Neil Kelly: Thanks, Holly.

Mayra Diaz: Thanks, Holly.

Neil Kelly: OK. So this is your opportunity. Feel free to come off mic or type something in the chat. Mayra and I don't really have any updates. I mean, if you're reading the newsletter, you are getting all the necessary updates. But if you have specific questions or things that maybe have come up in your consortium, feel free to ask it now. And I don't think there's any topics off the table right, Mayra?

Mayra Diaz: No. Just leaving this room open for an opportunity for you all to ask any questions. So feel free to unmute or type it in the chat.

Dana Galloway: I have a question.

Neil Kelly: Hi, Dana.

Dana Galloway: Hi, Neil. Hi, Mayra. I sent this question in yesterday. The Ed Code that says that if you're going to start up a new CTE class, you have to do a labor market study. You have to do an adequate study to justify that there will be jobs in the region.

But the language is vague on that so can you-- are there any more details on that? We have a member that wants to start up a new class and-- is this a formal written study? Or is it enough to say, yes, we've looked at the data and we can justify that?

Neil Kelly: Well, yeah. And I can take this. Is a K-12 member?

Dana Galloway: Yeah.

Neil Kelly: OK. So there is language in the Ed Code that says specifically workforce and investment or workforce development board study using labor market information. The way that's going to work on the K-12 side is it'll be, if you're receiving state apportionment, then you're going to be required next year to go into the course approval system that currently only we WIOA II two grantees we're doing, but it's really set up for K-12 county offices that are receiving state apportionment.

So they will go into that system. They'll select their courses. If it's a CTE course, then they will be asked when was the labor market-- last labor market study. And so there'll be a dropdown menu that'll show the years. If it's a new CTE course and started after January 1st 2022, then they should have a current labor market study.

The way that Ed Code reads is once you do the labor market study, then you take it to your board or you can take it to the consortia for approval, and then they look at it. And it's really up to the consortia or the board to judge the merits of that labor market study. The state is not going to review your labor market study, but your local board or consortia will.

So that's where there might be an issue where this isn't good enough, or you didn't give me enough information so we're not going to approve it, or it's really up to them. With the state, we're just looking for you to tell us when that labor market study is. And maybe, down the road, if there's an audit, we would confirm that, but we're not currently auditing state funds. So does that help?

Dana Galloway: Well, kind of. So does it have to be a labor market study that you can produce or--

Neil Kelly: Well, you can use one. It says, using one developed by your local workforce board. I think it gives you a wide range of options. I don't think they call that any specific study, but they do mention your local workforce boards, and supplies, chain, and things like that. So they throw a couple of buzzwords in there. But really, it's going to be up to whoever is the approving body. Whatever the local board or the consortia really wants to see.

Dana Galloway: OK. So then all new CTE courses from here on out should be approved by the consortium as a whole?

Neil Kelly: Right. And then also, if you have non-WIOA II agencies, they will have to go through this process to do course approval just in general, which they've never had to do before.

Dana Galloway: Yeah. No, they're all WIOA II already.

Neil Kelly: Oh, OK.

Dana Galloway: Yeah, yeah. OK. Yeah, that does help.

[laughter]

Neil Kelly: Right.

Dana Galloway: Got it.

[laughter]

Thanks.

Neil Kelly: Great. Sure.

Mayra Diaz: Looks like there's a question in the chat by Janeth. Hi, guys do we have a max percentage to carryover with TAP?

Neil Kelly: Well, let's see. I just ran the numbers I don't know if this is Janeth's question, but we had two consortia come in above 20% on carryover. They had their carryover at 30% and one at 40%. But the rest, I mean, like 43 or 36 came in at 20% and then five came in under 20%. So it's really up to you guys to determine, for your member carryover, you can select whatever you want.

But just looking at what people have selected, 36 selected 20%, five went below 20%, two went above 20%, and then 26 opted not to put any carryover in the CFAD, but they might have their own by-laws that govern carryover that they were using before 1491.

Janeth Manjarrez: OK.

Neil Kelly: Janeth, does that answer your question?

Janeth Manjarrez: Yes, Neil. I just wanted to make sure. I know that we have this new 20% carryover. But I know that with like, let's say, we do go over the 20% and we have, and we write the CAP, which is the Correction Action Plan, in NOVA, then we can share, yes, we do have over 20% carryover, but it's been encumbered and we're going to spend it in X, Y, Z.

Neil Kelly: Oh, I see.

Janeth Manjarrez: I just wanted to see, OK. Well, we can carry over 40% and explain that those funds will still be-- or have been encumbered and will be spent on time. But I want to make sure that we're not dinged for it as long as we have an explanation. Or is there a maximum, even with an explanation?

Neil Kelly: Mayra. Mayra, do you want to explain? I mean, we're still working on the written expenditure plan, right?

Mayra Diaz: Yeah. So, at the moment, if you're looking at NOVA in the way that you're entering information, that will be updated to reflect the carryover logic. And our developers are currently working on finalizing that. So stay tuned for whenever we put forth our webinar on NOVA updates related to AB 1491.

Janeth Manjarrez: Yes.

Mayra Diaz: That will allow you to view it from that perspective. And those updates are still taking place at the moment.

Janeth Manjarrez: OK.

Mayra Diaz: So yeah. Keep an eye out for that webinar. We'll be able to provide additional context to how NOVA will be interpreting and collecting this data so you'll be able to [audio out]. Because, at the moment, it's still reflective as it has been over the years and it's not--

Janeth Manjarrez: Right.

Mayra Diaz: --really looking at it from a carryover perspective.

Janeth Manjarrez: OK. Got it. Thank you. That helps a lot because I know for the North Orange County Regional Consortium, I just shared-- and we'll be sharing at our May meeting, or executive committee meeting, that we're going to be amending our by-laws to include this 20% carryover threshold and also the member effectiveness. Just to make sure that it's updated.

So what I'm hearing from you, should I-- and our goal is to have it ready for fall. Just kind of wait till we get more information about the NOVA input process of AB 1491. And then disseminate that information to be best prepared for those changes on a local level.

Mayra Diaz: I'm trying to think how this would be best helpful. I know as you are trying to prepare for your meetings. I guess just trying to understand how you're going to be incorporating that into the by-laws. I think, from the NOVA standpoint, as of right now, the logic and the percentages that you're inputting or tracking it on an expenditure basis versus the way that it's going to be applied and updated in NOVA.

Those percentages that you'll be looking at are going to be tracking it on a carryover basis. So that's where that trigger in the CFAD was going to allow you to flag. If the consortium voted to include a percentage, then in the new tools, we'll be able to flag and show-- I think, right now, if we're looking at NOVA, like I said, it's not going to make sense because you're not able to view. We're supposed to be incorporating an additional monitoring tool that we'll be able to flag and show you what those percentages are looking like on the fiscal reporting.

Janeth Manjarrez: OK.

Mayra Diaz: You'll see consortium carryover balances. It will also identify member carryover balances. There will be a trigger for the written expenditure plan. So until we can see all those updates, I think, we'll have to think about how to, for you, how to approach incorporating that into your by-laws.

Janeth Manjarrez: Yeah. Thank you. And it's not just-- I get it. For me, just to clarify it. It's not so much to incorporate the like the cement-- the logistics of NOVA, it's just like the purpose and to how much do we carryover. I know that, in our consortium, we opted out right now not to do a percentage on a member level, but to try to stay within that 20% threshold. Of course, if we do go over with an explanation.

Mayra Diaz: Right. And I know that. And, as far as the way that we will be capturing it in NOVA, is if the members are not putting forth at the consortia level, that percentage then that is where you still have-- the consortia has the ability to reflect that on their by-laws as they wish. Whereas, the only other level of tracking that will be occurring is at the state level. And there will be a written expenditure plan. So I hope that kind of--

Janeth Manjarrez: Yeah.

Mayra Diaz: It's still really up to you all and the members and the consortia to decide and outline in the by-laws as you guys wish to.

Janeth Manjarrez: Yes. Got it. Thank you so much.

Mayra Diaz: Yeah, absolutely.

Neil Kelly: OK. And then I was responding in the chat. If I wasn't clear, if anybody wants to come off mic-- but I think, Holly, who's in the queue?

Holly Clark: I'm sorry. Let me get to that.

Neil Kelly: Kelly, are you in the queue? Are you just-- no. OK.

[laughter]

Holly Clark: Now I think-- I think that-- we have comments in the chat, of course. But I think--

Neil Kelly: I answered Shannon's question and Kathy had a follow up question. I don't know if they want to come off mic if they want to clarify anything.

Shannon Eller: I can just semi-clarify, maybe clarify.

[laughter]

So, in our area, we have super rural areas. And so, like today, we just had a consortium meeting. And we invited our workforce board and they gave a little presentation. And one of the biggest things that's needed is health care jobs.

However, like for some of our sites, the closest hospital is, gosh, an hour and a half, two hours away. So, for that site, if they were wanting to do health care, then that might not be their number one pick for a CTE health care pathway because there's not a lot of jobs in that area.

So we rely heavily on a local job list for those little tiny communities that don't have a lot going on to see, OK, what are the jobs that are available out there. So I just wanted to make sure that I was understanding correctly that when the course approvals come out and we have a template of what we have for approval via the consortium based on that LMI data that the site comes up with using multiple resources.

We made that clear when we came up with this template. But I just wanted to make sure that we didn't also have to put the date that the latest workforce development board LMI study came out. When do we have to approve it in the CDE system?

Neil Kelly: Yeah. I mean for the K-12s, what you have to show is just your recent job market study and you still have the Ed Code we're trying to hit some of the high points. But it's really up to your consortia or your local board, whoever is approving those courses, to say, this is what we want to see in the job market study. So I don't think we're going to be reviewing that at the state level. We'll leave that up to the local consortia or local board to determine if that met what the Ed Code calls for.

Shannon Eller: OK. Perfect.

Neil Kelly: It sounds like that's what you're doing anyway so.

Shannon Eller: Yeah. And I just wanted to clarify because I never want to do anything wrong. So thank you very much.

[laughter]

Neil Kelly: Sure.

Kathy Walker: Neil--

[interposing voices]

Neil Kelly: Go ahead, Kathy.

Kathy Walker: OK. I see it looks like you said the '23-'24 year will be the first year that our non-WIOA funded agencies will need to have the course approvals done.

Neil Kelly: Yeah.

Kathy Walker: We will have some training coming up for them.

Neil Kelly: Yeah. We're working with 010 to roll out some training. We first have to train the CTE consultants because not many of them are familiar with the non-WIOA AIP agencies. I think it's going to take us-- there'll be some probably some training next month. And then, hopefully, they'll open that up to any agencies that want to get familiar with that system that the WIOA II grantees are already familiar with. But the CAEP-funded agencies will have to get used to the course approval process.

Kathy Walker: OK. That sounds good.

Neil Kelly: Yeah.

Kathy Walker: In our consortium, we do have-- when an agency adds something during the year that was not originally approved through the annual plan, they have a proposal form they submit and they do include a link to the market study on that proposal that they give to the consortium. It's mainly for information only. I mean, we do approve it, but we just look at it to make sure that it fits within the guidelines of our plan and that it is a desired or needed program within our area.

Neil Kelly: That's great. So all they would have to do is just click on the dropdown and select the year that they did that and that would suffice.

Kathy Walker: OK. Perfect.

Neil Kelly: OK, great. Thank you.

Mayra Diaz: Looks like Mary Ann has her hand.

Mary Ann Pranke: Yeah. So I just wanted to add that you can ask your workforce board for specific data for your city or your communities and they can provide that information. So, for example, even though I'm the CAEP coordinator, I'm also staff to the workforce board. So I have access to data that the public does not have access to.

And if I just go in and get LMI data, it'll be for LA County. But Glendale is one city within LA County. And so our labor market could be very different than what's on the MSA, the Metropolitan Statistical Area report. So I get it specifically for Glendale.

And, for health care, we actually did run studies specifically for health care and specifically for medical assistants, dental assistants, and certified nursing assistants. And what we were able to do is, yes, we have hospitals in Glendale, but we were able to get-- I was able to pull the list of all of the health care companies, organizations in Glendale.

So it's a list of all the organizations, and their addresses, and phone numbers. So we can contact them for internships, externship, and jobs. So it's that specific that they can get it within a community. So even if there isn't a hospital in your specific area, there could be, as we found, lots of medical offices, clinics, surgical centers, smaller facilities that would take some of our people.

So we have someone dedicated to just calling those employers and establishing internships, externships for our medical assistants and dental assistants. And then we co-enrolled them with WIOA so that WIOA can actually pay for their internships and externships. So they're on the Verdugo Workforce Board payroll while they go through their internships.

And so they actually are getting paid to do their internships and externships. So just want to throw it out there. Your workforce board does have access to very specific data. And all they have to do is go in, log in, and pull it for any city or community. If you request it, they should be able to do that for you.

Neil Kelly: Mary Ann, who would be, if you're not too-- if you don't have great contacts at your local workforce development board, who would you suggest they start with?

Mary Ann Pranke: I would go to the workforce board director or, in the minutes, you can usually see who their staff person is that is staffing the board, or to the director, and just ask them who does your LMI data for the board? Or who is the analyst that does your local planning and so forth.

And they're the ones that typically are in charge of running those reports. We have to report to our board. We have to report it. In Verdugo, we do it monthly and we do it quarterly. But most of the boards have to do it at least quarterly for the board. So there's typically an analyst that's in charge of that.

Neil Kelly: Thank you so much. That's fantastic.

Mayra Diaz: That's great. Excellent. Excellent resource tip, Mary Ann. Thank you. I know there was another comment about the Centers of Excellence as another great resource to access labor market information. And in addition to the workforce development board, I think, those are some really great resources to be able to dive into for some more extensive labor market information. So thank you.

Neil Kelly: I think we're caught up on the chat. Holly, do we have anybody else with their hand up?

Holly Clark: No. Not that I see. Everyone, this is your time to-- oh, we do. Paul. Go ahead, Paul.

Paul Rosenbloom: Hey, good afternoon. I came in late so I might have missed this, but two questions. One was any update on the health care funding opportunity and then two, any signals on the May revise that we're looking forward to tomorrow?

Neil Kelly: Mayra, do you want to take the health care one?

Mayra Diaz: Yeah. I can provide an update on the 130 million. We have been meeting regularly within our inter-agency work group. And we are looking to finalize these meetings and the details to be able to release the letter of interest no later than before the end of this month of May. Fingers crossed. So keep an eye out for that.

We are looking to try and target that. You will receive additional marketing, additional information. Once that is released, we don't-- we're working on the timeline and the dates for how long that will be made available. So keep a very close eye on that because I know we're working with a very tight time frame in releasing that and collecting the information.

So yeah. More details to come. That's the only update that I have. But we're still finalizing those meetings and we're hoping to come to a conclusion at our next inter-agency work group meeting, which is next week, and hoping to release the LOI by no later than the end of this month of May.

Neil Kelly: OK. And then I can handle the May revised. I don't have an official response, but I've been looking at the budget hearings and the staffing notes. And, I guess, there is an increased COLA on the table. I don't know if it's like it's a small amount like another 1% or 3%, whatever-- something small-- but there's no money for it.

So even if they wanted to do an extra additional COLA, they don't know where they would find this funding to fund it. So I'm not anticipating any change in the May revised for adult Ed, but we've always been surprised when it happens. So stay tuned next week.

[laughter]

Does that answer your questions, Paul?

Paul Rosenbloom: Yeah, that's great. Thanks. Thanks very much.

Neil Kelly: OK.

Holly Clark: OK, Kelly.

Kelly Henwood: Sorry. OK. This might be a little bit in the weeds and I know this isn't all the member agencies, but I'm just wondering, so we're looking at our revising our by-laws and we're looking at-- I'm from San Diego College of Continuing Education and we're only a two-member consortium that is ourselves and San Diego Unified Ed.

So I know that there's some realignment at the State Department of Juvenile Justice Services. So there are juvenile offenders that are going back to counties that are over 18 years old. Many of them have already completed their secondary school degree, but they're coming back into the facilities operated by the counties.

And I'm just wondering if any agencies or if anybody knows of consortia rather that actually have your local, whatever would be the equivalent of your juvenile court in community schools, I don't know if the County Office of Ed's operate those in every area under the juvenile justice system.

But I'm just wondering how folks are dealing with, not a huge number, but there are juvenile offenders that are over the age of 18 that are coming back to the counties that I'm wondering how the adult ed services might be being provided in any of the local areas? Is that confusing? I don't mean to confuse, but I'm just trying to figure out what's going on with other regions.

Neil Kelly: Yeah. I'm looking at who's here that might be into Jail Ed, like Heidi, from Contra Costa County. They used to have a Jail Ed contract. I know Chafee used to, but doesn't do Jail Ed anymore. Anybody else, feel free to comment. I know in Kathy's region in Ventura-Ventura Adult has the Todd Road Jail program. But I'm not sure if anybody is up to speed on the issue you're talking about. I haven't heard anything about that.

Kelly Henwood: Yeah. Because they're not technically in the adult system. They're in the state juvenile system, but they're over the age of 18. So they're like the higher level offenders that are now coming back to the counties. And so most of them because they've completed their secondary ed degrees, aren't any longer in the K through 12 apportionment system. But many of them, obviously, they're still going to be locked up for a while and so they're being served. And I think-- I'm just wondering.

Neil Kelly: So Kelly, they're at the county jail level, though?

Kelly Henwood: They're at the juvenile county facility level. Yeah.

Neil Kelly: But they're over 18?

Kelly Henwood: Yeah. Because they're higher level offenders. So the state's moving them out of the state system back to the county system, but they're still juvenile offenders.

Neil Kelly: Well, Elk Grove, I don't know if anybody's here from Capital Consortia. I know they work with the jail system. I don't know. Holly, is there something maybe we could get a little group on possibly?

Holly Clark: Yeah. I think so. What I was going to suggest, Kelly, is if you could actually type out that question and email it in to TAP, we will forward that on to some of the consortia that we know do have jail programs. And because there's a difference, right? They can have a jail program, but possibly not have the knowledge you're looking for. So if we can show them exactly what you need, we can gather some responses and see who we can put you in touch with. So TAP can handle that on the back side.

Kelly Henwood: OK. And I'm not super aware of all. I know there's legislation that changed recently about it which is why it's happening at the state level back to the county probation level. So I'll try to figure out what the--

Neil Kelly: Yeah. Because there are CTE does court and community. They have funding. We have adult ed. We have WIOA II that goes to jail education. And then the Chancellor's Office, they have jail education programs. County chairs have their own jail ed. And then, of course, Corrections. So I just wonder where this falls in that whole scheme of jail education.

Kelly Henwood: OK. I'll send a question, Holly.

Holly Clark: Right. Thank you. And then, Neil, I don't know if you can see the chat. But Nancy Miller said, will consortias be required to report on the three-year plan metrics?

Neil Kelly: I would think that's part of the annual plan process where they-- so we're bringing in the data from last year, the '21-'22 year. We would be updating their targets. I don't know if they're reporting out on their-- let me see the question there. Reporting out on the three-year plan metrics. I mean, that's part of the annual plan to review how you're doing, right?

Mayra Diaz: Yeah. So I think the annual plan should address with the questions that are included in the annual plan. You're looking at it from that perspective how you're going to strategize towards those metrics. As for, I know that with the three-year plan when we did the training, we're also currently working with our NOVA programmers at the moment to update those targets that are currently missing for '21-'22 in the three-year plan.

And so we are working on that. I'm hoping that should be completed within the next week or two. And I know a lot of you are currently working on that annual plan. So keep an eye out for that. We'll try and send out some communication once that has been finalized. The annual plan template--

Neil Kelly: I think that was-- didn't we say we were going to do a Word document? Is that what you're talking about, Kelly? Just something you can use on your own before you put it into NOVA?

Kelly Henwood: Yeah. We haven't started working on our annual plan yet. So I want to actually, before summer, gets out. I want to send some information out in terms of updates for our strategies and activities that align with the plan. So I want to see what the template is.

Neil Kelly: Yeah. Holly or Veronica, were you going to send out an annual plan template in a Word doc?

Holly Clark: It's-- I believe it's available on NOVA. Veronica's internet actually removed her from the meeting. So I'm pulling up NOVA right now. Let me just check. I know the annual plan is available.

Kelly Henwood: It is, OK.

Mayra Diaz: So, in addition to that, we did work with Veronica to provide an annual plan template whenever we sent out the memo. So if you go on-- and we'll post it on the chat here. But if you go on to the CAEP TAP website, you'll see the '23-'24 annual plan memo, guidance, and-- I don't think the templates on there, but we do have one. So we'll make sure to make that-- actually, it is on there. So the annual plan templates for '23-'24, there's a PDF available version. We'll post it on here for you all, but it is accessible.

Kelly Henwood: Thank you.

Neil Kelly: All right. And then let's see. Karima made a comment. Some agencies might not have their data ready in time to include in the annual plan. The annual plan is your annual update of what you're doing and guiding you.

So if not all your data is not ready, it's not like-- it's up to your members to review and approve, not necessarily the state. So you do it with what you have to move that plan forward.

So it's not like you're going to get dinged if your data is not ready. OK. Dana confirms that and there it is in the chat. Thanks, Margaret.

Holly Clark: And Neil, we have Dr. Holder-Jackson has her hand up when you're available for the next question.

Karyn Holder-jackson: Thank you. Neil, one of my members have some carryover that they're going to be using for capital outlay, like building improvements, because they're tearing down the adult school where they are and they're moving someplace else. And so they need to expand just a little bit because they're growing.

But it does say in the fiscal management guide that any capital outlay will be closely scrutinized. And it says that they are required to notify the CAEP office of their intent. So who do we notify at the CAEP office about this?

Neil Kelly: For K-12, this sounds like it's a K-12 adult school.

Karyn Holder-jackson: Mm-hmm, yes.

Neil Kelly: OK. So they would send a email to CAEP TAP.

Karyn Holder-jackson: OK.

Neil Kelly: And say, this is what we're planning to do. We got approval from our district. We're following all our procurement guidelines and whatever other requirements are for renovations and improvements. And then the consortia also approved it. And then CAEP TAP will, if it's K-12, they'll send it to CDE. CDE will review it. If they have any questions, they'll respond directly back to you. But it's just informational so you don't need state approval.

Karyn Holder-jackson: OK.

Neil Kelly: But the state has an opportunity to ask questions and maybe raise concerns if things aren't clear.

Karyn Holder-jackson: OK.

Neil Kelly: But really that approval comes at the district level and at the consortia level.

Karyn Holder-jackson: OK, great. And I have one other question. One of the members asked about the fiscal management guy because I waited until all of their things were done because I wanted them to review it. We're going to be talking about it. And they asked me. They said this management guide has been revised several times. Is there a plan in the works to actually just recreate one or update it instead of just updating? Are there plans that work to create a new one?

Neil Kelly: We just updated this, what? A few months ago, Holly?

Holly Clark: Yes.

Neil Kelly: So you mean a wholesale change? I don't think so.

Karyn Holder-jackson: I don't think it's necessary. But again, this is--

Neil Kelly: Yeah.

Karyn Holder-jackson: This is the personality of my member so I'm just relaying the--

[laughter]

Mayra Diaz: I think, I guess it might depend where we're pulling it from. I know the website might not have the most-- it depends where on the website you might be pulling it on.

Kelly Henwood: This was the one that we were-- It was a memo were sent along with the updated guide, which I made sure that everyone has it. Because I'm making sure that they're-- I'm picking out certain things I want them to pay attention to, especially for my newest members. But this particular member--

Neil Kelly: This is the fiscal management guide?

Karyn Holder-jackson: Yes. This one--

Neil Kelly: OK.

Holly Clark: It was updated in March of 23 and is up on the CAEP website.

Karyn Holder-jackson: I advised him this was the most recent one. But if anyone's familiar with this, he is the very much the personality where he will follow those rules to the letter and--

Neil Kelly: I mean, if they want more specificity, I would say, yeah, we could have maybe provided more specificity on the allowable uses. But that's so difficult to provide specific direction because there's so many different variations on use of funds. So that's why we always suggest if you have a specific question on use of funds, email the TAP and then they'll coordinate with the state to get a response.

Karyn Holder-jackson: I appreciate that. Thank you so much.

Neil Kelly: Sure

[laughter]

Kathy Walker: On that same subject, I recently had to do that. I did send my request on to TAP, had to qualify it a little differently. I'm noticing that some of our K-12 districts are seeing the use of some expenditures for paying for oversight of the adult schools a little differently than it might have been-- that it should be. So good clarification from TAP on that and I'm hoping that that's going to take care of this issue.

But as they-- even as they read that fiscal guideline, they still are referring back to the California School Accountability Manual. And we're thinking there was a conflict there. So I'm hoping we have it straightened out, but it was something that had not come to us before about funds being used at the district office to pay for their salaries when they're not necessarily hands on with our program.

Neil Kelly: Right.

Kathy Walker: Kind of an interesting scenario.

Neil Kelly: Yeah. Admin costs and indirect costs always get a little squirrelly.

Kathy Walker: Right. And some see it as direct cost.

Neil Kelly: Right.

Kathy Walker: Yeah.

Neil Kelly: Thanks for sharing. Were there anything in the chat? There was a lot of stuff in the chat, but I don't know if there was a question.

Kathy Walker: Crystal had asked, but I think possibly we answered it. They need both district and consortium approval. I believe that was regarding the capital outlay request.

Neil Kelly: Yeah. I would say-- yeah, because the consortium is approving their budget and work plan. And so if they are going to put something large, like renovations or capital improvements, that would be in their budget. And so the consortia would approve that as well as the local district has to approve it too. And make sure they're following all the district guidelines.

Holly Clark: OK. And then Janae just asked if a member needs the December 31, 30 extension to spend down their '21-'22 funds, how do we go about submitting that request? And, I believe, Neil and Mayra, isn't that an automatic in NOVA? They can put in their corrective action plan which will-- Is that the corrective action plan that grants that?

Neil Kelly: So, hmm, let's see. So this is for-- so it's funds expire. So there's a couple of things working here. So you have 30 months to spend the money. And so if this is '21, '22 funds. So that would be funds that were given out July 1, 2021. So that would be six months, 12 months, 18 months. And we're getting into--

OK. So the funds expire at the end of this year like she said. We don't really extend past the 30 months. So 30 months is plenty plus you have this carryover legislation with the 12 months. So we're hoping 30 months is plenty, but we've never extended it.

That's why you should do an allocation amendment or you have carryover guidance to move that money around so that you don't lose it. What we don't want to have in your March report that you're returning money to the state. So Janae, you should be looking to maybe move that money to another member if they can't spend it down by December 31 of this year.

Holly Clark: And I think what she's referring to is the two-year benchmark of funding with the 60-day extension. So the funds are for two years. However, they don't expire until 30 months. So usually from July till December, they consider that the extension to finally spend those funds. And Mayra, you may know on that I believe. It's just in NOVA, it will give them a prompt when they're doing their reporting.

Mayra Diaz: Initially. But I think what would be helpful, we can go back and confirm if you wouldn't mind, Janae, sending an email to CAEP TAP and we'll coordinate to ensure what will be flagged or what the process can be to look into it a little bit more carefully. Because there might be something in place. But as we're working on updates with 84 to 91, we want to make sure we can provide what that's going to look like moving forward and no carryover.

Neil Kelly: Yeah. To Mayra's point, we are changing the use of that corrective action plan. So you're not going to have the ability nor would it be required after the two years to ask we're going to use that for the one-year consortia corrective action reminder I think. I don't know. We'll have more details, like Mayra said, when we roll out the NOVA enhancements.

Shannon Eller: Can you send the information to everyone? Because I think a lot of people might be in that same boat as Janae. I know we will be. So if it can be sent out to--

Holly Clark: Yes.

Shannon Eller: --everyone, that'd be great.

Holly Clark: Yeah, absolutely. Once we get this information-- once we get the question answered with the definitive answer, we will email all consortia leads and members with that information. And then I know Dana has her hand up, but quickly Cheryl Carter asked, can the consortium go back and amend the carryover threshold?

Neil Kelly: You have to wait until next year if you already certified your CFAD.

Mayra Diaz: Yeah. Unfortunately, if you've already submitted that, submitted your CFAD, you will have to wait until next year.

Holly Clark: OK. Thank you. And then I think we're ready for Dana.

Dana Galloway: OK, thanks. I just wanted to go back to the capital project thing. We've only done that once with one large capital project. But the little ones, I mean, like the little ones that involve maybe one classroom, retrofitting one classroom, or preparing it for a program or something like that. Do those require consortium approval and informing the state?

Neil Kelly: It would be a good practice to inform the state. And if it's part of their budget, it would be a good practice for the member to alert the consortia that they're doing that.

Dana Galloway: Thank you.

Neil Kelly: Yeah, OK. Then that's fine.

Dana Galloway: Yeah, no. The group knows what they're doing, but--

Neil Kelly: Right. I would just send just a little FYI email up to CAEP TAP just to cover yourself.

Dana Galloway: Even for the little ones?

Neil Kelly: Yeah. Just because it's all part of that object code.

Dana Galloway: OK.

Neil Kelly: It's not like we're going to say anything, but just so there's not a compliance issue. It's not even compliance because it's an informational email. But I'm just saying.

Dana Galloway: OK. And like most of this stuff is in our plans and everything anyway so.

Neil Kelly: Right. Yeah. So just FYI.

Dana Galloway: Just to cover--

Neil Kelly: No more than a couple of lines.

Dana Galloway: OK, got it. Thank you.

[laughter]

Kathy Walker: On that same subject, we started just doing that this year in our consortium where, if when they turn their budget in, I see they have money allocated in the capital outlay. Then we look into that and ask them, what is this for? What are you spending this for?

And then we take that, send a real short email to the CAEP office, CAEP office. And so far, they've all come back. It's been reviewed, no further questions. So we approve it at the consortium level. But we start with the budget. And if people put capital outlay money in the budget, then we want to know, hey, what are you going to-- what are you using that for?

Neil Kelly: Thank you.

Holly Clark: Thank you. And Dr. Holder-Jackson, I had a private message to you. I wasn't sure if your hand was still up from your previous question or if you had another question. She's on mute. Oh, she took it down. It was just accidental.

Karyn Holder-jackson: Sorry, I thought it was down. Sorry.

Holly Clark: No worries. So then the next quest-- we don't have anything in the chat. So Karin has her hand up for the next question.

Karin Liu: Thank you, Holly. Neil, I'll direct this to you. I am with Woodland Adult education. I have a large CTE renovation project going on. I know that prior to Eric Pomeroy's passing, he had discussed it, I believe with you, and he sent a letter up to CAEP on TAP on my behalf.

The project has grown in scope somewhat just because construction prices have increased. My current consortium director, Lorelei Nissan, is aware of this project. I believe she spoke with Carolyn Zachary about it. But do we need to-- and I do have district approval, and my consortium-- other consortium members know about it. Do I need to do anything else?

Neil Kelly: If you received an email back from CAEP TAP saying, hey, no further questions and you have that on file, that would be fine. But if you don't, I would just send an updated email to CAEP TAP and then we can reply to it and you can keep that on file.

Karin Liu: And should I reference that Eric Pomeroy had initially submitted?

Neil Kelly: Mm-hmm. Yeah, that would be fine.

Karin Liu: I may have an email from him that he forwarded. But again, with the increase in costs, there's nothing official that I know of for that. So I'll go ahead and do that.

Neil Kelly: Yeah, that would be great.

Holly Clark: Thank you, Karin.

Karin Liu: --so much.

Holly Clark: We keep all of our emails at TAP. So I will go back through. I'm making a note right now. I will go back through and I will search for any email we may have received from Eric and/or Lorelei. And I can always-- if I find something, I will send that to you. If the price did change, like Neil said, maybe just a quick update to let them know the price has changed and then we'll just continue it from there. So I will be in touch. OK. I'll let you know either way.

Karin Liu: OK. I appreciate it. Thank you so much.

Holly Clark: Of course.

Neil Kelly: Thank you.

Holly Clark: OK. So I don't see any other questions. Dr. Holder-Jackson? No? OK.

Neil Kelly: Let's see. I don't know. What's the cutting edge? I don't know if there's any other. We already dealt with the health care, dealt with carryover, talk about annual plan. What about data? Anybody have any data questions? Have you looked at the data? '21-'22? It's out there. We haven't had a webinar on it, but it's out there so.

Paul Rosenbloom: I have looked at the LaunchBoard. I was pleasantly surprised to see the pipeline has '21-'22 data.

Neil Kelly: Mm-hmm.

Paul Rosenbloom: I was scratching my head. Some of it didn't line up with our costs numbers. I mean, that's something we've seen before, including participants serve, kind of off by a couple thousand. So I have to follow up with folks on that. It'd be nice to see them. It's fine if there's rounding errors or they're off by 50 or 60 to explain that away. But, in the thousands, it's a little bit of a head scratcher.

Neil Kelly: Yeah.

Mayra Diaz: We do have a webinar scheduled for May 18. May 18, 12 o'clock. We're working with our partners from WestEd to put forth this webinar and go over the release of the AEP 6.0 '21-'22 data that is now available on the LaunchBoard.

So I do believe CAEP TAP has sent that out. Check out the Events page so you can register for that. We'll be collaborating with our partners and we'll be able to help provide additional clarity if there's any question specifically around those numbers or mismatching information.

Paul Rosenbloom: Great. One other question actually is, and maybe it's a webinar topic, but just looking for examples of adult schools working with their community colleges on the AB 1705 compliance and providing opportunities for remedial math supports.

So we're exploring that in San Joaquin County and it's always looking for good examples in the field that we can build on so we can support students that are showing up at the college, but just need a tune up in math. And so some of those opportunities for those kind of classes aren't there. So we're looking at things like math jam or offering a prep class at the adult school. But always interested to hear about what else is happening out there.

Neil Kelly: Paul, we used to do a lot of boot camps and refreshers. We haven't revisited that since the pandemic, but they were out there. I just wonder, like you said, do a little environmental scan of who's doing what now. Yeah, it doesn't-- my recollection is a little too old going back pre-pandemic unfortunately. So I don't know if anybody else had anything to share with Paul on that one.

Holly Clark: We did have a comment in the chat from Dana that said, Paul, a problem in the past with the LP was the participants at CC was not defined as the same as participants in K-12. So that was a comment.

Neil Kelly: Ah, OK.

Holly Clark: Jamie, did say LaunchBoard doesn't always match. What we show through TE either.

Neil Kelly: Yeah. I see a question or comment from Janae. That's an interesting one. Quarterly expenditure reports. I mean, I would just say things that you should be looking out for is your admin costs. I know this has been an issue where people wanted-- And Dana has brought this up to our attention among other people. But wouldn't it be great if we were able to separate out our consortia admin from our regular program budget and expenditures.

And I think there's a ways in NOVA that you can separate out your budget so you can show what's admin, what's consortia related. But we're still working on the expenditure part of that and we haven't fixed that yet. But that would be a red flag.

Because if it's a carryover issue, you don't want to be flagged for carrying all the consortium money over when every member in your consortia shares that responsibility and all of a sudden that one member gets flagged for that. So that would be one thing I would look for. Oh, go ahead, Holly.

Holly Clark: Another one to always look for is being over spent in any object code. If you get a red exclamation point to the far right of an object code, that means, you have spent more than you budgeted. And you'll want to go back and do a budget revision to move funds from one category to that category to cover your expenses.