WIOA Performance Workgroup

1. WIOA Performance Workgroup 1/11/2017

2. Agenda • TEGL 10-16 • Policy Requirements • Training Needs

3. Performance Guidance • TEGL 10-16 Released 12/19, • Performance for Core programs: Title 1, Tile II, Title III, and Title IV • We now have more answers and understanding

4. TEGL 10-16 • Notes: • Family Care is no longer an exclusion reason. •   How do we exempt a participant from performance if they have to take care of a family member now that we no longer have that exemption available??? All you can do is to establish a gap in service to see if the situation resolves itself during the two allowable gaps • Date of Program Exit date is not a required field for Reportable Individuals and should not be reported. All the references in the TEGL to date of exit are only to indicate that if they return more than 90 days after the last self-service or informational activity, a new period as a Reportable Individual can be started. • Detailed requirements for incumbent workers

5. Notes Continued • Reporting Unique participants……..Complicated in original meaning in NPRM • Measures now defined, for instance MSG is measured by program year • Effectiveness in Serving Employers reported across all core programs and reported annually • Services require re-mapping based on Attachment 7 (Title I and Title III done)

6. Reporting Unique Participants • Page 37 states: • Establish a unique identification number that will be retained by the same individual across multiple programs • We love DOL for this. It appears DOL is relaxing the requirements from the NPRM??? • Does not state all core programs • MWE supplies a State ID which is unique for all participants. Title I, Title III, TAA, JVSG, MSFW,NDWGs, Incumbent Worker Training, etc. Title II and Title IV do not have the same number being utilized

7. Policies/Procedures Needed based on TEGL • Performance Measures (TEGL 10-16) • Negotiations and Goals • Common Exit Policy (page 34/35) • Effectiveness on Serving Employers, which 2 for MD (page 28)

8. Effectiveness In Serving Employers • Departments have determined that this indicator will be measured as a shared outcome across all six core programs within each State to ensure a holistic approach to serving employers. • The Departments are implementing this indicator in the form of a pilot program to test the rigor and feasibility of three approaches, and to subsequently set a standardized indicator. • This indicator is reported on an annual basis; therefore, the reporting period for the effectiveness in serving employers indicator is the program year • States must select two of these three approaches to report on this indicator. • Governors also may establish and report on a third State-specific approach for measuring effectiveness, in addition to the two Departmental approaches selected. • The Departments will evaluate State experiences with the various approaches and plan to identify a standardized indicator that the Departments anticipate will be implemented no later than the beginning of Program Year 2019.

9. Effectiveness In Serving Employers • Employer Penetration Rate- Record the total number of establishments, as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Quarterly Census of Earnings and Wages program, that received a service or, if it is an ongoing activity, are continuing to receive a service or other assistance during the reporting period. DIVIDED By Record the total number of establishments, as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Quarterly Census of Earnings and Wages program, located within the State during the final month or quarter of the reporting period. • Repeat Business Customers- Record the total number of establishments, as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Quarterly Census of Earnings and Wages program, that received a service or, if it is an ongoing activity, are continuing to receive a service or other assistance during the reporting period (E1), AND who utilized a service anytime within the previous three years (E4). DIVIDED By Record the number of unique business customers (establishments - as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Quarterly Census of Earnings and Wages program) who have received a service previously in the last three years. • Retention with Same Employer in the 2nd and 4th Quarters After Exit, looks at FEIN data to determine if yes

10. What’s Next • Step 1- Which measures can we collect and how • Step 2- Which measures allow us to measure effectiveness to its true meaning for MD

11. Data Collections Options/Ideas- for 2 of the 3 measures • Option 1: let DORS into MWE with confidentiality agreements to serve employers and add services • Option 2: have DORs work with BRR and BSRs to add the employer and services they worked with in MWE • Option 3: data sharing and agreements, especially if different system, figure a way to share the data • Any other options?

12. Data Sharing for Last Measure • TEGLs states DORS supplies data to SWA for data combination for Retention With Same Employer, page 26

13. Discuss Measures for MD • Which measures do we like and why?? • Do we want a measure that shows MD as a higher or lower outcome? • Note 2 measures will not have all the data for the PY end for submittal.

14. Training • Who wants a 1 day training on performance measures, now that detail has come out on MSG and Credentials, etc? • Late February or early March • Another option is 2 hour call for February

15. MWE System Changes • MWE system changes for WIOA and TAA coming 1/16/17 • All WP changes has been postponed and is being re-evaluated based on TEGL 10-16. Due to the concerns that were raised on a State call and the late publication of the TEGL 10-16, GEO has elected to postpone the release of Wagner Peyser changes in order to appropriately plan and make additional system modifications to address the concerns raised.

16. Performance Questions • Any questions on Performance for Local Plans? Things to discuss…..

17. Questions