WORKFORCE PLANNING REGIONS An opportunity for alignment and innovation

What economists say about regions Businesses choose to cluster and grow based on competitive advantage Accessibility to resources People Can I find and recruit the talent from close enough that people will come to work for me? Is the infrastructure in place to create a skilled workforce nearby? What is the cost to recruit and retain talent based on the other companies within the commute area? Materials – raw materials, processed materials Are the materials I need readily available in my vicinity? If not, am I close enough to reliable transportation to get what I need when I need it? Similar industries Can gain efficiencies by locating near my upstream and downstream supply chain? Are there other companies similar to mine close by, creating more opportunities and synergies? Regions are about growing competitive advantage, economies and jobs

Workforce Regions are also a requirement What is the opportunity? economies are regional – businesses recruit talent and people commute across boundaries intended to align economic development and workforce strategies a way to create synergies and leverage resources New emphasis on regions as a driver of innovation - anticipate some DOL funding opportunities will be tied to workforce regions. Requirement: must have regions identified in our state plan in order to receive WIOA Title I funds. Regional plans must be submitted by locals.

Local Areas and Regions WIA created Local Workforce Development Areas (WDAs) Identified by Local Elected Officials One workforce development board per area WIOA created Workforce Regions Governor identifies regions, based on data All local areas become regions Some regions may consist of just one local area Some regions may contain two or more local areas Some regions could contain local areas across state boundaries Regions do not change the authority of or allocations to local workforce areas

Process DateActivity Oct 2014 Gov. asks for a “data driven recommendation” re: workforce regions in consultation with WDCs, LEOs and others. FebLocal Governance & Sector (LG&S) Subcommittee starts data review and process discussions AprilNPRMs require states regions policy and lists possible factors to identify regions. LG&S continues working on process. Develops a letter and webinar to solicit input. JuneWTECB asks WDCs & LEOs which factors to use for identifying regions and suggestions for possible regions. WDCs and LEOS list same factors as NPRMs. Eleven areas ask to be identified as regions. JulyRegions Task Force (6 WDCs, labor, business, Governor’s Office, and staff) unanimously recommend factors to identify regions. LG&S unanimously agrees, Steering Committee agrees with one “no” vote. WTECB unanimously agrees. AugRegions policy finalized after public comment. Staff works on suggested regions based on policy. SeptSeptember 8 Steering Committee cancelled. Staff presents map to WTECB on Sept 17. Thirty day public vetting process begins. WTECB asks locals to respond to the suggested map by Oct 17. OctOct 21 WTECB recommends regions to Governor. He has 15 days to respond. Regions built into state plan and regional guidance. NovFirst draft of state plan due for review by WTECB on 11/19.

What we learned from local input and taskforce Strong agreement on economic factors to identify regions Labor markets Economic development areas Industry concentration/sectors 11 of 12 areas asked to be identified as a region Strong emphasis on existing regional collaborations Interest in cross state collaborations Concerns about loss of flexibility and the planning process Staff’s task – consider the feedback, the requirements of the policy and the Governor’s expectation to make a data driven decision and develop a map for further consultation.

Factors used to identify regions Factors applied from the policy Labor Sheds (population centers and commute patterns) Economic Development Regions Industry Concentration/Location Quotients NOTE: Governor’s Office asked for consideration of alignment with Governor’s sectors Additional local factors Locally identified sectors Locally initiated regional planning efforts Geographic boundaries NOTE: Regions must consist of complete, contiguous WDAs

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA Washington’s Workforce Development Areas (WDAs)- Building Blocks of Workforce Planning Regions REGIONS NOT CHANGE WDA BOUNDARIES

Labor Sheds - Population Centers (MSAs) ` Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Benton Franklin San Juan Island Bellingham MSA 201,140 Yakima MSA 243,231 Spokane MSA 471,221 Snohomish King Pierce Kennewick-Pasco-Richland MSA 253,340 Whatcom Longview MSA 201,140 Wenatchee MSA 110,884 Seattle- Tacoma- Bellevue MSA 3,439,809 Olympia MSA 252,264 Bremerton- Silverdale 251,133 Mt. Vernon-Anacortes 116,901 Washington Clackamas Multnomah Columbia Part of Portland- Vancouver-Beaverton MSA 2,226,009 SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget analysis of census data Seattle-Tacoma- Olympia Combined Statistical Area 4,199,312

Bonner Kootenai Benewah Latah Nez Perce Washington Clackamas Multnomah Clatsop Columbia Sherman Gilliam Umatilla Union Wasco Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA Whatcom 34% 11% 17% 6% 10% 44% 8% 6% 5% 8% 5% 25% 14% Labor Sheds – WDA to WDA Commute Patterns 5% or more Source: the US Census Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics (LEHD) Commute Flows Between WDAs ##% KEY: 25% 7% 5% 16% 6% 19% 9% 43% 5% Interstate Commute Flows between Counties ##% Morrow Wallowa Boundary Hood River

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA SWWDA Federal Economic Development Districts Source: Economic Development Administration Cowlitz-Wahkiakum Peninsula Columbia-Pacific (COLPAC) SouthEast Washington Tri County Benton- Franklin North Central Multnomah Greater Portland Inc. Clark, Skamania, Columbia, Washington, Yamhill, Multnomah, Clackamas Mid-Columbia (MCEDD) Skamania, Klickitat, Hood River, Wasco, Sherman Greater Spokane Central Puget Sound

Sectors Governor Identified Sectors Aerospace Information and Communication Technology Maritime Agriculture Life Sciences Clean Tech Locally Identified Sectors Aerospace Information Technology Maritime Agriculture Food Processing Construction Energy, Utilities, Waste Management Professional Services Finance Manufacturing (prioritized by all) Healthcare (prioritized by all by Pac Mtn)

Examples of Regional Collaborations Green Jobs Grant (King, Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish WDCs) Homelessness Initiatives (King, Pierce, Snohomish WDCs) Green Jobs Grant (King, Snohomish, Spokane WDCs) WorkStart (King, Northwest WDC) JBLM Veterans Initiatives (King, Pierce, Snohomish, Pac Mtn) Camo2Commerce (Pierce, PacMtn) Housing and Employment Navigator Program (Pierce, Northwest, South Central WDCs), Enhanced Ammonia Refrigeration Course – (Parts of North Central and South Central WDAs) Hanford (South Central, Benton Franklin) Air Washington (Statewide) Work Readiness Washington (Statewide)

Effort to Formalize Regional Planning Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA East Cascades Workforce Planning Region 2015 Columbia-Willamette Workforce Collaborative since 2010 Source: Locally developed materials

POSSIBLE WORKFORCE PLANNING REGIONS What the data suggested

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Lewis Pacific Snohomish Pierce Skagit Whatcom Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SeaKing WDA Kitsap – Thurston labor force ~114K Workforce Snohomish WDA Workforce Central WDA San Juan Island Seattle – Tacoma – Bellevue MSA Olympia MSA Bremerton- Silverdale MSA Mt. Vernon-Anacortes MSA Are Olympic, PacMtn & NWWDA part of the labor shed? Parts of these Local Areas are in the Combined Statistical Area 100K+ more people commute in and out of the MSA 39K+ between Olympic and Snohomish/ King/Pierce 35K+ between NWWDA and Snohomish/ King/Pierce 24K+ between PacMtn and Snohomish/ King/Pierce Puget Sound 12,000 Snohomish/King/Pierce Labor Shed More than 300,000 people commute within the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA 174K+ between King and Snohomish 130K+ between Pierce and King 225K+ from Snohomish and Pierce into King 96, ,500 35,000 46,000 9,000 6,000 5,000 8,000 6,000 3,500 5,500 7,800 6,000 4,000 3,000 22,000 4,000 Source: US Census Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Lewis Pacific Snohomish Pierce Skagit Whatcom Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SeaKing WDA Thurston Workforce Snohomish WDA Workforce Central WDA San Juan Island Kitsap Puget Sound - Economic Development Puget Sound Regional Development Council consists of Snohomish, King, Pierce and Kitsap counties The Council Administers the Federal Economic Development District Serves as the Regional Transportation Planning Organization Serves as the Metropolitan Planning Organization NOTE: Olympic Workforce Area cannot be split between two regions, unless the Chief Elected Officials want to create new local areas

Local AreaSnohomishKingPierceOlympic AerospaceLQ 5.3LQ 1.18 Locally Prioritized Information and Communi- cation Technology LQ 1.9 Locally Prioritized Life SciencesLQ 1.31LQ 1.17 MaritimeLQ 1.03LQ 9.87, 1.25 & 1.23 Locally Prioritized ConstructionLocally Prioritized Trade & Transportation Locally Prioritized Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Lewis Pacific Snohomish Pierce Skagit Whatcom Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SeaKing WDA Thurston Workforce Snohomish WDA Workforce Central WDA San Juan Island Kitsap Puget Sound - Sectors

Clallam (employment 25K+) Jefferson (employment < 10K) Grays Harbor Mason Lewis Pacific Snohomish Pierce Skagit Whatcom Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SeaKing WDA Thurston Workforce Snohomish WDA Workforce Central WDA San Juan Island Kitsap (employer 76K) Consisting of Snohomish, King, Pierce and Olympic Local Areas based on  Labor Sheds  Economic Development Regions  Sector Opportunities Do not include NWWDA or PacMtn  The region would be too large  NWWDA & PacMtn share fewer similarities with Snohomish, King, Pierce and the most populous part of Olympic PUGET SOUND REGION King

Washington Clackamas Multnomah Clatsop Columbia Hood Sherman Gilliam Umatilla Union Wasco Morrow Wallowa Columbia-Willamette Region Clark County is part of the Portland MSA 57K+ people commute into Portland MSA from SWWDC 12K+ commute from Portland MSA into SWWDA This is the 2 nd most signification commute pattern in the state, after the Puget Sound SWWDC is part of Greater Portland Inc. economic development strategy SWWDC formed the Columbia-Willamette Workforce Collaborative with Portland and Clackamas WDBs. They work together on four sector strategies: Manufacturing, Healthcare, Clean Tech, High Tech Lewis Pacific Skamania Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum SWWWDA 41,000 5,500 4,000 3,500 8,500 8,000 2,000 65,000 Source: US Census Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics (LEHD) 20,000 31,000 45,000 26,000 60,000 2,000

Bonner Kootenai Benewah Latah Nez Perce Washington Clackamas Multnomah Sherman Gilliam Union Wasco Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Morrow Wallowa Boundary Hood River Spokane Region Spokane is the 2 nd largest MSA in Washington Over 470,000 people are in the MSA Relatively few people commute between Spokane and surrounding WDAs Spokane is its own economic development region Spokane is its own transportation and metropolitan planning organization Spokane only shares a few sector priorities with its neighbors 4,000 5,500 8,000 Source: US Census Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA East Cascades Region North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin Agriculture – strong concentration

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA Source: ESD Survey of Workforce Development Councils East Cascades Region North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin Agriculture – strong concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs.

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014 Washington State Quarterly Census of Employment and Wage records East Cascades Region North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin Agriculture – strong concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs. Clean Tech – Also a strength in the region

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA East Cascades Region North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin Agriculture – strong concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs. Clean Tech – Also a strength in the region Energy and Utilities – also a focus in several parts of the region

Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA SWWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA East Cascades Region North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin Agriculture – strong concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs. Clean Tech – Also a strength in the region Energy and Utilities – also a focus in several parts of the region As well as Trade, Warehousing and Transportation

Local Regional Planning Efforts Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA PacMtn WDA NWWDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Spokane WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Workforce Central WDA East Cascades Workforce Planning Region 2015 Source: Locally developed materials

Washington Multnomah Clallam Jefferson Grays Harbor Mason Kitsap Thurston Lewis Pacific Okanogan Chelan Douglas Ferry Stevens Pend Oreille Lincoln Spokane Whitman Grant Adams Walla Columbia Garfield Asotin King Snohomish Pierce Kittitas Yakima Skamania Skagit Cowlitz Clark Wahkiakum Klickitat Whatcom Benton Franklin San Juan Island Olympic WDA South Central WDA North Central WDA Benton Franklin WDA Eastern WDA Workforce Snohomish WDA SeaKing WDA Suggested Workforce Planning Regions Spokane WDA 6 NWWDA Workforce Central WDA Pac Mtn WDA

Addressing local concerns Planning requirements Local areas have a history of working together, but that is not the same as regional planning Quality regional planning comes with practice and time Start from a strengths approach – allow locals in multi-area regions to focus on those aspects of regional planning most likely to create success, and take the time needed to work on the rest Expect incremental/phased implementation Allow room for error and learning opportunities as long as progress is being made Do not expect WDCs in a region to resolve issues that are WDC specific. It is still a state responsibility to assure each local area is in compliance. Do not add more process than necessary Recognize that collaboration takes resources – offer additional funding to multi-area regions?