1. The Workforce Investment Act – Lessons Learned, Planning for Reauthorization
CASAS Summer Institute June 14, 2005 Jean L. Scott Administrator/State Director Adult Education Office

2. California’s Current WIA Title II System
Competitive application each year
Multiple provider types (283 total)
Increasing enrollment (up 54% since 1999)
Majority ESL (66%)
Required CASAS assessments
Pay-for-performance:
Significant gains on CASAS tests
Completion of 2 instructional levels
GED/high school diploma
Open competitive process to allow new agencies to apply, to expand services to unserved areas and populations
Increased from 195 providers in to 291 in to 283 in , significant increase in number of CBOs, as shown on next slide.
Provided access to learners who may not otherwise be served.
Enrollment has continued to increase each year, up 54% from A later slide will demonstrate what that looks like.
ESL enrollment makes up the majority of our program,down from 68% in ESL is distantly followed by ASE at 21% of total enrollment up from 19% 4 years ago. ABE comprises12% of total enrollment, up slightly from 11% and finally, ESL-Citizenship, makes up less than 1% of total enrollment, down from 2% in the early years.
All local programs must use CASAS assessment to measure learner progress.
We pay our local programs for student outcomes.

3. CA WIA Title II Provider Types 1999-2000 through 2003-04

4. CA WIA Title II Learner Enrollment 1999-2000 through 2003-04

5. Major Policy Changes From: To: Funding “seat time” Pay for performance
Serve below HS only
10% set aside for ASE
Optional MIS
Standard MIS
End-of-year reporting
Quarterly reporting
Sample learner testing
Testing all learners
“Good ideas”
Evidence-based practices

6. Major Program Changes From: To: Paper data submission
Data disk or electronic
Duplicate enrollment #s
Unduplicated counts
Few data checks
Extensive data checks
Teacher-centered
Learner-centered
Revolving door enrollment
Retaining enrolled learners
“What data?”
“Our data shows…”
Limited technology use
Mentoring others

7. Major Learner Changes Annual increase in: Enrollment
Average rate of level completion
Average rate of core performance measures achievement

8. Positive Lessons Learned
“Get what you pay for”
Stronger infrastructure
Improved curriculum
Significant changes in classroom delivery and content
Increased use of technology
Expanded TA and training
Expanded accommodation for special needs
Two-year time frame for change
If we pay for it, projects respond, e.g., student outcomes, data collection, technology plan
Infrastructure - data collection processes, technology, professional development, focus LPs on same topic
Improved curriculum – Cross Roads Café, Lifelines, Madison Heights, GED Connection
More articulated continuum for learners, again learner-centered, e.g., low beginning, high beginning, and impact of EL Civics on ESL instruction
Increase in distance learning opportunities, use of technology in classroom, technology mentor teachers, online professional development, systematic communication with the field, lists, listservs, Web casts, online application, online program evaluation survey, electronic data submission
Expanded TA & training, e.g., individual agency TA - EL Civics Program Specialists, networking groups, more PDCs
Introduction of POWER assessment.
Two years from projects to accept new ideas to improve the system.

9. Unintended Consequences
Increased # of agencies = greater access to programs
Increased # of agencies = diluted resources
Improved instruction = increased benchmarks
Increased benchmarks = maxed out funding levels

10. Future Plans Implement multi-year grants
Reformulate pay-for-performance system
Strengthen intake/goal setting processes
Improve learner persistence
Continue investment in:
evidence-based practices
infrastructure and technology
Continue coordinating Leadership Project activities
Strengthen collaboration with Title I
Investigate data match for job outcomes