ATTACHMENT I

MOTION BY SUPERVISOR DEANE DANA

MEETING

DECEMBER 1980.
ATTACHMENT XV

November 29, 1983

This past Sunday's LOS ANGELES TIMES featured an article on how the County's Job training program targeted to General Relief recipients is being studied by the State through its Employment Development Department. Mentioned in the article are viewpoints by the private sector and State officials, as well as comments by several representatives of the Department of Community Services. In addition, the article cited several situations, all indicating that the County's jobs training program is not working and will not be successful.

The County's current budget was adopted in part based on the success of operating a Federally-funded job training program targeted to General Relief recipients. If the scope of the program is drastically altered, then we face the real possibility of layoffs of additional County employees. Because the points raised in the article are of a serious nature potentially affecting the welfare of thousands of County recipients,

I, THEREFORE, MOVE THAT the Department of Community Services, Department of Public Social Services, and the Chief Administrative Office, in conjunction with the Private Industry Council report within two (2) weeks on the comments and situations mentioned in the article, the status and intent of the State study; and a recommended program as to how the County's current employment training effort can be improved.

MOTION

Schabarum

Hahn

Edelman

Dana

Antonovich

Los Angeles imes

Sunday, November 27, 1983

d

By LLOC. WOLINSKY, Timas fall Writer

At the Chinatown Service Center,
directors of a jobe program that
specialius in leaching Awan refu.
gees to speak English were puzzled
by the applicants sent them Loot
month by Los Angeles County. All
23 were unemployed blacks frore
the inner city, hardly in need of
Chinese-glish translators.

The Asian refugees, meanwhile,
had been sent to another training
center run by the county perin-
Lendent of schools where none of
. the Instructors could speak their
Languages These people ware alt-
Ung around not learning a dama
thing," said an exasperated Jensen
Ng. the Chinatown project manager.
Across town, directore of a Ban
Fernandu Valley jobs training cen
Ler eel up to help unemployed
women were equally puzaled by
their applicania Bix of the nine
were men and all lived la central
Los Angelea, nearly 30 miles away.

At these centers and in many
others spread out across Los Angel-
as County the applicants are gener-
al-relief recipients-the first wave
plan celimated 8,000-who are

unly one to laut the funding
general rebel recipients

They were angled out by the
financially awrapped Board of Su
pervitore because general rebel
which ex $74 oil annually.
the only welfare procure that
almunt enurely county supported
and all previous allemple to stem is
growth have failed. There are cur.
rently about 13,000 people-marily
young men-on general relian
Los Angeles County, about hall of
whom are considered unemployable
because they are incapacitated by
such conditone as uncontrolled al-
coholism or drug addiction but do
not have the blods of permagnol
disabilities that enable them to
receive other government and

Fower Opportunities

While the county believes the
rest of the recipients are capable of
holding pole, the cries our lend that
Umalling training to those on general
real means fewer opportunities for
ether unemployed groups including
refugees, recipients of late and

Please see JOB, Pape

County Job-Training Officials Told to Shape Up Program

By LEO C. WOLINSKY, Times Staff Writer

Directors of a heavily criticized
Los Angeles County job-training
program designed to force gener-
al-relief recipients off welfare rolls
were ordered Tuesday to improve
their performance to forestall possi-
ble action by the state.

The Board of Supervisors, on a
motion by Supervisor Deane Dana,
gave top county managers two
weeks to come up with a plan to
deflect criticism that is expected to
be raised by state investigators
probing the jobs plan. The investi-
gation was ordered by the Deukme-
jian Administration through its Em-
ployment Development Depart-

slip-ups as evidence that the county
is not serious about job training. It
has also been charged that by
flooding the program with gener-
al-relief recipients, the county is
leaving little or no room for training
Jobless people who are not on
welfare.

Officials of the county's Commu-
nity Services Department who
oversee the jobs program say they
almed the program at general-rellef
recipients because they are the
most in need of help. They claim
that any problems are the result of
the newness of the program.

But Dana said he la concerned
that the charges, contained in a
recent article published by The

11-30-83

Times, are "of a serious nature
potentially affecting the welfare of
thousands of county residents."

He also noted that the county's
$5.1-billion budget is predicated on
the success of the jobs program in
cutting welfare costs. If the scope of
the program is drastically altered as
a result of the state investigation, he
said, "then we face the real possibil-
ity of layoffs of additional county
employees."

State investigators say they ex-
pect to complete their inquiry by
mid-December. The results eventu-
ally will be sent to Deukmejian, who
could stop the funding or order
changes in the way the program is
run.

DECLARATION OF FINDINGS

Complainant: Western Center on Law and Poverty
Service Delivery Area: Los Angeles County

ATTACHMENT II

Background:

This declaration of findings relates to the Los Angeles County service delivery area plan for the period October 1, 1983 through June 30, 1984. This declaration of findings is the result of a complaint made by the Western Center on Law and Poverty on October 6, 1983. This declaration of findings is made pursuant to the provisions of section 15029 of the Unemployment Insurance Code.

Issues:

The issues raised by the complainant are as follows:

1. That the service delivery area plan was not developed and approved in accordance with the requirements of the Job Training Partnership Act (hereinafter JTPA) and/or the Family Economic Security Act (hereinafter FESA).

2. That the service delivery area plan improperly "targets" the general relief population for training services.

Findings:

PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL

The service delivery area plan was developed by the County of Los Angeles. The private industry council for the service delivery area (hereinafter SDA) was certified by the Governor on August 1, 1983. Notice of the private industry council (hereinafter PIC) meeting on August 11, 1983 and copy of preliminary agenda was mailed to interested parties on August 8, 1983. The PIC met on August 11, 1983 and gave its concurrence to the plan. Notice that the service delivery area plan (hereinafter Plan) was available for review was published in seven local newspapers on August 12, 13, and 14, 1983.

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors reviewed and concurred in the Plan on August 16, 1983. The Plan was forwarded to the Employment Development Department on August 24, 1983. The PIC and the County Board of Supervisors approved their agreement on September 6, 1983 and September 20, 1983, respectively.

The Plan was approved on September 27, 1983.