1. www.spra.com Integration in the WorkSource System Presented to the Washington Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board August 3, 2006

2. 2 Social Policy Research Associates  SPR provides rigorous and responsive research, evaluation, and technical assistance  Located in Oakland, CA  Areas of expertise –Workforce development –Youth development –Family support –Education –Diversity www.spra.com

3. 3 Data Collection  Visited six comprehensive centers –1½-day visits –Interviewed 115 front-line staff and managers, 40 participants, and 36 employers WDCCenter Seattle/KingRenton South Central (Tri-County)Yakima SouthwestVancouver OlympicPort Angeles EasternColville Spokane  Survey of 1092 WorkSource employees –Internet survey with 429 respondents

4. 4 Organization of the Presentation Align- ment Joint Teams Emphasis on Employers Intensive Services Transition to Intensive Services Core Services Partnership Accountability Governance Staffing MIS Linking Job Seekers to Employers Employer Services Job Seeker Services Structure

5. 5 Overview of Partnerships WIA ESD Economic Development CBOs, Social Service Agencies Chamber of Commerce Organized Labor

6. 6 Structure-Major Partnerships  WIA-ESD –Good linkages at all centers visited  Consortium agreement  ESD operates many programs, including WIA –Integration rated high or very high by almost ¾ of survey respondents  Community and Technical Colleges –Adult basic education –Training –Financial aid for Training  WorkFirst –Location at WorkSource very beneficial to TANF recipients moving to the labor force

7. 7 Structure-Other Partnerships  Federally Mandated Partners –Vocational Rehabilitation, Job Corps, and Senior Community Service, have very few co-located staff – Benefits of co-location strong despite small numbers  Local partners –Economic development-Chamber of Commerce relationship is at WDC level –Social service agencies and CBOs often co-located but not party to the resource-sharing agreement

8. 8 Structure-Coordinating Staff  Staff coordination occurs widely –Cross-program teams –Managerial leadership –Cross-program training –Personal relationships  Contextual factor-center size –Small centers have stronger personal relationships  Depth of staff coordination has room for improvement

9. 9 Structure: MIS  SKIES use as full-featured MIS –ESD: All staff fully rely on it –WIA: Four of six areas fully rely on it –Other partners: Used primarily to document characteristics and services but have their own systems –Trend is towards increased use  Limited use of SKIES for case management

10. 10 Structure-Accountability  Common Measures and GMAP attempt to align program goals –Managers very interested in GMAP –Front-line staff more focused on program measures

11. 11 Intake Service Model-Job-Seekers Core Intensive Training Placement

12. 12 Job-Seeker Services-Core Services  ESD and WIA share core services in four sites; ESD only in two sites  Standard job-search tools across the system (labor exchange, workshops, self-service assessment, LMI)  Providing staff assistance to universal customers is limited—integration may provide some help –Small centers providing personal help find that integration improves capacity –Larger centers  Team approach in Vancouver and Renton  Minimum staff commitment to core (Seattle/King-25%; Spokane 10%)

13. 13 Job-Seeker Services-Transition from Core to Intensive Services  Personal relationship with the customer paves the transition effectively in smaller centers  Team approaches in two centers  Immediate referral of disabled and basic- skills deficient customers occurs quickly

14. 14 Job-Seeker Services-Intensive Services  Primary case manager has coordinating role; help from other staff as needed for access to their services –Assessment: shared readily but limited by technology –Counseling and case management: limited participation by other staff but access to their services appears smooth –Placement: remains with primary case manager

15. 15 Employer Services-Staffing and Services  Increased emphasis on employer customers, especially those with higher-quality jobs  Staffing –Separate business unit in five centers, with joint teams in four of those centers –Account representatives becomes familiar with employer’s business and hiring needs  Services-little effect from integration –Hiring and labor market information remain important –Employers did not see duplication

16. 16 Employer Services: Linkages to Job- Seeker Services  Integrating job seeker services with employer services makes labor exchange more effective –Mitigates advocacy role for job-seeker staff –Improves employer customer satisfaction –May improve job-seeker outcomes  One center has aligned both sides of labor exchange, one site has begun this effort

17. 17 Conclusions  Integration has made substantial progress at the structural level –Partnerships diverse and enduring –Joint management and work teams make key decisions –Strong personal relationships at some sites –Increasing use of SKIES  Service integration promotes job-seeker service delivery –Core services shared by WIA and ES in most sites –Expertise to assist customers with disabilities and basic-skills deficiencies is available –Recognition that core service needs more staff resources –Good transitions from core service to intensive service –Coordinated counseling and case management  Employer services are integrating –Increased emphasis on employer services at all sites, with business unit –Greater attention to paid to employer business needs at all sites –Joint employer service teams at some sites  Limited integration of job seeker and employer services

18. Social Policy Research Associates 1330 Broadway, Suite 1426 Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 763-1499 www.spra.com www.spra.com Contact: Jeff Salzman Jeff_Salzman@spra.com