Skip to main content
Research/Evaluation Report

State and Local Efforts to Strengthen Workforce System Governance and Planning Under WIOA

About

This report focuses on implementation of key changes to governance of the workforce system and how state and local workforce boards engage in planning across the core programs. Discussed here are the successes and challenges, promising practices, and possible areas for further technical assistance related to WIOA for workforce system governance and planning.

State and local workforce boards are responsible for overseeing the management and performance of the workforce system under WIOA, and for conducting strategic planning to ensure the workforce system meets the needs of employers and job seekers. WIOA built on the governance and planning structure that existed under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) by articulating new requirements in an effort to streamline governance, enhance strategic planning, and encourage more collaboration and engagement across core programs. The most noteworthy of these changes, according to state and local respondents, included:

  1. Changes to the composition requirements for state and local board membership, including mandating representation for Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA), Vocational Rehabilitation (VR), and registered apprenticeship programs; removing the requirement for representation from all American Job Center (AJC) partners; and moving from youth councils to youth committees.
  2. Expansion of the role of boards in strategic direction and oversight of the system, including certification of AJCs, guidance for the allocation of infrastructure funds in the AJCs, procurement of AJC operators, identification of regions, and development of strategies related to career pathways and industry partnerships.
  3. Requirement for states to develop a single, four-year “unified plan” that would cover all six core programs, with a modification required at two years. States could, if they wish, develop a four-year “combined plan” that included other partner programs. Overall, the integrated planning process was intended to lead to better service coordination and collaboration among core programs and other partners, such as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.
  4. Requirement to designate regions consisting of one or more local workforce development areas, and to develop a regional plan for each region along with local strategic plans.

Major Findings and Recommendations

Major Findings:

Structures and Roles of State and Local Workforce Boards.

  • State and local board composition: 1) some state boards reported a decrease in board size while others reported larger boards under WIOA; 2) observations about the value of these changes varied according to size of the new boards; 3) observations about the value of these changes varied according to size of the new boards; and 4) including representatives from Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) and Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) programs was viewed as beneficial.
  • Roles of state workforce boards: 1) WIOA requirements resulted in both more strategic planning and “administrative” tasks for boards; 2) respondents reported increased connections to education partners at the local level; 3) the Governor’s role was viewed as helpful for strategic planning; and 4) additional oversight stretched board staff capacity.
    Integrated State Planning.
  • Partnerships: 1) inclusion of core partners was viewed as beneficial; 2) state board staff reported using multiple methods for obtaining input from all partners; 3) changes in plan content were small; and 4) collaboration brought with it challenges in communication and consensus.
    Regional and Local Planning.
  • Regional designations and planning: 1)the most common approach for designating regions was to designate individual local areas as regions; 2) when multiple local areas were designated as a region, some states provided additional funding to support planning activities; and 3) challenges with regional planning included competing planning activities and difficulty aligning local interests.
  • Local planning: 1) local board chair involvement appeared to be a critical factor; 2) involvement of AEFLA and VR program staff was greater than under WIA but not universal; and 3) differences in administrative structures across partners were a barrier to planning.

Major Recommendations:

  • Provide targeted training on managing state and local board sizes.
  • Provide technical assistance on engaging partners in local planning.
  • Provide cross training to improve understanding of terminology and guidance.

Materials

Comments

Content Details

Methodology:

Topics:

Target Populations:

Programs:

Geographic Locations:

Industry Sectors:

  • Last Updated:
  • Created:
  • Resource Publication Date: 2020
  • Author(s): Sattar, S.; English, B.; van Docto, C.
  • Funding Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration
  • Resource Availability: Publicly available
  • Posted by: Justin Venneri
  • Posted in: Workforce System Strategies

Error

An error has occurred. The details of this error have been forwarded to our technical team. If you continue to experience issues, please contact our support team at support@workforcegps.org.

Event has ended