California
One-Stop System
Cost Study Report
October 18, 2007
Prepared for
The California Workforce Investment Board
By
Richard W. Moore, Ph.D.
Philip C. Gorman, Ph.D.
Andrew Wilson, MBA
The College of Business and Economics
Executive Summary
California’s One-Stop Career Centers began with a bold vision of bringing together a host of
federal, state, and local programs under one roof, with a common goal, to better serve people
seeking to improve their lives through education, training or employment. In 2006 the California
Workforce Investment Board’s (CWIB) Accountability Committee was uncertain how well the
vision had been realized and wanted to examine California’s One-Stops through a new lens. The
committee called for a cost study of the One-Stop Career System. In the committee’s view:
The reality is that there is inconsistent integration of services and no
centralized accounting process within the System that effectively controls
or accounts for all resources utilized to produce the System’s
Outputs….As a result, the One-Stop System appears to some of its
customers and outside observers as a fragmented and inefficient business
enterprise.1
The Study Approach
To complete a cost study of One-Stops, the CWIB contracted with a team of researchers in the
College of Business and Economics at California State University, Northridge to analyze the
costs and operations of California’s One-Stop Career Centers. The comprehensive report of
study and appendices are available on the CWIB Website at www.calwia.org. Working with
staff from EDD and the CWIB, the Cal State Northridge team developed the following research
questions to guide the study:
1. What resources do California One-Stops have and where do they spend them?
2. What do partners contribute to the operation of the One-Stop and how does the
pattern vary between sites?
3. How much and what types of services do One-Stops produce, and how do sites vary
from each other?
4. What do different One-Stop services cost to produce and how do costs vary between
sites?
5. Can standard measures or service units and costs be developed and applied across
One-Stops?
The study designed to answer these questions had two phases. In Phase I, the research team
conducted four in-depth case studies. The goal of the case studies was to answer the research
questions and develop methods that could be replicated in a state-wide survey of One-Stops. In
Phase II of the study, the team conducted a survey of 18 comprehensive One-Stops, which when
added to the case study data provided a study population of 22 full service One-Stops. To get the
best response possible, we promised each One-Stop anonymity. In the report you will see sites
are designated by generic names such as “large southern urban One-Stop” to protect each site’s
confidentiality.
1
From: “Proposal by the California Workforce Investment Board Accountability Committee for a Cost Study of the
One-Stop Career System”, October 28, 2005.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
ii
This is the first study to look at the consolidated costs and the consolidated services across the
full range of on-site partners in a group of One-Stops. The study used the Activity Based Cost
(ABC) accounting model to conduct its analysis. The purpose of Activity Based Costing is to
better understand the real costs of producing a product or service.2 The ABC approach focuses
on the processes and activities that produce specific services rather than the traditional line items
found in government budgets. In short, ABC is a dramatic departure from traditional
government budgets, and we believed it would provide valuable insights into the costs of OneStops. The ABC accounting model begins by mapping the processes and activities that generate
costs and produce services. Our case studies revealed that the One-Stops were built around four
processes:
• A universal services process, where an person can walk in to One-Stop and use services
to find a job or training opportunities;
• An enrolled services process, eligible clients formally enroll in programs such as the
WIA Adult program, the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act program or CalWorks;
• A business services process, services to business ranging from workshops on writing a
business plan to rapid response services for companies facing a layoff or closure;
• A youth services process, services to eligible youth that range academic support to case
management, to help finding a summer job.
Within each process were multiple activities, and each process produced multiple services lines.
Using this framework, the study estimated the costs of processes and the activities within them,
and then estimated the cost-per-unit of services produced. It also estimated the costs incurred by
partners within the One-Stops associated with each process.
Here’s a quick word about what this study is not. This study is not an evaluation of the One-Stop
system. It is not an attempt to make judgments about what costs are appropriate or what activities
are most efficient; rather, we endeavor to describe as clearly as possible what we observed.
There are no standards or regulations for what services should cost in One-Stops, or what
partners should contribute, or which services should be produced in what volume. So there was
no yardstick against which to evaluate what we found. Further, this is not a study of the larger
workforce development system. This study is restricted to services provided by personnel who
were based “under the roof” of the One-Stop at the time the services were provided. Services
that were conducted off-site by personnel who were not based at the One-Stop, such as training
at a local community college, were not included in the analysis.
With these limits in mind, here is a brief summary of our results for the research questions posed
before.
1.
What resources do California One-Stops have and where do they spend them?
The 22 sites studied had annual costs of $66.5 million, with an average cost of about $3 million,
but a median cost (the point at which half the sites were above and half below) of $2.4 million.
Costs ranged from a low of $900,000 to a high of $10 million.
2
For a general introduction to ABC see Cokins, Gary, et.al (1992) An ABC Manager’s Primer: Straight Talk on
Activity-Based Costing, Irwin Publishing.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
iii
We found the activities that took place in the One-Stops could be placed within four processes
noted above: “universal services process,” “enrolled services process,” “business services
process,” and “youth services process.” We then estimated the percentage of total costs
generated by each process. Summing across all 22 sites, we found that the “enrolled services
process” accounted for the largest amount of costs at 48%, followed by “universal services”,
“business services” and “youth services” (which were present in about half the One-Stops).
Figure E-1: Percent of Cost By Process Across All Sites
Youth
Services
9%
Business
Services
13%
Universal
Services
30%
Enrolled
Services
48%
2.
What do partners contribute to the operation of the One-Stop and how does the
pattern vary between sites?
Across all 22 sites partners’ costs accounted for about 34% or $22.4 million of total costs for the
One-Stops studied.
Figure E-2: Local Area Costs and Partner Costs
Partner Costs
$22,451,795
Local Area
Costs
$44,017,466
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
iv
Contributions tended to be largest in the universal process and smallest in business services. The
largest partner contribution was from EDD at about $13 million, followed by a mixed group of
local partners ranging from housing authorities to tribal councils to Goodwill, which as a group
contributed slightly less than $4 million. Health and Human Services Agencies (mostly county
agencies responsible for CalWorks programs) contributed over $2 million. No other partner
contributed over $1 million in costs across the sample of 22 One-Stops. It is important to note
that our tabulation of partner contributions is directly affected by our “under the roof” definition.
The pattern of partner contributions varied a great deal across One-Stops studied. The graph
below indicates that while partners contributed 34% of all costs, in a few One-Stops partner
contributions were equal to over 70% of total costs, while at the other end of the scale partner
contributions made up less than 10% of total cost at some One-Stops in the sample.
Figure E-3: Percent of Total Costs Contributed by Partners by One-Stop
100.0%
Total Partner Contribution as a Percentage
of One-Stop Total Cost
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
Su
rv
ey
5
-S
ou
t
Su h S
r
Su v e y u b
ur
rv
8
ey
- ba
10 Ce n /
n
R
C a S u r - N t r al ur a
s e v e y or t h - U l
r
st
u d 1 6 - - S u b an
y
b
S
ou u r b
Su 2 rv No th - an
e y rth
U
Su 1 7
- S r ba
rv
n
u
ey
b
S
1 ou ur
Su
S u 4 - th ba n
rv
r
S
e y v e y ou U r b
th
a
4
2
-N
-S -U n
o u rb
S u or
Ca
t
th a n
rv h se
ey
-R
U
r
st
S
u r 9 - b an ur a
ud
C
l
v
y
ey
/
e
3
1 5 n t r a Ru r
-C
a
-S ll
Ca e n t
ou Urb
s e ra l
th
an
st
-U
u Ru
rb
S u d y 1 r a l/
an
S
r
Su
S u v e y - S o u bu
rv
r
u
r
1
b
v
th
ey
1
a
e
18 y 6 - N - U n
- N - S orth rba
o
or
-U n
th uth
S u - S - S r ba
ub n
S u r v e ub
u
u
y
rv
e y 1 - r ba r ba
n
C n/
13
e
S u - S n t r Ru r
a
a
o
rv
ll
e ut
Ru
Su y 7 h - C S u r al
rv
en b ur
Ca e y
t r a ba
se 1 2
n
l
st
u d S ou - R u
y
t
r
h
a
Su
4
l
rv
e y No U r b
rth a n
3
-N o r Ru
ra
th
-R l
ur
al
0.0%
One-Stop
We also looked at how often partners appeared in the One-Stops. Below you can see that EDD
was the most active partner, present in 20 of the 22 One-Stops studied, while the Department of
Rehabilitation was in 14 out of 22. No other partner appeared in half of the One-Stops surveyed.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
v
Figure E-4: Number of One-Stops Served by Partners
22
Number of One-Stops Served by Partner
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
ED
D
P
ar
tn
er
s
D
O
R
Lo
ca
l
O
th
er
/U
ni
ve
rs
ity
Sc
ho
ol
C
ol
le
ge
Lo
ca
l
O
th
er
Lo
ca
l
S
ch
oo
l
A
du
lt
H
H
SA
Lo
ca
l
C
or
ps
Jo
b
Ad
ul
t
an
d
S
BD
C
AB
LE
A
AR
P
A
gi
ng
V
et
er
an
s
A
dm
in
.
0
Partner
3.
4.
How much and what types of services do One-Stops produce, and how do sites vary
from each other?
What do different One-Stop services cost to produce and how do costs vary between
sites?
These are two complex and closely related questions. As a new enterprise, One-Stops do not
have standard cost indicators like those found in more mature organizations. In the analysis, we
developed a wide array of cost per-unit of service measures which can evolve into valuable
management tools. From the case studies, we developed a standard set of services One-Stops
produced and then estimated the per-unit cost of producing those services, by dividing the total
costs of a service by the number of units produced at each One-Stop. In the table below we
present what we believe are the most valuable “cost-per” measures for understanding One-Stop
operations by process.
Table E-1: Services by Process: Median Cost and Range Of Cost Per-Unit of Service and
Range
Process/ Unit of Service
Universal Services
Per Universal Client
Per Universal Visit
Per Coaching and 1-on-1 assistance
Event
Median Cost Per
Range
$166
$41
$20
$33 - $554
$8 - $146
$6 - 145
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
vi
Process/ Unit of Service
Enrolled Service
Per Enrolled Client
Per Client Receiving Case Management
Per Enrolled Client Placed
Business Services
Per Rapid Response Employer Assisted
Per Rapid Response Employee Assisted
Per Mass Hire Event
Youth
Per Youth Served
Per Youth Placed in Employment
Median Cost Per
Range
$2,671
$1,208
$7,012
$579 - $8,015
$218 - $4,543
$739 - $20,708
$964
$157
$2,934
$62 - $18,127
$3 - $4,671
$355 - $11,524
$3,837
$2,526
$546 - $20,178
$617 - $6,328
Universal Services
Universal services accounted for about 25% of the costs in the One-Stops in the sample. These
services are open to anyone who walks into a One-Stop. In theory, Universal services are
provided on a self-service basis, but much like the public library, many clients need help and
One-Stops provide it by offering some one-on-one coaching, such as reviewing resumes or
helping with computers.
From our case study experience we found that there were three key cost-per-unit measures for
universal services: cost per universal client, cost per universal visit and cost per one-on-one
assistance event. The median cost per universal client was $166, with a range of only $33 to
$554. The cost per client visit tends to cluster around $40 a visit with a few outliers at higher and
lower costs. This is not surprising, as we found in our case studies that most universal access
processes deliver roughly the same types of services, and hence have similar costs.
The variance in cost-per-client is explained mostly by the average number of visits made by
clients. The average number of visits by universal clients varies across the sites from one to
twelve visits per client. Obviously, clients who visit many times on average will cost more to
serve than clients who come a few times. Finally, we found the median cost of providing oneon-one assistance to be about $20 per event.
Enrolled Services
The enrolled services process is the most costly process within the One-Stops, accounting for
48% of sampled One-Stop costs. We found three key cost-per-unit measures: the cost per
enrolled client, cost per client receiving case management and cost per client placed. Cost per
enrolled client had a median of almost $2,700, with a wide range from less than $600 to over
$8,000. The variance in cost was driven in part by the type of client. In sites where there was a
large CalWorks program in which clients got extensive case management over many months,
costs were higher than in One-Stops with only WIA clients. Similarly, if sites provided training
services in the One-Stop rather than contracting them out, costs tended to be higher.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
vii
Business Services
One of the key business services we looked at were rapid response services, where One-Stops
provide services to businesses facing a layoff or shut down. Another was mass hire events,
where a large business such as a big box retailer is seeking a number of employees, and the OneStop will advertise and provide a facility to the employer to meet and interview employees.
We examined rapid response from two perspectives: the number of employers assisted and
number of employees assisted. As the table above indicates, the median cost of providing rapid
response services to a business was $964, but the cost ranged widely. When we looked at the
cost of assisting an employee with rapid response service the median cost was $157, again with a
wide range. The wide variation is due to the variety of interventions offered and the size of the
companies. In one case, the One-Stop may just provide some routine information to the
company, while in another they may set up extensive on-site services. Similarly, the number of
companies served affects the cost per company served; the number of companies served ranged
from 450 to a handful.
The median cost of a mass hire event was $2,934, with a median cost per applicant interviewed
of $48. The wide range in costs is driven by the number of clients interviewed and the amount of
marketing and logistics that go into the event.
Youth Services
Only about half the One-Stops surveyed had a youth program housed under the roof, so our
measures in this process are more limited and more variable. We saw two key indicators here;
the cost per youth served, which is simply the total number of youth served divided by the total
cost of the youth process and the cost of placing a youth in any type of employment experience.
The median cost per youth receiving services was $3,837, substantially higher than the median
cost for enrolled adults. The costs varied widely from only $546 to over $20,000, but most sites
had costs between $2,000 and $7,000 per youth. Again, the wide variation in volume of service
delivered may account for the different costs in large part. The median cost per youth who was
placed in some type of employment (work experience, summer job, and regular employment)
was $2,526.
5.
Can standard measures or service units and costs be developed and applied across
One-Stops?
We believe the results of this study clearly show that such a set of standard measures can be
developed. The full report shows the detailed definitions and calculations we used for measures
we developed. Below we propose a process lead by the CWIB to develop a sophisticated
measurement system for One-Stops.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
viii
Conclusions
This project is the first Activity Based Cost Accounting (ABC) analysis of One-Stop Career
Centers and their finances and as such this project raises as many questions as it answers. Our
goal was not to evaluate how the One-Stops manage their costs but to describe objectively what
is happening in the field in terms of operations and finances and to provide a model for how
One-Stop costs and operations could be measured. The study does have a few observations
which will add some insight for policymakers and practitioners:
•
•
•
•
•
Traditional federal, state and local funding streams still drive how One-Stops
conceptualize costs and services, and undermine managers’ ability to see their operation
holistically.
There are few standard measures for units of service produced, so comparison and
benchmarking against other sites or over time is difficult.
Partner relations vary widely, based on local conditions, funding and eligibility
requirements for each program, and the personal networks of One-Stop managers.
One-Stops tend to structure their processes around the WIA program, so the four
processes we uncovered appear to be fairly consistent across sites.
One-Stop services were customized to local needs and this accounts in large part for the
differences in costs between sites.
•
Recommendations
Finally, we recommend that the State Board take the lead in developing a voluntary system of
standard measures of costs and services for the One-Stops. Such a system can evolve over time
into a powerful method for improving the performance of One-Stops. We see four specific steps
the Board could take to promote the development of such a system:
•
•
•
•
Extend the ABC analysis to different types of One-Stops, including satellite One-Stops
and smaller, less-than-comprehensive One-Stops.
Form a voluntary group of One-Stop managers and policy makers to develop a limited
set of key “workforce industry measures” based on their expert opinion and the results
of this study.
Create a voluntary centralized data-base system where One-Stops can submit data on
line and have key measures calculated and returned, benchmarked against other similar
One-Stops.
Link cost analysis to performance outcome measures that include all programs housed
“under the One-Stop roof.” These data can start to create a framework for reliable valid
cost/benefit analyses and ultimately a return on investment analysis.
The complete report is available at www.calwia.org .
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
ix
Acknowledgements
This project was designed to be a collaborative effort so we have many contributions to
acknowledge. First, we want to thank to the 22 One-Stop Career Centers and their local WIA
programs and partners for being willing to share their data with us and investing the time and
effort it took to complete the survey. We particularly want to thank the case study sites who
hosted our study team for several days each. Because we promised the sites strict
confidentiality, we are unable to name them here. We would also like to thank the California
Workforce Association and Virginia Hamilton for their instrumental role in communicating and
garnering support from the Local Workforce Investment Boards.
Three EDD staff worked with us through out the study. Doug Orlando participated in all four of
the case studies, and provided his invaluable accounting expertise, particularly about ABC
accounting, and a deep knowledge of One-Stops. Doug also contributed significantly to the
development of the survey instruments. Rod Addy participated in three of the case studies and
lent us his in-depth knowledge of One-Stops, WIA and local EDD operations to help us develop
our data collection approach. Both Doug and Ron are relentlessly cheerful and fun to be with in
the field. Steve Saxton, of EDD provided some of the original thinking that went in to study and
reliably came up with tough questions and new insights as the study progressed.
CWIB staff played and important in the project as well. Ray York, helped us plan our work and
see the issues from state level perspective throughout the project. He helped us many times at
critical junctures to gain cooperation from key parties and think through strategic decisions. Bev
Odom of the CWIB staff played a vital role in keeping the project on-time and on budget; she
helped manage our relationship with the steering committee and the CWIB, and most
importantly proved very persuasive in getting One-Stops to participate in the survey.
Professor Ken Euske of the Monterey Naval Post-Graduate School and a leading national expert
in the field of ABC accounting in the public sector served as a consultant to the project. He
played a critical role in helping us shape our methods and reviewed our work products through
out the project. His good humor and commitment to helping us get it “roughly right and not
precisely wrong” are much appreciated.
Our steering committee provided advice and reviewed many work products through out the
study. We thank them. The committee included:
Albert L. Tweltridge III, California Department of Education
Jean Scott, California Department of Education
Bob Schallig, California Department of Education
Tammi Holloway, California Department of Education
Ron Selge, California Community College Chancellor’s Office
Geri Douglas, California Community College Chancellor’s Office
Walter Dario Di Mantova, Los Rios Community College District
George Boodrookas, Modesto Junior College
Lana Fraser, California Department of Rehabilitation
Michelle Alford-Williams, California Department of Rehabilitation
Cindy Escott, California Department of Rehabilitation
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
x
Gail Sullivan, California Department of Social Services
Kristen Sanchez, California Department of Social Services
Joyce Fukui, California Department of Aging
Johnna Meyer, California Department of Aging
Rich Friedman, Housing and Community Development
Jamie Fall, California Labor & Workforce Development Agency
Wendy Wohl, Community Services and Development Department
Finally, we would like to thank our colleagues in the College of Business and Economics at Cal
State Northridge who supported the project with extra help when needed Liz Barrett and Jigar
Patel.
While many people contributed to the study the opinions expressed here and certainly any
mistakes are those of the authors only.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
xi
Table of Contents
Executive Summary................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... x
Table of Contents..................................................................................................................... xii
I
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
II
Methods ................................................................................................................................ 3
The ABC Approach .................................................................................................................. 3
Case Study Method ................................................................................................................... 4
Case Study Site Selection...................................................................................................... 5
Implementing the ABC Approach at the Case Studies ..................................................... 6
Conducting Case Studies...................................................................................................... 8
Reports ................................................................................................................................. 10
Survey Methods....................................................................................................................... 10
Activities Defined ................................................................................................................ 10
Services Defined .................................................................................................................. 14
Survey Instruments............................................................................................................. 16
Sample and Response ......................................................................................................... 17
Reconnaissance Interview .................................................................................................. 18
Survey Procedures .............................................................................................................. 19
Data Analysis....................................................................................................................... 20
Limits ................................................................................................................................... 21
III
Results ................................................................................................................................ 22
What resources do California One-Stops have and where do they spend them? ............. 22
Total Costs By Site and Process......................................................................................... 23
Total Costs by Site and Activity ........................................................................................ 28
What do partners contribute to the operation of the One-Stop and how does the pattern
vary between sites? ................................................................................................................. 42
Overall Partner Contributions .......................................................................................... 43
Partner Contributions by Process ..................................................................................... 43
Specific Partner Contributions.......................................................................................... 50
What do different One-Stop services cost to produce and how do costs vary between
sites? How much service do One-Stops produce and how does volume vary by site?.... 55
Universal Services ............................................................................................................... 55
Enrolled Services................................................................................................................. 66
Business Services................................................................................................................. 75
Youth Services..................................................................................................................... 89
IV
Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 96
V
Recommendations for Policy and Further Research ............................................. 99
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
xii
Appendix A: Other Partner Contributions....................................................................... 102
Appendix B: Other Cost-Per Measures............................................................................ 107
Appendix C-1: ......................................................................................................................... 113
Case Study 1 – Southern California Urban One-Stop Report .................................... 113
Appendix C-2: Case Study 2 – Northern California Suburban One-Stop Report . 129
Appendix C-3: Case Study 3 – Central California Rural/Suburban One-Stop Report
..................................................................................................................................................... 153
Appendix C-4: Case Study 4 – Northern California Rural One-Stop Report.......... 170
Appendix D: Survey Instruments ...................................................................................... 190
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
xiii
I
Introduction
In 2006 the California Workforce Investment Board’s Accountability Committee called for a
cost study of the One-Stop Career System. In the committee’s view:
The reality is that there is inconsistent integration of services and no
centralized accounting process within the System that effectively controls
or accounts for all resources utilized to produce the System’s
Outputs….As a result, the One-Stop System appears to some of its
customers and outside observers as a fragmented and inefficient business
enterprise.3
To complete a cost study of One-Stops, the California Workforce Investment Board (WIB)
contracted with a team of researchers in the College of Business and Economics at California
State University, Northridge to analyze the cost of California One-Stop Centers. Working with
staff from EDD and the WIB, the Cal State Northridge team developed the following research
questions to guide the study:
1. What resources do California One-Stops have and where do they spend them?
2. What do partners contribute to the operation of the One-Stop and how does the
pattern vary between sites?
3. How much and what types of services do One-Stops produce, and do sites vary from
each other?
4. What do different One-Stop services cost to produce and how do costs vary between
sites?
5. Can standard measures or service units and costs be developed and applied across
One-Stops?
The study subsequently designed to answer these questions had two phases. In Phase I, the
research team conducted four in-depth case studies of four full-service One-Stops. The goal of
the case studies was to answer the research questions and develop methods that could be
replicated in a state-wide survey of One-Stops. In Phase II of the study, the team conducted a
survey of 18 representative One-Stops.
This report presents the results of the case studies and the survey. We begin with a description
of the methods we employed and then present the results of the surveys.
3
From: “Proposal by the California Workforce Investment Board Accountability Committee for a Cost Study of the
One-Stop Career System”, October 28, 2005
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
1
How To Read This Report
This was a complex project and produced a long report. To help readers find what they
need we have some suggestions.
If you just want an overview of the report and key findings, read the executive
summary.
If you are interested in ABC approach and how it can be applied to One-Stops, read
Chapter II: Methods and look through the Appendices with our instruments and
procedures.
In you are interested in partner contributions look at pages 42 to 50 in Chapter III:
Results
If you want to see how One-Stops compare with each other look at the detailed graphs
throughout Chapter III: Results
If you are interested in why One-Stops differ from each other, read the case studies in
Appendix C .
If you are interested in where research should go from here, read Chapter IV:
Conclusions and Chapter V: Recommendations
The entire report in whole or in sections can be downloaded from the web at
www.calwia.org
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
2
II
Methods
A major product of this study is the development of a method for conducting Activity-Based
Costing (“ABC”) analysis of One-Stops. As we noted before, this is the first study of its type.
Here we provide a fairly detailed description of the reasoning behind our analysis and the
methods we employed to help other analysts who want to conduct similar studies. Readers more
interested in the results may want move on to section III.
As noted above, the study had two phases. In Phase I, we conducted four case studies to develop
an in-depth understanding of the One-Stop Career centers, how they operated, and how they
were financed. We used the knowledge developed in the case studies to construct a survey
method to capture standard data across 18 additional sites, providing a final benchmark group of
22 One-Stops. In both the case studies and the survey, our analysis method was based on
“Activity Based Cost Accounting,” a method designed to help managers better understand their
process and costs.
The ABC Approach
Throughout the study, we used Activity Based Costing (“ABC”) to analyze each One-Stop’s
finances. The purpose of Activity Based Costing is to better understand the real costs of
producing a product or service. It is a system designed to support effective management of
resources rather than to provide reporting to outside auditors. A key insight of the ABC method
is that certain activities may generate greater indirect costs than others, and that to really
understand the cost of a product or service, these costs need to be accounted for with some
precision rather than just spread as a general overhead rate.4 In short, ABC is a dramatic
departure from traditional government budget reporting systems, but we believed it would
provide valuable insights into the costs of One-Stops. The Figure below shows simply how an
ABC analysis is different from a traditional government budget.
Figure II-1: Comparison of Traditional Views and ABC View
Traditional Line Item Government
Activity Based Costing View
Budget View
Access to Resource
Salaries
$375,000
Room
$175,500
Career Search
Benefits
$92,000
Workshops
$82,000
Supplies
$47,000
Case Management
$103,000
Telephone
$8,500
ESL Training
$58,000
Rapid Response
Travel
$13,000
Service
$115,000
Business Plan
Consulting
$105,000
TOTAL
$535,500
TOTAL
$535,500
4
For a general introduction to ABC see Cokins, Gary, et.al (1992) An ABC Manager’s Primer: Straight Talk on
Activity-Based Costing, Irwin Publishing.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
3
At both the case study sites and the survey sites, it took a great deal of work for our team and the
local staff to transform their traditional accounting records into an ABC analysis of costs.
Case Study Method
There is not any systematic study of One-Stop costs on which this study could directly build.
Given the lack of previous studies in this area, the study team made two critical methods
decisions. First, given the research questions, the team decided that the best approach for
answering the questions was “Activity Based Costing,” commonly referred to as ABC
accounting, as we described before. Second, given the many complexities of applying ABC
accounting to One-Stops and the lack of previous research on which to model this study, the
team decided to begin the project with four case studies. The over-arching goal of this research
project is to use the grounded theory approach to develop a model of how One-Stops use their
resources to produce services. The grounded theory approach developed by Glaser and Strauss
uses case studies rich in detail to generate empirically based theory, which can then be tested by
other research methods5. This approach seems particularly appropriate to this setting where there
is little previous empirical work on which to build.
One-Stops are a novel type of organization. Studies of them are limited and research on their
finances is virtually nonexistent. There are few standard definitions or a standard practices. We
do know that One-Stops vary widely along a number of dimensions. Some One-Stops are large
with many employees, while others are small with just a few staff. Some One-Stops are operated
by local government employees, and others are contracted out to non-profit or for-profit
organizations. Some One-Stops are co-located with many partners, while others have few
partners active in the One-Stop. A recent report from researchers at the University of California,
Davis made a first attempt at capturing the complexity and variation in how California OneStops operate, but it did not study the financial aspects of One-Stop operations6.
When confronted with the task of performing an evaluation of a complex program about which
little is known, evaluators have, as noted earlier, frequently use a case study approach.7 The case
study approach allows researchers to enter programs with a blank slate and capture the reality of
what actually exists in rich detail, rather than imposing a template of what they think exists or
what they think should exist.
In this study, we entered each case study site and documented how each site was organized and
how partners participated. We used whatever measures of service were collected at each site.
Because of this case study approach, each case study report differs in a variety of ways from
each other site. We do not have a complete set of standard measures across each site. Rather,
the case study approach allows us to show each site as it is, as it operates. The case studies did
5
Glaser, B.G. and A.L. Strauss (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
New York: Aldine.
6
Cambell, David, et.al (2006) Final Report: UC Davis Evaluation of California’s Workforce Development System,
Department of Human and Community Development, University of California Davis.
7
See for example Patton, Michael Quinn (1980) Qualitative Evaluation Methods Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
4
show us the commonalities and differences found in the system, and provided a basis for
designing a survey which did use a standard set of measures to collect data on a larger sample of
One-Stops in the second phase of the research.
Below we elaborate the steps employed in conducting the case studies.
Case Study Site Selection
We wanted to select four sites that would capture a good part of the diversity found among
California One-Stop Centers. We began by sending a letter to every WIA local area in
California, from the State WIB and the Secretary of the EDD, asking for volunteers. We also
made presentations at several professional meetings to explain the purpose of the study. As part
of the project, the State WIB offered a $10,000 payment to local areas who would volunteer one
of their One-Stops to be a case study site. Sites were promised strict anonymity so that they
would be willing to open their practices to the researchers. From the pool of volunteers we
selected four full-service One-Stops, which represented a good cross-section across a variety of
characteristics we were interested in. Due to restricted resources we were not able to include
satellite One-Stops in our sample. We also required that, to be a case study site, One-Stops had
to at least have counts of the number of universal access clients. It is important to note that our
“unit of analysis” is full service One-Stops, not local areas. The table below profiles the case
study One-Stops.
Table II-1: Profile of Case Study Sites
Site Name
Local Area
Characteristics
So-Cal Urban
- Multi-city local area
- Multiple One-Stops
in local area
- Large
- Southern California
No-Cal Suburban
- Multi-city local area
- Single One-Stop in
local area
- Northern California
Central CA Urban
- County local area
- Small city in rural
area
- Multiple One-Stops
- Central Valley
region of California
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
Service Area
- Urban
- Low Income
- Large Metro area
labor market
- Suburban
- High-tech area
- Mid to high
income
- High levels of
education
- Small city
surrounded by
rural area
- High
unemployment
- Low levels of
education
- Agricultural area
- Low income
One-Stop
Characteristics
- Large
- Staff: city
employees
- Large
- Staff: city
employees
- Mid-sized
- Staff: county
employees
5
Site Name
No-Cal Rural
Local Area
Characteristics
- County local area
- Small city and rural
area
- Multiple One-Stops
- Northern California
Service Area
- Rural
- Small local labor
market
- High
unemployment
- Low income
One-Stop
Characteristics
- Small
- Staff: non-profit
employees
Implementing the ABC Approach at the Case Studies
Conducting an ABC analysis at each site was a complex process. The figure below shows the
process we used to move through an ABC analysis.
As Figure II-2 indicates, the process had five steps8.
Step 1: We first found the annual expenditure report for the most recently closed year, which for
the survey sites at the time of our visits was FY 2004-05. These expenditure reports were based
on traditional line item budgets for the One-Stop and for all major partners such as EDD. This
was not easy, as some One-Stops do not have separate budgets but instead are integrated into the
local area budget. Most partner agencies did not have a budget for a particular One-Stop and
therefore had to do some reverse-engineering to extract the One-Stop’s data from a larger budget
report.
Step 2: We had One-Stop managers identify the responsibility centers through which they
managed the One-Stop’s work. For example, the resource room that served universal access
clients was often a responsibility center. Other responsibility centers typically were enrolled
services, business services, and youth services. We also treated each partner as a responsibility
center. We would then move 100% of costs, including support costs, from the Local Area into
the responsibility centers. The largest item in every case was payroll. For a variety of practical
reasons, each partner who provided services in the One-Stop was treated as its own responsibility
center.
Step 3: We mapped all the processes and activities that went on in the One-Stop, in many cases
these processes overlapped with the responsibility centers, and in others they did not. (See Figure
II-3, for a sample process map with activities).
Step 4: In this step, for each responsibility center, we identified key cost drivers, usually staff
time, space used, and equipment. We used these cost drivers to identify the cost of each activity
in the process map, for each responsibility center. For example, a resume writing workshop
would take staff time to plan and deliver, use some space in the One-Stop and consume some
supplies. We kept going until 100% of each responsibility center’s costs had been assigned to
the set of activities.
8
Our method evolved and simplified as we went from case to case. For example, in the first case study we attempted
to have every staff member estimate how they had spent their time in the previous year. This proved impossible.
We did find that managers were able to estimate better how the effort of their unit was distributed.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
6
Step 5: In this final step we took the costs of the various responsibility centers traced to various
activities and added them together to get the cost of the activity. Then we took the units of
service produced to calculate the cost per service unit. So, for example, if we found across all
the responsibility centers that there was a cost of $12,000 for delivering workshops during the
year, and 10 workshops were produced, then the cost per workshop was $1,200.
The approach described here was taken largely from Service Process Measurement; Breaking the
Code, Applying Activity Based Performance Measures to Service Processes, by K.J. Euske et.al.
Professor Ken Euske, of the Naval Post-Graduate School in Monterey, served as a consultant to
this project and was instrumental in developing the methods employed.
Figure II-2: One-Stop ABC Analysis Process
One-Stop ABC Analysis Process
STEP 1
Traditional
Line Item
Budget
STEP 2
STEP 4
Distribute
all costs to
Responsibility
Centers
For each
Responsibility
Center,
measure
Cost Drivers
by
Activities
• Space Allocation
• Time Allocation
STEP 5
Use
Cost Drivers
to Allocate
cost to
Activity,
calculate cost
per unit of
service
Process Map
STEP 3
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
7
Figure II-3: Sample One-Stop Process Map
04-05
Labor Market
Outcomes
Sample One-Stop Process Map
Universal Access Process (mass service)
Outreach /
Recruitment
Reception /
Orientation
Self
Service
Counseling /
1-on-1 assist.
Group
Workshops
Job
Development
• 6,631 Universal
Clients
• # Entered
Employment
• 24,537 Client
Visits
Registered Clients Process (service shop)
Planning
Intake
IEP
Core / Intensive
Case Mgmt.
Training
OJT
ITA
Placement
• 253 Placements
• $11.50 Average
Wage Placed
Individual
Job
Development
Employer Services Process (service shop)
Employer Outreach
Employer Services
LABOR MARKET
Basic Skills
• 21 On-Site
Recruiting
Events Adult
• 2,441 Job
Participants
• 280 Hired
• 13 Small Business
Workshops
Support Activities
Conducting Case Studies
Conducting the case studies involved three stages. In the first stage we reviewed the available
information on the site to familiarize ourselves as much as possible with the site. In the second
stage we conducted the site visit. Some cases were done in a single multi-day visit, while other
cases, particularly the first case, required multiple follow-up visits. In all four cases there were
follow-up contacts by phone and email to collect additional data and clarify data collected. Data
collection for a typical site visit consumed over 10 person-days of work by our team. In the third
stage we analyzed the data collected, wrote up a case study report, reviewed the case study report
with the staff of the case study site and made final revisions.
One important methods issue that emerged immediately in the field work was: what to count?
Which costs and activities should be included and which excluded? This was a particularly
significant issue in relation to partner costs. For example, if a One-Stop gives a participant an
ITA, essentially a training voucher, to attend a local community college, should the costs of the
voucher and the additional subsidies the client gets by attending the community college be
included in our analysis? Similarly, if the local Salvation Army shelter is a partner and a
universal client is referred there, and gets services, should that be counted in the cost analysis?
After a lengthy discussion of the theoretical and practical issues involved in trying to trace all
costs through the entire network of providers, we came up with a definition that we used across
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
8
all sites. We call the definition the “under the One-Stop roof” criterion. Simply put, we only
measured costs and activities that took place physically in the One-Stop. Services that clients
received away from the site, or services the One-Stop contracted for away from the site
(including ITAs and OJTs) were not counted in this analysis. So by the “under the One-Stop
roof” criterion, a community college counselor who spends time in the One-Stop advising clients
is counted, but a community college counselor who provides counseling at the college campus
does not. This definition was essential for us, since we needed a bright line that allowed us to
know which costs are in our analysis and which are out.
Text Box II-1 below shows the detailed protocol we followed in conducting the case study
analysis.
Text Box II-1: Case Study Protocol
Stage I: Pre-visit reconnaissance
• Obtain mission/vision/goals/objectives
• Obtain Annual Plan – current and for FY04-05
• Get performance on Federal performance measures FY04-05
• Survey One-Stop to gather descriptive data (organization chart, floor plan of site,
partners on site, etc.)
Stage II: On-site
• Walk-through, including interviews with key personnel. Purpose:
o Define the boundaries of the One-Stop
o Validate Responsibility Centers
o Define Activities
• Caucus to review data so far
• Meet with Director. Purpose:
o Revise/refine the definition of the One-Stop, including Partners; validate
the list
o Revise/refine the list of Responsibility Centers; validate the list
o Revise/refine the list of Activities; validate the list
• Get WIB budget w/ breakout by funding stream
• Get WIB staff time allocation (specifically, allocation to the One-Stop)
• Define responsibility centers (at One-Stop, and in WIB Central Office), identify
the leader of each one
• Get salary data for existing employees and also for FY04-05 employees
o Assign each employee to a Responsibility Center
• Map the activity/process flow
• Interview each Responsibility Center Leader; allocate time/effort across activities
• Define Activity measures
• Define Outcome measures; link to activities
• Identify Partner contributions
• Meet with people as needed to nail down budget spreadsheets
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
9
Stage III: Analysis and Reporting
• Get 100% of costs into responsibility centers
• Trace 100% of each responsibility center’s costs to activities
• Calculate total cost of each activity
• Calculate total cost of each process
• Calculate partner contributions “under the roof” and assign their costs to specific
activities
• Link best service measures to activities and calculate cost per service
• Draft report
• Review report with study team and site
• Final report revisions
Reports
Each case study was written up in a detailed report. The four case study reports can be found in
Appendix C. These reports provide details on how our ABC analysis evolved and the local
factors that affect costs and services at each site. We recommend these reports to readers who
want a rich explanation of One-Stop costs.
Survey Methods
In the case studies we used the grounded theory approach where we tailored our analysis to how
each site was organized, to the unique set of services provided and used whatever measures of
services produced the site had. In the survey sites we needed to create standard data collection
methods, and that meant creating a standard set of activities and measures of services produced.
We had to clearly define the activities and the services produced so that sites could accurately
report how resources were used and what services were produced. We also needed clear survey
forms which would allow One-Stops to report their costs by responsibility centers reliably, and
to then trace those costs back to specific activities. We would not have been able to do this
without the rich experience we accumulated in the case studies. Using the case studies we
developed a standard set of activities and services which would allow One-Stops to accurately
describe their activities and services produced. These standard definitions were used to produce
questionnaires for the surveys.
Activities Defined
In the case studies, we found that virtually all One-Stops organized their activities for adults into
four processes that reflected WIA funding streams. There was a universal service process, an
enrolled services process, and a business services process. A few One-Stops also served youth,
which treated that as a distinct process. We found the activities of partners could be accounted
for within these processes. For example, when EDD offered Veteran services, we fit those
activities into the enrolled service process; and providing assistance with a UI claim fit easily
into the universal services process. When a local Small Business Development Corporation
offered a workshop on marketing for small businesses, it fit into Business services. Below is the
standardized process map we developed for the survey.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
10
Figure II-4: Standardized Process Map for Survey – Universal, Enrolled, and Business Services
Universal Access Process (mass service)
Workshops
Job Club
Self Service
Coaching
Enrolled Clients Process (service shop)
Counseling
Assessment
Case Mgmt.
Individual Plan
Placement
Training and Education
Support Services
LABOR MARKET
CUSTOMERS - Individual & Business
Orientation
ITA/OJT
Business Services Process (service shop)
Rapid Response
Mass Hires
Business
Workshops
Business
Counseling
Business
Center
Job
Development
Support Activities
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
11
Figure II-5: Standardized Process Map for Survey – Youth Services
Y
O
U
T
H
College Preparation
Employment Services
LABOR
MARKET
Case Management
Or
Academic Support
Follow-Up
FURTHER
EDUCATION
Support Activities
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
12
Each activity needed to be defined to make sure respondents knew what we were asking about.
We made a preliminary list of activities and defined them. After reviewing them with our
advisory committee we revised the list and honed the definitions. Below are the specific
activities you see in the process map with the definitions we used in the survey.
Figure II-6: Activities by Process With Definitions
Process and Activities
Definition/ Notes
Universal Service Activities
Self Service- Job Search Information and
Support
This is what goes on in the resource room; people seek
jobs and related information and use resources to support
the job search such as faxing resumes, completing self
administered assessments, self referral to other services,
using word processing etc.
One-on-one assistance is not included in this service line.
Coaching: For Job Search Information and
Support
In the resource room clients get one-on-one help with a
variety of activities, accessing information, quick
informal coaching on resumes, help filing a UI claim etc.
It may also include informal referral to other resources
inside or outside the One-Stop.
Introducing new clients to the resources in the One-Stop
on their first visit; includes initial needs assessment.
These are workshops that build skills or give support for
job search.
Workshops may serve universal clients, enrolled clients or
both.
This would include traditional job clubs of any type,
whether they are staff facilitated or peer facilitated. They
must be open to universal clients.
Orientation to One-Stop
Workshops: Job Search and Support
Job Seeking Networks
Enrolled Service Activities
Assessment
Individual Service Plan, such as IEP
Case Management
Counseling
ITA/ OJT
Training and Education
A comprehensive assessment of skills, background and
interests for registered or potentially registered clients,
interpreted by a professional.
A service plan for an individual that involves one or more
formal services leading to employment; that will be
tracked by a staff member.
Meetings, phone calls and other activities where a staff
member helps a client complete their plan. It may involve
problem solving, securing support services, or brief
counseling. This includes follow-up after placement or
exit.
Counseling for specific personal problems in scheduled
sessions – individual or group. For example, drug and
alcohol counseling.
Trainees receive an ITA or an OJT experience as part of a
training plan.
Formal training or education which is part of a service
plan. For example GED or ESL classes provided in the
One-Stop.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
13
Process and Activities
Definition/ Notes
Support Services
This is restricted to support services such as drop-in child
care which are delivered under the roof.
Defined as staff provided assistance to locate and secure a
job.
Placement Assistance
Business Service Activities
Rapid Response Assistance
Meeting at the company site with employers or employees
of companies considering a lay-off or closure.
Mass Hires/ Job Fairs
One-Stop staff arrange logistics, screen applicants for
employer hiring a number of employees or Job Fairs
where employers come and meet a number of potential
applicants.
Workshops
Workshops to provide skills or information for
businesses.
Business Consulting
One-on-one assistance to businesses to provide help with
taxes, marketing, loan applications etc.
Business Center Service
Essentially office support for small businesses, faxing,
internet access, office space etc.
Contacting businesses to identify open positions and
posting those positions in the One-Stop and elsewhere.
Job Development
Youth Service Activities
Employment Services
Counseling, Case Management Supportive
Services
College Preparation
Academic Support
Follow-up
Youth placed in work experience, summer jobs or regular
employment.
Services to counsel and support youth while they are
enrolled in a program.
Activities to prepare youth for college, campus visits,
SAT Prep, information session etc.
Services such as GED preparation, home work clubs, or
tutoring to help improve academic achievement.
Follow-up services to see if youth have completed
activities.
Services Defined
We needed a list of clearly defined services produced by One-Stops that would account for
virtually all the services produced. Again we reviewed our case studies to develop a list of
service measures we thought each One-Stop would know. We reviewed that list with the
advisory committee, and revised it according to feedback we received.
A key problem in doing ABC analysis is the problem of joint costs. A detailed description of
joint costs is provided in the case study reports. For now, we off the following simplified
definition of joint costs: Joint costs occur when there are two distinct outputs and it is difficult or
impossible to accurately trace the portion of costs consumed in the production of each distinct
output. To overcome this problem we created a list of services produced that either tied clearly
to a single activity or were clearly produced by an entire process. For example, a workshop
delivered is tied clearly to cost of workshops in the universal process, so the cost per workshop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
14
could be calculated by simply dividing the number of workshops delivered into the fully loaded
cost of workshops. On the other hand, the cost of serving a client in universal services could be
calculated by dividing the total number of universal clients into the fully loaded cost of all
universal service activities.
The following Figure lists the measures of services produced for which we collected data, and
the activities to which the measures are linked in our cost analysis.
Figure II-7: Activities by Process; Services Produced and Measured
Process and Activities
Services Produced and Measured
Universal Service Activities
Self Service- Job Search
Information and Support
Number Universal Access visits
Number Universal Access clients
Number Universal Access Service Events (e.g. faxed a resume,
accessed career information on internet)
Coaching: For Job Search
Information and Support
Number of times one-on-one coaching events occur
Orientation to One-Stop
Workshops: Job Search and
Support
Job Seeking Networks
Number of new universal access clients.
Number of Workshops
Number of People attending
Number Job club or network members
Total Job club or network attendance
Enrolled Service Activities
Assessment
Number of comprehensive assessments
Individual Service Plan, such as
IEP
Case Management
Number of IEPs or other formal plans
Counseling
Number of client session
ITA/ OJT
Training and Education
Number of clients with ITA or OJT
Number of clients receiving training/education
Number of hours of training/ education
Support Services
Number of clients receiving support services
Placement Assistance
Business Service Activities
Number of clients placed (entered employment)
Rapid Response Assistance
Number of employees assisted
Number of employers assisted
Number of mass hire events
Number of applicants interviewed at mass hire events
Number of applicants hired from mass hires events
Number of Job Fairs
Number of companies participating
Number of Job seekers participating in job fair
Number of workshops
Number of businesses attending
Mass Hires/ Job Fairs
Workshops
Number of clients getting case management
Number of meetings with case manager
(staff/ client ratio may be a meaningful measure as well)
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
15
Process and Activities
Services Produced and Measured
Business Consulting
Number of companies serviced
Number of hours of consulting
Business Center Service
Number of businesses served
Job Development
Number of jobs developed
Youth Service Activities
Employment Services
Number of youth placed in any employment
Counseling, Case Management
Supportive Services
Number of youth receiving services
Number of meetings or appointments
College Preparation
Academic Support
Number of youth participating in college preparation events
Number of youth participating
Number of participants attaining credential
Follow-up
Number of youth followed up
Survey Instruments
Once we had established standard definitions for processes, activities and services, we turned to
designing questionnaires that would collect the needed data. The challenge in designing a survey
of 18 One-Stops to collect data on costs, activities and services produced was three fold. First,
we needed to develop instruments that were clear enough for sites to complete without a great
deal of assistance from us. Second, the instruments had to allow for the existence of various
numbers and types of partners and structures. Third, we needed to incorporate the standard set of
processes, activities and services so that comparisons could be made across the sites.
To meet these challenges we developed the set of survey instruments which are included in the
appendices. Here we provide a brief description of each instrument and its purpose. The cover
letter sent to participating One-Stops and sample copies of the survey instruments are included in
the Appendix D.
•
“Sample Cover Letter and Instructions”
•
“Expenditure Instrument for Subject One-Stop Center”
This instrument allows local areas to take their traditional line item expenditure report and move
costs into responsibility centers within the subject One-Stop, so that costs can then be traced to
various activities.
•
“EDD Financial and Effort Worksheet”
Since EDD is the most prevalent partner, with a significant presence in the One-Stops we
studied, we developed a specialized instrument on which EDD could report its costs in a
standardized manner recognized by local managers. This instrument then shows local managers
how to trace staff time and other costs to a standard set of activities. Finally, the EDD managers
reported the volume of service produced in standard categories.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
16
•
“Services Lines Data Collection Instrument”
Based on the case study sites, we developed a standard list of services we believed met three
conditions: first, they would cover almost all the services produced by One-Stops; second, they
would be common across many One-Stops; and third, the One-Stops were likely to have counts
of these services or be able to produce counts relatively easily. The service categories were
designed to cover the activities of partners as well. We designed the list of service measures so
that each service could be traced back to a single activity from the list of activities on the “Effort
Allocation Instrument.” This was to solve the problem of joint cost described earlier in the case
studies.
•
“Effort Allocation Data Collection Instrument”
This instrument was designed so that each responsibility center manager could trace the effort of
his or her unit back to a set of four standard processes (universal, enrolled, business and youth)
with standard activities. This would allow us to calculate the costs within each responsibility
center for each activity.
•
“Partners Short Survey Form”
From our field work we learned that most partners play a limited role in the One-Stops; partners
may provide some staffing in the resource room, or offer occasional workshops, or have a
counselor on-site a few hours a week. The short form was designed so that partners could, in a
single form, report their costs, the activities they were involved in, and the services produced.
Sample and Response
For the survey, we wanted to create a sample that would represent the wide diversity found
among California’s comprehensive One-Stops. We wanted One-Stops that were large and small,
located in rural, suburban and urban areas, and ones managed by public and private employees.
We began by sending letters to all local areas in the state and asked them to voluntarily
participate in the survey portion of our study. In some cases a local area contacted us and
expressed interest in participating in the survey, and in other cases an individual One-Stop
expressed interest. In all we had sites from 21 local areas volunteer.
As we did when deciding the case study locations, we made a list of site characteristics that we
wanted to have represented in our survey sample. These characteristics included which area of
the state the One-Stop is located in (South, North, or Central California) and the local setting of
the One-Stop (rural, suburban or urban). We specifically chose 20 sites from 11 different local
areas in order to get a sample that represented all types of One-Stops from all areas of the state.9
During the course of the survey we lost five sites from our original sample because the site either
could not or did not want to participate in the survey. We were able to add three replacement
9
We initially chose one One-Stop to be our pilot survey site. This proved beneficial because we found it necessary
to make changes to several survey instruments after the pilot site had reviewed them.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
17
sites. In the end, we had 18 complete, usable surveys. In the final benchmarking analysis we
added in the four case study sites for a final sample of 22
The table below shows the breakdown of how the final sample of 22 survey sites satisfied our
requirements.
Table II-2: Final Sample of One-Stops By Key Characteristics
Urban Suburban Rural
Totals:
North CA
2
2
3
7
South CA
6
2
2
10
Central CA
2
1
2
5
10
5
7
22
Totals:
After we established our list of survey sites, we contacted the Director of each local area. We
sent the Director a letter thanking him/her for volunteering and telling, them which of their sites
we wanted to include in the survey. This was then followed up with a telephone call to the
Director.
Reconnaissance Interview
We then contacted each of the volunteer One-Stop site and made arrangements for one of our
interviewers to conduct a one-hour phone interview with the One-Stop manager. We refer to this
one-hour initial phone interview as the Reconnaissance Interview. We conducted a
Reconnaissance Interview with each One-Stop, to get a basic understanding of how the One-Stop
was organized and to help customize the surveys to best reflect the particular One-Stop’s
operations.
There were several purposes to the Reconnaissance Interview:
• Get an overall feel for the One-Stop
• Establish a single point of contact (SPOC) at the One-Stop. In some cases we also
identified the key fiscal person at the One-Stop.
• Establish the One-Stop’s responsibility centers
• Get basic knowledge about the site (One-Stop size, staff size, locale, what the One-Stop
operating agency is, where financial data is kept – locally or at head office, etc.)
• Identify who the One-Stop’s partners were that provided services “under the roof”.10
10
Initially we asked the One-Stop to differentiate between Major and Minor partners. Partners who made a
significant contribution to the One-Stop were to be considered Major partners and would be requested to complete
two survey instruments, the ‘Expenditure Instrument’ and the ‘Effort Allocation Form’. Partners who did not make a
significant contribution to the One-Stop were to be considered Minor partners and would be requested to complete
one survey instrument, the ‘Secondary Partners Survey Form’. After distributing a complete survey to our survey
pilot site we realized that making a distinction between Major and Minor partners was not necessary. We realized
that all partners except for EDD need not complete the fiscal instrument, and that the Major partners would have a
difficult time completing the two forms because of the complexity of the two forms. Instead we decided that all
partners, except EDD, were to be given the ‘Secondary Partners Survey Form’, which we re-named the ‘Partner
Short Survey Form’.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
18
After completing the Reconnaissance Interview we took the information learned and used it to
customize the survey instruments for each One-Stop. Customization of the survey instruments
involved inserting the One-Stop’s name where appropriate and adding the One-Stop’s
responsibility centers where appropriate.
Survey Procedures
Each One-Stop was then sent a package containing the full set of customized survey instruments
for their site. A typical survey package included:
• Cover Letter and Survey Checklist (addressed to the SPOC, as identified in the
Reconnaissance Interview, which was typically the One-Stop manager)
• Expenditure Instrument11 (customization of this form included adding the responsibility
centers as identified in the Reconnaissance Interview)
• Expenditure Instrument Instructions12
• EDD Financial and Effort Worksheet
• EDD Instructions
• Service Lines Data Collection Instrument (one form to be completed by the One-Stop and
to include data from the One-Stop and all partner agencies)
• Effort Allocation Data Collection Worksheet (one Effort Allocation form was customized
and sent for each of the One-Stop’s responsibility centers.)
• Partner Short Form (one Partner Form was customized and included for each of the OneStop’s partners, not including EDD)13
Included with each survey package was a flash drive containing electronic copies14 of all the
survey instruments and an overnight delivery return address envelope, postage paid.
The single point of contact at each site was asked to oversee the distribution of the survey
instruments to whoever they felt was best suited to complete the forms. They were also asked to
collect the completed instruments and return them all together to us. In the case of the EDD
instrument, the One-Stop’s SPOC was asked to forward the EDD Instrument to the EDD
manager at their One-Stop. There were sites where an EDD manager contacted us directly with
questions regarding the survey instrument, but typically they were able to complete the form
11
During the survey we found that almost every One-Stop site was having trouble understanding and completing the
Expenditure Instrument. We revised it, renamed it the ‘Expenditure Short Form’, and resent it to all the survey sites.
We found this new form was much easier for the sites to complete.
12
We found that with the development of the ‘Expenditure Short Form’ the ‘Expenditure Instructions’ were no
longer necessary; however, much of the information contained in the instructions remained helpful to the person
completing the fiscal form.
13
The California Department of Rehabilitation was not asked to complete a ‘Partner Short Form’ by each One-Stop
where they contributed. Instead, this agency provided us information on their contributions to all participant OneStops from the state level.
14
We requested that the fiscal instruments, the “Expenditure Instrument’ and the ‘EDD Financial and Effort
Worksheet’, be completed electronically. This was primarily because each instrument had features that could only
be seen and used when viewed electronically. These features took advantage of options specific to Microsoft Excel.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
19
without our assistance. The One-Stop’s SPOC was responsible for contacting their partners and
having them complete the Partner survey instrument. In many cases the SPOC completed their
partner’s forms themselves. In only one case were we contacted with questions directly by a
One-Stop’s partner.
When the survey package was sent out to each One-Stop we gave them a completion deadline of
two weeks. Only one site met that deadline. Some sites were able to complete the survey within
one month, but most sites required more than two months to complete the survey. In many cases
the instruments that took the most time to complete were the partner’s instruments. This was
most likely due to the lack of control each One-Stop has over their partners.
Each One-Stop was encouraged to contact us should they have any questions or problems. At
one point or another, every site contacted us with questions; some needed help with the fiscal
form and others simply had a question regarding one of their partner’s contributions.
We contacted local areas by phone and email to encourage responses and to answer questions.
In the end it took five months to get all completed surveys in.
Once questionnaires were returned we reviewed obvious reporting errors and missing data. Sites
were contacted and, to the degree possible, missing data was collected and errors corrected. Data
were entered into a series of linked spreadsheets for analysis.
While the case studies examined the fiscal year July 1, 2005 – June 30, 2005, the survey
happened some time after the case studies were completed. When the survey began, an
additional fiscal year had been completed, so we decided in the survey to gather data for what
was at that point the most recently closed fiscal year – July 1, 2005 – June 30, 2006.
Data Analysis
The goal of the data analysis was to answer the research questions posed earlier in the study. To
accomplish this, the analysis went forward in two phases. First we defined a set of measures we
could calculate from the data. Next we made the calculations for each One-Stop and then
arrayed the data to create a benchmark group for each measure.
The measures fell in the following four broad categories:
•
•
•
•
Overall costs
Partner costs
Costs per activity
Costs per service unit produced.
In the following section we present the results by following the process map introduced earlier.
Thus, we look separately at Universal Services, Enrolled Services, Business Services and Youth
Services.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
20
It is important to note that not all One-Stops provided every activity in our standardized list of
activities, and not every One-Stop counted every service we identified. While all One-Stops
reported some activities and services for the universal, enrolled and business services processes,
most One-Stops did not have a youth program. As a result, we do not have data on every
measure for every One-Stop in the sample.
Limits
Every research method has its inherent limits. By combining qualitative case studies with a
quantitative survey we tried to reduce limits imposed by each method. Still, there are some
limits to our analysis that need to be acknowledged and considered when interpreting the study’s
results.
Both the case sample and the survey sample are designed to capture the variety of full-service
One-Stops found in the state, but it is not a “representational random sample” which could be
weighted up to provide estimates for the entire state. Our sample is made up of volunteers and
One-Stops who chose to volunteer, which may be systematically different from other One-Stops.
We did not include satellite One-Stops or One-Stops that were not full-service. While we
included One-Stops of different sizes and in different regions, we did not attempt to do so in
proportion to the population.
Data are self reported. We did not audit the data provided. We essentially accepted what OneStops reported about their resources expended and services produced. In some cases where OneStops had not kept good records, for example had not tracked the number of workshops
presented, we encouraged respondents to estimate rather than not report.
None of the One-Stops tracked how they spent their time by activity; we had to ask managers to
estimate how their staff spent their time. While this approach is commonly used in this type of
analysis, it means that the allocation of staff costs is only as good as the managers’ estimates.
Most importantly, our study is descriptive not evaluative. There are no standards or benchmarks
for how a much One-Stop’s services should cost or how much partners should contribute. We do
not attempt in this study to identify “good” or “poor” use of resources. Rather, we establish
descriptive benchmarks for how resources were used and for the quantity of resources used.
Overall our goal was to create a description of One-Stop costs and services which is “roughly
right rather than precisely wrong”.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
21
III
Results
In this section we use data from our analysis to answer the research questions posed by the study.
It is important to remember in interpreting the results that data presented in this report represent
all the costs for all the partners that operated “under the roof” of the One-Stop. Partner costs and
services delivered away from the One-Stop are not included. Hence, if a participant got training
on a nearby community college campus, that cost is not included, but if the client met with a
community college counselor in the One-Stop, that cost and that service are included.
We will begin each section by describing the median costs for measures discussed in the section.
The median is the value at which half the sample was higher and half the sample was lower).
We also show the range of costs. Then, we graphically display the full distribution of values for
all 22 sites so the reader can see the complete distribution of costs. Readers who are interested in
moving through the results quickly can just at the introductory tables and graphics and ignore the
complete benchmarking distributions. On some of the following charts there are sites located on
the right side of the chart that appear to have a zero value. These are sites where the applicable
value was either not reported, not measurable, or not applicable.
What resources do California One-Stops have and where do they spend them?
In this section we analyze One-Stop costs by process and activity. We examine both the dollars
spent by process/activity and the percentage of costs accounted for by each process/activity.
Overall, the 22 sites had a total cost of $66.5 million in the study year. As the graph below
indicates, across all sites, almost half (48%) of all costs were incurred in the enrolled services
process. Universal services was the second-largest cost component at 30%. Business service
and Youth service processes accounted for a much smaller proportion of costs. It is important to
note that many One-Stops in our sample did not have Youth services.
Figure III-1: Total Costs By Process, All Sites
Youth
Services
9%
Business
Services
13%
Universal
Services
30%
Enrolled
Services
48%
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
22
Total Costs By Site and Process
In this section, we analyze the range of costs found across all the One-Stops' data and benchmark
the One-Stops against each other.
•
Total Costs
As expected, we found a wide range of costs across One-Stops. Total costs varied from slightly
over $10 million to about $900,000 among the 22 One-Stops. The median total cost was about
$2.4 million. This wide variation in cost reflects a similarly wide variation in size of
communities served and the number of clients served by the different One Stops.
Figure III-2: Total Cost by One-Stop
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
Total Cost
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
rv
11
Su
ey
rv
ey
rv
Su
Su
10
-N
or
th
-S
- N ub
u
o
rth rba
Su e y
2
n
rv
e y - S - Ur
ba
Su
1 6 o ut
n
h
rv
e y - So - R
Su
ur
ut
Su 8
rv
al
-C hey
r
Ur
en
1 8 ve y
- N 17 tral ban
-S
or
th
o u Ur b
an
S u S u th Ur
r v bu
e
r
b
ba
Su
y
an
3
rv
-N n/R
ey
Su
o
14
S
rth ura
rv
l
ey urv
e y - So - R
5
u
15
-S
th ura
ou
-S
-U l
th
o
r
S u - S u th b a n
Su
u
-U
rv
rv
e y bu
rb
ey
rb
7
an
a
4
- N Ce n /
R
Ca
nt
or
u
ra
ra
se
th
-U l-R l
Su
s
ur
rv tudy rb
an
ey
al
13 4 /
No Ru
Su - S
rth ra
o
rv
-R l
e y ut h
u
1
Su
Su ra
2
Ca
l
r
se
C a v e y S o b ur
ba
ut
st
se
1
h
ud
n
st
y
u d C e - Ur
3
- C y 1 ntra ban
e
-S lSu ntr
ou R u
rv a l ra
th
ey
l
R
ur - U
6
r
Su - S al/S ba
Ca
n
o
r
u
s e v e y ut h b u
- S r ba
9
st
ud
-C
n
u
y
e n bu
2
- N tra rba
or l - U n
th
- S rb a
ub n
ur
ba
n
$0
One-Stop
•
Cost By Process
Analysis of cost by the four major processes shows that One-Stops make very different decisions
in how they spend their funds. This is driven in part by the partners who are under the roof. For
example, if a One-Stop has a large Cal-Works project under the roof it may have a high
percentage of its costs in enrolled services.
The data we collected show that the cost of the universal service process ranges from $2.8
million to less than $200,000. Typically, universal services represented 30% of the total OneStop cost, but that figure ranged from a high of 47% to low of 19% within our sample of OneStops.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
23
Su
rv
ey
Su
9
rv
-C
ey
en
10
- N tra
Su
l
o
Su
rv
rth - Ur
e
rv
- S ban
ey y 1
6
ub
4
-N -S
ur
ba
or out
n
h
Su
th
-U
rv
U
ey
rb
rb
Su Su
1
an an
rv
rv
ey 1 /R
ey
N
6
ur
o
5
rt
al
-S -S
ou h ou
U
t
h
th
rb
an
S
Su - S
ub ub
rv
ur
ur
ey
ba
C
b
as
an
7
n
-C
C
/R
as e s
en
tu
u
e
d
r
tra
st
al
ud y 4
l
-N -R
y
2
ur
o
-N
al
rth
Su
or
rv
-R
th
ey
ur
8
al
Su
Su - C
en bur
rv
Su Su
ba
t
e
r
r
al
v
y
n
rv
3
ey ey
- N - Ur
18 13
ba
or
-N
n
S
th
-R
or out
h
th
- S ura
Su
Su
l
u
rv
bu bu
ey
rb
rb
a
an
1
Su
n
C
rv
/R
as
ey Cen
C
ur
e
a
t
1
al
ra
st
se
5
ud
-S lst
y
R
ud
o
3
ur
- C y 1 uth
al
-U
en
tra So
rb
ut
an
lSu
h
R
-U
rv
u
ey
ra
r
l/S ba
1
ub n
Su 4 ur
So
rv
ba
u
e
y
t
n
Su
h
2
-U
rv
ey
So
rb
a
u
1
Su
n
t
7
-S hrv
ey
ou Ru
ra
12
th
-U l
-S
rb
ou
an
th
-U
rb
an
Universal Services Cost as a Percentage of One-Stop Cost
rv
ey
Su
10
-N
o
rv
ey rth
-S
Su
1
ub
rv 1 N
ey
u
o
rth rba
16
Su
n
rv
U
So
ey
Su
u t rb a
8
h
rv
n
Su - C
ey
en - Ur
rv
5
b
e
t
ra
-S
y
l - an
3
ou
Ur
Su
th - N
ba
o
rv
n
Su Su rth
ey
bu
rv
18
R
e
u
r
b
y
r
a
al
2
Su N o
-S n/
r
rv
ou Rur
ey th a
th
S
4
-R l
- N ub u
r
ur
Su orth ban
al
rv
-U
/
e
rb Rur
Su y 7
a
al
n
rv
/R
ey C e
15 ntra ura
Su
l
rv
-S ley
R
o
17 uth ura
Su
rv
-S
-U l
ey
o
C
r
as
14 uth ban
e
Su stud Sou Urb
an
y
th
rv
4
ey
-N -U
6
rb
Su - S o r t
an
h
o
r
-R
Su vey uth
ur
rv
9
a
Su
ey
bu l
13 C e
- S ntra rba
S
n
C
lur
ou
as
v
U
t
C
e
rb
as ey 1 h st
a
S
e
ud
ub n
st
y
ud C e
u
3
- C y 1 ntra rba
n
en
-S ltr
ou Ru
ra
Su al t
h
C
R
rv
-U l
as
ey ura
e
rb
st
12 l/S
a
ud
- S ub n
y
u
2
o
r
- N uth ban
or
-U
th
- S r ba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
One-Stop Universal Services Total Cost
Figure III-3: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: Universal Services
$5,000,000
$4,500,000
$4,000,000
$3,500,000
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-4: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: "Universal Services" as a Percentage of
One-Stop Total Cost
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
24
Enrolled Services Cost as a Percentage of One-Stop Cost
S
18 urv
e
-N y2
or
-S
th
- S out
Su
h
u
rv
bu - R
ey
rb
u
17
an ral
Su
C
rv
-S
/R
as
ey
ou
ur
e
9
al
st
- C th ud Su
rv
U
y
e
ey
rb
nt
3
an
ra
-C
1
en - C l - U
tra en
rb
an
tr
lSu
R al rv
ur
R
ey
C
a
u
l/S
as
ra
12
e
ub l
-S
st
ur
ud
ou
b
an
y
th
1
-U
Su
-S
rv
rb
o
ut
an
Su ey
h
3
rv
-N -U
ey
r
b
or
an
15
Su
t
C
-S has rve
ou Ru
y
e
ra
8
st
l
- C th ud
U
y
en
r
2
b
tra
a
n
Su
N
lo
rv
U
ey rth
r
- S ba
7
Su
n
u
rv
bu
C
en
rb
Su ey
an
tra
1
rv
l
ey 4 So - R
6
u
ut
ra
Su - S
h
o
-U l
r
Su vey uth
r
b
-S
an
rv
ey 16
u
13 - So bur
b
Su
ut
-S
an
S
rv
ou h ey urv
U
th
ey
r
5
b
an
-S
11 - S
o
- N ubu
Su uth
rb
o
an
- S rth
rv
ub
Su ey
10
ur Urb
rv
ba
ey
an
-N
n
4
/R
- N orth
u
C
ra
as orth - S
l
e
- U ubu
st
rb
ud
rb
an
an
y
4
-N /R
ur
or
al
th
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
ey
Su
rv
Su
ey
rv
2
ey
10 - S
- N out
h
Su
or
-R
rv
th
ey
- S ura
Su
11
l
Su
rv
ub
ey
-N
rv
ur
ba
18 ey
or
n
th
- N 17
-U
or
rb
th So
an
ut
Su h Su
bu
rv
U
rb
ey
rb
an an
8
Su
-C
/R
rv
en
ur
ey
tra
al
16
l-S
Su
U
r
o
b
rv
ut
an
ey
h
Su
-U
3
rv
-N
rb
ey
an
15 orth
Su
-R
-S
rv
ey
ou
ur
al
Su
th
14
S
rv
-U
-S
ey urv
r
o
ba
ey
5
ut
n
h
-S
7
-U
ou - C
rb
en
th
a
t
-S
n
ra
Su
ub l R
rv
ur
ey
ba ura
l
1
n
Su
-C
/R
C
rv
as
en
ur
ey
C
e
a
t
as
ra
12
l
st
ud e s
-S l-R
y
tu
ur
ou
3
dy
a
th
-C
l
1
-U
en
Su
rb
tra So
rv
u
a
lt
ey
n
R h4
ur
U
-N
r
al
Su
/S ban
o
rv
rth
ub
ey
ur
-U
13
ba
rb
Su
n
-S
an
rv
ou
/R
ey
th
6
- S ura
C
-S
l
as
ub
ou
e
ur
th
st
ud
- S ban
y
Su
u
4
C
- N bur
as rve
ba
y
or
e
9
n
st
t
h
-C
ud
-R
y
en
ur
2
t
al
- N ra
lor
U
th
r
- S ban
ub
ur
ba
n
One-Stop Enrolled Services Total Cost
Enrolled services is where most One-Stops incurred their largest costs. Costs ranged from $4.7
million to about $400,000. Most One-Stops incurred between 40% and 50% of their costs in the
enrolled process; the full range was from 31% to 71% of total One-Stop costs.
Figure III-5: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: Enrolled Services
$5,000,000
$4,500,000
$4,000,000
$3,500,000
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-6: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: "Enrolled Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Cost
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
4
30%
20%
10%
0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
25
5
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
-S
Business Services Cost as a Percentage of One-Stop Cost
ou
th
C
-S
as
ub
e
ur
st
ud
ba
y
n
S
4
/R
ur
-N
ve
S
ur
ur
y
or
al
ve
7
th
-C
y
13
R
en
ur
-S
tr
al
S
ou al ur
S
ve
R
th
ur
ur
ve
y
al
12
Su
y
4
bu
-N -S
rb
or out
an
h
th
S
ur
C
-U -U
as
ve
rb
rb
e
y
an an
st
1
ud
-C
/R
y
en
ur
2
S
al
ur
- N tra
ve Su
lo
r
rth
y
R
18 vey
- S ura
- N 14
ub l
or
ur
th So
ba
ut
n
h
S
S
ub
ur
-U
ve
ur
r
y
ba ba
15
n
n
S
ur
/R
-S
ve
ur
ou
y
S
al
ur
th
16
ve
-U
-S
y
r
6
ou
ba
-S
th
n
S
ur
ou
-U
ve
th
r
ba
y
9
S
S
ub n
-C
ur
C
ur
ve
as
en
ba
C
y
e
t
r
a
17
al
n
st
ud se
-U
-S
s
y
tu
r
ou
ba
3
dy
-C
th
n
1
-U
en
tra So
rb
ut
an
l
-R h
S
ur
ur - U
ve
r
al
S
y
/S ban
ur
8
ve
ub
-C
y
u
en
rb
10
an
- N tra
lor
S
U
th
ur
r
ve
- S ban
y
S
ub
3
ur
ur
-N
ve
ba
y
o
n
rth
11
S
ur
R
N
ur
ve
or
al
th
y
2
-S -U
rb
ou
an
th
-R
ur
al
S
ur
ve
y
5
-S
ou
th
C
-S
as
ub
e
st
ur
ud
ba
y
n
Su
4
/R
r
-N
Su ve
ur
y
o
al
rv
rth
7
Su ey
-R
10 Ce
rv
ur
ey
- N ntra
al
4
l- N orth
R
or
- S ura
th
Su
l
- U ubu
r
rb
Su Su vey
rb
an
rv
a
rv
1
n
1
ey ey
/R
-N
18 13
ur
or
al
-N -S
th
-U
or ou
th
th
r
- S ba
Su
Su
n
u
rv
bu bu
ey
rb
rb
a
a
1
n
Su
n
6
/R
-S
rv
ey
ur
ou
al
12
th
S
ur
-U
-S
ve
rb
ou
y
an
th
Su 14
-U
-S
rv
ey
r
ou
ba
th
1
Su
n
rv
ey Cen Urb
a
t
1
r
Su
n
a
5
-S lrv
ey
ou Ru
ra
17
th
S
-U l
-S
ur
rb
ou
v
an
Su ey
th
2
rv
-S -U
ey
r
ba
ou
8
n
- C th
Su
en - R
C
ur
tra
as rve
al
y
e
lC
3
st
as
U
ud - N
rb
e
or
y
an
st Sur
1
t
ud ve
-S hy
y
3
6
ou Ru
-C ra
th
S
en ou
-U l
tra th
rb
l
an
-R S
Su
C
ur ubu
as rve
al
r
e
y
b
/S
9
st
ub an
ud
-C
ur
y
en
ba
2
- N tra
n
or l U
th
- S rba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
ey
One-Stop Business Services Total Cost
The costs of the business service process were substantially less than universal or enrolled
services. Costs ranged from a few thousand dollars to $1.3 million within the sample. Most
One-Stops incurred less than 20% of their total costs in business services, with a substantial
number of One-Stops incurring less than 10% of their total cost in business services.
Figure III-7: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: Business Services
$5,000,000
$4,500,000
$4,000,000
$3,500,000
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-8: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: "Business Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Cost
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
26
Su
r
Youth Services Cost as a Percentage of One-Stop Cost
Su vey
rv
12
ey
-S
13
ou
Su - So th
-U
Su
rv
ut
h
e
r
rv
- S ban
ey y 1
5
ub
4
u
-N
So
rb
ut
an
or
h
th
Su
-U -U
r
rv
b
rb
an an
Su ey
3
/R
rv
-N
ey
ur
or
al
8
- C th
Su
en - R
rv
ur
tra
ey
al
Su
l
2
rv
-S -U
rb
ou
Su ey
an
16
th
rv
ey
C
-S
-R
as
6
o
u
e
ut
ra
st
h
ud Sou
-U l
th
y
r
b
2
Su
a
-N -S
rv
Su
ub n
or
ey
r
ur
th
18 vey
b
an
-S
Su
-N 1
ub
rv
or - C
ey
ur
e
t
ba
h
n
5
- S tra
n
-S
ub l ou
R
ur
th
ur
b
al
-S
a
Su
ub n /
rv
R
ur
ur
ey
ba
al
7
Su
n
/R
rv
C
as
ey Cen
ur
C
e
tr
al
9
st ase
- C al ud
st
R
en
y
ud
ur
3
t
ra
al
-C y1
len
U
rb
tra Sou
an
C
lth
as
R
-U
e
ur
rb
Su stu
al
an
/S
d
rv
u
ey y 4
- N bur
10
b
an
or
th
Su - N
or
-R
rv
th
ey
u
11 - Su ral
Su
bu
-N
rv
ey
r
ba
or
14
th
n
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
r
ou
ba
17
th
n
-U
-S
rb
ou
a
th
n
-U
rb
an
S
ur
ve
y
15
S
ur
-S
ve
ou
y
t
8
-C hU
Su
en
rb
rv
tra
an
ey
l3
Su
U
-N
rb
rv
an
or
ey
th
S
2
ur
-R
S
-S
ve
ur
u
ou
y
ve
ra
12
l
th
y
4
- N - So - R
S
u
ut
ra
ur
or
h
ve
l
th
y
-U -U
13
rb
rb
S
-S
an an
ur
ve Su
ou
/R
r
y
th
ur
18 vey
-S
al
S
1
-N
ur
ub
6
ve
-S
or
ur
y
th
ba
o
5
- S uth
n
-S
ub
ou
ur Urb
th
ba
an
-S
n
Su
/R
ub
rv
ur
ur
e
b
al
S
y
an
ur
7
ve
-C
/R
y
ur
en
6
al
tra
-S
S
lou
ur
C
R
th
as
ve
e
- S ura
y
st
l
1
ub
ud
-C
ur
y
en
ba
2
- N tra
n
S
lor
ur
C
R
th
ve
as
C
y
- S ura
e
9
l
st as
ub
-C
ud e
ur
st
en
y
ba
ud
3
t
ra
n
-C y
l1
en
U
tra So
rb
u
a
lC
t
n
as
R hur
e
U
al
rb
Su stu
/
a
S
dy
ub n
rv
ey
4
ur
-N
ba
10
o
n
rth
-N
S
or
-R
ur
th
ve
- S ura
y
l
11
Su
ub
-N
ur
rv
ba
ey
or
n
th
14
Su
-U
-S
rv
rb
ey
ou
a
th
n
17
-U
-S
rb
ou
a
n
th
-U
rb
an
One-Stop Youth Services Total Cost
Of the 22 sites, fifteen had youth services under the roof. Youth costs ranged from $78,000 to
almost $1.5 million. Most One-Stops that had youth services spent between 8% and 20% of their
total costs on youth services.
Figure III-9: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: Youth Services
$5,000,000
$4,500,000
$4,000,000
$3,500,000
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-10: One-Stop Total Cost by Process: "Youth Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Cost
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
27
Total Costs by Site and Activity
We asked One-Stops to trace 100% of their costs to the standard list of activities within the
processes that we introduced earlier. To provide a more detailed idea of where costs were
incurred, we present here the percent of total costs from each site for each activity, by the four
processes. We begin the analysis of each process by showing the median percentage of costs15
for each activity, and the range of percentages across the sites. Then we display the complete
benchmarked data for all 22 sites. We begin with universal service activities.
•
Universal Process Costs By Activity
Overall, universal services costs accounted for between 19% and 47% of all costs. The median
was 28%. Costs were relatively evenly divided across the activities. Seldom did any One-Stop
invest more than 20% of its total costs in any particular universal activity. In some activities
there was a wide variation in costs. For example, the data show that in “Self Service Job Search
Information and Support” costs ranged from 3% to 24 % of total cost, with a median of only 7%.
Table III-1: Universal Activities: Median Percent of One-Stop Costs and Range
Activity
Median Percent Of
Range of Costs
Cost
Self Service Job Search Information
7.2%
2.9 – 24.1%
and Support
Coaching and 1-on-1 assistance
8.9%
1.9 - 21.2%
Orientation to One-Stop
5.0%
1.3 – 16.3%
Workshops: Job search and
4.3%
1.4 – 11.7%
Support
Job Seeking Networks
1.0%
0.1 – 11.6%
All Universal Activities
28.1%
19.3 – 47.0%
A major cost item which we uncovered in the case studies is “Coaching and 1-on-1 Assistance”.
It appears that much universal activity is not completely self-service but in fact involves staff
spending a good deal of time helping individuals. As Table III-1 indicates, “Coaching and 1-on1 Assistance” was the most expensive activity in the universal process with a median cost of
almost 9% of the total One-Stop cost.
About two-thirds of the One-Stops provided job clubs or other networking activities for job
seekers. This activity was not very costly overall, with half the One-Stops reporting they spent
less than 1% of total costs on this activity. The low costs may be due to the fact that job clubs
and networks are largely self-managed by the participants.
All but one of the One-Stops provided workshops to clients as part of the universal services
process. Costs ranged from 1% to almost 12% of total costs with a median of 4.3%. Orientation
15
In calculating the median and the range we eliminated One-Stops that reported they did not have the particular
activity rather than include 0s, hence median and ranges are for the One-Stops that reported some level of activity.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
28
Su
"Universal - Coaching and 1-on-1 Assistance" Cost as a Percentage of
rv
ey
Total One-Stop Cost
7
Su
-C
rv
en
ey
tra
14
Su
-S l-R
rv
ey
ou
ur
al
8
t
Su
-C hrv
U
en
ey
r
b
Su
tra
an
9
rv
ley - C
U
en
rb
6
t
an
Su - So ral
-U
ut
rv
h
ey
rb
-S
an
16
Su
- S ubu
rv
r
ey
ou
ba
th
n
Su 17
-U
-S
rv
r
ey
ou
Su
ba
Su
th
rv
n
11
rv
ey
-N -U
ey
10
rb
or
5
a
th
n
-S -N
-U
or
ou
Su
th
rb
th
rv
a
ey
-S
S
n
ub ub
4
ur
-N
ur
b
b
a
o
C
an
rth
n
as
/R
e
-U
st
ur
rb
ud
al
an
y
4
Su
-N /R
u
rv
ra
or
l
Su ey
th
3
C
-R
rv
-N
a
ey
u
Su se
or
ra
15
s
th
rv
l
ey tud
-S
18 y 2
ou Ru
ra
t
h
-N
N
-U l
or
or
th
rb
th
a
-S -S
ub n
ub
Su
u
ur
rb
rv
C
ba
an
ey
as
n
e
2
/R
st
-S
ud
u
ou
ra
y
l
th
1
Su
-S
rv
ey
ou Rur
a
th
1
Su
-C
-U l
C
r
as
en
rb
Su vey
e
an
t
rv
12
ra
st
ud ey
-S l-R
13
y
o
ur
3
al
- C - S uth
-U
en ou
rb
tra th
a
lSu
n
R
ur bur
al
ba
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
"Universal - Self Service - Job Search Information and Support" Cost as a
Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
5
Su So
ut
rv
h
ey
-S
C
4
ub
as
ur
N
C
e
or
ba
st as
th
ud e
n
st
-U
/R
y
ud
3
ur
r
ba
-C y
al
n
en 1 /R
S
Su
tra
ou
u
rv
ra
lt
ey
l
R hur
10
al Urb
-N
/S
an
Su
ub
or
rv
ur
th
ey
ba
C
-S
14
as
n
ub
e
st
So
u
r
ud
b
u
a
Su
th
y
n
4
rv
-N -U
ey
or rba
16
Su
n
t
-S hSu rve
R
ou
y
ur
rv
1
t
a
ey
h
7
-U l
13 - S
Su
rb
- S out
an
rv
h
ey
ou
S
-U
th
18 urv
- S rba
- N ey
ub n
o 2ur
So
Su rth
ba
Su uth
n
C rve
as
y
bu - R
6
e
rb
u
-S
st
r
an
a
ud
ou
/R l
y
th
2
ur
-N -S
al
u
Su
or
th bur
rv
- S ba
Su ey
ub n
3
rv
ur
ey - N
ba
Su
11 ort
n
h
rv
-R
ey - N
or
ur
9
Su
t
a
h
-C
rv
-U l
en
ey
tra rba
8
Su
n
l
-U
rv
C
en
ey
tra rba
1
Su
5
n
-S l-U
rv
ey
rb
ou
a
7
t
Su
n
-C hrv
en Urb
e
tra
an
Su y 1
lrv
ey Ce
R
12 ntra ura
l
-S lou Ru
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
Su
rv
ey
to the One-Stops represented a substantial cost, with a median value of 5% of total One-Stop
costs.
Figure III-11: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Universal - Self
Service - Job Search Information and Support"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-12: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Universal Coaching and 1-on-1 Assistance"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
29
st
ud
y
3
"Universal - Workshops: Job Search and Support" Cost as a Percentage of
Total One-Stop Cost
-C
en
tra
l
Su - R
ur
rv
al
Su ey
/S
3
ub
rv
-N
ey
ur
ba
or
Su 9 n
C th rv
e
ey
R
nt
ur
S
r
1
a
a
C
u
as rve - C l - U l
e
e
rb
st y 12 ntr
an
ud
a
-S ly
C
R
2
o
as
ur
u
t
e
al
N
or h st
ud
U
th
Su
- S rba
Su y 1
rv
ey
rv
- S ub n
e
5
ou urb
-S y1
an
th
5
Su out - S
h
ou Urb
rv
th
an
ey
S
13 ubu - U
- S rba rba
Su
n
n
o
rv
/R
ey uth
- S ura
8
Su
-C
l
u
rv
ey
en bu
tra rba
16
n
Su
lU
Su rve So
rb
ut
y
rv
an
h
2
ey
-S -U
6
rb
Su - S out
an
h
o
rv
-R
ey uth
C
as
11 - S ura
e
ub
l
Su stu - N
ur
rv
ba
dy ort
h
Su ey
n
4
1
-N -U
rv
rb
ey 0 N orth an
4
- N ort
-R
or h Su
th
Su ura
l
rv
-U
b
Su
ey
rb urb
rv
S
7
a
a
ey ur
n
n
/R
18 vey Ce
ur
- N 17 ntr
al
a
or
-S lth
R
ur
- S out
Su
al
rv
ub h ey
ur Ur
ba ba
14
-S n/ n
R
ou
ur
th
a
-U l
rb
an
C
as
e
e
st
ud
"Universal - Orientation to One-Stop" Cost as a Percentage of Total OneStop Cost
y
Su
2
rv
ey - N
13 orth
Su Sur Sou Su
bu
ve
th
rv
r
y
ey
7
Su ban
4
bu
- N Ce
r
nt
Su orth
ra ban
-U l-R
Su rve
y
rb
u
rv
an ral
ey 11
/R
10 - N
or
th ura
Su - N
o
-U l
rv
e y r th
- S rba
Su
1
ub n
rv
e y Ce
ur
C
nt
9
as
ra ban
e
l
st Cen - R
u
ur
tra
Su dy
al
l
4
rv
-N -U
Su ey
r
ba
or
12
rv
ey
- S th - n
6
R
ou
Su - S
th ura
o
l
rv
ey uth - Ur
- S ba
16
Su
n
u
rv
ey - So bu
rb
ut
Su 8
a
-C hn
r
U
en
C ve y
as
14 tra rba
e
-S l-U n
st
ud
Su
o
r
Su y 1 uth ban
rv
ey
r
-U
-S
1 8 ve y
rb
ou
an
- N 15
t
-S hor
U
th
ou
r
b
a
th
Su Su
-U n
b
rv
Su
rb
ey urb
an an
rv
C
as ey Sur 3 N / Ru
v
5
e
or
st
- S ey
ra
ud
l
ou 2 - th y
S
R
th
3
ur
-C
- S out
al
h
ub
en
-R
u
tr
Su al - rba ura
n
l
rv
R
/R
ur
ey
17 al/S ura
l
- S ub
ou urb
an
th
-U
rb
an
C
as
Figure III-13: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Universal Orientation to One-Stop"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-14: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Universal Workshops: Job Search and Support"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
30
"Universal - Job Seeking Networks" Cost as a Percentage of Total OneC
as
Stop Cost
st
e
ud
st
y
ud
3
-C y1
en
Su
tra So
u
rv
l
S
- R th
ur
ey
ur - U
18 vey
a
l/S rba
- N 11
n
or
- N ub
ur
th
o
Su - S rth ban
u
-U
rv
ey bur
ba rba
7
Su
n
-C n
rv
e
en / R
C
tra ura
as y 1
l
e
lSu stu Ce
R
n
ur
d
rv
al
ey y 4 tral
-N -R
10
u
- N or
th ral
S
o
-R
Su urve rth
- S ur
rv
y
a
3
e
u
- N bu l
Su y 6
rb
rv
or
-S
a
ey
th
n
o
-R
1 3 u th
Su
ur
S
Su
So
rv
al
ey urv
ey uth bur
5
- S ba
12
-S
ou
- S ub n
ur
th
o
Su
- S uth ba
Su
r
ub
-U n
rv vey
u
ey
16 rba rba
n
4
n
-N -S
/
ou Ru
Su ort
r
t
a
h
h
l
rv
ey - U - Ur
ba
Su 9 - rba
n
n
rv
C
en / R
ey
ur
15 tra
Su
a
C
-S l-U l
as rve
y
e
ou
rb
8
st
- C th - an
ud
y
U
en
2
rb
- N tra
a
Su
or l - U n
rv
t
h
r
- S ba
Su ey
2
ub n
rv
ey - S
u
17 out rba
Su
n
rv
-S hey
R
o
14 uth ura
l
-S
ou Urb
an
th
-U
rb
an
Figure III-15: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Universal - Job
Seeking Networks"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
C
as
e
0.0%
One-Stop
•
Enrolled Process Costs By Activity
The enrolled services process was the highest-cost process for most One-Stops, with a median
cost of over 46% of total One-Stop cost. The most costly activity, by far, in the enrolled process
was case management, with a median cost of over 20% of total One-Stop costs. Case
management costs ranged from 7% to 38% of One-Stop costs. These data clearly show the high
cost of working intensively with participants enrolled in a formal program. They also indicate
that case management is the primary service for enrolled clients that occurs in the One-Stop. We
made several attempts to unbundle the case management activity into sub-activities to get a
better understanding of this large cost item, but we found the One-Stops generally were not able
to break this activity down further. As is true throughout this report, all costs and activities that
took place outside the One-Stop, such as training at a near-by community college, are not
included in our cost estimates.
Table III-2: Enrolled Activities: Median Percent of One-Stop Costs and Range
Activity
Median Percent Of
Range of Costs
Cost
Assessments
3.3%
0.2 – 22.6%
Individual Service Plan
4.6%
0.5 – 11.7%
Case Management
20.2%
6.7 – 38.5%
Arranging and Managing ITA/ OJT
2.7%
0.7 – 12.0%
Delivering Training and Education
1.8%
0.4 – 11.4%
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
31
Activity
Support Services
Placement Assistance
All Enrolled Activities
Median Percent Of
Cost
1.8%
7.0%
45.9%
Range of Costs
0.1 – 15.1%
2.0 – 14.0%
31.3 – 70.8%
Other significant cost items in the enrolled process and found in most One-Stops include:
conducting assessments (median cost 2.3% of One-Stop total cost), developing an individual
plan (median cost 4.6%), and providing placement assistance (median cost 7.0%). Training costs
were much lower and were not found in all the One-Stops. This is probably because much of the
training activity was conducted outside the One-Stops. We learned from the case studies that
very little training, other than brief workshops and some limited class room training such as ESL
training, takes place under the roof of the One-Stops. Most of the costs reported for skill training
such as WIA Individual Training Accounts (ITA) or on-the-job Training (OJT) placements
probably represent the cost of setting up and managing ITAs and OJT funded under WIA.
Support services were also a minor cost item in most One-Stops, with median cost just 1.8%.
Only four sites report spending more than 5% of costs on support services.
Ca
"Enrolled - Assessment" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
st
u d se s
y
tu
3
dy
-C
1
en
-S
t
ou
Su ra l
rv - R th ey
ur
Ur
b
S u 1 2 a l/
Su a n
rv
S o bu
ey
r
S u 1 7 ut h b a
n
-S
rv
e
ou U r b
Su y 1
an
t
h
r
S u v e y C en U r
t r a ba
11
rv
ey
-N l- n
6
or R u
ra
th
Su So
l
u
rv
th - U r
e
b
y
Su
Su a n
2
rv
- S bu
e
o u rb
Su y 7
- C t h an
rv
en - R
S u S ur e y
9
t r a ur a
v
rv
l
ey ey
1 0 C en l - R
5
- N tra u ra
-S
l
ou
or
-U l
Su
th
t
rb
Su h rv
a
ey
r v S u S ub n
b
e
18
ur
ur
y
ba
- N 1 4 ba
n
-S n/
or
th
R
o
ut
ur
Su h
a
C
-U l
a s r v e S ub
u
e
y
1 5 r b a r ba
st
u
n
-S n/
Su d y
ou R u
rv 2 t
r
ey
h
No
- U al
1
Ca 3 - r t h
r
S o - S ba n
se
ub
ut
st
u
h
S u u dy
- S r ba
n
rv
4
u
ey
- N bu
or r ba
Su 8
t
n
h
rv
e y C en - R
ur
1 6 tra
a
Su
Su
-S l-U l
rv
r
rb
e y v e y ou
4
3 t h - an
-N
-N
Ur
or
b
or
th
th a n
-U
-R
rb
ur
an
al
/R
ur
al
Figure III-16: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Enrolled Assessment"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
C
as
e
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
32
Ca
st
ud
y
3
-C
en
"Enrolled - Case Management" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop
Cost
Su tral
rv - R
ey
u
1 ra
S u 6 - l/ S u
S
b
r
S u v e y ou u rb
rv
3 th - an
ey
-N
Ur
Su 9
o
b
rv - C rth a n
Su
ey
en - R
rv
tra
u
ey
S 15
l - r al
18 urv - S
Ur
o
e
ut
ba
-N y
n
or 2 - h th
S o Ur
S
ut ba
C a ur
S
s e v e y ub h - n
ur
R
st
ud 12 ban ura
-S
l
y
/
Ca 2
o
R
se - N uth ura
o
-U l
st
r
rb
S u u dy t h Su a n
rv
4
ey
- N bu
Su 8
rb
o
rv - C rth a n
ey
en - R
Su 1 7 t r a
u
rv
l - ral
ey - S
Ur
o
ba
S u 1 4 ut
h
-U n
Ca rve - S
s e y 7 out r ba
h
n
st
ud Ce - U
S u y 1 nt r r ba
a
n
r
S u v e y - So l - R
Su rve 1 - uth ura
l
C
Su rve y 6
en - U r
y
rv
ba
e y 4 - S o u t r al
n
-R
t
N
5
- S or t h u
o u h - S u r al
bu
th
U
r
rb
Su a
S ba
S u r ve u b n / n
ur
Ru
y
rv
e y 1 1 ba
ra
l
Su 1 3 - N n /
R
o
rv
ey - So rth ura
1 0 ut h
U l
- N - S rba
n
or
u
th b u
- S rba
n
ub
ur
ba
n
se
st
ud
y
"Enrolled - Individual Service Plan, such as IEP" Cost as a Percentage of
Total One-Stop Cost
3
-C
en
Su C
tra
rv as
ley e s
R
ur
t
18
ud
al
/S
-N y1
ub
or
-S
ur
th
o
ba
- S ut
n
Su
ub h U
r
u
Su
ve
rb
rb
y
an an
rv
2
ey
/R
-S
6
Su
ur
ou
S
rv
al
So
t
u
h
ey
rv
-R
ey uth
5
- S ur
-S 1
al
u
ou 7 th So bur
ba
- S ut
Su
n
ub h rv
ey
ur Ur
ba ba
12
n
n
Su
-S
/R
rv
ou
ur
Su ey
th
al
3
rv
-N -U
ey
r
ba
or
Su 9 th
n
C
Su rve
en - R
y
ur
tra
rv
1
a
e
1
C
as y 1
-N l-U l
e
0
st
- N orth rba
ud
n
or
-U
y
th
2
rb
a
Su
Su
N
n
or
rv
th bur
e
- S ba
Su y 1
-C
ub n
Su rve
ur
en
y
ba
rv
tra
ey 14
n
l
13
So - R
ur
- S ut
Su
a
h
o
l
rv
ey uth - U
- S rba
8
Su
n
u
rv
C
en bur
ey
ba
tra
Su 15
n
lrv
U
ey So
rb
u
Su
an
7
t
h
Su
r
-U
rv vey Ce
rb
ey
16 ntr
an
al
4
-N -S
-R
o
C
or
ur
u
as
th
th
al
e
st
ud Urb Urb
an an
y
4
-N /R
ur
or
al
th
-R
ur
al
C
as
e
Figure III-17: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Enrolled Individual Service Plan, such as IEP"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-18: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Enrolled - Case
Management"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
33
10
"Enrolled - Training and Education" Cost as a Percentage of Total OneStop Cost
Su Nor
y
th
rv
5
-S
- S ey
ub
ou 3 ur
th
N
Su
ba
o
r
rv
n
ey Sub th R
ur
6
ba ura
Su - S
n
l
ou
Su
rv
/R
th
e
rv
ey y 8
- S ura
l
ub
4
- N Ce
ur
n
ba
Su orth tral
n
-U
rv
ey - U
r
16 rba ban
Su
-S n/
rv
Su
ou Ru
e
ra
y
th
rv
l
2
ey Sur
v
So Urb
18
ey
an
ut
-N 1
h
or - C
-R
en
th
ur
t
r
al
Su
al
Su
rv
-R
ey bur
u
ba
ra
11
Su
l
n
rv
ey - No / R
ur
r
1
t
a
Su
h
2
-U l
-S
rv
e
rb
ou
an
Su y 7
th
-C
-U
rv
Su
ey
en
r
b
rv
tra
an
ey 9 l1 3 Ce
R
n
u
ra
Su - S tral
o
-U l
rv
ey uth
r
b
C
-S
an
14
as
e
- S ub
st
ur
C
o
u
b
as
ut
dy
an
h
e
4
st
- N - Ur
ud
b
or
an
Su y 1
t
C
rv
-S has
ey
ou Ru
e
15
ra
Su
st
th
ud
l
rv
-S
y
ey
ou Urb
3
an
- C 17
th
C
en
as
tra Sou Urb
e
an
st
lth
ud
R
U
ur
y
rb
2
al
a
-N
/S
ub n
or
ur
th
b
-S
a
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
e
Su
rv
ey
e
"Enrolled - ITA/ OJT" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
st
ud
y
2
C
as
-N
e
or
st
Su Su
ud th r
ve
rv
y
Su
ey
y
4
- N bu
18 13
rb
o
-N
an
rt
So
or
ut h th
R
h
u
r
Su
Su Su Sub al
b
rv
ur
r
ey vey urb
ba
an
n
4
3
-N
-N /R
u
o
o
Su
rth
ra
rth
l
rv
ey - U
rb Rur
1
Su
an
al
7
-S
rv
/
e
ou Ru
Su y 1
ra
th
l
rv
ey Ce - Ur
14 ntra ba
n
S
l
C urve So - R
as
ur
ut
y
al
h
e
st 2 ud
So Ur
ba
ut
Su y 1
n
rv
-S he
R
ur
Su y 7 out
al
h
rv
e y Ce - U
rb
nt
Su 8
a
r
- C al
n
rv
en - R
ey
ur
15 tra
Su
a
l
l
rv
ey - So - Ur
Su 9 - uth ban
C
rv
en - Ur
e
ba
Su y 11 tra
n
l
r
Su vey - N - Ur
o
b
rv
rth
16
an
ey
-S
Su 10
ou Urb
an
rv
th
ey No
r th - U
6
Su
rb
S
S
Su an
rv
ur
C
as e y
v e o ut
bu
h
5
e
y
- S rba
12
-S
st
ud
ou
- S ub n
y
ur
th
o
3
- S uth ban
-C
ub
en
-U
u
tra
r
l - rba ban
n
R
/R
ur
al
/S ura
l
ub
ur
ba
n
C
as
Figure III-19: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Enrolled - ITA/
OJT"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-20: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Enrolled - Training
and Education"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
34
C
"Enrolled - Placement Assistance" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop
as
e
Cost
st
Su ud
y
rv
ey 2 N
4
- N ort
h
Su
o
r
rv
ey th - Sub
U
ur
6
r
ba
Su - So ban
n
rv
ut
/
R
ey
h
u
Su
1
Su ral
-C
r
bu
Su ve
en
rb
y
rv
1
t
an
ra
ey
5
l13 - S
R
o
ur
ut
Su - S
a
h
o
rv
-U l
ey uth
- S rba
17
Su
n
C
rv
- S ub
as
ey
ou urb
e
9
Su
st
a
t
n
-C hud
rv
y
U
ey
en
3
tra rba
-C 8
n
len - C
U
tra en
rb
an
l - tra
Su
l
R
rv
ur - U
e
r
C
al
as y 7
/S ban
ub
-C
e
st
u
ud en
rb
t
an
Su y 4 ral r
R
ve
N
Su
u
or
y
S
rv
th ral
ey urv 2 ey
So - R
5
ur
-S
ut
1
a
h
ou 1 -R l
N
th
o
u
- S rth
ra
Su
ub
r
-U l
Su vey
ur
rb
b
rv
16
an
a
ey
-S n/
1
R
C
ou
ur
as 0 th
a
N
e
o
-U l
st
ud rth
Su
rb
y
a
S
rv
S
1
n
ur
ey
- S ub
18 vey
ou urb
1
a
-N
th
4
n
-S
-U
or
th
o
r
- S uth ba
n
Su
ub
rv
ur Urb
ba
an
Su ey
n
3
rv
/R
-N
ey
ur
12 ort
al
h
-S
-R
ou
ur
th
a
-U l
rb
an
e
st "Enrolled - Support Services" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
ud
Su y 1
-S
rv
ey
ou
1
Su
th
rv
C
ey
en Urb
tra
Su
11
an
l
rv
ey - No - R
Su
rth ura
1
rv
l
Su 2 ey
So - Ur
rv
5
ba
ut
- S ey
h
n
-U
ou 3 N
th
rb
an
- S ort
S
Su
ub h R
rv urv
u
ey urb
ey
an ral
2
4
/
Su
So
Ru
N
o
rv
ut
ra
ey rth
h
l
-R
Su
10 - U
rb
ur
rv
an
al
N
ey
/R
13 orth
- S ura
Su - S
l
u
o
rv
ey uth bur
- S ba
14
Su
n
rv
- S ub
ur
ey
o
15 uth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
o
r
16 uth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
Su
o
r
17 uth ban
Su
rv
ey
rv
-U
-S
ey
18
o
rb
an
- N 8 - uth
-U
C
or
en
th
r
ba
Su - S tral
n
-U
u
rv
ey bur
r
ba ba
Su
7
n
-C n
rv
en / Ru
Su ey
9
t
r
r
r
a
v
- C al
C
C
-R l
as ey
as
e
6
e
e
ur
- S ntra
st
st
a
lud
l
ud
ou
U
y
y
th
r
2
3
- N - S ban
-C
u
or
en
th bur
tr
C
- S ba
as al ub n
e
s t R ur
ud
al urb
/
y
Su an
4
- N bu
rb
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
C
as
Figure III-21: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Enrolled - Support
Services"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-22: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Enrolled Placement Assistance"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
35
•
Business Process Cost By Activity
Virtually all One-Stops had some business service activities, but for most is was a relatively low
cost area; the median percentage of One-Stop total costs spent on business services was 15.3%.
The highest cost activity within the business service process was “Job Development”, with a
median cost of 5% of One-Stop total cost. Job development was an activity that we located in
business services, but which in reality often serves business clients, enrolled clients, and
universal clients. Rapid response services were one of the most common business services
activities, but it accounted for only small portion of total cost, with a median cost of about 1%.
Providing mass hire services or job fairs to match local employers with job seekers was another
common activity with median cost of 3.1%. Nine One-Stops reported they spent close to 5% or
more of their total costs on this activity. Thirteen of the 22 One-Stops reported costs for business
workshops, with typical costs accounting for less than 1% of total costs. Similarly, 14 One-Stops
reported providing consulting services for business but typically this represented only of 1% of
total costs. Fifteen One-Stops reported having a business center that provided walk-in services
to business; median cost of these walk-in services totaled less than 1% of all One-Stop costs.
Table III-3: Business Activities: Median Percent of One-Stop Costs and Range
Activity
Median Percent Of
Range of Costs
Cost
Rapid Response Assistance
0.9%
0.0 – 5.9%
Mass Hires Job Fairs
3.1%
0.2 – 9.6%
Workshops
0.7%
0.2 – 3.6%
Business Consulting
1.1%
0.0 – 3.1%
Business Center Services
0.7%
0.0 – 10.7%
Job Development
5.0%
0.1 – 16.8%
All Business Activities
15.3%
1.0 – 21.9%
C
"Business - Rapid Response Assistance" Cost as a Percentage of Total
as
e
One-Stop Cost
st
ud
S
y
ur
1
ve
-S
y
10
ou
th
-N
-U
S
o
ur
rth
rb
ve
an
S
y
ur
S
11
ub
ve
ur
y
-N
ba
13
or
n
-S
th
-U
ou
S
ur
t
r
h
ba
ve
n
y
S
ub
7
S
-C
ur
ur
ba
ve
en
n
y
tra
C
12
as
l-S
e
R
ur
st
o
ut
ud
al
h
y
S
-U
4
ur
-N
rb
ve
a
o
y
n
rth
14
S
-R
-S
ur
ve
ur
ou
a
y
th
17
-U
-S
S
rb
ur
ou
a
ve
n
th
y
S
-U
3
ur
C
-N
rb
ve
as
a
y
or
n
e
9
st
- C th ud Su
R
en
y rve
ur
3
t
ra
al
- C y1
S
lur
en 5 U
ve
rb
tra So
y
a
u
5
ln
S
t
-S
ur
R hve
ur U
ou
al rb
y
th
/S a
18
-S
ub n
-N
ur
ub
or
ba
ur
th
ba
-S
n
/R
ub
S
ur
ur
ur
ve
ba
a
y
S
n
ur
1
/R
ve
-C
ur
y
en
a
6
tra
-S
lou
R
S
t
h
ur
ur
-S
ve
al
y
ub
S
2
ur
ur
-S
ve
ba
ou
y
n
8
th
S
-C
-R
ur
S
e
v
ur
ur
nt
ey
ve
al
ra
16
ly
4
U
-S
C
-N
rb
as
ou
a
or
n
e
th
th
st
ud
-U -U
rb
y
rb
2
a
an
n
-N
/R
or
th
ur
a
-S
ub
ur
ba
n
Figure III-23: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Business - Rapid
Response Assistance"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
36
C
as
e
C
C
"Business - Workshops" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
st
as
as
ud
e
e
y
st
st
1
ud
ud
-S
y
y
o
2
3
- C - N uth
-U
o
en
r
t
Su
h
tra
r
- S ba
rv
ley
ub n
R
ur
u
10
r
al
/S ban
-N
S
ub
or
Su urv
u
t
rb
Su rve ey 1 h an
S
y
rv
1
ey 4 - N ubu
N
r
5
o
b
an
- S orth rth
ou
-U -U
th
r
r
b
an
- S ba
Su
ub n /
rv
R
ur
ey
u
ba
ra
Su
7
l
n
rv
/R
ey Ce
u
n
C
ra
tra
8
as
l
-C
l
e
st
en - R
Su
ud
ur
tra
rv
a
y
ey
l
l4
U
-N
13
rb
or
an
Su - S
ou th rv
th
R
ey
- S ura
12
Su
l
u
rv
So bur
ey
Su
ba
ut
16
rv
n
h
S
ey
-U
-S
18 urv
rb
o
an
- N ey 2 uth
or
-S -U
th
rb
o
an
- S ut
Su
ub h rv
R
ur
ey
u
ba
ra
Su
1
n
l
rv
/R
ey Ce
u
n
ra
tra
9
Su
l
-C
l
rv
en - R
ey
ur
tra
17
a
Su
l
-S l-U
rv
rb
ou
Su ey
an
14
th
rv
ey
-U
-S
6
rb
ou
an
th
Su - S
ou
-U
rv
th
ey
r
b
-S
an
15
Su
- S ubu
rv
rb
ou
ey
an
th
3
- N - Ur
ba
or
n
th
-R
ur
al
C
"Business - Mass Hires / Job Fairs" Cost as a Percentage of Total Oneas
e
C
Stop Cost
st
as
ud
e
e
y
s
st
1
ud tud
-S
y
y
2
o
3
Su
- N uth
-C
rv
or
ey
-U
en
th
tr
5
- S rba
- S al Su
ub n
R
ou
ur
rv
t
al urb
ey h an
/
S
S
4
- N ubu ubu
r
C
rb
ba
as ort
an
n
h
e
/
st
ud Urb Ru
r
an
y
Su
al
4
-N /R
Su rve
y
ur
rv
or
1
al
ey
- C th
-R
13
e
Su - S ntra ura
l
o
lrv
ey uth
R
ur
1
Su
al
Su
2
r
b
Su vey Sou urb
a
7
t
rv
n
-C hey
U
e
6
- S ntr rba
n
ou al Su
th
R
rv
- S ura
Su ey
l
u
3
rv
- N bu
ey
rb
15 ort
an
Su
rv
-S hey
R
Su
o
Su 8 - uth ura
rv
ey
rv
-U l
C
en
ey
18
rb
an
- N 14 tral
-U
-S
o
rth
Su
rb
ou
rv
ey - Su th - an
bu
U
10
rb
r
Su - N ban an
or
rv
/
th
R
ey
ur
1
Su 1 - Sub al
ur
N
rv
o
rth ba
Su ey
n
2
rv
-U
ey - S
rb
o
16
ut
an
Su
rv
-S hey
R
o
Su 9 - uth ura
rv
-U l
C
e
ey
n
rb
17 tra
an
-S l-U
rb
ou
an
th
-U
rb
an
C
as
Figure III-24: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Business - Mass
Hires / Job Fairs"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-25: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Business Workshops"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
37
"Business - Business Center Service" Cost as a Percentage of Total OneStop Cost
st
ud
Su y 2
rv
ey - No
rth
10
Su - N - S
ub
or
rv
th
ur
ey
Su
11 - S ban
ub
rv
ey
ur
N
or
ba
1
th
n
Su
Su 2 U
So
r
r
v
rb
Su
ey vey
ut
an
rv
h
3
ey 4 -N -U
N
5
rb
or
- S ort
an
ou h - th Su
U
R
th
rb
u
rv
an ral
ey - S
/R
13 ubu
Su - S rba ura
n
l
o
rv
/R
ey uth
- S ura
17
Su
l
rv
- S ub
ey
ou urb
16
an
Su
th
rv
-S
ey
ou Urb
1
Su
an
th
rv 4 U
So
ey
r
b
ut
an
Su 9 h
C
rv
en - Ur
ey
C
b
t
ra
as
an
1
-C le
st
U
rb
ud en
tra
an
y
Su
4
lr
R
Su
Su vey - N
u
o
ra
rv
7
r
l
ey rve
- C th
18 y 6
en - R
u
tra
ra
-N
S
C
l
lor out
as
R
th
h
e
- S - S ura
st
ud Sur
l
ub ub
ve
y
ur
u
3
y
- C 15 rba ban
en
-S n/
R
tr
ou
ur
Su al t
al
R hrv
u
ey
ra Urb
8
l/S
a
-C
S
ub n
u
C urve en
as
tra rba
y
e
n
lst 2 U
ud
So
rb
y
u
a
t
1
n
-S hou Ru
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
C
as
e
e
"Business - Business Consulting" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop
C
as
Cost
st
e
ud
st
y
ud
3
-C y1
e
Su ntr - So
a
u
rv
ey l - R th
10
ur - U
a
l/S rba
Su - N
ub n
o
rv
e y r th
ur
Su
11 - S ban
ub
rv
ey
N
Su
or urb
1
an
th
rv
Su 6 ey
So - U
rv
5
rb
ut
- S ey
a
h
ou 3 -U n
th
N
rb
Su
- S ort
an
rv
ub h R
ur
Su ey
u
b
8
r
rv
al
e y - C an
en / R
6
ur
tra
Su - S
al
lSu
o
r
U
rv vey uth
ey
- S rba
12
4
ub n
Su - N - S
ou urb
or
rv
an
t
ey
th
h
13 - U - U
r
r
ba
b
Su - S
n
ou an
rv
/R
C ey 1 th u
as
ra
S
5
l
e
ub
st - S
ou urb
u
Su dy
an
th
4
rv
-N -U
ey
or rba
17
S
C
- S th - n
as urv
e
R
e
ou
y
st
th ura
ud 7 l
C
y
U
Su
e
2
r
- N ntra ban
rv
ey
S
l
or
18 urv
th - R
- N ey 2 - S ura
or
- S ubu l
th
Su
- S out rba
n
h
rv
ey ubu
rb Rur
Su 9
al
- C an
rv
en / R
ey
u
t
1
r
r
Su
al
a
4
-U l
rv
ey So
rb
ut
a
1
n
-C hen Urb
tra
an
lR
ur
al
C
as
Figure III-26: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Business - Business
Consulting"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-27: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Business - Business
Center Service"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
38
"Business - Job Development" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop
Cost
Figure III-28: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Business - Job
Development"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
-R
ur
th
-U
ba
n
y
rv
e
-N
or
Su
4
y
th
ur
-N
or
ub
4
-S
y
th
ou
-S
Su
rv
e
st
ud
e
5
Ca
s
ey
Su
rv
a
/R l
r
u
b
r
1
C a S ur
- C an / a l
ve
se
Ru
en
y
tra
st
ra
ud 7 l
l
C a y 2 C en - R u
Su
tra
ra
-N
se
rv
l
ey
lo
s
R
18 tud rth
- S ura
-N y1
l
- S ub
or
ur
th
o
Su
- S uth ban
S u r v e y ubu - U
rb
rb
rv
an
an
ey 14
/R
13 - S
o
ur
ut
Su - S
a
h
o
rv
-U l
e y ut h
r
- S ba
12
Su
n
u
rv
e y - S o b ur
S u 9 - ut h ba n
rv
C
en - Ur
ey
ba
1 7 tra
Su
rv
-S l-U n
ey
ou
rb
1
an
Su 6 - t h So
Ur
rv
e
ba
ut
y
Su
h
2
rv
-U n
ey - S
rb
o
1
Su
ut
an
h
Ca
rv 5 So - R
se
Su e y
u
u
8
st
- C t h - ral
ud rve
y
Ur
y
en
6
3
ba
tra
-C -S
n
e n o ut l - U
h
tra
r
- S ba
lub n
S
R
u
ur
S u ur v
b
e y r a l/
rv
S u an
ey
3
b
10
ur
N
Su - N orth ban
o
rv
-R
ey rth
1 1 - S ur a
l
u
-N
b
or urb
an
th
-U
rb
an
0.0%
One-Stop
•
Youth Process Costs By Activity
Fifteen of the One-Stops in the sample had a youth process. In those One-Stops, the median
percentage of cost accounted for by the youth process was just under 13%. The range was broad,
from 3% to 23% of One-Stop total cost. It’s important to note that not every One-Stop with a
youth process provided every activity, so data on several activities is limited. “Counseling and
Case Management and Supportive Services” was the highest cost activity, with a median cost of
3.5% of One-Stop cost. “Employment Services” and “Follow-up” were the next most costly
activities.
Table III-4: Youth Activities: Median Percent of One-Stop Costs and Range
Activity
Median Percent Of
Range of Costs
Cost
Employment Services
2.0%
0.9 – 12.6%
Counseling, Case Management,
3.5%
0.2 – 8.6%
Supportive Services
College Preparation
0.3%
0.0 – 3.8%
Academic Support
0.8%
0.2 – 3.8%
Follow-up
1.8%
0.2 – 8.8%
All Youth Activities
12.9%
3.3 – 23.3%
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
39
"Youth - Counseling, Case Management Supportive Services" Cost as a
C
Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
st ase
ud
st
y
u
3
d
-C y1
en
t
ra Sou
C
las
t
R he
ur
U
Su stu
r
al
dy
rv
/S ban
ey
ub
4
-N
ur
10
ba
Su - N orth
n
o
rv
-R
ey rth
u
r
1
Su
Su
a
rv 1 bu l
N
ey
r
14 orth ban
Su
Su
-U
r
-S
rv vey
rb
ou
ey
an
17
th
4
-U
-N -S
r
o
b
an
Su orth uth
-U
rv
ey - Ur
r
b
ba
an
12
S
-S n/
Su urv
R
o
u
e
ut
rv
ra
h
ey y 2
l
-S -U
13
r
b
o
an
ut
Su - S
h
o
rv
-R
ey uth
- S ura
15
Su
l
rv
- S ub
ey
ou urb
an
16
Su
th
rv
-U
-S
ey
rb
ou
an
th
Su 8 -U
C
rv
en
ey
Su
r
ba
t
r
rv
1
al
n
ey
S
18 urv Cen Urb
e
t
a
-N y
ra
n
3
l
o
-N -R
Su rth
ur
o
al
rv
Su rth
ey
bu - R
6
Su
- S rba ura
S
rv
n
l
o
ey urv
/R
ey uth
5
ur
-S
-S 9
a
l
u
ou - C
en bur
th
ba
tra
S
n
Su
l
C
as urv
bu - U
e
rb
e
rb
an
st y 7
a
n
ud
-C
/R
y
e
2
- N ntra ura
l
lor
th
R
- S ura
l
ub
ur
ba
n
C
as
e
e
"Youth - Employment Services" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop
C
as
Cost
st
e
ud
st
y
ud
3
-C y1
en
-S
tr
ou
C
as al t
e
R hur
Su stu
U
rb
a
d
rv
ey y 4 l/Su an
- N bu
10
rb
Su - N ort
an
h
o
rv
-R
e y r th
u
Su
1
Su ra
l
rv 1 ey
No bur
r
1
Su
th ban
4
rv
-S
-U
ey
o
17 uth rba
Su
n
rv
-S
ey
ou Urb
Su
1
a
th
rv
n
Su 2 ey
So - U
rv
5
rb
ut
- S ey
a
n
ou 3 - h U
th
N
rb
Su
- S ort
an
rv
ub h R
Su ey
ur
ba ura
8
rv
n
e
l
/R
Su y 6 C e
ur
rv
- S ntra
ey
al
l
o
1 3 u th - U
-S
- S rba
n
Su
o
u
rv uth bur
- S ba
Su ey
2
ub n
rv
ey - S
u
16 out rba
Su
n
C
-S has rve
R
e
o
y
15 uth ura
st
Su u d
l
-S
y
rv
ou Urb
ey 2 an
t
h
N
4
-U
- N ort
Su
h
- S rba
Su ort
rv
h
ey
rv
ub n
ey - U
18
ur
r
ba
b
9
-N
- C an
n
or
/
en
R
th
u
t
r
Su
Su al - ral
rv
U
ey bur
rb
b
an
7
Su
- C an
rv
/
ey
R
en
ur
tr
1
- C al - al
R
en
tra ura
l
lR
ur
al
C
as
Figure III-29: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Youth Employment Services"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-30: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost:
"Youth - Counseling, Case Management Supportive Services"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
40
C
as
e
C
C
st "Youth - Academic Support" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
as
as
ud
e
e
y
st
st
1
ud
ud
-S
y
y
o
2
3
- C - N uth
or
-U
en
th
tr
C
- S rba
as al n
u
e
R
b
ur
st
ud
al urb
a
/
Su
y
Su
n
4
- N bur
Su rve
ba
y
or
rv
1
n
th
ey
-R
1 0 Ce
nt
ur
r
Su
a
al
N
o
rv
-R l
ey rth
ur
Su
11 - S
al
u
rv
ey - No bur
rth ban
14
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
15
an
Su
th
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
an
16
Su
th
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
an
1
th
Su
Su 7 So - Ur
rv
rv
b
ut
ey
ey
an
h
4
3
-N
-N -U
r
Su Su
b
or
or
rv
an
rv
th
th
ey ey
-U
-R
18 13
r
u
ba
ra
-N -S
n
l
or out
/R
h
th
u
ra
-S -S
Su
l
ub ub
rv
u
ey
ur
Su Su
ba rba
1
r
2
n
rv
ve
-S n/
ey
y
R
6
ou
5
ur
-S -S
th
al
-U
ou o u
th
th
r
- S - S ban
Su
ub ub
rv
u
ey
ur
ba rba
Su 8 n
n
C
rv
/R
e
ey
nt
ur
ra
7
a
l
-C lSu
rv
en Urb
tra
an
Su ey
2
lrv
ey - S
R
ur
ou
9
al
- C th
en - R
u
tra
ra
ll
U
rb
an
C
as
e
C
st "Youth - College Preparation" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
as
ud
e
e
y
st
st
1
ud
ud
-S
y
y
2
o
3
- N uth
-C
or
-U
en
th
tr
C
- S rba
as al ub n
e
s t R ur
ud
al urb
/
y
Su
Su an
4
- N bu
Su rve
rb
y
or
rv
an
th
ey 1 C
10
R
en
tra ura
Su - N
l
lo
rv
R
e y r th
ur
Su
11 - S
al
ub
rv
ey - N
ur
14 orth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
o
r
15 uth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
o
r
16 uth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
ou
rb
1
an
th
Su 7 -U
S
rv
Su
o
r
ba
ey
ut
rv
h
n
2
ey
S
18 urv - So Urb
ut
an
- N ey
h
or 3 -R
N
th
ur
o
r
al
Su
th
Su
Su
rv
-R
rv
ey bur
ey
ba ura
7
l
n
4
/
Su - N Ce
nt Rur
or
rv
r
a
th
ey
al
-R l
13 - U
Su - S rba ura
n
l
o
rv
/R
ey uth
- S ura
Su 8 l
u
rv
C
en bur
ey
Su Su
ba
tra
1
r
2
rv
ve
n
-S l-U
ey
y
6
ou
rb
5
an
-S -S
th
-U
ou ou
th
th
r
- S - S ba n
Su
u
rv
ub
bu
ey
ur
rb
b
9
an
- C an
en / R
ur
tra
al
lU
rb
an
C
as
Figure III-31: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Youth - College
Preparation"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Figure III-32: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Youth - Academic
Support"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
41
C
a
"Youth - Follow-up" Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost
st
ud se
st
y
u
3
- C dy 1
en
-S
tr
C
as al - out
e
R hSu stu
u
U
rb
rv
dy ral/
Su an
ey
4
b
10
-N
ur
ba
Su - N ort
n
h
o
rv
-R
ey rth
Su
11 - S ura
ub
rv
l
ey - N
u
14 orth rba
Su
n
rv
ey - So - U
rb
ut
15
Su
an
h
rv
ey - So - U
rb
ut
Su
17
an
h
Su
r
rv vey - So - U
rb
ey
ut
8
an
h
4
- N Ce
nt Urb
Su ort
ra
an
h
-U l-U
Su rve
y
rb
rb
rv
1
a
a
ey
2
n
n
13 - S
/
ou Ru
Su - S
r
t
a
h
o
rv
-U l
ey uth
- S rba
1
n
Su
u
Su
rv Cen bur
e
rv
tra ba
ey Sur y 3
n
-N l-R
18 ve
ur
or
-N y7
al
t
or - C h th
en
R
u
Su
t
ra
Su ral
C
l
as rve
bu
e
y
rb Rur
9
st
al
ud
- C an
y
/R
en
2
ur
- N tra
al
Su
lo
U
Su Su rve rth
- S rba
y
rv
rv
n
2
ey
ey
- S ubu
6
5
rb
- S - S ou
a
t
n
h
ou o u
-R
th
th
Su
- S - S ura
l
rv
ub ub
ey
u
u
16 rba rba
n
n
-S
/
ou Ru
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
Figure III-33: Activity Cost as a Percentage of Total One-Stop Cost: "Youth - Follow-up"
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
C
as
e
0.0%
One-Stop
What do partners contribute to the operation of the One-Stop and how does
the pattern vary between sites?
One-Stops were designed to bring together a host of federal, state and local programs. Despite
this grand vision of service integration, funding sources flow from a variety of distinct pipelines.
In our experience, One-Stops generally do not have an integrated budgeting or accounting
system. We had to ask each partner to estimate the fully loaded cost of their activities under the
One-Stop’s roof in order to calculate partner contributions at each site. Here, we analyze how
much partners contributed and what activities those contributions supported in each One-Stop.
In determining the amount of partner contributions, it is important to note that different partners
have different relationships to the One-Stop. Some partners such as EDD Job Service Division
have missions that are closely aligned with One-Stops’ missions, and one might expect to see a
lot of joint activity under the One-Stop roof. Other partners such as local housing authorities
have missions only tangentially related to One-Stops’ missions and one might not expect to see
them play a major role in the One-Stop. Similarly, some partners may provide valuable support
to the One-Stop and valuable services to clients, but if they do so away from the physical OneStop they are not included in our calculations.
We want to be very clear in stating that we have not attempted to make, nor have we made, any
judgment as to whether or not partners should make contribution “under the roof” of the OneStop. Our purpose here is simply to describe what partners contributed under the roof of the
One-Stops we studied, not to evaluate whether the partner contributions should have been larger
or smaller or somehow different.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
42
Overall Partner Contributions
As the graph below indicates, of the $66.5 million in costs reported by our sampled One-Stops,
$22.4 million (or 34%) of total costs were partner costs. These partner costs were generated by a
wide array of partners, and the partner costs were incurred in a variety of different processes and
services.
Figure III-34: Local Area Costs and Partner Costs
Partner Costs
$22,451,795
Local Area
Costs
$44,017,466
In this section we look at how partner contributions were distributed across the various processes
and activities, how much partners contributed at each One-Stop, and how much individual
agencies or groups of agencies contributed.
In our sample One-Stops, partner contributions varied from a high of 81% to a low of 2% of
One-Stop total costs. The median contribution was about 25%. The dollar contribution ranged
from over $2.5 million to just a few thousand dollars. We emphasize again that in our analysis
we only measured costs that occurred under the roof, and we did not measure contributions that
partners made to One-Stops and their clients away from the One-Stop. The wide variation in
contributions is due to the individual arrangements partners have with each One-Stop. For
example, if an EDD operation was located within a One-Stop, we found there was always a large
partner contribution. In several rural One-Stops the One-Stop was co-located with the CalWorks
programs, again creating a large partner contribution. We haven’t made any judgment that either
a large or small partner contribution is “good” or “not as good.”
It is important also to understand how we define what was not a partner contribution. We
assumed that the contract to operate the One-Stop between the operator and the local area was
not a partner contribution, although we recognize that WIA is one of many partners in the OneStop. All other resources coming into the One-Stop were considered partner contributions.
Partner Contributions by Process
When we look at partner contributions within the four processes (see Table III-5), we find that
partner contributions were largest as a percentage of total process cost in the universal process,
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
43
with partner contributions accounting for a median of about 35% of total universal costs. From
our field work we know that many partners come into One-Stops and offer services in the
resource room to universal clients, thus generating this relatively large contribution in the
universal process. EDD is the largest partner by far, and the bulk of the EDD contribution is in
the universal process.
Table III-5: Partner Contributions as a Percentage of Process Costs: Median Percent of
One-Stop Costs and Range
Activity
Median Percent Of
Range of Costs
Cost
Universal Process
34.8%
3.0 – 94.4%
Enrolled Process
24.5%
1.3 – 78.1%
Business Process
7.2%
0.0 – 100.0%
Youth Process
22.4%
0.0 – 100.0%
Total One-Stop Costs
25.6%
4.4 – 81.1%
Enrolled services was next highest in terms of partner contribution percentage, with a median
partner contribution of 24.5% of total enrolled services cost. Partner contributions to enrolled
services tended to be large when the One-Stop had other large enrolled programs under the roof,
such as a CalWorks program or a large Trade Adjustment Act program managed by EDD. At a
number of One-Stops, youth services were often provided primarily by a partner, and thus there
are some sites where the partner contribution was 100% of youth costs. It may be that the local
area contracted separately for youth services and then located that contractor in the One-Stop,
rather than contracting with the agency that operated the One-Stop for youth services.
Business services had the lowest median partner contribution, just 7.2% of total business services
cost. In many One-Stops, business services were a relatively small operation, with most services
being delivered by a few One-Stop staff, with few partners.
Below we display the partner contributions overall and by process in both percentage and dollar
terms, and by sites to show the full distribution of contributions.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
44
5
-S
ou
th
Su
-S
rv
ub
Su
ey
ur
rv
b
8
ey
- C an
/R
10
en
ur
- N tra
Su
al
C
lor
as rve
U
th
e
y
r
- S ba
st
16
ud
- S ub n
y
u
2
o
- N uth rba
Su
n
rv
or
ey
U
th
- S rba
17
Su
n
u
rv
ey - So bu
rb
ut
14
a
h
Su
S
-S
-U n
rv urv
r
ey
ey ou
th ban
4
2
-N -S -U
rb
ou
Su ort
an
C
t
h
rv
as
-U he
R
e
y
r
u
b
st
9
ud Sur
- C an ral
ve
y
en / R
3
y
ur
- C 15 tra
a
en
-S l-U l
C
t
o
r
r
as
al
ba
ut
e
-R h
n
st
ur - U
ud
r
al
/S ban
Su y 1
r
- S ub
Su
Su vey
ou urb
rv
an
th
ey rve 11
-U
y
18
N
6
- N - S orth rba
n
or ou
th - Ur
th
Su - S - S ban
u
Su rve ubu bu
rb
y
r
rv
ey 1 - ban an
C
13
en / Ru
tra
r
Su - S
o
l - al
rv
ey uth
R
u
Su
7
r
- C Sub al
rv
ur
e
C ey
ba
as
12 ntr
al
n
e
st
ud Sou Ru
ra
y
th
Su
4
-U l
rv
rb
ey No
an
r
t
3
h
-R
-N
ur
or
a
th
-R l
ur
al
Su
rv
ey
Total Partner Contribution as a Percentage
of One-Stop Total Cost
rv
e
y
5
y
rv
th
10
ou
Su
-S
rv
e
-S
-N
or
th
ey
-S
ub
ub
ur
u
rb
ba
Su 8
n
rv - C an
ey
en / R
t
16
ra ura
Su
lrv - S
U l
Su ey outh rba
2
n
rv
ey - S - U
Su 17 out rba
rv
-S h- n
e
R
Su y 11 outh ura
l
rv
ey - N - U
Su 14 orth rba
S
rv
-S
-U n
Su urve e y
15 outh rba
rv
y
n
4
ey
-S
18 - N
ou Urb
o
rth
-N
an
th
Ca
se
Ca orth - U - Ur
rb
ba
st
se
a
ud
n
st Sub n /
y
ud
Ru
3
y urb
r
1
a
al
C a Ce
-S n/
se n t
ou R u
s t ra l
ra
u d - R th
-U l
y
2 ura
rb
Su No l/Su an
Su rve rth bu
- S rba
rv
y
3
ey
- N ubu n
6
or rb
Su - S
th a n
o
rv
-R
ey uth
Su 9 - - S ura
l
ub
C
rv
e y en
u
tra rba
Su 7
n
-C lS u rve
en Ur
y
rv
ey 1 - tra ban
l
C
1
en - Ru
Ca 3 r
So tra
se
l - al
ut
st
Ru
h
u
-S
S u dy
ra
4
l
rv
- N ubu
ey
r
b
or
12
a
- S th - n
ou Ru
th
ra
-U l
rb
an
Su
Su
Total Partner Contribution
Figure III-35: Total Dollar Partner Contribution by One-Stop
$2,750,000
$2,500,000
$2,250,000
$2,000,000
$1,750,000
$1,500,000
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
$250,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-36: Percent of Total Costs Contributed By Partners By One-Stop
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
Here we show the full distribution of costs in both dollar and percentage terms that partners
contributed to each of the four processes.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
45
Su
rv
ey
Su
17
rv Su
-S
r
ey
ve
ou
y
5
-S 8
th
-U
ou - C
en
th
Su
rb
t
an
r
rv
al
S
ey
ub
-U
10
ur
r
ba ba
-N
n
Su
n
or
/R
rv
th
ey
ur
-S
al
14
C
C
- S ubu
as
as Su
rb
rv
o
e
e
ut
an
e
st
s
h
ud tud y 2
-S -U
y
y
rb
3
2
o
an
-C -N
ut
h
en
o
-R
tra rth
C
u
as
lr
S
ub al
R
Su e s
ur
tu
al urb
rv
d
/
ey
y
Su an
1
bu
4
-N -S
rb
ou
an
or
th
Su
th
rv
-U -U
ey
r
ba
rb
9
an
n
Su
-C
/R
rv
en
ey
ur
tra
a
1
Su
l
6
l-S
rv
U
rb
ou
Su ey
an
1
t
h
rv
5
-U
ey
-S
rb
6
ou
Su
an
-S
t
rv
ou h ey Sur
U
v
t
h
18
rb
ey
-S
a
- N 11
ub n
or
-N
ur
th
b
o
an
- S rth
Su
ub
rv
ur Ur
ey
ba ba
1
n
Su
n
-C
/R
rv
ey
en
ur
C
al
t
12
ra
as
e
-S lst
R
o
ur
ud
ut
al
y
h
Su
4
-N -U
Su rve
r
b
y
or
an
rv
th
ey 7 -R
C
13
en
u
ra
-S
tr
l
ou al Su
R
th
rv
u
-S
ra
ey
l
u
3
- N bur
ba
or
n
th
-R
ur
al
Total Partner Contribution to "Universal Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Universal Services Cost
Su
rv
ey
17
Su
rv
-S
ey
Su
ou
Su
8
rv
rv
- C th ey
ey
U
en
10
rb
5
an
- N tra
-S
lor
ou
U
th
th
r
b
Su - S - Su an
u
bu
rv
ey bur
r
ba
ba
1
Su
n
n
rv 1 /R
N
ey
o
u
r
r
1
th
a
Su 6 -U l
So
rv
rb
e
u
a
y
S
th
n
2
Su urv
-S -U
e
rv
rb
ou
ey y 1
a
n
th
4
4
-N -S
Su
ou Ru
o
ra
rth
th
Su
rv
ey
-U l
rv
ey - U
18
rb
r
b
an
a
- N 15
-S n/
or
th
ou Ru
ra
-S
Su
th
l
C
ub
rv
as
ur Urb
Su ey
e
b
9
an
st
a
r
v
n
ud
ey - C
/R
y
en
6
3
ur
tra
-C -S
a
en out l - U l
h
tra
rb
l
Su an
Su - R
bu
u
r
C
rb
as vey ral/
an
S
e
3
u
st
ud - N bur
b
o
an
rt
Su y 1
-S hrv
ey
ou Ru
C
ra
as
7
t
l
C
-C has e s
en Urb
tu
e
dy
tra
an
st
ud
l
4
y
-N -R
2
u
Su - N orth ral
or
-R
Su rve
th
y
- S ura
rv
ey 1 l
ub
C
13
ur
en
tra ban
Su - S
lo
rv
R
ey uth
- S ura
12
l
- S ub
ou urb
an
th
-U
rb
an
Total Partner Contribution to Universal Services
Figure III-37: Total Partner Dollar Contribution to "Universal Services" by One-Stop
$2,000,000
$1,750,000
$1,500,000
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
$250,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-38: Total Partner Contribution to "Universal Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Universal Services Cost
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
46
Su
rv Total Partner Contribution to "Enrolled Services" as a Percentage of Oneey
Stop Total Enrolled Services Cost
5
-S
o
Su uth
rv
ey - S
10 ubu
S
- N rba
u
C
n
as rve or
/R
th
e
st y 16
- S ur
ud
al
u
y
So bu
rb
ut
Su 2 an
N
h
Su
r
rv vey orth - U
ey
8
- S rba
4
n
- N C e ub
ur
nt
or
b
S
r
al
a
th
C
ur
as
-U n
Su vey - Ur
e
rb
st
b
1
r
a
v
a
ud
n
ey 1 n
y
/R
N
6
3
- C - S orth ur
a
l
en ou
th - Ur
t
- S ba
Su ra l
r
ub n
R
ur
C ve y
u
as
14 al/S rba
e
st
- S ub n
u
u
Su dy 1 outh rba
rv
-U n
ey - S
ou
r
Su
1
th ban
rv 5 ey
So - U
Su
rb
ut
rv
9
an
h
ey
S
18 urv Cen - U
r
e
b
t
-N y
ra
l - an
or 2 So Ur
th
ba
ut
Su - S
n
h
u
rv
-R
e y bu
r
u
Su
b
1
an ral
rv
/R
ey C e
Su 17 ntra ura
Su rve - S l - R l
o
y
rv
ey 7 - uth ura
-U l
C
13
e
- S ntr rba
al
n
Su
o
-R
rv uth
C
as ey
- S ur
a
e
3
st
- N ubu l
u
rb
or
Su dy
an
th
4
rv
-N -R
ey
ur
or
12
- S th - al
R
ou
th ura
-U l
rb
an
y
5
-S
o
Su uth
rv
ey - Su
bu
10
rb
Su
rv Nor an /
ey
th
R
Su
- S ur
1
al
rv 6 u
ey
So bu
rb
ut
8
a
h
Su
n
C
rv
en - U
tra rba
Su ey
2
n
l
rv
-S -U
e
ou rb
Su y 1
an
1
t
h
rv
-R
ey - N
Su
ur
rv
Su
15 ort
al
h
ey
r
18 vey - So - U
rb
ut
- N 14
a
h
-S
or
-U n
th
o
Su
- S uth rba
C
n
r
as Su
rv vey ubu - U
e
rb
e
rb
st
an a n
ud y 4 17
-N -S
y
/R
3
ur
- C ort out
al
en h - h U
C
rb
as tra Urb
l
a
a
e
n
st - R u n /
ud
R
ra
ur
y
l
/
S
1
al
S
- S ub
Su urv
ou urb
e
an
th
C rve y 3
as
y
-N -U
6
e
rb
or
st
an
ud So
t
ut h y
R
h
2
Su - N - S ura
u
l
o
rv
ey rth bur
- S ba
Su
7
n
u
rv
C
e
en bur
ba
Su y 1
t
n
- C ral
r
v
Su
e
rv y 9 ent Ru
ra
ey
- C ral
-R l
13
e
ur
Su - S ntra
al
l
ou
rv
th - Ur
C ey
- S ba
as
12
e
ub n
st
ud Sou urb
y
th
an
4
-N -U
r
b
or
th an
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Total Partner Contribution to Enrolled Services
Figure III-39: Total Partner Dollar Contribution to "Enrolled Services" by One-Stop
$2,000,000
$1,750,000
$1,500,000
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
$250,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-40: Total Partner Contribution to "Enrolled Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Enrolled Services Cost
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
47
Su Total Partner Contribution to "Business Services" as a Percentage of Onerv
Stop Total Business Services Cost
ey
5
-S
ou
th
Su - S
ub
rv
e
ur
ba
Su y 7
n
rv
/R
ey C e
n
8
tra ura
Su
l
lC
en
rv
R
ur
tra
Su ey
a
2
l
l
rv
ey - S - Ur
ou
ba
Su 15
th
C
n
-S
as
rv
-R
e
e
ur
st y 1 out
al
ud
-C hy
en Ur
2
Su
- N tra ba
n
rv
l
ey orth - R
- S ura
14
Su
l
rv
u
ey - So bu
rb
u
1
S
Su urv 6 - th - an
So
e
rv
U
rb
ey y 1
ut
an
7
h
4
So
U
Su Su
N
rb
or
u
rv
rv
a
th
th
ey
ey
n
18 10 - U - Ur
ba
- N - N rba
n
n
or
o
/R
th
C rth
as
- S - S ura
C
e
l
ub ub
as
st
C
u
ur
e
ud
a
st
ba rba
y
u d se
n
n
4
st
y
-N /R
u
3
ur
or
- C dy
a
1
t
l
en
-S htr
ou Ru
Su al ra
th
R
rv
ur - U l
e
al
r
Su y 1
/S ba
1
r
- N ub n
Su ve
or urb
rv y 9
an
ey
- C th
1
e
3
Su
nt Urb
r
rv
an
ey Sou al U
th
6
- S rba
Su - S
o
ub n
rv
ey uth
u
- S rba
12
Su
- S ub n
ur
rv
ey out
ba
h
n
3
-N -U
r
ba
or
th
n
-R
ur
al
y
5
-S
ou
th
Su - S
ub
rv
e
ur
Su y 7
b
- C an
rv
ey
en / R
ur
8
t
al
Su - C ral
rv
en - R
e
u
t
Su
y
ra
r
a
2
l
rv
l
ey - S - U
rb
Su 15 out
a
n
-S hrv
e
R
ur
Su y 1 out
al
h
rv
e y Ce - U
r
ba
Su
14 ntr
al
Su
n
r
rv vey - So - R
ey
ur
ut
16
a
h
4
-U l
-N -S
C
rb
as ort out
a
h
h
n
e
-U -U
st
u
rb
rb
Su dy
a
a
C
n
as rve 4 - n /
R
e
N
y
u
or
st
1
ud 7 th ral
y
S
S
Su
R
2
u
o
r
u
ur
rv
ey vey - No th
a
rth - U l
18 10
r
- N - N - S ba
ub n
o
or
th rth
u
Su - S - S rba
n
Su rve ubu ubu
y
r
rb
rv
ey 1 1
an ban
1
/R
C
as 3 - Nor
th ura
So
e
C
l
as
st
u
ud
U
th
e
st
y
- S rba
ud Sur
1
n
u
-S
ve
y
bu
3
y
rb
- C 12 out
an
en
-S hU
tra
ou
r
b
l
Su - R th - an
ur
U
r
r
al
Su vey
/S ban
3
rv
u
b
-N
Su ey
ur
o
ba
9
rv
n
ey - C rth
en - R
6
-S
tra
ur
al
l
ou
th - Ur
- S ba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
e
Total Partner Contribution to Business Services
Figure III-41: Total Partner Contribution to "Business Services" by One-Stop
$2,000,000
$1,750,000
$1,500,000
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
$250,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-42: Total Partner Contribution to "Business Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Business Services Cost
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
48
C Total Partner Contribution to "Youth Services" as a Percentage of Onea
Stop Total Youth Services Cost
Su se
st
rv
e y u dy
5
2
-S
ou Nor
th
th
Su
rv Sub Sub
ey
ur
ur
ba
b
8
Su
- C an
n
rv
/
e
en
Su
R
y
ur
tra
9
rv
al
l
ey - C
en - Ur
6
ba
tra
Su - S
n
l
o
rv
ey uth - Ur
- S ba
16
Su
n
u
rv
ey - So bu
15 uth rba
n
Su
-S
rv
ou Urb
Su e y
a
t
h
n
2
-S -U
Su rve
y
rv
12 out rba
e
n
Su
y
-S h1
rv
R
o
ey 3 ur
So uth
a
4
-U l
- N ut
h
rb
o
rt
Su
Su an
rv h b
U
ey
rb urb
1
an
- C an
Su
Su
rv
en / Ru
ey
rv
tra
r
S
al
ey
ur
3
l
1 8 ve y - N - R
ur
or
7
al
th
C
N
as
C orth Ce
e
as
nt Rur
st
r
al
e
ud
st Sub al y
ud
R
u
3
- C y 1 rba ura
l
en
-S n/
t
C
ou Ru
as ral
r
t
a
h
-R
e
l
Su stu
ur - U
rb
a
d
rv
ey y 4 l/Su an
- N bu
10
Su - N ort rba
n
h
or
rv
-R
th
e
Su y 11 - S ura
ub
l
rv
ey - N
u
14 orth rba
Su
n
rv
ey - So - Ur
17 uth ba
n
-S
ou Urb
an
th
-U
rb
an
rv
e
y
e
5
as
st
ud
-S
y
2
ou Nor
th
th
Su
-S
rv Su
bu ubu
Su ey
rb
rb
8
rv
an
e y - C an
en / R
6
ur
tra
Su - S
al
l
o
rv
ey uth - U
- S rba
Su 9
n
u
rv - C
ey
en bu
15 tra rba
Su
n
l
rv
e y - So - U
16 uth rba
n
Su
rv - So - U
rb
ut
Su e y
a
h
2
n
-S -U
S u r ve
y
ou rb
rv
a
ey 12
t
n
h
-R
13 - S
ur
- S out
a
h
Su
Su
ou
l
Su rv
th - Ur
ey rve
- S ba
rv
y
ey
4
n
3
- N ub u
18 - N
- N orth ort rba
n
or
-U hth
R
ur
Su - S rba
al
n
u
rv
/
e y bu
rb Rur
7
S
an
al
Ca
ur
/
se
C a ve y C e
nt R u
st
s
1
r
r
e
ud
al
a
st
-R l
y
ud C e
3
- C y 1 n tr a u r a
l
len
Ca tra Sou Ru
ra
th
se l l
Su stu Rur - U
rb
a
rv
d
ey y 4 l/Su an
- N bu
10
Su - N ort rba
n
h
or
rv
-R
th
e
- S ur
Su y 1
1
a
ub
rv
l
ey - N
u
14 orth rba
Su
n
rv
e y - So - U
1 7 uth r b a
n
-S
ou Urb
an
th
-U
rb
an
Su
C
Total Partner Contribution to Youth Services
Figure III-43: Total Partner Contribution to "Youth Services" by One-Stop
$2,000,000
$1,750,000
$1,500,000
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
$250,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-44: Total Partner Contribution to "Youth Services" as a Percentage of OneStop Total Youth Services Cost
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
49
Specific Partner Contributions
The next aspect of partnership we examined was the contribution of specific partners or types of
partners. To do this, we identified federal and state agencies that appeared in our sample OneStops, such as the Department of Rehabilitation and EDD. We put local partners such as local
adult education agencies together as a group, as well. The figure below shows the number of
sites in which each agency made a measurable contribution. EDD was by far the most common
partner, appearing in 20 our f 22 One-Stops, followed by a variety of local programs ranging
from Goodwill to local tribal councils to housing associations. The Department of Rehabilitation
was active in 14 sites. Community Colleges or other higher education institutions were found in
about half the sites. Local educational agencies and local adult education programs each were
found in fewer than 10 One-Stops.
Figure III-45: Number of One-Stops Served by Partners
22
Number of One-Stops Served by Partner
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
rt n
D
Pa
oc
al
/U
O
th
e
rL
ge
ol
le
Lo
ca
lC
ED
er
s
R
DO
ve
ni
lS
ca
Lo
er
th
O
ca
Lo
rs
oo
ch
ho
Sc
lt
du
lA
g
in
ity
l
ol
SA
HH
ps
b
Jo
d
an
C
Ad
or
ul
t
RP
DC
SB
LE
AB
AA
Ag
Ve
te
ra
ns
Ad
m
in
.
0
Partner
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
50
The dollar contributions of partners shed more light on these relationships. We looked at dollar
contributions from two different angles. First we looked at the actual dollar value of
contributions and next as a percentage of total One-Stop costs. Again EDD is by far the largest
contributor to One-Stops, with costs of over $12 million in the 22 One-Stops studied. The next
largest group of partners was the mixed local agencies which contributed slightly less than $4
million. Health and Human Service Agencies, including many local CalWorks programs
contributed over $2 million in costs. No other partner contributed even $1 million across all the
22 sample sites.
Figure III-46: Total Partner Contribution for All One-Stops in the Sample
$14,000,000
Partner Contribution to One-Stop Costs
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
rtn
D
Pa
ED
er
s
SA
rL
th
e
O
O
th
e
rL
oc
oc
al
al
ni
HH
ol
ve
Sc
ho
rs
it
y
R
DO
ge
Lo
ca
lC
Lo
ol
le
ca
in
lA
g
du
an
/U
d
lt
S
ch
Ad
oo
l
ul
t
LE
b
C
AB
or
ps
DC
RP
AA
SB
Jo
Ag
Ve
te
ra
ns
Ad
m
in
.
$0
Partner Type
Looking at these contributions as a percent of the total $66.5 million in our sampled One-Stops'
costs, we see that EDD accounted for almost 20% of all the costs in the sampled One-Stops. The
next largest contribution was 6% by a mixed group of local agencies. Health and Human
services accounted for almost 4% of total costs, while all other partners accounted for less than
2% of total costs.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
51
5
-S
ou
th
-S
Su
ub
rv
ur
ey
Su
ba
17
rv
n
ey
/R
-S
10
ur
ou
al
t
h
Su
N
-U
or
rv
th
rb
ey
-S
an
16
Su
- S ubu
rv
r
ey
ou
ba
th
14
n
S
-U
-S
Su urv
rb
ou
Su rve ey
a
th
n
11
y
rv
-U
4
ey
-N -N
rb
18
o
an
o
rth
- N rth
-U -U
or
rb
th
rb
-S
an an
Su
ub
/R
rv
ur
ey
ba ura
7
l
Su
n
-C
/R
rv
C
en
as
ey
ur
C
e
t
al
15
ra
a
st
ud se
-S l-R
st
y
ou
ur
ud
3
al
th
-C
y
-U
en 4 rb
N
tra
C
an
or
as
lth
e
R
-R
st
ur
ud
Su
al
ur
/S
y
al
rv
1
ub
ey
-S
ur
13
ba
ou
-S
n
th
Su
ou
-U
rv
th
ey
rb
a
9
Su
n
-C
bu
C
Su
en
as
rb
rv
t
e
a
ra
ey
n
st
lud
3
U
-N
y
rb
2
o
an
Su - No rth
rth - R
rv
e
u
Su
y
-S
ra
1
l
rv
ub
-C
ey
ur
en
6
ba
t
r
n
al
So
Su
-R
ut
rv
h
ey
ur
a
12
S
l
- S ubu
rb
ou
a
th
n
-U
rb
an
Su
rv
ey
EDD Contribution
AB
LE
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
D
O
R
ED
D
O
H
th
H
er
SA
Lo
ca
lP
ar
tn
er
s
/U
ni
ve
O
rs
th
ity
er
Lo
ca
lS
ch
oo
l
Lo
ca
lC
ol
le
ge
an
d
Ad
Lo
ul
ca
t
lA
du
lt
Sc
ho
ol
Ag
in
g
C
or
ps
SB
D
C
AA
R
P
Ad
m
in
.
Jo
b
Ve
te
ra
ns
Partner Contribution as a Percentage of One-Stop Costs
Figure III- 47: Partner Contributions as a Percent of All One-Stop Costs
20.0%
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0%
8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
Partner Type
In the following figures, we show the contribution of key partners to each of the survey sites in
dollar amount to illustrate how costs varied across the sites.
Figure III-48: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: EDD
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
One-Stop
52
Figure III-49: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Partners Not Otherwise Categorized
$2,500,000
Contribution by Other Partners
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
th
n
-U
r
u
b
ey
rb
an
a
7
-C n/
R
en
ur
tra
al
lRu
ra
l
ur
ub
Su
th
or
Su
rv
ey
y
3
18
-N
rv
-S
ub
ou
/S
al
12
ey
rv
Su
en
-C
-S
ur
R
l-
tra
1
ey
rv
Su
st
ud
Ca
se
ba
ra
ba
Ru
tra
l-
ur
en
ub
-S
-C
th
ou
-S
13
l
n
al
ur
al
-R
th
or
-N
ou
4
y
st
ud
ey
rv
Su
Ca
se
rv
ur
ur
al
th
/R
an
rb
-S
2
ey
th
or
Su
-N
rv
-R
ba
ur
ub
-S
-U
th
ou
-S
ey
rv
Su
rv
e
Su
Su
4
ey
6
ey
n
n
n
ba
ba
tra
en
-C
8
-C
9
ey
rv
Su
Ur
l-
Ur
tra
n
en
ur
ba
l-
/R
ur
al
n
an
rb
a
-U
th
ub
-S
rv
Su
y
5
-S
Su
rv
ou
th
ey
ey
14
11
-S
ou
or
-N
ou
th
th
-U
-U
rb
rb
a
n
ur
al
ba
rv
Su
Su
rv
rv
ey
ey
16
3
-S
-N
or
th
-R
ur
ub
th
or
-N
Su
st
ud
ey
rv
se
Ca
Su
y
10
2
-N
or
th
-S
-S
ub
ur
ba
n
n
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-50: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Health and Human Services Agency
(HHSA)
$1,719,219
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
HHSA Contribution
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$372,572
$400,000
$212,116
$200,000
$91,500
$134,310
$2,236
$0
Survey 3 - North Rural
Case study 3 Central Rural/Suburban
Survey 1 - Central Rural
Survey 4 - North Urban / Rural
Survey 13 - South - Case study 4 - North
Suburban
- Rural
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
53
Figure III-51: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Local College or University
$500,000
Local College or University Contribution
$450,000
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$198,940
$200,000
$150,000
$129,333
$138,674
$100,000
$50,000
$34,500
$23,850
$20,404
$44,880
$56,200
$1,461
$0
Survey 3 North - Rural
Survey 7 Central Rural
Survey 15 - Survey 14 Survey 4 Survey 12 - Survey 17 South - Urban South - Urban North - Urban South - Urban South - Urban
/ Rural
Survey 9 Central Urban
Survey 13 South Suburban
One-Stop
Figure III-52: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Department of Rehabilitation
Department of Rehabilitation Contribution
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$42,191
$30,413 $32,465
$18,951 $20,275 $20,276 $25,641
$5,069 $5,677 $10,138 $10,138 $11,485 $12,189 $16,220
$50,000
n
-S
th
ou
y
rv
e
Su
6
y
rv
e
9
-S
12
ey
Su
ub
ur
Su
-C
ba
rv
en
n
ey
tra
13
l-S
Ur
ba
ou
n
Su
th
-S
rv
ey
ub
14
ur
Su
ba
-S
rv
n
ou
ey
th
10
Su
Ur
-N
rv
ba
or
Ca
ey
n
th
se
4
-S
st
N
u
ud
bu
or
th
y
rb
3
an
-U
-C
r
ba
en
n
tra
/R
lur
R
al
ur
Su
al
rv
/
Su
e
y
Ca
bu
1
se
rb
-C
an
st
e
nt
ud
r
y
a
l
2
-R
-N
ur
or
al
th
-S
ub
ur
ba
n
rb
a
-U
-R
-S
ou
th
or
th
rv
Su
Ca
se
st
ud
y
1
4
-S
-N
ou
th
-U
-R
st
ud
y
e
Ca
s
ur
a
rb
an
ur
al
l
ra
Ru
ou
th
l2
-S
en
tra
ey
7
-C
Su
rv
y
rv
e
Su
l
$0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
54
Figure III-53: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Local Adult School
$500,000
$450,000
Local Adult School Contribution
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$149,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$9,200
$21,679
$23,460
$25,200
Survey 1 - Central Rural
Survey 10 - North Suburban
$29,321
$0
Case study 2 - North Survey 8 - Central - Suburban
Urban
Survey 7 - Central - Case study 1 - South
Rural
- Urban
One-Stop
What do different One-Stop services cost to produce and how do costs vary
between sites? How much service do One-Stops produce and how does
volume vary by site?
A key objective of our study was to develop some “cost per unit” measures for One-Stops to
better understand their cost structures and to begin to develop some measures of efficiency that
managers could use to improve. Most industries have standardized cost per unit measures, auto
companies know the cost per car produced, airlines know the cost per passenger mile flown,
public libraries know the cost of purchasing and shelving a new book and colleges know the cost
per enrolled student. Knowing these “cost-pers” allows organizations to compare their
performance to other similar organizations and track their performance over time, and identify
areas where improvement is needed. In this section we make the first effort to define and
measure cost per unit of service produced in One-Stops. Because this is a first effort, we
attempted to measure everything we could. Over time, through feedback and discussion, we
expect the field will arrive at a limited number of cost per unit of service measures which will
become standard management indicators recognized and used throughout the system.
We have organized our measures around the four processes as we have other sections.
Universal Services
Universal services accounted for about 25% of the costs in One-Stops surveyed. These services
are open to anyone who walks into a One-Stop. In theory, Universal services are provided on a
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
55
self-service basis, but much like the public library, many clients need help and One-Stops
provide it by providing orientations on how to use the available services. Most sites provide
some One-on-one coaching, such as reviewing resumes or help with computers, and most OneStops provide various workshops which may serve both universal and enrolled clients.
From our case study experience we found that there were two key cost per-unit measures for
universal services: cost per universal client and cost per universal visit. The median cost per
universal client was $166, with a range of $33 to $554. The cost per client visit clustered around
$40 per visit, with a few outliers at higher and lower costs. This relatively tight clustering in cost
per universal access visit is not surprising in retrospect, as we found in our case studies that most
universal access processes deliver roughly the same types of services, and hence might be
expected to have similar cost structure.
The variance in cost per client is explained by the average number of visits made by clients. As
we see in the figure below, the average number of visits by clients varies from one to twelve.
Obviously clients who visit many times on average will cost more to service than clients who
come a few times. The management insight here is that managing the number of client visits is a
way to manage universal costs.
Table III-6: Universal Services: Median Cost and Range Of Cost Per-Unit of Service
and Range
Unit of Service
Median Cost Per
Range
Per Universal Client
$166
$33 - $554
Per Universal Visit
$41
$8 - $146
Per Universal Service Event
$8
$2 - $30
Per Coaching and 1-on-1 assistance
$20
$6 - 145
Event
Per Client Orientated to One-Stop
$34
$8 - $308
Per Workshop
$942
$135 - $5,838
Per Client Attending Workshop
$118
$23 - $612
Per Attendee at Job Club or
$61
$10 - $318
Networking Event
Within the universal process we were able to cost some additional activities, the median cost of a
self-service event was only $8, median cost of orienting a new client to universal services was
$34, while coaching clients in universal services had a median cost of $20 per coaching event.
Workshops had a median cost of $942 per workshop and a median cost of $118 per attendee. The
substantial range in workshop costs is driven largely by the length of the workshop which could
be one hour or several days, and the number of clients attending. Most One-Stops have job
clubs or other types of networking activities where job seekers meet and help each other search
for employment and build skills. Only a few survey sites could provide data on this activity.
Most of these activities are run by volunteers and require little staff assistance but the median
cost is still $61 per attendee at an event.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
56
Su
S
rv
ey urv
ey
5
- S 12
ou
-S
th
o
C
- S uth
as
ub
e
st
ur Urb
ud
ba
an
y
n
4
Su
-N /R
rv
u
e
or
ra
Su y 2
th
l
-R
rv
-S
Su ey
ur
ou
7
a
rv
l
- C th ey
R
en
6
tra ura
Su - S
l
o
lrv
R
ey uth
- S ura
16
Su
l
- S ubu
rv
ey
rb
ou
Su
an
17
th
Su
rv
ey
-U
rv
-S
18 ey
rb
ou
an
th
-N 8Su
-U
C
or
e
th
rv
rb
n
t
ey
an
- S ra
4
ub l - U
ur
Su - N
rb
b
o
rv
an an
rth
ey
/R
10 - U
Su
ur
r
b
rv
-N
al
an
ey
or
/R
13
th
u
Su ral
Su - So
bu
ut
rv
ey
h
rb
11
Su
Su an
rv
bu
-N
e
rb
C
or
as y 9
an
e
- C th C
st
as
U
en
u
rb
dy
e
t
an
ra
st
1
l
ud
-S -U
y
rb
ou
2
an
-N
th
Su
-U
or
rv
th
ey
rb
14
Su
Su an
-S
rv
bu
ey
rb
ou
an
15
th
C
-U
Su
-S
as
rv
rb
ou
e
e
an
th
st
y
ud Su
3
-U
rv
y
ey - N
rb
3
o
an
-C
rt
1
en - C h R
tra en
u
ra
tr
ll
R al ur
al Ru
ra
/S
ub l
ur
ba
n
Number of Unique Universal Clients
10
-N
or
Su
th
rv
-S
ey
Su
ub
3
rv
ur
ey - N
ba
11 orth
Su
n
rv
-N
-R
ey
or
ur
15
th
a
Su
-U l
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
a
14
th
Su
n
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
a
1
th
n
Su
6
-U
-S
rv
rb
ey
ou
Su
a
t
S
1
rv
n
-C hey urv
en Urb
18 ey
a
t
8
r
-N
n
- C al
Su
or
en - R
th
rv
ur
ey
- S tra
a
4
ub l - U l
-N
ur
ba rba
or
Su
n
th
n
rv
/R
-U
ey
ur
rb
9
al
a
Su
n
-C
/R
rv
en
ey
u
tra
ra
17
l
lS
-S
U
Su urv
rb
o
ut
ey
a
rv
n
h
ey
2
-S -U
13
rb
C
as
- S ou
an
e
ou th st
t
R
ud
h
u
-S
y
ra
Su
1
l
- S ubu
rv
rb
ou
Su Su ey
an
t
7
h
r
rv
v
-C
-U
ey ey
en
r
6
5
tra ban
-S -S
lC
ou ou
as
R
t
t
h
h
e
- S - S ura
st
l
ud
ub ub
ur
y
ur
2
b
C
- N ban an
as
C
or
e
/R
as
st
th
ud
e
- S ura
st
S
y
l
u
ud ur
4
ve
- N bur
y
3
ba
y
o
- C 12
rth
n
en
-R
tra So
u
u
r
lt
al
R hur
U
r
al
/S ban
ub
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
ey
Total Cost per Universal Client
In the next section we present the complete cost distributions the universal services produced in
most One-Stops, which we could measure. In most cases there are a substantial range of costs
which are driven in part by the number of clients who receive the service, so we have included
the volume of service produced by each One-Stop and matched it with the costs
Figure III-54: Total Cost per Universal Client
$600
$500
$400
$300
$200
$100
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-55: Total Number of Unique Universal Clients
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
57
rv
y
ey
rv
e
7
-C
e
Su 8 - ntra
l
rv
C
en - R
ey
Su
12 tra ura
Su
rv
l
l
rv
-S
e
ey
Su y 5
ou Urb
1
a
th
rv
4
n
e y So
-S
1 8 ut h
ou Urb
a
th
-N -S
-U n
u
or
t h bu r
rb
b
an
Su
a
r v S ub n /
ey
Ru
ur
b
1
Su
ra
a
7
l
rv
-S n/
ey
R
o
16 uth ura
Su
-U l
-S
r
Ca rvey ou
t h ba n
s
2
Su
e
-S -U
st
rv
e y u dy o u r ba
th
n
4
4
-N -R
Su - N
u
o
o
rv
ra
rt
e y r th
l
-U hRu
Su 1 0
r
b
-N
ra
rv
an
Ca
ey
or
/R l
th
se
6
-S
- S u ra
st
S
ud
l
ur
ou
u
ve
y
th bur
3
y
- S ba
-C
1
- C ub n
en
en urb
tra
tra
a
lSu
l- n
R
ur
Ru
rv
a
e
ra
l
y
Su
l
3 / Su
r
C a v e y - N bu r
o
11
se
rth ban
st
ud - No - R
r t h ur a
Su y 1
rv
-U l
e y - So
ut rba
15
Su
h
n
Ca
r
-S
se ve y
ou Urb
9
st
a
t
h
n
u
Su dy 2 Cen - Ur
ba
tra
rv
ey
n
N
l
13 orth - U
r
-S
- S b an
ou
ub
th
u
- S r ba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
Su
Number of Universal Visits
rv
ey
rv
4
11
y
9
3
2
en
tra
l-
an
ur
rb
n
n
an
ba
rb
-R
-U
-U
th
th
th
or
ou
-N
-S
ou
rb
a
ur
-U
ub
th
-S
or
th
-S
or
-N
-C
ey
15
16
-N
rv
e
ey
Su
Su
y
y
rv
rv
e
rv
e
Su
Su
y
10
rv
e
y
Su
rv
e
Su
-N
or
-S
ou
al
Ur
b
rv
th an
rv
e y th ey
-R
U
6
5
r
ur
b
-S
So
an
al
ou
ut
/
Ca
R
h
th
u
se
-S
S u r al
u
st
bu
u d bu
Su
r
S u y 1 ba r ban
rv
n
ey
rv
ey
So / R
18
ur
ut
-N 8a
h
C
-U l
or
e
nt
Ca t h
r
b
ra
an
se - S
l
s t ubu - U
rb
ud
r
b
S
an
Ca urv y 4 an
-N /R
ey
se
u
or
17
st
ra
ud
l
- S th y
ou R u
2
ra
th
Su - N
Ca
-U l
or
rv
th
se
e
- S r ba
Su y 1
st
ud
ub n
rv
y
ey Ce
u
3
1 4 nt r a r ba
-C
n
-S len
tr
ou R u
ra
th
Su a l -U l
R
rv
ur
e
r
S u y 7 a l / S ba n
r
S u v e y C e u bu
nt
r
rv
r a b an
ey 12
l13 - S
Ru
- S out
ra
l
ou h U
th
r
- S ba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
Su
Su
Su
Total Cost per Universal Visit
Figure III-56: Total Cost per Universal Visit
$160
$140
$120
$100
$80
$60
$40
$20
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-57: Total Number of Universal Visits
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
58
Su
rv
ey
Su 14
rv
ey So
ut
1
h
Su
C
en Urb
rv
ey
t
an
r
Su
al
3
-R
rv
ey - N
Su
u
or
ra
S
7
rv
l
- C th ey urv
R
en
18 ey
ur
8
t
r
al
-N
- C al
or
en - R
Su
th
ur
rv
- S tra
a
ey
ub l - U l
10
u
r
- N rba ban
Su
n
or
rv
/R
th
ey
- S ura
17
Su
l
u
Su
-S
rv
b
e
rv
ou urb
ey y 1
a
th
n
5
4
-U
-N -S
rb
ou
o
a
Su
th
rth
n
-U
rv
ey - U
rb
rb
a
1
a
Su
n
6
-S n/
rv
ey
C
ou Ru
as
r
11
th
al
e
s
-N -U
rb
Su tud
or
y
a
th
rv
n
ey 1 -U
S
6
rb
- S out
a
n
ou h Su
U
th
rv
rb
e
a
Su
y
Su
n
2
C
rv
bu
-S
a
e
rb
ou
Su se s y 9
a
n
t
rv
- C th
ey udy
en - R
2
5
u
t
r
r
-N
-S
a
a
or l - U l
ou
th
th
rb
C
a
-S
as
Su
n
C
e
ub
b
as
st
ud urb urb
e
an
Su
st
an
y
ud
4
rv
-N /R
y
ey
3
u
o
r
- C 12
rt
al
-S hSu ent
R
ou
ra
ur
rv
al
e y l - R th U
13
ur
r
- S al/S ba
ub n
ou
u
th
- S rba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Number of Visits Per Universal Client
Figure III-58: Average Number of Visits per Universal Client
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
59
y
5
-S
ou
t
Su h S
rv
ey ubu
rb
Su 8
an
rv
/R
ey Cen
u
Su
1 7 tra
l - ral
r
v
Su
ey
So
U
rb
rv
ut
a
ey 14
h
-U n
10 - S
o
Su - N uth rba
n
or
rv
th - U
e
C
as y 7
- S rba
e
ub n
Su stu Ce
nt urb
d
rv
an
ey y 4 ral
Su
6
rv
- S No Rur
S
rth
ey
ur
a
o
18 vey uth
-R l
- S ur
- N 16
or
- S ub a l
th
ur
ba
- S out
Su
n
ub h rv
ey
ur Ur
ba ba
Su 11
n
n
rv
/R
ey - N
or
t h u ra
Su 1 l
C
rv
ey ent Urb
a
r
a
Su 2
n
-S lr
ou Ru
Su vey
r
a
t
3
r
h
-N -R l
C vey
a
9
or
ur
C se
t
al
h
as
st
C
ud
en - R
e
y
st
tra
ur
ud
1
- S l - U al
y
2
Su
- N out rba
n
rv
or h e
th
U
Su y 15
- S rba
r
- S ub n
Su ve
ur
y
rv
12 out
ba
e
C
h
y
as Su
-U n
13 - S
rv
e
ou
ey
rb
st
So th
ud
a
4
y
-U n
u
3 - N o th
-C
rth - S rba
n
en
u
tra - Ur bur
ba
ba
ln
n
R
/
ur
al Ru
/S
ra
ub
l
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
e
Number of Universal Service Events (e.g. faxed a resume, accessed career
information on internet)
Cost per Universal Service Event (e.g. fax a resume, access career
information on internet)
Su
r
C
as vey
e
2
st
-S
u
Su
rv dy 1 out
h
ey
10 - So - R
- N uth ura
Su
or
-U l
th
rv
rb
e
Su
y
Su an
3
rv
- N bu
ey
rb
or
an
Su 15
t
-S hrv
R
e
ou
Su
ur
y
th
1
a
Su
rv
ey
-U l
rv 1 N
ey
18
rb
o
rth
an
- N 16
-U
-S
or
th
rb
ou
an
-S
th
Su
-U
ub
rv
ey
ur
rb
ba
an
12
Su
rv
-S n/
ey
ou Ru
ra
th
Su 9 -U l
C
rv
en
ey
r
b
an
14 tra
Su
C
-S l-U
as rve
rb
ou
y
e
an
1
th
st
ud 7 -U
So
y
r
2
ba
Ca
Su
u
n
se - No th rv
ey
U
rth
st
r
ud
5
ba
-S
y
Su
n
4
ou
- N bu
th
rb
o
a
rt
Su - S
n
ub h rv
Ru
ur
Su e y
b
ra
1
a
rv
l
-C n/
ey
R
en
6
ur
t
ra
al
So
Su
lut
rv
R
h
e
- S ura
Su y 7
l
ub
-C
Su
rv
ur
e
en
rv
ey y 8
tra ban
-C
l4
C
as
e
Ru
Su - N
e
or ntra
ra
rv
st
t
l
lh
u d ey
U
13 - U
y
rb
3
r
ba
an
-C -S
n
en out
/R
h
tra
- S ura
ll
u
R
bu
ur
rb
al
an
/S
ub
ur
ba
n
Figure III-59: Cost per Self-Service Activity: Universal Service Event (e.g. fax a resume,
access career information on internet)
$30.00
$25.00
$20.00
$15.00
$10.00
$5.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-60: Volume of Universal Service Events (e.g. faxed a resume, accessed career
information on internet)
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
60
7
-C
Universal - Number of Times One-on-one Coaching Events Occur
Su
rv
2
en
tra
l
ey
Su
So - R
u
rv
9
ey
- C uth ral
10
en - R
ur
S u - N tra
al
l
rv
o
e y r t h - Ur
Su
b
Su 16
rv
S u an
ey
r
1 8 ve y S o bu r
u
11
t h ba
-N
Ca
-N -U n
or
se
t
r
or
Su h st
t h ba n
ud
rv S u
y
e y bu - U r
3
ba
1 4 r ba
-C
n
-S n/
en
ou R u
tra
Su
t
l
r
rv
h
Su - R
ey
- U al
rv ur
5
r
- S ey al/S ban
3
ou
ub
N
t
or u rb
Su h th an
rv S u
-R
b
e
Su
ur
y
ur
1
b
rv
al
e y 7 - an
/
S
6
R
o
ut
ur
h
a
C a S ur S o
ve uth - U l
se
r
y
- S ba
st
1
n
ud
u
C a y 2 C e n bu r
tra ba
se
-N
n
l
st
u ort h - R
S u dy 1 - S u ra
l
rv
ub
ey - S
u
S u 1 5 o ut h r b a
n
r
Su v ey - So - U
rb
rv
ut
1
a
2
h
n
Su ey
-S
1
rv
ou U rb
ey 3 a
t
S
h
n
4
- N outh - U
- S rba
S u ort
rv h ub n
e
C a y 8 U rb urb
an
an
se
s t C en / R
ud
tra u r
y
al
l
4
-N -U
or r b a
th
n
-R
ur
al
ey
ey
rv
rv
Su
Su
Su
rv
ey
14
Su
rv
-S
ey
o
17 uth
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
o
r
Su Su
15 uth ban
rv
rv
ey
-U
-S
ey
6
ou
rb
5
an
-S -S
t
ou h ou
Ur
th
th
b
Su - S - Su an
u
rv
bu
e y bu r
rb
an
1 1 ba
n
S
Su urv - No / R
u
e
r
rv
ra
th
ey y 3
l
-N -U
10
rb
o
-N
an
Su
rth
o
rv
-R
ey rth
Su
- S ura
16
Su
rv
l
ey
rv
- S ub
ur
ey
18
o
ba
- N 12 uth
n
-U
-S
o
Ca rth
o
r
- S uth ban
se
-U
u
st
ud bu
rb
rb
y
a n an
1
Ca Sur
se ve y S o / R
ur
ut
st
a
h
ud 1 Ca
-U l
C
y
en
se
rb
2
- N tra
an
st
ud Sur
l
ve orth - R
y
3
u
y
-S
ra
-C
7
l
u
en - C
en bur
tra
b
tra
an
lSu
lR
ur
rv
Ru
al
ra
Su ey
/
S
2
l
u
Su
rv
bu
ey - S
rv
r
o
ba
ey
9
ut
n
h
4
-R
- N Ce
nt
ur
ra
Su ort
a
lh
l
r
Ur
S u ve y - U
ba
rb
rv
8
a
n
ey
-C
n
1
en / R
Ca 3 tra ur
a
So
se
ll
u
Ur
st
ud th ba
y
Su
n
4
- N bu
or rba
n
th
-R
ur
al
Cost per One-on-one Coaching Event
Figure III-61: Cost per Universal One-on-one Coaching Event
$160.00
$140.00
$120.00
$100.00
$80.00
$60.00
$40.00
$20.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-62: Volume of Universal One-on-one Coaching Events
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
61
ey
5
Su
rv
e
y
12
-S
ou
-S
Ca
th
o
- S uth
se
ub
-U
st
ud
u
rb
an
S u y 1 rba
n
rv
-S
/
ey
ou Ru
r
1
Su 1 - th - al
Ur
rv
No
rth ba
Su e y
2
r
-U n
S u ve y - S
ou rba
rv
9
n
ey
- C th
Ca
S
1
en - R
s e urv
ur
ey 0 tra
st
al
N
l
ud
4
- N orth - U
y
r
3
- C orth - S ban
ub
en
ur
tra Ur
ba
b
l
Su
n
- R an
rv
/
R
Su
Su ey ura
l/S ura
7
rv
rv
l
ey
-C
e
u
18 y 6
en bu r
tra ba
-N -S
n
ou
lor
th
R
th
Su
- S - S ura
l
ub
rv
u
e y bu
ur
ba
14 rba
Su
rv
-S n/ n
ey
R
o
16 uth ura
Su
rv
-S
-U l
ey
ou
r
1
th ban
Su 7 -U
S
rv
ou
rb
Su e y
an
th
3
rv
-N -U
ey
r
ba
o
8
n
- C rth
Ca Sur
en - R
se ve
y
ur
tra
st
1
al
u
l
Su dy 2 Ce - Ur
nt
ba
rv
r
ey
al
n
N
13 orth - R
- S u ra
Su - S
l
ou
ub
rv
ur
C e y 1 th ba
as
S
5
n
u
e
st - S o b u
ud
rb
ut
a
y
h
n
4
-N -U
or rba
n
th
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
Number of New Universal Clients
Su
rv
e
Su y 1 0
rv
ey - N
13 orth
-S
Su - S
o
u
rv
ey uth bur
Su
1 1 - S ba n
ub
rv
ey - N
or urb
a
th
Su 15
-U n
rv
ey So
r
b
ut
an
7
Su
h
rv
ey Cen Ur
b
tr
S
an
1
Su urv
- C al e
rv
R
ur
ey y 1 entr
al
6
a
4
-N -S l-R
ou
u
o
Su
ra
r
t
l
rv th - h Ur
ey
U
r
b
b
Su 8 an
an
rv
C
en / R
ey
Su
14 tra ura
rv
ey
Su
-S l-U l
rv
18
ou
r
- N ey
t h b an
-U
or 3 th
N
rb
o
an
Su Su rth
-R
Su rve bur
u
b
y
ra
rv
a
2
l
ey
-S n/
6
Ru
Su - S out
ra
h
o
rv
-R l
e y u th
Su
- S u ra
Su 9 rv
l
u
rv
ey
C
en bu
ey
5
17 tra rba
-S
n
l
Ca
o
-S
-U
se
Ca uth
o
r
st
- S uth ban
se
ud
u
s
bu
tu
y
Ur
3
d
ba
- C y 1 rba
n
en
-S n/
tra
ou Ru
Su
r
lth
a
C
-U l
as rve Ru
r
e
y
12 al/S rba
st
ud
- S ub n
y
ou u r b
Ca 2
th
an
se
N
st orth - U
ud
rb
a
y
Su
n
4
- N bu
or rba
th
n
-R
ur
al
Cost per New Universal Client
Figure III-63: Cost per New Universal Client
$350.00
$300.00
$250.00
$200.00
$150.00
$100.00
$50.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-64: Volume of New Universal Clients
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
62
rv
y
y
ey
rv
e
rv
e
9
-S
-C
16
ou
th
en
t
-U
rb
ra
an
Su 8 l
-U
C
rv
en
ey
rb
t
r
an
7
al
Su
rv Cen Urb
e
t
an
Su
ra
y
3
l
rv
-N -R
Ca ey
u
o
17
ra
se
rt
l
-S hst
ud
ou R u
Su
y
ra
th
Su
rv
1
-U l
ey
-S
rv
e
rb
ou
5
an
-S y1
th
-C
ou
-U
e
t
h
rb
C
n
tra
-S
as
an
le
u
Su stu bu
Ru
r
d
b
rv
an ral
ey y 4
-N /R
10
ur
o
S
al
Ca urv No rth
-R
ey rth
se
u
1
st
Su ral
ud 5 y
S o bu
r
2
u
Su
th ban
-U
rv Nor
e
t
h
Su
r
y
- S ba
1
rv
ey 2 ub n
S
u
6
rb
- S out
an
S
ou h Su
U
rv urve th
r
b
ey
-S
an
y
2
4
u
- N - S bu
rb
o
o
ut
an
Su
rth
h
rv
-R
ey - U
u
r
ba
ra
Su 1 4
l
n
r
/
Su Sur vey Sou Ru
ra
ve
11
th
rv
ey
C
y
-N -U l
as
18 13
rb
e
- S ort
an
st
No
ud
ou h U
y
t
r
h
th
r
3
b
a
-S -S
-C
ub n
u
en
ur
tra bur
b
ba
an
ln
R
/R
ur
al
u
ra
/S
l
ub
ur
ba
n
Su
Su
Su
Universal - Number of Workshops
Su
Su rve
y
rv
ey 11
13 - N
or
t
Su Sou h U
th
rv
rb
an
Su ey 2 - S
u
rv
bu
ey
So
Su
rb
an
ut
12
rv
ey
-S h10
ou Ru
ra
-N
th
Su
-U l
or
rv
th
ey
rb
-S
an
15
Su
- S ub
rv
ey
ou urb
an
14
th
Su
Su
-U
-S
r
r
r
o
v
v
ba
Su
ut
ey
ey
h
n
rv
3
ey 4 -N -U
N
r
5
ba
o
o
-S
rt
rth
n
ou h -R
U
th
rb
ur
al
Su
Su an
/R
rv
bu
Su ey
ur
rb
al
1
a
rv
-C n/
ey
R
en
6
ur
C
t
ra
as
al
So
lC
ut
as e s
R
h
tu
e
ur
d
st
al
Su
ud y 4
- N bur
y
2
b
o
-N
Su
rth an
rv
or
-R
e
th
C
as y 8
- S ura
e
-C
l
ub
st
en
ur
ud
ba
Su y 1 tral
n
rv
-S -U
ey
rb
ou
an
th
Su 17
-S
-U
rv
ey
ou
rb
an
Su
th
7
-U
rv
ey C e
rb
Su
n
an
tra
Su 9 rv
l
ey
C
C
rv
as
en - R
ey
18
u
e
t
ra
ra
st
- N 16
ud
-S l-U l
or
y
th
rb
ou
3
an
-S
th
-C
-U
ub
en
ur
tra
r
b
ba
an
ln
R
/R
ur
al
ur
/S
al
ub
ur
ba
n
Cost per Universal Workshop
Figure III-65: Cost per Universal Workshop
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-66: Volume of Universal Workshops
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
63
8
-C
en
tra
1
l
Su 6 So - Ur
rv
ba
ut
Su e y
h
n
3
rv
-N -U
ey
rb
o
an
rth
Su 17
rv
-R
e y So
C
ur
as
u
7
th
al
e
st
u d C en U r
b
y
tra
an
Su
l
rv 1 So - R
e
Ca y 1
ur
ut
al
4
h
se
st - S o - U
ud
rb
Su
u
S
an
th
y
rv
ey urve 4 No Urb
y
5
an
-S 9r
o
C th en
Su uth
Ru
t
rv
r
ey - Su al - ral
bu
Ur
10
ba
r
Su - N ban
n
o
rv
/R
rth
e
Su
y
u
r
1
rv
- C Sub al
ey
ur
en
6
b
t
an
Su Sou ral t
rv
Ru
ey h Su
Su ral
rv 2 So bur
ey
ba
ut
S
1
n
h
Su urv 1 -R
N
e
rv
or
ur
ey y 1
th
a
5
l
4
Su - N - So - Ur
ba
or
ut
rv
h
t
ey
n
h
13 - U - U
rb
an
Su - S rba
n
C
ou
Ca
r
/R
th
se a se ve y
- S ura
12
st
st
ud
ud
l
ub
So
y
ur
Su y 3
2
- N uth ban
-C
rv
ey
-U
or
e
th
18 ntr
r
- S ba
- N al ub n
R
or
u
ur
th
r
- S al/S ban
ub
ub
u
ur
ba rba
n
n
/R
ur
al
y
y
rv
e
rv
e
Su
Su
Universal - Number of People Attending Workshops
Su
rv
ey
12
Su
rv
-S
ey
o
Su 15 uth
-S
r
v
Su
ey
ou Urb
rv
an
th
ey 11
13 - N - U
r
or
ba
t
n
Su Sou h C
as
Ur
t
r
h
v
e
b
e
a
y
st
Su
n
2
ud
Su y 2 - So bur
b
rv
ut
an
-N
h
Su ey
or
1
th - R u
rv
ey 0 -S
ra
N
l
4
- N orth ubu
rb
Su
o
Su rth
Su a n
rv
ey
rv
bu
-U
e
rb
5
rb
an
-S y1
an
-C
ou
en / Ru
th
tra
ra
l
lSu Su
bu
Ru
rv
r
e
ba
ra
Su
y
l
n
3
rv
-N /R
Su ey
ur
or
9
rv
a
t
-C
h
e
-R l
e
C y6
ur
as
- S ntra
al
e
lou
st
U
t
u
rb
dy h Ca
S u an
1
se
b
st
ud Sou urb
an
Su
th
y
4
rv
-N
U
ey
r
b
or
17
Su
a
t
rv
-S h- n
ey
R
ou
u
14
ra
Su
th
l
rv
-S
ey
ou Urb
an
th
Su 16
-S
rv
e
Su
ou Urb
an
Su y 7
th
rv
ey
C
rv
-U
as
ey Ce
18
rb
e
n
8
t
an
st
- C ral
ud - No
y
en - R
rth
3
u
ra
- S tra
-C
ll
u
en
Ur
tra bur
b
ba
an
ln
R
/R
ur
al
/S ura
l
ub
ur
ba
n
Cost per Person Attending a Universal Workshop
Figure III-67: Cost per Person Attending a Universal Workshop
$700.00
$600.00
$500.00
$400.00
$300.00
$200.00
$100.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-68: Total Attendance at Universal Workshops
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
64
y
y
1
Su 7 So
r
ve
5
ut
y
h
3
Su So
-N -U
ut
rv
rb
or
ey h an
th
Su
4
-N
bu
R
u
rb
Su ort
an ral
h
rv
/R
ey - U
rb
C
ur
9
as
an
al
e
st Cen / R
ud
ur
t
r
Su
al
al
y
4
rv
- N - Ur
Su
Su ey
b
o
1
rv
r th a n
r
e y ve y 4 So - R
18
6
u
th ura
-N
S
-U l
or out
h
th
r
- S - S ban
Su
C
ub ub
as rve
u
u
rb
y
e
rb
1
st
an an
ud 5 So / R
y
2
ur
ut
Su
a
h
rv Nor
-U l
ey
th
rb
Su 8 Su a n
C
en bur
Su rve
y
b
t
ra
rv
ey 1 l - an
U
10 C e
rb
nt
an
ra
Su - N
lo
rv
R
e y rt h
ur
11
Su
al
Su
r
bu
Su vey - N
r
o
b
rv
rt h
a
e y 12
-U n
13 - S
r
o
b
u
an
Su - S
th
o
-U
rv
e y u th
r
b
-S
a
1
Su 6 ub n
S
ur
rv
ba
ey out
Su
h
n
2
C
r
-S -U
as
Ca vey
e
ou rba
se
7
st
t
n
h
ud
st
y
ud Cen - R
3
tra ura
-C y1
l
len
tra Sou Ru
ra
lth
l
R
ur - Ur
al
/S b a n
ub
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
e
Su
rv
e
Universal - Total Job Club or Network Attendance
Su
rv
e
Ca y 8
se
s t C en
ud
tra
Su
y
l
4
rv
- N - Ur
ey
S
Su
ba
ur
or
1
5
n
rv
ve
t
-S hey
y
R
6
ou
5
u
ra
-S
th
So
-U l
ou
ut
h
th
rb
Su a n
Su
Su Su
bu
bu
rv
r
rb
rb
e y ve y
an
a
n
3
4
Ca
-N /R
se - N
u
o
o
st
rth ra
ud rth
-U
-R l
y
2
r
ur
b
-N
Su
an
al
rv
or
ey
th / Ru
-S
14
ra
Su
l
rv
- S ub
ey
ou urb
Su 9 an
th
rv
-U
C
en
ey
tra rba
Su 17
n
lrv
Ur
ey So
ba
u
th
1
n
Su
-U
rv C e
rb
nt
ey
an
ra
Su
2
l
Su rvey - So - Ru
rv
ra
ut
ey 7 h
l
-R
10 Ce
n
u
tra
ra
Su - N
l
lo
rv
Ru
ey rth
ra
Su
11 - S
l
ub
r
S u ve y - N
ur
or
ba
rv
1
t
h
2
ey
n
13 - S
ou Urb
an
Su - S
th
ou
Ca
rv
-U
th
se
Ca ey
- S rba
16
se
st
n
ud
- S ub
st
ur
ud
Su y 3
o
- C y 1 uth ban
rv
ey
-S -U
e
18 ntr
rb
ou
an
- N al th
R
-U
or
u
th
ra
rb
- S l/S
a
ub n
ub
ur
ur
ba
ba
n
n
/R
ur
al
Cost per Universal Job Club or Network Attendee
Figure III-69: Cost per Universal Job Club or Network Attendee
$350.00
$300.00
$250.00
$200.00
$150.00
$100.00
$50.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-70: Volume of Universal Job Club or Network Attendance
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
65
Enrolled Services
The enrolled services process is the most costly process within the One-Stops, accounting for
48% of sampled One-Stop costs. In this section we break out the various services produced in
the enrolled process and estimate their costs. Again, we begin with an overview of the median
cost and range of costs by service unit, and then we present the complete distribution of “cost per
unit,” with volume produced to help interpret the costs. Three key cost per unit measures we
found in the analysis are the cost per enrolled client, cost per client receiving case management,
and cost per client placed.
Cost per enrolled client had a median of almost $2,700, with a wide range from less than $600 to
over $8,000. The variance in cost was driven in part by the type of client. In sites where there
was a large CalWorks program where clients got extensive case management over many months,
costs were higher than in One-Stops with only WIA clients. Similarly, if sites provided training
services in the One-Stop rather than contracting them out, costs tended to be higher.
Table III-7: Enrolled Activities: Median Cost and Range of Cost Per-Unit
Cost Per Unit of Service
Median Cost Per
Range
Per Enrolled Client
$2,671
$579 - $8,015
Per Client Receiving Case
$1,208
$218 - $4,543
Management
Per Enrolled Client Placed
$6,957
$739 - $20,708
Per Assessment
$409
$77 - $2,226
Per IEP or Other Formal Plan
$350
$75 - $1,609
Per ITA/ OJT Arranged and
$616
$116 – $5,305
Managed
Per client Trained or Educated
$168
$23 - $528
Per Client Receiving Support
$48
$5 - $525
Services
Cost per Client Getting Placement
$937
$105 - $3,133
Assistance
Case management generally is at the core of enrolled services. The median cost of providing
case management to a client was $1,208 but the range was substantial. The goal of most OneStop programs is to help people find a job. To measure this important service we took the total
cost of the enrolled services process and divided by the number of enrolled clients placed. Costs
varied widely, from a high of over $20,000 to a low of less than $1,000 with a median cost of
around $6,957. Again the number of clients placed, the services actually delivered in the OneStop, and the characteristics of clients served drive these differences. But given the emphasis put
on serving enrolled clients in the One-Stops we believe this is an important measure for the
system.
The following graphs show the cost per unit measures and the volume of services produced for
other enrolled services for which we had sufficient data to calculate cost per measures.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
66
e
st
ud
y
3
-C
en
tra
Su l - R
C rve ura
as
y
2 l/Su
e
-S
st
b
u
Su dy ou urb
an
th
rv
4
ey
-N -R
Su 8
ur
or
al
th
rv
ey C e
16 ntra Rur
Su
a
-S lr
U l
rb
Su vey ou
t
a
h
rv
3
-U n
e
Su y 9 Nor rb
an
th
rv
ey C e
-R
ur
Su 17 ntra
al
rv
-S le
U
rb
Su y 7 out
- C h - an
rv
e
U
e
Su y 15 ntr rba
al
rv
n
ey
So - R
Su Sur 14 uth ura
l
v
rv
ey ey Sou Urb
11
th
an
4
Su Su - N - N - U
o
o
r
r
rv
ey vey rth rth ban
Su 18 10 - U - U
rb
rb
rv
an
ey No No an
rth rth
/R
5
-S
- S - S ur
ou
ub al
ub
t
Su h - urb urb
an
a
S
r
C vey ubu n /
as
12 rba Rur
e
Su stu - S n / al
d
R
o
rv
ey y 1 uth ura
-S
-U l
1
Su
3
o
ut rba
rv
h
e y So
ut
-U n
6
h
Su
So - S rba
C
as
n
r
u
e vey uth bu
r
st
ud 1 - - S ban
ub
C
y
e
ur
2
- N n tr
ba
a
n
or
lth
R
- S ur
ub al
ur
ba
n
C
as
Total Cost per Client Receiving Case Management
Su
rv
Su ey
st
2
ud
rv
y
ey - S
3
ou
8
-C
- C th
en
en - R
t
r
ur
C
tra
al
as al le
R
U
ur
st
r
ud
al
ba
/S
Su
y
n
u
4
rv
- N bur
ey
b
o
an
rth
Su 17
rv
-R
ey So
ur
u
th
Su
7
a
-U l
rv
e y Ce
rb
n
an
t ra
9
l
Su - C
en - R
rv
u
t
ra
ra
Su ey
l
l
3
rv
-N -U
ey
rb
o
an
16
rth
Su
-S
rv
ey
ou Ru
ra
th
Su 15
l
-S
rv
U
ey
rb
ou
an
th
11
Su
Su
rv
-N -U
e
rv
rb
or
ey y 1
an
th
4
4
-U
-S
Su
N
r
o
b
ut
o
an
rv
h
ey rth
-U
10 - U
C
r
ba
Su
as
- N rba
n
rv
e
n
o
e
st
/R
ud rth
Su y 5
ur
y
al
S
rv
1
ey So
- S ubu
18 uth
rb
ou
a
-N
n
Su th
-U
Su orth bu
rb
r
b
rv
a
n
ey - Su an
/R
bu
13
Su
ur
rb
al
an
rv
So
ey
ut
/R
h
6
ur
al
Su
Su
So
rv
bu
ey uth
rb
Su an
Su 12
C
bu
rv
as
ey So
rb
e
u
an
th
st
1
ud
-C
-U
y
en
rb
2
an
- N tra
lor
R
th
u
-S
ra
l
ub
ur
ba
n
C
as
e
Total Cost per Enrolled Client
Figure III-71: Cost per Enrolled Client
$9,000
$8,000
$7,000
$6,000
$5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-72: Cost per Client Receiving Case Management
$5,000
$4,500
$4,000
$3,500
$3,000
$2,500
$2,000
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
67
rv
ey
18
Su
rv
or
ey
-N
th
-S
Enrolled - Number of Clients Receiving Case Management
Su
rv
10
ub
- N urb
a
e y or t n /
Su
Su 12 h - Ru
rv
S
ra
ey
rv
l
e - S ub
5
- S y 1 out u rb
1
a
h
ou
-N -U n
t
or
r
Su h t h ba n
S
r
S u v e y u bu - U
rb
r
1
rv
an
e y 6 - ban
S
6
/
S u - S ou R u
t
rv
o u h - ra l
e
t
Ur
Su y 15 h S u ba n
rv
Ca ey
b
S
se
1 ou u rb
s t 4 - th - an
ud
So
Ur
y
ba
1 ut
n
S u S ur - S h Ur
ve
rv
o
ba
ut
y
ey
13 3 - N h - U n
S
S u ur - S o o r t h r b a
rv v e y uth
-R n
ey
17 ur
4
S
- N - S ub a l
u
o
S u or
ut rb
a
h
rv th
ey - U - U n
rb
rb
8
Ca
an
S u - C an
se
rv
e en / R
st
u d S u y 2 tral u ra
rv
y
-S -U l
e
3
o u rb
-C y7
- C th an
en
-R
e
t
n
S u ra l
ur
al
rv - R tral
e
C a y ur
R
se 9 - al/S ura
l
s t C e ub
u
n
u
C a S u dy 4 tral rba
r
n
ve
-U
se
y -N
r
st
u d 1 - or t h b a n
C
y
en - R
2
-N
u
tr
or al - ra l
th
R
- S u ra
l
ub
ur
ba
n
Su
Figure III-73: Volume of Enrolled Clients Receiving Case Management
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
68
ey
10
Enrolled - Number of Clients Getting Placement Assistance
Su
-N
ve
r
o
y
18 vey rth
-S
- N 12
- S ub
or
th
ou u r b
a
Su - S
th
u
-U n
rv
e y bu
r
r
b
an
Su 11 ba
n
/R
S u rve - N
y
o
ur
rv
ey 1 - rth
al
C
13
en Urb
Su
-S
tra
an
rv
Su
o
ley
R
r v uth
5
- S ura
- S ey
l
Su
ub
ou 3 rv
u
N
e y th or rba
t
S
n
h
4
-R
- N ubu
ur
Su orth rba
a
l
rv
-U n/
e
rb Rur
Su y 7
a
a
-C n
rv
/R l
e
Su e y
16 ntra ura
rv
ey
l
-S l6
ou Ru
Su - S
ra
th
l
o
rv
ey uth - Ur
- S ba
1
n
Su 7 u
So bu
rv
rb
ut
Su e y
an
h
2
rv
e y - S - Ur
ba
1 4 o ut
Su
rv
-S h- n
Ca ey
ou R u
8
se
ra
th
-U l
st - C e
ud
n
r
ba
Su y 1 tra
n
l
rv
ey - So - Ur
ba
ut
Su
15
n
C
rv
-S has
e
ou Urb
e
Ca y 9
st
a
t
se
h
ud
n
st Cen - U
y
u
3
tra rba
- C dy
n
l
Ca
4
en
-N -U
se
t
or rba
st r a l n
th
ud
R
-R
y
ur
2
- N al/S ura
l
u
or
th b u r
- S ba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
r
Su
rv
e
st
ud
y
3
-C
en
tra
Su l - R
rv
u
S u e y r a l/
S
2
rv
ey - S ubu
Su
rb
1 7 ou
rv
- S t h - an
e
ou R u
Su y 8
r v - C th - r a l
en
U
Ca ey
se 15 tral rba
-S
-U n
st
rb
S u u d y out
a
h
rv
4
-U n
e
rb
S u y 1 No
4
a
r
rv
- S th - n
e
ou
R
Su y 1
u
r v 6 - t h - ra l
ey
So
Ur
9
ut
b
a
h
S
-U n
Ca urv Ce
se ey ntra rb
a
3
l
n
st
ud - N - U
Su
r
y
rv
S
1 orth ban
e y ur
ve - S
5
- S y 7 ou R u
ra
th
o
l
ut - C
Su
en Ur
h
rv
tr a b a
ey Sur - S
n
u
l
1 8 ve
y bur - R
S u - N 1 1 b an u r a
o
-N
rv
r
/R l
e y th
o
4 - S u r t h u ra
Su - N
bu - U l
o
rv
rb
ey rth rba
n an
Su 10 - U
/R
r
rv
b
ur
ey No an
a
rth
/R l
6
Su - S
- S ur
a
Su rve out ub
l
u
h
y
rv
- S rba
ey 1
n
u
13
C
en b u
Ca Sur - So tra rba
n
v
lut
se
e
Ru
st y 1 h 2
ud
ra
S
- S ub
l
y
2
ur
- N out
ba
h
n
or
th - Ur
- S ba
ub n
ur
ba
n
C
as
Total Cost per Enrolled Client Placed in Employment
Figure III-74: Total Cost per Enrolled Client Placed in Employment
$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
$10,000
$5,000
$0
One-Stop
Figure III-75: Volume of Enrolled Clients Placed in Employment
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
69
Su
Su rvey
rv
ey 1 10 C e
nt
ra
Su - N
lo
rv
R
ey rth
ur
11 - S
Su
al
ub
rv
ur
N
ey
Su Su
o
ba
r
r
1
v
t
rv
h
6
n
ey ey
-U
-S
18 13
rb
ou
a
th
-N
So
n
-U
ut
or
h
th
rb
Su
a
S
n
rv
Su Su
ey urve
bu
bu
rb
y
5
r
b
1
a
-S
a
2
n
-S n/
ou
th
Su
ou Ru
r
th
rv
al
ey Su
bu - U
6
- S rba rba
n
n
Su
o
/R
rv uth
C
u
e
r
y
a
a
Su
2
Su se
bu l
-S
st
rv
rb
ey udy ou
a
th
n
4
4
-R
-N
ur
or Nor
al
th
Su th U
rv
rb Rur
e
Su
y
an
al
3
rv
-N /R
ey
u
o
14
ra
Su
rt
l
rv
-S hey
ou Ru
ra
th
Su 1 5
-U l
-S
rv
e
rb
ou
an
Su y 7
th
rv
-U
ey C e
rb
n
8
t
an
Su
- C ral
rv
en - R
ey
u
t
ra
ra
Su 9 ll
C
rv
U
e
e
C
as y 1 ntra rba
n
7
e
C
C
-S l-U
st
as
as
ud
rb
ou
e
e
y
an
st
th
st
1
ud
ud
-U
-S
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-N
-C
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
b
-S
a
lub n
R
ur
al urb
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Enrolled - Number of Assessments
ve
9
y
y
-C
en
tra
7
Su
-C lU
rv
e
rb
nt
an
Su ey
ra
2
lrv
ey
Ru
So
8
ra
ut
Su
h
l
rv - C
en - R
ey
Su
u
t
r
14
ra
Su
al
rv
-U l
rv
-S
ey
ey
r
o
5
15 uth ban
-S
-U
-S
ou
t
Su
ou
rb
h
an
th
rv
ey Su
bu - U
6
rb
rb
an
Su
an
So
rv
/R
e y ut h
Su Su
u
rv
rv
Su ra l
ey 11
ey
bu
10 - N
18
rb
o
an
- N - N r th
or
-U
or
t
rb
Ca th - h Su a n
se
S
bu
st ubu
rb
ud
rb
an
y
an
4
Su
-N /R
rv
u
e
or
Su
y
th ral
3
r
-N -R
S u ve y
ur
o
rv
16
rt
al
Su ey
-S h1
R
rv
3
o
u
ey
ut
-S
ra
h
l
4
o
- N ut h - U
r
b
Su orth - Su an
rv
bu
-U
e
rb
rb
an
Su y 1
- C an /
rv
e
R
en
Ca
y
u
tra
17
ra
se
l
C
Ca
-S lst
ud
se a se
ou Ru
y
r
st
st
t
a
h
1
ud
ud
-U l
-S
y
y
r
o
2
3
- N u t h ba n
-C
or
-U
en
th
tr
- S rba
Su a l ub n
rv
R
u
ey
u
r
12 al/S rba
- S ub n
ou u r b
a
th
-U n
rb
an
Su
r
Su
rv
e
Cost per Enrolled Assessment
Figure III-76: Cost per Enrolled Assessment
$2,500.00
$2,000.00
$1,500.00
$1,000.00
$500.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-77: Volume of Enrolled Assessments
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
70
10
Su - N
o
r
18 vey rth
- N 11 - S
or
- N ubu
th
r
- S orth ban
Su
ub
rv
ur Urb
C
ey
as
ba
an
1
e
n
-C
/R
Su stu
e
ur
dy
nt
rv
al
ra
1
ey
l13 - S
ou Ru
r
S
th
a
So
Su urv
-U l
ut
e
rv
h
- S rba
ey y 1
2
ub n
4
-N -S
ou urb
Su
or
an
th
th
rv
ey Su
-U -U
r
r
5
v
rb
b
- S ey
an an
ou 3 /R
th
N
ur
- S ort
al
Su
ub h rv
R
ey
ur
ba ura
16
l
Su
-S n/
R
rv
ou
ur
C
a
as ey
t
h
l
2
e
-S -U
st
rb
u
ou
a
Su dy
n
th
4
rv
-N -R
ey
ur
or
15
Su
a
t
l
-S hrv
ey
R
ou
ur
14
th
Su
al
-U
-S
rv
rb
ou
Su ey
an
17
th
rv
ey
-U
-S
6
rb
ou
an
th
Su - So
-U
ut
rv
h
ey
r
b
-S
a
Su
7
ub n
rv
ur
ey Ce
b
n
8
an
t
Su
- C ral
C
C
as rve
as
en - R
y
e
e
u
t
r
ra
9
s
st
- C al l
ud tud
U
y
y
en
rb
2
3
t
an
- C - N ra
lo
en
U
tra rth
r
- S ba
lub n
R
ur
u
r
al
/S ban
ub
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
ey
Su
rv
ey
Enrolled - Number of IEPs or Other Formal Plans
rv
ey
18
Su
se
y
ey
st
ud
rv
e
rv
Su
y
y
1
-S
ou
ur
rb
-R
-U
th
th
ou
ou
-S
-S
2
17
rv
e
al
-N
8
an
- C th or
Ur
en
th
b
t
ra
l - an
Su Su
Ur
S u r v e bu r
ba
ba
y
rv
n
3
n
ey
/
Ru
N
6
Su
or
-S
S
r
a
th
rv
ur
ey
ve o u t
-R l
h
y
5
- S ur a
9
-S
o u - C e u bu l
th
n
r
S u - S t r al ban
-U
rv
ub
ey
u
rb
1 4 r ba
an
Su
rv
-S n/
ey
ou R u
15
ra
th
C a S ur
-U l
ve - S
se
o
r
y
ba
ut
st
h
n
ud 7 -U
C
y
e
r
2
n
b
t
a
Su
ra
n
l
rv Nor
ey
t h - Ru
1
ra
Su
S
6
l
rv
- S ub
ey
ou u r b
th
an
Su 12
-U
r
S u ve y S o
rb
ut
rv
an
1
h
1
ey
-U
Su
10 - N
r
o
b
rv
r
e y - No th - a n
r
Ur
1
Ca 3 - t h b
Su a n
So
S u se
bu
ut
s
rv
h
t
e y u dy
- S r ba
4
ub n
4
Ca
u
se
N
or N or r ba
st
S
th
n
ur t h ud
-R
ve
y
U
3
y
ur
1 rb a
-C
- C n / al
en
R
en
tra
tra u ra
ll
lR
ur
Ru
al
r
/S
al
ub
ur
ba
n
Su
Ca
Su
Cost per Enrolled IEP or Other Formal Plan
Figure III-78: Cost per Enrolled IEP or Other Formal Plan
$1,800.00
$1,600.00
$1,400.00
$1,200.00
$1,000.00
$800.00
$600.00
$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-79: Volume of Enrolled IEPs or Other Formal Plans
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
71
Su
rv
e
Su y 7
rv
ey C e
nt
ra
Su 8 lC
rv
e
R
ey
n
ur
Su
14 tra
a
S
rv
ur
-S l-U l
ey
ve
rb
ou
y
5
an
12
th
-S
-U
-S
ou
th
rb
ou
an
-S
th
Su
-U
ub
Su rve
u
r
b
rb
y
rv
an an
ey 11
/R
13 - N
o
rth ura
Su - S
o
-U l
r
ut
Su vey
h
- S rba
16
rv
n
ey
- S ubu
10
rb
ou
Su
a
th
Su
rv
n
N
ey
-U
or
rv
th
ey
18
rb
a
1
-N
S
n
7
- S ubu
or
th
r
o
- S uth ban
Su
ub
rv
ur Urb
e
ba
an
Su y 2
n
/R
rv
-S
ey
ur
ou
al
S
1
th
Su urv
-R
ey C e
rv
u
n
ey
r
t
15
ra
al
4
l-N -S
ou Ru
or
r
th
a
t
Su h -U l
rb
Su rve Urb
a
an
y
rv
n
3
ey
-N /R
6
ur
o
Su
rth
al
So
C
-R
ut
as rve
h
y
u
e
ra
9
st
l
- C Su
ud
y
en bur
2
b
C
t
an
- N ral
as
-U
C
e
or
as
st
rb
C
ud th e
a
se
st
y
Su an
ud
4
st
- N bu
y
ud
rb
3
o
an
-C y1
rt
-S hen
R
tra
ou
ur
lth
al
R
ur - U
rb
al
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Enrolled - Number of Clients with ITA or OJT
y
1
Su 7 So
rv
Su ey 2 uth
rv
ey
So Urb
an
ut
Su 15
h
-R
rv
ey So
ur
ut
1
Su
al
h
rv
ey Cen Urb
t
a
1
Su
ra
n
4
r
-S lSu vey
ou Ru
r
9
rv
al
- C th ey
U
en
10
tra rba
Su
n
N
lor
rv
U
th
rb
Su ey
a
1
Su
rv
n
ey 1 bu
N
6
rb
or
a
th
Su
So
n
-U
rv
ey uth
rb
a
16
Su
S
n
rv
- S ubu
ey
rb
ou
Su
8
an
S
rv
- C th ey urv
U
en
ey
rb
5
t
r
an
-S
a
7
ou - C l - U
en
th
rb
an
tra
-S
Su
lub
rv
R
e
ur
C
as y 1
ba ura
2
e
l
C
C
-S n/
st
as
as
ud
ou Ru
e
e
y
ra
st
th
st
1
ud
ud
-U l
-S
y
y
rb
o
2
3
an
- C - N uth
-U
or
en
t
h
tra
r
C
b
-S
a
as
lub n
e
R
ur
st
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
Su
Su
- N bu
rv
rv
r
b
or
ey
ey
an
th
4
3
-R
-N
-N
Su Su
u
or
or
rv
ra
rv
th
th
l
ey ey
-R
-U
18 13
u
r
ba
ra
-N -S
l
n
ou
or
/R
th
th
ur
-S -S
al
ub
ub
u
ur
ba rba
n
n
/R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Cost per Enrolled Client with ITA or OJT
Figure III-80: Cost per Enrolled Client with ITA or OJT
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-81: Volume of Enrolled Clients with ITA or OJT
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
72
rv
e
rv
e
y
16
Enrolled - Number of Clients Receiving Training/Education
-S
o
y
Su 15 uth
-U
rv
e y So
rb
ut
an
Su
1
h
rv
-U
ey Ce
rb
nt
1
an
ra
Su
4
lrv
Ru
e y So
u
ra
7
t
l
-C hSu
en Urb
Ca rve
tra
an
se y 3
l
-N -R
st
u
ur
or
S u dy
al
t
h
4
r
-N -R
S u ve y
u
o
rv
12
rth ral
ey
1 0 - So - R
u
th ura
Su - N
or
-U l
S u rve
th
y
rv
- S rba
ey 1 1
ub n
13 - N
ur
Su
or
Su
th ban
rv
So
ey
rv
U
e y u th
18
- S rba
- N 17
n
u
or
So b u
th
rb
u
a
th
Su Su
Su
-U n
b
rb
Su rve rvey urb
y
an an
rv
2
ey 4 -S
/R
N
5
o
ur
o
ut
-S
rt
a
h
ou h -R l
U
Su t h
r
u
ba
ra
rv
n
l
ey Su
/R
bu
6
u
r
ba
ra
Su - S
l
n
o
rv
/R
ey uth
- S ura
8
Su
-C
l
u
rv
en bur
Ca ey
ba
tra
9
se
n
-C
lCa
C
st
as
U
en
ud
se
e
tra rba
y
st
st
n
1
ud
ud
-S l-U
y
y
r
o
2
3
- N uth ban
-C
o
-U
en
tra rth
- S rba
lub n
R
ur
a l urb
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
Su
Cost per Enrolled Client Receiving Training / Education
Su
rv
ey
Ca
se 1 2 So
st
u
ut
Su dy
h
4
-U
rv
ey - N
rb
o
Su
7
rth an
-C
rv
ey
en
R
tra ura
Su 14
l
-S lrv
e
ou Ru
ra
Su y 1
th
l
-U
rv
ey Ce
r
15 ntra ban
Su
Su
-S lr
R
r
v
ur
S u ve
ey out
y
al
h
rv
2
ey 4 -S -U
N
rb
5
o
o
ut
an
-S
rth
h
o
-U
-R
Su uth
r
u
b
ra
rv
an
l
ey Su
/R
bu
6
u
r
b
Su
an ral
So
rv
/R
e y uth
u
8
Su
- C Su ra l
rv
e n bu r
ey
Su
ba
tr
9
rv
n
- C al ey
Ur
en
10
b
t
ra
an
Su - N
lor
Ur
Su rve
th
y
b
rv
-S
a
ey 11
ub n
13 - N
ur
Su
o
b
r th
a
Su - S
rv
o
ey
rv
-U n
e y ut h
18
r
b
-S
an
- N 17
- S ub
o
Ca rth
ou urb
a
-S
se
th
C
Ca
-U n
u
st
u d bu
se a se
rb
r
y
ba
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
ou Ru
2
3
-N
ra
-C
th
-U l
o
en
tra rth
r
ba
l
Su - R Sub n
ur
ur
rv
a
l/S ba
Su e y
n
3
rv
- N ubu
ey
16 ort rba
-S h- n
ou R u
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
Figure III-82: Cost per Enrolled Client Receiving Training / Education
$600.00
$500.00
$400.00
$300.00
$200.00
$100.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-83: Volume of Enrolled Clients Receiving Training / Education
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
73
Enrolled - Number of Clients Receiving Support Services
Su
rv
Su ey 2
rv
ey - S
14 out
Su
-S hrv
ey
ou Ru
ra
15
th
-U l
Su
Su
-S
rv
rv
r
ba
ey out
ey
n
h
3
4
-N -U
-N
rb
o
o
an
rth
rth
Su
rv
e y - Ur - R u
b
ra
16
Su
a
l
rv
-S n/
ey
ou Ru
C
ra
9
t
as
h
-C
-U l
e
st
en
rb
u
t
an
Su dy 4 ral
-U
rv
Su
ey
rb
N
or
an
rv
th
ey 1 -R
1 0 Ce
n
u
tra
ra
Su - N
l
lo
rv
R
ey rth
u
ra
11 - S
Su
l
r
- N ubu
Su vey
rb
or
rv
a
1
t
h
n
2
ey
-U
13 - So
rb
Su
ut
a
S
rv
S
h
n
ur
ey
ve outh - U
rb
y
Su 18
a
1
S
n
7
rv
- S ubu
ey Nor
th
rb
ou
5
a
-S
n
Su th ou
bu
U
th
rb
Su
rb
a
a
rv
n
ey Sub n /
R
ur
6
ur
b
al
an
So
Su
ut
/R
rv
h
ey
ur
Su
al
7
Su
-C
rv
bu
e
en
C
r
as y 8
tra ban
e
-C
l
C
C
st
as
as
en - R
ud
ur
e
e
tra
y
al
st
st
1
l
ud
ud
-S -U
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-C -N
th
-U
o
en
tra rth
r
b
-S
a
lub n
R
ur
ur
al
b
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
y
4
-N
or
Su th rv
U
rb
e
Su
y
an
2
rv
/R
ey - S
o
ur
16
Su
ut
al
rv
-S hey
ou Ru
14
Su
ra
th
l
rv
-S
ey
ou Urb
15
Su
an
th
rv
ey - So - Ur
C
ba
ut
9
as
h
e
-U n
st C e
nt
ud
Su
rb
ra
an
S
y
rv
l4
ey urv
U
ey - N
5
rb
o
-S
an
1
r
- C th
o
en - R
Su uth
u
t
ra
rv
ra
ey Su
l
bu l - R
6
rb
ur
Su
an
So
al
rv
ut
/R
e
h
ur
Su y 7
- C Sub al
rv
ey
Su
ur
en
rv
8
tra ban
ey
l
10 Cen - R
Su - N tral ura
or
-U l
rv
th
e
r
Su y 11 - S ban
- N ubu
Su rve
y
r
or
rv
th ban
ey 12
-U
13 - S
Su
ou
r
rv
Su - S
th ban
ey
o
r
-U
18 vey uth
- S rba
- N 17
- S ub n
or
ur
C
t
h
o
as
- S uth ba
e
C
C
ub
-U n
st
as
as
ud
ur
e
e
ba rba
y
st
s
1
n
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
3
2
ou Ru
-C -N
r
th
a
en
o
-U l
tra rth
- S rba
lSu
ub n
R
u
ur
rv
b
ey ral/
Su an
3
- N bu
r
ba
or
th
n
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Cost per Enrolled Client Receiving Support Services
Figure III-84: Cost per Enrolled Client Receiving Support Services
$600.00
$500.00
$400.00
$300.00
$200.00
$100.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-85: Volume of Enrolled Clients Receiving Support Services
1,000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
74
Cost per Enrolled Client Getting Placement Assistance
Figure III-86: Cost per Enrolled Client Getting Placement Assistance
$3,500.00
$3,000.00
$2,500.00
$2,000.00
$1,500.00
$1,000.00
$500.00
C
as
e
st
ud
y
3
Su Ce
n
rv
ey tra
l4
- N Ru
C
r
o
as
rth al/S
e
- U ub
st
rb urb
Su udy
an
an
rv
4
ey
-N /R
Su
ur
15
or
al
th
rv
ey - S
ou - Ru
Su 8
th
r
rv
- U al
ey C e
17 ntra rba
Su
n
l
Su rve So - U
rb
ut
rv
y
an
h
2
ey
-S -U
6
rb
Su - S ou
an
o u th
rv
-R
ey
th
Su
16
- S ur
a
rv
ey - S ubu l
ou
rb
Su 9
t
a
h
n
rv
ey Cen - U
Su
14 tra rba
rv
S
ey ur
n
l
-U
5 vey So
rb
-S
u
7
ou - C th - an
th
en Ur
Su - S
tra ba
n
u
rv
ley bu
R
r
u
b
1
Su 1 - an ral
/
rv
N
or Ru
Su ey
ra
th
3
-N -U l
C rve
as
y
rb
or
1
e
a
n
- C th
Su stu
rv dy ent Ru
ra
ra
ey
1
l
-S l1
Su Su
R
o
rv 0
rv
ur
ey ey - No uth
al
rth - U
18 13
- S rba
-N -S
o
ub n
or
th uth
ur
C Sur - S - S ban
as
ub
ub
ve
e
ur
u
st y 12 rb
a ba
ud
-S n/ n
y
2
R
- N outh ur
al
or
U
th
- S rba
ub n
ur
ba
n
$0.00
One-Stop
Business Services
The business services process is the area where One-Stops differ the most from each other in
both the amount of costs and the variety of services offered. So the number of One-Stops
reported costs and services produced vary substantially from one service to another. The key
cost per unit measures we found in this area are related to Rapid Response, which is the service
most commonly produced.
We looked at rapid response from two perspectives: the number of employers assisted and
number of employees assisted. As the table below indicates, the median cost of providing rapid
response services to a business was $964, but cost ranged widely. When we look at the cost of
assisting an employee with rapid response service the median cost was $157, again with a wide
range. The wide variation is due to the range of interventions offered and the size of the
companies. In one case the One-Stop may just provide some routine information to the company
and in another they may set up extensive on-site services. Similarly the number of companies
served affects the cost per company served; the number of companies served ranged from 450 to
a handful.
In the table below we show the services for which we could estimate costs. Overall we can see
that on a per unit basis Business services tend to cost more than services to individual job
seekers.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
75
Table III-8: Business Services: Median and Range of Costs Per-Unit of Service
Unit of Service
Median Cost Per
Range
Per Rapid Response Employer
$964
$62 - $18,127
Assisted
Per Rapid Response Employee
$157
$3 - $4,671
Assisted
Per Mass Hire Event
$2,934
$355 - $11,524
Per Applicant interviewed at Mass
$48
$18 - $1,148
Hire Event
Per Job Fair Event
$17,778
$354 - $38,380
Per Business Participating In Job
$1,423
$468 - $17,286
Fair
Per Job Seeker Participating in Job
$205
$9 - $2,427
Fair
Per Business Services Workshop
$4,285
$565 - $12,905
Per Business Attending Workshop
$344
$28 - $912
Per Business Receiving Consulting
$313
$0.27 - $1,127
Services
Per Business Using Business Center
$536
$47 - $12,504
Services
Per Job Developed
$161
$63 - $987
Many One-Stops provide mass hire events where a large business such as a big box retailer is
seeking a number of employees, and the One-Stop will advertise and provide a facility to the
employer to meet and interview employees. The median cost of one of these events was $2,934,
with a median cost per applicant interviewed of $48. The wide range in costs is driven by the
number of clients interviewed and the amount of marketing and logistics that go into the event.
Similarly, One-Stops host job fairs where various employers and training agencies will have
booths and disseminate information. The median cost of a Job Fair was substantial at $17,778,
the median cost per business participating was $1,443, and median cost per job seeker was $205.
Finally, job development-the process by which One-Stops communicate with employers to
uncover the need for employees, finding out about what skills are needed for the job, and
disseminating such information--is a service we placed in the business services process. We
found the median cost to develop a job was about $161.
In the following graphs the reader can look in detail at distribution of cost per service and the
volume produced for all Business services. One-stops provide an array of business services we
described earlier, here we present the best cost per unit estimates we could calculate for the OneStops which reported data; both the costs and the volume of services produced.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
76
Business Services Rapid Response - Number of Employers Assisted
Su
rv
ey
Su
1
rv
ey C e
14 ntra
Su
r
-S lSu vey
ou Ru
rv
ra
1
th
6
ey
-U l
13 - S
r
o
ba
ut
n
Su Sou h U
th
rv
r
ey
- S ba
2
ub n
S
ur
Su urv - So
ba
ey
rv
ut
n
ey
h
3
10
R
N
ur
o
r th
al
Su
N
o
rv
-R
ey rth
ur
1
Su
al
Su
rv 1 No bur
ey
b
r
1
a
Su
th
5
n
rv
-U
-S
ey
rb
ou
9
a
S
th
n
Su urv - C
-U
e
e
rv
ey y 1 ntra rba
n
2
l4
-N -S
U
rb
ou
or
a
th
Su
n
th
C
rv
-U -U
as
ey
rb
e
r
b
an
st
an
ud 7 C
/R
y
en
2
u
tra
ra
Su
l
l
rv Nor
ey
th - Ru
C
17
as
Su ral
e
b
Su
Su stud Sou urb
an
th
rv
rv
y
ey
4
ey
U
-N
6
rb
Su 18
o
an
rt
S
rv
ey Nor out h R
h
th
5
u
-S
-S
Su ral
u
ou
bu
th bur
rb
an
- S ba
Su
n
C
r
u
ve
/R
as
b
ur
Ca
y
e
u
b
8
ra
se
st
- C an
l
ud
st
y
en / R
ud
3
u
t
ra
ra
-C y1
ll
en
tra Sou Urb
an
lth
R
ur - Ur
al
/S b a n
ub
ur
ba
n
Cost per Business Services Rapid Response: Employer Assisted
Su
rv
Su ey
1
rv
ey 7 So
6
Su - So uth
-U
r
u
ve
Su
th
y
- S rba
rv
ey 7 ub n
C
13
ur
en
ba
t
Su
ra
So
n
lrv
u
th
ey
R
ur
1
Su
al
S
2
rv
- S ub
ey
ou urb
1
an
th
Su 5 So - Ur
rv
b
e
u
an
Su
th
y
3
rv
-N -U
ey
rb
o
9
a
S
r
Su urv - C th - n
e
e
R
rv
ur
ey y 1 ntra
al
4
l4
C
as
-N -S
Ur
ou
e
b
o
an
st
th
u d rt h
-U -U
y
rb
2
r
b
an
Su No an /
rth
rv
R
u
e
-S
ra
y
Su
2
l
ub
rv
ey - S
ur
Su
o
b
1
u
a
S
t
6
rv
n
-S hey urv
e
ou R u
5
ra
-S y1
th
-C
-U l
ou
e
th
Su
r
Su
- S ntra ban
rv
ey
lrv
ub
e
R
18
ur
y
b a u ra
-N 8l
n
Ca
C
or
/R
e
Ca
se
th
n
ur
- S tra
se
st
a
ll
ud
u
st
Ur
y
u d bu
3
ba
- C y 1 rba
n
-S n/
en
ou Ru
Ca tra
r
l
t
a
h
se
-R
-U l
u
Su stu
dy ral/S rba
rv
n
ey
4
u
- N bu
10
r
Su - N orth ban
o
rv
-R
ey rth
11 - S ura
l
u
-N
b
or urb
an
th
-U
rb
an
Figure III-87: Cost per Business Services Rapid Response: Employer Assisted
$20,000.00
$18,000.00
$16,000.00
$14,000.00
$12,000.00
$10,000.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$4,000.00
$2,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-88: Volume of Business Services Rapid Response: Employers Assisted
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
77
e
Business Services Rapid Response - Number of Employees Assisted
st
u d Su
rv
y
e
3
-C y7
en - C
e
t
Su ral - ntra
rv
lR
ur
ey
al Ru
ra
Su 17
/S
l
- S ub
rv
e
ou urb
C
as y 1
t
e
- C h - an
st
U
e
u
Su dy ntra rba
n
4
rv
l-N
ey
R
ur
or
Su 8
al
rv - C th ey
en
R
ur
16 tra
Su
al
l
rv
ey - So - Ur
1 4 u th b a
n
S
Su urv - So - U
rb
e
ut
rv
an
h
ey y 2
10 - S - U
rb
Su - N out
an
h
-R
Su rve orth
y
rv
ur
1
ey
S
a
1
13 - N ubu l
Su - S orth rba
n
o
rv
e y uth - U
- S rba
Su
15
n
u
rv
ey - So bu
rb
ut
9
a
-C hn
S
U
en
Su urv
tra rba
rv ey
n
l
Su
3
e
-N -U
rv y 6
ey
or rba
-S
t
n
4
h
o
- N uth
-R
- S ur
Su ort
a
C
h
l
ub
r
a
ur
Su se vey - U
rb
ba
1
s
rv
an
n
ey tud 2 y
So / R
Su 18
2
ur
ut
rv
al
ey No No h rth
rth
U
5
r
-S
- S - S ba
ou
ub n
ub
C
as th - urb urb
an
e
Su an
st
/
u d bu
rb Rur
y
a
al
1
-S n/
ou Ru
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
C
as
y
Cost per Business Services Rapid Response: Employee Assisted
13
Su - S
o
rv
ey uth
-S
12
Su
- S ub
ur
rv
o
ba
ut
Su ey
h
n
3
rv
-N
U
ey
rb
15 ort
an
Su
rv
-S hey
ou Ru
14
ra
Su
th
l
Su
rv
-S
e
rv
ou Urb
ey y 9
an
t
h
4
- N Ce
Su
nt Urb
or
ra
an
r
t
v
h
l
C
-U -U
as ey
6
rb
e
r
b
an
st
an
ud So
ut
/R
y
h
2
u
r
Su No Sub al
rth
ur
C rve
b
as
y
Su an
2
e
bu
st
ud So
rb
ut
Su
an
y
h
4
rv
-N
ey
R
u
o
1
Su
ra
r
6
l
rv
- S th ey
R
ou
u
8
Su
ra
th
C
rv
-U l
C
as
en
ey
rb
e
17 tra
an
st
l
ud Su
r
ve
U
y
So
r
3
ba
ut
-C y1
h
n
-U
en - C
e
t
r
r
Su
nt
ba
al
Su
rv
n
- R ral
e
r
ur
Su y 5 vey
al Rur
-S
/
rv
7
al
Su
ey
o
bu
18 uth Cen
r
tra ban
-N -S
lub
or
R
C
u
as th - urb
e
Su an ral
st
/
b
Su
ud
R
ur
ba ura
y
rv
1
ey
n
l
10 - So / R
ur
Su - N uth
a
o
-U l
rv
ey rth
r
11 - S ban
- N ubu
rb
or
an
th
-U
rb
an
Su
rv
e
Figure III-89: Cost per Business Services Rapid Response: Employee Assisted
$5,000.00
$4,500.00
$4,000.00
$3,500.00
$3,000.00
$2,500.00
$2,000.00
$1,500.00
$1,000.00
$500.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-90: Volume of Business Services Rapid Response: Employees Assisted
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
78
Su
rv
y
e
5
-S y1
-C
ou
e
th
- S n t ra
Su
lub
C rvey urb Rur
as
al
an
2
e
/R
st
ud So
ur
u
Su
y
al
th
4
rv
-N -R
e
ur
or
Su y 7
al
th
rv
-R
ey C e
Su 9 - ntra ura
l
l
rv
C
en - R
ey
ur
16 tra
Su
a
rv
-S l-U l
e
C
ou
rb
as y 8
a
t
n
e
-C hst
U
en
ud
rb
an
Su y 1 tra
lrv
U
ey - So
Su Su
rv
ut rba
1
rv
5
n
h
ey ey
-S
18 13
ou Urb
an
th
-N -S
C
ou
-U
or
as
th
th
r
e
st
- S - S ban
ud
u
ub
bu
y
ur
2
ba rba
Su
n
n
rv Nor
/R
ey
th
- S ura
17
Su
l
C
rv
- S ub
as
ey
u
o
e
12 uth rba
Su
st
ud
rv
-U n
-S
y
ey
o
r
3
- C 14 uth ban
-U
-S
en
Su
t
ou
rb
rv ral
- R th - a n
ey
Ur
ur
10
al
/S ban
Su - N
ub
or
rv
t
ur
ey
h
11 - S ban
Su
Su
- N ubu
rv
r
rb
ey vey ort
an
h
4
3
-N
-N -U
Su
r
b
an
rv orth orth
ey
-U
-R
6
r
u
ba
-S
ra
n
l
ou
/R
th
u
-S
ra
l
ub
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
e
Business Services - Number of Mass Hire Events
Su
rv
ey
14
Su
-S
rv
ey
ou
C
12
as
th
e
-U
So
st
Su
rb
u
ut
dy
rv
an
h
ey
4
U
-N
13
r
Su
b
or
Su - S
rv
th a n
o
ey
rv
-R
ey uth
18
- S ura
- N 15
- S ubu l
or
th
rb
ou
an
th
Su - S
-U
ub
rv
ur
ey
r
ba ba
Su
7
n
n
rv
/R
ey C e
nt
ur
8
Su
al
- C ral
rv
en - R
ey
u
t
r
r
17
Su
a
a
-S l-U l
rv
ey
rb
ou
a
th
Su 16
n
-U
rv
ey So
rb
u
a
t
1
n
-C hSu
rv
en Urb
e
tra
an
y
Su
2
lrv
R
ey - S
u
o
ra
9
ut
l
h
Su - C
Su
-R
e
r
rv
ur
ey vey ntra
a
l
l
4
3
-N -U
-N
rb
Su
or
or
an
rv
t
t
h
h
e
-U
-R
Su y 6
- S rba ura
rv
n
l
ey
ou
/R
10
th
u
Su - N - Su ral
o
bu
rv
ey rth
C
as
- S rba
1
n
1
e
u
C
C
bu
-N
st
as
as
ud
rb
o
e
e
rth
y
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-U
-S
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
Su
an
-C -N
th
rv
-U
o
en
ey
tra rth
r
5
b
-S
a
-S
lub n
R
ou
ur
th
al urb
a
-S
/S
ub n
ub
ur
ur
b
ba
an
n
/R
ur
al
Cost per Business Services Mass Hire Event
Figure III-91: Cost per Business Services Mass Hire Event
$12,000.00
$10,000.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$4,000.00
$2,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-92: Volume of Business Services Mass Hire Events
250
200
150
100
50
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
79
Su
rv
ey
1
Su
rv 4 So
ey
u
8
Su
- C th rv
ey
U
en
r
Su 9 - tral ban
C
rv
U
en
r
Ca ey
ba
t
se 1 - ral
-U n
C
st
rb
ud en
tra
Su
an
y
4
l
rv
-N -R
ey
ur
or
16
Su
al
C
- S th as rve
R
e
ou
y
ur
17
st
t
al
h
ud
-S
y
ou Urb
2
Su
a
t
S
rv
h
N
n
ur
e
ve orth - U
Su y 5
- S rba
-S y7
rv
n
ey
u
o
18 uth Cen bur
tra ba
-N -S
n
lu
or
R
t h bu r
Su
- S ba ura
l
rv
ub n /
ey
R
u
12 rba ura
Su
l
rv
-S n/
ey
R
o
1 5 u th u r a
Su
-U l
Su rve So
rb
ut
y
an
rv
h
2
e
-S -U
Su y 6
- S ou rba
rv
th
ey
n
o
-R
10 uth
u
Su
Su ral
N
Su rve orth bu
rb
y
rv
Su an
e y 11
bu
13 - N
r
or
ba
t
n
Su
Su Sou h U
th
rv
rv
r
ey
ey
- S ba
C
4
3
ub n
as
ur
C
e
as Nor No
ba
st
r
t
e
th
n
ud
st h y
ud
U
R
3
ur
- C y 1 rba
al
n
en
/R
tra So
ur
ut
lal
h
R
ur - U
r
al
/S b a n
ub
ur
ba
n
Business Services - Number of Applicants Interviewed at Mass Hire Events
Cost per Business Services Applicant Interviewed at Mass Hire Event
ve
y
15
Su
rv
-S
Su ey
o
12 uth
rv
ey
-U
-S
6
- S outh rba
n
Su
ou
-U
t
r
rb
Ca vey h Su a n
se
2
b
st
Su
u d S o u rb
ut
an
rv
Su
y
h
ey
4
r
-R
1 8 ve y - N
ur
o
7
-N
al
r
- C th or
en
Ru
th
tra
r
Su - S
l - al
u
rv
R
ey bur
u
b
Su
1
a n ral
rv
/R
ey Ce
n
tra ura
16
Su
l
rv
-S ley
R
o
Su 8 - uth ura
rv
-U l
C
en
ey
rb
17 tra
an
Su
-S l-U
rv
ey
rb
ou
14
an
Su
th
rv
-U
-S
ey
rb
ou
9
an
t
Su
Su - C h U
e
rv
r
ey vey ntra rba
n
l
4
3
-N -U
Su - N
or r b a
or
rv
th
th
n
ey
-R
10 - U
r
ur
Su - N ban
al
or
/R
Su rve
th
y
rv
- S u ra
1
ey
1
u
-N
bu l
Ca 13
r
or
se - S
th b a n
Ca
ou
C
-U
st
as
t
ud
se
h
e
- S rba
y
s
st
n
1
ud tud
- S ubu
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
Su
a
t
h
n
rv
No
ey Cen
rth - U
tr
5
- S rba
- S al ub n
R
ou
ur
ur
th
- S al/S ban
ub
ub
u
ur
ba rba
n
n
/R
ur
al
Su
r
Figure III-93: Cost per Business Services: Applicant Interviewed at Mass Hire Event
$1,200.00
$1,000.00
$800.00
$600.00
$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-94: Volume of Business Services: Applicants Interviewed at Mass Hire Events
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
80
Su
r
18 vey
- N 14
-S
or
th
o
Su - S uth
u
-U
rv
ey bur
ba rba
Su
7
n
n
rv
/R
e y Ce
n
u
tra
12
ra
Su
l
rv
-S ley
ou Ru
8
ra
Su
th
rv
-U l
C
en
ey
rb
17 tra
an
l
Su
-U
-S
rv
r
o
b
e
u
an
Su
y
th
2
rv
-U
ey - S
r
ba
Su 9 - out
n
h
rv
C
en - R
Su ey
ur
t
r
1
rv
al
a
ey 6 -U l
S
6
rb
C
- S out
a
as
n
ou h e
U
st
th
u
- S rba
Su dy
n
u
4
r
- N bu
Su vey
or rba
rv
1
5
ey
n
th
-R
13 - S
ou
ur
t
Su
So
a
h
-U l
ut
Su rve
h
y
- S rba
rv
1
ey
ub n
1 0 Ce
ur
nt
ba
ra
Su - N
n
lor
rv
th
R
ey
u
ra
11 - S
Su
Su
- N ubu l
rv
rb
Su rve
or
ey
an
y
th
rv
3
-U
ey 4 N
N
r
5
b
or
an
- S ort
th
ou h -R
U
C
t
h
r
u
as
- S ba
ra
e
n
l
C
C
u
st
/R
as
as
ud bu
e
e
r
u
ba
y
r
st
st
a
1
ud
ud
l
-S n/
y
y
R
o
2
3
- C - N uth ura
o
-U l
en
tra rth
- S rba
lub n
R
ur
al urb
/S
a
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
ey
Business Services - Number of Job Fair Events
y
13
C
-S
as
ou
e
st
u d th Su
y
Su
4
rv
- N bu
Su ey
or rba
1
rv
n
th
ey 5 -R
S
6
ou
Su - S
th ura
o
rv
-U l
ey uth
- S rba
16
n
Su
- S ub
rv
ou urb
an
Su ey
t
h
2
rv
-U
ey - S
rb
12 out
an
Su
rv
-S hey
R
ou
u
ra
th
Su 8 -U l
C
rv
en
ey
Su
rb
t
ra
an
Su
rv
7
ley
r
18 vey Cen Urb
tra
an
- N 17
-S lor
th
ou Ru
ra
Su
th
rv Sub
-U l
ey
ur
rb
b
1
Su
an
a
4
rv
-S n/
ey
ou Ru
9
Su
- C th - ral
rv
U
en
ey
tra rba
1
n
-C lSu
Su
rv
en Urb
Su rve
e
t
a
y
y
ra
rv
n
3
l
ey 4 -N -R
N
5
ur
or
- S ort
al
th
h
o
-R
Su uth - U
rv
- S rba ura
ey
l
ub n /
10
R
ur
ur
b
Su
an
al
N
o
rv
/R
ey rth
C
as
- S ura
1
e
1
l
C
C
u
st
as
as
ud - No bur
e
e
y
rth ba
st
st
1
n
ud
ud
-U
-S
y
y
r
2
o
3
- C - N uth ban
o
en
-U
tra rth
- S rba
lub n
R
ur
al urb
/S
a
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
e
Cost per Business Services Job Fair Event
Figure III-95: Cost per Business Services Job Fair Event
$40,000.00
$35,000.00
$30,000.00
$25,000.00
$20,000.00
$15,000.00
$10,000.00
$5,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-96: Number of Business Services Job Fair Events
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
81
ve
y
18
Su
y
ve
rv
e
y
2
14
-S
ou
-N
t
-S hor
t
ou R u
h
C
as
-S
ra
th
l
e
st ubu - U
u
rb
Su dy rba
an
n
4
rv
-N /R
ey
ur
or
Su 8 al
t
h
rv
C
en - R
ey
u
t
1
r
ra
a
Su
5
-S l-U l
rv
e
ou
rb
Su y 7
an
th
rv
e y C e - Ur
Su 9 - ntra ban
l
rv
C
en - R
ey
12 tra ura
Su
l
l
r
Su vey - So - Ur
ba
rv
ut
1
7
h
ey
n
13 - S
ou Urb
Su - S
a
t
n
ou h rv
Ur
th
Su e y
b
1
a
rv
Su
n
ey 6 So b u
6
rb
u
a
th
Su
So
-U n
ut
Su rve
h
y
- S rba
rv
1
ey
ub n
10 C e
ur
nt
ba
Su - N
r
n
or al rv
th
ey
Ru
ra
11 - S
Su
Su
- N ubu l
rv
rb
S u rve
ey ort
a
y
rv
h
3
-U n
ey 4 N
N
5
r
ba
or
- S ort
th
n
h
o
Ca uth - Ur - Ru
- S ba
ra
se
C
n
l
C
u
st
as
as
/
ud bu
e
e
rb Rur
y
st
st
a
al
1
ud
ud
-S n/
y
y
R
2
o
3
- N uth ura
-C
o
en
-U l
tra rth
- S rba
lub n
R
ur
a l u rb
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
r
Su
r
Business Services - Number of Businesses Participating in Job Fairs
Cost per Business Services: Business Participating in a Job Fair
Su
rv
ey
Su
6
rv
-S
ey
o
13 uth
-S
Su - S
u
o
rv
ey uth bur
- S ba
Su 12
ub n
rv
ur
ey So
C
ba
u
as
7
t
n
-C he
U
st
rb
ud en
t
a
Su
ra
y
n
l
4
rv
-N -R
ey
ur
or
16
Su
al
t
rv
-S hey
R
ou
u
15
r
Su
th
al
rv
-S
ey
Su
ou Urb
1
a
S
th
rv
n
ey urv 7 So - Ur
18 ey
ba
u
8
-N
n
- C th or
U
en
th
rb
an
- S tra
Su
rv
ub l - U
ey
ur
ba rba
Su 9 n
n
C
rv
/R
en
ey
ur
14 tra
a
Su
-S l-U l
rv
rb
ey out
a
Su
h
n
2
rv
ey - So Urb
an
ut
1
-C hSu
Su
R
en
rv
Su rve
ey
tra ura
y
rv
l
3
ley 4 R
N
N
5
ur
or
- S ort
a
th
h
l
o
-R
Su uth - U
rv
- S rba ura
ey
l
ub n /
10
R
ur
u
Su - N ban ral
o
rv
/R
ey rth
C
ur
as
11 - S
al
e
C
u
C
st
b
as
as
u
N
ud
r
e
e
o
b
y
rth
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-U
-S
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-C -N
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
b
-S
a
lub n
R
ur
al urb
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Figure III-97: Cost per Business Services: Business Participating in a Job Fair
$18,000.00
$16,000.00
$14,000.00
$12,000.00
$10,000.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$4,000.00
$2,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-98: Volume of Business Services: Businesses Participating in Job Fairs
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
82
y
18
Business Services - Number of Job Seekers Participating in Job Fairs
-N
or
th
Su
rv Sub
ey
ur
ba
Su 8 n
C
rv
en / R
ey
ur
tra
Su
7
al
l
rv
ey Ce - Ur
n
b
9
tra
Su
an
l
rv - C
en - R
ey
u
t
r
1
ra
Su
a
7
rv
-S l-U l
ey
ou
rb
1
Su
an
th
2
rv
-S
-U
ey
o
r
14 uth ba
n
Su
-S
rv
ou Urb
e
an
y
Su
th
2
rv
-U
ey - S
rb
16 out
an
Su
rv
-S hey
ou Ru
1
ra
th
Su
5
l
-S
r
v
Su
ey
ou Urb
rv
a
th
n
ey 1 10 Ce - Ur
nt
ba
Su
r
N
n
or al Su rve
th
R
y
rv
- S ura
1
ey
1
l
ub
13 - N
ur
ba
- S ort
n
Su
ou h Su
U
th
rv
Su rve
ey
- S rba
y
rv
n
3
u
ey 4 - N bu
N
5
rb
or
- S ort
a
th
n
h
o
-U
-R
Su uth
ur
- S rba
rv
al
e
ub n /
R
C y6
u
as
- S rba ura
e
n
C
l
C
o
st
as
as
/R
ud uth
e
e
- S ura
y
st
st
1
ud
ud
- S ubu l
y
y
r
2
o
3
- N uth ban
-C
or
en
-U
th
tr
C
- S rba
as al e
ub n
st Rur
ud
al urb
/S
an
y
4
u
- N bu
r
ba
or
th
n
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
y
Cost per Business Services: Job Seeker Participating in a Job Fair
15
Su
-S
rv
ey
ou
1
th
Su 6 -U
S
rv
rb
o
ey
ut
an
Su
h
2
-U
rv
ey
So
rb
an
ut
Su 12
h
rv
ey Sou Ru
ra
th
7
Su
l
rv
ey Cen Urb
a
t
1
ra
Su
n
4
-S lrv
ey
ou Ru
Su
r
8
al
Su
rv
- C th ey
rv
U
en
ey
rb
18
t
a
r
a
- N 17
n
-S l-U
or
rb
th
ou
an
-S
th
Su
-U
ub
rv
ey
ur
rb
b
an an
Su 9 C
/R
rv
en
ey
ur
t
ra
al
1
-C lSu
Su
U
en
rv
r
r
b
v
Su
ey
ey
an
tra
rv
3
l
ey 4 -N -R
N
u
5
ra
- S orth orth
l
ou
-R
-U
th
Su
ur
rb
a
a
rv
Su
l
n
e
/R
bu
Su y 6
- S rba ura
rv
l
n
ey
o
/R
10 uth
- S ura
Su
N
l
ub
or
ur
th
Su rve
ba
y
rv
Su
n
ey 11
bu
13 - N
r
C
as
- S orth ban
e
ou
C
-U
C
st
as
as
th
ud
e
e
- S rba
y
st
st
n
1
ud
ud
- S ubu
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-C -N
th
-U
or
en
rb
tra th
C
-S
a
las
ub n
R
e
ur
st
ur
al
ud
b
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bur
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Figure III-99: Cost per Business Services: Job Seeker Participating in a Job Fair
$2,500.00
$2,000.00
$1,500.00
$1,000.00
$500.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-100: Volume of Business Services Mass Hires/Job Fairs: Job Seekers
Participating in Job Fairs
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
83
Su
rv
ey
14
Su
-S
rv
Su
ey
ou
rv
th
e y 17
-U
13
So
rb
u
an
Su
th
So
rv
-U
u
ey
th
r
- S ba
Su 9 n
u
C
rv
en bur
ey
ba
t ra
1
Su
5
n
lrv
U
ey So
rb
Su
u
a
th
S
1
n
rv
-U
ey urv
e y Ce
rb
5
nt
a
1
-S
ra
n
2
-S lou
th
ou Ru
Su
r
-S
th
a
rv
e
-U l
ub
Su y 6
ur
rb
b
a
rv
an
n
ey So
/R
10 uth
u
r
a
Su
Su - N
o
bu l
rv
e y rt h
rb
Su
1
Su
Su an
rv
ey
rv 1 bu
N
ey
18
rb
o
r
an
th
- N 16
-U
-S
or
th
rb
ou
an
t
Su Su h b
U
rv
rb
ey urb
an an
Su
Su 2 So / Ru
rv
r
e y v ey
ra
ut
h
l
4
3
-N
-N -R
ur
or
or
al
Su
th
th
-R
rv
-U
e
rb
ur
Su y 7
a
al
-C n/
rv
e
R
e
C
ur
nt
as y 8
al
e
- C ral
C
C
st
as
as
en - R
ud
e
u
e
t
y
ra
ra
s
st
1
ud tud
-S l-U l
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-C -N
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
C
b
-S
a
as
lub n
e
R
ur
st
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bu
r
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Business Services - Number of Workshops
Su
rv
Su ey
12
rv
e
Su y 6 - So
ut
rv
-S
h
ey
o
1 3 u th - U
rb
an
Su
S
So
rv
u t u bu
ey
h
- S rba
Su
1
ub n
rv
ur
ey Ce
nt
ba
1
Su
ra
5
n
rv
-S ley
R
ou
u
ra
17
Su
th
l
rv
-S
ey
ou Urb
14
an
Su
th
rv
-S
ey
ou Urb
9
an
th
Su
-U
C
e
rv
rb
ey ntr
an
al
Su
Su 2 So Urb
rv
r
e y ve y
ut
an
h
4
3
-N
-N -R
ur
or
or
al
Su
th
th
rv
-U
-R
ey
r
u
b
ra
Su
7
an
l
r
Su vey Cen / Ru
8
rv
tra
ra
-C
ey
l
l
en - R
10
ur
Su - N tral
al
o
-U
rv
ey rth
Su
r
Su
1 1 - S b an
rv
ey
rv
- N ubu
e
18
r
y
or
t h ba n
- N 16
-U
-S
or
Ca
th
o
r
- S uth ban
s
Ca e s
Ca
-U
ub
t
u
se
se
rb
dy u r b
an
s
st
a
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
ou Ru
2
3
-N
ra
-C
th
-U l
o
en
tra rth
r
C
Su
- S ba
as
lrv
ub n
e
ey
st Rur
ur
ud
5
a
l/S ba
-S
y
4
ub n
ou
ur
th
N
ba
- S ort
ub h - n
Ru
ur
ba
ra
n
l
/R
ur
al
Cost per Business Services Workshop
Figure III-101: Cost per Business Services Workshop
$14,000.00
$12,000.00
$10,000.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$4,000.00
$2,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-102: Volume of Business Services Workshops
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
84
Business Services - Number of Businesses Attending Workshops
Su
rv
ey
14
Su
-S
rv
ey
ou
15
th
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
an
1
Su
th
7
rv
-U
-S
ey
rb
ou
an
th
Su 9 -U
C
rv
en
e
r
ba
y
Su
t ra
S
1
n
rv
-C ley urv
U
e
e
r
y
5
ba
nt
1
-S
ra
n
2
-S lou
th
ou Ru
Su
r
-S
th
a
rv
e
ub
-U l
Su y 6
u
r
- S rba ban
rv
ey
n
o
/R
10 uth
u
Su ral
Su
N
or
th bur
Su rve
y
- S ba
rv
ey 11
ub n
13 - N
ur
Su
or
ba
th
Su
rv
So
n
ey
-U
rv
u
th
ey
18
rb
an
- N 16
S
- S ub
or
th
ou urb
an
t
Su Su h b
U
rv
rb
ey urb
an an
Su
Su 2 So / Ru
rv
r
e y v ey
ra
ut
h
l
4
3
-N
-N -R
ur
or
or
al
Su
th
th
-R
rv
-U
e
rb
ur
Su y 7
a
al
-C n/
rv
e
R
e
C
ur
nt
as y 8
al
e
- C ral
C
C
st
as
as
en - R
ud
e
u
e
t
y
ra
ra
s
st
1
ud tud
-S l-U l
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-C -N
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
C
b
-S
a
as
lub n
e
R
ur
st
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bu
r
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Cost per Business Attending a Business Services Workshop
Su
rv
Su ey
1
rv
ey 2 So
6
ut
Su - So
h
-U
ut
rv
h
ey
rb
Su
1
Su an
-C
rv
bu
ey
e
r
17 ntra ban
Su
-S lrv
ey
ou Ru
ra
15
Su
th
-U l
rv
-S
ey
rb
ou
an
th
Su 9 -U
C
rv
en
ey
r
ba
tra
1
n
lSu 4 U
So
rv
r
ba
ey
ut
h
n
Su
Su 2 So Urb
rv
r
ey vey
an
ut
h
4
3
-N
-N -R
ur
or
or
al
Su
th
th
-U
-R
rv
ey
rb
ur
Su
7
a
al
-C n/
r
R
Su vey
en
u
ra
t
8
rv
l
- C ral
ey
en - R
10
u
t
ra
ra
Su - N
l
lor
U
th
Su rve
rb
y
rv
Su an
ey 11
bu
13 - N
rb
Su
or
an
th
Su - S
rv
ou
ey
-U
rv
t
e
h
18
rb
y
an
- N 16
S
- S ub
or
th
C
ou urb
as
an
-S
th
e
C
C
-U
u
st
as
as
ud bur
rb
e
e
ba
y
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
ou Ru
2
3
ra
-C -N
th
-U l
o
en
tra rth
rb
C
Su
-S
a
as
lrv
ub n
e
R
ey
ur
st
ud
5
al urb
an
/S
-S
y
u
4
ou
- N bu
th
r
b
an
- S ort
ub h R
ur
u
ba
ra
n
l
/R
ur
al
Figure III-103: Cost per Business Attending a Business Services Workshop
$1,000.00
$900.00
$800.00
$700.00
$600.00
$500.00
$400.00
$300.00
$200.00
$100.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-104: Volume of Business Services Businesses Attending Workshops
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
85
18
Business Services - Number of Businesses Receiving Consulting Services
-N
or
th
Su
rv Su
bu
e
rb
Su y 1
an
rv 6 ey
/R
So
ur
Su 9
ut
-C h
al
rv
ey
en - U
r
ba
Su 17 tra
n
rv
-S lU
e
rb
Su y 7 out
a
h
n
Su rve - C
en Ur
y
rv
tra ba
e y 15
n
13 - S l R
o
Su - S uth ura
ou
l
rv
th - U
e
Su y 1
- S rba
-C
rv
ub n
Su
ur
e
C ey
a
ba
14 ntr
r
C
a
as vey se
n
-S ls
e
ou Ru
st 5 - tud
ud
So y
r
t
h
a
4
y
-N -U l
3 uth
-C
- S or rba
t
n
e
ub h
-R
Su ntr
u
ur
rv al - rba
ey
a
n
R
Su
/R l
ur
6
a
rv
ey So l/S ura
u
bu l
10 uth
Su - N - S rba
n
u
rv
or
e
th bu
rb
Su y 1
rv 1 - Su an
bu
ey
N
o
rb
1
an
Su 2 - rth
rv
So - U
ey
rb
ut
an
Su
h
Su 2
rv
ey rve So Urb
ut
y
an
4
h
-N 3Su ort Nor Rur
h
th
al
r
C vey - U
a
rb Ru
8
r
a
C se
al
n
as
st - C
u
en / R
e
st dy
ur
tra
ud
1
al
-S ly
U
2
- N out rba
n
or h th
U
- S rba
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
ey
rv
ey
Ca 6 So
se
u
st
u d th Su
y
Su
4
rv
- N bu
ey
rb
o
1
Su
rth an
4
r
Su vey - So - R
ur
rv
ut
a
h
ey 15
-U l
13 - S
ou
rb
Su
a
So th
rv
-U n
e y ut h
rb
1
Su
Su an
7
rv
ey So bur
u
7
th ban
Su
rv
ey Cen Urb
Su
tra
Su
an
rv
1
ey
lrv
ey Ce
18
nt Rur
9
-N
al
- C ral
or
en - R
th
- S tra ura
Su
ub l - U l
rv
rb
ey urb
an
Su
Su 2 - an
/
So
rv
rv
Ru
ey
ey
ut
ra
h
4
3
l
-N
-N -R
ur
or
Su ort
al
t
h
h
r
S u ve y - U
rb Rur
8
rv
al
ey
- C an
10
en / R
u
t
r
r
Su
al
No al
rv
rth - U
e
r
Su y 11 - S ban
rv
- N ubu
Ca ey
12 orth rba
se
n
C
Ca
-S
st
ud
se a se
ou Urb
y
st
st
a
t
h
1
n
ud
ud
-S -U
y
y
rb
2
ou
3
Su
a
th
rv
n
ey Cen Nor
-U
th
tr
5
- S rba
- S al ub n
ou
R
ur
u
th
Su
- S al/S rba
ub n
rv
ub
ey
u
u
16 rba rba
n
-S n/
ou R u
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
Su
Cost per Business Receiving Consulting Services
Figure III-105: Cost per Business Receiving Consulting Services
$1,200.00
$1,000.00
$800.00
$600.00
$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-106: Volume of Businesses Receiving Consulting Services
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
86
Business Services - Businesses Using Business Center Services
Su
r
1 8 ve y
- N 14
-S
or
th
o
- S uth
Su
rv
ub
-U
ey
ur
ba rba
Su 1 2
n
n
rv
ey So / Ru
u
Su
ra
7
th
l
rv
ey Ce - Ur
nt
ba
8
ra
n
Su
lC
e
R
rv
ur
ey ntra
al
lSu
3
-N
U
Su
rv
ey
or rba
rv
ey
th
n
2
-R
-S
13
o
u
u
ra
Su
So
th
l
rv
-R
ey uth
ur
1
Su
al
Su
7
-S
rv
b
e
ou urb
Su y 1
an
th
rv
ey Ce - Ur
Su 9 - ntra ban
lrv
C
e
e
Su
Ca y 1 ntr Rur
al
a
rv
6
se
-U l
ey
-S
st
rb
ou
5
u
- S dy
a
th
n
4
o
-N -U
Su uth
rb
o
a
rv
r th
n
ey Su
-R
bu
6
ur
Su - S rba
a
n
o
r
/R l
Su vey uth
- S ura
rv
15
ey
l
u
10 - So bur
Su - N uth ban
Su
o
-U
rv
rv
ey rth
r
ey
11 - S ban
4
u
-N
b
C
or urb
as Nor
a
th
t
e
C
C
-U n
st h as
as
ud
U
r
e
e
r
b
ba
y
s
an
st
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
2
ou Ru
3
-N
ra
-C
th
o
en
-U l
tra rth
r
- S ba
lub n
R
ur
al urb
/S
a
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
ey
Cost per Business Using Business Center Services
Su
rv
ey
15
Su
-S
r
Su vey
ou
rv
th
ey 16
-U
13
So
rb
C
ut
-S
an
as
h
ou
e
-U
rb
Su stud th Su an
y
rv
4
ey
- N bur
6
b
or
Su - S
th a n
o
rv
-R
ey uth
- S ura
Su 17
l
ub
rv
ur
ey So
ba
u
Su
th
1
n
-U
rv
ey C e
rb
nt
a
9
Su
n
- C ral
rv
en - R
ey
ur
t
r
Su
7
a
al
-U l
rv
ey C e
rb
n
t
a
14
Su
ra
n
rv
-S ley
ou Ru
Su
r
8
t
al
rv
Su - C h ey
U
e
rv
18
ey ntra rba
n
l
2
Su No
-S -U
rt
rv
ou rba
ey h n
th
Su
4
-R
bu
Su - N
u
r
o
b
rv
an ral
ey rth
/R
10 - U
r
ur
b
an
al
Su - N
o
rv
/R
r
t
e
h
C
ur
y
as
11
al
S
e
C
C
st
- N ubu
as
as
ud
rb
e
o
e
y
rth
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-U
-S
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-C -N
th
or
-U
en
tra th
r
b
Su
-S
a
l
rv
ub n
Su - R
ey
ur
ur
rv
5
a
b
l/S
a
- S ey
ub n
ou 3 ur
N
th
b
an
- S ort
Su
ub h rv
R
ey
ur
u
ba
ra
12
l
-S n/
ou Ru
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
Figure III-107: Cost per Business Using Business Center Services
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-108: Volume of Businesses Using Business Center Services
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
87
Su
rv
ey
17
Su
rv
-S
ey
ou
th
Su 8 -U
C
rv
en
ey
tra rba
1
Su
n
2
l
-U
-S
Su rve
rb
ou
y
rv
a
th
n
ey 1 C
1
en Urb
C
as 3 t
a
ra
So
n
e
lst
R
ud uth
Su
ur
y
Su
a
S
rv
1
ey
rv
- S ubu l
ey
18
rb
ou
a
1
th
-N
n
6
-S
or
th
ou Urb
an
t
Su Su h bu
U
rv
rb
r
e
b
a
y
Su
an
n
2
rv
/R
ey - S
ou
ur
9
Su
al
- C th
rv
en - R
ey
u
Su
t
r
r
14
S
a
a
rv
-S l-U l
ey urv
ey
rb
ou
5
an
15
-S
th
-U
ou
-S
th
rb
ou
Su
an
-S
th
rv
e
-U
ub
Su y 6
ur
rb
b
rv
an an
ey So
/R
10 uth
u
Su ral
Su - N
or
b
rv
ur
th
ey
- S ba
1
ub n
Su 1 Su
ur
N
rv
rv
or
ba
ey
ey
th
n
3
4
-N
-N
U
rb
or
or
an
S
th
th
C
C
-U
-R
as urve
as
e
e
rb
ur
y
s
st
7
a
al
ud tud
-C n/
y
y
R
en
2
3
u
ra
- C - N tra
l
lo
en
R
tra rth
u
C
-S
ra
as
ll
ub
e
R
ur
st
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bu
rb
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Business Services - Number of Jobs Developed
y
Su 14
rv
ey So
ut
Su
1
h
rv
C
en Urb
Su ey
Su
an
t
1
ra
rv
rv
5
ey
ey
-S l6
18
ou Ru
ra
th
-N -S
-U l
or out
h
th
r
- S ba
n
u
Su Su
bu bu
rv
rb
r
e
b
a
y
Su
an
n
2
rv
/R
ey - S
ur
ou
1
Su
al
t
6
rv
-S he
C
ou Ru
as y 9
r
al
e
- C th U
en
Su stud
tra rba
rv
y
n
1
ey
lU
13 - S
rb
ou
a
Su
th
So
n
-U
rv
ey uth
rb
12
an
Su
S
- S ub
rv
ey
ou urb
an
17
Su
th
-U
rv
-S
ey
rb
ou
an
8
th
Su - C
Su
-U
e
r
rv
ey vey ntra rba
n
l
4
3
-N -U
-N
rb
or
or
an
Su
th
th
-U
-R
r
Su vey
r
u
b
rv
an ral
ey 7 /R
1 0 Ce
n
tra ura
Su - N
l
l
C
C
o
rv
-R
as
as
ey rth
ur
e
e
11 - S
st
a
st
l
ud
ud
- N ubu
y
y
rb
2
o
3
an
- C - N rth
-U
o
en
tra rth
r
C
Su
- S ban
a
l
-R
rv
se
ub
ey
ur
st
u
r
u
5
al
/S ban
- S dy
ub
4
ou
u
th
N
rb
an
- S ort
ub h R
ur
u
ba
ra
n
l
/R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Cost per Business Services: Job Developed
Figure III-109: Cost per Business Services: Job Developed
$1,200.00
$1,000.00
$800.00
$600.00
$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-110: Volume of Business Services: Jobs Developed
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
88
Youth Services
Half the One-Stops surveyed had a youth program under their roof, so our measures in this
process are more limited and more variable. We saw two key cost-per indicators here. The first
was the cost per youth served, which is simply the total number of youth served divided by the
total cost of the youth process. The second was the cost of placing a youth in any type of
employment experience.
The median cost per youth receiving services was $3,837 substantially higher than the median
cost for enrolled adults. The costs varied widely from only $546 to over $20,000, but most sites
had costs between $2,000 and $7,000 per youth. Again the wide variation in volume of service
delivered may account for the different costs in large part.
The median cost per youth who got placed in some type of employment (work experience,
summer job, and regular employment) was $2,526. The median cost of providing a case
management and counseling to youth as $1,260, with a wide range, showing again the intensity
of these services probably varies a great deal from site to site. College preparation was a more
costly item, median cost per youth of $3,350 because relatively few youth participated.
Providing academic support had a median cost of $1,425 per youth. Finally following up youth
cost $522 per youth.
Table III-9: Youth Services: Median Costs and Range Per-Unit of Service
Service Unit
Median Cost Per
Range
Per Youth Served
$3,837
$546 - $20,178
Per Youth Placed in Employment
$2,526
$617 - $6,328
Per Youth receiving Counseling,
$1,260
$28 - $5,709
Case Management, Supportive
Services
Per Youth Participating in a College
$3,350
$32 - $4,976
Preparation Event
Per Youth Participating in
$1,426
$265 - $5,825
Academic Support
Per Youth Followed-up
$522
$146 - $2,468
Again, the following graphs provide a complete distribution of costs and volume of service for
the site which had youth programs.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
89
Su
rv
ey
12
Su
-S
rv
Su
ey
ou
rv
th
e y 15
-U
13
So
r
- S uth ban
ou
Su
-U
th
rv
- S rba
Su ey
n
u
3
rv
- N bu
ey
rb
Su
o
a
1
S
rth
rv
n
ey urv 6 So - R
18 ey
ur
u
8
al
-N
- C th or
U
en
th
rb
t
a
r
S
n
Su al Su urv
bu
U
e
rv
rb
rb
ey y 9
a
an
n
4
/R
- N Ce
ur
or ntra
al
Su
th
l
-U -U
rv
rb
rb
Su Su ey
a
7
a
rv
n
rv
-C n/
ey
ey
R
en
6
5
ur
t
-S
ra
al
S
lo u ou
th
R
th
ur
al
Su
Su - S
u
bu
r
Su vey bur
rb
b
rv
an an
ey 1 /R
10 C e
n
tra ura
Su - N
l
lo
rv
R
e y rth
ur
11
al
Su
S
rv
- N ubu
ey
rb
or
an
14
th
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
an
1
th
Su 7 -U
S
r
C
rb
as vey out
an
h
e
C
C
st 2 as
as
ud
So Urb
e
e
y
an
ut
s
st
1
ud tud
-S hy
y
ou Ru
2
3
ra
-C -N
th
-U l
o
en
tra rth
r
b
C
-S
a
las
ub n
R
e
ur
st
ur
al
ud
b
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bur
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Youth - Number Served
5
Su So
ut
rv
ey h S
4
- N ubu
Su
r
rv orth ban
ey
-U
/R
6
ur
Su - S rba
al
n
o
rv
/R
ey uth
u
-S
ra
Su 8 l
u
C
rv
en bur
ey
Su
b
tra
an
7
rv
-C ley
S
18 urv
en Urb
tra
an
- N ey
3
lor
R
th - N
u
ra
- S ort
Su
l
ub h rv
ey
R
ur
u
ba
ra
16
Su
l
r
-S n/
Su vey
ou Ru
rv
r
1
t
a
h
5
ey
-U l
13 - S
ou
rb
an
Su - S
th
o
rv
-U
ey uth
r
b
-S
an
Su 9 u
C
rv
en bur
ey
C
b
as
12 tra
an
e
C
C
-S l-U
st
as
as
ud
rb
ou
e
e
y
an
s
th
st
1
ud tud
-U
-S
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-C -N
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
C
b
-S
a
as
lub n
e
R
ur
st
ur
ud
al
b
a
/S
y
Su
ub n
4
rv
ur
ey - N
b
or
an
1
S
- C th Su urv
R
en
u
e
tra
rv
ra
ey y 2
l
l10 - S
R
u
o
ra
ut
Su - N
h
l
o
rv
-R
ey rth
ur
11 - S
Su
al
u
rv
ey - No bur
rth ba
14
n
-U
-S
rb
ou
an
th
-U
rb
an
Su
rv
ey
Cost per Youth Served
Figure III-111: Cost per Youth Served
$25,000.00
$20,000.00
$15,000.00
$10,000.00
$5,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-112: Volume of Youth Served
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
90
y
y
1
Su 2 So
r
v
5
ut
- S ey
h
-U
ou 3 Su
N
th
rb
o
rv
an
r th
ey - S
u
bu
13
R
Su - S rba ura
l
n
o
rv
/R
e y u th
u
1
S
Su ral
Su urv 5 So bur
e
rv
ba
ut
ey y 8
h
n
4
-U
- N Ce
Su
nt
rb
o
r
an
Su
rth
al
rv
ey
-U
rv
ey - U
18
rb
r
b
an
- N 16
a
-S n/
or
th
ou Ru
ra
Su
th
rv Sub
-U l
ey
ur
rb
b
an an
Su 9 C
rv
en / R
ey
ur
t
ra
7
al
Su
lSu rvey Cen Urb
tra
rv
an
ey 1 l10 C e
R
u
n
tra
ra
Su - N
l
lo
rv
R
ey rth
ur
Su
11
al
Su
rv
ey - No bur
rt h b a
14
Su
n
rv
-S
ey
ou Urb
1
an
th
Su 7 -U
rb
Su rve Sou
an
y
th
rv
2
ey
-S -U
C
ou rba
as 6 So
th
n
e
C
C
st
-R
as
as
ud uth
e
e
u
-S
y
ra
s
st
1
ud tud
- S ubu l
y
y
rb
2
ou
3
an
-N
-C
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
C
b
-S
as
a
lub n
e
R
st
ur
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bu
r
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Su
rv
e
Youth - Number Placed in Any Employment
Su
rv
ey
16
Su
rv
-S
ey
o
Su 8 - uth
-U
C
rv
en
e
Su
tra rba
Su y 7
n
rv
l
-U
rv
e
ey Ce
Su y 5
rb
nt
1
a
ra
rv
5
n
ey So
-S l1 8 u th
ou Ru
r
th
a
-N -S
-U l
u
or
t h bu r
rb
b
an
an
Su Su
/R
bu
rv
r
u
e
b
S
y
a n ral
3
Su urv
-N /R
e
rv
ur
or
ey y 9
al
- C th
4
en - R
Su - N
ur
tra
or
rv
al
th
ey
l
13 - U - Ur
b
r
b
an
Su
an
So
rv
/R
e y ut h
u
Su 12
Su ral
rv
bu
e y So
rb
u
an
t
1
Su
-C hU
r
e
ve
Su
rb
n
tra
an
y
rv
2
e
-S l-R
Su y 6
u
o
rv
ra
ut
e y So
h
l
-R
1 0 uth
u
ra
Su - N - S
l
ub
o
rv
ur
ey rth
Su
1 1 - S ban
u
rv
ey - No bur
r th b a
14
Su
rv
-U n
-S
Ca ey
o
r
17 uth ban
se
C
Ca
-U
-S
st
a
ud
se
se
ou
rb
y
an
s
th
st
1
ud tud
-U
-S
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-N
-C
th
or
-U
en
rb
Ca tra th s e l - R S u an
bu
st
ud ura
r
l/S ba
y
4
ub n
-N
u
or rba
th
n
-R
ur
al
Cost per Youth Placed in Any Employment
Figure III-113: Cost per Youth Placed in Any Employment
$7,000.00
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-114: Volume of Youth Placed in Any Employment
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
91
Su
rv
ey
12
Su
-S
rv
Su
ey
ou
rv
th
e y 15
-U
13
So
r
- S uth ban
ou
Su
-U
th
rv
- S rba
Su ey
n
u
3
rv
- N bu
ey
rb
Su
o
a
1
S
rth
rv
n
ey urv 6 So - R
18 ey
ur
u
8
al
-N
- C th or
U
en
th
rb
t
a
r
S
n
Su al Su urv
bu
U
e
rv
rb
rb
ey y 9
a
an
n
4
/R
- N Ce
ur
or ntra
al
Su
th
l
-U -U
rv
rb
rb
Su Su ey
a
7
a
rv
n
rv
-C n/
ey
ey
R
en
6
5
ur
t
-S
ra
al
S
lo u ou
th
R
th
ur
al
Su
Su - S
u
bu
r
Su vey bur
rb
b
rv
an an
ey 1 /R
10 C e
n
tra ura
Su - N
l
lo
rv
R
e y rth
ur
11
al
Su
S
rv
- N ubu
ey
rb
or
an
14
th
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
an
1
th
Su 7 -U
S
r
C
rb
as vey out
an
h
e
C
C
st 2 as
as
ud
So Urb
e
e
y
an
ut
s
st
1
ud tud
-S hy
y
ou Ru
2
3
ra
-C -N
th
-U l
o
en
tra rth
r
b
C
-S
a
las
ub n
R
e
ur
st
ur
al
ud
b
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bur
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Youth - Number Receiving Counseling, Case Management Supportive
Services
Cost per Youth Receiving Counseling, Case Management Supportive
Services
Su
Su rve
y
rv
ey 4 N
5
- S ort
ou h U
th
rb
Su
a
rv Sub n /
ey
R
ur
ba ura
Su 16
l
-S n/
rv
Su e y
ou Ru
ra
7
rv
th
ey
-C
-U l
Su
6
e
Su - S ntra rba
rv
n
ey
o
lr
18 vey uth
R
- S ura
-N 8l
u
C
or
en bur
th
ba
- S tra
n
S
ub l - U
Su ur
rb
rv vey urb
an an
ey
3
13
-N /R
ur
or
Su - S
a
th
o
rv
-R l
e y u th
- S ura
15
Su
l
u
rv
e y - So b u
rb
ut
Su 9
a
n
rv - C h U
ey
en
r
Su 12 tral ban
-U
rv
e y So
rb
ut
an
1
Su
-C hU
Su
rv
en
r
e
b
rv
an
ey y 2 tral
-R
10 - S
o
u
ut
ra
Su - N
h
l
o
rv
-R
ey rth
u
Su
11 - S
ra
l
ub
rv
ey - N
u
14 orth rba
Su
n
r
-S
-U
C vey
o
as
17 uth rba
e
C
C
-S
st
-U n
as
as
u
e
e
o
st
st dy 1 uth rba
ud
ud
-U n
-S
y
y
3
2
o
r
-C
- N uth ba
n
en
or
Ca tra th - Urb
l
Su an
se
b
st Rur
ud
al urb
/
y
Su an
4
- N bu
rb
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Figure III-115: Cost per Youth Receiving Counseling, Case Management Supportive
Services
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-116: Volume of Youth Receiving Counseling, Case Management Supportive
Services
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
92
rv
ey
Su
Su
y
rv
7
9
th
l-
n
ba
al
an
ur
ur
/R
ub
n
-S
ba
ba
rb
ur
-U
ub
th
tra
ur
en
ou
ub
-C
-S
-S
-S
ou
th
-S
ou
12
-S
ey
ey
6
th
rv
rv
ey
ou
Su
rv
-S
Su
5
13
rv
e
y
Su
rv
e
Youth - Number Participating in a College Preparation Event
Su
rv
e
ey
1
-C
en
tra
n
Ur
ba
y
l- n
10 Ce
R
Su - N ntra ura
l
lo
rv
e y rth
R
Su
11 - S ura
l
ub
rv
ey - N
u
S u 1 4 or t h r ba
n
rv
ey - So - U
Su 15 uth rba
rv
-U n
ey - S
Su
S u 1 6 out h r b a
rv
ey
r
-S
-U n
1 8 ve y
o
r
- N 1 7 u t h ba n
-S
-U
or
th
ou
rb
Su - S u t h - a n
bu
Ur
rv
ey
ba
rb
n
Su
Su 2 - an
/R
rv
rv
S
ou
ey
ey
ur
th
a
4
3
-N
-N -R l
ur
or
S u or t
al
th
h
r
C a ve y - U
rb Rur
8
se
a
al
C
Ca
st - C e n /
se a se
u
R
n
s t dy 1 t r a u r a
st
ud
ud
-S l-U l
y
y
2
3
o
r
- N uth b a
-C
n
or
en
-U
th
Ca tra
rb
an
se l S
st R u ub u
u d ra
l/ S r b a
y
n
4
- N u bu
or rba
th
n
-R
ur
al
Su
Su
Cost per Youth Participating in a College Preparation Event
Su
rv
Su Su ey
7
rv
rv
-C
ey
ey
en
6
5
tra
-S -S
lou o u
R
t
h
th
ur
-S -S
Su
al
u
ub
rv
b
u
ey
ur
r
b
ba
an
Su 9 n
C
r
en / R
Su vey
u
tra
rv
ra
ey 12
ll
U
13 - So
r
b
ut
a
So
h
Su
n
-U
ut
rv
h
ey
rb
a
1
Su
n
-C
Su
bu
rv
en
r
ey
tra ban
lSu 2 Su
R
So
r
rv
ur
ey vey
ut
al
h
3
4
-N
R
N
ur
o
o
Su
rth
rth
al
rv
-R
ey - U
Su
ur
rb
8
rv
al
- C an
ey
en / R
10
u
t
r
r
al
a
Su - N
-U l
o
rv
ey rth
rb
a
11
Su
S
n
rv
- N ubu
ey
rb
or
an
14
th
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
an
15
th
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
Su
an
16
th
Su
rv
ey
-U
-S
rv
ey
18
rb
ou
an
th
- N 17
-U
-S
or
C
th
rb
ou
as
an
-S
th
e
C
C
-U
u
st
as
as
ud bur
rb
e
e
ba
y
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
ou Ru
2
3
ra
-C -N
th
-U l
o
en
tra rth
r
b
C
-S
a
las
ub n
e
R
ur
st
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bur
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Figure III-117: Cost per Youth Participating in a College Preparation Event
$5,000.00
$4,500.00
$4,000.00
$3,500.00
$3,000.00
$2,500.00
$2,000.00
$1,500.00
$1,000.00
$500.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-118: Volume of Youth Participating in a College Preparation Event
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
93
Youth - Number of Youth Participating in Academic Support
13
Su - S
o
rv
y
ey uth
5
-S
12
-S
ou
- S ub
th
ou urb
-S
an
Su
th
ub
-U
rv
ey
ur
r
b
ba
16
an
Su
rv
-S n/
R
Su ey
ou
u
8
ra
t
rv
l
ey - C h U
en
6
r
b
t
ra
an
Su - S
lo
rv
U
ey uth
- S rba
Su 9 n
u
C
rv
en bur
ey
b
t
ra
an
7
Su
-C lSu rve
en Urb
y
rv
tra
an
ey 1 l10 C e
R
u
n
tra
ra
Su - N
l
lo
rv
R
ey rth
ur
11
Su
al
Su
rv
bu
ey - N
r
14 orth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
Su
ou
rb
15
an
Su
rv
th
ey
r
-S
18 vey
ou Urb
an
th
- N 17
-U
-S
or
th
ou
rb
an
t
Su Su h bu
U
rv
r
rb
b
ey
an an
Su
Su 2 So / Ru
rv
rv
ey
ey
ut
ra
h
l
4
3
-N
-N -R
C
u
as
or
or
r
a
t
th
e
l
C
C
st h as
as
U
ud
e
e
rb Rur
y
st
st
a
a
1
ud
ud
l
-S n/
y
y
R
2
o
3
- C - N uth ura
or
en
-U l
th
tr
C
- S rba
a s al ub n
e
R
ur
st
ud
al urb
/S
an
y
u
4
- N bu
r
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Su
rv
ey
Su
rv
e
Su y 7
rv
ey Ce
nt
Su Su
8
r
rv
rv
e y - C al ey
en
R
6
5
tra ura
-S -S
ll
ou
ou
U
th
th
r
Su
- S - S b an
ub
rv
ub
ey
ur
u
ba
Su 9 - rba
n
n
C
rv
/
en
Su
ey
Ru
tra
rv
1
r
al
2
ey
lUr
13 - S
ou
ba
Su
So t h
n
-U
rv
ut
ey
h
rb
a
1
Su
n
Su
rv Cen bur
ey
tra ban
l
Su 2 Su
So - Ru
r
rv
e y ve y
ra
ut
h
l
3
4
-N -R
Su - N
u
o
o
rv
ra
rth
e y rt h
l
-R
10 - U
u
r
b
ra
Su - N
an
l
o
rv
/R
ey rth
Su
1 1 - S u ra
l
u
rv
ey - No bur
r th b a
14
Su
n
-U
-S
rv
ey
Su
o
r
15 uth ban
Su
rv
ey
-U
rv
-S
e
18
rb
o
y
an
- N 17 uth
-U
-S
or
C
ou
rb
a s th an
e
Su t h C
Ca
st
Ur
ud bu
se a se
b
r
y
ba
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
ou Ru
2
3
-N
ra
-C
th
or
-U l
en
rb
Ca tra th s e l - R S u an
bu
st
ur
u
r
al
Su d y
/S ban
4
u
rv
b
ey
No urb
16
a
rt
-S h- n
Ru
ou
ra
th
-U l
rb
an
Cost per Youth Participating in Academic Support
Figure III-119: Cost per Youth Participating in Academic Support
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-120: Volume of Youth Participating in Academic Support
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
94
Su
r
Su vey
rv
ey 12
13 - So
Su
ut
-S
rv
ou h ey
S
U
th
18 urv
- S rba
- N ey
ub n
or 3 ur
N
th
ba
or
Su
t
n
rv Sub h ey
R
ur
u
b
1
ra
Su
a
6
l
rv
-S n/
ey
ou Ru
9
ra
Su
- C th l
rv
U
en
Su Su ey
tra rba
7
rv
n
rv
l
-C
ey
-U
ey
e
6
r
5
- S - S ntra ban
lou ou
th
Ru
th
Su - S - Su ral
u
bu
Su rvey bu
rb
rb
rv
an
1
a
ey
n
/R
10 C e
n
u
tr a
ra
Su - N
l
lo
rv
R
ey rth
ur
11
Su
al
Su
rv
ey - No bur
rth ba
14
Su
n
-U
rv
-S
ey
rb
ou
an
15
Su
th
-U
rv
-S
ey
rb
ou
1
an
th
Su 7 Su
-U
S
r
rv
rb
ey vey out
an
h
2
4
-N -S -U
rb
o
o
ut
an
Su
rth
h
rv
-U
-R
e
C
rb
ur
as y 8
al
e
- C an
C
C
st
as
as
en / R
ud
e
e
u
t
y
ra
ra
s
st
1
ud tud
-S l-U l
y
y
rb
2
ou
3
an
-N
-C
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
C
b
-S
a
as
lub n
e
R
st
ur
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bu
r
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Youth - Number Followed up
y
Su
rv
e
5
-S y7
ou - C
en
th
Su
tra
rv
ey
lSu Su
b
R
rv
18
ur
ba ura
- N ey
l
n
or 3 /R
N
th
Su
ur
- S ort
rv
al
e
ub h Su y 6
R
u
rv
- S rba ura
ey
l
n
o
/R
13 uth
- S ura
Su - S
l
u
o
rv
ey uth bur
- S ba
Su 9 n
u
C
rv
en bur
ey
ba
16 tra
Su
n
rv
-S l-U
ey
rb
ou
1
a
t
Su
h
2
n
-U
rv
e y So
rb
ut
a
1
h
n
S
Su
rv urve Cen Urb
ey
tra
an
y
2
4
-N -S l-R
ur
ou
Su ort
al
th
h
rv
e
U
Su
R
y
r
u
b
8
rv
ra
ey
- C an
l
10
en / R
u
ra
Su - N tral
o
-U l
rv
ey rth
r
11 - S ban
Su
ub
rv
u
N
ey
r
14 orth ban
Su
-U
rv
-S
ey
r
o
15 uth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
e
C
ou
rb
as y 1
an
th
7
e
C
C
-U
-S
st
as
as
ud
ou
r
e
e
b
y
an
s
st
th
1
ud tud
-U
-S
y
y
rb
2
ou
3
an
-N
-C
th
or
-U
en
rb
Ca tra th se l - R Su an
b
st
ur
ud
al urb
a
/S
y
ub n
4
-N
ur
ba
or
th
n
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
e
Cost per Youth Followed Up
Figure III-121: Cost per Youth Followed Up
$2,500.00
$2,000.00
$1,500.00
$1,000.00
$500.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure III-122: Volume of Youth Followed up
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
95
IV
Conclusions
As we noted before, this project is the first Activity Based Cost Accounting (ABC) analysis of
One-Stops Career Center (One-Stops) and their finances, and as such this project raises as many
questions as it answers. Our goal was not to evaluate how the One-Stops manage their costs but
to describe objectively what is happening in the field in terms of operations and finances. Here
we present our conclusions about One-Stops and their costs that emerged from our research.
•
Traditional federal, state and local funding streams still drive how One-Stops
conceptualize costs and services.
While One-Stops are charged with bringing together a host of federal, state and local programs,
they still must account separately for the money received from and the services produced for
each program. The system brings together several programmatic responsibility centers,
independently managed to accomplish specific goals. So a client served by multiple programs
will be counted multiple times, and will often have multiple records. There is no unified
accounting of costs incurred under the One-Stop roof. To make a reasonable accounting of
costs, we often had to contact six or seven partner agencies who themselves did not know what
they had spent in the One-Stop since they often deliver their services in-kind by locating staff in
the One-Stop or by delivering services such as a workshop in the One-Stop. We had to take
these partners through the steps of estimating the costs they incurred in the One-Stop to get a full
accounting of their costs. So we found, literally, at every site that no one knew what the total
costs of operating the One-Stop were. Similarly, partners often report the services they produced
to managers not attached to the One-Stop and not to the One-Stop manager. One-Stop and nonOne-Stop activities were often co-mingled, so if a community college counselor enrolls students
at the One-Stop those enrollments will be reported to the Community College but often not to the
One-Stop Manager.
This arrangement creates rigidities in operating the One-Stops. It is not realistic to expect OneStop managers to make cost efficient decisions when they don’t know their costs and don’t
control all the resources under their roof. Similarly, we found mangers often don’t know all the
activities that are taking place in the One-Stop or what services were produced by partners. We
found a number of managers and fiscal staff who had difficulty understanding the ABC
framework and the analysis and information it would produce.
•
There are few standard measures for units of service produced.
We found that each One-Stop had their own methods for counting, or frankly, not counting the
services produced. Different One-Stops had invested in different client tracking software and
had a wide variety of paper and pencil tracking systems for measuring services produced.
Complicating this is the reality that One-Stops and their partners must report to a variety of
funding sources each with their own requirements. To calculate the total volume of service
produced at any One-Stop we needed to collect service data from multiple partners. For
example, to get the number of clients receiving case management service we needed to collect
the number of clients getting case management in the WIA program, in EDD programs such as
the Trade Adjustment Act, in CalWorks program (if it was in the One-Stop) and any other
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
96
programs that provided case management. At none of the case study sites was there a central
location which collected all this data, rather, each program was maintaining the records for their
funding stream. Similarly, One-Stops could usually tell us how many businesses they served
with WIA funds, but were likely not to know how many businesses were reached by other
programs, such as a small business development corporation, if it was in the One-Stop.
The capability of One-Stops to produce counts of services delivered varied widely. Some OneStops, for example, had readily available counts of workshops delivered, with number of
attendees, while at other sites staff had to go back through their personal calendars to create a
count of workshops and then estimate the number of attendees.
We were particularly struck by the fact that the universal process consumed substantial resources
at every One-Stop yet there were no performance measures for this aspect of the program, and no
standard measures of service produced, not even the simple counting of clients. Fortunately, we
found that each One-Stop did have some measures of universal services produced.
In two of our case studies, the One-Stops had software for maintaining case records on enrolled
clients but the software could not produce a count of the number of case management meetings.
Some local areas could not break down WIA performance measures to the individual One-Stops
since they are collectively held accountable to the state as a local area, making it impossible to
link cost and performance at the One-Stop level.
As noted before, business services varied the most, with one site counting every flyer sent out
and others having difficulty counting up the number of Rapid Response events that occurred in
the year.
•
Partner relations vary widely
Our analysis showed clearly that partner contributions vary widely. This is largely driven by the
strategic decision to co-locate. Most partner relationships appear to be driven by the local
context, institutional arrangements and history. For example, in a case where the CalWorks
program is co-located with the One-Stop, it is because both the One-Stop and CalWorks are
county programs in a small county. Similarly, if there is a history of subcontracting WIA to
local Non-profits, many services may take place away from the site.
Even if partners are under the One-Stop roof, the actual management of services varies a great
deal. We saw some sites where EDD and WIA jointly provided services, and were well
integrated and seamless to the client. Managers worked closely together and were aware of each
others activities. In another site, WIA and EDD managers seldom spoke, staff of the two
agencies worked in separate areas and there was little integration of services.
•
One-Stops tend to structure their processes around the WIA program.
We did find some substantial commonalities in how One-Stops were structured. Since the WIA
program dominated three of the four case study sites, we found the service process was built
around the WIA service categories of universal services, registered services (adult and dislocated
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
97
worker) and business services. Services provided by partners usually fit into one of these
processes. For example, if EDD provided a resume writing workshop, it fit naturally in the
“universal services process” if it was open to everyone. English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL)
classes provided by the local educational agency fit into the “enrolled services process”, as
students had to enroll in school to attend the class. If a small business development corporation
provided training on business plan writing, that was a natural fit for business services. Thus,
despite the wide variance in size, local economic conditions, and partner relations, we found that
these processes could be used to classify activities and costs.
It is important to note the emphasis and scope of each of these common processes did vary
dramatically across the sites, but all three processes were present at each site.
•
One-Stop services were customized to local needs.
The UC Davis evaluation cited earlier16 found that under WIA local areas did adapt their
programs to local conditions. We made a similar observation. The mix and types of services
developed within the One-Stops varied based on the community the One-Stop served, while
staying with a fairly common framework of the three processes described before. Thus the
Central California Urban One-Stop Case Study, which served a large number of agricultural
workers, contracted a substantial amount of case management out to a local non-profit that
specialized in this population. In the NoCal Rural One-Stop Case Study, where the market is
dominated by very small businesses, there was a walk-in service for small business owners.
Thus this customization to local needs may account in part for the variation in costs and volume
of service we observed.
16
Campbell, et.al. (2006)
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
98
V
Recommendations for Policy and Further
Research
One-Stops began with a bold vision of bringing together a host of federal, state, and local
programs under one roof, with common goals, to better serve people seeking to improve their
lives through education, training or employment. Realizing this vision requires new ways of
thinking and managing. Unfortunately, agencies managing One-Stops and their partners are still
supported by a traditional system of rigidly separated funding streams and accountability
systems. Real integration of services can only be achieved voluntarily at the local level by local
WIBs, One-Stop Managers and local partners. Recent research has found that local history and
even local personal relationships drives these partnerships17.
Given the ad hoc local nature of partnerships and the traditional funding streams that finance
One-Stops it is not surprising that most of the One-Stops studied did not have a good grasp on
what it cost to produce specific services or how they could most efficiently share costs with
partners. Further, these managers have little or no data available on the costs of comparable
One-Stops on which to benchmark their performance or identify best practices. The typical OneStop manager we encountered had no idea if it cost more for her One-Stop to serve a universal
client than the next One-Stop down the road. Similarly, One-Stop managers have little
information about what factors drive their costs. In short, One-Stop managers are – in a strategic
sense—managing in the dark. They do not have reliable and valid fiscal data and the accounting
tools to perform effective analysis to improve their performance.
Similarly, policymakers at the state and local level are frustrated by a lack of information about
costs and partner contributions. Local WIB members work with budgets that cover only a
portion of the services actually delivered in their One-Stops and know little about the costs of
producing services. This lack of information makes it difficult for them to make strategic
choices based on good evidence. The situation at the state level is similar.
This study represents a first step towards creating some industry standards for One-Stops that
will allow individual One-Stops to systematically measure how they spend their resources and
what those resources produce. One-Stop Managers will now have some benchmarks to see if
they are generating more support or less support from their partners than their peers. They will
be able to know if the services they produce are more costly or less costly than other One-Stops.
Policymakers will similarly have a rough picture of how partners contribute to One-Stops, what
services One-Stops produce, and at what cost. We believe the analysis produced by this report
will provide a foundation for a vigorous discussion on how to improve One-Stop operations and
develop effective policies at the state and local level. But this is a first step. Here we
recommend some next steps to build on this study.
17
Campbell, et.al. (2006
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
99
1. Extend the ABC analysis to different types of One-Stops.
Given our resource constraints we were able to collect data from a limited number of full-service
One-Stops. To develop a more complete picture we recommend extending the study to smaller
One-Stops and satellite One-Stops that make up a substantial part of the One-Stop System.
2. Form a voluntary group of One-Stop managers and policy makers to develop a limited set
of key “industry measures” based on their expert opinion and the results of this study.
Industry standards tend to evolve over time through trial and error. As a new set of institutions,
One-Stops are just beginning to develop standard measures which are widely understood and
used to manage effectively. It has taken 100 years for the auto industry to establish quality and
productivity measures that are commonly used internationally. This study provides a wide array
of potential measures for tracking partner contributions, services produced and cost per service
produced. In fact, it produced too many. It is up to practitioners and policymakers to work with
these measures and identify the limited number that are critical indicators that should be tracked
universally. Further practitioners need to provide suggestions for refining the measures and the
data collection that support them to improve the quality of the measures.
Once measures are established they can provide data to improve the performance of individual
One-Stops, and the performance of the entire system. The measures can be used to track changes
over time. In the long term, as more data are collected and analyzed, the system will be able to
evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of individual One-Stops and evaluate particular policy
initiatives.
It seems logical to us that the California Workforce Investment Board (CWIB) take the initiative
to convene and support such a group.
3. Create a voluntary system where One-stops can submit data and have key measures
calculated and returned benchmarked against other similar One-Stops.
Each One-Stop and local area can not develop and maintain an Activity Based Cost accounting
system of its own system. Using our survey as a model, an online system should be developed
where individual One-Stops can submit data in a standard format and receive back a
benchmarked report for a set of standard measures, much as we have done here.
This will also create a database for state-wide analysis that can be used for policy and
management purposes at the state level. Such a system should produce regular reports for
policy makers tracking a few critical measures at regular intervals,
4. Link cost analysis to performance measures that include all programs “under the OneStop roof”.
It is critical in the long run that process and cost measures be linked to the system’s ultimate
outcomes. We could not do that in this study as there were standard outcomes only for enrolled
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
100
WIA participants. Participants in Universal services or in other programs did not share the same
outcome measures. For example, we could not calculate cost for every universal access client
who found a job as we did not how many of the universal clients found a job. The federal
government is promoting a system of “common measures” which are to cut across all federal
training programs, this is a start. The CWIB should consider developing outcome measures that
apply to all participants who pass through a One-Stop and incorporate such measures into a
benchmarking system.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
101
Appendix A: Other Partner Contributions
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
102
Table A-1: Partner Presence Across all Sites
EDD
Other
Local
Partner
DOR
Local
College /
University
x
x
Case Study 1
x
x
x
Case Study 2
x
x
x
Case Study 3
x
x
x
Case Study 4
x
x
x
Survey 1
x
x
Survey 2
x
x
Survey 3
x
x
x
Survey 4
x
x
Survey 5
x
x
x
Survey 6
x
x
x
Survey 7
x
Survey 8
x
x
x
Survey 9
x
x
x
Survey 10
x
x
Survey 11
x
x
x
Survey 12
x
x
x
Survey 13
x
x
x
Survey 14
x
Survey 15
x
x
Survey 16
x
Survey 17
x
x
Survey 18
x – denotes partner presence in subject One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
x
x
Other Local HHSA Job
Local Adult
Corps
School School
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Aging/ AARP SBDC
Adult
ABLE
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
V.A.
x
x
103
Figure A-1: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Aging & Adult
$500,000
$450,000
Aging & Adult Contribution
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$16,950
$16,950
Survey 5 - South - Suburban /
Rural
Survey 6 - South - Suburban
$8,000
$0
Survey 14 - South - Urban
Survey 17 - South - Urban
One-Stop
Figure A-2: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: ABLE
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
ABLE Contribution
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$159,519
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$5,460
$0
Survey 1 - Central - Rural
Survey 13 - South - Suburban
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
104
Figure A-3: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: SBDC
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
SBDC Contribution
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$137,612
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$12,000
$900
$0
Survey 3 - North - Rural
Case study 1 - South - Urban
Survey 9 - Central - Urban
One-Stop
Figure A-4: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Job Corps.
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
Job Corps. Contribution
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$76,500
$50,000
$18,720
$21,947
Survey 15 - South Urban
Case study 2 - North Suburban
$30,000
$3,500
$0
Survey 12 - South Urban
Survey 13 - South Suburban
Survey 2 - South - Rural
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
105
Figure A-5: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: AARP
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
AARP Contribution
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$48,326
$50,000
$27,560
$6,300
$7,088
Survey 3 - North - Rural
Survey 1 - Central - Rural
$0
Survey 4 - North - Urban / Rural
Case study 3 - Central Rural/Suburban
One-Stop
Figure A-6: Partner Contribution by One-Stop: Veterans Affairs
$500,000
$450,000
Veterans Affairs Contribution
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$16,390
$0
Survey 4 - North - Urban / Rural
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
106
Appendix B: Other Cost-Per Measures
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
107
Enrolled - Number of Client Meetings with Case Manager
Su
Su rve
y
rv
3
ey
-N
6
or
Su
So
th
rv
-R
ey uth
Su
- S ura
1
Su
2
rv
l
u
bu
ey
rv
ey So
rb
5
u
a
t
-S
1
n
-C hou
en Urb
th
t
a
Su
ra
n
lrv Sub
R
ey
ur
u
b
r
al
Su 9 an
C
rv
en / R
ey
u
t
ra
ra
Su 1 7
ll
rv
ey Sou Urb
an
th
Su
7
-U
rv
ey C e
r
15 ntra ban
Su
-S lrv
R
ey
o
16 uth ura
Su
-U l
-S
rv
ey
r
o
C
14 uth ban
as
e
-U
-S
s
Su
tu
rb
ou
d
an
rv
ey y 4 th U
10
N
rb
Su - N orth an
o
rv
-R
e y rt h
Su Sur
11 - S ura
ve
rv
u
y
ey
bu l
-N
18 13
rb
or
an
t
-N
So
h
-U
ut
or
h
th
r
- S ba
ub n
Su Su
Su
bu
ur
rv
rv
b
rb
ey
ey
an an
2
4
/
-N
Ru
So
ut
ra
Su orth
h
l
rv
-R
ey - U
C
u
r
as
b
ra
8
a
e
l
-C
n
C
C
st
as
as
en / R
ud
ur
e
e
tra
y
st
a
st
1
ud
ud
-S l-U l
y
y
rb
ou
2
3
an
-N
-C
th
-U
o
en
tra rth
r
b
-S
a
lub n
R
ur
ur
al
b
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Su
rv
e
Ca y 1
6
se
st - So
ud
ut
Su
y
h
4
rv
- N - Ur
ey
ba
or
14
n
t
Su
-S hrv
Ru
o
u
e
ra
Su
th
y
3
l
rv
-N -U
ey
rb
o
1
a
Su
rth
5
n
rv
-S
-R
ey
o
ur
Su
a
Su 17 uth
rv
-U l
-S
ey
rv
e
ou
rb
5
y
an
-S
7
t
-C hou
en Urb
th
tr
an
Su
rv Sub al ey
R
ur
u
b
Su 9 a n ral
rv
C
en / R
ey
ur
t
ra
Su 12
a
-S l-U l
rv
e
rb
Su
ou
y
an
1
t
rv
-C hey
en Urb
6
-S
tr
an
S
ou al Su
Ru
rv urve th
ey
-S
ra
y
2
l
4
u
- N - S bu
rb
o
o
ut
an
Su
rt h
h
r
-R
S u ve y - U
rb
ur
8
rv
a
al
-C
ey
n
en / R
10
u
t
ra
ra
Su - N
ll
o
rv
Ur
ey rth
Su Sur
b
an
ve
11 - S
rv
ey
y
- N ubu
18 1 3
rb
or
an
t
-N -S
ou h or
U
t
Ca
h
th
r
b
a
-S -S
s
ub n
Ca e s
C
as
tu ubu
ur
se
dy
e
b
r
ba
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
ou Ru
2
3
-N
ra
-C
th
o
-U l
en
tra rth
r
- S ba
lub n
R
ur
al urb
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Cost per Enrolled Client Meeting with Case Manager
Figure B-1: Cost per Enrolled Client Meeting with Case Manager
$1,400.00
$1,200.00
$1,000.00
$800.00
$600.00
$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure B-2: Volume of Enrolled Client Meetings with Case Manager
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
108
e
st
ud
y
2
Su
rv No
rth
ey
Su
14
-S
rv
ey
So ubu
rb
Su
u
1
rv 7 - th - an
ey
So
U
r
ba
ut
Su
9
h
rv
-U n
ey C e
n
r
b
t
Su 8
r
an
rv - C al en
U
Ca ey
r
b
t
1
ra
an
se
6
-S lst
u
ou Urb
Su dy
th
a
4
rv
-U n
e
Su y 1 Nor rba
th
n
rv
-R
ey C e
Su
rv
ur
12 ntr
S
ey
al
a
u
18 rve - So - R l
ur
ut
-N y7
h
a
l
or
th Cen Ur
ba
Su - Su tral
n
-R
Su
bu
rv
e
r
rv
u
ey y 2 ban ral
10 - S
/R
ur
Su - N out
al
Su rve ort h R
h
y
rv
ey 11 - S ura
13 - N ubu l
rb
Su - S ort
an
h
o
rv
e y u th - U
- S rba
15
Su
n
S
u
Su rve urve So bur
ut
ba
y
rv
y
h
n
3
ey 4 -N -U
N
5
rb
or
- S ort
a
th
h
n
o
-R
Su uth - U
ur
- S rba
rv
C
al
e
n
as
/
C y 6 u bu
e
a
st
- S rb Rur
u d se
a
a
ou
n
st
y
/R l
u
th
3
- C dy 1 - S ur
al
u
en
tra So bur
ba
ut
lh
n
R
ur - U
al
r
/S b a n
ub
ur
ba
n
C
as
Business Services - Number of Applicants Hired From Mass Hire Events
e
st
ud
Cost per Business Services: Applicant Hired from Mass Hire Event
Su y 4
-N
rv
e
Su y 2 orth
rv
e y - So - R
ur
ut
7
Su
al
h
rv
e y C en - R u
Su
tra
ra
Su
1
rv
l
ey
lrv
ey Ce
18
nt Rur
ra
- N 12
al
-S lor
R
th
o
Su
- S uth ura
l
rv
ey ubu - Ur
ba
Su 8 - rba
n
n
rv
C
en / R
ey
ur
16 tra
Su
a
rv
-S l-U l
ey
r
o
14 uth ban
Su
rv
-S
-U
ey
o
r
17 uth ban
Su
rv
S
U
ey
ou
rb
9
an
t
Su
Su - C h U
en
rv
r
Su rve
ba
ey
tra
y
rv
n
l
3
ey 4 -N -U
N
r
5
ba
or
- S ort
th
n
h
o
-U
-R
Su uth
ur
- S rba
rv
al
e
ub n /
Su y 6
R
u
- S r b a u ra
rv
ey
n
l
o
/R
1 0 u th
Su - N - S ura
l
u
Su rve orth bur
y
rv
- S ba
1
ey
1
ub n
13 - N
ur
Su - S orth ban
ou
rv
-U
th
Ca ey
- S rba
15
se
C
C
- S ub n
st
as
as
ud
ou urb
e
e
y
s
an
st
th
1
ud tud
-S -U
y
y
rb
2
ou
3
-N
an
-C
th
o
-U
en
tra rth
r
- S ba
lub n
R
ur
al urb
a
/S
ub n
ur
ba
n
Ca
s
Figure B-3: Cost per Business Services: Applicant Hired from Mass Hire Event
$1,800.00
$1,600.00
$1,400.00
$1,200.00
$1,000.00
$800.00
$600.00
$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure B-4: Volume of Business Services Mass Hires/Job Fairs: Applicants Hired From
Mass Hire Events
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
109
ey
Su
rv
e
rv
e
y
12
-S
y
5
ou
8
- C th Su So
ut
U
e
rv
n
ey h tra rba
S
n
l
4
- N ubu - U
rb
rb
Su ort
an
an
h
rv
/R
ey - U
16 rba ura
Su
n
l
rv
e y - So / R
Su 9 - uth ura
l
C
rv
en - Ur
ey
ba
tra
7
Su
n
lC
S u rve
en Urb
y
rv
t
1
a
r
al
ey
n
10 C e
nt Rur
Su - N
ra
al
Su rve orth l - R
y
u
rv
ey 11 - Su ral
bu
13 - N
Su - S orth rba
n
ou
rv
U
ey
th
- S rba
14
Su
n
u
rv
e y - So b u
Su
15 uth rba
Su
rv
ey
r
-S
-U n
1 8 ve y
o
r
- N 17 uth ban
-S
-U
or
th
ou
rb
Su Su th - an
bu
Ur
rv
ey
rb
b
an an
2
S
Su urve So / R
ur
ut
rv
y
a
h
3
e
-N -R l
C y6
as
ur
or
-S
a
e
th
C
C
o
st
as
as
-R l
ud uth
e
e
y
- S ura
st
st
1
ud
ud
l
- S ub
y
y
ur
2
3
o
- N uth ban
-C
en
or
Ca tra th - Urb
se l Su an
bu
st R u
ra
ud
l/S rba
y
n
4
u
- N bu
or rba
th
n
-R
ur
al
Su
rv
Su
Youth - Number of Academic Support Participants Attaining Credential
rv
e
ey
4
Cost per Youth Academic Support Participant Attaining Credential
-N
Su orth
rv
-U
y
e
5
rb
-S y7
a
ou
C n/
R
en
th
Su
tra ura
-S
l
rv
le y u bu
Ru
rb
8
Su
r
an
al
rv
e y C en / R
ur
tra
Su 9
al
l
rv - C
ey
en - Ur
Su 12 tral ban
-U
rv
ey So
rb
ut
1
an
h
Su
rv Ce - Ur
nt
ey
b
an
ra
2
S
l
Su urve - So - Ru
ut
rv
ra
y
h
3
e
l
-N -R
Su y 6
ur
or
-S
rv
a
t
ey
h
o
-R l
1 0 u th
Su - N - S ura
l
u
Su rve orth bu
y
rb
rv
1
a
ey
S
1
n
13 - N ubu
Su - S orth rba
n
o
rv
ey uth - Ur
- S ba
14
Su
n
u
rv
ey - So bu
Su
15 uth rba
Su
rv
ey
r
-S
-U n
1 8 ve y
o
r
- N 17 uth ban
-S
-U
C orth
o
r
as
- S uth ban
e
Ca
C
se ase stud ubu - U
rb
r
y
st
s
1 ban an
ud tud
-S
y
y
/
R
3
2
ou
ur
-C
t
al
en Nor h U
t
t
h
Ca ra
rb
an
se l S
st Ru ubu
r
u
Su dy al/S rba
n
4
rv
- N ubu
ey
or rba
16
- S th - n
R
ou
th ura
-U l
rb
an
Su
rv
Su
Figure B-5: Cost per Youth Academic Support Participant Attaining Credential
$7,000.00
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$4,000.00
$3,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,000.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure B-6: Volume of Youth Academic Support Participants Attaining Credential
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
110
Su
rv
ey
15
Su
-S
rv
ey
ou
12
th
Su
-U
-S
rv
ey
rb
ou
an
1
Su
th
6
rv
-U
-S
ey
rb
ou
8
an
Su
- C th rv
U
en
ey
r
ba
t ra
Su 9 n
lC
rv
U
en
ey
r
ba
t
r
7
al
Su
n
r
Su vey Cen Urb
t
a
rv
ra
n
ey 1 l1 0 Ce
R
ur
nt
ra
al
Su
N
lor
Su rve
th
R
ur
y
rv
al
Su
ey 11
bu
13 - N
rb
or
an
th
Su
So
-U
rv
ey uth
rb
Su
a
14
Su
S
rv
n
ey
- S ub
rv
ey
18
ou urb
an
th
- N 17
-U
-S
or
th
rb
ou
an
t
Su Su h b
U
rv
rb
ey urb
an an
Su
Su 2 So / Ru
rv
Su rve
e
ra
ut
y
y
rv
h
l
3
ey 4 -N -R
N
5
ur
o
o
-S
rth
rth
al
ou
-R
-U
th
Su
rb
ur
a
al
rv
ey Sub n /
R
u
6
C
u
r
as
b
-S
an ral
e
o
C
C
st
/R
as
as
ud uth
e
u
e
y
s
st
Su ral
1
ud tud
bu
y
y
S
rb
o
2
3
an
- C - N uth
or
-U
en
t
h
tra
r
C
b
-S
a
as
lub n
e
R
ur
st
ud
al urb
an
/S
y
u
4
- N bu
r
b
or
an
th
-R
ur
al
Youth - Number of Meetings or Appointments
Su
rv
e
Su y 7
rv
ey Ce
nt
Su 9 ra
l
rv
C
en - R
ey
16 tra ura
Su
rv
-S l-U l
ey
r
o
12 uth ban
Su
rv
-U
-S
ey
rb
o
an
Su 8 - uth
-U
C
rv
en
ey
r
ba
tra
Su 15
n
lrv
Ur
ey So
ba
u
1
th
n
Su
-U
rv C e
rb
nt
ey
a
r
n
Su
Su 2 - al Ru
So
rv
Su rve
e
r
u
y
y
al
th
rv
3
ey 4 -N -R
N
5
ur
o
o
-S
rth
rth
al
o
-U
-R
Su uth
r
u
b
ra
-S
rv
a
l
e
ub n /
R
Su y 6
ur
u
b
rv
ra
S
a
ey
l
n
o
/R
1 0 u th
u
Su - N - Su ral
or
Su rve
t h bu r
y
- S ba
rv
ey 11
ub n
13 - N
ur
o
ba
rt
Su - S
n
ou h rv
U
e
t
h
Su
r
y
b
-S
14
an
Su
rv
ey
rv
- S ub
ey
18
ou urb
a
th
- N 17
-U n
-S
o
Ca rth
rb
ou
an
-S
s
th
Ca e s
C
as
tu ubu - Ur
se
dy
e
b
r
ba
an
s
st
1
ud tud
-S n/
y
y
ou Ru
2
3
-N
ra
-C
th
-U l
or
en
rb
Ca tra th s e l - R S u an
b
st
ur
ud
al urb
a
/S
y
ub n
4
-N
ur
b
or
t h an
-R
ur
al
Cost per Youth Meeting or Appointment
Figure B-7: Cost per Youth Meeting or Appointment
$400.00
$350.00
$300.00
$250.00
$200.00
$150.00
$100.00
$50.00
$0.00
One-Stop
Figure B-8: Volume of Youth Meetings or Appointments
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
One-Stop
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
111
Appendix C: Individual Case Study Reports
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
112
Appendix C-1:
Case Study 1 – Southern California Urban One-Stop
Report
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
113
SoCal Urban One-Stop Case Report
Background
The SoCal Urban One-Stop is part of a local area which includes eight cities and some county
territory in a large metropolitan area in Southern California. The local area, which we will call
the Multi-City WIB, operates four full service One-Stops. Three are operated by contracting
with local cities, and a fourth (SoCal Urban One-Stop) is managed by the city government which
also manages the WIB and the local area.
The Multi-City local area is very entrepreneurial. It has won contracts and grants from a number
of agencies at the State and county level. While the Multi-City formula grant from WIA in
2004-05 was less than 44 million, the WIB’s total revenues were over $14 million.
SoCal Urban One-Stop Description
The SoCal Urban One-Stop serves three cities and a piece of county territory with a diverse
population. It is located in a multi-story office building, on a busy street in the center of the
largest of the cities. The One-Stop is spread out over three floors within the building. The
facilities include a large resource room, a computer lab, numerous offices for counselors, and
several classrooms and meeting rooms. The One-Stop is busy, averaging 100 visits a day to its
resource room.
The list below shows the agencies which are official partners of the One-Stop. The agencies in
bold are agencies which provide significant measurable contributions to the One-Stop’s
operations and are featured in our analysis.
Table C1-1: Partners Who Contribute and Do Not Contribute in the One-Stop
Measurable Contributions In One-Stop
• State of California Employment Development
Department,
• California Department of Rehabilitation,
• Small Business Development Corporation (at
local Community College)
• City Adult School
Without Measurable Contributions in One-Stop
• Local Community College,
• California State University, Local,
• County Department of Social Services,
• City Housing Services,
• US Veterans Administration,
• City Action Agency,
• Regional Occupation Center ,
• the Youth Collaborative, and the
• Regional Native American Center.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
114
Defining the One-Stop Boundaries
For the purposes of our analysis we had to define what was inside and what was outside the OneStop. For example, down the street from the One-Stop was a Salvation Army facility to which
the One-Stop referred people. Should the costs of that operation be in our analysis? Similarly,
the Community College operated programs in the One-Stop building, but these programs did not
serve One-Stop customers except incidentally, while the City Adult Education unit in the OneStop ran General Education Development (GED) and other programs just for One-Stop Clients
in the One-Stop. To make these decisions consistent we developed an “operational definition” of
what was and what was not considered a One-Stop activity for the purpose of our analysis:
Activities and agencies are included in the analysis if they provide workforce services to
One-Stop clients and if the services meet one of the following conditions: (1) under the OneStop’s Roof or (2) Provide customized services to One-Stop clients based on a formal
agreement.
Based on this definition the Community College operation is excluded and the City Adult
Education operation is included. It is also important to note that while the local area’s youth
program was under the supervision of the One-Stop manager, it was not physically in the OneStop in the year studied, so it is excluded. Similarly most training is provided through ITAs
(Individual Training Accounts) where the One-Stop will contract with another agency to train a
client. Hence, we included in our analysis the cost of assessing the client and supervising the
ITA, but the actual cost of training - because it occurred outside the One-Stop - was excluded.
One-Stop Structure
The One-Stop is managed by a center director. Based on our observations and discussion with
WIB and One-Stop staff we broke the work of the center into five responsibility centers18:
1. The Resource Room: The operation provides walk-in services such as on-line job
searching, computers and printers for producing resumes and letters, career information,
and referral information. Most clients self-serve, but staff from the One-Stop and the onsite EDD unit are available for brief one-on-one assistance. Any one who walks in and
provides their name, address and social security number may use these services.
2. Registered Services: The registered services area provides one-on-one case
management and referral to training and other services for clients who are formally
registered in WIA or a county funded employment program for welfare recipients.
3. Employer and Placement Services: This unit markets the One-Stop’s services to
employers while it also develops job prospects for clients. Members of this unit also
provide direct placement assistance to clients as well as deliver services directly to
employers, including rapid response services.
18
In the 2004-05 fiscal year, which was studied, the One-Stop director was also responsible for a Youth program
which was housed at a separate site, with its own supervisor. While the payroll for this program was included in the
One-Stop’s budget it is not included in our analysis.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
115
4. Director’s Office and Administration: The Director and her staff administer the OneStop, manage relations with the central office and partner agencies, and interact with the
public on behalf of the One-Stop.
5. Partners: Partners with significant operations under the One-Stop’s roof such as EDD
and the Local Adult Education program were treated as their own responsibility center in
the fiscal analysis.
In the year we studied, 2004-05, the One-Stop had 32 people on its payroll. In addition there
were EDD employees who worked under the One-Stop’s roof providing services to clients. The
local Adult Education unit had an operation in the One-Stop that included two classrooms and
four staff that provided basic education to One-Stop clients. A Department of Rehabilitation
(DOR) counselor was as at the center one morning a week. A Local Community College sub-let
a substantial amount of space from the One-Stop. Its space included a computer lab and
classroom which were used for various college activities, but since these activities were not
specifically for One-Stop participants we did not include the space or the activities in our
analysis.
Activity data gives an additional sense of the level of activity of the One-Stop. In the 2004-05
year studied there were over 24,500 visits to the One-Stop; about 100 visits a day. Over 6,600
individuals used the One-Stop. One thousand sixty-eight individuals were registered into various
programs, 455 exited a program and 253 were placed. The One-Stop contacted 4,297
companies, and visited 480. Staff conducted 21 on-site recruiting events in which 2,441 job
seekers participated leading to 280 being hired into jobs.
One-Stop Processes and Activities
We began our analysis by mapping the processes we observed in the One-Stop. We asked the
One-Stop staff to validate this process map and help us define specific activities. Figure C1-1
shows the final process map, with the key measures of what the processes produce.
This process map was the framework we used for estimating the costs of each activity and
ultimately the costs of producing different products.
We found three major processes in the One-Stop:
1. Universal Access Process: This process served any citizen who came to the One-Stop
seeking help. It provided a wide range of resources in a resource room, including career and
labor market information, access to computers for job searching and resume preparation,
access to phones and fax machines, limited one-on-one coaching and advice, and career
oriented workshops.
2. Registered Services Process: This process provided longer-term services for clients who
were registered in any of the various WIA or County funded workforce programs offered by
the center.
3. Employer Services Process: This process provided a variety of services to businesses
including ‘Rapid Response Services’ to businesses who were closing or laying off a
significant number of workers, help hiring through referrals or setting up on site screening
interviews, and referrals to other business assistance services.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
116
Figure C1-1: SoCal Urban One-Stop Process Map
SoCal Urban One-Stop Process Map
Universal Access Process (mass service)
Outreach /
Recruitment
Reception /
Orientation
Self
Service
Counseling /
1-on-1 assist.
Group
Workshops
Job
Development
04-05
Labor Market
Outcomes
• 6,631 Universal
Clients
• 24,537 Client
Visits
Enrolled Clients Process (service shop)
Planning
Intake
IEP
Core / Intensive
Case Mgmt.
Training
OJT
ITA
Placement
• 253 Placements
• $11.50 Average
Wage Placed
Individual
Job
Development
Employer Services Process (service shop)
Employer Outreach
Employer Services
LABOR MARKET
Basic Skills
• 21 On-Site
Recruiting
Events Adult
• 2,441 Job
Participants
• 280 Hired
• 13 Small Business
Workshops
Support Activities
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
117
Process Cost Analysis
We began by taking the traditional line item budget for the One-Stop and the costs assigned to
the One-Stop for support services and putting them into “responsibility centers”. These centers
were recognized organizational units to which personnel and other costs could be assigned. Other
responsibility centers were identified when there were significant shared resources such as
classrooms, or in-house partners with significant contributions. Table C1-2 shows the total cost
by responsibility center.
Partner Contributions
We attempted to measure the cost of each partner’s activities within the One-Stop. We found
five partners that seemed to make a substantial contribution within the One-Stop. For DPSS, we
were unable to get data on their contribution, but we expect that these contributions were
relatively small. As the table indicates, while partners make a substantial contribution—over a
quarter of all costs, the bulk of the resources come from a single partner, EDD. Other partners’
contributions are relatively small.
Table C1-2: Costs by Responsibility Center
Responsibility Center*
Cost
Resource Room
Case Management (Registered, Dislocated)
Job Dev / Employer services
Admin Directors Office
EDD
Local Adult Education Program
Local CC- SBDC
Rehab
Classrooms
Total
$534,639
$1,277,836
$723,210
$392,436
$888,918
$149,000
$12,000
$10,138
$16,387
$4,004,564
Percent of
All Costs
13.4%
31.8%
18.1%
9.9%
22.1%
3.7%
0.3%
0.3%
0.4%
100.0%
*The WIB administers the county’s welfare to work program. The funds expended in the One-Stop have been
accounted for, but we attempted to get the costs of DPSS for administering the contract, but were unable to get an
estimate.
As the table indicates, total cost for the 2004-05 program year was slightly above $4 million
dollars. In establishing these responsibility centers and costs, we distributed all support costs,
such as accounting or rent, to the cost centers listed above, so is there is no responsibility center
for support costs.
Figure C1-2 below indicates the percent of cost attributable to each responsibility center. As the
Figure shows local area costs were 74% of all costs with partners making up the remaining 24%.
EDD was the largest partner by far, accounting for 22% of all costs. Minor partners (Department
of Rehabilitation and Local Community College) were less than one percent and are not
portrayed in the figure.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
118
Figure C1-2: Percent of Costs by Responsibility Center
Inglewoood Adult
4%
Resource Room
13%
EDD
22%
Case Mgt/
Registered/
Dislocated
33%
Admin Directors
Office
10%
Job Dev/
Employer
Services
18%
Cost By Process and Activity
Our next step was to trace the costs of each responsibility center back to the activities that
generated the costs. To understand the cost of each process, and the activities within each
process we identified a number of “cost drivers” that allowed us to trace costs back to activities.
The most important cost driver was staff time, since that was the largest budget item. We asked
managers and many staff members to estimate the time they spent on different activities. We
also looked at the physical space used for various activities and traced the cost of that space back
to the various activities. We used the judgment of senior managers to distribute support cost
across the activities. We used the same process with partners who made significant contributions
to the One-Stop. Table 1-3 shows the cost of each activity, and also shows how much of those
costs were supported directly by the One-Stop and WIB, as well as the portion attributable to
partner contributions.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
119
Table C1-3: Costs by Activity, One-Stop and Partner
Activity
Total cost
One-Stop +
WIB Support
cost
Partner
Universal Activities
Outreach / Recruitment / Eligibility workshops
Reception Orientation
Self Service
Counseling 1-on-1 Assistance
Group Workshops
Universal Total
$353,758
$251,048
$179,289
$577,882
$121,196
$1,483,173
$277,094
$225,868
$167,693
$262,537
$83,383
$1,016,575
$76,664
$25,180
$11,596
$315,345
$37,813
$466,598
Registered Activities
Planning / Intake / IEP
Core and Intensive Services (Case Mgt.)
Basic Skills
Training / OJT / ITA
Placement
Job Development
Registered Activities Total
$19,622
$1,081,158
$156,692
$69,867
$446,804
$160,421
$1,934,564
$19,622
$892,815
$7,692
$46,864
$373,436
$124,250
$1,464,679
$0
$188,343
$149,000
$23,003
$73,368
$36,171
$469,885
$157,189
$429,461
$586,650
$138,632
$324,445
$463,077
$18,556
$105,017
$123,573
$4,004,387
$2,944,331
$1,060,056
Business Services
Outreach
Services to Employers
Business Services Total
Grand Total
This table adds some valuable insights into how this One-Stop’s costs are structured. Of the
roughly $4 million of costs, about $1 million came from partner contributions. The great bulk of
that came from EDD, which contributed over $800,000, and much smaller contributions from
three other partners. In a later section we look at partner contributions in more detail.
As Figure C1-3 below indicates, the largest investment was made in the registered services
process, which consumed almost half of all costs, followed by universal activities, which
consumed a little more than a third of all costs, and lastly business services, which consumed less
than 15%.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
120
Figure C1-3: Percent of Costs by Major Process
Business
Services &
Outreach
15%
Universal
Services
37%
Registered
Services
48%
When we look at the cost of specific activities, we find that the highest costs in the Universal
Access process were generated by “counseling and one-on-one assistance”. We can see that both
One-Stop staff and EDD staff put substantial time into this activity, generating high costs.
Outreach, recruitment and eligibility workshops were the second highest cost activity in this
process.
In the registered process the largest costs by far were in core and intensive services activity,
which generated well over half the costs in this process. It appears these large costs reflect the
labor intensive nature of case management across all the various programs.
In the business services process the bulk of the costs were generated by providing services to
businesses.
Cost By Product
The final step in our analysis is to estimate the costs of particular One-Stop products that are
produced by processes and activities described before. One-Stops are a service business and it is
often hard to distinguish between activities and products. For example, when a client has a oneon-one session with a counselor to review her resume, is the product a counseling session or is
this event merely an activity leading to a product such as placement in a job? We did not worry
too much about this distinction. In this case we were constrained by what the One-Stop
measured; we could only estimate costs for products which were measured by the One-Stop. We
could also only estimate costs when One-Stop staff could assign cost drivers – usually their time
– to specific products. We were also interested in products that were likely to be found in other
One-Stops, such as a universal access visit, or a workshop. The list of products in Table C1-4
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
121
below are thus those products on which we had measures of volume and which we thought
would be common to other One-Stops and thus could provide some valuable insights about
managing One-Stops.
Before we could calculate the costs for each activity or product, we needed to deal with an
additional methodological problem, the problem of “joint costs” (see Text Box C1-1). Joint
costs are those costs that are shared by various products. For example, reception is an activity
that supports many products such as universal access visits, case management, job placement and
others. It is difficult to break that cost down to get an accurate estimate of the cost of reception
for each product.
Text Box C1-1: The Problem of Joint Costs
Some of the “cost-per” calculations are afflicted by a condition known as the
“joint cost” or “joint product” or “joint revenue” problem. This condition
occurs when two or more products are produced using a single, indivisible input
(or are associated with a single bundled revenue stream). This creates
ambiguity when we try to compute the cost-per of the separate outputs.
A common example is that of raising chickens. An input is the feed. Outputs
include chicken wings, chicken legs, and chicken breasts. We may know the
chicken ate 9 pounds of food, but we do not know exactly how much of that
food went to the chicken’s wings, legs, or breasts. In this example, the cost-pers
would likely be approximated by apportioning the cost of the chicken feed
according to either the weight of each of the component outputs, or the revenue
associated with the component outputs. So, an approximation in this example is
only an estimate, but is possible.
However, other cases of joint costs are more difficult to solve. These more
difficult cases occur when the revenue for a component product is hard to
determine (or when there is no revenue associated with a particular product),
and when the product has no physical weight (or when the weight is not clearly
related to revenue). This is the nature of a One-Stop’s operations. Consider the
resource room, for example. We can determine the total amount a One-Stop
spent on the resource room. We can even calculate how much it cost to make
the resource room available, on a per-person basis, for the year. But then some
people who use the resource room will end up producing a resume, and others
will end up producing a job search plan. There is no good way—as far as we
can see at this point—to know how to apportion the cost of the resource room
across those separate outputs. These outputs have no apparent revenue
associated with them, and they have no physical weight. So, a calculation of the
“cost per resume” or “cost per job search plan” would be very difficult.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
122
In making our estimates we tried to get as close as possible to the unique costs of a product. In
cases where we could not break down the joint costs we assigned the whole pool of costs to
multiple products. The tables below include notes on how we made our decisions. In some
cases we were not able to isolate the costs of the product but we did have measures of how much
of the product was produced. In these cases we reported the amount of the product without a
cost estimate.
Table C1-4: Cost for Universal Access Products
Product
Number of unique visitors
Total of visits
Service events
Individuals attended orientation sessions
Self-service service events
Self-service self-administered assessments
Counseling & 1-on-1 assistance events
Group workshops - # workshops
Group workshops - # people served
Job development - # job openings identified
Cost Per
Unit
$224
$41
$19.40
$2.35
$28
$2,886
$235
$334
Number of Total Cost Note
Units
6,631 $1,483,173
1
36,686 $1,483,173
2
76,434 $1,483,173
3
1,547
76,434
$179,289
4
900
21,000
$577,882
5
42
$121,196
6
516
$121,196
7
480
$160,421
8
*refer to Table C1-7 for further explanation of calculations
The analysis of Universal Access products provides some valuable insights into the costs of this
One-Stop. A Universal Access client was served for about $224, and a single visit to the
resource room cost about $41, a self-serve event such as looking at job listings or faxing a
resume costs about $7. Brief one-on-one counseling events cost $28. The cost of running a
workshop was $2,886.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
123
Table C1-5: Cost of Registered Service Products
Product
Cost Per Number
Unit of Units
Lower-bound estimates (excludes placement & job development)
Registered clients
$1,243
1,068
New registered clients
$2,212
600
Exited
$2,917
455
Placed
$5,246
253
Total Cost
Note
$1,327,339
$1,327,339
$1,327,339
$1,327,339
9
Mid-range estimate (including placement & job development)
Registered clients
$1,811
1,068
New registered clients
$3,224
600
Exited
$4,252
455
Placed
$7,646
253
$1,934,563
$1,934,563
$1,934,563
$1,934,563
10
Upper-bound estimate (further adds outreach, employer services)
Registered clients
$2,361
1,068
New registered clients
$4,202
600
Exited
$5,541
455
Placed
$9,965
253
$2,521,213
$2,521,213
$2,521,213
$2,521,213
11
Other Registered Services
Average wage at placement
Registered customers placed
# STEP clients
# Individual Employment Plans (IEPs)
Case management - # services reported
Case management - # cases managed
Basic Skills - GED - # people
Basic Skills - GED - total # person-hours
Basic Skills - ESL - # people
Basic Skills - ESL - total # person-hours
Basic Skills - ABE - # people
Basic Skills - ABE - total # person-hours
Basic Skills - Citizenship - # people
Basic Skills - Citizenship - total # person-hours
Basis Skills - total # people served
Basic Skills - total # person hours
Training/OJT - # training enrollments
Training/OJT - Adult Ed
Training/OJT - Occ. Skills
Training/OJT - OJT
Training/OJT - Services
Training/OJT - Co-enrolled training
Placement - staff-assisted
Job development - # participants
$1,766
$1,223
$3,266
$1,583
$6.19
$1,234
$11.50
253
$446,804
124
150
884 $1,081,158
331 $1,081,158
51
13,260
25
6,500
21
5,460
2
104
99
$156,692
25,324
$156,692
130
0
110
16
2
2
253
130
$160,421
12
13
14
15
16
17
*refer to Table C1-7 for further explanation of calculations
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
124
For a variety of reasons we found it much more difficult to estimate the cost of Registered
products, in part because it was not possible to completely break down the mix of services
received by each individual and hence we could not solve the joint cost problem. We have
estimated that on the whole, it cost between $1,243 and $2,361 to serve a registered client and
about $3,266 to provide case management services to a single client. The cost per case managed
is based on JTA data indicating the number of cases managed; however, it is not completely
clear that only 331 cases were managed during the year.
Table C1-6: Cost of Employer Services
Product
Companies contacted
Companies visited
Business expos & job fairs
Mixers & events
Phone contacts re: rapid response
Flyers / newsletters mailed
On-site recruiting events
Job-seekers participated in on-site recruiting
events
Jobs Developed
Job-seekers hired thru on-site recruiting events
Cost Per
Unit
Number of
Units
4,297
480
23
75
900
3,760
21
2,441
Total Cost Note
496
280
*refer to Table C1-7 for further explanation of calculations
Business services was the area where it was hardest to trace costs back to products because staff
was unable to estimate the time they spent on various products. While we were able to estimate
the total costs of business services we could not trace cost to individual outreach or service
activities.
This final table presents our notes on how our calculations were made and serves as a reference
for tables C1-4, C1-5 and C1-6.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
125
Table C1-7: Notes on product Cost Calculations
Note Numbers
1 $534,638 - $16,387
2 $534,638 - $16,387
3 $534,638 - $16,387
4
5
6
7
8
9
$179,289
$577,882
$121,196
$121,196
$160,218
$19622 + $1,081,158 + $156,692 +
$69,867
10 #9 + $446,804 + $160,421
11 #10 + $157,189 + $429,461
12
13
14
15
16
17
$446,804
$1,081,158
$1,081,158
$156,692
$156,692
$160,421
Formula for Numerator
total of the following activities:
outreach/recruitment/eligibility workshops, self-service,
counseling/1-on-1 assistance, group workshops,
reception/orientation
total of the following activities:
outreach/recruitment/eligibility workshops, self-service,
counseling/1-on-1 assistance, group workshops,
reception/orientation
total of the following activities:
outreach/recruitment/eligibility workshops, self-service,
counseling/1-on-1 assistance, group workshops,
reception/orientation
total of self-service activity cost
total counseling / 1-on-1 assistance activity cost
total group workshop activity cost
total group workshop activity cost
total job development activity cost
total of the following activity costs: planning/intake/IEP,
plus intensive services, plus basic skills, plus
training/OJT/ITA
same as #9 but adds costs of the following activities:
placement, job development
same as #10 but adds costs of the following activities:
outreach, employer services
total of "placement" activity
total of case management activity cost
total of case management activity cost
total of Basic Skills training activity cost
total of Basic Skills training activity cost
job development responsibility activity cost
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
126
Table C1-8 – SoCal Urban One-Stop Cost Tracing Worksheet - Dollars
Placement
Job Development
Outreach
Services to Employers
$58,220
Training / OJT / ITA
Counseling 1-1 Assistance
$136,887
Basic Skills
Self Service
$157,593
Core and Intensive Services
(case mgt)
Reception Orientation
$84,636
Planning/ Intake/ IEP
Outreach / Recruitment /
eligibility workshops
$534,639
Group Workshops
Total Costs for Each
Responsibility Center
ACTIVITIES
$22,137
$0
$16,554
$0
$675
$20,078
$6,090
$3,393
$27,957
Responsibility
Center
One-Stop
Resource Room
Classrooms
Case mgt/
Registered/Dislocated
Job Dev/ Employer
services
Admin Directors
Office
$16,387
$16,387
$1,277,836
$17,010
$26,284
$0
$142,705
$29,476
$0
$830,071
$0
$0
$157,172
$4,645
$21,723
$48,718
$723,210
$144,642
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$180,803
$90,401
$90,401
$216,963
$392,436
$30,806
$41,991
$30,806
$61,612
$15,383
$19,622
$46,190
$7,692
$46,190
$15,383
$23,114
$23,114
$30,806
$2,944,508
$277,094
$225,868
$167,693
$262,537
$83,383
$19,622
$892,815
$7,692
$46,864
$373,436
$124,250
$138,632
$324,445
100.0%
9.4%
7.7%
5.7%
8.9%
2.8%
0.7%
30.3%
0.3%
1.6%
12.7%
4.2%
4.7%
11.0%
EDD
$888,918
$76,258
$24,775
$11,596
$306,221
$37,813
$0
$188,343
$0
$23,003
$73,368
$35,968
$18,556
$93,017
Rehab
Local Adult
Education
$149,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$149,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$12,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$12,000
$1,049,918
$76,258
$24,775
$11,596
$306,221
$37,813
$0
$188,343
$0
$172,003
$73,368
$35,968
$18,556
$105,017
100.0%
7.3%
2.4%
1.1%
29.2%
3.6%
0.0%
17.9%
0.0%
16.4%
7.0%
3.4%
1.8%
10.0%
$3,994,426
$353,353
$250,642
$179,289
$568,758
$121,196
$19,622
$1,081,158
$7,692
$218,867
$446,804
$160,218
$157,189
$429,461
100.0%
8.8%
6.3%
4.5%
14.2%
3.0%
0.5%
27.1%
0.2%
5.5%
11.2%
4.0%
3.9%
10.8%
One-Stop subtotal
Expense by activity
as %
Partner
Contributions
Local- SBDC
DPSS- Step Indirect
Partner
contribution
subtotal
Partner contribution
by activity as %
Total cost for
activity
Total cost by activity
as %
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
127
Table C1-9 – SoCal Urban One-Stop Cost Tracing Worksheet – Percent of Effort
Total Costs for Each
Responsibility Center
Outreach / Recruitment /
eligibility workshops
Reception Orientation
Self Service
Counseling 1-1 Assistance
Group Workshops
Planning/ Intake/ IEP
Core and Intensive Services
(case mgt)
Basic Skills
Training / OJT / ITA
Placement
Job Development
Outreach
Services to Employers
ACTIVITIES
$534,639
$16,387
$1,277,836
$723,210
$392,436
$2,944,508
15.8%
29.5%
25.6%
10.9%
4.1%
0.0%
3.1%
0.0%
0.1%
3.8%
1.1%
0.6%
5.2%
1.3%
20.0%
7.9%
2.1%
0.0%
11.2%
2.3%
0.0%
65.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10.7%
7.9%
15.7%
3.9%
5.0%
11.8%
2.0%
11.8%
12.3%
25.0%
3.9%
0.4%
12.5%
5.9%
1.7%
12.5%
5.9%
3.8%
30.0%
7.9%
$888,918
$10,138
$149,000
$12,000
8.6%
2.8%
1.3%
34.4%
4.3%
21.2%
0.0%
2.6%
8.3%
4.0%
2.1%
10.5%
Responsibility Center
One-Stop
Resource Room
Classrooms
Case mgt/ Registered/Dislocated
Job Dev/ Employer services
Admin Directors Office
One-Stop subtotal
Partner Contributions
EDD
Rehab
Local Adult School
Local- SBDC
DPSS- Step Indirect
Partner contribution subtotal
100.0%
100.0%
$1,060,056
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
128
Appendix C-2: Case Study 2 – Northern California
Suburban One-Stop Report
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
129
NoCal Suburban One-Stop Case Report
Background
The NoCal Suburban One-Stop serves a consortium of several largely suburban cities in
Northern California. The local economy is characterized by a large number of high-tech
companies and a manufacturing sector that has experienced substantial change in the last 10
years. A Workforce Investment Board provides policy direction.
The vision of the center focuses on serving as a hub to bring together a large array of public
agencies and private employers to promote economic growth and opportunity in the region.
.
The One-Stop has been aggressive in seeking funding beyond its formula grant. Overall OneStop costs in 2004-05 were slightly less that $10 million, including the costs of all partners.
NoCal Suburban One-Stop Description
The One-Stop has a large welcoming facility. The One-Stop is adjacent to a civic center and on
several bus lines. Staff take great pride in the One-Stop and the quality of its services.
The One-Stop operates, in a sense, under two brands or two organizations. The first is the NoCal
Suburban Training Association, which is an employment and training agency. The second is an
association of over 30 partner agencies which serves businesses and individuals through the OneStop. The local WIB leads both programs. The programs are marketed to the community
separately but delivered through the One-Stop.
The One-Stop prides itself in being at the hub of a large network of local agencies, public and
private. The list below shows the agencies which are official partners of the One-Stop. The
agencies in the first section are agencies which provide significant measurable contributions
“under the roof” of the One-Stop in the 2004-05 program year and are featured in our analysis.
The rest are agencies that partner with the One-Stop in various ways but do not provide services
in the One-Stop which we were able to measure.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
130
Table C2-1: List of Partners19 2004-05
Partners with a Measurable Cost Contribution in the One-Stop
• State of California Employment Development Department,
• City Adult Schools, (3 partners, 1 measurable contributor)
• Local Community Colleges (3 partners, 1 measurable contributor),
• Employment services for the disabled
• Local Job Corp
• State Department of Rehabilitation
Partners Without a Measurable Cost Contribution in the One Stop
• County Social Service Agency
• University of California, Local, Extension
• Public Library
• Care Community Employment Services (mental health and employment
services
• Applied Tech Services (customized training)
• Options Inc. (disabled services)
• Credit Counseling (non-profit community based credit counseling)
• Optimism Services (employment service to the disabled)
• County Housing authority
• National Council on Aging
• Step Up Center (veterans services)
• Youth employment office (youth program partially funded by local
government and WIA)
• Job Training Institute (employment services for disadvantaged students)
• Professional Development Services (customized training)
• Employment Club (job club)
• Older Worker Organization (no-fee referral service for people over 55)
• Vision Foundation (services for the blind and visually impaired)
• Brain Injury Services (services for people who have suffered brain injuries)
• Local Independent Living Centers (services to help the disabled live
independently)
• Small Business Development Center
• Employment Help (career services for the working poor)
• Access (services for the disabled)
Defining the One-Stop Boundaries
For the purposes of our analysis we had to define what was inside and what was outside the OneStop. For example, the nearby library was available to One-Stop clients and provided computer
access when the One-Stop was closed or full, but since it was not “under the One-Stop roof”, it is
not included in our analysis. To make these decisions consistent we developed an “operational
19
Names of some partners have been changed to protect the anonymity of the One-Stop.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
131
definition” of what was and what was not considered a One-Stop activity for the purpose of our
analysis:
Activities and agencies are included in the analysis if they provide workforce services to
One-Stop clients and if the services are provided in the One-Stop facility.
Based on this definition the activities of many partners are not included in this analysis because
they take place away from the facility. While these partnerships are real, we were not able to put
a cost on the services provided. To do so would mean tracing costs of services received by OneStop clients through a large system of support agencies, requiring us to analyze innumerable
budgets. For example, if a client walks to the local library and uses a computer to search for
jobs, we would have to calculate the cost of that event and somehow count the number of times
this happened. Or in another case, a housing agency may have given a client advice about how
to find housing; again we would have to find out how many such events took place and attempt
to cost the event. This type of tracing through the large complex employment and social service
network found in the county was simply not possible.
We analyzed the youth services differently. Youth services are mostly delivered away from the
One-Stop center, but by staff that are often housed in and managed by staff in the One-Stop.
Since this is viewed by the staff as core program, and managed as part of the One-Stop, it is
included in our analysis, even though much of the activity did not take place “under the roof”.
Doing this also allowed us to include a youth program in one of case studies which we viewed as
important for setting up the larger survey which would come later in study, and would need to
include youth.
One-Stop Structure
The local area has an Executive Director in the One-Stop but the One-Stop itself is managed by
the One-Stop manager. The graphic below shows our initial map of the One-Stop, as the local
staff saw it. Units inside the oval are “inside” the One-Stop and units outside the One-Stop are
outside the oval. The goal of our analysis was to understand the costs of each unit and what they
produced.
After discussion with staff and analysis of available data we reduced this map to seven
responsibility centers for which we could reliably identify costs and services produced. The
responsibility centers are the units through which the city-paid One-Stop staff deliver services
and the partners who have measurable operations under the roof. The final list of responsibility
centers used in our analysis is:
• Universal Services Unit ( includes staff and facilities providing universal services)
• Enrolled Services Unit (includes staff and facilities providing WIA Adult and Dislocated
workers services)
• Business Services (includes staff and facilities providing business services)
• Youth Services (includes staff and facilities providing youth services)
• EDD (includes EDD staff and facilities “under the One-Stop roof”)
• Local Adult Education (includes local school district staff providing ESL classes)
• Local Job Core (includes staff providing information about Job Corp and serving
participants).
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
132
Figure C2-1: NoCal Suburban One-Stop Organization Map 04/05
NoCal Suburban One-Stop
Organization Map 04/05
City HR
(Payroll)
Executive Director
One-Stop Manager
04/05
Operations
(Support)
Universal Services
& Partner Outreach
Labor Market
Information
Enrolled Services
(Registered) Adult
& Dislocated
Youth
Job Development &
Employment Recruitment
Business
Services
EDD
County
TANF
Public
Library
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
133
In the year we studied, 2004-05, the One-Stop had 99 people directly on its WIA funded payroll
and spent a total of $8.6 million. In addition there were 10-12 EDD employees who worked
under the One-Stop’s roof providing services to clients, who accounted for about $1.2 million in
costs. Other partners occasionally had staff working under roof, seeing clients, offering
workshops, participating in job fairs etc.; these costs totaled about $77,000.
Activity data gives an additional sense of the level of activity of the One-Stop. We look at
activities as taking place within four processes (defined later): A “Universal Services Process”,
“Enrolled Services Process”, “Youth Services Process” and “Business Services Process”.
Below we provide some of the key indicators of level activity for each process.
The One-Stop is a busy place. In the 2004-05 year studied in the “Universal Process” there were
over 53,000 visits to the One-Stop; over 200 visits a day. Over 6,600 individuals used the OneStop, and over 77,000 service events took place. The One-stop has a swipe card system which it
uses to keep track of visits and attendance at various activities.
Universal Service Process Activities
•
•
•
•
6,676 unique clients visited center
5,688 new members joined the center
53,614 unique center visits (one visit per client per day)
77,355 member services provided (includes Job Club attendance)
In Enrolled Services almost 2,000 clients received some form of individualized services.
Enrolled Services Activities
•
•
•
•
•
1,838 registered clients (including 1,090 new clients)
964 exiters
1,424 intake interviews
1,090 Individual Employment Plans (IEPs) developed
1,547 clients got intensive case management
The Business Services reached over 140 businesses.
Business Services Activities
•
•
•
115 new business clients established a strategic alliance with the One-Stop and received
multiple services
24 returning clients got new service
98 rapid response events, reached 3,802 employees
Youth activities reached a over 3,000 youth while approximately 300 formally enrolled in WIA
Youth Activities
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
134
•
•
•
•
3,078 youth attended workshops
313 formally enrolled in WIA
133 placed in work experience
120 youth exited program
One-Stop Processes and Activities Analysis
We began our analysis by mapping the processes we observed in the One-Stop. We asked the
One-Stop staff to validate this process map and help us define specific activities. Figure C2-2
shows the final process map, with the key measures of what the processes produced. This
process map was the framework we used for estimating the costs of each activity and ultimately
the costs of producing different products.
As we said previously, we found four major processes in the One-Stop:
1. Universal Access Service Process: This process served any citizen who came to the OneStop seeking help. It provided a wide range of resources in a resource room, including career
and labor market information, access to computers for job searching and resume preparation,
access to phones and fax machines, limited one-on-one coaching and advice, career oriented
workshops and a large job club.
Within the Universal Access Service Process are a number of activities, as indicated on the
process map. After passing through reception, clients may participate in any or all of these
activities in any order. Key activities we identified included EDD help, where clients
received help accessing EDD services such as filing an unemployment insurance claim,
posting a resume on Cal Jobs, and getting information about specialized programs such as the
Trade Adjustment Act or veterans programs. The center has touch screen kiosks which
provide information about jobs and related programs services. Staff have drop-in
appointments with clients where they orient new clients (or members as they are called) to
the center’s services and also provide information about enrolling in WIA funded programs,
or other programs. The center offers a wide range of workshops, ranging from personal
finance to interviewing skills to job search strategies. There is also self-service, where
clients use the resources of the center to look for and apply for jobs. This is the most
common activity. Clients search job listings, and they use computers to prepare letters and
resumes. Clients also use phones and email to contact employers. While clients are selfserving they may seek and get some quick one-on-one assistance from staff who work in the
center. One-on-one assistance may include help with writing a resume, help resolving a
computer problem, or how to locate resources in the center. Finally, the center has a large
job club which holds regular meetings. In the meetings job seekers help each other search
for a job and learn from experts who make presentations to the club.
2. Enrolled Services Process: This process provided longer-term services for clients who were
registered in any of the various WIA, EDD or County funded workforce programs offered by
the center.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
135
Activities in the enrolled services process tend to move in a regular sequential pattern.
Registered services begins with a formal intake process where clients’ eligibility for
particular programs is assessed and a plan for their program is developed in conjunction with
a detailed needs assessment, which may involve skill testing. After the intake and
assessment activities, clients’ paths diverge. Some clients will be referred out to training,
perhaps at a local community college or other training provider. Other clients will get case
management, where a staff person will work intensively with them, helping them identify
employment opportunities and coach them through the job search process. They may also
get assistance with related problems such as transportation, child care or housing. Some
clients will go directly to placement services. Clients who complete training, or who are in
case management, will also get placement services in order to help them land a job. Finally,
after clients are placed, staff follow up on clients to make sure they are making a successful
adjustment to employment and they arrange additional support services as needed.
3. Business Services Process: This process provided a variety of services to businesses
beginning with outreach and recruitment of businesses to make them aware of the center’s
business services. ‘Rapid Response Services’ are for businesses who were closing or laying
off a significant number of workers; in this case staff will go to the business site and provide
services to employees who are facing layoffs. “Staff Services and Assistance” help
companies hire by referring applicants or setting up on-site screening interviews. Business
service staff will also receive job listings from employers and help them fill positions by
posting them in the One-Stop. The center has a large network of partners who provide other
business services such as help with small business loan applications or developing business
plans. The “Information and Resources” activities connect business with referrals to other
business assistance services.
4. Youth Services Process: The youth services process has two paths. The first path is called
youth “universal” services. In this path youth are not registered in WIA but receive services
such as workshops related to careers and employment. In the other path, youth are registered
in WIA and receive case management, some get placement in work experience, and then
youth are followed up to make sure they are successful in work or school after exiting the
program. Many of these services were paid for with funds from local government. Youth
services were managed from the One-Stop but principally delivered away from the One-Stop
so are presented in a separate process map.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
136
Figure C2-2: NoCal Suburban One-Stop Process Map
Kiosks
Universal Access Process (mass service)
Workshops
Job Club
Reception
-Multiple receptions
EDD Help
Drop in Appt.
EDD One-on-one Veterans Asst.
Self Service
04-05
Labor Market
Outcomes
• 6,676 Unique
Client Visits
• 53,614 Center
Visits
• 84,266 Total
Services
Provided
One-on-One Asst.
Enrolled Clients Process (service shop)
Planning / Intake
Initial Needs
Assessment /
Develop IEP
Core / Intensive
Case Mgmt.
Placement
Follow-up on
Placed
and Exited
Participants
Training
-WIA
-TAA
- ESL
Employer Services Process (service shop)
Marketing and Outreach
Rapid Response
Information and Resources
Staff Services
& Assistance
• 1,838 Total
Enrolled Clients
• 964 Exiters
LABOR MARKET
NoCal Suburban One-Stop Process Map
• 98 Rapid
Response Events
• 32 Recruitment
Events
• 497 Job Seekers
Attended
Support Activities
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
137
Figure C2-2: NoCal Suburban One-Stop Process Map - Youth
NoCal Suburban One-Stop Process Map - Youth
04-05
Outcomes
Universal Services
Youth Reception
Case Management
Recruitment
Placement in Work Experience
Recruitment of employers
for Work Experience
Follow-Up
Labor Market
and
Education
• 3,078 Youth
Attended
Recruiting
Events
• 45 Employers
Contacted for
Youth
• 133 Placed in
Work
Experience
• 120 Exits
Support Activities
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
138
We attempted to measure what was produced by each activity we identified in the activity
mapping exercise. In Table C2-2 we show the activity identified and the best available measures
of services produced. This One-Stop kept much better track of its activities than most other sites
but still, as the table indicates, we were unable to identify output measures for some activities,
and we found multiple measures for others.
Table C2-2: NoCal Suburban One-Stop Processes and Activities with Measures of Services
Activity
Universal Service Process
Reception:
Receiving of visitors/ Scheduling
appointments in-person/ Answering
phone inquiries
Self Service:
Clients use resources of One-Stop
to search for jobs, write resumes
and letters, contact employers
Service Unit Measure
2004-05
6,676 unique clients visited center
53,614 unique center visits by clients (one visit per
client per
day)
5,688 new members
6,911 non-member services provided
58,408 member services provided
77,355 member services provided (including Job
Club)
84,266 services provided
39,924 career center visits
60 local college appointments.
124 DOR appointments.
117 disability navigator appointments.
171 IAW
365 PJSA
936 intake appointments.
43 Project Hired appointments
6,676 unique clients visited center
53,614 unique center visits by clients (one visit per
client per
day)
One-on-one assistance:
Drop-in appointments
Orientation/ help completing OneStop membership applications/
Referrals to partners and outside
agencies.
Help with Labor Market
Information and EDD programs
such as registering in CalJobs,
checking out & troubleshooting
computers, website maintenance
4,798 appointments
2,996 first appointments
1,802 repeat appointments
282 people not seen
25 BPAO appointments (Social Security issues)
2,593 service events
7,553 registered in CalJobs
20,049 total one-on-one assistance events
Job club activities:
18,947 Job Club services provided
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
139
Activity
Scheduling and arranging job club
meetings, managing volunteers
Workshops
Developing , delivering and
supporting workshops
Workshop Topics:
Job Search Skills Workshops
(Ace the Interview, Career
Exploration, Holiday Job Search,
Job Applications, Planning Your
Job Search, Resume Facts,
Strategize Your Job Search)
Labor Market Info Workshops,
Employment Shift: Public / Private,
Entrepreneurship (SCORE)
Service Unit Measure
2004-05
2,402 member visits
200 meetings
72 orientation sessions
342 members reporting return to work
3,120 member volunteer hours
Estimated 8,000 peer advising volunteer hours
793 people attended Foundations workshop
5,316 people attended Universal workshops
148 EDD provided workshops
Self Assessment Workshops –
(workshops – Discover You,
Managing Your Bills, New
Employee Success Tactics, Who
Am I)
Resume Critique Workshop
Job Development:
Receive job listings and enter into
CalJobs
Activities for Enrolled Clients
(Adult, Dislocated, Other EDD
Program, etc.)
Enrolled WIA services
Planning/ intake/ developing IEP
WIA participants
Initial needs assessment:
Developing Individual Employment
Plans (IEP)
Soft skills assessment
Managing cases / delivering other
12,624 jobs entered into CalJobs
1,838 total registered clients
1,090 new registered clients
964 exiters
1,424 intake interviews
1,090 IEPs developed
127 soft skills assessment
1,441 core case management enrollments
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
140
Activity
core and intensive services WIA
participants
Providing training services
Following up placed and exited
WIA participants.
Activities for Youth
Marketing and outreach for youth
participants
Managing cases
Managing work experience
program
Recruiting employers for work
experience
Universal services:
Designing and delivering training
and workshops
Follow up participants
Business Services
• Marketing and Outreach
Marketing and outreach to new and
existing business clients
• Rapid Response
Planning a Rapid Response
Delivery of Rapid Response
Services
Reporting and Follow-up
• Network Services
Network: Building partnerships
with providers
Assessing Business needs and
matching resources
Ongoing Account Management and
Follow-up
Service Unit Measure
2004-05
1,547 intensive case management enrollments
1,061 veterans served by EDD Staff
465 new ITAs
85 ITAs carried over from previous year
Trained adult school: 57 adult, 224 dislocated workers
173 soft skills workshop participants
14 clients x 216 hours of instruction = 2,024 hrs of ESL
training
100 clients served with training from Trade Adjustment
Act by EDD
964 exiters
160 new WIA youth enrollments
3,078 youth attended workshops
2986 visits
391 universal appointments
133 Youth placed in work experience
45 employers contacted
17 employers recruited
3 youth communication skills tutoring 4 youth
279 youth job search (universal)
3,078 attended off site workshops
120 exiters followed up
115 new recruited and received services.
65 marketing events for rapid response
24 existing clients receive new service
98 companies served
3,802 employees served
3 existing business clients referred to SBDC
8 new businesses referred to SBDC
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
141
Activity
• Recruitment
Get and distribute job listings
Set up employer presentations at
One-Stop
Service Unit Measure
2004-05
58 new companies had listing distributed
4 existing business clients had listings distributed
31 recruitment events at One-Stop
497 clients attend
31 hires estimated
Economic Development
Promotions and Networking
Process Cost Analysis
Our cost analysis began by taking the traditional line-item budget for the One-Stop and the costs
assigned to the One-Stop for support services and putting them into “responsibility centers”.
These centers are recognized organizational units to which the costs of personnel and other
resources are assigned. In-house partners with measurable contributions were treated as separate
responsibility centers. If you refer back to Figure C2-1 you can see the organizational units from
which we began. Working with One-Stop managers, we assigned all units on that organizational
map to one of the responsibility units below. The costs of support units’ “operations and
support” were tracked to the responsibility units listed in Table C2-3. These units parallel the
processes described earlier, since most staff work exclusively with universal, enrolled or
business services. Table C2-3 shows the total cost by responsibility center and the percent of
total cost that could be traced to each center.
Table C2-3: Costs by Responsibility Center
Responsibility Center
Universal Services
Enrolled Services
Youth Services
Business Services
EDD
State Dept. of Rehabilitation
Local Adult Education
Local Job Core
Local Disability Services
Total
Cost
2004-05
$2,078,454
$4,095,043
$1,340,863
$1,281,470
$1,227,850
$42,191
$9,200
$21,947
$4,926
$10,101,944
Percent of
Total
Costs
20.57%
40.54%
13.27%
12.69%
12.15%
0.09%
0.22%
0.05%
0.42%
100.00%
As the table indicates, total cost for the 2004-05 program year was about $10.1 million dollars.
In establishing these responsibility centers and costs, we distributed all payroll as well as all
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
142
support costs, such as accounting or rent, to the responsibility centers listed above; so is there is
no responsibility center for support costs. Figure C2-3 shows graphically the distribution of
costs across responsibility centers.
Figure C2-3: Cost By Responsibility Center
Other Partners
1%
Universal
EDD
Services
12%
21%
Business
Services
12%
Youth Services
13%
Enrolled
Services
41%
The graph above shows that Enrolled Services consumed about 40% of all the costs with
Universal services consuming about half as much, around 20%. EDD was the most significant
partner by far, accounting for over 12% of all costs, while all other partners accounted for less
than 1% of One-Stop costs
Cost By Process and Activity
Our next step was to trace the costs of each responsibility center back to the processes and
activities that generated the costs. To understand the cost of each process, and the activities
within each process, we identified a number of cost drivers that allowed us to trace costs back to
activities. The most important cost driver was staff time, since that was the largest budget item.
To identify how staff time was spent we asked managers and many staff members to estimate the
time they spent on different activities. We also estimated the amount of physical space used for
various activities and traced the cost of that space back to the various activities. We used the
judgment of senior managers to distribute support cost across the activities.
We used the same process with EDD and the Department of Rehabilitation, we asked senior
managers to attribute staff time to the processes and activities we had mapped, then we had them
estimate how support costs were used. In the case of smaller partners such as the Adult
Education District, which were involved in only one or two activities, we had partners simply
calculate their fully loaded costs for activities in which they were involved.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
143
Our mapping of the processes and activities permits us to look at how resources are used at
different levels of aggregations and how they relate to different outputs. For example, we can
estimate the entire cost of the universal service process and calculate the average cost of serving
a universal client. At a more disaggregated level we can look at the specific costs of job club
activity and estimate the cost of serving a single job club member.
Figure C2-4 shows a highly aggregated analysis of the costs by each major process: universal
service process, enrolled services process, business services process, and youth services process.
Remember that we have now combined the costs of all responsibility centers and partners by
process.
Figure C2-4: Percent of Cost By Process
Youth Services
13%
Business
Services
13%
Universal
Services
28%
Enrolled
Services
46%
As the figure indicates, the enrolled services process accounted for almost half the costs, while
universal services process accounted for a bit more than a quarter. Youth and business services
were each about one-eighth.
Table C2-4 shows a more disaggregated analysis of costs. Here you can see the cost of each
activity. It also shows how much of those costs were supported directly by the local area, EDD
and other partners. It’s important to note that here we put partner costs into the processes and
activities they support, unlike in the responsibility centers, where we broke out partner costs
independent of activity. The activities here go into greater level of detail than in the original
process map, as we found managers were able to trace costs, in some cases, to specific subactivities. For example, within the enrolled services process, managers could trace the cost of
providing case management activities to veterans in a specific EDD program. In this analysis we
went to the most disaggregated level for which managers could estimate.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
144
Table C2-4 shows a detailed break down of costs by processes, specific activities, and the
contribution of various partners. A reminder: costs presented include labor, space, supplies and
expenses, and support costs such as accounting. The table is broken out to show the costs of the
local area, EDD and smaller partners. Overall the One-Stop had costs of about $10 million in
2004-05.
Table C2-4: Cost Detail by Process and Activity
Universal Services Process
Outreach and recruitment for participants
Reception: Answer point coverage – non-Job
Seeker Center
Reception: At Job Seeker Center: receiving
visitors, scheduling appointments, answering
phone
Drop-in appointments
Information and referral Kiosks
One-on-one assistance in the resource room,
help with LMI and EDD programs, checking
out & troubleshooting computers, website
maintenance
Assistance with CalJobs
Developing, delivering and supporting
workshops
Job Development
Supporting job club activities
One-Stop support and administration for
Universal activities
Activities for Enrolled Clients (Adult,
Dislocated, Other EDD Program, etc.)
Planning / Intake
Initial Needs Assessment / Developing IEP
Managing cases / Delivering other core and
intensive services (non EDD programs)
Providing training services
Soft Skills assessment / Training (PEP)
One-on-one services to Veterans
Trade Adjustment Act participant services
Learning Lab
ESL training (Adult Ed)
Following up placed and exited participants.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
Local Area
Cost
EDD Costs
$2,078,454
$684,270
Other
Partner
Costs
$34,038
Total Cost
$2,796,762
$843
$843
$332,553
$1,668
$375,810
$27,288
$374,122
$62,354
$561,284
$332,553
$374,122
$374,122
$62,354
$290,984
$243,012
$270,199
$127,901
$31,976
$4,219
$311,768
$62,354
$140,691
$127,900
$12,790
$144,910
$439,668
$75,144
$4,095,043
$530,790
$43,805
$4,669,638
$12,658
$491,405
$491,405
$1,118,320
$9,200
$21,947
$1,023,761
$286,653
$332,543
$198,247
$122,851
$9,200
$595,253
$491,405
$491,405
$1,105,662
$127,901
$302,175
$1,023,761
$286,653
$332,543
$198,247
$122,851
$573,306
145
Local Area
Cost
EDD Costs
Business Services
Marketing and Outreach (Subtotal)
Marketing and outreach to new business clients
Marketing to existing clients
Rapid Response (Subtotal)
Planning a Rapid Response
Delivery of Rapid Response services
Reporting and Follow-up
Information and resources
Building partnerships with providers
(Subtotal)
Assessing Business needs and matching
resources
Ongoing Account Management and Follow-up
Staffing (Subtotal)
Get and distribute job listings
Recruiter Services
Set up employer presentations at One-Stop for
adult, dislocated worker and universal clients
Economic Development Promotions and
Networking
Activities for Youth
Youth Answerpoint
Recruitment of youth participants
Universal Services for Youth
Managing cases
Recruitment of employers for work experience
Placement in work experience
Following up youth
$1,281,470
$291,243
$232,995
$58,249
$582,486
$104,848
$122,322
$122,322
$232,995
$116,497
$12,790
TOTAL
$8,795,830
Other
Partner
Costs
$421
Total Cost
$1,294,681
$291,243
$232,995
$58,249
$595,276
$104,848
$122,322
$122,322
$232,995
$116,918
$12,790
$421
$46,599
$46,599
$69,898
$291,243
$101,935
$87,373
$72,811
$421
$70,319
$291,243
$101,935
$87,373
$72,811
$29,124
$29,124
$1,340,863
$67,043
$268,173
$134,086
$536,345
67,043
67,043
201,129
$1,340,863
$67,043
$268,173
$134,086
$536,345
$67,043
$67,043
$201,129
$1,227,850
$78,264 $10,101,944
Looking within the processes we gain some additional insights about where the $10 million in
costs were generated. Within the Enrolled Services Process, the largest costs were generated by
case management and the provision of training services, over $1 million each, out of total costs
of $4.6 million. (It is important to note that training costs do not include the costs of Individual
Training Accounts (ITAs) and the vouchers that pay for training in the WIA system, because
training is not provided “under the roof”). The costs of bringing clients into the programs were
substantial, the cost developing plans and assessing clients amounts to almost $1 million.
The next highest cost process was Universal Services at nearly $2.8 million. Simply receiving
clients, answering questions and managing the high volume of clients in the Universal Process
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
146
was the highest cost activity, with over $700,000 in costs. It is important to note that due to the
facility’s structure and setting there are several reception areas and walk up stations where clients
can get questions answered. Another high cost activity was the job club, which had costs of
$439,668. Job club costs include substantial investments from both the local area, over
$311,000, and EDD, about $128,000. Providing workshops cost about $300,000 dollars.
The Business Service Process had almost $1.3 million in costs. In that area the highest costs
were found in Rapid Response services, with costs over $595,000. General marketing and
outreach to businesses cost $291,000 while marketing to new clients cost $233,000.
In the Youth Services Process, case management was the most costly activity by far, $536,000
out of a total cost of $1.3 million. Recruitment of participants cost $268,000 and follow-up cost
an additional $201,000.
Cost By Service Line
The final step in our analysis was to estimate the costs of particular One-Stop services produced
by processes and activities described before. One-Stops are a service business and it is often hard
to distinguish between activities and services. For example, when a client has a one-on-one
session with a counselor to review her resume, is the product a counseling session or is this event
merely an activity leading to a product such as placement in a job? We did not worry too much
about this distinction. In this case we were constrained by what the One-Stop measured, we
could only estimate costs for services which were measured by the One-Stop. We could also
only calculate costs for specific services when One-Stop staff could assign cost drivers – usually
their time – to specific activities that directly linked to measured service lines. We were also
interested in services that were likely to be found in other One-Stops, such as a universal access
visit, or a workshop. We begin our cost-per-service estimates with the services that we view as
produced by a whole process, not just an individual activity, we also focus on services we
thought would be common to other One-Stops and thus could provide some valuable insights
about managing One-Stops.
Before we could calculate the costs for each service, we needed to deal with an additional
methodological problem, the problem of “joint costs” (see Text Box C2-2). Joint costs are those
costs that are shared by various products. For example, reception is an activity that supports
many products such as universal access visits, case management, job placement and others. It is
impossible to actually break that cost down to get an accurate estimate of the cost of reception
for each product.
Text Box C2-2: The Problem of Joint Costs
Some of the “cost-per” calculations are afflicted by a condition known as the
“joint cost” or “joint product” or “joint revenue” problem. This condition
occurs when two or more products are produced using a single, indivisible input
(or are associated with a single bundled revenue stream). This creates
ambiguity when we try to compute the cost-per of the separate outputs.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
147
A common example is that of raising chickens. An input is the feed. Outputs
include chicken wings, chicken legs, and chicken breasts. We may know the
chicken ate 9 pounds of food, but we do not know exactly how much of that
food went to the chicken’s wings, legs, or breasts. In this example, the cost-pers
would likely be approximated by apportioning the cost of the chicken feed
according to either the weight of each of the component outputs, or the revenue
associated with the component outputs. So, an approximation in this example is
only an estimate, but is possible.
However, other cases of joint costs are more difficult to solve. These more
difficult cases occur when the revenue for a component product is hard to
determine (or when there is no revenue associated with a particular product),
and when the product has no physical weight (or when the weight is not clearly
related to revenue). This is the nature of a One-Stop’s operations. Consider the
resource room, for example. We can determine the total amount a One-Stop
spent on the resource room. We can even calculate how much it cost to make
the resource room available, on a per-person basis, for the year. But then some
people who use the resource room will end up producing a resume, and others
will end up producing a job search plan. There is no good way—as far as we
can see at this point—to know how to apportion the valid cost of the resource
room across those separate outputs. These outputs have no apparent revenue
associated with them, and they have no physical weight. So, a calculation of the
“cost per resume” or “cost per job search plan” would be very difficult.
In making our estimates we tried to get as close as possible to the unique costs of a service. In
cases where we could not break down the joint costs, we only assigned the costs directly
attributable to the product. Table C2-9 below includes notes on how we made our calculations.
In some cases we were able to identify costs that went with a particular activity but did not have
measures of the services produced by that activity so no cost per service calculations were
possible. The tables below show the best cost per service calculations we could make by the four
processes identified earlier.
Universal services are produced in a high volume at relatively low cost. You can see in Table
C2-5 that if we take all universal costs and simply divide by all universal clients we get a cost
per client of $419, if we look further and track the number of visits made for universal services
we get a cost per of $52 per visit. Providing one-on-one assistance in the resource room was a
significant cost item and costs per service were $28 an event.
A significant universal activity at this One-Stop, in which EDD was a major partner, is the large
and active job club. The cost of planning and hosting a job club meeting as $2,198, and it cost
$183 per job club member visit. Similarly developing and delivering a workshop cost $2,042.
EDD provides a service which benefits both businesses and job seekers in that it enters jobs into
the internet based job bank CalJobs, we calculate it costs about $11 to enter a job into the system.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
148
Table C2-5: Cost of Universal Access Services
Universal Services
Serving a Universal Access client
Providing a Universal Access visit
Job club member visit
Providing a Job Club meeting
One-on-on assistance in resource room
Developing and delivering workshops
Serving a client in a workshop
Enter job into CalJobs
Cost
Units
$2,796,762
$2,796,762
$439,668
$439,668
$561,284
$302,175
$302,175
140,697
6,676
53,614
2,402
200
20,049
148
6,109
12,624
Cost Per Notes*
Unit
$419
1
$52
1
$183
2
$2,198
3
$28
4
$2,042
5
$49
6
$11
6a
*refer to Table C2-9 for further explanation of calculations
It was, not surprisingly, much more costly to serve clients formally enrolled in a WIA or EDD
program. If we consider the costs of recruiting, assessing, and providing case management and
other intensive services to WIA clients we find a per client cost of $2,252. The cost of case
management alone averages $715. Placing clients in training and managing them during training
cost $1,861 for a client receiving training; remember this does not include the direct cost of
training usually paid for through and ITA (voucher). Following up participants who have
completed their planned program cost $595 per participant.
Participants receive different packages of services and these cost-per measures help us
understand the costs of the various packages. For example, a client who went through initial
enrollment and got case management and related intensive services and who was followed up
cost $2,212. A client who got those services plus training cost $4,073.
Similarly, we are able to estimate the costs of servicing enrolled clients in two EDD programs,
Veterans Services and Trade Adjustment Act (TAA). Veteran client services were less costly
averaging only $313 per veteran, while TAA clients were more similar to WIA clients in case
management, averaging costs of $1,982 per client.
Some training services were provided in the One-Stop by partners “under the roof” of the OneStop. The local adult education program provided ESL training, the costs of serving an ESL
student was $657 per student and the cost of an hour of instruction was $43.
Table C2-6: Cost of Enrolled Services
Enrolled Service
Serving an Enrolled WIA client
Enrolling a client and developing and
Individual Plan
Providing case management and other
intensive services
Providing training services
Providing soft skills assessment and
training
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
Cost
$4,138,848
$982,810
Number of
Units
1,838
1,090
Cost Per Note*
Unit
$2,252
7
$902
7a
$1,105,662
1,547
$715
7b
$1,023,761
$122,851
550
173
$1,861
$710
7c
7e
149
Enrolled Service
Follow up exited participants
EDD serving a veteran
Serving an EDD Trade Adjustment Act
client
Providing ESL training per client
Providing ESL training per instructional
hour
Cost
$573,306
$332,543
$198,247
Number of
Units
964
1,061
100
$9,200
$9,200
14
216
Cost Per Note*
Unit
$595
7d
$313
8
$1,982
9
$657
$43
10
11
*refer to Table C2-9 for further explanation of calculations
Business services account for about 13% of the One-Stop’s costs. The data available on services
provided allowed us to make a number of cost calculations. Recruitment costs are estimated at
$232,995 spent to recruit 115 business clients, yielding a client acquisition cost of $2,427.
Similarly outreach to existing clients cost of $2,427 per existing client who received additional
services.
We estimate providing Rapid Response Services, which is usually done in conjunction with
EDD, cost $3,697 per company served and $95 per worker reached.
The One-Stop gets and distributes job listings for companies; we estimate costs of serving each
company that used this service at $1,644. In addition the One-Stop host events where multiple
companies can come into the One-Stop and recruit employees, we estimate the cost of these
events at $2,349, and cost per individual job seeker who attends these events is $147.
Table C2-7: Cost of Employer Services
Business Service Produced
New business clients recruited
Existing clients recruited for service
Provide Rapid Response service for a company
Provide Rapid Response services to an individual
worker
Distribute companies job listings per company
Provide recruitment event at One-Stop
Serve an individual client at recruitment event
Cost Per
Unit
$232,995
$58,249
$362,282
$362,282
Number
of Units
115
24
98
3,802
$101,935
$72,811
$72,811
62
31
497
Total Cost Note*
$2,026
$2,427
$3,697
$95
12
13
14
15
$1,644
$2,349
$147
16
17
18
*refer to Table C2-9 for further explanation of calculations
This One-Stop runs an active youth program. The program serves both youth who are formally
enrolled in WIA and youth who are not. The program is funded with money from both WIA and
local government. Overall the average cost of serving a youth in the program is $414. A major
program expense is case management where staff work one-on-one with youth. We were able to
get the number of case management visits made and we estimate the cost of a case management
visit at $159. An important service for enrolled clients is work experience. We estimate the cost
of finding work experience jobs and placing students in them at $1,008 per youth participant.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
150
Table C2-8: Cost of Youth Services
Youth Services
Serve an individual youth client
Provide a case management visit
Provide work experience for youth client
Following up youth exiters
Cost
$1,340,000
$536,345
$134,086
$201,129
Units
Produced
3,238
3,377
133
120
Cost Per Note*
Unit
$414
19
$159
20
$1,008
21
$1,676
22
*refer to Table C2-9 for further explanation of calculations
Table C2-9 below show notes on the calculations reported in earlier tables.
Table C2-9: Notes on Service Cost Calculations
Number Calculation
1 Divides total services events by total cost of Universal process.
2 Cost of the job club divided by number of members served, does not include
joint costs such as reception.
3 Cost of job club divided by number of meetings held, does not include joint
costs like reception.
4 Number of one-on-one assistance events (including orientation, drop in
appointments, assistance with CalJobs, etc.) divided by the cost of one-on-one
assistance, does not include other costs such as reception, does include clients
and costs from EDD and Dept of Rehab as well as local area costs.
5 Cost of developing and delivering workshops divided by number of
workshops delivered, does not include other joint costs such as reception.
6 Cost of developing and delivering workshops divided by number of clients
attending, does not include other joint costs such as reception.
6a Cost of entering jobs into CalJobs divided by number of jobs entered.
7 Cost of services for WIA clients divided by number of clients served, does not
include joint costs such as reception.
7a Sums the cost of planning and in-take, plus the cost of needs assessment and
developing IEP, and the cost of case management and divides by all WIA
enrolled adults and dislocated workers.
7b Cost of case management and other core and intensive services divided by the
number of clients enrolled in intensive case management.
7c Cost of providing training services not including the cost of contracted training
services (ITAs) which occurred away from the One-Stop divided by the
number of clients receiving training.
Cost of following up clients who exited the program divided by the number of
7d exiters.
7e Cost of providing soft skills assessment and training divided by the number of
clients that completed training, only 127 out of 173 trainees received
assessment.
8 EDD's reported cost of serving veterans divided by number of veterans served.
9 EDD's reported cost of serving Trade Adjustment Act participants divided by
number of veterans served.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
151
Number Calculation
10 The Adult School’s loaded cost of provided training divided by number of
clients served, does not include One-Stop support costs such as space.
11 The Adult School’s loaded cost of provided training divided by number of
instructional hours, does not include One-Stop support costs such as space.
12 Cost of marketing and outreach activities for new business clients divided by
number of new business clients who received services.
13 Cost of outreach to existing business clients who got additional services during
the year.
14 Total cost of Rapid Response services divided by number of companies
served, does not include outreach and marketing costs.
15 Total cost of Rapid Response services divided by number of individual
workers served, does not include outreach and marketing costs.
16 Total cost of getting and distributing job listings divided by number of
companies who had job listings distributed.
17 Total cost of a recruitment event divided by the number of events.
18 Total cost of a recruitment event divided by the number of individual clients
attending.
19 Total cost of youth services divided by total number of youth served.
20 Cost of case management divided by the number of appointments.
21 Cost of developing work experience sites and placing youth in work
experience divided by number of youth served.
22 Cost of follow-up activities for youth divided by number of youth exiters.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
152
Appendix C-3: Case Study 3 – Central California
Rural/Suburban One-Stop Report
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
153
Central California Rural One-Stop Case Report
Background
The Central California Urban One-Stop is part of a local area, which we will call the Central
Valley WIB, which operates multiple full-service One-Stops. The WIB works in very close
partnership with the County government. One-Stop employees are County employees, and some
of the space in the One-Stop’s building is used for County activities other than those typically
performed by One-Stops. On the whole, the working relationship between the One-Stop and the
County appears very close and seamless.
Central California Urban One-Stop Description
The Central California Urban One-Stop serves an area whose population is growing fairly
rapidly, and in which the agriculture industry is a major economic force. The region served by
the One-Stop is economically well below the rest of the state, and the workforce on the whole is
not highly skilled; English as a Second Language (“ESL”) training is popular in the area.
The One-Stop itself occupies two buildings. One building is a multi-story structure that houses
One-Stop administration and some other County services. The other building is a single-story
structure in which the bulk of the One-Stop’s services occur. The multi-story structure does
contain some classroom and conference-room space that is sometimes used for providing OneStop services. The single-story structure is quite expansive, and contains the full range of
facilities normally associated with a good-size One-Stop. For example, there is a large resource
room, which was buzzing with activity during our visit, right at the building’s entrance, and there
is classroom space toward the back of the building. The One-Stop is busy, averaging over 100
visits a day to its resource room and also over 100 visits per day of various other types (e.g.,
enrolled customers, businesses). The costs generated by this operation during the year studied
were about $4.2 million.
The Central California Urban One-Stop is unique in its relatively heavy use of subcontracts to
provide some enrolled services. Specifically, what is typically called “case management” at a
One-Stop is largely outsourced to a number of specialized partners, and occurs largely away
from the One-Stop’s building and therefore those costs are excluded by definition from our
analysis.
The list below shows the agencies which are official partners of the One-Stop. Table C3-1 lists
agencies that provided measurable contributions on One-Stop premises and are featured in our
analysis. The table also lists partners in the WIA program that may provide valuable service to
clients but do not provide services “under the one-stop roof” and hence are outside the scope of
our analysis.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
154
Table C3-1: Central California Rural One-Stop Partner List
Partners Providing Measurable Contribution to the One-Stop, On-Premises
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
State of California Employment Development Department,
Community Services and Training Agency
Farm Workers Assistance
Department of Rehabilitation
Deaf and Hard of Hearing
American Association of Retired People
Department of Health and Human Services
Employment Services Agency
Partners Contributing to the One-Stop, Off-Premises
•
•
•
•
•
Services to Individuals with Disabilities
Local Community College,
County Child Support Services
Job Training for ex-Offenders
Small Business Development Center
Defining the One-Stop Boundaries
For the purposes of our analysis we had to define what was inside and what was outside the OneStop. More so than any of our other three case study sites, this One-Stop tested our definition of
what is included in the cost study and what is excluded. This One-Stop—more specifically, the
WIB—has significantly large contracts with a number of third-party partners to provide
“enrolled services” to One-Stop customers.
Our study team had previously developed an “operational definition” of what was and what was
not considered a One-Stop activity for the purpose of our analysis:
Activities and agencies are included in the analysis if they provide workforce services to
One-Stop clients and if the services are provided under the roof of the One-Stop.
Based on this definition, partners’ activities that are performed on One-Stop premises are
included in our calculations. However, partners’ activities that occur off One-Stop premises are
excluded from our calculations. This rule is not intended to make any judgment one way or the
other about the effectiveness of these contracting arrangements toward achieving either a costefficiency or a quality objective. We implemented the rule strictly as a way of treating the
various One-Stops in our study in a way that is consistent and that therefore can provide useful
benchmarking data.
The Local Area has more than one One-Stop and, on behalf of the set of One-Stops, engages in
contracts with a series of off-site service providers, primarily to provide services to enrolled
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
155
customers (e.g., case management, job search assistance, some workshops and training). The
service providers are differentiated from one another by their focus on specific and distinct subgroups of the One-Stop’s customers. The dollar amounts of the contracts between the Local
Area and the off-site service providers are significant in size, which might be expected since
“enrolled services” tend to be considerably more costly on a per-person basis than “universal
services.”
One-Stop Structure
The One-Stop is managed by a center director. Based our observations and discussion with WIB
and One-Stop staff, we broke the work of the center into four responsibility centers.20
•
•
•
•
Universal Services Unit
Enrolled Services
Business Services
Administrative Director Office
The responsibility centers are the units through which the city-paid One-Stop staff delivers
services and the partners who have a measurable contribution operate under the roof. A
responsibility center has one person who, on a One-Stop’s organization chart, is primarily
responsible for operations within that responsibility center.
In the year we studied, 2004-05, the One-Stop had 29 people on its payroll, not including
personnel listed as being WIB administration. These 29 people generally are those who are on
the floor providing services to customers. In addition, a series of partners had personnel working
in the One-Stop’s building to serve One-Stop clients, and therefore these partners are treated as
responsibility centers in our study:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
EDD: seven FTE
Employment Services Agency: one person full-time, a second person three days a week
Services to Individuals with Disabilities: one person, two hours per week
Department of Health and Human Services: two full-time employees
Department of Rehabilitation: one person, twelve hours per week
Deaf and Hard of Hearing: one FTE
American Association of Retired People: one full-time employee
Farm workers Assistance: 0.75 FTE
Activity data gives an additional sense of the level of activity of the One-Stop. In the 2004-05
year studied there were a total of over 60,000 visits to the One-Stop, which works out to about
240 visits per day. There were about 14,400 first-time visits to the One-Stop, which are about 58
per day.
20
In the 2004-05 fiscal year, which was studied, the One-Stop director was also responsible for a Youth program
which was housed at a separate site, with its own supervisor. While the payroll for this program was included in the
One-Stop’s budget it is not included in our analysis.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
156
A total of 1,282 individuals were served as “WIA enrolled” customers. Of these, 788 were new
registrants and 845 exited.
There were 860 new visitors to the “Business Services” function, and a total of 1,355 visitors
during the year. It is not clear how many of these visitors represented businesses and how many
were individual job-seekers.
One-Stop Processes and Activities
We began our analysis by mapping the processes we observed in the One-Stop. We asked the
One-Stop staff to validate this process map and help us define specific activities. Figure C3-1
shows the final process map, with the key measures of what the processes produce. This process
map was the framework we used for estimating the costs of each activity and ultimately the costs
of producing different products. We found three major processes in the One-Stop:
One-Stop Processes and Activities Analysis
We began our analysis by mapping the processes we observed in the One-Stop. We asked the
One-Stop staff to validate this process map and help us define specific activities. Figure C3-1
shows the final process map, with the key measures of what the processes produced. This
process map was the framework we used for estimating the costs of each activity and ultimately
the costs of producing different products.
As we said previously, we found four major processes in the One-Stop:
1. Universal Services Process: The operation provides walk-in services such as on-line job
searching, computers and printers for producing resumes and letters, career information, and
referral information. Most clients engage in self service, but at any given time there are
multiple staff members from the One-Stop, the EDD unit, and other partners, engaged in oneon-one assistance. Anyone who walks in and provides their name, address and social
security number may use these services.
Within the Universal Access Service Process are a number of activities, as indicated on the
process map. After passing through reception, clients may participate in any or all of these
activities in any order. While most activity is self-service, where clients access information
or work on resumes and cover letters, staff is available for one-on-one assistance. The
assistance ranged from help accessing the internet, to feedback on resumes and letters, to
quick referrals for other types of help.
The center offers a range of workshops, and generally runs in the range of five to ten
workshops monthly. The Universal Services process incorporates the daily activities of a
wide array of One-Stop personnel; some One-Stop personnel work more or less full-time on
Universal Services activities, and many others that are assigned primarily to other activities
also spend some portion of their time contributing to the Universal Access Process. Partly
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
157
for this reason, the Universal Access Process also includes Outreach and Recruitment
activities.
2. Enrolled Services Process: The enrolled services area provides some training and case
management activities, though a large portion of the case management activity is sourced to a
series of local subcontractors who specialize in serving various identifiable sub-groups who
can benefit from services customized to their particular needs and the particular industry/ies
in which they seek work. This is a key way in which the Central California Urban One-Stop
differs in a major way from other case study sites. Much of the activity performed as
“enrolled services” at the Central California Urban One-Stop is performed by partners under
contract, off-premises. Placement activities are conducted in close cooperation with the
“Business Services” process, as Business Services includes reaching out to employers to
define employer needs and to define opportunities for One-Stop customers.
3. Business Services Process: This unit markets the One-Stop’s services to employers,
develops job prospects for clients, and compiles information and reports intended to be useful
to businesses. Members of this unit also conduct outreach activities and sometimes provide
Rapid Response services. Rapid Response services are customized for businesses that are
considering closing or laying-off a significant number of workers.
Other “Employer services” include generating reports that provide information on local
economic trends and provide economic forecasts. These reports are designed to be useful for
local business, most of which who lack the resources and capacity to do such research
themselves.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
158
Figure C3-1: Central CA Urban One-Stop Process Map
Central CA Urban One-Stop Process Map
Universal Access Process (mass service)
Outreach /
Recruitment
Reception /
Orientation
Self
Service
Coaching /
1-on-1 assist.
Group
Workshops
Job
Development
04-05
Labor Market
Outcomes
• 60,732 total
client visits
• 26,013 Universal
visits
• 8,892 one-on-one
interactions in
Resource Room
Registered Clients Process (service shop)
Planning
Intake
IEP
Core / Intensive
Case Mgmt.
Training
OJT
ITA
Placement
• 1,282 WIA
Registered clients
• 788 new WIA
Registered
• 845 exiters
Individual
Job
Development
Business Services Process
Employer Outreach
Employer Services
LABOR MARKET
Basic Skills
• 860 visitors
• 495 new visitors
• 273 field visits
• 1,818 instances of
technical asst.
860 hired through
“on-site recruiting’
events
Support Activities)
Off-site 3rd-party subcontractors
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
159
Process Cost Analysis
We began by taking the traditional line item budget for the One-Stop and the costs assigned to
the One-Stop for support services and putting them into “responsibility centers”. These centers
were recognized organizational units to which personnel and other costs could be assigned. Other
responsibility centers were identified when there were significant shared resources such as
classrooms, or in-house partners with significant contributions. Table C3-2 shows the total cost
by responsibility center.
Table C3-2: Costs by Responsibility Center
Responsibility Center
Resource Room
Enrolled Services
Business Resources
Admin Directors Office
EDD
Community Services and Training Agency
Employment Services Agency
Job Training for ex-offenders
HHSA
Dept. of Rehab
Deaf and Hard of Hearing
AARP
Farm workers Assistance
Total
Cost
$1,684,732
$612,525
$379,788
$417,805
$617,692
$149,037
$77,322
$1,560
$91,500
$30,413
$46,323
$48,326
$36,245
$4,193,268
Percent of
total
40.1%
14.6%
9.1%
10.0%
14.7%
3.6%
1.8%
0.0%
2.2%
0.7%
1.1%
1.2%
0.9%
100.0%
As the table indicates, total cost for the 2004-05 program year was slightly above $4 million
dollars. In establishing these responsibility centers and costs, we distributed all support costs,
such as accounting and rent, to the responsibility centers listed above, so is there is no cost center
for “support costs.”
Partners listed on Table C3-1 are all lines from “EDD” downward. The total partner contribution
to the One-Stop’s operations is $1,098,417. Figure C3-2 shows the amount each partner
contributed to the One-Stop’s operations, as a percentage of the total partner contribution.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
160
Figure C3-2 – Contributions by Partners as a Percentage of Total Partner Contribution
Deaf and Hard of
Hearing
4%
AARP
5%
Farm workers
Assistance
3%
Dept. of Rehab
0%
HHSA
9%
Job Training for exoffenders
0%
EDD
58%
Employment
Services Agency
7%
Community Services
and Training Agency
14%
Cost By Process and Activity
Our next step was to trace the costs of each responsibility center back to the activities that
generated the costs. To understand the cost of each process, and the activities within each
process, we identified a number of cost drivers that allowed us to trace costs back to activities.
The most important cost driver was staff time, since that was the largest budget item. We asked
managers and many staff members to estimate the time they spent on different activities. We
also looked at the physical space used for various activities and traced the cost of that space back
to the various activities. We used the judgment of senior managers to distribute support cost
across the activities. We used the same process with partners who made significant contributions
to the One-Stop. Table C3-3 shows the cost of each activity, and also shows how much of those
costs were supported directly by the One-Stop and WIB, as well as the portion attributable to
partner contributions. Figure C3-3 shows the same data but in chart form.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
161
Table C3-3: Costs by Activity
Activity
Universal Activities
Reception & orientation
Assessment
IEP/ISS
Self service
1-on-1 coaching (excl. case management)
Enrolled Activities
Case Management
OJTs
Direct placement
PLACEMENT/ Occupational skills training
Workshops / seminars
Placement & follow-up
Business Services
Business information
Job development
Rapid Response
Outreach & recruitment
Total Cost
Total cost
$1,619,118
$531,057
$123,923
$20,890
$197,720
$745,528
$1,789,559
$279,589
$0
$254,429
$501,974
$358,238
$395,329
$784,590
$94,947
$527,548
$37,979
$124,116
$4,193,267
One-Stop +
WIB Support
Cost
Partner
contribution
$399,617
$123,923
$20,890
$197,720
$421,183
$131,439
$0
$0
$181,007
$0
$69,609
$501,974
$263,604
$360,587
$98,582
$0
$184,821
$0
$94,634
$34,742
$94,947
$297,694
$37,979
$124,116
$3,094,850
$0
$229,854
$0
$0
$1,098,417
$324,345
Of the $4.2 million total cost of operating the One-Stop, about $1.6 million (38.6%) was
traceable to Universal Activities, about $1.8 million (42.7%) was traceable to Enrolled
Activities, and about $0.75 million (18.7%) was traceable to Business Services.
When we look at the cost of specific activities, we find that the highest costs in the Universal
Access process were generated by “coaching and one-on-one assistance.” We can see that both
One-Stop staff and EDD staff put substantial time into this activity, generating high costs.
Outreach, recruitment and eligibility workshops were second highest cost activity in this process.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
162
Figure C3-3 – Cost by Activity
$600,000
$500,000
Cost
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
O
D
JT
ire
s
cc
ct
up
pl
ac
at
em
io
na
en
ls
t
ki
lls
W
or
t
ra
ks
in
ho
in
g
ps
Pl
/s
ac
em
em
in
ar
en
s
t&
f
Bu
ol
lo
si
w
ne
-u
ss
p
in
fo
rm
Jo
at
io
b
n
de
ve
lo
pm
R
en
ap
t
i
d
O
R
ut
es
re
po
ac
ns
h
&
e
re
cr
ui
tm
en
t
/O
IT
A
R
ec
ep
tio
n
&
or
ie
nt
at
io
n
As
se
1ss
on
m
en
-1
t
co
un
IE
se
P/
lin
IS
g
S
(e
Se
xc
lf
l.
se
ca
rv
se
ic
m
e
an
ag
em
C
as
en
e
t)
M
an
ag
em
en
t
$0
Activity
Cost By Service
The final step in our analysis is to estimate the costs of particular One-Stop services. In each
case study, we were constrained by what the One-Stop measured, so we could only estimate
costs for services which were measured by the One-Stop. We could also only estimate costs
when One-Stop staff could assign cost drivers – usually their time – to specific services.
Before we could calculate the costs for each activity or services, we needed to deal with an
additional methodological problem, the problem of “joint costs” (see Text Box C3-2). Joint
costs are those costs that are shared by various services. For example, reception is an activity
that supports many services such as universal access visits, case management, job placement and
others. It is difficult to break that cost down to get an accurate estimate of the cost of reception
for each service.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
163
Text Box C3-2: The Problem of Joint Costs
Some of the “cost-per” calculations are afflicted by a condition known as the
“joint cost” or “joint product” or “joint revenue” problem. This condition
occurs when two or more products are produced using a single, indivisible input
(or are associated with a single bundled revenue stream). This creates
ambiguity when we try to compute the cost-per of the separate outputs.
A common example is that of raising chickens. An input is the feed. Outputs
include chicken wings, chicken legs, and chicken breasts. We may know the
chicken ate 9 pounds of food, but we do not know exactly how much of that
food went to the chicken’s wings, legs, or breasts. In this example, the cost-pers
would likely be approximated by apportioning the cost of the chicken feed
according to either the weight of each of the component outputs, or the revenue
associated with the component outputs. So, an approximation in this example is
only an estimate, but is possible. So the solution in this example is relatively
However, other cases of joint costs are more difficult to solve. These more
difficult cases occur when the revenue for a component product is hard to
determine (or when there is no revenue associated with a particular product),
and when the product has no physical weight (or when the weight is not clearly
related to revenue). This is the nature of a One-Stop’s operations. Consider the
resource room, for example. We can determine the total amount a One-Stop
spent on the resource room. We can even calculate how much it cost to make
the resource room available, on a per-person basis, for the year. But then some
people who use the resource room will end up producing a resume, and others
will end up producing a job search plan. Some will do both; others will do
neither. There is no good way—as far as we can see at this point—to know how
to apportion the cost of the resource room across those separate outputs. These
outputs have no apparent revenue associated with them, and they have no
physical weight. So, a calculation of the “cost per resume” or “cost per job
search plan” would be very difficult.
In making our estimates, we tried to get as close as possible to the unique costs of a product. In
cases where we could not break down the joint costs we assigned the whole pool of costs to
multiple services. The tables below include notes on which costs were traced to which services.
In some cases we were not able to isolate the costs of the services but we did not have measures
of how much of the service was delivered. In these cases we reported the amount of the service
delivered without a cost estimate.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
164
Table C3-4 shows costs of some Universal Access services.
Table C3-4: Cost for Universal Access Services
Service
Total visits to the One-stop
Total # of visits to resource room
1-on-1 coaching (excl. case management)
# of participants trained (resource room count)
# participated in workshops (unique SSNs)
Workshop attendees (includes duplicates)
# attended orientation sessions
Cost per Total Cost Number
unit
of units
$69 $4,193,267 60,732
$70 $1,832,542 26,013
$84
$745,528
8,892
$1,035
$501,974
485
$172
$358,238
2,080
$51
$358,238
7,035
$224
$531,057
2,369
Note*
1
2
3
4
5
5
6
*refer to Table C3-7 for further explanation of calculations.
Note that some of the outputs listed in Table C3-4 are not directly attributable to the Resource
Room. For example, “total visits to the One-Stop” clearly involves much more than just the
activities of the Resource Room.
The analysis of Universal Access products provides some valuable insights into the costs of this
One-Stop. The One-Stop’s cost for serving the “average” Universal Access customer visit was
about $69. Approximately one-third of those visits included direct contact with Resource Room
staff (other than front-desk reception), and the average fully-loaded cost per interaction of this
sort was about $170. The cost per person participating in workshops was about $172. Since the
average person participating in a workshop participated in about 3.5 workshops, the per-personworkshop cost appears to be about $51.
Table C3-5 displays costs of some Enrolled Services at Central California Urban One-Stop.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
165
Table C3-5: Cost of Enrolled Service
Service
Cost Per Total cost
Unit
Lower-bound estimates (excludes placement & job development)
Enrolled clients
$808 $1,035,993
New enrolled clients
$1,315 $1,035,993
Exited
$1,226 $1,035,993
Placed
$428 $1,035,993
Mid-range estimate (adds placement & job development)
Enrolled clients
$1,528
New enrolled clients
$2,486
Exited
$2,318
Placed
$809
Number Note*
of units
1,282
788
845
2,420
7
8
$1,958,870
$1,958,870
$1,958,870
$1,958,870
1,282
788
845
2,420
9
Upper-bound estimate (further adds outreach, employer services)
Enrolled clients
$1,699 $2,177,933
New enrolled clients
$2,764 $2,177,933
Exited
$2,577 $2,177,933
Placed
$900 $2,177,933
1,282
788
845
2,420
10
*refer to Table C3-7 for further explanation of calculations
For a variety of reasons we found it much more difficult to estimate the cost of specific Enrolled
Services products. The key reason for this is the difficulty of calculating a cost for the particular
services. In One-Stops generally, Universal Access customers typically can be found physically
in a certain area of the One-Stop – the Resource Room. Costs of providing services typically
associated with Universal Access customers therefore are somewhat contained in a certain
physical area of the One-Stop. But while there typically is a certain area where “case
management” is conducted for Enrolled customers, these Enrolled customers also frequently
receive or directly benefit from services at various other areas of the One-Stop, such as the
“business services” area. So, the costs of serving Enrolled customers tend to be much more
dispersed across the physical facilities of the One-Stop and are difficult to trace specifically to
whether or not the funds were being deployed to serve Registered customers. We have estimated
that on the whole, it cost between $808 and $1,699 to serve an enrolled client. This cost is
considerably lower than at other case study sites, most likely due to the fact that a large amount
of case management (which we have found to be quite costly at other sites) is excluded from our
calculations here, due to our “under the roof” definition of a One-Stop’s activities. We’ll note
again that this study has arrived at no conclusion at all about the efficiency or effectiveness of
the contracting arrangement. Also, note that the placements number (2,420) includes more than
WIA enrolled customers.
Table C3-6 shows some analysis of costs incurred in providing Business Services.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
166
Table C3-6: Cost of Business Services
Service
New visitors
Repeat visitors
Total visitors
Number of companies served through Rapid
Response
Appointments
Technical assistance to businesses
Hiring/training events
Field visits to businesses
Cost Per
Unit
$110
$192
$70
$9,377
Number of
Units
$94,947
$94,947
$94,947
$37,979
$131
$52
$133
$348
$94,947
$94,947
$94,947
$94,947
Total Cost Note*
860
495
1,355
4
11
12
722
1,818
715
273
*refer to Table C3-7 for further explanation of calculations
Cost-per-unit calculations for Business Services are badly afflicted by the “joint cost” problem.
For example, an “appointment” may be an appointment either with an Enrolled customer to
explore business opportunities, or may be an appointment with personnel form a business who
are not Enrolled Customers. Likewise, field visits to businesses may benefit businesses, and/or
may benefit Enrolled or even Universal customers. Therefore, with the current data, it is not
possible to strongly associate the costs with the particular services.
Tables C3-4, C3-5, and C3-6 contain calculations derived from data that appears in Table C3-8.
If you want to see how a certain calculation in Table C3-4, C3-5, and C3-6 was made, refer in
those tables to the “Note” column. Then take the number in the “Note” area and find it in Table
C3-7. Then in the right-hand column of Table C3-7, you see that the total cost included in the
calculation is the sum of the costs of one or more activities. These activities correspond to the
very top line of Table C3-8. This information is supplied to allow a reader to understand exactly
which costs are included in each cost-per calculation, and which are not.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
167
Table C3-7: Notes on product Cost Calculations
Note formula for total cost
1 Total One-Stop cost, including partner contributions
2 Reception & orientation + Self service + 1-on-1 coaching (excl. case
management) Workshops / seminars
3 1-on-1 coaching (excl. case management)
4 Occupational skills training
5 Workshops / seminars
6 Reception & orientation
7 Case Management + OJTs + Direct placement + Occupational skills training
8 Note: number placed obtained from EDD; includes more than the number of
WIA enrolled
9 Case Management + OJTs + Direct placement + Occupational skills training +
Placement & follow-up + Job development
10 Case Management + OJTs + Direct placement + Occupational skills training +
Placement & follow-up + Job development + Outreach & recruitment +
Business information
11 Business information
12 Rapid Response
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
168
Partner Contributions
EDD
Community Services and Training Agency
Employment Services Agency
Job Training for ex-offenders
HHSA
Dept. of Rehab
Deaf and Hard of Hearing
AARP
Farm workers Assistance
Job development
Rapid Response
Outreach & recruitment
$0
$0
$37,979
$0
$84,237
$0
$18,989
$20,890
$0
$69,609 $501,974 $263,604 $360,587
2.2%
16.2%
8.5%
11.7%
$94,947 $297,694
3.1%
9.6%
$37,979 $124,116
1.2%
4.0%
$88,242
$88,242
Partner contribution total
$1,098,417
$131,439
TOTAL COST for activity
$4,193,267
A
$531,057 $123,923
B
C
0.0%
$88,242
$110,302
$74,519
$88,242
$72,489
$91,500
$18,248
$11,581
$24,163
$18,122
$912
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
$0
$0
$324,345
Business information
$0
$0
$0 $183,757
$94,947 $113,937
$0
$0
$20,890 $197,720 $421,183 $181,007
0.7%
6.4%
13.6%
5.8%
$24,163
$18,122
Pacelement & follow-up
$0 $252,710 $84,237 $168,473
$61,252 $61,252 $61,252 $183,757
$0
$0 $113,937
$0
$8,356 $188,012
$4,178
$8,356
Workshops / seminars
$0
$0
$0
$0
$399,617 $123,923
12.9%
4.0%
$617,692
$149,037
$77,322
$1,560
$91,500
$30,413
$46,323
$48,326
$36,245
ITA / Occupational skills
training
$0 $168,473 $421,183 $168,473
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$20,890 $29,246
$0 $12,534
Direct placement
OJTs
$3,094,850
1-on-1 counseling (excl. case
management)
$0
$61,252
$0
$62,671
Self service
$336,946
$0
$0
$62,671
IEP/ISS
Assessment
$1,684,732
$612,525
$379,788
$417,805
Case Management
One-Stop total
One-Stop expense by activity, %
Reception & orientation
Responsibility Center
One-Stop
Resource Room
Registered Services
Business Resources
Admin Directors Office
Total Costs for Each
Responsibility Center
Table C3-8: Central California Urban One-Stop Cost Tracing Worksheet - Dollars
$154,423
$74,519
$4,833
$1,560
$10,340
$912
$34,742
$98,582
$20,890 $197,720 $745,528 $279,589
D
E
F
G
$0 $184,821
H
$0
$94,634
$34,742
$0 $229,854
$0 $254,429 $501,974 $358,238 $395,329
I
J
K
L
$94,947 $527,548
M
N
$0
$0
$37,979 $124,116
O
P
169
Appendix C-4: Case Study 4 – Northern California
Rural One-Stop Report
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
170
NoCal Rural One-Stop Case Report
Background
The NoCal Rural One-Stop serves a sparsely populated Northern California County. The entire
workforce in 2005 was made up of about 43,000 workers, and the county had a higher than
average unemployment rate of about 7%. The local economy is largely made up of small
businesses. No single industry sector dominates. Government is the biggest employer
accounting for 24% of employment in 2004. Trade, transportation and utilities make up an
additional 18% and manufacturing 10%. There is a good deal of tourism in the area, so leisure
and hospitality industries account for 12% of employment.
The County WIA program is governed by a local WIB appointed by the board of supervisors.
The WIB has 34 members, many from the public sector, and a number of representatives from
small and mid-sized businesses. The county operates six One-Stops; most are small and have a
handful of staff. There is a substantial full-service One-Stop in the county seat which is the site
of this study. All the One-Stops are operated by a non-profit corporation, which we will call
WIA Non-Profit or WIA NP for short, whose only purpose is operating One-Stops in the County.
The county WIB has the following mission statement:
To improve the quality of the local workforce, to increase employment
opportunities and earnings, and to enhance the productivity and competitiveness
of business for the benefit of all residents...
The One-Stop we visited has a strong partnership with the county Department of Social Services;
in fact, the WIB is housed in that department. A staff of three within the Department oversees
the WIA program, supports the WIB and is housed in the One-Stop we studied. In 2004-05 costs
for the One-Stop we studied were about $3.2 million including the costs of all partners.
NoCal Rural One-Stop Description
The One-Stop is located in a modern one story office building, a little away from the center of
the county seat. The One-Stop is co-located with the county’s Department of Social Services’
(DSS) CalWorks program which is integrated into the One-Stop. EDD also has an operation
within the One-Stop. Thus the One-Stop is a hub for local workforce activity. Staff are
committed to providing a high level of professional service.
The list below shows the agencies which are official partners of the One-Stop. The agencies in
the first section are agencies which provide significant measurable contributions “under the roof”
of the One-Stop in the 2004-05 program year and are featured in our analysis. The rest are
agencies which partner with the One-Stop in various ways but do not provide services in the
One-Stop which we were able to measure.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
171
Table C4-1: List of Partners21 2004-05
Partners with a Measurable Cost Contribution in the One-Stop
• WIA NP (Funded with WIA funds)
• EDD
• DSS WIA Administration (county administrative unit for WIA)
• DSS Job Alliance
• DSS Drug and Alcohol Program
• DSS Mental Health
• Good Will
• Calif. Human Development Corporation Agriculture
• Local Rehab Assoc
• California Dept. of Rehab
Partners Without a Measurable Cost Contribution in the One Stop
• Local Community College
• Local Community Foundation
• Community Resources for Independence
• Consumer Credit Counseling
• Local Economic Development Corporation
• Older Worker Non-profit
• County Department of Mental Health
• County Department of Public Health
• County Office of Education
• Country Transit Authority
• Our House Non-Profit
• Project Sanctuary
• Local Adult School
• Local Community Services
Defining the One-Stop Boundaries
For the purposes of our analysis we had to define what was inside and what was outside the OneStop. To make these decisions consistent we developed an “operational definition” of what was
and what was not considered a One-Stop activity for the purpose of our analysis:
Activities and agencies are included in the analysis if they provide workforce services
to One-Stop clients and if the services are provided under the roof of the One-Stop.
Based on this definition the activities of many partners are not included in this analysis because
they take place away from the campus. While these partnerships are real we were not able to put
a cost on the services provided. To do so would mean tracing costs of services received by One21
Names of some partners have been changed to protect the anonymity of the One-Stop.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
172
Stop clients though a large system of support agencies requiring us to analyze innumerable
budgets. For example, if a client is referred to the local adult education program to get ESL
classes and these classes help her get a job, the partnership is real but the costs of that service is
not included in our analysis. Or in another case, the One-Stop may refer a client to a housing
agency to get advice about how to find housing, again the cost of making the referral would be
included in our analysis but the cost of providing the advice about housing would not be, because
tracing these cost through the large complex social service system is beyond the scope of this
study.
One-Stop Structure
The local WIB has a staff of three county employees who oversee WIA in the county and thus
the work of the One-Stop we studied. The One-Stop is actually operated by the WIA-NP which
employs an Executive Director who manages the One-Stop, and had 21 employees working in
the One-Stop in 2004-05. Most of these employees were full time in the One-Stop, a few had
some time allocated to other One-Stops. The graphic below shows how the One-Stop is situated
within the local area.
Figure C4-1: NoCal Rural County Workforce Development System
Northern California Rural County Workforce Development System
Board of Supervisors
Workforce Investment Board
Youth Council
• Oversight
• Executive
Partnership Council
WIA-NP One-Stop Operator
Subject One-Stop
(Comprehensive)
Other One-Stops
and Satellites
As noted before, the One-Stop is managed by the executive Director from WIA-NP. But the
One-Stop also houses large units from the county Department of Social Services and EDD. In
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
173
addition several specialized non-profits, such as Good Will, have limited operations in the OneStop. After discussion with staff and analysis of available data we identified ten responsibility
centers for which we could reliably identify costs and services produced. The responsibility
centers are the contractors hired to run the One-Stop (WIA-NP) and partners who have
measurable operation under the roof. The final list of responsibility centers used in our analysis
is shown in Table C4-2.
Table C4-2: Responsibility Centers 2004-05
Responsibility Centers
WIA-NP
EDD
DSS WIA Admin
DSS Job Alliance (CalWorks services)
DSS Drug and Alcohol Program. (Counseling)
Good Will (Job placement for CalWorks clients)
DSS Mental Health (Counseling)
CHDC Agriculture (Migrant and seasonal farm workers
services under WIA)
Local Rehab Assoc
State Dept. of Rehabilitation
In the year we studied, 2004-05, the One-Stop had costs of $3.2 million including the
contributions of all partners meeting the “under the roof” definition.
Activity data gives an additional sense of the level of activity of the One-Stop. We look at
activities as taking place within three processes (defined later): A “Universal Services Process”,
“Enrolled Services Process”, and “Business Services Process”. Below we provide some of the
key indicators of level activity for each process.
The One-Stop is a busy place. In the 2004-05 year studied in the “Universal Process” there were
over 18,000 visits to the One-Stop; over 70 visits a day. It is interesting to note that the average
Universal Access client visited the center almost 12 times; this is a higher average number of
visits than found at other case study sites.
Universal Service Process Activities
• 1,590 unique clients visited center
• 18,845 unique center visits (no more than one visit per client per day counted)
• 130 workshops provided
In Enrolled Services, because of the co-location with the county CalWorks, we see a lot of case
management and counseling activities.
Enrolled Services Activities
• 1,569 individual plans developed
• 1,569 clients received case management
• 9,408 meetings with case managers
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
174
•
3,194 individual counseling sessions
The Business Services reached 510 mostly small businesses.
Business Services Activities
• 510 businesses received consulting services
• 192 businesses visited the business service center
• 22 companies and 369 workers were served by rapid response services
One-Stop Processes and Activities Analysis
We began our analysis by mapping the processes we observed in the One-Stop. We asked the
One-Stop staff to validate this process map and help us define specific activities. Figure C4-2
shows the final process map, with the key measures of what the processes produced. This
process map was the framework we used for estimating the costs of each activity and ultimately
the costs of producing different products.
As we said previously, we found three major processes in the One-Stop:
1. Universal Access Service Process: This process served anyone who came to the One-Stop
seeking help. It provided a wide range of resources in a resource room, including career and
labor market information, access to computers for job searching and resume preparation,
access to phones and fax machines, limited one-on-one coaching and advice, career oriented
workshops and a job club. In this center, unlike other case study sites, many clients lacked
basic computer skills and staff spent a good deal of time helping clients learn to use on-line
resources.
Within the Universal Access Service Process are a number of activities, as indicated on the
process map. After passing through reception, clients may participate in any or all of these
activities in any order. While most activity is self-service where clients access information
or work on resumes and cover letters, staff are available for one-on-one assistance. The
assistance ranged from help accessing the internet, to feedback on resumes and letters, to
quick referrals for other types of help. Unfortunately, staff were unable to estimate the time
they spent in this activity so we were unable to assign a cost to one-on-one assistance at this
site.
The center offers a wide range of workshops, ranging from “Career Exploration” to “Retail
Sales Skills”. In addition, the center offers video and computer based, self-paced training,
which may be available free or for a small fee. This type of individual self-pace training
includes: Windows 95, Excel, Word, Microsoft Office, Typing Tutorials and other topics.
Data on how many clients used the various self-paced training modules were not available
and staff could not break out their costs so we were unable to analyze them separately from
other universal activities. Finally, the center has a job club which holds regular meetings. In
the meetings job seekers help each other search for a job and learn from experts who make
presentations to the club.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
175
2. Enrolled Services Process: This center has extensive enrolled services since there was a
large CalWorks program delivering services as well as WIA funded services at the site.
Activities in the enrolled services process tend to move in a regular sequential pattern.
Enrolled Services begins with an initial screening for eligibility; then most WIA participants
will get a comprehensive assessment of their skills, aptitudes and career preferences. Clients
then get an individual service plan which will vary based on the program in which they
enroll. At this point clients’ paths diverge. Some clients will be referred out to training
perhaps at a local community college or other training provider. Other clients will get case
management, where a staff person will work intensively with them, helping them identify
employment opportunities and coaching them through the job search process. Other clients
may be referred to counseling for a variety of issues. They may also get assistance with
related problems such as transportation, child care or housing. Some clients will go directly
to placement services. Clients who have completed training, or who are in case management,
will also get placement services, to help them land a job. Finally, after clients are placed,
staff follows up clients to make sure they make a successful adjustment to employment and
staff will arrange additional support services if needed.
3. Business Services Process: This process provided a variety of services to businesses
beginning with outreach and recruitment of businesses to make them aware of the center’s
business services. ‘Rapid Response Services’ are for businesses that were closing or layingoff a significant number of workers. In this case staff will go to the business site and provide
services to employees who are facing layoffs.
Business services are shaped by the reality that most local businesses are small and have
limited internal resources. The center provides a walk in service where businesses can come
into the One-Stop and get free consulting help, such as help with business plans, or simply
access to the internet.
The DSS WIA Administration responsibility center is the small unit that oversees the WIA
program for the county. The costs reported here are the costs attributable to this One-Stop, for
business sustaining costs. These costs would include the costs of the supporting the WIB,
administering contract with WIA-NP, and other necessary business costs that can’t be traced to
any other responsibility center.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
176
Figure C4-2: NoCal Rural One-Stop Process Map
Northern California Rural One-Stop Process Map
Workshops
Universal Access Process (mass service)
Job Club
• 1,590 Unique
Clients
• 18,845 Center
Visits
Orientation
Enrolled Clients Process (service shop)
Self Service
Counseling
Case Mgmt.
IEP
Support Services
Coaching
Placement
Training and Education
Business Services Process (service shop)
Rapid Response
Mass Hires
• 551 Total
Enrolled Clients
• 9,408 Case Mgmt
Meetings
Business
Workshops
Business
Counseling
Business
Center
LABOR MARKET
CUSTOMERS - Individual & Business
Reception
Planning / Intake
04-05
Labor Market
Outcomes
• 510 Business
Consulting Services
• 192 Businesses
Served by Business
Center
Support Activities
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
177
We attempted to measure what was produced by each activity we identified in the activity
mapping exercise. In Table C4-3 we show the activity identified and the best available measures
of services produced.
Table C4-3: NoCal Rural One-Stop Processes and Activities with Measures of Services
Activities By Process with Measure of Activity
Universal Activities
Universal Access clients total
Universal Access visits in 2004/2005
Universal Access service events in 2004/2005
Number of one-on-one coaching events in 2004/2005
Number of workshops provided in 2004/2005
Number of clients attending workshops
Number of clients attending Job Clubs
Total number of attendance incidences
Enrolled Activities
Number of enrolled clients
Number of comprehensive assessments conducted
Number of plans developed (IEP, work-plan or other name)
Number of clients assigned to case management
Number of client meetings held by case managers
Number of client counseling sessions total
Individual sessions
Group sessions
Number of training referrals (ITA, OJT, Adult School,
Community College, …)
Number of clients referred
Number of clients receiving support services to stay in
training
Number of Clients Placed in Employment (Other than from Self
Services)
Business Service Activities
Number of businesses receiving Rapid Response services
Number of workers that received Rapid Response information
Number of mass hire events held
Number of applicants interviewed
Number of applicants hired
Number of Job Fairs held
Number of companies participating
Number of businesses receiving business consulting assistance
Number of hours used to provide consulting assistance
Number of businesses visiting business service center
Number of service events provided to businesses
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
Total
1,590
18,845
20,478
NA
130
680
350
480
1,569
296
296
1,569
9,408
3,189
3,194
5
1,373
1,373
909
628
22
369
10
320
120
12
12
510
2,680
192
575
178
Process Cost Analysis
Our cost analysis began by taking the traditional line-item budget for the One-Stop and the costs
assigned to the One-Stop for support services and putting them into “responsibility centers”.
These centers are recognized organizational units to which the costs of personnel and other
resources are assigned. We treated the staff from the WIA-NP, which managed the center for the
local area, as a single responsibility center, each in-house partner with measurable contributions
was also treated as a separate responsibility center. The local Department of Social Service
program was large enough to break up into multiple responsibility centers because there were
clear units each with its own supervisor. The costs of support units “operations and support”,
such as information technology or accounting, were tracked to the responsibility units listed in
Table C4-4. Table C4-4 shows the total cost by responsibility center and the percent of total cost
that could be traced to each center.
Table C4-4: Costs by Responsibility Center
Responsibility Center
WIA NP
EDD
DSS WIA Admin
DSS Job Alliance
DSS Drug and Alcohol
Program
Good Will
DSS Mental Health
CHDC Agriculture
Local Rehab Assoc
Dept. of Rehab
Total
Cost in
Dollars
$873,841
$517,038
$120,241
$1,420,809
$121,553
Percent of all
Costs
26.6%
15.8%
3.7%
43.4%
3.7%
$89,789
$56,616
$17,829
$53,664
$10,138
$3,281,518
2.7%
1.7%
0.5%
1.6%
0.3%
100.0%
As the table indicates, total cost for the 2004-05 program year was about $3.2 million dollars. In
establishing these responsibility centers and costs, we distributed all payroll as well as all support
costs such as accounting or rent, to the responsibility centers listed above, so there is no
responsibility center for support costs. Figure C4-3 shows graphically the distribution of costs
across responsibility centers. To simplify the graph we have put into a “small partner” category
all the partners who contributed less than 2% of costs.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
179
Figure C4-3: Cost by Responsibility Center
Good Will,
2.7%
DSS Drug and
Alcohol Prog.,
3.7%
Small Partners,
4.2%
DSS Job
Alliance, 43.3%
WIA NP, 26.6%
EDD, 15.8%
DSS WIA
Admin, 3.7%
Of the four case study sites, this site had partners who made the largest contribution to costs.
The graph above shows that WIA-NP the contractor who operated the center accounted for only
26.6% of the costs, while the responsibility centers in the Department of Social Service Units
accounted for about half of all costs. EDD accounted for an additional 15.8% of costs. All other
partners accounted for only 6.9% of costs.
Cost By Process and Activity
Our next step was to trace the costs of each responsibility center back to the processes and
activities that generated the costs. To understand the cost of each process, and the activities
within each process we identified a number of cost drivers that allowed us to trace costs back to
activities. The most important cost driver was staff time, since that was the largest budget item.
To identify how staff time was spent we asked managers and many staff members to estimate the
time they spent on different activities. We also estimated the amount of physical space used for
various activities and traced the cost of that space back to the various activities. We used the
judgment of senior managers to distribute support cost across the activities.
We used the same process with the Department of Social Services, EDD, Good Will and the
other partners, we asked senior managers to attribute staff time to the processes and activities we
had mapped, and then had them estimate how support costs were used.
Our mapping of the processes and activities permits us to look at how resources are used at
different levels of aggregations and how they relate to different outputs. For example, we can
estimate the entire cost of the universal service process and calculate the average cost of serving
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
180
a universal client. At a more disaggregated level we can look at the specific costs of job club
activity and estimate the cost of serving a single job club member.
Figure C4-4 shows a highly aggregated analysis of the costs by each major process: universal
service process, enrolled services process, business services process, and business sustaining
costs. Remember that we have now combined the costs of all responsibility centers and partners
by process.
Figure C4-4: Percent of Cost by Process
Sustaining
Costs, 3.7%
Business
Services, 2.4%
Universal
Services ,
25.9%
Enrolled
Services,
68.0%
As the figure indicates the enrolled services process accounted for over two thirds of the costs,
while universal services process accounted for a bit more than a quarter and business services
accounted for less than 3%. Business sustaining costs were just under 4%.
Table C4-5 shows a more disaggregated analysis of costs. Here you can see the cost of each
activity. It also shows how much of those costs were supported directly by the local area, EDD
and other partners. It’s important to note that here we put partner costs into the processes and
activities they support, unlike in the responsibility centers where we broke out partner costs
independent of activity. Table C4-5 shows detailed break down of costs by processes, specific
activities and the contribution of various partners. A reminder, costs presented include labor,
space, supplies and expenses and support costs such as accounting. The table is broken out to
show the costs of the local area, EDD and smaller partners. Overall the One-Stop had costs of
slightly more than 3.2 million in 2004-05.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
181
Table C4-5: Cost Detail by Process and Activity
WIA NP
EDD
All Job
Service
Programs
Business Sustaining
Department of Social Services
WIA
Job
Drug & Mental
Admin
Alliance
Alcohol Health
CHDC
Agricultural
Workers
Local
Assoc.
of
Habilitation
Department of
Rehab.
Goodwill
estimated
cost
Total
120,241
120,241
Universal Process
851,058
Self Services
141,552
24,752
42,624
1,216
1,115
Coaching
53,963
169,962
71,040
1,216
5,069
Orientation
35,283
29,079
42,624
Workshops
31,329
22,148
142,081
Job Clubs
6,385
6,078
203
211,259
9,225
310,475
9,223
116,209
2,460
204,299
8,816
2,431
2,231,564
Enrolled Services
Assessments
46,175
170,497
30,388
764
1,074
IEP
66,017
12,138
255,746
17,017
2,368
16,099
Case Management
94,702
78,472
412,035
36,466
3,897
10,196
Counseling
49,079
Training & Education
117,595
Support Services
148,562
8,801
Placement
16,132
160,098
26,741
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
284,162
56,616
4,305
369,385
639,316
3,548
142,632
10,196
10,800
16,099
253,203
203
10,763
128,358
24,600
476,925
29,213
221,745
182
WIA NP
EDD
All Job
Service
Programs
Department of Social Services
WIA
Job
Drug & Mental
Admin
Alliance
Alcohol Health
CHDC
Agricultural
Workers
Local
Assoc.
of
Habilitation
Department of
Rehab.
Goodwill
estimated
cost
Total
Business Services
78,657
Rapid Response
10,240
3,667
13,907
Mass Hires
5,100
5,720
10,820
Business Workshops
5,100
Business Counseling
23,583
Business Center
23,047
TOTAL
873,844
5,100
25,783
2,200
23,047
517,037
120,241
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
1,420,809
121,553
56,616
17,829
53,664
10,138
89,789
3,281,520
183
Looking within the processes we gain some additional insights about where the $3.2 million in
costs were generated. Enrolled services accounted for most of the costs, about $2.2 million.
Within the Enrolled Services Process the largest costs were generated by case management:
$639,316. This reflects the large number of CalWorks clients in this center who get intensive
case management services, as the large number of case management meetings reported earlier
indicate. Similarly, support services, which are a relatively small cost at other case study sites,
are large here: $476,925. Again this reflects the large number of CalWorks clients making the
transition from public support to employment, who often require support services. The process
of enrolling clients into the various programs at the One-Stop was another substantial cost, the
cost of assessment and developing individual plans together accounted for over $600,000 of
costs. The various training services offered through the One-Stop and referral to training outside
the One-Stop cost only $128,358. This is because most training is delivered away from the OneStop and thus does not meet our under the roof definition. These costs are mostly for referring
and monitoring clients who are trained else where.
The next highest cost process was Universal Services at about $850,000. The largest cost item
here, accounting for more than one-third of the costs ($310,475), was one-on-one coaching,
where staff provide individual assistance to clients. Supporting self-service activities, which
includes maintaining a computer network, staffing the resource room, and receiving visitors was
the next most costly activity at slightly over $200,000. Workshops were a significant cost item
at over $204,299, orientation of new clients to the One-Stop cost less about $116,000, and the
Job Club was the least costly activity at $8,816.
The Business Service Process cost substantially less than the other two at a total of only $78,657.
Here the highest cost items were business counseling, where staff provide one-on-one assistance
to businesses and the Business Center, which was walk in assistance for local businesses to get
assistance. Together these two activities accounted for almost $49,000 of the cost. Rapid
Response, which is services for businesses facing a closure or layoff, was only about $14,000.
Finally, the cost to the county of managing and overseeing this One-Stop was $120,241. This
includes a share of the cost of supporting the WIB and other local area costs.
Cost By Service Line
The final step in our analysis is to estimate the costs of particular One-Stop services produced by
processes and activities described before. One-Stops are a service business and it is often hard to
distinguish between activities and services. For example, when a client has a one-on-one session
with a counselor to review her resume, is the product a counseling session or is this event merely
an activity leading to a product such as placement in a job? We did not worry too much about
this distinction. In our case studies we were constrained by what the One-Stop measured, we
could only estimate costs for services which were measured by the One-Stop. We could also
only calculate costs for specific services when One-Stop staff could assign cost drivers – usually
their time – to specific activities that directly linked to measured service lines. We were also
interested in services that were likely to be found in other One-Stops, such as a universal access
visit, or a workshop. We began our cost-per-service estimates with the services that we viewed
as produced by a whole process, not just an individual activity. We also focused on services we
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
184
thought would be common to other One-Stops and thus could provide some valuable insights
about managing One-Stops.
Before we could calculate the costs for each service, we needed to deal with an additional
methodological problem, the problem of “joint costs” (see Text Box C4-1). Joint costs are those
costs that are shared by various products. For example, reception is an activity that supports
many products such as universal access visits, case management, job placement and others. It is
impossible to actually break that cost down to get an accurate estimate of the cost of reception
for each product.
Text Box C4-1: The Problem of Joint Costs
Some of the “cost-per” calculations are afflicted by a condition known as the
“joint cost” or “joint product” or “joint revenue” problem. This condition
occurs when two or more products are produced using a single, indivisible input
(or are associated with a single bundled revenue stream). This creates
ambiguity when we try to compute the cost-per of the separate outputs.
A common example is that of raising chickens. An input is the feed. Outputs
include chicken wings, chicken legs, and chicken breasts. We may know the
chicken ate 9 pounds of food, but we do not know exactly how much of that
food went to the chicken’s wings, legs, or breasts. In this example, the cost-pers
would likely be approximated by apportioning the cost of the chicken feed
according to either the weight of each of the component outputs, or the revenue
associated with the component outputs. So, an approximation in this example is
only an estimate, but is possible.
However, other cases of joint costs are more difficult to solve. These more
difficult cases occur when the revenue for a component product is hard to
determine (or when there is no revenue associated with a particular product),
and when the product has no physical weight (or when the weight is not clearly
related to revenue). This is the nature of a One-Stop’s operations. Consider the
resource room, for example. We can determine the total amount a One-Stop
spent on the resource room. We can even calculate how much it cost to make
the resource room available, on a per-person basis, for the year. But then some
people who use the resource room will end up producing a resume, and others
will end up producing a job search plan. There is no good way—as far as we
can see at this point—to know how to apportion the valid cost of the resource
room across those separate outputs. These outputs have no apparent revenue
associated with them, and they have no physical weight. So, a calculation of the
“cost per resume” or “cost per job search plan” would be very difficult.
In making our estimates we tried to get as close as possible to the unique costs of a service. In
cases where we could not break down the joint costs, we only assigned the costs directly
attributable to the product. Table C4-9 below includes notes on how we made our calculations.
In come cases we were able to identify costs that went with a particular activity but did not have
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
185
measures of the services produced by that activity, so no cost per service calculations were
possible. The tables below show the best cost per service calculations we could make by the
three processes identified earlier.
Universal services are produced in a high volume at relatively low cost. You can see in Table
C4-6 if we take all universal costs and simply divide by all universal clients we get a cost per
client of $535, if we look further and track the number of visits made for universal services we
get a get a cost of $45 per visit. It is interesting to note that at this One-Stop clients made many
more visits on average than at other case study sites. Providing one-on-one assistance in the
resource room was a significant cost item but since these events were not counted we were
unable to calculate a cost per unit.
Other significant universal activities at this One-Stop were Workshops which cost about $1,500
each and $300 per client served. It cost $25 to serve a client in a job club.
Table C4-6: Cost for Universal Access Services
Service Lines
Units of
Cost
Service
Universal Access clients total
1,590 $851,058
Universal Access visits in
2004/2005
Universal Access service
events in 2004/2005
Number of One-on-one
coaching events in 2004/2005
Number of workshops provided
in 2004/2005
Number of clients attending
workshops
Number of clients attending
Job Clubs
Total number of attendance
Incidences’ at Job Club
Cost per Note*
Unit
$535
1
18,845 $851,058
$45
2
20,478 $851,058
$42
3
130 $204,299
$1,572
4
680 $204,299
$300
5
NA
350
$8,816
$25
6
480
$8,816
$18
7
*refer to Table C4-9 for further explanation of calculations
It was, not surprisingly, much more costly to serve clients formally enrolled in a WIA or a
Department of Social Service program. On average an enrolled client cost $1,422 to serve.
Looking at the beginning of the process it cost about $1,090 to assess a client and develop an
individual plan. Providing case management cost $407 per client served but only $68 per client
meeting. This One-Stop provided extensive counseling services. The cost of a counseling
session across all the programs and all the types of counseling averaged $45 a session. Placing
clients in training and supporting them during training cost $525 for a client receiving training;
remember this does not include the direct cost of training usually paid for through and ITA
(voucher).
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
186
Participants received different packages of services, and these cost-per measures help us
understand the costs of the various packages. Let’s compare two clients who got two different
packages of services. Client A, got a comprehensive assessment, case management to help them
resolve some personal issues and placement assistance; total cost $3,327. Client B also got a
comprehensive assessment, case management, and in addition got 10 personal counseling
sessions and training at a local community college; total cost to the One-Stop $4, 349.
Figure C4-5: Costs for Two Model Clients
Client A
• Comprehensive assessment and
individual plan $1,090
• Case Management $407
• Placement $554
Client B
• Comprehensive assessment and
individual plan $1,090
• Case Management $407
• Counseling (3 sessions) $135
• Referral to training $618
• Placement $554
Total Cost: $2,057
Total Cost: $2,804
Table C4-7 provides the best cost per service calculations we could make with the available data.
Table C4-7: Cost per Enrolled Service Unit
Service Lines
Total enrolled clients
Number of comprehensive assessments
conducted
Number of plans developed (IEP, workplan or other name)
Number of clients assigned to Case
Management
Number of client meetings held by case
managers
Number of client counseling sessions
total
Individual sessions
Number of training referrals (ITA, OJT,
adult school, community college, …)
Number of clients receiving support
services to stay in training
Number of clients placed in
employment (other than from self
services)
Units of
Cost
Service
1569 $2,231,562
296
$253,203
Cost per Note*
Unit
$1,422
7a
$855
8
1569
$369,384
$235
9
1,569
$639,316
$407
10
9,408
$639,316
$68
11
3,189
$142,632
$45
12
3,194
1,373
$142,632
$128,358
$45
$93
13
14
909
$476,924
$525
15
400
$221,745
$554
16
*refer to Table C4-9 for further explanation of calculations
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
187
Business services account for about 2.4% of the One-Stop’s costs. The data available on services
provided allowed us to make a number of cost calculations, which are shown in Table C4-8.
One service provided by the One-Stop was hosting mass hire events, where an employer who
needed to hire a number of people, such as at the opening of a large retail store, could come to
the Center and interview a number of applicants on a single day. The cost of one of these events
was $1,082, the cost for each interview generated was $34, and cost per person actually hired
was $90.
The One-Stop provided quite a bit of consulting services to businesses inexpensively. Using
data provided we calculate that the One-Stop provided consulting at a cost of just $51 per
business and an hour of Business consulting for just $10. Similar businesses who were served by
the business center, cost $120 each or $40 per service event.
We estimate providing Rapid Response services, which is usually done in conjunction with
EDD, cost $632 per company served and $38 per worker reached. This low cost may be
indicative of the fact that most companies were small and services were limited.
The One-Stop gets and distributes job listings for companies; we estimate costs of serving each
company who used this service at $1,644. In addition, the One-Stop hosts events where multiple
companies can come into the One-Stop and recruit employees; we estimate the cost of these
events at $2,349, and cost per individual job seeker who attends these events is $147.
Table C4-8: Cost of Employer Services
Service Lines
Units of
Service
Companies served with rapid
response services
22
Number of affected workers
that received Rapid Response
information
369
Number of mass hire events
10
held
Number of applicants
320
interviewed
Number of applicants hired
120
Number of businesses
510
receiving business consulting
assistance
Number of hours used to
2,680
provide consulting assistance
Number of businesses visiting
192
business service center
Number of service events
provided to businesses
Cost
Cost per
Unit
Note*
$13,907
$632
17a
$13,907
$10,820
$38
$1,082
17
18
$10,820
$34
19
$10,820
$25,783
$90
$51
20
21
$25,783
$10
22
$23,047
$120
23
575 $23,047
$40
24
*refer to Table C4-9 for further explanation of calculations
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
188
Table C4-9 below show notes on the calculations reported in earlier tables.
Table C4-9: Notes on Service Cost Calculations
Note Explanation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7a
Total cost of universal access process divided by number of unique clients
Total cost of universal access process divided by number of client visits
Total cost of universal access process divided by number of service events
Total cost of workshops divided by number of workshops held
Total cost of workshops divided by total workshop attendance
Total cost of job clubs divided by number of unique clients served
Total cost of job clubs divided by total attendance at job clubs
Total cost of enrolled services divided by number of clients enrolled in any
program
8 Total cost of assessments divided by number of assessments completed
9 Total cost of developing individual plans divided by total number of plans
developed
10 Total cost of case management divided by number of clients receiving case
management
11 Total cost of case management divided by number of case management client
meetings
12 Total cost of counseling divided by number of counseling sessions
13 Total cost of counseling divided by number of individual sessions
14 Total cost of training and training referrals (does not include cost of training
delivered away from the One-Stop) divided by number of clients getting training
15 Total cost of providing support services divided by number of clients getting
support services
16 Total cost of placement services for enrolled clients divided by number placed
17 Total cost of rapid response service divided by number of workers served
18 Total cost of mass hire events divided by number of mass hire events
19 Total cost of mass hire events divided by number of applicants who were
interviewed at events
20 Total cost of mass hire events divided by the number of applicants placed
21 Total cost of business consulting assistance divided by the number of businesses
receiving assistance
22 Total cost of business consulting assistance divided by the number of hours of
consulting services
23 Total cost of the business service center divided by the number of unique
businesses visiting center
24 Total cost of the business service center divided by the number of service events
(may be more than one per business)
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
189
Appendix D: Survey Instruments
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
190
Figure D-1: Sample Cover Letter and Instructions
Date, 2006
One-Stop Manager
Subject One-Stop Center
1234 Main St.
Anytown, CA
90000
Dear Ms. One-Stop Manager,
Thank you for agreeing to be part of our Cost Study of California One-Stops. Your cooperation
will help us gain a better understanding of how One-Stop Career Centers operate. This study is a
major priority for the State WIB. Once our analysis is complete, we will provide you with an
analysis of your data benchmarked against other California One-Stops, which will provide you
valuable management information.
Essentially we are asking for four types of data: first, information about expenditures for the
closed 2005-06 fiscal year; second, how your staff and partners spent their time during 2005-06;
third, an estimate of the services the Subject One-Stop Center produced in 2005-06; and fourth, a
simple report on your partners who play a limited role in your One-Stop. We ask that you use
the best available data, but as the directions on the instruments indicate, it is OK to estimate
when needed. We have enclosed a series of simple data-collection forms that you should be able
to complete easily from existing records or your own estimates. Please return the completed
forms by this date, 2007. You have both paper and electronic copies.
The following pages contain a list of enclosed survey instruments that can serve as a checklist; as
you collect data, simply check off each completed form.
Here are the types of data collection forms enclosed in this package:
A. Expenditure Information
“Subject One-Stop Center Expenditures as Traced from Agencies’ Total Costs”
(“Cost Study template”)
The spreadsheet should be completed by:
___ Your Local Area fiscal person (for Local Area expenditures and also for WIA
expenditures in the One-Stop)
B. How staff spent their time in PY 05/06
“Effort Allocation Data Collection Instrument”
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
191
To be completed by each responsibility center in the One-Stop
___ Subject One-Stop Center – Universal Services Staff
___ Subject One-Stop Center – Registered Services Staff
___ Subject One-Stop Center – Business Services Staff
C. Services Produced
“Service Lines Data Collection Instrument”
There is just one instrument summarizing all the services produced by the One-Stop.
To be completed by One-Stop Management:
___One-Stop Management
D. Information on Partners
“Partner’s Short Survey Form”
To be completed by each of the following partners:
___ Retired People’s Association
___ Veterans Resource Association
___ Junior College
___ Local University
___ County Human Services Department
___ Local SBDC
(EDD and the Department of Rehabilitation do not complete this form.)
If you feel that this partner list is incomplete please add to the list and have any additional
partners complete the ““Partner’s Short Survey Form”.
E. EDD Form – Cost Allocation Detail Sheet
___EDD Manager
Also enclosed are:
• A set of instructions containing an overview of the fiscal data-collection forms, with
information on how to go about making some of the calculations. We encourage you and
your major partners to review this set of instructions. We only want to know about
services and activities that occurred “under the roof” of your One-Stop. Services or
activities that occurred elsewhere or which were “contracted out” are not included,
even if they served One-Stop clients. For example, if a client got an ITA to receive training
at a community college, the cost of that ITA is not included because the training did not
occur in the One-Stop, but if the client is case managed by One-Stop staff the cost of the case
management is included in our analysis.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
192
•
A USB “flash drive” containing all these files. The flash drive has three folders:
o One folder is labeled “Data Collection Forms.” This folder contains most of the datacollection forms and directions listed above. The forms in this folder can be filled out
electronically or by hand on the printed copies provided.
o The second folder is labeled “Electronic Fiscal Forms.” This folder contains the subset
of the data-collection forms that we’d like to have filled out electronically. Please fill
out the contents of this folder electronically.
o The third folder is labeled “EDD” and it contains the instructions and forms for the EDD
Manager to complete. Please complete this spreadsheet electronically.
Once you have reviewed the forms, please call us with any questions you may have.
Once all the data-collection forms have been filled out, please keep a copy of everything and
send the originals, including the flash drive containing electronic information, in the enclosed
self-addressed stamped envelope to:
Richard Moore
Center for Management and Organization Development
California State University, Northridge
18111 Nordhoff St.
Northridge, CA
91330-8376
If you have questions, please call Andrew Wilson, the Research Assistant for this study, at 818677-6400.
I want to remind you that all the data you provide will be confidential. We will not identify
you or any of your partners in our reports or analysis.
Once again, thanks for your willingness to participate in this important project and we look
forward to returning your analyzed data to you. If you have any questions about the project
please contact either Andrew or me at 818-677-6400 or via email at andrew.wilson.68@csun.edu
or richard.moore@csun.edu.
Sincerely,
Richard W. Moore, Ph.D.
Professor and Project Director
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
193
Figure D-2: Expenditure Instrument for Subject One-Stop Center
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
194
Figure D-3: EDD Financial and Effort Worksheet
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
195
Page 2
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
196
Page 3
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
197
Figure D-4: Services Lines Data Collection Instrument
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
198
Service-Lines Data Collection Instrument
Instructions
One-Stops provide a wide array of services. Here we define a list of services commonly found in
One-Stops and some measures of those services. In the matrix below complete the following
steps:
1. Review the services and their definitions. If your One-Stop provides this service simply
check the Yes box under the service name or if you did not provide this service in 200506 check the No box.
2. For the services where you checked “Yes”, in the “Quantity” column on the far right,
indicate the amount of the service you produced in the 2005-06 program year. If you do
not track a particular measure simply put NA in that field. Important: All services
reported should be for your One-Stop only and not include data for other One-Stops in
you local area. You will want to make sure that you consult with your partners to get the
full count of various services, we are not just interested in WIA participants, we want
information on all the people served by your One-Stop. At the same time we want to
avoid duplicate counts.
The services are divided into four groups based on the client group: Universal Services,
Enrolled Services (services to clients enrolled in programs, these may be WIA programs, or
other programs which require formal enrollment like CalWorks), Business Services and Youth
Services.
To the degree you have “hard data” (i.e. printed or electronic records) please use them. For
example, if you have a count of universal access visits please use it. To the degree that you can
estimate from records please feel free to estimate. For example you may not have a complete
record for workshops given, but if you have a regular schedule of workshops each month you
can estimate the number of workshops by reviewing records for a typical month and multiplying
by twelve.
Questions: Call Andrew Wilson at 818-677-6400 or email andrew.wilson.68@csun.edu.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
199
Process
Universal
Service
Self Service- Job
Search Information
and Support
Yes
Universal
Coaching: for job
search information
and support
Yes
Universal
 No 
Workshops: Job
search and support
Yes
Universal
 No 
Orientation to OneStop
Yes
Universal
 No 
 No 
Job seeking
Networks
Yes

No

Definition/ Notes
This is what goes on in the resource
room; people seek jobs and related
information and use resources to
support the job search such as faxing
resumes, completing self administered
assessments, self referral to other
services, using word processing etc.
One-on-one assistance is not included
in this service line.
In the resource room clients get one-onone help with a variety of activities,
accessing information, quick informal
coaching on resumes, help filing a UI
claim etc. It may also include informal
referral to other resources inside or
outside the One-stop.
Introducing new clients to the resources
in the One-stop on their first visit;
includes initial needs assessment.
Measure
Quantity
Number Universal Access visits
Number Universal Access clients
Number Universal Access Service
Events (e.g. faxed a resume,
accessed career information on
internet)
Number of times one-on-one
coaching events occur
Number of new universal access
clients.
These are workshops that build skills or
give support for job search.
Workshops may serve universal clients,
enrolled clients or both.
This would include traditional job clubs
of any type, whether they are staff
facilitated or peer facilitated. They
must be open to universal clients
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
# of Workshops
# of People attending
# Job club or network members
Total Job club or network
200
Process
Service
Definition/ Notes
Enrolled
Assessment
A comprehensive assessment of skills,
background and interests for registered
or potentially registered clients,
interpreted by a professional
A service plan for an individual that
involves one or more formal services
leading to employment, that will be
tracked by a staff member
Meetings, phone calls and other
activities where a staff member helps a
client complete their plan. It may
involve problems solving, securing
support services, or brief counseling.
This includes follow-up after placement
or exit.
Counseling for specific personal
problems in scheduled sessions –
individual or group. For example drug
and alcohol counseling.
Trainees receive an ITA or an OJT
experience as part of training plan.
Yes
Enrolled

No
Individual Service
Plan, such as IEP

Enrolled
No


No

ITA/ OJT
Yes
Enrolled

Counseling
Yes
Enrolled

Yes
No
Case management
Yes
Enrolled


No

Training and
Education
Yes

No

Measure
attendance
Quantity
# of comprehensive assessments
# of IEPs or other formal plans
# of clients getting case
management
# of meetings with case manager
(staff/ client ratio may be a
meaning full measure as well)
# of client session
# of clients with ITA or OJT
Formal training or education which is
part of a service plan. For example
GED or ESL classes provided in the
One-Stop.
# of clients receiving
training/education
# of hours of training/ education
Enrolled
Support Services
This is restricted to support services
such as drop in child care which are
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
# of clients receiving support
201
Process
Service
Yes
Enrolled

No

Placement
Assistance


Business
Services
Business
Services
Yes
No
Mass Hires/ Job
Fairs


Measure
services
Quantity
Defined as staff provided assistance to
locate and secure a job.
Yes
No
Rapid Response
Assistance
Yes
Definition/ Notes
delivered under the roof.

No

# of clients placed (entered
employment)
Meeting at the company site with
employers or employees of companies
considering a lay-off or closure.
# of employees assisted
# Employers assisted
One-stop staff arrange logistics, screen
applicants for employer hiring a number # of mass hire events
of employees or Job Fairs where
employers come and meet a number of # of applicants interviewed at
potential applicants.
mass hire events
# of applicants hired from mass
hires events
# of Job Fairs
# of companies participating
# of Job seekers participating in
job fair
Business
Services
Workshops
Yes

No

Workshops to provide skills or
information for businesses.
# of workshops
# of businesses attending
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
202
Process
Business
Services
Service
Business Consulting
Yes

No

Definition/ Notes
One-on-one assistance to business to
provide help with : taxes, marketing,
loan applications etc.
Measure
Quantity
# of companies serviced
# of hours of consulting
Business
Services
Business Center
Service

Business
Services
Youth

Yes
No
Employment
Services
Yes
Youth

Yes
No
Job Development


Youth
Youth
Yes
No
Academic Support


 No 
Follow-up
Yes
Contacting businesses to identify open
positions and posting those positions in
the One-Stop and elsewhere.
Youth placed in work experience,
summer jobs or regular employment.
Number of jobs developed
Number of youth placed in any
employment
Services to counsel and support youth
while they are enrolled in program.
Number of youth receiving
services
Number of meetings or
appointments
Activities to prepare youth for college,
campus visits, SAT Prep, information
session etc.
Services such as GED preparation,
home work clubs, or tutoring to help
improve academic achievement.
Number of youth participating in
college preparation events

Yes
No
College Preparation
Youth
Number of businesses served
 No 
Counseling, Case
Management
Supportive Services
Yes
Essentially office support for small
businesses, faxing, internet access,
office space etc.
 No 
Follow-up services to see if youth have
completed activities.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
Number of youth participating
Number of participants attaining
credential
Number of youth followed up.
203
Figure D-5: Effort Allocation Data Collection Instrument
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
204
Subject One-Stop Center
Responsibility Center: Responsibility Center #1
Effort Allocation
Data Collection Instrument
Personnel at One-Stops spend their working hours on a variety of activities. The purpose of this
form is for you to estimate how people spent their time in program year 2005-06 in different
units within your one-stop. In the matrix below complete the following steps:
1.
In our first call to your One-Stop you identified the basic organizational units in your
One-Stop. We have prepared a form for each unit. Check the list below and make sure
that it is correct and that all your staff can be put into one of these units. If not please
call us.
List of Responsibility Centers:
a. Subject One-Stop Center – Responsibility Center #1
b. Subject One-Stop Center – Responsibility Center #2
c. Subject One-Stop Center – Responsibility Center #3
We need to account for 100% of the staff who work in your One-Stop with these groups.
2.
3.
4.
Review the activities and their definitions before you begin, so you have a sense of all
the activities included in our model.
Please distribute a copy of this form to the manager of each organizational unit defined
in (1) above.
In the far right column, have each unit manager indicate the percentage of effort his or
her staff spent on each activity during the 2005-06 Program Year. Remember, each
manager must distribute 100% of their unit’s effort across these activities.
Instructions: Think about all the time staff in your unit spent working in the One-Stop in 200506, think of all this effort as 100%. Then using your best judgment, distribute that 100% across
all the activities that went on in the One-Stop using the form below. Please fill in the grey cells
with percentages that indicate the relative amount of staff time that went into the various
activities listed in the left-hand column. It is quite likely that your staff will have spent no time
on some activities, in that case simply enter a 0. When you are done, all the percentages you
reported must add to 100%.
Note: You will have some activities, such as reception, which are not listed. These activities are
likely to be activities which support other activities. For example, reception supports the
resource room, services for enrolled clients, and so forth. When estimating effort, allocate this
time to the activities it supports. So, some of the time that goes into reception should be
distributed to “coaching” in the universal area, or “case management” in the enrolled area and so
forth.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
205
Subject One-Stop Center –
Universal Services Staff
_________________________________________________________
Person Completing Form_____________________________________________________
Date Completed __________
Number of FTE staff in your unit:_________________
Activities
Universal Activities
Support and maintenance of “self-service” activities, maintaining
resource room, staffing information / referral kiosks etc.
Coaching: Informal one-on-one assistance, may include drop in
appointments, NOT case management.
Orientation to One-Stop: providing new clients information about
One-Stop services, how to use the resource room, etc.
Workshops / Seminars supporting job search; resume writing,
interviewing, etc.
Support of Job Club or Other Networking Activities
Enrolled Services ; Services for Adult participants formally in
enrolled in any program
Conducting Comprehensive Assessments of Applicants
Allocation of effort (%)
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
Development of Client Plans such as IEP/ ISS
______%
Case Management, Referrals: (time spent conferring with clients or
not enrolled aimed primarily at referring them to outside services)
Case Management, Support: monitoring progress, solving problems,
arranging support services for enrolled clients.
Case Management, Training: setting up ITA, or other classroom
training
Counseling: One-on-one or group counseling with scheduled
appointments for specific problems (alcohol and drug counseling).
NOT case management.
OJT or ITA: Developing OJT positions and placing clients in them.
Training and Education; General Education (GED, ESL) /
occupational skills training – includes only training conducted in the
One-Stop
Providing Support Services: only support services such as drop in
child care that occur in the One-Stop
Providing Placement Assistance
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
206
Business Services
Developing Jobs: Identifying open jobs and listing them for OneStop customers and others.
Rapid Response: Providing assistance to companies and or workers
regarding layoffs or closures
Arranging and Managing Mass Hire Events and Job Fairs
Training and Workshops for Business: planning and delivering
training and workshops for business.
Business Consulting: one-on-one assistance for businesses
Business Center Services: temporary office space, computer
access, faxing , etc.
Youth Services
Provide Employment Services: Arranging work experience, job
placement, summer employment.
Counseling, Case Management, Supportive Services
College Preparation Services
Academic Support, (GED preparation, home work club, etc.)
Follow-up of Participants
TOTAL (must add to 100%)
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
______%
100%
207
Figure D-6: Partners Short Survey Form
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
208
Subject One-Stop Center
Partner’s Short Survey Form
Partner:
This questionnaire is for partners who are involved in only a few activities under the roof of your
One-Stop 2005-06 program year. For example, an adult education program that offers GED and
ESL classes in your One-Stop, or a community college which stations a counselor at your OneStop should use this short form.
To complete this form work with your partner to get the data you need. Here are the simple steps
involved:
1. Identify the agency.
2. List the services they provide (please use the list of services attached at the end of this
document)
3. Provide the best measure you have or can estimate about the amount of service provided
during the 2005-06 program year (see the “Service Line Data Collection Instrument” for
ways to measure service). Please also include this service count in the comprehensive
“Service Lind Data Collection Instrument” which covers all activities in your center.
4. Estimate the “fully loaded” cost of these services. By fully loaded cost we mean the
salaries of staff plus fringe benefits, any other direct or indirect costs such as assessment
instruments or instructional materials provided by the agency, and appropriate agency
over head. The attached matrix provides and example of calculating fully loaded cost.
As you can see in the example below the local community colleges participates in two activities,
counseling about opportunities at the community college two afternoons a week, and workshops
for small businesses on finance and HR practices.
Questions? Call Andrew Wilson at 818-677-6400 or email andrew.wilson.68@csun.edu.
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
209
Subject One-Stop Center
Agency /Activity
Measure of Annual
Activity
Sample
Agency : Community College
Activity 1: Coaching about training and
education
Annual Cost
PY 2005-06
Total Cost: $56,510
$ 46,700
350 one-on-one
appointments
( Hourly rate with fringes and
overhead $45 x 20 hours a
week x 50 weeks= $45,000,
200 assessment instruments
@ $8.50= $1,700)
$9,810
Activity 2: Business workshops
21 Workshops
225 participants
Agency Name:
(Each workshop 8 hours of
labor at $45 per hour X 21
workshops= $7,560
$10 of materials for each
participant $2,250)
Total Cost:
Activity 1:
Activity 2:
Activity 3:
Activity 4:
Activity 5:
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
210
List of One Stop Services
Universal Activities
Support and maintenance of “self-service” activities, maintaining resource room, staffing
information / referral kiosks etc.
Coaching: Informal one-on-one assistance, may include drop in appointments, NOT case
management.
Orientation to One-Stop: providing new clients information about One-Stop services, how to use the
resource room, etc.
Workshops / Seminars supporting job search; resume writing, interviewing, etc.
Support of Job Club or Other Networking Activities
Enrolled Services ; Services for Adult participants formally in enrolled in any program
Conducting Comprehensive Assessments of Applicants
Development of Client Plans such as IEP/ ISS
Case Management, Referrals: (time spent conferring with clients or not enrolled aimed primarily at
referring them to outside services)
Case Management, Support: monitoring progress, solving problems, arranging support services for
enrolled clients.
Case Management, Training: setting up ITA, or other classroom training
Counseling: One-on-one or group counseling with scheduled appointments for specific problems
(alcohol and drug counseling). NOT case management.
OJT or ITA: Developing OJT positions and placing clients in them.
Training and Education; General Education (GED, ESL) / occupational skills training – includes only
training conducted in the One-Stop
Providing Support Services: only support services such as drop in child care that occur in the OneStop
Providing Placement Assistance
Business Services
Rapid Response: Assistance to companies and or workers regarding layoffs or closures
Arranging and Managing Mass Hire Events and Job Fairs
Training and Workshops for Business: planning and delivering training and workshops for
business.
Business Consulting: one-on-one assistance for businesses
Business Center Services: temporary office space, computer access, faxing , etc.
Youth Services
Provide Employment Services: work experience, job placement, summer employment.
Counseling, Case Management, Supportive Services
College Preparation Services
Academic Support, (GED preparation, home work club, etc.)
Follow-up of Participants
California One-Stop System Cost Study Report
211