COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE JOINT COUNCIL COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES AND LAW & GOVERNMENT - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, November 10, 1998 10:15 a.m. - - - RESOLUTION NO. 960671 - A resolution calling for a full and comprehensive joint investigation by the Committees on Law & Government and on Health & Human Services into the exact ways in which the recently enacted so-called "welfare reform" legislation will impact the citizens of Philadelphia, and how the City can best exercise all powers that it may have in easing the burdens imposed on helpless citizens under the new law, including pressing for positive implementing legislation at the State level, and finding ways in which the City government, using subsidies that may be available under the new law, can provide jobs for welfare recipients at a living wage. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO, Co-Chair COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN, Co-Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I N D E X Mayor Edward G. Rendell . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Graham Finney, President. . . . . . . . . . . 30 21st Century League 6 Janet Raffel, Author. . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 21st Century's Special Report Charles Pizzi, President. . . . . . . . . . . 55 Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce Rosemarie Greco, Co-Chair . . . . . . . . . . 58 Private Industry Council Ernest Jones, President and CEO . . . . . . . 63 Private Industry Council Donna Cooper, Deputy Mayor. . . . . . . . . . 66 Mayor's Office of Policy and Planning Maddie Humphrey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Representing mothers, relatives of inmates in PA Leona Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Director, Employment Project Member, Union of the Homeless Sheri Honkala, Director . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Kensington Welfare Rights Union Elizabeth Ortiz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Kensington Rights (Also on behalf of Latino community) Erica Morrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Kensington Welfare Rights Union Maxine H. Tucker. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Deputy Commissioner, Department of Human Services Children and Youth Division Mike Nardone, Deputy Managing Director. . . . 124 Special Needs Housing 3 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 (Index, cont'd.) Mike Lucas, Assistant Health Commissioner . . 124 Department of Public Health Mark Bencivengo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Assistant Health Commissioner Sherri Heller, Deputy Secretary . . . . . . . 139 State Department of Public Welfare Richard Weishaupt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Community Legal Services Edward A. Schwartz, President . . . . . . . . 172 Institute for the Study of Civic Values 4 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 P R O C E E D I N G S
The joint Committee on Public Health & Human Services and the Committee on Law & Government is now in session. Chairwoman Tasco, of the Public Health and Human Services Committee, and I, David Cohen, will be co-chairing the hearing. This is a continued hearing from a hearing held a number of months ago that preliminarily dealt with the problems that will occur when the Welfare Reform Act goes fully into effect. Before the Chair recognizes the Mayor, the chair would like to ask all folks who are testifying to be brief. The calendar for today was: 9 o'clock Licenses & Inspections; 10 o'clock, this hearing; o'clock, the Finance Committee; o'clock, the Economic Development Committee. I know it won't do any good with you, Mr. Mayor. We'll accept you, like me, because both of us have records for speaking indefinitely. But we urge everybody to try to be as brief as possible. PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Before the Mayor speaks, Councilman Ortiz wanted to make a brief statement.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welfare reform has been described by our mayor as "a locomotive coming down the tracks" and "an accident waiting to happen." My other folks at the 21st Century League describe it as "a hurricane" or "a meteor" that will begin impacting on the City of Philadelphia and other urban areas of the Commonwealth. We here at City Council and in the city are preoccupied, and we need to begin finding what are the real facts and what are the real policies that need to be implemented in order to prevent hurt and the City of Philadelphia coming to its knees, as described by Mayor Rendell in one speech that he gave. We have come very far; we need to go further. There will be 25,000 households, supposedly that will be taken off the welfare rolls on March the 3rd. That's over 60,000, close to 70,000, human beings. We need to find out where we're at, where we're going, and what will 6 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 happen with these people and these children at that time. So we welcome the Mayor of the City of Philadelphia to these hearings, and I'm really very grateful that he has decided to open up these hearings for us because I believe that this is probably the most important public policy issue that we'll be facing within the next few years.
Mr. Mayor, we welcome you to this hearing. We know that all of the folks in Philadelphia are very anxious to hear about the City's plans. Please proceed in whatever fashion appropriate.
Well, thank you, Councilman Cohen and Madame Chairwoman and members of the panel. Let me just begin by praising City Council for holding these hearings. One of the things that has been of most greatest frustration to me very over the last couple of years is that no one has been paying any attention to this issue. All of the news we hear is good news. We hear about how welfare rolls are declining, we hear about how the situation is 7 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 under hand, how the good economy is taking care of this problem. And all of that is an illusion, but this is an enormous -- produces an enormous level of frustration to me and to people who are working in the front lines of this problem. The Washington Post had an article on welfare reform that just reinforced the sense of bliss that is down in Washington these days with both the administration and the Congress. Their recent article said, and I quite, "No one is being sanctioned. " Well, The Washington Post misses the fact that the real deadlines have not occurred yet. As Councilman Ortiz said in his opening remarks, those real deadlines will begin to have their major impact on cities like Philadelphia on March 3, 1999. And although there have been strong declines in welfare case loads in rural states such as Oregon, Tennessee, and Florida -- and even our state on the whole is experiencing a strong decline in the number of people who are receiving cash assistance -- in cities like New York, 8 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Detroit, Chicago, Atlanta, and Los Angeles and Philadelphia, the rate of welfare decline lags way behind the state. Welfare recipients in our cities are having a much tougher time becoming independent than in rural areas and suburban areas. A. -- the rate of case load decline lags far behind the overall state rate of decline. As a result, today, in 80 percent of these cities, the cities themselves have more individuals remaining on the case load than the entire rest of the state. In our case, Philadelphia has a clear majority of the state's welfare case load, with just over 60,000 heads of household and 130,000 children. To put this number in context, we could fill Franklin Field four times over and not be able to seat all of the individuals that are on the Philadelphia case load. As a point of reference, Pittsburgh has just over 18,000 heads of households. Now, the reason for this problem is not 9 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the fault of the State or the City, as you will hear; the reason for this problem is that the original legislation was inherently flawed. As you recall, I urged, as did several big-city mayors, urged the President to veto the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 for one plain and simple reason: that it did not provide sufficient money to transition welfare recipients in urban areas to the workforce. The Congressional Budget Office, surely not a liberal organization, estimated in 1996, at the time the President signed the bill, that it was $12 billion short of the necessary funding to make that transition successful. By what we know now, from the work we've done, I'd say that number should be around $20 billion short of where we need to go to make the transition successful. It is also true that there is a demographic factor here. Senator Tom Dashell of South Dakota told me four months ago that the South Dakota Department of Commerce has stopped trying to move businesses into the state because they have no workforce ready to fill those jobs. There is no people -- there are no people out of 10 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 work in South Dakota who are capable of doing the work. So that's wonderful news for South Dakota, but the majority of this country's welfare case load is in America's big cities, and those big cities have lagged behind the national rate of recovery. And that is true for the City of Philadelphia.
Notwithstanding all the good news that's occurred in Philadelphia, we've only had two years of increasing jobs. And last year, the increase in jobs was a very modest 3,000 job figure. When over the last half decade, the region itself has increased nearly 100,000 new jobs. So there is a mismatch between where the welfares case load is and where the jobs are. That's problem number one. Problem number two is that there's a transportation deficiency. We have, in most American cities, built a one-way transportation system, where people can get in from the suburbs but can't get from the city back to the suburbs. And many of the growth centers exist. 11 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 We've identified 15 suburban growth centers where there's a real need for entry-level employees. And right now, our transportation system cannot get people without cars out to those growth centers. The best it can do is if someone gets on a subway and bus, gets down to one of the commuter rail lines, goes back out to, let's say, Paoli; then there is no way of getting them from Paoli's train station to Berwyn. Or if they get off at Villanova or St. Davids, there's no way of getting them from there to the King of Prussia shopping center. So we have a lot of work to do to meet the transportation mismatch. Next, there's a mismatch in child care. There simply aren't enough available child-care slots to provide child care for all of the people who are on the case loads. If every one of those people found jobs today and needed child care, the child-care system in the state would collapse, notwithstanding the fact that the state has done a good job in ratcheting up the number of available child-care slots. There is also a time mismatch because 12 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. m. , Monday 4 through Friday child-care system. A lot of the 5 entry-level jobs that are available now are 6 nighttime and on weekends, when there is presently 7 no child care available. Donna Cooper will tell you in our plan how we are providing funds to both incentivize child-care providers to make slots available in that time period and how we are providing funds to deal with the transportation factor in getting people out to the suburbs. But if with we did all of that well, and if our case load was all ready to work -- and, remember, the reason these declining case load figures are so misleading is because what has happened since the Welfare Reform Act was signed is that the best segments of the case load, the ones who have some work experience, the ones who have no drug and alcohol problems, the ones who have no mental health problems, these are the people who are getting onto the job rolls. As you go down our case load, you will find people who have marginal, if any, literacy 13 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 skills at all-- marginal if any. You will find people who have substance-abuse problems, you will find people who have MHMR problems. And the further down you get in the case load, the harder it is to place everyone. But, understand, if everyone had no 8 problems, if everyone had some past work experience, if they had no substance abuse problems no MHMR problems, there simply are not enough jobs in the Philadelphia region to absorb our entire case load. Why? Because they compete. They don't seek these jobs in a vacuum; they compete with displaced workers. As you know, we read about every single day some merger or consolidation that's occurred in the Philadelphia area. And, by the way, without these mergers and consolidations, our job figures would be way up. But, you know, Meridian merged and consolidated into CoreStates, CoreStates, CoreStates merged and consolidated into First Union. Thousands of jobs lost in the process. The health-care industry. Although we have been successful in stopping the major fallout 14 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES.
960671 from the Allegheny bankruptcy, there's no question that we will have less jobs in the health-care Industry as a result of that; and overall, we have less jobs -- a declining job base in the health-care industry. So those displaced workers are out there looking for the available jobs as well. And then we have the high school and college, but most relevantly, the high school graduating classes every year that flood into the job market, looking for the same limited number of available jobs. So there simply aren't any jobs, number one. Our transportation system can't get people out to where they need to go. Our child-care system isn't totally responsive. And we have serious problems with getting our welfare case load -- many members of our welfare case load job-ready in the first place. Now, you also know that technology is creating a problem for us. It used to be, 23 years ago, if you were willing to work, you had a 24 strong work ethic and you could work with your 25 hands, you could find and hold a job. That 15 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 doesn't exist today. Just look at one job. I like to use this as an example. Twenty years ago, if you wanted to be a retail clerk in a department store or a five-and-dime store or even a boutique store, you only had to learn to press one button on a cash register and make change, and you basically could be a retail clerk. Now if you go into any department store, any store at all, you have to operate a mini-computer to be a retail clerk. You have to have a full range of literacy skills and some significant training as well. So the job market has changed. In fact, in two years across this region, the number of entry-level job vacancy positions that have required no or limited skills have actually decreased by close to 4,000, even though the overall increase in that time period of jobs has been close to a 100,000. So there's a mismatch in training and schooling between our welfare case load and some of the available jobs. As Councilman Ortiz said, come this spring and the first significant cutoffs begin, it 16 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 will be 26,000 families -- 26,000 families. And we cannot do welfare reform on the cheap. Those states that have had a significant impact over the long term in reducing their rolls have actually spent more money than they used to spend under the welfare system. They've spent more money up front to save money at the end of the road, and that is an importance component. Now, that's not to beat up on the state of Pennsylvania. The state of Pennsylvania has done some very significant positive things to help our problem. In fact, a recent study done by Tufts University held Pennsylvania as 1 of 14 states with welfare policies likely to improve the economic well-being of families. The strongest aspect of what the state has done is its generous earned-income disregard. This important incentive is already helping convince welfare recipients that they're better off working than remaining on cash assistance. It's been a powerful incentive. And the state didn't have to do that, and it did. Likewise, aspects of Pennsylvania's child-care subsidies program are among the very best in the nation. 17 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 In our efforts to spend the money -- as you recall, the President promised, after '96, that he would try to cure some of the defects in the welfare bill. 1 billion welfare-to-work jobs bill, where 80 percent of that money went directly to cities, directly to cities that had the largest case loads. And in mapping out our program -- and you'll hear more from Donna Cooper about that, in mapping out our program, the state has been an excellent partner. Unlike many governors, Governor Ridge was swift and clear in his commitment to appropriate the $11 million state match needed to draw down these funds.
In Ohio, Governor Voinovich wouldn't do that, so the residents of Ohio didn't even get the benefit of the federal funds. Likewise, the Governor and his staff have helped us develop a program that we believe is a national model, known as "Philadelphia At Work" and also the Greater Philadelphia Works 18 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 program. We've done some innovative things. I know you've seen on TV the advertisements we've been running both on TV and radio and direct mail in, one, trying to convince the case load that, in fact, this is happening, and they'd better get ready; and, two, trying to reach out to employers and get them to conceptionally think about going out and affirmatively hiring welfare-to-work people. That ad campaign is one of the most innovative in the country and is enormously successful. We've been running that ad campaign since September, and almost 6,000 clients have called the number to receive help to get into the system, and we've had almost 400 inquiries from employers based on those ads themselves. The state is also committing an additional $9 million to the novel Philadelphia At Work program, and the state has been a good partner, and we hope it will continue to be, and we believe that that is the case. You will hear from some witnesses who will say that the city and the state aren't doing enough. You will hear from some witnesses who say 19 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the state isn't doing enough. And I believe, given the inherent deficiencies in the law, the state's commitment has been a sound one. And I believe the city's programs are innovative and novel and designed to help as best we can. But to give you an idea of the dimension of this problem, assume for the moment that we have somewhere in the high 40s, mid-40s a thousand families still remaining on cash assistance. If all of our programs are successful, we believe we can place maybe close to 20,000 of those families in some jobs that will allow them to get income and continue to receive some level of assistance. That's less than half of the available case load. And to give you an example of the impact of that, let's suppose that only 400 of those 40,000-plus families can't comply with the rigors of welfare program, the city could incur at least $413,000 in unreimbursed health-care costs for services offered at our district health centers. Or let's say that a thousand additional children from those 400 families become part of 20 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 DHS system due to destitution, which leads to abuse or neglect. In this case, the city's share of the cost would be another $3 million annually, and we are low-balling these numbers. Or let's say that these families entered the shelter system -- not an unexpected result of all of this. 25 million to provide for their housing. And this is 400 families.
25 million for 400 families in our shelter system. We could also face serious budget issues at the school district. And there are many, many, many problems financially that you'll hear delineated by members of the administration that you have asked to appear as witnesses today. So this is a train wreck waiting to happen, despite the good efforts of the state and the city. This is a problem that deserves attention. It has received no attention. Mayor Rice, Mayor Arch, and myself had a press conference in Washington last fall to delineate what we thought through the results of a 21 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 national survey of cities, what we thought the number of families that would be left unaided when welfare reform kicked in in March of '99. One national media camera came from C-Span. Two months later, the CBS network alone had 29 cameras in Washington that day covering the aspects of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. So it was 29 cameras from one network, and not one camera from anybody other than C-Span to cover this issue. It shows why this hearing is so very much needed. Let me close by telling you what we believe are four areas that could help alleviate the potential train wreck on March 3rd. Unfortunately -- and your frustrations will be the same as mine -- these are programs that cannot be dealt with by us, we can't legislate them. They are areas that our $25 million 2-year program -- really a $56 million -- that comes from the federal welfare-to-work funds. Those funds can't ameliorate these problems. But I think this Council can be a strong advocate in trying to bring about these changes. What could be done to alleviate this 22 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 problem? Number one, the federal government, Congress, could extend the 24-month deadline and decrease state-required work participation rates. That's very, very important. That would certainly delay, slow, and mitigate the impact of this train wreck. Number two, the federal government could continue to expand welfare-to-work reverse-commuting funding streams and child-care availability. 1 billion for the next two years. They could increase child-care funding. As you know, the President tried to do that in the tobacco legislation, which was voted down by the Congress. That would have produced hundreds of millions of dollars for available child-care slots around the country. And thanks to Senator Specter and Santorum, $250 million was put into T21 for model reverse-commuting programs. But nationwide, we could increase that appropriation ten-fold and still not have all of the reverse-commuting 23 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 funding we need. Number three, our state government could relax aspects of Act 35 that are stricter than the national TANF legislation with respect to what an individual must do to keep their cash assistance after months. And that is something 8 that I have talked to and will continue to talk to 9 Governor Ridge about. 10 And, lastly, the state could expand 11 job-training, literacy classes, funding for 12 reverse-commute programs, new child-care services, 13 and broader exemption policies. And, again, 14 that's not meant to be critical, because the state 15 has not said no to any of those ideas, although 16 time is running out. 17 We have a significant TANF surplus as 18 the case load statewide declines. It does give us 19 the money to do things like I suggested in number 20 four. 21 So this is a problem that, as I said, 22 has gone on almost in secrecy. It is a serious 23 problem. I join with Councilman Ortiz when he 24 said it is among the most substantial facing the City of Philadelphia. That and the need to have 24 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 an accurate census count are two of the problems that I see that can have the most long-range detrimental impact to all of the progress we have made over the last seven years.
So, again, I want to close by thanking Council for having these hearings. There are at least local media here, and I know that the Council will be strong advocates -- not just with our own three Congressmen who are already on board, but with the administration and other people in the Senate and the Congress -- Senator Specter, Senator Santorum -- to achieve some of the changes which are important to mitigate the potential harm here. And let me close by saying that none of us, none of us is in favor of the continuation of the old welfare system. It didn't work, it produced generation after generation of dependencies. It didn't give opportunity to people. There were no incentives to get off of welfare. It was a lousy system, a flat-out lousy system. But all of us want that system changed in a way that is fair and equitable and will give everyone on that case load the opportunity to work 25 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 to the best of their abilities. But we can't ask people to get off welfare when there aren't jobs. We can't ask people to get off welfare when we don't have child care available for their kids. No mother is going to do that -- your mother wouldn't do it, my mother wouldn't have done it, no mother is going to do that. We can't ask people to travel three and a half, four hours to work and back in one day. We've got to begin to address these problems. I believe the Greater Philadelphia At Work and Philadelphia Works are two excellent programs designed to deal with these problems. You will hear more about all of this from Rosemarie Greco and Charlie Pizzi, the two co-chairman of the Private Industry Council. And, as all of you know, we worked hard to upgrade the level of response of the Private Industry Council. The fact that a Rosemarie Greco and an Ernie Jones would have signed on as president -- and now Rosemarie is chairman of the board -- is very significant about our efforts. Our own Donna Cooper has done an absolutely splendid job in PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 marshalling that $28 million into the most effective program we can. And then you'll hear from Mike Nardone and representatives of the Health Department and Human Services Department, who will give you more examples of what could happen once March 3rd arrives. And, again, all of it is speculative. I use the number 400. That may turn out to be a woefully low number, a conservative estimate. So we have to deal with this problem and we have to deal with it quickly. If I can ask the Chair's indulgence, I know you want to move on anyway, I have to be at a press conference that Tenet is having today, announcing an agreement with us that will, in fact, ensure that the level of care that was given out to the poorest and most have vulnerable citizens by the Allegheny System continues under Tenet. And Donna Cooper, Rosemarie, Ernie, and Mike Nardone are more than capable of answering any questions you have. And I'd love to have continued discussion with you about this problem. 27 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 So unless anybody else --
Mr. Mayor, could we just hold you for a few minutes. We'll be very careful to see that you can meet your requirements. I just wanted to mention that this is a continued hearing on Resolution No. 960671, which calls for a full and comprehensive joint investigation by the Committees on Law & Government and the Committee on Health & Human Services into the exact ways in which the recently enacted so-called "welfare reform" legislation will impact the citizens of Philadelphia; and how the City can best exercise all powers that it may have in easing the burdens imposed on helpless citizens under the new law. And a quorum of the joint committee is present. To my right is Councilwoman Blackwell; Councilman Nutter; Co-chair Councilwoman Tasco, Chair of Health and Human Services; David Cohen, myself, as chair of Law & Government. To my left are Councilman Ortiz and Councilman Rizzo. Thank you. I know, Mr. Mayor, everybody -- could we do this, agree that each 28 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 member of Council, before you leave, can ask one question of the Mayor, and then we'll excuse you.
I don't have a question, Mr. Mayor. I just want to let you know that this issue came up at the NBC board meeting this summer, and we will have a hearing on this to at the March meeting in Washington to raise the level of understanding, because I was amazed that some of the Councilmembers were not aware and are not aware of the impact that this could have on their cities 'cause a lot of them don't come, don't have that interaction with their counties. So we will have a hearing in Washington in March, and I'm chairing that committee.
But you shouldn't be amazed. The Washington Post writes an article 23 saying, What's everybody talking about? They don't get it.
Councilman Nutter 29 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 informed me he has no questions. Councilwoman Blackwell? No questions. Councilman Rizzo? Any questions, Councilman Ortiz?
May I ask that Mr. Grant Graham Finney, President of the 21st Century League, and Janet Raffel, author of the 21st Century's special report, perhaps both of them could come to table.
I hate to call it a "witness chair." Yes, Councilman Nutter?
I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Did I understand the Mayor to indicate that either Donna Cooper or someone else from -- 30 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
Mr. Finney and Miss Raffel, would you be good enough to identify yourselves for the record and then proceed in the order you wish to.
Yes, sir. Honorable members of Council, I'm Graham Finney, President of the 21st Century League. Janet Raffel, to my right, is a consultant to the League, directing our ongoing monitoring project of the evolving new welfare system. We are very grateful for the chance to help explain the context in which we're working. And in our remarks, we'll try only to augment that which the Mayor has already put on the record. The League, as you may or may not know, is a small, nonpartisan, modestly-funded agency that, two and a half years ago, started looking at 31 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the effect of devolution and downsizing at the federal level upon this city and this region. As a part of that, we have undertaken an extensive evident to understand it, and by understanding it ourselves, to be a source of credible information, a catalyst for change, and a facilitator in this massive turnaround that's occurring in the welfare system. One of the biggest points that I want to leave to you is to reiterate a point already made -- that the full extent of the changes that are now occurring really do an economic effects on the city as well as many individuals within it, rival, and over time, will be much larger than the positive economic effects of a new Performing Arts Center or even the one-time Republican convention. We approach this as a matter that requires urgent attention. I would like to have Janet Raffel, therefore, give you some of the background facts and figures that lead us to that conclusion and cause us to hope that a higher level of concern and joint action -- local, city and, state -- will occur as the witching day of March next year fast 32 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 approaches.
Miss Raffel, will you identify yourself for the record, and then proceed.
My name is Janet Raffel, and I'm a consultant to the 21st Century League, who conducted the study of the first-year experiences under welfare reform. My remarks, I'm going to try to keep them very brief, and so I provided you with a handout of a much more extensive presentation of what we found from the first year of welfare reform in the greater Philadelphia region. Let me start by saying how massive this transaction was. Philadelphia started with 71,600 people that are heads of household in the case load. Those numbers declined to 61,300 by August of '98. Fourteen percent of the case load has declined in Philadelphia as opposed to percent 21 in the state of Pennsylvania. But 15,800 of those 22 families are subject to the time limits and the 23 work requirements imposed by the new law. 24 Who are the people on welfare? Most welfare clients do want to work. The typical 33 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 pattern is that people's cycle on and off of welfare for a host of personal, family, and economic reasons, but many of the TANF clients do face very serious barriers to employment, as the Mayor mentioned. About 30 percent are functionally illiterate, percent lack English proficiency, 9 more than 50 percent lack a high school diploma, 10 and 40 percent may be addicted to drugs or 11 alcohol. And thousands more have been subject to 12 domestic violence. And all of these barriers 13 require some attention if an individual is going 14 to achieve self-sufficiency, which is the goal of 15 welfare reform, within the five years that is 16 allowed by law. 17 I might point out that the income that 18 is required to achieve self-sufficiency, according 19 to a very important study by Wider Opportunities 20 for Women, in the greater Philadelphia area, a 21 single mom with one child would need to earn $12.27 an hour for full-time work in order to be self-sufficient. For a single mom with three children, that wage goes up to $20.83 an hour. So from welfare dependency to a minimum-wage job to 34 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 those wages requires a fairly substantial transition. I now want to call to your attention the chart that we have developed, which is the path to self-sufficiency. Do I need to be at the mike or can I just come over and point to the chart very quickly.
While Janet is doing that, if I may interrupt, the work that we've done thus far has been done with the very good cooperation both of the state and now with the city, and as proceed into the second year, we'll be looking just as hard at Greater Philadelphia Works, the city model, as we have thus far at the state's in the hope of pointing out the next steps that need to be taken. And as Janet explains the chart, you will see that we clearly are in the middle of an extraordinary complex and addition to what was the old system.
So this chart is a draft and is a work in progress, just as the new welfare system in Philadelphia is a work in progress. 35 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 The TANF recipient has to come through the County Assistance Office, and there's 4 district offices where they will be cycled through 5 the system. 6 In the first stage, in a workfare 7 state, which is what Pennsylvania is, the process 8 has to begin with an independent job search or a 9 quick attachment program. There were slots 10 available in programs to support people for about 11 18 percent of the case load in Philadelphia. 12 They are also assisted by the job 13 centers, and there are nine contractors where 14 somebody could be referred to that quick 15 attachment search. This is also at the County 16 Assistance Office level, this is where people 17 learned about what the new laws are, what the, 18 what the referral opportunities are, the time 19 limits, and the requirements. After someone completes their job search, if they didn't get a job, then they go back to the County Assistance Office to a career development unit, which is a new unit created by the County Assistance Offices, where they hear about all their other options. And in 36 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Philadelphia, there are choices about what options you can make. Nobody can be required. There are 3600 slots in the (unintelligible) program, which is referrals to employment and training programs operated by 45 different contractors in the city. Communicate Solutions has about 2700 slots. There's independent job searches, which is where the majority of the case load ends up, working on their own to try to find a job. Education is this little box down here. If they are told that they're allowed to attend education programs, they can put that in their agreement of mutual responsibility. And now, starting in the fall, is this new Greater Philadelphia Works program, which you've heard about. I'll point out that there are 45 contractors here, contractors here, 7 regional 21 centers, which each have partners, and then 22 Philadelphia At Work down here. 23 It's a fairly awesome set of choices that a client needs to make to understand. And their ability to make good choices, to some 37 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 extent, depends upon the information that get at this year development unit at the County Assistance Office right here. And as I'm heading back, I will say that the County Assistance Office workers were not trained initially. And when I say that this is a system in transition, the County Assistance Office workers were not really trained initially to be case workers and job developers; they were trained initially to be income maintenance workers. And so it's a whole new set of responsibilities required at that level. The results in Philadelphia that we have seen with the case load decline and people getting jobs need to be interpreted carefully. We know that a robust economy was able to absorb these workers. The first year appears to have mobilized people who are most ready. And, as the Mayor points out, the client base that is left is likely to be much more challenging. But I will also point out that there is no information available on the status of people who leave the case load. We don't know how many people are still employed, what wages they're 38 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 earning, and whether they're on a path to self-sufficiency. So the cries or the situation doesn't just involve the people who are facing the deadline who are not meeting the work requirements; it's also this five-year charge of whether the entire case load is going to be self-sufficient. Some challenges remain in the system. One is that the success of this emerging system depends upon DPW case workers who are overwhelmed by heavy case loads in a confusing welfare system.
The program slots in Philadelphia can serve about 40 percent of the case load, leaving the balance to be on their own to find their way in that pathway. Assessment and case management to support people in their trek towards self-sufficiency is only available to some of the clients enrolled in some of the programs there. And the data systems to track clients and inform the public about welfare outcomes are not fully operational. As a consequence, there's a mystery here about where we stand. 39 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Another serious concern is that the programs that were developed in the first year of welfare reform -- and to some extent, those that were created in the second year -- fail to address major barriers to employment. There was minimal support for education. And, in fact, what we heard through the first year was that people who tried to enroll in education programs were told that this is a work-first state, and education is over, you have to go get a job. And while I understand that that has changed to some extent, there's still a lot of confusion about how people are going to be working part-time or 30 hours a week and add on skill development, literacy training, etc. And it's a particular problem for people who don't speak any English. Another issue is that there's no DPW --
Miss Raffel, I'm going to have to ask you to summarize.
Okay, I'll summarize by saying that for the 26,000 clients and their families who face the deadline, there could be a very serious crisis. But there's also thousands 40 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 more who are going to be facing that deadline in the months that follow, so we can't just focus on the March people. And I will close by saying that to date, there's no known contingency plan for clients facing welfare cutoffs, how sanctions are going to be enforced, how many additional work slots are going to be created to enable people who want to work to get work, and how exemption policies are going to be enforced. Thank you very much.
Mr. Finney, before you begin, isn't it true -- and tell me if I'm wrong -- that at the end of the day, the real problem is the lack of jobs, that all of the other problems that Miss Raffel and you talked about can be dealt with, you're working on them. But that the one solution we have not found is how do we produce enough jobs. And, as my colleagues are reminding me, jobs of a living wage.
Let me make these 41 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 comments. I think that's correct. Everyone we talk to fears the downturn in the economy. The future is dependent on a workforce development strategy that arms and mobilizes everybody. But I don't want to leave, sir, without making two more points.
One is this, that we've got to respect the fact that all of these systems are in transition. And what's required here is a level of intimate cooperation between city and state, and to a lesser degree, the federal government and the nonprofit community, which is being depended upon to deliver these services at a level that we have not had in the past. That seems to us to require having this issue dealt with in the same manner that the state and city have cooperated on the Kvaerner project, and more recently, on the convention. It means the Mayor and the Governor, at their level, grabbing hold and having some of the difficulties and absences here corrected in the months remaining. 42 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 What we've got basically here are two questions. A huge management problem. We have a two-year clock and a five-year management transition. To do it all well is going to require a much harder and bigger effort on all points, picking up on many of the points that the Mayor made. Come March -- and this goes to Janet's point about a contingency plan -- we not only will a management issue of major proportion that will be ongoing, but we will have, very frankly, a political, social, and moral issue as to who assumes the responsibility for those who are left without finding work and able to make the transition that the law requires. Is this to be thrust upon the city government or its limited philanthropic and nonprofit sources? Are there steps that the state can take, as have other governors have taken and other steps in other states to cushion these changes? Together, they make us, trying to be civic and not representing any special interest, call to your attention, which this hearing 43 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 suggests you already have, the need to elevate this discussion and to regard it as a much more serious and profound set of questions than has been given to them in the past. And we thank you for allowing us to testify.
Well, thank you. And each member, since I'm confining myself to a question, which is a very difficult for me to do, I'm going to impose that on each of the Councilmen. Councilman Nutter, any question?
Yes, Mr. Chairman. I respect the single-question request.
I appreciate it. I'll just ask a long question. First, with regard to the chart, it's stated that there is a certain income level required for self-sufficiency in Philadelphia, 12.27 an hour, according to the graphic, for a mother with one child, and $20.83 an hour for a mother with three children. 44 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Can you tell me what average wage rate you're finding placements for?
I don't have a definitive number, and perhaps Dr. Heller will be able to answer that. What I've heard around is 6.50 to 6.70 an hour is the typical placement rate in the quick attachment programs.
And is it your experience that that wage, or anyone's wage in particular, is generally determined by the potential employer to have some relationship between what they can afford and what they think the person is, by way of qualifications, eligible for?
-- versus a predetermined what you need to survive. There's obviously a gap between those two numbers.
How do you, I guess, either fill that gap, or what do you propose people to do? I mean, should someone just coming right out make 12.27 an hour, regardless of what 45 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 their background or qualifications are or. . .
No. I believe that there needs to be a very clear strategy for having support clients from that first being work-ready. I mean, some people aren't even are ready for that $5.15, and employers in the region have made it very clear that they will not employ people who are not work-ready. So that's one threshold but. But then, once people get the first job, then there needs to be ongoing support to increase a person's skill level to be able to get that next job and the next job. And while the state has promised to do career advancement and retention support programming, it has not been made available as of this date.
The other Sunday, I had a briefing with Council in the caucus room. Part of what you said and what Joan Reeves, the Commissioner of DHS for the city, stated is that it went to the management problem, the 46 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 communication between the different agencies and departments and offices, and that it may not be structured and it's not in place. And could you go into that a little bit more in terms of the record? Because I think those aspects are a part of the big wrench that can be thrown into any effort we may have. We may have some money to be spent and really face an inability because the caseworker is not communicating with the career development unit or somebody else or whatever it is happening, and they don't have a clear picture, or the DHS worker or the DPW worker may not be fully trained, and I don't know what programs to train this huge work force are in place by the state and the city to begin to be able to take care of these problems. So if you can give us what you found, you know, because we're going to have other witnesses, what you found it to be in terms of that.
Speaking for the League, on the basis of the work that Janet and her colleagues did last year, what we found was what I pretty much said, that the building of this new 47 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 system is a prodigious effort. We came away with enormous sympathy for the state case workers whose jobs have turned around and who are now working in a very different environment, required among other things to work intimately with partners on the local systems with whom they have never had cause to interface before. But at the same time, we found that there is the natural distance that has always been there, let's face it, between the city and the state on all sorts of dollar and other politically-charged issues. There's no question that a current need is a management information system and a public information system that better connects all of the many, many moving parts that need to be put in place solidly, and to get rid of the misinformation and the rumors and the number of folk, for example, who come to us all the time, asking us to interpret what's going on. These are people who are actively involved as contractors, as officials, etc. So it's not a knock on anybody. I think there are major efforts under way. The 48 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 problem is that the clock is out of whack with the effort and the dollars for a lot of these absolutely essential add-ons to the transition in education, in dealing with special populations are not well-tuned, and in some cases, are not in place. That's why I said that we need to address this. After all, the city's program is only several months old. When we do our study next year, I am sure we will find some with the same weaknesses and omissions as we found in a civic voice when we looked at the state's work in the first year. Come on, we've got to recognize that the laws of the land have thrust upon everyone in this room brand-new assignments, and it's going to take some doing to do it in a way that does not hurt this population, which we estimate to be the size of the city of Scranton, from getting work and making this major transition in their lives.
But I want to note 49 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 that the first hearing of this committee was one year and nine months ago, so that there has been a lot of time available to the city and to the state and to the federal government to understand the need for these things. I find that what I'm looking for is, how are we going to get the jobs? I think every other problem is manageable. I think you point out very important issues that have to be dealt with. But I don't think the problem is with the labor force; I think the problem is with the people who we expect to get jobs from, and I think we've got to have some clear indications where these jobs are coming from. I think we're in the right direction when we move towards jobs, but the answer that I don't see at all is any real serious approach to provide enough jobs.
Thank you very, very much. The next panel -- (Applause.) 50 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
Oh, it's all right, I want to make a comment while they're leaving.
Not at all. I certainly would like to thank you for the briefing that Councilman Ortiz and Cohen called. I think you really, really have done a thorough job at trying to give us the latest information in an objective slant. I also agree with Councilman Cohen. It's obvious that the rudder meets the road with those people who can't read at the 8th-grade level because there's no plans for any kind of job training there and that we have got to provide, as Leona Smith would agree with and said, we've got to provide job training for those people at the 51 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 bottom rung of the ladder who may not be academically able to cut it in real-life survival and in real-life jobs. But I think that the information that you've given us and that you approach and that you work on this is excellent, and thank you.
I've just got a question. The Mayor mentioned that some cities and states have spent more than normal welfare funding to guarantee a program that could serve the needs of the recipients. And have we done that in Pennsylvania?
We're still looking at this. I think it's safe to say that a number of states were out of the box more quickly than was Pennsylvania in addressing this issue. They accepted waivers to experiment in years before the new acts were placed. The one that's usually referred to is 52 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Wisconsin. Michigan is also referred to. In Wisconsin in particular, Governor Thompson has invested a considerable number of state dollars into the process to reinforce their welfare-to-work transition, noting that some of these educational and other issues are just very, very difficult to deal with. We know that the state is looking at other options, and we look forward to ways in which it can round out the comprehensive set of services that they know needs to be in place to get us anywhere along this path to self-sufficiency, which is the language that the law sets in motion.
Thank you very much. The next panel, there are eight names I'm going to call. The first four, I would like to ask to sit at the table. The next four, I'd like to have sit in the back, and they will be coming up shortly. Mr. Charles Pizzi, President of Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce. Miss Rosemarie Greco, Co-chair of the 53 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Private Industry Council; Ernest Jones, President and CEO of the Private Industry Council; And Donna Cooper, Deputy Mayor of the Mayor's Office of Policy and Planning. I would also like to have come within the railing Mr. Mike Nardone, the Deputy Managing Director for Special Housing; Mike Lucas, the Assistant Health Commissioner for the Department of Health; Maxine Tucker, the Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Human Services. (Unidentified woman in audience, later identified as Maddie Humphrey, raises hand.)
I represent three organizations of mothers of Philadelphia, and I'd like to know, given o'clock as the next meeting in this room, where will there be time for mothers to speak to this issue?
Do we have them on the agenda? 54 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
I understand, and I'm sure you're on the agenda, but I will be checking on that.
You have corporate people to hear from first, and this is already a continuing session. And I submit that there's much to be said by and for mothers that does not represent industry, does not represent jobs; represents quality of life in this city. And there's a major public investment that has already been transferred from those mothers to the private industrial sector. (Applause.)
Since you're closed tomorrow on behalf of VFW and World War II children.
You make your point 55 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 very eloquently, and I think it's a correct point. At the termination that I have just called, we will listen to the mothers.
I would say, hopefully, no later than 12, preferably by --
Mr. Pizzi, the four of you can decide who ought to go in what order. Why don't you identify yourself and then proceed, Mr. Pizzi.
Great. My name is Charlie Pizzi. I'm here today as both the President of the Philadelphia Greater Chamber of Commerce and also the Co-chair of the Private Industry Council.
To be sensitive to timing 56 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 issues, let me just not read from the testimony, but just hit on the salient points.
Very good. Just so long as it turns out not to be longer than the written statement.
I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, you can put me on the clock. The challenge before us today has been -- I would like to say on behalf of the business community and the Private Industry Council takes it very seriously. We understand this is not just about jobs, but it is about families. But we must approach it in a very opportunistic way. We must engage the private sector in order for it to have success because we all believe that the best program that you can give the family is a job. We at the Chamber have hired five former welfare mothers and have had a successful record of experience with them over the last five years. We need to not only call this attention to the business community in Philadelphia, but also to the suburban Philadelphia companies 57 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 because the need is there, and we, with the help and the cooperation of John Butler and Feather Houston, can work together to engage that private sector with the tax credits and with the wage subsidies so that it's a win-win situation. However, I just want to call to your attention that we are looking at a timing issue come March, whereby if we do not and are not able to get these families and women into the system, it will be a very difficult time, both for them and the infrastructure that has been set up to process those ladies for job training. When the Mayor asked me to take over as Chairman some time ago, about six month ago, it was a very -- I took on the responsibility seriously. But I can tell you that if it wasn't for the help and the work of Rosemarie Greco to restructure the Private Industry Council, along with Deputy Mayor Cooper, we would not be in the situation that we are in today. We have revamped the system, the structure for the intake of these women, that we can provide the best and fastest -- best and fast adequate processing for their needs and assessment 58 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 of their needs. But this is not a fail-safe -- this is not a sure mechanism, nothing will be, because we are dealing with the human element here, and the need are vast and the opportunities are small. So I just want to say before I turn this over to Rosemarie Greco, I want to publicly thank you for taking on this responsibility for the restructuring of the Private Industry Council.
Rosemarie Greco, Co-Chair of the Private Industry Council. There are several issues that I would like to address but I will not because there are people sitting directly behind me, the one such person who addressed this group, focussing on the true core issue of welfare-to-work -- the mothers and their children. So I am going to skip over those particular factors related to the heart of this issue and deal instead very quickly with the 59 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 management perspective of delivering service to these families. The Private Industry Council, as you know, has as its charter workforce development, and it inherited the responsibility for the administration of Greater Philadelphia Works through the welfare-to-work legislation. Much was needed to be done at the Private Industry Council in order to ready it for this extraordinary challenge. And I will tell you there is still more work that needs to be done at the Private Industry Council to make it a customer-focussed, client-sensitive, enabling power in this city. The work that has been done is documented here in this manual. It tell you about all the transitional and transformational changes we made. It will also have in here a base audit that Chairman Pizzi had come into effect six months ago. We know all the problems that are inherent in the Private Industry Council. We've set about fixing them with two customer bases in mind: the workforce community and the employer 60 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 community. They are inextricably linked. You cannot have economic viability unless you have economic development with business, and you cannot have business development without a competent workforce. We get confused in this city about what is a qualified worker and especially when we focus on some of the numbers that you recently heard from the 21st Century League, and people are defined necessarily honestly and objectively and statistically in terms of literacy and work experience. But the fact is we have qualifiable people in the TANF population who can and will become qualifiable provided that we make that gap, we build a bridge over that gap between the workforce community and the employer community. Let me address two issues that were raised here by your questioning. One is, where are the jobs? The jobs, Mr. Chairman, are in the city and mostly outside of the city for entry-level workers. The impediments to those jobs not the job openings or even necessarily the skills of the potential workers, but the impediments of every day life -- transportation, 61 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 child care. These are factors that are addressed in the Greater Philadelphia Works Plan which takes a wholistic approach to the individual who wants and needs a job as well as to the employer community who need successful workers without the impediments and the worries of child care and how do I get there from here. You will hear more about Greater Philadelphia Works, and so I will not continue to stay on that subject. One final comment. The transformation at the Private Industry Council in terms of the disciplines we use and the methods we employ and the people who came and helped us -- many at no 17 charge, were shared with the state leadership. I am told that there was only one such meeting of this sort in people's memory at least. ) and his senior staff, the PIC senior staff, and the city senior staff came together. 62 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 And what we identified very clearly is this has got to be, the implementation of Greater Philadelphia Works will either be a win for the state, a win for the city, and most critically, a win for our families; or it will be a lose-lose-lose.
Cooperative effort, sharing, alliances and partnership between the city and the state directed towards this TANF population in the City of Philadelphia, which is nearly one half of the state of Pennsylvania, needs to be focussed on. It should be the highest priority of the Private Industry Council, the County Assistance Office, and the Department of Public Welfare, as it relates to the City of Philadelphia its economic viability, growth, and its care of its citizenry. Without it, if we fail, we will be addressing issues of more and deeper homelessness, potential domestic violence and child abuse, crime and despair. It will affect every small shop, every large corporation, every entity, public and private in our city. Thank you.
Thank you very much, 63 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Miss Greco. (Applause.)
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of City Council. First, thanks for the invitation to be here today. And I, like my predecessor speakers, will be brief.
I am Ernest Jones, the recently-appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of the Private Industry Council. I've been in that position for approximately five weeks and, I must add, it has been a baptism under fire. You will hear shortly from Donna Cooper Deputy Mayor on the Greater Philadelphia Works, which is the Private Industry Council's and Philadelphia's approach to welfare-to-work, so I won't go into that. Rosemarie also indicated that the Private Industry Council internally is undergoing and has undergone transformation and a reorganization. We are doing that in the effort 64 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 to improve our effectiveness as an organization. I understand there have been some complaints in the past about the performance at the PIC, particularly in the area of contracting and payment. We are doing this to address those and other issues. Again, I won't mention much more about the reorganization other than to say that it is ongoing and will probably be with us for at least several other months. Having to implement the largest welfare-to-work program in the state, and, at the same time, doing an internal restructuring, are both monumental tasks. There's a third item that I just want to bring to your attention, which could make these other two issues pale in comparison. And that is, we are, effective July 1, 1999, going to be operating under a totally different system of workforce development as a result of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, which was signed by the President in August. That calls for a total restructuring of the way we at the Private Industry Council carry out our business and others 65 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 in this arena. So we have these three concurrent activities going on, which, I think, and I'm not saying this necessarily to elicit sympathy -- although I would gladly accept it -- but to give you a sense of the environment in which we are working in trying to implement welfare-to-work. Having to deal with all three of these issues at the same time gives me some cause for concern as to whether or not we will be as successful as we want to be in finding jobs for people. However, notwithstanding that, I'm sure I speak for my two co-chairs in saying that we at the Private Industry Council will give 110 percent in making sure that folks are trained and are given job opportunities within the next several months. At this time, unless there are questions, I would ask Deputy Mayor Donna Cooper to give you a more detailed discussion of the Greater Philadelphia Works.
Thank you, Mr. Jones. Donna Cooper. We're delighted to have 66 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 you here, as always.
And we're going to have the questions at the end of the four speakers.
Thank you, Councilman. My name is Donna Cooper. I am Deputy Mayor for Policy and Planning, and I appreciate Council taking the time this morning to look at this issue. Before I go into the plan, I have two sentences. One is that Graham Finney mentioned that the Philadelphia plan for welfare recipients had been operating seven months. I think he meant seven weeks, so I just wanted to clarify the record -- it has been seven weeks. And the second thing is that vis-a-vis the timing issues, I've spent considerable time looking at the same social experiment that's going on in Europe where the entire systems of social supports are also being restructured. However, the European government put no time limits on individuals; they put time elements on themselves. They said that within four years, the systems had 67 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 to be restructured to enable people to achieve self-sufficiency, and then they would trigger time limits on individuals. So it just seemed like a more rationale approach to this problem. (Applause.)
We hope you'll convince the Mayor to add that into his schedule.
Sure. Nevertheless, as the Mayor pointed out, we have received federal welfare-to-work funds that enable us to complement the existing PIC resources that were shown to you by Janet Raffel and the state resources that are spent to help move welfare recipients to work in Philadelphia. Those resources total about $26 million a year for two years. It is simply a two-year funding stream. Unless Congress reauthorizes this, it will not exist in 21 (unintelligible). 22 Vis-a-vis jobs, we based our plan on 23 the premise that there were approximately 7500 to 24 8,000 entry-level job vacancies available for welfare recipients in the region in a 12-month 68 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 periods. There may be more, that would be great; our estimates don't demonstrate that. So I think your first question about jobs is still the math problem in all of this. The first thing that we did with our funds together with the state was to begin planning for Philadelphia At Work, which is a jobs program, creating 1500 transitional jobs, where an individual can build a work history and gain a job reference that will enable them to capture a job in the private labor market. That program is up and operating. There are approximately 150 women in that program now. By the end of January -- I'm sorry, by the middle of February, there will be 750 women. In any 12-month, there will be 1500 individuals in that program. Forgive me if I say "women" all the time. There are some men who are custodial parents on the case load, but it's 99 percent women. " There's a program called "Philly At 69 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. , where these women are currently getting trained through work. As the Mayor mentioned, we have a public awareness campaign. We're doing direct mail to welfare recipients to demonstrate to them the financial rewards of even getting a job that pays as low as $6 an hour compared to staying on public assistance because of the earned income disregard. Likewise, we're doing direct mail to employer that showcases the success stories of women who have very successfully entered the labor force and have gotten promoted are valuable employees in their companies. We've purchased time on major broadcast and print and radio outlets. In every case where we're purchased time or space, we've gotten a one-for-one contribution in the same time period or placement slot. We've also asked all of those media outlets to hire welfare recipients, and most 70 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 of them have followed through with hiring at least one part-time person from welfare. That campaign should go through the middle of next spring. And as the Mayor said, it's been highly responded to. We are also using some of our funds to offer wage subsidies to employers. In fact, it is state money that will pay the wage subsidies, and we're grateful to the state to have those funds, and we're using our money to market and fashion those wage subsidies so they're easier for employers to take advantage of. 50 an hour, offer at least 30 hours at work a week, and the person must stay at that wage rate, you know, thereafter, we'll pay 50 percent. So if somebody gets paid $10 an hour, we'll pay $5 of the wage subsidy. 25. We'll do that for up to eight months, and then the employee has to go on the permit payroll of those companies. We have hopes that somewhere in between 2 to 3,000 companies may take advantage of this. 71 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 However, what we hear from employers by and large is that they don't really need the wage subsidy; they need us to do a really good job of sending workers to them who will show up to work and make a good contribution in the labor force, so that's our job, and that's what the bulk of funds used for. You may or may not know that the federal law prohibits us from using any of this new money for job training.
So what we are trying to do is -- Congress is so wise. What we're trying to do is stretch the definition of job-readiness to enable us to provide intensive supports, both through personal job coaches -- you may know them as case manager, but we call them job coaches -- to reinforce the work aspect of this. And with job coaches, people go through a sets of seminars that we call job-readiness training -- perhaps in the old days, it may have been called, to some extent, general job training. We obviously can't do any skill-specific training with our resources, but we are partnering with existing PIC programs and existing programs through the Mayor's Commission 72 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 on Literacy and other entities to get more skill enhancement. Fortunately, a lot can be done via computers and the Web that looks like job training, so we're taking advantage of that too. Those services are being delivered through regional job centers, our service centers. And, as Janet Raffel pointed out, there are five contractors. Those centers are spread throughout the city, and they are the place where people engage in a customer-service, welcoming environment. We sort of consider it a cross between an employment agency and a union hall, where people can hang out, find out information about jobs, get job leads, get support, and also be linked to employers. The regional job centers also each have a contract to identify all jobs along SEPTA lines in their parallel suburb area and the city area. So, for instance, if I am the regional job center serving northwest Philadelphia, I (unintelligible) find all entry-level jobs in northwest Philadelphia as well as jobs that go out along the 73 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 SEPTA routes from northwest Philadelphia. Likewise for West Philly, South Philly, etc. Our hope is that through those regional job development efforts, we will identify the 7500 jobs that we think might be available in the region. We are looking forward to state funding that will enable public assistance recipients in the city to both combine work and training. We understand that the state may release those resources in a career advancement frame work. We are also permitting regional service centers to use some of their money to give people funds to do training. For instance, if somebody's working, a regional service center could pay the $95 that somebody might need to become a Microsoft office-certified, you know, operator -- assuming somebody has those literacy skills. So the regional centers have some money to pay for training certification. As the Mayor mentioned, we've been working very closely --
Do you want to finish now. You're overwhelming us. 74 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
Oh, okay. Two more things. We're working very closely with SEPTA. We're expanding access to King of Prussia and the airport corridor both from the city and when you get there, and SEPTA will be operating an on-demand service for people who get off work from 1 in the morning till 5 in the morning in the King of Prussia and airport areas. And we have a marginal cost incentive for day-care providers to offer care as late as 11 at night and as early as 5 in the morning.
I think one other aspect that this whole plan was developed --
Because I'm going to announce -- I'm going to change my ruling. I want to ask the four people waiting to be heard to be patient 'cause I just have a sense that the next group of witnesses, the mothers, are really at the core of the whole thing. And as soon as this panel -- I'm going to ask the committee to withhold questions because mothers have a real time problem, and I think 75 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 we've got to hear from them because they have more at stake than anyone has. Could we hold your statement and do the questioning later? Is that all right, Mr. Pizzi?
For a few minutes, let's all hear from the mothers. All right, thank you very much. We're going to call you back for some questioning very soon. Would the mothers -- I'm going to allow the young woman who spoke to bring up with her those who she wishes to have speak. (Women representing mothers come forward.)
Miss Humphrey, are there other people who you wish to bring to the table?
Okay, please be good enough to. . . be good enough to identify yourself. Are the other two people going to be joining you? Sheri Honkala, do you want to come forward? 76 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 We're going to go out of order because I think, unless we hear from those who are most directly affected, we're not going to be able to deal effectively with the problems that are going to exist. Miss Humphrey, identify yourself for the record and then proceed.
My name is Maddie Humphrey. I'm a nurse, I'm a business administrator and a health planner, and I'm an attorney, and I represent the mothers and other family members of the incarcerated from Pennsylvania. And I also was a mother myself in the early sixties. I'm still a mother, only my son is deceased. And with me is Leona Smith. Please identify yourself .
Yes, Leona Smith, the Director of the Employment Project, and I'm in the Union of the Homeless.
Sheri Honkala, from the 77 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Kensington Welfare Rights Union. And Erica Morrison.
And the gentleman who's with you, is he going to be speaking? (Unidentified gentlemen shakes head.)
Well, we only knew -- I only knew last night that I would be joining the group. And, Mr. Cohen, I want to go back to 1968, when I raised the question about the health monies that were being spent in Philadelphia 'cause you're the only one in this room who was in the room that day.
What we are dealing with now -- there are four points I want to make about what has been said in terms of its cost. First of all, it's because of the transition from the factory age to the service age. And those of us who are in the service systems, which are not industries -- I, as a nurse and planner, am in a service industry. It's not like the hard industries that were in the factories. 78 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 And instead of us using the service specialists to reframe our quality of life systems we turn to the factory specialists to do that. And what we have now is the results of taking a factory mentality into the service age. Therefore, we're totally moving from a mediocracy (sic) into a technocracy, and we're depending on data management rather than nurturing or tender loving care, as we did under the quality of life system. So I'm very emotional about this because it affects me as a mother, even though I no longer have a living child on the planet. And so we've also destroyed our back fix senses. It was about 30 years ago when the FCC froze the 40 largest markets in local origination public-access cable television so that we could no longer talk to one another as neighbors about what we knew that was going on, so that our popular culture lost its nurturing life. And one result of that was the Osage fire. Because the testimony given at the federal trial in that the bull horns were used in 1985 on Osage Avenue because the mothers had no way to let 79 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 people know that they were still suffering from the 1978 ordeal. And the only way they could communicate was by bull horns. Today, we had passed that ordinance in 1983 for to us get that local origination communication capacity, but we still haven't implemented the ordinance and we've gone through two of Mr. Goode and two administrations of Mr. Rendell. So we're suffering from a lack of communication. So what the mayor calls "mismatches" is really the lack of communication among the people who are affected by public policy. A third reason for our problem is, in 1968, we were under Region 2 of HEW, or the federal government, where we were part of the culture above the Mason-Dixon line. Today, we're in a Region 3 or something else, where we're part of the culture below the Mason-Dixon line. That makes a tremendous difference in the quality of life for African-Americans in the United States. And, again, we have -- and since 1968 in Philadelphia, prioritized federal funds to include a large component for research. So 80 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 between big government, big business, and big academia, we've taken our intergovernmental pool of money and parlayed it so that it creates business in order to serve the people instead of serving the people so we can create business. And I think from the point of view of a mother, who also happens to be a professional, we have got to go back to quality-of-life parameters. We cannot operate by data management. I'm also representing what I consider to be the knowledge in Father Divine's righteous government platform. And he indicated, as you were talking about, the workers. No, it's not jobs; it's quality of life. And the quality of life for an infant is the first nine months in the mother's womb, which should be tonic rather than toxic. And in Philadelphia, there are too many toxic pregnant women walking around. We're not being well taken care of emotionally as well as medically. We also have a problem of, once the child gets on the planet, of having a home without a mother. We do not need to expand the number of hours of childhood spent in a home without a 81 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 mother, because the nurturing center of the mother is what creates a decent citizen. (Applause.)
And the last thing I want to say is that under what I consider to be the Bill of Rights, the Ninth Amendment Coalition, we have a right to have information relative to the public policies that affect our quality of life. We don't get it in Philadelphia. We have a law saying we should it; we should implement that law. Father Divine's righteous government platform says we should not let our lives be controlled by the insurance industry, and we have taken health out of the public health arena and placed it into the insurance industry. And that is a backwards step. We can't change it here at the level of the city, but we have to understand that if mothers are forced to live under the industrial concepts that are dominated by the insurance industry, we are no longer essential to the life on the planet, and that would be a mistake. So I think Philadelphia, the cradle of 82 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 liberty, is not like any of these other cities or not like any of these other states. We have to clear up once and for all whether we are a free-market region of the Delaware Valley or whether we are a five-county region of the state of Pennsylvania, because that's where the competition is killing the people.
Would the young woman please identify yourself for the record and proceed.
Yes. My name is Leona Smith, representing the Employment Project, and I am the director of that agency. I want to thank the members of Council for allowing the issues at hand to be presented. As I listened to the previous presenters who made statements, in many areas, I kind of disagree with the approach that is currently being taken. And the reason why I disagree with it is because of the population that we serve. Many of the providers provide 83 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 opportunities if you have an eight-grade level or above. Many of the clientele that our agencies serve are on a fifth-grade level or below. Many have never worked in their lifetime, has been on welfare in terms of that dependency. And I'm all for work, but at the same token, I'm outraged that there are no training dollars being made available as it should be. Because what we are doing and what I'm seeing is that a person is jumping over the hurdle without any type of leadway (sic) to lead that person to that hurdle. Many of our people who don't have skills, who have perhaps never even worked, there is no -- enough money, let me say that, there is not enough money to work with that individual. And it is a process just like for everything else to work with that person and guide them and work through the entire process so that they can become self-sufficient and work-ready. There is a major, major concern. What we all can agree on is the fact that we heard numbers and statistics about how many jobs that's coming into the City of Philadelphia, but what we 84 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 haven't heard, we can take it to the bank, is the fact that people are going to be taken off of welfare, and it doesn't balance out. What's going to happen to the people who are not fortunate enough to get one of those jobs? The bottom line is they're going to be taken off, what is going to happen to that clientele? Statistically, in The New Observer, that was done by the United Way, where it indicated over 40,000 of different individuals will become homeless, and over 100,000 will become hungry and homeless by the March 3rd of the year of 1999. So we are already dealing with a crisis, and now we're talking about a situation that's going to add on to the cries. As I listened to the Mayor who said about around the whole issue of shelter, and we know for a fact that shelter closes in the summertime, okay, because there's not enough beds, and it's indicated that there's not enough money. So what's going to happen, what's going to happen? And we've heard the problems -- well, I 85 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 am not satisfied with some of the solutions to the problem. I think the city has to target some of those resources to bring those jobs back into the City of Philadelphia. Lastly, I am nervous because I strongly believe that the way the current system is today, it's going to put the working class against the homeless individual, because it don't take a rocket scientist -- (Applause.)
-- to add up that if they can get a welfare mother to work for $5.25 an hour versus paying somebody that's working $8 an hour, that worker is going to lose that job, that employer is going to get that wonderful incentives that's being given out. And as a result of it, they will be getting and two three for one off of the backs of the poor and welfare recipients. So I think that this process really needs to be looked at more carefully. And I think, on behalf of Donna Cooper and the rest of the (unintelligible) that spoke up here, that they should, if they're in a position, fight for more training dollars for people who don't have the 86 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 skills. You can't just say for us to get a job, and we're up here when a whole lot of us are down here.
I think we're beginning to get to the heart of the problem.
Miss Honkala, would you identify yourself for the record and then proceed.
My name is Sheri Honkala, and I'm the Director of the Kensington Welfare Rights Union, an organization made up of and run by welfare recipients. And we appreciate you skipping us forward on the agenda, because around and o'clock is generally when women have to begin to pick up their children from school. We are an organization, like I said, run by and for welfare recipients and other poor and homeless people in the Kensington section of Philadelphia. Our work with poor people has 87 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 traveled beyond Philadelphia to Pennsylvania and to the rest of the country. And last week, our organization was one of only four organizations cited in the United Nations High Commissioner's Report. And I was given the honor of speaking before the United Nations on behalf of poor people in the United States of America. Since the enactment of welfare reform, we have been defining in quotes welfare reform as a violation of our human rights, using the document signed in 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We take these violations seriously and have assembled a team of attorneys in New York at the Center for Constitutional Rights, headed by Peter Weiss, who are examining different legal handles on this basis. And it is in this framework that I will make my comments today. The crisis that we are facing is serious. The number of people that have entered our office has tripled. Daily, we are seeking jobs for people. Many of our folks have already been sanctioned, and there has been an increase in 88 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 hunger that is measurable in the Kensington area. The amount of people that are now grappling with trying to find housing is absolutely astounding. People who are removed from the day-to-day reality, caught up in the bureaucracies, trying to develop the programs have forgotten the faces, focus on the policies, bickering over which program is going to get a little bit of promise versus this program getting this amount of promise. They are blinded to the serious basic human rights violations that are occurring in our very own city. We are beginning to plan for what will happen in March, because we don't think it's okay that numbers of men, women, and children will continue to line our streets and have no place to go. It is not a success when the numbers do not match, when people will enter the streets, and we will highlight this program or that program as being potentially successful. That is not enough. Without real money for transportation, child care, and literacy, I fear for our city. You can't ask a group of people to adjust to nothing, you just can't. 89 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 We are a desperate people facing a desperate situation, and we are prepared to do the desperate things that we have to do. Nobody can tell us that food, clothing, and housing is up for negotiations. We will reclaim these things and ensure that people do not go without food, clothing, and housing in Philadelphia. (Applause.)
We recommend the following: That City Council urge DPW to begin to see the faces, to take a tour with us, to look into the eyes of what is going to happen to people if we don't get serious about putting money behind real transportation plans, behind putting real money behind child care, and doing it quickly. To make sure that DPW also takes up the conversion model in guaranteeing people get money for their work and to show that they are truly committed to people going to work by really providing the opportunity for people to be able to work. We need jobs that pay a living wage in this city. 90 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 We at Kensington Welfare Rights Union are committed to seeing that we live in a city that doesn't exempt itself from meeting basic human rights, and that we are ensured that we will uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights this 50th anniversary by ensuring nobody continues to go hungry and that we can build a society in which people are free from unemployment and homelessness. (Applause.)
Thank you, thank you very much. Identify yourself for the record, please.
My name is Elizabeth Ortiz, and I'm from Kensington Rights, and I'm here for the Latinos, that they don't read, write or what. And I feel as this way, I'm here to represent them because I have a parent, my mom like that, she don't know reading, she don't know how to function out here. So I'm here to represent us to see what we can do about us people, us Puerto Ricans, you know, because it's hard, even hard to read a 91 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 letter to get through what we have to do. So that's why I'm here, to stand for everyone, plus the Latinos, because I'm one too.
Hello. I'm Erica Morrison, and I'm a member of the Kensington Welfare Rights Union. I've been with this union for the past year now. And if it wasn't for the Kensington Welfare Rights Union, I would still be on the streets, with my three children. I'm a welfare recipient. I'm not lazy or shiftless or crazy. And I've been through an eight-week job search and haven't been able to find a job, especially one that's going to be paying for child care or any of that. And I've worked very hard day-to-day, helping people with their -- that have problems like homelessness and things. And we are dedicated to fighting for these basic human 92 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 rights. And basically, that's all I have to say. (Applause.)
Well, we thank all of you because we think you put reality into this and have moved us away from theory, because I may be the only person in the room that lived through the only other major economic crisis that threatened the stability of the government, and that was when the banks closed in 1932, shortly after Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected president. We obviously cannot tolerate a situation in which thousands of people, including women and children, are going to be homeless on the streets of Philadelphia, and you've added a real touch of urgency to the situation, and we thank you very much for that.
In our communities, we consider ourselves to be the Department of Civil Peace, because as families of the incarcerated, we are primarily victims of them as well. We're usually the first one that gets the frustration 93 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 and anger from a family member who faces the confusion out here because we're the one closest to them at home. So we do have a central position and are ready to work for and with the government, first of all, to be able to speak to the system. We cannot allow corporate America to speak for us.
I was devastated when I attended a brief hearing last week, and I think that the public here and everybody here needs to know that it was discussed how our children -- and I think that needs to be raised -- will be taken away from us, particularly if there's one child that is in the system of DHS and if that parent don't find a job within the 12-month period being on public welfare, then our children are going to be taken away from us.
So I'm saying to myself everyone here needs to know 'cause I was at that briefing. If that welfare mother don't find a job 94 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 within months, they will remove all of the siblings from the household. I think everybody needs to know that and take that information back to the communities and organize. We're not going to let that happen, that's the first thing. And, secondly, I just want to raise in particular with the Latino and Asian community, many times we get calls because they really are not getting the adequate services that they need. People who cannot speak language have no clue if their family's going to be taken off of welfare. So I urge those in power, in control of the dollars in a sense -- many of them are my friends, and they can't help it that they don't speak the language, so supportive services need to be increased in the Latino community as well as the Asian, because welfare being taken away is going to affect them.
National Public Radio just finished a series on people in Philadelphia. I think everybody in Philadelphia ought to get a copy of that series and listen to it. Thank you.
Councilwoman 95 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Blackwell?
Thank you very much certainly to Leona Smith and Maddie Humphrey and Sheri Honkala and the other two guests whom I just met today. We think your testimony was very, very important. And I took the mike to say to Maddie that from '68 to now, quality of life changed.
Quality of life no longer means the enhancement of life, but it means the taking away of rights that we consider America. And we have a lot of laws on the books certainly that some of us fought against, new laws on the books that take away those rights. So now when we say "quality of life," the meaning has taken on the opposite, it has taken on -- it's taken on the opposite meaning. So we just wanted to say that again. And I thank you and I think that your testimonies mean that we have to be ever-vigilant, and we have to work closely together to try to protect victims. All of us are victims of these 96 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 new systems.
Thank you very much to the whole panel, thank you. (Applause.)
May I, Mr. Chair, while we are here, acknowledge the presence of Jerry Mondesire, President of the NAACP, and certainly Tom Cronin, President of District Council 47. Thank you both.
I think both gentlemen are here to mostly hear, but if they wish to be heard at any stage, the Chair will certainly be happy to hear them. Would the previous panel come back, or those who are still here, that consists of Mr. Pizzi, Miss Greco, Mr. Jones, and Miss Cooper, just for a few minutes to see if there are any questions.
Yeah. Well, I'll try, 97 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 yeah. I'm not certain.
Is there any questions that any member of the committee has? Councilman Ortiz? Councilman Nutter?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Miss Cooper, I was out of the room for a little while. If any of these questions are redundant, you'll tell me they are, and I'll accept that. This is based on the presentation made by Miss Raffel and pursuant to the Mayor's presentation. One, was there a -- or do you have a handout of the items or points that the Mayor made with regard to his recommendations? At the end of hi testimony, he kind of, in his own mayoral way, in a rapid-fire fashion, laid out about a half a dozen things. And I think some of us were only able to get about four of them. Can you get that material to the various 98 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 chairs so we can see exactly --
All right, thank you. And in the intervening time, are there particular industries, I guess, that we're trying to target for these particular jobs? And can you share any information about skill level, wages, and ability for any kind of career opportunities in those types of jobs?
The biggest response that we've gotten from employers is obviously in the retail sector, because there's dramatic demand for new workers in the retail sector as well as in the nursing assistance sector of home care and nursing home care. Our effort to target jobs -- that's who's responded to us. Our effort to target jobs has been in -- particularly around hospitality and tourism, and not simply related to the new hotel development, but to the airport expansion, the American Airlines and U.S. Air expansions in Philadelphia, which offer a number of good-paying 99 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 jobs. We're also looking at jobs in data-intensive fields. Typically, those jobs start at about 7.50 an hour. So our outreach efforts are where we perceive lower barriers to entry, where the entry-level wage rate is at least over 6.50 and closer to 7. We are also finding opportunities -- so when I say "data-intensive," that also includes things like call centers.
You may be familiar, for instance, with PRWT. They have hired a number of public assistance recipients with us.
Do you have any information with regard to whether those jobs have benefits or limited benefits or no benefits?
The Private Industry Council's experience last year, which was the first year in which people were really mandated to engage in work activities, demonstrated that people started jobs at about 7 -- the average wage rate of entry was about 7.30, and 50 percent of 100 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the job had health benefits. I should point out that some of those health benefits do have a copay that may, in fact, put the health benefits out of the reach of the individual. But nevertheless, the employer listed that they had health benefits. Another alternative is looking at how Medicaid income guidelines could be expanded so that more people would have health-care coverage.
Okay. Lastly, and I had a brief conversation with the Mayor's chief of staff, Greg Ross, about this. It's kind of a public policy matter of when we get into the wage rates, what the employers pay versus what it really costs to kind of function at a decent level in Philadelphia, and the gap in between what the person may make versus what they need to make, that argument. Can you shed any light on the public policy implications or view of does it make sense to have people in jobs that are at a wage level that either still places them technically under poverty guidelines or continues, even with work, to make them eligible for some level of benefits 101 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 or aid from some other sector? So the person is working but it's at an level that still makes them eligible for some other form of assistance. And does that make any sense? Or does it make more sense to have them just working at a level that essentially makes them ineligible for other benefits because that level is so high that, technically, they could take care of themselves or be at self-sufficiency?
Well, I mean, it seems to me that society benefits when people are not reliant on public assistance and have a sense of independence. However, I'm not certain that an entry-level wage rate of approximately $12 an hour, which is what would be required just to support a family of two, is reasonable. In my work with public assistance recipients and with working poor families, people would rather work than be on assistance as long as they can get child-care support and health-care coverage. A growing problem is the cost of mass transit, that if you have a job in the suburbs, 102 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 your transpass costs you $109 a month. When you add that to your child-care co-pay and your health-care co-pay, you're having a hard time. So the question, it seems to me is, yeah, it's much better to just move people in the labor force if they can sustain themselves at least while the economy is expanding because at least children see them working, they have a better sense of dignity, but I think we have a responsibility of figuring out how we close those gaps to stop people from dropping out of the workforce really fast.
Lastly -- and thank you, Mr. Chairman -- Miss Cooper, you and I have had either ongoing discussion, if not some level of debate, about the prospect of moving people transportation-wise out to jobs in the suburbs versus the ability of having those folks work in the city. And has any of your view expanded or changed on that? And what are we doing to ensure that there are actually more jobs in the city for folks as opposed to outlying areas?
Well, I mean, I think that 103 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the development of the tourism industry here is going to create new entry-level vehicles into the labor force. I know that, you know, my first job was a waitress at the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C. -- not when all the excitement was happening. But nevertheless --
Yeah. The tourism industry is a great way to get into the economy. The goal of, I think, all of us, is to help people build skills so they can get on to either promotions in that industry or in other industries. So that building of the downtown hotels, I think, is going to be a step in the right direction. In addition, I mean, I think that you've probably heard enough from Bill Hankowsky and Steve Mullin and the Mayor on efforts to try and attract businesses to the city. We continue 104 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 to have an extraordinarily high business tax rate in the city when you combine the federal, state, and local taxes. That's an impediment to urban growth. In addition, there are reasons why it's cheaper to build in the suburbs, on pristine land than in cities on brown fields. And so the issues are so much more complicated and bigger than sort of does it make sense to have people working in the city. Sure, but I think, at this point, we are a region, and we need to be looking at how transit links this region in two directions so that people can get to all sorts of growth industries that are located in the city and around the city.
Thank you. I'd like to follow up on that question in terms of the jobs in Philadelphia. What collaborations have you with the Commerce Department, PIDC, PCDC, to develop jobs in the neighborhoods? And what incentives are given to small businesses in the neighborhoods? 'Cause neighborhoods really -- small businesses 105 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 really are the life blood of our life here in Philadelphia. So rather than move first to the suburbs, what are you doing to link -- to provide those linkages with the small businesses here in Philadelphia? And how do you communicate with small businesses to let them know that they can participate in this program?
Good question. I don't want to mislead Council to think that we're doing the suburbs. There's first two simultaneous efforts: both city jobs in the neighborhoods and downtown, and outside, but since we seldom think about outside, I wanted to highlight that. Specifically to your question, PCDC, PIDC, and Commerce have been intimately involved in the planning for welfare reform since January, when we all began to meet. PIDC, as you know, tends to work with larger businesses. As they make their transactions, they immediately link up all of those businesses with the employer services unit of the Private Industry Council, which identifies with the business all the job openings in the 106 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 business and then begins to alert the different systems about the opportunities, and host job fairs for those folks. And my experience in the last six months in observing that is there's a very high level of employer services and a lot of people getting jobs. We have a lot of job orders right now at the Private Industry Council. In terms of neighborhood businesses, the first thing that we've trying to do is with the regional service centers, their job developers will first develop jobs in the neighborhood, because they're the jobs easiest for people to get to, so that the hours that it might take to get to the suburbs are eliminated, and the cost of transportation is obviously less. So the regional service centers are working with neighborhood job banks and neighborhood job developers in identifying the opportunities for employment in their neighborhoods. And they are paid for each job opening that they identify that we put somebody from public assistance into successfully.
Who's paying, the 107 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 regional centers?
The regional centers, and they also pay the neighborhood job banks. They transfer their per-payment fee to the neighborhood job banks. So we're trying to create more resources that are in the neighborhood to continue to look for jobs and build partnerships with employers. In the empowerment zones or where there's an organized business consortium, like a neighborhood chamber, or the West Philadelphia chamber, etc., where there's an organized business community, we've been working with the empowerment zone staff and other parts of commerce to make ongoing presentations. I think the biggest engagement will be when we do the direct mail to employers, which includes the Chamber of Commerce mailing list, and all the smaller chamber mailing lists, both inside and outside the city, where we mail to them about the success stories and talk to them about the wage subsidies. It's the perspective of the Commerce 108 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Department and the Mayor that the businesses that are most likely to take advantage of the wage subsidies will the small businesses because there margins are so narrow that this will be a big benefit to them.
Are they all members of the Chamber of Commerce? How do you reach those businesses that are not?
Well, what we're doing is about an 11,000-piece direct mail and we're combining that with the neighborhood job developers who are going out. So, you know, if you have or other people have other suggestions, obviously, we're buying media time, print ad time, neighborhood newspaper placements. So if there's opportunities to try and reach them that we haven't thought of, we need to continue to develop that over the year. As I mentioned, the efforts that we're doing are about seven weeks old, and we'll continue to rule out more outreach strategies. We want to see if these job developers can really identify all those jobs at the neighborhood level. 109 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 And, again, I think the one indicator is going to be the use of the wage subsidies. But it's also, a lot of times, even the neighborhoods say to us, I just really need somebody who's going to come and be here and get support from you guys to make sure their child care doesn't fall apart.
You said that there's going to be about 52 million? We keep hearing different numbers. It's million for 11 two years? 12
So what is your 18 target area? How many people have you targeted to 19 place? 20
I knew that was going to 24 be your next question. I'm sorry I don't have 25 that off the top of my head. 110 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 We have that back at our office, but I didn't bring that with me. I can bring that this afternoon and give it to you later.
Sure. In order to place 7500, we anticipate serving somewhere around 11,000 folks.
The regional centers, how many regional centers are there? How were they selected? And how were people notified that the regional centers would be set up so that they could apply to be a regional center?
Sure, mm-hmm. The regional centers, there are five organizations that now have contracts for regional centers, and several of them have more than one location. So that, for instance, the regional center operated in the Kensington and northeast sections of the city is operated by JEVS. They have a partnership agreement with Congreso and impact for two additional locations in their geographic area. So the total number of locations, I 111 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 think, is somewhere around 11, but I could also deliver a list. I should have attached that to my presentation.
PIC sent out an RFP for a regional center, you know, structure. The actual RFP was for employment-advising services. And the Private Industry Council staff have departed, but my recollection is that went out to somewhere between 4 to 500 agencies. Again, I'd be happy to provide Council with the mailing list. That was one RFP that went out. Then there was another RFP that had a number of other welfare-to-work services that included the job placements aspect. And, again, it went out to the same mailing list. And then from those responses, the PIC reviewed those proposals, and Rosemarie was the head of that review process.
Yes. We were -- we actually had originally expected to select seven. 112 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Actually, we did select seven, but through the contract negotiations, because our per-head placement rate is relatively low for the level of services that we're asking, although we're hoping that it will suffice, two of the contractors selected not to continue to engage.
You have said that you are going to do the direct mail piece to the employers. And you also -- there is a marketing program to inform welfare recipients that this deadline is coming. What funds will be made available to the regional centers for community marketing campaigns so that they can notify individuals in their service district?
Sure. The regional centers are on a performance-based budget. They get a flat dollar-fee from us for their overall number of people they're going to serve. They can use those funds as they wish. So when the regional center submitted a budget to us, most of them had money for the printing of flyers and handing out door-to-door information and going to neighborhood meetings. 113 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 So that it's really up to each regional center to determine how much of their resources they want to use for outreach. Given the response to the hotline, and we meet with the regional seniors pretty much every Monday, they have lots and lots of people calling them. In order to access services, the individuals have to go to the DPW offices in the neighborhood. And so over the last several weeks, people have been going to the DPW offices. And then, if it makes sense for them, getting referred back to the regional center so they can begin to engage. But some people who call us haven't done their eight-week job search yet or may still be eligible for more intensive job training services. So that all those people that we refer there may not all come back to us. But my sense is, at this point, based on our meeting last week, that people are beginning to see, you know, increasing numbers of referrals. We would like there still to be more people engaged. 114 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
So, therefore, a regional center would have to use their -- they have to develop their own budget to develop their marketing plan? What is your marketing budget? What is their marketing budget for the program?
Just so I can clarify that. That was in the RFP when we put out the requirement for services that, you know, community outreach would be the expectation on the provider. The money that we're spending for the commercials, the radio broadcast, TV, and direct mail to clients and employers, is a little over a million dollars.
Of the many vendors that you have and the services that you provide, how much money is provided to minorities and women?
No, but I mean your vendor services, the money that's being --
-- Contracted 115 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 out. You have $53 million.
And we want to know how much of that is being given to women.
If you don't have it right now, we'd like to have that information.
We'd like to know, who is your marketing firm, what ratio of that would be for women and minorities.
-- of this 116 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 program.
What other governmental services will be provided to the regional centers that will enhance the one-stop employment and human development service system? How are they linked to gaining Social Security cards, other information, birth certificates? Are their linkages there?
The biggest link that we've created is together with our behavioral system, and the Health Department will speak a little bit to that in their testimony as well as to emergency service systems vis-a-vis housing and the shelter system and the Department of Human Services supports. Last week, we were beginning to talk about impediments to service that were more bureaucratic like Selective Service, Social Security cards, and things like that. So we've begun to reach out to the federal agencies that represent that infrastructure so that we can get people into the programs. The Selective Service issue is 117 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 particularly important as it relates to non-custodial parents, which we hope to serve over 500. And if they didn't sign up for Selective Service, when it happened, you know, in 1979, since then, then we have a problem getting people engaged, and we're trying to work with Selective Service on waivers to that. We're also trying to replicate a program that's in place in Florida to sort of expunge certain aspects of people's background records so that there's less of an impediment to jobs. You can do that on certain parts of somebody's record, not all of it, and so we have a task force of agencies that are working on the record-expunging process.
Okay. Thank you. I'll stop now, and Councilman Ortiz has some questions.
You know, we have a tremendously long list of witnesses to cover, so I'm just going to urge all of my colleagues on Council and all of the speakers to be very, very brief. We'd like to hear from everyone. 118 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
All right. Miss Cooper, two questions. One is about the accessibility of day care. We have most of the day care centers, whether they be family and group day care homes and family child care and so on, at the present time, according to a study my staff is doing -- and Andy Goldenberg here is doing that with Kara Gerry (ph.) Of the Delaware Valley Child Care Council in my office -- are really at capacity. Now, Leona Smith referred to, one, the population that you're targeting in terms of the 7500, and I'd like you to speak to that a little bit. But once you identify that population and once they go into jobs, how are they -- there's two problems that you had, and you mentioned them both, and they were the aspect of the health care and the subsidized child-care facilities that may not be available for these 7500 individuals that you're targeting.
We did a study about a year and a half ago of all existing regulated centers to see if they -- what maximum capacity 119 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 would mean. And it was for a total of 2,000 additional kids could be added to existing centers. Now, that doesn't speak to homes or unregulated care. So I think that it perhaps would make sense for Council to ask for the child-care referral service that's operated by the state that manages the subsidy system to speak to that issue, because the city obviously does not fund or manage the child-care system, but it is a significant impediment. We work very closely with the state on this issue and have a good working relationship with --
Yeah, let's make the answers shorter -- we don't have the slots.
Yes. We do not have the 120 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 slots in regulated care.
Okay. The second question I have is, Rudolph Giuliani, the Mayor of New York City, has employed over 38,000 individuals in terms of welfare-to-work programs. And whether we like it or not, that has been one of his main claims to fame across the United States. But there has been studies that they have actually replaced a lot of formerly- unionized workers in slots that were vacated, where people retired and so on. And Leona Smith also spoke to this, and I saw you shaking your head in terms of -- 'cause I know where you're coming from. What are the city plans for welfare-to-work in terms of city jobs and whether we are going to be following the Giuliani model? And if we're not going to follow the Giuliani model, what model are we looking at? And how many jobs are we looking at in terms of public service jobs that we're going to be allocating in terms of the welfare-to-work situation?
In the transitional jobs 121 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 program that we put together, we worked very closely with both District Council 47, 33, and 1199-C, so that would be with all three, not both. But nevertheless, we will continue to plan together with the unions. We do not want to create the same situation in New York vis-a-vis the union or vis-a-vis the public assistance recipients. We are trying to look at jobs where people will actually learn skills as the basis for which we continue to expand any kind of public jobs program. We currently don't have any money at this point to expand public jobs programs. So the difference in New York is that Rudy Giuliani has control of the county welfare budget in New York City, 'cause that is the county. And we know that the state continues to plan -- and they talk to us regularly about this -- for an expansion in community service employment. And we hope that this will be a wage-based system which will put a set of certain incentives together and regulations that will, I think, protect from us building a New York City model. 122 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I think people are testifying later that could speak to that more directly so that your time is saved a little bit here if that's okay.
All right, thank you. Actually, you know, we applaud the kind of love relationship that seems to exist between the Governor's office and the Mayor's office, but sometimes, when you need action, you've got to move more directly, and we hope that the city will prevail upon the Governor very quickly to make money available. There are two big surpluses around, and everybody talking about them. There's a surplus at the state level of hundreds of millions of dollars. There's a surplus at the city level of $169 million. I've yet to hear a word from any representative of the city or state government -- and Deputy Commissioner Heller will be on very shortly to testify. But I'd like to hear that we're actually using the surplus for very important purposes, the kind of purposes we're talking about 123 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 today. Please communicate the message. Thank you. (Applause.)
Can we have the next panel -- Mr. Nardone, Mr. Lucas, Miss Tucker. Miss Tucker, why don't you introduce yourself, and then have the other members of the panel and then proceed. Mr. Nardone is Deputy Manager Director for Special Housing, Mr. Lucas is Assistant Health Commissioner of the Department of Health, and Miss Tucker is a Deputy Commissioner of Health of the Department of Human Services. COMMISSIONER TUCKER: Good afternoon. Thank you for inviting us here.
And you have to give your name again. COMMISSIONER TUCKER: Good afternoon. I'm Maxine H. Tucker, Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Human Services Children and Youth Division. Commissioner Reeves would have been here today, but she had a commitment that was schedule prior to this hearing. Again, as I said, I want to thank you 124 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 for the opportunity of being here. And what I'm going to try to do is very, very briefly highlight some critical points after my two colleagues have introduced themselves.
Good morning. My name is Mike Nardone, Deputy Managing Director for Special Needs Housing.
Good afternoon. My name is Mike Lucas. I'm the Assistant Health Commissioner for the Department of Public Health. COMMISSIONER TUCKER: Based on the number of families that have been possibly indicated that may fail to meet the work requirements for the 24-month time limit that's due in March, for those 26,000 families with 60,000 children, we are looking at conceivably having at least 426 of those children who may enter the child welfare system. It could be as high as 672. We have put a request in our budget to the state for FY '99 to service those additional children if that, in fact, becomes a reality. As of 9/30 of this year, we were purchasing in-home services for 7,508 dependent 125 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 children and 2,548 families, and another 8,140 children in placement, of which 88 percent of those children are eligible to receive TANF. Of the 1,275 children in placement -- of the 8,000 children in placement, 1,275 of them are living in kinship-care arrangements. We do not know at this particular time what the -- how many of those children will be affected by the TANF deadline.
Miss Tucker, we'll make your statement a part of the record. We had a briefing in which Commissioner Reeves was with us. She expressed a great deal of our questions, and she was really troubled because there were not a lot of answers that had been given to the Department, either by the state or the city or otherwise. But the one thing that really disturbed me out of it was when she spoke about the Federal Protection Act and the -- actually, the thing that -- the situation that Miss Leona Smith referred to, in which individuals, after 12 months, that have not be able to get either a job placement, whatever it is, that their children and their parental rights may be terminated of that child 126 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 that is currently within the DHS system and then all of the other children, even though they may not be in the system or whatever. And that is really a disturbing fact, and it's really something that Miss Reeves was incredibly concerned about and really shocked a lot of us, this little clause in there that really goes to the termination of parental access. Very few of us had been aware of it.
Yes, it is. And what I brought along today for Council are copies of a recent brochure we have put together in terms of trying to educate the parents of children who are already in our system as well as educate the parents where potentially the children may come in our system. There are four groupings of children that are impacted at this point. Certainly, the first group, where the time clock of 12 months is running, has to do with children who came into the child welfare system in out-of-home placement as of November 19, 1997, which is the date that the law came into effect. As of the end of October, of those children who came in on or after, there 127 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 are 2100 of them who are still in out-of-home placement. The law requires that for those children who have come in on or after that date, that there is a 12-month time clock that says that there must be a permanent plan for these children, and that permanent plan has to be either children returned to their own homes with their families, or that we will show cause as to why their parental rights should not be terminated and those children adopted. So that's one group of children. The children who were in placement prior to November --
But that impacts on all the other siblings that that mother may have in the home, even though they may not be in placement with DHS. That's what Miss Reeves told us. COMMISSIONER TUCKER: This law only affects those children who are in out-of-home placement, not the children who are already at home. And, hopefully, we will all do everything we can to support those parents in a way they need 128 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 to be supported to take care of their own children. I have some brochures that we'll try to get to parents. Now, the critical piece is that there are three other groups of children in which a deadline will affect them. By May 30th of 1999, the first third of children who have been in care the longest, who have been in care out of 10 months, must have a permanent plan for those 11 children, or their parental rights may be 12 terminated. 13 Now, one of the requirements that not 14 only the Department has to be a part of, but we as 15 a human service system have to be a part of, is 16 that if those families have not received the 17 services that they need to be able to take their 18 children home, then we cannot just automatically 19 terminate their rights. 20 But if we've provided the service -- 21 and when I talk about "we," I talk about the 22 collective we. If it's drug and alcohol, if it's mental health or what have you, if we have offered the service, and families or parents, for whatever the reasons, have not taken those services, then 129 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 their personal rights will be terminated. And I think I have to be very honest with you, the law does not allow us to do anything different. The next third of children --
Would you go over that last statement again? The law does not allow you to do anything different as to what? COMMISSIONER TUCKER: If the services that the parents need in order to take their children home and take 'em home and keep 'em safely, if the service had been provided, or the opportunity for the services had been offered, and parents have not taken advantage of them, then the law does not give us any leaveway (sic) in not terminating the parents' parental rights.
I just think the Department ought to be very, very careful to make sure that the paperwork is accurate and that parents have been communicated with frequently so that you have a full record of a parent refusing. Because my experience with various agencies is not one that gives me confidence that they will really know whether or not the parent had full opportunity to utilize those services. 130 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I hope you don't follow the examples of the Water Department and the gas company, which send out letters to people who often can't read, does absolutely nothing to check on the actual status, and then draws the conclusion that the people have not taken advantage of benefits offered to them. We will be demanding that in any case in which you find that a parent has not taken advantage of services, that there be a complete record establishing the number of efforts made, the outreach efforts, if the folks are folks that don't know English, that the Department has taken the steps to make sure that there were people who spoke the language of the people involved. So I'm hoping that before any rights are terminated, that all of these steps be taken. And I would hope that you develop a system which enables to you inform the Council of your proposed actions before they are followed out. Because we're going to be watching very, very carefully. We don't want homes broken up or not fully united as a result of a provision in the law that may be a technical provision and that may not 131 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 be in the best interests of everyone. COMMISSIONER TUCKER: You're absolutely right. One of the things that we have begun to do already is to, in terms of trying to publicly educate not only the parents but publicly educate those who provide service with the parents or who even know the parents, by putting together this brochure, which is also -- this brochure is in Spanish as well.
Well, I can just tell you, Miss Tucker, that if any parents' rights are terminated, that probably a hearing will take place as quick as we can put it together, probably within 48 hours. (Applause.)
Because this committee's going to be a continuing committee, and we're going to continue to recess for just a few days at a time so that we are in a position to act immediately. And I hope all of these City departments take notice. I've discussed this with my co-chair, and she has agreed that this committee has to be 132 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 an ongoing, continuing committee.
Miss Tucker, could you just answer, under what authority does this action take place in terms of terminating parental rights? COMMISSIONER TUCKER: We have to provide the documentation to the Family Court Juvenile Division. We're in court a minimum of every six months to report to the court what actions we have taken in terms of planning for children, planning either for them to go home or planning some other permanent placement. So it is clear that the final decision about whether or not a parent's parental rights are terminated rests with the Family Court judge that hears the case based on the information that has been provided by the Department in terms of the services that have been provided and the outreach that we have made. 133 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 This piece of legislation, more than any piece of legislation in my experience, definitely challenges everybody to present the documentation. If you don't have the documentation, then the actions will not occur.
Who works with the parent? Is that your department, or are there other agencies that work with the Department? And who's coordinating that mother or father who is responsible for getting these services? Who's paying attention to that individual to make sure that they get adequate information to know where they're going to get the services and all of that? COMMISSIONER TUCKER: Ninety-five percent of the services to children in out-of-home care are provided through our contracted agencies. So it's the contracted agencies who are responsible for the direct day-to-day work with the parents and for the outreach to those parents. The Department's role in this is a case management one. In other words, we provide the oversight, we monitor whether or not the services for which we contracted for for those families are 134 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 actually provided. Every six months, we do family service plan revisions. We get quarterly reports from the agency to track what kinds of services and whether they're appropriately done. So we should be having a face-to-face with parents and age-appropriate children at least every six months in preparing for that court hearing, which, as I said, we must go to court a minimum of every six months to report out what we and the private agencies have done in providing the needed services for those families.
Could I go to Mr. Lucas? He hasn't been heard yet, but I just wanted to ask you a question because the services provided because a lot of parents probably -- I'm not saying all of them are, but probably have some substance abuse. COMMISSIONER TUCKER: Absolutely.
Okay. Are there enough dollars to provide the services to these families -- I mean to these individuals, to these parents to get the services they need to address the substance issue? 135 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
Mark Bencivengo is here. He might be the appropriate person to address that question.
Yes, because it all ties in with the requirement to receive the services and the ability of the agencies to deliver and also in view of the cutback of the HMOs and health providers to provide one-shot service -- COMMISSIONER TUCKER: That's right.
Madame Co-chair, could I interrupt at this moment? At 1 o'clock, this hearing is going to end today. It's going to be recessed until Monday, at 10 o'clock a.m. Among the witnesses who are scheduled to testify today, if they prefer, they can go to the staff table in the back and tell what is the best time. We hope that the hearing on Monday will run from 10 o'clock till p.m., but we're 25 not going to be able to hear all of the 136 1 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 witnesses. We'd like to know from Dr. Heller, whether she prefers to be heard Monday rather than today. And any other witnesses that are schedule. We're sorry but we want everybody to be heard, and we need all of this information, but there's a Finance Committee scheduled at o'clock, there's an Economic Development Committee scheduled at o'clock today. But we're hoping that you're going to be able to accommodate yourself to everybody's need so that we can, you know, get a full hearing on everything now. But be prepared for continuing hearings, if necessary, even on a daily basis until we find some solid answers to the questions that are being raised and discussed today. Thank you. Any witnesses who prefer Monday to today can just go to the staff table now and sign up for that. Okay? Sorry, Councilwoman Tasco. Mr. Lucas, I think, directed a question to you. 137 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 And to the gentleman, identify yourself for of the record first.
My name is Mark Bencivengo. I'm Assistant Health Commissioner with responsibility for the drug and alcohol programs within the Philadelphia Department of Public Health. In response to your question regarding sufficient substance-abuse treatment capacity and dollars -- I think that was the thrust of the question -- dollars to service this population, we believe that the majority of these women will be Medicaid-eligible; i.e., they will be enrolled in Health Choice. And I'm on the board of CBH, as is Commissioner Reeves and, of course, Commissioner Richman and Deputy Commissioner Covone, and we've worked with Judge Ransom in Family Court to have an assessor down there and to make a linkage for services with CBH, and that CBH will place these individuals into drug and alcohol treatment services. And as an entitlement, CBH would then pay for the services while the woman or man is in treatment. 138 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
All right. I'm going to ask this panel -- I don't like to do it, but I don't think we have any choice. The Deputy Commissioner of Human Services -- I think still call it the "Department of Welfare" at the state level -- cannot be here on Monday, and I think very important we hear from her now. I would ask this panel to come back Monday at 10 o'clock. Thank you. We'll continue with your testimony and the questioning on Monday. (Commissioner Sherri Heller comes forward.)
Commissioner Heller, I want you to know that with the special attention being given to you and the state representatives today, it means that the special attention is going to continue to be focussed on the state as well as on the city on a continuing basis so that coming forward now may be a mixed blessing for you. Because we think that everybody's feet, including our own, have to be held to the fire until get away from cataclysmic events that may otherwise occur. Commissioner, why don't you introduce 139 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 yourself and have each person at the table introduce themselves, and then you can proceed in the manner you wish. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Thank you very much, Councilman.
But this will be the last panel that's going to be heard today. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I appreciate your courtesy very much. I appreciate the opportunity to be back here today. I appreciate the many remarks this morning acknowledging the strong partnership and cooperation we've had the city and the Private Industry Council since the time I was last here.
Well, we want that partnership to continue and to be strengthened. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Great.
But it's got to produce results. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Understood. My name is Sherri Heller. I'm the Deputy Secretary for Income Maintenance at the Department of Public Welfare. I have with me Mr. David Flori (ph.), 140 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 who's the Director of the Bureau of Employment and Training Programs at the Department; and Mr. Don Jose Staval (ph.), who is the Executive Director of the County Assistance Office of Philadelphia. I have provided you with copies of very extensive testimony, which I'm not going to read because I know that's not the way the day is going for you.
You've heard the testimony today. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Yeah. Let me skip through parts of it and draw your attention to the importance of the graphs that you have in front of you because there is some data that speaks to some of the questions that were raised today.
Excuse me, can everybody hear the commissioner's voice clearly? Okay, I want to make sure everybody hears it because she is the top-ranking state official with the responsibility for carrying out this program. Go ahead, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I just want to draw your attention, skipping right over the prose 141 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 to make this easy.
Could you just hold a minute till that awful noise. . . COMMISSIONER HELLER: Certainly, of course, of course.
Go ahead commissioner. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I want to point out the nice graph on of the testimony. We've shown you the case load reduction of about percent in the cash assistance cases 13 Philadelphia since welfare reform began in 14 Pennsylvania. 15 I think significantly, of the 64,000 16 adults who were receiving temporary assistance for 17 needy families or TANF cash assistance in Philadelphia, when the 24-month clock so-called began in March of '97, 61 percent have not been on continuously, 61 percent are not subject to this work requirement deadline we've been describing on March 3rd of '99. About 25,000 adults have received TANF continuously and remain subject to that deadline. You can see the case load reduction has 142 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 been pretty steady in Philadelphia since we began. But we don't -- as you point out, results are what matter. And we don't like to measure our success just in terms of case load reduction. We have been trying to follow more closely job placements, and you see job placements in Philadelphia also on that graph. As you can see, job placements in Philadelphia continue at a good pace of some 1500 to 2200 job placements a month this year. 45 an hour. And in Philadelphia, we're doing slightly better than that. 93 this year. 93 an hour for these jobs, if you add in the equivalent of medical-assistance, food stamp benefits, and the other benefits that continue after people leave cash assistance, it's the 143 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 equivalent of about a $12 hour job. The jobs that Philadelphia TANF recipients are getting hired for have been in a variety of field -- over 1200 medicine and health occupations, plus another 2600 at-home health care or geriatric care, 1900 in education-related fields -- I'm going to skip over some of these just for time, but there's a lot of data here for you. There were 7700 as cashiers and tellers and another 1,000 in bookkeeping and accounting, 2300 cooks, waiters, and restaurant personnel. 1300 manufacturing, welding, and construction jobs. There were placements at Westin Suites, Bayada Nurses, UPS, Argon Bright Security, Penrose Management Corporation, Mellon Bank, Genesis Elder Care, and numerous other Philadelphia companies. In Philadelphia right now, of course, not everybody who got a job right off the bat got a job that pays well enough to close the cash-assistance welfare care. Right now, about 9,000 current cash-assistance recipients in Philadelphia are working in paid jobs while also getting cash assistance. About 7,000 are in 144 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 education and training programs while receiving cash assistance in Philadelphia. About 600 Philadelphia TANF recipients are studying for advanced degrees while on cash assistance in Philadelphia. That 600 represents more than half of the 1100 TANF recipients enrolled in higher education statewide each month. My assessment, to summarize, is that the progress made by cash-assistance recipients in terms of movement into employment in Philadelphia so far and statewide is good, and we can probably attribute the progress to date to three factors: program and policy changes, which we won't go into at length for time's sake here; an economy that's doing pretty well and in which employers, as you heard Miss Cooper say, are hungry for reliable attending entry-level personnel; and I think the rather energetic and creative work done by Mayor Rendell and his staff and the Private Industry Council to get a consistent message out -- much more so than when I was here last time. I think we have a very consistent message going out in Philadelphia to TANF recipients and to employers alike. And the 145 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 message is quite straightforward.
Jobs are available, parents who have been on welfare make reliable employees, and the personal and financial rewards for going to work are real and substantial. I want to draw your attention -- I'm going to skip here a little for time's sake -- to the little picture on , which represents the ways in which the Department of Public Welfare purchases education and training services. We refer to this as our continuum of employment and training services, and we buy some services for people who are not particularly job-ready, very intensive case management and education and training services like Single Point of Contact, all the way to the Rapid Attachment programs that we purchase for people who are more job-ready and who need a couple of months perhaps of job search assistance. I want to emphasize to you that we purchase employment and training services all along this continuum, depending on what the individual needs of the clients are. In fact, if you look at the chart on 146 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the bottom of -- I'm skipping a lot of text here, but I think the pictures tell the story -- you can see that we have changed the amount of money we have spent in each of these categories over time. So when I came to talk to you last time, we were spending some new money on so-called Rapid Attachment services -- you know, helping people do job search assistance, six or eight weeks of assistance. And that got a lot of attention at the hearing last time I was here. But, as you can see, we increased our investment in Rapid Attachment services in Fiscal Year '97-'98. In Fiscal Year '98-'99, sharply reduced the amount of money being spent on these job search assistance programs; and, instead, increased the amount of money that we've been spending all along on very intensive education and skills training programs for more needy individuals. In other words, the money that was saved in the early going because some people got Rapid Attachment help and got jobs quickly was put back into the education and training program to 147 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 provide more intensive services for people who needed more services. " We're planning services that help people who got entry-level jobs so they don't get stuck at that first level on the career ladder. That's pretty much -- oh, I should say something about transportation and child care because I know there was a lot of discussion on that and because Councilman Ortiz asked me to in his invitation. We are providing transportation allowances for about 6500 cash assistance clients a month in Philadelphia now. These are transportation allowances that support clients in training programs and those who are looking for work. We also purchased SEPTA transpasses for clients at all 19 County Assistance District Offices, about 1800 of them a month, up from 600 when we began this year. There's been a lot of discussion on child care, so I'll just mention briefly that DPW 148 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 upset over $43 million just for TANF families making the transition from welfare-to-work last fiscal year -- last year. That $43 million represented an increase of over million above 6 the prior year. 7
But, Commissioner, 8 isn't it true that it doesn't really matter what you're spending; what's important is how much of a need are you meeting. As a result of that, can you tell us, for example, that there will be sufficient day-care programs for everyone for whom it's necessary in order for that person to go to work. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I am not able to give you the kind of 100 percent assurance that you like. I can tell you that right now, on the Philadelphia TANF case load, fewer than 200 clients are claiming exemption from their work requirements on account of inability to find appropriate child care. As you may know, there's extensive work going on in Philadelphia to do needs assessment, which will get more at the kind of sophisticated question I think you're asking about, whether 149 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 care's available at night, when the good job is on the night shift. I think there's still questions like that out there left to answer.
Miss Cooper, could you come forward for just a moment? (Donna Cooper returns to the witness table.)
You just heard the statement of Commissioner Heller that there are only 200 people in Philadelphia who say they need day care for which day care has not been provided. Is that in line with your understanding as to the situation in Philadelphia? And then Councilwoman Blackwell has the additional question of who's paying for it and how is it being handled financially? Is that right, Councilwoman Blackwell?
Sure. Child care is a state-funded system with a participant co-pay. The experience that we have, I think Deputy Secretary Heller must be correct, that only 200 150 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 people have claimed exemption as a result of child care. However, there are, in our understanding, significant numbers of people on waiting lists for regulated care. Whether people are able to then find an unregulated care provider, either a family member or a neighbor or something like that, is another question, but there are waiting lists in the city, in certain parts of city for regulated care providers. And there continues to be problems with off-hour care. Sometimes the public assistance recipient is paying directly for that -- you know, you have to $15 for every hour you're late, just like in a private day care system. So lots of times people are able to use a subsidized care and then they pay out of their pocket for when they have to come late because their work shift ends late. What we find when we interview people who went through either Spot, the PIC program, Rapid Attachment, or Community Solutions, who did not keep their jobs, the number one reason that they said they could not keep their jobs was 151 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 because of issues associated with child care. And that's a big issue, you know, that's associated with child care, a huge category. It could mean a lot of things. But I think it would be correct to assume that if we successfully continue to move thousands of people into the workforce, we will encounter bigger and bigger child-care problems.
Well, I'm just wondering, is there a way of your working with Commissioner Heller and her staff? And when I say "you," I mean whatever other folks are needed from Philadelphia.
To make sure that realistically the problem is sharply decreased, and we'd like to see it eliminated. In other words, if the only thing stopping someone from taking a job is day care, it seems to me be the falsest kind of economy to deny that person day care. And that's the kind of question we're trying to direct our attention to. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I think Miss Cooper will agree that the kind of communication 152 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 you're describing is, in fact, happening in Philadelphia.
Good. COMMISSIONER HELLER: If these clients are having trouble with child care, it's not for a lack of resource. I want to mention that what we're spending this in year in Philadelphia for child care represents another $20 million increase over the $8 million that we increased, so it's not for lack of resources. There are -- let me be the first to point out to you -- some gaps in the child-care system because of sort of ancient regulations that we're trying to change. So, for example, I know you know about this, we could have an example where somebody gets a job, it's a good enough job to go off cash assistance and stop that clock from ticking. She gets guaranteed transitional child care for 12 months, then it's up, and she goes on a waiting list, okay? That's the kind of client that Miss Cooper's describes. Those kind of artificial rules like that 12-month limit on transitional child care, we 153 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 have proposed regulations to change, and we have every expectation that those changes will be in place this winter.
Councilman Cohen, what might be useful is to, when you come back on Monday, I assume there will be a set of people who are experts in the field of child care that would also perhaps describe what other states are doing to expand the pool. Pennsylvania is spending more money. But, again, as the Mayor pointed out, if we are successful with Greater Philadelphia Works, I think we're going to hit a pretty serious child-care problem within regulated care.
All right. I think that's a very fine point. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Yeah, it is a fine point. And I imagine you'll hear -- you should ask everybody this question, not just the bureaucrats like Donna and me.
We should ask whom? COMMISSIONER HELLER: The moms you talked to as well. Because in our experience in talking to clients, we find that some very much 154 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 want the reliability and so forth and the early childhood expertise that come associated with regulated care, especially if they're on night shift and it's time for their baby to sleep and so forth, seek out neighborhood care, and are very interested in pursuing training for neighborhood and neighborhood and relative caregivers so that they get good quality care in those environments as well. So when you look at the child-care availability issue, you have to look at regulated and unregulated care. Shall I keep going, or are we having questions here?
Thank you. Yeah, these are big questions because mothers are really, really suffering. And, for example, I understand that even in a lot of jobs, they have to track folks for 90 days, and who knows if people will even be working after 90 days. We've got problems, for example -- and I know we'll talk about this Monday -- in the whole traditional housing phase, let alone that we 155 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 don't have enough dollars for just homeless beds. But the way it's happening is that a person goes from welfare to traditional housing. After they serve that time, they're told to take out their savings, which they had to save, so they take out a thousand dollars, which makes them ineligible for shelter, and then they don't have anyplace to go. So they're back in shelter, and everybody's stuck. We spent all this extra money because we don't have that next phase. And Commissioner Tucker and others have talked about this really, really severe problem. Mothers are really afraid of losing their children because they don't have work and the implications of this. Are we really doing like 25,000 jobs a year at 2200 a month? Are we really doing that even for those who don't pass literacy tests and can't read up to 8th grade? Are we really doing -- giving what's happening in March, are we expected to do that this year? Are we realistically doing these jobs, and do the records say these people have been 156 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 retained? COMMISSIONER HELLER: I heard about five questions there. I'll do my best, and you tell me if I'm unresponsive on any of them.
Thank you. COMMISSIONER HELLER: First, I think it's important to make a distinction between the Adoption and Safe Families legislation, which there was some discussion here this morning about termination of parental rights, and the welfare reform legislation. Both of them have deadlines of sorts coming up, and so I think there's some -- I would hate to see there be too much confusion between them, and so I'm not prepared to talk about the Adoption and Safe Families Act, but it is distinct from that.
But doesn't that tie into the whole issue of the welfare reform? And is there any discussion between the two entities to see where there's a clash? COMMISSIONER HELLER: Well, certainly within the Department of Public Welfare, there's a lot of discussion about that. I spend a lot of 157 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 time talking to my colleagues. I think you make a good point, Councilwoman. We have worked in a world where all of these systems have sort of walls between them so that if a given family had housing issues to deal with, drug and alcohol issues and health-care issues to deal with, job training and welfare issues to deal with, child-care issues, and what's happening is that welfare reform has sort of changed the world so that families can't live like that anymore. The agencies have to be -- the plan, in other words, that the children and your agency might develop for a family to stay together has to be compatible with the plan that we develop in the welfare office for moving towards financial sufficiency or else the family gets caught in the middle, and that's the kind of thing you were describing, and housing as well.
I don't want to take her question, but this is very important. What is happening on the state level to bring those departments together to talk about this? Because if you have the Adoption Act and you have 158 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the welfare reform, and the departments aren't talking, somewhere or another, something's going to happen and somebody's going to get hurt. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Right.
Who can make that happen? COMMISSIONER HELLER: The people who can make that happen are Deputy Secretary Joanne Lower (ph.) In the Office of Children, Youth and Families, and myself. And I can assure you that the Secretary of Public Welfare, Feather Houston, had created an environment which ensures that that happens. I mean, none of us can do anything until we understand the impact that it's having on the other office; or better yet, the impact of what we're doing on a given family's ability to deal with what's happening also in their lives. And you see all kinds of -- I mean, this juncture between children and youth services and welfare reform is only one of them. You'll see, for example, that we in welfare reform are very involved with the experts in domestic violence. 159 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I mean, think about the interaction there, okay, where you have a woman trying to move toward financial self-sufficiency and perhaps an intimate partner who wants to remain in control. There can be real dangers associated with this move from welfare to work. Substance abuse is another. You have a lot of people who say, Oh, I can get a job, I'm going to go right out there and I'm going to get a job. And they might have even been in our early statistics, but they have addictions they haven't acknowledged yet, and they're going to lose those jobs if we don't do a good job of coordinating services. These kinds of discussions are ones that we are involved in all the time. So I don't think we're being -- I don't think we're ignoring those issues at all. I do want to talk to you a little bit about -- you talked about the 90 days job retention. Our early contracts of Rapid Attachment made final payments to the people whose services we bought if jobs were retained for 90 days, but those are not the only contracts we have 160 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 in our continuum of services. For example, we have the Community Solutions program, in which there's a lot more money invested here in Philadelphia, where the final payment is not made unless job retention is for a year, months. Plus the contractors don't 8 get paid unless the jobs are a certain amount per 9 hour, and 50 percent of them have to have medical 10 benefits. 11 So I don't -- that's why I said in the 12 beginning that the statistics aren't as meaningful as the way we're thinking about the program.
Miss Heller, may I raise this? COMMISSIONER HELLER: Please.
I think it's very important that at the hearing Monday, it would be wonderful if you could be here, but if you could not be, could there been knowledgeable people from your staff here? Because I understand that the questions and answers are raising concerns in the advocacy community, and I think it would be good because I think a lot of different things have to coming 161 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 together. And certain walls that you referred to kind of have to be broken down, and we've got to have a communication that permits us to achieve the results. Would it be possible for you -- and maybe you can change your schedule? 'Cause we'd love to have you back, but we need to have representatives from your department. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I'll certainly ensure that knowledgeable folks are here to make sure it's a productive session.
Good. And if it's possible for you to be here too. We just urge upon you or Feather Houston, with whom I sat for many years on the SEPTA Board. So maybe you can speak to her and tell her, for Auld Lang Syne reasons, maybe she or you ought to be here. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I appreciate your making us feel so appreciated.
Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Just to finish up the remaining points of the testimony.
Right. And then I think we're going to have to call it a day. 162 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 COMMISSIONER HELLER: Okay.
Let me say, Madame Chairwoman, that we know we worry Don Staval to death. He has an excellent reputation in our town and he works with community groups, so we don't want to unduly pressure him. But we're really concerned about -- we're really fearful of what we see happening very early in the year in the year, in March, of our own quality-of-life bills, of the convention coming here and what else that means for poor and homeless people, and for our lack of new homeless dollars, notwithstanding mental health and DNA funds, we don't have any new homeless dollars. So all of those things impact us greatly. And when we see that we're going to see 25,000 new jobs a year, it sounds great, but we haven't heard here locally about any job training for those people who absolutely can't read at the minimum level. And what do we do? You know, we all kind of feel that we're stuck. These mothers are afraid. They don't want to lose their children. We know that DHS has their regulations, and we 163 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 know that we've got a serious employment problem, a serious housing problem. Notwithstanding all the great things are city is, I think we've come a long, long way, but I don't want us to turn around and go backward during these tough times. So we try to appeal to those of you who are at a state level and who can -- who are able to hear us and impact on decisions that affect us locally. COMMISSIONER HELLER: I certainly concur with about what you said not going backwards when we get under pressure. I would concur with Ms. Greco's remarks, from the Private Industry Council, where she said that we're in this together; we all win or we all lose together. I don't think any of us can ignore the kinds of concerns that you're talking about and succeed. Let me just say -- perhaps I can close. You gave me a hint of what I should say since I only a few minutes left. Let me focus for a minute on this March date that's riveting everybody's attention. As 164 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 you probably know, we have state regulations and case law which are very prescriptive about the kind of notices and the kinds of individualized reviews of cases we have to do before anyone loses cash assistance benefits. So there's not going to be some automatic cutoff where thousands of people lose benefits all at once because they aren't working for hours a week in March. 11 Every case that appears in our records, 12 where the adult is not doing the requisite number 13 of activity, will be reviewed before anything 14 happens. There's procedures that we go through to 15 figure out why it's happening. People have an 16 opportunity to correct the situation. 17 So it's not as though all of a sudden, 18 on March 4th, there's going to be a looming loss 19 of benefits for thousands of people. Cases will 20 be called in, reviewed individually before people lose benefits. What we are going to be looking for -- well, let me say what we're going to -- we'll provide as much guidance and as many supports as we possibly can, but clients are expected to take 165 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 personal responsibility for meeting this work obligation. They're expected to make specific plans to meet the work requirement and to move towards self-sufficiency, and they're expected to follow the steps in those plans. Clients who do not take those steps will lose cash-assistance benefits, but clients who come in and explain their reasons and take steps to remove the obstacles to meeting the work requirements will not lose benefits. So I think we're working on a very reasonable individualized process that will take some time. It won't happen all of a sudden in March. Of course, if there is a decision for people's benefits to be cut, those decisions are appealable. And there's a separate process for that as well. Let me just close, then, with a plea for your help, if I might.
One of the -- I've spoken to you about some pieces of unfinished business. One of the pieces of unfinished business is to fix the child-care regulations. Another piece of unfinished business is for us to 166 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 complete work on alternative work activities for those people who didn't find separate independent employment. But perhaps the most important piece of unfinished business is to consistently get the word out about how important it is for people to not wait till March to take action, to come into the County Assistance Office and see what the -- we have thousands of vacancies in our training programs. And Greater Philadelphia Works has more, as you heard.
Commissioner, could I interrupt you for a minute? COMMISSIONER HELLER: By all means.
I'd like to ask Mr. Richard Weishaupt to come forward for a moment because I'd like to have a clear indication. On one hand, we're told cataclysmic events are going to occur in March, unless many things happen. And your testimony is to the contrary. Mr. Weishaupt, you heard Commissioner Heller's statement about the hearing process that's needed, that there will be no drastic 167 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 cutoff of large numbers of people. Could you identify yourself for the record and state your agreement or disagreement. We're trying to bring the issues to a head so we know what we have to dealing with.
Good afternoon. My name is Richard Weishaupt. Good afternoon. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Good afternoon.
Well, part of the problem is that it's November 10th, and the new program goes into effect in less than four months. We're still in the planning phase, and we still don't know what's going to happen. We still don't even know where the work activity is going to come from for 25,000 people in the City of Philadelphia. We do know that large numbers of them will probably not have 20 hours of work activity by March 3rd lined up. And the -- we're deathly afraid that even if a small percentage of people, for one reason or another, don't get their mail, don't respond to a letter saying, Hey, you know, you're in trouble, you haven't done your 20 hours, 168 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 come in. Every time that someone doesn't come in on time, maybe because their kid was sick or maybe because they overslept or maybe but they didn't read the letter or maybe because they just didn't want to come. Every one of those families is going to be cut off assistance, and they cannot get back on for at least 30 days under the plan that Deputy Secretary Heller is contemplating. And you heard Mayor Rendell talk about how, Well, if there was 400 people that that happened to, it would cost us you know $2.5 million in child welfare services, plus another million in health services. If the situation of people being sanctioned stays at the current level, the number will be four times higher than what the Mayor is estimating. And if it goes up to 10 or 12 percent, it will be 5 or 6 times higher. So we're looking at a very, very serious possibility. And I don't want -- I will consider it a personal failure if any family in Philadelphia is denied the means to survive because of missing an appointment or getting 169 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 sanctioned. But we're not talking about one child or one family; we're talking about, even under the best of scenarios, hundreds of families. And to tell you the truth, we need to work collectively around the clock to make sure that people are not sanctioned, penalized for failing to comply with these work requirements. I think that Americans of all different income levels want to work, want to be self-reliant, and that we need to do lots more to help them rather than punish them.
Commissioner, can we take this point to recess the hearing? COMMISSIONER HELLER: No, no, I think I need to respond.
Oh, would you like to speak on it now? COMMISSIONER HELLER: It would be appropriate to respond. I'll be brief.
Okay, because I think we're getting to the crux of situations that have to be dealt with, and this Council wants to be in a position to assist all the parties. I don't think we want a single 170 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 Philadelphia to go without food or shelter as a result of the application of laws. We've just got to make sure that that doesn't happen. (Applause.)
Commissioner Heller. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Okay, a couple quick points to respond. One, we have regulations in place. We have had and we continue to have regulations in place which enable people who miss appointments for good cause to not be sanctioned. So I think to throw up the specter of people losing their means of sustenance because of a circumstantial event really misrepresents the seriousness of the situation. On the other hand, I confess to you, I'm of two minds as to whether to close on a very reassuring note or to echo the note of alarm you heard from Mr. Weishaupt. On the reassuring part, I stand by what I said -- you're not going to see massive cutoff of benefits in March. Every case will be individually reviewed, and we will be examining to see whether the client, whether the mom, the 171 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 family member -- we won't be artificial and just say "client" -- is actively trying to become self-sufficient; planning for self-sufficiency and taking the steps in her plan. I don't want to be overly reassuring on the other hand, because to be frank, I'm worried about the people who are just waiting to see what happens. I would like to see them come in now. We have vacancies, we have training programs, we have job search assistance for people. And if they just sit around and wait to see what happens, they will get caught up sort and there will be some consequences like lost benefits that we don't want to see. So I think the appropriate note is to say there's not going to be chaos in March. Every circumstance will be reviewed individually. On the other hand, for people who cannot, or will not, respond to the message and take advantage of the opportunities that we can make available, there will be lost benefits.
Well, can I ask one other participant to join the group -- Ed Schwartz, former Councilman Schwartz. 172 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 I just want to close on a note which is a good note for beginning Monday. We want to nail down this question. For example, Commissioner Heller, Commissioner Heller? COMMISSIONER HELLER: Yes.
It strikes me -- I don't know who's going to be right, but I think we'd like to see that before somebody's cut off, some agency, some advocacy group -- maybe the community legal service -- somebody ought to be notified so that before the effective date of cutoff, if there's any sounds reason why the person should not be cut off, even though the record, you know, appears that a cutoff would be justified, some procedure like that might be able to be worked out. And I just raise that for your thinking. I don't ask you to give me an answer to that. (Ed Schwartz comes forward.)
Mr. Schwartz, if you could briefly join this discussion. Just identify yourself. It's former Councilman Schwartz, but identify yourself. I'm told you're entitled to 173 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 use that title.
I am former Councilman Ed Schwartz, Head of the Institute for the Study of Civic Values. We've been paying very close attention to these issues and have organized a sizeable coalition around it. I have a few comments. One, March is the beginning of a process -- not the beginning and end of a process; meaning that people's 16-month or 24-month consecutive limit continues to run out on March 4th and 5th and 6th. So to ask what happens in March and say, Well, we're not going to have chaos in March doesn't really address what we're facing. In 1981, when the Reagan budget passed, there were no homeless people lying in the streets. When I served on City Council, there were 4,000 and 500 people in the streets. And if 174 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 we said that in 1981, we would have looked like maniacs, but that's where it was. Now, the one thing that was obscured this morning that I don't think you yet maybe fully understand -- Commissioner Heller had certainly referred to it -- the State Act 35 has a very precise definition of work that is much more restrictive than the federal definition of work-related activities. Under the federal definition, you can continue to pursue job training, vocational education, and certain other things while looking for a job as work-related. But the state's definition, passed by the legislature, that defines this for Pennsylvania, is that people must be working -- work, what you and I would call a job for hours a week. Starting March 3rd, that 19 begins, all those with 24 months. 20 Now the number of people who will be vulnerable to that has shifted around in these projections for the last six months per year. The most conservative number that we've heard is 15,000 in Philadelphia will be eligible, will be vulnerable to that as of March 3rd. 175 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671
I know he said 26, but I'm using the cautious number that's been given most recently because they can exempt a certain number of people and all of this.
Well, I know. I'm just saying what the state has said. And 15,000, by the way -- I mean, we get used to these numbers as is if -- 15,000 is 2/3 of the entire workforce of the City of Philadelphia. So 15,000 would be alarming enough, and it's obviously going to grow. Now, we have one of two choices here. You can either believe that somehow, all of these placements processes are going to yield enough reduction in the vulnerable people by March 3rd, that we won't have a problem. I don't believe that. Or we can do what the job policy network is asking and what we enjoin and others are asking is for the state legislature to revisit its definition of work and include education and looking for work request. If that happened, then 176 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 we would be able to solve the problem. What we hear here is that we're not going to change the definition of work, but there's going to be some kind of grace period of good intentions on the part of the recipient where we won't sanction them. But how long can that go on? Is the Welfare Department in Philadelphia going to endlessly disobey the law? The law requires that people work for hours a week. 12 And here is the conundrum that the 13 state is faced with. We are a work-first state. 14 Every other state with the work-first philosophy 15 has added a huge workfare program to go along with 16 it. So they guarantee a job. 17 As Councilman Ortiz points out, 38,000 18 people in the city of New York are working for the 19 city, under workfare. And the welfare reform 20 advocates with whom I met last summer there are focussed entirely on workfare. What shoe we are all waiting to hear drop is the so-called work net program which is, in fact, described very generally here. There will be no way of solving this problem unless they 177 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 change the law, in which case all sorts of education and training become eligible without a massive community service jobs component that permits people to work hours a week. There may 6 be grace periods that they're willing to provide 7 for good intention. 8 If they say they'll provide that good 9 intention forever, as long as somebody seems to be 10 trying to, you know, get a job, then, of course, 11 they've found a way out from under what the law 12 requires. But the law requires that everyone who 13 reaches welfare for 24 consecutive months ends up 14 having to work 20 hours a week. 15 And what's marvelous about these 16 statistics that I was looking at is that if you 17 add up the number of people who got placed in 18 jobs, that's 24,215 over the 19 months they're 19 looking at. The case load itself dropped by 20 significantly less than that. So the questions are --
Well, but I'm just using real numbers as opposed to the percentages. The 178 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 24,000 -- the real case load drop was about or 11,000, something like that. So that means one of three things. It means that new people were coming on welfare to uptake the case load, and some of that is there. It means that some of these people are working at jobs whose income is so low that, in fact, they're still receiving TANF under the earned-income disregard because that disregard means you still get federal welfare money and, therefore, you're still on welfare, as far as the federal law is concerned, and your five-year clock is still ticking placed. Or it means a certain number of these people are placed in jobs and, in fact, they ended up back on welfare two, three months later. So if we're really looking at what we're up against, we have to look at the reduction in the case load. The fact is, as of March 3, 1997, we needed to reduce the case load by 890 a month in order to reach the goal of percent of people, with just about everybody off of welfare in months by the year 1002. And we are, not even in 179 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 these best of times, doing that. But the bottom line for March 3rd is, a law has been passed, and we should forget the word "welfare." People who are working are not on welfare. So what we're talking about is a workforce expansion program. We are expanding the workforce by another 50 to 60,000 people over the 5-year period who right now, as welfare recipients, weren't even counted as part of the workforce. So we're expanding this workforce by anywhere from to 25,000 people by March in 15 part-time jobs.
And if there are not the jobs available for them in the government or the private sector --
Councilman, let me give Commissioner Heller the last word for today.
And then we're going to be recessing till 10 o'clock on Monday. Commissioner Heller, is there anything 180 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 you want to say? COMMISSIONER HELLER: Sure. I think the most important thing to do is to correct a slight factual inaccuracy that might mislead people.
All right. COMMISSIONER HELLER: It is not the case that the only hours of work activity that maintain eligibility after months of cash 11 assistance is a job. That is not correct, okay? 12
What else is there? 13 COMMISSIONER HELLER: Work activity 14 could include subsidized employment. 15
That's a job. 16 COMMISSIONER HELLER: Paid or unpaid 17 work experience. 18
That's a job. 19 COMMISSIONER HELLER: Community 20 service. 21
That's a job. 22 COMMISSIONER HELLER: I thought I was 23 going to get the last word here, my friend. 24
Not in misleading people, you're not. 181 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 COMMISSIONER HELLER: And --
Not while I'm sitting here, you're not going to continue to mislead these people. That's all work. You see, they've got different definitions. A job is somebody that's an employer that pays you. This is all work, as opposed to sitting in a classroom, going on a job search, or going on job training. COMMISSIONER HELLER: No, it's a -- okay, no --
Are any of those three activities -- looking for a job, job training or vocational education are any of those considered work under the state law? Are they? COMMISSIONER HELLER: Let's clear up the --
No, you've been sitting here for two years misleading this city with statistics that, in fact, don't make any sense. (Applause.)
I assure you, Madame, I know at least as much about all of this as you do and ran programs of this magnitude. So you're not 182 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 going to get away with it here. Does job training, vocational education, or job search count as "work" under Act 35? COMMISSIONER HELLER: Let me be as precise as I can. A work activity looks more like a job than it does like classroom instruction; there is no ambiguity about that, all right? Work experiences provided in the context of an educational program will count. So, for example, anybody who would come into the County Assistance Office now and sign up for a Community Solutions education program, a Single Point of Contact education program, or any of the other contract that DPW has with education and training providers, would, as part of that contractual arrangement, include hours of work 20 activity, subsidized employment, internship sorts of activities, so that a person does not have to choose between such an education program and meeting the work. There is no ambiguity, however, that that's a lot of hours for a single parent to do 183 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 the hours of work activity and to get education is hard. That's why it's so important that people come in before their 24 months are up and take advantage of the education and training programs that we have to offer.
And all I am saying in 8 response to that is that the programs that are 9 being described are those that are 35-hour-a-week 10 programs so they include 20 hours of community 11 work experience. I am running that program, so I 12 know what it looks like. It's not under their 13 contract. We have a program where recipients work 14 for 20 hours a week, so we're qualified under 15 this. 16 But the difference between the federal 17 law and the state law is that somebody sitting in 18 a classroom training program for vocational 19 education, preparing to be something else, but 20 they're sitting there, under the federal law, that is still qualified as a work-related activity. And under the state law, it is not qualified. So all of the PIC training providers were brought together a month ago by the PIC, and they were told by the PIC that if they were 184 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 running training programs, they had to completely throw out their classroom models. (Applause.)
And it turn on its head in order to be able to accommodate hours a week 7 of work. 8 So that's what I'm saying. And we have 9 just heard in response to that, again, obscuring 10 what's going on, that we are running certain 11 programs that involve 20 hours a week. 12 But that's not what we're up against. 13 We're up against 15,000 people who need to be 14 working 20 hours a week under some arrangement, 15 whatever else they do. And who is supposed to 16 provide those jobs, as Councilwoman Tasco asked? 17 I've spent most of my quarter looking 18 at economic development. I'm on the architect 19 program, and I can tell you from that experience 20 that there is not a shred of possibility that enough jobs will be created in the City of Philadelphia alone to accommodate this workforce, so it's time to stop obscuring the magnitude of the problem. The city is involving this program for 185 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 precisely 750 people at any given moment. That is the number of people who, at any given moment, are going to be working in the public works part of it. Everyone else is looking for work. Those 6,000 people a year, they're all looking for work. And if their 24-month time limit expires as of March 3rd of next year, you know what, they've got to be looking for work while they're working for hours a week. 11 So we, again, are all very interested 12 in what the work net program will look like, 13 because that is where, in fact, the state is 14 talking about responding to the problem, which is 15 to create a framework for community service work 16 that gives people 20 hours a week of work 17 experience. 18 And, by the way, not only don't I have 19 I have a problem with that; I have been running 20 that program for five years. And I don't have this view that a person who is working for our communities, working for the good of the community or the city, is doing something other than work or a job. We are expanding the workforce, and it 186 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 seems to me, we need to expand what we mean by "work." (Applause.)
And that is anything that involves improving the value of our life in the community. And that's something that neither the city program nor the state program has yet come to grips with.
Commissioner Heller, I think this is a pretty good place to stop the discussion today. We'd like to know, from the state's point of view, whether you believe Councilman Schwartz is right. If he's right, then we would hope that there would be a recommendation from the Governor to the State Legislature to change the state law. If it's not right, then we'd like to understand why he's not right. COMMISSIONER HELLER: Yeah. I think the gentleman made about 15 points in his remarks, so it's impossible for me to just give you a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down about whether I agree. Let me reassure you, however, that 187 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 there is no intention to obscure what the requirement is, all right? Work activity, whether it's paid or unpaid, looks like work; it don't look like classroom instruction. And the General Assembly, in Act 35, was unambiguous that they expected people who remain on cash assistance longer than months to 9 be doing some sort of work activity to remain 10 eligible for those cash-assistance benefits. 11
Mr. Chairman, Madame 14 Chairwoman, obviously, I think, as the Mayor 15 stated and I stated, this is probably the biggest 16 public policy problem that we're going to be faced 17 as a city within the next five years. 18 We as a legislative body, as the Mayor 19 again stated, have not looked at this in any 20 in-depth form. We looked at it a year and a half 21 ago, we looked at it today. 22 Meanwhile, throughout the whole period 23 of time, notwithstanding the fact, our homeless 24 program has not been reformed, we have not looked at how we are spending that type of money. 188 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 We approved a sidewalk behavior bill, that if this goes through and the effects of this reform happen, we are not going to need a sidewalk; we're going to need a highway behavior bill, because that's what's go to be happening. (Applause.)
Our answers to the problem have been to put into place legislation prohibiting things instead of looking at the way that we can resolve the issues of employment, joblessness and training that we have. And I hope -- I hope that -- this is not the end because we should have had -- I've had -- I have seven pages of questioning for you here, Madame Secretary, which we're not going to get into because of time. So I would hope that we continue this hearing immediately, that everybody comes back, they we do what the Mayor said, that we keep on doing exactly what we did today -- clarifying, taking the obscurity out of this issue, the obfuscation that has happened on the issue, to take the semantics out of it. A job is a job is a job is a job. 189 PUB. HEALTH/HUM. SVCS. AND LAW & GOV'T. - RES. 960671 And that's what we should be looking at. And a living-wage-paying job is a job. (Applause.)
So I would hope, Mr. Chair, that we have the proximate hearing, and that nothing else is scheduled, so that the people can come in here, so that the Secretary can come back, so that everybody can get a full understanding, and the City Council can get a full understanding of this so that we don't have six hearings in one day.
The joint committees stand in recess until Monday morning, at 10 o'clock. Thank you. (Adjourned at 1:35 p.m.) - - - 190 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Tuesday, November 10, 1998, were reported and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: JOINT COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES AND LAW & GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION NO. 960671 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter