Responsive Programming Fund

Responsive Programming Fund project submissions:

• should meet training needs that are otherwise unavailable (or largely inaccessible) through existing programming.
• must be developed jointly with Labor and Management to qualify.
• can address training needs for members of the service/maintenance/LPN, professional or technical and RN bargaining units.

This training can only be provided free of charge to Training Fund eligible workers. Non-eligible workers (e.g., per diem employees) are welcome to participate, but will require separate funding to cover the full cost of participation.

Responsive Programming Fund proposals are reviewed twice a year. Submit your proposal by:

• February 1, for consideration at the April Training Fund Board of Trustees Meeting
• August 1, for consideration at the October Training Fund Board of Trustees Meeting.

Proposals may be fully approved for funding, conditionally approved with a request for clarifying information, or declined with suggestions for improvement and re-submission at a future date.

Labor/Management teams submit your idea to begin the process: Submit an idea form

We are here to support your project planning, and will follow up within a week to clarify and review the feasibility of your submission.

Funding availability varied by year, so detailed planning conversations with the Training Fund are important to ensure your project is appropriately implemented and scaled.

Submitted projects are assessed and scored based on the following criteria. Proposals with higher scores are more likely to be funded than those with lower scores when submissions exceed available resources.

1. Impact: Your idea’s potential to serve the greatest number of workers (scored 1 – 5: 1 = serving fewer workers, 5 = serving a high number of workers).
2. Relevance across the partnership: Your idea’s potential to meet an unmet training need across multiple Training Fund Employers (scored 1 – 5: 1 = relevant to a low number of employers, 5 = relevant to a high number of employers).
3. Cost: Your idea’s number of potential workers served vs. total cost (scored 1 – 5: 1 = higher cost per worker served, 5 = lower cost per worker served).
4. Diversity of offerings: Chosen projects should be balanced to serve a variety of job classes (scored 1 – 5: 1 = multiple offerings proposed to benefit the same job class, 5 = only one option proposed for the same job class).

There is no set requirement other than addressing an unmet training need that adds value to both the worker and the employer. Some examples of past and potential future Responsive Programming Fund projects include:

Past:

• Hiring a nationally recognized trainer to come to Seattle to deliver a two-day review course for the VIRR certification test (Vascular Interventional Radiography Registry). No review course for this difficult national exam existed on the West Coast.
  • The Training Fund paid for the trainer’s costs. Sixteen IR Techs from across the Training Fund participated free of charge in the two-day training.
• Having a local community college develop and offer a 10-week review course for surgical technicians to prepare for the national certification exam. No national exam review course for working surg techs previously existed–either locally or nationally.
  • Twenty-two surgical techs from across the Training Fund participated free of charge in the training.  

Future:

• Working with the community colleges to develop and offer a phlebotomy preceptor training course to build skills and confidence so existing staff can effectively precept new hires.
  • This would help address the hiring bottleneck created by the new MA-P law that took effect in July 2013 by supporting a higher quality employer attestation MA-P qualification process.
• Working with community colleges to develop and offer an acute-care nursing assistant course with clinicals hosted at a Training Fund employer.
  • This would help address the nursing assistant experience requirement that frequently prevents frontline service staff from successfully being hired into entry-level patient care roles at their hospitals.