2.6 One-Stop Delivery System Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs)

2.6.2 One-Stop Infrastructure Funding

Effective date: August 1, 2020

All one-stop partner programs must contribute to the infrastructure costs of comprehensive Job Centers based on their proportionate use of the one-stop delivery system and relative benefit received.¹ In affiliate Job Centers, only the one-stop partners participating in the affiliate Job Center must contribute to the infrastructure costs for that Job Center.² When two or more entities receive funding to carry out a required program in the local area, each entity must contribute to infrastructure costs, including costs at an affiliate Job Center.³

NOTE: Native American programs authorized under WIOA Sec. 166 are not required to contribute to Job Center infrastructure costs. Any agreement to contribute, or not contribute, must be documented in the MOU. The lack of agreement on infrastructure costs with Native American programs does not trigger the State Funding Mechanism (SFM) for the local area, and Native American programs are not subject to the SFM if it is triggered.⁴

The term "infrastructure funding," used with respect to a Job Center, means the non-personnel costs that are necessary for the general operation of the Job Center.⁵ Line items that fall into this category may include:

• Rent – The costs for usage (lease) of the facility, or portion of the facility, in question. This should not include any other line items (i.e., utilities or maintenance) unless they are included in the lease.
• Maintenance – The costs to maintain the physical structure of the facility, including janitorial services, lawn care, and snow removal.
• Utilities – The costs for general services to the facility in question, such as electricity, gas, water and sewage, but not including internet access.
• Equipment⁶ – The costs for equipment used to facilitate access to the one-stop center, including, but not limited to, assessment-related and assistive technology for individuals with disabilities.
• Common Identifier Costs – The costs for signage, outreach, and other identification for the one-stop center.
• Technology – The costs for technology to facilitate access to the one-stop center (i.e., internet access), including, but not limited to, technology used for the center's planning and outreach activities. This includes assistive technology to ensure meaningful access for individuals with disabilities.
• Supplies⁷ — The costs for items as defined in Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR 200.94, used to support the general operation of the one-stop center.⁸

It is not necessary to identify in the MOU shared costs that are directly cost-allocated through an individual partner's lease agreement with the lessor (i.e., costs for Resource Room space, shared conference rooms, bathrooms, and hallways that are cost-allocated to each partner through the lease agreements). This also applies to shared maintenance, utility, and/or supply costs that are cost-allocated by the landlord through the individual lease agreements. In this case this should be clearly documented in the Infrastructure Funding Agreement (IFA).

Partners must negotiate the extent of infrastructure costs. In-kind contributions are allowable; however, partners must agree that the in-kind contribution is required in the Job Center and is an acceptable form of cost contribution among the partners.

The local WDB, CEOs, and Job Center partners in a local area may fund the costs of Job Center infrastructure through:

• The Local Funding Mechanism (LFM) or
• The State Funding Mechanism (SFM).⁹

Local Funding Mechanism (LFM)

Local WDBs must attempt to engage partners in good-faith negotiations using locally identified costs and locally determined cost allocation methodologies agreed upon by the local WDB, CEOs, and one-stop delivery system partners.¹⁰ These costs and cost allocation methodologies comprise the Local Funding Mechanism (LFM).

State Funding Mechanism (SFM)

In cases when local negotiations related to the funding of one-stop infrastructure cannot be successfully completed within the timeframes established in DWD-DET's annual MOU guidance, the local WDB must notify DWD-DET of the failed negotiations, which will trigger application of the State Funding Mechanism (SFM). The SFM may be triggered in any case where one or more required partners fail to reach consensus related to infrastructure costs.¹¹ Failure to reach consensus on additional costs does not trigger the SFM.¹² Failure to reach consensus on infrastructure costs with additional non-required partners does not trigger the SFM.¹³

The SFM looks at the covered portion of funding for a fiscal year for a program that is a required partner. In local areas where the SFM is applied, the covered portions of funding for a fiscal year shall be provided to DWD-DET from the required partner programs to assist in paying the costs of infrastructure of Job Centers in those local areas of the state not adequately funded under the local funding mechanism.

A request to invoke the SFM must be submitted by the local WDB, in writing,¹⁴ to DETWIOA@dwd.wisconsin.gov. This request must include:

1. a description of the good-faith negotiations that occurred at the local level;
2. a copy of, or link to, the WIOA Local Plan;
3. a description of the cost allocation methodology or methodologies proposed by the partners to be used in determining the proportionate share;
4. the proposed amounts or budget to fund infrastructure costs and the amount of partner funds included;
5. the type of funds (cash, non-cash, and third-party in-kind contributions) available;
6. any proposed or agreed upon one-stop center or system budget; and
7. any partially agreed upon, proposed, or draft Infrastructure Funding Agreements (IFAs).¹⁵

Once a request is received, DWD-DET will:

1. Determine the infrastructure budget(s).
   
   1. If a budget was agreed upon by the one-stop partners during local negotiations, but consensus was not reached on individual programmatic contributions, then DWD-DET will use the locally determined budget.
   2. If consensus was not reach by local partners on an infrastructure budget, or DWD-DET determines that the agreed upon budget does not adequately meet the needs of the local area or does not reasonably work within the confines of the resources available to that local area, then DWD-DET must use a formula determined by the State WDB using the following factors:
      
      1. The number of one-stop centers in a local area;
      2. The total population served by such centers;
      3. The services provided by such centers; and
      4. Any factors relating to the operations of such centers in the local area that the State WDB determines are appropriate.¹⁶
   
   
2. Establish a cost allocation methodology to determine the distribution of infrastructure funding costs among local one-stop partners based on proportionate use of the one-stop center and relative benefit received. This cost allocation methodology must be consistent with the Federal Cost Principles of the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Part 200, all relevant federal regulations and statutes, further regulatory guidance, and the partner programs' authorizing laws and regulations. The following methodologies may be considered:
   
   1. Number of customers served;
   2. Square footage used;
   3. Full-time equivalent staff employed by each partner;
   4. Other variables as determined appropriate to the local area.¹⁷
   
   
3. Apply the established cost allocation methodology or methodologies to the infrastructure budget to determine partners' proportionate shares. In doing so, DWD-DET will consider the following:
   
   1. The costs of administration of the one-stop delivery system for purposes not specifically related to a one-stop center for each partner (i.e., costs associated with maintaining the Local WDB or information technology systems);
   2. Statutory requirements for each partner program;
   3. Each one-stop partner's ability to fulfill such requirements; and
   4. All other applicable legal requirements.¹⁸
   
   
4. Calculate the statewide caps to determine the maximum amounts that required partner programs could be required to contribute toward infrastructure funding in the local area. This is a requirement even when only one local area is unable to reach consensus on an IFA through the LFM, but the caps only restrict those infrastructure cost contributions required by one-stop partners within the local area(s) that has (or have) not reached consensus.
   
   NOTE: If multiple local areas do not reach consensus, then the total infrastructure funding costs that must be contributed by each required one-stop partner in all of the local areas that do not reach consensus is restricted by the program cap. For example, if three of eleven local areas do not reach consensus, then the required infrastructure funding contributions of each required one-stop partner under a particular program in these three areas would be added together, the sum of which could not exceed the calculated applicable program cap.
   
   To calculate the applicable program caps, DWD-DET will take the following steps:
   
   1. Apply a partner's individual applicable limiting percentage¹⁹ to the total federal funding which that program receives for the affected program year to reach the maximum potential cap (MPC).
      Limiting % total federal program funding = MPC
   2. Select a determining factor or factors that reasonably indicate the use of one-stop centers in the state. DWD-DET may use the WIOA formula allocation methodology, or other appropriate data, to determine this factor.
   3. Apply the determining factor(s) to all local areas across the state, and then determine the percentage of the factor(s) that is applicable to those areas that reached consensus, or the consensus areas' factor percentage.
   4. Apply the consensus areas' factor percentage to the MPC to find the consensus areas' portion of the MPC.
      Consensus areas' factor % x MPC = Consensus areas' portion of the MPC
   5. Subtract the amount equal to the consensus local areas' portion of the MPC from the MPC. The remaining amount is the applicable program cap for use in the local areas that have not reached consensus and are subject to the SFM.
      MPC – Consensus areas' portion of MPC = Applicable program cap for non-consensus area(s)
   
   
5. Assess the aggregate total of infrastructure contributions as it relates to the statewide cap to ensure that the funds required to be contributed by each partner program in the non-consensus local area(s), in aggregate, do not exceed the applicable program cap. See pages 24 and 25 in TEGL 17-16 to find each partner's individual applicable limiting percentage.
   
   1. If the aggregate total contributions are below the applicable program cap, then DWD will direct the one-stop partners to contribute what was determined to be their proportionate shares.
   2. If the aggregate total contributions exceed the cap, then DWD-DET may either:
      
      1. Inquire as to whether those local partner programs that have pushed the aggregate total contributions above the applicable program cap are willing to contribute beyond the applicable program in accordance with their proportionate share; or
      2. Allow the local WDB, one-stop partners, and CEO(s) to re-enter negotiations to reassess each one-stop partner's proportionate share and make adjustments and identify alternate sources of funding to make up the difference between the capped amount and the proportionate share of infrastructure funding on the one-stop partner; and/or % infrastructure costs to reflect the amounts of funds available without exceeding the applicable program cap level.
   
   
6. If re-negotiation fails under step 5 above, adjust the proportionate shares to ensure that the aggregate total contribution of a program's local one-stop partners under the SFM does not exceed the applicable program cap.

Once all SFM calculations are completed, DWD-DET will notify, in writing, all required partners of their required contribution. This notification will include documentation showing the calculations completed.

Appeals by One-Stop Delivery System Partners

Any one-stop delivery system partner may appeal the portion of infrastructure funds assigned to them under the SFM by following the appeals process outlined in the WIOA State Plan as follows:

1. Submit a written appeal to CWI within 15 calendar days of receiving a written determination notification;
   
   1. Explain why it believes the determination is contrary to the provision of WIOA section 102(b)(2)(D)(i)(IV).
2. CWI Chair will convene a special meeting of a designated committee to review and respond in writing to such an appeal within 30 calendar days of its receipt.
3. If the petitioning entity is denied, further appeal to the Secretary of Labor may occur if the entity alleges that the area meets the requirements of WIOA section 102(b)(2) or that the entity was not accorded procedural rights under the state appeal process described herein. All such appeals to the Secretary must be submitted within 15 calendar days of receipt of the notification of denial by the CWI on behalf of the Governor. The appealing entity must simultaneously notify the Governor and the CWI of such an appeal to the Secretary of Labor. The Secretary of Labor will make a final decision within 30 calendar days after the appeal is received. The Secretary of Labor will notify the Governor and the appellant in writing of the Secretary's decision. Pending the Secretary of Labor's decision, the original determination of infrastructure costs will be implemented.

• ¹ TEGL 17-16, p. 2-3 and p. 5-6
• ² TEGL 17-16, p. 6
• ³ TEGL 17-16, p. 6; TEGL 17-16, p. 5 defines "entity" as the grant recipient, administrative entity, or organization responsible for administering the funds of the specified program in the local area. It does not include the service providers that contract with, or are sub-recipients of, the local administrative entity. For programs that do not include a local administrative entity, the responsible state agency is the partner.
• ⁴ TEGL 17-16, p. 8
• ⁵ WIOA Sec. 121(h)(4), TEGL 17-16, p. 4
• ⁶ 2 CFR § 200.33
• ⁷ 2 CFR § 200.94
• ⁸ TEGL 17-16, p. 4
• ⁹ WIOA Sec. 121(h)
• ¹⁰ TEGL 17-16, p. 19
• ¹¹ TEGL 17-16, p. 20
• ¹² TEGL 17-16, p. 20
• ¹³ TEGL 17-16, p. 20
• ¹⁴ TEGL 17-16, p. 21
• ¹⁵ TEGL 17-16, p. 21
• ¹⁶ TEGL 17-16, p. 21-22
• ¹⁷ TEGL 17-16, p. 22
• ¹⁸ TEGL 17-16, p. 22
• ¹⁹ WIOA Sec. 121(h)(2)(D); 20 CFR § 678.738(c); 34 CFR § 361.738(c); 34 CFR § 463.738(c); TEGL 17-16, p. 24-25

2.6.3 Shared Delivery Costs / Additional Costs

Effective date: August 1, 2020

One-stop partners must share in additional costs, which must include applicable career services, and may include shared operating costs and shared services that are necessary for the general operation of the one-stop center.¹ The costs of shared career services may include initial intake, assessment of needs, appraisal of basic skills, identification of appropriate services to meet such needs, referrals to other one-stop partners, and business services, including the personnel expenses associated with delivering these services.

The cost of the competitive procurement for a one-stop operator, and the subsequent contract issued to a one-stop operator in each Job Center or one-stop delivery system, may be negotiated as a shared delivery cost with one-stop partners assuming one-stop partners come to consensus on the shared cost and cost-allocation methodology.

Resource room costs may be included in local negotiations as shared delivery costs. This includes the cost of integrated career service provision as well as personnel costs related to shared career services and/or reception services which may or may not be included in a one-stop operator contract. For staff who split their time between resource room/reception functions and other functions, reasonable measures should be used to split their staffing costs between the functions they perform.

Partners must negotiate the extent of sharing delivery/additional costs. In-kind contributions are allowable; however, partners must agree that the in-kind contribution is required in the Job Center and is an acceptable form of cost contribution among the partners.

• ¹ TEGL 17-16, p. 4
• ² These costs are identified as infrastructure costs and must be shared.

2.6.4 Local Negotiations

Effective date: August 1, 2020

Local WDBs and all WIOA-required one-stop partners must enter into good-faith negotiations to determine each provision in the MOU, including:

• Completion of the MOU template regarding the structure and integration of the one-stop delivery system in the local area;
• Costs necessary to support the infrastructure of the one-stop delivery system in the local area;
• Costs necessary to support the delivery of shared services in the local area; and
• The cost allocation methodology or methodologies by which shared costs will be split between partners to reflect proportionate use and relative benefit.

DWD-DET strongly recommends convening these negotiations in-person to facilitate effective communication between all parties. Local WDBs, CEOs, and/or partners may request assistance with the negotiation process from DWD-DET.

The method for determining the appropriate portion of funds and noncash resources to be provided by the one-stop delivery system partner for each program for a Job Center must be determined as part of the development of the MOU for the Job Center or one-stop delivery system and must be stated in the MOU. In cases where local negotiations stall or fail DWD-DET will implement the State Funding Mechanism (SFM) upon request.

Allocation Cost Pools

Local areas are empowered to select the cost sharing methodologies that best suit the needs of the participating one-stop partners. While some areas might be best served by a single cost-sharing method, others may benefit by allocating different types of costs using multiple methodologies. To simplify the cost-allocation process, DWD-DET recommends that partners bundle similar costs into cost pools and allocate the pools as a whole, as opposed to allocating each line item individually. For example, a WDB may choose to bundle all infrastructure costs into one cost pool that is allocated on a square-footage basis, while the remaining costs are pooled and allocated on a per-participant basis. This allows WDBs more flexibility in determining equitable cost allocations for costs driven by use, while correctly accounting for fixed facility costs. Acceptable cost allocation methodologies may include:

• Square footage;
• Full-time equivalent employee count (FTE);
• Customer count; and
• Customized/Manual allocations based on local negotiations.

2.6.5 Budget Development, Modification, and Periodic Reconciliation

Effective date: August 1, 2020

The local WDB must develop an annual budget for each certified Job Center within the WDA. Each budget should break down items into the cost allocation pools and expense types used during the negotiation process, with projected numbers.

The system of record for Job Center budgets is DWD-DET's Sharing of Local Area Resources (SOLAR). Annual budgets and any budget modifications during the MOU period must be entered into SOLAR. Budgets must also be reconciled against actual expenditures on, at minimum, a quarterly basis using SOLAR's periodic reconciliation feature.

2.6.6 Review and Approval Process

Effective date: August 1, 2020

In order for the local WDBs' MOU(s) to be considered complete and ready for review by DWD-DET, the following must be completed:

1. Successful negotiation of terms with all required and additional one-stop partners, or implementation of the State Funding Mechanism;
2. Completed documentation of the agreed upon terms using the MOU Template, Infrastructure Funding Agreement template, and Shared Delivery Cost Agreement template;
   and
3. Development of Job Center budgets in the SOLAR application.

These documents must be submitted to the assigned Local Program Liaison for DWD-DET review and approval.

Upon DWD-DET approval of the MOU documents, they will be returned to the local WDB to be routed for signatures by all relevant signatory authorities. The signatory authority for all DWD programs is the Deputy Secretary of the Department.

Completed and signed MOUs will be uploaded to the SOLAR application.