Integrated Service Delivery Model - California Workforce System
Frequently Asked Questions - Background on Service Integration in California

Back to Top

What is Service Integration?

A Service Integration Model is being developed in California which once implemented, will create a new local workforce system that is skill based and which moves each One-Stop Career Center client through a common set of value added services designed to increase their employability and their chances of retaining jobs and advancing in them.

Back to Top

What are the basic elements of the Service Integration model?

We have identified three key principles or priorities to guide this work:

  • A common pool of co-enrolled customers, composed of WIA Title I Adult and Dislocated Worker; Wagner-Peyser, Long Term Unemployed, Veteran, Migrant Seasonal Farmworker, and Trade Adjustment Act.
  • A common set of services available to all customers in the pool through a common customer flow.
  • Shared WIA, WP, Veteran, MSFW and TAA staffing of the common integrated service and customer flow.

These priorities imply a dramatically different service model, impacting everything from program focus, priorities, performance, staff development and training to One-Stop facilities management and design.

Importantly, the service integration model moves local systems to a skill-based emphasis, with particular attention to business demand for a prepared and skilled workforce, with less emphasis on program requirements. The local workforce system would shift toward a greater commitment for contributing value-added services in preparing workers as job candidates. Within the center itself there will be less emphasis on self-help and general resource room activities, and more on assessment, career coaching and skill development specifically. While those are the broad parameters, the Planning Team work groups are addressing the more specific recommendations for common services and service flow.

Back to Top

What started this focus on Service Integration?

Interest in pursuing this initiative is the result of discussions that began in late 2006 between Virginia Hamilton, Executive Director, California Workforce Association, and Dennis Petrie, EDD Deputy Director for Workforce Services. The present broader discussion caught momentum upon discovery of a shared motivation among state and local partners, both eager to eliminate service inefficiencies whatever may be their cause.

While state and local partners have long talked about better planning for resource deployment and service design, what we’ve had in California—notwithstanding several instances of success—are two local systems, one WIA funded, the other Wagner—Peyser funded. Successful service coordination in California’s local workforce system has tended to be personality and relationship driven rather than systematic. The focus of this initiative is on systematically improving that coordination for improved customer outcomes and more efficient and effective client service.

Back to Top

Who is the group leading this work?

Based on the shared interests and motivation referenced above, state leadership and several Local Area leaders convened an initial meeting in February 2007 to engage a more formal process and a larger set of partners for exploring opportunities in service integration.

These partners now include Directors and other representatives from 12 Local Workforce Areas and approximately 26 of EDD’s top state, regional and local managers, mostly from the Workforce Services Branch but also including Unemployment Insurance. Also participating are representatives from the California Workforce Investment Board and the Labor and Workforce Development Agency.

The 12 Local Workforce Areas partnering with EDD to work on service integration under this framework are North Central Counties Consortium, Sacramento Employment and Training Agency, Sonoma County, North Valley Job Training Consortium (NOVA), work2future/Silicon Valley Workforce Investment Network, Madera County, Verdugo Consortium, Greater Long Beach, San Bernardino County, Riverside County, City of Santa Ana, and San Diego Workforce Partnership.

This Planning Team of State and Local representatives met on June 1, July 12 and September 6–7 and has follow—up meetings scheduled monthly here forward. This group has organized several "work groups" to explore key components of a service integration model, and has set a target date of July 2008 for implementing several "learning labs" to test models for service integration.

Back to Top

Is this process and information final, or is the strategy for Service Integration still evolving?

It is not final; we are only in the beginning stages of planning for improved service integration for California’s workforce system. The Service Integration Planning Team has developed this FAQ to assure that we are collectively sharing with the broader community of partners and stakeholders our current status and new information as it develops and evolves. This FAQ, and other support documents we will disseminate from time to time, should be considered as "living documents." Information on our status will continue to be updated as work groups make progress and, especially, as the California Workforce Investment Board, the Labor and Workforce Agency and EDD establish or recommend new policy, both in draft and final form. In the not–too–distant future additional information as it is developed–both from the State and from Local Area experience-will be posted and/or linked to the EDD, CWA and CWIB web sites.

Back to Top

Is the number of Local Workforce Areas set, or can other areas join this planning process?

We are not planning to add any Local Areas beyond the current 12 identified in Question #4 above. The strategy is to have these 12 Areas serve as learning labs, beginning July 1, 2008. By keeping to a more limited number for experimenting with the comprehensive adjustments we anticipate, we will better be able to manage the technology and other logistical challenges inherent to testing new models.

Aside from participation as a learning lab, however, other Local Area representatives and workforce professionals may be involved in the work groups and contribute to our strategy development and planning for service integration.

While we are limiting participation in the larger Learning Lab experiment, we encourage Local Areas to begin or continue looking for ways to improve service coordination and integration. We do not want to limit creativity and efforts at improvement. We encourage close coordination of your efforts with LWIA and Local Workforce Service partners in the service integration planning described herein. This will help us to avert any problems and will also help assure that your local efforts will contribute to the body of knowledge we’re developing on service integration. While we encourage your initiative, it should be noted, too, that the State’s capacity to work solutions for each local initiative may be limited, given resources committed to this effort at service integration planning.

Back to Top

Is the Planning Team supported by any facilitation or content expertise?

Yes, the Planning Team is working with Greg Newton for facilitation services and to provide information from other states who are implementing service integration. It is anticipated that Mr. Newton will continue to work with the Planning Team as long as determined his assistance is needed. Newton and Associates are also providing consulting services to several of the Local Workforce Areas who will serve as "learning labs" for service integration.

Back to Top

What are the larger goals of Service Integration?

There are several profound motivators for system reform beyond the alignment of interests between state and local leaders. Most seriously, we collectively face a very different workforce future. We already have and continue to witness dramatic changes to labor market conditions, skill requirements, demographics and the economy that have far reaching implications for our daily work, yet our systems have not kept pace with these changes. Some key goals for service integration include:

  • responding to 21st Century industry demand and our contemporary workforce crisis;
  • assuring that our services and training are in alignment with current local and regional labor market requirements;
  • shifting service priority to an emphasis on worker skills, assisting workers to gain the skills leading to self-sufficiency and responding to business demand;
  • coping with limited and declining funding through a more efficient use of resources and a reduction of program duplication and requirements;
  • improving our positioning with legislative and other policy leaders, by assuring the Local Workforce System is stepping up and claiming both credit and ownership for the larger number of clients we already serve;
  • increasing service levels and quality; and
  • redefining and improving performance.
Back to Top

How big is the scope of this Initiative?

Participants in the early planning are in agreement that this work on service integration represents an unprecedented and extraordinary opportunity to improve and reform our service structure, particularly to a demand-driven model focused on the skills of job candidates. Its focus on business demand assures that job-seeker investments are value-added and effectively lead to employment.

It is important to understand that "service integration" as it is evolving through discussions among state and local partners is not just about better communication and improved general planning, but it is about exploring a sweeping set of adjustments in front end operations, for all WIA, Wagner-Peyser, Veteran, MSFW and TAA funded programs and staff.

Back to Top

Have any other states implemented this sort of Service Integration?

Yes. Several are already there−New York, Oklahoma, Louisiana, North Dakota–and others are in various stages of exploration, development and implementation. The State of New York has operated under the common customer pool model since July 2006. As compared to current WIA performance, service integration has resulted so far in improved worker earnings, no change in worker retention, and only a very small drop in entered employment. These positive results were obtained even while calculating performance on the total pool of clients entering the One-Stop system.

Back to Top

How can interested parties learn more about Service Integration?

As was previously mentioned the EDD, CWA and CWIB web sites will contain or link to regular updates in order to share information about our efforts in California. These updates and progress reports will be used for the sharing of experience, comments and documents from the Planning Team workgroups and eventually California’s learning lab partners. All of this information and material will be available to all of California’s local workforce system partners and stakeholders.

Back to Top

What is the process to move toward implementation?

California’s planning for integrated service is structured to move forward by identifying policies, strategies and operating models in three key areas: integrated customer pool, integrated customer flow and integrated staffing. Work groups involving state and local partners will develop recommended policies, strategies and models. These will be tested through Local Areas volunteering to serve as "learning labs" for proposed models. The target date for learning lab implementation is July 2008.

Back to Top

What are Learning Labs?

The work groups described above will develop recommended policies, strategies and models. These will be tested through the Local Areas volunteering to serve as "learning labs" for proposed models.

A learning lab is defined as a commitment of the Local Workforce Investment Area, local Workforce Service Branch Field Divisions, CWIB and EDD’s Central Office Workforce Services and Unemployment Insurance Divisions to test in field operation the recommended policies, strategies and service models put forth by one of the work groups and supported by the larger Integrated Service Planning group. It is a time limited experiment, though intended as a precursor to both a local and statewide commitment for service integration among WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker, Wagner-Peyser, Veteran, MSFW and TAA programs.

Note that by the term "learning lab" we are referring to whole Local Workforce Areas, not to separate service centers. There are two reasons for this: First, we are not intending a distinction in service integration priorities between full service versus satellite centers. The goal and priority for service integration is system improvement across all service delivery and access points. Second, we believe it would create an unmanageable environment for reporting and assessment were we to experiment, for example, with co-enrollment in one center and not another. While we recognize the value of testing different options and strategies in service integration within a region, we also need some consistency throughout each Local Area to evaluate progress.

The learning labs will test a wide variety of approaches to achieve integrated service delivery, as outlined in their local integrated service delivery plan. The learning from these approaches will inform the development of the draft and subsequent state integrated service delivery policy.

Among the learning to be captured from these labs are:

  • impact on service quality
  • ease of data collection
  • increased efficiencies and effectiveness
  • impact on performance outcomes
  • the time required to implement integrated services delivery
  • sufficiency and identification of resources to meet the responsibility
  • increase in number of customers receiving skills and other training
  • impact on cost per customer served
  • impact on skills improvement from entry to exit
  • impact on customer service outcomes
  • impact on duration of unemployment
Back to Top

What are the Work Groups?

The Planning Team agreed on June 1, 2007 to move forward through the work of four separate Work Groups. The following summarizes the work groups" immediate focus. Note, however, that the scope and membership of Work Groups continues to evolve as we continue our research and planning. The summary below is only a current snapshot of the continuing work.

Integrated Customer Pool: Liz Clingman from EDD and Robin Purdy from Sacramento Employment and Training Agency co-chair. This group focuses on the impacts and benefits of co-enrollment, or rather, a common case-file; what does this kind of integration mean to performance; what does it mean to eligibility and to documentation requirements; what policy or system changes need to be made to achieve co-enrollment.

Workforce Intelligence Group: Steve Saxton from EDD and Reg Javier from Workforce Advancement Division San Diego Workforce Partnership co-chair. Much of the workforce intelligence that people seek exists within local workforce organizations and the traditional labor market information (LMI) system, but additional, and better organized, information is needed to enable clients and workforce professionals to optimize their workforce decisions. This group focuses on identifying (1) the types of workforce information needed and reasons why each is needed for each functional area and user type; (2) currently available information sources to address the needs, (3) gaps in the current information system, (4) methods and resources to produce and deliver information, and (5) approaches for teaching about the availability and use of workforce intelligence.

Integrated Customer Flow: Stewart Knox from North Central Counties Consortium and Ellen Greer from EDD co-chair. The key question is how best to organize local operations to move toward and manage the common customer pool as defined under an integrated structure. The group is examining other states’ policy and procedure manuals, developing a menu of services and operational flow charts. More specifically, the group is working to define parameters and minimums for local integrated services to be used by all Learning Labs in developing and customizing their local integrated services delivery plan.

Integrated Staffing Employer Services: Geneva Robinson from EDD and Judy Sernas from Verdugo Jobs Center co-chair. The initial question here is how to manage integrated teams, focusing on functions not funding. The group has completed its initial work on functional supervision, recommending adoption of an "On-Site Work Coordinator Policy," similar to that in use in New York, implemented through Local Memoranda of Operations, and structured both to attain functional supervision yet alleviate staff, supervisor and union concerns. The recommendations on functional supervision must be presented to various public employee unions for vetting and any items of concern by the unions need to come back to this group in order to propose solutions that address the issues identified. Finally, this workgroup will also focus on Employer and Business Services products and models that can be considered for inclusion within the various Learning Labs as part of their service menu.

Back to Top

How is the Planning Team approaching the definition of State and Local roles?

While the planning process intends a full statewide implementation of integrated services, the partners are very clear that the State’s role is to set policy that defines the priorities, tools and resources for WIA, WPA, Veterans, MSFW and TAA, and it is Local WIB and Elected Official responsibility to plan, design and implement its own integrated service delivery strategy.

Under this framework, we envision that the State will issue a general, first draft integrated service delivery policy with broad parameters (and minimums) for local integrated service delivery. This will be tested by learning lab experience and will be continuously improved through feedback from the learning labs and discussion with the Integration Planning Team.

Further, the State will research and determine what resources and tools are available to assist local Workforce Boards, other than their own, in the integration of services and assist those Boards in accessing them.

Back to Top

How does this effort at Service Integration impact State and Local strategy for managing information technology?

Currently, California uses two locally distributed systems for compliance reporting under the Wagner-Peyser, WIA, and TAA programs: CalJOBSSM and the Job Training Automation (JTA) system. These systems are not integrated. Acquisition of a new integrated system is outside the more immediate scope of the service integration planning, probably two or more years into the future.

Compounding this lack of system integration, most Local Workforce Areas have purchased their own data management and reporting software systems for WIA, which, by various means, send information to the State’s JTA system for statewide reporting.

While each of these issues contributes to the service and management inefficiencies that motivate our movement for service integration, we believe that service integration of these several programs can occur under current technology.

Key to making this work is the streamlining of data collection and reporting across each of these programs. As we find efficiencies in what client information we collect, how we document program eligibility and compliance, and in what we report, we will not only improve our emphasis on client services but also free up administrative capacity. Our work on improving the coordination among data management systems will be far more manageable under a streamlined, integrated service model.

Again, for emphasis, while much planning and strategy development is still ahead of us, we do not foresee any technology barriers to service integration that cannot be overcome.

Back to Top

What is the strategy for linking Labor Market Information to the Service Integration agenda?

An important component of the planned integration model is a greater emphasis on the investment in worker preparedness and skills consonant with local business demand. Developing strategies to invest in such skills requires an on-going State and Local commitment to improved intelligence on local industry trends and the occupations in demand.

Accordingly, EDD’s Labor Market Information Division (LMID) is an essential partner in service integration planning. LMID is currently working on two priorities as it pertains to service integration. One is to develop strategy for better aligning its labor market research and product development to worker skills assessments. The other is to coordinate the work of its LMI Consultants with Local Workforce Area investments in understanding local labor markets. While this Labor Market Information emphasis continues, more research and work yet needs to be done on developing appropriate skills assessment strategies.

This same emphasis for linking labor market research with worker skill needs and skill assessments leads also to a greater coordination with the Labor and Workforce Agency’s Regional Economies Project, sponsored by the Economic Strategy Panel and California Workforce Investment Board. The CWIB will be leading an effort to accelerate the delivery of the Project’s Industry Clusters of Opportunity resources to Local Workforce Areas.

Back to Top

What are the potential impacts on performance and performance management?

The opportunities and consequences of the proposed common customer pool are significant. The idea is that virtually all clients who enter a Local One-Stop and receive any kind of staff-assisted services will be registered into a common pool, thus included in the performance calculations for WIA, WPA, Veterans, MSFW and TAA programs. Program operators and local areas would no longer be able to seek to "manage" performance by controlling who is registered. Freed up from that management consideration, more program and administrative resources may be dedicated to the customer flow and, particularly, to the assessment and skill enhancement dimensions of service.

Experience in other states indicates that this model does not have a detrimental impact on WIA or other program performance. As noted above in Question #10, the State of New York has operated under the common customer pool model since July 2006. As compared to current WIA performance, service integration has resulted so far in improved worker earnings, no change in worker retention, and only a very small drop in entered employment. In support of the service integration model, the State of New York successfully negotiated an adjustment to their performance standards and has subsequently met all of them. These positive results were obtained even while calculating performance on the total pool of clients entering the One-Stop system.

It is understood that in the testing phase of this strategy development, the State will appropriately take the learning lab experiment into consideration in the negotiation of Local Area performance. When this service integration model gets to a statewide roll-out, the State will need also to negotiate appropriately adjusted WIA performance levels.

Equally important, as we move toward implementation of learning labs, State and Local partners will need to identify and agree on appropriate performance measures better aligned with system goals.

The idea is not to lower performance outcomes, but rather to move away from managing to inappropriate performance standards and to a greater focus on a demand-driven service strategy, focusing on assessment and skills enhancement for all clients, with services leading to employment taking best advantage of those skills.

Back to Top

How does Service Integration planning impact current discussions to improve the delivery of Trade Adjustment Assistance in California?

The Department of Labor has ruled that California is out of compliance for failing to establish co-enrollment of Trade Adjustment Act clients into the WIA Dislocated Worker program. Of even greater concern than matters of compliance, this disconnect between the WIA and TAA programs has contributed to California’s weak performance in the TAA program, with California’s access to federal TAA training and other service funds for eligible clients lagging far behind other states. Because of the urgency to improve upon the State’s delivery of TAA services, we are planning to include TAA in the service integration model and learning labs in July 2008.

While broader service integration planning proceeds, however, we anticipate that the State will issue a Directive in late 2007 that will drive more immediate and statewide change for federal compliance on TAA. Most importantly, we encourage all Local Areas to work immediately on finding solutions for improving TAA and WIA coordination and the delivery of TAA services. The experience of Local Areas successfully moving in this direction will provide guidance to the broader service integration planning and learning lab implementation. A separate state/local workgroup on TAA has already helped identify barriers to services and identified options for improving access to TAA funds to benefit California’s workers and businesses.

Important Links

Top Links This Month

FAQs

Contact Us