HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02021999 - D6 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �Tt CONTRA
FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator jY �� COST.
Ron Metter, Chair, PIC ;;�� � ` ' COUNTY
John Cullen, Social Service Director
DATE, February 2, 1999
SUBJECT: Future of Workforce Development in Control Costa County
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATtt7N{S} & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION(S)
1, ACKNOWLEDGE that Contra Caste County is undergoing fundamental changes in
employment workforce development services, due to the federal Workforce Investment Act
of 1998, welfare reform and the establishment of the new Cine-Stop Career Centers through
East Bay WORKS.
2. RECOGNIZE that over the past six months a Committee composed of representatives of the
Private industry Council (hoard and staff), Social Service Department, Economic Partnership
and the County Administrator's Office have systematically examined ways to maximize the
efficiency and effectiveness of workforce development in Contra Costa County.
. RECOGNIZE that the Committee thoroughly reviewed the new policy and programmatic
mandates of the federal and state law and regulation including meeting with representatives
of the State Departments of Social Services and Employment Development. The Committee
also investigated alternative workforce development organizational structures as represented
y Napa Works, San Bernardino County, NOVA (Silicon Valley, Santa Clara County) and
Sonoma County. In addition, the Committee went through an extensive process of examining
the services and activities of the Private Industry Council and the Social Service Department
CalWORK5 Division.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT. YE$ SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR�r21=COMA�IENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
—APPROVE —OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF 313OARD t4N APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ki `s TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN ARID ENTERED
ABSENTa ABSTAIN- ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact:Sara Hoffman,335-1090 � ��;e'
ATTESTED �� w, �,w� �---
cc: SCJ PHIL BATCt# LOR, LERIC F
John COW,mal Service THE BOAR GI SUPERVISORS
Art Uner,PIC AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Ron Wetter,PIC(v48 CAO)
BY ys ,DEPUTY
kbr
4. RECOGNIZE that the Private Industry Council and its Executive Committee reviewed the findings
of the Committee and concur on the need to reconfigure in the County'sworkforce development
system in order to best meet the needs of employers, incumbent workers, job seekers and the
economic development community.
8. ACCEPT the attached report from the Private Industry Council Chair, the Social Service Director
and the County Administrator on the fundamental changes in workforce development and the
investigation into ways to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of workforce development
efforts in Contra Costa County.
E ACKG# t UNd1 EASC3N{S} FOR RECOMMENDATION{Sl,
The PIC/8S Ad Hoc Committee was formed in June 1998 in recognition of the fundamental changes in
employment and workforce development services being experienced in Contra Costa County due to the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998, welfare reform, and the County's own initiatives in establishing East
Say Works and One Stop Career Centers.
Representatives of the Private Industry Council (board and staff), Social Service: Department, Economic
Partnership and County Administrator's Office were charged with the task of examining organizational
options that would maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of workforce development in Contra Costa
County.
This report reviews the major findings and conclusions of the Committee.
Driving Forces of Change
Even before the passage of the federal Workforce Investment Act in August 1998, there were strong
messages from the federal government that the future of workforce development would be based on
integrated service delivery and collaboration. The California plan for One-Stop Career Centers further
refined that vision into operational expectations. SS 67 and California's Regional'Workforce Preparation
and Economic Development Act also called for greater collaboration through coordinated job
development, regional planning and cross-agency service delivery utilizing multiple funding streams.
The federal Workforce Investment Act requires multi-agency collaboration with a 'seamless service" goal
from the customer point of view. The erne-stop career center concept means that employment services
available to public assistance participants, youth, dislocated workers, the disabled and independent
workers are provided at the same location and that the service delivery system is integrated. In addition,
effective workforce development requires a focus on economic development as part of the new systems
approach.
CaIWORKs funding under welfare reform is intended to serve welfare participants while they search for
work, build employment skills, or retool for a new career. An historic overview of human service
philosophy reveals a shift from"aid to the destitute"to individual responsibility and initiative. Welfare-to-
work services under CalWORKs also provide employment-related support services to reduce barriers
to economic self sufficiency, including child care, transportation, mental health counseling and substance
abuse treatment. Some have characterized the new CalWORKs mandate as the "ASC" requirements;
support for"A"job,'a "B"etter Job, a "C"areer.
During this time of changing state and federal policy, PIC and Social Service CalWORKs have been
working together to an increasing degree. Social Service contracts with PIC for job developers. Social
Service participated in PIC"s planning for One-Stop Career Center and is a partner service provider.
PIC has Welfare-to-Work funding to serve CalWORKs participants, and does so in close coordination
with Social Service.
These forces have been changing the relationship between PIC and Social Service and blurring the
historic distinctiveness between PIC and Social Service/Employment service mandates. Increasingly
the service mandates between the two organizations have overlapped with PIC being given greater
responsibilities for the welfare population and the Social Service department being given responsibility
for job retention. tinder welfare reform, PIG has new "Welfare to Work responsibilities, while Social
Service has new job retention responsibilities. Under HR1886, PIC has a universal eligibility mandate
with increased emphasis on public assistance recipients. The distinction between who is the client,
2
employer or employee, is also a thing of the past: both PIG and Social Service recognize that service
to employers means not only referring spilled, solid job candidates, but also helping job seekers obtain
those necessary skills, abilities and supports. Similarly, service to job seekers means not only help for
individuals, but also business and economic growth so that jobs will be available for them. As a
consequence, the two organizations have established very close working relationships and participated
together on various projects, such as East Bay Works and the One-Stop Gamer Centers.
Policy oversight responsibilities are also changing. HR1385, the federal Workforce Investment Act of
1993, eliminates JTPA, creating new Department of Labor funding and functions including a mandate
for universal service under the one stop career center concept. It replaces PIC boards with Workforce
Investment Boards (WIBs)which, under federal law, must become operational by July 1, 2000. The new
WlBs will be responsible for:
1) developing a 5-year local workforce investment plan and conducting oversight of the One-
Stop system, youth activities and employment and training activities in partnership with the
Locally Elected Official (Board of Supervisors);
2) selecting One-Stop operators with the agreement of the Locally Elected Official (Board of
Supervisors);
3) negotiating and reaching agreement on focal performance measures with the Locally
Elected Official (Board of Supervisors) and the Governor; and
4) assisting the Governor in developing the Statewide employmentstatistics system under
the Wagner-Peyser Act;
5) identifying eligible providers of youth services, and eligible providers of adult and
dislocated worker intensive and training services;
6) ensuring the effective provision of connecting and brokering activities; and
7) coordinating workforce investment activities with economic development strategies.
Under HR 1335, the WIB expected to be accountable to the Board of Supervisors in Contra Costa
County as the "Local Elected Official," The Board may also designate the WIB to be the Board's
advisory body on CaIWORKs.
Invest!"anon into Wave to Maximize Efficiency and Effectiveness
To accomplish its charge, the Committee thoroughly reviewed the new policy and programmatic
mandates of the federal and state law and regulation including meeting with representatives of the State
Departments of Social Services and Employment Development. The Committee also investigated
alternative workforce development organizational structures as represented by papa Works, San
Bernardino County, DOHA (Silico Halley, Santa Clara County) and Sonoma County. In addition, the
Committee went through an extensive process of examining the services and lactivities of the Private
Industry Council and the Social Service Department CalWORKS Division,
Committee members had extensive discussions about what they learned from the site visits, state
discussions and analysis of our own departments. Over the course of multiple meetings, three critical
points emerged:
1) that the needs of employers, incumbent workers, job seekers and the economic
development community would be best met with a seamless workforce development
system that did not differentiate clients by funding category;
2) that under federal law, the Workforce Investment Board cannot delegate its statutory
policy and program oversight responsibilities for Department of Labor programs ; and
3) that, under state law and regulation, the Social Service Director must oversee GalWORKs
administration and that CalWORKs funding must flow to the Social Service Department.
3
The Committee felt that comprehensive policy development was a critical underpinning to creation of a
seamless workforce development system. After multiple iterations of various alternatives, the committee
came to consensus that changes were necessary to meet both state and federal requirements and
Contra Costa's complex workforce development needs. The Committee also recognized that the
County's workforce development system would continue to evolve to meet the changing needs of the
workforce and the regional economy.
The conclusions and findings of the Committee were reviewed by the Private Industry Council, which,
through its Executive Committee, met several times with the Committee. These meetings resulted in
further refinements to the work of the Committee. The Private Industry Council then took action to
endorse the work of the Committee.
Finding; Service Delivery - The Committee felt that the existing bifurcation of responsibility for
workforce development services between Social Service and PIC does not maximize efficiency and
effectiveness. if responsibility for services was consolidated, operations could be streamlined to
minimize duplication and overlap. Resources could be used more efficiently than the current practice.
For example, the most appropriate funding source could be used when a client is eligible for multiple
programs, if eligibility intake was consolidated. Likewise, efficiencies could be realized from merging
of support functions, such as human resources, staff development, fiscal/budget and information
technology.
Finding: Strategic Planning -The Committee also concluded that the current split between CalWORKs
and JTPAJDCL policy and strategic planning functions does not effectively support the County's ability
to create a seamless workforce development system. No single County departmental position has
primary responsibility for ensuring policy coordination, consistency and continuity within the County and
among the many gather public organizations with workforce development responsibilities, such as the
community colleges. Ivor is there one position that links workforce development with economic
development and with workforce services.
Finding: Policy Oversight- The Committee agreed that consolidating policy oversight under the WIB
would maximize consistency between CalWORKs and the new Workforce Investment Act: ensure
compatible, complimentary policies and program accountability; and support leveraged funding and
efficient resource utilization. The new arrangement would also maintain accountability to the Board of
Supervisors, since the WIB would be advisory to the Board for CaIWCRKs. Consolidation would also
help ensure that Contra Costa not only develops a workforce development system that meets federal
and state requirements, but also responds to local priorities and needs. In addition it would support
existing efforts to strengthen regional strategies and alliances, such as East Bay Works, a workforce
system partnership among public and private agencies in both Alameda and Contra Costa counties.
Role of the Richmond City PIC and the Workforce Development Advisory'Panel
Under HR1335, a WIB cannot both set policy and operate programs. (A PIC can do so). The Richmond
PIC currently provides program services and has received recognition for their excellence as a high
performing PIC. It is likely that they may need to choose between being a service provider or a policy
body. The Richmond PIC recognizes this and has had discussions with the Richmond City Council on
whether to seek waivers to be able to continue both service provision and policy oversight; to join with
the Alameda County in a regional WIB or to join with the Contra Costa WIB. Discussions are ongoing
regarding becoming part of the Contra Costa WIB.
The Workforce Development Advisory Panel (WRAP) currently includes the major public agencies
responsible for various aspects of workforce development, including among others adult education,
community colleges, Cal State Hayward-Contra Costa, Contra Costa PIC, Richmond PIC, Social Service
and EDD. Other members represent business organizations, such as the Economic Partnership, Contra
Costa Council and Chambers of Commerce. Many would be members of the WIB under HR1355. Some
are already members of the PIC. The Board of Supervisors previously approved a request from the
Advisory Panel to participate in the formation of the new WIB. This activity is now underway.
4
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORK
(THREE i3? MINtYTB LXXXT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers'
rostrum_before addressing the Board.
ame: {i ; ` phoria
y ,
Addre.} s
y�,p. . y:_41-IL
I am speaking` far myself � or organization; ,?
r{;
(tome of orpsnixat{on)
CHECK ONE:
X4� �
wish to speak on Agenda item � j . Date. u ;
M comments will be. '
Y general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of r ' R�' � � � #;r te
4
do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the
Board to consider.
Kequest to I'Speak Form
r= ( THREE 3) MINUTE UNTO
C Wtete fOm NXI Orce It In the box sw the Women` arum
bcr+e the 8
woo
a m —
CHEM ONE: *am*
.� I wbb to Wit an AXW& ftm #„My sufflowtv will be: 11P '!el—1
_--
to calf"41—