Gail Gray explained that Montana has earned a performance bonus of over two million dollars. One of the criteria this was based on was the number of job placements. The areas of concern were retention and the wages earned. She said this was a joint effort by DPHHS, DLI, and many private agencies.

3. Regulatory Committee Tasks

The committee reviewed their goals and tasks.

4. Review Public Funds document

Desiree Taggart explained that the document titled State of Montana Workforce Development Programs for Individuals & Programs for Business was designed to give an overview of all of the programs in the state. She explained that this document is a draft and invited the committee to make comments. The document is more extensive and inclusive than previous documents.

Chair Leroy Bingham suggested that the full board might be highly interested in seeing this document. Desiree explained that this document would need to be updated yearly and as new programs emerged. Leroy stated that the Section 166 programs ram needs to be included. Jerry Driscoll added that the Department of Transportation receives millions for job training and should be included. Desiree concurred and said she would be contacting them.

Dennis suggested that information on program outcomes might be useful.

Leroy suggested that perhaps by informing the full board some pressure could be applied to get programs to respond to Desiree's request for information.

Jerry stated that in Apprenticeship & Training, Mark Maki is the supervisor and that there is another $280,000 in a grant program that Mark Maki runs as well.

The committee decided to present the document to the full board at the July 16, 2002 meeting for further input. Dennis suggested that the document might be valuable to committees in the special legislative session.

Leroy requested iree to make this document available on the web site when it is complete. Further we need to compile a list of interested parties for this document which could include educators, legislators and other important persons to receive the final document. Leroy suggested that the Salish Kootenai and Blackfeet TANF programs be added. The draft document will be mailed to the full board. Arlene Parisot explained that Carl Perkins should also be included in the adult and youth sections. Dennis stated that it would be interesting to see a breakdown of what the state and federal dollars put in. Desiree will work to clarify some of the information. Will discuss who to deliver the document to, how and when at the next committee meeting. Leroy suggested that a link could be forged from the Prevention web site at DPHHS to the document on the board site.

5. Review of Carl Perkins Plan

Arlene Parisot explained that the Executive Summary of the Carl D. Perkins State Plane 2001-2004 outlines the program in Montana. She added that the local applications funding is split 65%-35%. When Perkins III was put in place the Office of Public Instruction set aside $60,000 to hold some schools harmless and requested a waiver for some secondary schools. The amount that is held out from the 10% is held out for the states. A partnership is required between educators and entities within the community. State leadership funding is 45%-OCHE, 55%-OPI funded. One institutional grant is in place currently. Arlene explained that the Office of Public Instruction is working hard to gather comments regarding the reauthorization. She added that three of Montana's tribes are also running the program.

Lunch 11:45 - 12:30

Leroy briefed Gail Gray on what took place in her absence (she was not present for the Review of Carl Perkins Plan presented by Arlene. The committee voted to approve the Carl D. Perkins report as presented by Arlene Parisot.

6. One Stop Position Paper

Desiree explained that the paper was designed to show the status of the One Stop System in Montana. She explained that she sees Montana as being very flexible in it's service delivery and that at this point this is more of a fact paper than a position paper. There are efforts underway through a State Agency Management Team to coordinate services but the system includes many more entities. Leroy commented that the two One Stops seem to have gone in different directions. Dennis suggested that there is information on hand and that staff gather the information for the next meeting. He further stated that we should be looking at principles not mandates Gail stated that she likes collocation where possible. She explained that it is the larger areas that have the hardest time collocating and that it is not realistic to expect to have all services everywhere.

Leroy agreed with Dennis that they should be careful about being restrictive and asked if there had been any thought about increasing the number of One Stops in Montana.

Jerry explained that there are two issues:

What is a One Stop?
What does collocate mean?

Gail explained that she thinks that collocation is a trend.

Leroy added that promoting collocation is good but mandating it may not be. He added that they should follow the spirit of the board's goal by increasing the number of One Stops as defined by the requirements that Lewistown and Butte comply to.

Dennis suggested that the committee do as follows:

Get a sense about the services that are provided and what that means.
Provide some guiding principles.

The committee asked staff to add a page on the tribal services to the programs document chart of services. It was also decided to work on defining collocation and itinerant services. Dennis and Leroy agreed that they would like to have information on what One Stops have done across the nation. Desiree will gather the information and deliver it to the committee members for their review prior to the next meeting. Gail reported that the State Agency Management Team has had two meetings and signed an interagency agreement. Some of the team's discussion has been regarding collocation and how to better facilitate it.

The committee voted to pursue investigating current practices and forming some guiding principles regarding One Stops.

7. 5-year Plan

Desiree explained that when the Workforce Investment Act started there were two different options for how to complete a plan. Montana chose to complete the minimum requirements. Desiree suggested that the committee consider the following as they decide on when/if to create a new plan:

Will a unified planning process help with the guiding principles?
Is this something that we want to do or submit to the feds?

Dennis suggested collecting more information. What benefits are there? Is there any money involved, are there more services, what would it require? Gail explained that with everything else currently going on she does not think a unified plan would be a good idea. Desiree will compile pros and cons for the next committee meeting.

8. Other Business

None

9. Call to the Public

10. Establish Next Meeting Date

The committee asked Desiree to send documents for their review as they become available.

September 19, 2002

Full Board October 15, 2002

11. Adjourn

Chair Leroy Bingham adjourned the meeting at 1:45 pm.

| | | | | |

| | | Contact Us |