►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
B
C
E
G
Members,
thank
you
for
being
here
9
A.M
meeting
this
morning
and
we're
going
to
go
in
the
order
of
the
agenda.
Oh
first,
we
need
to
approve
the
minutes
from
last
meeting.
We
have
a
motion.
We
have
a
second
appreciate
that
all
those
in
favor
approving
the
minute
say
aye
any
opposed
hearing
known
minutes
are
approved.
Next,
we
will
go
down
to
number
three.
We
have
a
report.
An
update
from
the
education
labor
cabinet.
Welcome.
Thank
you
for
being
here
this
morning.
H
D
Is
Jamie
link
I'm
the
secretary
of
the
education
and
labor
cabinet?
We
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
appear
today
and
give
you
a
brief
update
on
the
merger
of
the
Kentucky
education
and
labor
cabinet,
as
well
as
an
update
on
state-sponsored
Workforce
Development
programs.
So
with
that
we'll
get
started
and
I'll
allow
my
colleagues
to
introduce
themselves.
I
A
D
So
we'll
start
with
the
the
merger
of
the
Kentucky
education
and
labor
cabinet,
which
was
a
reorganization
of
the
Kentucky
labor
cabinet
and
the
education
and
Workforce
Development
cabinet
and
I
would
like
to
acknowledge
the
support
from
Senator
Mike,
nemas
and
representative
Russell
Weber
for
their
assistance
with
our
reorganization
bill,
and
this
was
based
upon
a
vision.
Governor
beshear
had
to
strengthen
Kentucky's
Workforce
Development
approach
by
combining
both
the
labor
and
education,
Workforce
Development
cabinets
and,
as
you
will
see
in
the
presentation,
the
way
we
see
this
I
don't
like
to
read
PowerPoints.
D
If
that's
okay
with
you
the
way
I
see
this
is
it's.
It
allows
our
cabinet
to
address
the
entire
Workforce
continuum
from
early
childhood
education
through
primary
and
secondary
education
through
Career
and
Technical
education,
apprenticeship
to
job
placement
and
then
after
employment,
the
protections
of
workplace
safety,
wage
and
hour
protections,
workers,
compensation
and
unemployment
insurance.
D
D
You
can
see
those
there
again,
I,
don't
need
to
read
those
for
you,
I,
don't
believe
with
a
total
of
1539
filled
positions.
This
is
not
including
the
Department
of
Education,
which
is
administratively
attached
to
our
cabinet,
but
obviously
they're
governed
by
the
board,
as
well
as
the
commissioner
and
you
can
also
see
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
the
slide.
Our
funding
model
with
Federal
General,
restricted
workers,
compensation
and
tobacco
settlement
funding
for
a
total
of
853
million
dollars.
I
Thank
you
Mr
secretary,
and,
thank
you
all
so,
as
as
many
of
you
know
in
the
budget
bill
that
was
passed
this
this
past
session,
the
education
and
labor
cabinet
was
allocated
or
appropriated
500
000
to
conduct
a
study
of
state-sponsored
Workforce
Development
programs
and
was
directed
to
work
in
collaboration
with
sieber
out
of
the
University
of
Kentucky
and
I
noticed
that
that
Dr
Clark
is
here
as
well,
and
we
appreciate
his
support
and
the
first
sort
of
task
in
this
was
to
identify
sort
of
what
our
criteria
are
for
determining
what
is
a
truly
state-sponsored
Workforce
Development
program.
I
A
lot
of
money
comes
through
state
government
from
the
federal
government
for
Workforce
Development
wioa
Wagner
piser
funding
sources
like
this,
but
the
the
bill
directs
us
to
look
at
truly
state-sponsored
Workforce
Development
programs,
so
in
conjunction
with
Kentucky
Center
for
statistics
and
the
University
of
Kentucky.
In
the
past
months,
we've
gotten
together
and
started
looking
at
sort
of
what
our
criteria
are
for
determining
what
those
state-sponsored
Workforce
Development
programs
are
and
as
you'll
see
on
the
slides
and
I.
Also
don't
like
to
to
read
off
PowerPoint
presentations.
I
The
criteria
that
we've
we've
come
to
is
first,
there
has
to
be
a
general
fund
appropriation
right.
It's
state
sponsored.
The
second
piece
is
again:
it's
sponsored,
so
it
needs
to
be
the
majority
funded
by
State
dollars.
General
fund
Appropriations.
The
next
piece
is,
it
does
have
to
have
a
Workforce
Development
impact
right,
we're
looking
at
Workforce
Development
programs,
but
the
key.
There
is
also
that
it
has
to
truly
be
directed
at
Workforce
Development
programmatic
issues.
I
So
we've
worked
together
in
conjunction
with
Dr
Clark
and
the
University
of
Kentucky,
and
obviously
the
Kentucky
Center
for
statistics
to
formulate
these
criteria,
and
the
next
sort
of
step
in
this
process
is
we'll
be
looking
at
the
whole
of
state
government.
We've
begun
with
the
truly
the
education
and
labor
cabinet,
we'll
be
looking
at
the
entirety
of
state
government
to
determine
which
programs
truly
sort
of
fit
into
that
bucket
again,
when
we,
when
we
look
at
these
programs,
there
are
going
to
be
limitations
to
sort
of
the
study
and
what
we're
able
to
do.
I
A
Sure,
thanks
Sam,
you
know
I
think
prior
to
a
discussion
of
limitations,
I
think
it's
it's
good
for
us
to
acknowledge
how
fortunate
we
are
here
in
Kentucky
to
have
the
robust
longitudinal
data
system
that
we
do
have
has
very
little
to
do
to
do
with
me.
So
that's
not
that's
not
me
bragging
on
myself,
but
we
are
very
lucky.
We
have
one
of
the
nation's
most
robust
systems.
It
includes
data
from
agencies
and
partners
across
the
state.
Many
many
of
the
data
sources
go
back
10
years
or
more.
A
It
includes
data
from
sources
from
post-secondary
education,
K-12,
education,
adult
education,
apprenticeship,
unemployment,
insurance,
just
to
name
a
few.
That
I
think
could
be
specifically
helpful
for
for
the
purpose
of
this
study.
However,
we
don't
have
everything
as
hard
as
we
try.
We
don't
have
all
data
and
so-
and
it
does
take
some
time
to
identify
new
data
sources,
to
structure
agreements,
to
secure
new
data
sources
to
actually
get
the
data
and
then,
of
course,
to
integrate
it
into
the
system
and
so
a
Sam
referenced.
A
We
think
that
the
best
approach
in
this
instance
is
to,
as
we
identify
the
programs
which
meet
these
four
criteria,
also
ask
for
which
of
those
programs
do
we
already
have
data
that
exist
in
our
in
our
system
and
that
way
we'll
be
able
to
design
robust
methodologies
and
produce
analyzes.
That
I
think
will
be
impactful
for
this
purpose
within
the
window
that
that
has
been
laid
out
for
us.
A
And
I
think
Sam
will
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
our
updates
and
and
next
steps.
I
Here,
certainly,
thank
you
Matt,
so
sort
of
what
we're
looking
at
now
is
is
the
next
steps
and
and
again
what
I
referenced
earlier
is
identifying
sort
of
across
state
government,
the
entirety
of
of
the
the
workforce,
impacted
programs
or
the
the
programs
that
directly
impact
Workforce
Development
and
do
receive
state
funds
and
from
there
we
can
start
to
sort
of
fill
up
the
bucket,
so
to
speak,
of
the
the
programs
that
meet
our
specific
criteria.
I
So
it's
if
we're
looking
at
the
Justice
cabinet
and
there's
a
program
for
justice
involved
folks,
you
know,
is
there
a
general
fund
appropriation?
Is
it
51
or
more
general
fund
appropriation?
Is
it
directly
related
to
impacting
Workforce
Development
outcomes
and
and
once
we've
sort
of
figured
out
what's
what's
entirety
of
our
bucket
across
state
government,
then
we're
going
to
start
looking
at
what
is
sort
of
what
is
the
universe
within
that
that
smaller
bucket
of
programs,
where
we
have
active
data
already
and
and
I
you
know?
I
Obviously,
I
won't
commend
Kentucky
Center
for
statistics.
They
do
a
fantastic
job.
They
do
have
a
lot
of
data,
but
there
are
going
to
be
programs
that
that
likely
do
we
do
not
have
data
on
that
are
gonna.
You
know
that
are
obviously
designed
to
meet
this
new
bill
and
and
the
requirements
of
this
study.
So
we
will
have
to
put
agreements
in
place
to
to
exchange
data
and
we
do
anticipate
to
have
sort
of
that.
I
Universe,
that's
going
to
be
in
our
in
our
bucket,
so
to
speak
together
by
January
of
2023
and
then
we'll
begin
sort
of
working
with
the
University
of
Kentucky
and
and
case
KY
stats,
to
a
greater
extent
to
determine
what
data
is
out
there
and
and
what
programs
we
can
start
start
looking
at.
G
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I'll
lead
us
off
with
questions
and
general
counsel.
Flynn
I'll
begin
with
you,
because
you
kind
of
ended
it
and
using
the
term
Universe
I
know
you
know
you
had
mentioned
we're
still
trying
to
get
an
idea
of
just
how
big
the
universe
is.
So
this
question
might
be
a
little
bit
difficult,
but
I
mean
once
you
know,
you're
going
to
have
the
goals
and
the
scope
by
January
2023.
Do
we
have
any
idea
the
length
of
time
once
we
have?
I
Well,
we're
sort
of
restricted
by
the
the
budget
language.
Obviously
we
we
have
to
have
a
report
back
to
the
legislature
by
December
1
of
of
2023,
so
we're
sort
of
working
with
that
Universe
I.
I
Do
think
that
that
you
know
at
some
point
if
we
determine
that
more
time
is
needed
to
study
that
that
that's
a
conversation
that
you
know
we
would
like
to
have
with
the
members
of
this
committee,
whether
it's
extending
that
time
period
or
revisiting
it
at
some
point
or
constructing
some
studies
and
and
further
legislative
language
that
are
directed
at
specific
programs
where
we
don't
have
data
or
that
are
going
to
take
a
larger
period
of
time
for
us
to.
G
Address
I
guess
along
those
same
lines,
you
know
where
you
noted
the
relationships
with
the
University
of
Kentucky
g4c
in
the
future.
After
this
first
go-around
after
we
have
an
idea
of
you
know,
you
guys
are
developing
the
the
scope,
the
metrics
and
everything
like
that.
G
Is
this
something
that
is
going
to
be
able
to
be
done
on
a
you
know
routine
yearly
basis
internally,
or
will
it
always
do
you
think
we're
always
going
to
need
University
of
Kentucky
or
another
University
to
assist,
because
the
scope
of
the
project
is
just
that
big.
I
And
Senator
I
appreciate
the
question.
I
I
think
we
we
might
be
putting
the
car
before
the
horse
a
little
bit.
We're
not
really
going
to
be
able
to
tell
you
whether
we're
whether
the
educational
labor
cabinet
and
KY
stats
can
can
really
do
this
kind
of
work
until
we've
we've
sort
of
dug
into
it.
I
understand.
E
Thank
you
Mr
chairman,
and
thank
you
for
your
presentation
here
today.
Going
back
to
the
10
major
organizational
units.
I
had
a
question.
Could
you
describe
for
me
exactly
how
the
Department
of
Education
is
administratively
attached
to
you.
D
That
is
by
Statute
and
I'll,
defer
to
my
general
counsel
for
that,
but
we
do
not
govern
the
day-to-day
operations
of
the
Department.
Of
course,
policy
is
set
by
the
Kentucky
Board
of
Education
and
commissioner
glass
and
and
his
administration
conduct
the
daily
operations
of
KDE.
D
However,
I
do
think
it's
incumbent
upon
the
cabinet
to
support
the
department
in
any
way
possible,
specifically
when
it
comes
to
Workforce
Development
initiatives
and
the
community,
the
Career
and
Technical
education.
In
fact,
we
met
with
them
yesterday
for
over
an
hour
talking
about
what
more
can
the
cabinet
do
in
conjunction
with
the
Department
to
prepare
young
people
for
the
next
step,
post-graduation,
whether
that
be
post-secondary,
education
or
employment,
or
a
combination
of
both
so
I
do
believe.
E
I
just
wanted
to
double
check
on
that,
because
when
the
department
was
set
up,
it
was
set
up
outside
of
the
cabinet
outside
of
the
governor
to
be
an
independent
organization,
and
the
legislature
constitutionally
has
the
responsibility
for
education
in
the
state
of
Kentucky
and
because
we
make
the
policy
and
we
also
fund
it
too,
as
well
so
I'm.
Just
trying
to
make
sure
that
this
connection
is
a
collaborative
connection
and
not
an
authoritative
connection.
D
G
I
want
to
go
back
to
the
four
guidelines
you
discussed
and
it's
number
two.
You
said
the
majority
of
the
fun
needs
to
come
from
the
general
fund,
so
state
sponsored,
which
makes
you
know,
I.
Think
that
makes
sense
to
get
started.
G
I
understand
it's
using
your
term
Universe,
it's
a
big
universe
out
there,
but
do
you
think
in
the
future,
there'll
be
an
opportunity
for
those
that
are
you
know
below
the
51
threshold
to
go
back
and
really
start
looking
at
everything,
I
mean
in
a
perfect
world
with
unlimited
time
and
resources
we
would,
as
the
general
assembly,
you
know,
be
able
to
have
a
report
that
every
amount
of
our
funding
we're
seeing
the
ROI
on
that
and
I
guess
looking
out
again,
maybe
because
we
don't
have
this
first
part
done
but
I
guess
in
the
future,
do
you
foresee
maybe
the
ability
to
go
back
and
and
look
at
the
ones
that
are
below
that
funding
level.
I
I
I
think
that's
an
excellent
question
and
I
think
that's
absolutely
a
conversation
that
that
can
and
likely
should
be
had
once
we
see
sort
of
what
the
Dynamics
are
with
with
this
study
and
the
limitations,
but
also
the
data
that
that
we
receive
on
on
this
piece
is
as
you're
well
aware
and
as
you
alluded
to
and
I
was
speaking
with
with
Jeff
Harmon,
who
it's
always
good
to
see
here
earlier.
We
have
so
many
funding
streams
for
Workforce
Development
programs
that
truly
are
federal
in
in
nature.
I
The
the
workforce,
Innovation
Opportunity,
Act,
perfect
example,
74
million
dollars
that
that
go
to
that
flow
through
the
the
cabinet
in
the
office
of
the
K
web
to
the
local
Workforce
boards,
and
that's
an
area
that
obviously
we
could
could
take
a
look
at
in
in
future
years.
Assuming
that
and
again,
this
is
a
big
assumption
that,
after
we've
gone
through
sort
of
this
study
that
that
we
believe
that
you
know,
obviously
we
have
the
bandwidth
to
to
accomplish
that.
I
But
again,
you
know
that's
going
to
be
a
determination.
That's
made
after
we
see
sort
of
what
the
time
and
resources
are
for
for
this
study.
Thank.
G
G
B
A
rookie
mistake,
I
should
know
better
than
that
you're
good.
Thank
you
all
right.
Thank
you.
You
hear
me
now
all
right.
Good
again,
my
name
is
Mike
Clark
I'm
associate
professor
of
Economics
at
the
University
of
Kentucky
I'm,
also
the
director
for
the
center
for
business
and
economic
research
at
UK.
B
For
those
of
you
who
are
not
familiar
with
our
Center,
we
basically
do
applied
economic
and
policy,
research
for
various
government
agencies,
business
groups
and
Community
groups
across
the
state
or
frequently
asked
to
come
and
testify
about
the
the
state
of
the
economy
or
present
to
different
groups
about
how
the
economy
is
doing
and
do
a
lot
of
different
types
of
different
research
projects
across
a
lot
of
different
issues
related
to
economics,
the
labor
force
and
so
on.
B
So
today,
I
was
asked
to
come
and
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
we
can
potentially
learn
by
evaluating
Workforce
Development
programs.
Now
we
think
about
Workforce
Development
programs,
it's
important
to
keep
in
mind
that
these
programs
cover
a
broad
spectrum
of
different
types
of
services.
These
can
be
programs
that
might
focus
on
things
that
are
often
referred
to
as
soft
skills
such
as.
How
do
you
find
a
job?
You
know,
how
do
you
write
a
resume?
B
Do
interviews
things
that
really
are
kind
of
designed
to
help
the
worker
understand
how
they
can
get
into
a
job,
or
they
can
be
a
much
more
intensive
programs
where
we're
really
trying
to
help
the
worker
develop
skills
that
are
going
to
be
marketable
in
the
labor
force.
So
these
these
different
types
of
programs
can
provide
a
lot
of
different
Services.
They
vary
across
who
they
serve,
what
types
of
services
they
provide
and
the
intensity
in
which
they
provide
those
services.
B
It's
fairly
common
for
states
to
go
through
and
look
at
their
Workforce
training
programs
to
decide
or
basically
understand
what
type
of
an
impact
are
we
getting
from
these
and
the
evaluations
that
we
typically
see
are
generally
trying
to
answer
two
basic
questions.
Now,
not
all
studies
will
look
at
each
of
these
questions,
but
most
studies
will
look
at
this
first
question.
That
is
how
do
the
programs
affect
labor
market
outcomes?
B
Now
we
hope
these
programs
are
going
to
do
a
number
of
things,
one
we
hope
they're
going
to
improve
the
employment.
That
is,
are
individuals
who
participate
in
these
programs
going
to
be
more
likely
to
find
a
job
with
the
training
than
they
would
have
in
the
absence
of
the
training.
So
we
hope
maybe
we're
having
an
impact
there.
Second,
how
does
it
affect
their
wage
rates
if
we're
helping
the
worker
improve
their
skills,
and
these
are
skills
that
are
valued
in
the
market?
B
Then
we
hope
what
is
going
to
happen
is
that
their
wages
are
going
to
increase
and
we
might
also
see
as
their
way
or
as
their
skills
improve,
that
they
might
be
working
more
hours.
All
these
are
different
ways
that
these
labor
force
programs
can
go
through
and
affect
the
individuals
by
increasing
their
earnings.
So
the
real
goal
here
is
to
understand
through
whatever
mechanism
it
might
actually
operate.
How
do
these
programs
affect
the
earnings?
B
All
these
are
different
types
of
Labor
Market
outcomes.
There
are
other
types
that
we
might
be
concerned
about,
but
these
are
kind
of
the
primary
ones
that
researchers
look
at
when
evaluating
these
programs.
Now
some
studies
will
take
this
a
bit
further.
Not
all
studies
do
this,
but
some
will
try
to
answer
this
second
question
this:
how
do
the
benefit
or
do
the
benefits
exceed
the
cost
of
these
programs?
So
the
idea
is
to
get
at
the
issue
that
was
mentioned
by
chairman
Schroeder
earlier.
What
is
the
return
on
investment
of
these
programs?
B
These
programs
consume
resources.
You
know
from
State
local
Federal
governments.
They
may
actually
cost
the
individual
participants
depending
on
the
type
of
the
program,
but
they're
consuming
resources.
What
we
want
to
understand
is
what
are
the
benefits
that
we're
going
to
get
from
this,
whether
this
be
to
the
individual
participant
or
maybe
the
state
and
determine?
What
exactly
is
that
return
on
investment?
And
we
often
look
at
this
in
terms
of
the
present
value
I'll
discuss
these
things
a
little
bit
more
detail
in
just
a
moment.
B
Now,
when
we're
looking
at
these
programs,
it's
important
to
understand,
we
can
look
at
them
from
a
couple
of
different
perspectives.
The
two
primary
perspectives
we
look
at
are
the
participants
perspective
kind
of
the
government
perspective
or
the
public
perspective
from
the
participants
perspective.
There
are
different
types
of
costs
and
benefits
that
we
might
be
interested
in.
B
Looking
at
on
the
cost
side,
you
can
kind
of
imagine
that
if
somebody
is
stopping
what
they're
doing
to
invest
in
their
training
in
some
kind
of
a
training
program,
they're
spending
more
time
in
maybe
an
apprenticeship
program
or
more
time
at
a
community,
Technical,
College
or
in
any
other
type
of
training
program,
they
might
be
spending
less
time
actually
working,
and
so
one
of
the
costs
that
they
might
incur
in
terms
of
participating
in
a
training
program
is
lost
earnings
for
a
period
of
time.
That's
a
fairly
natural
thing
that
we
have.
B
We
see
this
even
when
people
are
going
on
to
to
earn
a
bachelor's,
they're,
forgoing
some
earnings
for
a
period
of
time
with
the
Hope
or
the
expectation
that
that
investment
is
going
to
change
their
earnings
in
the
future.
But
it's
a
cost
early
on.
There
may
be
some
additional
fees,
tuition
associated
with
the
program,
and
there
are
other
costs
as
well.
One
type
of
cost
is
work
related
expenditures,
so
you
can
imagine
an
individual
who
goes
through
a
training
program.
I
get
out
of
the
training
program.
B
They
have
more
marketable
skills,
they're
working
more,
they
may
incur
additional
Transportation
costs
that
tends
to
eat
away
at
maybe
some
of
the
earnings
benefits
they
have.
They
may
have
additional
child
care
costs,
because
they're
they're,
not
home
caring
for
the
kids
as
much
they
might
be
working
and
therefore
need
someone
to
take
care
of
their
kids.
B
Now
those
are
some
of
the
types
of
costs
that
they
might
see,
but
on
the
benefit
side,
these
are
the
ones
that
we're
pretty
familiar
with
that
we're
really
hoping
are
there
higher
earnings
and
we're
hoping
these
are
higher
earnings
over
a
long
period
over
a
long
career
or
higher
fringe
benefits
from
the
public
or
the
government
perspective.
Obviously,
there's
some
program
costs
associated
with
these,
but
also
there
can
be
some
some
other
types
of
costs
that
it's
important
for
us
to
kind
of
understand.
B
B
Now,
on
the
benefit
side,
we
see
additional
tax
revenues.
If
the
program
is
successful
at
increasing
the
earnings,
these
individuals
will
be
generating
more
in
terms
of
tax
revenues
and
they
may
be
reducing
the
the
dependency
on
different
types
of
Public
Assistance
programs.
So
there's
a
potential
fiscal
impact
there
and
it's
not
necessarily
the
case
that
these
types
of
benefits
for
the
for
the
government
necessarily
pay
for
the
cost
they
might
they
might
not,
but
they
can
potentially
offset
some
of
the
cost
of
these
programs.
B
Now.
These
are
just
some
of
the
different
types
of
costs
and
benefits
that
these
studies
tend
to
look
at.
It's
not
all-encompassing.
If
we
sit
here,
we
could
probably
brainstorm
about
a
lot
of
different
types
of
of
other
benefits.
That
might
actually
be
much
more
difficult
for
us
to
get
at
but
are
important.
Nonetheless,
one
example
of
this
is
you
think,
about
an
individual
who,
maybe
through
a
training
program,
is
more
employable
that
improves
their
access
to
employer-sponsored
health
insurance,
which
increases
their
access
to
Medical
Care,
which
maybe
improves
their
quality
of
life.
B
These
are
benefits
that
may
not
show
up
in
terms
of
of
measures
that
we
can
look
at
like
earnings,
but
there
are
benefits.
Nonetheless,
you
can
also
think
of
an
individual
who
maybe
is
working
two
jobs
just
to
get
by
if
they
participate
in
a
training
program
that
increases
their
wages,
they
may
find
they
don't
have
to
work
seven
days
a
week
as
a
result
of
that
their
earnings
May
not
change
much,
but
the
hours
that
they
work
might
decline.
So
they
are
able
to
spend
more
time
with
their
family
or
Leisure.
B
These
are
clearly
benefits
to
the
individual
that
again
may
not
show
up
in
terms
of
earnings.
So
there's
a
lot
of
different
types
of
costs
and
benefits,
and
typically,
what
tends
to
happen
with
these
studies?
Is
they
look
as
as
much
as
they
can
but
data
limitations?
As
we're
discussing
the
previous
presentation
do
play
into
which
of
these
you
can
actually
analyze.
Most
studies
will
at
least
look
at
the
earnings
impact
and
and
the
tax
impact
for
the
state.
B
This
is
all
just
made
up
data,
it's
just
kind
of
illustrate
a
point:
we
can
kind
of
Envision
a
worker
who
maybe
is
low
income,
their
wages
might
be
going
up
for
a
period
of
time
and
if
they
were
to
just
kind
of
continue
on
that
track
without
any
type
of
additional
training,
their
wages
might
kind
of
continue
along
that
Trend.
You
know
keeping
up
with
inflation,
some
marginal
increases
in
the
earnings
over
time,
but
basically
it
just
stays
along
that
same
track.
B
If,
however,
they
participate
in
the
training
program,
we
hope
what's
going
to
happen
is
that
their
wages
are
going
to
change
and
again
here,
I'm
kind
of
illustrating
that,
for
a
brief
period
of
time,
earnings
might
be
lower
whether
investing
in
the
training,
but
we
hope
again
that
we're
going
to
have
this
long-term
impact
in
terms
of
Labor
Market
outcomes.
Specifically,
we
hope
earnings
are
going
to
be
higher
now
as
a
researcher.
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
determine
what
is
the
difference
between
these
two
paths?
That's
what
we
want
to
measure.
B
That's
what
you
want
to
understand
in
terms
of
thinking
about
this
Roi
is
we're
really
trying
to
measure
what
are
these
differences
so
typically,
the
way
this
is
done
is
we
work
with
agencies
like
KY
stats,
to
look
at
different
types
of
Labor
outcomes
in
terms
of
employment
or
earnings
to
see
what
these
things
look
like.
So
we
might
start
with
a
A
group
of
individuals
who
participated
in
some
type
of
a
training
program
to
observe
what
their
wages
were
after
the
training
program.
Did
they
change?
Did
they
go
up
now?
B
Your
natural
question
you
might
be
looking
at
is
I'm
reading
through
this.
It's
like
okay,
that
green
line.
We
see
it
right
because
they
they
did
the
training
program.
We
can
observe
what
their
wages
were
over
a
period
of
time
after
that,
but
that
means
they're
no
longer
on
that
dotted
Blue
Line.
We
don't
see
that
because
they
invested
in
the
training
that
dotted
blue
line
is
what
would
have
happened
in
the
absence
of
that
training.
So
how
do
we
get
at
that?
B
Well,
basically,
what
we
do
is
in
measuring
these
different
types
of
Labor
Market
outcomes.
Are
these
impacts
we're
comparing
the
outcomes
of
the
individuals
who
participated
in
the
programs
to
the
individuals
who
did
not
participate
so
participants
versus
non-participants?
So
much
like
when
you're
looking
at
some
type
of
a
healthcare
medical
procedure,
you
know,
if
you're
thinking
about
a
study,
you
might
look
at
a
number
of
people
put
them
into
two
different
groups.
One
is
your
treatment
group.
They
receive
the
new
medication.
The
other
is
your
control
group.
They
receive
some
type
of
placebo.
B
If
you
do
this
and
you
do
it
well,
you
you
have
a
large
number
of
people.
You
randomly
assign
them
to
this
treatment
in
this
control
group.
Then
what
you
anticipate
is
that
those
two
groups
ought
to
be
pretty
similar,
where
the
only
difference
is
the
treatment
that
you
provided
and
then
you
can
draw
some
really
strong
conclusions
about
the
effect
of
that
treatment.
B
Now,
in
Workforce
training
programs,
we
rarely
get
to
randomly
assign
people
to
a
training
program
versus
not
it
actually
does
happen
sometimes,
but
rarely
are
we
able
to
do
that
so
what
researchers
do
is
they
typically
rely
on
what
we
call
non-experimental
research
designs?
The
idea
is,
we're
still
going
to
have
a
treatment
in
a
control
group,
but
the
control
group
is
going
to
come
from.
People
didn't
participate
in
the
program.
B
These
are
going
to
be
individuals
who
are
very
similar
to
those
who
did
participate
in
the
training
program
as
we
go
through,
and
we
try
to
to
find
people
who
have
similar
demographics,
similar
experience
and
education
levels
prior
to
the
training,
and
we
use
those
as
a
comparison
group,
or
we
might
look
at
if
there's
eligibility
criteria
associated
with
the
training
program.
We
might
look
at
those
who
just
missed
out,
who
are
just
a
little
bit
of
above
an
income
threshold,
for
example,
as
a
control
group.
B
Now
this
allows
us
if
we
develop
this
control
group
very
well.
It
allows
us
to
make
some
really
good
conclusions
or
inferences
about
the
effects
of
these
programs.
Now,
there's
still
some
things
that
that
we
can't
perfectly
control,
for
we
can't
easily
observe
motivation,
for
example,
so
you
can
kind
of
imagine
somebody
who
might
participate
in
these
programs
as
being
more
highly
motivated
than
people
who
don't
people
who
are
more
highly
motivated
are
more
likely
to
go
out
and
get
training,
but
they're
also
more
likely
to
go
out
and
find
a
job
or
earnings.
B
B
So
in
terms
of
of
this
individual,
where
we're
trying
to
understand
how
their
earnings
were
affected,
the
green
line,
which
represents
what
they
would
earn
with
the
training
program,
comes
from
actually
seeing
what
their
earnings
were
over
a
period
of
time.
The
dotted
Blue
Line
comes
from
non-participants,
who
have
been
carefully
selected
to
be
a
good
control
group.
B
So
here's
an
example
of
of
some
of
the
results
that
came
from
a
similar
study
done
in
Washington
state
now,
Washington
State
evaluates
their
programs
on
a
five-year
basis
and
they've
got
a
lot
of
different
programs
much
like
Kentucky,
but
here
are
our
three
one:
focus
on
adults,
one
on
dislocated
workers
and
the
last
one
on
youth
and
so
what
they
evalued.
What
evaluated
was?
How
did
it
affect
employment
and
for
the
adult
program?
B
What
they
found
is
that
the
population
who
participated
in
the
program
were
4.1
percentage
points
more
likely
to
be
employed
than
similar
people
who
did
not
so
I,
don't
know
what
the
kind
of
Baseline
is,
but
if
you
kind
of
think
about
okay,
this
population
that
was
targeted
for
this
this
training,
if
they
had
an
employment
rate
of
about
50
percent,
this
would
mean
that
they,
after
participating
the
program,
have
an
employment
rate
about
54
percent,
so
a
pretty
significant
increase
in
terms
of
the
employability
of
these
individual
workers.
This
also
increased
their
earnings.
B
This
study
found
that
the
impact
on
earnings
was
about
one
thousand
three
hundred
dollars
per
quarter,
so
this
particular
program
for
adults
increased
their
earnings.
Now
these
results
were
observed
over
about
nine
to
twelve
quarters.
So
you
know,
roughly
through
a
three
year
period,
After
exiting
the
program.
B
Now
it's
important
to
recognize
that
these
different
types
of
effects,
they're
going
to
differ
across
different
types
of
people
and
different
types
of
programs.
What
works
for
older
workers
may
not
be
applicable
to
younger
workers
and
vice
versa.
Also,
programs
across
different
types
of
states
are
going
to
differ
in
terms
of
the
types
of
services
they
provide,
how
they
provide
it,
what
populations
they
target
and
the
intensity
of
the
services
that
are
provided.
So
we
have
to
be
careful
about
drawing
conclusions
from
different
different
states.
B
As
we
go
through
and
we
evaluate
these
different
labor
market
impacts
or
the
various
types
of
costs
and
benefits
that
we
look
at,
we
want
to
do
this
over
time.
So
here
again
it's
just
some
hypothetical
data.
That
kind
of
illustrates
what
this
might
look
like.
We
might
observe
cost
in
the
early
parts
of
participating
in
the
program
right.
You
know
the
ideas
again,
there's
cost
to
the
state
of
providing
the
program.
There
may
be
lost
wages
for
the
worker,
so
there's
cost
early
on
again.
B
What
we
hope
is
that
this
is
going
to
increase
their
earnings
long
into
the
future.
So
the
idea
when
we
go
through
when
we
start
looking
at
what
kind
of
a
return
on
investment
do
we
get?
Is
we
have
these
upfront
costs
and
we
have
what
are
we
hope,
our
long-term
benefits
associated
with
these,
because
we're
looking
at
different
periods?
We
have
to
be
careful
in
terms
of
analyzing
this.
B
We
have
to
basically
discount
those
benefits
that
might
accrue
long
into
the
future
if
earnings
go
up
by
2.4
or
2
400
10
years
from
now,
that's
good,
but
that's
10
years
from
now.
We
can't
count
that
as
two
thousand
four
hundred
dollars
right
now,
we
have
to
Discount
that
so
what
we
do
is
we
go
through
and
we
calculate
what
we
call
a
net
present
value
and,
ultimately,
what
we're
trying
to
understand
is
when
we
look
at
this
on
the
net
present
on
a
present
value
basis,
do
the
benefits
exceed
the
cost?
B
Is
these
programs
are
taking
resources
to
be
able
to
fund
they're,
potentially
costing
the
worker
do
the
benefits
associated
with
those
exceed
the
cost?
If
the
net
present
value
is
greater
than
zero?
It's
basically
telling
you
that,
yes,
it
is
returning
more
in
terms
of
benefits
than
what
we're
giving
up
in
terms
of
cost
to
fund
the
program
and
what
the
work
or
is
losing
in
terms
of
wages.
B
If
it's
less
than
zero.
However,
it
means
that
the
cost
of
the
resources
are
actually
greater
than
the
benefits
that
we
receive.
So
that
would
be
a
program
that
you'd
want
to
determine
whether
you
need
to
make
changes
or
if
you
want
to
continue
funding
it
all
right.
So
I
want
to
go
back
to
Washington
State.
To
give
you
a
sense
of
what
this
looked
like
for
for
them,
they
went
through
and
they
looked
at
the
impacts,
but
then
they
turned
this
into
costs
and
benefits.
What
does
this
mean
on
a
present
value
dollar
basis?
B
Now
these
results?
They
are
present
value.
They
also
only
represented
the
benefits
and
costs
over
the
first
two
and
a
half
year
participate
in
the
program
so
from
the
participants
perspective.
What
they
found
is
that
if
you
sum
up
all
the
wages
that
they're
going
to
earn
over
the
first
two
and
a
half
years,
if
you
discount
those
discount
those
appropriately,
the
worker
gains
about
sixteen
thousand
dollars
the
cost,
which
is
for
the
participant,
primarily
tuition
fees,
they
have
to
pay
in
the
Lost
earnings.
B
That
total
is
about
six
thousand
eight
hundred
dollars
so
from
the
participants
perspective,
there's
a
gain
of
about
nine
thousand
dollars
to
this
Pro
participating
in
this
program
for
the
public.
The
cost
was
about
four
thousand
four
hundred
dollars
the
benefits
in
terms
of
additional
tax
benefits
or
tax
revenues
and
reduction
in
terms
of
Public
Assistance.
They
estimated
to
be
about
seven
thousand
five
hundred
dollars.
So
in
this
particular
program,
the
government
gains
as
well
again
on
a
present
value
basis.
B
Now,
one
of
the
things
they
did
is
they
basically
said
all
right.
Well,
this
is
two
and
a
half
years,
but
we
hope
that
this
program
is
going
to
provide
benefits
long
into
the
future
over
the
entire
life
of
the
career
or
life
career
of
this
individual.
Now
the
costs
are
all
born
at
the
beginning.
So
if,
if
it
improves
wages
over
the
entire
life,
the
benefits
might
actually
be
much
larger.
So
what
they
did
is
they
basically
said
all
right?
B
B
When
you
look
at
the
benefits
to
both
the
participant
and
to
the
state
net
of
the
cost
that
they
incur
now,
there's
a
couple
of
issues
that
we've
got
to
be
careful
about
understanding
when
we're
looking
at
this
type
of
analysis,
the
first
short
term
versus
long
term,
I
told
you
in
Washington
States
they
did
their
analysis.
Looking
at
the
earnings
over
about
a
three
year
period,
That's
fairly,
typical,
most
research
studies
look
at
a
period
of
about
one
to
three
years
and
they
get
really
good
information
about
that.
B
It's
really
hard
to
to
see
how
wages
changed
over
a
10-year
period
or
a
20-year
period.
It's
just
hard
to
kind
of
keep
up
with
these
individuals
and
to
actually
see
how
the
wages
change
over
a
long
run
period
of
time.
And
the
thing
is
it's
not
a
guarantee
that
these
effects
are
going
to
be
permanent.
These
effects
might
actually
decline
over
time,
particularly
if
you're,
focusing
on
youth
programs
impacts
that
you
might
have
for
youth.
B
They
might
give
them
a
boost
for
a
while,
but
it
might
be
that
their
peers,
who
didn't
participate,
might
actually
catch
up.
At
some
point
in
time,
so
we've
got
to
be
careful
about
interpreting
the
short
run
and
these
long-term
impacts.
B
The
other
issue
is
that
when
we
are
are
engaging
in
training
programs
and
training
more
workers,
we
could
actually
be
having
additional
labor
market
effects.
B
This
is
potentially
good
for
the
worker
right,
because
what
we're
doing
is
we're
increasing
their
wages,
but
as
we
produce
more
workers
with
these
different
types
of
skills
in
some
occupations,
we
might
see
that
this
could
displace
existing
workers
or
it
could
actually
have
an
effect
on
the
market.
Wages
you're,
basically
increasing
the
supply.
B
Now
I
tend
to
think
these
effects
are
not
necessarily
large
they're,
something
to
be
mindful
of
when
you're
in
a
tight
labor
market
like
we
are
now
they
are
likely
to
be
relatively
small,
if
not
insignificant
in
terms
of
an
effect.
But
if
you
have
a
labor
market
or
an
occupation
where
there
is
an
ample
supply
of
workers
already
and
you're
training
more,
this
might
be
more
of
a
concern,
but
again
you're,
probably
not
generating.
B
B
The
idea
behind
doing
these
evaluations
is
to
provide
you,
the
policy
makers
and
the
officials
at
the
cabinets
to
administer
these
programs
information
to
identify
both
strengths
and
weaknesses
in
terms
of
how
these
operate
is,
if
you're,
seeing
that
the
effects
are
not
large,
you
can
start
looking
at.
Why
are
they
not
large?
Why
are
they
not
working
and
while
I
showed
you
one
program
that
in
Washington
state
they
estimated
to
have
a
positive
effect?
That's
not
always
the
case.
There
have
been
several
studies.
B
You
know
one
particular
category
of
of
programs
called
Education
First,
mandatory
Education,
First
programs.
These
are
programs
that
were
done
in
several
states
where
the
idea
was
you
have
these
welfare
recipients.
B
You
want
to
train
them,
give
them
some
skills
early
on
before
they
start
looking
for
for
work
and
hope
that
that
gives
them
a
leg
up
in
terms
of
finding
work
and
increasing
their
earnings.
What
they
found
is
that
these
studies
didn't
actually
work.
The
benefits
to
the
workers
were
smaller
than
the
cost
incurred
to
support
these
programs.
So
it's
not
a
guarantee
that
the
programs
actually
work.
B
B
In
these
cases,
these
states,
these
programs
were
trying
to
provide
Preparatory,
GED
training
or
some
basic
adult
education,
and
they
suggested
that
what
may
be
happening
is
that
these
skills
that
were
being
provided
by
these
training
programs
were
just
relatively
low
skills
that
they
didn't
really
provide
them
much
of
an
advantage
over
their
peers,
not
participating
in
these
programs
and
did
not
translate
into
skills
that
employers
were
looking
to
pay
additional
wages.
For
so
this
type
of
analysis
can
give
you
an
understanding
of
what
works.
B
What
doesn't
work,
how
big
the
impacts
are,
but
it
also
helps
you
understand
what
that
rate
of
return
is
on
these,
and
so
it
helps
you
think
about
how
you
allocate
resources,
scarce
resources
to
programs
that
can
potentially
yield
the
largest
benefits.
Now
chairman
Schroeder.
That
concludes
my
comments.
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
If
I
can
thank.
G
You
for
the
excellent
presentation,
I'll
lead
off
again
with
the
first
question:
I'm
I'm
curious,
so
is
it
possible
to
you
know
I
think
you're
well
aware
of
what
we
have
tasked
with
that
budget
language?
Are
we
at
this
point?
Do
we
have
to
just
look
at
programs,
say:
okay,
here's
our
control
group
going
forward,
or
is
it
possible
to
go
back
and
and
say?
Well,
we
can
see
the
control
group
here
that
didn't
you
know,
sign
up
for
the
training.
Basically,
are
we
able
to
look
back
or
is
it
from
this
day
forward?
B
Fortunately,
you're
well
positioned
to
be
able
to
develop
a
control
group
from
historical
data.
As
you
heard
in
the
earlier
presentation,
KY
stats
has
done
really
a
phenomenal
job
of
building
a
data
infrastructure
that
allows
you
to
to
do
this
type
of
research.
So
you
know
again,
there
may
be
some
limitations
in
terms
of
what
we
can
do
in
terms
of
what
data
is
collected,
but
they
do
have
a
good
start
at
this.
They
have
a
lot
of
historical
data.
They've
done
a
really
great
job
and
I
will
say.
B
Researchers
across
this
state
are
just
you
know,
really
thrilled
with
this
data,
because
it
allows
them
to
do
this
type
of
research.
So,
yes,
I
think
the
idea
is
to
go
back
and
look
at
programs
where
you
know
maybe
they've
existed
for
a
period
of
time
because
you'll,
if
you're
looking
at
a
program
for
example,
that
that
you
just
started
last
year,
we
don't
have
a
whole
lot
of
history
after
they
completed
the
program
to
evaluate
that
program.
Just
you
know
they.
B
If
they
completed
this,
you
know
maybe
in
July
we
only
have
a
few
months
of
wage
data,
but
what
we
can
do
is
we
can
look
at
programs
that
you've
been
funding
for
a
period
of
time.
See
graduates
who
maybe
left
are
those
who
left
the
program,
maybe
in
2016,
for
example,
see
what
their
wages
look
like
over
the
next
few
years
and
find
a
control
group
from
data
from
2016
for
people
who
are
very
similar
to
those
who
participate
in
the
program.
So
we
can
develop
control
groups,
at
least
in
theory.
F
Thank
you
Mr
chair
and
thank
you
Dr
Clark
for
being
here
today.
I
noticed
the
citation
date
for
the
Washington
State
study
was
2017,
so
my
looming
question
and
concern
going
forward
is
with
the
massive
disruptions
across
every
sector,
the
labor
market
employees,
employers-
are
we
going
to
be
able
to
have
accurate
data
points
to
actually
do
these
studies
I
know
about
this
much
about
statistics,
but
I
know
you've
got
to
have
accurate
data
points
to
have
accurate
results.
Can
you
speak
to
that.
F
B
You,
yes,
I,
think
we
can
now.
You
know,
that's
something
that
we
are
you're
correct.
You
know
I
mean
when
we're
going
through
and
looking
at
at
data
and
I've
been
doing
this
with
with
Lexington
a
lot
is
we
we've
got
this
big
asterisk
around?
You
know
2020
2021
and
a
lot
of
things
changed,
and
certainly
we
need
to
be
aware
of
that
as
we're
analyzing
it
a
couple
of
ways
that
we
can
do,
that
is
one
to
analyze
it
prior
to
the
pandemic
and
kind
of
see
you
know
in
normal
situations.
B
How
did
these
things
work?
The
other
is
to
see
exactly
well.
How
did
these
things
help
people
fare
as
they
were
moving
through
the
pandemic
through
a
very
disruptive
period?
Did
it
help
them
remain
employed
compared
to
people
who
didn't
participate
in
the
program?
So
there's
a
lot
that
we
can
learn
by
observing
individuals
as
they
kind
of
move
through.
B
You
know
the
ups
and
downs
of
the
of
the
pandemic,
so
yes,
it's
something
that
we're
going
to
be
mind
have
to
be
mindful
of,
and
it
could
affect
what
we
present
to
you
and
that
you
know
as
we're
going
through
and
looking
at
data
that
maybe
was
collected
during
that
that
disruption.
You
know,
we'll
have
to
kind
of
acknowledge
that.
Yes,
you
know
there
are
some
caveats.
Those
were
unusual
times,
but
here's
still
what
this
can
potentially
tell
us
about.
H
Thank
you.
I
really
appreciate
this
presentation,
because
I've
long
been
concerned
about
the
effectiveness
and
net
present
value
of
some
of
these
programs
am
I
correct
in
thinking
that
there
may
have
been
some
studies
along
these
lines.
Perhaps
you
all
are
involved
or
not
relating
to
various
college
degrees
through
the
CPE
different
programs
that
they've
approved
in
things
or
we
not.
Do
we
not
have
a
mechanism
for
that
right
now
that.
B
B
In
fact,
back
when
I
was
a
graduate
student,
so
that's
telling
you
how
long
ago
this
was
you
know
we
would
go
back
and
we
try
to
understand.
Okay,
you
know
what
did
people
who,
who
graduated
from
you
know
the
various
public
State
institutions?
You
know
what
would
their
earnings
look
like
compared
to
what
they
would
have
earned
in
the
absence
of
this
and
I?
Think
there
have
been.
You
know,
different
attempts
to
kind
of
do
similar
types
of
stuff,
but
I
don't
know
what
the
status
of
that
is.
Okay,.
H
Well,
I
appreciate
she
I'm
looking
forward
to
the
workforce
piece
of
this,
and
certainly
if
it
hasn't
been
done
recently,
then
we
probably
should
look
at
trying
to
encourage
our
CPE
or
whatever
folks
to
do
with
something
similar
because
I
know
my
generation
when
I
was
in
school.
Most
of
my
friends
graduating
with
master's
degrees.
H
You
know
we're
doing
things
like
working
at
Kroger
and
so
forth,
and
you
know,
whereas
maybe
at
one
point
you
needed
that
degree
for
the
job
now
I
think
we've
almost
got
more
degrees
than
jobs
or
they're,
not
the
right
ones,
or
something
because
people
aren't
really
even
working
in
their
fields
and
I.
Just
am
concerned
that
the
present
value
of
all
those
Investments
probably
aren't
what
people
think
they
are,
but
anyway,
something
to
look
forward
to
thanks.
G
Okay,
thank
you,
members,
any
other
questions.
Okay,
seeing
numbers
Clark.
We
certainly
appreciate
your
time
today
found
it
very
informative.
We
look
forward
to
the
cabinet
and
the
results
that
you
know
you
guys
conclusions
when
you
work
together
and
I
think
it's
going
to
help
the
statement
for
it
in
the
right
direction.
So
we
certainly
appreciate
everyone's
time
today,
members.
This
is
my
last
meeting
sharing
so
I
know,
I
see
a
lot
of
Tears
In,
Your
Eyes,
but
it's
okay,
I'll
be
around
and
really
just
want
to.
Thank
the
staff.