OAKLAND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD YOUTH COUNCIL MEETING

OAKLAND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD YOUTH COUNCIL MEETING Wednesday, May 13, 2015 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Oakland City Hall Hearing Room 3 Department of Economic & Workforce Development 250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 3315 Oakland, CA 94612 www.oaklandwib.org

1. Call to Order OAKLAND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD YOUTH COUNCIL AGENDA Wednesday, May 13, 2015 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Oakland City Hall Hearing Room 3 2. Adoption of Agenda Action 3. Adoption of Minutes from February 11, 2014 Meeting Action 4. Meeting Notes from April 22, 2015 Meeting Informational 5. PROPOSED FY 2015-2016 WIB YSP Budget Allocations Action 6. 2015 Summer Program Funding Recommendations Action 7. Youth Council Member Announcements Informational 8. Open Forum Informational 9. Adjourn Action 2 P a g e

Meeting called to order 3:16pm. OAKLAND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD YOUTH COUNCIL MEETING NOTES Wednesday, February 11, 2015 3:00-5:00pm Oakland City Hall, Hearing Room 3 Roll Call George McDaniel Gilbert Pete Jr. Elena Anaya Derrick Bedford Kathy Chao-Rothberg Chris Chatmon Gay Plair Cobb Barry Luboviski Galen Maness Ken Maxey William Patterson Nicole Thompson Obray Van Buren Excused Excused Excused Quorum established. 3 P a g e

Item #1: Agenda Motion made to adopt the agenda as noticed by Barry Luboviski Seconded by Kathy Chao-Rothberg Approved by Consensus Item #2: Review of Minutes Galen Maness requested a correction on page one of the May 28, 2014 Youth Council Minutes in reference to his attendance. Motion to approve as amended made by Barry Luboviski Seconded by Kathy Chao Rothberg Nine in favor to accept the Minutes as amended One Abstention Obray Van Buren Item #3: Youth Council Planning Session ed by Ricardo Quezada Summary of the planning session was provided highlighting: Challenges the committee sees that are affecting Oakland. Success the committee has had in the past twelve month. Challenges the committee has struggled with in the past twelve months. The planning session lacked quorum with four members participating in the session. Invitation to review information covered and includes additional member s concerns and suggestions of what members feel we should be addressing in our efforts. Recommendation: Members should review Action Planning items discussed at the session to be considered by the committee for action. Need Identified: Stay focused with continued member participation and engagement while also considering if changes to meeting times, frequency or structure are necessary to increase participation and ensure that everyone s voice is being valued. Discussion: Committee vacancies will be filled per requirements under the Workforce Innovation Opportunity Act (WIOA) which requires that the majority of Board membership be comprised of individuals from the business sector. Need Identified: Quorum requirements are dependent on having appointed members that attend, participate and do the work. The Working Groups also provides the opportunity to identify community stakeholders or interested individuals to weigh in and have input. Action planning to address secondary education partnership to bridge gaps. This includes new members to the WIB Committees and starting a conversation between OUSD Superintendent s representative in the Employer Strategies committee and the Youth Council representatives to engage business and youth. Need for clarification: Jobs for youth served was made possible through leveraged funding as well as the need for additional partnerships to serve youth that were eager to work but did not qualify to participate. 4 P a g e

Item #4: Youth Council Work Groups ed by Ricardo Quezada Recommendation to discuss outreach and community partnerships in West Oakland: First meeting was held February 4, 2015 with four of five members participating in the meeting. Discussed history of West Oakland Work Groups, concern over its inactivity and the need for increasing capacity in the area. Need Identified: A clear purpose to develop solutions for providing direct services to West Oakland neighborhoods. Need Identified: Develop partnerships that target underserve populations of West Oakland. Work Group members will coordinate and develop a calendar of meetings with objectives of the group. WIB Director clarified his role in participating in the Work Group. He met with the Committee Co-Chair prior to the meeting to discuss that because this was a work group that as an outcome to the Youth Council initiative, he did not feel it appropriate to sit in on the convening and does not intend to facilitate the work so that the WG has an opportunity to do its work and bring it back to the Youth Council. The goal is to participate as it comes to the Youth Council. Co-Chair expressed the intention of the meeting was for WG members to gain a common understanding of mission and objectives and that WG meeting would be open to the public. WIB Director provided clarification by stating that the WG is appointed by the committee and approved by the Chair to represent the interest of the community. These are not public notice meetings, therefore the WG meetings are not open to the public Decisions made to open WG meetings to the public must be public noticed so that all members of the community have equal opportunity to participate as opposed to individuals invited. Discussed the intention, naming and the definitions of the Work Groups, the Youth Council Work Group will continue to be identified as the West Oakland Work Group. Interested parties providing services in an area cannot be restricted; legislation does not prohibit the conversation about building capacity in the area. Speaker: Michele Clark, Director of Youth Employment Partnership (YEP), stated that West Oakland has struggled to build a training community and supports West Oakland developing its own experts, including her agency which provided services through a West Oakland agency in the past.. Item #5: RFP 2016-2019 Strategies for Serving Youth ed by Ricardo Quezada Discussed aligning the system with the changes to legislation under the Workforce Innovation Opportunity Act (WIOA) through an RFP process: Explanation of changes to the population served, reporting and performance measures. 5 P a g e

Intention of this item is that all committees recognize that there is a tight time frame and the goal is to take advantage of these meetings to gather any input possible regarding how we move forward with the processing and structuring of the RFP. Nonetheless, WIOA will guide the shaping of our workforce development system as discussed at the WIB retreat and the special meeting with Bob Lantern. Opportunities will continue to be available for public, committee and Youth Council input on the RFP development process. Recommendation: Special meetings may be necessary once details of the act are released by Department of Labor and the State and should include the RFP timeline. The RFP timeline has been published and provided to all members including two meetings for this purpose of discussing WIOA, the law and the implications on the system going forward. WIB staff invited a representative from a State organization that was developing and training statewide to come personally and inform the WIB members on the changes within the new legislation (WIOA) and member participation was limited. He agreed to come back and do a separate session for the Youth Council as part of his commitment which also had limited participation. WIOA will be the cornerstone of what our strategies are going forward and staff will continue to present and agendize updates to the implementation of the legislation. Suggestion: To have additional discussions regarding the development of RFP, strategies for serving youth and changes in WIOA such as Contra Costa WIB s Earn it and Learn It and STEM programs which engages local business representation geared towards youth. Action was not recommended. Item #6: YSP Performance Corrective Action Report ed by Ricardo Quezada An explanation was provided regarding the system s performance outcomes as well as the process for attaining results from the State to the committee: Initial training and technical assistance on CalJOBS is provided to the Youth Service Providers. Results from the State shows that the system currently is failing the three performance measures: : 1) Placement in Employment, Education or Advanced Training; 2) Literacy and Numeracy Gains; and 3) Attainment of Degree or Certificate Data was analyzed and questions regarding exit cohorts were submitted for further clarification from the State. The State confirmed performance outcome results were correct. WIB Staff is in the process of meeting with the providers to implement a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) that requires ongoing communication with the Youth Service Providers as well as training and technical assistance. Assistance has been requested from the State in the form of training opportunities to improve understanding of 6 P a g e

performance, CalJOBS, case management and system outcomes. OWIB leadership has conducted individual communication with the Executive Directors of each Youth Service Provider to discuss the need for agencies to participate in trainings and develop systems included in the CAP to improve outcomes. Staff will do everything possible to ensure provider success including bringing DOL and EDD to assist in training and technical assistance. Staff will continue providing technical assistance and believe that the work is being done. The CalJOBS system has rigid timelines and failure to report appropriately and in a timely manner leads to negative impact on performance. Failure to perform may lead to the loss of Workforce Investment Area designation. Explanation of 2013-14 performance data and lag in State reporting. Review of the system s performance has been vigilant and ongoing by the System Leadership committee. At this time no additional staff will be considered. Invoice reimbursement, performance, RFP and completing a budget are the existing priorities. Discussed the meeting with DOL and EDD to share OWIB s staff plan to move forward. Staff is exploring opportunities to include regional collaborations and including inviting other WIBs to participate in the DOL and EDD training. Speaker: Michele Clarke, Director of YEP, shared history of her organization and presented her interpretation of the cause for the system s current performance which she associates are positive outcomes which were allowed to Soft Exit by the PIC, when it was the system administrator, delayed release of contracts and youth electronic files that were updated at a time when Youth Service Providers did not have access to CalJOBS. Kathy Chao Rothberg, Director Lao Family Community Development, agreed with the prior analysis of the cause for the current performance. Speaker: Carrol Fiff, Community Member, voiced concern regarding the possibility of losing funding. OWIB Director shared that the letters sent to the providers were agency specific based on analysis of the services provided and performance outcomes. Also, that the question was how to present the data to the body and the community. The decision was made to present in total with all the possibilities. DOL and the State s meeting with OWIB requesting that staff gather information from the Youth Service Providers as to the assistance each agency needs so that the training is tailor made to fit the needs of the entire system and expanding the training to the region demonstrates their investment in our success. DOL and EDD will provide a two-phase training with a session being targeted for front line staff by EDD on CalJOBS and a second session by DOL and EDD on performance targeted towards Executive Directors and staff. EDD is willing to give us an open window to present information that documents the positive attainment of performance outcomes if it s within the past open quarters. Clarifying the position of presenting performance information to the Youth Council and the Executive committees which included the full range of issues and possibilities, because one of the possibilities if we don t retain positive outcomes from previously Soft Exited participants could be that the State Board could make adjustments about our funding. OWIB is working with DOL, EDD and now the Youth Service Providers to prevent that from happening. 7 P a g e

A range of possibilities was presented based on system performance and actions taken to avoid reaching to the extreme of those options. Item #7: Youth Council Meeting Calendar Review ed by Ricardo Quezada Suggestion was made to consider increasing the frequency of meetings due to current performance and lack of participation at the meetings: The calendar of meetings was presented demonstrating six Youth Council meetings, monthly Youth Service Provider meetings, Work Group meetings and additional trainings as was previously discussed with DOL and EDD. Discussed frequency of meetings and need to discuss the RFP, youth summer jobs and adoption of the new legislation. Questions were raised regarding the summer jobs program status. Meeting with the Mayor will determine direction for some of these items. Need Identified: Meeting effectiveness should be evaluated as opposed increasing frequency. Increasing frequency would not encourage additional participation for some members. Suggestion to have meetings that correlate with time specific activities such as the release of the RFP, summer jobs program and WIOA implementation. Effectiveness and purpose of meetings should be clear and if the committee decides to increase frequency, it should be clear that doing so as a one-time decision to address the current items or it is ongoing to be mindful of everyone s schedule. Concern raised on the committee s inability to meet quorum requirements in the last two meetings. Concern expressed over staff s current responsibilities and ability to be successful. Explanation of the process that includes planning and preparing for committee meetings to ensure that the process meets City s compliance requirements. OWIB Director suggested that the body be in favor of stronger more focused meetings. So that the committee gets more business done during the allocated time. Keeping open the option to increase meeting time in the event that additional time is needed. Members should commit that during this time we do business that generates direction for staff and the Council. He is not in favor of increasing meetings to do what we are doing and is concerned of member s participation with very busy schedules. The group should also consider that except for a few members, many are members to the full WIB and have a mandate to participate in those meetings. Also, the staff will do what it must to support the committee s decision. Review times of meetings to ensure they align with important activities. Suggestion to be more strategic during the meetings. Item #8: Youth Council member Announcements No discussion. Open Forum No discussion. 8 P a g e

Barry Luboviski moved to Adjourn the meeting Seconded by Obray Van Buren Meeting Adjourned at 5:19 pm 9 P a g e

Meeting called to order 3:10pm. OAKLAND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD YOUTH COUNCIL MEETING NOTES Wednesday, February 22, 2015 3:00-5:00pm Oakland City Hall, Hearing Room 4 Roll Call George McDaniel Gilbert Pete Jr. Elena Anaya Derrick Bedford Kathy Chao-Rothberg Chris Chatmon Gay Plair Cobb Barry Luboviski Galen Maness Ken Maxey William Patterson Nicole Thompson Obray Van Buren Excused Excused Excused Absent Excused Absent Excused Quorum not established. Department of Economic & Workforce Development 250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 3315 Oakland, CA 94612 www.oaklandwib.org 10 P a g e

Item #1: Agenda Pending Item Item #2: Review of Minutes Pending Item Item #3: 2015-16 Budget ed by Al Auletta Summary of the budget was presented for 2015-16: The budget outlook for 2015-16 has been presented at several forums including the WIB Executive Committee, Full WIB committee and the City Council on February 26, 2015. In FY 2014-15 the system had unobligated carry forward funding. For FY 2015-16 no carry forward funding is assumed. An overall reduction of $1,065,000 in system revenues Graphic chart presented to explain that FY 2015-16 the youth system will not have the additional $380,000 in carry forward funding that was available and contracted out in FY 2014-15. A reduction of 19% of available youth funding for FY 15-16 due to the spend down of unobligated carry forward funds in FY 14-15. A projection of a 15%-20% reduction has been shared with the Youth Service Provider (YSP) network. City budget process, priority and timelines are available on the City s websites. Primary function of the Youth Council is to identify eligible youth service providers and recommend them for contracts and also to provide oversight of eligible providers and their activities. Performance considerations have been presented to the Youth Council for funding determinations and contract recommendations to the Executive Committee. Discussion: Concerns over enrollment and performance levels of YSP network and CalJOBS technical assistance, conversations, support and training provided to the YSP network by staff. History of carry over funding was discussed. Discussion: Importance of tracking data, case management, CalJOBS and performance overview and DOL s If it s not in the system, it did not happen policy. Item #4: Classrooms 2 Careers (Update) ed by Co-Chair Gilbert Pete Jr. Summary of Classrooms 2 Careers (C 2 ) formerly known as Mayor s Summer Job Program: New direction encompassing work based learning (WBL) experiences for youth that will lead to year round opportunities. Initiative moving towards a more internship driven program aligning the City with Oakland Unified School District. New approach still being developed with the goal of serving students by providing opportunities in the summer which carries over to the school year. 11 P a g e

Explanation: OUSD s ECCO Exploring College and Career Opportunities Curriculum Incorporation of classroom presentation, career exploration visits, student internships and teacher externships, on sector strategies to youth opportunities to what historically was a job program with limited exposure to career pathways. Focus on industry engagement, internships and business partnership. Summer Program Coordinator overseeing employment program funded through Oakland Housing Authorities (OHA). Item #5: Council Resolution Introduced by 100 Black Men (Item #11) ed by John Bailey Item was presented at the Executive Committee meeting. Discussion: City Administrator is taking the lead and convened all the City Departments to address this matter. ed Resolution by 100 Black Men (Item #11) to be included as part of the record. Discussion: C 2 assist by engaging youth year round, Mayor s fund raising efforts, the increase in age of youth eligible for participation and collaboration in the Career Pathway Trust initiative are all examples of increased opportunities available to youth in the City and the development of partnerships in an effort to build a system to serve all youth.. Item #6: Youth Council member Announcements No discussion. Open Forum An effort will be made to have Youth Service Providers present at the May 13, 2015 Youth Council meeting. Discussion: Funding recommendation and the best way to move forward. Meeting Adjourned at 4:35 pm 12 P a g e

MEMORANDUM To: Oakland WIB Executive Committee From: John R. Bailey, Executive Director Date: May 13, 2015 Re: PROPOSED FY 2015-2016 WIB Youth Service Provider Budget Allocations Summary Staff is requesting that the Youth Council take action regarding Youth Service Provider allocations for FY 2015-2016, and is presenting two options for consideration in this memorandum. The proposed Workforce Investment Board (WIB) budget for FY 2015-2016 is shown as Attachment A. Overall, the Oakland WIB is facing a reduction of $1,065,000 in revenues this year compared to last year due to the absence of unobligated carry-forward funding to augment our regular Formula Workforce Investment Act (WIA) funding of $4,628,338. Whereas we budgeted $1,983,729 for youth activities and support for FY 2014-2015, in FY 2015-2016 we have $1,603,729 in youth funding to work with. That represents a reduction of $380,000, or 19%. Staff recognizes that the demand to enable our youth and young adults to become gainfully employed increases, and that funding to meet that growing demand is diminishing, specifically with regard to our WIA funding. WIA Youth formula funding has gone down from a high of $1,785,300 in FY 2012-2013 to a projected $1,603,729 in FY 2015-2016. Table 1 illustrates the decline in overall Youth Formula and carry-forward funding from FY 2012-2013 to date. Youth Service Provider Performance In a performance report released by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) in the fall of 2014, Oakland failed all three youth performance measures that covered the period of participants exiting the program in FY 2012-2013. With support from DOL and the State Employment Development Department (EDD), WIB staff convened an all-day training on youth performance measures and CalJOBS the State s mandated performance tracking system. Staff also provided numerous one-on-one training and technical assistance sessions with service providers at their sites and by phone. More service provider support is needed to ensure our System s performance improves, including consideration to allocate some youth funding for technical assistance for all providers that are struggling to meet and exceed performance benchmarks. 13 P a g e

The following tables one through five summarize how Youth Service Providers are performing in FY 2014-2015 to date: TABLE 1 FUNDS AVAILABLE Service Provider Contract Amount Funds Remaining Civicorps $225,000 $84,375 Lao Family $250,000 $250,000 Youth Employment Partnership $300,000 $300,000 Youth Radio $208,980 $156,735 Youth UpRising $250,000 $109,963 TABLE 2 ENROLLMENTS Service Provider Enrolled Enrollment Goal % of Enrollment Goal Civicorps 28 44 64% Lao Family 39 40 98% Youth Employment Partnership 41 60 68% Youth Radio 11 40 28% Youth UpRising 16 35 46% EDD recently informed WIB staff that FY 14-15 participant enrollments must be in the CalJOBS system by June 30, 2015. This effectively means that the cut-off date for enrolling FY 14-15 WIA youth clients is June 15, 2015. WIOA goes into effect July 1, 2015 for youth, which means only participants enrolled under FY 2015-2016 WIOA contracts can be enrolled from July 1 forward. TABLE 3 Service Provider Civicorps Lao Family Youth Employment Partnership Youth Radio Youth UpRising PLACEMENT IN EMPLOYMENT OR EDUCATION Total Combined Category Quarters Placement 13 Exit 25 Placement 25 Exit 32 Placement 65 Exit 103 Placement 12 Exit 13 Placement 1 Exit 12 State Goals % of Placement to Exit Success Rate 55.0% 52.0% 95% 55.0% 78.1% 142% 55.0% 63.1% 115% 55.0% 92.3% 168% 55.0% 8.3% 15% 14 P a g e

TABLE 4 Service Provider Civicorps Lao Family Youth Employment Partnership Youth Radio Youth UpRising ATTAINMENT OF DEGREE OR CERTIFCATE Total Combined Category Quarters Attainment 23 Exit 37 Attainment 10 Exit 27 Attainment 31 Exit 83 Attainment 0 Exit 7 Attainment 0 Exit 6 State Goals % of Attainment to Exit Success Rate 56.5% 62.2% 110% 56.5% 37.0% 66% 56.5% 37.3% 66% 56.5% 0.0% 0% 56.5% 0.0% 0% TABLE 5 Service Provider Civicorps Lao Family Youth Employment Partnership Youth Radio Youth UpRising LITERACY AND NUMERACY GAINS Total Combined Category Quarters Gains 0 Deficient 17 Gains 22 Deficient 25 Gains 0 Deficient 10 Gains 2 Deficient 18 Gains 0 Deficient 9 State Goals % of Gain to Deficient Success Rate 40.5% 0.0% 0% 40.5% 88.0% 217% 40.5% 0.0% 0% 40.5% 11.1% 27% 40.5% 0.0% 0% Failure in meeting Literacy and Numeracy measures is not unique to Oakland and in fact is a measure that is being failed significantly across the country. This measure is proposed to be replaced under WIOA. FY 2015-2016 Youth Revenue The overall decline in budgeted funding for youth in FY 2015-2016 compared to FY 2014-2015 is $380,000. The only funds projected for Youth in FY 2015-2016 are Formula funds at an estimated amount of $1,603,729. We will not get the exact figures from the State until sometime in late April or early May. With the proposed reduction in the Summer Youth Program 15 P a g e

allocation and the elimination of the Youth Wage Pool reserve, staff is recommending a 15% reduction in Youth Service Provider contract amounts from FY 2014-2015. Table 6 illustrates the decline in Youth Formula and unobligated carry-forward funding since FY 2012-2013: TABLE 6 FY 2015-2016 Funding and Service Level Options The Youth Council s primary duties include recommending eligible providers of youth services to be awarded grants and contracts and conducting oversight with respect to eligible providers and youth activities. Staff recommends that the Youth Council s actions regarding FY 2015-2016 WIA budget allocations be based on performance considerations. 16 P a g e

Table 7 summarizes funding and contracted service levels for FY 2014-2015. TABLE 7 FY 14-15 Youth Service Provider Contract Allocations Service Provider Contracted Service Level Goals Total Award ISY OSY Total Civicorps $225,000 40 40 Lao Family Community Development Youth Employment Partnership $250,000 24 27 51 $300,000 15 45 60 Youth Radio $208,980 40 40 Youth UpRising $250,000 24 11 35 TOTALS: $1,233,980 1 63 163 226 OPTION 1 Table 8 represents a proposed prorated reduction of 15% as compared to FY 2014-2015 funding levels for FY 2015-2016 based upon the reduction of $380,000 in available revenue this coming year. Proposed service level reductions are 20%, based on the increased emphasis in serving out-of-school youth under WIOA. [Blank Intentionally] 1 The FY 14-15 total allocation included $77,267 for a Youth Wage Pool Reserve, which did not materialize due to an over-estimate of Youth carry-forward funds. 17 P a g e

TABLE 8 FY 15-16 Youth Service Provider Contract Allocations Proposed Service Level Goals Service Provider Total Award ISY OSY Total Civicorps $191,250 32 32 Lao Family Community Development Youth Employment Partnership $212,500 20 20 40 $255,000 12 36 48 Youth Radio $177,633 32 32 Youth UpRising $212,500 14 14 28 TOTALS: $1,048,883 46 134 180 Please note that service levels are negotiable and that the figures presented in this table are a proposed starting point for discussion. $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 Youth Service Provider Allocations $300,000 $250,000 $ 255,000 $250,000 $225,000 $ 212,500 $208,980 $ 212,500 $191,250 $177,633 Civicorps Lao Family Community Development Youth Employment Partnership Youth Radio Youth UpRising FY 14-15 FY 15-16 18 P a g e

In-school Youth Service Levels FY 14-15 FY 15-16 24 24 20 15 12 14 Lao Family Community Development Youth Employment Partnership Youth UpRising Out-of-School Youth Service Levels FY 14-15 FY 15-16 45 40 40 36 32 32 27 20 11 14 Civicorps Lao Family Community Development Youth Employment Partnership Youth Radio Youth UpRising OPTION 2 As illustrated in Tables 2 5, two of our service providers are performing below the 50% performance benchmark threshold. Following is language in City Council Resolution No. 85114 C.M.S. for the adoption of the WIB s FY 2014-2015 budget: FURTHER RESOLVED: That each contract for workforce development activities funded with WIA Title I funds shall have specific performance benchmarks consistent with WIA regulations, and that the City shall terminate the contract of a service provider that materially fails to meet 50-75% of contract performance benchmarks and reallocate funds to other providers that meet their benchmarks. 19 P a g e

Staff is working with Youth Radio and Youth UpRising on the development of detailed Corrective Action Plans (CAPs) intended to improve performance in all areas. The CAP timeframe is May 15, 2015 August 15, 2015. An option for the WIB s consideration is to defer making FY 2015-2016 funding decisions for Youth Radio and Youth UpRising pending the outcome of their respective corrective actions. Staff can bring the outcome data and progress report forward to the Youth Council at a special meeting in late August and to the Executive Committee during its September 2, 2015 meeting for review and consideration of FY 2015-2016 funding. Thank you. 20 P a g e

Line Items Oakland Workforce Investment Board FY 2015-2016 BUDGET Attachment A A B C D E F G H I J K L FY 14-15 ADULT FY 15-16 ADULT FY 14-15 DISLOCATED WORKER FY 15-16 DISLOCATED WORKER FY 14-15 RAPID RESPONSE FY 15-16 RAPID RESPONSE FY 14-15 YOUTH FY 15-16 YOUTH FY 14-15 TOTAL FY 15-16 TOTAL $ DIFFERENTIAL 1 WIA Formula Allocations $1,579,174 $1,579,174 $1,195,435 $1,195,435 $250,000 $250,000 $1,603,729 $1,603,729 $4,628,338 $4,628,338 $0 0 2 Carry Forward/Transfer $430,000 $0 $150,000 $0 $105,000 $0 $380,000 $0 $1,065,000 $0 -$1,065,000-100% 3 OJT Grant $988,217 $0 $988,217 $20,000 -$968,217-98% 4 Total Revenue $2,009,174 $1,579,174 $2,333,652 $1,195,435 $355,000 $250,000 $1,983,729 $1,603,729 $6,681,555 $4,648,338 -$2,033,217-30% 5 ASSETS $130,000 $104,000 $130,000 $104,000 -$26,000-20% 6 Comprehensive Career Center $498,000 $531,520 $710,000 $434,880 $300,000 $250,000 $1,508,000 $1,216,400 -$291,600-19% 7 Neighborhood Career Centers $348,000 $386,400 $87,000 $165,600 $435,000 $552,000 $117,000 27% 8 OPIC OJT Project $175,522 $175,522 $0 -$175,522-100% 9 Unity Council OJT Project $65,400 $65,400 $0 -$65,400-100% 10 English Center OJT Project $67,189 $67,189 $0 -$67,189-100% 11 Lao Family OJT Project $115,469 $115,469 $0 -$115,469-100% 12 Year-Round Youth Programs $1,311,247 $1,048,883 $1,311,247 $1,048,883 -$262,364-20% 13 EASTBAY Works $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $10,000 $10,000 $60,000 $60,000 $0 0 14 Summer Youth Program $200,000 $100,115 $200,000 $100,115 -$99,885-50% % 15 Subtotal of Programs $1,001,000 $1,046,920 $1,245,580 $625,480 $300,000 $250,000 $1,521,247 $1,158,998 $4,067,827 $3,081,398 -$986,429-24% 16 Adult/DW Training Funds $270,000 $256,000 $225,000 $174,000 $55,000 $550,000 $430,000 -$120,000-22% 17 OJT Project Training $475,000 $475,000 $0 -$475,000-100% 18 Adult/DW Supportive Services $70,000 $50,750 $30,000 $29,250 $100,000 $80,000 -$20,000-20% 19 Subtotal Direct Client Support $340,000 $306,750 $730,000 $203,250 $55,000 $1,125,000 $510,000 -$615,000-55% 20 Total Program Expenditure $1,341,000 $1,353,670 $1,975,580 $828,730 $355,000 $250,000 $1,521,247 $1,158,998 $5,192,827 $3,591,398 -$1,601,429-31% 21 Professional Services $25,000 $5,000 $25,000 $10,000 $25,000 $10,000 $75,000 $25,000 -$50,000-67% 22 Operation & Maintenance $15,500 $6,000 $15,500 $7,500 $15,500 $8,500 $46,500 $31,253 -$15,247-33% 23 Internal Services Fees $41,000 $7,000 $45,000 $7,500 $35,000 $8,924 $17,594 $17,594 24 City Personnel $586,674 $207,504 $317,572 $341,705 $386,982 $417,307 $1,367,228 $983,093 -$384,135-28% 25 Subtotal of City Operations $668,174 $225,504 $403,072 $366,705 $462,482 $444,731 $1,488,728 $1,056,940 -$431,788-29% 26 Total Expenditures $2,009,174 $1,579,174 $2,333,652 $1,195,435 $355,000 $250,000 $1,983,729 $1,603,729 $6,681,555 $4,648,338 -$2,033,217-30% 4/7/2015 % 21 P a g e

Oakland Workforce Investment Board FY 2015-2016 BUDGET Attachment A.1 G H I J K L Line Items FY 14-15 YOUTH FY 15-16 YOUTH FY 14-15 TOTAL FY 15-16 TOTAL $ DIFFERENTIAL % WIA Formula Allocations $1,603,729 $1,603,729 $1,603,729 $1,603,729 $0 0% Carry Forward/Transfer $380,000 $0 $380,000 $0 -$380,000 Total Revenue $1,983,729 $1,603,729 $1,983,729 $1,603,729 -$380,000-19% 12 Year-Round Youth Programs $1,311,247 $1,048,883 $1,311,247 $1,048,883 -$262,364-20% - 100% 14 Summer Youth Program $200,000 $100,115 $200,000 $100,115 -$99,885-50% Subtotal of Programs $1,511,247 $1,148,998 $1,511,247 $1,148,998 -$362,249-24% 22 P a g e

MEMORANDUM To: Oakland WIB Youth Council From: John R. Bailey, Executive Director Date: May 13, 2015 Re: Summer Program Funding Recommendations Per City Council Resolution No. 84373 C.M.S., the Oakland WIB is authorized to approve the disbursement of funds for the Mayor s Summer Jobs Program to contracted youth service providers without the need for staff to return to the City Council for approval. While Mayor Schaaf has directed staff to develop an internship-focused summer and yearround program model called Classrooms 2 Careers, the legislation remains in effect regarding disbursement of summer program funds. Oakland Housing Authority Grant The Oakland Housing Authority (OHA) Board of Directors has again approved a $450,000 grant to serve 260 OHA residents between the ages of 16 and 21. The program model includes a total of 20 hours of per-employment and job retention training, and 100 hours of paid work experience at the City s new minimum wage rate of $12.25/hr. The OHA grant pays service providers a flat fee of $500 per participant for Program and Administrative support, and up to $1,225 for youth wages. Any costs above and beyond the $1,725 per participant, such as training incentives and bonuses, mandatory withholding taxes, and other program costs must be borne by the service providers. Staff is recommending that we go with the same three service providers that opted in to the OHA grant last year, and disburse summer program funds using a pro-rated formula based on the number of OHA slots each agency is getting. The WIA funds are intended to provide operating support for allowable summer youth activities in conjunction with year-round services, which may include defraying the costs not covered by the OHA grant. The miscellaneous funds are also intended to help defray the costs not covered by the OHA grant. Any funds above and beyond those needed to cover all costs associated with the OHA grant must be used to create new summer program opportunities for youth ages 16-21, including work experience, stipended internships, service-learning and the like. Note the Miscellaneous Allocations are not guaranteed. They will be disbursed based upon the approval of the Office of the Mayor and availability of funds. The WIB s authorization to disburse these funds is essential to receive now for purposes of program responsiveness. 23 P a g e

Following is a table of recommended OHA service and summer program funding allocation levels: 2015 PROPOSED SUMMER PROGRAM ALLOCATIONS LFCD YEP YU TOTALS OHA MSJP GRANT ALLOCATIONS Number of OHA Youth Proposed: 100 100 60 260 Total Proposed cost to OHA: $172,500 $172,500 $103,500 $448,500 Pro-rata share: 38.46% 38.46% 23.08% 100% FY 2014-2015 WIA ALLOCATIONS WIA Youth One Stop Cost: $38,462 $38,462 $23,077 $100,000 MISCELLANEOUS MSJP ALLOCATIONS* Recommended First-Wave Allocations: $15,385 $15,385 $9,231 $40,000 Not-to-Exceed Allocations: $38,462 $38,462 $23,077 $100,000 Sub-Totals: $226,346 $226,346 $135,808 $588,500 * Note the Miscellaneous MSJP fund allocations are not guaranteed. Per City Council fund distribution authorization, the WIB must approve the disbursement of MSJP funds to contracted youth service providers. Staff is recommending these not-to-exceed fund disbursements in the event the City raises $100,000. The proposed distribution of funds is based on agency capacity estimates derived from the allocation of OHA MSJP slots, which the agencies proposed. Staff requests that the Youth Council approve the recommendations for fund disbursement levels reflected in the 2015 Proposed Summer Program Allocations worksheet above. Thank you. 24 P a g e

NOTES: 25 P a g e