Community & Economic Development

The Argument for Regionally Based Job Training Programs

Prior to passage of the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) in 1973, job training programs were largely federally operated.  Moreover, they were very fragmented and there seemed to be no rhyme or reason to the way the programs were organized.  CETA changed all that. Though it remained federally funded, all funds were passed through to states and localities, and for the first time the job training system was locally operated through a system of “prime sponsors” – units of general purpose government such as cities or counties.

President Richard Nixon underscored this point when he signed CETA into law.  He said,  

“For the first time, [funds will] be made available to State and local governments without any Federal strings as to what kind of services or how much of those services should be provided. From now on, State and local governments will be the decision makers concerning the mix of manpower services, which they make available.”

Over the next 40 years, the nation’s job training system was transformed from one that began as city- or county-based to one that required a regional response to the workforce needs of business, industry, and workers.[1]

This transformation was not always without controversy.  States sought to control the program and deliver services statewide, and individual cities and counties sought to maintain their control over the funds and the program. Yet time and time again policymakers decided that America’s federally funded job training system should be delivered locally through a system of regionally based workforce programs that were multi-jurisdictional and reflected labor markets, economic development areas, and regional economies.

Why?  Regions, rather than individual cities or counties, are more likely to reflect the true labor market of an area.  Workers of course will cross governmental boundaries to get to work, employers will draw upon workers from a wide area and not just the municipality or county in which they are located, and wage rates are likely to be similar across these areas, thereby ensuring that individual workers would consider a variety of locations for work. 

Regions, rather than individual cities or counties, are more likely to be able to generate successful economic development strategies.  The many jurisdictions within a region are better able to develop effective land use and tax policies, make better use of the human capital throughout the region, and generate business and industrial development and jobs.

With passage of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act in 2014, policymakers finally made it clear that workforce development and job training programs must be regionally based. 

The law states that each state when drawing up its workforce development areas shall develop planning regions that consist of labor market areas, economic development regions, and other “contiguous sub-areas” of the states.  And as part of the identification process, the state will use the following regional criteria:

What began as a single city- or county-based job training system some 45 years ago has morphed into a robust, multi-jurisdictional job training system that reflects how and why economies emerge. Going beyond governmental boundaries, this system provides workforce development based on labor markets, economic development areas, local economies, industrial composition, labor force conditions and participation, and much more. 

[1] The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) in 1983, the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) in 1988, and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) in 2014 succeeded CETA. 

The Importance of a Federally-funded Job Training System

Workforce development programs – whether the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, the Job Training Partnership Act, the Workforce Investment Act or the current Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act – have a long history in this nation, and have always had bipartisan support.

The problem is that at a time of very low unemployment, the need for an effective and well-funded federal job training system may be greatest.  

More recently, however, budget constraints at the federal level have kept funding for workforce development programs well below what most job training experts believe is necessary, and historically low unemployment rates have been used as an excuse to recommend that workforce development funding be cut each fiscal year.

The problem is that at a time of very low unemployment, the need for an effective and well-funded federal job training system may be greatest.  

Here’s why.  

First, the federal government is the most effective distributor of funding for programs like the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). Every state and every workforce development area is assured of receiving funds that reflect the numbers of unemployed adults, dislocated workers, and youth in need of job training assistance. Left to be funded by the states or localities, there is a significant chance that the funding of these programs will be less likely, and even if states choose to fund the program, the funding will prove irregular at best with some states making substantial investments while others may make no investments at all.

Second, while unemployment is at record lows, underemployment is at record highs:

  • Approximately 21 million or 14 percent of all working Americans are at a job for which they are overqualified.
  • An estimated 4.5 million or three percent of all Americans are working part-time but would prefer to work full-time.
  • Eighteen million, or 12 percent, of all Americans are working two or more jobs in order to make ends meet.

Third, the workplace and the nature of work are evolving rapidly. In the last few years we have seen a substantial increase in the use of robotics, artificial intelligence, and autonomous systems.  More progress has been made in the past five to eight years than in all the previous 50 years and the changes that are occurring today are very different than the automation cycles that occurred in the 1950s, 1980s, and 1990s. During those cycles the perception was that we were automating mechanical, clerical and routine work, and that automation in those cycles was designed to help workers be more productive and to reduce some of the hard physical labor often required in manufacturing, construction and related types of jobs.

The fact is that our nation suffers from a skills shortage.

Today, however, the machines we are building seem capable of doing wholly new things. They appear to have their own cognitive and knowledge skills, and are capable of machine learning.

The fact is that our nation suffers from a skills shortage. Yes, we have more college graduates than ever. Yes, we have more community college graduates than ever. But all too often, key industries in our country are unable to find enough sufficiently trained workers to perform the jobs they have because there is a mismatch between the skills workers have and the skills employers need. And this gap is likely to grow over time unless we make the right kinds of investments in workforce training that address the problem.

According to the National Skills Coalition, we can close this gap by “adopting policies that support sector partnerships and career pathways, and by making job-driven investments [and using] data to better align workforce and education investments with employer skill needs.”

To that end, a workforce development system that is funded at the federal level to meet these needs can help address this ongoing problem, and ultimately remedy it.  

Next week:  Why a Regional Job Training System Makes the Most Sense

Addressing Public Health Concerns Using Regional Solutions

Happy National Public Health Week! This annual week-long celebration, spearheaded by the American Public Health Association (APHA), celebrates the nation’s public health successes while calling attention to our most pressing health-related challenges.

In the words of APHA’s Executive Director Dr. Georges Benjamin: “We all have a responsibility to the health of our community and our country. We know our needs are as varied as our communities themselves.”

That is why the role of regional councils in public health is so critical. Their relationships with all the major stakeholders in their communities – local government officials, business executives, and nonprofit and community leaders – gives them a broad view of what the most pressing health concerns are today.

With their wide lense across communities, regional councils recognize that health intersects many areas of public life, including transportation, the economy, housing, energy, the rise of extreme weather events, and the environment. With their long-term planning strengths, these organizations can also identify and analyze what potential impacts that current public health issues could look like ten, twenty, and even thirty years from now.

As highlighted in NARC’s health one-pager, the work of regional councils around public health has been primarily driven by two considerations: 1) planning for future development to improve public health, and 2) mitigating the negative consequences of the existing built environment.

Many regional efforts overlap with this year’s themes for National Public Health Week: healthy communities, violence prevention, rural health, technology and public health, and climate change. Several more ways regional councils are improving health outcomes include:

  • Prioritizing transportation and pedestrian safety;
  • Improving air and water quality;
  • Increasing access to local, healthy food;
  • Providing safe, stable homes for families through affordable housing; and
  • Bringing community resources to those who need it most.

Here are just a few examples of the different ways regional councils are working to understand and address public health concerns in their communities:

  • The Metropolitan Area Planning Council works to integrate public health perspectives in all of their projects, from planning to data collection to policy development. Their public health work focuses on healthy community design; health and equity assessments; food systems and healthy food access; and local public health collaboration and shared services.

  • The Brazos Valley Council of Governments, supported in part by the Healthcare Connect Fund, has been deploying a private broadband network to connect rural hospitals, clinics, and schools that provide healthcare services. This will help drastically expand the healthcare options of the 62 percent of residents living in rural areas within the region. 

  • The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments recently published a report that aims to better understand health disparities in the region. They discovered that the health of a community is shaped less by healthcare and more by factors like income, education, housing, transportation, and the environment.

  • The Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission has launched several transportation safety campaigns to keep motorists, bicyclists, and the public safer during their commutes. They have also developed air quality awareness campaigns to share ways residents can help reduce traffic congestion and air pollution, improving the health of the region.

  • The South Florida Regional Planning Council – in conjunction with the Florida Institute for Health Innovation and the Florida Atlantic University’s Center for Environmental Studies – developed a report titled Health and Sea-Level Rise: Impacts on South Florida. The report mapped out zones most prone to sea level rise impacts, described associated public health risks, and identified the region’s most vulnerable communities to these sea level rise health effects.
  • The Southeast Michigan Council of Governments has developed the Green Infrastructure Vision for Southeast Michigan, which seeks to protect undisturbed areas, promote built infrastructure that improves water and air quality, and encourage outdoor physical activity and recreation. The plan highlights how green infrastructure improves not just the health of a region’s environment, but also the health of its residents.

Census Day is a Year Away!

We are officially one year away from the decennial census. By April 1, 2020 – National Census Day – the U.S. Census Bureau plans to send a letter or a door knocker to every U.S. household to conduct a constitutionally-mandated, nationwide headcount.

Each year, our regions continue to grow and increase in diversity. Because this opportunity comes around only once every 10 years, it is critical that regions do everything they can to ensure a fair and accurate count for all our communities. The decennial census determines:

  • How more than $600 billion in federal financial assistance is dispersed annually for state, regional, and local government programs and services.
  • How many representatives will represent each of our regions in the U.S. House of Representatives.
  • Key decisions that regional leaders make regarding long-term planning initiatives.

The 2020 census is already facing significant challenges, including years of underfunding, the challenges of the first “high-tech” census count, and the potential inclusion of a citizenship question. So what can regional councils do to help make sure the hard-to-count communities – like people of color, low-income folks, LGBTQ people, immigrant communities, rural communities, and young children—are not missed?

Several regional councils are already ahead of the game, undertaking efforts in their communities to prepare local governments, private partners, nonprofit and community leaders, and the public for participation in the 2020 census. Some of our members’ regional initiatives are highlighted below:

Central Texas Council of Governments (CTCOG)

View Presentation

Recognizing that they have been historically undercounted in the decennial census, they have continued with their critical efforts to validate mapping and local addresses with the U.S. Census Bureau for most of the entities in their region. To do this, CTCOG:

  1. Provided education to their member governments on the problems an undercount could cause.
  2. Offered to review member’s census materials for errors and omissions, using 911 address files the first cycle and adding digital map comparison in the second cycle.
  3. Convinced their board of directors that the initiative was in the best interest of the region and should be covered with in-house funds where possible. They also asked each entity to sign an Interlocal Agreement with a not-to-exceed amount for any cost beyond CTCOG’s ability to cover. 

Alamo Area Council of Governments (AACOG)

View Presentation

AACOG served as their region’s local update of census addresses (LUCA) coordinator, informing their board of directors and membership governments of the opportunity to review and comment on the Census Bureau’s residential address list for jurisdictions prior to 2020 Census. AACOG was designated to conduct LUCA on behalf of four of their member counties, providing the service at no cost. The organization chose not to create their own Complete Count Committee (CCC) but is working closely with the U.S. Census Bureau in their outreach to their rural leaders, member governments, and their board of directors. AACOG is also the region’s coordinator for the Participant Statistical Area Program (PSAP). They are providing information on PSAP to their member governments and will assist counties and communities lacking capacity or resources with their participation.

Mid-America Regional Council (MARC)

View Presentation

MARC is currently undergoing the process to form a regional CCC, which will bring together stakeholders to educate and motivate residents to participate in next year’s census. The organization continues to offer support to other local CCCs as well. MARC will spend the next few months developing a 2020 census communications and outreach plan and engage diverse community organizations in the effort. Later down the road, they will implement their communications plan on all fronts using social media, traditional media, and outreach from community partners. They will also identify locations for residents to obtain assistance with their census questions and look for ways that they can ease the region’s cybersecurity concerns through educational efforts. 

Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC)

View Presentation

On the technical side, MORPC provided support to local governments in the region so they could participate in LUCA and the consolidated boundary and annexation survey (BAS). MORPC also serves as the lead agency for PSAP in the region; they are currently seeking input on potential tract and block group changes and will start undertaking related GIS analyses soon. The organization continues to build local awareness for the upcoming census by sharing the potential challenges and impacts with regional stakeholders, engaging with partners across sectors and communities. The City of Columbus and Franklin County have recently launched their own CCC with 29 subcommittees – MORPC will be chairing the local government subcommittee and staffing many others to get the work of this new CCC off the ground.

It is not too late to start getting involved in 2020 census activities! As you can see from the regional examples above, there are several ways that your organization and the stakeholders throughout your communities can help. We encourage you to take a look at our NARC census one-pager for ideas. You should also check out resources from organizations such as the National League of Cities, Census Counts, and the U.S. Census Bureau.

2018 End of Year Summary

In 2018, NARC advocated on your behalf on Capitol Hill and with the Administration, fostered innovative partnerships between members and with national organizations, and highlighted your daily successes. With active support from members like you, NARC has fostered better connections between members, increased our programming, and expanded our scope throughout the country.

The political landscape is more divided than ever, but NARC will continue to bridge divides with a regional perspective in 2019. The coming year will be another important opportunity to expand the role of regions in transportation, infrastructure, environment, public safety, and human services.

As we prepare for what lies ahead, we took a look back at a few of NARC’s many successes in 2018, successes that were only possible as a result of your generous and ongoing support.

Federal Advocacy
NARC continued to engage and connect with congressional staff as the go-to organization to address concerns that cross jurisdictional boundaries. NARC established relationships with federal agencies and acted as a resource on issues ranging from alternative fuel vehicles to broadband. NARC held a series of summer legislative briefings to keep you up to date on federal issues, including automated vehicles, the Farm Bill, the Federal Communications Commission, and integrated planning.

Rural Economic Development Innovation (REDI) Program
Emphasizing partnerships and innovation, NARC collaborated with the National Association of Counties Research Foundation (NACo) on a USDA grant supporting rural economic development. In October, NARC and NACo were awarded $139,000 to implement economic development plans and projects. We will steward applicants through capacity-building workshops, mentorships, and webinars.

Fleets for the Future
In 2018, NARC wrapped up our Department of Energy-funded Fleets for the Future (F4F) project. F4F harbored many successes in its 2.5 years, including the creation of best practices guides and templates for alternative fuel vehicle procurement and the development of several regional and national cooperative procurement contracts. Read more about the project and its accomplishments in our condensed F4F Final Report.

Membership Committee
This year, NARC established a membership committee to recruit new members and improve engagement with current members. This member-driven committee encouraged new regional voices to share their ideas, challenges, and best practices amongst the NARC membership. Since the committee was formed, at least eight regional councils have become NARC members.

Major Metros Roundtable
NARC continued to work with the Major Metros Roundtable (MMR), a member-directed and member-supported group that meets regularly to discuss challenges and solutions that are particular to regional councils in the nation’s largest metropolitan areas. In 2018, MMR held three in-person half-day meetings in conjunction with NARC’s three conferences in addition to monthly hour-long conference calls which highlighted an individual issue on each call – including transportation, public safety, resiliency, and more.

Sharing Best Practices
To highlight your groundbreaking work, NARC featured best practices, innovations, and creative solutions during our three conferences, in our weekly newsletters, and through monthly webinars. NARC continued to update the repository of best practices from the Rapid-Fire Innovation session at the Executive Directors Conference. Transportation Thursdays and eRegions provided updates on regional council activities and accomplishments across the country. Our webinars and conferences invited members to share their work firsthand and encouraged others to ask questions and bring these ideas back to their own regions.

MWCOG Celebrates 10 Years of Climate Action

On November 14th, NARC staff attended Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments’ (MWCOG) most recent Climate, Energy, and Environment Policy Committee meeting at MWCOG offices. The Committee met to celebrate ten years of climate action since MWCOG adopted their regional program on climate change in 2008. Additionally, Dr. James Kinter, Director of the Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere at George Mason University, gave a presentation on climate change and risks posed to the Metropolitan Washington region. Lastly, the Committee spent time discussing the next ten years of climate action, including identifying what goals and actions may be needed to address climate change in the region.

In 2007, MWCOG’s Board of Directors celebrated its 50th anniversary and at the same time came together to discuss the next fifty years. Recognizing global climate change as a defining force in the decades to come, the Board adopted Resolution R31-07, creating a regional climate change initiative. The program would include developing a greenhouse gas inventory, setting regional goals, identifying best practices for reducing emissions, advocating policies at the federal and state levels, making recommendations on regional climate change policy, and creating a steering committee to guide the initiative. In 2008, MWCOG’s Board of Directors approved the National Capital Region Climate Change Report, which includes significant greenhouse gas reduction targets for the region and 78 recommendations to help area leaders and citizens meet the targets. Since then, MWCOG has been involved in a number of national and regional partnerships, programs, and other efforts aimed at addressing climate change.

Following this portion of the meeting, Dr. Kinter provided attendees with an in-depth look at climate change and the risks it poses to the Metropolitan Washington region. He presented evidence of human-caused climate change and discussed the major sources of carbon dioxide emissions and where that carbon dioxide ends up. Furthermore, he showed some of the possible scenarios – developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – for future global temperature change based on the various levels of action taken by the world’s governments to address emissions. He then discussed the risk that climate change poses to Washington, D.C. and how effects such as increased nuisance flooding have already been witnessed in the region.

Finally, the Committee brainstormed goals and actions that may be needed to address climate change over the next ten years. Some actions included net-zero public buildings, solar power purchase agreements (PPAs) on government buildings, electric municipal and public school buses, getting rid of diesel buses, increased development of electric charging infrastructure, and more widespread use of Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing programs.

During closing statements, there was an emphasis on “acting quicker because the damage is coming quicker.” Many Committee members made remarks that there needs to be a realization of the economic benefits of climate action and that jobs such as those in solar installation are top in the country. Lastly, the Committee complimented MWCOG on its role over the last ten years and on its continued commitment to regional climate action over the next decade.

To view documents from the meeting, please visit MWCOG’s website.

What’s in the President’s Proposal to Reorganize the Federal Government?

This is the first in a series of three blogs dealing with aspects of the president’s federal reorganization plan. It is based, in part, on a recent NARC Wednesday Legislative Briefing that was held on the president’s reorganization plan on Wednesday, August 7.

On June 21, the president released his plan to reorganize certain parts of the executive branch. If adopted by Congress and implemented by the president, it would touch virtually every agency in the federal government and the way Americans receive government services.

The following are proposals that would have the most significant impact on regions:

The Department of Education and the Workforce

The president’s proposal would merge the Departments of Education and Labor into a single department. The new Department of Education and the Workforce would include four separate agencies focusing on four different issue areas: K-12 education, enforcement of worker protections, workforce and higher education, and research and administration.

The American Workforce and Higher Education Administration, one of the four new agencies, would be charged with ensuring U.S. workers possess the skills necessary to succeed on the job. This agency would bring together workforce development programs from the Employment and Training Administration at the Department of Labor and higher education, vocational education, and rehabilitation services from the Department of Education.

The Department of Health and Human Services

The proposal would also reshuffle other domestic agencies and would make it possible, according to the White House, to revamp agencies and, where Congress agrees, reduce funding. Social safety net programs – including housing from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and other welfare programs from the Department of Health and Human Services, and nutrition programs including the Supplemental Nutrition Association Program (SNAP) from the Department of Agriculture — would be consolidated under a new Department of Health and Public Welfare which would replace the current Department of Health and Human Services.

Other Proposed Changes

If the president’s proposal is adopted and implemented there would be many other potential changes, including:

  • Transferring of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program to the Department of Commerce into a new economic development agency (more detail will be provided on this in an upcoming blog post);
  • Privatizing the Postal Service;
  • Creating a government-wide public-private partnership office to “improve services to citizens”;
  • Relocating more staff and offices outside of the National Capital Region (Washington, DC and its Virginia and Maryland suburbs);
  • Consolidating food safety functions into a single office within the Department of Agriculture;
  • Moving USDA’s rural housing activities to the Department of Housing and Development;
  • Shrinking the Office of Personnel Management and sending some of its functions to the Department of Defense;
  • Privatizing the FAA’s air traffic control services and the Saint Lawrence Seaway; and
  • Revamping the Army Corps of Engineers by dividing its functions between the Department of Transportation (navigation) and the Department of the Interior (flood control, wetland permitting, and management of inland waterways).

Why Is this Reorganization Plan Being Proposed Now?

Mick Mulvaney, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, a former member of Congress, and a founding member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, was the main architect of this plan. As a member of Congress, Mulvaney had argued for merging human services programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), housing assistance, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), among others, under a single umbrella agency. He has also argued strongly that the federal government needs to be streamlined and that past efforts have been unsuccessful. This proposal would allow the administration to create a new umbrella department for all welfare programs. Whether these proposals would streamline government remains to be seen.

Over the next two weeks, in two new blogs, we will explore what it would mean to the future of CDBG to transfer it to a new economic development agency within the Department of Commerce and what the likelihood is that Congress would adopt this or any reorganization plan.

President Seeks to Increase Job Training Opportunities for America’s Unskilled Workers

On Thursday, July 18, the president signed an executive order that creates the Council for the American Worker. Led by the secretaries of commerce and labor, the Council is expected to focus on reorganizing federal workforce development programs and generating funding for new job training initiatives, especially apprenticeships and older worker training.

This initiative comes as business and industry are reporting a shortage of qualified workers to fill the nearly six million job vacancies. Of the 6.6 million Americans who are unemployed, most lack the skills and education to fill current job openings, according to the nation’s business leaders.

According to the White House, twenty-three private-sector companies and trade unions have come together to create up to four million apprenticeships, and retraining and continuing education slots over the next five years. If this effort succeeds, the president and many business leaders believe the current skills shortage among America’s workers can be addressed.

The initiative would also bring together representatives from business and industry, unions, and state governments to examine the range of federal workforce development programs and better align them to meet the labor demands of the private sector.

Unfortunately, the initiative feels a bit like “déjà vu all over again.” The very things that the president has tasked the private and public sectors with in this initiative were what led to the passage of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act (WIOA) and lie at the heart of what local workforce investment boards do every day.

For more than a decade, Congress discussed and debated what needed to be done to ensure that the nation’s workforce system operated effectively. Four years ago, Congress passed and then President Obama signed into law the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. The law received strong bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, and passed overwhelmingly (415 – 6 and 95 – 3, respectively).

The result is a system that ensures that:

  • Workforce development areas and labor markets, to the extent feasible, are co-terminus;
  • Workforce development programs provide services to anyone seeking job assistance –veterans, youth, persons with disabilities, dislocated workers, people in poverty, and food stamp recipients, to name just a few;
  • Job search and job training assistance is available through locally-based one-stop workforce centers, which bring together training and support programs from throughout the federal government rather than from one department or funding stream; and
  • Local leaders – both elected and appointed — work with business and industry to identify employer needs and provide the kinds of job training, education, and supportive services through the local one-stop that are necessary to help employers fill job vacancies.

Should we be duplicating or replacing an existing program before we know its impact on local and national employment trends? The desire to reorganize or reimagine the job training system is really part of a larger attempt to cut federal funding for job training programs. And the other question is why establish a jobs council without including local elected and appointed officials who are directly responsible for implementing and operating workforce development programs?

Despite these questions, we should not minimize the importance of this effort. Workers’ wages have decreased over the past forty years, with the most dramatic effect on prime-aged males with limited skills. Their median annual earnings have fallen by twenty-eight percent since 1969. Post-secondary education, healthcare, and childcare are out of reach for a large portion of Americans.  And much of this is tied to the lack of skills of these workers, who often need to work two or three jobs just to make ends meet. So, it is clear, something must be done. President Trump’s proposal is in its infancy, and how it plays out will tell us a lot more about what was intended and what is possible. We welcome the administration’s efforts to ensure that all Americans have the skills they need to be productive, working Americans.

Harvard Releases State of the Nation’s Housing Report

The Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies recently released its 3oth annual housing report, The State of the Nation’s Housing 2018. Managing Director Chris Hebert said, “By many metrics, the U.S. housing market in 2018 is on sound footing. But a number of challenges highlighted in the first State of the Nation’s Housing report 30 years ago persist today, and in many respects, the situation has worsened for both the lowest-income Americans and those higher up the income latter.” Long-term challenges that the report has identified include: an increase in cost-burdened households, constraints in the supply of new housing, more expensive land prices and housing construction costs, and decreased rates of homeownership among young adults and black households. See this recorded webcast for a discussion about the implications of the report’s findings.