Located in:
- Program-specific Requirements for Adult Education and Family Literacy Act ProgramsThe Unified or Combined State Plan must include a description of the following as it pertains to Adult Education and Literacy programs under title II, the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA).
f. Assessing Quality
Current Narrative:
Performance Accountability assesses the effectiveness of grantees in achieving continuous improvement of adult education and literacy activities. The performance outcome measures shall consist of the following core indicators:
1. Measurable Skills Gains (MSGs);
2. The percentage of program participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the program;
3. The percentage of program participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the program;
3. The median earnings of program participants who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after exit from the program;
5. The percentage of program participants who obtain either a recognized postsecondary credential or a secondary school diploma, or its recognized equivalent, during participation in or within one year of exit from the program;
6. The percentage of program participants who, during a program year, are in an education or training program that leads to a recognized postsecondary credential or employment and who are achieving measurable skill gains towards such a credential or employment; and
7. The indicators of effectiveness in serving employers established pursuant to clause (iv).
Setting Performance Targets
Each fiscal year Louisiana negotiates proposed target percentages for each of the core indicators of performance with the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Career, Technical and Adult Education (OCTAE). Each local eligible program is responsible for meeting or exceeding the negotiated performance targets. Each program shall analyze progress towards meeting the targets on an ongoing basis. Each program must utilize the Louisiana approved standardized assessments which provide the framework needed to measure program effectiveness.
Data Collection and Analysis Local programs are required to collect data on the program’s performance and are required to analyze it to determine progress towards meeting the targets and areas of improvement. Analysis should include a review of academic, employment, secondary credential, and postsecondary measures. Local programs must assure that National Reporting System of Adult Education data quality standards are met.
Program Evaluation The State will evaluate annually the effectiveness of the adult education and literacy activities, based on the core performance measures, through activities and processes listed below. Strategies, processes and barriers to attaining the performance levels will be reviewed, as well as qualitative and quantitative data. The annual evaluation will address the extent to which local providers implement the activities specified in Section 225 and 231 of the Workforce Investment Act. The purpose of these activities, strategies and processes is to assess the effectiveness of the State to achieve continuous improvement of adult education and literacy activities and to optimize the return on investment of Federal funds in adult education and literacy activities. The results of the valuation will provide relevant information to determine achievement of levels of performance for each of the core indicators for the local providers.
a. Data Collection. The state-approved MIS system shall be used by all eligible entities receiving funds under this title. Providers shall enter data monthly during a program year. Data will be reviewed for compliance with performance measures and expectations for the delivery of services as approved in the individual application. LCTCS and Louisiana Workforce Commission (LWC) will data match placement/wage data for students entered in the state-approved MIS system. LCTCS has instituted a comprehensive data system, Enterprise Resource Planning System (ERP), for all colleges. The ERP System will provide the capability to match data from disparate sources and produce analytical and actionable information to drive programmatic decisions.
b. Review Process. Desk Monitoring: Desk monitoring is conducted twice a year, at a minimum, by WRU staff. Desk monitoring relies primarily on data that is collected and reported by the local programs in the statewide approved data management system. Using a structured format, local programs provide monthly data to the state office where state staff can review the data to guide program review activities, inform technical assistance, identify risk-assessment areas, and promote program improvement. The system is able to produce a series of reports that allow WRU staff to examine demographic, assessment, and academic information.
Programmatic/Fiscal Onsite Monitoring: WRU staff will conduct formal monitoring visits of funded programs on a prescribed schedule each year. Programs are identified for onsite monitoring through a comprehensive risk analysis based on the following factors: (1) desk monitoring; (2) need to verify data quality and program expenditures; (3) consistent low performance on core indicators in several categories; (4) prospective noncompliance with grant requirements identified through review of programmatic and fiscal reports, or ongoing communications with the program; (4) unresolved audit findings; (5) ongoing lack of progress in resolving required actions from prior monitoring visit; (6) significant staff turnover in the program; and (7) recent or newly established programs.
The goal for State onsite monitoring visits are to: (1) ensure that implementation of the program service/activities as outlines in the RFP have been fully executed; (2) ensure that programs meet AEFLA requirements; (3) improve the quality of federally-funded activities; (4) provide assistance identifying and resolving accountability problems; and (5) ensure the accuracy, validity, and reliability of data collection and data reporting as well as policies and procedures for program accountability.
Corrective Action Plan Upon completion of the review, a formal written report will be provided to the program administrator. If a program fails to meet performance goals or other state and/or federal programmatic requirements, a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) will be required to outline the course of action for program improvement. The local program will be given a period of 30 days to respond in writing to the findings. WRU will provide technical assistance throughout the corrective process and by the end of a designated timeframe, programs should be able to correct the identified issues, end their respective CAP and improve the quality of the program. WRU will provide ongoing technical assistance, professional development and other support until the required steps of the plans are completed. Programs that fail to comply with grant requirements and regulations may not be eligible to receive funding in subsequent years of the cycle and/or funds may be terminated.
Evaluating Professional Development
LCTCS, WorkReady U provides varied professional development opportunities through the:
(1) Regional Resource Centers (RRC);
(2) Louisiana Community and Technical College System (LCTCS) Conference; and
(3) Louisiana Association for Public, Community, and Adult Education (LAPCAE) Conference
Regional Resource Centers
In order to advance the WorkReady U (WRU) mission, promote learning communities, and pursue high quality adult education practices, the Regional Resource Center (RRC) regions have been aligned with the Louisiana Workforce Development Board (LWDB) regions. Regional Resource Centers
(1) facilitate professional development (PD) opportunities;
(2) provide resources and support; and
(3) offer technical assistance (TA) to increase student performance and program enrollment.
Targeted trainings based upon needs assessments are beneficial to an individual’s professional growth, a program’s improvement, and core partner relationships. WRU prefers a three-pronged approach to PD in which
• participants are provided with material beforehand,
• training occurs, and then
• there is follow-up after the training in the form of
o Communities of Practice, or
o Training of Trainers.
Each year’s focus areas arise from national trends and challenges, state goals, and program/partner needs in an effort to better prepare our students, staff, partners, and programming for the new landscape in adult education. Professional development activities focus on:
(1) aligning adult education and literacy activities with core partners and program services
(2) improving the overall service delivery to students, including –
(a) online instructor courses
(b) teacher observation/evaluation training
(c) teacher-leader cohorts working with national experts to capture research-based best practices for instruction
(d) supervisor training
(e) support staff (including data entry and intake/orientation employees)
(3) improving adult education and literacy activities, with regard to—
(a) the development and dissemination of instructional and programmatic practices based on the most rigorous or scientifically valid research available and appropriate, in reading, writing, speaking, mathematics, English language acquisition programs, distance education, and staff training;
(b) strengthening partnership at the local level to provide access to employment, education, and training services; and
(c) effective uses of technology to improve system efficiencies
(4) training on the monitoring and evaluation of program quality and adult education and literacy activities
(5 ) certification and recertification on administration of NRS approved assessments adopted in the WRU Assessment Policy guide.
(6) WRU Recipient Grant Management Handbook
(7) collecting and disseminating best practices both at onsite meetings and virtually via –
(a) online forums/discussion boards
(b) virtual meetings/calls
Participant evaluations are collected for all professional development activities. Participants respond to items regarding:
• the training as a whole
o objectives
o materials
o environment
o presentation
• the immediate application in
o classrooms
o programs
o workforce
State staff, along with RRC leads, review this information to plan for future trainings and potential technical assistance. The team looks at:
• cost effectiveness;
• return on investment;
• transferability of skills/knowledge; and
• benefit of students/clients from Professional Development outcomes.
LCTCS and LAPCAE Annual Conferences WorkReady U supports both annual conferences geared towards adult education in Louisiana. Professional development opportunities for instructors (full-time, part-time and/or volunteers), supervisors, partners, and employers consist of:
• development and implementation of technology applications, and/or distance education, including support the use of instructional technology
• development and dissemination of curricula, including curricula incorporating the essential components of reading instruction for adult learners
• development of contextualized curricula and effective models for integrated education, training and career pathways
• development and implementation of a comprehensive model that assists in the transition from adult education to postsecondary education
• integration of literacy and English language instruction with occupational skill training, including promoting linkages with employers
• activities to promote workplace adult education and literacy activities
• identifying curriculum frameworks and aligning rigorous content standards that specify what adult learners should know and be able to do in the areas of reading and language arts, mathematics, and English language acquisition, taking into consideration the following:
o College and Career Readiness Standards;
o The current adult skills and literacy assessments used in the State;
o The primary indicators of performance described in section 116 of WIOA;
o Standards and academic requirements for enrollment in nonremedial, for-credit courses in postsecondary educational institutions or institutions of higher education supported by the State; and
o The content of occupational and industry skill standards widely used by business and industry in the State.
• development and pilot of strategies geared to improving teacher quality and retention
• development and implementation of programs and services to meet the needs of adult learners with learning disabilities or English language learners based on valid research Each conference committee collects evaluations from participants to:
• guide the direction and focus of the following year’s event; and
• inform state staff of underlying needs.