Discussion Document      

To:                   GWDC Members and interested parties

Prepared by:     Kathy Sweeney and Luke Weisberg

Date:                October 3, 2001

The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) requires states to develop a process by which education and training programs are reviewed and deemed eligible to provide training using WIA Title I-B funds.  The intent of this is for states to set up a process that promotes consumer choice and helps to reduce the likelihood that federal funding will be spent on training programs that do not produce strong results.  The law gives states responsibilities for developing the process, and gives the actual decision-making authority for designating a training program as “eligible” to Local Workforce Councils.

The policy opportunity

WIA allowed states to “grandparent” higher education, apprenticeship and other training providers into the WIA-funded system during its initial implementation.  Minnesota is now in the process of setting up what is referred to as “subsequent certification” for education and training providers.  Currently, the eligibility process is limited to programs eligible for WIA Title I-B funds (adult, dislocated worker, and youth services).  This is, as you may know, a very limited slice of funding relative to other federal and state funding streams available for education and training.  Given the GWDC’s pursuit of strong, meaningful outcome measures through Preeminence Minnesota, there is an opportunity to recommend that we expand the subsequent eligibility policy to cover other federal and state funding sources.  Expanding the subsequent eligibility policy to cover additional federal and state funding programs has great potential to significantly increase customer choice for current WIA Title I-B recipients because more training providers would find it in their best interest to become certified as eligible training providers, thus expanding the array of programs from which customers can choose.  It also opens the door for greater choice among other education and training recipients beyond WIA Title I-B.

An expansion would also create a “level playing field” at the front end by ensuring that providers of service, across all programs, would be asked to submit performance information as part of the provider certification process.

The state has almost completed an interface with ISEEK known as the “Consumer Report” system that will display most of the performance information collected from education and training providers.  Attached to this document is a diagram showing the connection between provider certification and the Consumer Report process.

Elements of subsequent eligibility

There are three elements to be considered: 1) defining the performance information to be gathered; 2) defining the scope of programs/funding sources to be covered by this policy; and, 3) determining the performance thresholds that must be met in order for programs to be deemed “eligible providers”

1) MN Dept of Economic Security (MDES) staff working with MN Dept of Trade and Economic Development staff have already defined the performance information needed for the subsequent eligibility process for WIA Title I-B (See attached “Workforce Investment Act Certification” document).  These are many of the same data elements the GWDC is examining as part of the common performance standards work requested by the State Legislature and underway by GWDC staff jointly with the Minnesota Job Skills Partnership Board.  (Based on that work, we may refine this list next Spring.)

2) The policy decision to be made is if the GWDC wants to propose expanding the provider certification process to other programs and funding streams.  It would be within our statutory authority to propose expanding coverage to include other WIA titles (e.g., rehabilitation services, and adult education).  For state-funded programs (including the state dislocated worker program) we would need to work cooperatively with other boards and state agencies to propose implementing a broader policy.

3) MDES staff has drafted preliminary performance thresholds for each of the measures outlined in the attached document.  If the GWDC recommends expansion of the policy to cover other programs and funding streams, the GWDC should work cooperatively with all affected state agencies and program staff to review the performance thresholds to ensure they are reasonable and consistent for all programs.

Discussion questions and potential actions

1.      Does the GWDC want to pursue expanding the subsequent eligibility process to cover programs and funding streams beyond WIA Title 1-B?  If so, how broadly should the policy reach?

2.       If coverage of the policy is expanded, what criteria might be used to develop actual performance thresholds for the program measures outlined in the attached document “Workforce Investment Act Certification”?  How should those programmatic thresholds relate to the broad outcome areas articulated through Preeminence Minnesota?

Attachments:

·         Workforce Investment Act Certification fact sheet

·         Diagram showing interface between eligibility determination and Consumer Report