WORKFORCE PLANNING REGIONSAn opportunity for alignment and innovation

What economists say about regions• Businesses choose to cluster and grow based on competitive advantage

• Accessibility to resources• People

• Can I find and recruit the talent from close enough that people will come to work for me?• Is the infrastructure in place to create a skilled workforce nearby?• What is the cost to recruit and retain talent based on the other companies within the commute area?

• Materials – raw materials, processed materials• Are the materials I need readily available in my vicinity?• If not, am I close enough to reliable transportation to get what I need when I need it?

• Similar industries• Can gain efficiencies by locating near my upstream and downstream supply chain?• Are there other companies similar to mine close by, creating more opportunities and synergies?

• Regions are about growing competitive advantage, economies and jobs

Workforce Regions are also a requirement

What is the opportunity?economies are regional – businesses recruit talent and people commute

across boundariesintended to align economic development and workforce strategies a way to create synergies and leverage resources

New emphasis on regions as a driver of innovation - anticipate some DOL funding opportunities will be tied to workforce regions.

Requirement: must have regions identified in our state plan in order to receive WIOA Title I funds. Regional plans must be submitted by locals.

Local Areas and Regions

WIA created Local Workforce

Development Areas (WDAs)• Identified by Local Elected Officials• One workforce development board per area

WIOA created Workforce Regions• Governor identifies regions, based on data• All local areas become regions

• Some regions may consist of just one local area• Some regions may contain two or more local areas• Some regions could contain local areas across state boundaries

Regions do not change the authority of or allocations to local workforce areas

ProcessDate Activity

Oct 2014

Gov. asks for a “data driven recommendation” re: workforce regions in consultation with WDCs, LEOs and others.

Feb Local Governance & Sector (LG&S) Subcommittee starts data review and process discussions

April NPRMs require states regions policy and lists possible factors to identify regions. LG&S continues working on process. Develops a letter and webinar to solicit input.

June WTECB asks WDCs & LEOs which factors to use for identifying regions and suggestions for possible regions. WDCs and LEOS list same factors as NPRMs. Eleven areas ask to be identified as regions.

July Regions Task Force (6 WDCs, labor, business, Governor’s Office, and staff) unanimously recommend factors to identify regions. LG&S unanimously agrees, Steering Committee agrees with one “no” vote. WTECB unanimously agrees.

Aug Regions policy finalized after public comment. Staff works on suggested regions based on policy.

Sept September 8 Steering Committee cancelled. Staff presents map to WTECB on Sept 17. Thirty day public vetting process begins. WTECB asks locals to respond to the suggested map by Oct 17.

Oct Oct 21 WTECB recommends regions to Governor. He has 15 days to respond. Regions built into state plan and regional guidance.

Nov First draft of state plan due for review by WTECB on 11/19.

What we learned from local input and taskforce• Strong agreement on economic factors to identify regions

Labor marketsEconomic development areasIndustry concentration/sectors

• 11 of 12 areas asked to be identified as a region• Strong emphasis on existing regional collaborations • Interest in cross state collaborations• Concerns about loss of flexibility and the planning process

Staff’s task – consider the feedback, the requirements of the policy and the Governor’s expectation to make a data driven decision and develop a map for further consultation.

Factors used to identify regions

• Factors applied from the policy• Labor Sheds (population centers and commute patterns) • Economic Development Regions• Industry Concentration/Location Quotients

NOTE: Governor’s Office asked for consideration of alignment with Governor’s sectors

• Additional local factors• Locally identified sectors • Locally initiated regional planning efforts• Geographic boundaries

• NOTE: Regions must consist of complete, contiguous WDAs

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

Washington’s WorkforceDevelopment Areas (WDAs)-

Building Blocks of Workforce Planning Regions

REGIONS NOT CHANGE WDA BOUNDARIES

Labor Sheds - Population Centers (MSAs)

`

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Bellingham MSA 201,140

Yakima MSA 243,231

Spokane MSA

471,221

Snohomish

King

Pierce

Kennewick-Pasco-Richland MSA 253,340

Whatcom

Longview MSA 201,140

Wenatchee MSA 110,884

Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue

MSA3,439,809

Olympia MSA

252,264

Bremerton-Silverdale

251,133

Mt. Vernon-Anacortes 116,901

Washington Multnomah

Columbia

Part of Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton

MSA 2,226,009 SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget analysis of census data

Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia

Combined Statistical Area

4,199,312

Bonner

Kootenai

Benewah

Latah

Nez Perce

Washington Multnomah

ClatsopColumbia

Sherman

Gilliam

Umatilla

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

Whatcom

34%

11%

17%

6%10 %

44%

8%

6%

5%

8%

5% 5%

25%

14%

14%

Labor Sheds – WDA to WDA Commute Patterns 5% or moreSource: the US Census

Longitudinal Employment and

Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Commute Flows Between WDAs

##%

KEY:

25 % 7 %

5 %

16%

6%

6%

19%

9%

43%

5%

Interstate Commute Flows between Counties ##%

Morrow

Wallowa

Boundary

Hood River

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

SWWDA

Federal EconomicDevelopmentDistricts Source: EconomicDevelopment Administration

Cowlitz-Wahkiakum

Peninsula

Columbia-Pacific (COLPAC)

SouthEast Washington

Tri County

Benton-Franklin

North Central

Multnomah

Greater Portland Inc.Clark, Skamania, Columbia, Washington, Yamhill, Multnomah, Clackamas

Mid-Columbia (MCEDD)Skamania, Klickitat, Hood River, Wasco, Sherman

Greater Spokane

Central Puget

Sound

Sectors

Governor Identified Sectors

• Aerospace• Information and Communication

Technology• Maritime• Agriculture• Life Sciences• Clean Tech

Locally Identified Sectors

• Aerospace• Information Technology• Maritime• Agriculture• Food Processing• Construction• Energy, Utilities, Waste Management• Professional Services• Finance• Manufacturing (prioritized by all)• Healthcare (prioritized by all by Pac Mtn)

Examples of Regional Collaborations• Green Jobs Grant (King, Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish WDCs)• Homelessness Initiatives (King, Pierce, Snohomish WDCs)• Green Jobs Grant (King, Snohomish, Spokane WDCs)• WorkStart (King, Northwest WDC)• JBLM Veterans Initiatives (King, Pierce, Snohomish, Pac Mtn)• Camo2Commerce (Pierce, PacMtn)• Housing and Employment Navigator Program (Pierce, Northwest, South

Central WDCs), • Enhanced Ammonia Refrigeration Course – (Parts of North Central and South

Central WDAs)• Hanford (South Central, Benton Franklin)• Air Washington (Statewide)• Work Readiness Washington (Statewide)

Effort to Formalize Regional Planning

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

East Cascades Workforce

Planning Region 2015

Columbia-Willamette Workforce

Collaborative since 2010 Source: Locally developed materials

POSSIBLE WORKFORCE PLANNING REGIONSWhat the data suggested

Clallam

Jefferson

Grays Harbor

Mason

LewisPacific

Snohomish

Pierce

Skagit

Whatcom

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SeaKing WDA

Kitsap –

Thurston labor force ~114K

Workforce Snohomish WDA

Workforce Central WDA

San Juan

Island

Seattle – Tacoma – Bellevue

MSA

Olympia MSA

Bremerton-Silverdale

MSA

Mt. Vernon-Anacortes MSA

Are Olympic, PacMtn & NWWDA part of the labor shed?• Parts of these Local Areas are in the Combined

Statistical Area• 100K+ more people commute in and out of the

MSA• 39K+ between Olympic and Snohomish/

King/Pierce• 35K+ between NWWDA and Snohomish/

King/Pierce• 24K+ between PacMtn and Snohomish/

King/Pierce

Puget Sound

12,00

012,000

Snohomish/King/Pierce Labor ShedMore than 300,000 people commute within the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA• 174K+ between King and Snohomish• 130K+ between Pierce and King• 225K+ from Snohomish and Pierce into King

96,5

00

128,

500

35,0

0046

,000

9,00

06,

000

5,000

8,00

0 6,00

0

3,50

0

5,500

7,80

0

6,000

4,000

3,000

22,000

4,000

Source: US Census Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Clallam

Jefferson

Grays Harbor

Mason

LewisPacific

Snohomish

Pierce

Skagit

Whatcom

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SeaKing WDA

Thurston

Workforce Snohomish WDA

Workforce Central WDA

San Juan

Island

Kitsap

Puget Sound - Economic Development

Puget Sound Regional Development Council consists of Snohomish, King, Pierce and Kitsap counties

The Council• Administers the Federal Economic

Development District• Serves as the Regional Transportation

Planning Organization• Serves as the Metropolitan Planning

Organization

NOTE: Olympic Workforce Area cannot be split between two regions, unless the Chief Elected Officials want to create new local areas

Local Area Snohomish King Pierce Olympic

Aerospace LQ 5.3 LQ 1.18

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Information and Communi-cation Technology

LQ 1.9

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Life Sciences LQ 1.31 LQ 1.17

Maritime LQ 1.03 LQ 9.87, 1.25 & 1.23

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Construction Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Trade & Transportation

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Locally Prioritized

Clallam

Jefferson

Grays Harbor

Mason

LewisPacific

Snohomish

Pierce

Skagit

Whatcom

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SeaKing WDA

Thurston

Workforce Snohomish WDA

Workforce Central WDA

San Juan

Island

Kitsap

Puget Sound - Sectors

Clallam (employment 25K+)

Jefferson (employment < 10K)

Grays Harbor

Mason

LewisPacific

Snohomish

Pierce

Skagit

Whatcom

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SeaKing WDA

Thurston

Workforce Snohomish WDA

Workforce Central WDA

San Juan

Island

Kitsap (employer

76K)

• Consisting of Snohomish, King, Pierce and Olympic Local Areas based on Labor Sheds Economic Development Regions Sector Opportunities

• Do not include NWWDA or PacMtn The region would be too large NWWDA & PacMtn share fewer

similarities with Snohomish, King, Pierce and the most populous part of Olympic

PUGET SOUND REGION

King

Washington

Clackamas

Multnomah

ClatsopColumbia

Hood

Columbia-Willamette Region

Clark County is part of the Portland MSA• 57K+ people commute into Portland MSA from

SWWDC • 12K+ commute from Portland MSA into SWWDA• This is the 2nd most signification commute pattern

in the state, after the Puget Sound

SWWDC is part of Greater Portland Inc. economic development strategy

SWWDC formed the Columbia-Willamette Workforce Collaborative with Portland and Clackamas WDBs. They work together on four sector strategies: Manufacturing, Healthcare, Clean Tech, High Tech

Lewis

Pacific

Skamania

Cowlitz

Clark

WahkiakumSWWWDA

41,0

00

5,50

0

4,00

0

3,50

0

8,500

8,000

2,000

2,00

0

65,000

Source: US Census Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics (LEHD)

20,000 31,0

00

45,000

26,000

60,0

00

2,00

0

Bonner

Kootenai

Benewah

Latah

Nez Perce

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

BoundarySpokane Region

Spokane is the 2nd largest MSA in Washington• Over 470,000 people are in the MSA• Relatively few people commute between

Spokane and surrounding WDAs• Spokane is its own economic development

region • Spokane is its own transportation and

metropolitan planning organization• Spokane only shares a few sector priorities

with its neighbors

4,000

5,50

0

8,000

Source: US Census Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

8.38

6.76

5.92

1.11

7.3

7.952.83

9.56

6.72

2.51

2.0

5.35 3.52

1.96

1.36

1.72

1.066.08

1.285.33

1.701.4

East Cascades Region

North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin• Agriculture – strong

concentration

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

Source: ESD Survey of Workforce Development Councils

East Cascades Region

North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin• Agriculture – strong

concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs.

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

2.241.37

2.19

1.43

1.09

1.35

1.38

1.28

4.32

4.321.47

1.45

1.44

1.31

1.35

1.09

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014 Washington State Quarterly Census of Employment and Wage records

East Cascades Region

North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin• Agriculture – strong

concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs.• Clean Tech – Also a strength in the region

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

East Cascades Region

North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin• Agriculture – strong

concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs.• Clean Tech – Also a strength in the region• Energy and Utilities – also a focus in several parts of the region

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

SWWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

East Cascades Region

North Central, South Central, Eastern and Benton Franklin• Agriculture – strong

concentration, as well as local prioritization and a focus on food processing in 3 WDAs.• Clean Tech – Also a strength in the region• Energy and Utilities – also a focus in several parts of the region• As well as Trade, Warehousing and Transportation

Local Regional Planning Efforts

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

PacMtn WDA

NWWDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA Spokane

WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Workforce Central WDA

East Cascades Workforce

Planning Region 2015

Source: Locally developed materials

Washington Multnomah

Clallam

Jefferson

GraysHarbor

Mason

Kitsap

Thurston

Lewis

Pacific

Okanogan

Chelan

Douglas

FerryStevens

PendOreille

Lincoln

Spokane

Whitman

Grant Adams

Walla Walla

Columbia

Garfield

Asotin

King

Snohomish

Pierce Kittitas

Yakima

Skamania

Skagit

Cowlitz

Clark

Wahkiakum

Klickitat

Whatcom

Benton

Franklin

San Juan

Island

Olympic WDA

South Central WDA

North CentralWDA

Benton Franklin

WDA

Eastern WDA

Workforce Snohomish

WDA

SeaKing WDA

Suggested Workforce Planning Regions

1

4

3

52 Spokane

WDA

6

NWWDA

Workforce Central WDA

Pac Mtn WDA

Addressing local concerns• Planning requirements

• Local areas have a history of working together, but that is not the same as regional planning• Quality regional planning comes with practice and time

• Start from a strengths approach – allow locals in multi-area regions to focus on those aspects of regional planning most likely to create success, and take the time needed to work on the rest

• Expect incremental/phased implementation• Allow room for error and learning opportunities as long as progress is being made• Do not expect WDCs in a region to resolve issues that are WDC specific. It is still a state

responsibility to assure each local area is in compliance.

• Do not add more process than necessary• Recognize that collaboration takes resources – offer additional funding to multi-area

regions?