Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03071989 - IO.5 `ro BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I • D• 5 FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Contra February 27 , 1989 Costa DATE: \.`/o"'.' "J Review of Advisory Boards, Committees SUBJECT: and Commissions SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION• Continue the Private Industry Council without change in its composition or operation. BACKGROUND: The Private Industry Council was reviewed with its Executive Director on February 27, 1989. Federal law requires the Private Industry Council and federal and state law dictate the composition and manner of selecting the members of the Council. We are, therefore, recommending the continuation of the Council as presently structured. The report from the Executive Director of the Private Industry Council is attached to our report. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: _ RECOMMENDATION OF CO Y ADMINISTRATOR �j_ REC MMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE X APPROVE THER 11 SI GNA URE s : om Powers Sunne Wright McPeak ACTION OF BOARD ON March 7, 1989 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: County Administrator ATTESTED Exec. Director, PIC PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382/7-83 BY 6 ,DEPUTY CONTRA :MTA COON" PR1VArE MUSTRY COUNCL !13f nISO LAM, SUITE 100 C04MR0. CA 911120 949-5239 "TE February 15, 1989 CC: TD Internal Operations Committee (Suppisor Powers & McPeak) A."C.-MWr Executive Director SUBJECT PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL The Private Industry Council is federally mandated for the operation of a JOb Training Partnership Act (DTPA) funded employment and training program. The PIC was initially established under the parameters of Title VII of the' Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA), a prototype of the JTPA program. The PIC was then reorganized to meet the new JTPA requirements that superceded CETA. The members of your PIC are appointed by the Board from nominees of the various categories represented on the PIC. There are 20 members, the representation classifications pursuant to federal law are: Business 12 Labor 2 Education 2 Economic Development 1 Rehabilitation 1 Community Based Organizations 1 Employment Service 1 PIC members serve for two year terms, the terms are staggered so that half of the positions come up for reappointment every year. PIC by-laws limit membership to three full two year terms. PIC positions that vacate mid-term or at the end of a full term must be back-filled by the board within 60 days of the vacancy. Not only is the PIC mandated by the Federal JTPA legislation, it is empowered by the legislation, which requires a partnership between the Board and PIC. In theory, any decision by either the Board or PIC requires concurrence; neither party can take unilateral action. In practice, the Board and PIC have a formal written agreement which make the PIC the program planner and selector of service providers and the Board the grant administrator. Under this agreement the Board lacks program control but it has full fiscal control, allowing it to protect its fiscal liability. Accordingly, the PIC is not an advisory committee, it is federally required for the JTPA program and it is empowered by the federal legislation. The PIC makes annual reports to the Board of Supervisors. Since the Board has authorized the Internal Operations Committee to review PIC and other such County appointed groups, for the sake of efficiency we are combining last year's annual report into this response. The PIC does not directly operate programs. It contracts with service providers to provide all direct services to participants. Contractors are selected through a competitive process pursuant to federal procurement rules as interpreted by the State. Contracts must be periodically put out to bid. Most contracts are performance based; cost reimbursement contracts are not available for Contractor expenses. Last year our program exceeded the seven mandated performance standards; in addition we exceeded an optional eighth performance measure, earning a incentive award of $1901213. Federal law requires the Governor to establish minimum performance criteria necessary to earn an incentive award, and minimum performance criteria below which the program operations are considered unsatisfactory. Two consecutive years of unsatisfactory performance can lead to the Governor disbanding the PIC and placing the service delivery area into receivership. To date, the Contra Costa PIC has successfully met the incentive criteria each year. Last year: the standard for the adult entered employment rate was 64.5%; we achieved a placement rate of 78.6%. the standard for the welfare adult entered employment rate was 56.1%; we achieved a welfare placement rate of 73.8%. the standard for the adult average wage at placement was $5.07 per hour; we achieved an average hourly wage rate of $6.45 per hour. the standard for the adult cost per entered employment was $4,384; our cost per placement was $3,102. the standard for the youth entered employment rate was 41.6%; we achieved a youth placement rate of 75.1%. the standard for the youth positive termination rate was 74.3%; we achieved a positive termination rate of 86%. the standard for the youth cost per positive termination was $4,102; our cost per youth positive termination was $2,620. Lastly, the standard for the optional high risk youth measure was a positive termination rate of 60.1%; we achieved a rate of 88.6%. This past year in the core 78% program, we enrolled 952 participants and placed 684 in jobs. Of those participants 169 were enrolled in classroom training; another 311 were enrolled in On-the-Job Training. We also had 398 participants go through job search training. In all programs including those funded with last year's incentive award and those funded with the Governor's discretionary funds, we had 1,566 participants, of which 905 were placed in jobs. In the core summer youth program, we placed 888 young people in work experience positions of which 60 materialized into full-time jobs. In the county-wide Chambers of Commerce, the State Employment Development Department, and our good friend and benefactor, Chevron, USA, we had our third best effort: placing 2,869 young people in summer jobs despite an increase in the minimum wage. For this year the Board approved a $4,383,505 budget, of which $8,730 was general fund money to support the County Advisory Committee for the Employment and Economic Status of Women (ACEESW) . The PIC allocated matching program funds to support the ACEESW. The actual JTPA program requires no direct support from the County general fund. By law, administrative expenses are limited to 150 of the grant funds, and supportive services/economic generating activities are also limited to 15%; mandating that at least 70% of the funds be expanded on training. Since State Employment Development Department figures indicate approximately 50,000 individuals over age 16 are eligible for our program, our funds allow us to serve less than 5% of the eligible population.