State Leadership Funds (Adult education and family literacy act Section 223 (AEFLA))
AEFLA Section 223(1)(a)
Title II is a key stakeholder in Maryland's WIOA State Plan and the alignment of Title II activities with other workforce activities works to implement strategies developed in the State Plan. Maryland's Benchmarks of Success continues to unify the efforts of Maryland's entire workforce system through strategically developed committees and regular reporting. Benchmarks of Success reflects the shared vision of excellence among Maryland’s workforce partners around five strategic goals geared towards strengthening the earning capacity of Marylanders. The Benchmarks' four main committees: Data and Dashboard, Professional Development and Technical Assistance, Communications, and Policy, all had representation from state Title II staff and Title II held leadership positions on the Data and Dashboard and Professional Development/Technical Assistance committees. In addition, local Title II leadership participated on the committees as well. The Benchmarks initiative seeks to provide a forum for the open sharing of ideas, challenges, and solutions that affects all of Maryland's workforce system.
PY21 workgroup initiatives including joint listening sessions conducted by Titles I, II, III, and IV in better understanding how Measurable Skill Gains are measured, tracked, and reported across all agencies through the Data and Dashboard Committee. These efforts in PY21 will culminate in a joint MSG Policy for Maryland in PY22 across Titles I, II and IV. Maryland's Career Pathways Grant, which provided targeted co-enrollment guidance and financial assistance between Titles I and II, completed in PY21, with committee work in PY21 focusing on documenting best practices through extensive interviews and report writing. A final report on these efforts is to be released in PY22. Finally, the Benchmarks e-Learning series continued in PY21, providing front line staff across all the WIOA partners training on the roles and responsibilities of the following entities: The Governor's Workforce Development Board, Title I, Title II, and Title III.
AEFLA Section 223(1)(b)
Maryland requires all adult education grantees to submit an annual Professional Development Plan that demonstrates a commitment to continuous improvement in learner achievement and instructor effectiveness. based on identified programmatic goals. Professional development plans must be data-driven based on student outcomes, local and state goals, instructor needs, assessment surveys, classroom observation, and other data to determine professional development needs. In PY 21 local agencies began to transition to in-person instruction to meet student demand for such, while continuing to provide hybrid and virtual classes. The Maryland Labor team and local program staff worked in tandem to ensure access to the shifting landscape of course delivery.
The Maryland Virtual Training Institutes (MD VTI) were offered in December and June of the program year. All content was recorded and archived to enable resource sharing on the website as part of the quality professional development efforts. In PY21, the state offered 17 unique sessions on topics aligned with instructional practices and WIOA implementation. A total 212 unduplicated participants attended at least one session of the VTI. Sessions are designed to be brief and include topics that can be easily incorporated into instruction. Most importantly, they are designed by practitioners and offered at no cost. Feedback for VTI has been very positive. As in previous VTIs, participants and presenters have joined from outside of Maryland allowing for a rich exchange of information. In addition, several of Maryland’s Title II grantees actively incorporate archived VTI sessions into their new instructor and new staff orientations.
In PY 21, adult education team members implemented “Gather and Grow” a content-focused professional development opportunity for ABE and ESL instructors based on local program need. Lesson Planning was chosen as a priority topic. Participants were assigned a reading material/ pre-workshop material before the session took place, and throughout the workshop, participants worked on creating effective lesson plans that were guided by CCRS Standards and CASAS Competencies. Separate sessions were offered for ABE and ESL practitioners. The lesson planning workshop in March 2022 garnered close to 20 participants in each group.
Maryland began the Student Achievement in Reading (STAR) Pilot in September 2021 with six local programs (35 local staff) and three state staff participating in the initiative. The nine-month pilot ended in June 2022, with 93% of participants receiving Certificates of Completion. This exceeded the expected 60% completion success rate. As a result of the successful outcomes, a State Education Program Specialist and a local instructor will become State Trainers for Maryland and continue the STAR rollout.
Communities of Practice (CoP) continue to be a valuable resource for leadership team members. Virtual meetings provided a forum for programs to share challenges and best practices with peers and provided a continuous avenue for open communication between State staff and the local program leadership staff. CoP meetings are scheduled quarterly for each local leadership team role - Program Administrator, Instructional Specialist, Intake/Assessment Specialist and Management Information Specialist, and additionally for Transitions staff, NEDP® Lead Advisor/Assessor and IELCE/IET Specialist/Coordinator.
National/State Conferences
Adult education team members attended national conferences, either virtually or in-person during PY21including Coalition on Adult Basic Education (COABE), Executive Function Conference, National Association of State Directors of Adult Education, TESOL International Conference, Learning Disabilities of Association of Illinois Virtual Conference, Literacy and Language Institute, National Meeting for Adult Education State Directors, Math Institute and CASAS Summer Institute. Members of the team also presented at COABE.
State conferences attended included Maryland TESOL, Maryland Association of Adult Community and Continuing Education (MAACCE), Governor’s Grant Conference, Maryland Association of Boards of Education (MABE), and Montgomery Coalition for Adult English Literacy (MCAEL). Members of the team attended and presented at the MD Workforce Association (MWA) Raising the Bar, MD VTI, MD TESOL, and Montgomery Coalition for English Literacy (MCAEL).
AEFLA Section 223(1)(c)
Six programs were identified for Program Improvement during PY 21 based on three years of performance data. The local programs met with the Labor team to discuss performance issues and propose strategies to address them. Each program developed a program improvement plan that included strategies related to enrollment, retention and instruction, expected outcomes, implementation timeline and an evaluation of each strategy. Additional funds were provided to support implementation of the improvement plan during the grant period. State staff met with the leadership of the six programs to review program improvement progress and will continue to follow the progress of the programs.
The state team partners with local programs to onboard new staff, provide forums for discussing common challenges and recommend resources. Regular communication including team meetings and communities of practice have facilitate a sense of collaboration between the state and local leadership.
AEFLA Section 223(1)(d)
Adult education program specialists conducted program evaluation and monitoring throughout the reporting period through a combination of a desk review of quarterly data, midyear and final reports, and virtual site visits.
The State conducted three week-long full virtual monitoring visits during PY21. Using a virtual monitoring model developed in-house allowed for significantly more classroom observations than are possible during onsite visits. The entire state team (or majority of team staff) could more readily evaluate the effectiveness of online instruction and identify best practices and problem areas requiring technical assistance. A written report detailing observations, recommendations, and required corrective action, if indicated, is provided at the conclusion of each monitoring visit. Two IELCE-IET programs were also monitored during this time combining online class observation and in-person IET training content visits.
Fiscal monitoring visits and annual enrollment data verification audits are performed through the Division’s Office of Monitoring and Compliance (OMC). In PY21, monitors from OMC conducted enrollment data verification for all local programs. State monitors have been able to conduct successful audits virtually, improving efficiency and avoiding delays due to COVID closures. Programs that fail to meet data quality standards are required to submit corrective action plans consistent with the federal data quality checklist and provide professional development to staff in understanding the importance of consistent data collection methods. Fiscal monitoring resumed in PY 21 with five local programs receiving monitoring from OMC.
AEFLA Section 223(a)(2)
During the first half of PY 21, adult education programs delivered online, distance, hybrid, and HyFlex course options to overcome the physical spacing requirements and prohibitions in place at many agencies. As restrictions on in-person group gatherings and meetings relaxed, programs have adapted to embrace a variety of classroom modalities with lessons and activities tailored to connect with learners at their point of access.
In order to monitor our programs' strategic utilization of various distance education applications, we continue to require prior approval via Proxy Hour Request Forms. The forms track audience, alignment to standards, reports available to monitor proxy hours, and proxy hour type, including clock time, student mastery, and teacher verification. For PY 2021, results of these tracking tools indicate that on average across the state, there is a marked increase in the use of distance education platforms for ABE learners. Also, there is an upward trend in the use of assignments and teacher verification models for distance instruction, which greatly lends itself to a more hands-on integration of technology in classroom instruction through extension activities based on the transference of digital literacy skills.
Programs are finding success in retaining students through asynchronous classes, many of which can supplement instruction leading into a new managed enrollment period. Also, learner persistence is augmented online, as trends indicate that learners increasingly favor remote access to programs for high school diploma options, such as GED® and the National External Diploma Program.
Performance Data Analysis
All WIOA programs are measured on several core indicators of performance. The information that follows demonstrates the performance of Maryland’s Title II programs on these core indicators.
Employment Rate/Median Earnings
Maryland’s Title II employment rate 2nd quarter after exit for all Periods of Participation was 33.80% in PY21. The Title II employment rate 4th quarter after exit for all Periods of Participation was 35.99% in PY21. Median earnings 2nd quarter after exit for all Periods of Participation was $5,525.00.
Measurable Skill Gains
Considerable changes in enrollment trends, course delivery types, and remote proctoring continued in PY21. While MSG attainment is not yet as high as Maryland would like, PY21 saw considerable growth in this area due to increasing enrollment and the return to in-person assessment.
After showing a noticeable decline in enrollment from PY19, enrollment from PY20 to PY21 showed double-digit percentage increases. ABE enrollment increased year-over-year by 20.50%, ESL by 24.18%, and overall enrollment by 27.84%. The ESL enrollment increase was especially heartening, as it saw a significant decrease during the pandemic. Despite the impressive one-year gains, enrollment is still below pre-pandemic levels, with a decrease of 24.46% in overall enrollment when compared to PY19 levels (Overall PY19 enrollment was 21,473). Another bright spot in enrollment trends is the average attendance rate. Average attendance hours per participant saw an increase this year at 91.99 hours on average, an increase of 3.33 hours per participant over PY20.
In PY21, 5,808 out of 16,985 Periods of Participation saw a Measurable Skill Gain, resulting in a 34.19% MSG rate. This was below the negotiated level of performance of 43%, but it was an increase of 13.27 percentage points over PY20 performance. While enrollment is still lower than the pre-pandemic level in PY19, this MSG rate does exceed the 28.64% MSG rate set in PY19.
For high school diploma attainment, completion levels were on par with pre-pandemic years. A total of 417 participants earned a secondary school diploma in PY21, compared to only 230 in PY20 and 426 in PY19. Of the 417 completers in PY21, 78 were with the National External Diploma Program and the remaining 339 were through the GED Tests
Credential Attainment
The credential attainment rate for all Periods of Participation was 26.98% in PY21. This lags the negotiated target of 37%. However, this result is considerably higher than in previous years. Maryland credits increased data training on the importance of this metric and how to properly capture and report it in our data system in making great improvements in this level. With the renewal of Maryland’s license with LiteracyPro’s LACES system for a new five-year contract, training on utilizing the data system to its full potential to benefit the reporting of all metrics will continue in earnest.
Integration with One-stop Partners
Local representation on workforce development boards and committees continues to provide an effective means to ensure alignment and provide opportunities to develop resources to mitigate barriers and assist common customers to meet education and career goals.
As directed by the State, local plans address the implementation of WIOA required activities, including representation on the local workforce development board, career pathways, assessment practices, and data sharing for co-enrolled participants. The adult education local programs provide input for local workforce plans, MOUs, and Resource Sharing Agreements with WIOA partners.
Beginning in PY 20, local adult education programs negotiated infrastructure costs with WIOA partners based for the most part on use of square footage in the American Job Centers. This seems to be working effectively without a of need for intervention by the State. Previously, infrastructure costs had been negotiated almost exclusively through the State Adult Education Office.
Although some programs are co-located in the American Job Centers, onsite co-location is not always feasible. The AJCs are strictly daytime operations, which is unworkable for adult education programs. However, adult education staff regularly participate in orientation/information sessions providing a seamless “no wrong door” model and reducing co-enrollment barriers. Where possible, programs participate in joint intake activities including basic skills assessment, and assign specific staff to facilitate referrals between agencies. Staff are cross trained to understand eligibility requirements and identify students who are ready to benefit from referrals. Programs have begun to implement shared referral forms and community service data bases to streamline the intake processes and follow participant progress toward goals.
For the greater part of PY21 local area partners continued to meet remotely. During periods of high infection, Job Centers were closed, and online services were available only by appointment. Customers without computer access or the ability to meet during daytime hours were limited in their ability to participate. The many closures and higher than usual staff turnover also slowed referrals and collaboration between partners agencies.
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education
IELCE Funds and grants
In PY 2020, the Adult Education and Family Literacy services team released a competitive grant application for IELCE/IET to all local providers in the State. Twelve programs applied and were awarded WIOA 243 funds to implement IELCE, IET, and IET Bridge programs.
Training activity
Due to residual effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, local programs continued to encounter issues in providing the Integrated Education and Training (IET) component of the program, primarily due to lack of access to in-person training. Shortages of training staff were common. Trainings that were offered had few available slots for IELCE students. Offerings that could adapt to a virtual and simulated format were more successful.
Many providers are challenged to fulfill the requirement to offer IET in combination with IELCE. The State has approved a more flexible interpretation of the 'in -combination' requirement. A participant may attend IELCE and begin the IET the following session. This has allowed participants with job and family responsibilities a more workable schedule.
IELCE Section 243(c)(1)
Facilitating partnerships continue to be a sticking point for many IELCE providers. This was further exacerbated by pandemic closures. The State plans to provide technical assistance to meet this need in PY 22. Grantees are encouraged to seek employer input on curriculum, occupational information, and workplace culture. Some have been successful in enlisting support to facilitate mock interviews and provide internships or externships for program participants. Programs are also encouraged to partner with the AJC to provide barrier removal and access to in-demand employment opportunities. The state is making efforts to provide training on how to develop successful partnerships in order to strengthen the adult education to workforce pipeline.
IELCE Section 243(c)(2)
Finding adequate numbers of participants to fill IETs has been difficult, particularly for more rural programs. Participant interests are diverse and often do not align with in-demand employment opportunities available in their area. Although some programs have had success using training programs outside of their local area, this is rarely possible in the more rural communities.
Program data indicates that IELCE participation declined slightly in PY21, dropping to 1,157 participants from the 1,372 participants in PY20. However, despite the smaller program size, Maryland saw the MSG rate for IELCE participants increase from 21.03% to 39.54%. Maryland credits this increase to increased awareness and professional development on the goals of IELCE programming with our local grantees, which in turn results in a better-informed student population in understanding their participation
Adult Education Standards
Maryland adopted the Career and College Readiness Standards for Adult Education to provide a consistent and shared expectation across all adult education programs of the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to provide a seamless transition into post-secondary education and the workforce and align with the K-12 Common Core State Standards implementation. The high school credentialing paths, the 2014 GED® test and NEDP®, are aligned with the College and Career Readiness Standards.
The online course, College and Career Readiness Standards for Adult Education, by The Center for Families Learning, has been a valuable resource for Instructional Specialists (IS) in promoting a better understanding of the standards and how to integrate them into the curriculum.
The ABE Instructional Framework developed and launched in PY 20 continues to provide a resource for instructional staff to better understand the skills assessed in TABE 11/12 and the CASAS GOALS series.
Maryland’s Digital Literacy Framework for Adult Learners (2020) and its accompanying Instructor Implementation Guide (2020), structure and inform technology instruction and digital integration for adult literacy and language acquisition across the State. The Framework) provides the scope and guidance to integrate the essential elements and resources of digital literacy and to evaluate learner outcomes within the existing legislation, standards, and frameworks of adult education. The Digital Literacy Framework Project II - Digital Literacy Framework Learning Modules guide learners through the contextualized components of each of the seven elements. The Learning Modules deliver novel strategies for integrating technology into curriculum across multiple modalities for learners to grow, personally and professionally, into adaptable, agile digital citizens. In PY 2021, the workgroups finalized the content for the online learning modules which are scheduled to be released in early PY 2022.
Programs for Corrections Education (AEFLA Section 225)
The Correctional Education (CE) program is housed in the Department of Labor. It provides educational opportunities to over 9,000 inmates with services offered at each Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS) State institution, the Patuxent Institution, and all pre-release units.
In Maryland, an offender is defined as an individual who has been committed by a judge to state prison and is in the custody of the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS).
DPSCS follows the rules established by the Association of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA) for use in its Performance-Based Measures System (PBMS). After the end of a fiscal year, a release cohort is created and processed against the Offender Case Management System (OCMS). Currently, the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services reports recidivism based on which inmates released from state custody return to sentenced state custody in either correctional or community supervision. The Department reports recidivism on a one-year timeframe, in keeping with state reporting requirements. The most recent report available measures recidivism between FY 2016-2019. In FY17, the recidivism rate for return to state custody in one year is 6.2%. This may be viewed as the most reliable baseline for Maryland’s recidivism trends. Subsequent cohorts are impacted by the COVID 19 pandemic’s disruption of normal criminal justice functions that impact measurable events. Because the pandemic may have delayed adjudication of recidivism activities or suppressed normal activity within the community, these years warrant a more longitudinal 5-year recidivism calculation to provide a more comprehensive measure of release outcomes over this time.
Within the FY 19 cohort, first year recidivism was largely in line with previous years and barely impacted by the pandemic. Record low numbers of individuals recidivated through the second-year post release with a 6.6% lower rate compared to the previous year. This roughly corresponds with the period between April 2020 and April 2021 and represents the largest single-year decline in three-year recidivism outcomes reported since 1990. It is possible, given the robust intake rates of FY 22 that some events occurring during this period may be pending final adjudication or were resolved without sentence to the state, underrepresenting the prevalence of new offences in this cohort. The large decrease in release cohort size, decrease of 22% from FY 19 to FY 22, is also a co-occurring difference beginning with the FY 19 cohort that is expected to continue for years with the multi-year trend in depressed intakes.