s3.amazonaws.com · Web viewFeasibility study process overview, including fact base development & project design, analysis, and stakeholder engagement and recommendations Social Finance

Final Report:Assessing the Feasibility of Catalyzing Career and Technical Education (CTE) with Pay for Success (PFS): Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Independent School District (PSJA ISD) Feasibility StudyFebruary 2018

ContentsProject Context...........................................................................................................................................3

Project Methodology..................................................................................................................................3

Project Partners..........................................................................................................................................5

Phase I: Fact Base Development & Pathways Design................................................................................6

1. Understanding the target population & intervention landscape...................................................6

2. Defining industry focus for career pathways expansion................................................................7

Phase II: Analysis......................................................................................................................................10

1. Benefit analysis.............................................................................................................................11

2. Cost analysis..................................................................................................................................16

3. Partnership opportunities and stakeholder roles........................................................................18

Recommendations on Program and Financing Options...........................................................................20

Conclusions and Next Steps......................................................................................................................21

Appendix A: Sources.................................................................................................................................23

Appendix B: Feasibility study interview list.............................................................................................24

Final Feasibility Report | Page 1

Executive SummarySocial Finance and Jobs for the Future, funded by the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE) at the US Department of Education, assessed the feasibility of using Pay for Success (PFS) financing to expand career and technical education (CTE) programs in four sites across the country.

This final report provides a detailed summary of the findings and recommendations for the Pharr San Juan Alamo Independent School District (PSJA ISD) in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas. Over six months we conducted a detailed feasibility study in order to assess whether outcomes-based financing could be used to expand agriculture career pathways at PSJA ISD. The first stage of this study focused on defining the specific agriculture career pathways and developing a fact base; the second stage focused on analyzing the costs and benefits of CTE program expansion and developing recommendations for next steps. Throughout the feasibility study, Social Finance and JFF engaged with stakeholders across K-12, post-secondary, and industry to better understand the local landscape and potential partnership opportunities that PSJA ISD could engage in to support CTE program expansion.

Our feasibility assessment concluded that there is a strong case for expanding agriculture career pathways at PSJA ISD with outcomes-based financing. We developed three recommendations to help PSJA ISD advance this work:

Create a cross-sector working group to lead the design and implementation of pathways comprised of K-12, post-secondary, and local industry stakeholders

The working group should include a governance and leadership structure, which includes, at minimum, representatives from industry, postsecondary, and K-12 stakeholders. This group should have clear roles and responsibilities for all partners in order to drive the work forward.

Develop a clear work plan and timeline for pathways mapping and design over the next six to twelve months.

Identify external funders and partners who can support the expansion of agriculture pathways In order to scale the three pathways to each serve 60 students annually for four years

and given existing state funding streams, we estimate the outstanding funding needs to be ~$5,300,000 over an initial ramp-up year and four years of services.

Given the benefits generated by these pathways for local stakeholders, including local employers, the Texas Education Agency, and post-secondary institutions, we recommend that PSJA ISD partner with entities to provide additional funding support.

Incorporate a focus on outcomes into the agriculture pathways expansion PSJA ISD could pursue an outcomes-based approach by incorporating performance

management in pathways design and by structuring performance incentives in funding structures.


In terms of next steps, we propose that PSJA ISD approach these recommendations in two phases. In the first phase, PSJA ISD should convene a cross-sector working group to complete the pathways design work initiated under this feasibility study. PSJA ISD should also continue to engage with local employers, post-secondary institutions, and the Texas Education Agency to define each stakeholder’s role in the expansion of the agriculture pathways, including potential funders. In the second phase, PSJA ISD should work towards structuring an outcomes-based contract to help fund facility and start-up costs associated with expanding agriculture pathways.

Project Context

In 2016, the U.S. Department of Education awarded a $2 million grant to Social Finance and Jobs for the Future (JFF) to expand Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs for underserved, high-need youth through Pay for Success (PFS). Social Finance and JFF held a national competition from January to March 2017 and selected four sub-partners to receive technical assistance in assessing the feasibility of using PFS financing to implement a new or scale an existing CTE program. Following the feasibility phase, up to three of the sub-partners are eligible to receive technical assistance to structure projects to scale high-quality CTE programming. These would be the first-ever PFS projects in K-12 education.

Social Finance and JFF awarded technical assistance to four CTE sites: Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Independent School District focused on expanding their agriculture career pathways in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas; Mahoning County Educational Services Center (MCESC) focused on regional collaboration between stakeholders in northeastern Ohio; NAF focused on expanding work-based learning and paid internships for their work in Dallas, Texas; and South Bay Community Services in San Diego, California, focused on launching and scaling their Back on Track program.

Project Methodology

The feasibility study with the Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Independent School District was conducted in three phases over six months. The first phase, Fact Base Development & Project Design, spanned September through December 2017; the second phase, Analysis, began in mid- December 2017, overlapping with the first phase, and was completed in mid-January 2018; and the third phase, Stakeholder Engagement and Recommendations, spanned September 2017 through late-January 2018. Specific activities occurring during each phase are shown in Figure 1 below:

Figure 1. Feasibility study process overview, including fact base development & project design, analysis, and stakeholder engagement and recommendations


Social Finance has developed a framework and set of criteria for assessing the feasibility of Pay for Success financing, as described in Figure 2. We have found that these criteria reflect the components needed for a successful outcomes-based contracting or funding project of any kind. The feasibility analysis in Pharr-San Juan-Alamo identified a target number of students per grade-level to enroll in agriculture career pathways; provided a refined understanding of the evidence base of career pathways to serve these populations; estimated the costs and benefits of scaling agriculture career pathways at PSJA ISD; and engaged stakeholders across the community with common interests.

Figure 2. Criteria for assessing PFS feasibility (Defined target population; measurable impact goals; intervention that works; capable service provider(s); positive value to society; and community)

Project Partners


Social Finance and Jobs for the Future worked closely with a Working Group which held bi-weekly meetings to collect key information, discuss findings, provide ongoing feedback on analysis and research, and make key decisions. In addition to Social Finance and Jobs for the Future, the Working Group included the following representatives from PSJA ISD: Ms. Griselda Quintanilla (CTE Director), Mr. Romeo Robles (Agriculture CTE Coordinator), and Dr. Jaime Curts (Director, Research, Evaluation & Grants).

The study’s Steering Group convened three in-person meetings to discuss results and recommendations. The Steering Group was comprised of the Working Group as well as representatives from PSJA ISD leadership, local government, post-secondary institutions, employers, and workforce organizations. A complete list of the Steering Committee members is provided in Table 1 on the following page.

Table 1. Steering Committee members

Name Title, Organization Name Title, Organization

Luis Bazán Director, Pharr International Bridge

Daniel King Superintendent PSJA ISD

Ronnie Cantú Board Member, PSJA ISD Flor Leal Community Engagement Specialist, Workforce Solutions

Nora Cantú Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum, PSJA ISD

Stephanie Méndez

CTE Business and Community Partner Specialist, PSJA ISD

Laura del Garza U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Victor Pérez Executive Director Pharr Economic Development Corporation

Oscar Cuellar, Jr.

Executive Director, San Juan Economic Development Corp.

Griselda Quintanilla

CTE Director, PSJA ISD

Jaime Curts Director, Research, Grant Management, & Evaluation, PSJA

Alexis Racelis Assistant Professor, College of Sciences, UTRGV

Freddy Flores Trade Liaison, Pharr International Bridge

Roxanna Vásquez-Lucio

Director of Development, College of Sciences, UTRGV

Dante Galeazzi President & CEO, Texas International Produce Association

Romeo Robles CTE Agriculture Coordinator, PSJA ISD

Hector Garza Director of Industry Relations, Texas International Produce Association

Rubén J Saldana District Extension Administrator, Texas A&M Agrilife Extension District 12

Juan Guerra City Manager, Pharr, TX Sandy Silva HR Director, Wonderful Citrus

Jim Hearn Research Assistant, Texas A&M; University Kingsville Citrus Center

Rafael Tapia Executive Director, Alamo Economic Development Corporation

Allen Williams Landscape/ Wildlife Habitat Specialist, PSJA ISD

Phase I: Fact Base Development & Pathways Design


1. Understanding the target population & intervention landscape

Social Finance and JFF began the feasibility by seeking to understand the current state of CTE programming in PSJA ISD. PSJA ISD is widely recognized in Texas and in the nation as a leading school district for dual enrollment. All high schools in PSJA ISD are early college high schools, with approximately 3,500 high school students enrolled in college courses every semester. PSJA ISD serves a student population that is predominantly Hispanic (99%) and that includes more English language learners (44%) and economically disadvantaged students (88%) than the state average (17% and 60%, respectively). As part of PSJA ISD’s mission to provide comprehensive, quality instructional programs that help connect every student to college and the career of their choice, the district seeks to increase the number of underrepresented students pursuing career pathways in agriculture-related fields.

Figure 3. Student demographics at PSJA ISD, summary of students by grade, gender, ethnicity, English language learners, and career & technical education

In analyzing the current CTE programming at PSJA ISD, Social Finance and JFF spoke with members of the Working Group and district leadership to identify key components of PSJA ISD’s CTE programming. The table below highlights the key interventions and strategies currently employed by the district.


Table 2. PSJA ISD CTE interventions and strategies

CTE Model or Component Description

Early College High School (ECHS)

Aligned curriculum that includes both high school and college-level courses to receive college credit and support transition to college. Could include four-year ECHS, enhanced 2-year early college programming, and/or one-year credentialing. PSJA ISD is a leader in ECHS; all district high schools are ECHS.

Career Academies

Career academies are schools within schools that link students with peers, teachers, and community partners in a structured environment that fosters academic success. PSJA ISD’s Collegiate Academies are aligned with the five endorsements stipulated in House Bill 5.

Work-Based Learning

Work-based learning programs provide internships, mentoring, workplace simulations, and apprenticeships along with classroom-based study.

Career Counseling

Support system to help students explore career opportunities, navigate career education options, support attainment of credentials as relevant. Also helps build teacher awareness of job seeker tools and programs for student career awareness

In addition, all students commit to one of PSJA ISD’s career pathways when entering high school. With regards to agriculture career pathways, PSJA ISD currently has 888 students enrolled in Natural Resource, Agriculture Mechanics, Plant Science, and Animal Science pathways. This represents a 7.5% enrollment growth from when these pathways were first launched in the 2016-17 academic year.

2. Defining industry focus for career pathways expansion

Another component of understanding the local landscape was analyzing local labor market data. Using data from the Texas Education Agency, Texas Workforce Commission, and Workforce Solutions of the Lower Rio Grande Valley, Social Finance and JFF analyzed high-growth industries related to agriculture that are projected to offer living-wage jobs in the region (see Figures 4 and 5).


Figure 4. Industries with high job growth, including agriculture sector highlighted in orange (agriculture, forestry, fishing & hunting; information technology; transportation & warehousing; wholesale trade; accommodation & food services; and management of companies & enterprises)

Source: TEA & Texas Workforce Commission


Figure 5. Industries projected to offer living wage jobs (agriculture sector highlighted in orange), defined as $9.87 hourly wage for individual and $20.55 hourly wage for a family

Source: TEA & Texas Workforce Commission 1

Throughout feasibility, Social Finance and JFF spoke with local employers and workforce development organizations (including trade associations, economic development corporations, and companies) to verify that the labor market data reflects their understanding of current and projected industry needs. Based on this analysis, Social Finance and JFF recommended that PSJA ISD focus career pathways expansion on the areas where agriculture intersects with industries that are projected to offer high-growth, high-wage job opportunities. Specifically, Social Finance and JFF proposed three pathways for expansion: (1) Agribusiness and Trade; (2) Agriculture Mechanics and Engineering; and (3) Plant Science.

JFF began a “reverse-mapping” process to facilitate PSJA ISD engagement with post-secondary and local industry stakeholders to further define and map out each of the prioritized pathways. This would be an important next step in structuring and implementing these three new career pathways. For more information on the reverse-mapping process, see Figure 6 below.


Figure 6. Reverse-mapping career pathways from the regional labor market, starting with in-demand careers and working backwards to ensure the relevant pathways through postsecondary and secondary programs exist to prepare students for in-demand careers

Phase II: Analysis

During the second phase, the analysis focused on understanding the costs and benefits of the proposed agriculture career pathways expansion. The analysis leveraged existing research to understand the potential impact of the targeted program on short- and long-term outcomes; quantified potential fiscal and social value that could be generated by expanded access; and identified the entities (e.g. government agencies, educational institutions, employers) who directly benefit from the value generated by the program. In addition, we defined the total funding need for effective implementation


In-Demand Careers

Use Labor Market Information (LMI) to identify high-demand, high-wage industries and occupations

Use LMI to identify needed skills and credentials valued by employers

Vet LMI with industry partners and gather additional information about in-demand skills and credentials

Finalize pathways based on LMI and industry input

Postsecondary

Identify programs of study at South Texas College (STC), University of Texas at Rio Grande Valley (UT RGV), and Texas State Technical College (TSTC) aligned with labor market demand

Explore options for dual credit courses applicable to multiple postsecondary programs of study

Map course sequences

Identify needed wrap-around services

Secondary

Develop scope and sequence aligned with postsecondary programs of study

Identify needs for new classes (e.g., staff, equipment, TEA approval)

Develop Work Based Learning (WBL) continuum

Plan for career information and advising

Identify needed wrap-around services

of the program. This analysis does not intend to bind any organization to target values that would be generated by expanded access to the program; obligate any government agency or philanthropic organization to contribute funds to the project; or represent the full spectrum of value generated by the program.

1. Benefit analysis a. Evidence base of key components of career pathways programs

Due to limited research on career pathways programs, Social Finance reviewed national literature on key components of career pathways programs which have been studied more robustly – namely, career academies, dual enrollment, and work-based-learning – to better understand the benefits of career pathways.

The review of academic literature evaluating each of these program components focused on the strength and relevance of the evidence with respect to the PSJA ISD context. The evidence base of dual enrollment proved to be the strongest and most relevant to PSJA ISD, whereas the evidence base of work-based learning was more limited.

Figure 7. Assessing the evidence base (in terms of strength and relevance of evidence) of key components of career pathways programs, including career academies, dual enrollment, and work-based learning

Sources: See appendix for full list of studies


b. Outcomes of career academies, dual enrollment, and work-based learned

Table 3. Assessing the evidence base of outcomes generated by career pathways programs

Outcomes Backed by Stronger Evidence Outcomes With Limited Evidence

Career Academies

Decrease high school drop-out rate by 11%1

Increase number of completed high school core courses by 16%1

Improve high school attendance rates by 6%1

Increase wages by 11% more than non-Academy students over an 8-year period (earnings for young men increased 17% per year)2

Lead to higher levels of interpersonal support from teachers and peers2

Increase likelihood of building a high school transcript that combines academic and career or technical courses2

Increase likelihood of being exposed to a range of career awareness and development activities, both in and outside school2

Increase career and technical course-taking and participation in career development activities (for students at medium or low risk of dropping out)2

Dual Enrollment

Increase college enrollment (students were 2.2 times more likely to enroll in 2- or 4-year college)3

Increase college persistence (students were 2 times as likely to complete 2nd year, and 1.7 times as likely to complete degree)3

Increase attendance rate by 8% and increases grad. rate by 7%4

Increase chance of attaining a postsecondary degree by 25%4

Increase college GPA by 0.20 points 3 years after grad.5

Increases postsecondary credits earned after 2 years by 20%6

Work-Based Learning

Minority students participating in work-based programs enter college at twice the rate of non-participating students7

Increase high school graduation rates8

Increase knowledge of education and career options8

Increase development of technical skills, professionalism, including maturity needed to work collaboratively, solve problems, and complete assignments8

Results in the development of skills that are applicable within an industry sector rather than training for employment within a specific company9

Increases social capital and connection to postsecondary options and

1 (Kemple, 2000), Career Academies Impacts on Students’ Engagement and Performance in High School2 (Kemple, 2008), Career Academies: Long-Term Impacts on Work, Education, and Transitions to Adulthood3 (Struhl & Vargas, 2012), Taking College Courses in High School: A Strategy for College Readiness4 (US Department of Education, 2017), WWC Intervention Report: Dual Enrollment Programs5 (Karp, 2007), The Postsecondary Achievement of Participants in Dual Enrollment6 (Rodriguez, 2012), NCPR, Bridging College and Careers7 (CART, 2012), A Model for Success: CART’s Linked Learning Program Increases College Enrollment8 (DOL, 2014), What Works In Job Training: A Synthesis of the Evidence9 (Cahill, et al, 2015). Not as Hard as You Think: Engaging High School Students in Work-Based Learning


continuing work opportunities9


c. The economic value of improved educational outcomes

Based on the literature review and discussions with the Working Group, we focused our economic analysis on three outcomes: i) increased high school graduation, ii) increased postsecondary degree completion, and iii) increased career readiness. Using data provided by academic studies and other publicly available resources, Social Finance estimated a value for each of these three outcomes. Value per outcome was comprised of value created (such as increased tax revenues due to employment), and cost avoidance (such as reduced healthcare or criminal justice system costs).

Tables 4-6 outline the economic value for each of these outcomes. Note that this analysis was designed to assess the value of these selected outcome metrics, but does not reflect the full value generated by agriculture career pathways, which would include many more outcomes.

Table 4. Estimated value of increased high school graduation rate

Economic Value per student

i. Increased wages10 $379,587ii. Increased investment income11 $11,981iii. Increased employer contribution for health insurance11 $50,437iv. Increased tax revenues12 $169,634v. Reduced healthcare costs12 $49,390vi. Reduced justice system involvement12 $32,439vii. Reduced welfare expenditure12 $3,659TOTAL VALUE $697,127

10 Carnevale et. al (2009), The College Payoff11 Trostel (2015), It’s Not Just the Money12 Levin et. al (2006), The Costs and Benefits of an Excellent Education


Table 5. Estimated value of increased postsecondary degree completion


i. Increased wages (Associates Degree)13 $485,092ii. Increased investment income (Associates Degree)14 $21,788iii. Increased investment income (Bachelor’s Degree)15 $63,878iv. Increased wages (Bachelor’s Degree)16 $620,413v. Increased employer contribution health insurance (Associates Degree)17 $33,436vi. Increased employer contribution health insurance (Bachelor’s Degree)18 $29,621vii. Increased tax revenues (Bachelor’s Degree)19 $292,605viii. Reduced justice system involvement (Bachelor’s Degree)20 $7,822ix. Reduced welfare expenditure (Bachelor’s Degree)21 $87,889x. Reduced healthcare costs (Bachelor’s Degree)22 $68,807TOTAL VALUE $1,711,349

Table 6. Estimated value of increased career readiness


Increased wages due to more relevant industry credentials23 $126,596Reduced employer costs of turnover24

Productivity losses when someone leaves a job, the costs of hiring and training a new employee, and the slower productivity until the new employee gets up to speed in their new job

$5,410

TOTAL VALUE $132,005

d. Beneficiaries of the economic value of improved educational outcomes

The value generated by these three outcomes impacted by career pathways accrues to a variety of stakeholders, including state and federal government, local employers, post-secondary institutions, and

13 Carnevale et. al (2009), The College Payoff14 Trostel (2015), It’s Not Just the Money15 Ibid.16 Carnevale et. al (2009), The College Payoff17 Trostel (2015), It’s Not Just the Money18 Ibid.19 Ibid.20 Ibid.21 Ibid.22 Levin et. al (2006), The Costs and Benefits of an Excellent Education23 Grossman et. al (2015), The Value of Credentials24 Boushey and Glenn, 2012, review of 11 papers on the cost of employee turnover


community members. Social Finance mapped these benefits to specific beneficiary stakeholders, as shown in Table 7. We began initial engagement with many of these entities during feasibility, and have prioritized entities for targeted future engagement, as described in the section below on Partnership Opportunities. While most of the fiscal value generated would accrue to the state and local government, additional outcomes and societal benefits are closely aligned with various stakeholder goals.

Table 7. Analysis of the value accrual to different entities

2. Cost analysis

The Working Group developed a detailed budget for expanding the three agriculture career pathways and analyzed existing funding streams as well as funding gaps.

Social Finance developed a cost model for agriculture career pathways expansion (see Table 8), including initial start-up costs and annual ongoing costs. We assumed that each pathway would enroll 60 students (180 total) per year and that students would participate in the pathway for four years. Given these parameters, we estimated initial start-up costs of ~$2,500,000 and annual on-going costs of ~$900,000, for a total cost of ~$6,000,000 over an initial ramp-up year and four years of services. A significant portion of the initial start-up funding is for capital outlays, such as new building facilities and equipment. On-going costs include teacher salaries and supplies.


Table 8. Estimated costs of agriculture pathways expansion

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 TotalTotal Students 180 180 180 180 720

1) Payroll CostsSalaries & Fringe - $321,661 337,744 337,744 337,744 1,334,893$

Total Payroll Costs -$ 321,661$ 337,744$ 337,744$ 337,744$ 1,334,893$

2) Professional and Contracted ServicesCopier rental (1/3) 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 30,000$ Tuition - 216,000 216,000 216,000 216,000 864,000$

Total Professional and Contract Services 6,000$ 222,000$ 222,000$ 222,000$ 222,000$ 894,000$

3) Supplies and MaterialsComputers (Cost less than $5,000 ea) 56,000 - - - - 56,000$ ICEV - Online Textbooks - 3,300 3,366 3,433 3,502 13,601$ Books - 45,000 45,900 46,818 47,754 185,472$ Materials & Supplies 9,000 40,000 40,800 41,616 42,448 173,864$ Software 15,000 5,000 5,100 5,202 5,306 35,608$ Software 15,000 5,000 5,100 5,202 5,306 35,608$ Trees (Citrus) 8,400 - - - - 8,400$

Total Supplies & Materials 103,400$ 98,300$ 100,266$ 102,271$ 104,317$ 508,554$

4) Other Operating CostsTravel for students to conferences (does not include field trips) - 17,500 17,850 18,207 18,571 72,128$ Transportation costs related to dual enrollment and WBL - 18,000 18,360 18,727 19,102 74,189$ Educational Field Trip(s) - 3,000 3,060 3,121 3,184 12,365$ Payments for internships - 197,280 201,226 205,250 209,355 813,111$ Meeting costs - 1,500 1,530 1,561 1,592 6,182$ Non-employee costs for conferences - - - - - -$ Renovation - - - - - -$ Training & Travel Staff 4,500 4,500 4,590 4,682 4,775 23,047$

Total Operating Costs 4,500$ 241,780$ 246,616$ 251,548$ 256,579$ 1,001,022$

5) Capital Outlay CostsClassroom furniture and equipment (less than $5,000 ea) $39,840 $0 $0 $0 $0 39,840$ Building Classroom Complex 808,335 - - - - 808,335$ Shop Building 1,176,000 - - - - 1,176,000$ Equipment $157,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 157,800$ Greenhouses 108,000 - - - - 108,000$ Equipment $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 75,000$

Total Capital Outlay Costs 2,364,975$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,364,975$

Total Costs 2,478,875$ 883,741$ 906,626$ 913,563$ 920,640$ 6,103,445$

Next, we analyzed existing funding streams that were available to support the costs of agriculture pathway expansion in order to identify the gap in funding and need for external financing (see Table 9). This analysis incorporates the current state-level funding of $1,968 per CTE student for each student’s school district. Consistent with PSJA ISD’s current pathways budgets, we assumed that 58 percent of these funds would be kept by PSJA ISD to cover pathways costs and the remaining 42 percent would go to the school district.

After accounting for state per-pupil funding of ~$200,000 annually, the additional capital needed for agriculture pathways expansion is approximately $2,500,000 in upfront funding and $700,000 in annual on-going costs. State funding is only available once students are enrolled, therefore it could not be used to reduce the initial capital outlay.


Table 9. Estimated funding needs for agriculture pathways expansion

Funding StreamsYear 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Total Costs 2,478,875$ 883,741$ 906,626$ 913,563$ 920,640$ 6,103,445$

Number of students 0 180 180 180 180 720State Funding 205,459$ 205,459$ 205,459$ 205,459$ 821,837$ Total Costs (minus) State Funding 2,478,875$ 678,282$ 701,166$ 708,104$ 715,181$ 5,281,608$

3. Partnership opportunities and stakeholder roles

Throughout the feasibility study, Social Finance and JFF engaged with a range of stakeholders including local and state government, local employers, and post-secondary institutions. See Appendix B for a list of stakeholders interviewed.

Social Finance and JFF identified three types of roles that stakeholders can play in supporting the expansion of agriculture career pathways at PSJA ISD: programmatic partnerships, funding partnerships, and measurement and evaluation partnerships.

a. Programmatic partnerships

In order to successfully implement the proposed agriculture career pathways, PSJA ISD would have to work with partners on the curriculum design of the pathways and courses, expanding work-based learning opportunities such as paid internships and apprenticeships, and expanding dual enrollment opportunities in those pathways.

Post-secondary institutions: PSJA ISD could partner with post-secondary institutions such as the UT RGV College of Sciences and Texas A&M Kingsville on the design and implementation of agriculture career pathways. Specifically, post-secondary institutions could enter into agreements with PSJA ISD to offer dual credit courses and could offer PSJA ISD students research or work-based learning opportunities with university faculty.

Employers: Local employers, such as Wonderful Citrus and members of the Texas International Produce Association (TIPA), could work with PSJA ISD and post-secondary partners to ensure that agriculture pathways are aligned with their current and future hiring needs. Local employers could also provide internship and other work-based learning opportunities for PSJA ISD students.

State Government: The Texas Education Agency (TEA) could provide CTE and pathways design resources. Currently, TEA provides school districts with guidance on curricula, sample programs of study, and information on Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for career and technical education.

Local Government: The City of Pharr is already supporting the expansion of agriculture career pathways at PSJA ISD by providing land for the school district to use for the construction of a new Collegiate Agriculture Facility (CAF). PSJA ISD could also partner with Pharr International Bridge, the second largest produce-crossing bridge in the country, to align agriculture pathways and offer work-based learnings opportunities.


b. Funding Partnerships

Partners could financially support the development and ongoing costs associated with the agriculture career pathways, from providing direct funding to PSJA ISD to entering into cost-sharing agreements and providing in-kind donations.

In order to identify and prioritize potential funding partners for the career pathways expansion, we used four criteria:

Policy alignment with the goals of the agriculture career pathways and selected outcomes; Accrual of benefits from career pathways sufficient to incentivize repayment; Ability to dedicate funds from existing budgets or from identified new funding sources; and Ability to enter into a multi-year contract, including likelihood of sustained leadership commitment.

Based on these criteria and our cost-benefit analysis of agriculture career pathways, we prioritized four funding partners: the Wonderful Company, members of the Texas International Produce Association (TIPA), the Texas Education Agency (TEA), and UT RGV College of Sciences.

Table 10. Prioritization of potential funding partners


c. Measurement & evaluation partnerships

In order to track longitudinal student outcomes across multiple sectors, PSJA ISD or the project would enter into data-sharing agreements to track post-secondary and workforce outcomes beyond the career pathways programs. This could include a partnership with the state longitudinal data system, the National Student Clearinghouse for postsecondary outcomes, or the state department of labor for unemployment data on wages and earnings.

Recommendations on Program and Financing Options

Our feasibility study finds that there is a strong case for expanding agriculture career pathways at PSJA ISD. Based on our assessment of the regional labor market and understanding of student demand, we recommend that PSJA ISD focus on developing three pathways: 1) Plant Science, 2) Agribusiness & Trade, and 3) Agricultural Mechanics & Engineering. There is significant value generated by these agriculture pathways which accrues to a variety of community stakeholders, including local employers, postsecondary institutions, and state government. This indicates various partnership opportunities to support the outstanding funding and programmatic needs.

Given our feasibility assessment and findings, we recommend the following next steps:

Recommendation #1: Create a cross-sector working group charged with leading the design and implementation of pathways in Plant Science, Agribusiness & Trade, and Agricultural Mechanics & Engineering.

The working group should include a governance and leadership structure, which includes, at minimum, representatives from industry, postsecondary, and K-12 stakeholders. This group should have clear roles and responsibilities for all partners in order to drive the work forward.

Develop a clear work plan and timeline for pathways mapping and design over the next six to twelve months.

Complete reverse-mapping of pathways, as outlined in Figure 6 above.

Recommendation #2: Identify external funders and partners who can support the expansion of agriculture career pathways.

In order to scale the three pathways to each serve 60 students annually for four years and given existing state funding streams, we estimate the outstanding funding needs to be ~$5,300,000 over an initial ramp-up year and four years of services.

Given the benefits generated by these pathways for local stakeholders, including local employers and industry, the Texas Education Agency, and post-secondary institutions, we recommend that PSJA ISD partner with entities to provide additional funding support.

Based on conversations with many of these stakeholders, there is interest in a potential cost-sharing arrangement. While there is no commitment yet, potential cost-sharing could include sharing the facilities and constructions costs with UTRGV and sharing the costs for ramp up, internships and ongoing costs with the Wonderful Company or other members of the Texas International Produce Association.


Next steps would include securing specific funding and partnership commitments from stakeholders.

Recommendation #3: Incorporate a focus on outcomes into the career pathways expansion.

There are a variety of ways PSJA ISD could incorporate a learning agenda and a focus on outcomes into the expansion of agriculture career pathways. A set of prioritized options, from a program evaluation to a prevention fund, are included in Table 11 below.

Table 11. Prioritization of potential funding partners

Conclusions and Next Steps

Our feasibility assessment found that there is a strong case for expanding agriculture career pathways at PSJA ISD, and our recommendations focus on a process for mapping the career pathways, securing external financing and programmatic partners, and incorporating a focus on outcomes into the structuring and implementation phases.

In terms of next steps, we recommend that the project move forward into transaction structuring. Social Finance would work to identify sources of capital needed to launch and operate agriculture career pathways and to ensure that any project structure incorporates an explicit focus on outcomes. This would include developing a performance management system in order to track the outcomes recommended during feasibility, with a particular focus on tracking longitudinal student outcomes not


currently tracked. JFF would provide ongoing technical assistance to inform the development and implementation of high-quality pathways.

The members of the working group and steering group are committed to developing an outcomes-based project to expand agriculture career pathways and have jointly developed a work plan outlining next steps to launching pathways in a phased approach beginning in fall 2018.

Figure 8. Next steps in transaction structuring, including next 3, 6, 12 months and longer term


Appendix A: Sources

“Bridging College and Careers.” (Rodríguez, 2012)

“Career Academies Long-Term Impacts on Labor Market Outcomes, Educational Attainment, and Transitions to Adulthood.” (Kemple, 2008)

“Career Academies Impacts on Students’ Engagement and Performance in High School.” (Kemple, 2000)

“The College Payoff.” (Carnevale, 2009)

“The Costs and Benefits of an Excellent Education.” (Levin et. al, 2006)

“It's Not Just the Money.” (Trostel, 2013)

“A Model for Success: CART’s Linked Learning Program Increases College Enrollment.” (CART, 2012)

“Not as Hard as You Think: Engaging High School Students in Work-Based Learning.” (Cahill, 2015)

“The Postsecondary Achievement of Participants in Dual Enrollment.” (Karp, 2007)

“Taking College Courses in High School: A Strategy for College Readiness.” (Struhl & Vargas, 2012)

“The Value of Credentials.” (Grossman et. al, 2015)

“WWC Intervention Report: Dual Enrollment Programs.” (US Department of Education, 2017)

“What Works In Job Training: A Synthesis of the Evidence.” (DOL, 2014)

Review of 11 papers on the cost of employee turnover (Boushey and Glenn, 2012)


Appendix B: Feasibility study interview list


Documents

s3.amazonaws.com · Web viewFeasibility study process overview, including fact base development & project design, analysis, and stakeholder engagement and recommendations Social Finance