. Prepare an annual report to the Secretary of Labor, the Governor and Legislature in accordance with WIA.

OWIB has a schedule to review of labor market information products and make recommendations for changes when needed.

OWIB publishes an annual workforce “state of the state” report in conjunction with its annual conference

Hold an annual workforce event in accordance with Executive Order 13-08.

First conference is held by 6/30/15. Use conference as a platform to release the annual workforce “state of the state” report.

Review the workforce system budget to the Governor, and recommend state and local investments for talent development, job creation, employment, income progression, business competitiveness, and integrated service delivery and facilitate provision of resources to LWIBs to support locally developed workforce solutions contingent on budget approvals. Develop allocation formulas for the distribution of

OWIB has criteria by which it evaluates and makes recommendations for investments into workforce. There is a process in place for OWIB to participate in the development of budgets for Oregon’s workforce programs.

29

funds WIA Title 1 funds.

21

FUNCTIONS WHICH LWIB WILL BE CHARTERED TO PROVIDE

CRITERIA TO BE MET BY JUNE 30, 2105

Create an aligned workforce system

- Serve as a neutral, independent broker of workforce services, - Invest in services from those equipped to deliver the best

possible results. Develop and continuously improve activities carried out through statewide workforce system

- Select or serve as the one-stop operator for WorkSource Centers in the local community;

- Identify unnecessary duplication among workforce investment activities and make recommendations to the OWIB and state agencies to rectify these.

- Provide data-driven guidance and advice to help Oregon’s Governor, the Oregon Workforce Investment Board and State Agencies to align Oregon’s workforce system to achieve better outcomes for Oregon’s businesses and job seekers.

LWIB has identified the local one-stop operator and entered into contracts for appropriate workforce services.

LWIB has a mechanism for reviewing local workforce system performance and recommending improvements.

LWIB provides recommendations related to unnecessary duplication and improving alignment among local workforce programs in its strategic plan.

Provide the convening table for the development of local workforce solutions

- Bring together workforce stakeholders and partners beyond the members of the Local Workforce Investment Board to identify workforce issues and possible solutions. Create a structure(s) to assure wide stakeholder input informs LWIB decisions.

- Expand private-public partnerships with the integrated workforce system to better meet the needs of communities and create solutions to address tomorrow’s workforce challenges.

- Use data to inform the conversations and decisions at the convening table.

- Partner with the Governor’s Regional Solutions Committees and Economic Development organizations to identify and leverage opportunities to expand job creation and incent job growth.

LWIB includes mechanisms for bringing additional partners into strategic discussions in strategic plan

At minimum, LWIB provides evidence that it has a working sector partnership in place to develop local workforce solutions

LWIB has a regular schedule for sharing data among local partners and their boards, and a mechanism in place

LWIB can provide examples of efforts to interface with Regional Solutions and/or economic development organizations.

LWIB can demonstrate strategies, products or services implemented in the local area to help meet Oregon’s 40-40-20 goals

22

- Partner with education and economic development to meet

Oregon’s 40-40-20 goals for educational attainment as well as goals for increasing employment, job retention, wage gain and movement along career pathways.

Develop the Local Workforce Investment Plan for the community

- Develop a single local strategic plan to better align economic development, education and training, and workforce development investments and services for job seekers and businesses to efficiently address local labor market needs and statewide priorities

- Convene local partners to develop the plan and improve progress toward plan outcomes.

- Assure that the plan include strategies to help those who are chronically unemployed and under employed have opportunity to become employed and progress along career pathways.

LWIB has an approved local plan on file that has been updated as necessary to address these items.

Labor market expertise

- Become the brokers of labor market intelligence for the workforce system.

- Assist in the development and continuous improvement of a statewide labor statistics system.

- Publish media worthy state of the workforce reports. - Work with partners to coordinate surveys, and labor market data

collection. - Inform local policy and decision making with labor market data.

LWIB publishes an annual local state of the workforce report.

LWIB has a publications schedule in place to indicate when labor market products will be available in the local community.

LWIB distributes labor market data in the local community.

Investment and Accountability

- Leverage local resources to advance progress toward the larger vision of increased prosperity

- Increase resources dedicated to workforce activities in the community.

- Hold local programs accountable for the delivery of agreed upon activities and outcomes under the plan. Make recommendations for improvements.

LWIB can demonstrate how it is leveraging resources and its plan to increase resources in its strategic plan.

LWIB has a mechanism to increase transparency and accountability among local partners.

LWIB has identified in its strategic plan how it will assure that chronically unemployed and underemployed populations will be served locally, and shares data regarding the effectiveness of these

23

- Assure that workforce services help those who are

chronically unemployed and underemployed find jobs with pathways to higher incomes.

- Enter into workforce performance compacts with OWIB and state agencies

efforts

LWIB has an approved performance compact in place with the state and OWIB

Administrative Capacity

- Demonstrate the capacity to appropriately administer federal and state laws and funds, the requirements of sunshine laws, document retention, etc., and contract monitoring

- LWIB develops its own budget

LWIB demonstrates the capacities to satisfaction of the primary state agency administering the program funding stream.

24

Action Item: Workforce System Redesign Attached documents:

1. Motions 2. Workforce System Redesign Work Group recommendations (same report from

last meeting) 3. What stays the same (11-19-13) table 4. Recommendation by action status table 5. Workforce System redesign timeline

25

Recommended Actions The OWIB recommend to the Governor that the following work already in progress continue:

Recommendation #1: Direct an interagency workgroup to develop a system-wide, state-level balanced score card by June 2014.

Recommendation #2: In partnership with Local Workforce Boards, create a process to cascade state-level metrics to the local level so that local boards can monitor performance and prioritize strategies and resources to maximize results for job seekers.

Recommendation #10: Strengthen the role of the LWIBs by entering into charters that clearly spell out the roles and responsibilities of the LWIB as well as the commitments of state agencies and the OWIB in supporting the LWIBs.

Recommendation #11: Direct the LWIBs and workforce agencies to enter into performance compacts to clarify the performance expectations of the LWIBs and the programs in their communities.

The OWIB make the following recommendations to the Governor related to workforce and employment related services for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed:

Recommendation #3: Convene workforce system partners to conduct a system-wide review of existing workforce and employment related programs, services and policies for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and chronically unemployed and underemployed.

Recommendation #4: Direct the workforce system partners to develop a statewide workforce policy for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed that establishes goals for improved workforce services.

Recommendation #5: Direct the workforce system agencies to submit a biennial report to the Governor charting the progress in achieving outcomes for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed as well as documenting special initiatives and efforts to implement best practices.

26

The OWIB endorses Recommendation #6-- redesign the Oregon Employment Department as Oregon’s lead agency for workforce programs, including the relocation of WIA Title I-B and the Oregon Youth Conservation Corps programs to OED—to the Governor.

The OWIB make following recommendations to the Governor to enhance the role of the Oregon Workforce Investment Board regarding workforce development:

Recommendation #7: Enhance the role of the OWIB within the workforce system, including making it the advisory committee to a newly redefined Oregon Employment Department, through legislation in the 2014 Legislative Session.

Recommendation #8: Dedicate professional staff for the OWIB located at OED.

Recommendation #9: Establish clear collaborative relationships with the other state advisory bodies whose missions include workforce development.

The OWIB make the following recommendation to the Governor:

Recommendation #12: Approve a dispute resolution process to resolve disagreements between state agencies and the LWIBs.

The OWIB make the following recommendations to the Governor to enhance support for service delivery:

Recommendation #13: Create a workforce system innovation and capacity building function within the redesigned OED.

Recommendation #14: Develop and integrate information systems to ensure that the state agencies have the tools necessary for service delivery.

Recommendation #15: Challenge state agencies and LWIBs to find local opportunities to pilot new models of service delivery across the workforce system programs.

27

Designing Oregon’s Workforce System for a

Changing Economy

Work Group Recommendations to the


November 4, 2013

Oregon Workforce System Redesign Work Group

28

Workforce System Redesign Work Group

Agnes Balassa, Office of the Governor Krissa Caldwell, Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development

Karen Goddin, Business Oregon

Gerald Hamilton, Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development

Paul Hill, Oregon Employment Department

Karen Humelbaugh, Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development

Dacia Johnson, Oregon Commission for the Blind

Erinn Kelley-Siel, Department of Human Services

Carol Lamon, Department of Human Services.

Melissa Leoni, Oregon Employment Department

Salvador Llerenas, Oregon Employment Department

Clay Martin, Linn Benton Lincoln Workforce Investment Board

Sarah Miller, Department of Administrative Services

Lisa Nisenfeld, Oregon Employment Department

Tracey O’Brien, Office of the Governor

Kim Parker, Workforce Investment Council of Clackamas County

Sou Souvanny, Department of Administrative Services

Stephaine Parrish Taylor, Department of Human Services

29

Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 4

Recommendation Scorecard ......................................................................................................................... 6

I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 7

II. Stakeholder Engagement ................................................................................................................... 10

III. OWIB’s Role in Considering This Report ......................................................................................... 12

IV. Recommendations ............................................................................................................................. 13

A. Creating a Shared Vision, System Outcomes and Measures ......................................................... 13

B. Integrating Service Delivery .......................................................................................................... 17

C. Defining the Governance and Accountability Structure ................................................................ 19

D. Enhancing Support for Service Delivery ....................................................................................... 22

Appendix A Workforce Programs by State Agency .................................................................................. 25

Appendix B PFM High-Level Findings ..................................................................................................... 27

Appendix C List of Stakeholders Engaged ................................................................................................ 30

30

Executive Summary In December 2011, the Governor charged the Oregon Workforce Investment Board (OWIB) with transforming the workforce development system to achieve better outcomes for Oregon’s businesses and for all Oregonians who can and want to work. The recent recession had tested conventional approaches to getting people back to work and meeting business hiring needs, and the Governor asked OWIB to recommend how to proceed in this new environment. As a result, the OWIB adopted the Workforce Development Strategic Plan 2012-2022. By providing a vision, goals, statewide strategies, and outcomes, the OWIB set the stage for changes to the workforce development system with greater responsibility and flexibility to create workforce solutions for local communities.

This work has continued in 2013. The Workforce System Redesign Work Group (Work Group) was formed consisting of leadership from the state workforce agencies, the Governor’s Office, and representatives from Local Workforce Investment Boards. Public Financial Management (PFM) was contracted to identify the barriers to achieving the vision, goals and outcomes established in the OWIB plan, and to recommend changes to Oregon’s workforce system to address these barriers. PFM made 16 separate findings regarding the current state of the workforce system resulting in 20 recommendations, most of which focused on structural changes necessary to fund and manage an efficient and effective workforce system able to invest in new initiatives to meet local workforce needs. Through additional research and substantial stakeholder feedback on PFM’s recommendations, the Work Group makes 15 recommendations to the OWIB to improve services to the workforce system’s customers––job seekers and businesses.

These recommendations are largely focused on structural changes needed to support a more flexible and responsive workforce system. They are intended to address findings that the current system suffers from a lack of clear governance, effective communication, shared vision, strategies for best serving those who are chronically unemployed and underemployed, and clearly understood roles and responsibilities. The resulting inefficiencies reduce resources (including staff time) for services to system customers and investments into new products and services that better address the changing labor market.

The next phase of the workforce redesign effort will focus on identifying the products and services that best meet the needs of workforce system’s varied customers in a changing economy.

The Work Group Recommendations, like the PFM Recommendations, are structured around four areas:

(1) Creating a Shared Vision, System Outcomes and Measures; (2) Defining the Governance and Accountability Structure;

31

(3) Integrating Service Delivery; and (4) Enhancing Support for Service Delivery.

The 15 recommendations are designed to address the system’s dual mission of helping Oregonians, including the chronically unemployed and underemployed, become employed and advance in careers, as well as helping businesses find, keep and advance workers to contribute to the business’ success.

Moreover, the Work Group Recommendations are intended to further the goals set forth in the OWIB strategic plan, which were integrated into the Jobs and Innovation Section of the Oregon’s Ten-Year Plan. The Ten-Year Plan serves as the blue print for state investment. The table on the next page lists the Work Group’s recommendations and shows how these align with the Jobs and Innovation Strategic Principles outlined in the Ten-Year Plan.

32

Recommendation Scorecard

Jobs & Innovation Strategic Principles1

Rec

omm

enda

tion

No.

Work Group Recommendation

Dep

loy

stat

e re

sour

ces i

n w

ays t

hat s

uppo

rt lo

cal

econ

omie

s

Mak

e be

tter

use

of

wor

kfor

ce re

sour

ces

Coo

rdin

ate

with

edu

catio

n pa

rtne

rs to

add

ress

40-

40-

20 g

oals

Incr

ease

the

skill

s of

Ore

gon

wor

kers

Cre

ate “

wor

k re

ady”

co

mm

uniti

es

1 Direct an interagency workgroup to develop a system-wide, state-level balanced score card by June 2014.

2

In partnership with Local Workforce Boards, create a process to cascade state-level metrics to the local level so that local boards can monitor performance and prioritize strategies and resources to maximize results for job seekers.

3

Convene workforce system partners to conduct a system-wide review of existing workforce and employment related programs, services and policies for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and chronically unemployed and underemployed.

4

Direct the workforce system partners to develop a statewide workforce policy for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed that establishes goals for improved workforce services.

5

Direct the workforce system agencies to submit a biennial report to the Governor charting the progress in achieving outcomes for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed as well as documenting special initiatives and efforts to implement best practices.

6

Redesign the Oregon Employment Department (OED) as Oregon’s lead agency for workforce programs, including the relocation of the state WIA Title I-B and Oregon Youth Conservation Corps programs to OED.

7

Enhance the role of the OWIB within the workforce system, including making it the advisory committee to a newly redefined Oregon Employment Department, through legislation in the 2014 Legislative Session.

8 Dedicate professional staff for the OWIB located at OED. 9 Establish clear collaborative relationships with the other state advisory bodies whose

missions include workforce development.

10

Strengthen the role of the LWIBs by entering into charters that clearly spell out the roles and responsibilities of the LWIB as well as the commitments of state agencies and the OWIB in supporting the LWIBs.

11 Direct the LWIBs and workforce agencies to enter into performance compacts to clarify the performance expectations of the LWIBs and the programs in their communities.

12 Approve a dispute resolution process to resolve disagreements between state agencies and the LWIBs.

13 Create a workforce system innovation and capacity building function within the redesigned OED.

14 Develop and integrate information systems to ensure that the state agencies have the tools necessary for service delivery.

15 Challenge state agencies and LWIBs to find local opportunities to pilot new models of service delivery across the workforce system programs.

1 Oregon’s Ten-Year Plan, available at www.oregon.gov/COO/TEN/Pages/index.aspx.

33

http://www.oregon.gov/COO/TEN/Pages/index.aspx

I. Introduction

The Great Recession created unprecedented challenges to the state, including the loss of jobs that will not return, long-term unemployment for many workers, changing skills needs of employers and stagnating incomes for Oregonians. These challenges provide the impetus for Oregon’s workforce system to change how it serves the state’s job seekers and businesses.

What change is needed? The polarization of Oregon’s job market has increased since the conclusion of the Great Recession.2 New high wage, high skill jobs are being created but low wage, low skills jobs are growing at a much higher rate. Middle skill, middle income jobs are shrinking as a share of the economy. At the same time technologies that can significantly impact the future are evolving at incredible speeds. Opportunities for creating an economy that provides opportunities for citizens and new solutions to business and social problems will depend on the skills of Oregonians. If Oregon is to build a highly innovative and adaptable economy, it must help all of its citizens access opportunities to build their skills.

In addition to the hundreds of thousands of Oregonians who access post-secondary education each year, more than 300,000 unemployed, underemployed and transitioning workers receive services via WorkSource Centers and state and community partners. These service locations must offer a more robust menu of options to help those in transition make informed choices about how to invest private and/or public resources in their education and training, and to navigate the vast menu of skill development options available in today’s market place. Service locations must be accessible. Program design must meet the unique needs of the large number of Oregonians who are chronically unemployed and underemployed.

Oregon’s workforce system includes the publicly and privately funded programs and services designed to address the dual mission of helping Oregonians become employed and advance in careers and helping businesses to find, keep and advance workers to contribute to business success. Programs and services include education and training, workforce development, economic development and social services.

Oregon’s State and Local Workforce Investment Boards are charged with better coordinating among these programs to achieve the best possible outcomes. These boards are specifically charged with aligning a significant number of programs and resources designed specifically to help people become employed. These programs are currently administered across the following four state agencies:

• Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development:

2 See Josh Lehner, Job Polarization in Oregon: An Examination of Occupational Growth by Wage Level, 1980- 2012, (Oct. 2013), available at http://oregoneconomicanlaysis.com /2013/10/24/report-job-polarization-in-oregon.

34

http://oregoneconomicanlaysis.com/

o Workforce Investment Act Title I-B: Youth, Adult, Dislocated Workers funded by the U.S. Department of Labor.

o Workforce Investment Act Title I-D: National Emergency Grants funded by the U.S. Department of Labor.

o Workforce Investment Act Title II: Adult Education and Family Literacy funded by the U.S. Department of Education.

• Oregon Employment Department: o Workforce Investment Act Title I-D: National Veterans’ Employment Program

funded by the U.S. Department of Labor. o Workforce Investment Act Title I-D: Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers

Program funded by the U.S. Department of Labor. o Workforce Investment Act Title III-A: Wagner-Peyser (Employment Service)

funded by the U.S. Department of Labor. o Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Trade Readjustment Allowances funded

by the U.S. Department of Labor. o Supplemental Employment Department Administration Fund (SEDAF) funded by

the state. o Unemployment Insurance Benefits funded by employer taxes held in the U.S.

Department of Labor Trust Fund. o Unemployment Insurance Administration funded by the U.S. Department of

Labor. o Federal Grants for Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC), Self-Employment

Assistance (SEA), and Reemployment Eligibility Assessment (REA) funded by the U.S. Department of Labor.

• Department of Human Services o Workforce Investment Act Title IV: Vocational Rehabilitation funded by the U.S.

Department of Education. o Workforce Investment Act Title V: Senior Community Service Employment

Program (SCSEP) funded by the U.S. Department of Labor. o Social Security Act Title IV-A: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families

(TANF) Job Opportunity and Basic Skills (JOBS) program funded by U.S. Department Health and Human Services.

o The Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246): SNAP Oregon Food Stamp Employment and Transition (OFSET) program funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

• Commission for the Blind: o Workforce Investment Act Title IV: Vocational Rehabilitation funded by the U.S.

Department of Education.

35

While the goal of prosperity for Oregonians requires all of the inputs of a larger workforce system, many of the recommendations in this report refer specifically to the programs and resources referenced above.

In June 2013, Oregon’s workforce development agencies3 formed the Workforce System Redesign Work Group (Work Group) and contracted with the Public Financial Management (PFM) to assist Oregon in evaluating its current challenges and recommend changes that would assist in reaching the state’s goals. PFM was asked specifically to identify ways to invest in new services in a resource constrained environment. PFM was also asked to consider how recommendations could strengthen local design, provide more investment at the level closest to jobs seekers and businesses—the local level—and increase accountability.

The Work Group developed transformation principles to guide their work and the work of PFM. Oregon’s workforce system needs to be transformed in a way that:

• Results in employment and greater prosperity. o Advances the Governor’s 40-40-20 education goal to build a more highly skilled

citizenry as a driver of economic development and prosperity. o Puts more Oregonians to work in good jobs. o Accelerates the reemployment of the unemployed and decreases unemployment

among the disabled, veterans, those in poverty, and the underserved. o Assures that businesses have the skilled workers they need to innovate and grow. o Assures that more Oregonians are job ready.

• Achieves the best possible outcomes with current resources. o Aligns outcomes and measures across programs. o Enhances a culture of accountability, data-based decision making and continuous

learning. o Increases efficiency in the use of public resources.

• Offers seamless access and support for customers – businesses and job seekers. • Increases alignment of inextricable, systemic relationships between education, economic

development and workforce development. • Promotes local innovation in the achievement of state goals.

o Aligns policies and practices at the state level to support unique responses to local economies and characteristics of regions and communities.

o Gives local boards the guidance, authority, responsibility and resources to improve results.

• Provides opportunities for public and private efforts to meet the unique needs of individuals and businesses

3 Oregon’s workforce agencies include the Department of Human Services, the Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development, Business Oregon and the Employment Department as well as the Office of the Governor.

36

Across the state, PFM met with agencies, program managers, service providers, and workforce partners. In addition, businesses and job seekers were surveyed about the current workforce system and programs. This work resulted in 16 Findings. (See Appendix B). The most telling finding was that Oregon’s current system ―lacks strong, clear governance, clear communications and strong collaboration among the workforce system, economic development and education‖4

which results in a lack of alignment of resources to achieve system goals and create synergies. Also of note among the finding is that the system lacks ―flexibility and agility in delivering training to better meet the needs of employers and job seekers in changing economic conditions.‖5 Moreover, PFM found the system lacks a focus on Oregonians that are chronically unemployed and underemployed, including the persons living with disabilities and those living at or below the poverty line.

On September 20th, PFM presented their findings and recommendations to the Oregon Workforce Investment Board (OWIB). There were 20 recommendations by PFM, organized around four areas: (1) Creating a Shared Vision, System Outcomes and Measures; (2) Defining the Governance and Accountability Structure; (3) Integrating Service Delivery; and (4) Enhancing Support for Service Delivery.

II. Stakeholder Engagement

Immediately following the release of the PFM recommendations, staff engaged stakeholders online, in-person and by phone to gather feedback. The Governor’s Office, Oregon Employment Department (OED), the Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development (CCWD), and Department of Human Services (DHS) conducted approximately 70 engagement and listening forums with program managers, Local Workforce Investment Boards, businesses, advisory groups, regional coordinators, staff, community partners and post-secondary partners.

In addition, staff and the public were provided the opportunity to offer open-ended feedback through the Workforce System Redesign website. More than 250 comments came in from private citizens, staff and partner organizations.

During the month-long feedback session, comments centered on the following major themes:

Timing

There was general agreement that the timing of the Workforce System Redesign is right. Many comments were supportive, although many noted hesitation to accept all the recommendations as presented in the PFM report.

4 Public Financial Management (PFM), ―State of Oregon—Findings and Recommendations‖, (2013) at page 1. 5 Id at 2.

37

Achieving Clarity and Agreement on Vision and Outcome

These comments centered on developing a clear vision and consensus on specific and measureable outcomes. There were concerns that the recommendations lacked details and provided no criteria for measuring success. Comments noted that existing efforts to develop common outcomes and measures should be the foundation for future work.

Clarifying the Costs and Benefits of Redesign

A number of comments focused on cost, suggesting the cost of the redesign should be weighed against the benefits. Some sought clarity on how the efforts would lead to better outcomes.

Finding Balance

These comments focused on striking a balance between the needs of employers and those of job seekers, between the value of a larger combined state workforce agency, and maintaining the agility inherent in a small existing organization, and between a stronger state board and local flexibility. It was suggested that strong partnerships with education and economic development should be created or strengthened to align services without using existing limited resources. Some recommended creating incentives for businesses to use the workforce system.

Leveraging Partnerships to Support all Oregonians

Comments noted that accessibility of services is not the same as equity. Redesign of services should provide the same quality of services for everyone but take into consideration the unique needs of special populations. It was noted that those living in poverty and facing barriers to employment have not always experienced success using the existing workforce system.

Realigning the Geographic Boundaries of Local Workforce Investment Areas

The most common comment in this section is that different areas have different needs. Any change in geographic boundaries should be done in collaboration with the employers and those that serve the community, whether it is urban or rural.

Creating a Better “F ront Door” for all U sers

Comments supported a ―no wrong door‖ approach. Regardless of where a job seeker enters the system, they should be provided with quality service that is unique to their needs. It was suggested that linking information technology across the workforce system to provide an integrated interface would enable staff to be more efficient and enhance customer service for both job seekers and businesses.

38

Moving the Office of the Administrative Hearings (OAH)

Everyone who commented on the OAH was supportive of the office separating from OED. There were varying opinions on where it should be located.

Keeping the Good Parts of the System

Comments noted that there are parts of the current system that work well. This good work should not be lost during a redesign.

Questions About an Umbrella Agency

Comments voiced concerns that the creation of a new agency could increase bureaucracy and costs. Some recommended using collaboration from within the system instead of charging one agency to mandate changes. Others suggested that a new structure should be built from the bottom up by identifying efficiencies, removing duplication and defining roles before building a larger structure or organization.

As a result of the feedback received and on-going research, the Work Group developed the set of staff recommendations contained in this report to the OWIB for its consideration.

III. OWI B’s Rol e in Considering This Report

The Oregon Workforce Investment Board (OWIB) is created pursuant to the Federal Workforce Investment Act and is codified in Oregon Revised Statute sections 660.321 and 660.324. The OWIB is comprised of the Governor (or his representative) and a majority of representatives from the private sector, as well as representatives of public agencies with a role in workforce development and education, representatives of labor, locally elected officials, and representatives of community based organizations.6

The OWIB is tasked with developing a single, unified state plan for the statewide workforce investment system and submitting the plan for the Governor’s approval. In addition, the OWIB is tasked with assisting the Governor in developing Oregon’s workforce system, ensuring timely consultation and collaboration with workforce stakeholders and recommending the duties and responsibilities of state agencies in implementing the federal Workforce Investment Act.

The OWIB, as an advisory board, is receiving the Work Group recommendations and will decide whether or not to endorse the recommendations for the Governor’s consideration. As OWIB weighs the Work Group recommendations, it must consider whether the recommendations help the board meet its and the Governor’s mission to transform the workforce development system to

6 See The Workforce Investment Act, 29 U.S.C. §2821(2013).

39

achieve better outcomes for Oregon’s businesses and for all Oregonians who can and want to work.

IV. Recommendations

The following Work Group Recommendations are organized around the four thematic areas of change developed by PFM:

• Creating a Shared Vision, System Outcomes and Measures; • Integrating Service Delivery; • Defining the Governance and Accountability Structure; • Enhancing Support for Service Delivery.

Building on the work done by PFM, the Work Group identifies 15 recommendations for immediate focus by the OWIB. Several of PFM’s recommendations, including exploring opportunities to redesignate and realign Local Workforce Investment Areas, were identified as meriting additional research, stakeholder engagement and discussion prior to any specific recommendations being made. Recommendations related to these topics may be part of a later phase of implementation.

A. Creating a Shared Vision, System Outcomes and Measures

Oregon has already developed a strategic foundation to guide its investment into workforce programs and services in the Ten-Year Plan for Oregon as part of the Governor’s budget process. The outcomes and strategies adopted by the OWIB in the Oregon Workforce Strategic Plan 2012-2022 were integrated in the Jobs and Innovation Section of the Ten-Year Plan. The strategic principles identified in the Ten-Year Plan will guide the development of workforce products and services for the State of Oregon.

Jobs & Innovation Strategic Principles7

• Deploy state resources in ways that support local economies and their economic development decisions.

• Increase the skills of Oregon workers, particularly in sectors critical to local economies.

• Make better use of workforce resources in order to optimize training, skill development and certification resources.

• Create ―work ready‖ communities, with special attention to the needs of locally- identified key populations and community needs.

7 Oregon’s Ten-Year Plan, available at www.oregon.gov/COO/TEN/Pages/index.aspx.

40

http://www.oregon.gov/COO/TEN/Pages/index.aspx

• Coordinate with education partners to address 40-40-20 goals, particularly related to in- demand ―middle skill‖ jobs and career/technical education.

Utilizing the Jobs & Innovation Strategic Principles as the strategic foundation for the change in Oregon’s workforce system, the Governor expects the following results:

• Resource planning and alignment between a state workforce agency and partners, particularly local workforce boards;

• State and local partners will work to support local sector strategies and to cross-pollinate successful strategies across the state;

• An examination of the cost-effectiveness and relevance of existing tools and efforts, creating savings through financial efficiencies that can then be reprogrammed for training, skills development and certification or other services in local systems; and

• The maximization of public-private partnerships to effectively address the needs of businesses and job seekers.

Align Measures and Outcomes Across the Workforce System

In 2012, the OWIB created a set of system-wide outcomes within their Strategic Plan that every system participant and every community must seek to achieve.

Oregon’s Workforce Strategic Plan 2012-2022 Outcomes8

For Employers For Oregonians • Oregon employers find the skilled workers they need and retain them. • Oregon’s targeted sectors experience job growth. • Employers are satisfied with workforce development services and results.

• Oregon’s workers possess the skills and abilities required by business. • Oregon’s workers see higher earnings. • Workforce development participants are satisfied with workforce development services and results.

• The workforce system operates with

The System • Return on investment.

increased efficiency and greater coordination. In order to know whether the OWIB system-wide outcomes are being achieved, the next critical step is to develop a system-wide, state-level ―balanced score card‖ reflecting outcome and process measures that will allow the OWIB, Local Workforce Investment Boards (LWIBs), state agencies, and the public to track system performance, celebrate accomplishments and prioritize areas for improvement.

8 Oregon Workforce Investment Board, Oregon’s Workforce Development Strategic Plan 2012-2022.

41

To that end, an interagency workgroup (including individuals representing state and local interests across workforce programs) should be tasked to develop a system-wide, state-level balanced scorecard for OWIB to review by June 2014. The balanced scorecard could include metrics that demonstrate: the number of job seekers who find work, enter education or training programs, and retain a position at set benchmarks; system-wide average earnings, average wage gain, and skill gains for workforce system participants; employer and job seeker satisfaction with workforce programs; targeted industries growth; and return on investment. Metrics should be broken out by demographic data where possible to ensure accountability for performance across different populations.

Once the state-level balanced score card is established, efforts should be made to ―cascade‖ state-level metrics to the local level. LWIBs and their local workforce partners should have access to real-time data relevant to their local service delivery areas so that they can monitor program performance and engage locally in conversations that focus on how best to prioritize strategies and resources to maximize results for Oregonians.

Common outcome and process measures at the state and local levels will increase system-wide accountability for outcomes. Shared metrics will inform resource allocation and priorities for system improvements, as well as help connect each and every partner throughout the workforce system to a common set of accountability metrics. Finally, and most importantly, shared accountability for results will maximize resources, improve system performance and strengthen outcomes for Oregonians.

Work Group Recommendation #1:

Direct an interagency workgroup to develop a system-wide, state-level balanced score card by June 2014.



Emphasize Equity & Outcomes for Chronically Unemployed and Underemployed Populations

Many Oregonians’ attempts to enter the workforce and gain financial independence are met with challenges. For instance, of the 383,381 working age Oregonians with disabilities, only 35.7 percent of these individuals are employed and their median annual wage $14,036. For a family of four, the federal poverty line for 2013 is $23,455 in annual income. The most recent figure for Oregonians living at or below the federal poverty line is 662,285 individuals—over 17 percent of the state’s population. The Urban League of Portland’s The State of Oregon reported that work participation of black males is nine percent lower than his white counterpart; for black

42

females it is six percent lower. Thirty-nine percent of black children live in household whose income below the poverty level. According to ―Facing Race: 2011 Legislative Report Card on Racial Equity‖, Oregon’s unemployment rate for people of color in 2009 included 15 percent of Blacks and 14 percent of Latinos. In Oregon, the report cites that while 13 percent of Whites are poor, 39 percent of Blacks, 23 percent of Native Americans, 40 percent of Pacific Islanders and 28 percent of Latinos live in poverty. These are just a few examples of Oregonians facing barriers to employment and prosperity.

The issues surrounding workforce services to persons with disabilities, individuals living at or below the poverty level and chronically unemployed and underemployed were the subject of robust stakeholder feedback. Several advocate groups criticized the PFM Recommendations for not sufficiently recognizing the unique needs of these job seekers and for failing to identify specific strategies to address those needs. In addition, there was a great deal of concern expressed regarding the role and status of current programs housed in the Department of Human Services in the umbrella agency recommended by PFM. (See also Work Group Recommendation #6). Finally, concerns were raised about the need for adequate representation of people with expertise in serving special populations in the workforce governance structure at the state and local levels. The Work Group weighed these concerns seriously in reaching these recommendations.

Oregon must continue to prioritize the work to improve outcomes for those who are chronically underemployed and unemployed, including persons with disabilities and persons living at or below the poverty line. The Governor has already identified this as a priority in his ―Employment First‖ Executive Order (No. 13-04), affirming the state’s commitment to offering integrated employment services to individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The Prosperity Initiative, led by the First Lady, is intended to continue to shed a light on these issues and identify effective solutions. And the Closing the Employment Gap Work Group has prioritized several targeted strategies to advance improved outcomes for those populations.

In order to ensure the continued commitment to increasing outcomes for all Oregonians, there should be a full review of existing workforce and employment related programs, services and policies designed to serve persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed. As a result of this review, the state should develop an overarching workforce policy to ensure consistency and equitable service delivery for improved workforce services for persons with disabilities, individuals living at or below the poverty line, and the chronically unemployed and underemployed, including minority groups. In addition, the Local Workforce Investment Boards should be required to include strategies to effectively meet goals for improved service in partnership with the Department of Human Services and community partners and guide these individuals to appropriate jobs in their local plans. A biennial report to the Governor should be published by the workforce agencies and

43

their partners chartering the progress in achieving outcomes and documenting special initiatives and efforts to implement best practices.




Direct the state workforce system partners to develop a statewide workforce policy for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed that establishes goals for improved workforce services.



B. Integrating Service Delivery

PFM found that Oregon’s current workforce system suffers from a ―lack of streamlined functionality‖.9 Moreover, current economic conditions at the federal, state and local levels indicate that state and federal workforce funds are not expected to increase in the near future. As a result, Oregon could benefit from streamlining administrative functions, leveraging best practices and creating the structural framework for a more integrated, flexible and visionary system.

Redesign the Oregon Employment Department to Serve as Oregon ’s Lea d Agency

for Workforce Programs

In light of shrinking resources, Governor Kitzhaber charged the OWIB with the creation of a workforce system that is more highly aligned, integrated and effective at helping Oregon’s job seekers and businesses thrive. Currently, the majority of workforce programs and resources that support those who are unemployed and underemployed are administered at the Oregon Employment Department (OED). Other substantial resources are administered by the

9 PFM, ―State of Oregon – Findings and Recommendations‖, (2013) at page 16.

44

Department of Human Services and the Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development.

PFM recommended (PFM Recommendation #3A) that Oregon create one umbrella workforce agency to include all these programs and resources. However, the Work Group is not recommending the full integration of all workforce programs into one umbrella agency at this time. Instead, the Work Group recommends the redesign of the current OED to become a more comprehensive workforce agency with the integration of specific programs necessary to achieve an expanded mission. Many states have chosen to integrate their Workforce Investment Act Title I-B programs with the programs currently administered at the OED. PFM compared Oregon’s workforce agency structure with that of nine peer states selected to serve as benchmarks because of their similar commitment to integrate significant components of the workforce service delivery. (See Appendix A). While there are some differences in how these states have organized workforce programs into agencies, all but Oregon and Oklahoma included the Workforce Investment Act Title I-B program with the Employment Department programs in one agency.

While stakeholders were varied in their responses to the creation of a new single workforce agency, concerns about the impact of a single agency on persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed, led the Work Group to recommend a phased approach. Questions about the federal complexities of integrating some of these programs also require additional research to determine how to best integrate and align the remaining workforce programs as appropriate into a redesigned and repurposed OED. The specific PFM Recommendation that the Office of Administrative Hearings be moved out of OED and into another state agency was met with uniform support and did not raise similar concerns.

Because the workforce system resources in WIA Title I-B, currently administered by CCWD, are critical to this effort, the WIA Title I-B and the Oregon Youth Conservation Corp programs should be integrated into OED as soon as feasible. An effort should be made to maintain the nimble and responsive nature of a smaller agency and culture while integrating into a larger organization that has other advantages.

Pending more analysis to determine exactly how the rest of the workforce programs best align with or within the newly redesigned OED, performance compacts should be developed among the state workforce agencies, including Department of Human Services where many other workforce programs are administered. The compacts will support better alignment of the programs while additional research and stakeholder consultation is conducted regarding how best to align the other workforce programs with the lead workforce agency for the state. While state research continues, OWIB should convene a statewide series of design meetings staffed by state agencies and local workforce investment boards. These meetings will help develop

45

recommendations about how to better integrate state level infrastructure based on local delivery goals and strategies.

In addition to analysis and research on the best way to align programs, the second phase should focus on service delivery and design which will also inform what additional structural changes or compacts may be required in subsequent phases. Given Oregon’s biennial budget cycles and the possible need for legislative action, these phases will most likely occur over several biennia. Service delivery reforms should focus on the best ways to deploy WorkSource staff, focusing on cross-team services within the WorkSource Centers. In addition, service delivery should ensure the post-secondary system receives well-prepared students from the workforce system.

The OWIB will serve as the primary advisory board of the newly redesigned OED in order to ensure the coordination of the statewide workforce policy and implementation of Oregon’s Strategic Plan. (See also Work Group Recommendation #7). This should be accomplished in the first phase of implementation.

Oregon has required the alignment of Title I-B and OED programs at the local service levels; the time has come for the state structure to parallel what is already occurring with the workforce system partners at the local level in order to ensure consistency and coordination. By integrating these programs into one agency, resources will be freed up and redeployed to better support services delivered locally to the workforce system’s customers—job seekers and businesses.


Redesign the Oregon Employment Department as Oregon’s lead agency for workforce programs, including the relocation of the state level WIA Title I-B and Oregon Youth Conservation Corps programs to OED.

C. Defining the Governance and Accountability Structure One of the most significant findings by PFM was that ―at present, Oregon’s Workforce System lacks strong governance, clear strategic communication and direction, as well as regular coordination among affiliated governing partners in economic development and education.‖10

This is evidenced by agencies operating within their own silos, lacking formalized delineation of each partner’s roles and responsibilities within the system and the lack of engagement of economic development and education system partners.

Redefine, Repurpose and Strengthen the Role of the OWIB

Governor Kitzhaber’s Executive Order No.13-08 recognized a strengthened role for the OWIB for driving workforce strategy within Oregon prior PFM’s Recommendations. The

10 PFM, ―State of Oregon–Findings and Recommendations‖, (2013) at page 10.

46

Recommendation from PFM (PFM Recommendation #2A) seconds this by proposing that the OWIB become a more assertive board with dedicated staff and clear lines of authority and accountability related to the OED, other state workforce agencies and the LWIBs. The Work Group agrees with this concept and has developed it further in this recommendation.

As envisioned, the OWIB would continue to provide advice to the Governor on the workforce system. This includes recommending system outcomes, effective strategies to achieve outcomes, strategic investments, performance measures, opportunities to increase system alignment, and supporting innovative efforts by the LWIBs and local partners.

The current statute falls short of providing OWIB with any clear authority for holding workforce programs and LWIBs accountable for meeting goals. During the past several years, the OWIB has limited its focus to overseeing the activities funded by Title I-B of Workforce Investment Act which is only one of the resources available to achieve the vision and goals of the workforce system. Therefore, the Work Group recommends that the OWIB hold accountable all of the workforce programs previously identified on pages 7 and 8. This accountability would include sanctions for chronically underperforming programs.

The OWIB would also formally approve the local strategic plans, enter into performance compacts, and regularly review local system outcomes. Second, the OWIB would promote alignment of the workforce system by working with other state agencies administering workforce related programs to increase efficiencies and eliminate duplication. Third, the OWIB would work with the Oregon Education Investment Board, Higher Education Coordinating Council and the Oregon Business Development Commission to identify common areas of interest to better align resources and to recommend strategies for reaching statewide goals. Fourth, the OWIB will hold an annual conference to promote effective workforce strategies. Finally, the OWIB will publish a biennial report on the state of Oregon’s workforce system which will include a progress report on outcomes.

In addition, the OWIB, under Work Group Recommendation #6, would provide guidance to the Oregon Employment Department (OED), as the new lead agency on workforce policy, including the deployment of strategic investments and program evaluations. The OWIB may need to restructure its subcommittees to reflect this new role and to assure that all appropriate representation is provided for those who are chronically unemployed and underemployed.

In order to ensure statewide success, the OWIB should work with other advisory bodies, including, but not limited to, the State Rehabilitation Council, the Commission for the Blind, the State Apprenticeship Council and the Higher Education Coordinating Council, to collaborate and coordinate program and policy work and create new, more effective relationships.

For the OWIB to be successful in its new enhanced role three things must occur. First, each OWIB member must make a commitment to be substantively engaged in the work. The board

47

members must lead on issues of human capital and workforce development as well as be representative of the varied interests of the many unique populations within the workforce system. Second, there must be dedicated professional staff, similar to other state boards, located together at OED. In the short term, a memorandum of understanding should be developed between the appropriate agencies to ensure the resources and staffing is made available. Finally, many of the changes recommended in this section will require authorization by the Legislature. The Work Group recommends that legislation be developed and introduced in the 2014 Session to enhance the OWIB’s statutory powers to reflect the recommendations in this report.


Enhance the role of the OWIB within the workforce system, including making it the advisory committee to a newly redesigned OED, through legislation in the 2014 Legislative Session.


Dedicate professional staff for the OWIB at OED.


Establish clear collaborative relationships with the other state advisory bodies whose missions include workforce development.

Redefine, Repurpose and Strengthen the Role of LWIBs

Governor Kitzhaber’s Executive Order No.13-08 also creates a strengthened role for the Local Workforce Investment Boards (LWIBs). Through the Order, the LWIBs will be rechartered to serve as neutral, independent brokers of workforce services, investing in services from those equipped to deliver the best possible results. The LWIBs will help to direct public workforce investments from the state and local level for talent development, job creation, income progression, business competitiveness, integrated service delivery and expanded opportunities for citizen prosperity based on outcome data and best practices.

This new role of independent broker was intended to provide the LWIBs with the neutrality necessary to not only convene all local partners for the development of a local strategic workforce plan, but also to create transparency for evaluation and accountability for results. These newly rechartered LWIBs will be positioned to identify partnerships and opportunities to increase resources for workforce development in their communities.

The Work Group agrees with PFM’s recommendation to strengthen and repurpose the LWIBs, with a specific focus on better aligning the LWIBs with economic development through greater use of labor market expertise.

48

In addition, the Work Group recommends that the new charters for the LWIBs clearly spell out the roles, responsibilities and authority of these boards. These charters should clarify that LWIBs have the responsibility for building strategic workforce plans that are comprehensive and include a variety of partners. By agreeing to these charters, state agencies and LWIBs will acknowledge their responsibilities in supporting these roles and providing consistent messaging and guidance to their staff and contractors. Agencies will also be agreeing to provide the data required by the LWIBs to fulfill their responsibilities for accountability and visa versa.

The OWIB strategic plan recommended the creation of compacts with the LWIBs as a mechanism to clarify expectations for outcomes and create accountability for results. The Work Group also recommends the creation of performance compacts with LWIBs as a tool for increasing accountability. The parties to the performance compacts will include those agencies responsible for the programs and resources identified on pages 7 and 8. Compacts will clarify the reporting relationship between the LWIBs and the OWIB.

Finally, the Work Group recommends the development of a dispute resolution mechanism to settle disputes between state agencies and the LWIBs for the approval of the OWIB. This will assure that there is a clear and established process for resolution when disagreements occur.


Strengthen the role of the LWIBs by entering into charters that clearly spell out the roles and responsibilities of the LWIB and the commitments of state agencies and the OWIB in supporting the LWIBs.


Direct the LWIBs and workforce agencies to enter into performance compacts to clarify the performance expectations of the LWIBS and the programs in their communities.


Approve a dispute resolution process to resolve disagreements between state agencies and the LWIBs.

D. Enhancing Support for Service Delivery In light of the current fiscal environment, the workforce system must be more thoughtful and strategic in deploying its resources. This requires a new method of collaboration and cross- pollination of innovations and best practices between all workforce partners.

In addition PFM’s report underscored the importance of having a workforce information system integrated and supportive of staff functions. The system needs to support local service delivery, provide the data to ensure system-wide accountability and transparency, and ensures a ―no- wrong door‖ approach for customer interfaces. Moreover, there is a need to support case

49

management and staff services in a new way that frees staff from the burden of serving the needs of the administrative system over the needs of our real-life customers.

Increase Innovation and Capacity Building

The Governor’s Executive Order and this workforce system redesign effort call for locally- determined workforce and economic development policy initiatives. However, PFM found that Oregon’s Workforce System currently lacks the capacity to replicate and share successful workforce programs across boundaries and recommended the creation of an office dedicated to increasing innovation and capacity building to serve as a primary resource for the workforce system as a whole.

The Work Group recommends the creation of a workforce system innovation and capacity building function within OED. OED, as Oregon’s lead workforce agency, will be uniquely placed to cross-pollinate good ideas and effective strategies from agency to agency, place to place within Oregon and from other states. One of the stakeholder criticisms of the PFM report was that it failed to recognize all the good work going on within the current system. This speaks to the necessity of a centralized group focused on creating opportunities to encourage innovation and build capacity to provide the best services possible to all the workforce system customers.

One of the best ways to encourage innovation is through incentives. OED should be tasked with developing a fund for grants and loans for local innovation that addresses challenges and conditions. Innovations eligible for funding could include piloting of new programs or service delivery models as well as special training for staff. These projects could be funded through administrative cost-savings, partner investments as well as public and private investments.


Support the creation of a workforce system innovation and capacity building function within the redesigned OED.

Ensure Workforce Agencies Have the Information Technology Necessary for Service Delivery

PFM’s findings and recommendations underscore the need to share data and better manage common customers in the workforce system. All Oregonians utilizing the workforce system deserve a streamlined, less bureaucratic and consistent entry into services. The concept of ―No Wrong Door‖ is more than a simple referral to another program down the hall or down the street—it is a true integration of data and customer approach across funding streams, agencies and programs. Ultimately, it is to provide the best service to our system’s customers—the job seekers and the businesses.

The workforce agencies must have the tools necessary to support service delivery, including: intake and registration; eligibility and assessment; benefits payments; case management; labor

50

exchange; and performance management and reporting. The exact details of what is required for these systems vary for each tool and each agency. Moreover, each agency has a different team tasked with the development and support of these systems. This recommendation will take a concerted effort by the workforce agencies to develop and implement over a period of time.

In the meantime, the OWIB should challenge the workforce system agencies to find local opportunities to pilot new models of service delivery to job seekers and businesses.


Develop and integrate information systems to ensure that the state agencies have the tools necessary for service delivery.


Challenge state agencies and LWIBs to find local opportunities to pilot new models of service delivery across workforce system programs.

V. Conclusion

The Work Group, through stakeholder feedback on the PFM Recommendations and additional research, has made 15 recommendations to redesign Oregon’s workforce system to better align with OWIB’s Strategic Plan and achieve better outcomes for Oregon’s businesses and for all Oregonians who can and want to work. These recommendations will be formally presented to the OWIB at its November 8th board meeting. At that time, the OWIB will also solicit public comments on the recommendations. The Board will decide whether or not to endorse the recommendations to the Governor at the December 6th OWIB meeting. In the meantime, efforts to prepare legislation for those items that require legislative approval will begin.

The Work Group sees these recommendations as the first phase of a longer effort to better align resources to support innovations in service delivery and continually improve outcomes. The next phases of this work will help to identify best and promising practices and to continue to align infrastructure to support those practices.

51

Appendix A

Workforce Programs by State Agency 11

Wor

kfor

ce In

vest

men

t Act

Wag

ner-

Pey

ser

Une

mpl

oym

ent I

nsur

ance

Labo

r Mar

ket I

nfor

mat

ion

Eco

nom

ic D

evel

opm

ent

Adul

t Edu

catio

n

Trad

e

Adj

ustm

ent

Voc

atio

nal R

ehab

ilitat

ion

Tem

pora

ry A

ssis

tanc

e fo

r N

eedy

Fam

ilies

V

eter

ans

OREGON

Community Colleges & W orkforce Dev.

Oregon Employment Department

BusinessOregon

Department of Human Services

CALIFORNIA

Employment Development Department

Office of Business & Econ. Development

Department of Education

Department of Rehabilitation Services

Department of Social Services

INDIANA

Department of Workforce Development

Indiana Economic Dev. Corp.

Family and Social Services Administration

IOWA

Iowa Workforce Development

Iowa Economic Development Authority

Department of Education

Department of Human Services

11 PFM, Peer State Benchmarking White Paper (2013).

52

Wor

kfor

ce In

vest

men

t Act

Wag

ner-

Pey

ser

Une

mpl

oym

ent I

nsur

ance

Labo

r Mar

ket I

nfor

mat

ion

Eco

nom

ic D

evel

opm

ent

Adul

t Edu

catio

n

Trad

e

Adj

ustm

ent

Voc

atio

nal R

ehab

ilitat

ion

Tem

pora

ry A

ssis

tanc

e fo

r Nee

dy F

amili

es

Vet

eran

s

MICHIGAN

Workforce Development Agency

Unemployment Insurance Agency Michigan Economic Dev. Corp Department of Human Services* Dept. of Tech., Management, & Budget

MISSISSIPPI Department of Employment Security

Mississippi Development Authority Community College Board Department of Rehabilitation Services Department of Human Services

NEW YORK Department of Labor

Empire State Development Department of Education Department of Family Assistance

OKLAHOMA Employment Security Commission

Dept of Commerce Department of Education Department of Rehabilitation Services Department of Human Services

TEXAS Texas Workforce Commission

Texas Economic Development Division Texas Education Agency Dept. of Assistive & Rehab. Services Health and Human Services Commission

53

Appendix B PFM High-Level Findings12

In an effort for the PFM team to effectively share their system findings with the WPC they first developed a comprehensive database of system findings that was initially sorted into topic areas that included Accountability, Business Processes, Customer Service, Financial Management, Integration, Organizational Structure, Personnel, Procurement and Technology. The findings were ranked on an impact scale (1=low, 4=high) and outlined by department. These findings were based on consistent themes discovered through site visits to field offices and central staff offices; interviews with leadership, stakeholders and front-line staff; internal and external customer service surveys; information requests and organizational reviews from those agencies defined in the Workforce System Organizational Review section.

This comprehensive database of findings was further refined into four key thematic areas. The overall findings within each of these thematic areas are described below:

Leadership, Accountability and Alignment: The findings in this section acknowledge the need for stronger governance of the Oregon Workforce System, as well as stronger collaboration between the Workforce System, economic development and education. The current Workforce System has no clear lines of program authority or super-structure to provide system-wide governance and accountability. Workforce policy, products and services are generated by multiple state agencies and delivered locally through multiple providers. Plans are not aligned and information systems are not interconnected.

Performance, Customer Service and Equity: The findings in this section acknowledge the need for consistent performance across the Oregon Workforce System, as well as more of a focus on those segments of Oregon’s population with historically higher unemployment rates. They also highlight the demand for streamlined administrative processes; opportunities to leverage successful practices across the system and the lack of knowledge employers have about how the Workforce System can be helpful to them.

Integration: The findings in this section acknowledge the need for one single point of accessing all Workforce System products and services for both employers and customers seeking skill development or jobs, and streamlining employer contacts.

State/Local Relationships: The findings in this section acknowledge the need for the State to identify WHAT results are to be achieved and align functions so that the locals will have the support and resources to determine HOW the results will be achieved.

12 PFM, ―State of Oregon–Findings and Recommendations‖, (2013)

54

From these thematic findings, the WPC put together a summary of the findings that were used to ensure that the collective message from the redesign project input process was clear and consistent for internal and external stakeholders. These findings were categorized in five key areas: Governance, Workforce System Needs, Roles, Data/Accountability and Equity Impact. The findings within each key area are outlined below:

Governance • Oregon’s Workforce System lacks strong clear governance, clear communication and

strong collaboration among the Workforce System, economic development and education.

• The current Workforce System has no clear lines of program authority or super-structure to provide system-wide governance and accountability.

• Workforce policy, products and services are generated by multiple state agencies and delivered locally through multiple providers.

• Workforce program plans are not aligned and information systems are not interconnected. Workforce System Needs

• The current system lacks flexibility and agility in delivering training to better meet employer and job seeker needs based on economic conditions.

• The system does not fully reflect the needs and engagement of those it serves (both businesses and job seekers).

• The current system does not systemically engage feedback from businesses and job seekers to influence changes for the whole system.

• The current system suffers from lack of streamlined administrative processes, missed opportunities to leverage successful practices across the system and employer knowledge about how the Workforce System can be helpful to them.

Roles • Roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined for all levels of the system and

formalized in compacts or other agreements (i.e. OWIB, LWIBs, and Community Colleges, agency field staff or contracted providers of service).

• State agency programs do not have clearly defined roles and responsibilities and relationship to the system governance model.

• There is not currently a clear sustainable feedback loop with businesses in all levels of the system that provides consistent information about their needs and the system’s ability to meet their needs.

Data/Accountability • There is not a common set of outcomes that drive the activities of the Workforce System.

55

• There is no mechanism to create a shared understanding of and accountability for outcomes by all partners.

• The integrated system lacks effective data collection, integration and reporting at both the state and local level, with a focus on a population and sector lens.

• The current Workforce System does not have immediate feedback loops built in to foster accountability for outcomes.

Equity Impacts • The Workforce System lacks a focus on those segments of Oregon’s population with

historically higher unemployment rates.

56

Appendix C List of Stakeholders Engaged (Excluding website)

Adult Basic Skills Directors American Federation of Labor Career and Technical Education Regional Coordinators Career Pathways Alliance CareOregon Central City Concern City of Roseburg Economic Development Commission Closing the Employment Gap Workgroup Community Action Partnership of Oregon Community Colleges and Workforce Development Staff County Commissioners

• Douglas County • Jackson County Board of Commissioners

Department Human Services • Aging and People with Disabilities • Child Welfare Services • Children Adults and Family Division • Contractors • Financial services • Human Resources • Interstate Compact of the Placement of Children • OBI • Office of Equity and Multicultural Services • Oregon Project Independence (Central Office staff) • Self Sufficiency staff • Staff • Vocational Rehabilitation

Home Forward Housing Authority of Washington County Human Services Coalition of Oregon Local Workforce Investment Boards

• Job Growers Incorporated • Lane Workforce Partnership • Linn, Benton, Lincoln Workforce Investment Board • Rogue Valley Partnership (Jackson and Josephine County)

57

• The Oregon Consortium/Oregon Workforce Alliance • Workforce Investment Council of Clackamas County Board Member • WorkSystems, Inc • Contractors

Manufacturing 21 Coalition Neighborhood Partnerships Options for Southern Oregon Oregon Association of Community Corrections Directors Oregon Bioscience Association Oregon Commission for the Blind Oregon Community College Association Oregon Community College Presidents Oregon Education Investment Board Oregon Employment Department

• Advisory Council • Business Group • Communications Office • Executive Team • Facilities Staff • Financial Services Staff • Front Desk Staff • Human Resources Staff • IT Services Staff • Mailroom Staff • Office of Administrative Hearings • Oregon Employer Councils • Research Division • Trade Act • Training Programs Unit • Unemployment Insurance

o Bend o Eugene

o Metro • WorkSource Offices

o Albany o Astoria

o Baker City o Beaverton-Hillsboro

58

o Bend o Brookings o Coos Bay o Enterprise o Eugene o Grants Pass o Gresham o Klamath o La Grande o McMinnville o Medford o Oregon City o Pendleton o Redmond o Roseburg o Salem o South Willamette Valley and Southwest Oregon o St. Helens o The Dalles o Tillamook o Tualatin

Oregon Health Authority • Office of Information Services • Payroll

Oregon Supported Employment for Excellence OWIB Member - Assistant Vice Chancellor for Industry Partnerships Oregon Workforce Partnership Partner Meeting: The Job Council, OED, and DHS (Jackson and Josephine County) Representatives for public housing authorities for Multnomah and Washington Counties Rogue Valley CC Partners and Economic Development Partners (Jackson and Josephine County) State Independent Living Council State Rehabilitation Council Technology Association of Oregon TANF/Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Program Contractors Urban League of Portland

59

For Community Colleges

What Stays the Same? What Changes? Community College Comprehensive Mission - Workforce system redesign will not diminish the

career and technical offerings in Community Colleges nor affect the rest of the comprehensive mission of the colleges to provide education for AA and transfer degrees, workforce development, and basic skills remediation. Workforce redesign does not seek to turn community colleges into junior colleges or change their mission in their communities

Increased support for the mission - Redesign will result in stronger Local Workforce

Investment Boards that can provide additional support for the college mission and the achievement of middle 40 goals

Governance - At the state level, the HECC will continue to be

the governing body for Community Colleges. - At the local level, Community Colleges continue

to be the governing board for colleges. Redesign does not impact the autonomy of the Community College Boards

- At the state and local level, the Community Colleges will continue to have a seat on the State and Local Workforce Investment Boards

Local operations - Since Community Colleges do not directly

receive the WIA Title I funds that will move from CCWD to the Oregon Employment Department, there is no change in service delivery

State Operations - CCWD will no longer manage the WIA Title I

(OWIB, One Stop, Adult, Dislocated Worker and Youth) funds. By law, these funds can only be used to administer the WIA Title I program They cannot be used to administer college programs. However, removal of these funds will impact staffing levels at CCWD

Roles within the workforce system - Community Colleges are the primary providers

of workforce training in Oregon. Workforce Redesign does not change that

- Some Community Colleges are contracted to deliver WIA 1B services. Colleges interested in providing these services will continue to compete for these contracts, as they currently do

Better referrals - Workforce redesign is intended to improve the

quality of referrals to colleges, better supporting the success of students who enroll

Opportunities to contract - Local Workforce Boards who are required to

give up service delivery under workforce redesign will have to contract for services. Colleges who are interested in providing these services will have a chance to bid

Local Partnerships - Workforce redesign does not undermine the

relationships colleges have with local partners and businesses

Greater Coordination - Workforce redesign charges LWIBs with greater

coordination among workforce programs to better meet the needs of job seekers and businesses

60

For the Workforce System

What Stays the Same? What Changes? Mission - The Workforce system’s mission of getting

people to work and moving up career ladders which helping business find the skilled workers they need will remain in tact.

Mission - The workforce system will have a more

comprehensive mission that increases the focus on skill development and upward mobility for those it serves.

Governance - The Oregon Workforce Investment Board will

expand its oversight role beyond the WIA I program to include the workforce programs at the Oregon Employment Department.

- Local Workforce Investment Boards will play a stronger role in coordinating services, aligning resources, evaluating program effectiveness and achieving outcomes

State Operations - The Oregon Employment Department will

continue to administer the following programs: WIA Act Title I-D National Veterans’ Employment Program and Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers Program, WIA Title III-A Wagner-Peyser (Employment Service), Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Trade Readjustment Allowances, Supplemental Employment Department Administration Fund (SEDAF), Unemployment Insurance Benefits, Unemployment Insurance Administration, Federal Grants for Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC), Self-Employment Assistance (SEA), and Reemployment Eligibility Assessment (REA)

- CCWD will continue to administer the community college funds, WIA Title II(Adult Basic Skills and Family Literacy), GED and Perkins programs

State Operations - The WIA Title I and OYCC programs will be

integrated into the Oregon Employment Department rather than CCWD

- The Oregon Employment Department will no longer administer Office of Administrative Hearings

Local Operations - WorkSource will continue to serve as the

primary delivery structure for those seeking employment, or better employment and businesses seeking employees

Local Operations - LWIBs will stop delivering direct services - LWIBs will play a more comprehensive

convening, coordinating, evaluating and investing role

Local Partnership - Strong local partnerships that are already in

place will not be affected by the Workforce Redesign

Local Partnerships - The role of the Local Workforce Investment

Boards will be clarified to eliminate confusion.

61

Recommendation Status

Rec

omm

enda

tion

No.


Rec

omm

enda

tion

Alr

eady

in

Pro

gres

s

Rec

omm

enda

tion

Nee

ds

OW

IB A

dopt

ion

Rec

omm

enda

tion

Req

uire

s L

egis

lativ

e Act

ion

Comments

1 Direct an interagency workgroup to develop a system-wide, state- level balanced score card by June 2014.

The strategic plan already required this

2



3


4

Direct the workforce system partners to develop a statewide workforce policy for persons with disabilities, persons living at or below the poverty line and the chronically unemployed and underemployed that establishes goals for improved workforce services.

5


This could be a stand alone report or part of a biennial “state of the workforce” report

6

Redesign the Oregon Employment Department (OED) as Oregon’s lead agency for workforce programs, including the relocation of the state WIA Title I-B and Oregon Youth Conservation Corps programs to OED.

7

Enhance the role of the OWIB within the workforce system, including making it the advisory committee to a newly redefined Oregon Employment Department, through legislation in the 2014 Legislative Session.

8 Dedicate professional staff for the OWIB located at OED.

9

Establish clear collaborative relationships with the other state advisory bodies whose missions include workforce development.

Executive Order 13-08 requires OWIB and OEIB to work on common goals. This action requires additional board-to- board partnerships

62

Rec

omm

enda

tion

No.


Rec

omm

enda

tion

Alr

eady

in

Pro

gres

s

Rec

omm

enda

tion

Nee

ds

OW

IB A

dopt

ion

Rec

omm

enda

tion

Req

uire

s L

egis

lativ

e Act

ion

Comments

10

Strengthen the role of the LWIBs by entering into charters that clearly spell out the roles and responsibilities of the LWIB as well as the commitments of state agencies and the OWIB in supporting the LWIBs.

Executive Order 13-08 already requires the rechartering of LWIBs and OWIB

11

Direct the LWIBs and workforce agencies to enter into performance compacts to clarify the performance expectations of the LWIBs and the programs in their communities.


12 Approve a dispute resolution process to resolve disagreements between state agencies and the LWIBs.

13

Create a workforce system innovation and capacity building function within the redesigned OED.

Clarification: OED would create this function, not OWIB.

14

Develop and integrate information systems to ensure that the state agencies have the tools necessary for service delivery.

Clarification: state agencies would carry out this function, not OWIB

15

Challenge state agencies and LWIBs to find local opportunities to pilot new models of service delivery across the workforce system programs.

63

Workforce System Redesign Timeline

December 6, 2013 - OWIB Adopts Workforce System Redesign Recommendations and Sends to Governor

- OWIB approves re-chartering criteria with or without amendments

December 31, 2103 OWIB/LWIBs Rechartering Criteria Finalized

January 31.2014 Initial re-chartering guidance issued to OWIB and LWIBs February 2014 Legislative Session: Consideration of Workforce System Redesign

Legislation to Implement Some of Recommendations

March 2014 to June 2014 Rechartering guidance finalized

March 31, 2014 Draft Performance and Outcome Measurements by Interagency Work Group Due

March 2014 Phase II—Service Delivery Redesign Work Begins. Community design meetings held across the state to develop recommendations for improved service delivery

March 2014 Development of Necessary MOUs and Performance Compacts Between Workforce Agencies in Order to Implement Workforce System Redesign Recommendations

April 2015 Budget development begins for the 2015 session April 2015 OWIB staffing plan put in place June 30, 2014 Final Performance and Outcome Measurements Due

June 30, 2014 Final Rechartering Documents issued to OWIB and LWIBs

July 31, 2014 Recommendations for 2015 session developed based on community design meetings.

September 2014 First OWIB annual conference held. Three tracks - Sector strategies - Work Ready Communities - next steps - System innovation – translating the results of community design

meetings into phase III of workforce system redesign September 2014 Phase III alignment work begins

64

2013 OWIB Year in Review

Attached documents: 1. 2013 Year in Review

65


2013 Year in Review

• Submission of HB 4141 Report to the Legislature • Changes in membership:

o Said goodbye to: Susan King, Cam Preus (CCWD), Laurie Warner (OED) o Will be saying farewell to: Rosemary Pryor (Chair) o Will be staying for 2nd terms: Lori Luchak and Dave Baker o Welcomed: Jessica Gomez, Barbara Rodriguez, Claire Spanbock, Frank Wall,

Maureen Fallt, Joe Weber, Lisa Nisenfeld (OED), Gerald Hamilton (CCWD) • NCRC/CWRC

o OWIB Sub-Committee merged with National Career Readiness Certificate (NCRC) Implementation Committee and Certified Work Ready Communities (CWRC) Academy workgroup to align and streamline workforce systems efforts and strategies around CWRC initiative.

o Formed communications and marketing workgroup to develop communication plan that builds awareness and highlights the value of the CWRC initiative and the NCRC among businesses.

o Presented CWRC initiative at Oregon Economic Development Association (OEDA) and Association of Oregon Counties (AOC) statewide conferences.

o Approved recommendation to eliminate use of ACT Talent Assessment and to contract for a new soft-skills assessment for statewide use to reach certification goals.

o 27,000 NCRCs earned by Oregonians to date • Sector Strategies

o Two Statewide Industry Sector Strategies events were held this year. o The Sectors Subcommittee has developed and deployed a staff training

survey to determine further training needs. o Sector 101 has been created and the subcommittee has gathered data on

local implementation activities. • System Innovation

o Hired PFM to evaluate Oregon’s Workforce System and make recommendations to improve it.

o Workforce Interagency Work Group developed 15 recommendations for the OWIB to consider as Phase I in a system redesign to improve outcomes and services.

• Annual OWIB Retreat

66

Information - Committee Reports

System Innovation: The Committee has not met since July 24, 2013.

Sector Strategies: Committee report attached.

Certified Work Read Communities: The Committee has not met since October 15, 2013. Green Jobs Council: The Green Jobs Council has been on hiatus during the legislative session. The committee will convene after the session to determine whether legislative actions have an impact on Green Jobs and consider next steps.

67

Sectors Subcommittee

Notes

November 14, 2013 Attendees: Adalberto Rubio, Katherine Bartlett, Karen Humelbaugh; Phone: Alan Unger, Shalee Hodgson, Tracey O’Brien

Staffing

CCWD is releasing an RFP to develop the model and implementation framework in order to support the LWIBs with sector strategies. The process should be complete by late January.

Currently, there is dedicated staff from OED and DHS supporting the sub-committee.

Purpose of Sector Strategies & the Role of OWIB

The group discussed using information which is being presented to the AOC (see attached PPT), and the “State Sector Strategies: Coming of Age” document (see attached) as a starting point to frame up the subcommittee’s role, and start to outline goals and strategies.

It was suggested that representatives from local areas attend the December SS subcommittee meeting. Shalee agreed to extend the invitation to local areas, and will choose from areas that are experienced and inexperienced in implementation of their SS.

Commissioner Unger suggested that the group create a mock SS roadmap which outlines the pathway of a strategy from beginning to end (skills to employment).

December Meeting

In addition to the mock roadmap, and presentation from local areas, the December meeting will include information about the SS Dashboard, and update on the RFP & timeline.

December 12, 2013 10:30-12

Agenda will be sent out closer to the meeting date.

68