Transcript SB 84 Report on AB 1808 County Plan Addendum Strategies

Senate Bill (SB)
84 Report
Ryan Fruchtenicht
Welfare to Work Division
California Department of Social Services
744 P Street, Sacramento CA 95826
“Who is this Guy?”
Ryan Fruchtenicht is an Associate Governmental Program Analyst (AGPA) in the
CalWORKs Division Employment Bureau of the California Department of Social
Services (CDSS). Ryan is a member of the Program Performance Oversight Unit
which helps to bring counties together to share ideas and review a site county’s
WTW program for promising practices and areas for improvement. Ryan is also
the author of the SB 84 report to the Legislature. He has worked for the
Employment Bureau for more than two and half years. Ryan earned his Bachelor
of Science degree in Psychology
from Oregon State University in
1998. He and his wife Karen
recently welcomed their baby
boy Tiernan Fruchtenicht into
their family. Guess which one is
Tiernan in this picture.
2
A Brief
History of The SB 84 Report
or
Finnigan’s Law: The farther away the
future is…the better it looks.
3
How did we get here?
Temporary Aid to
Needy Families (TANF)
Reauthorization ,
Deficit Reduction Act
(DRA) of 2005
Assembly Bill (AB) 1808
(Chapter 75, Statutes of
2006)
SB 84 (Chapter 177,
Statutes of 2007)
Reauthorization of
original TANF program
(1996)
California Legislature’s
response to TANF
Reauthorization
Follow-up to some of
the provisions in AB
1808
Signed by the President
on February 8, 2006
Signed by the Governor
on July 12, 2006
Signed by the Governor
on August 24, 2007
•Major changes to TANF •Provisions to help state •Report to the
program
increase WPR
Legislature the results
•Response to changes
of implementing
to TANF program
strategies to increase
•Attempt to avoid
WPR
penalties
4
TANF Reauthorization, a Closer Look
(Why would we want to do that!?)
• TANF Reauthorization had four major
impacts on the TANF program:
1. Recalibration of the caseload reduction credit (CRC).
2. Work verification plan (WVP) requirement.
3. Required that work activities be defined.
4. Newly identified work eligible individuals.
5
The CRC Change
• Caseload Reduction Credit (CRC) base year
changed from 1995 to 2005
50%
Projected All Families CRC for Federal Fiscal Year 2007
6
The WVP & Defining Work Activities
• Explain how states will verify that TANF recipients
are participating in activities for the required
number of hours
• Each state must submit clear definitions for WTW
activities
7
Newly Identified Work Eligible
Individuals!
• Adult (or minor child head-of-household)
receiving assistance under TANF or Separate State
Program
• Non-recipient parent living with a child receiving
assistance (child-only recipients)
• Work-eligible individuals that are in Separate
State Programs funded with state Maintenance of
Effort (MOE) dollars (two-parent recipients)
8
Work Participation Rate WPR Calculation
Old WPR Calculation
County X has 1,000 one-parent cases and 500 cases are fully participating:
500 ÷ 1,000 = 50% WPR
New WPR Calculation
County X has 1,000 one-parent cases and 500 cases are fully participating;
200 two-parent cases, 45 of which are fully participating; 150
sanctioned cases; 40 exempt cases; 35 Safety Net (child-only) cases:
545 ÷ 1,425 = 38% WPR
9
Penalties!
• Up to five percent reduction of the state’s federal
block grant
• The penalty could increase two percent per year up
to 21 percent
• State’s TANF MOE requirement would increase each
year of noncompliance
• FFY 2007 is the baseline that the penalties will be
assessed starting in FFY 2009
10
CalWORKs v. TANF
Farber’s Third Law: We are all going
down the same road…in different
directions.
11
CalWORKs v. TANF
• CalWORKs Hourly Requirements
• Single-Parent Family: 32 hours per week (20 hours per week
must be core activities)
• Two-Parent Family: 35 hours per week (20 hours per week
must be core activities)
• TANF Hourly Requirements
• Single-Parent Family: 30 hours per week (20 hours per week
must be core activities)
• Single-Parent w/ child under 6: 20 hours per week (20 hours
per week must be core activities)
• Two-Parent Family: 35 hours per week (30 hours per week
must be core activities)
12
Assembly Bill 1808
California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
Peers’s Law: The solution to a problem
changes the problem.
13
Assembly Bill 1808
California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
AB 1808 Policy Changes:
• Clarified shared penalties
• Required county plan
addendum
• Ended durational sanctions
• Required data master plan
and data publishing
• Required county peer
reviews
14
Assembly Bill 1808
California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
County Plan Addenda Requirements:
• Each county perform a comprehensive review of its
existing CalWORKs plan
• Include immediate and long-range actions to
improve WPR
15
Assembly Bill 1808
California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
County Plan Addenda Requirements:
• The addendum must address increased
participation in:
• Up-front engagement
• Reengaging noncompliant or sanctioned individuals
• Achieving full engagement
• Preventing families from going into sanction status
• Other strategies to increase WPR
16
Assembly Bill 1808
California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
County Plan Addenda Requirements:
• A description of anticipated outcomes
• A proposed plan to measure progress in achieving
the anticipated outcomes
• How counties will use the single allocation
• How they will work with community partners
17
AB 1808 Plan Addendum Certification
Process
• CDSS certified that each addendum complied with
state regulations and statute, and where
applicable, federal statute.
• Plan Addenda were received from December
2006 through July 2007.
• The last Addendum was certified in September
2007.
18
SB 84 (Chapter 177, Statutes of 2007)
Added Section 10534.5 to the W&I Code which
required CDSS to:
• Review the AB 1808 addenda to identify promising
practices for up-front and sanction reengagement
• Work with CWDA to gather information on
implementation and results of the strategies
• Gather information on the characteristics of timelimited families
19
SB 84 (Chapter 177, Statutes of 2007)
Added Section 10534.5 to the W&I Code which
required CDSS to:
• Work with CWDA to identify strategies used by
counties to encourage participation by time-limited
families
• Submit a Written Update due March 1, 2008
• Submit the Final Report due September 1, 2008
20
Finagle’s Laws of information:
1.The information you have is not what you want.
2. The information you want is not what you need.
3. The information you need is not what you can
obtain.
21
SB 84 Report Methodology
• CDSS in discussions with CWDA determined that it would
be best if counties identified which strategies are
promising practices.
• CDSS clarified with Legislature that time-limited means
Safety Net families.
• CDSS also determined that information on
implementation and results should also be requested for
the Safety Net strategies.
22
SB 84 Report Methodology
• CDSS developed a survey to collect preliminary
information for the written update.
• Did not ask for Safety Net characteristics at that time.
• CDSS developed a follow-up survey for up-to-date
information about the strategies.
23
SB 84 Report Methodology
• CDSS asked for information on Safety Net families at that
time.
• Required follow-up with counties for clarification on the
information provided by the counties.
24
SB 84 Findings
• What we know so far…
25
What is Up-front Engagement?
• Encouraging participation by an individual in the
CalWORKs program up front.
• Up-front engagement is the time an individual is
enrolled in WTW through the development of a WTW
plan.
• Develop an understanding of the individual’s needs,
wants, and possible barriers to employment.
26
What is Up-front Engagement?
• Activities: orientation, appraisal, job search and job
readiness, assessment, and the creation of a WTW
plan
• Applicants may volunteer to participate in the
activities.
27
Up-front Engagement
Voluntary Participation:
• Encourage voluntary participation by applicants
• Allows for completion of up-front activities by the time
the individual is determined eligible for cash aid and is
enrolled in the CalWORKs WTW program.
• Offer voluntary orientation and appraisal; some offer Job
Club also on a voluntary basis.
28
Up-front Engagement
Development of Specialized Units/Case Workers:
• Developed specialized units or caseworkers to manage
the up front engagement of individuals
• Developed an engagement team consisting of members
specializing in different aspects of up-front engagement
• Creates a single point of contact for applicants and
newly-approved recipients
29
Up-front Engagement
Co-location of Staff and Services:
• Relocated workers to a common location
• Co-located county eligibility workers and WTW staff with
behavioral health workers
30
Up-front Engagement
Recipient Appointment Reminders:
• Ensured that recipients are reminded of required
activities and are encourage to participate
• Case managers make two telephone contacts to remind
recipients of their scheduled activities and appointments
• Increased contact by telephone prior to orientation to
establish relationship
• All recipients leave an appointment with a written
reminder of their next required activity and a follow-up
call is made
31
Results of up-front Strategies
• Increased participation by individuals up-front and
long term
• Greatly reduced no-show rate for up-front activities
• A decline in up-front sanctions
• Individuals seem to be better informed of their rights
and responsibilities
32
Results of up-front Strategies
• Consistent enrollment in WTW activities
• Increases communication about and with recipients
• Faster referrals and less time between activities .
• Increased communication on shared recipient case
files
33
What is Sanction Reengagement?
• Encouraging an individual to again participate in the
CalWORKs program after he or she has been
sanctioned
• When a mandatory participant fails to comply with
program requirements the participant is sanctioned.
• The adult’s portion of the cash aid is subtracted
• Not eligible to receive supportive services.
34
What is Sanction Reengagement?
• Sanction period does not count against the 60-month
time limit
• Reengagement is when the individual enters into and
completes a curing plan
• Regardless of the reason for sanction these
individuals can be very difficult to engage
35
Sanction Reengagement
Home Visits or Offsite Meetings:
• Conduct home visits or meetings at a neutral location to
encourage sanctioned individuals to cure their sanctions.
• Sometimes visit as a team or one-on-one
• Contract with a case management agency to conduct
visits
• Social Workers visit all sanctioned or non-compliant
families
36
Sanction Reengagement
Intensive Outreach:
• Attempt more frequent and various types of
communication with sanctioned individuals to encourage
curing of sanctions.
• Make contact by phone to schedule curing appointment
• Send a sanction informing letters
• Meet with a team of workers
37
Sanction Reengagement
Specialized Unit/Caseworkers:
• Created specialized staff positions to directly manage the
sanctioned caseload
• Review all sanctioned cases
• Perform intensive outreach
• Held sanction curing orientations
• Focus on recently sanctioned individuals first; then longterm sanctioned
• Use multi-disciplinary teams to reengage
38
Sanction Reengagement
Reengage at Annual Redetermination
(RV)/Reapplication:
• Encourage the sanctioned individual to voluntarily meet
with employment workers to discuss curing sanctions
• Eligibility workers contact the WTW workers prior to the
individual’s visit
• Co-located an employment staff worker with the
eligibility staff workers
39
Results of Sanction Reengagement
Strategies
• Typically resulted in high reengagement rates
• Some smaller counties have reengaged all, or most of
their sanctioned cases
• Social Workers have reported success in determining
specific services to help individuals come into
compliance
• By using community partners some cost can be shared
40
Results of Sanction Reengagement
Strategies
• Increasing communication between CalWORKs
eligibility and employment staff
• Higher caseloads for non-sanction case workers
• Many recipients returned to sanction within a few
months
41
What is Safety Net Engagement?
• Encouraging participation by timed-out individuals
• Once an individual has received 60 months of
CalWORKs cash aid, he or she is discontinued from
aid
• These individuals are referred to as “timed out”
• Cash aid continues for eligible children
42
What is Safety Net Engagement?
• Safety Net cases are not required to participate
• Safety Net families are eligible for Food Stamps and
Medi-Cal
• Child care for up to 24 months if employed
• Counties can provide WTW services
• Supportive services are county option (not required)
43
Safety Net Engagement Strategies
Outreach/Marketing to Encourage Voluntary
Participation:
•Attempt to contact the timed-out individual to encourage
voluntary participation
•Discuss what services and supportive services are available
to them
•Invite them to a WTW orientation
•Invite timed-out individuals to job club
•Advertise open house events for Safety Net families
44
Safety Net Engagement Strategies
Administrative Review of Safety Net Caseload:
• Review Safety Net caseload to determine if working,
attending school, or in training
• Ensure they are receiving necessary supportive services
• Ensure that the individual’s level of participation is
reported correctly
• Encourage fully employed participants to leave aid and
receive job retention services to save time on their 60month clocks (pre Safety Net strategy)
45
Results of Safety Net Engagement
Strategies
• Increase in WPR of Safety Net caseload
• Permanent full-time positions
• Not employed enough hours to be considered fully
participating
• Small increase to overall WPR
46
Written Update is Published
• The Written Update was released to the
Legislature on July 18, 2008.
• It is posted on the internet at the following
address:
http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/cdssweb/entres/pdf/AB1808IncreasingWPR.pdf
47
What’s Next?
• Final Report
• Best Practices Website
• County Peer Reviews
48
Questions &
Comments?
49
Thank You for Coming!
Ryan Fruchtenicht
Analyst, Program Performance Oversight Unit
California Department of Social Services
744 P Street, Sacramento CA 95826
[email protected]
(916) 651-9958
50