PY2018 State Plan ModificationSECTION IV

Partner Coordination

(IV). Coordination with State Plan Programs

This section describes the methods used for joint planning and coordination among the core programs, and with the required one-stop partner programs and other programs and activities included in the Unified or Combined State Plan.

Description of the State Plan Modification Process

The WIOA State Plan partners updated the WIOA 2016 -2019 Combined State Plan during the Program Year 2018 modification process. [CF1][TP2]The Workforce Development Council’s new executive director Wendi Secrist led the plan update process through public meetings held every Tuesday from 1:30 pm. – 3:00 pm between February 6 and March 6. All of the meeting agendas were posted on the WIOA State Plan website on February 1, 2018. These agendas identified specific sections of the Combined State Plan to review. After review, the modified sections with tracked changes were posted on the State Plan website.

The public meetings were well attended by the State Plan partners. Other stakeholders such as service providers and employers attended in person or via conference call.

The following individuals contributed to the WIOA Combined State Plan and were responsible for its program-specific content.

  • Idaho Commission on Aging – Birgit Luebeck, Nutrition and SCSEP Program Specialist. Birgit represented the Combined Partner program of Senior Community Service Employment Program.
  • Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired - Mike Walsh, Rehabilitation Services Chief. Mike represented Title IV programs administered by the Commission.
  • Idaho Department of Labor - Cheryl Foster, Senior Planner and Rico Barrera, Senior Planner. Cheryl and Rico represented all core and partner programs administered by the Department, including Title I-B, Title III, Veterans Employment, and Trade Adjustment Assistance. Janell Hyer, Research Analyst Supervisor, provided all of the updated labor market information in the economic and workforce analysis section of the plan.
  • Idaho Division of Professional-Technical Education – Cruz Gallegos, State Coordinator for Adult Basic Education and GED Administrator. Cruz served as the State Plan Lead, represented Title II programs, and also provided a link to Carl D. Perkins programs via the Division (the Perkins program did not participate in the Plan, but is a close partner in the workforce development system).
  • Idaho Division of Vocational Rehabilitation - Teresa Pitt, Planning and Evaluation Manager; and Matt Markve, Program Evaluation Analyst. Teresa and Matt represented the Title IV general VR programs administered by the Idaho Division of Vocational Rehabilitation.

Description of the Original State Plan Process

In Idaho, the State Planning process was initiated by the Idaho Department of Labor, the Division of Professional-Technical Education, and the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. This group was expanded to include staff from the Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, which also receives Title IV programsfunds. The group nominated the State Coordinator for Adult Education to lead the project, referred to hereafter as “the State Plan Lead.”[TP3]

On[TP4] August 17th, the State Plan Lead sent out an email to representatives from each of the optional programs eligible to participate in the Combined State Plan. The email provided information about WIOA, the State Planning process, and expectations for programs that participated. The email asked that interested programs “opt in” to the planning process and attend the weekly planning meetings.

Three eligible programs opted to participate in the Combined State Plan: Veterans Employment, Trade Adjustment, and Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP). The Veterans and Trade programs are administered by the Idaho Department of Labor, while the Senior program is administered by the Idaho Commission on Aging.

Once the participating programs were identified, the Combined State Plan was drafted by a working group of core and partner programs. The group consisted of a representative(s) from each agency that administers a core or partner program as follows (in alphabetical order):

  • Idaho Commission on Aging - Raul Enriquez, Aging and Disability Resource Center (ADRC)/SCSEP Program Specialist. Raul represented the Combined Partner program of Senior Community Service Employment Program.
  • Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired - Rocio Gil, Counselor; Jeff Weeks, Counselor; and Mike Walsh, Rehabilitation Services Chief. Rocio, Jeff and Mike represented Title IV programs administered by the Commission.
  • Idaho Department of Labor - Cheryl Foster, Senior Planner. Cheryl represented all core and partner programs administered by the Department, including Title I-B, Title III, Veterans Employment, and Trade Adjustment Assistance.
  • Idaho Division of Professional-Technical Education - Amelia Valasek, State Coordinator for Adult Basic Education and GED Administrator. Amelia served as the State Plan Lead, represented Title II programs, and also provided a link to Carl D. Perkins programs via the Division (the Perkins program did not participate in the Plan, but is a close partner in the workforce development system).
  • Idaho Division of Vocational Rehabilitation - Teresa Pitt, Planning and Evaluation Manager; and Matt Markve, Program Evaluation Analyst. Teresa and Matt represented Title IV programs administered by the Division.

This group met weekly beginning in August, 2015. The State Plan Lead led the group in setting timelines and meeting agendas, assigning tasks, combining content from various programs, and managing the online sharing platform. However, the group was primarily collaborative, with each member having equal input into and responsibility for the process, content, and quality of the plan.

Additionally input from the public and other stakeholders was solicited as part of Idaho’s Public Comment Process. A more complete summary of the Public Comment Process can be found in Appendix 2 (Public Comment Outreach and Summary), including a summary of outreach efforts, an overview of comments received and responses to those comments, as well as complete copies of all comments submitted.

1

[CF1]I don’t want to delete the description of the original planning process. I’m ambivalent as to whether we should the modification update before or after.

[TP2]I think we should discuss our mid-cycle update process, not much has changed really other than Wendi is the lead.

[TP3]Is this still true? I would say that Wendi is the lead, no?

[TP4]Maybe summarize what we originally did and then talk about the involvement with core programs in the one-stop sub committee and our commitment for the WAG to continue to work on elements of the plan through the leadership of Wendi???? I think a statement or two could help this section.