Point of information. Commissioner, I think what I'm hearing here, and I 1513 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET think it would satisfy my needs, is that we really start all over again to prepare a budget that really gives us the information that we need. You made a comment to me that your books were open. Obviously, they're open, but they're not very clear. So my request, to support my colleagues here, would be really this process, I think, needs to start all over again and submit us your budget so we can understand it with no mirrors.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Nutter.
Do you have more detailed information for Fiscal '03, the current fiscal year? That's $1,808,091.
For '03, the 1.948 breaks down as follows: 1.3 million are for communications projects, and we will give you the breakdown of --
Commissioner, I'm sorry. Did you say 1.948? I'm still on the same page, 44-78. The budget book says $1,808,091. 1514 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
It is 1.808, and in that 1.808 there's approximately 1.332 in communications projects. And the balance of it is broken down in a project called CAPTA which provides support services for medically fragile clients for activities for our family preservation programs, youth development activities.
I don't mean to interrupt you. How do those projects or programs end up in the communications budget?
They're not. They're in the Fund for Philadelphia. The 1.808 is really the Fund for Philadelphia projects. Communications is part of that, but it is not all of that. So this document has to be corrected. The document that was shared with you has to be corrected. And we can provide the breakdown of what is in that 1.808. And as I mentioned, 1.332 is communications.
Why don't we do this? My request is going to be that we take your entire section of the budget which is section 44, and in accordance with the recommendation of Councilman Rizzo -- DHS seems to go from 44-1 to 44-108 in the budget book. I would like you to 1515 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET reprint that section and list every contract in every appropriate category with the name of the vendor or the provider or the contractor and the actual dollar amount.
And be prepared to respond to any questions about any contract that any member of Council may have.
Now, you also understand that not only on -78 where you have -- these are the 250 professional services. You also have 251, 253, 290 on -79. What I'm going to be interested in is the entire Class 200 section from 200 to 299.
We understand, and we will provide all the details requested. 1516 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
I still need to get an answer, though, to this general question of this communications strategy, what has been involved in this? Are we talking about radio ads, TV ads, billboards, buses, bus shelters, magazines, print media, radio? What is this strategy and what's the message that's been communicated for upwards of a million dollars?.
Well, we've used multiple strategies. For staff recruitment, we have used a significant amount of radio and print and just personal outreach. And the main cost in staff recruitment has been radio and the print materials that we do.
For the radio campaign, it was Keel Communications. We worked with them to do the radio campaign.
And who received the commission for the placement of the radio ads?
So let me make sure I understand. They were paid by the Department to place the ads. And then as a normal part of placing 1517 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET ads in all the forms of media, I believe the entity that places the ad then receives a commission, I'm assuming, from the radio or TV entity. Is that your understanding?
Yes, we did radio, and that is my understanding of how it works. You pay a commission for the coordination and the placement of the ads.
So in fact, the person ends up getting paid twice for a certain amount? They're being paid by DHS to go and place them; and then isn't there also in that business a commission that's paid for the actual placement?
Councilman, I will research that for you. My understanding is that there is a commission paid, but I'm not sure that it's about paying the person twice.
Who pays the commission then? Who pays the commission for the placement of the ad?
Well, I believe that the Department pays for the technical assistance, the creative design. And then the process of placing the ad, there is a commission -- I'm calling it a 1518 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET commission. We pay a percentage over the cost of the ad itself for the management and the coordination of it. I'm not sure if there is a separate commission paid by the receiver of the ad. I'm not aware of that. I don't believe so, but I don't know. I certainly do not have any interest in paying twice for the same thing. And it's not been my understanding that we've been doing that. We have been using Keel Communications. We used them in the first year. And the second year, to place --
When you say the first year and the second year, what was the first year?
Well, when we started doing this -- this campaign was in Fiscal Year 2000-2001. And the reason why we went ahead and --
It would have been the end of 2002, the end of calendar year 2000 into 2001. I became Commissioner February 1st of 2000 and spent the first few months assessing the challenges and problems at DHS. And one huge problem that we had was a very, very high turnover 1519 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET rate and few people coming in the front door.
Did you go through a RFP or was this a professional services contract?
I knew of Frank Keil's work because of work that he had done with then the Private Industry Council, the Philadelphia Workforce Development Corporation, now called the PWC, Philadelphia Workforce Development Corporation, when they have done the campaign to get employers to hire people from Welfare, the Hire My Mom Campaign. I was very impressed with that campaign and I was interested in using the person who had done that because they were so successful. So I reached out to Frank. At that point, I really had never worked with him. Nobody recommended me to him. I had just seen his work and I wanted to work with someone who had a proven campaign in terms of social marketing. And the truth is, Councilman, that I was also under a huge amount of pressure to get DHS up and running and I truly had a limited amount of time to do a lot 1520 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET of things that I needed to do. So I just reached out to him, and he was available.
Last question. Now, at the time that you brought Keel Communications on, we're now into February '01; is that what you're saying?
Yes. By February '01, he was working with us on the staff recruitment campaign.
Were you aware of any other contracts that that company may have had with the City or was working on behalf of the City.
I wasn't aware of specific contracts, other contracts that he had with the City. I do know that people were impressed with the work he was doing with DHS because we were delivering results so he may have been talking to other commissioners about doing work with them. But I was not part of those conversations, nor was I promoting conversations nor was I in the middle of those conversations. I was really only working with him on DHS under DHS agenda.
When did Keel Communications start working for the Mayor's Office? 1521 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
The services that Keel Communications provided to the Mayor were in this Fiscal Year '02-'03 and also in Fiscal Year '01-'02.
So when did they actually start? I don't really deal with fiscal years.
I believe from the information that I have in front of me that the services began January 1, 2002 between the Mayor's Office and Keel Communications.
So the company was already working for you prior to working for the Mayor's Office?
Now when you were deciding or trying to decide who to pick up for DHS, did you look at or consider any other companies?
Well, at the time that I reached out to Frank Keel for help, I did not; I did not. I approached him based on, as I said, the work that he had done with a system partner. And I had to hit the ground running and I was looking for someone who had pretty much done something like what I needed done. 1522 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
So, I mean, some of the other names in that business, people like Bruce Crowley at Crowley, Askins, Rogers or George Beach at Beach Communications, none of those firms were considered for this work?
I did not issue an RFP at the time that I reached out to Frank Keel.
I understand you didn't issue an RFP. You didn't think about them either?
No. As I said -- and I'm not saying that it was the best way to make a decision, Councilman, in hindsight and with more time, I would have done it differently.
I'm not making a value judgment about the decision; I'm not questioning the decision. I'm trying to understand the decision process.
I reached out to Frank specifically because of his work with PWDC which I was very impressed with and which was very successful.
So the size of the contract with Keel Communications presently is how 1523 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET much?
To date, our contract with Frank Keel Communications for this year is approximately $65,000 for consultant services. And through his contract, we do pay some subcontractors. And I can provide you the details of that. In this fiscal year, we have paid in consulting fees $32,200. For '01 we paid Keel for consulting fees $61,000 -- I'm sorry, for '01-'02 we paid 61,000. For 2000-2001, we paid 40,000 in fees.
Okay. You're going to provide us with the full detail on all of these contracts.
Did it ever occur to possibly just hire someone on staff to do this work?
I have a communications director, Lisa Rodriguez is our communications director. I have a communications team. And she coordinates all of these projects. We certainly have some staff involved in this that work very, very hard, but what we're doing is very huge; it's enormous. And part of what I asked Frank Keel to do was actually to develop Lisa's capacity to 1524 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET coordinate projects and we have been reducing reliance on Frank to do things that now we are coordinating and managing in-house, Councilman.
Last question in this area. How did the contract for the Mayor's Office end up in the DHS budget?
Because we had a contract -- because we were paying Frank Keel already and we had a contract, we were asked to ad the services agreement, the services that the Mayor needed into our contract with Keel Communications through the Fund for Philadelphia. And he would invoice separately for those services.
I'm sorry, Commissioner. I didn't understand that. You've now put a new entity into the conversation. Where does the Fund for Philadelphia come in in this?
Well, the Fund for Philadelphia is the entity that we pay Keel Communications and our communications vendors through.
Why would you pay through the Fund for Philadelphia? Why didn't you 1525 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET just contract directly?
I thought the Fund for Philadelphia was mostly a place where money came into, not went out of.
It's been used in both ways historically. It is a place where the City has fund-raised in the past, and it's also an entity which DHS uses in order to work on projects where we need flexibility and where we need to work with speed and where -- you know, to be honest, the slow process of City --
Is this the part where we talk about getting around the usual procurement requirements? Commissioner Domzalski talked about expediting. You're talking about flexibility. Is that where we're trying to get to here in this part of the conversation? We're trying to avoid going through the normal procurement process; is that why we're doing it?
Well, I think that DHS in its -- in our work, we use the regular procurement 1526 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET process a lot and the overwhelming majority of our contracts do go through the regular process. There are some instances in which we have made the decision to work with fiduciary agents and other partners for strategic reasons but, Councilman, I say with all sincerity that it is about getting the job done, it's not about getting around anything. It truly is getting the job done. Now, the reason why we put --
And if you didn't go through Fund for Philadelphia, you may have had to put your communications projects out through an RFP or go through procurement, right? By going through Fund for Philadelphia, you could pick who you wanted, right?
Well, I believe that there are processes that we would have had to go through going through the City procurement process that we do not have to go through through the Fund for Philadelphia, that is correct.
Look, I understand if we have to buy malaria medicine we may have to issue an emergency contract or not go through the procurement process. Generally, public relations 1527 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET services, I don't think, qualify as an emergency.
The issue for us is that in our effort to improve on our services and using what we're calling communications as a strategy that there were a number of different tasks and activities that needed to happen simultaneously and needed to happen pretty quickly, from my perspective. The fees for Frank Keel were included in the communications budget, but there are other expenses in the communications budget over and above the fees to Keel that also go through the Fund for Philadelphia, and we will definitely provide that information for all of City Council. I just want to say that, for me, as Commissioner of DHS, I feel that I have followed every rule to the best of my ability, but I have a mandate to fulfill and I just find the best way to get the job done, Councilman. And I certainly have no intent to violate any rules, but the mandate is serious and I'm held accountable for delivering an improved child welfare and juvenile justice system and that's why I have made the decisions that I have made to do some contracts through partnerships with fiduciary agents like the Fund for Philadelphia. 1528 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET And if I am directed do otherwise, I will do otherwise. Although I will say that I think it will have an impact, not all of it. But the procurement process works a lot, but it doesn't always work for our City and we need to be honest about that. We can't be asked to deliver on these aggressive mandates and then have our hands tied behind our back as commissioners sometimes.
Who signed off on the Mayor's Office contract going through DHS and the Fund for Philadelphia? Did you sign that contract?
Well, we were asked to do it. The Budget Office asked us to do it, and our Finance Director and I agreed to do it since that's what we were asked to do.
Well, I just assumed that it was an appropriate thing to do. And so once the information came to light, the Mayor's Office backed it out and they realized that it was not the right thing to do so they backed it out.
Why do you think it 1529 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET was not the right thing to do?
Because I think it would have been better for them to have Keel Communications dollars in their own budget and we would have been happy to transfer the money. We could have transferred the money over to them. And we did. Once this issue came to light, it was transferred back to the Mayor's Office.
I want to continue in this light. You talked about the communications budget, the $1.9 million and that it had also included some technology expenses, but if you look at item 251, there's another 1,607,343 item for consulting technology support, training, license, web design and other services. So it's more than -- what I'd like to know, what are the services you're going to provide. You're going to provide information on what the services were in the communications. I want to know what technology was involved in that $1.9 million because you have 1530 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET another line item for technology.
Councilwoman, we will provide the entire breakdown for that information, for the information requested. We built an intra-net at DHS from scratch and we built the web-based search system from scratch and it has cost a huge amount of money, but it will have the benefit to the entire City. We will provide that breakdown for you.
Not arguing that point, you stated in the communications expenditure you had used money for technology. And if you used money for technology, what was the technology? Because the other line item for technology states what you did with it, with that dollar amount. But I want to know what technology is included in communications.
I will qualify that. It may well be that some types of design consultants were used through the communications budget and some other technology consultants were used through the other line item. I will provide that information as soon as possible, in the next two days.
I can appreciate 1531 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET your concern for getting things done, but I will tell you that in the last week or so we have sat in this Council and discussed the use of minorities and women business here in Philadelphia, and since pamphlets and other advertising efforts may be very important to what you do, they were not dire services that you needed such as providing services to children or some of the other services you provide. You would have had an opportunity to look locally whether you used minorities and women or a majority company, but the company would have been a Philadelphia company. I'd also like to know subcontractors that were used by Mr. Keel and who they were. Were they Philadelphians? How many minorities and women were a part of that? A lot of money is being spent -- looks like, someone said to me, we live in Keel-adelphia. He doesn't live here. And I'm personally pained to sit here and listen to that and we can't get work for people who live in this City. And if we who are in charge in this City to help promote businesses and promote work for people who work in Philadelphia and who pay taxes in Philadelphia, who pay occupancy 1532 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET tax and business privilege tax aren't given the opportunity to do the business and we continue to send it out of the City, it's not good for us. And I can understand Ms. Davis being very pained and embarrassed the other day about the lack of the Administration's effort to be inclusive. What I'd like to know is you have in your budget some information regarding non-travel meals and official entertaining, it's on -44 of the budget detail. Why has this amount increased from $14,458 in FY '02, to $26,503 in FY '04?
Well, it's certainly not official entertaining, I want to be very clear about that. That does not happen at DHS. We have been extremely active in doing a lot of staff development and reform efforts with providers. We have, as we've mentioned, almost 2,000 staff. Of those staff, close to 600 social workers and 125 supervisors and we have a couple of thousand social workers in the provider community. As we try to reform DHS, we have been bringing staff together for a lot of staff development and training, and we make an effort to provide refreshments. The system is of such a scale, Councilwoman, that occasionally we 1533 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET have to -- it's not covered in that line, but occasionally we have to pay for rented space to be able to accommodate the numbers of people we have, and we do pay for some coffee or danish. And if we make people work through lunch, we provide lunch. That's what that has been used for. It's an expense that really ties staff training and development, not to official entertainment, I can assure you.
And you intend to do more staff training in 2004 than you've done in 2002?
It is absolutely essential that we do the staff training, however at DHS we have begun talking about areas where we need to cut back, and we can cut back and we will cut back if we don't get the resources. And even though, as you may know, it is important for people to feel cared for in government, and having a little bit of danish and a little bit of coffee, to be honest, goes a long way to make people feel valued. If we have to cut back on that expense, we obviously would. But we will have to train thousands of people to achieve the reform that we want in the Department of Human Services. And training at the 1534 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET level that we do, because of the hundreds of people we have to train at one time, is going to cost money to the City. But I believe it is an expense that we will just have to do because we want a reformed child welfare system.
Thank you. Let me just check something here. Who are the providers for the after school program? Do you have one, two, three or a number?
This is David Fair from the Division of Community Based Prevention Services. There are about -- altogether there's probably about 165 providers. I have a list which I can leave with you.
You should give it to the President. We appreciate that.
And all of those providers were selected through a Request For Proposals process.
Thank you. On pages 44-22 and 44-78, your Department identified legal services as professional services contract. Who are these legal service providers and what do we receive for our money? 1535 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
John Zanier, DHS Budget Director. On -22, these are parole hearing costs for Philadelphia residents incarcerated in other counties in Pennsylvania. The county residence is required to pay for the legal representation of these inmates at their hearings.
The legal services that are included there relate to civil rights litigation that the department has been involved in, and we pay for our litigation costs. For example, there's a lawsuit right now related to kinship care. It's a lawsuit that was filed against the State, but the City was joined in as a defendant and so we contracted out the legal representation of that. All of that is coordinated through the City Law Department. We basically transfer the funds to the 1536 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Law Department for that. In addition, we have --
Before you go on, what is the lawsuit around kinship care?
Well, it's actually very, very close to settlement. And the lawsuit was filed by advocates who believe that the State and all the counties have denied kinship caregivers the right to receive benefits for kinship care. And so the settlement is going to involve a review of cases within, I think, the last five years, identify relatives who may have received custody of children but not received payment. So DHS has been an active participant in settling the lawsuit so we can do right by our kinship parents and move forward. We have had to pay for the cost for our own City representation through that.
It was my understanding that some years ago when we dealt with the whole issue of kinship care which came out of this Council that the benefits followed the child. Was that something different that happened?
The lawsuit relates to the lack of clear policy at the state level as to how to handle kinship cases. We have many children 1537 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET living with their relatives getting paid as foster parents, many, many, many of them. In fact, under the law and best practice is that children should be with in their relatives if they can't live with their parents. But there are a number of individuals who are a part of this lawsuit, and I believe it was certified as a class action, who feel that they were not offered the benefits that they were entitled to. In other words, they stepped up, accepted the custody of the child, but did not receive an offer of kinship benefits. And the trigger in kinship care is if the government has assumed custody and has intervened and then the government finds the relative, then we have an obligation, a legal obligation to offer that relative kinship care benefits. And that is the crux of the lawsuit, that when we identified the relative or we had custody of the child first or we would have taken custody but for the relative stepping up to the plate, we had a legal obligation to offer benefits at that point. I believe that Philadelphia has been better at this than many other counties. This is a statewide lawsuit, not a 1538 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Philadelphia County lawsuit. But we were joined in it and we will do our part to go back and review our cases. We have many, many people receiving kinship care benefits right now. In addition to that, in terms of legal services, the City provides financial support to Community Legal Services for their representation of the indigent in Philadelphia. And this is part of that legal services line item. In this current fiscal year we paid Community Legal Services $720,000 for their services to the poor in the City.
On of your testimony, you stated that early intervention and intensive services are generally managed through provider contracts and that Philadelphia Safe & Sound provides primary prevention services. What is the total amount of contracts that Philadelphia Safe & Sound receives through your department?
This fiscal year, for after school programs, youth development programs, and beacons, DHS has provided Safe & Sound with 16.7 million in TANF and 1.4 million in Human Services 1539 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Development Fund.
A total of $18 million, rounded off, and it is 16.7 TANF; and the balance HSDF, Human Services Development Fund.
They were targeted for what purpose when they came to you? Did they come to you as a pass-through or were you to use them for services?
For prevention, in-home services, youth development services. And we are using those funds for the types of services that they were authorized to be used for. We submit a means base plan to the State where we tell them what we intend to do with the resources in terms of general categories, and we did inform the State that we were interested in receiving TANF money to be able to expand the array of after school and youth development programs for children in the City, so the money was given to us for that purpose. The State does not dictate to us whether we provide the 1540 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET services directly or whether we do it through a relationship with an agency or, let's say, an agency that subcontracts with a number of agencies.
So is Philadelphia Safe & Sound one of the agencies that I talked about earlier where you have these after school program dollars? Is that a separate -- is Safe & Sound one of the providers of the after school programs? You have other after school programs outlined on -- let me look at this. You have 12 million. Is that the money that's going to Safe & 13 Sound for the after school program? 14
That's not the only money we 15 spend in after school, but it is the bulk of the 16 money. We also support other after school and youth 17 development programs for other special populations. 18 For example, for our delinquency prevention programs 19 we have after school components that we don't fund directly through Safe & Sound. The reason for spending most of the money through Safe & Sound is that the Mayor has identified Safe & Sound as the agency that is responsible for developing the City's Children's Investment Strategy. In addition to the goal of 1541 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET finding out of school time opportunities for up to a hundred thousand kids that we don't think get them today, we also recognized at the beginning of the administration that many activities go on in the city that are called after school and youth development, but they really are not held to any particular standard, there's no licensing requirements for a lot of these programs. So part of the agenda has been, not only to get more money for the communities who support these programs, but also to raise the quality of them.
Safe & Sound is not a provider. Safe & Sound is an agency that then contracts with other agencies. But prior to being Safe & Sound, didn't you directly do that? Isn't that what one of the things that you went out and made contact with different agencies to provide these children services. Why put another middle level in between? What efficiency did that bring to 1542 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET it?
I just want to make clear, Safe & Sound does not provide services.
No, it's a managing entity. It's an entity that provides management and coordination and issues RFPs, provides technical assistance, provides support to the after school Youth Development Beacon Initiative, monitors the providers.
DHS has never invested in prevention the way that DHS invests in prevention now.
I'm not saying that it did not invest in prevention. I'm saying the job of DHS was to contract out, whether it be for prevention or maintenance or risk management or whatever, it was to provide the RFPs and to provide the management structure and so on.
That is correct. And there are a couple of things -- government can do this work of contracting with community in different 1543 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET ways. The way that DHS does it most commonly is, as you mentioned, Councilman, to contract directly with providers. And we do that in the majority of instances. However, the other way to contract to get services into a community, especially when it's a specialized service, it's through an intermediary where you can enter into a relationship with a management entity that provides a certain set of services and provides some of the oversight coordination and management of the initiative, because it would be unwieldy, let's say, or impractical or impossible for the Department to do it ourselves. In terms of the after school and youth development programming that DHS is now investing in, the Mayor wanted us, and I absolutely agree that the best model was to contract it out to an outside entity. Safe & Sound was not an entity that -- was a latecomer to this after school and youth development initiative. Safe & Sound was created during the Rendell Administration years with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. And their agenda is to do system reform around youth and after school development activities. It's always been 1544 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET their plan and their design to increase the number of after school services in the City. And so when we actually got the money from the State, they were the best prepared in the City, quite frankly, to run with this project. In addition to Safe & Sound, though, we're working with PHMC. PHMC does part of the technical assistance, United Way does part of the technical assistance. So really DHS is an investor in this program. While we have some contracts with, what we do directly is small compared to what Safe & Sound is doing. And quite frankly, Councilman, we would not have the capacity to do it the way they are doing it because my priorities are, quite frankly, elsewhere; they're in the abused and neglect and the foster care and the group home intuitions. I just could not do it effectively, and it needed to be done. It needed to be done. And they are a contractor with us. I want to say, though, that we also transfer money to the Health Department, we transfer money to OESS. We work with other partners in order to get the job done for the citizens but, ultimately, we are accountable to the State. And so 1545 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET therefore, we have an interest and concern how that money gets administered and gets used.
So any community organization or any other organization would have to subcontract with Philadelphia Safe & Sound to provide the after school programs in the various communities?
For those resources, yes, absolutely. And the funding has been allocated through a competitive RFP process, managed by Safe & Sound.
In your provider network, and I know it's quite vast, do you have any idea what is the diversity of the providers?
From the MBEC. And we have some additional information that we were able to collect about our more recent prevention investments. The level of participation -- the percentage of DHS total contract with MBEC participation is 24.1 percent, and the total dollar 1546 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET amount was $90 million for 2001. For 2002, our numbers show that the percentage of contract participation is percent with a total amount of 5 MBEC participation at the same $90 million. 6 The reason why we have additional 7 information to provide is because most of our growth 8 last year was done through those contracts with 9 management entities and so we have additional 10 information about the minority participation through 11 Safe & Sound and PHMC and our other prevention 12 providers. 13
This is David Fair, DHS 14 Prevention Services. 15 In the Class 250 contracts that are 16 funded through the community prevention services 17 division, we have 132 providers, some of which are 18 shared with through some of these fiduciary -- some 19 of them are directly contracted with us. Of the 132 providers, 32 percent meet the previous MBEC definition of a minority provider when they were applying as a non-profit corporation. These are all non-profit corporations. In terms of the dollars, there's $54 million that was spent in Class 250 contracts in this current fiscal year. And of that 1547 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET amount, 47 percent of the dollars, $25.3 million, is spent in the organizations that meet the prior MBEC definition of non-profit minority organizations. We did a recent survey with the Law Department of our provider system to determine their ability to serve clients with limited English proficiency, so we happen to also have some information on the number of people that we pay for in these agencies. Right now we're paying 438 full-time equivalent staff in those 132 agencies. Of those, 73 percent are African American, 13 percent are Puerto Rican or Latino, 1 percent are 14 Asian and 11 percent are white. 15
We certainly recognize the importance of having diversity in a number of areas: Racial diversity, cultural diversity, geographic diversity, linguistic diversity, and we are committed as a department to continue to improve on those numbers because they certainly can be improved.
Well, we hope every effort is made. It's getting very tiring. I think I've been here 15 years, and that's all we talk about every time we have a budget hearing and we 1548 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET hear the same message over and over again. We'd like to see better progress. I just have a couple more questions. One, about a program that was proposed by Warren E. Smith to provide counseling to African American males. What happened with that program? Are you familiar with that? Is anybody familiar with that program? It was a Dr. Gibbs involved.
I believe the program is the extended day treatment program for boys at risk of placement. It is a day/night program. There was one established for girls. And the model is very successful. It's a program that allows us to keep children that would otherwise go out of State in the region. We issued a competitive RFP to expand the program for boys in the City of Philadelphia. And we received a number of applications, and Warren E. Smith was one of the applicants. Two providers were chosen to do the work. One is Cornerstone and the other one was Congreso de Latinos Unidos. And it's my understanding that Warren E. Smith was not happy with the decision of not having chosen them and raised some concerns about that. Those concerns were reviewed by then Managing Director Estelle 1549 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Richman and so she was satisfied that the process that as followed was a fair process.
Was the targeted population mainly African American males?
The targeted population for this service is African American males. Both African American boys and Latino boys are over-represented in the juvenile justice system, so certainly we were very committed to making sure that services were available to African American males first and foremost and also to Latino youth as well because they're significantly over-represented in these kinds of efforts. Cornerstone is a provider that has a record of serving African American males and other youth as well. And Congreso, as you know, primarily serves Latino youth but also has a record of serving non-Latinos as well.
It's a delinquency provider that's been working in the City for quite sometime and providing deputy service. I'll ask Deputy Commissioner Ambrose to explain.
Good afternoon. Ann 1550 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Marie Ambrose, Deputy Commissioner for Juvenile Justice Services. Cornerstone was selected because they had been very successful in meeting a special needs in the juvenile justice field for children returning from out-of-state placement. Most of them were initially sex offenders. They were so successful with that population that we decided to expand their after-care services for the older adolescence who were aging out of the system.
Cornerstone is a female-run corporation out of Colorado who had some institutional programs that were successful that we used in the out-of-state capacity. And then because of their success with some of our children in the out-of-state capacity, we used them for community-based programing for children who are on after-care in Juvenile Justice.
If they're out of Colorado, how do they run the program in Philadelphia.
They have people in Philadelphia who are very competent and experienced 1551 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET who run the program.
That's correct. It's on 18th and Callowhill. And the new Cornerstone facility is on Hunting Park, I believe. They're trying to get space on Hunting Park.
I'm not exactly sure. I'd have to get back to you on the diversity of their staff.
I'd like to ask a couple of questions about Riverview. I can raise some concerns I have about Riverview because I have some constituents who've expressed a concern about family members who are there and the uncertainty around Riverview and what will they do with these families members if they have to leave Riverview. I caution you on the transition from an institution to community-based programs because, as 1552 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET you know, you'd have this nimbi. And unless you have begun to identify homes in the Philadelphia area where you can place 240 individuals, I'd be concerned about where you place them. I'd be concerned about who's going to monitor their care. You have senior citizens. It seems to me Riverview has a good reputation for providing quality care. And that you also have to be minding of the zoning. So those are issues that I see that confront you as you talk about Riverview because where are you going -- and are you going to create individual providers to provide the home care service for these residents, these senior citizens? And are the providers people who really have the qualifications to provide care or are they someone who just sees an opportunity to get a contract, puts the people on the porch and let them sit forever. So those are real concerns about the quality of care for the residents of Riverview as well as dealing with the community concerns of neighbors who sometimes, not always right, are concerned about group homes, conversion of single-family housing into multi-family housing. Those are the issues that have to be -- and I think 1553 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET you might want to talk to the Health Department in some of the trials and tribulations they had earlier on in setting up group homes. And so that is my concern. My major concern, though, is who will monitor the care? Who will be there to make sure that the senior citizens are getting quality care?
Councilwoman, my name is Rob Hess, Deputy Managing Director for Special Needs Housing. I appreciate your comments. I think they're absolutely on target. The care the folks get at Riverview is exceptional. I have not been in a personal care boarding home locally that can match it currently. Having said that, we heard before the previous Managing Director left and put the title "secretary" before her name, that this was going to be a focus for her and her work in Harrisburg and that she was going to work to achieve a much higher standard of living and standard of care in personal care boarding homes all across the Commonwealth. And so as she makes that her focus over time, we may begin to see that level of care and standards increase. If we do and if as we work through our 1554 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Five-Year Plan, it becomes clear that there are community-based options that are more appropriate and higher quality than currently exist, then that might be a direction to go. Ultimately, the real question, and I think you hit on it very well, is what is best for the individuals who reside at Riverview? Now, some would argue that Riverview being on State Road surrounded by prisons is not the best environment; that if we had high quality community-based options, that might be more appropriate. I don't believe today we do. So we'll have to look at this very closely and look at the options over time. If Secretary Richman is successful working throughout the Commonwealth to greatly enhance the standards of care at personal care boarding homes, then we may see that landscape change and then we ought to look closely at what that means for the people that are currently residents at Riverview. To answer your question with respect to who would monitor the quality of care in personal care boarding homes across the Commonwealth, that is 1555 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET DPW. So that would be clearly under Secretary Richman's purview.
But if we are -- if it's our responsibility to provide the care for these individuals, we no longer have responsibility once they've moved out of Riverview and placed into private care?
I think we'll still have some responsibility. In fact, I think the reality would be that if the quality of care was not a high quality of care, these are folks that very likely would end up rotating into our emergency shelter system or other systems, and we just don't want that. That would not be the appropriate level of housing for them. We can't afford to let that happen. Folks are much better off at Riverview today; it's a more appropriate housing setting, certainly, than our emergency shelter system would be, so we're sensitive to that point.
Let me ask you a question. Why is the consideration on the table to close Riverview? Is it the cost? Or is it because it's surrounded by prisons?
No, I think the reason that 1556 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Riverview is on the table is strictly an issue of what's in the best interest of the people that reside there. Is it in the best interest to be in an institutional setting that's kind of out of the immediate area of most communities, or under ideal circumstances would a more appropriate setting be community-based and perhaps even a smaller setting and non-institutional in nature. And I think that's the debate that really drives the looking at what the future of Riverview should be or should not be.
Well, it seems to me that senior citizens who can afford it are moving into institutional settings. They're selling their homes and going into assisted living, using whatever income they have to be in a setting where they can get care. It's still an institution. It's not a public institution, it's a private institution. Those who can afford to -- who are mobile and who retire can go to retirement communities. Others are moving to assisted living, which move to residential facilities, assisted living, and nursing home all in one. And these facilities seem to be cropping up all over the country, and I don't see a negative to having a quality care, City-run facility for people 1557 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET who live in the City who may not be able to afford to go in these assisted living facilities to have that same kind of setting. It's not a negative.
I don't disagree with you. But I also think that we have a responsibility to look at all the options. And over time, as the landscape changes, in this case if Secretary Richman is successful in really driving significant change in creating a much higher standard of living and standard of care within personal care boarding homes, that may be an appropriate option. And if it is a better option for some or all, they ought to have that option. We just need to keep it on the table. And I guess Riverview, in many ways, has been on the table for many, many years; so that hasn't changed. I think our focus is what's ultimately in the best interest of the residents that live there.
Well, I do think you all are creating some real uncertainty with families. They are beginning to wonder, what do I do, what am I going to do with a 90-year-old grandmother or 85-year-old aunt or something that. 1558 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET You're beginning to create these worries because you haven't made a final decision but you have it on the table and it's just creating some uncertainty with a lot of families.
I think that's unfortunate, and I think it is true. Anytime that you're looking at a change, it tends to make folks uncertain and uncomfortable. We certainly will engage the residents on a regular basis for communication, staff, the advocate community and others to make sure that we can fully inform people all along the way.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of information. 1559 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
In reference to Riverview, could you just go back over the plan just briefly? What is the date that you plan to make the significant change there?
Fiscal Year '04 will see no 7 change, with the exception that the average census, which is now about 260, we expect to see a drop to about 240. Changes beyond Fiscal Year '04 have yet to be decided. If there are appropriate and better community-based settings for folks by the end of the Five-Year Plan, then Riverview would be closed. But we're a long way from that. There's a lot of work that needs to be done between now and then.
How many acres is that property? If you don't know, that's fine.
But my point being, you know what's going to happen. The more there's conversation about it being closed, the more speculation its going to be that it's going to be sold. Has there been an appraisal? Is there a value associated with the property? I think that's something we really need to know if you start to talk about closing it. And I would hope that we 1560 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET would not -- if you have no population in the building, a couple dozen people, to maintain a facility like that would be like maintaining the Convention Center that we had out in West Philadelphia for all those years and dumping a lot of money into it. So I think that you really have to be upfront, especially when the community starts asking what's going to happen with Riverview. I know it's not -- correct me if I'm wrong. It's not in the heart of any residential area, but I'm sure there's going to be people concerned or people interested in that property. So I think you need to start planning. If it's in the Five-Year Plan, then coinciding with that there should be a plan on what happens if you do close it and at what level. I would hate to see money wasted at that facility just keeping a few dozen people there and spending millions of dollars a year just to keep it open.
I know that's on the radar screen for Public Property. And we certainly pass that question along and will get you an answer. I just don't know the answer. And I think it's much too early in the process for us.
It's pointed out to 1561 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET me that there's already estimations in the Five-Year Plan on the savings, 5.3 million, phase out Riverview, find alternate placement for its residents. So I think it's a little further along than you just suggested. If it's in the Five-Year Plan, then there's a projected savings of $5.3 million.
I think that savings projection would be based upon there being other, better, more appropriate community-based housing options that folks would move to. And if that were to happen and at that point Riverview did close, then I think what you see there is the operating budget for Riverview reflected.
Well, obviously, that's what it is. And find alternate placement for the resident is a very significant piece of the pie.
But, again, don't put us, as representatives of the people, the District Councilpeople, the Council at Large, with the speculation of what's going to happen there. The next thing it will be it's going to be a casino.
We'll keep you fully 1562 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET informed, Councilman.
Let's go back to something. I'm interested in adoption. And I'd like to talk to you about where are we in the adoption programs. How many kids do we have in the process? How many kids were adopted? And how can we get more kids adopted in the City of Philadelphia?
We had a good year in adoptions. We had a 44 percent increase in adoptions from calendar year 2001 to calendar year 2002. And we have at this point 1,200 children, approximately, as of December of '02 that are ready to be adopted. They are legally free for adoption, 1200 children in the pipeline.
I'd say from infant to teenagers. The bulk of the children that are in this group are probably between the ages of 5 and 13, I would say, but they really span all ages. Of those 1200 children as of December who are legally 1563 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET free for adoption, there's probably around 150 who have no adoptive resource. There were around 250 when I came to DHS, but through our communications efforts and a lot of those investments that we've made, we've identified a lot of adoptive resources for these children, you know, spread the word, getting a lot more people into the pipeline, and that number is down. However, we do have --
When you say they have no adoptive resource, what does that mean?
That they are legally free for adoption but there is no family right now who has expressed interest in adopting these particular children. Or perhaps they've expressed interest but have not made a commitment. So then the role of government, Councilman, is to continue to work harder to match those children with a family. Because if children grow too old in a system, they become less and less likely to be adopted. However, with our new reform initiative called Performance Based Contracting, we expect to see a significant number of permanencies. And I would ask Chief Deputy Commissioner Wanda Mile to speak to what our goals are around improving 1564 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET permanency for the City.
As the Commissioner said, I'm Wanda Mile, Deputy Commissioner for Children and Youth Program and Planning. We have an enhanced and intensive permanency agenda at DHS and have been working very, very hard with our provider partners and targeting first our family foster care providers who are responsible, not only for recruiting and training and managing appropriate foster parents and then sort of having children in our care placed with those parents, but also who are responsible for a permanency plan on behalf of those kids. We have been working with them for over a year at looking at ways in which we can together as a system better achieve permanencies, strong, safe, stable families for kids. If they cannot go home, which is our number 1 permanency option, reunification, then really identifying appropriate adoptive and subsidized permanent legal custody resources: Parents who can take on children, build new families for children in our system. So we have structured contracts, really re-worked our contractual arrangement and agreement with family foster care 1565 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET providers to incentivise and support and enhance their ability to move kids safely and more quickly to permanent homes.
Where are the parents coming from? Are they Philadelphia -- are the kids being settled with families here in Philadelphia or outside of Philadelphia?
The majority of children are adopted in the five county region, but some children get adopted by families outside. There are a number of cases where children are adopted outside. The overwhelming majority, though, are in the City and the region. And 90 percent of children get adopted by their foster parents.
Do we have a breakdown of the kids in terms of ethnicity and race and sex?
Yes, we do. And the overwhelming majority of children free for adoption are African American males.
And what's that number at this point? 1566 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Well, as of December, 1200 children freed for adoption, but within that number around 150, as I said, who do not have an adoptive resource. So that means that perhaps 1,050 will achieve an adoption soon than new cases will come into the adoption section, but there is that group of children who will languish unless we find them an adoptive family. And what DHS is doing about that is really picking up the pace around recruitment efforts for children who need to be adopted. We are going to the press. We're going to the radio.
Do you have many Puerto Rican and Latino families coming forward? Who comes forward? Do we place these kids in, generally, if he's a Puerto Rican kid in a Puerto Rican home? Or how do we try? Is there an attempt to do that?
We have a commitment to place children in as close proximity to their community of origin as possible. The system has held that as a value for many years. But the design of the system has not reflected that. In practice -- it's always been a value, but the practice has 1567 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET not necessarily been consistent with that value. In our new performance based contracting model, we entered into a dialogue with the providers and we have an understanding that providers will pick geographic areas where they are going to build their recruitment of foster parents. Most children should stay close to home because they can stay close to their friends and family and community and school. For some children, it may not be in their best interest, so it's not a hundred percent required. Specific to Latinos, we have two agencies Concillo (ph) and APM who do foster parenting and adoption. They are very successful at recruiting bilingual and bicultural families, and they also have multi-racial foster parents, too. Every agency makes an effort to recruit from everywhere. There is not and we would not tolerate a kind of a racial bias in favor of recruiting certain types of foster parents over others, but certainly we have two Latino agencies who specialize in the development of Latino families as resources and, yes, when we have the ability we place bilingual, bicultural children with those two organizations first. But, Councilman, it's not 1568 3/4/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET always the case. Our contracting process, though, moves us closer to that direction. We have been doing more recruitment, more advertisement in the Latino community around the need for adoptive and foster parents. We've been very much very proactive, much more than ever before targeting that community.