1 Common Practices of Workforce Investment Boards Reporting High Earnings Methodology

2 Welcome to the Pre Recorded Webinar Play/Pause Forward & Back Skip Ahead Volume Control Attachments Table of Contents On/Off Outline Tab Thumb Tab Notes Tab Search Tab

3  Nancy Mills, Executive Director, Working for America Institute  Ragini Kapadia, Analyst, Working for America Institute  George Nassar, Provident Data Services Today’s Presenters

4  Describe methodology for identifying WIBs with especially high reported 2008 client earnings and identifying common practices  Set the stage for our upcoming in-depth presentation on the policies & practices that help local WIBs place clients in relatively high-wage jobs.  The AFL-CIO Working for America Institute, conducted this work under a contract with the US Department of Labor. Today’s Goals

5  Executive Summary  Outcome-Based and Data Driven Approach  Overview of the Data and Preliminary Narrowing of the Field, Both Quantitative and Qualitative Methods  Strengths and Weaknesses of this Approach to Identifying WIBs with High Reported Client Earnings  Interview Protocol for Identifying Common Practices Agenda

6 Overview of Common Practices  Common Approaches of Leading WIBs Focus on Earnings Aggressive Partnering Bundling of Resources Innovative Customer Service

7 Outcome-Based and Data Driven Approach  How did we identify WIBs for this project? –Step 1: Started with WIASRD records from top twenty five (25) most populous cities –Accounted for regional cost of living, wage standard differences & impact of unemployment on potential earnings through comparisons to: Relevant Minimum Wage Center for Women’s Welfare and Wider Opportunity for Women’s Self-Sufficiency Standard, where available. Economic Policy Institute’s Basic Family Budget Calculator Regional Unemployment Levels

8 Preliminary Narrowing of the Field

9

10 Preliminary Narrowing of the Field

11 Preliminary Narrowing of the Field

12 Preliminary Narrowing of the Field

13 Preliminary Narrowing of the Field

14 Leading WIBs: Relative to Minimum Wage

15 Leading WIBs: Relative to EPI Basic Family Minimum

16 Leading WIBs: Relative to WOW Self Sufficiency Standard

17 Qualitative Considerations  Step 3: feedback from the field –Conference Call with Workforce Development Advocates/Organizations: Aspen Institute, CLASP, JFF, NAWB, Workforce Alliance & others –Strengths of the Approach Outcome Driven Compares Similar WIBs Accounts for Regional Differences –Weaknesses of the Approach Reliability of the Data Limitations of the Data and Reporting Requirements

18 New Set of Filters Step 4: New Set of Filters 1.Regional 2.Volume 3.High and Low Training Days 4.Wage Filter

19 Selected WIBs  Four (4) WIBs Selected:  Workforce Development Council of Seattle-King County in Seattle, WA  North Valley Job Training Consortium in Sunnyvale, CA  Workforce Solutions- Capital Area in Austin, TX  Employ Indy in Indianapolis, IN.

20 Identifying Common Practices: Interviews with Executive Directors  Protocol: –Telephone Interview with Prior Notification of Questions –Questions Organized by the Following Topics: Reporting and Data Collection Financial Resources Training and Intensive Services Job Development  Transcripts of Interviews

21 Overview of Findings  Common Approaches of Leading WIBs Focus on Earnings Aggressive Partnering Bundling of Resources Innovative Customer Service  To learn more about these approaches, please join us on our Webinar: Monday, February 28, 2011 at 2PM

22 Stay Informed, Get Connected! Workforce 3 One:  Communities of practice  Live web-based events  Register for updates! For more information about the workforce investment system:  Visit  Call US2-JOBS

23