HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08041992 - 2.8 TO:. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Costa
DATE: August 4, 1992 .,,J � � ;yw
County
SUBJECT: General Assistance Standards: Sanctions and Hearin q-coiiK�
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 . Adopt the report of Social Service Director Perfecto
Villarreal on General Assistance Standards of Assistance, attached
hereto, including the reports of Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance
Program Analyst and Gary Hamilton, General Assistance Alcohol and
Drug Diversion Service Program Director, on General Assistance
Program Sanctions .
2 . Adopt the report of Social Service Director Perfecto
Villarreal on General Assistance Hearings, attached hereto.
3 . Receive the comments of District Attorney Gary T. Yancey
as Reformulation of General Assistance Regulations .
4 . Adopt the proposed Resolutions on Amendments to Standards
for Administration of the General Assistance Programs; and General
Assistance Hearing and Appeal Procedures .
BACKGROUND:
Administrative Standards
Under the new procedures, General Assistance applicants and
recipients will be required to comply with program requirements as
a condition of eligibility. The new procedures also put the
responsibility on the recipient to show that he or she had good
cause for not complying with program requirements, or that non-
compliance was not willful . Recipients will be held responsible
for continuing to search for employment, cooperating with the Work
Program, participating in the General Assistance Alcohol and Drug
Diversion Services (GAADDS) program, and applying for all other
benefits for which he or she may be eligible, including
Supplemental Security Income. Failure to comply with General
Assistance program requirements will result in increasing periods
of ineligibility ranging from one month, to three months, to six
months .
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: XX YES SIGNATURE `S
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
1
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Orig: ATTESTED L �l 'j/_�✓_� z ��19�
cc: Distribution via Social Services PHIL BfffCHELOR, CLERK OF
County Counsel THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
t r
Hearings and Appeals
The proposed resolution on General Assistance Hearing and Appeal Procedures
clarifies the responsibilities of both the applicant and the County. The
resolution specifies the obligation of the County to provide written notice of
action to deny, reduce, suspend or terminate a General Assistance Grant. The
applicant has the responsibility to make any request for hearing in writing
within 14 days of the date of the notice. Other changes include criteria for
evaluating claimant requests to postpone hearings . Existing postponement
policies are liberal; clients continue to receive aid-paid-pending until the
hearing is actually held. The proposed change places the responsibility for
attending the hearing as scheduled on the client, while still providing for
reasonable postponements .
Consultation with Legal Services
County Counsel met with Legal Services to review the proposed resolutions, making
changes as appropriate. In addition, Board consideration of the resolutions was
delayed by one week in response. to- a request from Legal Services for more time
to discuss the proposed resolutions .
t � .
ti
v iud Uosta low
GARY T. YANCEY RECEIVED
District Attorney
,1111 2 91992
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY Office of
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA -►►nty Administrator
TO: SARA HOFFMAN, SENIOR DEPUTY
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: JACK WADDELL, SENIOR � Y
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
DATE: JULY 27, 1992
SUBJECT: REFORMULATION OF GENERAL ASSISTANCE REGULATIONS
Since the reformulation of General Assistance regulations has not
yet been completed, I would like to make some comments which
reflect the views of our office. I originally had decided not to
offer suggestions since we have limited expertise in the matter.
Since the development of the budget crisis, however, it becomes
even more important to be successful in the goal of deterring and
prosecuting attempts at welfare fraud.
It is important that the regulations be simple, straightforward
and unambiguous . Looking at the General Assistance program from
the perspective of prosecution I would make the following
observations :
It must be made clear that the "full time" daily job of a person
on General Assistance should be seeking employment. The person
should be required to submit proof of , continuing efforts . It
follows that full time students, strikers or persons voluntarily
terminating employment should not be granted General Assistance.
There are too many persons who are authorized to make a
determination of "incapacity to work" . The decision should be
placed in the hands of a county medical review board.
"Homeless" persons who claim county residency must be required to
provide an address where they are staying so that we can verify
our obligation to provide assistance under Welfare and
Institutions 17000 .
Those applying for General Assistance should be required to
provide a photograph and a thumbprint on the application to
dissuade the filing of multiple claims .
Given the limited General Assistance resources available it
should be seriously questioned why categories such as pregnant
women and caretakers of 16-17 year old children should be
considered unemployable.
What policies are in effect which would provide the applicant
with 1 one-way ticket back to the state or county of his
residence in lieu of emergency aid in accordance with Welfare and
Institutions 17004?
Emergency aid to non-residents appears to be discretionary. If
we are providing such aid perhaps it should be. eliminated.
Any determination of ineligibility should be binding and preclude
a refiling for assistance for 180 days .
All intentional violations of the regulations should result in
sanctions, progressive in severity, leading to permanent
ineligibility.
JW: jh
SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DATE: August 4, 1992
c,Ft�.�
F
FROM: PER CTO VILLARREAL
DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: GENERAL ASSISTANCE STANDARDS OF ASSISTANCE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Recommendation: That the Board adopt the proposed resolution amending Part 7 and Part 10
of Board Resolution Number 91/606, Standards for the Administration of the
General Assistance Program.
This amendment makes the following changes and clarifications:
1. Failure to cooperate in meeting program requirements or carrying out program
duties is a failure to comply with program requirements.
2. Any failure to comply with program requirements is subject to denial or
discontinuance and a period of ineligibility. Periods of ineligibility are no longer
limited to Work Programs and Quality Control failures. Failure to comply is excused
if it was for good cause or was not willful.
3. It is presumed that the duties of Department staff have been correctly performed;
it is presumed that the ordinary consequences of the applicant's or,recipient's acts
are intentional.
4. The burden of proof to establish failure to comply is on the Department. The burden
of proof to establish good cause or that a failure is not willful is on the applicant or
recipient.
5. Applicants
a. An applicant who fails to comply with program requirements shall be denied
aid and a thirty day period of ineligibility shall be imposed.
b. An applicant_who is serving a General Assistance/General Relief period of
ineligibility from another California County is ineligible for GA in Contra .
Costa County for the duration of the other county's sanction period.
C. An applicant who has quit without compelling cause or been fired for cause
from a job within sixty days prior to the date of the GA application is
ineligible for GA for sixty days from the last day of employment.
Gen 9c (New 3/86)
1
1
6. Recipients
a. A recipient who fails to comply with program requirements shall be
discontinued aid, and periods of ineligibility will be imposed: first failure =
one month, second failure = three months, third and subsequent failures =
six months.
b. If a year has passed from the date of the last period of ineligibility, the cycle
will begin again; i.e. the next failure will be followed by a one month period
of ineligibility. -
C. A recipient who refuses an offer of employment, or who quits a job without
compelling cause, is ineligible for GA for six months.
7. Fraud
a. Applicants or recipients who provide fraudulent information in order to
qualify for a General Assistance grant or for a larger grant, or to avoid
reduction or termination of aid are ineligible for GA for six months.
Attached are reports from Jewel Mansapit,Social Service Department General Assistance Program
Analyst, and Gary Hamilton, Health Services Department General Assistance Alcohol and Drug
Diversion Services Program Director supporting the policies proposed in this Board.Resolution.
Background:
General Assistance is a program designed to meet the minimum needs of persons who are
unemployed or who,because of their present disability, are seeking assistance to meet their current
needs. General-Assistance>,is intended,to be._a short-term program, with emphasis placed upon
assisting applicants and recipients to become self-sufficient. They are encouraged to become
employed or to obtain other resources which may be available to meet their needs, in compliance
with Welfare and Institutions Code §17000.
Welfare and Institutions Code section 17001 gives a county 'broad discretion" to determine the
conditions attached to the receipt of General Assistance. However, the conditions must be
11consistent, not in conflict with the [General Assistance] statute[s], and reasonably necessary to
effectuate [their] purpose." (Mooney v Pickett, 1971.) One purpose of the General Assistance
statutes is to rehabilitate recipients through work. (Welfare and Institutions Code §17200.)
Treatment of alcohol and/or drug abuse will often be necessary before this rehabilitative purpose
can be achieved.
At current growth rates, General Assistance costs in Contra Costa County for Fiscal Year 1992-
1993 are projected at $20.8 million. This is $3.5 million more than the $17.7 million in Fiscai Year
1991-92 expenditures. Over the past seven years, yearly GA grant costs have increased by $12.4
2
million, or 243%. The General Assistance caseload in Contra Costa County has grown 143% in
the decade 1982 to 1992.
Employable Caseload
Employable applicants and recipients are required to seek employment, and are referred to apply
for Unemployment Insurance benefits. Unemployable persons are referred to and assisted in
obtaining State and Federal benefits in the form of Disability Insurance, Worker's Compensation,
and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Applicants and recipients must accept referral to and
participate in county alcohol and drug abuse treatment programs. The General Assistance Alcohol
Drug Diversion Services program continues to screen and serve GA applicants and recipients with
known or suspected substance abuse problems.This is often the first step in assisting the client with
achieving the goal of self-sufficiency.
Sixty-two percent of the current General Assistance caseload is classified as Employable. Labor
market analysis recently completed for the Contra Costa County Refugee Advisory Council
provides the following information,which impacts the General Assistance population as well as the
Refugee population:
• Strong employment growth in the county will mean 41,900 more jobs in 1993 than
in 1988.
• Retail trade will be a major source of employment, although many of the new jobs,
such as those for sales clerks and cashiers, are likely to be part time. (It is noted that
a 20 hour per week job at minimum wage earns $365 per month, which exceeds the
maximum GA grant.)
• In line with its relatively fast population growth, the county's labor force will continue
to grow through 1993. Job growth_was.:slower_.si qe_ 1990, reflecting_the national
recession, but the overall economy is expected to rebound in a relatively short time.
Job growth is expected to continue uninterrupted through 1993.
• In recent years, several new shopping centers were built in the central/east areas of
the county. These facilities have created a continuing demand for workers in
restaurant occupations as well as a great demand for cashiers and sales clerks in that
region. Most of these positions represent entry-level employment for which most of
the GA population is qualified.
• The health care industry is expected to add 3,900 new jobs. As the county's
expanding population (and aging population) increases, the demand for additional
medical facilities and offices increases.
The above information supports the Department's belief that there is employment available and
suitable for the majority of the GA population. It is the applicant and recipient's responsibility to
3
actively seek work, and to accept any offer of employment. The goal of every employable
should be to find a job and become self-sufficient. The penalties for refusing a job or quitting a job
must be more significant to discourage the continuous return to General Assistance without
forfeiture.
The number of young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 receiving GA has increased
dramatically; in September, 1991 these recipients represented twenty-four percent of the total
caseload. Most of these individuals are classified as Employable. Many of these individuals are
former children in AFDC families or Foster Care children, who apply for GA when their AFDC
or FC eligibility ceases. Many of these young adults have little or no work history. What work
history they may have is sporadic, and generally is punctuated by job quits. In order to avoid the
continuation of a welfare lifestyle, the goal of self-sufficiency must be stressed and reinforced.
UnemplQyable Caseload
Recent evidence from the Social Security Administration and the State Disability Evaluation
Bureau indicates that the criteria for evaluating SSI disability claims has been liberalized.
Applications for SSI are being processed in a more timely manner,and many more claims are being
granted at the point of application. Applicants and recipients who appear to be eligible for SSI
must be required to apply for those benefits, and must follow-through and cooperate with the
application and appeal processes. It is imperative that those who are required to apply for SSI
comply with the necessary procedures.
In order to administer the growing caseload more effectively, and in keeping with the emphasis on
self-determination and self-support, new emphasis is being placed on the responsibility of the
applicant and recipient to comply with program requirements. In order to obtain compliance, it is
necessary to ensure that persons who refuse to comply with program requirements or refuse to
cooperate with services directed toward the goal of self-sufficiency are discontinued from assistance.
Periods of ineligibility will apply.to all applicants_:and-_recipients,_not just_:tojFmployable persons
and those who fail to comply with Quality Control. This will assure equitable treatment of
recipients, and effective administration of program policies. In the absence of mental disabilities
which prevent the individual from understanding or fulfilling his or her responsibilities,the ordinary
consequences of the applicant's or recipient's voluntary acts are presumed to be intentional. An
applicant or recipient will be allowed the opportunity to establish that a failure to comply was with
good cause or was not willful.
Repeat Recipients
A major percentage of the existing General Assistance caseload is comprised of recipients who have
received GA intermittently over the past year or several years. The receipt of aid is often
interrupted by a failure to comply with program requirements. A one month period of ineligibility
may be served, and the client is then "recycled" back into the system, without ever actually
becoming self-supporting. It is the Department's experience that the lack of significant, enforceable
sanctions actually appears to reinforce noncompliance.
4
In order to break the cycle of dependency on welfare,the General Assistance program must include
incentives to encourage recipients to make every effort to become self-sufficient and instill a sense
of personal responsibility. New emphasis is being placed on the responsibility of the applicant and
recipient to comply with program requirements. The proposed changes would strengthen the
penalties for non-compliance and compel the individual to assume responsibility for cooperating
with those requirements.
Fraud
The Department has received State approval for implementation of an Early Fraud Detection and
Prevention program at the point of application,with staff to investigate referrals of suspected fraud
by recipients as well. Although there is no existing data regarding the potential savings due to fraud
investigation,.since there have been no staff to conduct these investigations, it is believed that the
number of persons providing fraudulent information in order to qualify for aid or fo.ua.larger grant
is significant. San Diego County, in a 1988 pilot project, referred 1500 GA applicants/recipients
for investigation, and found 71% of those to have committed fraud of some type. At that time, San
Diego's annual savings attributable solely to those investigations was $254,866. A six-month study
of a recently implemented duplicate aid detection system in Los Angeles has revealed that 5% of
the General Relief caseload there was terminated for fraudulent receipt of duplicate aid payments.
Currently in Contra Costa County, there is no penalty for providing fraudulent information -- the
application is denied or the overpayment computed, but the client serves no period of ineligibility.
Under the proposed regulation changes, the penalty for providing fraudulent information is six
months of ineligibility. This reinforces the concept of client responsibility for his or her actions.
Drug and Alcohol Abuse
Those applicants and recipients whose possible dependency on alcohol or drugs is creating a barrier
to obtaining employment,are required to work-toward removing this barrier by cooperating with
the County's General Assistance Alcohol and Drug Diversion Service (GAADDS). Between July,
1991 and March, 1992 referrals to GAADDS averaged 125 per month county-wide. In April, 1992
the Department instituted a pilot program in the Richmond office for screening all General
Assistance applicants for evidence of alcohol or drug dependency, using a standardized, written
testing instrument. In April and May, 1992 this screening resulted in 734 referrals to GAADDS.
The screening also indicated a potential 52% to 62% of the GA applicants are dependent upon
drugs or alcohol. Therefore,within the next few months, the Department will be expanding the use
of the testing instrument county-wide, and will require that all applicants for General Assistance
be screened. If applicants refuse to be screened, their applications for GA will be denied. Once
screened, the GAADDS professional staff determines the client's participation requirements -- if
any -- in the GAADDS program. Once identified by the GAADDS staff as appropriate for
participation in the GAADDS treatment program, the recipient who refuses to comply is
discontinued and penalized. According to GAADDS substance abuse professionals, establishing
program requirements without parallel consequences for non-compliance reinforces negative
behavior.
5
Use of Sanctions in Other Counties
An April, 1991 study conducted by the Office of the Auditor General of all fifty-eight California
counties revealed the following information regarding sanction/penalty policies:
• 51 counties apply periods of ineligibility; 7 do not.
• Periods of ineligibility range from 14 days to 730 days, with two counties reporting
they permanently ban a recipient after repeated instances of noncompliance.
• 30 counties apply increasing periods of ineligibility for recipients who do not comply
with program requirements.
• Only two of.the 51 counties that apply sanctions are more-lenient than Contra Costa
County's current use of one-month ineligibility periods, regardless of the number of
violations of program requirements.
• 34 counties sanction for failure to comply with work programs requirements only; 17
counties sanction for failure to comply with work program and certain other
requirements. In those counties which sanction for failure to comply with
requirements other than work programs, noncompliance with work program
requirements accounts for 45% of the sanctions imposed.
One of the reasons that most California counties apply increasing penalties for failure to comply
with program requirements is to instill a sense of personal responsibility among GA recipients and
to lead clients to overcome social and economic dependency. More and more frequently, the
Department is seeing persons for whom General Assistance -has become a way of life. It has
become necessary to take dramatic steps to encourage those recipients to assume responsibility for
their-actions,-and_to influence-them to become self-supporting.
Compliance with General Assistance regulations is necessary to permit equitable administration
of the program. The use of graduated sanction periods for successive failures to comply has been
upheld in litigation in several counties: City of Los Angeles v County of Los Angeles (Los Angeles),
Mascorro v Board of Supervisors (San Diego), Reyes v San Diego (San Diego), among others.
Hearings and Aid-paid-pending
For the period January 1, 1991 through June 30, 1992, in Contra Costa County, 2327 General
Assistance hearing requests were filed. It is estimated that over 80% of all hearing requests-are
related to discontinuances and periods of ineligibility for failure to comply with program
requirements. Of those 2327 filings, fourteen percent were filed by employable recipients who had
more than one filing relating to program compliance sanctions during that period. Recipients take
advantage of the one month period of ineligibility, coupled with the flaws in the hearing system and
aid-paid-pending policies to manipulate the system. Many receive aid for extended periods of time
6
while continuing to fail to comply with program requirements. Strengthening the discontinuance
and period of ineligibility policies, along with tightening up the hearing policies and procedures,
should alleviate much of this exploitation.
7
SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
TO: Perfecto Villarreal DATE: August 3, 1992
Social Service Direc or
FROM: Jewel Mans it
General Assis
eye
Analyst
SUBJECT: General Assist ce Program Sanctions
1. This report is based upon my following experience and qualifications:
A. I am the General Assistance Program Analyst for the Contra Costa County Social
Services Department. I have been employed by the Contra Costa County Social Service
Department since November 1, 1966. I have been an Eligibility Worker, an Eligibility Work
Supervisor, and an Income Maintenance Division Supervisor. I have held my current position of
General Assistance Program Analyst since May, 1983. My duties include assisting with the
development of rules concerning the-County General Assistance Program and related programs,
the drafting of provisions for the General Assistance Department Manual, and serving as a
General Assistance resource person for other department staff persons. I am thoroughly
familiar with the operation of the General Assistance program in Contra Costa County.
B. I have been a member of the "Adult Eligibility and Grant Committee" of the
County Welfare Directors' Association since 1983. The County Welfare Directors' Association is
an organization of the Welfare Directors and managers of all the counties in the State of
California. The."Adult Eligibility and Grant Committee" of the Association is responsible for
General Assistance/General Relief matters under Welfare--and-Tnstitations Coders'-ction 17000.
I served for five years as Secretary of the Committee. I have organized the annual statewide
General Assistance Conference every year since 1985. Based on my duties as the General
Assistance Program Analyst for the Contra Costa County Social Service Department and my
activities with the County Welfare Directors' Association, I am familiar with the general
operation of General Assistance/General Relief programs throughout California since at least
1985.
C. I have either personal or expert knowledge of the matters stated in this report.
2. It is my opinion that the graduated, durational sanctions, provided in the proposed
amendments to Resolution No. 91/606, are necessary to permit effective and equitable
administration of the General Assistance program; and to facilitate the attainment of self-
sufficiency and self-support by General Assistance eligibles.
3. General Assistance program requirements have been adopted for the following purposes:
(a) to ensure initial and continuing eligibility for General Assistance; (b) to provide job search,
job training and work experience; (c) to confirm qualification for other benefits and aid
programs, such as Unemployment Insurance, Disability Insurance, and Supplemental Security
Page 1
Gen 9c (New 3/86)
Income (SSI); and (d) to prevent substance abuse and provide for substance abuse counseling
and treatment. _
For the General Assistance program to assist in obtaining self-sufficiency and self-
support on the part of eligibles it is necessary that applicants and recipients comply with
program requirements. It is also necessary to insist upon compliance equally by all General
Assistance program eligibles. To obtain compliance, General Assistance eligibles must know
that non-compliance will adversely affect their benefits, and that repeated non-compliance will
lead to increased detriment.
4. The experience of the Social Service Department shows that most of the population of
General Assistance eligibles is characterized by behaviors which adversely affect their
willingness to comply with General Assistance program requirements. We have identified the
following, one or more oLwhich is likely to be present in the case of a_majority of persons
eligible for General Assistance:
(a) Habitual welfare dependency. The number of young adults receiving General
Assistance has increased dramatically.In September, 1991, young adults comprised 24% of the
total caseload. Many of these recipients are former children in AFDC families or Foster Care
children, who have applied for General Assistance when their AFDC or FC eligibility
terminated. Eleven per cent of the approved GA applicants in May, 1992 were 18 year olds who
no longer qualified for AFDC. Many of these young adults have little or no work history. What
work history they have tends to be sporadic, and generally is punctuated with job quits.
Beyond the lack of work skills, many General Assistance applicants and recipients lack daily
living skills. They have little self-motivation, which combined with the lack of work skills, make
the goal of self-sufficiency more difficult to reach. Many lack competence in reading, math, and
reasoning; they are inadequately prepared, and have not accepted the need to make .their way
within-the--existing--socioeconomic-system. There are obvious indicators of failure to accept -
responsibility to meet the requirements of school, employers, or service providers, including the
Social Service Department.
(b) Drug and alcohol abuse. In April and May, 1992, the Social Service Department
instituted a pilot program in the Richmond office for screening all General Assistance
applicants for evidence of alcohol or drug dependency, using a standardized, written testing
instrument. The data from that screening shows that 52% to 62% of General Assistance
applicants are potentially dependent upon drugs or alcohol.
(c) Anti-social conduct. A significant minority of General Assistance applicants and
recipients attempt to manipulate and abuse the system. They are untruthful when they apply,
they fail to report income, and they repeatedly fail to conform to routine program requirements.
For these persons Contra Costa County's General Assistance program is a revolving door.
These individuals obtain aid, are disqualified, qualify again, and are disqualified again. They
disproportionately use up the County's limited administrative resources, making it more difficult
for other applicants to have their needs addressed in a timely manner, and are a glaringly bad
example to other General Assistance applicants and recipients.
Page 2
i
The General Assistance program requirements are designed to develop personal responsibility
and self-sufficiency. Therefore,the limited resources of the Social Services Department will be
focusing on behavior modification. A major percentage of the existing General Assistance
caseload is comprised of recipients who have received GA intermittently over the past year or
several years. The receipt of aid is often interrupted by a failure to comply with program
requirements. A one month period of ineligibility may be served, and the client is then
"recycled" back into the system, without ever actually becoming self-supporting. Sanctions are
the only effective means the Department can put into place to make it clear that General
Assistance applicants and recipients will suffer significant consequences as a result of their
failure to comply with program requirements. To establish program requirements without
effective consequences for non-compliance is unfair to those who comply, and reinforces the
negative behavior of those who do not comply. The failure to aggressively and effectively
sanction non-compliance also demoralizes staff and encourages non-compliance by all applicants
and recipients. It is the Department's experience that the lack of significant, enforceable
sanctions actually appears to reinforce non-compliance.
5. Attached are Appendix B and Appendix C to a 1991 Auditor General's study of the
General Assistance sanctions of all 58 California counties. This study shows that 51 of the
counties apply sanctions; 7 do not. Thirty counties apply increasing periods of ineligibility for
recipients who do not comply with program requirements. (Note that effective June 1, 1992
Santa Clara no longer applies graduated periods of ineligibility; therefore this number should be
adjusted to 29.)
6. Effective implementation of the County's General Assistance program requirements has
been hindered due to uncertainty as to the burden of proof and the definition of willful
conduct. It has been difficult -- both for staff presenting the Department's position, and for
Hearing Officers attempting to make a decision, to determine willful conduct. It is difficult for
Department staff to prove that a failure to comply was done willfully because staff have no
effective means of obtaining evidence as to the motivation of client conduct.
The proposed amendments resolve these problems in accordance with established statutory
principles. The Department, as the party imposing sanctions, bears the burden of proving the
client's failure to comply with program requirements; the client bears the burden of proving by
way of defense that a failure to comply should be excused for good cause or because it was not
willful.
7. Applicants or recipients who contend that application of the County's sanction policy is
erroneous, unreasonable, or disproportionate on the facts, continue to be able to appeal to the
Board of Supervisors for relief.
Page 3
Appendix B Counties Sanctioning General Relief Recipients
for Noncompliance With Program Requirements
Counties That Sanction
Counties That Sanction for Noncompliance
Counties That Only for Noncompliance With With Work Program
Do Not Sanction Work Program Requirements and Other Requirements
Imperial Alameda Alpine
Inyo - Butte Amador
Marin Calaveras Contra Costa
Mariposa Colusa Glenn
Monterey Del Norte Humboldt
Plumas 8 Dorado Madera
Tulare Fresno Mendocino
Kern Merced
Kings Modoc
Lake Mono
Lassen Riverside
Los Angeles . Sacramento
Napa San Francisco
Nevada Santa Claraa
Orange Santa Cruz
Placer Siskiyou
San Benito Sonoma
San Bernardino
San Diego
San Joaquin
San Luis Obispo
San Mateo
Santa Barbara .
Shasta
Sierra
Solano
Stanislaus
Sutter
Tehama
Trinity
Tuolumne
Ventura
Yolo
Yuba
Source: Office of the Auditor General's survey of counties,April 17,1991.
aSanta Clara sanctions general relief recipients for noncompliance with work program and
other requirements-,however,sanctions are only applied against recipients classified as
employable.
29
yY f
Appendix C Duration of Sanctions in Counties
(by Days)
Counties That
Sanction First Infraction Second Infraction Third infraction
Alameda 30 30 60 i
Alpine 30 60 Permanent
Amador 30 60 90
Butte 30 60 180
Calaveras 30 90 180
Colusa 30
Contra Costa 30
Del Norte 30 60 90
EI Dorado 30 60 90
Fresno 90 180 Permanent
Glenn 30 60 180
Humboldt 30 60 120
Kern 30 60
Kings 60
Lake 30
Lassen 30
Los Angeles 60
Madera 30
Mendocino 30
Merced Spa
Modoc 30 60 90
Mono 180 365 730
Napa 30 30 60b
Nevada 30 at 50%benefits 30 at 25%benefits
} Orange 90 180
Placer 30
Riverside 30 60 90
Sacramento 30c
San Benito 180
San Bernardino 30 60 90
San Diego 30 or 90d
San Francisco 14
San Joaquin 30
San Luis Obispo 30
San Mateo 30 60 90
Santa Barbara 30 60 90
Santa Clara 30 90
Santa Cruz 90
Shasta 30 60 90
Sierra 180 365
Siskiyou 30 at 50%benefits 30
Solano 30 60 90
Sonoma 30
Stanislaus 60 120 180
Sutter 30 60 90
Tehama 30 60 90
Trinity 30 60 90
Tuolumne 30 or 60d
Ventura 30
Yolo Warning 30
Yuba Warning,14 or 30d 14,30,or 60d 60
Source. Office of the Auditor General's survey of counties,April 17,1991.
aMerced also sanctions 365 days for fraud.
bOn the third violation, Nevada County continues the sanction until the recipient
comes into compliance.
°Sacramento also sanctions 90 days or 180 days for fraud.
dDuration of sanction depends on type of infraction.
31
f '
z
SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
TO: Perfecto Villarreal DATE: August 3, 1992
So ial Service Di ctor
FRO ry �iaiilton �L
General Assistance Alcohol and Drug Diversion Service Program Director
SUBJECT: General Assistance Program Sanctions
1. This report is based upon my following experience and qualifications:
A. I am the Program Director for the General Assistance Alcohol and Drug
Diversion Service (GAADDS) Program. I have been employed by the Contra Costa
County Health Services Department Alcohol Drug Abuse Mental Health Division since
1980. I have been an Alcohol Rehabilitation Worker, Alcohol Rehabilitation Lead
Counselor/Area Coordinator, and an Alcohol Program Supervisor. I have performed the
duties of GAADDS Program Director since March 1, 1990. My duties include directing
the development of policies and procedures concerning the GAADDS program;
overseeing the operation of the program in three District offices; providing direct
supervision of GAADDS staff; and collecting and evaluating data regarding the
operation of the program. As a counselor and in my current position I have worked
extensively with the General Assistance population in Contra Costa County.
B. For the past sixteen years I have had progressive experience working in the
field of substance abuse treatment in various capacities. I have provided services in
treatment, prevention and intervention systems. I have participated in various community
and professional groups: 1) Executive Board member, "P.A.L.M." (Problem of Addictions
in Labor and Management), 1989-1992; member, "ALAMACA" (Association of Labor
Management, Administration and Consultants on Alcoholism), 1989-1991; member,
"NMHA', (National Minority Health Association), 1987-1990; member, Youth Services
Bureau, 1989-1992; member, Anti-Drug Task Force (City of Richmond), 1989-1991;
member. Association of Alcohol and Drug Counselors, 1989-1992; member, Richmond
Unified Alcohol, Drug and Tobacco Advisory Committee, 1989-1991; member,
Community Partnership - OSAP Steering Committee; conference co-chair, conference,
"Blacks Against Alcohol and Drugs, 1989; planning committee, "Women and Children in
Crisis", 1990; conference co-chair, "African American Male Conference", 1992; committee
member, West County Substance Abuse Task Force, 1987-1989.
C. I have either personal or expert knowledge of the matters stated in this
report.
Page 1
Gen 9c (New 3/86)
2. The General Assistance Alcohol and Drug Diversion Services (GAADDS)
Program is a system approach in assessment, intervention and treatment of chemical
dependency. '
Intervention is a process by which the harmful, progressive and destructive effects
of chemical dependency are interrupted and the chemically dependent person is helped
to stop using mood-altering chemicals and begins to develop new, healthier ways of
coping with his or her needs and problems. It implies that the person need not be an
emotional or physical wreck (or "hit bottom") before such help can be given.
Intervention with chemically dependent individuals is an important step in the
direction of treating one of the most widespread diseases in our culture. Usually,
intervention is thought of in the context of family or employer and how the chemically
dependent individual's behavior affects others.
3. In the planning stages of the GAADDS program, we looked at the several drug
and alcohol programs, assessed their key components, and forged them into an effective
working model of assessment, intervention and treatment for reaching General
Assistance eligibles.
The GAADDS program's essential components are specifically designed for
identification, confirmation, assessment, treatment and referral.
4. The Social Service Department plays a key role in providing leverage for the
GAADDS program's effectiveness. The success of GAADDS hinges on the leverage
provided by the Social Service Department's General Assistance sanctions to not only
induce motivation, but to maintain treatment adherence through the application of
consequences for non-compliance with the GAADDS program.
5. A critical key which leads to the progression of addiction lo-mind-altering
substances and precludes recovery consideration, is the lack of consequences associated
with drug affected behaviors and enabling behaviors of others that tend to perpetuate the
addiction.
6. It is my opinion that the graduated, durational sanctions, provided in the proposed
amendments to Resolution No. 91/606, are necessary to facilitate the attainment of the
goals of the GAADDS program and the self-sufficiency and self-support by General
Assistance eligibles.
Page 2
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on August 4,1992 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson, McPeak
NOES: None f:
ABSENT: Supervisor Powers
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Amendments to Standards for ] Resolution Number 92/ 553
Administration of the General ]
Assistance Program ] E
f
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors RESOLVES that,
Resolution 91/606, adopting standards of aid and care for the indigent and dependent poor of the
county (General Assistance) effective November 1, 1991, as amended by Resolutions 91/710, 91/811
and 92/186, is hereby further amended as follows, to be effective September 1, 1992:
Part 7
701. Initial and continued eligibility is conditioned upon the applicant's and recipient's full
cooperation with the Social Service Department and upon compliance with all applicable
policies and regulations governing the GA program. Applicant and recipient responsibilities
embodied in this resolution include, but are not limited to, those set forth on forms GA 201A
and GA 34, which are provided to and shall be executed by all applicants prior to the granting
or restoration of aid.
702. Failure to comply with General Assistance program requirements expressed in this Resolution
or in the Social Service Department Manual of Policies and Procedures renders an applicant or
recipient ineligible for aid. Failure to comply is excused if it was forgood cause or was not
willful.
(a) Absent evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the duties of Department staff have been
correctly performed. (See Evidence Code §664). Absent evidence to the contrary, it is presumed
that the ordinary consequences of the applicant's or recipient's voluntary acts are intentional
(See Evidence Code §665).
(b) A willful act is one that is intentional or without reasonable excuse or cause. It need not be
done with malice, nor with a specific purpose to violate program requirements. Failure to
comply by a person who is mentally disabled to the extent that s/he does not understand
his/her responsibilities or is incapable of fulfilling them is not willful. Conduct which involves
negligence, inadvertence, physical disability or lesser mental disability may or may not be
willful.
(c) Each case will turn on its own facts. A determination must be made based on the evidence.
Evidence can be direct or it may be inferred from an applicant's or recipient's acts. The burden
of proof to establish failure to comply is on the Department. The burden of proof to establish
good cause or that a failure is not willful is on the applicant or recipient.
(d) Failure to cooperate in meeting program requirements or carrying out program duties is a
failure to comply with program requirements.
703. An applicant who fails to comply with program requirements by failing to meet any one of his
or her enumerated responsibilities shall be denied aid and a thirty day period of ineligibility
shall be imposed unless the applicant shows that the failure to comply was for good cause or
was not willful.
RESOLUTION NUMBER 92/_553
(a) Examples of such responsibilities include, but are not limited to: keeping appointments;
providing verification as requested;by the due date; filing application for other sources of
income or benefits, including Supplemental Security Income; participating in General Assistance
Alcohol Drug Diversion Service (CTAADDS) screening; completing applicant job search;
appearing for and participating in Work Programs Orientation; cooperating with Early Fraud
Detection and Prevention.
(b) The period of ineligibility shall apply to any member of a General Assistance assistance unit
who has failed to comply with program requirements.
704. An applicant who is serving a General Assistance/General Relief period of ineligibility from
another California County is ineligible for General Assistance in Contra Costa County for the
duration of the other county's sanction period.
705. An applicant who has quit without compelling cause, or been fired for cause from a job within
sixty days prior to the date of the General Assistance application is ineligible for General
Assistance for sixty days from the last day of his or her employment.
706. Once aid is granted, a recipient who fails to comply with program requiren,�ients by failing to
meet any one of his or her enumerated responsibilities shall be discontinued aid, and sanctions
will be imposed as follows, unless the recipient shows that the failure to comply was for good
cause or was not willful:
(a) The first discontinuance for a failure to comply with a program requireme;lt shall be followed
by a one month period of ineligibility; the second failure to comply with a program requirement
shall be followed by a three month period of ineligibility; and a third failure to comply with a
program requirement shall be followed by a six-month period of ineligibility. Thereafter, each
subsequent discontinuance for any willful failure to comply with a program requirement shall be
followed by a six month period of ineligibility.
(b) If a year has passed from the date of the end of the last period of ineligibility, the cycle will
begin again; i.e. the next failure to comply with a program requirement shall be followed by a
one month period of ineligibility.
(c) Examples of such responsibilities include, but are not limited to: appearing for Work Programs
Assignment Group or monthly Job Club meetings; submitting a timely and complete job search
report form; performing a monthly workfare assignment; cooperating with GAADDS;
cooperating with Quality Control; submitting a timely and complete montrily status report (CA-
7); cooperating with and completing the annual redetermination process;;providing requested
information or verification by the,due date; applying for any other resource or benefit, including
Supplemental Security Income, and taking all necessary steps to obtain such income..
(d) The period of ineligibility shall apply to any member of a General Assistance assistance unit
who has failed to comply with program requirements.
707. A recipient who refuses an offer of employment, or who quits without complelling cause, or is
fired for cause from a job shall be ineligible for General Assistance for six months from the
refusal or the last day of employment.
70$. An applicant or recipient who provides fraudulent information in order to qualify for a General
Assistance grant or for a larger grant, or to avoid termination or reduction of aid, shall serve a
six month period of ineligibility.
709. When an applicant for aid is denied, a new application shall be required to establish eligibility;
when a recipient is discontinued, a new application shall be required to establish eligibility.
710. Notice and Appeal Procedure
(a) Actions to deny aid or to terminate eligibility are subject to notice and appeal as provided in
RESOLUTION NUMBER 92/553
Board Resolution Number 92/ 553
Part 10
Administrative Review Panel
1005. The Department of Social Service shall establish an Administrative Review Panel which shall
review and make recommendations to the Director of Social Service regarding Hearing
decisions which are appealed to the Board of Supervisors.
(a) Any interested person may file a written challenge with the Director of the Social Service
Department objecting in whole or in part to regulations of the Department, or of the Board of
Supervisors governing the General Assistance program.
(b) The Administrative Review Panel shall review any such challenge. It shall make a
recommendation to the Director of the Social Service Department concerning such a challenge
within six weeks from the date of its receipt.
(c) The Director's determination may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors by written notice of
appeal, stating the facts and authorities on which it is based, delivered to the Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors, within two weeks from the date the Director's determination is mailed to
the appellant.
I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Boats of Supervi"s on the date own.
1.
ATTESTED:
PHIL BATCHELPfR,Cierk of the'So'erd
of§upe!visors a County Administrator
(A-1
Deputy
RESOLUTION NUMBER 92/553
y 1 • � _>1 �� 4r r I
SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
TO: BOARD OF SUPE VISORS DATE: August 4, 1992
,r=
FROM: PER CTO VILLARREAL
DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: GENERAL ASSISTANCE HEARINGS
Recommendation: That the Board adopt the proposed Resolution regarding General
Assistance Hearings, which supersedes Board Resolutions No.
74/365, 75/28, 87/468 and 88/576, and makes the following
changes:
1. A request for a hearing must be filed within fourteen days of
the date the Notice of Action was mailed to the applicant/
recipient.
2. Postponements of hearings are limited to those requested
prior to the end of the working day of the hearing; the
reasons for approval of postponement requests are limited.
Background:
Resolution No. 74/365 established the right of GA applicants and
recipients to an evidentiary hearing, the right of recipients to timely notice,
a stay of the proposed action pending the hearing determination ("aid-paid-
pending"), and the right to appeal the decision to the Board of Supervisors.
It also authorized the Social Service Director to adopt regulations to be
located in the Department Manual. (Dept. Manual §22-300/49-700)
Resolution No. 75/28 established the policies for the appeal to the Board
of Supervisors. (Procedures for this are reflected in DM §22-301/49-701)
Resolution No. 87/468 authorized the Social Service Director to establish
policies and procedures for a review of Evidentiary Hearing decisions by
the Director or his designee, at his discretion.
Resolution No. 88/576 established the administrative review panel to
review cases where clients were appealing Evidentiary Hearing decisions to
the Board of Supervisors. This Resolution also provides that anyone can.
file a written challenge to a GA regulation.
Gen 9c (New 3/86)
M
As the General Assistance caseload has grown, the number of applicants and recipients
who request Evidentiary Hearings has increased. The definitions of "timely filing period"
(thirty days) is currently very lenient, among the most permissive in the State.
Because of the volume of requests, the scope of hearings, and continued aid, combined
with staffing limitations, hearings are generally not held within the prescribed time-
frames; recipients may receive "aid-paid-pending" for many months before the hearing is
held and a decision rendered. The proposed changes will require the client to file a
hearing request in a more timely manner. This will reduce the number of hearings and
the amount of "aid-paid-pending" issued each month, while still affording the clients the
right to due process.
Existing postponement policies are very liberal, clients may be granted numerous
postponements and continue to receive aid-paid-pending until the hearing is actually
held. The proposed change places the responsibility for attending the hearing as
scheduled on the client, while still providing for reasonable postponements.
Procedurally, the resolution streamlines the hearing process by clarifying the role of the
pre-hearing review, and the decision review process.
2
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on August 4, 1992 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson, McPeak
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Powers
ABSTAIN: None
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SUBJECT: General Assistance Hearing } Resolution Number 92/554
and Appeal Procedures }
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors RESOLVES that the provisions of Resolutions No.
74/365, 75/28, 87/468, and 88/576 which established standards for General Assistance Hearings and
Appeals are hereby superseded.effective September 1, 1992:
Part 1
Hearings
101. General Assistance applicants shall be given written notice of action to deny an application.
102. General Assistance recipients shall be given written notice, mailed at least 10 days prior to the
effective date, of proposed action which will reduce, suspend or terminate his or her General
Assistance grant for cause. Prior notice is not required for action resulting from Board of
Supervisors' changes in grant levels.
103. A General Assistance applicant or recipient shall receive a Social Service Department hearing
upon their timely written request.
(a) The applicant or recipient must deliver or mail a written request for a hearing within fourteen
days of the date the Notice of Action was mailed. Absent evidence to the contrary, the notice is
presumed to have been mailed on the date it bears, and a request for a hearing is presumed to
have been delivered on the date it is received and mailed on the date it is postmarked.
104. Where a GA recipient timely requests a hearing challenging a proposed action which will
reduce, suspend or terminate his or her General Assistance grant, the proposed action will be
stayed until a decision is rendered.
(a) Actions implementing Board of Supervisor changes in grant levels are not appealable, and
hearing requests based thereon may be summarily denied.
105. Hearings will be scheduled within thirty days of the date of receipt of a request for a hearing.
The Appeals Unit will mail a written notice of the hearing to the claimant at least ten days in
advance of the Hearing date.
106. When a request for a hearing has been received, the claim may be reviewed and resolved in the
claimant's favor by a pre-hearing review.
(a) Proposed pre-hearing resolutions shall be reviewed and approved by the Appeals Manager and
the General Assistance Policy Manager.
107. If the claimant is unable to attend the hearing at the originally scheduled date and time, and a
timely request for postponement is made, the Hearing Officer will make an evaluation of the
request. The hearing will not be continued beyond the hearing date unless authorized by a
Hearing Officer on one of the following grounds, which require verification:
(a) hearing is continued at request of the Social Service Department,
RESOLUTION NUMBER 92/554
(b) mandatory court appearance which cannot be accommodated by adjusting the hearing time,
(c) illness which prevents travel,
(d) death in the immediate family,
(e) other substantial and compelling reason. (as approved by the Appeals Manager)
108. Decision
(a) A written decision shall be mailed to the claimant within thirty days after the,hearing record is
closed, unless the Department extends the time in writing, for cause. . .
(b) Proposed decisions shall be reviewed and approved by the Appeals Manager and the General
Assistance Policy Manager prior to notification of the claimant. The Hearing Officer's findings
of fact are not subject to change, but the General Assistance Policy Manager may order re-
hearing for cause.
Part 2
Appeals to the Board
201. The applicant or recipient may appeal an adverse hearing decision to the Board of Supervisors.
202. A written appeal must be received by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors within fourteen
days after the decision has been mailed to the claimant. Absent evidence showing the contrary,
a hearing decision is presumed to have been mailed on the date it bears.
(a) An appeal to the Board will not stay=the implementation of the Hearing decision, and the
recipient shall not be entitled to continue to receive assistance pending further hearing.
(b) The appeal will be scheduled for the first available Board meeting, but no earlier than the third
meeting following receipt of the appeal.
203. The Administrative Review Panel may review appeals of Hearing decisions and recommend
proposed action to the Director.
(a) If the Director supports the hearing decision, the Appeals unit will be notified to proceed with
the presentation to the Board.
(b) If the Director finds in favor of the claimant, the Clerk of the Board will be notified to
withdraw the item from the Board agenda. The appropriate Social Service District office will be
advised to take corrective action.
204. Both the appellant and the Department must file all written materials at least one week before
the date set for the Board hearing. New material must be served by mail on the opposing party.
205.
(a) Upon hearing the appeal, the Board shall make any required fact determinations based on the
record on appeal and testimony received by the Boaid. This record shall include the
Department's Hearing Officer's fact findings, plus any papers filed with that Officer.
(b) If the facts upon which the appeal is based are not in dispute or if any disputed facts are not
relevant to the issue ultimately to be decided by the Board, the Board will proceed immediately
to the next step without considering fact questions. The parties may stipulate to an agreed set of
facts.
RESOLUTION NUMBER 92/554
206.
(a) Once the facts are determined, or if there are no fact determinations required by the appeal,
the Board will consider legal issues presented by the appeal. Legal issues are to be framed,
insofar as possible, before the Hearing and shall be based on the Department's Hearing
Officer's decision and such other papers as may be filed.
(b) Appealing parties may make legal arguments both by written brief and orally before the Board.
If the issues are susceptible of immediate resolution, the board may immediately decide them at
the appeal hearing. If the County Counsel's advice is needed on legal questions, the Board may
take the matter under submission, reserving its final judgment until it receives,such advice.
207. The Board may decide an appeal immediately after hearing or take the appeal under
submission.
I hereby certify that this Is 9 tfUs and correct COPY Of
an action taken and on
on the minutes of thq
Board Of SuPervis on the date shown.
ATTESTED:
PHIL BATCHEL R,Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and county Administrator
Deputy
RESOLUTION NUMBER 92/ 554