Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-06-1983
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1983
>
Agenda - 06-06-1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/18/2017 2:41:56 PM
Creation date
4/18/2017 2:39:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/6/1983
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19830606
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1980's\1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
_ <br /> ORANGE COUNTY 0 <br /> BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda <br /> ACTION AGENDA =4 ABSTRACT Item No. (!=41 <br /> MEETING DATE June 6, 1983 __ <br /> Subject: Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) <br /> Department: Count Manager I Public Hearing: yes ' ncl <br /> —— <br /> Attachment s : Information Contact: <br /> Yes Orange Manager's Office <br /> Phone Number: 7 <br /> PURPOSE: To consider a direction whereby Orange County citizens would continue to recei <br /> employment and training services. <br /> NEED: PursuantIto Federal law signed October 13, 1982, the JTPA will replace CETA <br /> (Comprehensive Employment and Training Act) September 30, 1983. Purpose will <br /> remain the same under- the new Act and program to implement the Act; continued <br /> focus will be on providing employment and training opportunities for economi- <br /> cally dqadvantaged and unemployed persons. The difference comes in how the <br /> program is to be overseen and administered (detailed comparison of the two act <br /> is attached) . Policy for the program will be set by a Private Industry Counci <br /> (PIC) appointed by the local chief elected official(s) in each service deliver <br /> area. Once appointed the PIC and the chief elected official(s) will then join <br /> develop a local training plan that will determine the grant recipient program <br /> administrator and the mix of services and participants to be served. <br /> Orange County is faced with deciding between two alternatives for administrati <br /> Alternative 1 is to continue much the same as at present. The County would <br /> decfde to becone part of what is termed the "rural service delivery area" (RSC <br /> All small counties fit into this category unless they elect to pool their effo <br /> with other counties. Planning and coordination of programs would be through t <br /> Triangle J Council of Governments (one of 18 in the State) while the State wol, <br /> be the administrative entity (writing contracts and monitoring and auditing pr <br /> grams) aid the County would be the program operator. <br /> Alternative 2 is to join a multi-county and city consortium. The service <br /> delivery, area—cgDA) in this case would encompass 200,000 or more population ar <br /> include either Alamance or Durham. Planning and coordination would be accom- <br /> plished ,through a private industry council drawn from members of the consortit <br /> The PIC and chief elected official(s) would select a program administrator whi <br /> would also function as operator for all of the consortium members. <br /> IMPACT: The fac that less funding will be available Under the new Act gives some insi <br /> as to the alternative to select. Early estimate is that Orange,.because of ii <br /> low unemployment rate and the lesser allocation for the State, would receive <br /> of the $1242,785 1982-83 Title II-B funds. With future administrative funds <br /> limited to 15 percent it will be difficult to operate under Alternative 1 . Th <br /> Orange County program is already operating on a marginal basis as a result of <br /> Past staff cut-backs. Consorting with others would permit pooling of effort i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.