Common Measures With a Texas TWIST

1. Common Measures With a Texas TWIST Texas Workforce Commission

2. Overview • Texas’ Approach to Common Measures • Implementation Steps • Problems & Solutions • Common Measure Performance Reporting System

3. Texas’ Approach • Texas Workforce Commission Responsible for: • WIA/TAA/ES • TANF • Reintegration of Ex-Offenders • FSE&T • Child Care • Skills Development Fund • Self-Sufficiency Fund • SCSEP • Apprenticeship • Texas Law requires integrated system

4. Texas’ Approach • Policymakers and Stakeholders interested in: • How many Customers do we serve? • How many people do we help Enter Employment? • Are people able to remain employed? • What happens to their earnings? • What are our educational achievement outcomes? • Integrated Questions

5. Texas’ Approach Common Measures • Make it easier to evaluate performance outcomes across fund sources • Real Value is that they knock down barriers to Integration • Texas Embraced and Extended Common Measures to ALL its Workforce and Business Services

6. Implementation Steps Strategic • Got Buy-in from Policymakers and Stakeholders by demonstrating value of Common Definitions • Redeveloped Agency Strategic Plan and WIA State Plan around the idea of using Common Measures to drive integration

7. Implementation Steps Strategic • Got Waiver from DOL to remove restrictions on measures we had to contract to Boards • 2 Years ago (before Waiver) Boards had 46 contracted measures • This Year, Boards have 16 contracted measures

8. Implementation Steps Strategic • Aligned Board’s Job Seeker Measures with what was most important to system • Integrated Entered Employment • Integrated Retention • Integrated Educational Achievement

9. Implementation Steps Conceptual • Determined that in an Integrated System, Individuals are: • Not “Program Participants” • Customers who receive services from the workforce system • Programs are simply a means of funding services

10. Implementation Steps Conceptual • No “Date of Program Participation” • No “Date of Program Exit” • Common Date of Participation • Doesn’t matter what program funds the first qualifying service • Common Date of Exit • Doesn’t matter what program funds the last qualifying service

11. Implementation Steps Conceptual • Qualifying Services • Make an individual a Participant • Prevent Exit • Determined what is and isn’t a Qualifying Service • Shouldn’t be qualifying for some programs & not others

12. Implementation Steps Challenge • Texas doesn’t have a truly “Integrated” Case Management System • ES in WorkInTexas.com system • WIA/TAA/TANF/FSE&T/Etc in TWIST system • Skills/Self-Sufficiency/Apprenticeship currently in Excel • SCSEP is off with a contractor • How do you run an Integrated Workforce System without an Integrated Information System?

13. Problem & Solution Capturing Intake Information • Created Common Intake in all systems that capture Common Customer Characteristics: • Customer Identifiers (Name, SSN) • Employment Info (Status, UI, WPRS) • EEO Info (DOB, Gender, Disability Status, Ethnicity, Race) • Military Service • Education Information • Additional Customer Characteristics (Homeless, Single Parent, Offender, etc)

14. Problem & Solution Determining Soft Exit & Outcomes • Developed Common Measure Performance Reporting System • Each weekend, systems dump into COMPRESSOR • Creates unified, common customer record • Looks for 90 day gaps in service • Identifies Exit • Calculates Performance

15. Problem & Solution New Periods of Participation • Have each system look for 90 day gaps in its own services • Send customer back through simplified intake if it “appears” new POP might be beginning • Fields are prepopulated with prior values • No harm in having them “verify” information if it turns out there was no exit

16. Common Measure Perf Reporting System Greatly Simplified Client Model • Enrollment Instance Table • Key Table tracks individual customer/Period of Participation at integrated/system level • Includes: • Common Customer Characteristics • POP information (DOP, Exit) • Num/Den flags for each measure at integrated/system level • Wage data

17. Common Measure Perf Reporting System Greatly Simplified Client Model • Enrollment Program Level Table • Table tracks individual customer/Period of Participation at the program level • Allows us to report outcomes by program • Includes: • Num/Den flags for each measure at program level • Wage data

18. Common Measure Perf Reporting System Greatly Simplified Client Model • Service Instance Table • Table tracks ALL individual services received by customer in Period of Participation to identify DOP and Exit • Includes: • Service Type/Dates • Program • Self-Service/Staff-Assist/Intensive/Training Flags • Local Office Codes

19. Common Measure Perf Reporting System Greatly Simplified Client Model • Board Enrollment Reference Table • Table breaks performance out by Board • Links to Enrollment Instance Table

20. Common Measure Perf Reporting System Greatly Simplified Client Model Board Enrollment Reference Many One Enrollment Instance One One Many Many Service Instance Enrollment Program Many One