BC’s LMDA Agreement

Delivery of the LMDA Agreement in British Columbia

Norma Strachan, CEO IAVEG Conference June 2014

BC:1996- 2008

Co-Management Agreement-resulted in a myriad of programs in every community

6 different federal programs4 different provincial programs

-confusing for clients to determine eligibility

2007- 2009

March 2007 – LMDA AnnouncedBC initially refused to engage in dialogue with service providers to discuss LMDA implementation, so ASPECT invited governments & NGO’s from:

AlbertaOntarioQuebec

2008-2011

Provincially led consultations for input toprogram design, resulting in

The Employment Program of BC-Forced partnerships of service providers within communities

-Reduced 10 separate employment models to 1 with a “menu of services”

-reduced number of total contracts from 400 contracts to 73

-Resulted in a single point of access for clients

-Managed by a complex Integrated Case Management database system.

2012-2014

Difficult Implementation• Forced partnerships of employment agencies

Integrated Case Management System • Performance-based payments system…

delayed• Inconsistent services for specialized

populations (immigrants, youth, women fleeing abuse, persons with disabilities

Partnerships & Networks

Post devolution:• National organizations, networking and

commonalities diminished;• Focus became provincial; coping with changes

and new models;• Few opportunities for sharing issues, solutions best practices.

Unique to BC

• While the LMDA is managed by the Ministry of Social Development,

• The LMA is managed by the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training

Federal Impacts

-Limited capacity of the federal government to manage contracts;-Increasing need for recognition for contributions to employment services; -Threatening a change in direction of devolution

Because they can……..

Pro’s of Devolution

• Provinces are more responsive, develop more appropriate labour market interventions specific to regional needs;

• Greater ability to dialogue, discuss, provide input about workforce development requirements;

Con’s of Devolution

-reduction in national networking opportunities-lack of a federal framework, vision-no coordinated approach for labour market mobility across provinces; -subject to the whim of the federal government.

A Critical Role for the Federal Government would be:

- Develop national and international policies that promote workforce development;-Develop an employment strategy for all Canadians;-Collaborate with the provinces to achieve mutual goals -Develop accountability measures for the provinces And MONITOR outcomes