Michael Brustein, Esq. Brette Kaplan, Esq. Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC Spring Forum 2011

 Helpful Resources  WIA Reauthorization  WIA & ARRA  Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants  Career Pathways Innovation Fund  Funding Levels 2

 Workforce Investment Act (WIA) statute:  WIA Regulations:  Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration’s WIA helpful materials:  DOL ETA’s Find Grants Website: 3

 TAA Community College & Career Training Grants Program: Full Announcement: 03.pdf 03.pdf Amendment One: AMENDMENT1_ pdf AMENDMENT1_ pdf  Career Pathways Innovation Fund Grants Program: 06.pdf 06.pdf 4

5

 1998 Law with 5 year authorization  WIA is 8 years overdue for reauthorization  House and Senate leaders say:  They would take up WIA reauthorization early this year  They’ve been saying this since 2003  Still waiting for hearings  Legislative language is possible, but momentum will build ONLY if Congressional leaders believe they have enough votes for a quick passage 6

 Funding  Greater collaboration with business and education community  Increasing efforts to educate the workforce regarding training services 7

 Expanding access to training services  Rural access, One-Stop effectiveness, etc.  Participation of faith-based organizations  Democrats want more collaboration between Education and Labor Departments  Rigidity of Tiered Approach ▪ Core, Intensive, Training 8

 Contributions of One-Stop partners  Coordination of Federal, State, and local levels  Role of community colleges on local WIBs  Eligibility requirements for training providers too cumbersome 9

 Tension Between FERPA and Participants’ Personally Identifiable Information  Allowing for Contracting under ARRA  Applicability to Title VII to Faith Based Providers  Who Will Drive the Agenda?  Elimination of “Work First” 10

 State level unified planning among participating State Agencies on all four Titles  Common definitions across all programs  Common performance measures across all programs 11

 Questions of Effectiveness  Slim down State boards and local boards  100% transfer between Title I Adult and Title I Dislocated Workers 12

 Consolidate funding to streamline program administration and enhance efficiency at the state and local levels  Possibly only 1 WIA Title I funding stream  Provide greater representation on state and local WIBs for local business reps, education officials, community groups, & reps of employees 13

 Require each mandatory partner program to contribute a portion of its funds toward one- stop infrastructure funding  Incorporate current employment service functions into a new category description  “Work Ready Services”  Ex: Require One-Stop centers to provide labor exchange services, including job search, placement assistance, recruitment services for employers 14

 Allow states to determine required standards for eligible training providers  Streamline bureaucratic requirements that force many community colleges and other training providers out of the system  Allow FBOs to participate in the nation’s job- training system 15

 Democrats seeking more funding for One-Stops, and greater participation by businesses, education officials, and community entities  Biggest differences between Republicans & Democrats  Participation of FBOs and  Consolidating funding Streams  Universal Priority (Republicans, Democrats & Obama Administration)  Greater collaboration between labor and education sectors 16

 Grants for Department of Labor Training & Employment Services  Formula grants to States  Local WIBs may contract with IHEs if:  It would facilitate worker training for high- demand occupations, and  If such contract limits customer choice 17

 To provide training services, an IHE must:  Be eligible to receive federal funds under HEA Title IV, and provide a program leading to an associate or baccalaureate degree, or certificate;  Carry out programs under the National Apprenticeship Act; OR  Be another public or private provider of training service programs 18

 FY 2010: $3.83B for Department of Labor & Employment Services  FY11: ???  House Republicans are proposing $2.43B, but this will likely change  Possible elimination of WIA Title I Funding  FY 2012: President requests $3.83B 19

 Youth Activities  FY 2010: $924M  FY 2011: ???  House Republicans looking to cut funding  FY 2012: President requesting $156,000 funding cut 20

 Adult Employment & Training  FY2010: $826 million  FY 2011: ???  House Republicans proposing cuts  FY 2012: President requesting $1 million cut 21

 Dislocated Worker Employment & Training Activities  FY 2010: $1.4B  FY 2011: ???  House Republicans proposing cuts  FY 2012: President requesting $9.2 million cut 22

23

 TAA Community College & Career Training Grant Program  Authorized in ARRA  Funded under the Health and Education Budget Reconciliation Bill  Promised: $12 billion for American Graduation Initiative  Reality:$2 billion for TAA  4 year grant; $500 million per year 24

 Competitive grant  Administered by DOL ETA  Assists workers at firms who are, or threatened to be, separated from employment due to trade with foreign countries  Eligibility expanded to workers in the service & public sectors, and not only manufacturing workers  Workers may use benefits to pursue postsecondary degree programs at IHEs 25

 FY FY 2014: $500 million annually  Maximum grant: $5 million per institution or $20 million per consortium annually  Grants may exceed this amount under certain circumstances (See grant solicitation)  IHE’s can apply for competitive grants for training programs for TAA eligible workers  Eligible IHEs meet the requirements of HEA Section 102, but only with respect to a program that can be completed within 2 years 26

 Applicants are encouraged to work with content experts such as:  Cognitive scientists,  Human-computer interaction experts,  Information technologists,  Program evaluation experts, and  Others as appropriate to the development and implementation of the project. 27

 Institutions are strongly encouraged to engage in outreach and coordinate with broad networks of education and training institutions in the implementation and adoption of materials to ensure widespread use and encourage continuous improvement of the courses and learning materials created by these projects. 28

 Eligible institutions must involve at least one employer that is actively engaged in the project in one or more of the following ways:  Defining the program strategy and goals,  Identifying necessary skills and competencies,  Providing resources to support education/training (such as equipment, instructors, funding, internships, or other work-based learning activities),  Providing assistance with program design, and  Where appropriate, hiring qualified participants who complete grant-funded education and training programs. 29

 While only one employer is required, the Department encourages applicants to collaborate with multiple employers within a sector, ensuring that program graduates will be prepared with the skills needed in the applicant’s region 30

 Eligible institutions must consult the public workforce system (e.g., Local Workforce Investment Boards, One-Stop Career Centers, or State agencies that administer the TAA for Workers program) in the project, and the Department encourages applicants to actively engage the system in one or more of the following ways:  Identifying, assessing, and referring candidates for training;  Connecting workers with employers; and  Providing support services for qualified individuals, where appropriate. 31

32

 $122 million available for CPIF grants  $65 million for health care sector projects  40 to 50 grants ranging from $1M to $5M  $6.25M of total appropriation to support grantee efforts to conduct third party evaluation of grant activities  Eligible entities: Local WIBs, individual community and technical colleges, community college districts, and state community college systems  Grant Announcement: 06.pdf 06.pdf 33

 FY 2010: $125 million  FY 2011: Nothing  FY 2012: Nothing 34

This presentation is intended solely to provide general information and does not constitute legal advice or a legal service. This presentation does not create a client-lawyer relationship with Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC and, therefore, carries none of the protections under the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct. Attendance at this presentation, a later review of any printed or electronic materials, or any follow-up questions or communications arising out of this presentation with any attorney at Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC does not create an attorney-client relationship with Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC. You should not take any action based upon any information in this presentation without first consulting legal counsel familiar with your particular circumstances. 35