ONTARIO WORKS ENHANCED JOB PLACEMENT

PROGRAM

 

PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

 

THUNDER BAY DISTRICT SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION BOARD

 

November 15, 1999

 

 

1.              Preamble

 

The Ministry of Community and Social Services has announced changes to the Ontario Works’ Employment Placement program under the title of Enhanced Job Placement Program, as recently announced.  The changes improve the original Employment Placement component by providing simpler and more attractive fee payment schedules for agencies providing job placement services.  The program also provides a wage-subsidy of up to $4,000. to employers for each eligible employee hired in a permanent, fully-remunerated position under its auspices.  The Enhanced Job Placement Program includes publicly-funded organizations which had been ineligible under the original Employment Placement component.  Due to these improvements and the availability of a wage-subsidy for eligible employers who participate, it is recommended that the Thunder Bay District Social Services Administration Board adopt the Enhanced Job Placement Program, replacing the original component in the process.

 

2.       Purpose of the Proposal

 

This is the Thunder Bay District Social Service Administration Board’s plan for the Enhanced Job Placement (EJP) initiative, including the program design, the implementation plan and accountability measures we are proposing for the District.  We are submitting the plan to the Ministry of Community and Social Services for 80% - 20% cost-sharing, according to the attached budget plan. 

 

The plan has been prepared in accordance with the Implementation Proposal Guidelines for Job Placement, An Enhancement to Ontario Works Employment Placement, Ministry of Community and Social Services, March 1999.  Careful consideration has also been given in the proposal to the Ontario Works Act and Regulations and the Ministry’s Ontario Works Policy Directives.

 

3.       Authority to Operate the Program

 

The Employment Placement program was introduced as part of provincial welfare reform, and is governed by Ontario Works legislation effective May 1, 1998, and by the Ministry’s Ontario Works Policy Directives, which came into effect on the same date, and any revisions since implemented. Employment Placement, or EP, is one of nine employment activities prescribed in the Ontario Works Regulations (Ontario Works Act, 1997; Ontario Regulation 134/98 as amended by Regulations 227/98 and 272/98).   Section 26 of the Regulations defines the employment measures that satisfy participation requirements also prescribed in the Act.  Employment Placement is included as paragraph 4 of the Section.  Under the terms and conditions of the service delivery contract with the Province of Ontario, Ontario Works delivery agents are required to deliver, or ensure delivery of, the EP program component. 

 

4.       Features of Employment Placement (EP)

 

4.1     Overview

 

As it was introduced, EP provides funding for job placement services to Ontario Works participants. Although the Act may require a participant to participate in the Employment Placement option as a condition for eligibility for basic financial assistance [Ontario Works Act, Section 7(4) (b) and (d)], EP is not normally a mandatory component per se.  Rather, it is presented as one of a range of participation options available to Ontario Works participants, depending on their employment needs, abilities, experience and circumstances.  Specifically, the EP component is designated for job-ready participants who have completed four months of active job search.   It is delivered currently in the District through both the direct delivery (internal) method (Highway 11 delivery area) and through a purchase of service (external) arrangement with the Ontario March of Dimes (City of Thunder Bay).

 

The purpose of EP is to place participants into jobs and allow for innovative strategies to generate placement opportunities with employers.  The EP component also provides supports to self-employment as an exit strategy for participants.

 

The following province-wide standards govern EP[1]:

 

·       Jobs effected under the program component must be unsubsidized by a wage or training subsidy from any public source

·       Fees for job placement services must be derived from savings in financial assistance, calculated according to the prescribed provincial formula and paid over the time frames and to the maximum amounts as prescribed

·       Except for a small refundable advance, job placement fees must be paid in arrears, not in advance of the savings realized from job placement of the Ontario Works participant

·       Employers must comply with all applicable federal, provincial and municipal legislation, Regulations, and by-laws respecting the workplace, including the Employment Standards Act, the Employment Agencies Act, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Pay Equity Act, and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act

·       Placements covered by EP must be with employers, not the remunerated placement agency

Payments to job placement agencies were also enabled under the purchase of service option in the original EP component.  These, however, were subject to some inflexible and untimely compensation rules.  Fees were strictly performance-based, calculated as a percentage of savings generated over a six-month period. The fee schedules were cumbersome to calculate, and were not proven to be cost-effective nor sufficient to attract a high level of placement agency participation.  

No wage subsidy was provided under EP.  Provincial policy also excluded jobs subsidized by public funds.  The Enhanced Job Placement program (EJP) addresses the broad interpretation of public subsidy.  The new initiative builds on the original EP concept, but broadens capacity in the following manner:

·       Placement Services and Human Resources Supports provided under EJP cover job development, employer outreach, participant screening and job-matching, and support for problem-solving for the duration of the placement.

·       A new Employer Incentive component has been added to complement placement services

·       Placements may now be made in the public sector, as well as in the private sector and in not-for-profit organizations

Cost-sharing for the program remains at 80% -20%.  It also remains the purpose of the program to attach participants to ongoing, long-term employment.  We are advised, however, that in recognition of economic conditions, seasonal jobs and temporary jobs in construction will be approved by the Ministry of Community and Social Services for Northern Ontario EJP programs.  Part-time jobs should only be considered where the job enables the individual to leave social assistance through sufficient wages to achieve independence after mandatory deductions and STEP calculations as applicable.

The participants referred for EJP should be representative of the delivery agent’s total caseload and include participants placed with and without the employer incentive, described below.  Direct delivery, purchase of service, or a combination of both, remain the delivery options for the program. 

4.2     The Placement Services Component

Job placement covers provision of job-development, employer outreach, participant screening and matching, and human resource services for problem-solving and employer/participant support during the placement.  Placement fees are still payable in arrears.  However, an alternative placement fee schedule has been provided which allows placement fees to be funded on a negotiated fee-per-placement basis.  The total placement fee payable cannot exceed $2,400. for any  individual placement.  $1,800. is the maximum average fee for the EJP caseload.

The disbursement of the placement fees remains subject to minimal provincial standards or milestones:

·        25% disbursement at hiring

·       25% additional disbursement at three-months continuously employed

·       50% remaining disbursement for cases continuously employed for six months (over an eight-month period in exceptional circumstances such as illness, temporary lay-off or injury).  

4.3     The Employer Incentive Component

The new Employer Incentive component is designed to attract employers in hiring and training selected Ontario Works participants.  It is intended to cover the costs of on-the-job training and supervision of the hired participant.   Incentives may offset wages during the training period or be paid to educational and training institutions or organizations to purchase courses or required certification.

In the form of a wage subsidy, EJP Employer Incentive can subsidize a job at up to about $3.85 per hour per employee hired under the program.[2]  Maximum subsidy for a full-time, six-month placement would cost $4,000.  Under the provincial guidelines, the average Employer Incentive should not exceed an average of $2,000 per employer[3]. The differential between maximum average cost and maximum cost per placed individual may be accommodated by establishing variable length month placements, such as three months or less for entry-level positions and six months for more sophisticated jobs.  Alternatively, the Employer Incentive could establish the wage subsidy on a scale up to the maximum, to reflect varying degrees of placement difficulty according to the training and performance demands of the job and the levels of skill, education and/or experience of the candidate.  Additionally, policy may be created in the District to limit the wager subsidy to a maximum percentage.  Minimum or other low-wage jobs, for example, could be limited to a maximum wage subsidy of 25% of the remuneration.

5.     Labour Market Analysis[4]

 

Service to Ontario Works cases in the District comprises three Service Areas: City of Thunder Bay, Highway 11 area and Highway 17 area.  The Thunder Bay District Social Services Administration Board has six service agreements covering these areas with City of Thunder Bay, Geraldton, Marathon, Schreiber/Terrace Bay, Nipigon and Manitouwadge. 

 

Thunder Bay Census Metropolitan Area (CMA), the basis on which labour market data are compiled for HRDC and Statistics Canada’s (the Labour Force Survey), takes in the City of Thunder Bay, Geraldton and Area, Marathon and Area, and the Surrounding Areas, which include Terrace Bay, Beardmore and Nipigon. 

 

This region has a population of 157,000, with a working age population of approximately 69,000.  In August of 1999, there were 5,400 persons seeking a job. 

 

The District’s major city has a metropolitan population of over 125,000.  The remaining 17 townships have a combined population of about 32,000. The employment participation rate is relatively high, with 65.2% of the labour force engaged in the labour market. The Thunder Bay census management area had unemployment rate in August 1999 of 7.8%, which reflects recent job creation.  However, this growth has been largely the result of employment expansion in the low-wage service sector, and is not reflective of the unemployment rate experienced by less educated, experienced and skilled workers that, for the most part, comprise the Ontario Works caseload.  It is also a full 1.3 percentage points above the provincial unemployment rate, and 0.2 % over the national figure.

 

While unemployment in the urban area of the District has declined about 2 percentage points over the past two years, employment growth has not been robust for lesser skilled workers.  The 8% year-over-year decline in the number of EI claims for August 1999 for the Thunder Bay HRDC area is reflective of constraints in the eligibility criteria resulting from the June 1996 enactment of a new Employment Insurance Act.  On a national basis, the number of unemployed workers eligible for EI has declined from just under 80% to less than 40%.

 

The Ontario Works total average caseload for the District is 2,800, reflecting a slight overall downward trend over the past two years. Restructuring of the social assistance system has also resulted in the transfer of approximately 1,300 provincial sole support parent cases to Ontario Works in 1999, which partly offsets caseload reductions in unemployed singles and parents from increased economic activity.  There is supporting evidence in caseload numbers that Ontario Works participants have been less able to enjoy job growth that has benefited others in the City’s population.  These job gains also are not experienced throughout the District, with the Northern Ontario unemployment rate remaining above 12%.

 

In summary, while job growth continued in the region over the summer, the trend favoured the City of Thunder Bay and workers with employment profiles more advanced than that which characterizes the overall OW caseload.  Partly, job growth figures are  derived from employment growth in the establishment of call centres in Thunder Bay, one of which plans to add 250 positions to 50 workers already employed there.  Following a rebound in July, Geraldton gained six full-time positions but lost eight part-time in August.  Marathon saw an increase in August of 23 positions, an increase of nearly 110%, a figure which demonstrates the impact of a few jobs on a small labour market.  The Surrounding Area experienced job growth in July, but slipped bask in August.  Overall, the CMA increased jobs by 153 full-time positions.

 

The importance of forest products to the region cannot be understated.  Development Thunder Bay estimates that this sector accounts for 84% of the region’s $2.3 billion annual manufacturing output, and 1995 data suggest the sector employs more than 6,000 workers directly in manufacturing.  Bowater Pulp and Paper Canada Inc. and Buchanan Group (a wood products conglomerate) together employ 2,600 workers in the region, more than Lakehead University and the Regional Hospital, and second by a small margin only to the provincial government and the City of Thunder Bay, the area’s two largest employers.

 

Bombardier is another large private sector employer, providing 745 jobs in the region.  The list of top ten employers (by number of workers employed) is rounded out by Lakehead District Separate School Board and Provincial Papers Inc.  These are followed by the eleventh-place Government of Canada.  Canada Safeway Inc. and Confederation College are the last two organizations of thirteen in the area that employ more than 500 workers each.

 

Sectorally, Manufacturing is in third place, after Health/Social Services and Retail Trade as the largest regional employer.  Retail sales were estimated at $1.1 billion for the region, led by the automotive related sales and followed by food and appliances. Manufacturing in the region is proportionately lower than elsewhere in the province and country, but engages over 11% of the employed labour force.   Health/Social Services and retail each engage 14% of the employed labour force.  Education and Public Service employment match the Transportation/Storage and Construction sectors in size. Business and Personal Services also account for more than 10% of the working labour force.  

 

Thunder Bay District has more high school graduates, skilled-trades and technical college graduates than the national average.  However, the labour market profile illustrates that demand for labour requires higher levels of education and skill than are demonstrated in Ontario Works caseload demographics.

 

For example, 52% of the City of Thunder Bay caseload has less than a high school education.  Only 17% have a post-secondary education.  Half the caseload has been on assistance for more than four months (August 1999 Comprehensive Caseload Report), and more than one in five cases has been on assistance for more than a year.  Of the total caseload, 47% are unemployed workers and 39% are sole-support parents.  Length of time on assistance is similar between these groups.

 

Comparing sectoral representation in the labour market to Ontario Works participants’ prior employment is a revealing exercise.  Health /Social Services and Retail each engage 14% of the workers employed in the region, but only 3% of the OW caseload reflects having experience in the former sector and less than 2% have a Sales background. Manufacturing occupies about 11% of the employed labour force, but represents the employment experience of only an infinitesimal number of OW participants (less than one-tenth of 1%). Fully 75% of the City’s caseload is described as “Unskilled”.

 

This is abundant evidence supporting the observation that unemployment in the District, as far as OW participation is concerned, is largely structural, there being a sizeable gap between the demand for labour and the skills, education and experience of the unemployed caseload (employables and sole-support parents).   Further analysis also demonstrates that education and training remain the primary determinants of future demand for labour.  HRDC’s Job Futures: Overview of Occupational Outlooks characterizes Managerial, Professional and Technical/Paraprofessional/Skilled occupations as having at least a Fair employment future, with many are projected as Good, in every economic sector except Art/Culture/Recreation/Sport.  Conversely, Labouring and Elemental Occupations are given a Poor forecast overall, regardless of sector. 

 

Enhanced Job Placement will be positioned to engage each of the three major Service Areas to provide training opportunities and job placements to a very disadvantaged population for whom access and opportunity are limited.

 

6.     Program Design

 

6.1  Program Philosophy

 

The program will be operated in a manner consistent with the program requirements outlined above, as contained in the Implementation Proposal Guidelines for Job Placement, and consistent with provincial policy as described in the Policy Directives. Specifically, reference may be made to the following Directives:

 

·       Directive 7.0 Setting Participation Requirements

·       Directive 11.0 Completion of the Participation Agreement

·       Directive 24.0 Supports to Employment (STEP)

·       Directive 25.0 Child Care Deductions

·       Directive 31.0 Provision of  Benefits

·       Directive 38.0 Overview of Managing Participation

·       Directive 40.0 Employment Measures: Employment Placement

·       Directive 42.0 Overview of Monitoring Eligibility

·       Directive 43.0 Monitoring Eligibility

 

The EJP program will respect people’s dignity and their self-esteem, foster independence and self-reliance, and emphasize the benefits of employment and training in long-term, sustainable employment, including seasonal and temporary construction employment, and part-time employment which may make a person independent of social assistance.

 

The program will operate in a spirit of partnership, collaboration and cooperation with Thunder Bay District community partners and stakeholders.

 

6.2     Overall Program Design

 

Each of the three delivery areas has assessed and determined its service needs, capacities and priorities in planning for program implementation.  The Implementation Proposal Guidelines for Job Placement have been the subject of discussion and review.  Local program plans have emerged from the consultative process that has been implemented.  This proposal is designed to reflect and be responsive to those plans and priorities and the recommendations put forward by the District’s delivery agents. 

 

Throughout the District, the following program features are proposed:

 

The EJP will essentially replace the EP program in the District, due to the inadequacies of the program, complexity of the placement fee calculations, the reportedly negative cost-recovery aspect of program delivery for third party agencies, and the corresponding low response of job placement agencies and employers.

 

Funding for placement agencies will be restructured to reflect funding improvements and the range of Human Resources Supports provided under EJP.  We anticipate the continued and perhaps expanded funding of existing EP Placement Agencies.  These include Superior Training and Employment (STEP) and the Ontario March of Dimes. 

 

Staff roles in every delivery site are compatible with EJP program delivery, and engage staff at all levels.  Each of the three Service Areas anticipates engagement of placement services from third-parties to complement in-house staff roles and placement initiatives as the program evolves and expands. Funding for existing staff positions in EP will be carried over to EJP.

 

The wage-subsidy application of EJP is expected to stimulate employer hiring of OW participants, as this component is perceived to be critical for a successful job placement program in OW.  The enhancements and benefits of the new initiative are therefore expected to increase job placement capacity and employer response.  EJP will enable the expansion and adoption of strategies to place Ontario Works participants in training and remunerative employment.  Emphasis will be placed on the wage-subsidy application of the program to stimulate employment, training and placement of OW participants. 

 

The Board is also proposing to earmark future EJP funds to expand purchases of skill training from training organizations to complement employer-sponsored, on-the-job training.  Board staff will work closely with the delivery agencies and their training partners to explore how effective use may best be made of the formal training purchase option presented in EJP.  Beyond the first year, the Board envisions formal partnerships among the delivery agents, training providers and employers in each Service Area to coordinate a continuum of training and placement under the auspices of EJP.  A greater mixture of formal and on-the-job training can therefore become part of the District’s Service Planning for 2000-2001, subject to program evaluation results and budget approval.

 

6.3     Participant Target Groups

 

6.3.1   Description of Target Group

 

The selection of participant groups for initial implementation is inclusive. We will adhere to the Policy Directives’ definition of EP eligibility as being OW participants who have conducted a minimum of four months’ job search prior to, or since receipt of, financial assistance.  All participants who satisfy this criteria will be eligible to participate, provided they are “training ready”, i.e. sufficiently prepared to participate in fully remunerated, on-the-job training positions.  Local priorities in addition to these criteria are outlined under the Rationale section below.

 

6.3.2   Rationale

 

It is recognized that employers have the full decision-making authority over whom they hire, as they must pay wages at prevailing rates for trainees in the occupation.   Therefore, participant selection will be subject to staff pre-screening on the basis of each participant’s apparent suitability for job placement.  Basic job skills and sectoral/employer-specific skills, education, training and experience will be additional factors for participation.  Only qualified candidates will be referred to employers (in direct delivery sites) or the job placement agencies engaged in fee-for-service arrangements.  Matching will be on the basis of meeting employer needs and providing appropriate candidates to learn (entry-level) or develop on-the-job.

 

For prospective candidates who are not prepared to benefit from EJP, other employment supports, including pre-employment and job support training activities, will precede EJP participation.  Prospective EJP candidates will be directed to these programs and services as needed. 

 

The focus throughout the District will be on 25 year-old and older participants, to avoid duplication of the Ministry of Education’s Job Connect program, which offers a wage subsidy and other similar benefits to the under-24 years of age population throughout the District.

 

The City of Thunder Bay Service Area will focus additionally on the 35-50 year old population, which comprises more than 1,000 cases, nearly 30% of their total OW population. Singles and single- and two-parent families will be selected from this population.  If expansion of Job Connect capacity is necessary, the City will also engage the youth (under-25) population, which is also substantial, at 26% of the total OW caseload.

 

Highway 11 Service Area also has identified the over-35 population as a priority, including singles and single- or two-parent families.  Workers aged 35 to 64 comprise 57 cases, 33% of the total employable caseload in the area.  A second priority for Highway 11 the sole-support parents, which represent 46% of the area’s caseload.  However, the sole-support caseload also has an educational level higher than other cases (approximately 50% express education at Grade 12) and a greater proportion than other cases are working, qualifying for ‘top-up’ of financial assistance as a consequence of the higher budgetary requirements (allowance) allowable to families.  The area expects that seasonal employment will remain a major source for placement, as it characterizes the source of most job growth in the area. 

 

Highway 11 Service Area has three main sectors: mining, exploration, forestry and hospitality.  Most employment demand is seasonal, May to October. Employer preference is given to college and university graduates, even in the mills.  When employer demands were assessed in light of the OW participants’ profile in the Service Area, it was decided that the sectoral priority for EJP placements will be in Construction, Hospitality, Forestry and Mining Exploration, in that order.

 

Highway 17 Service Area foresees emphasis on entry-level employment, as the large employers in the area are not at this time in expansion mode.  Those large employers that do occasionally hire require high school education as an absolute minimum.

 

The profile of candidates for EJP in the Highway 17 Service Area reflects caseload demographics found elsewhere in the District.  Manitouwadge, for example, has nearly 60% of the EJP-eligible caseload coded as “unskilled”.  Almost 70% of these participants stated they had little or no employment skills or experience.  Basic education and employment skills will be a strong pre-requisite for EJP participants in the Area, as small employers place a high demand on entry-level workers’ ability to work and learn in less-structured training environments and with minimal supervision. 

 

Marathon has identified a target group priority in the 18- 45 year-old population.  Data indicate that 80% of these clients have Grade 12 or higher education, trade experience or qualifications and/or computer related skills and training.  Major employers in the area are the pulp mill and gold mines, although jobs with these employers have been in decline over the past two years.  Otherwise, it is recognized that small businesses will play a large role in the program’s success.  Job opportunities are most likely to be found in the hospitality industry.  EJP funding will be used to enhance the Human Resource Supports for participating small business employers in this area and throughout the District.  The Employer Incentive will be used as a wage subsidy to attract and retain employment for OW participants by compensating employers for the increased training and supervision needed in these placements.

 

6.3.3      Identification Method

 

Each delivery agent has identified the Service Path for identifying, pre-screening and referring participants to EJP.  Ontario Works staff will inform OW applicants about EJP and the Employment Placement (EP) component /option.  Applicants who have a minimum of four months of job search prior to application will be screened for EP eligibility.  Suitable candidates will be referred to a staff coordinator for the EP options, a role which is currently being performed by one or more case workers, support staff or management, in each of the delivery sites.

 

Follow-up interviews will also feature information on EP and the EJP program.  Monitoring procedures already address the Participation Agreement, which will incorporate EJP.  Similar screening and referral procedures will occur at monitoring interviews.

 

Posters will be created to advertise in the delivery agents’ and community partners’ service centres, to promote program awareness and self-identification.

As is currently the practice, community partner agencies will identify persons in their service delivery who may be eligible for EJP, and refer to the delivery agents for an intake interview.

 

6.3.4   Matching Process

 

In all delivery sites in the District, staff are in place to assess employability and training needs, and to refer participants to available programs and services, including Employment Placement (EP).  Enhanced Job Placement (EJP) is accommodated by utilizing the existing delivery system internally and externally to promote participant independence.  Intake and monitoring interviews will be the primary framework for identification, matching and referral.  Participation Agreements will be established and updated by case workers and support staff.  Continual review of employability and assessment of ongoing eligibility, service needs, and referral to appropriate internal and external programs and service is already an essential part of Ontario Works.  Human Resource Supports will be provided through both existing staff and fee-for-service arrangements.

 

In the City of Thunder Bay Service Area, the process for selection and referral will remain as it was for EP.  Staff will continue to be responsible for client screening, completion of the updated Participation Agreement (PA), referral to the EJP Service Provider, ongoing liaison with a contracted agency, and coordination of data to ensure correct statistical data is recorded in CWT/OWT.  As the program expands, there is potential to dedicate this role to EJP and separate the Community Participation (CP) functions currently attached to the role.

 

March of Dimes has tentatively agreed to perform the EJP matching, referral and follow-up function, pending negotiation of a streamlined funding process.  March of Dimes will also continue with job development and working with community partners for referrals and job placements. Problem-solving will be a joint process.

 

Highway 11 Service Area will also continue to use the local delivery agents’ current service path for assessment of employability, training- and job-readiness.  This service path is described below.

 

A Service Path Diagram is included in the Appendix.

 

The Municipality of Geraldton has successfully operated the Municipal Job Development Program (1992 – 1997).  The tools from this initiative will be revised and implemented to address roles and responsibilities, provide a template and database for identification of suitable EJP candidates from the OW caseload, and to generate an employer database for job development, job matching, referral and follow-up.

 

Staff in the Service Area expect the tools for identification, matching and referral will be largely manual, but the O’Donnell Morrison OW software will be utilized and adapted wherever possible.  Further employer information supports will be obtained from the Greenstone Economic Development Office.  Staff anticipate the compilation of an updated employer database for job development, matching and referral.  The database will include every employer in the Highway 11 Service Area, and will be automated if the volume of information and service outcomes warrant.

 

An improved response from employers and increased opportunities for training and placing OW participants are the results that Service Area staff anticipate will emerge from this revitalization of the EP component of Ontario Works.

 

With a 12.3% unemployment rate in the Service Area, these changes are welcome and will be enjoyed by local businesses and job ready OW participants.

 

The Highway 17 Delivery Area will continue to work with Superior Training and Employment (STEP, formerly Youth Employment) in Nipigon and area.  Prior to April 30 of this year, Nipigon had contracted all functions for EP to the agency.  Presently, they are engaged in program coordination with STEP to ensure staff have a good understanding of all available services in the area, and to eliminate duplication of effort.  STEP has expressed an interest in revising and expanding the service contract with this agency through the EJP program, and will continue to develop and partner with them on client identification, selection, matching ands referral. 

 

Currently one staff in Nipigon manages the entire OW program.  The delivery agent’s current role in overseeing the program will include EJP.  Nipigon values its community partners and recognizes the need for program support in the community.  Consideration will be given to establishing a Request for Proposals (RFP) process for Placement and Human Resource Support Services under EJP if the community’s response to the restructured Placement Services component in EJP so warrants.

 

Schreiber/Terrace Bay will sustain the case workers’ role to identify, pre-screen and refer suitable participants.   Like Nipigon, interest from local employers in Employment Placement was negligible, and the option became moribund, principally due to the EP program’s lack of an employer incentive component.  Again, the delivery agent anticipates a revitalization of job placement through EJP, which will be managed in-house. The case worker will identify, screen and match participants to available placements.  The Welfare Administrator will liaise with interested local businesses and generate the job placement and training opportunities. Participation Agreements will remain the responsibility of the case worker.

 

Manitouwadge case workers will also perform the identification, selection and matching of clients, complete the requisite PA documentation and record program data as required.  EJP, as in other delivery sites, provides an opportunity for expanded capacity.  Existing  procedures for matching participants to job will be exploited.  Employer contact will be directly through the Ontario Works office and jobs will be both matched by staff and advertised in the Resource Centre.  As in other delivery sites, linkages with HRDC and Job Connect will be sustained for recruitment, matching and elimination of duplication.  The existing Ontario Works Administrator will monitor placements.   The Ontario Works Supervisor will be responsible for problem-solving and providing Human other Resource Supports during the placement.

 

6.3.5   Child Care Supports

 

Child care supports will be provided to EJP participants through providing formal and informal child care as available, by allowing the appropriate STEP deductions, through the use of the mandatory Child Care Start-Up allowance, and by using Employment-Related Expenses (ERE) for babysitting/temporary care as needed. Child care will be provided on an informed choice basis.  Participants who have no suitable child care arrangements will not be required to participate in the program (Directive 33.0 Early Employment Measures and Basic Education, p.5).

 

6.3.6   Employment Supports

 

ERE will be provided as needed for transportation, appropriate work wear, tools and equipment, grooming costs, licensing fees, association costs and other items that may be covered under this mandatory benefit, according to the terms and conditions included in the approved budget and the provincial Policy Directives.  Similarly, Employment Start-Up Benefits will be provided in accordance with local and provincial policy.

 

7.       Training Plan Model

 

A training plan format will be developed among the delivery agents and current/prospective placement agencies for District-wide implementation.  The training plan will be attached to an employer contract.  The training plan will reflect and record the relevant requirements of the EJP program, including documentation of key information.  The attached schedule on Training Plans outlines the key data to be collected.

 

8.       Coordination Plan

 

The Board will be responsible for overall development and delivery of EJP, and the requisite financial management, program management, program coordination, program compliance, measurement and evaluation, and for contracting with delivery agents to meet their delivery responsibilities and financial and program accountabilities, per the service agreements already in place. 

 

Local delivery agents will be responsible for program delivery and for contracting placement services.  Delivery agents will ensure local coordination and cooperation.  Both internal and external resources will be used and contracted to delivery placement services.   Case management will remain a case worker/staff responsibility.  Program measurement and outcome reporting will also be the delivery agents’ responsibility, with the Board ultimately accountable for the District’s results.

 

Coordination of employment placement activities and strategies will be according to current contacts and formal and informal agreements among the delivery agents, the Board and community partners.  Existing relationships with key organizations will continue to be an integral part of OW delivery.  These already include Job Connect, HRDC, Confederation College, the provincial Apprenticeship Branch, placement agencies and organizations, community service providers, other government funders and program deliverers, Local Training Boards, employers, employer associations, local economic development agencies, Boards of Trade and Chambers of Commerce, training organizations and educational institutions.

 

9.       Monitoring and Accountability

 

As stated in the above section, the Board will be responsible for overall development and delivery of EJP.  This includes requisite financial management, program management, program coordination, program compliance, measurement and evaluation, program reporting, and contracting with delivery agents to meet their delivery responsibilities and financial and program accountabilities, per the service agreements already in place. 

 

Local delivery agents will be responsible for program delivery and for contracting placement services.  Delivery agents will ensure local coordination and cooperation.  Both internal and external resources will be used and contracted to delivery placement services.   Case management will remain a case worker/staff responsibility.  Program measurement and outcome reporting will also be the delivery agents’ responsibility, with the Board ultimately accountable for the District’s results.

 

Wage subsidies, fee-for-service placement services and formal training costs will be paid in arrears, according to the maximum amounts and minimum payment milestones prescribed.

 

Financial and program accountabilities are executed through: participant eligibility entitlement reviews at intake; verification procedures; case management and monitoring practices; manual program tracking and monitoring; contractual arrangements with service providers, delivery agents and employers; the Employer Agreement and Training Plan Schedule; EJP monitoring forms and procedures undertaken by staff and/or contracted service providers; employer payroll verification; participant verification of training and remuneration; financial administration at the Board and delivery agent level, according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; financial reporting and record keeping to satisfy municipal and provincial requirements; internal financial audits; and provincial audits.

 

On-site monitoring of placements will occur at least once within the first three months of a placement.  Client verification of training plans and completed training will occur during the minimal three-month follow-up contacts and will be recorded in Participation Agreements and Service Plans.

 

Delivery agents will record the following data for monthly review and quarterly reporting:

 

·       Average level of incentive paid

·       Number of participants placed with incentives

·       Average monthly placement fees per six months paid employment

·       Number of placement months recorded

·       Contracts with employers respecting payment amounts and milestones, projected and actual

·       Expenditures will be monitored and variances addressed in maximum per participant, per employer and per placement. 

·       Earnings will be tracked and reported quarterly. 

·       Cost-benefits analysis will occur at end year one

 

10.     Marketing

 

·       Delivery agents have each developed a list of key employers for priority contact

·       Existing links to the key stakeholders will be utilized and strengthened

·       Marketing materials will be developed prior to implementation including a program brochure for employers and prospective participants, a wall poster for offices of delivery agents and community partners, and a newsletter to community partners and stakeholders

·       Each delivery site is already in touch with the key stakeholders cited in the above sections to ensure marketing efforts are coordinated and not duplicative

·       An information pamphlet will be sent out in the cheque runs prior to implementation

·       Staff information sessions and materials will be developed for each Delivery Site to ensure participant identification, selection, matching, referral and placement

 

Notwithstanding the above, the need to market EJP places strains upon the District’s budget which were unanticipated and are difficult to accommodate.  The District is therefore requesting $5,000 in annual funds to cover printing costs, media advertising and other marketing and promotional costs related to launching this important new initiative.

 

11.       Proposed Budget

 

11.1        Budget Preamble

 

The District requests that MCSS recognize the need to renegotiate targets as the effectiveness of the program is determined, especially in the first year of operations.  We also request acknowledgement that any overachievement of the above targets will result in commensurate increases in remuneration to cover costs related to such achievements.

 

11.2    Financial Incentives

 

The District proposes that the Financial Incentives be structured as a wage-subsidy and training incentive program.  Given the relative disadvantages demonstrated in the caseload demographics and compared to realities in the labour market, we propose to offer a flat-rate scale of wage-subsidies, subject to provincially prescribed maximum payments and disbursed according to the prescribed minimum payment milestones.

 

To cover increased training and supervisory costs:

 

Entry level jobs may receive 1 to 2 months of wage-subsidy up to $3.85 per hour, not exceeding $2,000 per placement.

 

Jobs at a higher level of functioning and placements of severely employment disadvantaged participants may receive 3 to 6 months of wage-subsidy, not exceeding $4,000 per placement.

 

The following projections are annualized:

Projected number of District EJP Placements                  170

 

The District will assess the accuracy of this forecast in the first six months of operations.

 

11.3    Financial Incentives Budget
 
Please refer to Appendix 5 on Page 22.

 

11.4    Placement Services

 

Contracts with existing agencies will be restructured according to the Alternate Placement Fee Schedule.  Fees will be adjusted to reflect the services provided, from the following Placement Services menu:

 

·       Job Development

·       Placement recruitment

·       Participant suitability assessment

·       Job-Participant matching

·       Contract and training plan completion and management

·       Participant referral

·       Participant/Employer registration

·       Tracking

·       Follow-up

·       Site monitoring visits

·       Problem-solving (Human Resource Services) during placement


 

11.5        Total Annualized Budget Request                                    

 

Estimated annualized Financial Incentives Budget:                                       $340,000

Estimated annualized Job Placement Services Budget:                                   $259,500

Marketing and Promotions budget request                                                 $    5,000

Total estimated annualized EJP budget                                                     $604,500

Provincial Contribution (80%)                                                               $483,600

District Contribution (20%)                                                                 $120,900

 

 


Appendix 1

Training Plan Data

 

 

Training Plan Format

·       Name of Employer

·       Address and other Identifying Information

·       Nature of the Business (e.g. industrial classification)

·       Name of Placed Participant

·       Other Identifiers of Participant

·       Participant Release of Information on File

·       Job Title

·       Particulars of Job (e.g. remuneration, days, hours, weeks; vehicle requirements)

·       Employer Verification and Certification of No Displaced Workers

·       Employer Description of Training Plan:

         Skills to be learned/developed

         On-the-job training methods planned

         Formal training methods planned

         Supervisor and supervision plan

         Duration of training

         Start-Finish dates

         Contacts

         Safety factors and plan


Appendix 2

Monitoring Form Format

 

 

Monitoring Form Format:

·       Name of Employer

·       Address and other Identifying Information

·       Name of Placed Participant

·       Other Identifiers of Participant

·       Job Title

·       Start Date

·       Training Plan Elements for Review

·       Monitoring Visit Dates

·       Attending Representatives

·       Employer Verification of Completed Training Plan Elements

·       Employee Verification of Completed Training Plan Elements

·       Payroll Verification

·       Staff/Agency Witness, Verification and Endorsement

·       Comments and Items for Future Review

 


Appendix 3

Employer Contract Format

 

Employer Contract Format:

·       Employer Particulars

·       Terms and Conditions of Wage-Subsidy

·       Termination Clause

·       Employer Agreement to Indemnify Board and Delivery Agents

·       Maximum Amounts and Payment Milestones

·       Employer Agreement to Adhere to Employment Legislation, Regulations, policies and by-laws

·       Employer Agreement to Adhere to Confidentiality

·       Employer Certification of WSIB Insurance, where applicable

·       Contractor Certification of Ministry Insurance Coverage, where applicable

·       Contractor Certification of no WSIB premium increase consequential to the Agreement

·       Name of Participant

·       Employer Agreement to Payroll Verification and Monitoring Standards, including on-site visits

·       Employer Verification and Agreement Respecting No Other Training or Wage Subsidies Employer Certification of No Displacement Requirements

·       Employer Agreement to Formal Training Plan per Attached Schedule

·       Supervision Plan per Attached Schedule

·       Employer Agreement to Terms and Conditions of Wage-Subsidy

·       Employer Verification Participant not Immediate Family Member

·       Employer Verification No Fees/Funds Forthcoming from Placement Agency

·       Maximum Amounts Payable

·       Payment Milestones

·       Problem-Solving Protocol Agreement

·       Signatures and Witness

·       Hours agreed to (weekly, bi-weekly, monthly) for participant.


Appendix 4

Measurables/Tracking Data

 

 

Measurables/Tracking Data

Placement Services:

·       Number of participants placed

·       Average placement fee per placed participant

·       Number of participants employed after three months

·       Number of participants employed after six months

·       Number of participants placed into employment not in receipt of assistance after one year

Financial Incentives:

·       Number of participants placed with incentive

·       Average incentive placement per participant

·       Average amount of incentive per participant placed, based on six months employment

·       Number of participants placed with WSIB/Accident coverage per MCSS

·       Average number of months on OW prior to placement

·       Number of participants placed in employment with incentives not in receipt after one year


Appendix 5

Draft Ontario Works Enhanced Job Placement Program Budgets



[1] Source: Ontario Works Policy Directives, May 1, 1998, Directive 40.6, Employment Measures: Employment Placement, revised June 1, 1998.

[2] Average maximum is $165 a week, $665 a month, or $4,000 per six-month placement.  Calculation is based on 40 hours per week, 4.33 weeks per month X six months.  The same fee may be paid for third-party training in lieu of, or complimentary to, the wage-subsidy.

[3] This plan assumes this maximum average allowable is per employer times the number of employees placed, thus allowing for multiple placements with some employers.  The Ministry also allows special circumstances exemption to this limit, such as responding to a major employer need.

[4] Sources include: Development Thunder Bay data; Statistics Canada Labour Force Survey, Human Resources Development Canada, Revenue Canada and Industry Canada.  Special acknowledgement to Development Thunder Bay, which compiles an excellent summary of data on its webs site at http://devtbay.thunder-bay.oc.ca