Committee Hearing, November 16, 1998

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE JOINT COUNCIL COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES AND LAW & GOVERNMENT - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, November 16, 1998 10:15 a.m. - - - RESOLUTION NO. 960671 - A resolution calling for a full and comprehensive joint investigation by the Committees on Law & Government and on Health & Human Services into the exact ways in which the recently enacted so-called "welfare reform" legislation will impact the citizens of Philadelphia, and how the City can best exercise all powers that it may have in easing the burdens imposed on helpless citizens under the new law, including pressing for positive implementing legislation at the State level, and finding ways in which the City government, using subsidies that may be available under the new law, can provide jobs for welfare recipients at a living wage. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO, Co-Chair COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN, Co-Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I N D E X Rose Brandt, Executive Director . . . . . . . Mayor's Commission on Literacy 5 Joanne Weinberger, Executive Director . . . . 31 6 Center for Literacy 7 Wayne Branch, Vice President, Student Affairs 36 Community College of Philadelphia 8 Carol Groetzel, Executive Director. . . . . . 44 9 Women's Associations for Women's Alternatives 10 Hannah Oakman, Executive Director . . . . . . 62 Personal Empowerment Now 11 Edward A. Schwartz, President . . . . . . . . 71 12 Institute for the Study of Civic Values 13 Commissioner Joan Reeves. . . . . . . . . . . 98 Department of Human Services 14 Fred Dedrick, Director. . . . . . . . . . . . 100 15 Jobs Policy Network 16 Richard Weishaupt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Community Legal Services 17 Shelly Yanoff, Director . . . . . . . . . . . 113 18 Philadelphia Citizens for Children and Youth 19 Beth Tomlinson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 United Way of Southeastern Pennsylvania 20 Gloria Guard, People's Emergency Center . . . 130 21 Nateria Morrison, former welfare recipient 134 22 Barry Seymour, Assistant Executive Director 140 23 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission 24 Rose Evans, welfare mother, member of MOMS 148 3 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 (Index, cont'd.) John Dodds, Executive Director. . . . . . . . 154 Philadelphia Unemployment Project Rabbi Lina Zerbarini. . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Jewish Community Relations Council Leona Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Director, Employment Project Member, Union of the Homeless Maddie Humphrey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 Private Citizen Julio Paz y Mino, Program Director. . . . . . 177 Child Care Resources Developers of Southeastern Pennsylvania Paul Greenwald, Director. . . . . . . . . . . 180 Philadelphia Child Care Resource for West and Southwest Philadelphia Commissioner Estelle Richman. . . . . . . . . 181 Department of Public Health Mike Nardone, Deputy Managing Director. . . . 189 Special Needs Housing 4 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 P R O C E E D I N G S

The joint committees on Public Health & Human Services and the on Law & Government is now in session. This is a continuation of the recessed hearing that was held last week. The resolution calls for a full and comprehensive joint investigation by the Committees on Law & Government and on Health & Human Services into the exact ways in which the recently enacted so-called "welfare reform" legislation will impact the citizens of Philadelphia,. I want to call special attention to the words "exact ways." We would like to have very specific testimony in preference to generalized statements because what this committee hopes to do is be a continuous monitoring committee to make certain that no matter what happens, there are no 21 Philadelphians that are left without food, shelter, or the basic necessities of life. Before we proceed further, Councilman Ortiz has a letter that he wishes to read into the record. Council Ortiz. 5 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This a letter I wrote to Secretary Heller after her testimony and it says (reading): Please accept my gratitude for your appearance at our hearing on welfare reform last Tuesday. Your testimony greatly assisted us in understanding the State's view of the current status of the welfare reform process. As you know, this issue is multifaceted and complex, and notwithstanding your helpful testimony, there is still much that is unclear about what the City face on and after March the 3rd of next year. For this reason, my staff has prepared a list of basic questions enclosed with this letter, which we'd much appreciate your answering at your earliest convenience. Thank you for your cooperation. We're looking forward to hearing from you regarding the enclosed materials. I want to read the questions into the record so that we're very clear as to what are the answers that we're asking and seeking from the State. 6 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 How many slots are available for job preparation programs other than the State's Quick Attachment Program in Philadelphia? Number two, how many households statewide and in Philadelphia will reach the 24-month time limit on March 3, 1999? How much additional families will hit the deadline in April, May, June, July, August, September, and by December of '99? Are individuals who are not proficient in English required to conduct job searches? Does DPW have any programs specifically geared to serve non-English-speaking clients? Are any such programs being created? What can a person who has searched diligently for work but not found work do to avoid a cutoff of benefits after months? 19 Is the option given and the answers to 20 the above questions available to as many people 21 who need it, or is there a limited number of 22 spots? 23 Will the Department back a legislative 24 change or make available additional funds if it appears that not above slots under the above 7 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 program are available? Will the Department, if not enough slots are available, support a change in the law or applicable regulations that would continue benefits for the children of recipients who can't find work? What is the State doing to help ease the transportation problem concerning access to the work in the region for Philadelphia's welfare recipients? What provisions are being made to identify and help those who have special circumstances that prevents them from working 15 hours per week? For example, the homeless, those 16 with disabled children, kinship caregivers, 17 victims of domestic violence, etc.? 18 Does DPW plan to exempt any groups from 19 compliance with the work requirements set forth in 20 Act 35 and provide the number of people who have been provided exemptions to date broken down by category of exemption? What if an insufficient number of child care slots are available? Will exemptions given on that basis? 8 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 What else are you expecting of parents to do if he or she simply can't find anyone to take care of their children? We understand that there's a "Last Resort Program" being developed for persons unable to find work within months, and that involves 8 some kinds of employment with a nonprofit agency 9 with respect to that program. 10 Will guidelines be issued regarding the 11 kind of work that will be acceptable? What kind 12 of reporting from participating organizations will 13 be required? 14 What kind of financial aid will be 15 available to the institutions to defray the cost 16 of supervision, office space, equipment, other 17 overhead, and supplementary wages required under 18 the minimum wage law? 19 How will the recipients know which 20 agencies are eligible for this program? And what 21 kind of work will they be expected to do? Will it 22 be structured so as to allow the recipients to get 23 maximum earned income tax credit available under 24 the law?

And will they be covered under the Workman's Compensation law? 9 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 These are the questions that have been sent to the Secretary. Hopefully, she will answer these questions within the week so we can make it as part of our overall report.

Councilman Ortiz, I suggest that a copy of that letter be sent to the appropriate departments of City government so that we can determine to what extent the City government is seeking to get those answers from the State. We were told by the mayor that the City departments are working very closely with the State. And if the City departments have any recommendations to make for a modification or additional questions to be raised, we would be very appreciative. The first witnesses are going to be Mr. Morelli, Vice President of Institutional Advancement, from Peirce Junior College. Is he here? (Mr. Morelli is not present.)

Not here? The next witness will be Thomas Payne Cronin, President of District Council 47.

Mr. Cronin, we're 10 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 pleased you're here. Please come forward and bring anybody you wish to have join you. (Mr. Cronin comes forward.)

Good morning.

Good to see you. Please be good enough for the record to identify yourself and then proceed.

My name is Thomas Payne Cronin, President of AFSCME District Council 47. For the past year, advocates of the poor, disadvantaged, and dispossessed have been warned to watch the doomsday rhetoric. We have been admonished by the Ridge administration and others to be responsible with our comments and reasonable with our expectations regarding the March 1999 cutoff date for thousands of Philadelphia households receiving assistance. However, it is clear that any reasonable comments must fully go the distance in describing the potential disaster that Philadelphia could face in a few short months. The dimensions of the impending crisis are truly staggering. The population in Philadelphia on public assistance exceeds the total population of 11 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Scranton, Harrisburg, and Lancaster combined. The population in Philadelphia near or below the poverty line is approximately equal to that of the City of Pittsburgh. We have become a tale of two cities. One that could share the extravagant deal with the Kvaerner Company to create 950 high-paying jobs; and one that must worry about housing and medicine. One that could happily anticipate the next Republican National Convention; and one that must make impossible choices regarding their children. And one that could take great pride in the development of a new center celebrating the United States Constitution; and one so much captive of abject poverty that they cannot feel the majesty of the Constitution in any part of their lives,. AFSCME, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, of which District Council 47 is a part, is helping to lead the effort to cushion the effects of a dramatic and extreme welfare revisions collectively known as "welfare reform." Our 1.3 million members are, for the most part, professionals in government and 12 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 health care, and we have dedicated ourselves to making America's great urban centers prosper and reclaim the role they formerly played as the engine for national achievement. We are working in communities throughout the country to pass living wage legislation to help break the cycle of an elevated poverty that millions of Americans have had to exist in. Jobs without hope, meaning or a fair wage only break the spirit and plunder the dreams of children. However, it must be stated that we cannot allow the most vulnerable people in our society to be exploited by those who would attempt to destroy collective bargaining by pitting those on assistance against a unionized workforce. In the last century, J. Gould, the infamous robber baron, openly boasted that half of labor could be pitted against the other half at any time. Unscrupulous designs will not solve the problem but only serve to destroy confidence in our ability to deal with the pending crisis. The Ridge administration must be flexible. They must have requirements that are -- they have requirements that are among the most 13 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 severe in the country regarding how recipients of assistance can satisfy their obligations doomsday scenarios are not irresponsible in Philadelphia in November 1998; they are the most responsible way we have to remind State government of their financial and moral obligation to nearly 200,000 State residents. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Cronin?

Yes.

Mr. Ortiz.

Mr. Cronin, in terms of the plans that the City or the State may have for the welfare recipients as they are coming off welfare, have you been part of any conversations? Are you a part of any planning group that is working either with the City or with any State committee to see how we can integrate this workforce into the general workforce without pitting them against union labor and being used to replace union labor, as they have done in New York? 14 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Well, first of all, let me say that we've taken the position in the Philadelphia AFL-CIO, at the urging of District Council 47 that we develop a policy with respect to welfare reform. That policy has been developed and adopted by the Philadelphia Council AFL-CIO, and essentially, that policy states -- just to paraphrase it, we don't want the same thing to happen in Philadelphia that happened in New York where unions are pitted against the community and pitted against one another. That the position that organized labor should be taking is one that where welfare recipients are welcomed into the jobs, that they are covered -- and this is very important -- by collective bargaining agreements, that they are subject to OSHA laws and all other applicable sections of the collective bargaining agreements. In addition to that, that they should not be used for -- to have welfare recipients to supplant current workers in the City of Philadelphia. We've had meetings with the mayor. When I say "we," I mean AFSCME, District Council 33 and 47, along with our international, to stress 15 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 that position. The mayor has indicated that he agrees with what we're saying, what we're asking, and he doesn't want the same procedures to happen in Philadelphia that happened in New York. And that further, he said to us that he welcomed any ideas, that we could communicate those ideas to Donna Cooper of jobs that could be created within City government that would be new jobs, not the same types of jobs that our people are doing now. And District Council 47, as a matter of fact, has made several suggestions to the mayor and to Donna where new positions could be translated. As a matter of fact, Councilman, one of those new positions that we suggested would be in the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations where there's certainly, in a cosmopolitan city like we have, a need for additional people to do translating, whether in Spanish, Mung, and a whole variety of languages that we think are very important.

Thank you. Generally speaking, from what I've read in The New York Times and various magazines, the New York 16 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 experiment is looked upon as a forward-looking step. I take it from your statement that it's not. Could you be more specific as to the dangers that you think we ought to avoid here based upon your knowledge of the New York situation?

The New York Times made that statement?

I believe there was a news story in which what occurred in New York was regarded as a very forward-looking approach.

What are the positive aspects of welfare reform?

From everything that I hear from --

That may be have been because The New York Times may be interested in breaking the unions; I understand that. But I'd like to have your expert opinion.

The only thing that I can say is that everything that we hear from people in City Council in New York and everything that we hear from District Council 37, which is our counterpart in New York City, a whole variety of 17 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 services that they provide, is that the welfare system there is being used and welfare recipients are being used to supplant the current city workforce, which means cutting their wages, cutting their benefits, weakening, severely weakening the union, and in many case, essentially replacing entire groups of city employees with welfare recipients, not giving them the necessary training that they need, not giving them the necessary education. And the whole thing, in our opinion, in New York is a disaster, not to mention the tensions that have been exacerbated by the conflict between the community and the unions, and union on union. So if you want a police that divides people, if you want a policy that really is a cruel joke, you adopt the policy that they have in New York City. It's a disgrace.

Thank you. Councilwoman Tasco?

Thank you. What role -- how does all of that tie in with the civil service system in New York? I 18 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 mean, they are bringing on welfare recipients. Are they subjected to the civil service rules and regulations?

Not -- as far as I know, they are not. They've just essentially ignored the civil service system in New York. And, of course, the civil service system in New York, much like the civil service system in Philadelphia, where you have a commission, is political. So its appointees are there on behalf of the mayor. And if you have a mayor who's interested in not doing the right things, as my prejudices would indicate, then it's very easy to do that because your civil service system just acts as a rubber stamp for the mayor.

Is there any written analysis by your union of what's happening in New York, any documentation that we could secure?

Yes. I can certainly ask that. Our international union has done extensive research and has published articles on the system in New York. I can ask them to give me a copy of that, and I could forward that to you, 19 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Councilwoman.

Yes. Thank you.

Well, we think it would be good to make those available to all members of City Council because I think it's very important that they understand that New York is moving in the wrong direction and not in the right direction. In the public opinion in Philadelphia, there's often an idea that Mayor Giuliani of New York and Mayor Rendell in Philadelphia think alike on issues like this, and I think it's just important in getting the record clear and so that we're prepared in advance to avoid certain dangers. So I think that would be very good idea to send it to all Members of City Council. And if at some later time, because these hearings are going to be continuing, we would welcome the surveillance by District Council 47 and 33, where appropriate, and the FOP and the firefighters, to make certain that nothing approaching New York's situation develops here.

Well, we'll continue to certainly monitor that situation from our vantage 20 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 point and I'll be more than happy to provide every Councilperson with a copy of any research that we've done in New York.

All right, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Councilman Ortiz?

Ed Rendell made a statement here the other day, and it was printed in The Inquirer yesterday, and I'm very glad that The Inquirer and the Daily News are here. But he made a statement that, generally, the media has been either ignoring or not communicating the gravity of this issue to the people of Philadelphia. And I'm glad at least that the print media has been responsible enough. But, as you can see, the TV media and the radio media are not here. And I agree with the mayor in what he said, that this is probably the most important issue that will be facing the City in the next five years, and not enough attention and education is going on by the media to be able to educate our populace about what lies ahead. 21 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Thank you for that comment. I must admit that I'm a bit confused by the mayor's testimony here last week. He seemed to be extremely approving of what the State was doing 'cause I just heard compliment after compliment from him as to the activities of the State. And then, at the same time, he seemed to indicate that nobody was paying any attention to what he thought was going to be a disaster hitting Philadelphia. At some point I hope there will be clarification. And along that line, Donna Cooper stated that she could not be here today but that there would be somebody from her office here. Is there such a person here from Donna Cooper's office? (No response.)

I'm going to ask the staff to put in a call to her office so that we know her office is getting this information that's being produced today. Secondly, we were promised by the Deputy Secretary of Welfare, Sherry Heller, that 22 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 there would be two or three representatives of the State here today at this hearing. Are there representatives of the State present? (No response.)

Well, I guess I see no response to that. Is someone coming forward? No, I guess not. So I don't know how the State expects to be informed of the problems and be in a position to deal with them if it doesn't have representation at hearings like this. And I think the committee will want to communicate, and I would urge Commissioner Reeves that your office or Donna Cooper's office or the mayor's office, one of the three offices, communicate your concern as well as the committee's concern about the absence of State officials at a public hearing in City Council dealing with this very urgent issue. The next group of witnesses will be a panel, and I'm going to ask for three or four people to sit at the desk, and then the others to sit in back and they will come forward. Rose Brandt, the Mayor's Commission on 23 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Literacy, is she here? Please come forward. JoAnne Weinberger, the Center for Literacy, please come forward also. Wayne Branch, the Vice President for Student Affairs at the Community College of Philadelphia, please come forward. Carol Goertzel, the Executive Director of Women's Association for Women's alternatives. And then I'm going to ask the next two people to just take seats within the railing and be available. Hannah Oakman from Personal Power Now, a former recipient. And Edward Schwartz, President of the Institute for the Study of Civic Values, from whom we heard at great length last week. Mr. Schwartz, I hope you're not the cause for the absence of the State representatives here. (Laughter.)

We thought your questions were very intelligent and went to the heart of the matter, and I'm just concerned that that might have been too much.

It wouldn't have been the first time, Councilman. 24 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

All right. Who wants to proceed first? Please identify yourself for the record and then go ahead.

Good morning. My name is Rose Brandt. I'm the Executive Director of the Mayor's Commission on Literacy. The mission of the Commission is to ensure that quality adult basics education and literacy services are available to all adults in need of those services in Philadelphia, and those services are provided in over 400 sites around the City. I'd like to begin a discussion that this panel will continue about the relationship between education, work and self-sufficiency, and their impact on the lives of the individuals and families in Philadelphia as well as on the well-being of the City as a whole. We know that sweeping changes in welfare lives have required that recipients move from welfare to work. While this is a change that welfare recipients would like to make a great number of these individuals are ill-equipped to make the transition to work. There is an enormous 25 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 mismatch between the skills of those who are seeking jobs and the jobs that are available. So what is the educational need? Recent national and state surveys show that close to half of the adults in this country and in Pennsylvania lack adequate literacy skills to be effective in the workplace. The surveys to which I refer, the National Adult Literacy Survey and the Pennsylvania counterpart, ask participants to respond to a series of common literacy tasks such as reading a bus schedule, using an automatic teller machine, or understanding a judge's instructions to a jury. The results were divided into five levels, with those at the lowest level of literacy being Level 1, and those with the highest literacy skills being Level 5. The study found that over percent of American adults are functioning at 20 the lowest literacy level. This means they cannot usually perform tasks such finding an intersection on a street map, locating eligibility from a table of employee benefits, identifying and entering background information on a Social Security card applications, or totaling the entry on a bank PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 deposit slip. Additionally, close to 30 percent of adults scored in Level 2 in literacy skills. These individuals have considerable difficulty carrying out tasks requiring them to use lengthy texts or to do math calculations that involve more than one step. Perhaps just as concerning as the number of adults with limited literacy skills is the fact that most of the individuals in Level and Level of literacy did not think of themselves as having limited literacy skills. Now, this is specifically related to our concerns today in the following ways. Nearly 70 percent of adults on public assistance have limited literacy skills; that's literacy skills in the bottom two literacy levels. Also, 70 percent of individuals living in poverty and 70 percent of those who are unemployed are in the bottom two literacy levels. Education is a key piece of the picture for individuals moving from welfare to work, specifically if we are referring to work that leads to self-sufficiency. 27 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 So what's the scope of the need in Philadelphia? Forty-eight percent of Pennsylvania's welfare recipients live in Philadelphia. That's up from 38 percent four years ago. In Philadelphia, 34 percent of adults in the City lack a high school diploma. Of these, over 400,000 adults who have less than a high school diploma, fewer than 2,000 receive a GED -- that's a high school equivalency degree -- each year. Nearly 10 percent of adults 18 or over have less than a 9th-grade education. And mothers between the ages of 17 and 21 have, on average, below a 6th-grade reading level. So how is the education level related to welfare? Education does make a difference. It has always been a factor in an individual's ability to get hold and advance an employment that is self-sustaining.

If we analyze past welfare patterns, they show that over 60 percent of those who spend 5 years on welfare have less than a high school diploma; while over 65 percent of those on welfare who have a high school diploma or a GED leave welfare and become self-sufficient within 2 years. That's the pattern of welfare as it has 28 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 existed to date. So those with educational skills can make it under the current rules. In fact, historically, they have moved from welfare to work in a relatively short period of time. But what about the others, what about those with limited literacy skills? If we focus on one area on the First Congressional District in Philadelphia, 76 percent of the adults have limited literacy adults. And 42 percent of the adults are in the first, the bottom literacy level. Less than 33 percent are high school graduates. Put another way, that means that over 70 percent have less than a high school diploma. And only about 6 percent have a bachelor's degree. What are the implications of all of this for employment and self-sufficiency? Here again, we can look at existing or patterns or at past patterns. Adults in the lowest literacy level worked only half as many weeks a year as those in the highest three literacy levels. Those with literacy skills in the lowest level earned a weekly median income of about $240 compared to 29 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 $650 for those in the highest literacy level. And when the incomes of men and women are compared by levels of educational attainment, the comparison is even starker. So how did we get here? Many individuals on public assistance were once gainfully employed. Philadelphia had thriving factories, textile mills, and assembly plants. These offered jobs that individuals with limited literacy skills could get, hold and support a family on. But the world has changed. The jobs currently available in the workplace are at a higher end of literacy. Over the last ten years, the city has lost over 100,000 jobs. And from 1982 to 1992, the earning of those without a high school diploma has dropped 12 percent. Education needs to prepare individuals for jobs that are available today and for jobs for the future. Support services for those in educational programs are also important. Most adults leave educational programs for reasons unrelated to the educational program. These include change in employment situations, child 30 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 care and transportation needs. A strong predictor of persistence in educational programs is the availability of and use of support services. So what can we do? Donna Cooper mentioned the other day stretching the definitions to include educational activities. States can count adult education towards the work requirement for hours beyond the initial required per 10 week. Pennsylvania should include basic education 11 as a work-related activity. 12 Also, we need to get the word out. 13 Welfare recipients are unaware or uninformed about 14 the changes. Many are not aware of their own 15 limited skills. There are services available that 16 many are not aware of them or don't know how to 17 participate in them. 18 Also, quality support services are 19 necessary if individuals are going to be able to 20 continue in educational programs, especially as they learn to manage the very demands of family, work, and education. Thank you.

Thank you. (Applause.) 31 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Thank you. I am Joanne Weinberger. I'm the Executive Director of the Center for Literacy. And I would like to thank you for holding these hearings and listening to the needs of TANF recipients. As Rose has informed us, the educational needs of Philadelphia adults are very strong. The Center for Literacy is the State's largest provider of community-based services. Last year, we served over 2700 adults throughout the City of Philadelphia, 47 percent of whom were TANF recipients. Out of these recipients, 52 of them read below the 2nd-grade level, 459 read between the 2nd- and 5th-grade levels. Of the 700 students reading above the 5th-grade level, 145 went on to get a job, 66 reported obtaining a better job, 80 passed the high school equivalency of GED, and 91 entered higher education or a training program. Education does make difference. TANF recipients can enroll in a variety of programs both at the Center for Literacy and other places around the City. They can have 32 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 one-on-one and small-group tutoring or they can have classes with professional teachers. All programs of the Center for Literacy are geared to the goals of the learners, including job-readiness activities. Before sharing with you my specific recommendations, I'd like to tell you about three women who are or have participated in programs offered by the Center for Literacy. The first, Judy, is a 42-year-old woman whose youngest child is 11. She grew up in the South and left school in the 11th grade. Living now in North Philadelphia, she has never gone outside the area. She is reading below the 4th-grade level and just entered a 5-hour-a-week class in her neighborhood. She is wondering what's going to happen to her. She wants to be a home health care aide but cannot fill out an application, does not speak standard English, and cannot qualify for a Private Industry Council program. Another example of her lack of basic skills is how she's going to get to her next caseworker visit. She knows the office has moved, 33 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 and she knows what bus to take, but she doesn't know the neighborhood well enough or enough to pick up the phone and ask the question. So she's going get off the bus and walk around the neighborhood until she finds that office. Judy falls through the cracks of Greater Philadelphia Works. Because she's reading below the 4th-grade level, what's going to happen to her? By contrast, Frieda is a TANF recipient who is working hours a week at Hunter School. 13 As the mother of three school-aged children, she 14 entered CLF's program two years ago. In addition 15 to her work, she studies Monday, Tuesday and 16 Thursday evening, for a total of 7 hours a week, 17 with both a tutor and in a class. 18 She demonstrates that some TANF 19 recipients have the drive and determination to 20 juggle work, family and educational programs. Frieda's working for her GED. Although she's prepared for March the 3rd, she's worried about what happens if she or one of her children gets sick, and then what will happen to her? A third example is Irene, who entered 34 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 CFL's program two years ago because she wanted to find a job. As an intermediate-level student, she and a tutor worked on filling out job applications and reading want ads. She was successful in finding a job at Spectaguard. Although she initially took an entry-level position, she has since been promoted to supervisor. I share these examples with you because these women illustrate different levels of literacy, the diversity of what adult literacy programs offer, and the important role of educational programs in helping TANF recipients become self-sufficient.

Turning to recommendations, I would offer the following: First of all, the definition of work must be expanded to include education and training, especially for adults reading below the 5th-grade level because they are not prepared to obtain and keep a job. Secondly, the length of time for education and training must be extended. It is currently 12 months in the law, and it needs to be extended to 24 months. One year is simple 35 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 insufficient time, especially for low-level readers. Third, the exemption category should be used for those reading below the 5th-grade level. They need skills that are not going to be in place without substantial intervention. Fourth, intensive literacy programs must be provided to those reading below the 7th-grade level. Since the majority of current programs meet three to six hours per week, this is insufficient for low- level readers who are not qualified for a job. And, five, cross training of caseworkers and adult literacy program staff must occur so that caseworkers know what resources are available, and program staff will understand how the system works. The Center for Literacy would volunteer to do this training in each of the 19 County Assistance Offices. This volunteerism has been offered before and not been used. I'd like to thank you for your attention to these comments. I hope you will be a strong advocate in this area. 36 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

We'll ask each of to you testify and then we'll ask questions. The Councilwoman has a question.

Good morning. My name is Wayne Branch. I am Vice President for Student Affairs for the Community College of Philadelphia. I am pleased to offer testimony on welfare reform issues from the perspective of the higher education community. The higher education community has long been concerned with the philosophy that drives recent attempts to reform our welfare system as well as the manner in which reforms are being implemented. We understand that "quick attachment to the workforce," a phrase which underpins one of the guiding principles of welfare reform only works for individuals who already possess the skills to obtain and maintain meaningful employment. Without a coherent plan providing welfare recipients with needed skills, we cannot 37 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 expect that welfare reform will be successful. At Community College of Philadelphia, almost 60 percent of our students require basic skill development. This should not be a surprise. A 1986 survey of City residents estimated that in adults lacked basic skills, 25 percent had dropped out of high school, percent had less 9 than a 9th-grade education, and 2 out of every 5 10 Philadelphia citizens are unable to read and write well enough to get a decent job. Almost a decade later, the problem does not seem close to resolution. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported in 1995 that in all 171 Philadelphia public elementary schools, only 16 percent of the students tested scored above the 17 national average in reading. Also in 1995, half 18 of the School District's enrollments, nearly 19 110,000 students, live in households whose incomes 20 are below the poverty line. The link between 21 poverty and school achievement is undeniable. The 22 cycle of poverty is compounded by the lack of 23 education. 24 We now live in the Information Age. 25 Technology skills are now requirements for many 38 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 jobs. And, assuredly, if this is the Information Age, then the lack of information destines a person and their family to poverty. 4 percent of persons in poverty have earned a bachelor's degree or more. Clearly, the more education you possess, the more you are likely to earn during your life span. A person who has earned an associate's degree is likely to earn over a quarter million dollars more during their working life than a person who has earned a high school degree. According to the 1997 statistical abstract, the median income earnings of a person aged 35 to 44 is almost $8,000 a year higher if that person possesses an associate's degree. The mean income for a person in the same category who has not graduated from high school is only $6,738. Unfortunately, the Commonwealth ranks well above the national average for the percent of population that possesses only a high school diploma. 6 percent of Pennsylvania's residents possessed only a high school diploma. 39 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 This was the highest percentage in the country. The percent for the nation in the same year was 30 percent. It should be understood that the road to self-sufficiency must entail education and skills-training past the secondary level. Employers also are feeling the impact of this skills gap. The Department of Labor has issued several reports that have urged public education at all levels to better prepare our workforce. Locally, Community College of Pennsylvania has been the fortunate recipient of many training contracts seeking to respond to this need. Sadly, the impact of welfare reform in Pennsylvania has taken people from the very education and training programs that could have broken the cycle of poverty that they sought to improve their lives. In one of our neighbor sites known for work with public-assistance recipients, specifically women and their families in the Kensington neighborhood, enrollment is down by am 76 percent since the advent of welfare reform.

And though we are in the process of formalizing 40 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 our research, anecdotal evidence leads us to believe that many students are not returning to school for fear of losing their benefits or being mandated to participate in the 8-week job search programs while they are in school. Almost 70 percent of our full-time students receive some form of financial aid, and almost 50 percent of our entire student body receives some form of aid. Of those students receiving Pell grants, almost 50 percent have incomes so minimal that they receive the full Pell allowance. The majority of these full Pell grant recipients are known to be single parents receiving public assistance, approximately 4,000 students. Nothing in the welfare reform statutes disallows states from valuing education and training as a strategy to remove people from public assistance. There are states that have recognized that the skills gap dooms any efforts that seek to quickly attach public-assistance recipients to the workforce. Iowa, Minnesota, Vermont, and others have included training and a commitment to education as a critical element of their reform efforts. 41 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 With Pennsylvania's literacy issues, a more comprehensive approach to training and education is needed to increase welfare reform's success. Community College of Philadelphia, the Private Industry Council, and the County Assistance Office has developed and implemented a model program that seeks to provide needed education and training to teen parents and noncustodial fathers. This program exists primarily because of the efforts of Deputy Mayor Donna Cooper of the mayor's office and the Philadelphia Works initiative. Yet this is only a model program created by exception rather than by the rule. The higher education community continues to ask both the State and federal government to allow a 24-month full-time commitment to education and training for welfare recipients. We believe that if we really want to help people off public assistance, then we must support those initiatives that provide education and training, giving welfare recipients a fighting chance in today's job market. Additionally, the higher education 42 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 community is concerned by rules that don't value the on-the-job experience provided by programs that include work as an integral part of study. Currently, unpaid internships, cooperative education programs, and other forms of unpaid work study opportunities do not count toward the work requirements inherent in the welfare reform legislation. Community College of Philadelphia has many programs including, but not limited to, office science, dental assistance hygiene, early childhood education, health information technology that requires students to work in their chosen fields prior to receiving a degree. However, currently, these programs do not satisfy the mandatory welfare reform work requirement because these experiences are unpaid. These programs provide skills as well as education that lead to employment. And isn't that the goal? Finally, Community College of Philadelphia is supportive of the work of the Jobs Policy Network and enthusiastically endorses their recommendations; one, use of the unemployment insurance fund to provide an ongoing funding 43 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 source dedicated to training workers for growing industry; and, two, a commitment to providing skills and educational opportunities to individuals based on a required assessment of their skills, education, and job readiness. Much is needed to help people become self-sufficient. We encourage City Council to support efforts that include training and education as a strategy to reform the welfare reform system. Thank you for permitting me to speak with you this morning. )

Thank you very much. (Addressing Carol Goertzel.) Is there any way to sum up your testimony? I notice a lot of it there are statistics that have been reported from the other three.

Yes. I'd be glad to try. Some of our statistics are from some of the surveys that we've done with women, so it's from kind of women's voices themselves, where they're reiterating the same things that you do see from 44 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 other statistics, and I will try to go through it quickly.

Thank you.

Surely. I'm Carol Groetzel, Executive Director of the Women's Associations for Women's Alternatives, a nonprofit family preservation and job-training agency that serves about 800 people in Philadelphia every year. All of clients are poor and low-income, women and their children who come from families where abuse and neglect and generally lower literacy sills are prevalent. We work to help parents heal their own family relationships and to move on to self-sufficiency. What we've been doing as we've been embarking on a Pennsylvania family economic self-sufficiency project statewide, we have almost about 435 to 450 people on our mailing list who we're in communication with, and we're supported by a national organization, Wider Opportunities for Women. We're one of six states, plus the District of Columbia, that's embarked on this effort. 45 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 In 1998, we did interviews in seven areas around the State and we found that the concerns were similar, whether women were in urban areas, suburban areas, or the city. There was massive confusion about changes in welfare, confusion about availability of education, concerns about availability and quality of child care, feelings of stigma when they talked to their welfare worker, confusion about the AMR, and concerns about their ability to economically support their families when they're ineligible for TANF. Women themselves know the problems that they're facing. And we'll have a full report of the press conference on November 30th. People said, as you could see here, the two-year clock, what does that mean? I signed for AMR so I have 8 years left. Only 30 percent were aware that the 2-year time limit meant that after months, they must be working 20 hours a week. 22 And 68 percent were aware that their 5-year limit 23 exists. Over half did not understand the 24 difference between the 2- and 5-year limit. While 30 percent of the people we 46 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 interviewed cited access to education as the most important variable -- this is women on public assistance and lower literacy skills -- for their successful transition, only 5 percent, 3 women out of almost 60, were aware that education and training was permissible as an activity for 12 months. Almost nobody had it told to them that they could participate in education or training. As you'll see, people were told, You're in a GED program, that doesn't matter, we want you to get a job. People were in college, they were pulled out. Now, 39 percent of the women interviewed said that child care was, however, the greatest obstacle to getting off of welfare. The child care system was enormously complicated, and special arrangements for sick and disabled children were not available to them. People talked a lot about their welfare workers, which I won't go into here because changing systems is hard. But people that people in the welfare offices acted as if the money's coming out of their own pockets. And they were 47 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 treated as if they're stupid, and they're not; they're merely poor. Sixty-nine percent of the women interviewed said that they did not feel as though the County Assistance Office was providing them with the help they needed to negotiate the new welfare system. That, of course, means that 30 percent felt that they were getting that support. But 69 percent, when we're looking at what we are in March, is a lot of people. People get different caseworkers. There's just massive confusion about what they're being told and they are not being told about opportunities. The women themselves told us over and over they want to start a job and not a career, I want to build a foundation so I don't have to survive on a minimum-wage job. What does it mean to move families out of poverty? Which is what some of us are really concerned about, not keeping families in poverty.

The self-sufficiency standard, that I believe people have copies of and it was cited by Janet Raffel at the prior testimony, is a planning tool for welfare reform, and we are trying to get the 48 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 State to use it as a planning tool, and we're in negotiation, and it's not currently being used in the City because it says that you need to be earning about $12 an hour if you do not want to use all of the subsidies available and you want to have your family move out of poverty -- not to live in luxury, but to basically pay market-rate rent, child care, food, transportation, medical care, and taxes, without food stamps, Medicaid, and public housing and child-care subsidy. 50 an hour. There is no way -- we've been trying for months -- that you can do it on minimum wage if you're a mother with two children, you just can't with every possible subsidy that's there. If you don't get your earned income tax credit monthly -- and most people do not -- you must be earning over $8 an hour, $8 can do it basically. 25 for a mother and two children if you're using every subsidy but the earned income tax credit monthly. And to use the earned income tax credit, it has to go through 49 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. , so you're really a little bit at risk. There must be concrete information for people to help them move from a wage with subsidies to a self-sufficient wage. So when their lifetime eligibility for cash assistance expires, they will not be on the streets and they will be able to provide for their families and not forced into shelters and into other public systems. Those with the highest level of skill are currently being placed in the minimum-wage and lower-wage jobs because they're the most placeable rather than encouraged to go onto further education so that they will never see the welfare system again, making room for those who have lower-level literacy skills who may need to start out at lower wages as they improve their literacy level.

Where did you get that data from?

Pardon?

Where did you get that data from? 50 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Well, it's not hard data. That data is from people we've interviewed and talked to. And people that we work with who have higher-level literacy skills are spoken to over and over to enter a job, any job, no matter what the wage level is. And I think you'll hear more testimony about that later, okay? I will try to get you the information that I have, okay, that has harder data on that. The best way to get self-sufficiency wages the most quickly is through either non-traditional employment for women or through higher education. And Wayne just gave you a lot of the data, that it's just like this (gesturing), it just goes straight up in terms of the correlation between education and income level. College degree is an additional 3.65 an hour, etc. Discussion about income adequacy, we're saying, is imperative, and as we look to the City and to the welfare reform and to people hitting their 2-year and their 5-year clock, if you're doing everything right, you're working 20 or 25 hours a week at a minimum-wage job and you hit 51 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 your years, you can't pay your rent. So we're all concerned about 2 years, we're concerned about years. 5 And without assistance for planning for self-sufficiency, planning for income adequacy, the City is in trouble and families are in trouble. And when we're talking about mothers and children, we are also talking about their children and the safety and well-being of their children. The longer-term issue is what will happen in two years, in five years, and thereafter if they are not getting information about how to get a self-sufficient wage, how to kind of manage both the new systems and employment. There's a lot of secrecy about how you move up in jobs and you fill out even a college financial aid application. People don't know if it's turned back three times, that's normal. They give up, they say it's me. We know. We have used financial aid or our children or our nieces or our nephews -- you always have to do it over and over again because there are inevitable errors. There is so much about public systems and new systems that's a 52 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 mystery, and people need help moving through them. Long-term training. Long-term training is really important, and we all have stories of people, who, through nine months of training, have moved from being crack addicts to supporting their families; from people who have been trouble and never been on a job skill other than on a (unintelligible) level but have enough skill and education to be able to support their family. Our own job training has about 90 percent retention, and it is a 9-month training program training non-traditional 90 percent retention in their job training. Short-term quick fixes are not fixes at all in terms of supporting families and families supporting themselves with self-sufficient wages, and we ask you to look at these issue as you see what's happening in Pennsylvania. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you very much.

We'll now take questions of these four panelists, and then we'll bring the other two up. 53 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Councilwoman Blackwell.

Thank you, Madame Chair. Two questions. One, what is the difference from the months to 5 years? Is it 7 that the recipients still receive other benefits 8 other than cash assistance or a subsidy thereof? 9

After five years, my 10 understanding is that people receive no cash 11 assistance. They can still get food stamps unless 12 they've been sanctioned and deemed uncooperative, 13 when it seems that your food stamps might also be 14 at risk, but you'd still get medical care for your 15 children. 16

You get 17 medical care after the 24 months, right? 18

Pardon? 19

I know after 20 five years, everything goes. 21

No, you can't -- 22

But your 23 maximum in your lifetime, you get five years. 24

For cash assistance.

Okay. 54 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

You can still get food stamps.

In your statement, you said a lot of people and the recipients don't know the difference between what happens after months and what happens -- 8

Absolutely. 9

I'm not sure I 10 know now. 11

Absolutely. 12

I mean, it 13 raised the question for me to crystalize it. In 14 my own mind, I'm not positive I know what's the 15 difference between 24 months and 5 years, other 16 than 5 years is the maximum lifetime benefit. 17

Could you walk us 18 through it? 19

Other than 20 20 hours a month, we know you have to work after 24 21 months. What else do you get? 22

You can receive cash 23 assistance if you're working, supplemental cash 24 assistance. And you receive TANF if you're working 20 hours a week after 2 years. If you're 55 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 working 20 hours a week after 5 years, you don't receive any supplemental assistance; you're just working 20 hours a week.

Okay, I thought that was it. I thought maybe there was something I missed. Another question. It was mentioned by Miss Weinberger, is it? That you mentioned 5th-grade reading level for people to be pretty much employable. Now, we have been told and have heard in earlier hearings that you need an 8th-grade reading level, so is it 5th grade or 8th grade? And do we need to -- is our goal to try to bring people up to high school equivalency tests, 8th-grade reading level? And since we know we don't have -- none of the plans include people, there's no job training at this point for people who can't read, what should our goal be to make people employable?

It's a complex question. Basically, in order to enter a job training program, you must be reading at least the 8th-grade level. 56 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Right.

To get a job. You need to be reading about the 8th-grade level. Some minimum-wage jobs, you can get reading at the 5th- or 6th-grade level. The regional centers created under Greater Philadelphia Works will be working with people reading at the 5th-grade level and above.

To bring them up to --

Well, not to bring them up. To get them a job and to offer the wraparound support of employment advisors to be able help them get a job and keep a job. They must be employed hours a week. Education is 17 considered an add-on. 18 That's one of the reasons that both in 19 my testimony and in Carol's and Wayne Branch's, I 20 think Rose too, we talked about the importance of broadening the definition of a "work-related activity" to include education and training. The State has the option of doing that and has never exercised that option.

And that's 57 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 really a major problem.

That was Ed Schwartz's contention last week.

That's a very major problem.

And that does not take a legislative change.

Very, very important point. We've already had people who come to our office saying that they're in school and they have to quit.

That's right.

So that they can certainly support children.

And certainly people have been pulled out of education and training programs for the 8-week rapid attachment to the workforce programs also. We had people that were enrolled, that were taking the step and then were pulled out for purposes of that program.

We also have people who have been referred to two and three 8-week job search programs rather than into real training. So that we had somebody who said that they wrote 58 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 like resumes, but they were never sent to education and training so they could really be able to get a job that they could support their support families on.

And another 7 problem is, because we deal with an agency that 8 does a lot in training, an excellent job in 9 welfare to work, and they do not permit -- that's 10 the Professional Health Care Institute. As my 11 friends from Caring and Sharing will attest to, 12 they don't permit these ladies and men to sign 13 these big grants, big money grants that they can't 14 begin to pay off with what they will earn. And, unfortunately, a lot of recipients are victims of signing off their futures in these grants. And if they don't finish the program and try to start another, they're stuck because they already have received a State educational grant, so it's a big problem. But that does answer my question that you try for 5th-grade level to get them training for employment. Thank you.

Miss Weinberger, 59 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 you talked about your effort to provide volunteer programs in the assistance offices without any support for that. Who did you talk to? Did you talk to the local office or the State office? Or do you go to each office?

We basically talk to the central local office about providing staff development training. That's what we thought was important, so that caseworkers could indeed be informed about the kinds of education programs that were available and the importance of those educational programs.

And what was the reason why you were not -- why your offer was not accepted?

There was never a reason given.

Mm-hmm. In the planning of the City's program of Philadelphia Works, you mentioned, Mr. Branch, something about Donna Cooper helping you with this education piece, and then I didn't get a sense over here that there was any involvement for literacy 60 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 programs at all.

We are currently running a teen parent program, and that's the program that Donna Cooper and the County Assistance Office, the Private Industry Council, and Community College of Philadelphia all collaborated. The goal is to allow teen parents right out of Philadelphia public schools to come directly to college. We create work experiences for them to meet the 20-hour-a-week mandate. And then they would be allowed to continue post-secondary education for two years. And that's the program that other states have attempted to put forth statewide, or programs like that. And so what we are saying is, Why let that be the exception? Then let that commitment to post-secondary education be the rule.

So I guess, to sum it up and not to be simplistic, is that the State can allow for education but it's not happening.

That's absolutely true. The other option that the State has is to allow for these unpaid work experiences to 61 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 count towards the 20-hour-a week work requirement. And the State, as of yet, has chosen not to do that. And so programs -- for example, our secretarial science program has a work requirement as a part of study, that that would count towards the 20-hour-a-week commitment if the State would let it count for them.

Mm-hmm.

And if the State would emphasize a mapping to self-sufficiency to people that would include improving their education, plus whatever work experience they have, then people would be in a different place. And that has not historically happened in the last two years.

Okay, thank you very much. We appreciate it. Any other questions? (No further questions.)

Thank you very much. Miss Weinberger, you didn't have written testimony, did you?

Yes, I did. I 62 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 provided it to --

Okay, we'll get it, we'll get it. Thank you very much. Next is Mr. Schwartz and Miss Oakman. (Mr. Schwartz and Ms. Oakman come forward.)

We have a hearing here today at 1 o'clock. It's 11:20 now, so we hope you'll try and sum up your testimony for us because we have other panelists that we want to go on.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Hannah Oakman. " I'm an employee of Community College of Philadelphia, where I work to provide opportunities for community service for students, faculty, and staff. And I'm also a liaison at the college for welfare recipients with the Department of Public Welfare. I'm here today to assist City Council 63 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 from my vantage point as an employee of the college, as the Executive Director of a nonprofit, and as an 11-year veteran who has worked in the trenches. I'm also a former welfare recipient. I want to talk about the firsthand day-to-day struggle of the economically exploited. In 1983, I was a single mother of four, living in substandard housing, facing homelessness, and on welfare, receiving less than $5,000 for my family to survive. Some of you may have read my story in The Philadelphia Inquirer or in Women's World magazine or on the Internet where I'm currently featured on the nationally-lauded Moms on Line website. I've gone from welfare to the White House, and the reason why I'm here today is that if I don't reach out to help others like me, what good is my journey. For those of you who thrive on statistics, Dr. Wayne Branch of Community College spoke about the gaps of thousands of dollars between annual salaries of those who are not college-educated versus those who are. It doesn't take a genius to see that education is the 64 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 foundation for a future economic stability and growth for a family and for a city. If you think I'm here to preach Community College of Philadelphia, think again. I'm here to preach lifelong learning. I went to Community College of Philadelphia in 1983 as a single mom with my four sons, and my goal was to find employment I. Was told in the city, from the caseworkers, from people that I knew, even from my own friends and family, that welfare recipients needed 5 years to earn a 2-year degree, they were lazy, they were stupid too, and it was too hard to juggle education, family, and work. Allegedly, we were just not capable of that. My job, as I saw it, was to shatter every single myth. I earned my two-year degree in two years. I continued my education after my associate's degree and gained certification from a four-year college as a paralegal. Then I landed my first full-time job, making three times my welfare grant. I completed undergraduate work while working full-time, raising my children, successfully running a nonprofit community 65 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 development corporation. That was in 1987. I've decided now that it's time to go back to school, and I'm going to enter a master's degree program next year and go even further. It doesn't make me special; it makes me an average American. There are people that could do the same thing that are on public assistance if they had carefully-crafted support systems and appropriate resources. They need to take a look at where they are, and not look at where they came from, and look at where they're going. Many of the programs that are crafted right now have taken the "self" out of self-sufficiency. They are telling them what to do, when to do it, and where to do it, and the welfare recipients have not bought into their own success. All it's going to cause is them to recycle back to the welfare rolls. For those of you who are in positions of power, influence, and financial security, if you honestly want welfare recipients to leave the welfare rolls to become self-sufficient for a lifetime, I have one word that want you to remember: Push. 66 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Push for quicker results in the streamlining of the current child-care systems so that those who are trying to work don't lose benefits and their jobs when moving from subsidized care to transitional child care, because that's what's happening now. Push grant diversion.

Request that the State pay the difference between a welfare recipient's grant and the minimum wage, transforming welfare checks into wages earned through significant community service work, which will entitle them to the earned income credit. That is what work net should be. Push DPW to apply the 50 percent disregard on income earned to the net amount that the recipient actually receives instead of the gross. Push for heads of household who have successfully maintained substantial employment above the minimum wage to earn empowerment grants like many welfare-to-work programs across the country. Those grants are used for purchasing homes, establishing bank accounts, and paying for education or to add to their work wardrobe. The 67 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 current work wardrobe of $75 $150 in special allowances does not constitute a work wardrobe. Push harder to support Senate Bill 895, introduced by Senator Vincent Hughes, which is currently in labor and industry. Push for start-up funding and encourage continued funding for the development of 24-hour child-care facilities that will provide services to those who work non-traditional hours. Also encourage additional funding for children over age 12 who are no longer covered under child care because of their age. Push the School District to work closely with the Federation of Teachers to promote programming which begins before 8:15 and ends later than 2:45 for working parents. Regular being late and leaving early is neither excused nor tolerated in the working world, even though DHS will quickly state that a child's safety and security should be the parent's first priority. Push for the support of the emergency welfare agenda of the Jobs Policy Network, which Dr. Branch and others mentioned today, an agenda which addresses many of the problems that you see. 68 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Push Senator Rick Santorum to use the educational savings account for before- and after-school care, tutoring and computers for every school with large populations of low-income parents, making the availability of supportive care for working parents a reality. And he did say that that was available, those funds were there, and I've attached a copy to my testimony of his letter to me stating same from July 1, 1998. Push your constituents into the reality of what's going to happen. It is not going to go away. The federal government and the state are not going to change their minds. Whether we like it or not, welfare reform may be a lemon, but the reality is that it's time to make lemonade. An educated and self-sufficient parent is the best gift a mom or dad can give to their children and this city. And I'd also like for you to take note that after people are moved from welfare to work, there is a new set of problems that they may or may not have been prepared for. I'm a working parent. With my benefits, I make more than eight times the amount of money I got on welfare because 69 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I have a degree. And I've been able to get a career, not a job. Because a job does not help you get out of poverty; a career will. And what I'm facing every day as a working parent is what welfare recipients will face once they're off of public assistance. I don't drive fear of people out on the highway and also made it a point to overcome that fear so about to drive because. I don't drive because of my fear of the people out on the highway. And I've also made it a point to overcome that fear, so I'm about to drive. But because I don't, every day, because my children -- I have four school-aged children -- have to be at school at 8:15, and that's the earliest they can be there. If my job started at 8:30, I'd be late for work every day.

For me to get to work every day and make sure I'm on time, I spend over $200 a month to make sure I can get someone to drive me from the school to my job to stay employed because my children. Welfare recipients moving from welfare to work would never be able to do that. I thank you for the opportunity to 70 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 speak. )

Councilwoman Blackwell, go ahead.

Thank you, thank you, Hannah. Let me ask you a question. You mentioned that at years of age, what happens? 10

There is no care that is 11 provided by transitional or subsidized child care 12 for children over the age of 12 years old. They believe that they are no longer required to pay for child care. So that means our children that are that age are forced to be latchkey kids, whether we want them to be.

I mention that because that is also the age on a quality-of-life bill where children can't ride bikes or roller-skate on their own sidewalks. It's ironic that that is age 12 too. So you don't get day care, and a kid can get locked up.

And the School District has told me that there are programs that they are 71 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 trying to start for after school, but the money is minimal. And they said that they have to focus all of their resources on children age and over 5 because of the fact that there's no child care, 6 because the criminal justice system has said that 7 that is the problem age. 8

Thank you, 9 Hannah. 10

Mr. Schwartz. 11

Thank you. I am 12 former-Councilman Ed Schwartz, head of the Institute for the Study of Civic Values. And for the last 18 months, we have been organizing a coalition that involves many of the people you're hearing, called "JOIN," Jobs and Opportunities to Improve Neighborhoods. To address the agenda, we need to make welfare reform, so-called, work. I want to start by answering Councilwoman Blackwell's question as succinctly as I can, then I want to set forth what I believe to be the basic conflict between what we -- and I look at the two members of Council here, in fact, all of you who are here this morning -- believe and what we're up against. And then I want to 72 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 help you out by laying out seven areas -- and I'm giving you this -- that I believe, as you monitor this over time, are the questions that you need to be asking as we are asking them. First, the question, What's going on here two years, five years? As of March 3, 1997, there were, we learned, 64,000 heads of household who were receiving federal support under the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. " They would get food stamps, and they would still be eligible for Medicaid. And given my past, I'll give you a third one. On public housing, on Section 8, there was a debate, but it looked like, in effect, that Section 8 would still be required to pay their rent, although one wonders what will happen in Congress when they see the cost of that one. But you have heard from Carol Goertzel that you can't even live on the cash assistance. Now try to live on food stamps and Section 8; you 73 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 will definitely need Medicaid very soon after you attempt that one. That's what ends in five years. Under the federal law, after two years of consecutive receiving, everyone who receives this money now becomes a part of the pool. And the states are told, You have to have percent, 9 something like that, and Rich Weishaupt may 10 correct my percentage. " 13 And in the federal legislation, there's 14 a whole list of things identified as work-related 15 activities. They include jobs, they include 16 community-service jobs and all those things, but 17 they also include a year of vocational education, 18 and they also include job-readiness and job 19 search. 20 Now, many of us felt that even that list was too narrow, that we wanted them to permit people to pursue two years of vocational education -- in fact, GED programs and the rest of it, which was not allowed under the federal law. And so, this past year, Senator 74 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Wellstone from Minnesota introduced an amendment to the Higher Education Act that would have permitted recipients to pursue vocational education at least for two years. So some of these vocationally-directed programs at Community College could pass. It passed the Senate, it went to conference committee with the House, under the Higher Education (unintelligible), and they killed it. Now, that's the federal law. Two years. At least they can do some things that relate to education and work-related after the two years, and that's only a portion of the case load. Now we get back to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and so-called Act 35 here. What Act 35 did is basically define work without any of the other work-related activities included in it. So even if Wellstone passed and whatever, the fact is that as of March 3rd of this coming year, everyone who has been receiving benefits for TANF for consecutive months must 23 be working, as I said Friday. They must be in a 24 paid job, in a paid part-time job or in a community service job. They can do that as a 75 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 volunteer -- there's always a job for a volunteer. But basically, they are not able to spend hours a week in a vocational training 5 program. 6 Or here's an irony.

The City has 7 created Greater Philadelphia Works, and 6,000 8 people will be working for work under that program 9 in the private sector. After March 3rd, every one 10 of them who has reached the 24 limit, 24-month 11 limit, will have to be working while they look for 12 work under that program. 13 So even if we got the changes in the 14 federal law, the State would still have to change 15 it. 16 Now, could the Welfare Department find 17 some administrative way to interpret work? 18 Perhaps. Richard Weishaupt from CLS were just 19 discussing that. They're not going to do it. And 20 right now, there's no evidence that they're going to go back to the legislature. But that's a core issue here. And it's a -- reflects really a basic difference in perspective. This gets to be my second point I want to make. 76 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

That's the question that Secretary Heller did not answer the other day.

She obfuscated it. And when I challenged her on it, she listed a series of community service work options, all of which were work. And as I said, it did not contradict what I said. Then she talked about a program that they're running, which is essential a 30-, 35-hour-a-week program, and said that people could work, you know, while they were getting education. I guess I'm a little surprised to hear in the testimony today that Community College is not able to use the work that is involved in a work experience program there as a means of meeting the work requirement under the welfare in Pennsylvania. That is in direct contradiction to a what Sherry Heller said to you last week. She said that if you were in a work-study program or something like that, the work part could be used for the work requirement. Now you're hearing from our own Community College that that's not what they were 77 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 told. Again, this is a direct contradiction -- I will try not to use the word "lie." We'll just see what she says. (Laughter.)

I promise I won't bang anything on the table. I was told I -- I was going to bang my shoe but, you know, historical memory is not great. I'm not sure how many people will even remember Kruschev. But, look, the words we need to use to describe this is not "welfare reform"; it is "workforce expansion." On March 3, 1997, 80 percent of 64,000, roughly 53 or 4,000 mothers, were told that in five years, they were going to be laid off from full-time work and raising their kids. We're not going to pay 'em for that. And what we're going to pay them is for work. Starting on March 3rd, when they are working 20 hours a week, that's no longer welfare. They're working 20 hours a week and they're getting paid. Their welfare check right now and food stamps and these other things become a part of a paycheck. Now we can debate how much 78 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 people who work ought to get paid. Now, how to we treat expanding the workforce? How are different groups treated? When dislocated workers get kicked out of manufacturing jobs, so now we have a smart factory in West Oak Lane training them to become high-level machinists. We spend to $22,000 a 9 person on training them. 10 You all voted for the Kvaerner deal. 11 The training in that deal amounts to about at 12 least $29,000 a person to help former shipbuilders 13 become a part of this new economy. 14 We spent $400 a person on adult basic 15 literacy. The average training in a PIC program 16 is about 3 or $4,000, and people criticize that 17 for being too high. And you know what the difference is? These other programs are helping men, and this set of programs is helping women. (Applause.)

And so it's perfectly all right to help men, who are, after all, the backbone of the industrial economy -- and more power to 'em, and I did bang my hand on the table, sorry -- get 22,000. But when it comes to 79 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 women who are going to be the backbone of the new information and service economy, then, in fact, we are only prepared to spend a few hundred dollars. And the moment we think, in fact, we can throw them off of welfare, we do it. See, my view is that a healthy attitude toward this community and this Commonwealth would be to cheer what Hannah Oakman has accomplished with our help and to try to see what we need to do to help everyone follow the route she's followed. But everything that's happened in the last year or two would have made impossible what Hannah Oakman has already achieved. People were told in training programs that they had to go look for a job for eight weeks, and so they had to leave their training and education programs. And now when you argue with some of these folks, and the people on this panel have argued, that we should support folks in education and training, they're told, Well, other people go to school at night, why can't these people? Very true, some do. But they have not been led through their lives to understand and accept a certain 80 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 subsidy for families that we all say we want to support family values and suddenly have the rug pulled out from under them after they have already secured family responsibilities. You are asked to vote every month for some bill that's going to offer some business some major deal so that they will have profits equal to the highest levels of expectations of investors for the privilege of locating in Philadelphia so that maybe, at the end of that, some people will get jobs. But right now in this region, there are a lot of jobs, a point to which I will return -- in the region, outside the city. So isn't it an equally valid way to improve our economy to raise the level of education and training and skills that will permit people to work in the new economy? And let me make another point about understanding that. It's really not quite as complicated as it sounds, you all know this. What are the three, in this area, biggest places where people will work in the new economy? One is in health care, we all sort of know that one, and there are some jobs available in health care, but 81 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 they do require a certain level of education, even at the lowest level, for a nurse's aid, to be able to compete. Community College has a good program in it. A second is in retail, in stores. The net effect of tourism and the rest of it will be an expansion of retail. And in the suburbs, there's a lot of retail jobs. Those are available to people without high school diplomas, although they still have to think about it. What do you need to know to stand behind a counter and work the cash register? And that's not a very high-paying job, and it's not a very permanent one, but it is available. The good job, comparable to the factory job of the industrial economy, in the new economy, is an office job, whether it's in government, a economy or in a nonprofit. We all have spent our lives working in offices. So think about what you need to know how to do to work in an office. You run offices; would you hire somebody who couldn't read or write properly or use the phone intelligently or, at this point, use a computer? No, you wouldn't think of that, even as an intern. 82 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 So what we need to figure out is the training necessary to help people who are entering this new economy as part of workforce expansion be able to work in offices 'cause that's where the money is. And nothing like that question has been asked as a frame work for developing this policy.

In Tennessee, what they did, was first start with families first. They decided that maybe family values had more than just rhetorical meaning. And they screened everybody in terms of their place on the educational ladder. And so if you tested below a certain level in Tennessee, fifth or sixth grade, you were immediately exempted from a job search and the rest of it and required to go into adult basic education for hours a week until you were ready 18 to enter the workforce. 19 What these people in Pennsylvania did 20 was to test no one, throw everyone into the labor market, yank them out of training programs, force them there whether they were ready or not, and then take credit that a handful of them managed to get a job for a few months, and have yet to give us a statistic that indicates what the retention 83 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 of people was even three months after they got those jobs. Except that the data they gave you last week, interestingly enough, showed that there were or 16,000 more people placed in jobs than 6 the case load was reduced, indicating that there 7 are an all of a lot of people who are either still 8 on welfare while they're working or included two 9 or three times as they've moved from one to two to 10 three jobs. There's no way of knowing what the 11 real answer is because they won't tell us. 12 So are we out to increase the ability 13 of our workforce to compete, as the governor 14 himself says when he's not talking about this 15 particular group or people? Or is the idea simply to throw people off welfare as quickly as we can get it, brag to everybody that we've reduced the case load, and not look too hard at where anybody is at the other end of the rainbow? That's the issue. And we want to increase the ability of people to contribute to this economy, and the people we're dealing with in Harrisburg talk that language, but their policies have nothing to do with it. 84 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. )

I'm going to add one more point here and very rapidly go through the things, and that concerns the crisis we will face on March 3rd concerning this so-called community service work option. We have a debate among us as to which of the various statistics that the Welfare Department has given us will turn out to be true on March 3rd in terms of the number of people who need to be working. For a while, with 26,000 Don Stoval (ph.) in more recent meetings is saying 50,000. I'm sure by the end of the fall, it's going to well over 25,000 and probably in the 30,000 range. They need to be working hours a 18 week. Now, think about that. We have to find 19 jobs for people 20 hours a week, starting March 20 3rd, for as many people as work for the City of Philadelphia.

But Miss Heller says no, that's not the case.

Well, Miss Heller can say whatever she wants. Miss Heller came here two 85 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 years ago, the day The Daily News was reporting on her pilot program for this kind of stuff. And The Daily News reported that out of 26,000 people they enrolled in a certain program, they placed 5,000, which was a percent placement rate. Four out 7 of five didn't make it. 8 But she sat here in front of you and 9 said, Well, we placed 5,000 people in jobs, 10 without ever telling you that it was out of 11 26,000. If I accused her of consistently 12 misrepresenting her statistics, that was the 13 beginning of this process as far as I was 14 concerned. It was this Council in their first 15 hearing that Council Coleman was describing. 16 (Applause.) 17

So you'll excuse me if 18 people who give no information, and when they give 19 it, give it in a way that you can't understand it, 20 tell you something isn't true, I don't believe it. I was in one of these jobs and I felt that it was my responsibility to tell taxpayers and citizens how we, as their trustees, were spending their money and what we were getting from 86 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 it. These people seem to have the attitude that it's their money, and they're not going to tell you a damn thing about what they're going to do with it. (Applause.)

So whatever she says, the raw fact of the matter is that there's a real number out here of the number of people whose 24-month consecutive periods ends March 3rd. And one day or another, that number is going to be upon us. It will be -- the lowest I've heard from the Welfare Department is 15,000. And I'd say that if it's 15,000 on March 3rd, it's going to be a lot higher by July 3rd or September 3rd. And we are talking about creating a new workforce here of a magnitude that we have not had to do ever for adults. The only parallel you can give is the summer jobs for youth program where they try to find temporary kids at that level, you have to look at it that way. The SETA program that some of us lived through and were on (unintelligible), 4500 people, that's all, were working for the City of Philadelphia under SETA program, 4500. That's a 87 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 third of the most conservative number we've been given on welfare reform, and that was a day when everyone would complain about patronage workers lining the streets of City Hall or sitting around the rec centers. So how we construct a massive community-service program becomes a central priority. And let me add, in terms of the questions about New York. I have been to New York and visited a welfare reform coalition whose entire focal point in New York is workfare everything that Tom Cronin said about workfare is true. But the battle ground of the future are these new workers that we're bringing in who are being brought in to undercut the wage scales, undercut everything else of the existing workforce, without education to get them into jobs, and that's what we're about. You need to be monitoring the following: First, the battle over whether we can get the State to decide that education and training is a work-related activity, as is allowed 88 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 under the federal law. Secondly, you need to be pushing for accurate information about all of this so we know where we are. (Applause.)

Third, can we get a comparable commitment from the City and its programs for accurate information? They've been pretty good so far, so that may not be so hard. Fourth, how can we build a workforce of to 40,000 people doing community-service jobs 13 that does not undermine the existing workforce 14 that helps people get education and training in 15 the process and adds value to this community 16 instead of disrupting it. 17 The Institute has run a tiny little 18 program in collaboration with the Center for 19 Literacy and the Urban Affairs Coalition that 20 integrates community service, literacy and job 21 placement. And we have offered to significantly 22 expands what we do. But so far, no one's been 23 interested. 24 Can we work with SEPTA to build a fleet 25 of vans -- 89 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Mr. Schwartz, I'm going to have to ask you to summarize.

I'm going to end. Can we work with SEPTA to expand the ability of people to get from the City to the suburbs in massive numbers? We proposed last year at this Council 3500 vans and vehicle to do it. You need smaller vehicles. SEPTA's done a certain amount of reverse commuting. They haven't done anything like this. Can we create in every area of the City literacy centers that are geographically accessible to people so that they, in turn, can get the kind of education and training they need, near their homes, if they have to work, as looks likely to be. And, finally, can we build a child-care system that assures in the face of all of this that every kid in Philadelphia is going to be given adequate support while their parents are working. Those are the areas you need to be monitoring, and we will work with you to make sure that we provide you with the best information that 90 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 we can. And I appreciate time that you've given me to make these remarks. Thank you. (Applause.)

Any questions? (No questions.)

Thank you very much. I have this material here for you guys. (Commissioner Joan Reeves comes forward.)

Commissioner, we're very pleased that you're here. You've heard a great deal today. I think your office heard a great deal at the last hearing and at the original hearing that took place about a year and a half ago. Please proceed in any manner that suits you. COMMISSIONER REEVES: Thank you. My name is Joan Reeves. I'm Commissioner for the Department of Human Services. As Councilman Cohen mentioned, we've heard a lot, and you've heard from the Department before about the impact of welfare reform. 91 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I think there's some key issues that I want to highlight and I know others have identified some questions to be asked of the Department of Public Welfare, and I'd just like to add to that list, if I may.

Go ahead, please. COMMISSIONER REEVES: One is that we are in need of information from the Department of Public Welfare, and we have requested a list of the TANF families who have open cases with the Department of Human Services. We'd like to do a cross match so that we can then provide the levels of support to these families as the 24-month clock continues to tick. So one of the questions is, Will DPW provide that information to the Department of Human Services? The other is around child care, and I'm sure there will be those here today to testify about the concerns. But families, parents will need to have available, accessible, affordable, and safe child care that has quality. One of our major concerns is that the way the child care is being proposed is that the lowest quality child care will be the child care that will be most 92 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 available to those parents who can find it. The other question is, When will the State determine the percent of the TANF 5 recipients who will be exempted from the 6 requirements based on hardship? Even though they 7 have not identified the 20 percent, those people, 8 once they identify them, the clock will already 9 have been running. So we would like for the State 10 to identify that group. 11 The other big question for us is, 12 What's happening with the TANF savings? You know, 13 will those dollars that the State has been able to 14 save be reallocated for child welfare services, 15 for use with education and job training, and for 16 other support services that the families will 17 need. 18 One of the key areas that we're 19 concerned about is kinship care. The State has 20 been working for some time now with the Kinship Care Task Force, looking at changing some of State law, looking at guardianship, which is not available in this state right now, for kin to take care of their children. Those kin who are receiving TANF for 93 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 both themselves and the child are also going to be reaching that 24-month time period. We are interested in knowing whether those kin could become a part of the 20-percent exemption. As some of you already know, we have about 2,000 children in our system who are in placement with kin. Now, we can pay as much as $13,000 per year for a family of 2 children to that fact; whereas if they were receiving TANF, they'd get about $5,000. My concern is that kin will start coming to the Department, not because the children are really dependent but because they will have a way to take care of their kin without having to use up their own TANF resources. And the final thing that I want to mention here about a question, I think someone mentioned it earlier, about the DHS requiring that parents' first responsibility is keeping their kids safe. Well, yes, that's true. And if it's a TANF parent, they have an agreement of mutual responsibility. And if they're a TANF problem in the child welfare system, they also have a family service plan. We've been trying for a long time now 94 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 to have those two plans so that they're not in contradiction with each other because we could say to a parent, In order for you to either get your child returned to you, you have to go to parenting classes. And if those classes are during the day and a parent has an Agreement of Mutual Responsibility that says you will work during the day, those two requirements by government are in conflict. And what is the parent to do? So we would like to have, with DPW, a dialogue and an agreement so that our Family Service Plan an our Agreement of Mutual Responsibility are in synch with each other. So those are some of the key issues that we think should be asked along with all the other questions that Council has submitted to Deputy Secretary Heller.

Well, with respect to the issues you've raised, questions relating to your seeking to get information from DPW, what has been their response when you've asked for that information? In other words, why don't you have that information, what do they say? 95 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Well, it's not been clear. I mean, I do have to take some responsibility for not pushing and pushing to get it. But as we get closer to the time line, we absolutely need to know who is in both of our systems so that we can provide the support. I am expecting a response from Deputy Secretary Joanne Lauer (ph.), who is in charge of the Office of Children, Youth and Families, which brings up another question -- what's the coordination within DPW between Secretary Heller and Secretary Lauer as they look at the impact of welfare reform on these same families?

Well, we would like this committee to work very closely with you so that we're working in the same direction. We do have the feeling that the City approach is much more realistic, and that's probably because the City is where the problems are going to be, if any exist source. And, of course, I'll speak only for myself at this point. It always seemed to me that when the so-called reform welfare reform law was passed, there really was no intention to do 96 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 anything other than to just dump a lot of people, get them off of welfare. And nobody, I think, among the active group seeking the so-called welfare reform, I don't think anybody intended to have the kind of programs that you have been developing, that the City has been developing and that all of the advocacy groups have been developing. I think you are succeeding in dealing with the terrible impact that would have occurred, and I just hesitate to think what would have happened if there weren't groups like yours on the alert, you know, in City government, on the alert to prevent the worst from happening. But we want to work with you closely, and we want to work closely with all of the advocacy groups because we've just got to reach the goals that so many of us are talking about, and we can't let, you know, ourselves be a society where people are going to be starving to death or living on the streets. 'Cause I think that's the direction that was originally intended. Councilwoman Tasco?

I just have a 97 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 question. Are the other county offices, the Department of Human Services offices, talking to the State? Or do you have all one message, or does it seem to be that it's just Philadelphia raising the question about all of the problems associated with this welfare reform? COMMISSIONER REEVES: I think what has happened, we have 67 counties and 67 different approaches. The TANF program is a State-run program; whereas the Child Welfare Program is a county-run program, which makes it somewhat difficult for the two to really communicate with each other. I do -- I have heard that, you know, places like Allegheny County are very concerned. Some of the smaller counties, I don't know whether their child welfare systems are as concerned as we are because they have fewer children. You know, when someone says either 15,000 or 26,000 heads of household, if you look at that as 2-1/2 children minimum average per household, that's a lot of children that will be impacted by this. 98 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 So I think here in Philadelphia, the stakes are much, much higher than in some of the other counties.

I guess my concern is that I get a sense that the Department of Public Welfare in Harrisburg is not listening. And I'm wondering, is it because it's Philadelphia yelling again, and those liberals and do-gooders down there are making the noise, and we don't really know if what they're saying is true or not. That's why I asked if there are other counties across the State. Maybe some of the advocates who will testify will let us know what's happening in other parts of the State relative to this whole issue of welfare reform, because we know what the attitude of Harrisburg is about towards Philadelphia. COMMISSIONER REEVES: Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Commissioner. We're looking forward to close. Cooperative work. COMMISSIONER REEVES: Thank you. So am I. 99 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

The next panel is going to consist of: Fred Dedrick, Director of the Job Policy Network; Richard Weishaupt, Community Legal Services; Shelly Yanoff, Executive Director Philadelphia Citizens for Children and Youth; Gloria Guard, Executive Director of People's Emergency Center; And then I would ask Robert McGinley, the Agency Relations Manager for United Way, and Barry Seymour, the Assistant Executive Director of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission to take seats within the. . . Despite the fact that we're in our second day of what had been billed as a one-day hearing, and we still have many witnesses to go, we'd like to urge folks to summarize rather than to read their statements. That, of course, is provided the summary will be shorter than the reading of the statement. Our experience sometimes goes to the contrary. So we'd like your cooperation. We'd 100 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 like to get if possible at this stage, we'd like to complete the record so that our staff can study the record, can communicate with various agencies and with the City and with the State and move forward. Mr. Dedrick, would you begin?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Fred Dedrick. I'm Director of the Jobs Policy Network. I want to thank the members of City Council for calling this hearing and for asking us to testify. Copies of my testimony are available and have been distributed so I will try to summarize. The Jobs Policy Network is a broad-based coalition of employers, community organizations, and educational institutions and other groups working together to develop a highly-skilled workforce for greater Philadelphia. Our region is a region with a workforce capable of meeting the needs of the Philadelphia-area employers, but also a region where individuals, because of their education and training, have many opportunities to obtain with wages and benefits sufficient to support a family. 101 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I want to make just three important points today. And, again, this is a summary of my testimony. The first point is, welfare reform must not be examined in isolation. It must be looked at as a component of workforce development. Secondly, workforce development in this city, in this region is absolutely essential to our economic development. And, thirdly, we have the resources to do both of these things: to make welfare workforce development and make workforce development a component of economic development. Prior to this position, I was Director of Economic Development for Greater Philadelphia First. I spent ten years trying to work with companies, trying to attract them to the Philadelphia region. What companies want to see now in a region is not just low taxes or green fields or a nice Center City building, what they care about most is their workforce. Because without a workforce, all those other things are irrelevant. I can also say that in that ten years, 102 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I learned about what our competition is doing. And our competition is beating us badly. In that time, I realized that the state of Tennessee, the state of the North Carolina had two people full-time in Pennsylvania working to attract companies from Pennsylvania to their states. That was their job, to bring companies from Pennsylvania to their states. I can also tell you that the workforce development programs now are a key component of how states try to attract companies from other states and how states compete for companies, for new companies. North Carolina and South Carolina are examples of very, very aggressive states in how they use their community college program. Essentially, if you're going to provide more than 50 jobs, they will basically give you free training for all your new employees and do that at no cost to you. I can tell you that the state of Georgia.

May I interrupt you for a moment. Please, private conversations, please take them out in the hallway. It's 103 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 difficult to hear. Go ahead, sir.

Thank you. I can tell you that the state of Georgia takes its lottery proceeds and invests it entirely in education, and it does that in order to provide this benefit: if you have a B average in high school, you can attend any state university in Georgia for free. Now, that's very difficult to compete against.

I think they're wonderful programs.

A wonderful program, absolutely. The point here is that other states are moving very aggressively on investing in their workforce. And if we continue to look at welfare reform in isolation and not look at it as an opportunity to develop the workforce, we'll be missing a very important point. In fact, the governor's Executive Order of December 1997 defines what he would like to see in the workforce system of the state of Pennsylvania, the goals of Pennsylvania's 104 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 workforce system. And here are the three goals he lists: economic opportunity for all citizens, economic self-sufficiency and individual responsibility, and an educated workforce with relevant skills. I don't think we'd have much arguments with those goals. It has been stated before, those goals are in contradiction to the welfare reform policies being currently followed by the Department of Public Welfare.

Could you submit to the committee at a later time a specific program that you would like to see adopted with respect to an educated workforce?

Yes, I can do that, Councilman. I think that many of the things that have been stated here today are components to that. The Jobs Policy Network's emergency agenda for welfare reform is part of my testimony. A number of people have already testified in favor of that agenda. And, basically, it goes back to the theme that we've heard for these two days; and that is education and training, that's the only 105 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 way we're going to be able to compete.

Thank you.

An important --

I'm going to ask you to summarize.

Okay.

I'm really trying to make it make possible for everybody to be heard because we have to recess again at 1 o'clock.

Okay, let me get then to the numbers because I think that's really important. In 1994, the Pennsylvania case load hit its peak. There was 788,768 recipients cash assistance. In fiscal year '98, there were 463,000. The spending in '94 was at $1.3 billion. The spending at the end of 1998 was at $773 million. That's a drop of over $500 million. The surplus that's available currently in the State from TANF and from the savings on the State maintenance of effort requirement provide significant funding for all the State could want to do in education and training. The important thing is to change Act 35 106 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 so that we can use those resources for education and training for the workforce and thereby allow them to move into self-sufficiency. The bottom line is simply how many people since March of 1997 have moved into self-sufficiency. The State cannot answer that, but that is the right because that's what the State's Act 35 requirement is, it's right in the legislation, self-sufficiency. That's what the governor says is the goal of the workforce, self-sufficiency. So unless we have those outcomes, we really cannot judge whether the program's a success.

Thank you. Let that be your conclusion. Thank you very much, it's been very helpful. Mr. Weishaupt.

Thank you. My name is Richard Weishaupt. I'm a senior attorney with Community Legal Services. And I thank you for the opportunity to testify here today. I want to make a couple of points just in passing, and then we can go back over them, if 107 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 you have any interest in doing so. I want to talk about the nitty-gritty of what happens in March of '99. Not because the other questions particularly --

Well, go right ahead and tell us about it.

Okay, all right. We've got some number of people, at least 15,000, probably more like 25,000 people who are going to have to be doing something that looks like work for hours a week. Most of those people will 13 not get jobs in the sense of, you know, you go 14 there, you get paid from your employer, and it 15 looks and feels like a job with salary. 16 Most of those people will also not be 17 in the special programs that the City has 18 designed. Most of those people are going to be in 19 a program that is euphemistically called 20 "community service," which is basically workfare, okay? We still don't know even what the standards are for those slots, whether people can -- how it can be exploitative or not, who can sponsor those slots, who's going to pay for the 108 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Worker's Compensation for those slots, even where, if I'm a parent and I need to be working the 4 hours a week and I have no problem with that, and 5 I just say, Look, I cannot find a job, where do I 6 go to volunteer? Maybe I'll pick up some skills, 7 maybe I'll make some connections. There isn't 8 even a clear plan right now, less than four months 9 before this starts, there isn't a plan for where I 10 can go and look. 11 What Deputy Secretary Heller talks 12 about is, Well, we're going to give people 13 personal responsibility to go out. So they're 14 going to be knocking on the door of your 15 Councilmatic offices, of Community Legal Services 16 office, of Fred's office, of Gloria's office, of 17 all these different offices. 18

I don't like to 19 interrupt, but is it possible for you to put forth 20 a program that you think meets the needs that you're talking about? We've heard -- you know, we know that we face calamitous things.

At the very least, Councilman, what we need to do is for DPW to put their cards on the table so that somebody can take 109 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 charge. So that, yes, I would be willing to help, as would a number of people in this room, to help design a program that services people's need.

I would like to urge that that be done.

We've been banging heads on that for a long time, and so far, nothing.

Well, I think it may be different if the City and the Council can cooperate.

I think so.

But we would like to receive from you as soon as possible what you think needs to be done in a specific program. Don't tell us how bad the conditions are going to be if it's not done because we know that. But we want to know what you are suggesting has to be done. 'Cause we think Community Legal Services probably is in the best position of any one group to have an overall picture of everything. If it includes legislation or a change in regulations, I think you ought to deal with that. 110 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671

Okay.

Because we need a working program, because I don't have any confidence in bureaucracy in general, whether it's State, City, or even City Council bureaucracy to achieve it.

Okay.

But you are living with the problems in the field, and I think you can develop that program. All right, would you undertake that? And could you undertake on behalf of the Community Legal Services to play a central role in helping to bring groups together to do that?

Yes.

Thank you. Shelly.

One more thing not. (Unidentified person addresses committee members off-mike.)

You can testify as soon as they finish here. (Same person continues to address committee members off-mike.)

You will be able to 111 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 but let's finish with this.

Mr. Weishaupt, go ahead.

A couple other points. (Same person continues to address committee members off-mike.)

Excuse me, could you please -- (Same person continues to address committee members off-mike.)

You will have an opportunity to testify. Let us finish with this panel, please. (Same person continues to address committee members off-mike.)

Thank you very much. Could we move on, please? (Applause.)

Mr. Weishaupt, would you please sum it up.

Sure. Councilman Cohen asked Secretary Heller about a way to avoid sanctions, and that's something that's very important. A lot of the 112 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 families that are in danger of being sanctioned are going to be on the case load of the Department of Health and Human Services and, I'm sorry, in (unintelligible) organization at DHS. And we need as a city to recognize the fact, I think, that the State isn't going to do much to avoid sanctioning people, and we need to make our organization -- the City's organizations as well as the nonprofits and organizations like myself out there so that we can prevent people from being sanctioned. And you know the reasons why. Because data in other states suggests that it is families like the families that are connected with DHS that most frequently fall victims to being sanctioned. We also need to pay particular attention to organizations that deal with the homeless, that deal with disabled children and with domestic violence. Do you know that in Philadelphia, the Welfare Department has been able to find only six families that have been victims of domestic violence so that they can exempt them from the work requirements. Six? I mean, I knew we had made 113 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 progress in the field of domestic violence, but I didn't realize we'd gone so far that there are only six families that the can find in their entire case load that have any connection. We also need to pay attention to the needs of language minorities. The literature suggesting -- and The New York Times has written some articles on this, that as the case loads have declined, one of the groups that gets left behind most often are people in language minorities because, basically, they offer them all these programs, only in English. And so, surprise, surprise, who's left? People who don't speak English very well. And we need to pay attention to that because I'm afraid what's going to happen is March 3rd's going to come and people are going to be sent letters in English saying, Do this or else, and they're not going to understand what they mean, and they're going to get cut off.

Thank you very much. Shelly Yanoff.

Good morning. I'm Shelly Yanoff. I'm the Director of Philadelphia Citizens 114 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 for Children and Youth, the region's child advocacy organization.

I think I'm going to ask you to read your statement; I think we'll do better that way.

Okay. I'll let that go. I'd like to tell you that our kids are being watched out for.

That was a compliment; that was not a --

Right. That Pennsylvania has made sure that kids whose families go off welfare are keeping their health-care coverage; that families on welfare with chronically ill children, of there are a substantial number if Philadelphia and nationally, are being exempted from at least the two-year State work requirement and being considered for the percent exemption 20 from the 5-year limit. I'd like to be able to tell you that there are special programs and special consideration for the large number of welfare recipients that Rich just referred to in Philadelphia for whom English is not their first 115 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 language, and the City estimates that that is over percent. 4 I'd like to tell you that families, 5 mothers who go off welfare, all know they're 6 entitled to help with child care, that the State 7 is not planning to increase the cost of child care 8 to them or make it harder for those who are 9 working part-time to get child care. 10 I'd like to you tell you that there's 11 no waiting list for subsidized child care, that 12 the State has used up all its allocated funds in 13 child care, and that there's no increase in child 14 abuse reports. 15 But if I told you any of those things, 16 I would be lying. 'Cause none of them is true. 17 I'd be lying because the welfare 18 caseworkers do not themselves get nor give clear 19 messages. The information they have to give is 20 complicated, and they're too overwhelmed to be able to provide the kind of assistance the families with whom they are dealing need. They also don't appear to have the tools to do the job. In our own United Way study, soon to be released, people who do not understand English or 116 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 who are unable to read were being sent on fruitless job searches. We found families who lost jobs because of sick children or because they didn't have child care and didn't know what to do or how to get it. We found people who needed a lot of education or at times just a little bit more being told they had to quit school go to work. Case after case that were interviewed told us they did not know they had a benefit available to them, they didn't understand what they were signing in their contract, or they thought their children's health benefits had a time and use limit where they thought they couldn't get child care. The State has not communicated its messages simply, and it hasn't communicated them at all in many cases. Because for many years, Medicaid was tied to welfare -- and I just want to take a minute on this because even members of Council do not seem to understand it. Medicaid for children is not subject to a time limit. As long as your income is low income, children in the City and 117 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 State are covered for health insurance. We gained so much in this country on children's health expansion in the last two years, but people are not taking advantage of it because they don't understand it. Recognizing the danger of this, Congress passed special appropriations for Medicaid outreach to the post-welfare population. But our state has not drawn down those dollars. We know that there are slightly more than 10,000 families or about 20,000 fewer children receiving welfare today than there were last year. These children all should have health insurance coverage. Yet there are almost 8,000 fewer children in Philadelphia receiving health insurance through Medicaid now than there were last year. Unfortunately, health insurance for kids is tracking the drop in cash assistance. In total, we've lost almost 20,000 kids from health insurance since 1996. And that's at a time when Medicaid eligibility was rising. We are not making sure, as are California and Massachusetts and other states, that children's health is 118 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 protected when their parents go off welfare.

Without a major effort on the part of the City and State, poor children will continue to suffer the consequences, and emergency rooms, health clinics, and hospitals in the poorest communities will be expected to be the doctor of choice, and somehow, the communities will have to pick up the bill. Already, we are seeing a sharp increase, something like percent, of children 12 without insurance in our health clinics. 13

What would the City 14 need to do -- the State obviously doesn't care 15 about Philadelphia children. What could the City 16 do? 17

The City needs to apply 18 pressure to the State, in the first instance, to 19 combine the Medicaid and CHIP programs and do 20 simple advertising. Health insurance is 21 available. Very simply just call this number. 22 And there should be one simple application. 23 If I have three children and one is 24 eligible for CHIP and two are eligible for 25 Medicaid, I should be able to make one application 119 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 out, and the State and the City should work together to put the applications in the right boxes, but my coverage should be maintained. And there's no reason -- the money is there, there's no reason not to do it, except to really, in the long run, inhibit people from getting health care for their kids. Every time a cash case is closed by the State, the State should assure that health insurance is kept open for children. Parents should be informed that their children are automatically still covered and that they won't need to reapply for a year. And when they need to reapply, they can do it by mail. Because we want people to take care of their kids' health, and we want them to avoid having to lose work to apply for care. And the message must be simple. Concerning child care, again, the message needs to be clear and the reality needs to be better. If we want parents to work, we have to provide child care. Providing more child care and making the process simpler is critical. It is not simply enough and there's not enough child care, and it's too costly. 120 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 In the last year, more child care is indeed being subsidized by the State and federal government, but there's still a substantial waiting list of more than 3,000 children in Philadelphia alone, 3,000 children are on the waiting list for subsidized child care. And this is as of Friday: In northwest Philadelphia, Councilwoman Tasco's and Councilman Cohen, 851 people, kids, are on the waiting list for child care. In west Philadelphia, 535. In south, 577. In north, 630. So we're telling everybody to go out to get work. And we're telling low-income workers that we'll help them with subsidized child care, and then we help them by putting them on a waiting list. That doesn't make sense.

Is there any truth to the rumor that women who are working and have child care, their children are being taken off welfare to provide day care for welfare TANF workers?

What is true is that if I apply for child care now, I get a higher priority if I'm coming off welfare than if I am and have 121 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 never been on welfare before but I'm very low-income. And those are the bulk of the waiting list, although not all. It is also true that the State has $20 million of unallocated -- of allocated -- I'm sorry, of appropriated funds for child care that it is not using. And that is one of the things that should be changed right away. (Applause.)

Concerning child care, we recommend three steps: First, Pennsylvania should follow the examples of Illinois and Rhode Island, among others, and say it will provide child care for all low-income workers. For about $11 million, the State can wipe out Philadelphia's current waiting list. That's a little more than half, just slightly more than half of what is the unappropriated child care fund, the surplus that the State has for child care. Second, the State has proposed child care regulations that set parent copays higher than that of the overwhelming majority of states. Currently, we have a good system, but the State is 122 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 proposing to make it much harder and much more expensive for a low-income family to have to pay for child care. It doesn't make sense. I've got the data in here. But, basically, we are going into being more expensive than the overwhelming majority of states. That doesn't make sense. The State should reconsider and reject its proposals. And those proposal are coming up on Thursday. (Unintelligible) is going to consider them, there's a hearing. We would urge all our delegation to reject those proposals because it doesn't make sense to say you want women to work and, oh, yeah, we're going to raise the cost of your copays. Thirdly, the State should provide subsidies for those parents who leave welfare to go to work and are working hours a week. 20 Another proposed change in the regulations of child care is that nobody will be able to get subsidized child care unless they're working 23 hours a week rather than just 20 hours a week. 24 Now, that makes no sense. I mean, 25 hours is how many hours you're supposed to be 123 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 working 20 hours a week is what people are -- there are lots of jobs that people can get for that. We ought to be able to support and not create obstacles for families. As we've mentioned, we've found many families whose children have chronic illnesses. Both the State and the City have to take steps to protect these children -- to assist in helping with child care if necessary, to waive or exempt their parents from work requirements. Society has not helped when mothers work and children are more at risk. We should look carefully at the increase of cost in the child abuse and neglect system. As Commissioner Reeves suggested, kinship care is very popular, we hope it will continue to be a way of caring for your family if the parents can't provide for them. It makes no sense to put kids more at risk because TANF may be threatening the people who would take them in. We should recognize the burden and the responsibility that family members are taking when they take in kids and not have those families being subject to being inhibited 124 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 from taking kids over, taking care of kids. Finally, we must recognize that a good job requires, preparation and education. And others before me have talked about the critical importance of counting education as a work requirement, of stretching the State's definition of work. In several weeks, we will release our study with the United Way study of 50 families who have been experiencing the system, whom we've interviewed a lot. And we will talk with you again about those findings. But it is amazing to look at and read the stories of lots of -- hundreds of people and see they fall into so many of the categories that public policy could and should address. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you very much.