COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE JOINT COMMITTEES ON LAW & GOVERNMENT AND HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, December 9, 1998 11:00 a.m. - - - - - - WELFARE REFORM HEARINGS - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform I N D E X General Auditor Robert Casey, Jr. . . . . . . Marva West, PA Social Services Union. . . . . 50 Talmadge Bellow, PA Social Services Union . . 62 Joe Morelli, Vice President, Institutional Advancement, Peirce Junior College. . . . . . 76 Arun Prabhakaran. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Forum Committee for the Black Radical Congress Rochelle Phillips, Social Supports Coordinator the Friends Neighborhood Guild. . . . . . . . 93 Leona Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 President, National Union of the Homeless Executive Director of the Employment Project John Austin, Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Right People Campaign Lawrence W. Roy, Private Citizen. . . . . . . 128 Barbara King, Private Citizen . . . . . . . . 134 Khalefat El, Sergeant-at-Arms . . . . . . . . 136 Right People's Campaign for Human Rights Paul Smith, Private Citizen . . . . . . . . . 142 Timothy Heyward, Private Citizen. . . . . . . 151 Joyce Taylor, J.T. Save the Children Assoc. 152 3 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform P R O C E E D I N G S
In view of the press conference being held with respect to Disney Land in the mayor's reception office at this moment, the joint committee on Law & Government and Human Services is going to recess until 11:30 a.m. We're told that the auditor general will be here at that time and the hearing will begin. So this is notice to all members of the committees and to the public generally that the hearing will be recessed for 30 minutes, until 11:30. Thank you. - - -
The joint committees of Law & Government and Health & Human Services is now in session to continue the welfare reform hearings. We're delighted that the first witness this morning is going to be Auditor General Robert Casey, whose reports on this subject have enlightened and alerted Pennsylvanians and Philadelphians in particular of the dangers that face us. Mr. Auditor General, please come forward. He also happens to be the distinguished 4 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform son of a distinguished father, and we welcome you here to Philadelphia. (Auditor General Robert Casey comes forward.)
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for not only inviting us but for making our appearance here possible. I also want to thank your colleague Councilman Ortiz for his help, and I do appreciate this opportunity to testify today about the status of welfare reform in Pennsylvania. And I think that today, I --
Mr. General, may I ask you to please identify yourself first for the record.
It's just a traditional part of the parliamentary procedure here.
But I want to emphasize that although we sit here today in Philadelphia in 5 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform City Council chambers, in many ways what I say today will speak to individuals in Harrisburg, specifically the governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Ridge and the entire General Assembly. I think it's important for people to understand that prior to my remarks. And I also want to say for the record that we have a prepared statement which I believe the committee has, and I'd respectfully request that that statement be made a part of the record.
And what I'll do is summarize those remarks that I made in the written statement. About years ago, a little over 20 17 years ago, just before he died, Senator Hubert H. 18 Humphrey of Minnesota set forth a moral test for 19 government. And he basically said that the moral 20 test of government is how it treats those in the dawn of life, those in the shadows of life, and those in the twilight of life. That is the moral test which any government, and certainly Pennsylvania state government, must meet. Not just when it feels like it, not just when the 6 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform budget looks good; it's got to meet that test all of the time. Governor Casey once said, when speaking about Pennsylvania, he said that the family of Pennsylvania must leave no one out and must leave no one behind. And I think when we take both of those statements, they speak to what we're here gathered today to talk about. Because this is a critical issue for the state of Pennsylvania, not just for our largest city, Philadelphia; it's a critical issue for all of the cities, all of the towns, the rural areas of Pennsylvania, that we focus on this issue right now. So what are we talking about here? Let me just step back for a minute to talk about what we're focussed on today. We're talking today -- and I know that both members of Council who are here with us today and others who will be here with us today, I know you will understand this, but I think it's important to restate it. We're here today to talk about real life, not some obscure program in Harrisburg, not some discussions simply about case loads and numbers -- we're here to talk about real life. 7 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform Real life, for example, for a single mother who's struggling to make ends meet, who's struggling to find a job or struggling at the find child care, struggling just every day just to get through the day, to get transportation, to make sure that her children can get to quality child care, to make sure she can work so that she can provide for those children and to love them with peace of mind. So I think that sometimes we get lost in the numbers and the details, and I think it's important to remember who we're talking about when we talk about these issues. There are a lot of people that are going to be affected by this, this looming deadline of March 3rd. Some estimates say it will be as high as 25,000 people just in Philadelphia alone. And, of course, that doesn't include children, that's just the adults. So I'm here today to do a couple of things. But primarily I'm here today to say that Governor Ridge and the General Assembly of Pennsylvania must commit the time and the energy and the resources necessary to make sure that 8 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform welfare reform really does work. And I noticed in the newspaper over the Thanksgiving holiday, I read stories all over the state about all the time and energy and commitment they brought to stadiums and all the time and energy and committee that he and the legislature over the last four years have brought to corporate tax cuts -- in other words, big corporations get tax cuts every year. So if they can spend all of that time on stadiums and corporate tax cuts and stay up late at night and lobby people, find the resources, drink the coffee, do everything they can to focus on an issue like that, they can bring the same dedication and the same energy and zeal to finding the right solutions to welfare reform. I think the families in this state would like to read a story about the governor and legislature staying up late at night, worrying about and focussing on and solving the problems that we takes face in welfare reform. But in the last couple months, the silence from Harrisburg on this issues has been deafening. And I think it's about time that they spoke directly to this issue. 9 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS.
- Welfare Reform So I'm here to propose some solutions. I don't, nor does my department have all of the answers. We are not as expert as some who may testify before this committee, but I think we have some practical solutions which focus on the problems of that single mother that I talked about before. First of all, let me say what we're doing in a practical way that I think will have an impact on this issue. There are two performance audits which our department is conducting which will have an impact. The first is a performance audit on how we're spending all of that new money that's coming into Pennsylvania. 4 billion (with a B) dollars that are spent through the temporary assistance for needy program, the so-called TANF Program, the federal program, and also the related child care development block grant money, how we're spending that for welfare to work, where the money going, who's going to benefit, and how the State is dealing with it. Also, we're doing an audit of the Department of Public Welfare's regulation and oversight of child care in Pennsylvania, and 10 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform specifically subsidized child care. I'm not going to go into the detail here that's in the statement, but we're doing those two things right now, and we have hope to have the first audit the on TANF and how that money's spent, we hope to have that completed by February of 1999.
And, Mr. General, that's money that's supposed to be dedicated to the welfare reform program?
That's correct. And I think it's important that someone give an accounting of where that money's going and how it's spent, so we should have answers to that. And I know that Councilman Ortiz, you had a series of questions which you read into the record for Deputy Secretary Heller to answer. Several of those-- and I hope all of those questions, we should be able to answer those in the course of that audit.
We have not gotten a response as of yet, as of this date, from Deputy Secretary Heller. We hope that she is much more 11 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform quicker with the problems of welfare people than she is in responding to the questions that we have given her.
Well, I know the feeling because in our department, we often don't get responses very quickly from that department, but I don't want to bore you with the details of that. But let me say at the outset, I'm going to make about four recommendations. I think it's important to review those quickly before we get into some more detail. Four recommendations are as follows, and I'll use a lot of shorthand here. But first of all, we think -- I think that the state of Pennsylvania should expand the definition of what constitutes work for those who are subject to the requirements after two years. In other words, after March 3, 1999, what will be the definition of "work." Right now, it's very narrow, it's very restrictive, and it cannot include education and training. I think that's a mistake. So that's recommendation number one. The second one involves the individual assessments by caseworkers. We think that that 12 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform process has to be improved dramatically. In other words, when a welfare recipient comes before a caseworker employed by the Department of Public Welfare, how is that process going to work? Is that going to be a process which is done by a highly trained person, or is it going to be done by a person who's told by Harrisburg to keep the numbers down no matter what, and I think that's something that we have to look at carefully. We also think legally, legally, that the State cannot sanction someone, take them off the rolls automatically; that they have to conduct by law that individual case by case assessment, and that process we can talk a lot about.
That would seem to me to be something that lawyers call "due process."
I would think if it's not due process, it's a very close relative of due process, no question about it. Thirdly, we have to as a state eliminate barriers for those who are trying to lift themselves out of poverty or off of dependency. I think the Council and members here 13 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform are well familiar with those barriers -- child care barriers, which I'll talk about; jobs; all of the barriers that we can focus on. An fourthly and finally, just as a quick review, we think that the State of Pennsylvania, this administration, the Ridge administration, should figure out a way to eliminate or at least reduce the adverse impact of the so-called full family sanction. In other words, when an individual in that family is sanctioned because they have not followed the rules, so to speak, the impact of that can affect an entire family. We think that that should be changed. And now I just want to get into some of the more detail. I know we have a lot of witnesses to follow so I'll try to move quickly.
Well, I think it's very important, General, that you take whatever time is needed --
-- to explain these issues because all hope that the governor would use his position, use what's generally called the 14 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform "bully pulpit" to explain to the people of Pennsylvania what they face and the steps that ought to be taken to meet it. Everybody would welcome a program that really brings in genuine work pays affordable wages so that people can live in dignity and support their families. And we have found the silence from the governor appalling. And when we have invited him, we've done it consistently, the governor's representatives to explain what the governor's policies are, we have met a brick wall because we've just not been able to get answers. And you, so far as the state level, have been the only voice we've heard calling attention to these problems and doing as you're doing right now, pointing out what's needed. So we need that kind of assistance so that we can to go out into our communities and alert the people so that they can contact their representatives in the General Assembly, both the House and the Senate, and contact the governor's office so we can face something other than the catastrophe beginning in early March. So we welcome you and we don't want you 15 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform to feel rushed.
'Cause, after all, it may be your office that's the only place where we might be able to find out where the money really went.
Incidently, we are going to be joined in the course of these hearing by a number of other members of the two committees. We just came from the mayor's reception room where there was a program dedicated to the coming to Philadelphia of Disney. It promises to deal with certain important aspects of Philadelphia life, but nothing could be as really important as the subject we're talking about here. And I'm David Cohen, Chairman of the Law and Government Committee. Councilwoman Marian Tasco, who's Chairman of the Health & Human Services Committee will be joining us shortly. To my left has been Councilman Ortiz, who's been spearheading the investigation of the situation and trying to bring public attention to the issue. And to my right is Councilman Frank Rizzo. And we will be introducing other members 16 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform of these two committees as come into the chambers. Thank you, General, please proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I said before, and I think Councilman Cohen and Councilman and Councilman Rizzo know this, March 3rd is the deadline that we all have to focus on. And those who are receiving assistance at that point in time are required to work hours per week. And I think that if that 11 were to proceed as it's going right now, there 12 would be some very harsh and very onerous results 13 for a lot of families in Pennsylvania. 14 But I think and we think, after looking 15 at this issue carefully, we think that 16 Pennsylvania can avoid that harsh impact by doing 17 a couple of things. First of all, as I said 18 before, expanding that definition of work to 19 include education and training for a limited 20 period of time. That would give people the opportunity to invest their time in something which would be productive, which would enhance their ability to leave dent. And I think it's important to understand the two basic mandates that TANF, the 17 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform federal law, imposes on states. There are basically two mandates. Because what the other side on this issue will say is, they'll say, Well, if you change the definition of work, you're going to hurt the State's effort, they're going to lose money down the road because they'll be penalized. That's not true for two reasons. Number one, the first mandate is the so-called individual eligibility determinations. In other words, the states decide those. They're given some discretion, some latitude. For example, they're given some discretion as to what is the definition of work. So that gives us an opening, a possibility to work with. The second part of this is what's called the minimum work participation rates. In other words, looking at the aggregate, the aggregate case load of those who are on assistance. That is very strict, under federal law; it's dictated by federal law. We don't have the option to not comply with that -- we have to. But we think that because the State is meeting that obligation, meeting that minimum work participation rate, met it last year, appears to 18 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform be meeting it this year, and we probably will meet it in the future, the next couple years. Because we're okay there, that gives us a lot of room to work, specifically with that definition of work. So that's an important point, an important legal point of what our room to maneuver is on this issue. Because Pennsylvania's exceeding those rates right now and will do so even if the work definition is expanded. So that's point number one. We think that that's something the State can do, and we think the Ridge administration should act upon that. Secondly, Pennsylvania must do a case-by-case eligibility determination before terminating an individual who is the recipient of welfare benefits. There can be no termination under state law if an individual has made a good-faith effort to try to find work, to try to comply with the rules; and secondly, if there is a good reason why that person has been unsuccessful. If they can meet that test, this state cannot eliminate them from the rolls. Now, we may have some debate about 19 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform that, but I think that we're on very sound legal ground about the reading of the statute on that issue. So I think that's important.
Do you have any thought, General, with respect to the job? Suppose there are no jobs available? Would that fit if someone has shown by the record that they've sought employment but the private sector just has failed to provide the jobs that are necessary?
Right. And I think the key there is that it's a good-faith attempt. And I think the focus of most welfare reform programs around the country is the focus on those who, for whatever reason, even those that are well aware of what they're supposed to do, they're well aware of what they're required to do under the law, and they just ignore it, and they don't commit that good-faith effort and they don't have a good reason. And I think that's a small percentage of those out there. Reading the summaries by some other individuals, reading newspaper stories, you would think that there weren't many people who could 20 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform meet that good-faith test. I think there are a lot of them, and we have to make sure as a state that we objectively look at those people and not make a subjective decision which is driven by a political priority from Harrisburg.
Should there be a responsibility on the part of state to see to it that there are successful outreach programs so that women with small children who may not be able to read the English language, for example, or may suffer from illiteracy, shouldn't the state take steps to make certain that they do whatever's necessary to make sure that people understand the requirements? 'Cause we find in Philadelphia frequently that water is shut for nonpayment of bills and that the Water Department just assumes that the people have received the bills, have received the warnings and understand them. And often, when the investigation is made, we find to the contrary. I'm wondering whether that kind of outreach would fit within your definitions as to the requirement of the State to make sure that 21 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform each case is examined so that if there's any bad-faith finding, it's based on the premise that the people understood what their obligations were but consciously just neglected them or refused to follow them only. And only in such a case, it would seem to me, would there be any justification for taking any action. I must say there even, I'm troubled; I'm troubled by what I think is a total concept foreign to American law and American social policy. If the mother fails to do what's needed, is it right to punish the children? And if you have any thought along those lines, we would certainly welcome them, too.
Absolutely. And I think it leads into what I was about to say next about the barriers. And you pointed out some of them, not just with welfare reform, but with other issues. The obvious barrier to employment is the scarcity of jobs. I don't think there's anyone who's appeared in this chamber or anywhere else who would say that there are plenty of jobs out there for those who are looking. That's a big problem, and it's a barrier and a hurdle over 22 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform which some people cannot get over. And I think we have to factor that in when those eligibility are made by DPW. That's on obvious one. The other one, which I know you've heard testimony on is child care, the DPW regulations now, and I'll talk more about those in a minute. But DPW claims now that the new regulations will prevent people from having to be bounced from one child-care system to another within the State-subsidized program. And I hope that happens, I hope they're right about that, that would be an improvement. But right now, we face the problem of a waiting list of about 12,000 people, and at the same time, you have this waiting list. The solution to that by the Department of Public Welfare, the Ridge administration was to say, Well, we're going to increase copayments for those who are receiving child care. In other words, so if you're a single mother with two children who needs child care and you're making about 11,000 bucks a year, under the new regulations, your weekly copayment, the amount you've got to come up with every week, goes from 5 23 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform bucks a week to 15 bucks. So it's a 200 percent increase. And you just factor that in over a year, and $520 more has to come off the back of someone who's making 11,000 bucks a year. The rationale and the premise that they make is ridiculous. The premise is, We've got these people over here who are waiting for child care, and we need money to pay for it. And you know who's going to pay for it? You, who's making 11,000 bucks a year and has 2 kids. That's ridiculous. It's ridiculous on its face, but it's even -- it's unconscionable when we know right now that we've got hundreds of millions of new dollars coming into this state right now for child care, welfare reform. We've got a budget surplus that would choke a horse right now, and we're telling people in this state, through these regulations, that they've got to pay for that so that someone who's almost as poor as they are or maybe has a little more money than they do can get child care. That's outrageous. A lot of people in this state have spoken against it, and those regulations will go into effect in February unless 24 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform they're changed.
You either put food on the table or you pay for the day care.
You've got to make -- the choices that the State is putting are a really, really very bad situation.
And with no shortage of funds for baseball stadiums and football stadiums.
No. And, you know, people, you know, they stay up all night, you know, drinking the coffee and lobbying and pushing and pulling and finding money and creative financing schemes for stadiums for stadiums or corporate tax cuts or anything else. But when it comes to these people issues, there's silence, there's dodging, there's ducking, and weaving and ignoring. It's outrageous. You know, under the federal standard for child care, the federal "touchstone," I'll call it, is affordability for child care. In other words, we as a government, federal or state, 25 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform are going to help people with child care based on the issue of affordability. And I think, in this state, lately, even though there's more money spent, overall money spent on child care because of the new wave of federal money, they've actually cut state money. That's another story. But instead of focussing on affordability, the focus seems to be, in state government, number crunching. And I don't think in this state, at any time, but especially when we're trying to move people from welfare to work, I don't think that affordability should take a back seat to number crunching. Another area, which I know you've heard testimony about, which I won't get into too deeply, is transportation, the whole issue of reverse commute for city dwellers to get to jobs in the suburbs. I know that there's been a lot of collaboration in this town about that, private-sector and government agencies working together, and I applaud that. We have to have the same effort statewide on transportation. And then the next barrier is the whole issue of caseworker training. Now, there's been a 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform lot written about this, and I can't say that I've done my own analysis or survey, but just based upon what's on the public record and newspapers and studies about caseworkers in some cases, in some cases, not every case, but in some cases, not knowing the regulations. That's one problem -- not being able to communicate answers to those who are looking to them for answers, and also not being able to be reached. So there's a communication breakdown. So you have a situation where someone may not have a good communication with their caseworker, and then guess who decides whether they're going to be cut off from benefits? That caseworker, who, in some cases, may not have been giving them all the information, they may have been hard to reach, they may not have been adequately trained, and all the rest.
Exactly, exactly. So we have to focus as a case on state on caseworkers. I guess there's one study showed that 80 percent, 80 percent, of the recipients of public assistance 27 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform that they interviewed in this one study, 80 percent did not know that they could get help with child care. Now, that's the kind of communication breakdown that you, Councilman Cohen, that you talked about before, in other issues. The second-to-last issue I want to talk about is the so-called Three Strikes Rule, the full family sanction rule, where, if after the two years, let's just take -- after the two years, if you have a young mother who's got two children and she, for some reason, is in violation and is sanctioned, she loses her benefits for 30 days. And then, say, she gets sanctioned a second time, she loses her benefits for 60 days. In both of those cases, the children are impacted as well. But then on the third violation, she loses benefits forever. Now, I don't think that anyone in this state, no matter what part of the ideological spectrum they come from, thinks that a young child should be sanctioned permanently because of mistakes that their parent made. And you mentioned that -- you made that point before. Many of these families, as you know, 28 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform and you've heard testimony about this, many of these families are dealing with chronic illnesses -- either a chronic illness that the child has or several children have, or that the parent has, and that's yet another barrier for that family. So I call on today the Ridge administration and the General Assembly to eliminate or at least reduce the adverse impact of that full family sanction. Connecticut -- and we cite in our written testimony a number of other states, what they're doing. Connecticut, the state of Connecticut, in order to mitigate that problem, has provided food and rent vouchers for families. We ought to look at options like that for Pennsylvania so that children do not suffer because of this sanction. And, finally, when we get to the crux of what we're doing here and the crux of what I'm doing here today -- I think it's what you said earlier in your remarks, Mr. Chairman, is that a lot of this is the attention and the focus brought to it. And I think the Ridge administration 29 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform and all of those individuals what work for the Ridge administration, the governor himself, his front office, his Department of Public Welfare Secretary, the deputy secretary who appeared before this committee, all of those individuals should publicly explain in great detail for families in this state what's going to happen on March 3rd, because it's apparent there's a lot of confusion, there are a lot of problems, there are a lot of mistakes that have been made. And I think they have the responsibility to explain to the people of this state, and especially to the families that going to be adversely impacted, what's going to happen and what they're going to do about it to soften the blow that will happen for some families. And they do that in a way that reaches out to people. They' shouldn't do it in a way which sends out a policy paper that gets mailed around. They should do it in a dramatic way that reaches the most people possible. And when a governor in this state focuses on an issue, he or she can bring tremendous attention and tremendous energy and 30 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform resources to issues like that. And there's no 3 issue right now that requires more attention in the next three months than the issue of welfare reform. And I think that all of us have to focus on that. Let me just conclude with some observations.
You know, when you think about welfare reform in this state or in any other state, this is not an issue about number and budgets and case loads; this is an issue about people, real people trying to deal with real life. It's about that single mother that I talked about before who's trying to lift her family out of dependency, who's trying to do the right things, who's trying to provide child care, who's trying to provide work so that her family can sustain itself. And that mother is in -- she can be in Scranton or Aliquippa or Connellsville out in western Pennsylvania, a small town, or here in Philadelphia. And it's not limited to one area of the state or one county or one city. State government -- the crux of all of this, I think, is that state government must demonstrate that it 31 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform cares about her, that it really cares about her, and that it cares about her children and what's going to happen to her children with these new regulations and these new laws, that we really do care about what happens to that family as they walk down that difficult road to self- sufficiency. And that's what this is all about. And it's really about even more than whether that woman is able to find a job or whether she's able to provide child care for her children. It's really about, I think, a lot more than that. I think we, as a state all of us, I think, want to allow her and want to enact policies which will give her peace of mind, the peace of mind to know that this system is going to support her and help her -- not to not to give her a handout, but to help her and assist her in that difficult process. And also that system is going to support her to give her peace of mind not just to live, but to dream, to dream about her children's future in a very, very great state, to give her the opportunity to dream about their future. That's what this is about. It's about 32 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform more than all of the things that we talked about today. Every family, no matter how wealthy or no matter how poor they are, ought to have the opportunity to dream. That's what our whole country is about, and I think that's what Pennsylvania must be about. And that, that promise, that is the promise of Pennsylvania, and that's the promise that we must keep. And I think, whether it's the individuals in this room today or those who are in the legislature or the governor or anyone else who's involved in this issue, all of us, all of us have an obligation to make Pennsylvania the best that it can be, to make Pennsylvania the best state possible. We all have an obligation to make this a commonwealth in life as well as in name, a place where people can have opportunity and can dream and strive and lift themselves out of dependence. I think, at the bottom line, I think it has to be a place where we truly are one family. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much, 33 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform General. (Applause.)
We think you've set forth a program that's not only doable, but is an absolute must program because I just can't comprehend, as we approach the millennium a government saying to the people, You have our permission to starve, to live on the streets. Government has the other responsibility, of providing the opportunities that you talked about. And the dreams, Mr. General, I must say, can only come not when the stomach is empty and there's no roof over the head, but it's got to come by saying that every family is guaranteed, under our form of government, an opportunity to raise their family in a healthy environment. And we thank you very much. I'd like to ask Councilman Ortiz who I know has a series of questions.
Thank you. Auditor General, in terms of the surplus that we have, and given the rationale of 34 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform the Ridge administration and the State legislature that this is a "first work state," that you got to go out -- not training, not aspect of looking at how capable and what capacity you have to go out and find work, but you just go out there and find monies. There is no planning that I see anywhere of any jobs program coming forward to supplement the TANF requirements. There's no jobs programs that are going to take care of that great majority of individuals that, on March the 3rd, will be affected and impacted. Did see any of that and do you have any idea in which way this surplus that we have currently in the state level can be used to put forward a plan along those lines?
Well, I think that there are ways that we could make some target investments in programs that work. For example, in our statement, we talk about just one small example. The state of Maryland has a program where they provide opportunity for -- because they have a need for transportation and also a need for jobs, they try to, in essence, marry the two, 35 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform where they help individuals to obtain jobs within that industry -- in other words, to develop small businesses that will transport people who need that kind of transportation. So you're almost dealing with two barriers at once. I think that if this state focuses on this issue, I think there's money to invest in it. No one is saying that we've got to spend all of our surplus; we need that for economic downturns, and we can't spend all of the surplus. But we can, I think, make target investment in programs which will help people not just find work, but will help people invest in jobs that they can support their families on. And I think that there are a lot of programs around the country that other states are doing that we should take a hard look at. What I'm afraid has happened, frankly, is that we have a good economy. That's point number one. Point number two is that this has not been a priority in Harrisburg, okay, not at all. Point number three is that, you know, the law was passed, the state law was passed in 1996, and I'm afraid that there are some people in Harrisburg 36 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform that think that all you have to do is pass a law that's called "reform," stamp the word "reform" on it, and then the bureaucracy will be implemented, don't worry about it. And that's very dangerous. It stifles, I think, creativity, it leads to a situation where the train is going and there's no way to stop it, and don't worry about it because we have a surplus and everybody's happy, and the and unemployment rate statewide is low.
So I mean a lot of the creativity and energy and resources which we can bring to this have not been examined or explored. And, yet, we have this deadline facing us.
We had quite an extensive discussion, and former Councilman Ed 37 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform Schwartz challenged Deputy Secretary Heller in terms of the very aspect that you were speaking about, the expansion of the definition of work, and she was accused of, in essence, trying to run a game on people by not telling the truth as to what all of these regulations meant and giving the impression that if we do expand the definition, that it would hurt us somehow in our ability to satisfy federal requirements and so on down the line. Do you see this at all as a realistic factor in our ability to expand the definition, or is it just another rhetorical barrier that is being put forward by the deputy secretary?
We think, and in our written testimony, we expound on it more than I can here, but we think that not only have we met those bigger aggregate requirements, not only have we met them but we've met them with a lot of room. For example, I think in the first year, and these are by DPW members, in the first year, the percent number, and I won't get into all of the calculations here because I -- it doesn't, um. . . Here's basically what the calculations 38 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform are: In the first year, their rate that they had to achieve was about percent. What they 4 actually achieved was 23 percent, so they have a 5 lot of room there. 6 We think in fiscal year 1999, the 7 federal fiscal year, that what they need is only 8 about a 1 percent rate, because their rate has 9 come down because of the progress that's been made 10 since 1995 on people obtaining work. We think, by our calculations, they only need 1 percent -- that's the number they have to reach, and we think they're going to be able to do that. So I don't think the argument that expanding the definition of work adversely impacting the state holds any water. We think that they can do both, that they can meet those aggregate requirements, and at the same time, expand that definition of work. See, this would be easier, I think, for people to agree with, people like me, people like both of you and others around the state. This would be a lot of a lot easier to digest if we knew that this system was working very well, that the communication problem wasn't there, if we knew 39 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform that people were being trained, if we knew people were on the road to self-sufficiency. If there weren't any big problems with this, it would be a different story, we'd have a harder argument to make. But you can't say, on the one hand, that we can't expand the definition of work because it will ruin our -- allegedly ruin our big picture, which it won't; and at the same time, acknowledge that there are problems with communication, there's big problems with child care, there's a lot of problems here. So, I mean, I think any policy-maker -- a governor or a legislator -- must be open to the idea to say, Okay, look, we thought it would work out a little better; it's not working out as well. We've got to make some changes. And no one in politically or terms of reality -- this is going to occur. Welfare reform's here to stay. There's a consensus in Washington and I think there's a consensus around the state. And we've got to deal with it. I didn't like it when it came, but I think office have to deal with it. But I think that one thing 40 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform that --
And you didn't like it because I think you knew, as most of us, everybody in this room knew, that it was born not out of good intentions but out of evil intentions, and that's the reason there are so many flaws in the system. That's the reason -- there's inattention to the real human problems that are being caused. The drive was to get people off of welfare without respect to the lack of jobs that were available. And I think that that is what we're trying to do through these hearings and through education, I think, is to take a thing conceived in sin, as I see it, and make it something, you know, that people can live with. Everybody agrees it's much better for individuals and families to be in a work situation rather than in a welfare situation, but all of the programs that you're suggesting should have been in place at the same time that the legislation was enacted instead of being in a situation where people are confronted with homelessness, with no 25 means of supporting their families. 41 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform So I just don't begin -- assuming that the governor of the state, because he's been a strong advocate always of cut the relief rolls, not worrying about what happens after you cut them. And I think your efforts are moving in the right direction, and I think an informed and educated electorate will take the correct action to see that government doesn't revert back to the middle ages when people starved to death or froze on the streets.
I think too often people in Harrisburg are concerned with the scoreboard and numbers crunching and, you know, whether the rolls going down. And if they're going down, fine, everything's okay.
Yeah. That seems to be the only score card they're interested in.
I don't know where those people are at. The one thing that bothers me, and perhaps your office will be able to determine for us, because we've asked the question, how do you determine that those people are actually employed, how do you determine that they're actually keeping employment that they were 42 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform placed on when they went off the welfare rolls? And they have no answers. They just say that the welfare rolls are down but that they don't know where the people have gone to. They cannot identify where it is that they've been placed. They cannot tell us that people that were off the welfare rolls and whether they have come back or not, whether they have entered into a cycle of just going off, getting a job for four months, five months, not holding it, going back on the welfare rolls. We don't know any of those things because they're not -- either they're not equipped to do it, they don't want to do it, they don't want to find out, they don't want to tell us the real truth about the numbers that are going off or not. And we need your office, in essence, to be able to give us the reality of those statistics. That when they say 14 percent, we can identify where that 14 percent is at. When we can identify what of that percentage has come back on the roll and been placed by other individual so that we begin to understand whether this law is 43 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform really having an effect, a positive effect in actually finding work for people on welfare or not. Because right now, we've asked the State, we've asked the City, and the City doesn't know. And they've asked the State and the State doesn't know. So we need to be able to determine real, exact numbers. The reality of the percentage going down, whether it is real or not, whether it's fiction, is made up. Because statistics lie, and we all know that.
General, I want to note the presence of Councilwoman Blackwell.
Certainly, it seems to me in our quest to try to deal with all these welfare, all the -- the March 3rd deadline, we've been really concerned because it seems to me there has to be three issues that need to be dealt with in order to make any sense of it. 44 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform One is, of course, transportation that everybody knows is an issue. Two is day care, which is the other issue. And the third is even in job training. And in our local program here to bring Philadelphians to work, nobody -- there wasn't seem to be a focus on how we're going to help people who capital read at eighth-grade level or above. Those who read at eighth-grade level or below, I should say, are the ones for whom we don't have a program. We've got to have a program that will enable these people to get some kind of meaningful job level training with jobs at that end that can help our city so that they can be a part of the workforce. If we don't create those kinds of job training opportunities because maybe these aren't the people that we want to train for the other jobs, for those, you know, maybe with the computer repair. I'm involved in a school -- we've been trying to do our part in welfare to work -- that does nursing assistance, computer repair, and several other areas. They do about five areas of job training. 45 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform But for those who read at eighth-grade level or below, we've got to find other jobs that maybe people can learn by rote. People can be very intelligent but not able to read.
And not be able to pass certain kinds of tests, but they can do a lot of jobs in our city to make it grow. They can do a lot of jobs in all manner of city services. And that, I think, is where we really need a focus that will allow the city to do that. So I wanted to know your opinion on that and if you think at this point in this whole welfare-to-work system that there's room for such a proposal. I mean, folks can do all kinds of work in our communities, from horticultural to street-sweeping, go landscaping, and all other kinds of work. I mean, we all know somebody, if we're old enough, we all have people in our families who -- I can say I have a master's degree but I had a father who couldn't go further than ninth grade but who knew more than I did when he passed, even with my degrees. 46 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform
So I'm just wondering if you think there's somewhere that we can find a place in this whole welfare maze for these individuals.
Well, I think there is, and I think it goes without saying that there are a lot of people right now working on this issue in the trenches.
Three of them are before me today -- the members of Council, the mayor, the Private Industry Council. There's a lot of people in cities like Philadelphia across the state who are working on this every day and have provided insights into this issue. I think, however, the leadership on this issue has to come really from a lot of people, but primarily from one person: the governor of the Commonwealth. This is a State program which affects not just Philadelphia, it affects the entire state. That person, the governor of this state, has to, in the next three months, provide 47 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform some leadership and commit the time and the energy and the resources and the focus on this issue to solve some of these problems that you pointed out, especially in the area of job creation, job training, child care, and transportation. We cannot just have local communities trying to hopefully patching together a solution. This has to come from the people who said in 1996 that this would be a great system, that it would work, it would help families. And they've got to admit that there are problems with it and try to fix them. And I think taxpayers expect that, I think families who are going to affected by this expect that. And that's where the leadership in the long run has to come. No matter how well a particular city or particular region deals with it, it's got to come from top. And I think, you know, when I read after the election that the governor had a priority list of four or five or six or seven priorities for his second term, welfare reform and making it work was not on there. I think he ought to go back, take out his pencil, and add one more 48 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform priority for his second term.
Actually, I think he has to put it at the top of the list.
Because I think that if there's any public policy issue that is going to impact on this city in the next five years, it's welfare and this aspect of the welfare reform. And if the governor does not make that the first priority in terms of education and making this work, then this city and Pittsburgh and the poor people across the state are in for a very, very bumpy, bumpy ride.
And let me just point out one example. I spent a lot of time in the last year focussing on the whole issue of nursing homes. And I've been saying for six months or more that we should have a nursing home report card, a very simple task for the governor and the people in Harrisburg. It has taken about four or five months of saying it that they're finally responding to it. They're finally saying, Well, we're studying it, we're looking at it. But took them a while so. 49 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform So I think I can understand the frustration that some people have that when there's an important issue to focus on, you've got to keep on them and pushing them in making sure that the people who pay the freight in this state, the taxpayers and the families affected by this, want this done. Everybody wants the system to be better, but it's going to require some leadership in Harrisburg.
General, we're going to be counting on you to lead the way, and we're going to do everything we can do here. And we deeply thank you for making the time available to appear here today.
Marva West, representative of District Council 668 of the Pennsylvania Social Services Union. 50 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform (Ms. West comes forward.)
Thank you and I thank everybody for being patient this morning with the schedule but we're going to stay in this continued session until all witnesses are heard. Miss West, please identify yourself for the record and then proceed. You may introduce the gentleman with you, and he may or may not share, you know, the speaker's microphone, depending on your issues. Go ahead, Miss West.
And on behalf of the Pennsylvania Social Services Union, we do thank you for the opportunity to be able to come before this committee to speak today. For the record, my name is Marva West. I am employed by the Pennsylvania Social Services Union, and with me is my colleague Talmadge Bellow. We are both busy agents for the Pennsylvania Social Services Union. And I must say, just to clear the record and get this straight, that my colleague 51 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform and I are not income-maintenance caseworkers. We were asked to come here today as representatives of Local 668 to basically talk about the perceptions of what's going on with the caseworkers. And there's been a lot in the media about their inefficiency and those kinds of things, and a lot of people seem tend to believe that they're ineffective. We're here today basically to try to give some clarifications and to point out areas that the workers which we represent are faced with. So, while we're not business agents and we're not caseworkers, so we don't have the experience of a caseworker and, therefore, we can't really answer kind of specific questions.
Well, we know that they all try to do a very good job. We're concerned about whether being given the information properly, whether they're being overloaded with cases so that they don't have the time available to make the explanations. We have a lot of confidence in the caseworkers, but they can only do what they're 52 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform being permitted to do. And those concerns that have been expressed are not meant in any way to be critical of the individual caseworkers but of the system which seems to prevent them from doing what know we know they would want to do, to do make full information available to everyone.
Well, we certainly appreciate that, and that's really kind of what we're here today to clarify. First of all, let me, if I could give a little history in the Social Services Union.
We're a social and rehabilitative union. Therefore, we represent those individuals who work in social services or rehabilitative services. We have a lot of drug and alcohol counselors in addition to caseworkers. We represent approximately about 15,000 members across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And of that number, 9,000 are indeed employed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And in Philadelphia, 1200 of those are income-maintenance caseworkers.
Let me interrupt you 53 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform for just a moment to announce that Councilwoman Marian Tasco, who's Chair of the Health & Human Services Committee and Co-chair of these hearings, she's immediately to my left. Thank you. This is Miss West testifying. Go ahead, please.
The job basically of our income-maintenance caseworkers is to provide assistance and to determine eligibility for recipients within DPW. That means they determine whether or not they're eligible for cash, medical assistance, or food stamp benefits. Of late, however, the job of the income-maintenance caseworker has been a daunting task because, on a daily basis, they kind of are receive constant changes to rules, regulations. And, quite honestly, there are very few clarifications on those issues. We've heard, for instance, one of problems that we've seen is that from the beginning of the implementation process, our union has been meeting with officials from DPW, requesting, for one thing, a very simple thing, we 54 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform thought, was that there would be consistent implementation of Act 35 throughout the State, meaning that every office that was represented, that was of DPW, they would all carry out the policy in the same way. What we actually got from Secretary Heller was a response that basically said they did not want to take away the flexibility from each of the County Assistance Offices and, therefore, the executive directors were left with the responsibility to design basically their own plan for implementation of welfare reform. And that got worse because the executive directors decided that they would advocate that responsibility to each of the district offices. And I think to speak to a lot of the issue where people say that the caseworkers are confused and misinterpret the rules, it really speaks to this whole mishmash implementation of welfare reform. We felt it should have been consistent. We didn't get that. So that was kind of the beginning of our problem. Our workers are faced daily with, again, as I said before, a lot of rule changes, 55 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform and they're expected to absorb and implement all of those changes many times on very short notice. And I must say, in defense of them, that they do succeed in actually doing that, even if they don't have the necessary tools and resources available to them. And, unfortunately, it does put them in the position that it looks as if they're not knowledgeable of their jobs. That couldn't be further from the truth. Our worker do an outstanding task of trying to deal with the management that, you know, they work under. Our workers right now, as a result of welfare reform, are pressured daily and threatened with discipline. We believe that there is a complete lack of sensitivity on the part of the Department of Welfare, and not our workers, in terms of implementation of policies and procedures as it relates to welfare reform. So one of the things that I'd like to say or share with people is, if you hear nothing else today, that, you know, our feeling among the workers is please don't kill the messenger. The workers we represent within DPW are not 56 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform responsible for establishing policy, nor has our input been accepted on a statewide or a local level as it relates to even policy development. So, therefore, they end up being the ones who are responsible for implementing rule changes and dealing with the constant rule changes. But unfortunately, they just don't get -- people are not seeing them in that particular light. They seem them as the bearers of bad news and inaccurate news. And, in fact, that's a result of the management style that we're having to work and live under. I was also asked to speak on the issue of whether or not our workers are being used as scapegoats in this whole issue of welfare reform. Without question, we believe that is true. And, again, for that very first reason that I noted about the implementation inconsistencies. In the climate that we exist in today, it's quite easy to blame the messenger. And in fact, it's occurring daily.
They've been accused in the media of being insensitive and unresponsive to client needs. We again believe that that is completely inaccurate. 57 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform The job of the income-maintenance worker, over the last, I would say, three decades really, has really changed, and I think our caseworkers started out in the '60s as being workers who not only dealt with determining eligibility for their clients, but they also were responsible for dealing with the individual and their family. Recognizing that there were some social educational needs that people needed and various other things, they even did home visits, and they worked with clients in terms of getting them into job-training programs and referrals for child care and things of that nature. Unfortunately, we estimate that somewhere between the late '70s and early '80s that that position of the Department began to change. The home visits were abolished, and people, as workers, were informed that their job is to basically just determine eligibility, make sure that the client has the paperwork that they need that makes them eligible for the services that they're looking for -- be it cash, food stamps, or medical assistance -- and then to leave that thrown. 58 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform That was, of course, a big transition for our workers 'cause they had been used to dealing with their clients. As a result, however, of this whole focus on just determining eligibility, the case loads did begin to expand. I guess there was just a need to -- again because there wasn't a lot of follow-through on other programs in terms of moving people from welfare to work, the case loads did grow. And as time evolved and things changed, the climate for which our workers existed under also changed. So it become a factor for them, for the employer, for the Department of Public Welfare basically for our workers to deal with just statistics, do the paperwork, provide the cash, the food stamps, and don't worry about other things. Well, certainly, we all know that that changed as a result of the legislation that was signed into law in August of '96, and then business began to take a different tone, and the Department of Public Welfare began to change as well. As a matter of fact, when Pennsylvania began to really implement its welfare reform, they 59 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. " And our workers were insulted by that; they felt that it was ridiculous to put any such poster out saying that a job, any job is important because it showed a lack on the part of Department to really focus on the needs of clients, not jut getting people into any kind of job. Because, as we're aware, any job is not a job that moves people from welfare to self-sufficiency. People need to be able to earn jobs that provide them with a living wage. We expressed these things over and over again to the Department. And, unfortunately, their responses were very -- well, let's say their responses were non-responses because they felt that, you know, in some ways, that we were just kind of looking not to deal with moving people off of welfare but keeping them there, when, in actuality, our workers knew that clients faced a lot of barriers. There were people who needed educational training, there were people who needed basic job training. 60 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform And there were also people who needed to understand the ethics of work: going on a job on a daily basis, how to dress, how to deal with employers, and those kinds of things. And we have a number of committees, and we have a committee composed basically of caseworkers who are dealing with the Commonwealth, and we were raising these issues with them about providing these resources and doing various things. And, again, their response was not one of being positive. They wanted us to just do the things that the district offices were asking us to do.
Our workers were pushed into trainings that were maybe for one day to deal with welfare policy. And, as you know, the policies are very complicated. You know, they're very complex.
Miss West, I would like to say to you that I think you would perform a great service and your union could if you kept us informed of what it was of the demands being made --
-- on the workers 61 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform that were unreasonable. I don't think that the discussion ought to be just between your union and the governor's office, say, or the state administration. Of course, that has to take place, but we think that if we knew about it, we could help all of you.
Because you're the folks that get the information, and if you provide it to us -- because you are confirming all of our worst fears as to what's happening, and most of us expected that that was ongoing, and that's why I said at the outset that we think the caseworkers are trying to do a very good and honest job but that it's being made impossible for them to do it in many ways. And we'd like to give you support, you know, in the demands that you make of the, you know, the heads of the department of the governor's office to permit the caseworkers to do the kind of jobs and consider the factors that you've just mentioned. Because I think we're all in agreement that we're talking about meaningful jobs. We know 62 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform people need training, they've got to have information, and training and education has to be recognized as part of the work process. And that should be considered work. I thought the general who was here, Auditor General Casey, made that point very well, and we'd like to be very supportive.
I'm a business agent with Local 668. I'm here today because mainly I've been around for a while. I'm senior business agent in the State of Pennsylvania so I've seen some things. I wanted to sit by Marva's side today to make sure that it was clear on where Local 668 is coming from. I want to add before I go further that a business agent is not my only task. I live in the community, I'm from North Philadelphia. I was 63 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform raised in the Raymond Rosen Project, I came out of the Model Cities Program. I'm now a ward leader in the 29th Ward, on the Republican side. So I am involved deeply with regards to every aspect of what's going on in the community. One of the things that needs to be reiterated here is that the activities of local have been to do exactly what you suggested, and that is to reach out. We have set up community services committees within the local, in the Philadelphia area to do just that. They have caseworkers go out and actually touch base with you guys, let you know what's going on from the other side. One of the things also, before I turn it back over to Miss West, is that you need to know that the reason the caseworkers are not here today is because our caseworkers are afraid for their jobs. If they came before you at City Council or responded to the invite to go talk on public television, they are fearful that they will be disciplined or the subject of discipline. So there is sort of a gag order with regard to our case worker there, and that's the 64 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform reason why these business agents are here today, to tell you what's going on.
Well, we appreciate that. And I might say, as a Republican, you're in an especially good position to put pressure on the governor and all of the others.
So we appreciate that, and we're very happy that you were here today because it makes very clear that we thought about the caseworkers was absolutely right. We knew they're really trying to do everything they can and that conditions are impossible for them, 'cause we get reports. Individually, our Council phones often ring from caseworkers who are very concerned that they're not being permitted to do the kind of job they feel is needed.
All right. The additional staff, we've requested additional staff because, you know, again because of the requirements of 65 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform welfare reform, there's a greater need for people to spend more time with their clients; and yet, there's still ongoing case loads. So we need additional staff to cover that.
We have not been able to get that. The few people that they've been bringing in, of course, it takes them at least a year before they really can be of any service to the workers who are currently there. So in addition to that staffing barrier, there's been a lot of discussion about people not being able to reach our caseworkers. And that's not completely inaccurate. We met with the Department in an effort long before it began to hit the media that people couldn't reach our caseworkers, that we felt the need for voice mail because, as a result of welfare reform, it required that our caseworkers now sit down with their clients and do what is call "interactive interviewing." By that process, the caseworker is to develop, in conjunction with the client, an agreement of mutual responsibility. That requires 66 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform a lot of time. It's sitting down and, first of all determining, what kind of needs --
Well, can you tell us what was the response of the Administration was to that request.
We received no response for many months. Finally, in September, we received notice from the executive director here in Philadelphia that, in fact, Deputy Secretary Heller was agreeable, as a pilot, to allowing the caseworker supervisors to have voice mail. That has not become a reality yet, but even with that, I think it falls short of what we really need. What's really happening is when our clients attempt to reach our caseworkers, no one's answering the phone, and they immediately assume people are not working but, you know, the voice mail would certainly help to cut down on the agitation and frustration of clients.
Could I ask you a question? How many cases are there per caseworker?
Well, our cases our measured basically by a matrix, so it's really kind of -- 67 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform in terms of cases, people are probably dealing, on an average, with about maybe anywhere from 500 to 700 people on a case load. So that case loads -- and that includes not just the adults in that household, but of course, the children and all of the services that they need.
So then let's talk about how many households, let's reduce it to households because when a caseworker works with a parent on working out her mutual responsibility form, she's talking about the mother and all the family members in that discussion. So for this purpose, why don't we just then that number.
Yeah, right. So they're going from just dealing with the individuals, the clients, in making sure that they get food stamps, just sort of like a technical service, to now really interacting with the client to say, What can you do? How can we develop a plan for you? And so you're increasing the responsibility, but you still have to deal with 68 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform this 500 number case load, so no wonder there's the frustration. 'Cause even with voice mail, you're still not going to be able to even get back to those people. 'Cause they're going to leave a message but at least they'll feel good that somebody -- Well, I left a message, at least they got my message.
But in that overall scheme of things, it's going to take time to go back through the messages on the voice mail to get to everybody.
That's why additional staffing is so important. But, again, we've not been able to get that.
So then there is the need because -- we do want this personal one-on-one interaction because of all the things that were told to us, the process that was going to take place, that the client would get all of this personal service, they would able to work with their caseworker on their mutual responsibilities, then the person's supposed to be knowledgeable enough to send them to Plan A or 69 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform Plan B or Plan C. And then you're saying, Well, the caseworker may not know because they haven't been given adequate training. So what we got was a really global perfect picture if it could work that way. But it's not really working that way sums up what you're saying.
That is correct. It is not happening that way at all. And, you know, as a client, and I come in an office and I'm sitting there and, of course, I'm going to get frustrated if I'm waiting an hour or more to see my caseworker because the management has required me to schedule maybe people in a day to deal with 16 this process. 17
Correct, everybody has to come to the office unless they have, you know, something that prevents them from coming in the office -- they're disabled or something -- and 70 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform then they make arrangements for someone to go out and deal with them. But those cases are very few and far in between, but --
At the rate you're going, at what point do you think the clients may be reached? I mean, will everybody have had some contact, their program work out?
At this point, I think that most of our clients have received some correspondence, and many of them have already come in for that first time. What our bigger concern is right now is that we were informed at our last statewide meeting and discussion with the employer, which was in October, that come March 3, 1999, no one would be automatically cut off, all those clients who are at the 24-month clock would continue to receive assistance. The problem is, they're going to now all have to be reinterviewed, and the AMRs are going to have to be redone, and then those clients are going -- supposedly, the Department is going to be providing a list of like all contractors that these caseworkers will now have to send those 71 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform clients to those specific contractors and to those specific job providers.
Miss West, when we recess today, and I don't know when it will be, but we're going to be recessing until Tuesday, February 2, at a.m. 8 We would like you to be in touch with 9 our staff as to what the situation is and the 10 concerns that Councilwoman Tasco and you have 11 expressed, because we would like you back on that day to report to us what has happened. You are free to use in any way this request on our part for you to report to us two weeks prior to February 2nd what the situation is, and you can tell whatever administrators that you're being requested by the Council of the City of Philadelphia to give full details in all of these areas and that you're going to be making a report to us at our hearing on February the 2nd.
I think you may find that that will be helpful to you when you tell them that you've been requested by this committee to come back on that date. 72 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform
If, in the meantime, you can inform me, either Councilwoman Tasco or me, of any particular problems, we will do our best also to intervene in support of the kind of things that you're talking about, that will enable the people affected to get the services I believe, and I think everybody in Council believes, they're fully entitled to.
We don't want to see a single person taken off cash assistance if that person has made an effort to get into a work status. And we want the responsibility for the failure of that person to be placed squarely where I think that belongs, and that's on the State.
Certainly. We certainly agree with you on that. And I would just like to leave one other point. The barrier that we've come up against is the whole issue of alternate work schedules and why we think important. And why we haven't gotten that is because now clients are working, there are many who are in job activities, 73 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform but they're working core hours. They're either, you know, between and 5 p.m. 4 So it makes it impossible for them, if 5 they're scheduled for an appointment with their 6 caseworker and they just started a new job, for 7 them to come in to the office. And so we have 8 been asking and advocating for alternate work schedules so that our caseworkers can --
Can you tell us what that means, "alternate work schedules."
Alternate work schedules mean that we people would be -- I guess some refer to it as "flexible schedules," where some workers come in at 7:30 and work until 3, or some would come in at 10 and work until 6, or whatever the --
The office would be open from anywhere from 7:30 to, I believe, 9 is what we've asked for.
If you would send us a specific outline of that, I think Councilwoman Tasco and I would be prepared to write, if you tell us to whom. 74 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform
We would write urging that they do that. We'd make that one very specific demand 'cause that's important not only for caseworkers but for their clients as well.
Exactly. And so we will be glad to follow up on that. And I guess, really, quite honestly, that concludes what I have to say but I would like to close in saying that there's been this whole being thing talked about of case loads decreasing. And just so that you know, PSSU has also been asking the Department to provide us with stats on where these people are. We know, our workers know for a fact that they are getting into jobs and not staying into those jobs very long. You know, like they may go there for three or four weeks, and maybe there's a child-care problem and people are coming back through the system. But we haven't been able to get real, hard stats on that.
Sure. 75 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform
So that we can direct a separate request. And tell us who the appropriate person or officer might be that we could direct it to.
We would like to do that 'cause you have that information, and we don't have that.
We're going to have this hearing. We will be resuming when it finishes sometime much later today, but it will be resuming on Tuesday, February 2, 1999, at 11 a.m.
Okay. And we will provide you two weeks before then all the information you requested, and we'll also make sure get information about the alternate work schedules.
Thank you very much. And you may be in contact with the same staff members that brought you here today. 76 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform
All right. Thank you both very much for being here with us. (Applause.)
Joe Morelli, Vice President for Institutional Advancement at Peirce Junior College. And Helen Rosenfeld, the Assistant Dean for Outreach. (Peirce Junior College representatives come forward.)
We welcome you. Proceed in whatever order you think is best for you, and each speaker will identify himself or herself for the record.
Thank you. For the record, I am Joe Morelli. I'm Vice President for Institutional Advancement at Peirce College. And my colleague is Helen Rosenfeld, also from Peirce College. We thank you for the opportunity to address this committee. We are here this afternoon to provide perhaps a solution to some of the problems that 77 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform this committee and the auditor general had identified in terms of the welfare-to-work legislation and reform.
Good, Mr. Morelli. Let me just intercept you for a moment to announce that Councilman Richard Mariano has also joined us this morning. Go ahead, Mr. Morelli.
I just want to urge you to be very brief. We don't need a history on Peirce College. If you could deal directly with whatever the issue is.
Yes, I'm going to try to outline that, yes. We want to outline what we believe is a solution.
Peirce College has been, since 1865, providing, you know, workplace skills and competencies, and we have been --
We're all familiar with the very fine reputation of Peirce College.
Thank you. I just want 78 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform to say that we also have been working in the welfare-to-work programs and providing programs that will help people with job skills training.
Our solution, however, is to provide -- we have a different model that we'd like to bring forth in terms of training and education for welfare-to-work people.
Have you submitted that model to different government officials?
And if can you tell us to whom, what their response has been, it would be very helpful.
I have used it in a prior position in northeastern Pennsylvania in terms of the Appalachian Regional Commission, where we did a similar program.
Do you have it in writing? Is there anything in writing that you could give to us in the committee?
Yes. And I also have -- my written testimony has already been presented to this committee several weeks ago when it convened 79 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform the first time.
Okay? However, the essence of the model, of the program, basically is to provide career counseling, to provide assessment first. In other words, to identify what a person's interest, abilities, and aptitudes are, rather than say I have a job put, them into a quick training program, and try to stuff them into a job. We first want to identify what that individual can do in terms of -- and to identify exactly where they are with the basic communication skills, with basic job skills. That's the essence. In other words, to try to prepare them for a career rather than --
We understand that. Can you tell us what you've done about presenting it and what your experience has been.
Okay. We are doing it right now. At Peirce, we're dealing with probably over a thousand individuals a year that are coming through this kind of program.
And is there a 80 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform program that the State is funding that makes it possible for them to become students at Peirce?
Not at the moment, not at the moment. We do have several -- we're partnering with several agencies to provide some of the, you know, PIC Council programs. We do have some of those, and we can provide results of those programs. We can provide, you know, placement results.
And what response do you get from the State when you make these proposals?
Well, it varies. Sometimes, you know, we've gotten some funding. And other times, it's a -- it's just a no, and there's no reason --
So we're all convinced that it's essential to have these kind of programs so you don't have to convince us in the committee of that.
That's not what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to point out that there's a model that I believe works, that will find solutions to the problems. 81 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform The key is -- I believe you have to expand. As the auditor general said, you have to expand the general definition of work to include more training an education.
That's the essence. So that a person has time to search for a career and is given the basic skills and competencies. There are jobs out there. The problem is that they are high-tech jobs and they need more training and education. And it takes time to do that. You cannot make up for twelve years of educational neglect in a six-to eight-week training program.
Well, depends on what career you're preparing for. In other words, most people --
What would be your proposal that you would present to the State?
My proposal would be, roughly, at least a minimum of six months, and 82 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform it could take up to two years, depending on, you know, the skill and competency that's needed for that particular job.
And your proposal would be that that training and educational period should be considered as part of the work.
That's exactly right. However, as part of the training program, there should be on-the-job training. In other words, another key component is to place people in a job as early as possible as long as they have the basic skills.
An entry-level job is just that; it's entry level, it's a way to gain experience so that they can move on, into a career, and eventually end up with a job that will provide self-sufficiency, that will provide a liveable wage. And that's another key ingredient of our model.
And how would that fit into your model? What would you be proposing? 83 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform
What I'm proposing is that as part of the overall training program, as part of that six months to a year, you provide what amounts to, in educational jargon, as a "co-op." Okay, in other words, you are giving them the basic skills, you're giving them the education, but then you place them in a job so that --
Now, would Peirce College be doing that, or would you be asking the state to do that?
Would or Peirce College do the placing, like Drexel University does?
Exactly. We would search for the jobs, and we have been. In other words, we partner with business and industry. To give you an example, we have a pharmacy tech program. We are partnering with CVS and Rite Aid. They come to us, and they'll take every one of our --
Now, what has happened when presented this proposal to the 84 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform State?
And we think you ought to be -- and we would be supportive of that. We'd be supportive of any efforts in this direction to expand the definition work, to be a realistic definition, which would mean preparing to be able to enter the workforce.
And a combination of training and sort of on-the-job training seems to me to be a very useful approach. Councilman Ortiz?
'Cause we think it's great. 85 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform
And that's all I'm trying to do, is to tell you that you don't have to convince us of -- MR. MORELLI; I'm not selling. What I was doing was describing a model that I believe -- that I know works. And we're willing to work with any City, State or federal agency that would want to incorporate this type of model into the welfare-to-work programs.
The purpose of these hearing are exactly that, Mr. Morelli. The purpose of these hearings is to build up the pressure, the consciousness that -- because no one really out there is talking about this except the thousands of welfare recipients that going to be affected that they're worried that they're going to be hurt. And they're the only ones really that seem to be concerned because newspapers are not putting it out except for a few stories here and there. So what we're trying to do at these hearings is to begin putting out the force, the education so that people become concerned. I like that Peirce and Drexel are here because we need 86 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform those institutions to join in the effort. We've got to force them to change the definition of work. They're not going to do it willingly. We have to get masses of people involved that -- because March 3rd is not just going to affect just welfare recipients. March 3rd is going to affect this Penn's Landing, it's going to affect the Convention Center, it's going to affect the Marriott Hotel, it's going to affect everything that we've been trying to do in this city. And if we don't make the changes that are necessary to make, then you can count on DisneyQuest, Mickey Mouse, and Goofy to just keep walking down the highway, you know? (Applause.)
But the thing is that we need Drexel, we need Peirce, we need you folks to begin joining us in this effort that we're trying to put forward. It is -- it's taking us -- it will take us even more. We're hopefully -- we're in a an election period that hopefully this issue will become a priority of the mayoral candidates. I 87 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform hope that they begin to understand that the wage tax reduction and this other aspect will mean very little if we have 75,000 people out on the streets. So that it's something that we're trying to get across to people, that they have to begin talking about-- and not only talking about but forcing the state legislature to begin making the changes that are necessary. At one point, we may need you and other people join us going to Harrisburg and do the things that we need to do.
And we also want to make sure that you're in touch with Mayor Deputy Donna Cooper, who is heading up the Philadelphia program for the mayor. We want them to know what your model program is so that they can take advantage of it. Because what we're talking in terms of putting pressure on the state legislature, there's much to be done right here in Philadelphia.
Because we can't afford to just wait for the State to act. We've got to be ready to act if the State begins taking 88 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform people off of cash assistance. So I just like to urge you -- have you had contact with Miss Cooper?
Well, we urge you to move in that direction, and you can use our name. Since I'm the one that's here, say that it's at the request and suggestion of Councilman David Cohen that you are in contact with them and you want the City to know fully about your program so that it can be ready for operation, moving in the right direction.
Well, look, we thank you both very much for being here and we're very delighted to see as venerable an institution as Peirce dealing with this problem.
And we wish you very well in your program. And if you get an unfavorable response or it looks to you like people are stalling, let us know. We'll help open the doors.
Thank you. We'll 89 12/09/98 - LAW & GOV'T, HEALTH & HUM. SVCS. - Welfare Reform certainly let you know.
Thank you very much. Arun Prab -- you have to forgive me. Prabhakaran? Okay, when you identify yourself, sir, would you begin by spelling your last name so that the