Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Get Me to the Gray, presented by COJA Services Inc., is a podcast about the conversations we’re told we shouldn’t have. Hosted by journalist and author Paula Lehman-Ewing, the show brings people with fundamentally different ways of seeing the world into honest dialogue—where we name what divides us and keep talking anyway.
COJA Services Inc. works with mission-driven organizations and brands that are clear on their values but struggle to translate that clarity into public-facing language. We help teams align internal narratives, reduce confusion before it becomes mistrust, and translate complexity into public understanding without relying on scripts, rhetoric, or generic AI language that strips voice and judgment.
If you're in the greater Denver metro area, register for our LIVE events at tinyurl.com/COJAEvents
S2E1_Roger-Low_MAIN
Jason Masino: [00:00:00] Welcome to Get Me to the Gray, a podcast from COJA Services, where we explore complicated questions without assuming we'll arrive at a clean answer.
I'm Jason Masino, COJA's Director of Strategic Partnerships, hosting this special series, What's College For Now? We ask a lot of higher education. We want it to help people earn a living, think independently, participate in their communities, and build meaningful lives. Those expectations can reinforce each other, but they can also pull in different directions.
Colorado is currently working through some of those questions. House Bill 261317 created an advisory committee to develop a plan for bringing oversight of higher education and workforce development programs into closer alignment. That gives us an immediate reason to talk, but the question is bigger than one bill. Today, I'm joined by Roger Lowe, founder and CEO of the Colorado Equitable [00:01:00] Economic Mobility Initiative, or CEEMI. Roger launched CEEMI in 2021 after more than a decade working in public policy, including roles with U.S. Senator Michael Bennet and Colorado's Office of State Planning and Budgeting. His work focuses on economic mobility, workforce development, and using evidence to understand which programs actually improve people's lives.
Roger and CEEMI supported House Bill 261317, so I'm interested in understanding the case for change and where the difficult questions remain. Roger, thanks for being here.
Roger Low: Thanks for having me, Jason.
Jason Masino: So before we even, get into the bill, when you hear, "What's college for now?"
What's your initial response, gut reaction, intuitive, what have you?
Roger Low: Yeah. Well, I think, true to the name of your podcast Jason, there, there's not just one answer to that. Increasingly college [00:02:00] is diverse. I mean, it's not, just 18-year-olds anymore.
It's for a whole bunch of different learners, It's for people, high school students that are starting to do dual en- and concurrent enrollment, through traditional college students, all the way up to, you know, 40, 50, 60-year-olds that are trying to get a completely second career.
Um, people go to college for a wide range of different reasons. So there's not one answer to that. But what I think is true is we need to make sure that, that the college system and the higher ed system and the post-secondary system and the training system that we have empowers opportunity seekers and learners- With information and data so that they can choose what's best for them, right?
We know from polling that, something like 58%, I think of incoming college freshmen a couple years ago said that economic mobility and, finding a career with a good wage to allow them to thrive, um, and and earn a livable wage is the single most important reason that they're enrolling in college.
That's not everyone, but it's a majority. And so I do think based on just what the, the customers of higher education are telling us uh [00:03:00] Pathways and programs that lead to economic mobility and to a living wage is a really important primary goal of the system. It's not the only goal, but it's a major goal.
Jason Masino: So for people who haven't really been following, what problem is Colorado trying to solve through this House bill?
Roger Low: Colorado today looking for a path to a better job today chooses from among 472 schools, more than 300 apprenticeship programs, more than 4,500 eligible training programs, and nearly 10,000 degree options, all supported and governed by more than 20 divisions, offices, and units across seven different state entities.
So the abundance of options is not the problem. The problem is the absence of a coordinated, consistent mechanism to compare, coordinate, and align across those options.
And one of the primary problems is our system is so siloed and disjointed across these seven different, these 20 different divisions, offices, and units across seven different state entities, [00:04:00] that there really isn't-- there's no overarching comprehensive plan. There's no strate- single strategic plan.
There are multiple strategic plans across multiple different agencies. There are multiple measurements of success. There are multiple different data sources that have to be coordinated, and some folks have been doing awesome work trying to coordinate them but, as is natural in government, when you divide governance across so many different entities, there's also a little bit of sort of pushing and pulling and tug-of-war over data, over what the what right metric is, over the right strategic priorities.
, Colleges, high schools, students, training providers, um, apprenticeships, e- everyone that's sort of trying to work within the system, are all governed by multiple different state entities. And sometimes they get told directly contradictory information about what sort of rules they have to comply with. So House Bill 1317 builds on a lot of the, the work that Colorado has already done, right?
Colorado is already moving in this, this direction. There's this increasing understanding that K through 12, higher education, and [00:05:00] workforce development aren't three totally separate things. They're all one connected thing.
And we need a governance structure that reflects that. Other states have started to move in that direction. We can too. The House bill is a bipartisan House bill overwhelmingly supported by both parties, um, that creates this 27-member transition advisory committee that is tasked with making recommendations to the next legislature on how to create a more integrated, streamlined state governance structure.
And so , that, transition advisory committee or TAC is meeting now. I'm one of the 27 members, and we're taking a look at how do we produce a final report that will move us in a slightly more integrated, direction while doing the change management well.
Jason Masino: In a lot of conversations that I'm having with different colleagues and that I'm hearing with other people some people are still a little confused about the, the merging of offices or what exactly the end result will look like. So [00:06:00] can you speak on that a little bit?
Roger Low: We don't know yet for sure because the, the Transition Advisory Committee is still in the process of making its final report. We don't know exactly what divisions or offices will be combined in this new department. House Bill 1317 has a list of, has some entities that it directs this TAC to...
It says these need to move into a new department.
Jason Masino: Mm-hmm.
Roger Low: And there's a whole bunch of other entities that are in a maybe category, where maybe they'll move and maybe they won't. So we're taking a look at that. It, it builds on top of the existing structure, right?
It's not going to eliminate the Colorado Department of Education. It's not gonna eliminate the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment- which have very important separate functions, right? What the, the House bill does say should move is, for instance, WIOA, the Workforce Innovation Opportunity Act, right? It's the flagship federal law , that governs workforce development and job training. Right now, the, the key functions of WIOA are split across multiple different state agencies, right?
You've got some parts of it are administered by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment. There are other parts of it that are administered by the Colorado Department of Education. And still [00:07:00] other, important functions related to WIOA are governed by the Colorado Department of Higher Education.
And so, you know, like other states before us, , Virginia and Missouri are two examples of states that have moved in this direction.
We've been trying to sort of, uh, move toward a more integrated approach over the last decade and we've made some real progress. But I think one of the things that's repeatedly come up is when core things like how we define success, strategic planning resource allocation , how we're measuring student success, how we're measuring success for employers.
When those things are defined by completely different agency leadership, you can try to make sure that they're aligning and coordinating, and that gets you so far. But actually integrating those functions under one roof, under a unified vision by one executive director is really going to lead, in my view, and in the view of the people that have set this process in motion over the last two years, to a more coherent statewide strategy, right?
It's not that this is going to completely eliminate different strategic plans that different- Right ... entities have, [00:08:00] but it will make it more unified. And we're giving a really long runway, right? I mean, this planning process started early in 2025, then it led to a big sort of detailed report mapping out how we might do this, being released in December last year.
And this new department, if it moves forward, would still require additional legislation to actually enable it next year- Mm-hmm ... and wouldn't actually turn its lights on until July- Yeah ... 2028. So there's a long runway to sort of plan- Yeah ... and be intentional about this and get this right.
But i-i-in my view, it's just, it's inherently better for all the different actors in this ecosystem to have one address, one executive director, one guiding leadership vision that primarily sort of governs post-secondary talent development, workforce training strategy, rather than a bunch of disparate visions and executive directors that all have to spend a lot of time coordinating with each other.
And by the way, there are a bunch of, back office functions like, you know, procurement or data systems or budgeting that I do think, [00:09:00] long term could be done much more efficiently if they're all being done under one roof rather than being coordinated across multiple different entities.
Jason Masino: Mm-hmm. Okay. Yeah, I definitely understand that theoretically, and as you know, I worked in a state agency. I worked at CDHE previously. I do understand that, greater effort to coordinate, uh, activities within and between different departments definitely will yield greater results. I also think more about the people who look to gain and are affected most by this, and that's the learners.
In a perfect world, if this goes well, what should feel different for someone who is trying to get an education, change their career, or improve their financial situation that is missing right now?
Roger Low: Yeah one big thing I would say is one front door and no dead ends, [00:10:00] right? This idea that, if I'm a learner navigating the system, wherever I am, I'm a high school student that's pursuing college credit for the first time. I'm, I'm a more traditional sort of, you know, 20-year-old student pursuing a BA or BS or an associate's degree, or maybe I'm pursuing a short-term credential, or I'm an apprentice, or I'm a single parent, really trying to sort of im-improve my earnings capacity and I need to upskill while I'm holding down a job, while I'm taking care of my family.
Or my job just got eliminated because of AI and I'm looking to reskill, right? Mm-hmm. Those are some wildly different use cases. And right now those people interact with very different parts of government, right? They touch very different parts of the system.
We need a more unified place where all those people can go, right? Just for instance, wouldn't it be great if we had like a sort of a digital front door in Colorado where any of those people could go to look at, okay, given where I live in the state and given my, you know, my resume, my background, my earnings potential, what are the right pathways for me?
Like, for someone that is comparable to me, what's gonna lead to a living wage and what's not, right? Right [00:11:00] now, um, we're terrible at giving people that information.
Jason Masino: Mm-hmm.
Roger Low: Um,
Jason Masino: Welcome to Get Me to the Gray, a podcast from COJA Services, where we explore complicated questions without assuming we'll arrive at a clean answer.
I'm Jason Masino, COJA's Director of Strategic Partnerships, hosting this special series, What's College For Now? We ask a lot of, we ask a lot of higher education. We want it to help people earn a living, think independently, participate in their communities, and build meaningful lives. Those expectations can reinforce each other, but they can also pull in different directions.
Colorado is currently working through some of those questions. House Bill 261317 created an advisory committee to develop a plan for bringing oversight of higher education and workforce development programs into closer alignment. That gives us an immediate reason to talk, but the question is bigger than one [00:12:00] bill.
Roger Low: right? For everyone that isn't well-served by a BA, who's not, you know, getting a, a degree and not having to go into massive crushing amounts of debt to do it, and then is able to, to earn a good wage.
For, for that clear minority of people, the system's working reasonably well. For everyone else,
they, they need
better visibility on what short-term certificates or credentials or apprenticeships or work-based learning or pathways are going to lead to a living wage, and they don't have it right now. And the, the fragmentation of the system makes that a lot more challenging because they have to go to multiple different pathways.
There's a bunch of different federal, state, and local funding that's all patchworked together. There's no unified sort of coherent vision for how those all knit together to, to better improve outcomes for the 75% out there that aren't being well-served by the current system.
And there's a lack of sort of an agreed upon metric or sort of front door where people can go to measure what's going to understand what's gonna work for them. So it's not that creating this new structure is gonna solve everything.
Jason Masino: Mm-hmm.
Roger Low: And there's other things we could do to move in [00:13:00] this direction short of creating , the integrated structure, right?
Like, th-this is neither necessary nor sufficient- Mm-hmm ... to solve all these problems. It is, however, I think, a clear step in the right direction if what you're trying to do is set one front door with no dead ends. One other point, when federal policy shifts, like for instance it did with the passage of H.R.1, the so-called, One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which has a lot of very problematic provisions in it across different areas.
It also affects higher education. Right now the system is scrambling to deal with those changes. And again, you've got like six or seven different state systems that are all kind of trying to figure out. And they're talking to each other. But again, learners in Colorado are suffering because there's not one coherent sort of unified strategy in Colorado for how we respond to massive federal changes in policy, or how we respond to a major sea change like AI, right?
Mm-hmm. There's seven different strategies. Learners would be better served by one strategy, one set of stakeholder, one, you know, sort of coherent vision for how we better get data on what is really working well for people [00:14:00] rather than seven different agencies trying to collect that data and coordinate amongst each other.
So in terms of building a system that's more adaptive, that's more nimble, that's more responsive to federal change or external, technological change, and critically a system that's more transparent, all those things are gonna be better enabled by a more integrated structure.
Jason Masino: So it sounds like, um, in terms of those, uh, economic mobility goals, that this can be something that alleviates that pressure.
Roger Low: That, that's certainly the hope. And Jason, l- I'll add one other, one other quick point on this, because your question is centered on exactly the right question, which is how is this gonna help learners, right?
Jason Masino: Mm-hmm.
Roger Low: I mean, there's no, like, organized lobby to represent them, right?
However, a lot of the different groups that currently benefit from or at least understand the current structure, those folks are very organized. Everyone in this reform effort has been talking about this, this so-called spaghetti chart.
There's a great visual in the report the governor's task force put [00:15:00] out last December that sort of shows the spaghetti chart. I mean, suffice to say, it looks like, uh, someone just hurled a mass of spaghetti at a wall, right?
Mm-hmm. That's the, what this tangle of different programs and divisions and offices that reports up through seven different departments looks like. It's not particularly well-coordinated. Um, a lot of the individual offices or divisions within the spaghetti chart are nervous about change, and I totally get that.
I mean, that's reasonable. Change is always a little bit messy, and it's hard to do perfectly, so it's reasonable that folks are, have some anxiety about how the structure's gonna change. But I'm, I am a little worried that in any reform effort, it's the sort of the incumbent folks that are nervous about change, their voices are quite loud, and there's not a lobby out there for the people that I think would be much better served by changing the status quo.
Jason Masino: While we all know, especially in today's world, how helping people earn a living is very important where does [00:16:00] that goal of economic mobility fit in education's other purposes, including intellectual development, civic participation, independence, or simply understanding the world?
And I ask you because you have experience working with a variety of different players, um, such as people in legislation, people on the workforce side, learners. Just as we're talking about this, I'm thinking about like, yeah, there are those people who are very prepared to deal with this type of system.
But what if there is someone who maybe economic mobility is low on their list and they want to, pursue higher education more on the intellectual development, uh, side of things and don't necessarily need to tap into the economic side. Will this, you know, mean anything for [00:17:00] them? Will they, um, have services thrown at them that they won't need?
Or will they just kind of just not have to use certain parts of this new system that's created?
Roger Low: I think that a lot of people are asking that question, and it's like a really important question.
But the first thing I want to say is this effort toward an integrated department it says absolutely nothing about somehow devaluing or under-prioritizing other important parts of the higher education system that aren't necessarily primarily about economic mobility, right?
That's a worthy debate to have. Like I think people can say, "Well, we need to focus the system more on economic mobility," or, "We need to balance it with more traditional liberal arts or civic engagement," that sort of thing. And either of those is a totally valid view, by the way.
And which-whichever way your view skews on that, I think you'll be better served by like a more sort of integrated governance structure that is looking at the system holistically rather than piecemeal. In some ways I do think it's a red herring or a false dichotomy, right?
Most people that are really knowledgeable and thoughtful about this issue aren't [00:18:00] suggesting that we should only be funding sort of things that are, that, that have economic mobility. I think the argument that I think is very strong is students should better understand What pathways are gonna lead to what?
But let's have more data about what's actually effective. And then yes, we-- in terms of if for, for funders out there, for the government in terms of, taxpayers, let's at least have an informed debate about like what things are going to lead to a strong economic ROI.
And then things that might not, but are really, really important socially and we still wanna support, right? Part of the problem is , without more transparent data that primarily students and learners, but also employers, policymakers, funders, higher education institutions, workforce centers, like all those different constituencies need access to that.
Without like clear, transparent outcomes data, it's really hard to have an informed conversation about that. And one other really important point that I think also points to the, false dichotomy aspect of this, like if you look at what employers are [00:19:00] saying that , they most need from our higher education system, it's actually less focused on hard skills than you'd think, and it's more focused on so-called durable skills, right?
Jason Masino: Mm-hmm.
Roger Low: Things like, the ability to manage conflict effectively or critical thinking skills, right? The ability to work collaboratively with others. The ability to think creatively. Like these are durable skills, and If you really unpack what is valuable about a liberal arts degree, those durable skills are some of the most important components of it.
And so having a system that is clear-eyed about the importance of durable skills is going to help us make sure that folks that maybe pursue other alternative post-secondary options that aren't a traditional liberal arts degree, are still given programs that, the data shows are going to get them where they wanna go, and are going to have the kind of durable skills that are exactly the kind of things that align with what you're talking about, right?
Jason Masino: Mm-hmm ...
Roger Low: no one is suggesting we shouldn't fund those things. Yeah. In fact, I think people that actually understand, like what is going to lead to a good job with a good wage, understand that like those durable skills are really [00:20:00] important.
Jason Masino: I think what you're describing are just transferable skills- Yes ... and how they can apply to different settings. And I also really love that you tie things back to data and outcomes. My next question was about your work and how it emphasizes evidence and outcomes.
And looking to the future, what would convince you and others working kind of behind the scenes on this, that this transition is moving towards success? And what would make you question the direction?
Roger Low: That's a great question. It's really easy for government to fall in the trap of measuring inputs or outputs. So an input is like how many people are enrolling in the program. An output is how many people are completing like a specific program, right?
Those can be useful to measure, but particularly when you're thinking about like a [00:21:00] workforce development or job training or post-secondary system, those probably aren't the most important things to measure. The most important things to measure is what is actually happening to the learners when they get through that system.
The Federal Reserve just put out a report looking at Colorado and the immediate surrounding states literally like in, in the last 10 days. And one of the things they found is one of the most important factors dragging down economic growth right now is actually a shortage of skilled labor.
Despite the fact that there's plenty of people looking for work, there's continues to be this misalignment where a lot of The skills that, cutting edge employers, that are in a position to offer good jobs with good wages are most looking for, there's a mismatch between that, that skill set and what they're actually finding in Colorado's labor force, right? And that actually is a major economic challenge for the state right now, according to the Federal Reserve. So I'm interested in, measuring how a system better fills that skilled labor gap. I'm interested in looking at, particularly in the age of AI, where our [00:22:00] workforce needs are changing very rapidly, like what credentials are measurably based on helping people.
And so we need to have much better data for them on what is actually gonna lead to a good career in 2026.
And similarly, someone whose job is eliminated 'cause of AI, we don't have good information for them about what they should go do next, and we need that. Mm-hmm.
So, we should be holding the system accountable based on the outcomes that it's producing. Again, I don't wanna suggest that, like, an integrated unified department is a panacea for that. It's absolutely not. But it is, I can tell you having worked , in Colorado now for five years trying to solve this problem, it is greatly exacerbated by the sort of the seven-headed Hydra monster structure- Yeah
of, of the state, of our state governance.
Jason Masino: Okay. So I do want to , bring the conversation back to some of those central questions I asked in the beginning. And in thinking about some of those, one that [00:23:00] comes to mind is when we think about having a more connected system, what must Colorado be careful not to lose as it builds a more connected system?
Roger Low: Look, of course we need to be intentional and thoughtful about this. It's one of the reasons that we're doing this really long runway I mentioned earlier of like not trying to go through the integrated department earlier than July 2028.
The overall governance structure in my view, kinda, kinda sucks. But underneath that- Uh-huh . There's a lot of great work. I mean, we have some wonderful four-year colleges. We have some wonderful community colleges. We have some great training programs.
We have some great apprenticeships. No one is suggesting throwing those things out. Um, uh, what we need is a system that's going to do a better job of shining a light and directing sort of limited resources for those apprenticeship, work-based learning opportunities, uh, dual and concurrent enrollment programs and short-term credentials and training providers and degrees that [00:24:00] have the, the best evidence of success.
So if anything, we want a system that's going to do a better job of like focusing on the things that are working well and figuring out how we scale those things and how we unlock more outcomes data so that we can find more and more of those things in Colorado. There's a lot of great people in the system
we don't wanna, lose those people. We just wanna organize them into a structure that's coherent, and that needs to be done incredibly thoughtfully, right? Change management has to be done really intentionally and well, and I do think this, this sort of, this massive s- you know, very stakeholder-intensive process that, that is moving forward over the course of multiple very, very deep dive meetings this transition advisory committee is aimed at making sure that we collect that feedback and are intentional about that, and that when we start moving divisions and offices under one roof, that we do that with a lot of intentionality and in a way that where we don't lose really, really valuable expertise.
That's very important.
Jason Masino: All right. So before we wrap up, where would you point someone who [00:25:00] wants to understand your work or explore these questions further, particularly some of these ideas that you threw out towards the end of our conversation?
Roger Low: Well, you can certainly go to CEMI's website, um, which is, uh, CEMI, that's C-E-E-M-I.org, and, uh, and read more about us there.
Landon Mascarenas and I wrote a, co-wrote a piece in Work Shift a year ago that sort of focused on a lot of the different things in Colorado that the community college system or that other aspects of our workforce system are doing right now.
Very briefly, CEMI is partnering with the Colorado Evaluation Action Lab at the University of Denver on a demonstration project we call Colorado WORK, the Colorado Wage Opportunity Results Coalition, which is a data dashboard for the first time is unlocking pre and post earnings outcomes for a growing cohort of Colorado training providers.
We don't think Colorado WORK is like the solution for the entire system, but we think it like points to what a sort of a, a user-friendly intuitive dashboard might look like. And it points to the fact that there are no legal, [00:26:00] bureaucratic, technological or political barriers that make it impossible to connect that data in a way that is understandable for training for training providers, policymakers, and most importantly, learners.
You know, there's gonna be a new governor coming in and a new legislature that are gonna be looking at this. So by all means, like for folks that are really interested in this process, I think there'll be multiple different opportunities to to provide input about like what we need to do more of, do less of, do better, do differently.
Um, and I think people should, should make their voices heard.
Jason Masino: Roger, thanks so much for taking the time to to work through this with me. I am leaving with a lot of different things still in my mind. Um, you reiterated a lot of uncertainty with AI, with data still needing to be collected, with things constantly [00:27:00] changing, and I, um, really appreciated the fact that we're ending on a note that is not so definitive.
So that's where we'll leave it today in The Gray. We don't have to settle the purpose of college in one conversation, but we can be more thoughtful about the expectations we bring to it and whose experiences shape the answer. We'll include links to Roger's work at CMIE and the official House Bill 26-1317 information in the episode notes.
You can also find the other conversation in What's College For Now through COJA's Get Me to the Gray page, where we're exploring this question from different perspectives. You don't need to leave agreeing with everything you heard. Maybe your next step is to read more, ask a question, or talk with someone whose experience of education is different from yours.
I'm Jason Messino. Thanks for listening to Get Me to the Gray.