HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03051996 - D2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
,E.....- • _.__oma
-, Costa FROM: .� �` • COSta
Phil Batchelor, County Administrator
County
DATE: March 5, 1996 f'sr;cou+
SUBJECT: Organization and Services Review of Community Services Department
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . HEAR presentation of Paul McIntosh, affiliated with Shannon
Davis Associates of Sacramento;
2 . ACCEPT written report of Paul McIntosh on the organization and
services review of Community Services Department;
3 . DIRECT County Administrator to prepare organizational options
in response to recommendations contained in the report and
changes in anticipated Federal and State welfare reform
legislation. '
BACKGROUND:
On November 7, 1995 the Board of Supervisors authorized an
independent third-party review of the organization and services of
the Community Services Department. The goal of the review was to
determine how the department is functioning; what, if any, changes
need to be made to insure that programs and services to our
citizens are more effective; how the programs of the department are
organized compared to other agencies; and to present findings,
recommendations and options to the County.
While the consultant's report is responsive to the request of the
County, this review evolved into a broader review of the
environment for social service programs in general due to the
significant and sweeping welfare reform changes being proposed by
both the Federal and State governments . This report concludes that
to successfully manage the transition from the current
administration of social service programs, including those
contained in the Department of Community Services, significant
structural and organizational changes need to considered.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMI E
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON March 5 , 1996 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X
Please see Addendum (Attached) for list of speakers.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED THAT the above - recommendations are
APPROVED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the organizational options developed
by the County Administrator are REFERRED to the Family and Human
Services Committee for coordination of information and public
meetings in the! community prior to bringing those options to the
full Board. 1
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT Bishop ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: 1, 4 q 5 and 2 NOES: None AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: 3 ABSTAIN: None OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED March 5 , 1996
Contact: SEE PAGE 2 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
CC. ep ISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTR R
4EPU Y
-2-
The impending welfare reform will place emphasis in the near future
on a temporary assistance program that will include job development
and job training coupled with the integration of child care and
children' s services . This report and its recommendations are the
starting point for addressing the changes needed in the delivery of
County Social Services and Community Services programs to comply
with the dramatic and fundamental changes expected in the near
future.
Contact: Scott Tandy 646-4087
cc: County Administrator
Paul McIntosh (via CAO)
County Counsel
Auditor-Controller
Community Services Director
Social Services Director
D.2
March 5, 1996
Item D.2
ADDENDUM
The following persons appeared to speak on this item:
1 . Henry Clarke, General Manager, Local 1 , P.O. Box 222,
Martinez, CA.
2. Ella Gordon, 6190 Rose Arbor, EI Sobrante, CA.
3. Kim Stevenson, 609-12th Street, Resident District 1 (No City
Given on Speaker Card).
4. Rev. Lawrence Laky, 1918 Henry Ave., Pinole, CA.
5. Andre Henry, Community Child Care, 2600 Giant Road #5,
San Pablo, CA.
The following persons submitted written comments on speaker cards, but
did not wish to address the Board:
1 . La Toya Carr, Verde Preschool --(Parent), .525 Verde Ave.,
Richmond, CA.
2. La Shonna Wooten, Verde Preschool, 600 Market Ave.,
Richmond, CA.
Public comment on this matter was concluded after all persons desiring
to speak were heard.
t <
et
Paul McIntosh
1525 Sean Drive
4 Placerville, California 95667
(916), 622-1374 (Voice)
(916) 642-0149 (Fax)
February 15, 1996
Phil Batchelor
Chief Administrative Officer
Contra Costa County.
651 Pine Street, 11th Floor
Martinez, California 94553
Re: Report on the Organization and Services of the Contra Costa
County Department of Community Services
Dear Phil;
The attached report summarizes my recommendations regarding the
Contra Costa County Department of Community Services. Although my study
began as a review of the department's organization and services, it necessarily
evolved into a review of the environment for social service programs in general.
The Federal and State governments are on the verge of making radical,
sweeping changes to social service programs, under the cloak of "welfare
reform". For Contra Costa County, and other California Counties, to
successfully manage the transition from the current administration of social
service programs, including the Department of Community Services, to the new
era, sweeping structural and organizational changes will have to be considered_
At both the Federal and State level, emphasis is 'placed upon a
temporary or transitional assistance program where adults will be supported .
(on a limited basis) while they are trained and assisted in finding jobs. With
no Federal or State safety net, it would appear that if these people fail to find
sustainable employment, they will end up on County-funded General
Assistance. Therefore, it would appear that successful programs will focus on
job development and job training for current welfare recipients. Since a sizable
portion of those recipients are single mothers, a key ingredient to a successful
program will be the integration of child care and children's services into the
administration of the temporary assistance program. That is the
recommendation of this report.
Y•.21
While there are many avenues that a study of the Department of
Community Services could take; and indeed there have been many analyses
completed in the past, this report deals with the anticipated changes in the
operating environment for the programs themselves. This change is dramatic
and fundamental. Current program restrictions and requirements should not
be used in the analysis of potential changes, as these restrictions and
regulations could be significantly different in the new environment. It makes
little sense to analyze and reorganize programs under the current structure,
when that structure is about to undergo radical change.
Change is usually met with a high degree of anxiety. Indeed, the stakes
are very high for all concerned in welfare reform. My recommendations
suggest changes ' to the current method of program administration and
organization. There may be. better ways of addressing the needs of clients in
the future, but analysis of those approaches must await adoption of specific
regulations. My report should be viewed as a beginning point of change, not
an ending point. Certainly, a great deal of analysis and negotiation must take
place before the change will be complete. The transition from the current
organizational and program structure to an approach that will serve Contra
Costa County under the expected state and federal changes, will be an
enormous task, and significant county resources will need to be devoted to its
accomplishment. The Chinese have a saying, though, that is appropriate:
"The longest journey begins with the first step". It is important that the first
step be in the, right direction. My report provides Contra Costa with a
direction for taking that step. The report also recommends that Contra Costa
County act now and be prepared for change and help to mold policy at the
state level; rather than waiting until later and simply reacting.
Sincerely,
� IJI
Paul McIntosh
Attachment
V r
Report on the
Organization and Services
of the
Contra Costa County
DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY SERVICES
To
Phil Batchelor
County Administrative Officer
Contra Costa County
Prepared by:
Paul McIntosh
1525 Sean Drive
Placerville, California 95667
February 15, 1996
J 4
Introduction
Contra Costa County has long helda strong commitment to the
preservation of the family. This commitment was never more evident than
in 1990. With the financial failure of the Richmond Unified School District,
Contra Costa County stepped forward to support and administer Child
Development and Child Nutrition programs, adding those responsibilities to
the Department of Community Services, which administered the federal
Head Start program. By undertaking these programs, Contra Costa County
became unique among California counties; no other county in the state
operates programs for children to the extent of Contra Costa. Taking over
responsibility for these programs has not been without some pain and
effort, however. During the period of 1990 through 1995, the State of
California annually reduced revenues available to counties to meet local
needs, or increased program responsibilities for counties. As a result, the
Department of Community Services has had to support children's programs
primarily through grant funds. Like other California counties, Contra Costa
has not had discretionary revenues available to support those programs
desired at the local level but not mandated by the state or federal
government.
With federal and state reforms to current income maintenance and
support programs. imminent, the opportunity to examine all programs
affecting families becomes available. Contra Costa County has
commissioned a study of the organization and services of the Department
of Community Services to ensure that family preservation issues remain
the central focus of social service reform. This study seeks to:
• Provide the County with options and recommendations for the
assignment and direction of programs within the Department of
Community Services
• Provide the County with recommendations for improving the
coordination and effectiveness of programs administered by the
Department.
While the study began with an analysis of the Community Services
Department and the programs it operates, the enormity of the proposals for
welfare reform dictated that this study examine the basic operating
environment (e.g. rules, regulations, program objectives, etc.) for the
Department's services instead. What good would it do to provide
recommendations to assignment and direction of programs if the very basis
of those programs were about to experience sweeping changes?
Therefore, the focus of this study is to prepare Contra Costa County for the
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page Z
impacts Federal and State welfare reform proposals will have at the Focal
level.
To accomplish this study, the Community Services department head
and program mangers, other key County personnel (including the
Department of Social Services), community organizations, and state and
federal officials were interviewed, prior reports and documents were
reviewed and analyzed, and current gubernatorial and legislative proposals
were studied.
Executive Summary
Contra Costa County has made the preservation of families as a top
priority in the delivery of county services. Building healthy families, though,
needs to be all-inclusive. Family issues and children's issues cannot be
separated, but rather, must be dealt with in concert. After reviewing
potential changes to the administration and structure of programs serving
eligible participants in Contra Costa County, this report recommends that
the Department of Community Services be consolidated with the
Department of Social Services. Furthermore, the Department of Social
Services should act now to begin planning for the integration of children's
development and nutrition programs, and the Head Start program, with job
development/training activities and approaches. Finally, this report
recommends that Contra Costa County review the 'organizational and
programmatic approach to job training and economic development to
determine whether or not these elements should be consolidated into the
Social Services framework to provide an integrated approach to block grant
administration.
Background
The Community Services Department operates four divisions: Head
Start, Child Development, Child Nutrition, and Community Service Block
Grant/Weatherization. The Department's mission, and the focus of these
programs, is to "provide comprehensive services to low income residents of
the Contra Costa County contributing to independence and self sufficiency
." As opposed to income maintenance or entitlement programs, the
department's focus is to assist low income residents to get on their feet and
become independent of institutional support. The department
accomplishes this goal by
1 Executive Summary, Department Strategic Plan dated January 18, 1995
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 3
• providing child care to eligible parents (thus enabling those
parents to pursue gainful employment);
•providing preschool (Head Start) opportunities to eligible
children (thus preparing them for formal education);
• providing nutritious meals to children enrolled in preschool and
day care programs; and,
• providing grant-funded training to eligible residents.
Although the department's mission statement focuses on "low income
residents", and the primary recipients of the departments services are
parents/families, the primary benefactor of its services are children2 . With
the exception of the training and weatherization programs administered:
through the Community Service Block Grant/Weatherization Division, the
primary focus of the department is on children. Since Contra Costa County
has declared preservation of the family and support for children as primary
goals for the_County3 , both the Community Services and Social Services
Departments play a key roles in accomplishing the overall .goals of the
Board of Supervisors. There are a variety of issues facing the department,
however, which may inhibit its ability to succeed in meeting its stated
mission.
Prior to 1990, the Contra Costa Department of Community Services
was a small department. The Adopted Budget for the 1989/90 fiscal year
provided 58 allocated positions and an annual operating budget of $4.2
million. When the Richmond Unified School District declared bankruptcy in
1990, Contra Costa County stepped in to assist the school district and
ensure that children's programs would not suffer from the fiscal problems of
the school district. Since the Summer of 1990, Contra Costa County,
through the Community Services. Department, has administered Head
Start, Child Development and Child Nutrition programs at County sites and
through contracts. The Community Services Department is officially
recognized as the local Community Action Agency, making the department
eligible for significant state and federal funds and grants.
Today, the department maintains a staffing allocation of 402
2 It must be noted that the Department,as a Community Action Agency, serves more than children and
their families. The department'serves all low income residents to provide services that lead to
economic independence and self-sufficiency.
3 Contra Costa County"Efficiency and Effectiveness", March, 1994
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 4
employees and has an annual operating budget of $14.2 million (an
increase of 593 % and 238%, respectively). County staff has done an
exceptional job of rebuilding the children's programs and bringing them to
their current status. Contra Costa County operates 9 child development
sites and administers contracts with 5 delegate agencies. In 1993, 2,212
children attended day care facilities through the Child Development
program, a 100% increase in service to children. The County operates 8
Head Start sites, and administers contracts with 2 delegate agencies. In
1993, 1 ,175 children participated in Head Start programs. The County
contracts with 6 delegate agencies for Community Service Block Grant
program services.
Despite these efforts, estimates are that, due to limited funding, the
Department of Community Services reaches only 17% of the children
eligible for its programs. Head Start serves 29% of eligible children, Child
Development serves only 5% of eligible children. . To reach larger shares of
the eligible population, more funding must be obtained from state and
federal sources. The Community Services Department has been very
active in pursuing additional grant funds to expand these programs.
Over the past five years, the department has experienced significant
growth in program responsibility and staffing. In 1989/90, there were 5
managers in the department, including the department head, and 53 line
employees; a ratio of roughly 1 to 10. Today, there are 40 managers in the
department and 362 line employees; a ratio of roughly 1 to 9.
The department inherited programs that relied to some extent on
community agencies. As noted, the department administers contracts with
13 delegate agencies. As the contracting agency, the Department has a
responsibility, under state and,federal regulations, to ensure that delegate
agencies comply with those regulations. This has required that the
Department provide.training and assistance to those delegate agencies. At
times, the delegate agencies have resisted compliance, or have disagreed
with the Department's interpretation of regulations. These disagreements
have often had to be settled at the Chief Administrative Officer or Board
level. Threats of non-funding in the Head Start program, and other issues,
have resulted in a significant amount of management attention on the
relationship between the Department and the delegate agencies. At times,
this attention has been at the expense of other managerial duties.
Critical Factors
. . D2
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 5
Aside from the issues associated with phenomenal program and
staffing growth, there are other significant issues facing the Department of
Community Services and other social services agencies in Contra Costa
County. These issues deal with the program environment in which the
County and social services departments may be operating during the
coming year. While departmental managers are fighting to cope with
today's issues, policy-makers in the federal and state government are
moving to restructure the foundation of the programs administered by the
department. The changes likely to occur as a result of welfare reform will
have far-reaching impacts on social service programs, including both the
Department of Community Services and Department of Social Services and
the clientele the departments serve. Because of the enormity of the
changes contemplated in the structure of social service programs, the
criteria used to measure successful services in Head Start, child
development and child nutrition programs will be radically changed.
Federal Welfare Reform
During the course of 1994 and 1995, Congress has debated
reforms to welfare and Medicaid programs. Some of the proposals
considered have been radical, while others would make minor
changes to the programs currently administered by.Contra Costa
County. During the summer of 1995, the House of Representatives
passed a comprehensive welfare reform bill (House Resolution 4).
The Senate adopted a similar version of the bill and a conference
.._committee met during most of the fall to work out differences. A
compromise bill was passed by both houses in December and sent to
President Clinton for action. On January 9, 1996, President Clinton
vetoed the bill, stating the bill passed by Congress did not provide
enough support to children. Even though the President has vetoed
the legislation, both the President and Congress desire welfare
reform. Thus, the stage is set for a compromise bill that will address
the concerns of the President and the democratic minority. There are
several areas where both sides agree and most political analysts
predict will be changed by a compromise bill:
• A significant reduction in the amount of funds spent on
entitlement programs. Some lawmakers want to reduce
federal expenditures by as much as $58 billion over a five year
period.
• Federal block grants -to states with limited outcome
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 6
measures. The federal government will step out of the funding
picture by providing block grants to states. States will be left to
establish program and entitlement criteria. The Aid to Families
with Dependent Children (AFDC) will be eliminated as an
entitlement program and replaced by a state-run. Temporary
Assistance to Needy Families program.
•Time-limited grants. There will be limitations on the length of
time a person may qualify for welfare assistance. Most analysts
predict a two year maximum.
• Single mothers ineligible. Single mothers will not be eligible
for benefits unless they stay at home with their parents and
continue their education through completion of high school
graduation.
•Work in exchange for benefits. Recipients, to the extent
possible, will be required to work in exchange for benefits. The
current bill would require adult recipients to go to work or job
training after a maximum of two years on entitlement programs.
One thing that all analysts agree upon is that the program
changes through Federal legislation will result in less money for
California counties. The Legislative Analyst has estimated that
Federal block grant reforms will have a negative impact on the State
of California of between $6.6 and $8.3 billion over the first five years
of implementation4. The LAO also. projects cost shifts to county
government in California ranging from $2 to $3 billions. There are
also suggestions that Head Start, weatherization and energy
assistance funds will be cut. All of these funding reductions will have
a negative impact on Contra Costa County programs in general and
directly on Community Services programs.
Current State Proposals for Welfare Reform
The,Wilson Administration has long been an advocate of radical
change to the welfare system. In past years, the Governor has
proposed grant reductions, two-tiered grants, significant changes to
General Assistance, reduction of grants for teen pregnancies, and
4 Legislative Analysts Office Policy Brief: House and Senate Welfare Reform:Fiscal Effects on
California, September 7, 1995
5 Ibid.
Contra Costa County Communlry Sevices Study Page 7
other reforms to the system: In his 'State of the State message
delivered to the State Legislature on January 8, 1996, Governor
Wilson again advocated radical change to the welfare system:
Instead of welfare, we'll offer able-bodied adults our new Ready-to-
Work program.. It'll offer temporary help to those in need ... (B)ut the
goal will be helping people find work...not letting them sit around
watching filmstrips about work, but actually doing it... Those people
who aren't yet prepared to work will get.help. What they won't get is a
welfare check. They'll continue to be eligible for food stamps. But
we're going to replace cash grants to these individuals with vouchers
for clothing and rent. So, their ticket to independence will be getting
back on the track to work. And for those able to work who won't, their
full grant will last just 6 months. It will decline again after a year. And
after two years, the checks stop for good.6
Governor Wilson's actions go beyond his speech. In his budget
summary for the 1996/97 fiscal year, Governor Wilson assumes that
the federal government will achieve welfare reform that provides a
basic block grant that eliminates Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC) as an entitlement program, substituting in its place a
state-run Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program7• In his
Budget Summary, Governor Wilson proposes a redesigned welfare
system. Some of his fundamental changes include:
• Elimination of the requirement that aid is provided only if one parent is
deceased, disabled, missing or unemployed. Instead, eligibility would be
based on the one parent or two-parent family's income and assets as
well as the presence of a child under 18 years of age.
• Provision of a flat grant. Rather than paying larger grants to families
with more children,.the proposed grant structure would be based on
what someone could earn working full time at the minimum wage.
• Elimination of the "one-size-fits-all" approach. The proposed system
recognizes the barriers to self-sufficiency presented by different
groups within the welfare population; thus, the eligible population
would be channeled to one of the following four tracks:
* California Employment Re-entry Assistance. The purpose
of this program is to transition individuals with a labor force
connection quickly into employment. This program includes
those who have worked in the past or are currently working.
6 "Taking Charge of California's Future'State of the State Address, Governor Pete Wilson,January 8,
1996
7 In his budget summary for the 1996/97 fiscal year Governor Wilson devotes an entire section to the
federal block grant proposal and changes the Administration proposes to the welfare system.
Governor's Budget Summary, 1996/97, Pages 37-43
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 8
The focus is on rapid re-employment by providing employment-
oriented, services. This group would receive time-limited cash
assistance while involved in intensive efforts to re-enter the
labor market.
o Family Transition Assistance Program. The current
welfare caseload includes parents who have never worked and
teen parents who require more intensive services. Rather than
direct cash payments, this group would receive vouchers for
services, such as housing, transportation, and child care. This
will guarantee that the children's needs are being met
while the parents move from dependency to work
(emphasis added). The duration of benefits would be based on
determining the time needed for the parent to enter employment.
Because the goal is to provide intensive intervention to remove
barriers to employment, these recipients move directly from this
program to employment.
o Disabled Family Assistance Program. Disabled adults may
be unable to meet fully the needs of their children without
assistance from other sources. Adults caring for a disabled child
may also need income assistance when the needs of the child
prevent full-time employment. The Disabled Family Assistance
Program would assist families when the barrier to employment is
a disability of the child or the adult. Recipients of this program
would receive cash aid, which would be time-limited based upon
the anticipated duration of the disability.
o Child-Only Assistance Program. This program would assist
two distinct populations for which cash assistance is provided
only for the children - parents who are ineligible for aid, and
children living with relatives who receive welfare in lieu of
foster care payments.
For the first category, this program assumes parents should financially
support their children even when they are ineligible for aid. This
program would provide limited cash assistance to meet the needs of the
children and to encourage parental financial support. For the second
category, when a child is living with a relative who is not the parent,
cash assistance would be available for the needs of the child. These
benefits would not be time-limited.
The Administration's proposal builds on prior reforms to modernize the
welfare system, creating incentives to work and removing current
disincentives to marry. Using the flexibility of the federal block grant
to achieve major systemic changes, this new system provides short-term
assistance to those who need it, while allowing them to advance beyond
welfare dependency and to set an example of self-sufficiency for their
children.8
8 (bid. Pages 39-40
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 9
On January 10, 1996, the California Department of Social
Services released their report entitled "Proposed Redesign of the
Welfare System" which parroted Governor Wilson's budget message,
noting that "(c)entral to this approach is the well-being of children
and the goal of giving children a healthy starts (emphasis added)"
and "(t)he redesign is focused on achieving independence through
work while at the same time strengthening and supporting
children and families'10 (emphasis added)". The report goes into a
little more detail, though, in the structure of likely program reforms:
The program will be locally administered under contract with the state.
Counties will be offered the first right of refusal to continue to be the
local entity administering welfare. In any event, each county will
continue to be responsible for its share of the cost of the
welfare program, as well as its continuing obligation for
administration of the General Assistance (GA) program.
Local administering entities will be given flexibility to
determine how to deliver the services necessary to meet the
performance outcome objectives of the redesigned welfare
program. This includes the ability to deliver services or contract with
existing or newly-formed provider networks. ...
The proposed redesign will also permit the integration of
interrelated service systems at the local level to best meet
the needs of children and families. The goal is to eliminate
duplication of services by encouraging and replicating successful
models of service delivery integration." (emphasis added)
The report describes each program component and
highlights the "generic benefits and services generally available to
eligible low income families". In each program, child care and
employment services are highlighted as a services available.
Governor Wilson's proposed changes do not stop with welfare
reform. Federal reformers are also considering changes to the Medicaid
program, which will effect California's Medi-Cal program, and the
implementation of a Workforce Development Block Grant which will
consolidate some 100 federal employment and training programs. In his
budget, Governor Wilson proposes several steps to integrate these federal
program changes with the Welfare Block Grant proposal. Finally, Governor
Wilson has proposed strengthening school programs aimed at prevention
9 Proposed Redesign of the Welfare System, Department of Social Services, Page 2
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid. Page 3
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 10
of dependency, including expansion of the Healthy Start program and an
increase in state funding for preschool programs.
While it is clear that Governor Wilson's proposal to implement federal
block grant legislation must withstand the legislative process, it is equally
clear that in the coming fiscal year and beyond California Counties will be
faced with dramatic changes in social service programs. These changes
will impact a number of current county programs and a significant number
of county residents. California Counties would be well'-advised to prepare
for these changes now, anticipating some of the over-riding principals of
the federal and state legislation, and make organizational adjustments that
provide the County with flexibility in implementing program changes.
Contra Costa County is not unique in that it administers an archaic
welfare system designed to address social problems which existed in the
1930's. To deal with the social problems facing today's families, the county
has the following structure:
•The Department of Social Services administers income
maintenance, child welfare, child protection and job training
programs;
•The Department of Community Services administers Head Start,
child development, child nutrition, weatherization and block grant
programs;
•The Department of Health Services administers health programs
which include services to indigents and eligible women and children
and'contracts for services to the aged;
*The Private Industry Council, an independent agency, operates job
training programs serving the indigent population; and,
•The Growth Management and Economic Development Agency
has responsibility for economic development, or the creation of jobs.
For counties to be successful in moving people from the current
income-maintenance program to a "Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families" program, the fragmented system in place today needs to be
replaced with an integrated system that significantly strengthens job
training, job creation and child care activities and integrates the
administration of these activities with the administration of the Temporary
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 11
Assistance program.
Contra Costa County already leads other counties in California since
it has program responsibility for Head Start, Child Development and Child
Nutrition programs. Integration of these programs with social service
programs can be accomplished with Board action. Complete integration of
programs affected by the change to Temporary Assistance, though, will
require cooperation with other agencies, some independent, and changes
to current state and federal regulations. The challenge facing Contra Costa,
and other counties, is to effectively organize the administration of these
changing programs to maximize the use of state and federal resources,
and minimize the fiscal.impact on local discretionary dollars..
Options for Program Administration
Reform of the current income-maintenance form of welfare is
imminent. Congress and the President are both poised to adopt legislation
which will convert, the system to an employment-based temporary
assistance model. Governor Wilson has outlined his recommendations for
conversion to an employment-based system in California. While the
California Legislature has yet to put its stamp of approval on these
proposed changes, it is quite probable that by 1997 California will be
operating a different type of welfare system. Since counties have the
primary responsibility for administering that system, it will be incumbent
upon counties to change their approaches as well. Since one of the
motivations for welfare reform, at both the state and federal level, is to
lower the costs of welfare programs, counties can expect to bear a greater
financial burden. To mitigate this burden, counties will need to reform
administration of social service programs and place an increasing
emphasis on job training, job creation and transitioning people into the
workforce.
In looking at optional approaches for dealing with the likely scenarios
arising out of welfare reform, it is clear that, at the local level, the more
successful programs will focus on the integration of current social service
programs with employment development, job training, child development
and child nutrition. For this reason, this study reviewed options for
enhancing the effectiveness of those activities in Contra Costa County. It
must be noted, though, that this study.was commissioned to review the
Organization and services provided by the Department of Community
Services. Therefore, the analysis and recommendations deal only with
how those programs would be most effectively administered under welfare
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 12
reform. It is beyond' the scope of this study to perform a comprehensive
review of other social service programs in Contra Costa County. Clearly,
though, such a comprehensive review must be incorporated into a
successful program in some fashion.
A review of the approach to social service program administration in
other counties was undertaken. , This review confirmed that Contra Costa
County is unique in its administration of social service programs, and was
unable to identify a suitable alternative approach that would fit Contra
Costa County. While there are other models of program integration -in
social services, none of them incorporated children's programs in attempts
to improve current income-maintenance approaches. Contra Costa County
Js the only county in California administering Head Start, Child
Development and Child Nutrition programs.
Not having an exact comparison made it difficult to review and
compare other models for application to Contra Costa County's situation.
Therefore, criteria for measuring the adequacy of alternatives was
developed. The criteria needed to be elements that would enable Contra
Costa County to position itself for future welfare reforms, while addressing
current organizational problems. These criteria are:
1. Administration of the Department of Community Services
and its programs. Is the department currently effective in its
delivery of services or are there organizational approaches that
will enhance that service delivery?
2. Money. The net county costs for the Department of Community
Services in fiscal.year 1995/96 was $73,000. Welfare reform
initiatives threaten to increase the cost of administration to
counties. Can. this cost increase be mitigated through
organizational change?
3. Improvement in the effectiveness of current social service
programs. Can the existing system meet the needs of
tomorrow or is there a better way to organize current functions
and activities to address those needs?
4. Coordination and communication among social service
departments. Are departments operating as efficiently as they
could under the current approach, or are there organizational
approaches to improve that communication?
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 13
Models for Charge
Based upon these criteria, the following models were developed and
analyzed. The recommendations of this report are based upon the model
which best meets the above criteria for Contra Costa County.
o No Change
Many people may argue "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Unfortunately, what works in today's world, may become obsolete
quickly with the changes to social service program legislation. With
the emphasis changing to temporary assistance; and away from
income maintenance, if no changes are made to the organizational
approach to social service programs in Contra Costa County, it is
predicted that General Fund costs are going to increase and a
significant amount of discretionary funding Will have to be devoted to
social service programs at the expense of other, equally desirable,
equally important issues.
While Contra Costa County has begun a program of integration
of social services, the significant reduction in federal and/or state
funds will demand tighter control over program dollars and a
significant increase in program coordination. This can be
accomplished under the current organizational structure, but not as
efficiently as it will need to be to avoid additional impacts on
discretionary dollars.
Reviewing the current structure through the above criteria
reveals the following:
1. Administration of the Department of Community Services
and its programs. Obviously, maintaining the status quo
would do nothing to impact the administration of the
Department of Community Services and its programs. The
question must be raised, however, whether the current
organizational structure will be sufficient to provide an
integrated approach to child development, Head Start and child
nutrition programs under welfare reform. A successful
temporary assistance program will rely heavily on the provision
of support programs for recipients to enable them to attend
training sessions. Furthermore, each of the programs outlined
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 14
by the State Department of Social Services contains a child
care component. The status quo may not be the most effective
way to deliver those services in the new environment.
2. Money. With the emphasis in social services shifting from
income maintenance to temporary assistance,, there will be an
increased demand in child development, preschool and child
nutrition programs. Under the current system, the increased
demand will outstrip available resources and lead to increased
costs for these programs.
3. Improvement in the effectiveness of current social service
programs. Maintaining the status quo does nothing to change
or improve current social service program delivery. In fact,
given the changes that will occur in those programs, the
maintaining the status quo will reduce program effectiveness.
4. Coordination and communication among social service
departments. As with program effectiveness, the making no
change in organization will do nothing. to improve coordination
and;communication,among social services agencies.
The current administration, of Community Service programs has
been: involved in many collaborative efforts in program administration.
Among other efforts, the Department was nationally recognized for
the PATHs Homeless Prevention Program, a joint venture with the
Social Services and Health Departments, the Housing. Authority and
Community-Based Organizations in the Pittsburg area. The
Department has also participated in the Living Free in Richmond
program, and is currently working with the Mt. Diablo School District
in a prevention .program at Bay Point. While these programs
demonstrate the Department's willingness to work in a cooperative
manner, the radical changes anticipated by welfare reform will
demand efforts well beyond these examples.
While recognizing the herculean efforts that have been put forth
by the Department of Community Services staff to bring the children's
program to their current status, the status quo does not appear to
meet the criteria established for a successful organizational approach
to welfare reform issues.
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 15
o Modify Existing Structure
A second approach to coping with the likely changes would be
to streamline the existing structure. The Department of Community
Services could be relieved of those programs currently being
administered which do not interact with social services to the extent
that children's programs do. Both the Community Services Block
Grant (CSBG) and Weatherization programs could be transferred to
another department for administration, leaving the Department
responsible for Head Start, Child Development and Child Nutrition.
This would enable the department to focus on those issues without
interruption. Such an approach, though, would probably require
Contra Costa County to reconsider. its' decision to be a Community
Action Agency, since Weatherization and CSBG administration are.
Federal-mandates under that program.
In looking at the criteria for measuring the effectiveness of this
model, though, it is doubtful that this approach will address the needs
of the County.
1 . Administration of the Department of Community Services
and its programs. It is doubtful that stripping off
weatherization and CSBG would significantly improve the
administration of children's programs. The vast majority of the
department's administrative focus is already on children's
programs. While a leaner department would have more time
available for administrative matters, the time freed up would not
be sufficient to improve current administration.
2. Money: CSBG funds are used to leverage additional funds and
services for families enrolled in Head Start and Child
Development programs. Removing the administration of those
funds from the Department would most certainly increase
general fund financial impacts or reduce services currently
available to eligible families. Furthermore, as noted, both the
weatherization and CSBG are federally-mandated programs of
a Community Action Agency. There are financial and program
benefits to the County's maintaining its CAA status.
3. Improvement in the effectiveness of current social service
programs. Nothing in this approach deals with the
effectiveness of social service programs. While the Department
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 16
of Community Services may have more time to deal with
children's programs, that gain will be marginal and insufficient
to positively impact social service program effectiveness.
4. Coordination and communication among social service
departments. As with program effectiveness, nothing in this
approach improves coordination and communication among
departments.
o Reorganize Socials Service Departments
Given the scenarios presented by policy-makers, where the
focus will be on temporary assistance to families while working to
provide job training and sustained employment, a third approach
would be to consider the merger of the Department of Community
Services, along with other social services agencies, with the
Department of Social Services. The purpose of this merger would be
to integrate administration of child development, preschool and
nutrition programs with the administration of temporary assistance.
Ideally, this model would also integrate the administration of job
training and economic development activities as well, to ensure that
those receiving temporary assistance would also be trained and have
jobs to which they could transition.
The merger, as envisioned by this report, could take the form of
combining departments into one, or merging departments into an
agency. The ultimate form of such a merger depends upon several
independent analyses that need to be completed, as explained
elsewhere in this report.
The Department of Social Services currently administers
income-maintenance programs for qualified Contra Costa County
residents. Associated with income maintenance, the Department
also administers the Greater Avenues through Independence (GAIN)
program, which provides job finding skills and training to eligible
clients. The mission of this department will be radically changed if
the proposed welfare reform legislation is passed. This reform period
provides a window of opportunity to integrate children's programs
with the administration of the temporary assistance approach_ to
social services.
The following assess the integration of children's programs with
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 17
the current social services structure, based upon the criteria
identified:
1 . Administration of the Department of Community Services
and its programs. Integration of social services programs
would provide a broader base of administrative support for
children's programs. With this broader base, and through
reorganization of current approaches to social services, the new
department/agency would be in a better position to administer
children's programs.
2. Money. It is likely that welfare reform will have a negative fiscal
impact on counties. This impact can be mitigated, however, by
successfully transitioning current recipients of income
maintenance programs to newly created jobs, thus reducing the
case load. Since the vast majority of program participants are
single mothers, success in reducing caseloads will require
careful coordination of child care, preschool and child nutrition
with transitional assistance programs to enable the mother to
participate in job training and employment. Through the
integration of these services, the fiscal impact.of welfare reform
under this model would be substantially less than the impact of
welfare reform under the status quo model.
3. Improvement in the effectiveness of current social service
programs. Under proposed reforms of current social services
programs, the effectiveness of those programs will be tied to
the ability to transition aid recipients into the workforce. Since
the majority of the aid recipients are single women, the
availability and integration of preschool, child development and
child nutrition programs will be critical to the success of that
transition.
4. Coordination and communication among social service
departments. Integration of Community Services programs
into the Social Services Department would consolidate the
strategic planning and managerial direction for those programs.
Staff would have more frequent opportunities to interact and
managerial direction would be uniform. Because of these
results, this model would provide for an improvement in
coordination and communication among social services
departments.
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 18
It is interesting to note that at the State level, after many years
of studies and resistance by staff, the Department of Economic
Opportunity, the organization responsible for overseeing Community
Action Agencies, has been integrated into the State Health and
Welfare Agency. While it remains a separate department,
administration of its programs is coordinated with other social service
programs through Agency staff.
Recommendations:
Contra Costa County has made the preservation of families a top
priority in the delivery of county services. Building healthy families, though,
needs to be all-inclusive. .. Family issues and children's issues cannot be
separated, but must be dealt with in concert. In order to provide Contra
Costa County with the best opportunity to improve the administration of
Community Services programs, avoid significant additional impacts on the
County's General Fund, and improve the effectiveness of social service.
programs and the coordination and communication among those programs,
it is recommended that Contra Costa County:
1. Combine the Department of Community Services,
Department of Social Services and other social service
program providers into one unit. The exact structure of a
combined approach needs to be carefully analyzed. It could
take the form of a department, which would require complete
restructuring of several organizations, or it could take the form
of an agency where existing structures could be merged under
one umbrella. Both approaches have pros and cons which
need further study;
2. Begin now to plan for restructuring of social service
programs. The Department of Social Services, and County
Administration, should begin a strategic planning process to
redesign the administration and focus of social services
programs within Contra Costa County in preparation for radical
program changes at the federal and state level; and,
3. Include Job Training in the Temporary Assistance
program. The strategic planning process should include
community-based organizations, especially those currently
responsible for job training and economic development within
Contra Costa County Community Services Study Page 19
the County to determine if those elements should be combined
into an integrated approach as well.
Reform of our current social service system is imminent, and radical
reform is probable. Contra Costa County has made a significant
commitment towards the preservation of families by supporting children's
programs when the Richmond School District dropped them. The reforms
that will become a reality in the next year offer the County the opportunity
to change its approach to social service administration as well, creating an
integrated, comprehensive program that incorporates child development,
preschool and child nutrition to support job training and transitional
assistance. Such an integrated program can be successful under the
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program and make Contra Costa
County a model for other California Counties.
RECE
= 5t 1996- " .
WE THE UNDERSIGNED; RESIDENTS, PARENTS, AND,
WORKERS, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM D2 . WE FEEL
THAT PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE NEEDED BEFORE A DECISION IS MADE ON AN
ISSUE THAT EFFECTS SO MANY PEOPLE AND THE FUTURE OF OUR CHILDREN.
ADDITIONALLY WE FEEL THAT THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION SHOULD
CONTINUE, THE SERVICES PROVIDED ARE VITAL.
NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER
3
Losi i
OcLq 5 7-14 ov d
A-f,, �3V^L1 g66
- (� C4l
I am's - � S � / �d3 x/63
-7 2, S so. 7 CLi 1
n '-� q aCd Dcr.w ne r
CV�� 44
Gj wk-) I -k,)qA�a V-� CLA I
Z-( t)
Jr� - R b
3001
, il0
It �,�i�� y �i7Z L
d
WE THE UNDERSIGNED; RESIDENTS, PARENTS, AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
WORKERS, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM D2 . WE FEEL
THAT PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE NEEDED BEFORE A DECISION IS MADE ON AN
ISSUE THAT EFFECTS SO MANY PEOPLE AND THE FUTURE OF OUR CHILDREN.
ADDITIONALLY WE FEEL THAT THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION SHOULD
CONTINUE, THE SERVICES PROVIDED ARE VITAL.
NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER
r�
v� 12tc� 23V -/�S
-vn 01 NqY� I so n 521 l Cly yo 0 V) t 64 '�3L-f-X88
LSWU
RD'OF SWE THE UNDERSIGNED; RESIDENTS, PARENTS, AND7EQ
WORKERS, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM D2 . WE FEEL
THAT PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE NEEDED BEFORE A DECISION IS MADE ON AN
ISSUE THAT EFFECTS SO MANY PEOPLE AND THE FUTURE OF OUR CHILDREN.
ADDITIONALLY WE FEEL THAT THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION SHOULD
CONTINUE, THE SERVICES PROVIDED ARE VITAL.
NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER
Fo oth.ill true
,(, jz r
49, e. 51*
Ao
l
A-1
-?
-739
1 Geo ���- �� ��w�l �--�i�� �� � ����� 2�� •- �y/�
� y
i
4�j - -
WE THE UNDERSIGNED; RESIDENTS, PARENTS, AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
WORKERS, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM D2 . WE FEEL
THAT PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE NEEDED BEFORE A DECISION IS MADE ON AN
ISSUE THAT EFFECTS SO MANY PEOPLE AND THE FUTURE OF OUR CHILDREN.
ADDITIONALLY WE FEEL THAT THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION SHOULD
CONTINUE, THE SERVICES PROVIDED ARE VITAL.
NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
�� soy G, 2-9 5� � 3�
C;a <
J