Transcript No Slide Title

Council for Education Policy,
Research and Improvement
Council Meeting
August 13, 2003
Ft. Myers, Florida
Workforce Education
Funding in Florida
Scope of the Analysis
 Develop a funding methodology for
workforce/career education that provides for:
 long term stability
 accommodates growth
 rewards program performance.
 Recommendations shall be developed in
consultation with community colleges,
vocational centers, school districts, the
Department of Education, and others
involved in public vocational education.
Work plan/Timeline
 August/September
 Data Collection
 Data Analysis Findings
 October
 Expert Panel
 Consideration of Funding Options
 November
 Draft Report to Council
 December
 Approval of Final Report for transmission to
Governor, House and Senate
Staff Activities
Conducted small discussion roundtable
with school district and community college
representatives
Data requests submitted to the
Department of Education
Survey sent to all community college
occupational deans, local vocational
directors, and adult education directors
Survey to local sponsors of apprenticeship
programs through the Department of
Education to collect data on funding
What do we mean by Workforce
Development Education Funding?
Population served: Adults
 Current funding system for serving high
school students in funding through the FEFP
(Florida Education Finance Program)
Delivery System: Dual with School
Districts and Community Colleges
Programs: Adult Education, Workforce
Education Training Programs,
Apprenticeship
Delivery Systems for Workforce and
Adult Education
N u m b e r O ffe rin g
% E n ro llm e n t I n
(1 )
C o m m u n ity
School
C o m m u n ity
School
C o lle g e
D is tric t
C o lle g e
D is tric t
28
0
100%
N /A
27
42
29%
71%
28
36
69%
31%
18/19*
57
12%
88%
A sso c ia te in
S c ie n c e / A sso c ia te
in A p p lie d S c ie n c e
C a re e r-T e c h n ic a l
a n d A p p re n tic e sh ip
C o n tin u in g
W o rk fo rc e
E d u c a tio n
A d u lt G e n e ra l
E d u c a tio n
(1 )
B a se d o n 2 0 0 1 -0 2 E n ro llm e n t
Key Issues
 Funding Disparities
 Current Funding and Performance
Situation in Workforce Programs
 Weaknesses of current system with regard
to stability, growth and program
performance rewards
 Meeting the training needs of emerging
industries and high skill/high wage areas
 Responsiveness of the current system to
the needs of local employers
 Role of Apprenticeship Programs
Adult General Education in
Florida
Florida v. The Nation: Percent of 18-24 Year Old
Population with a High School Diploma
90
More than 350,000 18-24 year
old residents do not have a high
school diploma.
85
80
7 4 .7 %
75
7 1 .7 %
70
65
NV
AZ
TX
GA
CA
NM
FL
MS
AL
LA
NC
OR
SC
US
KY
OK
TN
CO
AR
WA
IL
NJ
NY
MO
IN
MI
AK
OH
ID
DE
NH
SD
WV
KS
CT
MT
WI
ME
WY
VA
MN
PE
MD
NE
UT
IA
RI
VT
MA
HI
ND
60

Dropouts who
would have
graduated with
the class of 1991
attained
education
credentials,
including high
school diplomas
or equivalencies,
at much lower
rates than their
HS grad
counterparts.
Highest Educational Attainment Level of
HS Dropouts as of Fall 2000
13,742 High School Dropouts from 1990-1991
Masters <1%
Attainment Status
unchanged 68.2%*
College
Credit
Vocational
<1%
Bachelors
~1%
Associate of
Arts ~1%
GEDs
20.8%
* Does not include any
out-of state credentials.
Source: FETPIP Longitudinal
Vocational
Certificates
Adult High 4.4%
School
Diplomas
5%
Projected Supply of Workers
Demographic Trends
The Echo Boom: Demographic Trends in High
200
1 9 0 ,5 2 4
180
O th e r G ra d s/ C e rts
160
1 6 5 ,2 2 4
140
1 4 5 ,1 1 3
1 6 3 ,5 2 3
S ta n d a rd D ip lo m a s
1 2 5 ,0 5 0
120
1 1 3 ,8 1 3
100
A c tu a l
P ro je c te d
Florida Department of Education, “Projected Florida High School Graduates”, January 2003
2 0 2 0 -2 1
2 0 1 9 -2 0
2 0 1 8 -1 9
2 0 1 7 -1 8
2 0 1 6 -1 7
2 0 1 5 -1 6
2 0 1 4 -1 5
2 0 1 3 -1 4
2 0 1 2 -1 3
2 0 1 1 -1 2
2 0 1 0 -1 1
2 0 0 9 -1 0
2 0 0 8 -0 9
2 0 0 7 -0 8
2 0 0 6 -0 7
2 0 0 5 -0 6
2 0 0 4 -0 5
2 0 0 3 -0 4
2 0 0 2 -0 3
2 0 0 1 -0 2
2 0 0 0 -0 1
80
1 9 9 9 -0 0
T h o u sa n d s
School Graduates Show Increased Demand for
Postsecondary Education
Gap between Skilled Workers and Skilled Jobs:
Projected Growth in Supply and Demand of Workers
With Some Postsecondary Education, 1998 to 2028
Jobs requiring some postsecondary experience
Workers with some postsecondary experience
150,000
140,000
130,000
Thousands
120,000
110,000
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
1998
2008
2018
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Census Bureau and National Alliance of Business
2028
Florida v. The Nation: Florida ranks low on the
70
60
chance for college by age 19 when compared to the
rest of the nation
7 out of 10 ninth graders do not pursue a
college education at a university or
community college immediately following
high school graduation.
50
40
3 7 .5 %
3 1 .8 %
30
ND
MN
MA
NJ
IA
KS
NE
CT
SD
RI
PE
WI
NH
IL
MT
ME
IN
MI
VA
WY
MD
OH
WV
AR
MO
HI
NC
KY
US
CO
DE
OK
ID
NY
OR
VT
AL
TN
MS
SC
NM
LA
TX
CA
FL
GA
WA
UT
AZ
NV
AK
20
Projected Demand for Workers
Occupational Forecasting
Project Job Growth in Florida Employment from 2000
to 2010 by Educational Attainment Requirements
(Florida Codes)
5 0 ,7 1 9
G ra d u a te D e g re e
1 5 3 ,0 5 3
B a c h e lo r's D e g re e
2 8 5 ,8 8 7
A sso c ia te 's D e g re e
P o stse c o n d a ry
5 0 1 ,8 9 8
V o c a tio n a l C e rtific a te
H ig h S c h o o l D ip lo m a
1 9 1 ,9 1 6
& S o m e V o c a tio n a l
C e rtific a te
4 2 0 ,0 1 4
L e ss T h a n H ig h S c h o o l
0
100
200
300
T h o u sa n d s
400
500
600
Top 10 Fastest Growing Jobs in Florida
O c c u p a tio n
% G ro w th
fro m 2 0 0 0 2010
A nnual
O p e n in g s
E n try
W age
T ra in in g N e e d e d
C o m p u te r S u p p o rt S p e c ia lis ts
9 5 .2
3 ,0 8 6 $ 1 0 .9 6
P o s ts e c o n d a ry
V o c a tio n a l
C o m p u te r S o ftw a re E n g in e e rs , A p p lic a tio n s
8 4 .2
1 ,3 6 8 $ 2 2 .4 7
A s s o c ia te 's D e g re e
N e tw o rk a n d C o m p u te r S y s te m s A d m in is tra to rs
7 7 .7
7 4 5 $ 1 7 .9 5
P o s ts e c o n d a ry
V o c a tio n a l
C o m p u te r S o ftw a re E n g in e e rs , S y s te m s S o ftw a re
7 5 .6
7 3 2 $ 2 0 .9 2
B a c h e lo r's D e g re e
D e s k to p P u b lis h e rs
7 0 .6
1 5 9 $ 1 0 .1 1
P o s ts e c o n d a ry
V o c a tio n a l
N e tw o rk S y s te m s & D a ta C o m m . A n a ly s ts
6 9 .8
5 7 5 $ 1 8 .5 7
A s s o c ia te 's D e g re e
D a ta b a s e A d m in is tra to rs
6 7 .7
4 3 3 $ 1 5 .9 3
A s s o c ia te 's D e g re e
S o c ia l a n d H u m a n S e rv ic e A s s is ta n ts
6 1 .3
660 $
7 .4 6
P o s ts e c o n d a ry
V o c a tio n a l
P h y s ic ia n A s s is ta n ts
6 1 .1
3 3 1 $ 1 7 .2 0
A s s o c ia te 's D e g re e
C o m p u te r S p e c ia lis ts , A ll O th e r
6 0 .0
5 1 0 $ 1 1 .1 7
P o s ts e c o n d a ry
V o c a tio n a l
Source: Agency for Workforce Innovation, Florida Department of Education
Current Funding Methodology
Workforce Development Education
Funding Formula (WDEFF)
What is the Workforce Formula?
Performance-based funding system
 Adult General Education (AGE)
 Postsecondary Adult Vocational (PSAV)
 Apprenticeship
 Associate in Science (AS)
15% of funding for workforce programs
is “at risk” -- dependent on the
performance outcomes in the formula
 Remaining 85% of funding based on prior year’s
allocation
Factors that the Formula Takes into
Account
Targeted Populations
 Weights for completions from special populations
(e.g., disabled and economically disadvantaged
students)
Program Completion
 Degree Completion (A.S. degree)
 Completion of Competencies (OCPs and LCPs)
Levels of Job Placement
 Placements in targeted, high wage/high skill jobs
Data Timeline
Performance Dollars
are based on past
program completions
and job placements.
 2003-2004 Appropriation
 2001-2002 Completions
 2000-2001 Completers
placed in 2001-2002
Workforce Education
State Funding History
$780
Over the same time
period, funding has
increased 33% for
Community Colleges
and 27% for Universities.
$760
In M illio n s ($ )
$740
$720
$700
$680
Funding for Workforce
Education has
decreased 6% since
1997-98.
$660
$640
1 9 9 7 -9 8
1 9 9 8 -9 9
1 9 9 9 -0 0
2 0 0 0 -0 1
2 0 0 1 -0 2
2 0 0 2 -0 3
2 0 0 3 -0 4
Workforce Development Education
Fund–Created In 1997
$731,581,440
From FEFP
From CCPF
$435,538,646
$296,042,794
•School districts had projected
FTE
•Pulled from districts and
colleges differently
Workforce Development
Education Fund History (in Millions)
1997-98
$731.6
WDEF created from FEFP (public
schools) and CCPF (comm colleges)
1998-99
$712.2
separated adults with disabilities
1999-00
$704.6
first funding formula applied (but
not in ABE)
2000-01
$719.7
the $15M in additional funds were
earmarked for performance
2001-02
$672.2
amount remaining after a $51M
(7%) mid-year reduction from
original 2001-02 appropriation
2002-03
$678.7
CC workforce funds return to sector
budget, allocated to institutions on a
pro-rata basis (formula not used)
2003-04
$674.5
Funds allocated to institutions on a
pro-rata basis (formula not used)
Workforce Education
Performances vs. Appropriations
1,400
1,300
1,200
+47%
Performance Points
$750
In Millions ($)
In Thousands
1,100
1,000
900
800
-4%
700
600
WDEF Appropriations
500
400
$650
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
Formula Issues
 Performance increases have not translated into
performance funding increases
 Value of performance is a “moving target”
 As performances increase, and funds remain static or
decrease, the value of a performance decreases
 No mechanism for providing start-up funding and
continuation funding for new programs
 Capitalization Incentive Grants discontinued
 Lag-time in the Formula between performance and
funding
 Performance dollars are awarded based on program
completions from 2 years prior, and job placements of
completers from 3 years prior
 No mechanism to account for enrollment increases
Performance Funding for Workforce
Development: Lessons Learned

The approach has
been successful in:





raising the level of attention to
reporting…
increasing efforts to retain
and complete students…
increasing attention to
certain populations…
forcing a focus on certain
targeted jobs…
causing more program shifts
than had previously occurred.

Where the
approach is not
working:
 Workforce education not of
sufficient priority to allow
performances to fully drive
appropriations…

school district’s priorities are on K12 education...

community college’s priorities are
on the program fund…

business and industry priorities on
workers compensation, tax credit
issues.