HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06252013 - C.159RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to submit to California
Department of Community Services and Development the County's 2014-15 Community Action Plan to ameliorate
poverty and increase self-sufficiency efforts for impacted Contra Costa County residents.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct fiscal impact.
The State of California will prepare and distribute a Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) contract for Contra
Costa County once the State receives notice of its 2014 allocation.
BACKGROUND:
The 2014-15 Community Action Plan (CAP) was developed with input from Contra Costa County residents,
Department staff and clients along with the County's Economic Opportunity Council (EOC). The EOC reviewed and
approved the CAP at its regular meeting on June 13, 2013.
The CAP guides the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) program operated by the Community Services
Bureau of the Employment & Human Services Department. Approval of the CAP by the
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 06/25/2013 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
Contact: C. Youngblood,
313-1712
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: June 25, 2013
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc: Cassandra Youngblood, Jagjit Bhambra, Sam Mendoza
C.159
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:June 25, 2013
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Authorization to submit 2014-15 Community Action Plan (CAP) to State of California
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Board of Supervisors will allow the document to move forward for State approval. Once approved, the State will
generate a CSBG contract with the County for designated CSBG funds, which is based on County poverty data.
The needs assessment is a process used to determine unmet needs of low-income individuals, families, and
communities. The needs assessment informs CSBG eligible entities how to utilize CSBG funds to meet the needs
of low-income persons in their service areas in accordance with the assurances in the CSBG Act.
The CSBG contract will provide continuing funds for CSBG self-sufficiency programs and emergency services
for eligible county individuals and families. Funding will be determined by the State upon its receipt of notice of
the federal CSBG allocation for California for 2014.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If not approved, the County will not have the basis to receive CSBG funding in the 2014 program year.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The Employment and Human Services Department’s Community Action program supports two of Contra Costa
County’s community outcomes: “Children Ready for and Succeeding in School” and “Families that are Safe,
Stable, and Nurturing.” These outcomes are achieved by offering comprehensive services through the Community
Services Block Grant program, including high quality early childhood education, nutrition, and health services to
low-income children, as well as self-sufficiency programs and emergency services for eligible county individuals
and families throughout Contra Costa County.
ATTACHMENTS
2014-15 Action Plan
Community Assessment
Serving Low-Income Families Through Community Partners
State of California-Health and Human Services Agency
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES AND
DEVELOPMENT
P.O. Box 1947, Sacramento, CA 95812-1947
Telephone: (916) 576-7109 | Fax: (916) 263-1406
LINNÉ STOUT
ACTING DIRECTOR
EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
GOVERNOR
TO: CSBG Service Providers
FROM: Pamela Harrison
SUBJECT: 2014/2015 Community Services Block Grant Community Action Plan
DATE: February 15, 2013
The 2014/2015 Community Action Plan (CAP) is enclosed for review and
completion. In compliance with the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Act
(Public Law 105-285) the State is to secure a CAP from each eligible entity as a
condition to receive funding. Each entity’s CAP provides valuable and required
information that the Department of Community Services and Development (CSD)
must aggregate and incorporate into the Community Services Block Grant
(CSBG) State Plan that is due to the Office of Community Services (OCS) by
September 1, 2013.
To facilitate CSD’s review of the CAP please remember:
1. The CSBG National Programs Indicators Projections (CSBG/NPI CAP
Projections) are to be completed via the Excel Workbook on the CSD Provider’s
website (http://providers.csd.ca.gov/CSBG).
2. The Cover Page and Certification is to be signed by the Board Chairperson and
Executive Director.
3. The CAP original and (1) one copy are to be mailed:
ATTENTION: CSBG Field Operations Unit
Department of Community Services and Development
2389 Gateway Oaks Drive, Ste. 100
Sacramento, CA 95833
The 2014/2015 CAP forms are available for download via the CSD Provider’s
website at http://providers.csd.ca.gov/CSBG in the “Forms” and “Blog” sections.
The entire CAP must be submitted to CSD by June 30, 2013. Postmarks will not
be accepted. Please feel free to contact your assigned Field Representative with
any questions regarding the submission of the CAP.
Enclosures
BACKGROUND
To comply with the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Act, Public Law 105‐285,
Section 678B (11) eligible entities must complete a Community Action Plan (CAP), as a
condition to receive funding through a Community Services Block Grant. Federal law
mandates the Community Action Plan to include a community‐needs assessment for the
community served.
CSD collects the information from the CAPs and uses it to develop and submit California’s
CSBG State Plan and application for funding. CSBG funds may be utilized to support
activities that remove obstacles and solve problems that block the achievement of
self‐sufficiency per Public Law 105‐285.
The needs assessment is a process used to determine unmet needs of low‐income
individuals, families, and communities. The needs assessment informs CSBG eligible
entities how to utilize CSBG funds to meet the needs of low‐income persons in their
service areas in accordance with the assurances in the CSBG Act.
Community Action Plan
2014 – 2015
Checklist
The following is a check list of the components to be included in the CAP. The CAP is to
be received by CSD no later than June 30, 2013:
☐ Cover Page and Certification
☐ Table of Contents
☐ Vision Statement
☐ Mission Statement
☐ Community Information Profile
☐ Needs Assessment
☐ Statewide Priority
☐ Federal Assurances
☐ State Assurances
☐ Documentation of Public Hearing(s)
☐ Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
☐ CSBG/National Performance Indicators (NPI) CAP Projections
☐ Appendices (Optional)
I. Cover Page and Certification
The Cover Page and Certification captures the CSBG eligible entity name, address,
contact person, and certification signatures from the Board Chair and Executive
Director. This form must be completed in its entirety and attached to the CAP.
Signatures certify the governing body of the agency agrees to comply with federal and
state mandates set forth in the document.
Page 1 of 41
State of California
Department of Community Services and Development
CSBG Community Action Plan
CSD 410‐‐Vision (01/13)
COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK
GRANT
2014/2015 PROGRAM YEAR COMMUNITY ACTION
PLAN COVER PAGE
TO: Department of Community Services and Development
Attention: Field Operations Unit
2389 Gateway Oaks Drive #100
Sacramento, CA 95833
FROM: Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department
Agency Contact Person Regarding Community Action Plan
Name: Jagjit Bhambra
Title:Administrative Services Assistant III
Phone: 925‐313‐1545 Ext.
Fax:925‐313‐1710
Email:jbhambra@ehsd.cccounty.us
CERTIFICATION OF COMMUNITY ACTION PLAN AND
ASSURANCES
The undersigned hereby certify that this agency complies with the Assurances and
Requirements of this 2014/2015 Community Action Plan and the information in this
CAP is correct and has been authorized by the governing body of this organization.
Board Chairperson Date
Executive Director Date
Page 2 of 41
1. Table of Contents
I. Cover Page and Certification .................................................................. 1
II. Table of Contents.................................................................................... 2
III. Vision Statement ................................................................................... 3
IV. Mission Statement ................................................................................ 3
V. Community Information Profile ............................................................. 4
VI. Needs Assessment ................................................................................. 9
VII. Statewide Priority ............................................................................... 12
VIII. Federal Assurances .............................................................................. 15
IX. State Assurances ................................................................................. 29
X. Documentation of Public Hearing(s) .................................................... 32
XI. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan ........................................................... 35
XII. CSBG/NPI CAP Projections ................................................................... 36
XIII. Appendices (Optional) ........................................................................... 37
The Table of Contents is to be arranged in the order above. Please include the
appropriate page numbers for reference. Additional attachments are to be added as
appendices.
Page 3 of 41
III. Vision Statement
The Vision Statement describes a desired future based on your agency’s values. The
vision is broader than what any one agency can achieve; the agency collaborates with
others in pursuit of the vision.
Provide your agency’s Vision Statement.
To end poverty by working in partnership with the community and its organizations in
effort to maximize the opportunity for low-income families to achieve self-sufficiency.
I. Mission Statement
The Mission Statement describes the agency’s reason for existence and may state its
role in achieving its vision.
Provide your agency’s Mission Statement.
To support individuals and families to thrive by providing high quality services and
learning opportunities.
Page 4 of 41
• Community Information Profile
State law requires each CSBG eligible entity to develop a CAP that will assess poverty‐
related needs, available resources, feasible goals, and strategies to prioritize its services
and activities to promote the goals of self‐sufficiency among the low‐income
populations in its service area (Government Code 12747(a)).
Community Information Profile:
This section captures the problems and causes of poverty in the agency’s service area,
based on objective, verifiable data and information (Government Code 12754(a)).
Community Information Profiles shall identify the following:
1. The service area in terms of related factors, such as poverty, unemployment,
educational achievement, health, nutrition, housing conditions, homelessness, crime
rates, incidents of delinquency, the degree of participation by community members
in the affairs of their communities and/or similar factors deemed appropriate by the
agency. Factors described in the Community Information Profile must be typical for
baseline data and substantiated by corroboration gained through public forums,
customer questionnaires, surveys, statistical data, evaluation studies, key
informants, anecdotal sources and/or other sources deemed reliable by the agency.
Contra Costa County is the ninth most populous county in California, with a
population of over a million people. Over the past three decades, Contra Costa
County has changed from a suburban and semi rural area into a complex urban
setting with 19 cities, diverse housing, retail, commercial, and recreational
opportunities. Over the past five years, starting in October 2007, the eastern portion
of the county has been severely impacted by the economic recession. Many
residential properties throughout the county have gone into foreclosure. Sixty-one
percent of home sales today are due to foreclosures (MercuryNews.com). The
median household income is only $79,135 (quickfactscensus.gov, 2007-2011). While
the median home cost for the county is $301,800 (bestplaces.net), the maximum
affordable home price for a low-income household ranges from $127,706 for one-
person to $207,464 for a five-person family (http://www.co.contra-
costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/Home/View/3223). The median rent for a two-
bedroom apartment in Contra Costa County was up from $1,482 in 2011 to $1,525 in
2012(Huduser.org).
In January 2013, Contra Costa County’s Continuum of Care Consortium conducted a
biannual census of sheltered and unsheltered people experiencing homelessness. The
count took place on the night of January 29, 2013 and the morning of January 30,
2013. Through a survey administered to all service providers in the county, a count
Page 5 of 41
was taken of how many people were sheltered in their program that night, including:
families with children; persons in families with children; males, female and children in
families; number of individuals without children, and unaccompanied youth. For the
unsheltered count, many attempts were made to reduce duplication in the number of
homeless persons counted such as the count taking place between 6:30 am and 8:30
am, a time that most would not be “on the move.” The 2013 count found 3,798
individuals experiencing homelessness; an overall decrease of 476 individuals
experiencing homelessness than in 2011. The 2013 count found 336 fewer sheltered
persons than in 2011. This was due to differences in the number of sheltered
homeless persons reported by supportive services only programs, as well as a
decrease in the number of sheltered homeless children reported by the school
districts. The 2013 county found a decrease of 140 unsheltered homes persons. This
was due largely to the decrease in unsheltered persons living in encampments, from
1,031 persons in 2011 to 747 persons in 2013; 55 percent of unsheltered homeless
persons were encountered in encampments, compared to 69 percent in 2011
(CCHealth.org).
The American Community Survey for 2011 showed over 13 percent of children
younger than 5 years of age were living in poverty in the county. In the same report,
it was noted that 25 percent of the total county population was under 18 years;
almost 13 percent living below the poverty level. Demographic trends indicate
continued growth and increasing ethnic, racial and linguistic diversity. At least 23
percent of Contra Costa residents are foreign born and among people at least five
years old, 31 percent spoke a language other than English at home. Approximately
53 percent spoke Spanish; 47 percent spoke some other language and 42 percent
reported that they did not speak English “very well.” (The American Community
Survey)
In a report issued by the Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Communities, Contra Costa
County had 20 of the most impoverished neighborhoods located in seven cities
(http://www.bayareaalliance.org/indicators.pdf). In poorer areas of the county
there is a growing trend toward households composed of more than one family. One
of the primary housing indicators of community well being is the number of
individuals per room. In many of the more stressed communities within the county,
the ratio is greater than 1:1. The relative affluence of communities like Danville,
Moraga, Lafayette, and Orinda skew the data and obscure the dire poverty of
Richmond, Bay Point and the Monument Corridor in Concord.
Nine percent of Contra Costa County residents live in poverty(http://www.california-
demographics.com/contra-costa-county-demographics). Single parent households
make up 25.9 percent in the county. Single mother household poverty rate is at
28.7% and approximately 8.7 percent of households headed by those over 65 live in
poverty (http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-
publications/data/2011-child-poverty-in-america.pdf). The self-sufficiency level for a
Page 6 of 41
family of four with an infant and a preschool child has increased to $76,759
(http://www.insightcced.org/uploads/cfes/2011/Contra%20Costa.pdf).
The causes and effects of poverty are pervasive and deeply rooted. They include a
significant increase in the county’s population, chronic unemployment in certain
areas of the county; San Pablo, Richmond, Pittsburg, and fundamental structural
changes in the economy of the Bay Area that have led to proliferation of minimum
wage service industry jobs. As of April 2013, the unemployment rate in Contra Costa
was 7 percent as compared to 9 percent for the State of California. This has resulted
in a 4 percent increase in general assistance caseloads and a 3 percent increase in
Medi-Cal caseloads (US Census Bureau & EHSD data dashboard).
In 2011, Contra Costa high schools had a drop-out rate of 10.6 percent as compared
to 14.7 percent for the State of California (Kidsdata.org). Many communities, such as
Richmond, are extremely violent with homicides rates amongst the highest in the
nation. Families are stressed, many with single female heads of household.
The Community Information Profile and Needs Assessment draws on diverse sources.
The Agency relies not only on publicly accessible quantitative data sources such as
the Head Start Program Information Report, the U.S. Census Bureau, the California
Department of Finance, the California Department of Health Services, the
Department of Education, and internal data collected on program clients and surveys
such as our California State Preschool parent survey, but qualitative sources such as
participation in public forums, collaborations with agencies such as First 5 Contra
Costa, the United Way of the Bay Area, Head Start Policy Council, and the Head Start
Health Advisory Committee.
2. Community resources and services, other than CSBG, which are available in the
agency’s service area to ameliorate the causes of poverty and the extent to which
the agency has established linkages with those service providers.
There are numerous community resources and services, in addition to the CSBG
program that are available in Contra Costa County, aimed at ameliorating poverty. It
is imperative that the private sector, government agencies, community based, and
faith based organizations join together in collaborative efforts to leverage their
resources. The Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department,
Community Services Bureau (CSB) engages in partnerships with literally hundreds of
organizations committed to solving the root causes of poverty. These partnerships
include but are not limited to:
• Contra Costa Employment and Human Services Department
Page 7 of 41
o Workforce Development Board o Workforce Services o Children and Family Services o Aging and Adult Services
• Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence
• Contra Costa Crisis Center 211 Line
• Contra Costa Health Services Department
• Opportunity Junction
• Contra Costa Clubhouse
• Shelter, Inc.
• Greater Richmond Interfaith Program
• Families First
• Community Housing Development of North Richmond (CHDC)
• Child Abuse Prevention Council
• Community Alert Emergency Response
• Contra Costa County Office of Education
• Bay Area Rescue Mission
• Contra Costa County Mental Health Association
• Contra Costa Crisis Center
• Contra Costa County One-Stop Career Centers
• Mt. Diablo Unified School District
• Regional Center of the East Bay
• Richmond WORKS
• Volunteer Emergency Services Program
• Catholic Charities of the East Bay
• Contra Costa County Housing Authority
• West Contra Costa Unified School District
• SparkPoint
• Bay Area Legal Aid
3. A plan for regularly reviewing and revising the Community Information Profile. In
particular, entities are to describe how the agency ensures that the most current
data and relevant factors are included.
Community Services Bureau staff is deeply involved in community activities to ensure
timely, consistent and ongoing review and revision of the Community Information
Profile and Needs Assessment.
The Comprehensive Services Managers work with staff and Head Start parents to
identify commissions, committees, groups, and activities (to make assignments for
consistent representation). Throughout the year, as activities and opportunities are
Page 8 of 41
developed or offered, staff is assigned to participate, and parents are offered
opportunities for planning. Community Services also periodically conducts public
hearings to obtain input from the community to inform the Community Action Plan
and the Head Start and Early Head Start Grant Process. Community Services Analysts
are continuously monitoring quantitative data sources, both internal and external to
ensure that information and analysis is up-to-date.
Furthermore, the Assistant Directors and Analysts work with staff, parents and other
pertinent stakeholders to:
• Revise/refine the process of conducting community assessment.
• Develop questions to include in the Head Start parent questionnaire/survey.
• Use questionnaires to survey parents regarding community needs/problems.
• Describe demographics of current Community Services Bureau enrollment (by
collecting data from existing records; Family Partnership Assessments,
children’s applications, the Program Information Report, and health records).
• Determine areas of “eligible population,” where data has not been collected
from previously existing demographic records.
• Determine the number of eligible families in Contra Costa County per census
track using data from sources, such as school enrollment, birth rates, TANF
data, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) data, and CalWORKS
Stage 1 and Stage 2 childcare.
• Determine demographics of eligible children and their families in Contra Costa
County.
• Determine population by income, family size, family status including sex and
age, education/employment of adults, special needs, ethnicity, and language.
• Collect information indicating community needs/interests of the eligible
Contra Costa County population from other agencies serving that population
(Including information from sources such as First 5 Contra Costa, United Way,
CalWORKS, the Health Department, Contra Costa County Local Planning
Council for Child Care and the County Office of Education).
• Gather information on previously unidentified areas, so that appropriate
needs are catalogued:
o Basic needs (housing, food, transportation)
o Health needs
o Family life services (child care, welfare, mental health, etc.)
o Education and training
• Review other information for areas of concern:
o Self-Assessments
o Parent planning sessions
o Licensing
o Progress made on previous goals
o Training Plan
Page 9 of 41
• Review (and update if necessary) lists of resources available to meet
community needs.
• Needs Assessment
Needs Assessment:
Public law 105‐285 requires the State to secure from each eligible entity, as a condition
to receive funding, a CAP which includes a community‐needs assessment for the
community served. Additionally, State law requires each CSBG eligible entity to develop
a CAP that assess poverty‐related needs, available resources, feasible goals and
strategies, and that yield program priorities consistent with standards of effectiveness
established for the program (California Government Code 12747(a)).
The narrative description provided for the needs assessment serves as the basis for the
agency’s goals, problem statements, and program delivery strategies of the
CSBG/National Performance Indicators. The needs assessment should describe local
poverty‐related needs and prioritize eligible activities to be funded by CSBG.
Agency needs assessments shall identify the processes used to collect the most
applicable information. In particular, describe how the agency ensures that the needs
assessment reflects the current priorities of the low‐income population in the service
area, beyond the legal requirement for a local public hearing of the community action
plan.
Many organizations use a combination of activities to perform needs assessments, such
as:
1. Focus groups 2. Asset Mapping
3. Surveys
4. Community Dialogue
5. Interviews
6. Public Records
Agency has utilized Parent Surveys, Census Bureau Data, County Public Records,
Public Hearing, Head Start Policy Council and citizens input.
Assessment of Existing Resources:
Conduct an assessment of existing resources providing the minimum services listed in
Government Code section 12745(f). Provide a narrative of the services below. These
services shall include, but shall not be limited to, all of the following:
1. A service to help the poor complete the various required application forms, and
when necessary and possible, to help them gather verification of the contents of
completed applications.
Page 10 of 41
Services are available to facilitate the application process. Individuals and families
enrolled in Employment and Human Services Department programs are eligible for
Advocacy Services. Advocacy Social Workers are available to assist applicants for
programs such as General Assistance, SSI, CalWORKS and other EHSD programs.
Additionally for individuals and families enrolled in Community Services Bureau Child
Development programs, the services of Comprehensive Services Managers, Assistant
Managers and clerks are available on a regular and ongoing basis.
Assistance is also available to enroll eligible individuals and families in programs such
as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance and Weatherization Programs. Seniors
have access to the Aging and Adult Services Information and Assistance (I&A)
Program, a database of community resources, fact sheets, housing lists and resource
guides on many subjects. I&A staff steer callers to proper resources. Comprehensive
assessments are completed for callers with difficult or complex situations. Referrals
to care management may be made. Staff provides screening and intake for Adult
Protective Services, the Multipurpose Senior Services Program (MSSP), Linkages and
In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS).
2. A service to explain program requirements and client responsibilities in programs
serving the poor.
Multilingual services are available to explain program requirements and client
responsibilities in all of the Employment and Human Services Bureaus. Within the
Community Services Bureau is a Comprehensive Services Unit that has primary
responsibility for eligibility, recruitment, enrollment, selection and attendance within
the Head Start and Child Development programs. The staff of this unit also function
as case managers who serve as advocates for program participants and help the
clients understand their rights and responsibilities. Within the Aging and Adult
Services Bureau, Children and Family Services Bureau, Public Health and other
departments there is an Ombudsman service that include complaint investigation
and resolution services.
3. A service to provide transportation, when necessary and possible.
Public transportation is widely available within Contra Costa County. Unfortunately,
due to budget constraints imposed by the economic crisis, it is not possible to
provide transportation services directly to clients.
4. A service which does all things necessary to make the programs accessible to the
Page 11 of 41
poor, so that they may become self‐sufficient.
The Community Services Bureau uses a comprehensive service model for
identification and enrollment of eligible individuals. It does all things necessary to
ensure that needed and/or required programs and services are accessible to low-
income residents of the county. Comprehensive services personnel work in concert
with LIHEAP, CalWORKS Stage II childcare staff and the other Bureaus within the
Department. Common databases are used. As CSB is a Bureau within EHSD,
identification, eligible and enrollment is closely coordinated with CalWORKS (TANF),
the Workforce Development Board, and Child Protective Services.
To satisfy Government Code 12754 (a) provide specific information about how much
and how effectively assistance is being provided to deal with those problems, and
causes, and establish priorities among projects, activities, and areas as needed for the
best and most efficient use of resources.
See Attached Community Assessment
Page 12 of 41
• Statewide Priority
As identified in Government Code 12745(e) the department may prescribe statewide
priorities among eligible activities or strategies that shall be considered and addressed
in the local planning process and described in the CAP submitted to the state.
Additionally, each eligible entity shall be authorized to set its own program priorities in
conformance to its own determination of local needs.
Does the Agency accept the Family Self‐Sufficiency Statewide Priority? X YES ☐ NO
(If “No”, answer question 3)
1. What is the agency’s definition of Family Self‐Sufficiency?
The definition of Family Self-Sufficiency used by the Contra Costa County
Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services Bureau (CSB) is
as follows:
The Self-Sufficient Standards estimates the income that working adults require to
meet basic needs without subsidies of any kind. The Standard estimates the
minimum amount of money working adults must earn to meet their family’s basic
needs for housing, childcare, food, transportation, healthcare and taxes. Each June,
the Department of Labor under Title I of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), issues
the Lower Living Standard Income Level.
The Department of Labor (DOL) placed the responsibility for defining self-sufficiency
in the hands of state and local Workforce Investment Boards in determining eligibility
and extending services to low wage workers. The DOL provides a minimum
threshold for each board known as the Lower Living Standard Income Level (LLSIL).
The LLSIL, a poverty measure created by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, uses a basic
family budget approach based on the cost of food.
The self-sufficiency standard recommended by the EHSD’s Workforce Development
Board (WDB) is calculated at 200% of the LLSIL. This self-sufficiency standard takes
into account coast variations based on geography, particularly the cost of housing,
family size and the age of household members, as well as costs for childcare,
transportation, food and healthcare.
Adoption of the Standard allows the WDB to:
• Extend services to low-wage workers and place them on a path to self-
sufficiency, thereby raising community standards.
• Target high-road sectors of the economy and demand occupations for training
and develop customized training programs.
Page 13 of 41
2. Describe the strategies utilized to support and achieve the Family Self‐Sufficiency
priority.
In 2014-2015, Employment and Human Services Department, CSB plans to allocate
CSBG funding to the geographical areas identified in the Community Needs
Assessment; the needs identified during the public hearing recently conducted by the
Economic Opportunity Council (EOC); the pockets of extreme poverty located in West
Contra Costa County; the Monument Corridor area of Central Contra Costa County,
and in East Contra Costa County including neighborhoods in Bay Point, Brentwood,
and Oakley. In 2014, these funds will be distributed subsequent to a competitive
• Prioritize job-training programs that lead to self-sufficiency.
• Offer training in occupations with career ladders that lead to self-sufficiency,
or at a minimum, a wage gain.
• Set minimum standards for customized training.
• Establish placement wage goals for customized training and the overall One-
Stop system.
The definition of Family Self-Sufficiency used by the Contra Costa County EHSD
Community Services Bureau was adopted from the policy statement crafted by the
department’s Workforce Development Board.
It is the policy of the Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa (WDB) that will
adopt a Self-Sufficiency Standard that is 200% of the Lower Living Standard Income
Level (LLSIL) (http://www.wdbccc.com/docs/wdb-policy-bulletins-
administrative/wpb-02-13-updated-self-sufficiency-standard-policy-for-wia-
services.pdf?sfvrsn=0). The WDB used the updated 2013 LLSIL to create the self-
sufficiency wage scale and revise this policy. The Workforce Development Board
adopted an initial policy on November 24, 2003.
When applying the self-sufficiency standard to individuals seeking training, current
wages and family household size for that individual should be considered. The hourly
wage should be divided by two when more than one adult wage earner lives in the
household.
The Self-Sufficiency Standard will be applied when determining the following:
A. Individual customer intake based on family size and household income.
B. Employed-worker eligibility for Adult and Customized Training programs
in occupations with career ladders that lead to self-sufficiency.
C. Job training program priority in high-road sectors of the economy and
demand occupations.
D. Minimum standards for customized training.
Page 14 of 41
Request for Proposal (RFP) process that will include previous subcontractors as well
as other community based organizations and public agencies.
The areas of highest priority identified in the CSB Economic Opportunity Council’s
strategic planning process are:
• Unemployment (including obtaining employment at a livable wage)
• Community Centers, for youth in poor neighborhoods, to provide safe
environment for recreational sports, art, and homework assistance
• Incorporating urban gardens, education on cultivation and creating healthy
community that will have access to fresh produce
• Provide low cost healthcare clinics
• Housing and transition housing (including safe and affordable housing)
3. If the agency rejects the statewide priority, state the reason(s) for the agency’s
rejection.
The Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department, Community
Services Bureau (CSB) accepts the statewide priority.
Page 15 of 41
• Federal Assurances
Public Law 105‐285 establishes federal assurances eligible entities are to comply with.
Eligible entities are to provide a narrative description for the activities applicable to the
services provided by the organization.
APPLICABLE ASSURANCES:
Check each applicable activity supported by the agency as identified in the following
assurances and provide a narrative description of that activity.
1. Public Law § 676(b) (1) (A):
To support activities that are designed to assist low‐income families and
individuals, including families and individuals receiving assistance under part A of
Title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), homeless families and
individuals, migrant or seasonal farm workers and elderly low‐income individuals
and families, and a description of how such activities will enable the families and
individuals—
x i. remove obstacles and solve problems that block the
achievement of self‐sufficiency, (including self‐sufficiency for families and
individuals who are attempting to transition off a State program carried out
under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act);
The Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department, Community
Services Bureau (CSB) will comply with all specific assurances detailed under the
Federal Community Services Block Grant Act. CSB, the Community Action Agency for
the County of Contra Costa, is committed to ongoing assessment of the needs of the
low-income people in the County, as well as to assuring that the CSBG funds are
allocated to subcontracting agencies that further the purpose of these funds. CSB is
part of an integrated social services system housed within the Contra Costa County
Employment and Human Services Department. As such, CSB works with the other
divisions of the Department such as Workforce Services, Aging and Adult Services,
Children and Family Services, and the Workforce Development board. Because CSB is
a part of the Contra Costa County government, the agency has established strong
links with the County Health Services Department including Public Health, Mental
Health and Homeless Services, the Housing Authority, and the Building Inspection
Department. The Agency also operates the Head Start and Early Head Start programs
for the County as well as providing child development services under contract to the
California Department of Education, Child Development Division.
x ii. secure and retain meaningful employment;
Page 16 of 41
The CSB is an integral partner in the initiative started by the United Way of the East
Bay, known as SparkPoint. Together, several community based organizations, non-
profit, private and public agencies engaged in a yearlong planning process that
cultivated into the development of two SparkPoint financial development centers: a
center in Western portion of the county and a center in the Eastern portion of the
county. Contra Costa residents who reside in the Central portion of the county can
utilize either center.
SparkPoint centers, derived from the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Family Economic
Resource Centers, are family-oriented places where hard working, low-income
people can access a full range of services designed to help them get out of poverty
and achieve long-term financial stability. SparkPoint services focus on three areas:
improving credit, increasing income and building assets. Using an integrated service
model, SparkPoint clients are offered a host of services including:
• Income Support: benefits screening & tax preparation and workshops
• Savings and Assets: budgeting and banking workshops; financial planning;
home buyer IDA; pre-paid debit cards
• Workforce Development: career coaching: resumé creation
• Small Business Development: small business development course; small
business IDA
• Financial Coaching and Counseling: credit & debt workshops; credit
counseling; debt counseling
• Education: connections to training programs with priority seating; IDA
education
In addition, clients will benefit from the full scope of services of the SparkPoint
partner agencies such as: job training and placement; enrollment in adult education
courses or community colleges; home energy assistance; Medi-Cal eligibility
enrollment; micro-enterprise; legal services and mortgage default and foreclosure
counseling.
As the grantee for the Head Start (HS) and Early Head Start (EHS) programs, CSB
integrally involves HS/EHS parents in program planning, design, communication and
management. Parents have the opportunity to participate at the program level, such
as volunteering in their child’s classroom or, on a macro level by becoming a member
of the Head Start Policy Council. Policy Council members work collectively with the
Economic Opportunity Council to address the root causes of poverty and advocate on
behalf of the low-income population. Policy Council members also have the
opportunity to attend conferences that focus on the welfare of children and their
families, thus, increasing their awareness and knowledge of policies and practices
that have a direct impact on the low-income population.
Page 17 of 41
x iii. attain an adequate education, with particular attention toward improving
literacy skills of low‐income families in the communities involved, which may
include carrying out family literacy initiatives;
See Section 676(b)(1)(A)і
x iv. make better use of available income;
See Section 676(b)(1)(A)і
x v. obtain and maintain adequate housing and a suitable living environment;
See Section 676(b)(1)(A)і
x vi. obtain emergency assistance through loans, grants or other means to meet
immediate and urgent family and individual needs; and
See Section 676(b)(1)(A)і
vii. achieve greater participation in the affairs of the communities involved,
including the development of public and private grassroots partnerships with
local law enforcement agencies, local housing authorities, private foundations,
and other public and private partners to;
x I. document best practices based on successful grassroots intervention in urban
areas, to develop methodologies for widespread replication; and;
Page 18 of 41
See Section 676(b)(1)(A)і
x II. strengthen and improve relationships with local law enforcement agencies, which
may include participation in activities such as neighborhood or community
policing efforts;
See Section 676(b)(1)(A)і
2. Public Law § 676(b) (1) (B):
To address the needs of youth in low‐income communities through youth
development programs that support the primary role of the family, give priority
to the prevention of youth problems and crime, and promote increased
community coordination and collaboration in meeting the needs of youth, and
support development and expansion of innovative community‐based youth
development programs that have demonstrated success in preventing or
reducing youth crime, such as—
x (i) programs for the establishment of violence‐free zones that would involve youth
development and intervention models (such as models involving youth mediation,
youth mentoring, life skills training, job creation, and entrepreneurship
programs); and
See Section 676(b)(1)(B)і
x (ii) after‐school childcare programs.
As part of the County government, CSB has forged strong linkages with the County’s
Health Services Department’s Homeless Program- Calli House. A shelter for at-risk
homeless youth, Calli House provides intensive case management and wrap-around
services, health screenings and family reunification services for thousands of youth
on a yearly basis. CSB also partners with several local high schools that have on-site
childcare facilities for pregnant and parenting teens. This partnership allows CSB to
provide comprehensive services such as Early Childhood Education for infants, health
and disabilities screenings and referrals as well as mental health services including
Page 19 of 41
psychotherapeutic and educational services, consultation and referrals. CSB also has
an active and longstanding partnership with the City of Richmond’s Youth
Employment programs. Every year during the summer months, hundreds of youth
are placed with various employers, including CSB, and gain transferable work-related
knowledge and skills.
x 3. Public Law § 676(b) (1) (C):
To make more effective use of, and to coordinate with, other programs related
to the purposes of this subtitle (including State welfare reform efforts).
CSB actively participates in community based collaborative initiatives such as First 5
Contra Costa, Building Blocks for Kids, and the Health Access Coalition. The agency is
actively involved in hundreds of community partnerships including:
• Contra Costa Employment and Human Services Department
• Workforce Development Board
• Workforce Services – CalWORKS
• Children and Family Services
• Aging and Adult Services
• Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence
• Contra Costa Crisis Center 211 Line
• Contra Costa Health Services Department
• Opportunity Junction
• Contra Costa Clubhouse
• Shelter, Inc.
• Greater Richmond Interfaith Program
• FamiliesFirst
• Community Housing Development of North Richmond (CHDC)
• Child Abuse Prevention Council
• Community Alert Emergency Response
• Contra Costa County Office of Education
• Bay Area Rescue Mission
• Contra Costa County Mental Health Association
• Contra Costa Crisis Center
• Contra Costa County One-Stop Career Centers
• Mt. Diablo Unified School District
• Regional Centre of the East Bay
• Richmond WORKS
• Volunteer Emergency Services Program
• Catholic Charities of the East Bay
Page 20 of 41
MANDATORY ASSURANCES:
A narrative description is to be provided for each federal assurance identified in the
sections below:
4. Public Law § 676(b) (4):
Will provide, on an emergency basis, for the provision of such supplies and
services, nutritious foods and related services, as may be necessary to
counteract conditions of starvation and malnutrition among low‐income
individuals.
CSB participates in activities that support the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano:
• Food for Children-Richmond Program
• Food Assistance Program (includes Food for Children at locations other than
Richmond)
• The Brown Bag Program
These foods resources are used for distribution to hungry and needy individuals and
families throughout the County.
CSB also works closely with EHSD’s other bureaus to ensure that CalFresh enrollment
information and WIC enrollment information is available to clients. CSB’s Head Start
program participates in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) that provides
breakfast, lunch and snacks for over 2,500 children, 0-5 years of age, throughout the
school year.
Also housed under the umbrella of Employment and Human Services Department is
the Volunteer and Emergency Services Team in Action (VESTIA) program. Staffed
primarily with volunteers, VESTIA raises money and obtains donated goods and
service to provide supplemental support to EHSD clients, when no other resources
are available. Programs and services include: the Ready-to-Work Clothes Closet;
Attitude and Image employment seminars and workshops; food security assistance
• Contra Costa County Housing Authority
• West Contra Costa Unified School District
This ensures that minimum requirements are met and ensures that the needs of the
low-income people are assessed and efforts to meet these needs are coordinated
and evaluated.
Page 21 of 41
and emergency housing and critical assistance services.
5. Public Law § 676(b) (5):
Entities will coordinate and establish linkages between governmental and other
social services programs to assure the effective delivery of such services to low‐
income individuals and to avoid duplication of such services and a description of
how the State and eligible entities will coordinate the provision of employment
and training activities, as defined in section 101 of such Act, in the State and in
communities with entities providing activities through statewide and local
workforce investment system under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
As a Bureau under the auspices of the Contra Costa County Employment and Human
Services Department, CSB collaborates and coordinates with Workforce Services, the
bureau that manages CalWORKS programs, Aging and Adult Services, Children and
Family Services, and the Workforce Development Board. Additionally, key leadership
from CSB sits on the Contra Costa County One-Stop Consortium. Examples of this
coordination include the collocation of CSB staff at the County Service Integration
Team One-Stop Sites, Children and Family Services offices and Workforce Services
offices to facilitate the enrollment of clients in the LIHEAP program and the Head
Start and Early Head Start Programs, to provide reciprocal referrals, support and
information. In addition, CSB works with the Contra Costa Crisis Center and other
stakeholders to maintain and promote the County’s 211 line. This serves as a rapid
response to telephone inquiries regarding the spectrum of social services available to
Contra Costa County residents. CSB also is a primary partner in the newly developed
SparkPoint Initiative. SparkPoint centers focus on assisting families achieve
economic sustainability through a host of financial development and coaching
services.
6. Public Law § 676(b) (6):
Will ensure coordination between antipoverty programs in each community in
the State, and ensure, where appropriate, that the emergency energy crisis
intervention programs under title XXVI (relating to low‐income home energy
assistance) are conducted in such community.
CSB, as the designated Community Action Agency for Contra Costa County,
administers several Home Energy Assistance Programs designed to help low-income
families and individuals better cope with the financial burden of high energy bills.
These include the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program’s (LIHEAP) Heating
Page 22 of 41
and Energy Assistance, Fast Track emergency programs and “Weatherization”
programs, and the Department of Energy Weatherization program.
The LIHEAP program provides federal financial assistance for energy bills for families
and individuals whose income is below 100% of Federal Poverty guidelines,
including immediate financial assistance with 48 hour shut-off notices and energy
education and budget counseling services. Households applying for DOE and LIHEAP
may also receive free Weatherization and energy reduction services for their homes.
This includes the installation of insulation and other energy saving measures that
will reduce the loss of energy from the Home and can reduce monthly energy bills.
7. Public Law § 676(b) (9):
Entities will to the maximum extent possible, coordinate programs with and form
partnerships with other organizations serving low‐income residents of the
communities and members of the groups served by the State, including religious
organizations, charitable groups, and community organizations.
CSB facilitates and participates in a number of community collaborations with several
organizations that serve low income people. Examples include:
• The Contra Costa County Family Economic Security Partnership. This
collaboration was created as a vehicle to implement the Earn It, Keep It, Save
It initiative. The original purpose of providing tax preparation assistance to
the low income residents of Contra Costa County, so that they may take
advantage of the Earned Income Tax Credit has been very successful.
Approximately $5 million in tax returns have been realized over the past few
years. Recently, the collaborative has engaged in a strategic planning process,
identifying goals and strategies to expand the scope of the collaborative to
include year round asset development work to address some of the root
causes of poverty.
• CSB has an integral role in First 5 Contra Costa. Since the inception of First 5,
CSB has had a seat on the commission.
• The CSBG program manager is a member of the Contra Costa County East Bay
Works One Stop Consortium, the collaborative that operates the County’s
One-Stop Centers. A consortium of eight community partners operates the
One-Stop centers. The partners include: o Community College Districts o Adult Schools o State Employment Development Department (EDD) o State Department of Rehabilitation o Contra Costa County Community Development Department
Page 23 of 41
o California Human Development Corporation (CHDC) o Contra Costa County Employment & Human Services o Department (EHSD), including Community Services Bureau
• CSB partners with SparkPoint to assist low-income families. The SparkPoint
Centers are located throughout the Bay Area, two of which are located in
Contra Costa County, each center is developed organically according to local
community needs and offer services such as: o Credit, income and assessment development; o Integrate service delivery that is appropriately bundled and sequenced
Financial counseling for all clients; o Access to public and private benefits and mainstream financial services; o A commitment to continued engagement with clients over a 2-3 year
period.
• As a partner, CSB will contribute in-kind services such as LIHEAP and
Weatherization assistance, referrals and linkages to early childhood
development services, as well as, explore other resources leveraging
opportunities to support SparkPoint.
8. Public Law § 676(b) (10):
Each eligible entity to establish procedures under which a low‐income individual,
community organization, or religious organization, or representative of low‐
income individuals that considers its organization, or low‐income individuals, to be
inadequately represented on the board (or other mechanism) of the eligible entity
to petition for adequate representation.
All meetings of the Economic Opportunity Council (EOC) are held in accordance with
the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act and the Contra Costa County Better
Governance Ordinance. Public comment is provided in accordance with the Ralph M.
Brown Act and the County Better Government Ordinance. Additionally, the EOC
makes available to the general public all records as required by the Ralph M. Brown
Act and the County Better Government Ordinance. The public comment section of
any meeting allows any individual or any individual representing an organization the
opportunity to advocate on behalf of the low income sector, present issues within
the community or present his or her case appealing the non-selection of a low-
income or private sector representative. The EOC will notify the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors of its recommendation. Recommendations by the EOC are
subject to approval by the Board of Supervisors.
9. Public Law § 676(b) (12):
Page 24 of 41
All eligible entities will not later than fiscal year 2001, participate in the Results
Oriented Management and Accountability System (ROMA), or another
performance measure system for which the Secretary facilitated development
pursuant to section 678E(b), or an alternative system for measuring performance
and results that meets the requirements of that section, and a description of
outcome measures to be used to measure eligible entity performance in
promoting self‐sufficiency, family stability, and community revitalization.
CSB reports performance and results that meet the requirement via the Annual
Report. In 2013, an EOC member and staff member will sign up for ROMA training.
• Public Law § 678D(a)(1)(B):
Ensure that cost and accounting standards of the Office of Management and
Budget apply to a recipient of the funds under this subtitle.
The Contra Costa County Community Services Bureau and the Department of
Employment and Human Services complies with cost and accounting standards of the
Office of Management and Budget.
• Public Law § 676(b)(3)(A):
Provide a description of the service delivery system, for services provided or
coordinated with funds made available through grants under section 675C (a),
targeted to low‐income individuals and families in communities within the State.
In addition to CSBG funding, the Contra Costa County Community Services Bureau
administers the Head Start and Early Head Start Programs, California Department of
Education Child Development Programs, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Child
Nutrition Program, LIHEAP and the Department of Energy weatherization programs.
These programs assist low-income and historically under-served families and
individual by providing an array of supportive services.
The Community Services Bureau provides direct services and administers contracts
with community based organizations and other public agencies to provide this array
of services that assist individuals and families to attain their self-sufficiency goals
and/or provide safety-net services for those most in need. Our goal is to create a
comprehensive, coordinated, service delivery system.
Whenever possible, the Community Services Bureau leverages funding sources in
order to maximize resources and avoid duplication of services.
Page 25 of 41
• Public Law § 676(b)(3)(B):
Provide a description of how linkages will be developed to fill identified gaps in the
services, through the provision of information, referrals, case management, and
follow‐up consultations;
As a Bureau within the Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services
Department, the CSB has actively developed linkages with the other bureaus within
the department; Workforce Services, the bureau that manages the CalWORKS
programs, Aging and Adult Services, Children and Family Services (CFS), and the
Workforce Development Board. The sharing of referrals, information, case
management and follow-up has been facilitated by use of common data bases for the
administration of programs such as Stage 1 and Stage 2 childcare.
In addition, CSB staff are placed in Employment and Human Services Service
Integration sites to facilitate the enrollment of clients in the LIHEAP program and the
Head Start and Early Head Start Programs, to provide reciprocal referrals, support
and information. We also have forged strong linkages with the County Health
Services Department and the Head Start Health Advisory Committee to provide
dental exams, preventative care and follow-up using the successful Give Kids a Smile
Day model. CSB has provided this badly needed care to over 800 children annually.
CSB has also provided nutritious breakfasts to over 500 homeless individuals that
attended the June 2012 Homeless Project Connect 8.
In an effort to formalize the relationship between CSB and CFS, in providing child
development services for all eligible children and pregnant women who are currently
involved in CFS, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was developed. The
partnership will provide early childhood development and comprehensive services
for families who are CFS involved, as well as, ensure that CSB staff understands how
to best work with this vulnerable population. The MOU includes provisions for cross-
bureau training and representation at various child-welfare related meetings
including case managements, the Head Start Health Services Advisory Committee
and the CFS Peer Quality Case Review meetings. In addition and in response to the
critical needs of the population, CSB will prioritize the selection and enrollment of
children in foster care and in the children welfare system, into Head Start/Early Head
Start. CSB will also integrate the CFS family and child goals into our Family
Partnership Agreement and continually support the family in achieving those goals.
Lastly, CSB has been actively involved with First 5 Contra Costa in its strategic
planning process. As a result of this process, First 5 Contra Costa has revised its
strategic plan to focus on Family Economic Stability and Self-Sufficiency, School
Page 26 of 41
Readiness, and primary prevention activities.
• Public Law § 676(b)(3)(C):
Provide a description of how funds made available through grants under section
675C (a) will be coordinated with other public and private resources.
The Community Services Bureau administers several funding resources to provide
self-sufficiency and safety-net services. The agency staff works closely with other
agencies to maximize resources and reduce duplication. The following are examples
of coordination with other public and private resources:
1. The Community Services Bureau works closely with the Contra Costa County
Department of Health Services on a number of collaborative efforts such as
the Calli House Youth Homeless Shelter, the Ronald McDonald Mobile Dental
clinic, and the Health Access Coalition. CSB’s Community Services Block Grant
Manager has a seat on the Head Start Health Advisory Committee. CSB also
has an innovative Mental Health Intern program in partnership with the
county Mental Health Department.
2. The Community Services Bureau administers the Low Income Housing Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and the Department of Energy Weatherization
Program to provide energy assistance and training for jobs in the Green
Economy.
3. The Community Services Bureau is a member of the Contra Costa County One
Stop Consortium. Other members of the Consortium include the California
Department of Rehabilitation, the California Employment Development
Department, the California Human Development Corporation, the Contra
Costa County Community College District, the Contra Costa County Adult and
Continuing Education Coordination Council, the Contra Costa County
Community Development Department, the Contra Costa County Workforce
Services Bureau, and the Center for Senior Employment. The goals of the
Consortium include measures to: o Ensure that the One Stop Centers and the Consortium partners play a
pivotal role in the development and deployment of special projects,
programs, and initiatives designed to build and strengthen the workforce
system in Contra Costa County. o Target additional service and resources toward underserved populations
and populations with a high level of need. o Strengthen linkages with businesses and employers with a focus on jobs
and career fields that offer people viable opportunities to attain self-
sufficiency. o Develop and refine reporting systems and tools to get salient information
about customer activities and program performance and to guide decision
making and planning of future programs and services.
Page 27 of 41
o Enhance and augment staff development activities to ensure continuous
improvement for all individuals working within the One Stop Career
Centers.
4. Community Services Bureau supports 211, the County telephonic Resources
Database. This project hosted by the Contra Costa Crisis Center and has
implemented a rapid response phone line that provides a live worker who can
provide the client with a wealth of information on nonprofit and public
services and resources available in the County in a caring, sensitive, and
culturally competent fashion. The funding provided by CSB, the Health
Services Department, and First 5 Contra Costa allow comprehensive, up-to-
date resource information on local health and social services to be available
free of charge to everyone via a simple phone call.
5. CSB has an active partnership with the Contra Costa County Housing
Authority. The Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa administers
1,168 public housing units from as far West as San Pablo to as far East as
Brentwood. While the Public Housing waiting list is currently closed except
for seniors, disabled and/or disabled families only, Comprehensive Services
Staff and EOC support staff are committed to referring eligible families for the
subsidized housing programs.
6. Every two-to-three years, CSB conducts a competitive Request for Proposal
(RFP) process seeking the services of community based and public agencies
that provide services within the identified areas of priority, as noted in the
strategic plan. Eligible entities are invited to attend a bidder’s conference
where they learn about the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG), funding
limitations and restrictions, as well as the application process.
Subcontractors are selected through a rigorous scoring process, based on
specific program and fiscal criteria. Funding is provided on a year-to-year
basis, for a maximum of three years. The 2012-2014 Subcontractors include: o Opportunity Junction (OJ) – Job Training and Placement Program (JTPP):
CSBG funding will allow OJ to enroll 50 low-income Contra Costa residents
into the JTPP program who will receive case management services
including therapeutic services and essential work-related skills (computer,
English, math and business classes). o City of Richmond Program (RSYEP): Under the CSBG contract, RSYEP, the
City of Richmond will provide 25 program-eligible youth, ages 14-21 years
old, with employment during the summer months. The program will also
provide outreach and recruitment services to identify program eligible/at-
risk youth located in the agency’s service area as well as provide in-depth
follow-up for all youth enrolled in the program. o Contra Costa County Health Services Department Homeless Program (Calli
House): With the CSBG funding Calli House had received, they will provide
emergency shelter for at least 125 unaccompanied homeless youth; at
least 50 youth with health exams from the on-site adolescent health
clinic; reunification services and transitional and/or permanent housing
Page 28 of 41
opportunities if necessary. o Contra Costa Clubhouse: CSBG funding provides series to a minimum of
150 program participants. The Clubhouse will provide extensive peer-
based social support; assistance with development of pre-vocational skills
and case management services to include education assistance and
advocacy, job placement retention and wages assistance. o Bay Area Legal Aid: With the CSBG funding, Bay Area Legal Aid will
provide legal services for at least 50 low-income individuals living in
Contra Costa County.
• Public Law § 676(b)(3)(D):
Provide a description of how the local entity will use the funds to support
innovative community and neighborhood‐based initiatives related to the purposes
of this subtitle, which may include fatherhood initiatives and other initiatives with
the goal of strengthening families and encouraging effective parenting.
The Community Services Bureau participates in a number of innovative community
based initiatives. For example, the Richmond Summer Youth Employment Program is
an example of a truly successful public/private partnership that includes, not only
CSBG funds, but funds contributed by the City of Richmond, California, large
corporations such as Chevron, Mechanics Bank and Kaiser Permanente, and small
businesses, as well as local faith-based organizations and individuals. The program
subsidizes employment for at-risk youth over the course of the summer. CSBG funds
have been used to create 75 jobs for at-risk youth over the past two years. The
program is collaborating with local youth serving organizations in an effort to
increase their capacity to provide work readiness training and employment
placement.
Other innovative projects are the Family Economic Security Partnership, a multi-
agency collaboration with representatives, not only from CSB, but from agencies as
diverse as the Internal Revenue Service, the United Way of the Bay Area, Contra
Costa Community Colleges, the County Department of Health Services, First 5 Contra
Costa, Opportunity Junction (a community based non-profit working in the area of
vocational training), and many others. The Partnership has been able to save the
very successful Earn It, Keep It, Save It! Program, Family Economic Security
Partnership (FESP) and the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) program which
has returned several million dollars to the low income community in the form of the
Earned Income Tax Credit and other refunds.
Page 29 of 41
• State Assurances
Agencies are required to provide narrative descriptions of how the organization is
meeting each assurance below.
Government Code § 12730(h): "Eligible beneficiaries" means all of the following:
(1) All individuals living in households with incomes not to exceed the official
poverty line according to the poverty guidelines updated periodically in
the Federal Register by the United States Department of Health and
Human Services, as defined in Section 9902 of Title 42 of the United
States Code, as amended.
(2) All individuals eligible to receive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
under the state's plan approved under Public Law 104‐193, the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, and
(Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 11200) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the
Welfare and Institutions Code) or assistance under Part A of Title IV of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 601 et seq.).
(3) Residents of a target area or members of a target group having a
measurably high incidence of poverty and that is the specific focus of a
project financed under this chapter.
The Contra Costa Community Services Bureau assures that all recipients of services
under programs funded with Community Services Block Grants (CSBG) funds have
incomes at or below the official poverty guidelines, are recipients of TANF or SSI, or
are members of a group identified in our Community Action Plan as having a high
incidence of poverty. The income of families and individuals receiving
comprehensive services in Head Start, Early Head Start or California Department of
Education Child Development Contract programs is documented in the case file. The
income of all other recipients of CSBG funded services is documented on the required
State demographic, client characteristics and eligibility reporting forms.
Government Code § 12747 (a): Community action plans shall provide for the
contingency of reduced federal funding. Provide your agency’s contingency plan
for reduced federal funding. Also, include a description of how your agency will be
impacted in the event of reduced CSBG funding.
Due to the sequestration, the Community Services Bureau works with the Economic
Opportunity Council, the Board of Supervisors, local funding agencies and other
Page 30 of 41
stakeholders to review services priorities, the availability of resources, current
identified needs and engages in a collaborative planning process. Community
Services Bureau staff meet with funded agencies/programs to ascertain the impacts
of reduced funding, their ability to leverage other funding and to develop a
coordinated plan to proceed and move forward. The Community Services Bureau is
an active partner with many community-based organizations and, as such, is well
recognized and regarded in its abilities to leverage funds for identified servicers in
the community. This includes providing information on other available funding and
providing technical assistance to subcontracting agencies in the area of fund
leveraging. The Community Services Bureau has been active in identifying funding
opportunities for partner agencies through the local, state and national network of
community resources.
Government Code § 12760: Community action agencies funded under this article shall
coordinate their plans and activities with other eligible entities funded under Articles 7
(commencing with Section 12765) and 8 (commencing with Section 12770) that serve
any part of their communities, so that funds are not used to duplicate particular services
to the same beneficiaries and plans and policies affecting all grantees under this chapter
are shaped, to the extent possible, so as to be equitable and beneficial to all community
agencies and the populations they serve.
Due to demographic and economic changes in Contra Costa County, former
agricultural lands in the eastern portion of the County have become increasingly
urbanized, like other areas within the greater Bay Area. As a result, there is no
longer a significant population of migrant and seasonal farm workers within the
County. Nonetheless, the California Human Development Corporation (CHDC) does
provide to adult and youth migrant and seasonal farm workers and their dependents,
vocational and job training, on-the-job training, education, counseling, adult work
experience, English-as-a-Second Language, and emergency supportive services at the
East Bay Works Brentwood One Stop Business and Career Center. The Community
Services Bureau and CHDC are members of the Contra Costa One Stop Consortium
and work closely with each other and with other entities in Contra Costa County that
assist migrant seasonal farm workers and their families to become self-sufficient,
including obtaining their driver’s license. The Community Services Bureau does not
subcontract for employment and training services provided by the One Stop
Consortium. However, the agency subcontracts for employment support and case
Page 31 of 41
management services such as Opportunity Junction’s Job Training and Placement
Program. The Community Services Bureau also collaborates with all of its partners to
avoid duplication of services.
Page 32 of 41
• Documentation of Public Hearing(s)
California Government Code 12747(b)‐(d) requires all eligible entities to conduct a
public hearing in conjunction with their CAP. In pursuant with this Article, agencies are
to identify all testimony presented by the low‐income and identify whether the
concerns expressed by that testimony are addressed in the CAP. If the agency
determines that any of these concerns have not been included in the plan it shall specify
in its response to the plan information about those concerns and comment as to their
validity.
Provide a narrative description of the agency’s public hearing process and methods used
to invite the local community to the public hearing(s) are to be captured here. A copy of
each public notice published in the media to advertise the public hearing is to be
attached; in addition to, a summary of all low‐income testimony with an indication of
what section of the CAP addresses the concern or an explanation about the validity of
the comment. Agencies must also provide a narrative description of other methods used
to gather information about the low‐income community’s needs. Examples include:
Surveys, public forums, secondary data collection, and etcetera.
Below is an example of a diagram that can be used to capture and identify testimony of
the low income.
Name Low‐
Income
Comment/Concern Was the
concern
addressed
in the CAP?
If so,
indicate
the page
#
If not, indicate
the reason
John
Doe Job training needs Yes 32
N/A
Jane
Doe Transportation
needs in ABC, CA No N/A
Due to limited
funding,
agency meets
50% of the
transportation
needs in ABC,
CA.
• Attach a narrative description of the agency’s public hearing process. Also,
describe the methods used to invite the local community to the public hearings.
Note: Public hearing(s) shall not be held outside of the service area(s).
Name Low-
Income
Comment/Concern Was the
concern
If so,
indicate
If not,
indicate the
Page 33 of 41
The Contra Costa County Community Services Bureau convened a Public Hearing to
solicit input to the Community Action Plan. The Public Hearing was scheduled to
follow the Head Start Policy Council meeting on May 15, 2013.
The hearing was publicized using the internet and through direct email distribution to
community based organizations and other public agencies. The hearing was posted
on the home pages of Contra Costa County and Contra Costa County Employment
and Human Services websites. Multiple announcements were posted via social
media, such as CAP Contra Costa’s Twitter and Facebook during the two weeks
leading up to the hearing.
In addition, announcement flyers and posters were posted two weeks prior to the
addressed
in the
CAP?
the page
#
reason
CherRita
Jones Child Safety Yes 19 N/A
Irma Ruiz After School
Program in
Pittsburg
Yes 8 N/A
Marissa
LaMagna
Nutrition and
Childhood Obesity
Yes 20 N/A
Rikki
Thomas
Transitional Youth
Shelter in East
County
No N/A Due to
limited
funding and
availability of
transitional
youth
shelter in
West County
Neil
Zarchin
More funding for
fresh produce
No N/A Due to
limited
funding,
agency
provides
CalFresh
Program
Armando
Morales
Safe, multi‐cultural
youth program in
Brentwood
No N/A Due to areas
still under
development
Susanna
Luna
After School
Program in San
Pablo
Yes 8 N/A
Page 34 of 41
hearing. Public postings were made at the following locations: Contra Costa County
Libraries, 40 Douglas Drive, Martinez, Bay Area Rescue Mission, Shelter Inc.,
Richmond YMCA, City Halls, Chamber of Commerce, School Districts, Police
Department, Agriculture Center, Post Office, churches, and other public places such
as Starbucks, Peet’s Coffee, and restaurants.
The hearing was conducted at 500 Ellinwood Way, which is conveniently located in
the center of Contra Costa County allowing the public from all areas of the county
easy access. Additionally, the Public Hearing was announced via e-Blast.
The hearing included a presentation on the purpose of the Public Hearing; an
overview needs assessment; and addressing public concerns. Materials were
available in both Spanish and English and simultaneous Spanish translation of the
proceedings was provided, as well as childcare services. The CSBG subcontractors
were invited to speak on their services and achievements.
• Provide one (1) copy of each public notice published in the media to advertise
the public hearing.
• Attach a summary of all testimony presented by the poor and identify the
following:
1. Was the testimony addressed in the CAP? (If so, indicate the
page).
2. If the testimony was not addressed in the CAP, provide an
explanation.
Yes. See page 34.
• Attach a narrative description of other methods the agency used to gather
information regarding the needs of the community (i.e. surveys and public forums).
N/A
Page 35 of 41
1. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
To ensure a CSBG eligible entity is involved in the evaluation of its community action
programs the agency is to provide a narrative description of the specific method(s) of
evaluation, frequency, and monitoring that ensures program and fiscal performance in
accordance with the objectives in the agency’s CAP. The narrative description must
satisfy two criteria:
1. Data is collected to measure the progress of the agency’s
goals.
The Community Services Bureau will monitor and evaluate program and fiscal
performance in accordance with the objectives in 2014-2015 Community Action Plan
as follows: The Community Services Bureau incorporates program and fiscal
reporting requirements in all subcontracts for services. Subcontracting agencies
providing services are required to collect and report data semi-annually using the
national performance indicators and the client characteristics report. The
information is evaluated, aggregated and submitted to the Department of
Community Services and Development in a timely manner. In addition, the
Community Services Bureau Staff, the EOC Board Members, and the independent
auditors conduct annual program and fiscal monitoring of the contracting agencies.
2. Ensure reports are prepared and submitted to CSD in
accordance with contractual requirements.
The Community Services Bureau Senior Management meets periodically to review
and monitor the agency budget and review progress on agency goals and activities to
ensure compliance with timely fiscal and programmatic reporting.
Page 36 of 41
2. CSBG/ National Programs Indicators (NPI)
CAP Projections (CSD 801 CAP)
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Community Services
issued the attached National Indicators of Community Action Performance. The list
contains 16 broad outcome measures or indicators that will capture the universal
accomplishments of the various local and state CSBG agencies in our Community
Services Network. These indicators are very important in telling the story of what
community action accomplishes as a national Network. At the same time, these
indicators have been designed to evaluate performance of community action in
assessing the needs of our communities and to address poverty alleviation in a
comprehensive way.
As part of the CAP process, each agency is asked to review and identify the appropriate
National Indicators, and develop two years of projections/goals and strategies based on
these indicators. These National Indicators were developed using the six National Goals
and Outcome Measures. For the most part, you will be able to identify and develop
strategies based on the national indicators.
The CSBG/NPI CAP Projections (CSD 801 CAP) will be monitored and evaluated by CSD
Field Operations Representatives.
1. To access the CSBG/NPI CAP Projections (CSD 801 CAP) visit the CSD Provider’s
website at http://providers.csd.ca.gov/CSBG under the “Forms” tab.
2. When completed, save the Excel spreadsheets and include the workbook as an
attachment to the CAP.
Page 37 of 41
1. Appendices (Optional)
If an agency chooses to provide additional documentation, it should be labeled as an
appendix (i.e., Appendix A: Community Survey Results). All appendices are to be
attached to the CAP submission and mailed to CSD.
Community Assessment
Public Hearing Flyer
County Website Posting
Social Media Posting
CSBG/NPI CAP
Bay Area Progress Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU 2011 – 2013 Rev. 6/2011
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 2 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ 2 TABLE OF FIGURES ________________________________________________________ 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ______________________________________________________ 5 CONTRA COSTA DEMOGR APHICS _____________________________________________ 9 DISABILITY STATUS ______________________________________________________ 11 HEAD START ____________________________________________________________ 12 SELF -SUFFICIENCY _______________________________________________________ 16 UNEMPLOYMENT _________________________________________________________ 18 EMPLOYMENT ___________________________________________________________ 21 FREE AND REDUCED COS T MEALS ___________________________________________ 22 PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ______________________________________________________ 23 POVERTY STATUS ________________________________________________________ 25 HOUSING ______________________________________________________________ 26 TRANSPORTATION _______________________________________________________ 28 IMMUNIZATIONS _________________________________________________________ 29 BIRTHS ________________________________________________________________ 30 TEEN BIRTHS ___________________________________________________________ 32 ASTHMA _______________________________________________________________ 33 ORAL HEALTH STATUS OF CHILDREN _________________________________________ 34 PEDIATRIC NUTRITION ____________________________________________________ 35 HEALTH INSURANCE – CHILDREN ___________________________________________ 36 HEALTH INSURANCE – ADULTS _____________________________________________ 37 SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES _________________________________________ 39 PHYSICAL FITNESS _______________________________________________________ 39 STAR SCORES ___________________________________________________________ 40 DROPOUT RATES _________________________________________________________ 41 ENGLISH LEARNERS ______________________________________________________ 42 TEACHERS WITH EMERGE NCY PERMITS _______________________________________ 43 CHILD CARE AVAILABILITY _________________________________________________ 44 FOSTER CARE ___________________________________________________________ 49 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE _____________________________________________________ 49 CHILD ABUSE ___________________________________________________________ 50 JUVENILE ARRESTS _______________________________________________________ 50 ADULT ARRESTS _________________________________________________________ 51
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 3 Table of Figures Table 1 – Population by Ethnicity _____________________________________________ 9 Table 2 A – Household Characteristics __________________________________________ 9 Table 2B – Population By City _______________________________________________ 10 Table 3 – School Enrollment ________________________________________________ 10 Table 4 – Educational Attainment (ages 25 and over) ____________________________ 11 Table 5 – Countywide Special Education Enrollment by Age and Selected Disability, 2008 -2009 _______________________________________________________________ 11 Table 6 – Age of Head Start Enrollees, 2009-2010 _______________________________ 12 Table 7 – Ethnicity of Head Start Enrollees, 2009-2010 ___________________________ 13 Table 8 – Percentage Enrolled Families by Family Type, 2009-2010 _________________ 13 Figure 1 – Actual Enrollment of Early Head Start Children (Ages 0-3) by Type of Eligibility, 2009-2010 __________________________________________________________ 14 Figure 2 – Actual Enrollment of Head Start Children (ages 4-5) by Type of Eligibility, 2009-2010 _______________________________________________________________ 14 Table 9 – Number of Disabled Preschool Students in Head Start by Type _____________ 15 Table 1 0 – Annual Self-Sufficiency Wage for Various Family Types, Contra Costa County, 2008 _______________________________________________________________ 16 Table 11 A – Annual Income for Families in 2009 ________________________________ 17 Table 11 B – Annual Income for Families in 2005 ________________________________ 17 Figure 3 – Unemployment Rates _____________________________________________ 18 Table 12 – Annual Unemployment Rates by Sub-Area, Contra Costa County __________ 19 Table 13 A – Cities in Contra Costa County with Highest Unemployment Rates, April, 2011_20 Table 13 B – Cities in Contra Costa County with Lowest Unemployment Rates, April, 2011 20 Table 14 – Employment by Industry Sector, Contra Costa County 2006-2009 _________ 21 Table 15 – Percentage of Students Receiving Free and/or Reduced Cost Meals _________ 22 Table 16 – Public Assistance Recipients by Program, Contra Costa County ____________ 23 Table 17 – CalWORKs Recipients Aged 16 and over by Ethnicity, Contra Costa County __ 23 Figure 4 A – Percentage of Children Ages 0-5 in Families Participating in CalWORKs, Contra Costa County, 2000 ___________________________________________________ 24 Figure 4 B – Number of Families with Children 0-5 Receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), By City in Contra Costa County, 2011 ________________________ 24 Table 18 – Poverty Status in 2008, Contra Costa County __________________________ 25 Table 19 – Percentage of Homes Affordable to Median Income Households ___________ 27 Table 20 – Median and High Sale Price of Single Family Residences, Condos, and New Homes, and % Change over previous year. Contra Costa County, March, 2011 _____ 27 Table 21 – Median Monthly Rents, Fiscal Year 2011 ______________________________ 28 Figure 5 – Monthly Income Spent on Housing, Contra Costa County, 2011 ____________ 28 Table 22 – Clustered Modes over Time, Contra Costa County ______________________ 29 Table 23 – Workers 16 Years and Over Commuting to Work, 2008 __________________ 29 Table 24 – Immunization __________________________________________________ 29 Table 25 – Number of Births by Ethnicity, Contra Costa County ____________________ 30 Table 26 – Percentage of Births that are Low Weight _____________________________ 30 Table 27 – Percentage of Women Receiving Prenatal Care in the First Trimester _______ 31 Figure 6 – Percentage of Women Receiving Prenatal Care in the First Trimester, by Ethnicity, 2007 _______________________________________________________________ 31 Table 28 – Percentage of Births That Are to Teen Mothers (Aged 15-19), Contra Costa County _____________________________________________________________ 32 Table 29 – Teen Births by Ethnicity, Contra Costa County, 2009 ____________________ 32
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 4 Table 30 – Low Weight Births to Teen Mothers (aged 15-19), Contra Costa County _____ 32 Table 31 –Percentage of Teen Mothers (aged 15 -19) Receiving Prenatal Care in the First Trimester, Contra Costa County __________________________________________ 32 Table 32 – Asthma emergency room visits, 2009 ________________________________ 33 Table 33 –Asthma Incidence, 2009 ___________________________________________ 33 Table 34 – Days of School Missed due to Dental Problems, Children 5-17 Years of Age, 2009_ ______________________________________________________________ 34 Table 35 – Could Not Afford Needed Dental Care, Children 2-17 Years of Age, 2009 ____ 34 Table 3 6 – Indicators of Nutritional Health, 2007 ________________________________ 35 Table 3 7A – Health Insurance Coverage of Children ______________________________ 36 Table 37B – Health y Families Enrollment ______________________________________ 37 Figure 7 Health Insurance Coverage of Non -Elderly Adults (Ages 18-64), 2009 ________ 38 Table 38 – Health Insurance Coverage of Non -Elderly Adults (Ages 18-64), 2009 by Federal Poverty Level ________________________________________________________ 39 Table 39 – Sexually Transmitted Disease Incidence Rates for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea, All Ages _______________________________________________________________ 39 Table 4 0A – Percentage of Students who are Physically Fit ________________________ 39 Table 4 0B – Percentage of Students in Healthy Fitness zone (HFZ) on Body Composition Test 2009-2010 School Year. ____________________________________________ 40 Table 4 1 – Percentage of Third Grade Students Scoring Above the 50th NPR in Reading By Districts with Elementary Students ________________________________________ 40 Table 4 2 –Rate of Students who Dropout of High School, 4-year Derived Rate _________ 41 Figure 8 – Percentage of Students who Dropout of High School by Ethnicity, Contra Costa County, 4-year Derived Rate, 200 8-2009 __________________________________ 41 Table 4 3 – Percentage of Students who Dropout of High School by Ethnicity, Contra Costa County, 4-year Derived Rate ____________________________________________ 42 Table 4 4 – Number and Percentage of Students Who Are English Learners ____________ 42 Table 4 5 – Top Languages Spoken by English Learners, Contra Costa County 2008-2009 42 Table 4 6 – Percentage of Teachers with Emergency Permits _______________________ 43 Figure 9A – Total Population of Children Ages 0 -5 years, Contra Costa County (West), 2008 _______________________________________________________________ 44 Figure 9B – Total Population of Children Ages 0 -5 Years, Contra Costa County (Central), 2008 _______________________________________________________________ 45 Figure 9c – Total Population of Children Ages 0-5 Years, Contra Costa County (East ), 2008 _______________________________________________________________ 45 Figure 10 – Projected Growth in Child Population in Contra Costa County, 2006-2015 ___ 46 Table 4 7 – Child Care Need: 8 Zip Codes with Highest Need, Contra Costa County, 2011 47 Table 4 8 – Families Waiting on CEL and the Reasons for Needing Care, Contra Costa County, 2010 ________________________________________________________ 47 Table 49 – Children Waiting on CEL and Time Needed, Contra Costa County, 2010 _____ 47 Figure 11 - Preschool Slots Available at Licensed Centers, Contra Costa County, 2011 ___ 48 Figure 12 - Infant/Toddler Slots Available at Licensed Centers, Contra Costa County, 2011 _______________________________________________________________ 48 Table 5 0 – Rate of First Entry into Foster Care __________________________________ 49 Table 5 1 – Rate of First Entry into Foster Care, By Ethnicity _______________________ 49 Table 5 2 – Rate of Domestic Violence Calls for Assistance _________________________ 49 Table 5 3 – Rate of Substantiated Child Abuse Cases _____________________________ 50 Table 5 4 – Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrest Rate __________________________________ 50 Table 5 5 – Juvenile Felony Arrest Rate ________________________________________ 50 Table 56 – Adult Misdemeanor Arrest Rate _____________________________________ 51 Table 57 – Adult Felony Arrest Rate __________________________________________ 51
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 5 Executiv e Summary The Community Services Bureau in Contra Costa County is funded to provide child and family development services to more than 1,800 Head Start program eligible families and children, aged three to five. Head Start services are offered through 19 County operated children's centers, and 17 community centers, and family childcare centers. In addition, The Department provides Early Head Start Services to the 0-3 population for 401 income eligible families. Our program concentrates its services in the eastern, western and north central areas of the County. The western area, which is predominantly urban, is faced with the same challenges that confront most inner cities, including high violence, homelessness, and unemployment rates. The eastern area, which only ten years ago was predominantly agricultural, is in transition from a rural to a suburban economy. A boom in construction has created new housing that is affordable relative to the Bay Area, but is beyond the reach of the low income, predominantly immigrant population that is now being dislocated. In the central area, which is predominantly suburban, there is the concentration of the county’s high paying jobs. However, few of our clients have the ability to obtain them. Along the Monument Corridor in Concord, there are pockets of extreme poverty where as much as nineteen percent of the population is living below the Federal Poverty Guidelines. There is no doubt that the “Great Recession” has had its impact on Contra Costa County, with unemployment rates stubbornly presenting in the double digits. Despite this rate, the Bay Area economy has retained many low paying jobs that are available throughout the County. However, the extremely high cost of living makes it impossible for most of these workers to use this full time employment to support themselves and their families. The Community Services Bureau continues its history of successfully merging Head Start and Child Development programs into a unified Child Start program in order to offer more families full day, full year services including high-quality preschool education, health, and dental services, support for family members acquiring job skills in the CalWORKs program, and family advocacy services. Our families also have access to other services offered by the department including Heating/Energy Assistance, free meals, and emergency shelter. The department has extensive experience collaborating with other organizations to synergizing our efforts. Fundamental to the success of our health programs is our extensive network of formalized collaborations such as First 5 Contra Costa (Prop 10), Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the Child Health and Disability Prevention program (CHDP), as well as our partnerships via membership in various groups such as the Contra Costa County Asthma Coalition, the Community Coalition, Injury Prevention Council, Baby Shots Immunization Coalition, Dental Health Action Team and Bay Point Partnership for public health. DETERMINING COMMUNITY STRENGTHS AND NEEDS Community Services Bureau staff is deeply involved in community activities to ensure appropriate representation of child and family interests and a consistent forum for discussion of child/family needs. Examples of the Bureau’s commitment to and involvement with the community include two positions on the county First 5 Commission, collaboration with community based organizations in efforts such as the Building Blocks for Kids initiative, a Harlem Children’s Zone inspired project in
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 6 the Iron Triangle of Richmond, and the data collection process that included the County Office of Education, the Contra Costa Local Planning Council, and First 5 Contra Costa. This latter collaboration resulted in A Profile of Child Care Needs in Contra Costa County: 2006-2015. The Comprehensive Services Managers work with staff to identify commissions, committees, groups, and activities. Throughout the year, as activities and opportunities are developed or offered, staff is assigned to participate, and parents are offered opportunities for planning. Community Services also periodically conducts public hearings to obtain input from the community to inform the Community Action Plan and the Head Start and Early Head Start Grant Process. The Assistant Directors works with staff and parents to: • Revise/refine the process of conducting community assessment • Develop questions to include in parent questionnaire • Use questionnaire to survey parents regarding community needs/problems • Describe demographics of current Community Services Bureau enrollment (by collecting data from existing records; Family Partnership Assessments, children’s applications, the Program Information Report, and health records) • Determine areas of “eligible population,” where data has not been collected from previously existing demographic records • Determine the number of eligible children in Contra Costa County per census tract using data from other sources, such as school enrollment, birth rates, TANF data, ABAG, etc. • Describe demographics of eligible children and their families in Contra Costa County • Describe population by income, family size, family status including sex and age, education/employment of adults, special needs, ethnicity, and language • Collect information indicating community needs/interests of the eligible Contra Costa County population from other agencies serving that population. (This includes information from sources such as First 5 Contra Costa, United Way, Cal-WORKS, and the Health Department-CCC Local Planning Council for Child Care, County Office of Education.) • Gather information on previously unidentified areas, so that appropriate needs are catalogued, including: o Basic needs (housing, food, transportation); o Health needs o Family life services (child care, welfare, mental health, etc.) o Education and training o Review other information for areas of concern: o Self- Assessment o Parent planning session o Licensing o Progress made on previous goals o Training Plan • Review (and update if necessary) lists of resources available to meet community needs. The Community Assessment is a multi-phase process that is continuously updated. Staff/parents are appraised of needs in multi-service coordination meetings (to revise approaches and stay abreast in
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 7 supporting children and families). Information is shared with the Policy Council on a consistent basis. Parents participate actively as collaborative partners in the planning process. The causes and effects of poverty are pervasive and deeply rooted. They include significant unemployment in certain areas of the county; San Pablo, Richmond, Pittsburg, and fundamental structural changes in the economy of the Bay Area that have led to a proliferation of minimum wage service industry jobs. There has been rapid population growth in the county, in large measure due to immigration. There are numerous low performing schools in Contra Costa County, many with API scores in the lowest decile in the state. Many communities, such as Richmond, are extremely violent with homicide rates amongst the highest in the nation. Families are stressed, many with single female heads of household. No single agency would be capable of eliminating all of these causes and effects of poverty. It is imperative that the private sector, government agencies, community based, and faith based organizations join together in collaborative efforts to leverage their resources. Although the Head Start, Early Head Start, CDD, and CSBG programs that are available in Contra Costa County are committed to solving the root causes of poverty, without the partnerships with literally hundreds of organizations, progress could not be made. As this is year one of the three year grant cycle for the Community Services Bureau (CSB), this comprehensive Community Assessment was conducted, looking at the community anew to keep abreast of substantive issues facing the Head Start eligible community which informs all systems and services of the Head Start and Early Head Start programs. Strengths, resources, needs and trends in the Grantee’s service area are identified and integrated into the planning processes, and development and implementation of policies, procedures, services plans, and goals and objectives, all of which are referenced in our 2011 continuation grant application. The Head Start Policy Council and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors are integrally involved at the Community Assessment process. Their involvement, including roles and responsibilities, begins in the annual September orientation. The Policy Council’s involvement in the Community Assessment is to provide both input to the process, through participation in meetings and opportunities for dialog, and to review the data for planning in the context of shared governance. In the spring of each year, the full Policy Council receives a comprehen sive presentation of a current community profile and an opportunity to discuss and pose questions. The Policy Council reviews and approves the current Community Assessment in August of each year. The Board of Supervisors is continuously kept apprised of the data in the Assessment in the form of reports and presentations. On a monthly basis, the Community Services Bureau (CSB) staff reports on the status of the program’s responsiveness to the community to the County Board of Supervisors via the Director’s report to the County Administrator. To complete this assessment, a variety of information gathering techniques were undertaken. Focus group discussions took place with various clients and service providers of community-based and government programs such as WIC, Building Blocks for Kids, Contra Costa First Five, CalWorks, Children & Family Services, Contra Costa County Office of Education, Contra Costa Local Planning Council, Contra Costa Child Care Council, Family, Maternal and Child Health Programs, and the Housing Authority of Contra Costa. 149 encounters were documented and compiled to arrive at the top
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 8 five issues facing them in which the Head Start and Early Head Start programs can have a positive impact in the coming three years. The CSB Senior Management works with staff members to identify data sources including: • Local commissions, committees and groups • Community-based organizations • Parent and family partnership data • Internal data sources such as Program Information Report (PIR) • U.S. Census Bureau data • State of California data including California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit; California Department of Education; and California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division The CSB staff work with Head Start par ents and community stakeholders to: • Determine areas of Head Start “eligible population.” • Determine the number of Head Start eligible children in Contra Costa County, per census tract, using data from diverse sources such as school enrollment, birth rates, TANF data, Association of Bay Area Government demographic studies, the American Community Survey, and the U.S. Census, as well as other sources where data has not been collected from previously existing demographic records. • Determine the demographics of Head Start eligible children, including family income, education/employment of adults, special needs, language, and ethnicity. • Collect information indicating needs/interests of the Head Start eligible population from other agencies serving that population. Information is included from sources such as First 5 Contra Costa, the United Way, Cal-WO RKS, the County Health Department, Contra Costa County Local Planning Council for Child Care, and the County Office of Education. • Assess needs concerning housing, food, transportation, health, family life services (child care, welfare, mental health, etc.), as well as education and training needs derived from the CSB annual Parent Interest Survey and Family Partnership Agreements. The Grantee has reviewed other sources to inform the Community Assessment such as: • Self -Assessment • Parent planning sessions • Community Care Licensing • Progress made on previous goals and objectives • Training and Technical Assistance Plan • Updated lists of resources available to meet community needs
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 9 Contra Costa Demographics Contra Costa County’s population in 2009 was 1,041,274. In Contra Costa County, the percentage of Caucasians is similar to that of the state. The percentage of Latino residents in Contra Costa County continues to be significantly lower than that of California (23.2% vs. 37%, respectively). TABLE 1 – POPULATION BY ETHNICITY ETHNICITY CONTRA COSTA NUMBER CONTRA COSTA PERCENT CALIFORNIA PERCENT Caucasian 741,387 71.2 76.4 African American 101,004 9.7 6.6 American Indian and Alaska Native 8,330 .8 1.2 Asian 146,820 14.1 12.7 Pacific Islander and Native Hawaiian 5,206 .5 .4 Two or more races 38,527 3.7 2.6 Hispanic or Latino 23.2 37.0 Total population 1,041,274 - 36,961,664 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009, General Demographic Characteristics, Quick Facts The household characteristics of Contra Costa County and California are similar. Family households account for about 70% of the households in both Contra Costa County and California. Female-headed households (with no husband present) account for 10.5% of the county’s households compared to 12.9% in California. TABLE 2A – HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS HOUSEHOLD TYPE CONTRA COSTA NUMBER CONTRA COSTA PERCENT CA PERCENT Family households (families) 253,104 69.9 68.5 With own children under 18 years 120,947 33.4 34.8 Married-couple family 198,162 54.7 49.7 With own children under 18 years 92,821 25.6 24.5 Female householder, no husband present 37,859 10.5 12.9 With own children under 18 years 20,467 5.7 7.4 Nonfamily households 108,998 30.1 31.5 Householder living alone 86,591 23.9 24.5 Householder 65 year and over 26,960 7.4 7.8 Households with individuals under 18 years 133,420 36.8 38.7 Households with individuals 65 years and over 80,818 22.3 22.2 Total households 362,102 - 12,097,894 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009, General Demographic Characteristics
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 10 CITY/COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES 2005 TABLE 2B – POPULATION BY CITY LOCATION 2007 2008 2009 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TOTAL 992,700 1,016,302 1,020,898 Antioch 99,100 100,600 101,049 Brentwood 33,000 37,050 40,912 Clayton 10,950 11,000 10,982 Concord 124,700 124,900 124,798 Danville 43,100 43,250 43,273 El Cerrito 23,500 23,400 23,407 Hercules 20,450 21,700 23,360 Lafayette 24,350 24,300 24,317 Martinez 36,800 36,800 36,818 Moraga 16,500 16,450 16,435 Oakley 26,950 27,550 28,265 Orinda 17,800 17,750 17,797 Pinole 19,500 19,550 19,604 Pittsburg 60,900 61,500 62,605 Pleasant Hill 33,600 33,600 33,638 Richmond 101,100 101,700 103,012 San Pablo 30,750 31,050 31,344 San Ramon 46,950 48,600 51,027 Walnut Creek 65,800 66,000 66,501 BALANCE OF COUNTY 156,900 157,400 161,754 Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit 2009 More than 88.2% of the Contra Costa County population ages 25 and over are high school graduates or equivalent, compared to 80.6% of California residents. Almost 37.6% of Contra Costa County residents ages 25 and over have a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to 29.9% of California residents aged 25 and older. TABLE 3 – SCHOOL ENROLLMENT CONTRA COSTA (2007) CONTRA COSTA (2009) CALIFORNIA PERCENT (2007) CALIFORNIA PERCENT (2009) Nursery school, preschool 17,851 18,682 5.6 5.8 Kindergarten 13,878 12,945 4.8 4.9 Elementary school (grades 1-8) 111,837 115,726 39.7 38.4 High school (grades 9-12) 63,847 62,839 22.3 22 College or graduate school 68,333 68,785 27.4 27.9 Total population 3 years and over enrolled in school 275,746 278,976 10,341,546 10,328,984
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 11 TABLE 4 – EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT (AGES 25 AND OVER) CONTRA COSTA NUMBER (2009) CONTRA COSTA PERCENT (2009) CA PERCENT (2009) Less than 9th grade 40,794 5.9 10.5 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 40,102 5.8 8.8 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 142,434 20.6 20.9 Some college, no degree 154,188 22.3 22.2 Associate degree 53,931 7.8 7.6 Bachelor’s degree 169,399 24.5 19.1 Graduate or professional degree 90,576 13.1 10.7 Total population 25 years and over 691,426 100.0 23,782,109 Percent high school graduate or higher - 88.2 80.6 Percent bachelor’s degree or higher - 37.6 29.9 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics, 2010 U.S. Census Bureau, 2009 American Survey, Selected Social Characteristics Disability Status Children with speech or language impairment disabilities continue to account for the vast majority of the children ages 2 through 5 enrolled in Special Education. Other common disabilities of Special Education students include mental retardation and orthopedic impairment. Autism is a growing problem in the 3-5 age group. TABLE 5 – COUNTYWIDE SPECIAL EDUCATION ENROLLMENT BY AGE AND SELECTED DISABILITY, 2008-2009 TYPE OF DISABILITY AGE 0 AGE 1 AGE 2 AGE 3 AGE 4 AGE 5 Mental retardation 0 2 0 19 26 26 Hard of hearing 7 17 23 19 9 12 Deaf 1 5 2 3 4 8 Speech or language impairment 1 21 101 472 563 549 Visual impairment 1 0 3 8 5 13 Orthopedic impairment 0 11 11 16 30 21 Other health impairment 1 2 1 11 9 16 Specific learning disability 0 0 0 1 3 5 Deaf-blindness 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multiple disability 0 0 0 3 2 5 Autism 0 0 0 66 105 96 Traumatic brain injury 0 0 0 1 1 0 Emotional Disturbance 0 0 0 1 0 4 TOTAL 11 58 141 620 757 755 Source: California Department of Education, Special Education Division, 2009.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 12 Head Start HEAD START / EARLY HEAD START DEMOGRAPHICS Early Head Start programs serve children ages 0-3 years, while Head Start programs serve children ages 4-5. In 2006-2007, there were 305 Early Head Start enrollees while there were 2,348 Head Start enrollees. TABLE 6 – AGE OF HEAD START ENROLLEES, 2009-2010 EARLY HEAD START (AGES 0-3) HEAD START (AGES 4-5) NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT Under 1 year 52 25.6 0 0.0 1 year old 69 34.0 0 0.0 2 years old 82 40.4 0 0.0 3 years old 0 0.0 705 33.6 4 years old 0 0.0 1,393 66.4 5 years and older 0 0.0 0 0 Total enrollees 203 100.0 2098 100.0 Source: Contra Costa County Head Start (includes delegate agency), 2009. Note: Actual enrollment includes turnover. Actual totals may exceed more than 100% due to rounding. Early Head Start total by age excludes 42 pregnant women counted in total enrollment HEAD START / EARLY HEAD START RACE/ETHNICITY A majority of Early Head Start and Head Start enrollees in Contra Costa County are Latino (67.7% and 60.8%, respectively), followed by African American (21.2% and 30.2%, respectively). 72.7% of families with enrolled Early Head Start children are single-parent families, while close to 70% of families of Head Start enrollees are single-parent families.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 13 TABLE 7 – ETHNICITY OF HEAD START ENROLLEES, 2009-2010 EARLY HEAD START (AGES 0-3) HEAD START (AGES 4-5) NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT Latino 166 67.7 1275 60.8 African American 52 21.2 634 30.2 Caucasian 0 0 37 1.8 Bi- or Multi-racial 19 7.7 22 1.0 Asian 6 2.4 92 4.4 Pacific Islander/ Native Hawaiian 1 <1 29 1.4 American Indian / Alaska Native 1 <1 9 <1 Other 0 0 0 0 Unspecified 0 0 0 0 Total enrollees 245 100.0 2098 100.0 Note: Actual enrollment includes turnover and pregnant women in Early Head Start. Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding. FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS OF ENROLLED CHILDREN TABLE 8 – PERCENTAGE ENROLLED FAMILIES BY FAMILY TYPE, 2009-2010 EARLY HEAD START (AGES 0-3) HEAD START (AGES 4-5) NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT Two-parent families 51 27.2 596 31.1 Single-parent families 136 72.7 1317 68.8 Total families 187 100.0 1913 100.0 Source: Contra Costa County Head Start, 2010 HEAD START / EARLY HEAD START ENROLLMENT ELIGIBILITY Of those children enrolled in Early Head Start, 87% were enrolled based on income eligibility (below 100% of the federal poverty line), while 8% were enrolled based on receipt of public assistance. Comparatively, 70% of children enrolled in Head Start were enrolled based on income eligibility, and 17% were enrolled based on receipt of public assistance.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 14 FIGURE 1 – ACTUAL ENROLLMENT OF EARLY HEAD START CHILDREN (AGES 0-3) BY TYPE OF ELIGIBILITY, 2009- 2010 Source: Contra Costa County Head Start, PIR, 2010. Note: Actual enrollment includes turnover. FIGURE 2 – ACTUAL ENROLLMENT OF HEAD START CHILDREN (AGES 4-5) BY TYPE OF ELIGIBILITY, 2009-10 Source: Contra Costa County Head Start, PIR 2010. Note: Actual enrollment includes turnover. DISABILITY STATUS OF HEAD START CHILDREN The number of disabilities among preschool students in Head Start has decreased since 2007 from a high of 280 to 214 in 2010 due in large part to the implementation of the Response to Intervention (RtI) programming at the school districts. Speech or language impairment has been the top 9993159616 Public AssistanceIncome EligibleOver IncomeFoster ChildHomelessBetween 100% & 130% Poverty4571424562910121Public AssistanceIncome EligibleOver IncomeFoster ChildHomelessBetween 100% & 130% Poverty Total actual enrollment: 2098 Total actual enrollment: 245
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 15 disability of preschool age students in Head Start (197), with its prevalence decreasing by 8.2% from spring 2008 to spring 2010. Following speech or language impairment, the second most common disability is orthopedic impairment (7). TABLE 9 – NUMBER OF DISABLED PRESCHOOL S TUDENTS IN HEAD START BY TYPE TYPE OF DISABILITY 2005-2006 2006-200 7 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 Speech or language impairment 237 217 239 220 197 Multiple disabilities (including deaf-blind) 2 2 1 7 3 Emotional/behavioral disorder 1 1 1 1 0 Learning disabilities 1 1 1 0 0 Health impairment 1 1 2 0 0 Orthopedic impairment 0 2 4 3 7 Non-categorical / developmental delay 7 9 12 3 3 Autism 2 0 6 2 1 Visual impairment (including blindness) 1 1 1 3 Mental retardation 1 2 3 0 0 Hearing impairment (including deafness) 1 1 1 0 3 Traumatic brain injury 0 0 0 0 0 Total 254 237 280 236 214 Source: Contra Costa County Head Start Program Information Report, 2005-2010. Note: All of these preschool program students were recipients of special services.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 16 Self-Sufficiency By the end of 2008 the self-sufficiency standard had increased to almost $87,000 for a family with one adult, an infant, a preschooler, and a school age child. Table 11 shows the self sufficiency wage for various family types in Contra Costa County in 2008. The average rate of inflation has been applied over the past three years to derive the amount stated above. (CPI-U Consumer Price Index- All Urban Consumers Not Seasonally Adjusted) TABLE 10 – ANNUAL SELF-SUFFICIENCY WAGE FOR VARIOUS FAMILY TYPES, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2008 Monthly Costs Adult Adult + Infant Adult + Preschooler Adult + Infant Preschooler Adult + Schoolage Teenager Adult + Infant Preschooler Schoolage 2 Adults + Infant Preschooler 2 Adults + Preschooler Schoolage Housing 1082 1282 1282 1282 1282 1738 1282 1282 Child Care 0 817 830 1647 423 2071 1647 1254 Food 290 425 438 571 759 770 821 903 Transportation 97 97 97 97 97 97 194 194 Health Care 104 258 258 270 297 288 328 333 Miscellaneous 157 288 290 387 286 496 427 396 Taxes 379 617 627 879 502 1524 892 753 Earned Income Tax Credit (-) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Child Care Tax Credit (-) 0 -50 -50 -100 -53 -100 -100 -100 Child Tax Credit (-) 0 -83 -83 -167 -167 -250 -167 -167 Self-Sufficiency Wage - Hourly $11.97 $20.74 $20.96 $27.65 $19.47 $37.70 $15.13 $13.77 per adult per adult -Monthly $2,106 $3,651 $3,689 $4,866 $3,427 $6,634 $5,324 $4,848 -Annual $25,274 $43,807 $44,272 $58,391 $41,122 $79,613 $63,891 $58,174 Source: Self-Sufficiency Standard Report for California Self-Sufficiency Standard Report for California, 2008 Table 12 and 12A compare income distribution in 2005 and 2009 for Contra Costa County and the State of California. The results show that while lower income families in Contra Costa County constitute a smaller percentage of total families than the State of California, and higher income families constitute a larger percentage than the state, the overall distribution has changed over the six year period. While lower income families have remained about 11%, higher income families have increased and middle income families somewhat equalized over the same period.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 17 ANNUA L INCOME TABLE 11A – ANNUAL INCOME FOR FAMILIES IN 2009 INCOME CONTRA COSTA NUMBER CONTRA COSTA PERCENT CA PERCENT Less than $10,000 6,918 2.7 3.8 $10,000 to $14,999 5,117 2.0 3.1 $15,000 to $24,999 13,122 5.1 8.3 $25,000 to $34,999 14,896 5.8 8.6 $35,000 to $49,999 23,112 9.0 12.3 $50,000 to $74,999 40,747 15.9 18.0 $75,000 to $99,999 36,579 14.3 13.8 $100,000 to $149,999 55,211 21.6 17.2 $150,000 to 199,999 27,081 10.6 7.4 $200,000 or more 33,413 13.0 7.7 Median family income $91,455 - $68,909 Total families 256,196 100.0 8,333,690 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics, 2009. TABLE 11B – ANNUAL INCOME FOR FAMILIES IN 2005 INCOME CONTRA COSTA NUMBER CONTRA COSTA PERCENT CA PERCENT Less than $10,000 7,929 3.1 4.5 $10,000 to $14,999 4,583 1.8 3.6 $15,000 to $24,999 15,409 6.1 9.5 $25,000 to $34,999 16,107 6.4 9.6 $35,000 to $49,999 26,494 10.5 13.3 $50,000 to $74,999 44,940 17.8 18.8 $75,000 to $99,999 36,372 14.4 13.7 $100,000 to $149,999 53,105 21.0 15.3 $150,000 to 199,999 21,826 8.6 5.7 $200,000 or more 26,339 10.4 5.8 Median family income $82,641 - $61,476 Total families 253,104 100.0 8,281,119 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2005
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 18 Unemployment In 2011, the unemployment rate in Contra Costa County slightly lower than the state’s unemployment rate (10.5 vs. 11.7, respectively). However, the unemployment rate in Contra Costa County increased over 144.19% from 2006 to 2011 from a low of 4.3 in 2006 to 10.5 in 2011. During the same time period, the unemployment rate in California increased nearly 138.77% from 4.9 in 2006 to 11.7 in 2011. Unemployment continues to plague the Bay Area economy and places multiple stressors on families. FIGURE 3 – UNEMPLOYMENT RATES Source: California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division, 2011. 02468101214 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Percent UnemploymentUnemployment Rates Contra Costa CountyCaliforniaSource:California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Contra Costa County 5.2 5.5 5.4 4.8 4.3 4.7 6.1 10.2 11.2 10.5 California 6.7 6.7 6.2 5.4 4.9 5.3 7.2 11.3 12.4 11.7
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 19 TABLE 12 – ANNUAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATES BY SUB-AREA, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Alamo – CDP 2.1 1.9 1.7 2.2 3.8 4.2 3.9 Antioch – city 5.5 4.9 5.3 7 11.5 12.7 11 Bayview-Montalvin – CDP 8.9 7.9 9.3 12 19.1 20.9 19.6 Bethel Island – CDP 8.6 7.6 9.3 12.1 19.2 20.9 19.7 Blackhawk - CDP 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.9 4.9 5.5 5.1 Brentwood – city 4.3 3.8 4.1 5.4 9.1 10 9.3 Clayton – city 1 0.8 1.1 1.5 2.5 2.8 2.6 Concord - city 5.3 4.6 5.1 6.7 11 12.1 11.3 Crockett – CDP 9.4 8.3 9.8 12.6 20 21.8 20.5 Danville – city 2.5 2.2 2.4 3.2 5.4 6 5.5 Discovery Bay – CDP 2.9 2.6 3.3 4.3 7.3 8 7.5 East Richmond Heights – CDP 5.6 5 5.7 7.5 12.3 13.5 12.6 El Cerrito – city 4.3 3.8 4.1 5.5 9.1 10 9.3 El Sobrante – CDP 3.6 3.2 3.8 5 8.3 9.1 8.5 Hercules – city 3.2 2.8 3.3 4.4 7.3 8.1 7.5 Kensington – CDP 1.8 1.6 1.6 2.1 3.7 4.1 3.8 Lafayette – city 1.7 1.5 1.6 2.2 3.7 4.1 3.8 Martinez – city 3.9 3.4 3.7 4.9 8.2 9 8.4 Moraga Town – city 7.5 6.7 2.7 3.6 6.1 6.8 6.3 Oakley – CDP 3.5 3.1 3.3 4.4 7.4 8.1 7.6 Orinda – city 1.7 1.5 1.7 2.3 3.9 4.3 4 Pacheco – CDP 4.7 4.1 4.8 6.4 10.5 11.6 10.8 Pinole – city 3.1 2.7 3.2 4.2 7.1 7.8 7.3 Pittsburg – city 7.9 7 7.6 9.9 16 17.6 16.4 Pleasant Hill – city 3.9 3.4 3.8 5 8.3 9.2 8.5 Richmond – city 8.1 7.2 7.8 10.2 16.4 17.9 16.8 Rodeo – CDP 3.4 3 6.9 9 14.6 16 14.9 San Pablo – city 10.2 9 9.8 12.7 20.1 21.9 20.6 San Ramon – city 1.9 1.7 1.9 2.5 4.2 4.7 4.4 Tara Hills – CDP 5.5 4.8 5.2 6.9 11.3 12.4 11.6 Vine Hill- CDP 6.5 5.8 6.9 9.1 14.8 16.2 15.1 Walnut Creek – city 3.2 2.8 3.1 4.1 6.9 7.6 7.1 West Pittsburg – CDP n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Source: California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division, 2011. Note: CDP stands for Census Designated Place.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 20 TABLE 13A – CITIES IN CONTRA COSTA C OUNTY WITH HIGHEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, APRIL, 2011 Rank City Rate 1 San Pablo 20.6 2 Richmond 16.8 4 Pittsburgh 16.4 3 Concord 11.3 5 Antioch 5.0 6 El Cerrito 9.3 7 Brentwood 9.3 8 Pleasant Hill 8.5 9 Martinez 8.4 10 Hercules 7.5 TABLE 13B – CITIES IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WITH LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, APRIL, 2011 Rank City Rate 1 Clayton 2.6 2 Lafayette 3.8 3 Orinda 4.0 4 San Ramon 4.4 5 Danville 5.5 6 Moraga 6.3 7 Walnut Creek 7.1 8 Pinole 7.3 Source: California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division. April,2011.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 21 Employment Between 2006 and 2009 the county’s civilian labor force lost 23,600 jobs to total 320,900. The county’s unemployment rate peaked at 11.2% in 2010, and has since subsided to 10.5% and Contra Costa County’s unemployment rate has been consistently lower than the rate for California. Job losses have occurred in manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail trade, transportation and utilities, and government while job creation has occurred in retail finance, insurance, and real estate, and construction. Farm employment has seen a slight increase of 100 jobs since 2006. TABLE 14 – EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY SECTOR, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2006-2009 2006 2007 2008 2009 INDUSTRY SECTOR NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT MANUFACTURING 19,000 5.5 20,700 6.0 20,600 6.1 20,200 6.3 WHOLESALE TRADE 9,100 2.6 9,100 2.6 8,700 2.6 7,700 2.3 RETAIL TRADE 41,300 12.0 44,600 12.8 44,400 13.1 44,000 13.7 FINANCE, INSURANCE AND REAL ESTATE 32,100 9.3 29,200 8.4 26,500 7.8 25,600 8.0 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES 8,400 2.4 8,800 2.5 8,900 2.6 8,400 2.6 GOVERNMENT 48,900 14.2 52,200 15.0 52,600 15.5 51,800 16.1 FARMING 700 <1.0 700 <1.0 700 <1.0 800 <1.0 CONSTRUCTION AND MINING 30,000 8.7 27,600 7.9 29,200 8.6% 30,800 9.6 TOTAL EMPLOYMENT, ALL INDUSTRIES 344,500 - 347,300 - 339,500 - 320,900 - TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE 511,700 - 515,300 - 524,200 - 524,800 - Source: Employment Development Department Labor Market Information Division, 916-262-2162 www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov. June, 2010.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 22 Free and Reduced Cost Meals The percentage of Contra Costa County students receiving free and reduced cost meals has continued its upward trend in 2009-10. 37.1% of Contra Costa County students received free or reduced cost meals in 2009-10 compared to 55.9% of California students. The top three districts with the highest percentage of students receiving free or reduced cost meals continued to be Pittsburg Unified (78.4%), West Contra Costa Unified (65.8%), and Contra Costa County Office of Education (62.7%). TABLE 15 – PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS RECEIVING FREE AND/OR REDUCED COST MEALS DISTRICT 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 Acalanes Union High 0.9 0.0 0.7 1.1 2.1 2.52 Antioch Unified 36.1 37.2 44.7 45.1 51.0 54.1 Brentwood Union Elementary 23.5 21.1 23.4 23.5 26.2 28.4 Byron Union Elementary 15.5 13.6 16.3 16.4 21.9 26.5 Canyon Elementary 9.4 6.0 8.7 7.6 7.4 10.1 Contra Costa Co. Office of Education 40.8 45.2 30.2 50.8 56.4 62.7 John Swett Unified 36.9 38.8 46.1 48.2 49.9 45.5 Knightsen Elementary 8.4 24.4 26.5 24.9 26.0 29.1 Lafayette Elementary 0.9 1.5 1.7 2.2 2.0 2.3 Liberty Union High 13.2 14.0 13.4 16.1 19.1 19.7 Martinez Unified 15.8 17.9 17.8 20.7 18.3 27.3 Moraga Elementary 1.0 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 Mt. Diablo Unified 28.5 30.6 31.4 33.9 36.2 39.0 Oakley Union Elementary 29.0 32.2 37.2 38.4 41.0 49.1 Orinda Union Elementary 0 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.4 1.1 Pittsburg Unified 64.6 68.5 67.7 73.6 75.4 78.4 San Ramon Valley Unified 1.7 1.4 1.7 2.0 1.8 2.7 Walnut Creek Elementary 8.5 8.4 7.6 7.6 9.8 12.1 West Contra Costa Unified 57.5 58.5 60.6 63.1 64.5 65.8 Contra Costa County 30.0 31.6 32.0 33.4 35.1 37.1 California 49.7 50.8 51.0 51.2 53.8 55.9 Source: State of California, Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit, 2010
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 23 Public Assistance After falling to zero in 2005, Refugee Cash Assistance recipients rose to 53 in 2009 and then decreased in 2010 to 24. Welfare to Work programs saw a 10.7% decrease in participation while all other forms of public assistance showed sharp increases. Foods Stamps, now known as the CalFresh program, saw the steepest increase of 192% from 2002 to 2010. In 2010, over one third of CalWORKs recipients aged 16 and over were Latino (42.8%) followed by African Americans (34%) and Caucasian (25.7%). TABLE 16 – PUBLIC ASSISTANCE RECIPIENTS BY PROGRAM, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 CalWORKs 18,619 18,110 18,699 18,807 18,938 19,532 21,588 22,038 Food Stamps 19,392 n/a 27,023 29,400 30,867 37,368 47,397 56,625 General Relief 446 443 405 413 387 479 372 1,395 Refugee Cash Assistance 14 0 11 0 n/a 29 53 24 Welfare to Work 2,905 2,219 2,816 2,766 3,488 4,113 4,734 4,234 Note: Employment Development Department Labor Market Information Division, July, 2010. TABLE 17 – CALWORKS RECIPIENTS AGED 16 AND OVER BY ETHNICITY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ETHNICITY 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 Caucasians 1,970 1,860 1,860 1,830 1,920 1,850 1,950 1,960 African American 2,890 2,270 2,900 2,880 2,740 2,600 2,660 2,600 Latino 1,110 1,200 1,290 1,400 1,560 1,940 2,450 2,620 Asian / Pacific Islander 400 360 330 300 230 250 290 290 American Indian 10 20 20 30 40 40 30 40 Filipino 60 70 80 70 90 90 100 120 Total recipients aged 16 and over 6,440 8,980 7,080 6,450 6,270 6,760 7,480 7,630 Source: California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division reporting data from the California Department of Social Services, http://www.calmis.ca.gov/FILE/PIP/contrPIP.pdf. July, 2010. Note: Data is from July of each year.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 24 PUBLIC ASSISTANCE West County continues to have the highest TANF participation rate with 44%, followed by East County with 36%, and then Central County, with 20%. The cities with the highest concentration of TANF recipients are Antioch, followed by Richmond, and then Concord. FIGURE 4A – PERCENTAGE & NUMBER OF FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN 0-5 RECEIVING ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES (TANF), BY COUNTY AREA, 2011 Source: Contra Costa County, Employment and Human Services Department, CIS Report Unit, June 2011 FIGURE 4B – NUMBER OF FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN 0-5 RECEIVING TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES (TANF), BY CITY IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2011 Source: Contra Costa County, Employment and Human Services Department, CIS Report Unit, June 2011 1601, 20%2826, 36%3497, 44%CentralEastWest05001000150020002500
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 25 Poverty Status Data from the American Community Survey of 2008 demonstrate that 6.3% of families in Contra Costa County are living at income levels below the federal poverty level, lower than the statewide percentage of 9.6. Of all families with a female head of household (with no husband present), 19.4% lived in poverty compared to 24.1% statewide. TABLE 18 – POVERTY STATUS IN 2008, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Subject Total Margin of Error Below poverty level Margin of Error Percent below pove rty level Margin of Error Population for whom poverty status is determined 1,005,676 +/-2,145 88,559 +/-4,541 8.8% +/-0.4 AGE Under 18 years 247,430 +/-672 28,846 +/-2,270 11.7% +/-0.9 Related children under 18 years 246,349 +/-779 27,807 +/-2,299 11.3% +/-0.9 18 to 64 years 640,984 +/-1,882 52,591 +/-2,707 8.2% +/-0.4 65 years and over 117,262 +/-1,224 7,122 +/-1,053 6.1% +/-0.9 SEX Male 493,811 +/-1,546 38,536 +/-2,465 7.8% +/-0.5 Female 511,865 +/-1,189 50,023 +/-2,814 9.8% +/-0.5 RACE AND HISPANIC OR LATINO ORIGIN One race N N N N N N White 620,555 +/-5,098 43,605 +/-3,944 7.0% +/-0.6 Black or African American 90,953 +/-1,577 15,078 +/-2,099 16.6% +/-2.2 American Indian and Alaska Native 4,168 +/-785 300 +/-251 7.2% +/-5.9 Asian 135,619 +/-1,464 8,726 +/-1,529 6.4% +/-1.1 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander N N N N N N Some other race 108,115 +/-5,034 16,331 +/-2,510 15.1% +/-2.1 Two or more races 42,116 +/-2,565 3,860 +/-974 9.2% +/-2.2 Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 225,657 +/-486 31,163 +/-3,590 13.8% +/-1.6 White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 514,147 +/-1,686 29,760 +/-3,077 5.8% +/-0.6 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Population 25 years and over 666,799 +/-1,889 47,393 +/-2,516 7.1% +/-0.4 Less than high school graduate 78,809 +/-2,937 13,451 +/-1,559 17.1% +/-2.0 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 131,913 +/-3,796 13,792 +/-1,420 10.5% +/-1.0 Some college, associate's degree 203,165 +/-3,815 12,072 +/-1,186 5.9% +/-0.6 Bachelor's degree or higher 252,912 +/-4,342 8,078 +/-1,066 3.2% +/-0.4 EMPLOYMENT STATUS Civilian labor force 16 years and over 523,037 +/-3,514 26,735 +/-1,513 5.1% +/-0.3 Employed 490,774 +/-3,571 19,972 +/-1,351 4.1% +/-0.3 Male 263,469 +/-2,672 9,744 +/-1,022 3.7% +/-0.4 Female 227,305 +/-2,718 10,228 +/-993 4.5% +/-0.4 Unemployed 32,263 +/-2,078 6,763 +/-816 21.0% +/-2.5 Male 17,175 +/-1,531 3,373 +/-652 19.6% +/-3.8 Female 15,088 +/-1,298 3,390 +/-586 22.5% +/-3.4 WORK EXPERIENCE Population 16 years and over 788,806 +/-2,220 62,953 +/-3,094 8.0% +/-0.4
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 26 Subject Total Margin of Error Below poverty level Margin of Error Percent below pove rty level Margin of Error Worked full-time, year-round in the past 12 months 316,594 +/-3,920 4,220 +/-773 1.3% +/-0.2 Worked part-time or part -year in the past 12 months 232,864 +/-4,306 22,526 +/-1,507 9.7% +/-0.6 Did not work 239,348 +/-3,113 36,207 +/-2,562 15.1% +/-1.0 All Individuals below: 50 percent of poverty level 39,455 +/-3,355 (X) (X) (X) (X) 125 percent of poverty level 118,582 +/-5,394 (X) (X) (X) (X) 150 percent of poverty level 151,607 +/-5,768 (X) (X) (X) (X) 185 percent of poverty level 194,366 +/-6,079 (X) (X) (X) (X) 200 percent of poverty level 211,536 +/-6,534 (X) (X) (X) (X) Unrelated individuals for whom poverty status is determined 166,158 +/-4,564 28,356 +/-2,142 17.1% +/-1.1 Male 78,783 +/-3,378 11,572 +/-1,373 14.7% +/-1.5 Female 87,375 +/-2,588 16,784 +/-1,475 19.2% +/-1.5 Mean income deficit for unrelated individuals (dollars) 3,707 +/-320 (X) (X) (X) (X) Worked full-time, year-round in the past 12 months 70,804 +/-2,990 1,080 +/-429 1.5% +/-0.6 Worked less than full -time, year -round in the past 12 months 46,134 +/-2,223 10,741 +/-1,335 23.3% +/-2.5 Did not work 49,220 +/-2,083 16,535 +/-1,593 33.6% +/-2.3 PERCENT IMPUTED Poverty status for individuals 25.7% (X) (X) (X) (X) (X) Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics, 2008. Housing Due to the housing crisis and the resulting explosion of home foreclosures, ability to affording a house for median income households in 2011 has dramatically improved as seen in Table 22. In May 2011, the median sale price varied greatly throughout the county from $1,049,000 in Lafayette (zip code 94549) to $100,500 in Richmond (zip code 94801). TABLE 19 – PERCENTAGE OF HOMES AFFORDABLE TO MEDIAN INCOME HOUSEHOLDS 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Oakland PMSA 9.3 17.4 60.1 61.9 67.3 San Francisco PMSA 7.5 7.9 20.6 22.3 31.5 San Jose PMSA 13.7 15.5 33 45.5 54.1 Santa Rosa PMSA 10.4 13.9 47.4 53.4 61.9 Vallejo - Fairfield - Napa PMSA 14.9 20.4 64.6 78.7 84.8 Source: National Association of Builders, Housing Opportunity Index, 2011. Note: Oakland PMSA includes Contra Costa and Alameda Counties; San Francisco PMSA includes Marin, San Mateo and San Francisco Counties; San Jose PMSA includes Santa Clara County; Santa Rosa PSMA includes Sonoma County; Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa PMSA includes Solano and Napa Counties. Data is from 4th quarters.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 27 TABLE 20 – MEDIAN AND HIGH SALE PRICE OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, CONDOS, AND NEW HOMES, AND % CHANGE OVER PREVIOUS YEAR. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, MAY 2011 Community Zip Sales % Chg Median % Chg Hi Price Sq.Ft. % Chg Alamo 94507 17 -26.1% $1,100,000 -1.1% $2,395,000 $368 -5.0% Antioch 94509 94 -31.4% $137,000 -14.4% $330,000 $101 -7.5% Antioch 94531 80 -9.1% $200,000 -20.0% $492,500 $105 -7.0% Brentwood 94513 115 3.6% $315,000 14.5% $623,000 $125 -3.8% Byron 94514 1 0.0% $152,500 -42.5% $152,500 $116 -2.9% Clayton 94517 17 -5.6% $440,000 -11.1% $645,000 $232 -10.3% Concord 94518 20 -47.4% $326,500 -4.0% $520,000 $210 -4.6% Concord 94519 30 -31.8% $213,000 -27.6% $405,000 $183 -24.8% Concord 94520 44 -2.2% $115,000 -35.4% $288,500 $171 0.6% Concord 94521 49 11.4% $250,000 -20.6% $660,000 $217 -10.0% Danville 94506 27 -40.0% $812,500 -6.6% $1,500,000 $291 -17.0% Danville 94526 49 25.6% $805,500 0.7% $2,900,000 $349 -0.1% Diablo 94528 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a El Cerrito 94530 16 -50.0% $407,500 -24.5% $699,000 $356 -15.4% El Sobrante 94803 26 -16.1% $227,500 -2.4% $535,000 $178 -9.8% Hercules 94547 42 7.7% $310,000 -1.7% $710,000 $176 -5.0% Lafayette 94549 28 -20.0% $1,049,000 13.0% $2,225,000 $446 -3.2% Martinez 94553 52 10.6% $250,750 -21.0% $1,300,000 $207 -6.6% Moraga 94556 23 15.0% $768,000 14.9% $1,410,000 $387 -2.7% Oakley 94561 67 -32.3% $215,000 -4.4% $395,000 $107 -8.4% Orinda 94563 23 53.3% $972,500 10.3% $1,750,000 $414 -18.8% Pinole 94564 21 10.5% $240,000 -15.2% $366,000 $199 -10.9% Pittsburg 94565 118 -17.5% $170,000 -2.9% $467,000 $108 -6.2% Pleasant Hill 94523 35 -7.9% $331,500 -22.2% $799,500 $264 -13.8% Richmond 94801 40 8.1% $100,500 -23.0% $2,640,900 $86 -9.8% Richmond 94804 72 30.9% $130,500 -23.2% $437,500 $106 -28.8% Richmond 94805 15 -37.5% $170,000 -19.0% $344,000 $169 -3.9% Rodeo 94572 10 25.0% $225,000 -19.4% $310,000 $152 -9.2% San Pablo 94806 67 17.5% $127,000 -17.8% $460,000 $130 -12.6% San Ramon 94582 60 -40.0% $638,250 -8.0% $1,020,000 $281 -2.7% San Ramon 94583 44 -27.9% $479,500 -13.9% $1,400,000 $296 -9.1% Walnut Creek 94595 45 15.4% $375,000 1.4% $1,450,000 $327 -32.1% Walnut Creek 94596 31 0.0% $410,500 -25.3% $979,000 $357 -5.4% Walnut Creek 94597 28 -22.2% $403,000 -5.2% $1,500,000 $308 -20.0% Walnut Creek 94598 31 -32.6% $525,000 -8.3% $1,500,000 $325 -4.3% Source: Data Quick Information Systems, San Francisco Chronicle Charts for the month of May 2011. HOUSING HUD defines affordable housing as that which costs no more than 30% of household income. In 2011, the percentage of owners spending more than 30% of their income on housing in Contra Costa County was 53.70% while 40.6% of renters spent more than 30% of their income on housing. The median rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Contra Costa County (in the Oakland PMSA) was $1,482 compared to Santa Rosa PMSA at $1,976 and San Francisco PMSA at $1,631.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 28 TABLE 21– MEDIAN MONTHLY RENTS, FISCAL YEAR 2011 STUDIO 1 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOMS 3 BEDROOMS 4 BEDROOMS Oakland PMSA $1,043 $1,251 $1,482 $2,064 $2,533 San Francisco PMSA $1,330 $1,631 $2,046 $2,715 $2,916 San Jose PMSA $1,324 $1,556 $1,837 $2,638 $2,893 Santa Rosa PMSA $4,897 $1,086 $1,357 $1,976 $2,296 Vallejo - Fairfield - Napa PMSA $1,092 $1,186 $1,358 $1,869 $2,261 Source: HUD, User Data Sets, 50th percentile rents, FY 2011. Note: Oakland PMSA includes Contra Costa and Alameda Counties; San Francisco PMSA includes Marin, San Mateo and San Francisco Counties; San Jose PMSA includes Santa Clara County; Santa Rosa PSMA includes Sonoma County; Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa PMSA includes Solano and Napa Counties. FIGURE 5 – MONTHLY HOUSING COSTS AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2011 Selected Housing Characteristics Estimate Margin of Error Percent Margin of Error Housing units with a mortgage (excluding units where SMOCAPI cannot be computed) 198,705 +/-2,600 198,705 (X) Less than 20.0 percent 43,475 +/-1,659 21.90% +/-0.8 20.0 to 24.9 percent 23,829 +/-1,361 12.00% +/-0.6 25.0 to 29.9 percent 24,688 +/-1,299 12.40% +/-0.6 30.0 to 34.9 percent 21,045 +/-1,213 10.60% +/-0.6 35.0 percent or more 85,668 +/-2,207 43.10% +/-0.9 Not Computed 884 +/-279 ( X) ( X) Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2011 Transportation The number of people carpooling to work in Contra Costa County increased from 16% in 2000 to 23% in 2002 and decreased to 18% in 2005. From 2000 through , the percentage of people using transit (includes busses, trains and ferry boats) fluctuated from a low of 8% in 2002 to a high of 17% in 2004. In 2009, almost one-third (31.9%) of Contra Costa residents worked outside of the county compared to 19.0% statewide. By 2009, the mean travel time to work was higher in Contra Costa County at 31.9 minutes, the longest travel time in the nine Bay Area counties.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 29 TABLE 22 – CLUSTERED MODES OVER TIME, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Drive alone 66% 70% 66% 64% 66% 64% Carpool 16% 19% 23% 20% 15% 18% Transit 16% 9% 8% 13% 17% 15% Other 3% 2% 4% 4% 3% 12% Source: RIDES for Bay Area Commuters, Inc., Commute Profile 2032: A Survey of San Francisco Bay Area Commute Patterns, October 2005. TABLE 23 – WORKERS 16 YEAR AND OVER COMMUTING TO WORK, 2008 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA Percent using carpools 11.7% 11.9% Percent using public transportation (Excluding taxicab) 9.0% 5.3 Percent worked outside of county of residence 31.9% 19.0% Mean travel time to work in minutes (if worked outside of home) 31.9 27.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2008. Immunizations Historically, the percentage of fully immunized kindergarteners in Contra Costa County has been higher than the percentage of fully immunized California kindergarteners. However, beginning in 2006 immunization rates began to decline from 94.87% in 2006 to 93.17% in 2010. This decline is thought to be related to the controversies surrounding the perceived risks of immunization relative to the risk of illness. TABLE 24 IMMUNIZATION 2000 2001 2003 2005 2006 2008 2010 Number of students 13,282 13,666 13,740 14,338 13,815 14,166 14,325 Percent with Personal Medical Exemptions (PME) 0.2 0.2 0.17 0.27 0.21 0.19 0.24 Percent with Personal Belief Exemptions (PBE) 0.9 N/A 1.33 1.32 1.43 2.10 2.97 Percent requiring one or more immunization 4.4 4.6 3.74 2.73 3.58 3.12 3.62 Percent with all required immunizations, Contra Costa County 94.5 94.1 94.75 95.68 94.87 94.59 93.17 Percent with all required immunizations, California 92.2 90.9 92.53 92.82 92.69 92.74 92.61 Source: State of California Department of Health Services, Division of Communicable Disease Control, Immunization Branch, 2010.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 30 Births The number of overall Contra Costa births decreased by 3.5% from 2008 to 2009. The total number of Asian/Pacific Islander births increased slightly by .57%, while the total number of births by all other ethnicities show decreases with the largest decrease being by the Native American population which decreased by 44.4% since 2008. A baby is considered to be low weight if it weight less than 2,500 grams (5lb. 8oz.). The percentage of low birth weights in Contra Costa County has been slightly higher than the state in 2004 and from 2006 to 2009. The Healthy People 2010 Objective is that no more than 5% of births will be low weight. “In the United States, low birth weight (less than 2,500 grams or 5 pounds 8 ounces) is a strong predictor of infant mortality and morbidity. Preterm birth, occurring before 37 weeks of gestation, is one of the predominant proximate causes of low birth weight. Risk factors for preterm delivery include low socioeconomic status, low pre- pregnancy weight, inadequate weight gain during the pregnancy, history of infertility problems, smoking, and multiple gestations. Infants who are born at low birth weight are at a greater risk of developing other problems later in life, such as physical disabilities and developmental delays” Source: Child Health USA 2003, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration. TOTAL BIRTHS TABLE 25 – NUMBER OF BIRTHS BY ETHNICITY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ETHNICITY 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 % Δ ’08-‘09 African American 1,273 1,115 1,146 1,150 1,259 1,173 1,203 1,188 -1.2 Asian/Pacific Islander 1,618 1,592 1,723 1,775 1,969 2,007 1,940 1,951 .57 Caucasian 5,473 5,235 5,103 5,192 5,068 4,859 4,688 4,568 -2.5 Latino 4,091 4,073 4,305 4,589 4,910 4,986 4,844 4,536 -6.3 Native American 39 25 30 36 20 16 27 15 -44.4 2 or more races 821 1170 972 221 339 444 434 422 -2.8 Total 13,315 13,210 13,279 13,143 13,656 13,485 13,136 12,680 -3.5 LOW WEIGHT BIRTHS TABLE 26 – PERCENTAGE OF BIRTHS THAT ARE LOW WEIGHT 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 Contra Costa County 6.2 6.4 7.0 6.4 7.0 6.6 6.5 6.6 California 6.4 6.6 6.7 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.8 6.8 Source: State of California Department of Health Services, Center for Health Statistics, Birth Records, 2009
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 31 F rom 2000 through 2007, (the most recent year data is available), the percentage of women receiving prenatal care in the first trimester has remained higher in Contra Costa County than in the state. However, the percentage has decreased 4.6% from 2006 to 2007. The Healthy People 2010 Objective is that at least 90% of pregnant women will receive prenatal care in the first trimester. In 2001, Contra Costa County was close to meeting this goal with 89.4% of women receiving adequate prenatal care but since that time the percentage of women accessing prenatal care has declined to 83.4%. While it is beyond the scope of this study to speculate on the cause for this decline, there seems to be an association between the increases in birth rate amongst minority and immigrant groups traditionally challenged by barriers to health care access. It is an indicator of interest that should be investigated. PRENATAL CARE TABLE 27 – PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN RECEIVING PRENATAL CARE IN THE FIRST TRIMESTER 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Contra Costa County 89.3 89.4 89.2% 88.5% 87.8% 83.3% 88.0% 83.4% California 83.1 84.0 84.8% 85.8% 85.6% 81.1% 85.2% 81.1% FIGURE 6 – PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN RECEIVING PRENATAL CARE IN THE FIRST TRIMESTER, BY ETHNICITY, 2007 Source: State of California Department of Health Services, Center for Health Statistics, Birth Records, 2007. 70.0%75.0%80.0%85.0%90.0%95.0%Contra CostaCalifornia
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 32 Teen Births There has been a steady decrease in teen births in both Contra Costa County for the past four years. In Contra Costa County from 2005-2009, there was a decrease in low weight births to teen mothers (ages 15-19) from 8.4% in 2005 to 7.4% in 2009. The percentage of teen mothers receiving prenatal in the first trimester ranged from a high of 70.8% in 2006 to a low of 64.8 in 2009 and is well below the Healthy People 2010 Objective of 90%. TABLE 28 – PERCENTAGE OF BIRTHS THAT ARE TO TEEN MOTHERS (AGED 15-19), CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Contra Costa County 6.6 6.3 6.1 6.7 6.7 6.4 6.4 6.0 California 9.5 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.1 TABLE 29 – TEEN BIRTHS BY ETHNICITY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2009 ETHNICITY PERCENT OF TOTAL TEEN BIRTHS African American 20.7 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.8 Caucasian 20.8 Latino 56.6 TABLE 30 – LOW WEIGHT BIRTHS TO TEEN MOTHERS (AGED 15-19), CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BIRTH WEIGHT 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Under 1,5000 grams(2.2 lbs.) 11 15 11 12 12 1,500-2,499 grams (5.5 lbs.) 63 57 52 50 45 Total low weight (under 2,500 grams) 74 72 63 62 57 Total teen births 877 911 869 842 767 Percent low weight 8.4 7.9 7.2 7.4 7.4 Note: Low weight births are less than 2,500 grams. TABLE 31 –PERCENTAGE OF TEEN MOTHERS (AGED 15-19) RECEIVING PRENATAL CARE IN THE FIRST TRIMESTER, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PRENATAL CARE STATUS 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Number with prenatal care 600 645 594 557 497 Total teen births 877 911 869 842 767 Percent with prenatal care 68.4 70.8 68.3 66.1 64.8 Source: Source: State of California Department of Health Services, Center for Health Statistics, Birth Records, 2010.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 33 Asthma In 2009, the percentage of children 0-5 years old from low income families (0-100% of the FPL) who participated in the California Health Information Survey and indicated that they had an emergency visit or urgent care visit was 0 compared to the statewide rate of 41.8%. The California Health Interview Survey indicates the Contra Costa numbers are statistically unstable. However, the incidence rate in Contra Costa County, as compared to the State of California is 12.,9% higher than the statewide incidence rate. TABLE 32 – ASTHMA EMERGENCY ROOM VISITS, 2009 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA Had emergency room / urgent care visit for asthma within past 12 months (current asthmatics) Had emergency room / urgent care visit for asthma within past 12 months (current asthmatics) Visited emergency/urgent care for asthma 0 Visited emergency/urgent care for asthma 41.8% (27.4 - 56.2) 18,000 Did not visit emergency/urgent care for asthma 100.0%* ( - ) 1,000 Did not visit emergency/urgent care for asthma 58.2% (43.8 - 72.6) 25,000 TOTAL 100.0% 1,000 TOTAL 100.0% 43,000 Source: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, AskCHIS (2009 CA Health Interview Survey), 2010 * Red asterisk means statistically unstable TABLE 33 –ASTHMA INCIDENCE, 2009 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ever diagnosed with asthma Ever diagnosed with asthma Has asthma 21.6%* ( - ) 1,000 Has asthma 8.7% (6.0 - 11.4) 65,000 Does not have asthma 78.4%* ( - ) 2,000 Does not have asthma 91.3% (88.6 - 94.0) 679,000 TOTAL 100.0%* 3,000 TOTAL 100.0% 744,000 Source: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, AskCHIS (2009 CA Health Interview Survey), 2010 * Red asterisk means statistically unstable
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 34 ORAL HEALTH STATUS OF CHILDREN TABLE 34 –DAYS OF SCHOOL MISSED DUE TO DENTAL PROBLEM, CHILDREN 5-17 YEARS OF AGE, 2009 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA Days missed school due to dental problem in past year Days missed school due to dental problem in past year 0 days 88.9% (72.7 - 100) 39,000 0 days 92.5% (91.0 - 94.0) 2,667,000 1 day 2.7%* (0 - 8.0) 1,000 1 day 3.4% (2.4 - 4.4) 98,000 2+ days 8.4%* (0 - 24.1) 4,000 2+ days 4.1% (2.9 - 5.3) 119,000 TOTAL 100.0% 44,000 TOTAL 100.0% 2,884,000 Source: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, AskCHIS (2009 CA Health Interview Survey), 2010 * Red asterisk means statistically unstable TABLE 35 – COULD N OT AFFORD NEEDED DENTAL CARE, CHILDREN 2-17 YEARS OF AGE, 2009 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA Could not afford dental care that was needed Could not afford dental care that was needed Could not afford needed dental care 1.6%* (0 - 4.9) 1,000 Could not afford needed dental care 10.1% (8.7 - 11.5) 376,000 Could afford dental care 98.4% (95.1 - 100) 56,000 Could afford dental care 89.9% (88.5 - 91.3) 3,352,000 TOTAL 100.0% 57,000 TOTAL 100.0% 3,729,000 Source: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, AskCHIS (2009 CA Health Interview Survey), 2010 * Red asterisk means statistically unstable
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 35 Pediatric Nutrition Nutritional status (weight, height, hematology), among low income, high-risk infants and children is an important indicator of general health and wellbeing. There is also a significant correlation between poor nutritional status and poverty. In 2007, children in Contra Costa County exceeded the statewide average for underweight (7.6% and 5.3% respectively), and anemia (14.6% and 14.2% respectively). While Contra Costa County did not exceed the statewide average for children above the 95th percentile for weight, the county did rank 39th out of the 58 California counties. These data are consistent with the results of physical fitness tests, (see Table 40A,) done in grades five, seven, and nine, demonstrating relatively low levels on state administered physical fitness tests TABLE 36 – INDICATORS OF NUTRITIONAL HEALTH, 2007 Source: 2007 Pediatric Nutritional Surveillance. http://www.dhcs.ca.gov/services/chdp/Documents/PedNSS/2007/6B.pdf 6-20-11. WEIGHT AT BIRTH HEIGHT WEIGHT ANEMIA NUM. %LOW <2500G (RANK) %HIGH >4000G (RANK) NUM. SHORT STATURE %<5TH (RANK) UNDERWEIGHT %<5TH (RANK) OVER WEIGHT %>/=95TH (RANK) NUM. LOW HB/HCT %(RANK) Contra Costa 3,398 6.6 (38) 9.5 (41) 16,650 4.6 (26) 7.6 (44) 12.7 (20) 4,317 14.6 (37) California 220,928 6.4 87.5 1,016,899 5.1 5.3 15.5 474,562 14.2
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 36 Health Insurance – Children Contra Costa County has more children ages 0-17 covered by their parents’ employment-based insurance than California children. In 2005, less than 2.2% of the population of Contra Costa County was enrolled in Healthy Families. By 2009 the percentage had increased to 4.2%. TABLE 37A – HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE OF CHILDREN, 2009 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA Age 0-4 years Uninsured - 3.6 Medi-Cal 25.1* 38.6 Healthy Families 1.1* 4.2 Employment-based 67.4 47.0 Privately purchased 6.1 3.9 Other public coverage - 2.7 Total 70,000 2,736,000 Ages 5-9 years Uninsured 1.4* 4.5 Medi-Cal 13.9 28.3 Healthy Families 4.3* 9.4 Employment-based 75.9 51.5 Privately purchased 4.5% 4.6 Other public coverage - 1.7 Total 3,000 2,580,000 Ages 0-17 years Uninsured .8* 4.9 Medi-Cal 17.2 28.9 Healthy Families 1.7* 7.2 Employment-based 75.8 52.5 Privately purchased 4.5 4.3 Other public coverage - 2.3 Total 252,000 9,815,000 Source: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, AskCHIS (2009 California Health Interview Survey), 2010. * Statistically unstable.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 37 HEALTH INSURANCE – HEALTHY FAMILIES Contra Costa County Healthy Families enrollment for November 2006 showed a total of 4,942 families and in 2009 that number jumped to 12,624. In July 2006, the California Department of Health Services, Medi-Cal Eligibility Branch, appropriated funds for county targeted outreach, streamlined enrollment, retention and utilization (OERU) activities to increase the number of children in Medi-Cal and Healthy Families. This outreach has resulted in a 155.4% increase in participation. TABLE 37B HEALTHY FAMILIES ENROLLMENT ZIP CODE CURRENT ENROLLMENT ZIP CODE CURRENT ENROLLMENT ZIP CODE CURRENT ENROLLMENT 94506 65 94509 992 94513 786 94516 1 94518 338 94520 762 94523 229 94526 48 94530 175 94547 245 94549 60 94556 27 94563 30 94565 1,926 94575 0 94595 21 94597 115 94801 671 94803 374 94805 241 94514 55 94507 23 94511 7 94521 396 94517 48 94519 229 94531 591 94525 20 94529 1 94561 691 94548 6 94553 342 94583 204 94564 233 94572 121 94802 - 94596 120 94598 87 94804 836 94806 1,508 Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board 11/9/2010 http://www.mrmib.ca.go v Health Insurance – Adults In 2005 the percentage of uninsured non-elderly adults in Contra Costa County (11.7%) was less than half that of California (18.8%). Furthermore, there were more county residents covered by employment-based insurance (69.8%) than California (60.4%) and a lower percentage of residents covered by Medi-Cal or Healthy Families (6.3%) than California (9.8%). By 2009 the percent of uninsured Contra Costa residents had increased to 12.6%, still below the statewide average but still a significant increase. The percentage of Contra Costa residents covered by employer based insurance decreased slightly. The percentage covered by MediCal and Healthy Families increased significantly.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 38 FIGURE 7 – HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE OF N ON-ELDERLY ADULTS (AGES 18-64) 2009 PERCENT UNINSURED PERCENT WITH JOB-BASED INSURANCE PERCENT WITH MEDI-CAL OR HEALTHY FAMILIES Contra Costa County 2005 11.7 69.8 6.3 Contra Costa County 2009 12.6 67.1 10.4 California 2005 18.8 60.4 9.8 California 2009 16.2 55.2 18.7 Source: The State of Health Insurance in California: Findings from the 2009 California Health Interview Survey, UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, June, 2010. TABLE 38 – HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE OF NONELDERLY ADULTS (AGES 18-64) 2009, BY FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL (FPL) PERCENT UNINSURED PERCENT WITH JOB-BASED INSURANCE PERCENT WITH MEDI-CAL Contra Costa County 0-99% of FPL 31.3 22.0 39.8 100-199% of FPL 23.3 36.1 22.7 California 0-99% of FPL 29.2 11.5 53.1 100-199% of FPL 26.9 31.6 24.7 Source: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, AskCHIS (2001 California Health Interview Survey), 2009. 01020304050607080 Percent Uninsured Percent with Job -Based Insurance Percent with Medi-Cal or Healthy Families Contra Costa CountyCalifornia
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 39 SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES From 2007-2010, Contra Costa County has had consistently increasing case rates of Chlamydia as did California. In 2009, the Gonorrhea incidence rate in Contra Costa County (60.1 per 100,000 population) was slightly lower than that of California (60.8 per 100,000 population). The rate increased above the state rate in 2007 and 2008, decreased in 2009, and rose again in 2010. The consistently increasing rates for STD are particularly alarming as it is a proxy for unsafe sexual practices and HIV risk factors. The STD program provides and maintains a statewide surveillance system to define high-risk populations, assess STD trends, monitor prevalence of select STDs, measure health impact and cost, and evaluate progress toward reaching Healthy People Year 2010 STD objective. TABLE 39 – SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE INCIDENCE RATES FOR CHLAMYDIA AND GONORRHEA, ALL AGES 2007 2008 2009 2010 Chlamydia Gonorrhea Chlamydia Gonorrhea Chlamydia Gonorrhea Chlamydia Gonorrhea Contra Costa 303.0 93.1 330.7 73.8 317.1 60.1 356.2 76.0 State Total 366.0 82.8 379.8 66.7 390.6 60.8 394.8 68.7 Source: California Department of Health Services, STD Control Branch Provisional Data, State of California, Department of Finance, California County Population Estimates and Components of Change by Year, July 1, 2007-2010. Sacramento, California, December 2010. Note: Rate is per 100,000 population. Physical Fitness Students who meet all six of the fitness standards on the California Physical Fitness Test are considered to be fit. Contra Costa County’s percentage of 5th, 7th and 9th grade students who were physically fit was slightly higher than the state in 2009. The percentage of students in grade five and seven found not to be in the healthy fitness zone was slightly lower than the statewide average. However, students in the Pittsburg Unified School District, and the West Contra Costa Unified School District, significantly exceeded the statewide average of students not in the healthy fitness zone. The healthy fitness zone for body composition is 17% - 32% body fat for females and 10% - 25% body fat for males. TABLE 40A – PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO ARE PHYSICALLY FIT 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Grade 5 24.8 28.4 28.4 30.2 30.6 33.2 29.5 Grade 7 28.8 32.3 33.3 31.5 34.3 36.4 35.1 Grade 9 25.5 30.6 33.1 30.5 39.8 41.4 41.8 CALIFORNIA Grade 5 23.8 24.8 24.5 25.6 28.5 29.2 29.0 Grade 7 27.8 29.1 28.8 29.6 32.9 34.2 35.0 Grade 9 24.8 26.3 26.7 27.4 35.6 37.9 38.7
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 40 TABLE 40B – PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS IN HEALTHY FITNESS ZONE (HFZ) ON BODY COMPOSITION TEST 2009-2010 SCHOOL YEAR. GRADE 5 GRADE 7 TOTAL TESTED % IN HFZ % NOT IN HFZ TOTAL TESTED % IN HFZ % NOT IN HFZ Pittsburg Unified 762 63.5 36.5 673 56.3 43.7 West Contra Costa Unified 2,185 61.7 38.3 1,920 61.6 38.4 Byron Union Elementary 212 84.4 15.6 174 74.1 25.9 Moraga 190 91.1 8.9 198 83.8 16.2 Lafayette 315 67.3 32.7 334 82.9 17.1 Orinda 231 88.3 11.7 293 91.1 8.9 Contra Costa County 12,367 72.7 27.3 11,754 71.8 28.2 California 447,863 68.5 31.5 444,024 68.8 31.2 Source: California Department of Education, California Physical Fitness Test, 2009 Note: Students meeting six of six fitness standards are considered fit. STAR Scores Students reading at or above the 50th National Percentile Ranking (NPR) are considered to be reading at the appropriate grade level. Several factors contribute to higher test scores, including early childhood experiences such as quality licensed child care. Contra Costa County has a higher percentage of 3rd graders reading above the 50th NPR than California (51% vs. 44%, respectively). From spring 2004 to spring 2009, the percentage of 3rd graders reading at or above the 50th NPR has fluctuated at both at the county and state levels to a 2006 low of 44 and 35 percent, respectively. TABLE 41 – PERCENTAGE OF THIRD GRADE STUDENTS SCORING ABOVE THE 50TH NPR IN READING BY DISTRICTS WITH ELEMENTARY STUDENTS DISTRICT SPRING 2004 SPRING ‘05 SPRING ‘06 SPRING ‘07 SPRING ‘08 SPRING ‘09 Antioch Unified 38 34 37 32 32 36 Brentwood Union Elementary 45 45 47 42 41 55 Byron Union Elementary 45 31 43 39 44 55 Canyon Elementary N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A John Swett Unified 22 23 51 30 38 35 Knightsen Elementary 30 42 32 45 50 54 Lafayette Elementary 74 80 77 77 75 81 Martinez Unified 48 55 59 51 53 59 Moraga Elementary 72 86 83 85 85 88 Mt. Diablo Unified 44 46 47 45 44 49 Oakley Union Elementary 40 40 36 35 29 42 Orinda Union Elementary 82 83 95 85 81 90 Pittsburg Unified 20 21 24 22 20 26 San Ramon Valley Unified 72 72 76 75 73 78 Walnut Creek Elementary 68 76 71 69 74 71 West Contra Costa Unified 26 34 36 28 30 31 Contra Costa County 44 46 47 46 46 51 California 35 36 37 37 38 44 Source: State of California Department of Education, STAR District / School Summary Report, 2009. N/A - Schools with less than ten children tested do not publicly report scores.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 41 Dropout Rates In the 2008-09 school year, Contra Costa County’s 4-year derived high school dropout rate (dropouts per 100 high school students) was exceeded by the dropout rate of California (18% vs. 21.3%, respectively), however Pittsburg Unified exceeded be state rate at 22.3%. TABLE 42 –RATE OF STUDENTS WHO DROPOUT OF HIGH SCHOOL, 4-YEAR DERIVED RATE Source: State of California Department of Education, California Basic Educational Data System, 2010. The dropout rates for all ethnicities have fluctuation from 2001 through 2009, with all ethnicities showing a higher dropout rate in 2009 than in 2001. African American students had the highest dropout rate at 7.1% in 2009, followed by Native American Students at 6.4%, and then by Latino and Pacific Islander students at 5.2% each. Asian students had the lowest dropout rate in 2009 at 1.4% followed by Filipino students at 1.7% FIGURE 8 – PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO DROPOUT OF HIGH SCHOOL BY ETHNICITY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 4-YEAR DERIVED RATE, 2008-09 012345678 African American Latino Filipino Caucasian Asian Native American Pacific IslanderDISTRICT 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Acalanes Union High 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.2 Antioch Unified 10.8 12.2 10.1 11. 3 12.6 John Swett Unified 12.4 19.8 11.7 12.1 13.4 Liberty Union High 1.7 2.0 8.3 7.2 7.3 Martinez Unified 4.6 4.2 12.4 6.0 9.1 Mt. Diablo Unified 12.2 13.0 14.4 15.7 16.4 Pittsburg Unified 11.9 6.4 17.3 21.5 22.3 San Ramon Valley Unified 1.5 0.9 2.8 3.1 3.6 West Contra Costa Unified 33.3 17.8 11.2 11.9 15.4 Contra Costa County 12.7 12.6 9.4 16 18 California 13.3 12.6 15 18.9 21.3
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 42 TABLE 43 – PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO DROPOUT OF HIGH SCHOOL BY ETHNICITY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 4-YEAR DERIVED RATE 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 African American 3.1 8.3 8.1 6.6 3.6 7.8 7.4 7.1 Latino 2.0 3.7 5.3 3.9 3.6 6.3 5.2 5.2 Filipino 1.2 4.1 2.5 1.9 1.5 3.5 2.9 1.7 Caucasian 1.1 1.0 1.6 1.4 1.6 2.6 2.6 2.0 Asian 0.5 2.4 1.9 1.7 1.0 2.3 2.0 1.4 Native American 2.2 * 2.1 4.0 1.4 7.1 8.6 6.4 Pacific Islander 3.3 * 5.0 4.7 4.3 7.0 6.7 5.2 Source: State of California Department of Education, California Basic Educational Data System, 2010. Note: The 4-year derived dropout rate is an estimate of the percent of students who would dropout during a four-year period, based on data collected for a single year. English Learners Historically, the percentage of students who are English l earners in Contra Costa County has been about half that of the state. In 2008-09, 17.0 percent of the students in Contra Costa County were English Learners compared with 25.8% in California. Among the languages spoken by English Learner students in 2008-09 the most common language was Spanish (79.8%) followed by Tagalog (2.9%). TABLE 44 – NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO ARE ENGLISH LEARNERS 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Number of students who are English Learners 23,980 25,176 26,070 27,156 28,270 28,483 Percent of students who are English Learners 14.5 15.2 15.7 16.3 16.9 17.0 California percent of students who are English Learners 25.4 25.2 24.9 25.0 25.0 25.8 TABLE 45 – TOP LANGUAGES SPOKEN BY ENGLISH LEARNERS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2008-2009 LANGUAGE PERCENT Spanish 79.8 Filipino (Tagalog) 2.9 Vietnamese 1.6 Farsi 1.5 Punjabi 1.3 Source: State of California Department of Education, California Basic Educational Data System, 2009.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 43 Teachers with Emergency Permits In 2008-09, Contra Costa County exceeded California’s percentage of teachers with emergency permits by 1.8%. From 2001-02 to 2008-09, the percentage of teachers with emergency permits fluctuated in Contra Costa County, while in 2008-09 declined to 3.2 (from a high of 10.6) in 2001-02. The county has exceeded the statewide average consistently since 2002-03. The percentage of teachers with emergency permits varies greatly by district throughout the county. Mt. Diablo which serves the Monument Corridor had the highest percentages of teachers with emergency permits in 2005-06 with 32.6% of their staff being first or second year teachers. Canyon Elementary and Moraga Elementary had no teachers with emergency permits, while at Orinda Union Elementary, only 0.7% of the teachers have emergency permits. TABLE 46 – PERCENTAGE OF TEACHERS WITH EMERGENCY PERMITS DISTRICT 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 Acalanes Union High 5.8 5.7 4.0 4.2 5.0 3.2 0.3 10.5 Antioch Unified 14.0 13.9 9.9 6.4 3.5 3.0 9.5 9.3 Brentwood Union Elementary 4.9 5.9 4.9 1.8 3.2 1.0 1.4 0.7 Byron Union Elementary 10.2 6.8 1.6 4.3 2.7 1.2 0.0 4.8 Canyon Elementary 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Contra Costa Co. Office of Education 24.1 13.4 7.8 6.5 9.5 16.3 16.3 17.1 John Swett Unified 18.8 15.3 8.4 7.4 6.4 3.1 4.1 1.1 Knightsen Elementary 33.3 20.7 30.0 16.7 3.3 0.0 0.0 3.6 Lafayette Elementary 3.9 5.5 4.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 Liberty Union High 18.4 20.3 13.4 9.8 7.9 4.0 3.7 0.0 Martinez Unified 8.8 7.2 1.8 1.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.5 Moraga Elementary 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mt. Diablo Unified 12.4 10.1 9.7 6.1 32.6 16.2 3.0 0.5 Oakley Union Elementary 11.3 8.9 4.7 5.6 1.7 0.8 2.5 0.8 Orinda Union Elementary 2.7 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.9 0.0 22.3 Pittsburg Unified 15.5 14.2 8.4 3.5 1.1 0.9 3.3 2.9 San Ramon Valley Unified 10.0 10.4 1.9 1.8 2.9 2.5 2.8 2.3 Walnut Creek Elementary 7.0 6.6 3.5 5.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.2 West Contra Costa Unified 7.3 5.9 2.0 5.8 1.1 6.0 5.0 2.4 Contra Costa County 10.6 9.4 6.2 4.9 9.7 5.9 3.8 3.2 California 10.6 8.4 4.9 3.5 3.2 4.4 3.3 1.4 Source: State of California Department of Education, California Basic Educational Data System, 2009.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 44 Child Care Availability According to the Economic Impact Report published by the Contra Costa Child Care Council1, parents who use licensed child care play a huge role in Contra Costa County’s economy. In fact, according to the same report, the increased economic output from licensed child care: Increases industry output by $4.92 million; Contributes $2.66 billion value added to the gross product in the county; Creates $1.58 billion total direct, indirect and induced income; Generates $255 million indirect tax revenues; and Supports approximately 35,600 jobs. Further, licensed child care centers, including centers and family child care homes, generates approximately $231.4 million in gross revenues in the county. The child care industry also directly supports 4,757 full-time equivalent (FTE) workers in Contra Costa County, which equates to more child care professionals than police officers or lawyers in the county. CHILD CARE AVAILABILITY FIGURE 9A – TOTAL POPULATION OF CHILDREN AGES 0-5 YEARS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY (WEST), 2008 Source: www.abag.gov, June, 2010. 1 Contra Costa Child Care Council, Summary of the Economic Impact of the Child Care Industry in Contra Costa County, 2003. 321 134 1546 764953108369676422378 BayView/MontalvinCrockettEl CerritoEl SobranteHerculesPinoleRichmondRodeoSan Pablo
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 45 Child care Availability FIGURE 9B – TOTAL POPULATION OF CHILDREN AGES 0-5 YEARS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY (CENTRAL), 2008 Source: www.abag.gov, June 2010. CHILD CARE AVAILABILITY FIGURE 9C– TOTAL POPULATION OF CHILDREN AGES 0-5 YEARS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY (EAST), 2008 Source: www.abag.gov, June 2010. 321 134 1546 764953108369676422378 BayView/MontalvinCrockettEl CerritoEl SobranteHerculesPinoleRichmondRodeoSan Pablo76001942380017226455691AntiochBay PointBrentwoodKnightsen/Byron/Bethel IslandOakleyPittsburg
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 46 CHILD CARE AVAILABILITY FIGURE 10 – PROJECTED GROWTH IN CHILD POPULATION IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2006 – 1015 Children by Age 2006 2010 % Change 2006 -2011 2015 % Change 2006 -2015 0 to 1 or Infant 22,500 22,820 1.4% 23,420 4.1% 2 to 5 or Preschool 54,456 53,880 -1.0% 54,740 0.5% Total 0-5 76,956 76,700 -0.3 78,160 1.6% 6-12 or School Age 101,760 95,680 -6.0% 92,440 -9.2% Total 0-12 178,716 172,380 -3.5 170,600 -4.5% Children as % of Total Population 17.5% 16.3% 15.5% Sources: ABAG Projection 05; Brion and Associates CHILD CARE AVAILABILITY While the reduction in the populations of children discussed above will lessen shortfalls somewhat in several communities by 2015, the shortages will continue to be significant in many cities analyzed, particularly when the gap is considered in relation to the overall size of the 0 to 12 population in each city. The majority of these gaps are for school-age care. However, the estimated school age gap may not include a number of licensed-exempt facilities such as programs operated by the libraries, at private schools, community and faith-based programs, as well as programs operated by city departments of parks and recreation. The cities with the highest incomes also have the lowest rates of children as a percent of population and have either very small gaps in child care or have surpluses of child care spaces relative to demand. Danville, Lafayette, Moraga, and Walnut Creek have surpluses of child care spaces relative to their own resident demand. In Walnut Creek, which is a major employment center for the County, this makes sense. For the other cities, it is not as clear why there is a surplus of spaces although household income or “ability to pay” for child care is most likely the reason. These cities also tend to have lower labor force participation rates, lower children as a percent of total population rates, and of course, higher average incomes. Cities with lower household incomes and a higher ratio of children to the total population possess, on average, a disproportionately larger population of special needs children and other special population children such as children in protective services, in the county. There is a pattern of special population children that shows the majority of children are in Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, Richmond, and San Pablo. The distribution by type of special population varies slightly from city to city but overall, special population children are concentrated in the lower income communities. Special needs or education data with the exception of Early Intervention is not available by city.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 47 Eight zip codes are particularly affected by an insufficient supply of subsidized care: 94801 and 94804 (Richmond), 94806 (San Pablo), 94520 (Concord), 94565 (Pittsburg and Bay Point), 94509 (Antioch), 94561 (Oakley) and 94513 (Brentwood). The unmet need in these zip codes as of 4/15/11 per the Centralized Eligibility List (CEL) is noted in Table 49. TABLE 47 – CHILD CARE NEED: 8 ZIP CODES WITH HIGHEST NEED, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2011 Zip Code 0-2 3-5 94801 273 703 94804 279 695 94806 307 790 94520 (Monument) 284 464 94565 251 530 94509 216 450 94561 171 404 94513 178 361 Source: Centralized Eligibility List, April, 2011 TABLE 48 – FAMILIES WAITING ON CEL AND THE REASONS FOR NEEDING CARE, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2010. FAMILY COUNT CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES WORKING EDUCATION OR TRAINING SEEKING EMPLOYMENT INCAPA- CITATED SEEKING HOUSING PART- DAY PRESCHOOL 1,914 7 1,538 327 643 80 33 921 Source: “Status Report on the Implementation of County Centralized Eligibility Lists,” California Department of Education, Child Development Division, November 2010 TABLE 49 – CHILDREN WAITING ON CEL AND TIME NEEDED, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2010. CHILD COUNT CHILD HAS IFSP OR IEP CHILD IS FOSTER OR GUARDIAN CHILD CHILD NEEDS FULL TIME CARE CHILD NEEDS PART TIME CARE CHILD NEEDS EVENING CARE CHILD NEEDS WEEKEND CARE 2,523 110 89 1,564 1,628 125 96 Source: “Status Report on the Implementation of County Centralized Eligibility Lists,” California Department of Education, Child Development Division, November 2010
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 48 FIGURE 11 – PRESCHOOL SLOTS AVAILABLE AT LICENSED CENTERS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2011. Source: California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division, https://secure.dss.cahwnet.gov/ccld/securenet/ccld_search/ccld_search.aspx, June 2011 FIGURE 12 INFANT/TODDLER SLOTS AVAILABLE AT LICENSED CENTERS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 2011. Source: California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division, https://secure.dss.cahwnet.gov/ccld/securenet/ccld_search/ccld_search.aspx, June 2011 1311 318 993 2382 156 227 242 267 763 306 115 1159 835 2141 181 59905001000150020002500300080227724917291551684952671874050100150200250300
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 49 Foster Care From 1003 to 2010, the rate of first entry into foster care (per 1,000 children ages 0-17) in Contra Costa County was lower than the state rate. In 2010, the rate of first entry into foster care was much higher for African American children in Contra Costa County and California (5.8 and 7.5, respectively) than for any other ethnicity. Further, in 2010 in Contra Costa County, the rate of first entry into foster care for African American children was more than three times higher than the overall rate. TABLE 50 – RATE OF FIRST ENTRY INTO FOSTER CARE 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Contra Costa County 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.3 2.3 1.9 1.6 1.4 California 2.8 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.6 2.5 2.4 Note: Rate per 1,000 children (0-17 years). TABLE 51 – RATE OF FIRST ENTRY INTO FOSTER CARE, BY ETHNICITY, 2010 AFRICAN AMERICAN CAUCASIAN LATINO ASIAN Contra Costa County 5.8 0.9 1.3 0.7 California 7.5 2.2 2.5 0.7 Source: Child Welfare Services Reports for California. Retrieved November, 2011, from University of California at Berkeley Center for Social Services Research website. Note: Rate per 1,000 children (0-17 years); the foster care entries in some counties were between 1 and 4 and therefore masked to protect confidentiality. Domestic Violence The rate per 1,000 population of domestic violence calls for assistance in Contra Costa County has fluctuated over the last 9 years from a low of 4.0 in 2005 and then an increase in 2006 and 2007 of 4.8 per 1,000 population. The rate of domestic violence calls for assistance in Contra Costa County has been lower than the rate for California from 2001 through 2009. The jurisdictions with the highest numbers of domestic violence calls were Richmond, Antioch, and unincorporated Contra Costa County. TABLE 52 – RATE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CALLS FOR ASSISTANCE 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Contra Costa County 4.7 4.9 4.3 4.1 4.0 4.8 4.8 4.6 4.5 California 5.7 5.5 5.4 5.1 5.1 6.0 6.1 5.6 5.5 Source: California Department of Justice, 2009. Note: Rate per 1,000 population.
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 50 Child Abuse Over the past six years, the rate per 1,000 children ages 0-17 of substantiated child abuse cases in Contra Costa County has been lower than the rate of substantiated child abuse in California. The county rate has shown a steady decrease since 2007 when the rate peaked at 8.8, still below the state rate for that year of 10.7. TABLE 53 – RATE OF SUBSTANTIATED CHILD ABUSE CASES 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Contra Costa County 8.1 7.6 8.7 8.8 7.0 5.3 California 11.6 11.3 10.8 10.7 9.7 9.3 Source: Child Welfare Services Reports for California. Retrieved August 2010, from University of California at Berkeley Center for Social Services Research website. Note: Rate per 1,000 children (ages 0-17); the substantiated child abuse rate measures the number of child abuse reports that warrant an in-person investigation and are determined to have occurred. Juvenile Arrests The overall juvenile misdemeanor and felony arrest rates decreased in 2009 in both Contra Costa County and California. Contra Costa County’s juvenile misdemeanor arrests decreased from 20.4 arrests per 1,000 juveniles aged less than 18 in 2004 to 16.8 per 1,000 juveniles in 2009. On the contrary, felony juvenile arrest rates increased in the county from 10.8 per 1,000 juveniles in 2004 to 11.1 per 1,000 juveniles in 2009, with the highest rate noted as 20.7 in 2007. TABLE 54 – JUVENILE MISDEMEANOR ARREST RATE 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Contra Costa County 20.4 16.9 19.5 20.7 20.1 16.8 California 28.7 28.2 29.1 28.9 28.2 25.5 TABLE 55 – JUVENILE FELONY ARREST RATE 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Contra Costa County 10.8 11.1 12.4 12.9 11.3 11.1 California 13.5 13.6 14.5 14.2 14.1 12.9 Note: Rate per 1,000 juveniles (less than 18 years). 2009
Contra Costa County COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR CY 2011-2013 51 Adult Arrests Throughout 2004 to 2009, the adult misdemeanor and felony rates have been lower in Contra Costa County than in California. In 2009 the highest numbers of adult felony arrests occurred in the jurisdictions of unincorporated Contra Costa County, followed by the City of Richmond, the City of Antioch and the City of Concord. While these crime statistics show an overall decline in arrest rates in 2009, the perception of high crime is very real in the county. In November 2009, Forbes.com named Richmond one of the United States’ most dangerous cities based on FBI crime statistics. Gang violence is rampant in the communities of Richmond, Concord, Bay Point, Pittsburg, and Antioch. TABLE 56 – ADULT MISDEMEANOR ARREST RATE 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Contra Costa County 24.9 22.1 21.9 23.2 24.3 22.9 California 33.3 33.5 33.8 34.4 34.8 33.2 TABLE 57 – ADULT FELONY ARREST RATE 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Contra Costa County 15.5 17.1 16.3 15.4 15.0 14.3 California 19.4 19.6 19.0 18.4 17.2 15.9 Source: California Department of Justice, 2009 Note: Rate per 1,000 adults (18-69 years).