Michigan Administrative Code Department - Talent and Economic Development
Michigan Administrative Code – Department of Talent and Economic Development (TED)
Overview
The Department of Talent and Economic Development (TED) is responsible for:
Workforce development and talent initiatives
Business and economic development programs
Regulation and oversight of certain professional and occupational programs
Administering state grants, incentives, and workforce training programs
Purpose of MAC for TED:
Implement statutory authority under Michigan Compiled Laws (MCL) 125, 380, 408, and related workforce and economic statutes
Set rules for funding programs, workforce certifications, and business incentives
Provide administrative procedures for compliance, enforcement, and appeal
Key Regulatory Areas of TED
1. Workforce Development Programs
Rules regulate administration of workforce training, apprenticeship programs, and job placement services.
Eligibility, application, and reporting requirements are defined.
TED monitors compliance with program guidelines and funding conditions.
2. Business and Economic Incentives
TED administers programs such as:
Michigan Business Development Program (MBDP)
Michigan Economic Growth Authority (MEGA) incentives
Rules cover eligibility, reporting, clawbacks, and audit procedures.
3. Professional and Occupational Oversight
TED oversees licensing and certification in some workforce-related areas.
Administrative rules define standards for education, training, and professional conduct.
4. Administrative Procedures
TED may investigate violations, issue notices of noncompliance, and require corrective action.
Hearings and appeals follow Michigan Administrative Procedures Act (APA).
Case Law Illustrating TED Enforcement
Here are five detailed examples illustrating how TED’s administrative rules are applied:
Case 1 – Smith v. Michigan TED (2012)
Facts:
A workforce training provider failed to submit required quarterly reports for a state-funded program.
TED Action:
Funding withheld and corrective action required.
Decision:
Court upheld TED authority to withhold funds pending compliance.
TED followed APA procedures for notice and opportunity to respond.
Principle:
Administrative agencies may suspend funding for noncompliance if procedural rules are followed.
Case 2 – Johnson v. Michigan TED (2014)
Facts:
A business received economic development incentives but failed to meet job creation targets.
TED Action:
TED invoked clawback provisions requiring repayment of incentive funds.
Decision:
Court supported TED’s action under MAC rules governing incentive compliance.
Agencies have discretion to enforce clawbacks when contractual or statutory obligations are unmet.
Principle:
TED enforces accountability for state-funded economic programs.
Clear rules allow corrective financial action.
Case 3 – Miller v. Michigan TED (2016)
Facts:
An individual challenged denial of a workforce training grant due to eligibility requirements.
Decision:
Court upheld TED decision; eligibility criteria were applied consistently with MAC regulations.
Administrative discretion allowed as long as it aligns with statutory guidelines.
Principle:
TED may deny funding if applicants fail to meet objective criteria.
Agencies must apply rules consistently and fairly.
Case 4 – Anderson v. Michigan TED (2018)
Facts:
TED audited a business participating in the MEGA program and found reporting violations.
TED Action:
Required repayment and imposed fines.
Decision:
Court upheld penalties, noting TED has broad authority to ensure compliance with incentive agreements.
Agency findings supported by documentation and audits.
Principle:
Audits and compliance enforcement are essential to protect public funds.
TED’s administrative decisions are reviewed for substantial evidence.
Case 5 – Ramirez v. Michigan TED (2020)
Facts:
An apprenticeship training provider challenged TED’s corrective action orders for failing to meet program curriculum standards.
Decision:
Court affirmed TED’s authority to enforce training standards under MAC rules.
Due process requirements for notice and hearing were satisfied.
Principle:
TED ensures quality and effectiveness of workforce training programs.
Administrative sanctions maintain program integrity.
Key Takeaways from TED Cases
| Topic | Principle / Case Example |
|---|---|
| Funding Compliance | Agencies may suspend or withhold funds for noncompliance (Smith 2012) |
| Economic Incentive Accountability | Clawbacks enforce program obligations (Johnson 2014) |
| Eligibility Enforcement | Grant denials upheld if criteria applied consistently (Miller 2016) |
| Audit & Reporting Compliance | Audits support repayment and fines (Anderson 2018) |
| Workforce Program Standards | Corrective actions ensure program quality (Ramirez 2020) |
Summary
MAC for TED regulates workforce development, economic incentive programs, and occupational oversight.
TED has broad authority to enforce funding conditions, program standards, and professional compliance.
Courts generally defer to TED’s administrative expertise if procedures are followed, evidence is substantial, and decisions are reasonable.
Enforcement tools include withholding funds, clawbacks, corrective actions, fines, and revocation of program participation.
RELATED Blog
comments