NEW YORK STATE FORUM A ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION ON THE CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUES AND CONCERNS OF HUMAN SERVICES ADMINISTRATORS, ADVOCATES, AND CLIENTS

on behalf of Campaign for 11 Tomorrow's Workforce 12 13 * * * * * 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you for being here. 2 I'm Senator Patrick Gallivan, and I chair the 3 Social Service Committee in the Senate. 4 Senator Diane Savino chairs Children and 5 Families Committee in the Senate. 6 And we know that we face challenges. And 7 what we thought we could do is, is try to come 8 together to learn some of the challenges. 9 First, and foremost, we know the economic 10 climate, and we know the strain it's putting on the 11 various human service organizations. And we do 12 understand the budget issues. 13 We hope today, though, rather than focus so 14 much on the economics and the budgetary issues, we 15 could focus a little bit more on the challenges 16 that you face, dealing with regulations, the laws; 17 suggestions that you may have for us, where we can 18 then try to be helpful. 19 And I view this as a means to help us as we 20 go into the next legislative session, to help craft, 21 at least for the Social Service Committee, our 22 legislative agenda. 23 We -- we have a number of speakers today. 24 We hope to get to everybody. We do have a schedule 25 that we'll try to move through. And I know there's 1 people that had called, that are not on the 2 schedule. We'll try to make sure that we fit 3 everybody in. 4 The format would be: We'd ask you to come on 5 up -- whoever's turn it is, come and sit up here, 6 and give us your testimony. 7 It would be better, if you have prepared 8 testimony, or something in writing, that you give it 9 to us beforehand. 10 And our preference would be that you're not 11 reading, because we can read that, and you really 12 focus on the important issues and important things 13 that you'd like us to try to address. 14 But with that, before we get started, I'll 15 ask Senator Savino, if you would like to say a few 16 things. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator Gallivan. 18 I want to thank you for co-chairing this 19 forum with me. 20 And I want to thank all of you for coming 21 out. 22 You know, it's been just about -- just over 23 21 years since I walked through the front door of 24 HRA at 271 Church Street, as a caseworker, and what 25 was then the City's Child Welfare Administration. 1 A lot has changed in the social-service 2 delivery system over the past 21 years, but a lot 3 has stayed exactly the same. 4 Every year, we know we're going to go through 5 our annual budget dance. It's been a little bit 6 more brutal the past couple of years because of, 7 not just the shortage of public money, but the 8 demand that government stop spending as much money. 9 Your agencies and the public agencies have 10 been buffeted back and forth by the winds of 11 politics more often than the winds of policy. 12 I am sure we're going to have another budget 13 dance this year. And I know that you guys are 14 going to be up there in Albany, advocating, and 15 educating us. 16 And, quite frankly, you were all very 17 influential last year in helping us address some of 18 the real problems that were in State budget that 19 were proposed by the Administration. 20 And I know you're going to do the same thing 21 this year. 22 But one of the things that gets lost along 23 the way, I think Senator Gallivan is right, is we 24 spend so much time in the social-service field, 25 fighting to restore funding or to retain funding, or 1 to improve funding, that we forget to look at some 2 of the other issues and the legislative agenda that 3 never gets adopted. 4 So what we hope to do, while we fight to 5 protect funding, restore funding, and retain 6 funding, and improve funding in some places, is also 7 look at: 8 Some of the regulations that are placed upon 9 the social-service safety net, by the State; 10 Some of the difficulties in delivering 11 service as a result of the regulatory burden; 12 The difficulties in obtaining funding; 13 The difficulties in responding to 14 contracts; 15 And whether or not the policies that we've 16 imposed upon you actually make sense. 17 Nobody knows it better than the people who 18 deliver the service. 19 So, we hope that this is not just the first 20 of -- the first hearing, but the first of many 21 hearings, or interactions, that we will have, to 22 help development a system that better serves our 23 seniors and our children, who, all too often, are at 24 risk in our society. 25 So, with that said, we're going to go to our 1 first testimony. 2 I just want to check to see if the first 3 three are here. 4 The first person we have on our list, of 5 course, is Bobbie Sackman. I know she's here. 6 Nancy Waxstein, the executive director of 7 United Neighborhood Housing? 8 No? 9 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I haven't seen her yet. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, not yet. 11 Chris Winward is here. 12 Jim Purcell is here. 13 So, we're going to start with Bobbie. 14 And then, following Bobbie, will be 15 Chris Winward, and then, Jim Purcell. 16 Bobbie Sackman, director of public policy, 17 the Council of Senior Citizen Centers of New York. 18 BOBBIE SACKMAN: Hi, good morning. 19 I will apologize in advance because there's a 20 chance I'm going to cough in the middle of this. 21 My name is Bobbie Sackman, director of public 22 policy, Council of Senior Centers and Services. 23 I want to thank you for holding this forum 24 because the Committee on Children and Families, and 25 Social Services, actually holds some very 1 important issues that affect older adults. 2 And, I'm just going to summarize. I'm not 3 going to read. There's a lot of people that want to 4 speak. 5 Obviously, the major issue last year was 6 Title 20. It was the second year in a row. 7 First Governor Paterson, then 8 Governor Cuomo -- 9 Excuse me. 10 -- proposed what is almost a $25 million cut, 11 which would have closed 105 senior centers. And 12 nobody was elected to office to close 105 senior 13 centers. 14 And, so, we were very pleased that the 15 Legislature did restore it last year. The Governor 16 accepted the restoration. 17 So, this year, we have started a 18 letter-writing campaign. We're doing a press 19 conference, which Senator Savino will be present at 20 on Thursday. 21 Over 15,000 letters, to date, have been 22 sent from seniors to Governor Cuomo, asking him to 23 not put this in the budget again, and save them the 24 heartache and all the work. 25 One of the things that we're also looking at 1 is legislation to have language. That way, we don't 2 have to go through this every year. 3 The Title 20 funding that senior centers 4 falls under is considered discretionary and not a 5 mandated service. 6 We'd like to put language in there that just 7 protects the money that comes to New York City, 8 under Title 20, remains whole for the senior 9 centers. 10 There are some other -- Erie, Steuben, and 11 Nassau Counties do use Title 20 for senior services 12 as well. 13 I think Erie does it for Meals On Wheels. 14 I'm not sure about the other counties. 15 So, we are going to be looking at language, 16 and, of course, any way you could be supportive. 17 The other thing is food stamps. 18 Council of Senior Centers and Services is 19 part of a consortium of nine organizations now that 20 won a federal grant to do outreach and 21 food stamps. And, it's called "Hunger-Free 22 Communities." 23 And, what was really great about this 24 consortium is, it's brought together advocates for 25 children and for old people. 1 And, seniors only utilize food stamps at 2 about a 30 to 40 percent rate. It is wildly 3 underutilized. 4 So, again, anything that would help to do 5 outreach for food stamps. It's 100 percent 6 federal money. Brings money into local 7 communities for businesses. And, obviously, it's 8 money in the pockets of children, families, and 9 seniors. 10 And, what I've left with you was our 11 Medicaid Redesign Team recommendations, which don't 12 all fall under your committee, but it's really 13 calling for a community-based long-term-care system. 14 Where it should interest you, I hope, is 15 that, as we move into a managed Medicaid 16 long-term-care world, you will begin to see how 17 people do get hurt, because people always get hurt. 18 When you're making change and cutting at the 19 same time, nobody can pay attention to all those 20 details except people on the front lines. 21 So, just to make sure, you know, to keep an 22 eye out. And we believe we do have ideas that are 23 cost-effective, can save the State money, and keep 24 people out of nursing homes, which is what 25 everybody wants. 1 And just, finally, another issue that does 2 fall under your auspices: Kinship care got hit 3 really hard last year. I think they lost about half 4 of their funding. 5 And the way the money was put back, was that, 6 certain agencies that kept the money, and certain 7 agencies just got zero. So, it wasn't like it was, 8 somehow, across-the-board cut, you know, here and 9 there. 10 Every -- some -- so there's a program in 11 the -- the only one of its kind in the 12 United States, in the South Bronx, is the 13 "Grandparents Residence." You've perhaps heard of 14 it. 15 Presbyterian Senior Services has built a 16 building on New York City Housing Authority 17 property. It's been around for seven or 18 eight years now. 19 Grandparents raising grandchildren. That's 20 who lives there in the poorest community in the 21 nation, and they lost their kinship-care money, 22 which help pays for the after-school programs, 23 for the kids, for the grandparents. 24 So, uhm, that's -- that's not the right 25 direction to be going in. 1 And they have a rate in that building of 2 about -- they have about 90 children. And, to date, 3 most of them, like almost all of them, end up going 4 on to college. And this is not a community, you 5 know, that -- that's often a struggle for young 6 people in that community. 7 So, anything you can revisit on kinship care 8 would be greatly appreciated. 9 And that's really -- that's really -- and 10 just to remind you, that -- oh, not to remind you, 11 but to state, really, that, you know, the older you 12 get, what anybody wants in this -- in their 13 lifetime, is dignity to the last breath. And they 14 want to remain as independent as possible; whether 15 it's in the community, or if they become so ill that 16 it needs to be in a nursing home. 17 But nobody wants to go into a nursing home, 18 and it costs the State a lot of money. 19 So, really, remaining as independent as 20 possible is really at the heart of human rights for 21 old people. 22 Thank you. 23 24 25 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Bobbie, I have one question. 2 BOBBIE SACKMAN: Sure. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: I don't know if you guys 4 have question for her. 5 On the issue of seniors underutilizing 6 food stamps, is there any analysis as to why that 7 is? 8 Is it, that they're not applying? Do they 9 not know about it? 10 I mean -- 11 BOBBIE SACKMAN: I think it's a combination 12 of everything. 13 There seem to be this belief that you don't 14 get a lot. Like, you would get $10, or something, 15 and it was a lot of work. 16 Which isn't true. 17 But I think it's just hard for people. A lot 18 of -- and I can only speak for New York City. A lot 19 of seniors, English isn't that first language, so 20 they really do need help. And it's not always the 21 simplist, you know, process to go through. 22 They need to have their documents in order, 23 which is not always simple. 24 So, they need help, you know. 25 And I think some of it is just, really, 1 sitting down and educating people. And that's what 2 this project will do. But, the more we can help 3 people walk their way through it. 4 And you're not going to -- if they don't have 5 an adult child or a friend, or somebody, a relative, 6 to help them, they're not going to apply for 7 food stamps. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Has there been any 9 discussion about the requirement that they be 10 fingerprinted [inaudible]. 11 BOBBIE SACKMAN: Yeah. 12 Oh, I'm so sorry I didn't mention that. 13 We're against that fingerprinting. I mean, 14 that's ridiculous. 15 Plus, some seniors are homebound, so I'm not 16 sure how you're going to get their fingerprint. 17 But, it's an obstacle. And we -- you know, 18 we haven't seen that -- that people are abusing the 19 system. And, it does tend to be an obstacle. 20 So, we are opposed. 21 And New York City, I believe is the only city 22 in the nation, the only place in the nation, that 23 still has this, because the Bloomberg Administration 24 wants to keep this on the books. 25 So, you know, if it's working well around the 1 country, I don't think we have more abusers here 2 than they have elsewhere. 3 So, you know -- yeah, I'm sorry I didn't 4 mention that. I should have. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: How do we determine people 6 are eligible for Meals On Wheels, but don't -- 7 BOBBIE SACKMAN: You know, it's very 8 interesting -- 9 SENATOR SAVINO: -- because not everyone 10 pays. Some people contribute, some people don't. 11 BOBBIE SACKMAN: Well, it's a voluntary 12 donation for Meals On Wheels. 13 And the way we do it now: Because the 14 case managers are too backed up, they can't go out 15 and assess people, so we have, now, a presumptive 16 eligibility method in the city, where, if the senior 17 calls the local case-management agency, and it's 18 obvious they need a meal, they will get the meal 19 started without even going out to see them. 20 So, you know, again, you know, why are we -- 21 why do we have such a different standard? Because, 22 there's probably similar kinds of folks, whether 23 they're homebound or not homebound. 24 So -- and it's a disincentive. And, I think 25 it's an indignity. 1 I mean, if you're 70, 80, or older, and 2 you've never been fingerprinted, let's say, I mean, 3 it makes you feel like you're doing something 4 criminal. 5 So, I think it's not necessary. 6 And I would say, for anybody, any age, not 7 just seniors. So... 8 Thank you. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, thank you very much. 10 SENATOR GALLIVAN: We've been joined by 11 Senator Squadron, who's a ranking member on the 12 Social Service Committee. 13 Welcome. 14 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very much. 15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thanks for having in your 16 district. 17 Would you like to say a few words? 18 SENATOR SQUADRON: I want to thank the Chairs 19 of these two committees for doing this. It's -- 20 nothing could be more important. 21 Unfortunately, in Albany, something that 22 happens is, after the budget comes out, sometimes 23 human services drops off the radar or gets out of 24 the headlines, which is really a tragedy, since this 25 is the basic work that government needs to be doing. 1 So, to be having this conversation before the 2 budget comes out, while there's still space to 3 focus on it, is critically important, and figuring 4 out what we're looking at. 5 You know, for a couple of years, we were 6 able to sort of refill the pot on a lot of 7 social-services programs, thanks to the federal 8 stimulus bill, and others. And a lot of those 9 contracts are only now going to zero. 10 So, particularly interested in hearing about 11 how providers plan to handle that. 12 And, again, I want to thank the Chair for 13 coming all the way across the state. 14 I had to come all the way from upstairs, 15 which is why I was late. 16 Thank you so much. 17 [Laughter.] 18 SENATOR SAVINO: But do you have a 19 residential parking permit? 20 [Laughter.] 21 SENATOR SQUADRON: That's -- only if you want 22 it in your neighborhood, Senator Savino. 23 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Chris Winward, director of 24 budget and policy, Human Services Council. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Who cares? I do. 1 CHRIS WINWARD: Yes, thank you. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: I didn't bring my button. I 3 forgot. 4 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Good morning. Thanks for 5 being here. 6 CHRIS WINWARD: Thank you very much. 7 My name is Chris Winward. I'm director of 8 budget and policy at the Human Services Council. 9 Thank you so incredibly much for holding this 10 hearing. It's incredibly important, as 11 Senator Squadron well said, that, after the budget, 12 you know, we don't forget about human services; and, 13 particularly, how to help streamline the policies 14 and regulations that affect the providers 15 providing those services. 16 Thank you, again, for recognizing the 17 increased demand in human services, and the -- and 18 that the economic crisis has had on, both, the 19 ability to provide services, and the need. 20 While I acknowledge, obviously, that the 21 great strain on our economy and limited resources, I 22 do want to continue to stress the importance of 23 maintaining human services, not only as a 24 cost-effective safety net for those in need, but 25 also as an important economic engine around our 1 state. 2 Human Services employ, or non-profits 3 employ, 1.2 million people; or 14 percent of our 4 state's workforce. 5 And, we also provide -- or, rather, purchase 6 millions of dollars in goods and services for 7 communities, in the communities they need. 8 There's several ways in which the State can 9 reduce administrative and financial burdens placed 10 on providers that will allow them to better serve 11 the growing need and create savings. 12 Below are a summary of recommendations to 13 improve efficiencies, and contracting and 14 procurement in particular, which will reduce 15 burdens, both administrative and financially, on 16 the State and human-service providers. 17 And, also, some recommendations for reducing 18 burdensome policies and regulations. 19 In improving procurement and contracting 20 efficiencies, the human-service delivery system 21 would benefit significantly from improved 22 efficiencies in these areas. 23 For years, HSC has proudly worked with our 24 non-profit members in New York City, and with the 25 City government, to streamline the processes in 1 New York City. 2 And, we're very happy that many of the 3 following recommendations are actually accomplished 4 or in progress in New York City at the moment. 5 In March of 2012, we will have a paperless 6 contracting registration process in New York City. 7 Agencies need to register contracts and 8 make payments in a timelier manner. The -- a 9 paperless registration process would -- is designed 10 to standardize procurement into a standard on-line 11 paperless process that crosses agencies, which is so 12 important. 13 Obviously, non-profit providers have 14 multiple contracts for different service areas 15 with multiple agencies. Having this paperless 16 on-line system would, actually, greatly reduce the 17 amount of paperwork and administrative burdens, 18 both on the State and the providers. 19 Within that process, there's a shared 20 electronic-data vault, where non-profits will be 21 able to upload nearly all the documents required 22 to do business with the State, once, and then to 23 update them periodically as needed. 24 Prescreen: "Prescreening" is a centralized 25 prescreening process that would allow, as non-profit 1 providers interested in doing business, to be able 2 to determine integrity and capacity to engage in 3 business beforehand, allowing proposals to be 4 focused exclusively on the scope of work, rather 5 than integrity, as well. 6 Other items include: 7 A single integrity check, reducing 8 duplicative paper requirements, and using the 9 federal IRS 990 Responsibility Form. 10 Master service agreement: The State 11 currently has a few master service agreements. 12 Sticking with social services, they've worked 13 incredibly well in reducing, you know, burdensome, 14 paperwork again. And, saving money. 15 In the City, we also have just accomplished a 16 standard contract for human services. 17 Adopting a standard human-services contract 18 significantly reduces the time and costs involved in 19 developing terms and conditions, and making them 20 uniform across agencies. 21 All of these improvements would create 22 cost-savings efficiencies, and would reduce the 23 administrative burdens on non-profits, and allow 24 them to focus the time and resources where it really 25 matters: on providing high-quality services. 1 Some additional policies and regulations that 2 would improve providers' ability to spend more time 3 on the actual services provided, would include 4 a centralized financial audit management. 5 Currently, again, State agencies audit 6 non-profits a few times a year, per contract, 7 per agency. If that was more coordinated, again, 8 that would save a lot of time and money for both the 9 State and providers. 10 Claims and reimbursement flexibility: Having 11 the flexibility to move funding more freely 12 between -- within, and between, budget categories. 13 Taxes and fees: Non-profits are primarily 14 funded with public dollars, as you know. When 15 government imposes taxes or fees on these 16 organizations, it essentially demands back the money 17 that it contracts for. 18 Taxes and fees, such as the MTA payroll tax 19 that was enacted a few years ago, you know, simply 20 creates new administrative expenses, both for 21 government and non-profits, to then process and 22 collect these fees. 23 So, we would highly recommend that the State 24 discontinue the trend of assessing taxes and fees 25 on non-profits, as -- as they used to be, as 1 non-profit providers. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Everybody hates the MTA 3 payroll tax. 4 CHRIS WINWARD: Yeah. 5 So -- and then, finally, I just wanted to 6 mention, centralizing background checks and 7 fingerprinting. 8 Obviously, it would be much, uhm -- much more 9 beneficial to have agencies talk to one another, and 10 share fingerprinting, rather than having people go 11 through it multiple times. 12 So, thank you very much for the opportunity 13 to provide testimony. 14 If you have any further questions, I'm 15 available, or, like to follow up with you. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: I think you left out the 17 most important one, on the back of the page: 18 Contract Payment Cuts. 19 CHRIS WINWARD: Well, we didn't want to make 20 it all about, you know, the budget. 21 [Laughter] 22 CHRIS WINWARD: But, uhm -- yeah, obviously, 23 you know, especially when contracts are cut 24 mid-year, you know, that's a lot of administrative 25 burden that -- and leaves providers scrambling to 1 try to figure out resources to be able to provide 2 the service. 3 If they cannot find those resources, which 4 it's very likely, then, you know, we would hope that 5 the expectation of the service level would also be 6 reduced appropriately. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Has that happened often, 8 where, in the middle of a -- of the year, your -- 9 the funding that you anticipated receiving for a 10 particular service is cut? 11 CHRIS WINWARD: Yeah. Yeah, very often. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: What do you do then? 13 CHRIS WINWARD: Well, I think that you should 14 definitely ask some of the providers that are in 15 the room. 16 We are not a direct-service provider, but, in 17 the past, loans had been more readily available. 18 That is not the case anymore. Lines of credit have 19 ceased to existed for small businesses and 20 non-profits around the state. 21 SENATOR SAVINO: [Inaudible.] 22 CHRIS WINWARD: Yep, yep. Yeah. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: I have one or two questions, 24 and then you guys. 25 I'm just jumping in front of them, because 1 ladies go first. 2 On the shared electronic-data vault, has that 3 been done anywhere else? Any other state? 4 Do we have any other states that have adopted 5 these practices, to kind of streamline their -- 6 CHRIS WINWARD: That's a good question. 7 I'm not actually the resident expert in my 8 office, but, we are well on our way with the 9 New York City government to do that. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: That's something I would be 11 interested in looking at. 12 And, certainly, the issue of centralized 13 background checks, it makes no sense, you know 14 that multiple agencies have multiple background 15 checks, where there should be one. 16 CHRIS WINWARD: Processes, yeah. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: One place where, you know, 18 the not-for-profit world can send their employees 19 for fingerprinting, for State Central Registry 20 checks, for any other background checks, instead 21 of spreading it out among agencies. And, 22 especially, since most of the State agencies are now 23 at the lowest level of the staff themselves. 24 Anything we can do to lift the burden on the 25 overworked staff there, I think would be better, 1 so... 2 CHRIS WINWARD: Uh-huh. 3 Thank you. 4 SENATOR GALLIVAN: You mentioned 5 New York City just went to a standard contract? 6 CHRIS WINWARD: Uh-huh. 7 SENATOR GALLIVAN: When did they make that 8 move? 9 CHRIS WINWARD: Uhm, it was just finalized 10 within the last few months. 11 We'd been working -- HSC has been working 12 very closely with the Mayor's Office, and the 13 Mayor's Office Contract Services, on developing a 14 standard contract, to reduce [inaudible]. 15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Has it actually been 16 implemented yet? 17 CHRIS WINWARD: Uh-huh. 18 Yeah, on new contracts, going forward. 19 SENATOR GALLIVAN: How -- or it might be too 20 early to say. 21 How's the transition been with the agencies? 22 Has it been a positive thing for them? 23 CHRIS WINWARD: Uhm, it may be a little too 24 early to do a long-range study, but it, uhm -- 25 you know, it's a single contract that a non-profit 1 and the City can do across agencies, so, you know, 2 it's standard. 3 Standardizing is a good thing. 4 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Okay, thanks. 5 Dan, do you have anything? 6 SENATOR SQUADRON: When we look at this list 7 of six procurement-and-contracting efficiencies, why 8 haven't they happened? 9 They sound -- I mean, they sound like 10 absolute no-brainers in the twenty-first century. 11 Sound like, maybe, they were new ideas in 12 1985. 13 But, at this point, what's the holdup? 14 CHRIS WINWARD: In "Policies and Regulations" 15 section? 16 SENATOR SQUADRON: Procurement and 17 contracting efficiencies. 18 CHRIS WINWARD: Oh, sorry. 19 Uhm -- yeah, uhm, I think, uhm, just the 20 investment in -- in managing the change. 21 Also, unfortunately, agencies, state or city, 22 are well-oiled machines that are kind of set in 23 their ways. And -- but, yeah, we're making it 24 happen here. 25 SENATOR SQUADRON: All right, if -- what -- 1 based on your experience pushing for this, what do 2 you think would have to change in order to make this 3 stuff a reality? 4 CHRIS WINWARD: Uhm, it would take agencies 5 talking to one another, and developing best 6 practices, uhm, and leadership. 7 SENATOR SQUADRON: Do you have any sense of 8 how much savings you could see, on an annual 9 basis, on the state level? 10 CHRIS WINWARD: It's hard to determine, but 11 on the city level, we had estimated, between 80 and 12 100 million. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: 80 to 100 million dollars. 14 And, I assume, the scale of contracting, on 15 the city level, is smaller than on the state level? 16 CHRIS WINWARD: We have $4 billion worth of 17 human-service contracts in New York City. 18 SENATOR SQUADRON: And at the State? 19 CHRIS WINWARD: I think it's -- I don't want 20 to be misquoted, but, maybe, 132 billion? 21 SENATOR SQUADRON: 132 billion; compared to 22 4 billion. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: I saved 100 million in the 24 City. [Inaudible] $4 billion. 25 SENATOR SQUADRON: Well, there you go. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: We could save a lot of 2 money. 3 SENATOR SQUADRON: Based on your experience 4 doing the common contract, on the city level, how 5 long it would take if someone actually started 6 focusing on it today? 7 CHRIS WINWARD: We've been -- we've spent a 8 lot of time, you know, with -- of our collaborative 9 process with the City, that took, approximately, 10 2 1/2 years. And we should be finished in another 11 year and a half. 12 But, we had -- we took a lot of time in the 13 beginning. 14 SENATOR SQUADRON: But, of course, this was 15 a -- that was the first time in, so I'm sure the 16 lesson's learn, and the city level could be applied 17 at the state level. 18 CHRIS WINWARD: Absolutely. 19 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very much. 20 Important stuff. 21 Thank you. 22 CHRIS WINWARD: Thank you. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 24 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 25 1 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Nancy Wackstein -- 2 I did see -- oh, there you are. 3 -- from United Neighborhoods. 4 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Good morning. 5 Good morning, Senator Savino, 6 Senator Gallivan, Senator Squadron. 7 Thank you so much for sponsoring this hearing 8 this morning. Obviously, in our world, there 9 couldn't be a more important topic than this one. 10 The -- my name is Nancy Wackstein. I'm the 11 executive director of United Neighborhood Houses. 12 UNH, founded in 1919, is the membership 13 organization of New York City's settlement houses 14 and community centers, both old and new. 15 So, for example, Senator Savino, we have 16 Project Hospitality, in Staten Island, as one of our 17 newer members. I know that you're familiar with 18 them. 19 And, of course, Senator Squadron is familiar 20 with the seven agencies in his district. 21 Senator Gallivan, we're still working on 22 expanding to Erie County. We will let you know as 23 soon as we -- 24 [Laughter.] 25 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Got it. 1 NANCY WACKSTEIN: And, welcome back to 2 New York again. 3 The -- our organization is rooted in the 4 history and values of the settlement-house movement. 5 UNH promotes and strengthens the 6 neighborhood-based multi-service approach to 7 improving the lives of New Yorkers in need, and 8 the communities in which they live. 9 We now have 37 member agencies working at 10 more than 400 sites in all 5 boroughs, that 11 provide services to half a million New Yorkers 12 every year. 13 Our multiple services include: Early 14 childhood education; after-school programs; 15 teen centers; "English speakers of other 16 languages" classes; immigration; legal services; 17 GED classes; job training, tutoring, recreation, 18 meals and supportive services for the elderly; 19 mental health counseling; drug prevention; and art, 20 music, and drama programs. 21 Pretty much everything. 22 It is clear -- I'm not going to read my total 23 testimony, but it is clear that the safety net for 24 people in need is shrinking, while the demands on it 25 grow. I think that's probably been pretty well 1 documented. 2 Many of our programs have long waiting 3 lists of eligible participants. 4 This summer, for example, fewer than 5 24 percent of the teenagers who entered the lottery 6 for summer jobs, through the Summer Youth 7 Employment Program, got placements. 8 Last year, many of our services faced cuts of 9 as much as 50 percent; with services for youth, such 10 as after-school, hit the hardest. 11 Despite some notable successes, on the state 12 level, such as defeating a proposal that would have 13 likely led to the closure of 105 senior centers in 14 New York City, we believe, and all evidence shows, 15 that we're gonna face another difficult budget year 16 as a result of deficit-closing measures by both 17 the City and the State. 18 And I think it's important to note, that when 19 we talk about State cuts, they are often compounded, 20 and are on top of City cuts, sometimes federal cuts. 21 So, our agencies are really reeling from cuts 22 at -- from all three levels of government. And I 23 don't even think we've seen the worst yet from the 24 federal government. 25 So, we are counting on you and your 1 colleagues in the Legislature to protect funding for 2 crucial human services this year. 3 While much of the policy debate in the state, 4 and nationally, focuses on the need to create more 5 jobs, and we know that Governor Cuomo has made job 6 creation and retention one of the keystones of his 7 administration, what is rarely talked about, is that 8 human services, like child care, after-school care, 9 job training, English and GED classes, are indeed 10 "job creation and retention" strategies. And 11 they -- 12 SENATOR SAVINO: You're singing my song. 13 NANCY WACKSTEIN: And they are essential 14 supports that help people, New Yorkers, obtain and 15 keep jobs. 16 I think it's fairly elementary, that, if you 17 are a working parent and you have no access to 18 affordable child care, you can't work. 19 Moreover, our member agencies -- and I'm sure 20 this can be extrapolated to the human-services 21 sector as a whole -- we employ over 10,000 staff 22 members, just in our 37 agencies. And, often, we 23 are the employers who give community residents 24 their first entry-level jobs. 25 So, our agencies are much more likely to hire 1 from their local communities than other businesses, 2 and some of our program -- former program 3 participants are now current employees. 4 So, I think, to look at the human sector -- 5 human-services sector solely as a taker, and not a 6 giver, is the wrong way to look at it, because we 7 are employers. We are often the employers -- 8 the first employers for people who are just trying 9 to get their foot in the door. 10 So, our agencies partner with the city, 11 state, and federal government, as I said, to 12 maximize limited resources, running effective and 13 efficient programs of real value. 14 They -- we -- everybody loves the term 15 "leverage" these days. 16 We raise over $50 million in private 17 donations, from foundations and individuals, to 18 leverage the impact of government funding, and, to 19 make your dollars go much further in communities. 20 The state government's first priority must be 21 to preserve the core services that support the 22 communities we serve. 23 We offer below, several proposals to help 24 New York State use its resources well, to provide 25 for low-income communities. And we tried to stay 1 away a little bit from budget conversations, 2 because we know that's not the purpose of this 3 hearing, but needless to say, we believe that the 4 state government should take a balanced approach 5 between revenue and cuts. 6 But, I can certainly answer questions about 7 that later. 8 So, I don't want to read everything here, 9 but, we are asking for the Legislature to take a 10 leading role -- and we've talked to Senator Squadron 11 about this before -- on universal pre-K funding. 12 We really need some flexibility right now. 13 We are mandated for 2 1/2 hours. 14 It would be very, very helpful to the city's 15 child-care system, and to those agencies that are 16 providing child care, to have -- be able to have the 17 flexibility to use that for full day care. 18 And for -- and as I said earlier, for working 19 parents, full day care is the only real option. 20 So, again, we can follow up with you, and, 21 you know, the Committee staff, on Children and 22 Families, about this, if you want more information. 23 We are asking you to modify the 24 welfare-to-work requirements for parents of children 25 under one year of age. 1 This supports your legislation, 2 Senator Savino, that would amend the Social Services 3 Law, modifying the exemption for welfare-work 4 requirements for parent or relative of children up 5 to age 1. 6 I am happy to answer questions about that. 7 "YDDP"; YDDP is a funding stream. 8 "Youth Development and Delinquency 9 Prevention"; many of you know about this. 10 This is very important funding for us. 11 This is a funding stream that got hit hard in 12 last year's State budget. It funds after-school, it 13 funds teen, programs here. Again, pretty 14 essential to help families, uhm, and kids. 15 So, we -- currently, this is a legislative 16 change -- a regulatory change, really -- that would 17 allow agencies to collect fees. 18 And, we're not talking about huge fees. 19 We're talking about modest fees, that will help them 20 maintain their programs at the time when, frankly, 21 the State and the City are cutting their government 22 funding. 23 So, we can't -- you can't have it both 24 ways. We can't say to agencies, You can't collect 25 fees -- sliding-scale fees -- at the same time 1 we're saying, We're cutting you by, 25 percent, or 2 50 percent; and still expect these programs to 3 exist. 4 So, that seems to be a very, very easy fix. 5 And, again, you know, we're not talking about 6 agencies that are going to charge people hundreds 7 of dollars a week. We're talking about modest 8 incremental fees. 9 The high school equivalency diploma: You 10 know, again, that this is an important piece for a 11 lot of young people. 12 We have a real problem of disconnected youth 13 in the city of New York, state of New York. Young 14 people who are not in school, not at work. 15 There's a lot of talk about how to help such 16 young people: either, complete their high school 17 education, or get a job. 18 The GED exam has been a problem, getting 19 access to it, for a lot of these young people. 20 So, we want to talk with you, and others in 21 the Legislature, more about developing multiple 22 pathways to earn that high school equivalency, 23 which, again, is related to employment. Many, many 24 jobs require at least a high school equivalency. 25 And, last -- and, maybe, uhm -- 1 My colleague Bobbie Sackman, from the 2 Council of Senior Centers, talked about this 3 earlier, but, you know, we came in late. It's 4 pouring out, so we had a little bit of a delay in 5 getting here. It started, like, almost sleeting. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Really? 7 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Yes, we have Erie County 8 weather. 9 SENATOR GALLIVAN: It was sunny when we got 10 here this morning. 11 NANCY WACKSTEIN: I know. It was sunny. 12 SENATOR SQUADRON: Is that a metaphor? 13 [Laughter.] 14 NANCY WACKSTEIN: And our umbrella was much 15 too small. 16 [Moans.] 17 [Laughter.] 18 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very much. 19 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Uhm -- so, we want to -- we 20 want to make sure that the discretionary funding in 21 New York State's portion of the federal Title 20 22 block grant continues to be used to fund senior 23 centers in New York City. 24 The last couple of years, as you know, the 25 Executive has proposed that this money be mandated, 1 uhm -- I mean, I'm sorry -- move away from giving 2 the counties the ability to designate. 3 We think it's very important that they 4 continue to be able to designate. And, in our case, 5 use it for this important purpose. 6 So, thank you, again, for convening this 7 hearing. It's been, uhm -- it's wonderful that you 8 are focusing on this. 9 We urge the -- both Committees to continue, 10 in a sense, advocating for us with the Executive. 11 We would like to see more responsiveness from the 12 Governor's Office to our issues. We know there's 13 a -- there are big problems -- other big 14 problems in this state, but we think we're part of 15 the solution. 16 So, thank you. 17 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I have a question about 18 Senator Savino's legislation. 19 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Yes? 20 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Not of Senator Savino, 21 because we've talked about it. 22 I'm -- could you explain, just in the 23 material you submitted: You get to the point that 24 this will save $16.4 million if this legislation 25 passed? 1 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Yes. 2 MR. GERMAIN: From your perspective, how did 3 you arrive at that? 4 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Well, I'm going to call 5 upon my able staff person here, Gregory Brender, who 6 is our policy analyst for these issues. 7 And -- Greg? 8 GREGORY BRENDER: I believe the actual work, 9 to come to the number, came from the Empire Justice 10 Center, and Federation of Protestant Welfare 11 Agencies. 12 But they'd done it, based on the estimates 13 of, basically, mothers who would no longer be 14 needing infant/toddler care, which is the most 15 expensive form of care, based on that change. 16 I don't think that they estimated the full 17 number of people, because they seen some folks would 18 continue because you'd still have the option of 19 receiving care. 20 But, it was based on estimates of how many 21 people would no longer be receiving care. 22 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Are you able to take us 23 through it? 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, technically, that's 25 the correct answer to how they arrived at the dollar 1 amount. 2 What this legislation essentially would do, 3 it would adopt a policy that was enacted in 4 California, which faced far worse budget crises than 5 the State of New York has faced. 6 But what it essentially does is, it removes 7 from the child-care pool, the subsidized -- the pool 8 of subsidized day-care slots, women who are on 9 public assistance with children under the age of 1, 10 for a specified period of time. I believe it's only 11 one year, to take them out of the pool, so you 12 preserve the available day-care slots -- 13 subsidized day-care slots for the working poor. 14 I think Nancy touched on, in her earlier part 15 of her testimony, the need to couple our 16 economic-development policies and our child-care 17 policies. 18 I think there's a report in today's 19 "New York Times," by the Fiscal Policy Institute, 20 which talks about the job loss in New York State, 21 and the job gain. 22 We've lost a significant number of high-wage 23 jobs, and they've been replaced with low-wage 24 jobs. 25 Well, we have to -- if we're going to develop 1 an economic-development policy that puts people 2 back to work, and talk about job creation, we have 3 to also talk about what makes work pay. 4 And for many women -- and this is, 5 overwhelmingly, women in these low-wage jobs -- if 6 you take away subsidized day care, or access to 7 quality, affordable child care, they can't remain in 8 the workforce. 9 So, we have women who have already struggled 10 out of public assistance or low-wage poverty, gotten 11 into the workforce, and they're able to remain there 12 because they have access to subsidized day care or 13 quality, affordable child care. 14 But, now, we have more women who are on 15 public assistance, who are required to participate 16 in workfare, as a requirement of the federal 17 Welfare Reform Act, but we are not really creating 18 jobs for them. We're -- it's "make work," for the 19 most part. 20 But, if they have to comply with the workfare 21 requirements, that the federal government says, and 22 the State Social Service Department says, well, we 23 then have to provide subsidized child care, because 24 they're eligible for subsidized child care. 25 That takes away from the available pool, 1 which is shrinking. And that means, working women 2 who aren't on public assistance, are going to lose 3 their subsidized day care, which puts them at risk 4 of losing their job, and they cycle in and out. 5 So if we simply remove, for a specified 6 period of time, the women who aren't working 7 full time, who are on public assistance, for a -- 8 that have children under the age of 1, for one year, 9 preserve it for working women who really need it, we 10 will save the State a significant amount of money. 11 And, it's also the humane and right thing to 12 do, in my perspective. 13 NANCY WACKSTEIN: And I agree. 14 And we're facing, in this coming year, in the 15 city, a loss of about 10,000 slots, because of the 16 City's new Early Learn initiative. 17 And, because we had some restorations last 18 year, with one-time City Council money, where we 19 have no assurance that it will be continued. 20 So, at a time when we are at risk of losing 21 slots, I think this proposal makes a lot of 22 sense because there's going be a lot of competition 23 for those slots. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: We will be back here, for 25 those of you who are interested, on December 12th -- 1 right back here in this same room -- where the 2 Senate Children and Families Committee will be doing 3 a hearing on the Early Learn initiative, and what it 4 could possibly mean. 5 SENATOR SQUADRON: Just, very briefly, and 6 without getting into budget prescriptions: Can 7 you just take us through, sort of, what a budget 8 picture looks like for the settlement houses 9 across the state, without -- you know, sort of, 10 based on the Executive's proposed budget for the 11 last couple of years, without the restoration that 12 the Legislature has seen? 13 Are you having actual settlement houses 14 closing down? 15 What programs cease to exist? 16 How many people that are served, no longer 17 are? 18 Just get a sense of the scale, in human 19 terms. 20 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Senator, it is -- it's a 21 little hard to predict, but, you know, as I said 22 earlier, we're looking for your leadership, to try 23 to make sure that this year's Executive budget -- 24 or, at least this year's approved budget, will not 25 have some of the cuts we saw last year, like, 1 youth services. 2 Youth services, to me, took the hardest hit 3 last year, on the state level, and, which seems 4 extremely short-sighted. 5 And I know that Senator Gallivan has spent 6 some time in law enforcement, and we talked about 7 this earlier: To cut youth services for kids who 8 have no place to go after school or on weekends, 9 doesn't seem to be a cost-effective, or justifiable, 10 solution. 11 So that's -- that's the area where I'm most 12 concerned in the coming year. 13 If we get the same level of cuts to, as I 14 said earlier, YDDP, and other funding streams, 15 coupled with the City's intention now, to cut, what 16 they call "OST" -- out-of-school time -- we are at 17 risk of losing thousands of slots -- 18 What's the latest number? 19 GREGORY BRENDER: 30,000. 20 NANCY WACKSTEIN: -- 30,000 after-school 21 slots. 22 So, that -- that -- 23 SENATOR SQUADRON: 30,000 after-school 24 slots. 25 NANCY WACKSTEIN: If the OST -- 1 SENATOR SQUADRON: What happens to those 2 kids? 3 NANCY WACKSTEIN: What happens to those kids? 4 They're either latch-key kids; they're going 5 home on their own. Or, they're hanging out. Or, 6 they're doing things that they probably shouldn't be 7 doing. 8 Because, for a lot of these kids, they're 9 low-income working families. Their parents are at 10 work. They need something to do until six o'clock. 11 SENATOR SQUADRON: 30,000 kids, 2 hours a 12 day, with no supervision -- 13 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Yes. 14 SENATOR SQUADRON: -- 2 to 3 hours a day with 15 no supervision. 16 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Yeah, I mean -- 17 SENATOR SQUADRON: All right. 18 NANCY WACKSTEIN: -- you know, I'm not going 19 say they're all going to get into trouble, but 20 they're certainly not going to be learning -- 21 SENATOR SQUADRON: 300,000 unsupervised 22 hours a week, for teenagers and pre-teens, 23 and -- 24 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Well, you're faster than I 25 am. Yeah. 1 But the, uhm -- uhm -- 2 SENATOR SQUADRON: I haven't worked in law 3 enforcement, but -- 4 SENATOR GALLIVAN: He used a calculator. 5 SENATOR SQUADRON: I haven't worked in law 6 enforcement, but I can see Senator Gallivan getting 7 very nervous with those numbers. 8 NANCY WACKSTEIN: But, you're right; it's not 9 only the potential for getting into trouble, but 10 it's, also, the opportunity is lost. I mean, these 11 programs do a lot of help, academically. These 12 programs do a lot of work -- homework help. You 13 know, a lot of cultural-enrichment stuff. 14 So, it's not just, you know, babysitting. 15 These programs actually, uhm -- sup- -- I guess -- 16 what's the right word? -- supplement, the school 17 curriculum. 18 And, so, success in school, I mean, is very 19 much based on getting some support after school 20 hours. 21 And for many of these families, they can't 22 get it from their parents, so they get it from the 23 programs. You know, they don't have to do 24 homework when they get home at 6:30, because they've 25 done it at the after-school program. 1 So, I think there's a lot of implications 2 here. And that's -- that's an area I'm very worried 3 about. 4 I think we are also concerned about what all 5 the Medicaid changes will mean for older people. 6 Older people living at home, homebound 7 elderly people: Is long-term care going continue to 8 be available to the people who need it? 9 So, we've been monitoring some of the 10 Medicaid Redesign Team efforts. 11 I know that doesn't come under the 12 jurisdiction of your Committee, but it is of 13 concern. 14 And, for our agencies that provide home care, 15 if Medicaid is eliminated for the kinds of community 16 services they provide, they will have to shut those 17 programs. 18 So, I guess youth services and long-term care 19 are two of my major concerns. 20 The -- the City's Early Learn initiative is 21 going to result, I think, in the coming together of 22 some programs. It's going to shrink the system, 23 there's no question. So, there will be some 24 programs that will close. Some that maybe will 25 combine, if it makes sense, geographically, and, 1 you know, approach. 2 But, you know, no settlement house has had to 3 close, yet, but I don't think we've seen the worst 4 of these deficit-reduction impacts. I mean, we 5 have -- whatever happens on the federal level is an 6 unknown. 7 The State, I think -- you know, look, we -- 8 compared to education, and Medicaid -- you all know 9 this -- which are the two big chunks of the State 10 budget, we represent a relatively small percentage. 11 So, you know, don't look to us for the 12 savings. I mean, if the State has a $3.5 billion 13 deficit going into the new fiscal year, we're such a 14 small piece. That's not where you should be looking 15 for savings. 16 SENATOR SQUADRON: And just, very briefly: 17 Do you have a sense of the cost to your agencies in 18 the lack of member items over the last two years? 19 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Oh, yes, we do. I wish I 20 had brought that. We have a whole list. 21 But, let me talk -- can you just say a word 22 about member items? 23 SENATOR SQUADRON: Sure. 24 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Thank you, Senator 25 Squadron. 1 Member items are not pork: They're not the 2 Cheese Museum. They are not the road to nowhere, 3 the bridge to nowhere. 4 You know, it's hard to stand outside, you 5 know, City Hall, or Occupy Wall Street, and say 6 "Restore member items." 7 This is not -- you know, this is not a 8 rallying cry for a lot of people. 9 But I can tell you, what member items mean 10 for our agencies is: General operating support. 11 It means support, to be able to turn the 12 lights on; 13 It means support, to be able to fix the 14 elevator; 15 It means support, to be able to actually 16 make up for some of the City and State cuts that 17 have occurred. 18 So, if you were to cut 30 percent from your 19 after-school program, and you still want to serve 20 the same number of kids you were, you can use that 21 member item to -- to patch that hole. 22 So, I think it is not extra, it's not 23 enrichment. It's pretty core operating funding for 24 our agencies who are piecing together multiple 25 funding streams, multiple contracts. 1 So, it helps pay, as I said, for the 2 general infrastructure of a non-profit agency. 3 And -- 4 SENATOR SQUADRON: But fair to say, that it's 5 certainly in the millions? 6 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Oh, 7 it's certainly in the millions. 8 And, in fact, I can provide you; we had a -- 9 we have a whole list of our 37 members, and what 10 they lost. You know, I just don't have it in my 11 head. But the -- I can send that on. 12 It's significant, it's meaningful, and it's 13 important. 14 I don't know how else to say it. 15 And, again, you know, it's not a popular -- 16 it's not like talking about child care. Everyone 17 understands what child care is, and how important 18 it is. 19 Member items are as important to our 20 agencies functioning, and continuing to function. 21 So, uhm -- 22 SENATOR SQUADRON: Well, like, their concern 23 is, that when you're, both, cutting the contracts, 24 and the member items, and the specific 25 programmatic funding, all at once, it's a triple 1 whammy. And, you know, at some point, it's going go 2 hard to get off the mat. 3 So -- 4 NANCY WACKSTEIN: And it's very hard money to 5 replace. 6 I mean, I think you all know, that there's 7 money that is restricted for a certain purpose, and 8 there's money that's more flexible. 9 Obviously, the more-flexible money is better. 10 As -- you know, non-profits are businesses, 11 as -- our health-care costs are going up at the same 12 double-digit percentage that every other business in 13 this country. 14 How do you pay for that, if you're not going 15 the offload most of it onto your already low-paying 16 employees? 17 So, it's that sort of thing. 18 It's the -- it's the running of the business. 19 It's making sure that you can pay your utility bill. 20 It's making sure that you can pay your janitor, and 21 your health employ -- your health care for your 22 employees. 23 You know, this is not -- you know, it's not 24 headline-making stuff, but it's really important for 25 running these organizations. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: I think you're preaching to 2 the converted on this one. 3 But what might be helpful for us, is, as you 4 pointed out, no one -- no one's going to get any 5 sympathy if you, you know, join Occupy Wall Street, 6 or stand on the steps of City Hall, demanding the 7 return of member items. 8 Demand the return of member items, we are 9 painted the same way. 10 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Self-serving. Right, 11 right. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Craven elected officials who 13 are just trying to bolster their own re-election 14 efforts. 15 It might be helpful, though, for you, and 16 organizations that are in this room, to begin to 17 make that argument to the Governor's Office, who 18 doesn't quite see the value of member items. 19 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Uhm, Senator, you know -- 20 SENATOR SAVINO: He sees the value of 21 campaigning against these. And this is not a 22 criticism of the Governor per se. But, right now, 23 it's a pert -- you know, no one -- no one's going to 24 lose votes by saying that we have to, you know, 25 curtail this -- these awful member items. 1 The reality of member items, as you 2 pointed, is a difference between an agency being 3 able to service one more kid; or provide one more 4 meal for a senior; or make one more phone call to 5 someone who's at risk. 6 That's the reality of member items. And it's 7 $3,000 at a time. 8 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Right. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: You know, multiply that by 10 the 212 legislators. 11 NANCY WACKSTEIN: No, I mean, you make an 12 excellent point. And we can actually document from 13 our agencies, how they use that member-item money. 14 And, again, you know, fixing the elevator may 15 not be as compelling as saying, ten more kids in the 16 after-school program, but we can choose, because 17 there's a lot of -- a lot that's been lost. 18 So, you're absolutely right; we need to stand 19 behind, and we will stand behind, people in the 20 Legislature who are pressing for the restoration of 21 some of these items. 22 And I think you're absolutely right; that we 23 should send a letter right now to Governor Cuomo, 24 talking about that -- 25 Looking at you. 1 GREGORY BRENDER: Yeah. 2 NANCY WACKSTEIN: -- that the -- we will -- 3 you know, to really document the impact of this 4 loss. 5 And you're right; I mean, you know, there's 6 been -- you know, look, that's been crooked, 7 you know, use of this money by -- on -- some elected 8 officials, some non-profits. But it -- it's, 9 what, you know, .05 percent of the total. And the 10 whole thing gets blown out of -- blown out of 11 proportion, "New York Post" headlines. 12 But I can tell you, the non-profits in our 13 system use the money legitimately, and they use it 14 well. 15 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very much. 16 NANCY WACKSTEIN: Obviously, it's an 17 emotional issue: member items. 18 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Jim Purcell. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Before Jim comes up, I 20 just want to check, to see if the next three people 21 are here. 22 Julie Spitzer or Carol McLaughlin? 23 No? 24 Michele Yanche? -- Yancy? 25 Is Michele here? 1 No? 2 Anybody from her organization, Good Shepherd 3 Services? 4 No? Okay. 5 Vanessa Ramos? 6 Susan Welber? 7 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 9 Bich Ha -- Bich -- is that how you say it: 10 Bich Ha Pham? 11 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes, Bich Ha Pham. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Bich? 13 So, the next three, after Jim, will be: 14 Katherine, Susan, and Bich. 15 Jim, how are you? 16 JAMES PURCELL: I'm fine, thank you. 17 First, my name is Jim Purcell. I'm the CEO 18 of the Council of Family and Child Caring Agencies. 19 We represent about 110 non-profit agencies across 20 the state that provide foster care and 21 family-support preventive services, and related 22 services, under contracts with New York City and, 23 virtually, all of the Upstate counties. 24 Let me first say, that while Chris Winward 25 looks like a very nice person, she will hurt me if 1 I don't ask the question: Who cares? 2 And tell you the answer, which is: That I 3 do. 4 [Laughter.] 5 JAMES PURCELL: And I advise everybody 6 following me to do the same, because Chris takes 7 names. 8 I want to thank you, Senators, for convening 9 this hearing, and for taking your time with us 10 today. 11 Before I go through a few comments, 12 Senator Savino, let me answer your question. 13 Florida has implemented the sort of document 14 involved that we're talking about here. And I can 15 dig out from my files, someplace, the grid they 16 developed, to convince the State legislature to do 17 it, which has more squiggly lines and arrows, 18 and, allegedly, all of them, literally, true. 19 They also had one agency bring all the paper 20 to a hearing like this, that they were required to 21 submit to government agencies over a year. And it 22 was boxes and boxes. 23 I would just point out: One of our Upstate 24 agencies, admittedly, a very large agency in the 25 western part of the state, told me the other day, 1 that they will undergo 56 separate audits on their 2 various programs this year alone. 3 Renting the space to house the government 4 auditors is an expense that they'll have to figure 5 out how to do. 6 Let me start with just some background 7 comments. 8 The past few years have been especially 9 hard on the children and families of our state. 10 Children and families under great stress are far 11 more likely to be in harm's way. 12 Sometimes this is the natural consequence of 13 the lack of basic needs, whether it's food or heat 14 or shelter. 15 The news of chronic shortages in food 16 pantries, and stories of families living in cars, 17 are pushing the census of our homeless shelters to 18 record levels, all attest to these facts. 19 But the child who's had no breakfast, and is, 20 therefore, unable to concentrate in school, or the 21 young child left unsupervised after school, are even 22 more numerous, and they're significantly less 23 visible. 24 And we all know that when adults are stressed 25 over their capacity to care for their children, 1 they, sometimes, more likely to strike out 2 physically in anger and frustration. 3 All of these things are happening in our 4 state today. 5 For older teens already far behind in 6 school, the clarity that their prospects of 7 finding any job, let alone, that would allow them to 8 live independently and perhaps raise a family, 9 increase even further their alienation and their 10 despair. 11 These are not good times for many of our 12 children to be growing up in our country, or in our 13 state, and we all know, you only get to be a child 14 once. 15 And, yet, even as the numbers of families 16 needing help increase, the resources to help them is 17 dropping. The very programs that survive -- provide 18 these services have been destabilized in recent 19 years. 20 For those trapped at the lowest rungs of 21 our economic ladder, the question of whether we're 22 gonna have a double-dip recession must seem either 23 completely irrelevant or like some sort of 24 diabolical joke. 25 Allow me to be very clear: We are fully 1 aware that New York State, and all of the counties, 2 and New York City, and our school districts, all 3 face extremely challenging budget problems. 4 We have not requested any real increases in 5 funding in recent years, and we're sure we won't 6 in the next year. 7 We know that choices that you have to make 8 about scarce dollars are not easy ones, but we also 9 realize -- we must realize that the most vulnerable 10 in our state cannot survive if we cannot find ways 11 to help them to help themselves. 12 It's a sad and ironic fact that we cut these 13 programs that the poorest and most vulnerable need 14 just as their needs -- their numbers, and the 15 intensity of these needs, increases. 16 The federal government cuts funding, which 17 forces the State to make further cuts. The State 18 makes cuts, which forces the counties and the school 19 districts to make further cuts. 20 And, so, in the end, we just keep passing 21 this along until, in the end, there are little in 22 the way of the sort of community support services 23 that so many families depend on. 24 You asked the question of: What you can do? 25 The first thing I would urge you to do, is to 1 be the spokespersons for these children and 2 families, with your colleagues, and help all of them 3 understand, that while the budget must surely be 4 balanced, we can't balance it on the backs of the 5 most vulnerable: our children. And, especially, 6 at-risk kids, who, through no fault of their own, 7 have families which are particularly fragile, or 8 even unsafe. 9 I won't focus a lot on the budget question, 10 except to point out, that, next year is a critical 11 year in child welfare because all of our funding 12 streams sunset. 13 The preventive services funding, which I'm 14 happy to say, in the conversations we've had with 15 the local DSS commissioners over the last year, 16 and we put together a joint proposal on what we 17 would hope would happen with child-welfare funding, 18 we -- we all agreed, very quickly, that the single 19 most important thing is to keep preventive-service 20 funding open-ended. It is absolutely critical. 21 We'd like it to be continued in statute at 22 65 percent, although it's been whittle down to 62 in 23 the budget cuts over the last couple of years. 24 We won't even ask for the 65 next year. Just 25 keep it at 62, with the hope that it can go back to 1 65 when times get a little bit better. 2 But the open-ended nature of that funding is 3 what gives counties the assurance, that if they 4 spend another $10,000 keeping some kids out of 5 foster care, the State will pay its share of that. 6 And that is absolutely vital. 7 And, in fact, it's those preventive services, 8 the question is: Do they work? 9 20 years ago, there were 65,000 children in 10 foster care in New York State. I remember it. 11 It was hor- -- you do too, Senator. 12 It was a horrible time. 51,000 kids in 13 New York City, over 14,000 Upstate. 14 Today, there are under 23,000 kids in 15 foster care in our state. And, a significantly 16 lower number in residential care as well. 17 That is, primarily, the direct result of, I 18 would suggest, some better child-protective 19 investigations by counties and ACS, some 20 higher-quality staff and training and support. And, 21 certainly, of the community-based preventive 22 services which now exist all over the state. 23 And we simply have to preserve that 24 mechanism. If we don't, we will see more and more 25 kids in foster care. 1 As an aside: I'm told, that Arizona cut 2 their protective and preventive funding a few 3 years ago, and they now have 25 percent more kids 4 in foster care. 5 Oregon, a couple of years ago, cut 6 mental health services for adults. 7 It doesn't seem like I'd be here advocating 8 about that, except, they have more children in 9 foster care, because their parents can't get the 10 help that they need to keep them safe. 11 On foster care, that is funded through a 12 block grant. And while the number of kids is down 13 significantly over 20 year, over 10 years, over 14 5 years, the kids who do have to come into 15 foster care have a set of needs and intensity that, 16 in some cases, defies description. They are a very 17 needy group of kids, in every way. 18 The trauma, and what we've learn about the 19 impact of trauma on kids, has helped us do a better 20 job, but there -- we must support those services. 21 These kids, I like to remind you, are your 22 kids. We have taken -- the counties, the City, have 23 taken legal custody away from their parents. A 24 judge has done that, in the name of the State which 25 wrote the laws. 1 And, so, these are our kids, and if we -- we 2 have to do well by them. 3 A few things that I hope we will see in the 4 coming year: 5 The Governor appointed this past summer, 6 Clarence Sundram, as a special adviser on vulnerable 7 populations. We've had a number of conversations 8 with him, in meetings. 9 I haven't seen exactly what they're going to 10 recommend. This first came out of some of the 11 exposés about OPWDD group homes. But, I think 12 that Mr. Sundram brings an incredible amount of 13 experience to this. And some of the conversations 14 we've had are very, very promising, that would allow 15 us to provide probably better services, especially 16 for older kids who might be in some kind of 17 residential program, protect them, but at the same 18 time, probably save some money as we do that. 19 When we look at the funding streams, child 20 welfare is a -- almost incredibly regulated area, 21 both, the content of what workers do, the 22 practice, as well as the procedures, legal 23 safeguards for parents and kids. All appropriate. 24 The documentation requirements are 25 extraordinary. 1 So, we need to find some ways to be more 2 flexible. 3 And two that have been eliminated in the last 4 year, and I'm not arguing with the priority of 5 maintaining the core funding, and letting the stuff 6 that's more on the periphery, go, when you have to 7 do that. But, in eliminating what were called 8 "community optional preventive programs" -- 9 And, Senator, this was a particular problem 10 in Erie County; less so in New York City, Senator. 11 -- these were locally crafted programs, 12 where the county figured out that there was a 13 particular need in a particular community, and by 14 waiving certain of the regular rules -- 15 Whether it was a case plan for every kid, 16 where you're working in a school where all the kids 17 are at risk, and, if we could do something after 18 school, we don't need to have each family come and 19 apply, and fill out an application. 20 -- we're going to help this group of kids. 21 There are substitute documentation 22 requirements, negotiated by the county and the 23 State, but we've had to eliminate those programs. 24 And those are exactly the kinds of locally designed 25 programs, that we would suggest fill niches that 1 have been identified by local people, and keep kids 2 safe. 3 Some of the programs that Nancy was 4 describing a moment ago, might well fit into some of 5 those definitions. 6 And, similarly, there was a small amount of 7 money that was available to OCFS, for what was 8 called "a quality enhancement fund," that was also 9 eliminated. 10 We'd like to see that notion -- whether or 11 not it's the same rules or not, is a separate 12 question -- but maybe we ought to look for ways to 13 resurrect that notion of innovation and quality 14 changes that would let -- with State approval, but 15 would let providers and counties experiment with a 16 different approach. 17 There's often a need for some up-front 18 funding for those kinds of things, to get them off 19 the ground, test them out. 20 I hope some of them don't work, because if 21 every one we try works, then we're not trying hard 22 enough. 23 But, try some things. If they don't work, 24 kill that one, try something else. But, we need to 25 find ways to bring more flexibility and creativity, 1 innovation, if you will, into front-line work. 2 One area that we think would be a particular 3 beneficiary here, and this is also comes from our 4 conversations with local commissioners, is the fact 5 that New York State is still spending, on the order 6 of $140 million a year, to keep 650 kids in 7 out-of-state institutions. 8 I did the math. That works out to about 9 $225,000 a kid. Some of these costs, per kid, are 10 $300,000. 11 I can find providers in-state, for 12 300,000 -- for 295, will figure out a way to help 13 that kid. 14 What we need, is a way to create some 15 individual-kid flexibility. We don't need to design 16 a whole new program, or convert a whole cottage in a 17 facility, to serve X, Y, Z kids if we have one of 18 those kids. 19 But, maybe, if the question wasn't, "Can we 20 serve that kid today, with his unique set of needs, 21 with the existing program?" -- if, instead of saying 22 No, we can't, if the question was, "What would it 23 take?" then we start getting people being more 24 creative. 25 Well, if I -- if I've got a brittle diabetic 1 kid, for example, maybe I need more nutrition; a 2 dietitian consultation, because I've got to make 3 sure that this kid's diet, every hour of every day, 4 is on target. 5 Maybe it's, temporarily, an additional 6 worker, to really shadow this kid, to make sure that 7 he blends into the program, and isn't the instigator 8 of violence on a campus. 9 Whatever it may be, we are continuing to send 10 kids out of state, admittedly, fewer than there 11 were, five, six years ago, but at an enormous 12 cost. 13 And, by the way, those kids in facilities in 14 Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, they are not 15 importing people from New York to come there and 16 work, and pay their taxes. They're hiring their own 17 people to do this. 18 So, I must say, when I worked with 19 Mr. Wing (ph.), many years ago, we would go to 20 meetings on kids out of state. 21 And I used to suggest: We take this problem 22 away from the human-service people, which I used to 23 be one of at the State, because we obviously haven't 24 figured out the answer. 25 We ought to give this to the 1 economic-development people, because they will 2 figure out the answer to this. 3 These are job-intensive programs for these 4 kids. And we're talking about $140 million. 5 Uhm -- the, uhm -- I want to echo Chris's 6 comments about, fees, and mandates. 7 At the very moment, where the demand on us is 8 to be better businesses, to figure out your bottom 9 line, to cut unnecessary costs, we're getting more 10 fees. It seems like every local government has 11 figured out, that they can assess a garbage 12 collection fee. In New York City, what, for 13 generations, were free boiler inspections, now the 14 fire department charges for them. 15 I'm sure they got a budget problem they have 16 to meet, but as Chris said, we're funding these 17 programs with government dollars, then we're 18 paying government fees, and MTA taxes, and rate 19 givebacks on Medicaid, to do, what? 20 Well, to, you know, subsidize some other part 21 of the budget. 22 While we get all of those, and I enjoy the 23 MTA as much as anybody else, you know, asking these 24 agencies to come up with that money, and then to 25 watch the State agencies, frankly, decide that that 1 tax is not a fringe benefit, which would have put on 2 the personal-service side of the budget, it's a cost 3 of doing business, which puts it on the -- I mean, 4 it's just -- it just creates havoc within the way 5 the rate systems work. 6 The critical issue for our kids, the 7 families, what makes what we do work, when it 8 works, is the relationship between the caseworker 9 and the family. 10 The Legislature funded a few years ago, 11 OCFS, to do a caseload study, and figure out what 12 caseloads ought to be. 13 One of the recommendations was, that, in 14 foster care, the caseloads ought to be 11 or 15 12 kids. 16 In New York City, our foster-family-care 17 caseloads, right now, are about double that. 18 And, uhm -- and that's -- that study was done 19 before the permanency law was passed; and it was 20 done before the City instituted a terrific thing 21 called "Family Team Conferencing," which really 22 brings everybody to the table, with the family, to 23 figure out a solution, but, they take time. 24 According to that State study, if you do the 25 math, a caseworker with 20 or 22 kids on their 1 caseload, would have 52 minutes a month of 2 face-to-face time with each kid or their family. 3 And I like to point out, that if it was my 4 kid, or your kid, we would not think that was 5 enough. 6 And, so, we need to find ways to, either, 7 increase caseworkers, but, that costs a lot of 8 money; or find ways to cut the other things they 9 have to do. 10 And two areas come to mind. 11 This permanency law that was passed a few 12 years ago, we supported it. It was a terrific 13 idea. 14 We doubled the number of permanency 15 hearings in family court. 16 Judges were going to see kids every 17 six months, instead of every year, to make sure we 18 were moving that case along, and getting that kid 19 home, or freed for adoption. 20 The promise was, we'd stop adjourning cases. 21 And, in fact, there was a whole set of 22 provisions, that, if a case had to be adjourned on 23 Tuesday afternoon, it would be heard on Wednesday 24 morning. 25 It hap- -- unfortunately, it was implemented 1 in December, I forget the year -- getting old -- 2 but, it was December '07. And Nix (ph.) Mary Brown 3 died in November of '07; and, so, the caseload went 4 bananas. 5 And so, now, we have twice as many required 6 hearings in family court, permanency hearings, 7 and they often get adjourned. And when they get 8 adjourned, they can get adjourned for up to 9 six months. 10 So, we go into court today, to say: We've 11 been working with mom. She's not coming around. 12 Her issues are not -- she's not taking this 13 seriously. She's still doing X, Y, and Z. We need 14 to terminate her parental rights. 15 And the case gets adjourned -- we get the kid 16 ready for this. We tell them what's going happen 17 today. 18 The case gets adjourned, and we come back in 19 six months. 20 For six months, essentially, nothing's 21 happening in that case. 22 We've asked for more family court judges. 23 That didn't work. 24 I think we need to think about a trigger 25 mechanism in the law, that says: When we're 1 adjourning X number of cases in a particular county, 2 we suspend the new requirement until we catch up to 3 backlog, and then we reinstitute it. 4 I'm not opposed to these additional hearings. 5 They're probably wonderful. But if we're adjourning 6 a third of them anyway, we're not really doing the 7 kids any good, and we're tying up workers in court 8 for, on average, three hours, whether or not the 9 hearing's held. 10 So, I sit in court for three hours, waiting 11 for a case, that then gets adjourned, because the 12 judge has too many other pressing things; or some 13 lawyer didn't show up; or the caseworker didn't show 14 up. 15 We're all guilty of this. 16 Now, the other area is in documentation. 17 There's a lot of complaints about the State 18 connection system. 19 I'm actually not here today to complain about 20 it. 21 It's actually been significantly improved in 22 the last couple of years, but there's some legacy 23 problems. 24 There was a computer system that was -- 25 preceded connections. It's called "CCRS." It's 1 been around since the late '70s or early '80s. 2 It's dumb, literally. 3 Our workers have to feed both systems. 4 They have to put the same information in both 5 systems because connections never got to the 6 point where it could do several functions. 7 OCFS needs to finish that so we can have 8 5,000 workers not feeding duplicate systems the 9 same thing. 10 And, with that, I will thank you for your 11 time, your attention, and your patience. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Who wants to go first? 13 All right. 14 Thank you, Jim, for your testimony. 15 So, a couple of good -- some good news for 16 you. 17 I had -- [inaudible] -- hearings. 18 I was actually somewhat opposed to it, having 19 worked in the system, and I saw the potential 20 problems. 21 One: The shortage of judges. 22 We need 39 family court judges, statewide. 23 We're not going to get any. 24 We need seven in the city of New York -- 25 [inaudible] -- every country. 1 We need them desperately. We don't have the 2 money for it. 3 So, I knew it was going to create problems, 4 right off the bat. 5 And, exactly what I thought was going to 6 happen, you've just described. 7 The unintended consequence of well-intended 8 legislation, you know, the whole idea behind it was: 9 We want to move kids through the system 10 faster. We want to develop permanency quicker; 11 We want to have judges have more 12 interaction with the family; 13 We don't want children lingering. The 14 average length of stay is seven years in foster 15 care. 16 We all know the statistics. 17 But without the resources to do so, and 18 looking at the shortage of judges, all it did, was 19 require more hearings, and create more work for 20 caseworkers. 21 So, I've had two meetings with ACS, starting 22 with them, because they are the biggest of the 23 agencies [inaudible]. 24 And, now, Commissioner Richter, who recently 25 came off the bench, as a family court judge -- 1 [inaudible] -- has an interesting perspective on 2 this. 3 And I spoke to them about either repealing 4 the permanency law or amending it. 5 And they have agreed that they are willing to 6 support that concept, because they recognize that 7 the well-intended legislation has created problems 8 for them, and for the agencies. 9 The reality is: It can take up to two years 10 to get a disposition on an initial Article 10 in a 11 family court. 12 So, why you would be having a permanency 13 hearing to determine whether a child should be freed 14 for adoption, when you don't even have an initial 15 finding on neglect or abuse, makes no sense 16 whatsoever. 17 So, we are going to be drafting legislation 18 on that. 19 I have spoken to family court, Jan Fink, and 20 others, around amending it. 21 We may -- 22 JAMES PURCELL: Can I just inter- -- allow me 23 to interject for a moment. 24 I've been around the system for a long time, 25 and I thought I knew a lot of the underlying part. 1 I learned last year, that the average time to 2 disposition of the underlying child protective case, 3 in New York City, is 13 months. 4 And my reaction was: We wonder why these 5 parents are so angry. 6 If it took you 13 months, while you had my 7 kid in foster care, to figure out whether or not I 8 did what somebody said I did in the first place, I'd 9 be pretty angry too. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: [Inaudible] in order for a 11 family to be serviced appropriately, you have to 12 develop a relationship between the caseworker and 13 the family. And it takes time to build that 14 relationship. 15 And, so, if you now put the caseworker in the 16 position where they have to begin to process a 17 family for a termination of parental rights, you 18 have destroyed that relationship. And, now, you 19 need a whole new caseworker; otherwise, you're not 20 going accomplish anything -- [inaudible] -- service 21 money [inaudible]. 22 Sorry for that interruption, Jim. 23 But on -- again, on the permanency plan -- on 24 the permanency hearings, we are going to be 25 looking to -- [inaudible] -- so we'll be looking -- 1 JAMES PURCELL: [Inaudible] some reasonable 2 place to do that. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: [Inaudible] to help us with 4 that. 5 And on the -- on the 695 kids who were placed 6 out of state, where are they going? 7 I mean, are we seeing, like, are they all 8 going to Pennsylvania, or are they going around the 9 country? 10 JAMES PURCELL: You know, the good news is, 11 30 years ago, the State found -- that when they 12 first started looking at this, they found those kids 13 in Florida and Texas, and some pretty horrible 14 places. 15 Almost all those kids today are in contiguous 16 states. They're in Massachusetts, they're in 17 Pennsylvania, are the two biggest. 18 Just over 100 of those 650 kids, was the last 19 number I saw, probably from June, are foster-care 20 kids placed by the City or the counties, which is 21 down from, probably, three or four hundred a few 22 years ago. 23 The rest are placed by school districts. And 24 that number's also down, of several hundred of 25 those, there's fewer kids. 1 And there was a big push on this a few 2 years ago. Again, the Legislature directed the 3 State Council on Children and Families to look at 4 this. And they're the ones who documented, that the 5 very high costs -- some of these out-of-state 6 places have very high rates, which get paid, and 7 then they can have the supports they need to serve 8 some very challenging kids. 9 I'm not suggesting that our programs today 10 could necessarily take all of those kids back in 11 with existing resources. I'm not saying that. 12 I'm just saying, that, with some flexibility 13 around resources for a particular kid, I think we 14 could probably serve a lot more of them for less 15 than what we're spending out of state now. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: But the question is: What 17 is that they have -- what is their service need that 18 we can't provide? 19 Is it -- are they all the same? 20 Is it a medically fragile group? 21 Is it developmental disability? 22 What is it? 23 JAMES PURCELL: There are -- that's a mix. 24 The data on most of the kids would have to 25 come from State Ed. And it's -- while they have 1 categories, like, "developmentally disabled" or 2 "severely emotionally disturbed," it doesn't tell a 3 very refined picture. 4 We'd probably have to do that on a retail 5 basis; get down and talk about specific cases. 6 A number of them are dually diagnose. I 7 mean, that's one of the things that we, frankly, 8 don't do a good job with in this state, is -- my 9 experience on kids, is that, OMH and OMR, one -- 10 OPWDD, rather, ones -- they can't quite figure out 11 who serve as kid who is both developmentally 12 disabled and mentally ill. Those kids often end up 13 in the care of the County DSS commissioner, because 14 nobody else is doing it; or the schools. 15 And, so, there are a number of those kids out 16 of state. There's a significant number who are 17 severely emotionally disturbed, and probably a 18 pretty good number who are developmentally disabled. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: At the beginning of this 20 year, I met with the three commissioners: OCFS, 21 OMH, and what was then, OTDA; now it's -- oh, 22 whatever it -- OPWDD -- 23 Thank you. 24 -- OMRDD; now it's OPWDD. 25 They said they were going to embark on a 1 project of examining cross-systemization, to address 2 just that issue. 3 Have they made any progress, that you're 4 aware of? 5 JAMES PURCELL: I'm not aware of it. 6 I wouldn't want to say they haven't made 7 progress, but I'm not aware of it. 8 I want to repeat, though, the numbers are 9 down. I mean, but I just think we need to keep an 10 attention on this. 11 And the issue needn't be about, we -- I must 12 say, we use return kids from out of state as a bit 13 of a shorthand. 14 If the kid is doing really well, and he's 15 been in School X in Western Massachusetts for a 16 year, and he's going to go there another year, I 17 think we ought to make a -- we ought to respect 18 whether that's working for that kid. 19 I just think we could put the things in place 20 to top the need to place the next kid out of state. 21 Some of them will come back. Some of their 22 parents will want them back, closer to home. Some 23 may not. I'm not trying to change all of that. 24 In some ways, I would say, if we weren't 25 smart enough, collectively, to have the right 1 programs a year ago, when this kid needed it, well, 2 shame on us, and let's make sure he's getting what 3 he needs wherever he is. 4 It's also true, by the way, that we have no 5 oversight over those places. 6 And a number of those kids, a very high 7 number of those kids -- I -- we can get you the 8 numbers -- are in a place called the 9 "Judge Rotenberg Center" in Massachusetts. 10 And their belief is, using adversive 11 techniques on kids, to control behavior. 12 Back in my day, those were often helmets with 13 ammonia sprays. 14 They've gotten rid of those now. Now they 15 have backpacks, where they deliver a small 16 electrical jolt to a child who is acting out. 17 And they get, in most cases, parental 18 permission to do this. 19 And we still have -- it's why State Ed and 20 the Regents went nuts a few years ago, and created 21 new rules -- 22 "Nuts" was probably the wrong word, wasn't 23 it? I should be more tactful. 24 I'll revise, and fix my remarks later, if 25 you'll let me. 1 -- but, they -- they -- they developed new 2 rules about use of adversive techniques. And it 3 gets tricky, because: What's adversive? 4 If I hold a kid down, is that adversive? 5 But, it was aimed at this particular program, 6 which is still got, I think, well over 100 7 New York State kids in it. 8 And, doing things that you would not be -- 9 you would explicitly not be allowed to do in 10 New York State. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: Hmm. 12 Thank you, Jim. 13 Do you guys have any questions for him? 14 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No. 15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thanks, Jim. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 17 Next is -- 18 Who's next? 19 I lost track here. 20 That was Michele; right? 21 Because, Julie Spitzer, Karen McLaughlin, is 22 not here yet. 23 But we do have -- oh, wait. 24 Who is here? 25 Katherine? 1 My -- oh -- 2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I'm sorry, is someone from 3 Bronx Works here? 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Katherine McLaughlin? 5 No. 6 Katherine Eckstein. 7 SENATE AIDE: Yeah, go to Katherine Eckstein. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Children's Aid. 9 SENATE AIDE: And then we're going to -- 10 SENATOR SAVINO: And then we're going 11 backwards? 12 Okay, Katherine, come on down. 13 (Discussion off the record.) 14 KATHERINE ECKSTEIN: Good morning. 15 Thank you. 16 My name is Katherine Eckstein. I'm the 17 director of public policy at The Children's Aid 18 Society. 19 I just want to thank Chair Gallivan and 20 Chair Savino and Senator Squadron for being here 21 today. 22 I will -- I want to echo the sentiments of 23 my colleagues, that I think doing this before the 24 budget is really important because we know what 25 happens around budget time. 1 So, thank you. 2 As one of the nation -- I'll summarize my -- 3 my statement. 4 And, Senator Savino, we have had multiple 5 conversations around child-welfare issues, so I'll 6 also summarize those. 7 As one of the nation's largest and oldest 8 community-based organizations, Children's Aid 9 helps children in poverty to succeed and thrive. 10 We do this by providing comprehensive 11 supports to children and their families in 12 targeted high-needs New York City neighborhoods. 13 And throughout the City, we serve about 14 70,000 children, primarily in 4 target 15 neighborhoods, one of which is in Staten Island. 16 And, we have a network of community 17 centers, community schools, and health 18 clinics, where we offer 100 programs at 19 45 sites. 20 We provide education and youth-development 21 services; foster care, and preventive services; 22 after-school, summer, and weekend enrichment; early 23 childhood programs; adolescent pregnancy prevention; 24 comprehensive health services; legal services; and 25 programs for disconnected youth. 1 So, all of that to say, we see families at 2 multiple stages in their lives, both on the 3 prevention side and the intervention side, and that 4 will inform my thoughts today. 5 Every day, we see the impacts of the 6 current economic crisis. 7 And, again, you've heard from my colleagues 8 so I won't belabor the point. 9 But, what I want to say is, that, 10 particularly families living in poverty, are 11 experiencing additional and compounding challenges 12 now. 13 So, it's not just, like, families are facing 14 a housing crisis, or they're facing a health crisis, 15 or their child has lost an after-school program or 16 an early childhood program. But, often, families, 17 and in our experience, more and more families, are 18 experiencing two or three of those issues, and 19 families are reaching tipping points. 20 And we see that in everything that we do. 21 Families are losing housing. They need more 22 preventive services from us for child welfare. 23 And, so, we're particularly interested in the 24 interconnectedness of issues that children and 25 families face. 1 Just a couple of statistics from our own 2 work. 3 We -- Children's Aid Society is one of 4 "'New York Time's' Neediest Cases" organizations; 5 and, so, families can come to us for direct material 6 assistance. 7 Those requests have gone up significantly 8 over the last three years. 9 On average, last year, we had about 10 121 requests per month. And this year, to date, 11 we've had about 141. 12 And, so, you know, families are coming to us 13 with basic needs. They need, you know, winter coats 14 for their children, or Pathmark vouchers because 15 they don't have enough food on the table. 16 I was at a Thanksgiving dinner at one of our 17 community centers in Harlem last week, and we had 18 more families come to the Thanksgiving dinner than 19 ever before. And, families were asking if they 20 could take home platters of food, because that was 21 the only food that they would be having over the 22 next couple of days. 23 And, so, I think when we're seeing the 24 reality of what kids and families are facing, this 25 conversation is particularly important. 1 We, obviously, appreciate the tremendous 2 budget challenges that all levels of government 3 are facing. And we, like organizations around this 4 room, have cinched our belts. We have done more 5 with less. We have cut service. We've had to say 6 no to families. 7 And, we are now, much like families, reaching 8 a tipping point, where we -- where it is very 9 difficult to provide high-quality services with what 10 we're funded to do. 11 Well, I'll give you an example, and Nancy 12 talked about this a little bit, but, just, the 13 after-school system in New York City: 14 Three years ago, the City was serving -- 15 and it used to be the largest in the country -- was 16 serving 85,000 children. 17 Come this September, the City will serve 18 32,000 children. 19 That is a two-thirds -- almost a two-thirds 20 cut in the system. And part of that money that 21 funds the New York City system is funded by YDDP, 22 which is the "Youth Development and Delinquency 23 Prevention" program, which we know, at the state 24 level, was cut significantly. 25 So, you know, in the first couple round of 1 cuts, we were able to, you know, cut an enrichment 2 specialist, cut an art teacher. We cut the number 3 of days we were serving holidays. 4 Now we're having to cut entire programs. 5 So, Senator Squadron, you asked some of the 6 effects of these cuts. 7 We're having to cut -- we're having to close 8 sites. We have closed sites at a couple of our 9 schools, because we can't -- we can't cut anymore 10 else. We're cutting into infrastructure, and then 11 we wouldn't have the kind of staff ratios that we 12 need for kids, et cetera. 13 So, you know, I know that the focus of 14 today's hearing is not on -- is not on the budget, 15 but, I'd just like to echo some of my colleagues' 16 comments, that, if we cut programs that we know to 17 be effective, that are preventive, we will end up 18 paying more down the road. 19 And, so, anything that we can do to help you 20 make that case, please let us know. We have 21 statistics, we have testimonies. 22 I think it's -- you know, I think cutting to 23 the bone now will just -- we will -- we're going to 24 pay for it later. 25 So just a couple of, kind of, regulatory, or 1 non-budget-related, issues that I want to highlight. 2 The first: We also, like Nancy, support the 3 amendment to the guidelines around being able to 4 charge fees. 5 You know, again, we never want fees to be 6 prohibitive for families. And, so, we should never 7 not serve a family if they can't pay, but given sort 8 of the trifecta of budget cuts that we've heard, 9 it's really important for us to be able to have that 10 option. 11 Something that folks have not mentioned yet, 12 which I'd like to mention, are the revision of the 13 "school-aged child care" regulations; the SAC 14 regulations. 15 So, just an example: Right now, for example, 16 in New York City, for those folks running 17 after-school programs in schools, we're 18 regulated by the Department of Health; whereas, the 19 schools are regulated by the Department of 20 Education. 21 We have two separate licensing guidelines 22 that we have to deal with. 23 So, the State -- or, the Department of 24 Education deems it safe for a classroom of 25 children to be in a classroom all day. And, then, 1 the after-school program comes, and there are 2 different regulations; and, so, there's maybe not 3 the proper kind of cover on a radiator. And, so, 4 we're then fined -- the organization is fined that's 5 running the after-school program. 6 So, we, along with many of our colleagues, 7 led by the New York State After-School Network, has 8 developed a set of recommendations around aligning 9 the SAC regulations, or amending the SAC 10 regulations. 11 And, we've worked with OCFS to vet the 12 revisions. And the youth-development community 13 stands ready to do whatever we can, to make sure 14 that that is passed. 15 I won't spend a lot of time on child welfare 16 because we submitted testimony to the State, I 17 guess, a month and a half ago, but, to echo what Jim 18 said, just, you know: 19 Sufficient and flexible funding, obviously, 20 is so important. 21 Funding for preventive services should remain 22 uncapped. We know what a difference the investment 23 in preventive services makes. 24 And, then, just, also, we have shown, through 25 our own work, what reinvestment can do. 1 So, taking foster-care savings and 2 reinvesting it into preventive, we've actually 3 gotten better results for kids. We've gotten to 4 permanency faster for kids in the child-welfare 5 system. 6 So, we would encourage, uhm -- we would 7 encourage initiatives like that to continue, even in 8 these time of economic -- of economic challenges. 9 And, then, uhm -- and I know that this not 10 under the purview of your two Committees, but it 11 certainly affects children who we're all 12 responsible for, in the Medicaid Redesign 13 conversations, we are advocating for the Medicaid 14 foster care per-diem rate to be kept. These 15 children -- it's a very small portion of money that 16 we spend on Medicaid, and it is -- it allows us to 17 be able to effectively manage that health care, 18 which is, oftentimes, very complicated for kids 19 who are in foster care. 20 And, then, on contracts processing and 21 reporting requirements, we support -- we're a 22 member of the Human Services Council. We support 23 HSC's recommendations on all of the contracting, and 24 the S -- central registry alignments. 25 Just to highlight a couple of things: 1 You know, as a provider, we've had to wait 2 six months, a year, a year and a half, for 3 contracts to be processed, or to get reimbursed 4 for existing contracts. 5 And, you know, that has -- in the past, we 6 have been able to front cash, for expenses, but 7 that is really no longer an option, given the 8 situation that we're all in. 9 So, you know, anything that can be done 10 around the processing of contracts would be 11 greatly appreciated. 12 And, then, you know, just to respond to a 13 couple of items that have come up: 14 Children's Aid, over the years, has been, 15 uhm -- has received generous member items. And, 16 as Nancy said, it is not pork. 17 We have funded a Parent Leadership Institute 18 in Washington Heights, for -- from a member item, 19 where we have trained parents in business and 20 entrepreneurial activities and advocacy. We have 21 funded after-school programs. We have received 22 capital money to redo a community center. 23 So these are -- this is money that -- I know 24 I'm preaching to the choir -- but that is so 25 critically important. And, since it no longer is 1 coming from the federal government as well, we're 2 all in a crunch. 3 So, I will stop there. 4 And, thank you so much for convening -- 5 convening this hearing. 6 And, we are your partners in this -- 7 Children's Aid is your partners, and we look 8 forward to working with you, to try to preserve this 9 critical funding. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Just one or two questions, 11 and then I'm done, because you and I, we speak all 12 the time. 13 In your child-welfare categories, you have 14 put in after-care service for families being 15 reunified, and after-care support for adoptive 16 families. 17 One of the questions I've asked OCFS, and 18 even ACS -- they claim they can't track this -- is 19 the success rate of adoptions; particularly, 20 children who are coming out of the kinship system. 21 They say they can't track them. 22 I'm particularly interested in whether or not 23 they're successful after the fact. And if they're 24 not, why? 25 You know, many of these families were 1 vulnerable to begin with, and not just in their 2 initial home, but even in their foster-care 3 placement, with their extended family. 4 And, one of the things I would like to look 5 at, and maybe work with you guys, going forward in 6 the future, is: 7 If there is a higher rate of failure of 8 adoption among cases, that have come out of the 9 kinship system. 10 And if they are, why? And what can we do to 11 prevent that? 12 Because, disrupting a child again, and having 13 them go through the system again, is, you know, I 14 think, a trauma that we should do everything 15 possible to avoid. 16 So, if you guys have any information on that, 17 I'd be interested in seeing it. 18 And anybody else that's anybody else in the 19 child-welfare field. 20 KATHERINE ECKSTEIN: Great. We'd love to 21 work with you on that. 22 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 24 KATHERINE ECKSTEIN: Thank you. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Everybody else is here now. 1 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Except for 2 [inaudible], our last one, but yeah, we're back on 3 track. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, so we're going 5 backwards now, to where we were supposed to be. 6 Julie Spitzer, from the New York City Family 7 Eviction Preventions Supplement Program. 8 JULIE SPITZER: Thank you for having me. 9 I apologize, first of all, that I was late -- 10 SENATOR SAVINO: That's okay. 11 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Not a problem. 12 JULIE SPITZER: -- and of having to go back. 13 I'm here, actually, on behalf of 14 Bronx Works. It's a community-based organization 15 in the Bronx that service families at risk of 16 eviction, and keeping them out of the homeless 17 shelters. 18 Right now, I think we're at a point in time 19 where homelessness is on a rise. It's probably at 20 the highest peak it has ever been. 21 And I'm here to talk to you specifically 22 about the New York City FEPS Application Assistance 23 Program that was funded by the Office of Temporary 24 Disability Assistance. This program was previously 25 known as "HPP"; the Homelessness Prevention Program. 1 It's a program that helps people apply for 2 one of the last subsidies there is, the "FEPS" 3 subsidy -- the Family Eviction Prevention 4 Supplement -- which assists people who are at risk 5 of eviction; families that are at risk of eviction, 6 that are on public assistance, that at risk of 7 eviction, from losing their homes. 8 Currently, the FEPS program has been cut by 9 approximately 46 percent. 10 With the turmoil that's happening with 11 Advantage, which I'm sure everyone knows about, in 12 the City, there's approximately 6,000 families at 13 risk of losing their homes or ending up homeless. 14 FEPS is one of the most successful 15 eviction-prevention programs there is, and it's 16 been cut. 17 Currently, my programs have three centers 18 that we provide FEPS services for. 19 We're able to currently serve 20 400-and-some-odd families, with the cuts -- the 21 46 percent cut. 22 However, we are seeing approximately 23 2,000 families per month coming to us. And with 24 their only being able to service 436 families in the 25 Bronx, we're turning away approximately 1,500 people 1 who can potentially end up in shelter. 2 The cost to provide the services previously, 3 was approximately $836 -- yeah -- $833. 4 And the cost to keep someone in a shelter is 5 about $3,600. 6 With these cuts happening now, at this time 7 and date, it's detrimental. 8 The lines outside the courthouse are 9 wrapping around city blocks. 10 The lines in welfare centers, it's taking 11 people four hours to get in. 12 With just 2,000 people coming to see our -- 13 my organization, I can imagine the impact on the 14 rest of the city. 15 So I'm asking for the State Senate to, 16 please, restore the funding cuts, because it's more 17 cost-effective to keep these programs fully funded 18 than to cut these programs. Especially, this is 19 the only subsidy out there for families right now. 20 There are no other subsidies available to keep 21 low-income public-assistance recipients in their 22 homes. 23 And, this program has proven to be effective. 24 We served about 6,000 people last year. Very 25 successful. 1 And with these cuts, 46 percent cut just in 2 the Bronx, where the Bronx has the highest eviction 3 rate, because we have the highest poverty rate in 4 the whole city. 5 So, what I'm here today to ask, is, if -- in 6 the next year's budget, if we can consider restoring 7 the cuts to these programs, because there's 8 nothing else left. And, we're very effective. 9 Thank you. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: A question, Julie: What's 11 the cost of the sub- -- what is the subsidy valued 12 at each month, to a family? 13 If they come in to you and they're seeking 14 eviction-prevention services, what do you guys 15 provide, besides representing them in court, I'm 16 assuming? 17 JULIE SPITZER: We assist them with court. 18 We help them fill out the applications, 19 because there's only certain providers that can 20 provide FEPS application assistance. You have to be 21 trained in order to do it. 22 The providers that are currently doing it 23 is: Catholic Charities, CAMBA, Queens Community 24 House, and Bronx Works. And, certain legal-aid 25 and legal-service organizations can also provide the 1 FEPS application. 2 So when a family comes to us who's at risk 3 of eviction, the reason most of the families that 4 are coming to us that are at risk of evictions, is 5 because the shelter allowance, as you know, in 6 New York City, is unsufficient to pay rent. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: What is it now? 8 JULIE SPITZER: For a family of three, the 9 shelter allowance is $400. 10 So, there's no place in New York City you can 11 find an apartment for $400, obviously. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: You can't have a bathroom 13 for $400 in New York City. 14 [Laughter.] 15 SENATOR SAVINO: It hasn't gone up that much 16 since -- 17 JULIE SPITZER: Well, it used to be, I 18 believe, 286. And it went up to 400. 19 Since the Gigas (ph.) lawsuit was won, it 20 went up to about $400, but, we still need to 21 supplement; to help people enroll in the FEPS 22 supplement, which would bring a family of three up 23 to, like, maybe $900. 24 And that's somewhat reasonable, but not much. 25 So -- 1 SENATOR SAVINO: So you supplement? 2 If they're eligible, your -- the FEPS would 3 supplement them? 4 JULIE SPITZER: FEPS -- yes, the FEPS 5 supplements them. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: For how long? 7 JULIE SPITZER: Well, the supplement is 8 supposed to be until they're off public assistance, 9 or, five years. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Five years. 11 Is there a dollar -- is there a capped dollar 12 amount on it, like the Advantage Program was; where 13 it was a certain dollar amount over a specified 14 period of time, or whichever came first? 15 JULIE SPITZER: No. It's five years. 16 The cap is the maximum rent allowed for each 17 family, uhm, size. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: And what's the max -- so, an 19 average family of four, what's the maximum rent 20 allowed? 21 JULIE SPITZER: $900. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: $900. Okay. 23 JULIE SPITZER: But the family is also able 24 to, out of their public assistance, contribute some 25 of it towards there. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Whatever their shelter 2 allowance -- 3 JULIE SPITZER: Yeah, from their shelter -- 4 SENATOR SAVINO: -- for their family size is. 5 JULIE SPITZER: -- well, the shelter 6 allowance, plus, out of their food, and other, 7 money, which is very little. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 9 JULIE SPITZER: So they get -- you know, I 10 don't have the figures on top of my head, but, a 11 family of three may get, something like, 12 200-and-something dollars, or -- and then they'd 13 have to contribute any difference from there, up to 14 $100. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: And how many families have 16 we been able to prevent from being evicted -- 17 JULIE SPITZER: Last year -- 18 SENATOR SAVINO: -- in -- with this 19 program -- 20 JULIE SPITZER: -- 6,000 people. 21 SENATOR SAVINO: 6,000? 22 JULIE SPITZER: Uh-huh. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: And just in the Bronx? 24 JULIE SPITZER: No. In the Bronx, it was 25 3,000. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, so, 3,000 in the 2 Bronx, 6,000 citywide. 3 JULIE SPITZER: Yeah. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 5 Does the program exist in this in the rest of 6 the state? Do you know? 7 JULIE SPITZER: No -- 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Just in New York City? 9 JULIE SPITZER: -- it's only in 10 New York City, because the rents in New York City 11 are unlike the rest of the state. 12 And that's why this program has now been 13 block-granted with other State programs. And, 14 it's not the same, because New York City is -- it's 15 extremely different than other cities in the state. 16 The rents are enormous. The eviction rates 17 are enormous. There's a lot more people. 18 The poverty rate in -- just in the Bronx, is 19 the highest in all the congressional districts, 20 and I think in the United States. 21 So, it's -- 22 [Laughter.] 23 So, it's different. 24 So, we're asking if we can have this. 25 I mean, it's heartbreaking for me to see, you 1 know, 2, 000 people coming to my doors, and I'm only 2 able to serve, approximately, 400-and-change. 3 Where are all those other people going? 4 We give them referrals to other places, but 5 when they go to the other places, they're all saying 6 the same thing: There's just no resources. There's 7 just nothing. 8 SENATOR GALLIVAN: How do you determine who 9 you serve? First come, first served? 10 JULIE SPITZER: First come, first served. 11 We can only see -- I mean, with the cuts that 12 we receive, we can only see but so many people. 13 At each site, I have, maybe, three or 14 four workers. 15 I mean, my largest site is the Melrose Job 16 Center. And, we're being told that we're getting 17 1,100 tickets a month, just at that center, for 18 people to see our office, with three or four staff 19 in there. 20 We can't service that many people. We just 21 can't. Not with these -- I mean, we used to have a 22 budget of a million-and-change. And now it's -- 23 they've cut it by 46 percent. 24 And, at this time, where there are no 25 subsidies available, this is the only thing that's 1 available, why would you cut this very important 2 program? 3 It's detrimental, I think, to people. 4 Where -- the lines, if you've -- I mean, my 5 office is located side-by-side to the courthouse -- 6 near the Bronx courthouse. 7 And, literally, this morning I walked out my 8 office, the line outside of this Bronx Housing Court 9 wrapped around a city block. 10 It's -- and it's like that every day. And 11 it's heartbreaking. 12 It's, the holidays are coming. It's, where 13 do you expect these people to go? 14 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 15 What happened to the Homeless Diversion Unit? 16 JULIE SPITZER: They refer the clients to us. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, so they're still 18 there? 19 JULIE SPITZER: They're still there, but a 20 lot of their job was dealing with families, is to 21 refer them to our program, because that's only 22 thing. 23 I mean, there's -- with future -- if you're 24 on public assistance, there's no ability to pay your 25 rent unless you have a supplement. That's just the 1 bottom line. 2 So, unless you're saying, all of these people 3 on public assistance just have to make their ends by 4 themselves, there's no way to get around it. They 5 have to get on a supplement because there's no 6 apartment out there for $400. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Unless they're living in 8 public housing -- 9 JULIE SPITZER: Unless they're living in 10 public housing. Or, subsidized housing. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: -- or some other -- 12 subsidized housing. 13 JULIE SPITZER: And, right now, they're on -- 14 I mean, there's not enough public house for 15 everyone. 16 Subsidized housing, there isn't much anymore, 17 but FEPS. And if you don't have access to FEPS, 18 then you're sort of denying people their right to 19 have the subsidy, because we don't have the capacity 20 to serve everyone. 21 So, if 2,000 people are coming to me, and I 22 can only serve, you know, less than 500, you're 23 telling the rest of the people: We just can't serve 24 you. 25 SENATOR GALLIVAN: How much of your funding 1 goes to a subsidy -- 2 JULIE SPITZER: I'm sorry? 3 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- versus the people that 4 are helping others? 5 JULIE SPITZER: I don't understand the 6 question. 7 SENATOR GALLIVAN: How much -- of your 980 -- 8 or, 948,000 funding, that funding that comes to 9 you from the State -- 10 JULIE SPITZER: Uh-huh? 11 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- how much of that goes 12 directly to clients? 13 JULIE SPITZER: It doesn't go directly to 14 clients, because the subsidies -- 15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: It's providing for the 16 staff to -- 17 JULIE SPITZER: -- it's providing for 18 staff -- 19 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- that provides the 20 assistance -- 21 JULIE SPITZER: Exactly. 22 We have to staff each office with a certain 23 amount of people; because, like I said, 1,100 people 24 cannot be served by -- 25 SENATOR GALLIVAN: So you, essentially, cut 1 your staff in half? 2 JULIE SPITZER: Yes. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: So where does the subsidy 4 come from? 5 I think that's the other question. 6 JULIE SPITZER: The subsidy comes from the 7 State -- 8 SENATOR SAVINO: So the money's there? 9 JULIE SPITZER: -- and the federal 10 government. 11 It's there, yeah. 12 The money's there. It's just -- the money 13 for the subsidy is there. 14 It's, just, who is going to help people apply 15 for the subsidy? 16 So, that, we're limiting -- we were providing 17 the subsidy, but we were limiting the access to the 18 subsidy, because there's not enough people to 19 process those applications. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Ah, ha. 21 JULIE SPITZER: So that's the problem: 22 There's not enough people to process the 23 applications so people can get the subsidy. 24 The subsidy's already there. 25 So, it's about: We can't serve as many 1 people that need the service. 2 And that's the same thing that's being said 3 in all the boroughs; and, especially, the Bronx is 4 probably the worst. 5 We just don't have the manpower to serve all 6 those people. 7 If we had enough manpower, then we could 8 serve the -- the applications; eviction prevention 9 is a very, very complex thing. And providing the 10 FEPS application, it's -- the applications are way 11 thick. You have to understand welfare-management 12 system. You have to understand housing-court 13 information and terminology, and stuff. 14 So, you, in order to process that 15 application, it takes a lot of time to process an 16 application. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: And HRA doesn't do this 18 in-house, and neither does DHS? 19 JULIE SPITZER: No. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Even though they have the 21 Homeless Diverse Unit? 22 JULIE SPITZER: No, they don't do that. 23 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Do -- 24 JULIE SPITZER: It's contracted out. 25 SENATOR GALLIVAN: I'm sorry to interrupt. 1 Do you appear in court on behalf of the 2 clients? 3 JULIE SPITZER: Well, we advocate on behalf 4 of the clients. We're not attorneys, but we do 5 go to court, because we have an office in the 6 courthouse as well. 7 We work very closely with the supervising 8 judge, Madhavan, in the courthouse. 9 So, what we do is, we go before the Court, 10 and we tell them what's going on with the process; 11 whether or not the client qualifies, whether or not 12 the rent breakdowns that the landlord provided are 13 accurate. 14 Because, we -- we review the welfare system's 15 printouts that provide information on what checks 16 was given to the landlord. Because, a lot of times, 17 what landlords try to do, is they try to put in 18 late fees or non-possessory fees into 19 breakdowns. 20 We -- that's -- they're not possessory, so we 21 take them out, and make sure that the tenants's 22 only paying actual rent, and not fees, and, you 23 know, repair bills, or whatever, that the landlord 24 tried to cramp in. And, legal, and late fees; 25 anything else that the landlord is trying to cramp 1 into rent, and trying to evict the tenant for. 2 So, we'll work with the tenant, to make sure 3 that they're being fairly charged, and that they're 4 given sufficient enough time to process the FEPS 5 application, because it takes four to six weeks 6 for a FEPS application to actually get processed 7 from the State. 8 So, we have to advocate, to make sure that 9 they have enough time in court, so that they can do 10 this. 11 And the judges work very closely with us to 12 do that. 13 So, we're actually less expensive than a 14 legal-service provider that would charge a 15 tremendous -- well, a lot more money to do this 16 work. We do this work for half the cost. 17 And, we're effective, and we've been 18 effective. We've had success rate over 90 percent. 19 The program is effective. 20 It's just, that, right now -- and I thank the 21 Senate, because, in the past, you've been supportive 22 in making sure the program has stayed open. 23 And, we're threatened by cuts from the 24 Governor's Office, and stuff, but, each year, the 25 Senate and Assembly has seen the importance of it, 1 and brought it back into the budget. 2 But, unfortunately, this year, it's been 3 brought back in, but it's been cut to the point 4 where I have clients yelling and screaming and 5 knocking down our doors, saying: Why can't we get 6 an appointment? 7 Telling the judges they can't get 8 appointment. 9 I mean, my staff can only work but so many 10 hours per day. And they have to take a lunch 11 hour. 12 And I've had to tell HRA this as well: My 13 staff has to take a lunch hour, and they can only 14 work certain hours per day. 15 They cannot -- you know, I can't have 16 four people in one center, and -- each center I 17 have, I have about four -- three to four staff in 18 each center, but we have 1,100 people coming to us. 19 We can't do that. It takes over -- you 20 know, it takes up to an hour, to two hours, to 21 process an application. We can't service 22 1,100 people coming to us. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: HRA gives you space in the 24 center? 25 JULIE SPITZER: Yes, they give us space in 1 the center. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: They don't charge you for 3 it,though, do they? 4 JULIE SPITZER: No. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, well, that's good. 6 JULIE SPITZER: That's good. 7 Well, that's good, uhm -- but it's, still, we 8 need to be able to see all the clients that are 9 coming in. And the cut is tremendous. 10 So, we ask that in -- we know that there's -- 11 may not be much you can do for this year, but, maybe 12 next year, if you can work with us, to increase, and 13 bring us back to what we used to be, or, close to 14 it. 15 Thank you. 16 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 18 Next is -- 19 SENATE AIDE: Michele Yancy. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Michele Yancy? 21 Michele Yancy. 22 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Welcome. 23 MICHELE YANCY: Thank you. 24 Good afternoon. 25 Thank you for providing this opportunity. 1 I'm Michele Yancy. I'm director of public 2 policy at Good Shepherd Services. 3 I want to use my time, really, to focus on 4 the agenda that you have before you, that was 5 compiled by the New York City Youth Alliance. 6 Good Shepherd Services is an organization 7 that provides youth and family, domestic violence, 8 school-partnership, services in New York City. 9 And, we participate in a number of 10 coalitions that represent our work, and the work 11 of the fields in the areas in which we work: in 12 youth services, in child welfare, in domestic 13 violence, in summer youth employment, et cetera. 14 And we work on many of those policy 15 committees, executive committees, to help craft 16 recommendations that really represent the voice of 17 our own organization and the clients we serve, as 18 well as the field of providers and families and 19 young people in New York City. And really feel that 20 these organizations represent us, as providers, 21 extremely well. 22 And, so, I want to, both, specifically focus 23 on the Youth Alliance recommendations, but also just 24 lend our particular support to a number of other 25 recommendations that you'll be hearing, on which 1 those organizations will be testifying directly. 2 The Youth Alliance was not able to get a 3 separate slot, so I will be using mine to that end. 4 I am -- I also want to echo many of the 5 comments that were made by my colleague 6 Katherine Eckstein, of the Children's Aid Society. 7 Our two organizations are, in many ways, 8 sister organizations. We work very closely. 9 I could spend a lot of time saying the same 10 things that she said about what our families and 11 young people are experiencing. 12 So, instead, I will give -- will leave more 13 time for others here, and just say: Ditto. 14 I do want to, specifically, just as an 15 anecdote, say, that we had the same experience with 16 our Thanksgiving dinner. 17 We have a community center we operate in a 18 school in Red Hook, that had a Thanksgiving dinner 19 the Sunday before Thanksgiving. 20 It was actually profiled very nicely in a 21 daily news article in the Sunday edition of 22 "The Times," the Sunday before Thanksgiving. 23 And, we had the same experience with families 24 just wanting to take home whatever they could 25 because they are struggling so tremendously in being 1 able to put food on the table. 2 Katherine did reference the school-aged 3 child-care regulations, so I won't say as much about 4 that. 5 If you look on the back, I want to 6 particularly highlight the State policy priorities, 7 given the focus of this hearing. 8 You know, we, as an organization, as a 9 provider, who works in a number of schools 10 throughout New York City, really struggle with the 11 impact of these regulations on our services. 12 And Katherine, you know, gave you a list of 13 the many issues, so I won't reiterate that, only to 14 say: That an enormous amount of work was put into 15 developing these recommendations, which really was 16 led by the New York State After-School Network, in 17 which we also participate, Children's Aid Society 18 also participates. Many of the others you may 19 hear from today, do. 20 And, really, this is a really wonderful set 21 of recommendations to alleviate the, you know, 22 non-sensical burdens that the school-aged 23 child-care regulations place on our -- on schools. 24 And we work -- we started from the 25 perspective of saying, we would not even address 1 anything that's -- that really was an issue -- 2 presented an issue of safety for the children. And 3 we focus, you know, very much on, you know, red 4 tape, and administrative burdens; things that just 5 don't make sense. Or, things that were already 6 declared fine for the school day, but, somehow, not 7 for the after-school programs. 8 So, we would really urge you to address, you 9 know, to work with us, on really trying to move -- 10 move this through the Governor's Office. 11 And as you can see from our recommendations 12 here, we worked very closely, also, with the 13 Office of Children and Family Services, who vetted 14 these proposals. 15 And, so, a lot of stakeholders from many, 16 many different sectors, including providers who 17 are actually working in the schools, put this 18 together. 19 And, so, we would be happy to do whatever we 20 can, to work with you, to try and get this passed; 21 especially, right now, because many of these items 22 are resource-consuming. And it just don't make 23 sense, when it -- or, especially, right now, comes 24 so directly at the expense of a young person being 25 able to have that experience in the program. 1 The second -- the second piece, is that, we, 2 as the New York City Youth Alliance, want to -- 3 And you can see, if you look at the bottom 4 of -- or at the top of the first page, all of the 5 umbrella organizations that are members of the 6 Youth Alliance. You can see this is a very broad 7 and extensive network of organizations in 8 New York City. 9 And, we, Good Shepherd Services, as a 10 provider, actually are -- participate in several of 11 these umbrella groups. 12 Our combined organizations really want to 13 lend our support to the proposed amendment, which 14 was -- is -- that you can see all the numbers 15 highlighted here -- but, specifically, to the -- to 16 eliminate the prohibition that exists now, that, 17 essentially, prohibits localities from enabling 18 their State-funded programs, but ends up extending 19 to all of, even City-funded, or locale -- 20 local-funded, programs from charging a fee. 21 We're not making any specific recommendation 22 on whether programs should charge a fee. 23 What the recommendation really would do, 24 was -- would be, to just eliminate their 25 prohibition, and -- that's at the state level; to 1 allow that decision to be made at the local level. 2 And, so, in New York City, for example: The 3 New York City Youth Services portfolio receives now, 4 only, approximately, $3 million in YDDP -- 5 "Youth Development/Delinquency Prevention" -- 6 dollars. 7 That, you know, unfortunately, is a funding 8 stream that has been cut dramatically. And, I would 9 be remiss without really saying something, which I 10 will say, just very briefly when I'm finished with 11 this, about the larger package of budget issues 12 here, even though I know that's not the focus. 13 But, New York City matches -- quote/unquote, 14 matches that. It is a -- it's a matched funding 15 stream, with over $100 million of city tax-levy 16 resources. 17 And because we receive that $3 million, which 18 we overwhelmingly overmatch, New York City cannot 19 allow any of its contract agencies or providers or 20 programs, even if they don't get one cent, 21 actually, of that $3 million, from -- from being 22 able to implement a sliding-scale fee in their 23 programs. 24 I mean, that's the way that the -- such a 25 large blanket prohibition, and really doesn't make 1 sense. 2 And, so, we are in favor of removing that as 3 a -- as our prohibition. 4 And we especially do, though, want to lend 5 our support to ensuring that it's coupled with the 6 mandate, that it doesn't become something that 7 prohibits a young person who can't pay, from being 8 able to participate. And that it be coupled with 9 the -- you know, if there is a fee that's going be 10 charged, that it be a sliding-scale-fee system, so 11 that families that maybe can pay something would be 12 able to, but a young person wouldn't be prohibited 13 from participating if they can't. 14 And, so, while this isn't a budget agenda, 15 you know, the reality is, that our programs are so 16 extraordinarily constrained. 17 And I won't, you know, say anything about the 18 specific recommendations, but just to highlight, 19 that this is our -- will be our state agenda, which 20 many of us will be coming to Albany to meet with you 21 about, and really includes recommendations in summer 22 youth employment, after-school and youth-development 23 programs, run-away and homeless-youth funding, 24 GED, and, sort of, State Ed-related issues, as well 25 as the policy issues that I raised. 1 And I do want to thank both of you for the 2 leadership that you lended, speaking of the issues 3 related to State Ed, around the January Regents 4 advocacy. 5 And that will certainly be another battle 6 this year, but, your -- you know, your vocal support 7 was very much appreciated. 8 So, I'll just wrap up by saying: That we -- 9 we also participate in a number of other 10 coalitions. 11 We want to -- many of which you have heard 12 from, or will be hearing from -- we want to lend our 13 support, first, to the testimony you'll be hearing 14 from the Coalition of Domestic Violence Residential 15 Providers. 16 We are a leading organization in that 17 coalition. 18 We have an organization -- we have a 19 Safe Homes project that we operate in Brooklyn. 20 We serve up to 11 families at a time, providing 21 domestic-violence emergency shelter, which, you 22 know, roughly translates, at any given time, into, 23 approximately, 20 individuals, including, you 24 know, families with children. 25 And, we want to specifically lend our support 1 to the recommendation of allowing for the optional 2 45-day extension to the current mandated cap of 3 135 days. 4 For many of our families -- certainly not all 5 of our families -- but, for that portion of families 6 that really need that extra time, it makes a 7 difference between, them being able to transition to 8 a safe permanent housing, versus, returning to their 9 abusers, or to the shelter -- you know, to 10 homelessness, or to very, very safe -- unsafe 11 alternatives. 12 And then, finally, to lend our support to the 13 testimony you heard from Jim Purcell, of CFCCA; in 14 particular, our support for returning to the 15 65 percent; but, most importantly, maintaining the 16 uncapped and flexible nature of the funding for the 17 Medicaid Redesign recommendations that Jim 18 highlighted, and, for the purpose of this hearing 19 especially, the workload and mandate relief items. 20 We fully support all of those. And, it would 21 really make a huge difference to us, as a provider 22 of, both, child-welfare prevention, as well as 23 foster-care and adoption services. 24 Thank you. 25 1 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Two questions. 2 MICHELE YANCY: Sure. 3 SENATOR GALLIVAN: You may not know the 4 answer to this. 5 Regarding the SECC regulations, and the 6 recommendations made to the State, do you know the 7 status of where those recommendations sit? 8 MICHELE YANCY: My -- the last I had checked 9 in on them -- 10 And any of my colleagues who may have a more 11 recent update. 12 -- was that they had really gotten stuck in 13 the Governor's Office. 14 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Okay, thanks. 15 Second has to do with the Safe Home Program, 16 and the DV shelter they operate as. 17 So, you have capacity to be assisting 18 11 families at a time? 19 MICHELE YANCY: We have 20 beds; so, it 20 roughly translates into 11 families at a time. It 21 does depend on, obviously, how many children come 22 with each adult. 23 But, roughly, it's 11 families at a time, 24 yes. 25 SENATOR GALLIVAN: So, you would have room to 1 accommodate more, but you think -- but -- but 2 regarding the additional 45 days, you believe that 3 that part is needed, not to accommodate more people, 4 but to accommodate a family into transition? 5 MICHELE YANCY: Right. 6 So, we only have 20 beds. So, we can't -- 7 without, you know -- without a new contract, or a 8 new funding, or a -- and a new piece of property and 9 facility, we couldn't expand in that way. But, we 10 do -- we would have the ability to enable, if it 11 were possible, to have families stay, those -- that 12 portion. 13 And it's not -- it's certainly not, by any 14 means, the full 100 percent of families that we 15 serve, but that portion of families that we serve, 16 that, really, are not ready to leave at the end of 17 the 135, we would have the ability to allow them to 18 stay, up to an additional 45 days, if that were 19 possible. 20 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right, let me ask it, 21 kind of along the same lines, a little different 22 way. 23 So let's just say, that, that you then had 24 the option to extend an additional 45 days. 25 Would you then have to turn families away? 1 MICHELE YANCY: So -- yeah, so, the 2 Coalition of Domestic Violence -- 3 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We represent the 4 Coalition -- 5 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Okay, well, if you're 6 going to address that, we'll defer. 7 MICHELE YANCY: Yes, she will. 8 I just wanted to -- 9 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Okay. Sorry 10 [inaudible] to interrupt. 11 SENATOR GALLIVAN: No, that's okay. 12 Thank you. 13 MICHELE YANCY: Most importantly, wanted 14 to -- 15 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible] the 45. 16 MICHELE YANCY: -- the 45 days is a very 17 high policy priority for Good Shepherd Services, 18 which is why we wanted to specifically lend our 19 support. But, on the content of the issues, 20 certainly, I think the coalition can better 21 represent, and answer your questions. 22 SENATOR GALLIVAN: All right, thank you. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 24 We'll move on to the next. 25 [Laughter.] 1 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Sorry to interrupt. 2 SENATOR GALLIVAN: No, that's okay. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: It's okay. 4 Next -- 5 SENATE AIDE: Maria Victoria Mayoral, for the 6 Hispanic Children and Families. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: -- Maria Victoria Mayoral, 8 for the Hispanic Children and Families -- Committee 9 for Hispanic Children & Families, Incorporated. 10 Come on down, Maria. 11 Maria Victoria. 12 MARIA VICTORIA MAYORAL: So, good afternoon. 13 My name is Maria Victoria Mayoral, and I am 14 the director for the Early Care & Education 15 Institute at The Committee for Hispanic Children & 16 Families. 17 I'll say, right off the bad, that this is the 18 first time I do this, so, bear with me. 19 I actually -- CHCF has been a voice for the 20 Latino communities since 1982. And, we take pride 21 in the ability to bridge our multi-service 22 programs in youth development and early care in 23 education, with our advocacy initiatives. 24 So, we're, uhm -- we're always trying to make 25 sure that we're getting the pulse from the community 1 on what's going on, and their issues, and trying to 2 make sure we bring that back. 3 So that's why I'm here. 4 I want to thank the Chairs, 5 Senator Patrick Gallivan and Senator Diane Savino, 6 and the members of the Committees of 7 Social Services, and Children and Families, for 8 giving us the opportunity to testify. 9 Understanding the budget constraints: I'm 10 here today to make sure that I talk about concrete 11 issues that are -- that we're facing right now when 12 we're dealing with -- in the early care and 13 education arena. 14 In New York State, as you know, we're 15 continuously striving for a quality early care and 16 education. So, the word "quality" keeps being 17 said everywhere; right? 18 And, in an attempt to improve our efforts, 19 we recently submitted our application to New York 20 State's "Race to the Top, Early Learning Challenge" 21 grant. 22 In that grant, we have to -- as a state, we 23 have to roll out the quality rating system. 24 So, again, parents are concerned about the 25 quality of early care education that their children 1 are receiving. And we, in our -- from our end, 2 we're concerned about: How do we prepare and equip 3 these child-care providers, who deal with this 4 quality rating system, in a way that it makes 5 sense for them, and that they're able to actually go 6 through with it? 7 So, basically, I'm here to talk about 8 two main things. 9 The main -- the one of them is: The hiring 10 and the retention, and professional development, of 11 a culturally and culturally -- culturally and 12 linguistically competent workforce, and the access 13 to materials in English. And, the lack of access, 14 actually; 15 And, then, the fact that we need an increased 16 child-care-subsidy availability for low-income 17 working families. 18 So, first of all, in terms of the retention 19 and the professional development, I don't know how 20 much you know about the child-care-provider world, 21 but, when a child-care provider decides that they 22 might be in a situation where they're taking care of 23 their own kids. They don't -- they're out of a job. 24 We heard a lot of people talking about the 25 lack of jobs, the lack of -- the financial 1 situation is very tough for everybody. 2 So, they want to become a child-care 3 provider, they want to become a professional, and 4 they want to help others be able to work; right? 5 That's what a child-care early education 6 professional provides, as well as education for 7 these kids. 8 So, when a child-care provider decides to do 9 that, the first thing that they might encounter is 10 that the application is only in English. There's no 11 translation into Spanish for that application. 12 That might seem very simple for some people, 13 but, unfortunately, that presents a huge problem 14 because, these child-care providers might be 15 immigrants. They might be -- have -- maybe 16 they're learning English, and they know a little 17 bit, but not enough. 18 The application is this thick (indicating). 19 And what happens is, that they're not able to 20 actually sit down and write up. And if they're able 21 to find somebody to help them, it takes them 22 four or five or six hours, sometimes seven 23 hours, to fill this out. 24 Once they fill it out, sometimes they make 25 mistakes. We have to go back. 1 It really puts a burden on the child-care 2 providers being able to actually get licensed. 3 And I know there's a big push to put 4 unregulated care into regulated care so that we're 5 able to monitor these child-care providers. 6 So we are, for -- on one hand, we're pushing 7 the licensing process; but, on the other hand, we're 8 not giving them access to actually getting there. 9 So, New York State has an obligation to 10 provide this information in multiple languages. 11 I'm sure you already know this, but according 12 to the Civil Rights Division and Justice Department, 13 the -- we're required, that: 14 "Public funds to all, which taxpayers of 15 all races contribute, may not be spent in any 16 fashion that encourages, entrenches, subsidizes, 17 or results in racial discrimination." 18 Most of the kids that are being taken care of 19 in our systems, in our early childhood systems, 20 right now, especially home-based child-care 21 providers, are Spanish speakers. 22 So, we're talking about, we want to make sure 23 that we're empowering enough people to be child-care 24 providers, that are able to communicate with these 25 children, that are able to encourage dual-language 1 learning, and that are able to actually teach these 2 children in their own language, and get them, also, 3 ready for school. 4 The other issue that we're facing within the 5 same topic, is that: Less than 30 percent of the 6 total training organizations New York State offer 7 training opportunities in Spanish, and, only two 8 agencies offer bilingual child-development 9 associates credentialing. 10 So, this is a huge gap. We're talking about, 11 like I said, the facts say that, 80 percent of 12 community-based teachers, and 68 percent of those 13 who are at school-based, reported Spanish as the 14 first language of the children. 15 So, we're not talking about a minority here. 16 We're talking about a big majority. 17 And anybody, that I'm sure that works here in 18 early education, will know that. The community is 19 huge. We're -- 1 in 5 children in New York State 20 are -- or -- are Latino, and we're a group that 21 continues to grow. 22 Also, as part of the design team and field 23 test for QUALITYstarsNY, which -- will -- is 24 going -- getting rolled out, as we speak, CHCF fully 25 understands the importance of this project. 1 We think it's going to be very helpful for 2 parents to understand what the quality is of the 3 places where they want to take their kids. But, at 4 the same time, we want to make sure that there's a 5 culturally proficient, comprehensive, and tiered 6 education program and process, so that we are able 7 to make sure that, uhm -- that the -- like I said, 8 the child-care providers are equipped in that. 9 Whatever their strengths are, are being highlighted 10 as well. 11 A lot of the systems right now, are based 12 on -- on -- on values that we consider our own 13 values, but we want to make sure that everything 14 is considered in that system. 15 The limitations and the opportunities are 16 further thwarted by the fact that Hispanics 17 represent only 4.4 percent of the State workforce. 18 These numbers reflect an immense disparity between 19 the percentage of Hispanic people in New York State, 20 which is 17.6 percent, and the percentage of 21 New York City population who are Hispanic, which is 22 33.3 percent. 23 New York State should do about better job of 24 recruiting a workforce, and we can start with the 25 child-care providers. 1 Okay? 2 The need for an increase, this is the other 3 topic that I want to talk about, and, uhm, there's a 4 need for increased child-care-subsidy availability. 5 Parents come to us, all the time, and 6 they'll say: You know, what? I can't get subsidy. 7 And, it's frustrating. 8 And, I do know that this is tied to the 9 budget, but it's about rethinking the budget. 10 So, how can this work? 11 So, according to the Emergency Coalition to 12 Save Child Care: Under federal law, families on 13 public assistance are guaranteed child-care 14 subsidies. 15 Okay, great. 16 So -- however, families that are not on 17 public assistance, though they are considered 18 low-income working families, are not guaranteed 19 child-care subsidies. 20 Because there's only one pool of funding for 21 both populations, we are being faced with a 22 zero-sum game model; which basically, is, the cost 23 of providing care, and public-assistance family 24 grows, which we know is growing -- there's more 25 families, and more families on public assistance -- 1 we're also increasing -- decreasing the available 2 funding for low-income working families. 3 So, we're concerned for both populations. 4 Okay? 5 With decreased subsidies, children on 6 low-income working families will be subject to 7 inconsistent early care and education during 8 critical developmental stages. 9 So, more and more, we're learning, and 10 knowing, that these first years of life are crucial 11 for a child -- for child development, for human 12 development. And, as a nation, we're behind in 13 education. 14 So, we really have to start at these early 15 years, and invest, and make sure that we're doing 16 whatever we can with these teachers, and these 17 parents, to make sure that these children are 18 receiving what they need to receive. 19 So, we are -- I think we can do, as much 20 as -- we have to try, at least try, to lead -- to 21 make sure that we have, uhm -- that we're not 22 perpetuating the cycle of poverty. That we're -- 23 that we're helping people with child care. 24 A parent without child care cannot go to 25 work. And as unemployment continues to increase, we 1 have to make sure that we're providing, not only the 2 opportunities for people to work, or the slots to 3 work, but also the opportunity for them to have 4 their child in a place where they can get educated, 5 because they're the future of this country. 6 So, with that said, I want to urge you to 7 take account, equity, culture, language, when making 8 decisions in early care and education. 9 I want to make sure that more Hispanics are 10 represented in the workforce, and have equal access 11 to information and resources. 12 And, again, we can start with something as 13 simple as, translating the application. And that 14 can make a huge -- a huge impact for everybody. 15 And, we will have to make sure that we're 16 helping low-income and poor New York families 17 receiving quality education, by supporting 18 English-language learners, and people that are 19 trying to be dual-language learners as well. 20 And, helping people that want to go to work, 21 because, at the end of the day, that's what we're up 22 here for. 23 So, thank you. 24 25 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Maria. 2 Cultural competency is important in every 3 public-service delivery system, but probably no 4 greater -- in no greater way than it is in 5 social services, because people need help. And, 6 they can't communicate, they're not going to receive 7 help. 8 We've always had a problem, though, in both 9 the state and in the city, and locally, in 10 attracting Latinos to public service in the 11 social-service field. 12 That was true when I was a caseworker, and it 13 continues to be true today. 14 I'm not quite sure why. 15 I do know that one of the problems you 16 encounter, though, if you are a Latino 17 social-service worker, you get saddled with the 18 translation work for all of your co-workers. 19 MARIA VICTORIA MAYORAL: Yes. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: And, after a while, you stop 21 doing it. You don't get compensated any more for 22 it. There is no language differential, even though 23 many of the public-sector unions have tried to 24 negotiate a language differential. But, it's a -- 25 it almost acts as a deterrent to someone. 1 So, if you are Spanish speaking, and you can 2 assist clients, you don't get a break on your own 3 caseload, and you wind up doing the work for 4 everyone else. 5 But what I've never been able to understand, 6 and I've actually had conversations with the State 7 Civil Service on this: What -- what we -- what can 8 we do to recruit Latinos, into public service, 9 into social service? 10 What steps can we take? 11 Because, there seems to be -- we're failing 12 somewhere, and I've never been quite sure what it 13 is. 14 MARIA VICTORIA MAYORAL: I think it all 15 starts with education and empowerment. 16 I think, unfortunately, some people -- can 17 you imagine getting to this country, and saying, 18 Okay, I want to work; and, then, not being able to 19 fill out the application? 20 So it starts right there. 21 I think, once people are in that -- in that 22 zone, where they're getting the education that they 23 need, they're empowered, they're learning what 24 "advocacy" means. 25 That's something else that we do at the 1 Committee; is that, we teach people to be 2 advocates on behalf of themselves, on behalf of 3 the kids that they work for. 4 But I think it does start with education. 5 And, if these kids, early on, are getting 6 messages that, I'm going to leave you by the TV all 7 day long, with your grandma, because I can't afford 8 to take you to a high-quality child care. 9 And, then, that child goes into school, and 10 they're already behind. And they already don't know 11 how to read and write, and all the rest of the kids 12 know how to read and write. 13 And then they go into middle school. And 14 then they're facing disconnected youth. 15 I'm sure you've heard of that. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 17 MARIA VICTORIA MAYORAL: Those teenage years 18 are crucial, because, what happens is, that if 19 you're feeling disconnected, you don't feel 20 empowered, and you don't feel like you can make a 21 difference. 22 And I think civil -- you know, the public 23 sector is about making a difference, about feeling 24 that you can. And that's -- there's a very 25 psychological, and education, component that 1 drives that. 2 And, unfortunately, we're not doing a good 3 job. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah. 5 And it's -- again, it's the same problem 6 today as it was, you know, 20 years ago. 7 MARIA VICTORIA MAYORAL: But we can change 8 that. And I've seen it. 9 I've seen providers that will get here, and 10 they'll say: You know, what? I want to become a 11 child-care provider. 12 That's -- that's a step. And then -- and I 13 keep referencing them, because that's a population 14 that we work with. But, there's different ways to 15 do it. 16 But, then they'll -- from taking care of one 17 child, they'll learn: Wow, education. Wow, I can 18 make a difference for this child. 19 And then they'll be able to attract more 20 children. Then they can get their associate's 21 degree, their bachelor's degree. 22 And some of them now, are business owners. 23 These are small-business owners, that can grow their 24 business, that can feel empowered, and they're 25 leaders in the community. 1 So, that's when you see -- you see the 2 growth. 3 And a person like that could, potentially, be 4 part of -- part of the decision-making, at some 5 point. 6 But, it is -- it is a problem. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: It's very -- it is a big 8 problem. 9 MR. GERMAIN: Thank you. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 11 Next up, Susan Welber, from the Legal Aid 12 Society. 13 SUSAN WELBER: I guess it's afternoon. 14 Good afternoon. 15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Good afternoon. 16 SUSAN WELBER: My name is Susan Welber. I'm 17 a staff attorney at the Legal Aid Society, in our 18 Civil Practice Law Reform Unit. 19 And, I'm very grateful, as are all of us at 20 the Legal Aid Society, that, Senator Gallivan and 21 Senator Savino, that you've called this hearing, and 22 given us an opportunity to testify. 23 As you may know, the Legal Aid Society, which 24 is based as a huge non-profit law firm in New York 25 City, our civil practice represents approximately 1 40,000 individuals, in various cases and -- every 2 year, as well as, indirectly, and directly, impact 3 hundreds of thousand of other clients through 4 our class-action litigation, and other law-reform 5 work. 6 As you -- I'm sure you're aware, and other 7 people have testified today, the recent census data 8 shows that the poverty in New York City, 9 particularly the deep poverty, which is, living at 10 less than half of what the ordinary poverty level 11 is, is on the rise in New York City. 12 And I think the statistic that's most 13 jarring, is that, over 21 percent of children under 14 the age of 18 in New York City are living in deep 15 poverty, which is really extraordinary. 16 We're very aware that the Legislature and 17 your Committees face a very daunting task in 18 making sure that New Yorkers are provided with an 19 effective safety net and a route out of poverty, and 20 at the same time, face down the State's own revenue 21 challenges. 22 So, our testimony is focused on four areas 23 that we hope that both of your Committees will 24 focus on in the coming year. I'm going to highlight 25 some specific items, out of order that they're in 1 the testimony, but I encourage you to carefully look 2 at our testimony, which we included as much as we 3 could on these topics, as a reference tool after, 4 you know, the hearing. 5 The four topics that we want to address are: 6 Conserving child-care resources; 7 Two: Taking steps to reduce erroneous 8 sanctions, and giving families on welfare a 9 meaningful opportunity to move from welfare to work; 10 Three: Preserving the grant increase that's 11 slated to become effective in July of 2012 this 12 year: the welfare grant increase; 13 And, finally: To eliminate barriers to 14 accessing the social safety net, including this 15 FEPS issue, that Ms. Spitzer referred to, and 16 which Legal Aid is very familiar with. 17 The first issue that I wanted to highlight 18 is: Prioritizing the allocation of scarce 19 child-care resources. 20 And this is something that we know 21 Senator Savino is extremely familiar with, as she 22 sponsored the excellent legislation last year, that 23 was also sponsored by the Assembly, and that we hope 24 will be passed this year, because it's an 25 opportunity to, both, save the State money, and help 1 working families. And it's really a win-win. 2 There's no question that, as the last speaker 3 just said, access to child care is one of the most 4 significant anti-poverty tools that the State can 5 provide. 6 And as you know, the State has been forced to 7 cut millions of dollars in the New York State 8 child-care block grant. And, as a result, many 9 children in low-income working families are losing 10 access to child care. 11 Because New York State law guarantees 12 child care to families on public assistance, there's 13 a guarantee for those families. 14 The impact of the child-care block-grant 15 reductions will fall on the low-income working 16 families who are not on public assistance, because 17 the public assistance families have the guarantee. 18 The bill that Senator Savino and 19 Assemblymember Titus introduced would amend 20 Social Services Law, 332(d), to offer parents on 21 public assistance, with children under the age of 1, 22 the opportunity to -- the option of not 23 participating in welfare work programs for a year. 24 And, because, you know, we assume that, at 25 least a certain percentage of families will take 1 advantage of that opportunity, given the exigencies 2 of trying to care for very young children, and, 3 participate in any program or education program, we 4 think, you know, a certain number of families will 5 take that option of being exempt for a year. 6 This would save the State millions of 7 dollars in child-care money. 8 We estimated, based on 2009 figures, that 9 even if just 40 percent of the -- you know, 10 primarily, mothers of children under the age of 1, 11 took advantage of the option not to participate in 12 work requirements, and, therefore, not need the 13 State's subsidized child care, it would save the 14 State $16 million. 15 In states, such as California, that 16 implemented a similar rule, not only did they save 17 the child-care funds, but they saved millions of 18 dollars in administrative costs needed to maintain 19 those work programs that, you know, there was a 20 less of a demand for because significant number of 21 people were not participating, at least for the 22 period of time that their children were very young. 23 And we think that, you know, if the same held 24 true in New York State, this would be another 25 $12 million in savings for the State. 1 So that's number one. 2 Number two: We wanted to talk about 3 sanctions, and sanction reform. 4 You know, often, when you think about 5 sanctions as a social-policy tool, you think of 6 them as a tool for promoting participation in work 7 programs. 8 You know, the thought is, that if a family is 9 threatened with a sanction for failing to 10 participate in the work program, then they're going 11 to participate. 12 But, this doesn't work when there's an 13 incredibly high rate of erroneous sanctions, which 14 is the situation in New York City. 15 When the sanctions are erroneous, there's no 16 motivation on the part of the family. They don't 17 need the motivation to comply. They want to comply, 18 but they're being sanctioned, through no fault of 19 their own. 20 So, we want to discuss ways in which your 21 Committees could help to address this problem, and 22 also save the State money. 23 First, it has to be recognized that there's a 24 very high rate of public-assistance recipients, 25 particularly in New York City, who are sanctioned at 1 any given time. 2 Some of the most recent statistics show 3 that close to a quarter of welfare recipients in 4 New York City are, either, being sanctioned, or in 5 the process of being sanctioned, at any given time. 6 And as I said, many of these sanctions are 7 erroneous. They do not prove to have any basis in 8 fact. 9 The City is saying: You failed to show up to 10 this appointment. You failed to do X, Y, or Z. 11 But, the facts are showing that that's not 12 the case. 13 And one piece of evidence of the erroneous 14 nature, you know, aside from the, you know, 15 hundreds, and thousands, of cases that we see 16 every year, where we've investigated the facts, is 17 the State's own fair-hearing statistics. 18 Of the number of fair hearings that -- the 19 overwhelming number of fair hearings that are 20 requested on sanction issues, are reversed; or, the 21 City withdraws the notice that was imposing the 22 sanctions. 23 So this is a huge waste of State resources, 24 OTDA resources, in terms of, having to 25 administratively handle the fair-hearing request, to 1 conduct the fair hearings; when, ultimately, such 2 a huge percentage of them result in not having been 3 necessary. 4 One of the reasons there's so many 5 erroneous sanctions in New York City, is because of 6 operational errors that are caused by the City's 7 computer systems that are -- you know, were 8 developed, to provide more efficient services to 9 such a large population of persons receiving 10 welfare assistance. 11 And one of the operational systems that 12 causes these errors, we call "auto posting." 13 Through auto posting, once the time for a 14 client appointment has passed -- you know, let's say 15 Mrs. X is asked to come into the center at 12 noon 16 on a Friday. 17 After 12 noon has passed, a computer will 18 automatically initiate a non-compliance report for 19 the appointment, unless, a worker, a live worker, 20 inputs into the computer that the person showed up 21 on time, and was there. 22 If the worker, you know, because of 23 overwhelming caseloads, and overwhelming demands 24 at the center, delays indicating that Ms. X 25 showed up, the computer is going to assume that 1 Ms. X didn't show up. 2 Let's say Ms. X is disabled, and she needs 3 an accommodation from the City, and the City grants 4 the accommodation, of coming earlier, or coming a 5 day later, for her appointment. 6 Unless that's, somehow, told to the computer 7 system that conducts the auto posting, Ms. X will 8 be considered not to have shown up. 9 This results in thousands of erroneous 10 sanctions, and adverse case actions being taken 11 against families. 12 And, the errors always run against the 13 clients. They never run against the City. 14 So, I think I've given you a taste of why 15 this is such a big problem: There are too many 16 sanctions, and too many of them are erroneous. 17 And, I want to briefly highlight the impact 18 this has on our clients, as well as the State. 19 For our clients, many of whom are 20 participating in various work activities and 21 education programs that are approved by HRA, and 22 in compliance with the State, and helping the 23 State's participation rate for compliance in these 24 programs, when they get sanctioned, they're out of 25 the box. They're not able to participate. 1 Many of them want to participate. They need 2 the child care that they're guaranteed, to do that 3 participation. And, they want to continue in their 4 education program, and get a job. 5 I mean, no one in their right mind wants to 6 be on welfare if they can help it. It's just not 7 enough money. 8 So, when they're sanctioned, they're 9 derailed. 10 Beyond that, their family loses a significant 11 share of their meager income, in that, a pro rata 12 share of their income is lost of their 13 public-assistance income. 14 Families, also, are more likely to face 15 homelessness when they're sanctioned. Different 16 subsidies that people are eligible for, to help them 17 pay their rent, get reduced disproportionately, or 18 have in the past, gotten reduce disproportionately, 19 when a family is sanctioned. 20 And, often, you see these families who are 21 lining up around the Bronx courthouse, many of them 22 are facing sanction, and that's why they've fallen 23 behind on their rent. 24 The sanctions also cost the State a great 25 deal. As I mentioned, they cost the State in 1 unnecessary fair hearings. 2 This year, we can expect 300,000 fair 3 hearings to be requested for New York City 4 recipients, alone. 5 And, you know, given that, about 25 percent 6 of the caseload is facing sanction, at any given 7 time, many, many of those hearings are involving 8 sanctions, and all of those hearings cost the 9 State money. 10 The sanctions also cost the State money 11 because of the way that participation rate is 12 calculated. 13 If a family has been in sanctions for 14 3 months out of the past 12, which -- and many 15 families are automatically sanctioned for 6 months 16 if they've been sanctioned in the past -- that 17 family is taken out of the denominator in 18 considering the State's -- I'm sorry -- is the -- 19 remains in the denominator in calculating the 20 State's participation rate. 21 So, the higher the sanction rate, the lower 22 the State's participation rate, in many cases. 23 In many cases. 24 So what do we think that the Legislature can 25 do about this? 1 We have two recommendations. 2 One is: That the State can take -- the 3 Legislature can take steps to help prevent 4 sanctions, and improve the participation rate, by 5 giving clients the opportunity to avoid 6 sanctions before they're imposed. 7 How would you do this? 8 Well, the Legislature had the foresight, in 9 2006, to actually adopt legislation that calls for 10 this. 11 Section 341 of the Social Services Law, 12 states, that: Notice that gets sent to anyone who 13 the City is threatening to sanction, must include 14 instructions for how the person can avoid the 15 sanction, by agreeing to comply before the sanction 16 goes into effect. 17 But OTDA never implemented regulations 18 actually making this a reality for our clients. 19 So even though Section 341 of the 20 Social Services Law provides this opportunity to 21 avoid the sanction, it doesn't, in effect, exist for 22 our clients. 23 Food-stamp regulations, federal regulations, 24 as well as fair-hearing regulations, provide for the 25 same opportunity for a family facing a food-stamp 1 sanction to avert the sanction before it goes into 2 effect. 3 However, this is not a meaningful opportunity 4 because the State and the City are not offering this 5 as an opportunity for our clients. 6 So, we would ask that the Legislature ensure 7 that the law that's already on the books get 8 enforced, by encouraging, or mandating, OTDA to 9 implement regulations that would make this a 10 meaningful law. 11 We also think that the Senate should take a 12 leading role in addressing the high percentage of 13 sanction participants, by adopting a same-as 14 version of a very sensible sanction bill that is 15 embodied in Assembly Bill Number 3423, which 16 adopts sanction reform by two primary means. 17 One is: It requires social-services 18 districts to ensure that the family being sanctioned 19 is not otherwise exempt from work requirements 20 before imposing the sanction. 21 So, it asks: Does the family have child 22 care? 23 Which is already mandated by State law; that 24 if the family doesn't have child care, they can't be 25 required to participate. 1 Is the family disabled? 2 Does HRA already know that the family is 3 disabled? If so, don't impose a sanction on them. 4 This bill would, really, just amplify the 5 legal requirements that are already, elsewhere, 6 exists on the books in the State Social Services 7 Law. 8 It would also amend State Social Services 9 Law, Section 342, which currently requires 10 durational sanctions. 11 So, the first time a family, a mother of a 12 child is sanctioned, she is sanctioned only until 13 she agrees to comply. 14 The second time, it's three months. 15 And, then, the third, and every subsequent 16 time, it's six months. 17 This bill would say: No. If you're willing 18 to comply, the sanction ends. 19 This helps the State's participation rate; 20 avoids fair hearings; and, then, gives the 21 benefit to the family of being able to participate 22 in the education, training, and work-program 23 activities. 24 So, we encourage you to look more closely. 25 And, we're happy to provide our services, as 1 resources, for any questions you might have about 2 these sanction-reform issue. 3 Third: We encourage the Legislature to 4 ensure that the law that's already on the books, 5 providing for a grant increase for welfare-receiving 6 families, does pass this year -- or, does not get 7 blocked this year, when it's due to go into effect 8 July 2012. 9 Last year, the Governor's budget delayed the 10 increase for a year, to save money. 11 We think that the savings, which are, 12 really, not very great, are not worth depriving 13 families who are already receiving less than half 14 the poverty rate of, you know, a meager grant 15 increase that can make -- it doesn't sound like a 16 lot to many of us, but could make a huge difference 17 in our clients' lives. 18 And we put down the amounts in our 19 testimony. You can refer to, exactly, how much is 20 at stake for families. 21 Finally, we urge the State Senate to break 22 down barriers that are preventing many of our 23 clients from accessing the safety net. 24 There are three main barriers that we focus 25 on. 1 One is: Disabilities. 2 We encourage the Legislature to enact 3 legislation that would require OTDA to adopt a 4 quality screening tool, to screen for physical and 5 mental disabilities, including learning 6 disabilities. And, require local districts to 7 offer disability screenings to clients soon 8 after they come to the agency for help. 9 Many of the erroneous sanctions I was 10 referring to, they're caused because a client is 11 disabled. 12 This would help many clients in all 13 aspects -- disabled clients in all aspects of 14 their maintaining and accessing public assistance 15 that they desperately need. 16 In some cases, while they're waiting to 17 become approved for SSI, which is, you know, a 18 federal benefit that many of our disabled clients 19 are eligible for, but it takes a long time for them 20 to obtain. 21 FEPS: Ms. Spitzer I believe, from 22 Bronx Works, eloquently spoke about the need for 23 FEPS. 24 FEPS, as you pointed out, is a program that 25 is not being cut by the State. The subsidy is 1 available to any family that's eligible. 2 The problem is, that families can't access 3 FEPS without the help of trained assistants. 4 And, currently, HRA is not providing that 5 assistance. The State is contracting with these 6 various providers to help people access the 7 benefit. 8 And, there have been huge cuts. 9 And, Senator Savino, I think you'd be 10 interested to know, that, right now, from what we 11 heard most recently, there is no one in 12 Staten Island that is funded to help clients 13 access FEPS. 14 Legal Aid, and legal services, we do it, but 15 we don't get funded. 16 Contrary to what Ms. Spitzer says, we don't 17 get funded to provide this. 18 We do do it, however, but we have limited 19 resources. We can't provide this service to 20 everyone who's facing eviction, and who needs FEPS, 21 and who's eligible for it. 22 And it's really critical that OTDA report on 23 all actions that it's taking to ensure that all 24 families who are eligible for FEPS in New York City 25 can get. 1 And, we encourage, on both of your 2 Committees, to use your oversight role to ensure 3 that OTDA is making sure that every possible person 4 who can get FEPS, gets it. 5 Finally, I wanted to also point out, that, 6 although New York State has led the country for a 7 long period of time, in ensuring equal rights for 8 its citizens, including, most recently, with the 9 adoption of the Same-Sex Marriage Act this year, the 10 anti-discrimination laws that are on the books 11 in New York State do not mention sexual orientation, 12 or -- and, don't include an expansive definition of 13 "gender" that includes gender identity and gender 14 expression. 15 And, we think that many of our clients who do 16 get discriminated against on the basis of their 17 sexual orientation, or on their gender identity, 18 would benefit greatly in all aspects of 19 State-provided services, if the law was revised to 20 expand, and catch up with, you know, the other laws 21 that are on the books; particularly, the OCFS 22 regulations, and the OTDA regulations, for the 23 purposes of today's hearing. 24 So, if -- unless you have any questions, 25 those are the main issues we wanted to cover. 1 I'm sorry, I took up probably a lot of time 2 doing that, but there's -- you asked, and we have a 3 lot of things that we would like to see you help us 4 with, so -- 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh, not at all. I'm glad to 6 hear you're supportive of my legislation. 7 On the last piece: Would the proposed bill 8 by Senator Duane, the Gender bill, would that 9 address the discrimination of LGBT youth that you 10 mentioned in the final part of your testimony? 11 SUSAN WELBER: Unfortunately, I don't know 12 the answer to that question. But I can -- 13 SENATOR SAVINO: [Inaudible] take a look it. 14 SUSAN WELBER: -- I can find out, and get 15 back to your office about it. Absolutely. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: I'm curious. It might -- 17 because it's -- it might. But, if not, we should 18 take a look at it. 19 SUSAN WELBER: Okay. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Susan. 21 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Bich Ha Pham. 23 And after that, we have, Jim Madison, from 24 Brooklyn Kindergarten Society. 25 And, I think that's it -- do we have -- who 1 else -- wait, oh, one more. 2 Oh, you're write-in on the end. 3 You're not on my list. 4 What's her name? 5 JUDITH KAHAN: It's, Judith Kahan. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: And, then, Judith Kahan. 7 So we have, one, two, three. 8 Okay. 9 BICH HA PHAM: Great. 10 Thank you, Senator Gallivan and 11 Senator Savino, for this the opportunity for the 12 Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies to 13 testify. 14 My written -- our written testimony provides 15 a lot of information on our organization, and our 16 concerns with the various State and City budget 17 cuts, as well as pointing out the cost-effectiveness 18 of so many of the important human-services 19 programs many of the groups have testified today 20 about. 21 I wanted to, just for the sake of time, jump 22 straight through to the -- what the Committees 23 wanted to hear, in terms of recommendations 24 regarding challenges faced by non-profit 25 human-service organizations and specific 1 legislation. 2 FPWA supports the Human Services Council's 3 non-profit core platform, which Chris Winward 4 testified about today. It would go a long ways to 5 greatly alleviate the pressures on human-service 6 organizations. 7 I wanted to echo the support for 8 Senator Savino's Child Care and TANF Welfare Work 9 Waiver bill, which is a strong priority of the 10 member agencies that we have, who provide early 11 childhood education. 12 The State faces a minimum of a $36 million 13 subsidized child-care budget reduction for the next 14 state fiscal year. That's in addition to the 15 55 million that -- budget gap that existed in the 16 current fiscal year. 17 What we're seeing across the state are 18 counties, local districts, having to choose some 19 very -- between major budget cuts, budget gaps, in 20 this area, and cutting subsidized child care for 21 families that -- low-income families that are 22 employed, many of which are single-parent-headed 23 households. 24 I know the "Buffalo News," for example, 25 Senator Gallivan, has had several articles about 1 this issue, where, these working mothers were 2 basically told that they will no longer receive 3 subsidized child care, and are not earning enough 4 money to be able to pay for the care, and would 5 actually need to stop working. 6 And one of them, in particular, in the 7 article, said: I'm not going have any choice but to 8 get -- to go to welfare and apply. And that's the 9 last place I want to be. 10 So, this proposal, as you've heard today, is 11 a win-win for the State, to be able to preserve 12 those very, very scarce funding. And, it's 13 temporary; it's only for a two-year period. And 14 it's, again, for very young children under the 15 age of 12. 16 Senator Gallivan, you asked earlier today 17 about the budget calculations. And, I just wanted 18 to be a little -- provide some of that information 19 to you, that the Empire Justice Center and our 20 organization developed. 21 We estimated that -- based upon OCFS data, 22 that there are 3,713 children currently under 23 one year of age receiving the child -- the 24 subsidized child care. 25 So, of that number, we timesed [sic] it by 1 $7,368, which is the average annual cost of sub -- 2 of child care; which brings us to about 3 $27.35 million. 4 We subtracted from that, about 10 -- almost 5 $11 million, as -- for -- because, we assume that 6 welfare recipients who currently have 7 employment -- have a paid job -- would not want to 8 be exempt, but they would want to continue working. 9 So that's -- that's what ends up with the 10 $16.4 million savings. 11 And we've shared this information with your 12 staff and the Senate Finance Committee, earlier -- 13 you know, for the last session, and, about 14 two weeks ago when we met with them. 15 And they have not had any questions about the 16 data, so I believe that that is a pretty accurate 17 estimate. 18 We also met with the Division of Budget and 19 the Governor's Office in October, about this 20 proposal. And we're told that it is being 21 considered, along with other proposals, to try and 22 address the subsidized child-care funding gap. 23 It's something that I -- apparently, 24 Governor Cuomo is taking very seriously, because of 25 the extent of the harm being done. 1 And, I wanted to emphasize this: It's not 2 just the children and parents, currently, that are 3 losing the slots, but it's also the 4 infrastructure; because, once these child-care 5 centers are closed, it's very difficult to get the 6 space back, to get the leases back, to hire the 7 child-care workers back, and to get your 8 clients, your customers, back. 9 So, it's something that is going to be 10 problematic for the State, and, the employers 11 who -- who -- who these families work for, to be 12 able to get back -- you know, get everything back in 13 order. 14 I also wanted to highlight, that, the 15 New York State Public Welfare Association, last 16 session, did oppose the proposal for children 17 under -- waiving children under 24 months of age. 18 Now, the reason -- the main reason appeared 19 to be concerns with the federal participation 20 rates. 21 We're -- we've been communicating with them, 22 last month, to emphasize the bill that would just 23 exempt 12-month-olds, because that would not 24 impact federal participation rates. 25 So, we're working with them right now, to -- 1 to make sure that their -- are any concerns they 2 have are addressed in a area. 3 And then, lastly, on this bill, I wanted to 4 emphasize -- address a concern that we have heard in 5 the Senate, about the welfare recipients who are 6 waived, who have one -- who have infants under 7 12 months of age, who do choose to be waived from 8 the work requirements, and questions about: Would 9 that take them off their track, in terms of 10 employment? 11 And -- and what we're seeing across the 12 state, and a lot in New York City, is that, what the 13 welfare recipients are currently engaged in, 14 workfare programs, is not leading to employment. 15 When -- I know organizations have done 16 surveys of welfare -- workfare programs in New York 17 City, and had something, like, a 7 percent 18 job-placement rate. 19 Most of those people found the jobs 20 themselves. You know, they didn't do it through a 21 welfare work program. 22 So, it's -- so, on the one hand, you have a 23 program that's pretty ineffective. 24 And we -- my organization received HRA data 25 recently on the Back-To-Work Program, showing that, 1 even the minority people that were placed in 2 employment, had huge levels of turnover because 3 they weren't keeping those jobs. 4 So, it's an inefficient system and budget 5 program anyways. 6 On top of that is -- the flip side, is that, 7 these women who would be able to take care of their 8 infants at home, that that is work. That is 9 really valuable work. It's just as valuable as 10 sweeping the parks or cleaning the city toilets, 11 or doing any of the other work that they're now 12 being required to do. 13 So, we really encourage the Senate to 14 consider those -- those issues, in looking at this 15 bill. 16 One -- another bill that we would like the 17 Senate to consider, is a program that would -- it's 18 called the "Benefit Bank." 19 And, basically, what it would do is, it would 20 provide for New Yorkers -- low-income and 21 working-poor New Yorkers, to be able to apply for 22 various government benefits programs on-line. 23 Now, the OTDA program, myBenefits, has a 24 small handful of programs that that can happen 25 right now. 1 This -- the Benefit Bank program would do it 2 across all government -- all state government 3 programs, including the Department for the Aging, 4 and the various health programs. It's a big cost 5 savings for the State. 6 The Benefit Bank Work Support Initiative 7 estimates that, in New York State, every year, about 8 $5 billion in federal work supports is not being 9 taken -- you know, is not being drawn down in 10 New York. 11 And when you look at so many people in 12 New York who are poor and working poor, that's a lot 13 of money that New York is letting get by. 14 And this is, you know, it could be federal 15 work supports, tax credits, public benefits, 16 student financial aid. 17 That 5 billion turns into 237 billion in 18 economic -- positive economic impacts to New York 19 when that money is drawn down, and you cost out in 20 terms of the positive impacts. 21 The costs, on the other hand, would be, 22 compared to those benefits, are very affordable. 23 The first year to implement this program, in 24 terms of the software, support, servicing, is 25 $4 million; and in the out-years, $2 million; half 1 of which would go to non-profit organizations, to 2 help do facilitated [inaudible]. 3 So, basically, help clients to go through 4 and -- and -- and process their application on-line. 5 We have met with Commissioner Beth Berlin, 6 with OTDA, per a conversation with Paul Francis in 7 the Governor's Office, about this proposal. And we 8 hope to do a demo of this proposal, soon, to OTDA. 9 So, hopefully, there will be some progress on 10 that. 11 The last bill I wanted to mention, is the 12 bill to prevent homelessness for low-income 13 New Yorkers living with HIV/AIDS. 14 This is a bill that would basically cap the 15 rent obligations of these disabled New Yorkers, at 16 30 percent, which is -- which is the rule for 17 federal housing programs with -- because it 18 acknowledges that, you know, when you're disabled 19 and you're struggling and you're poor, paying 20 50 percent of your very low benefits towards 21 rent, it's just going be -- it's a one-way road to 22 homelessness, because you're not going to be able to 23 continue that kind of payment, considering your high 24 medical costs and your food costs, and your other 25 costs. 1 So this bill, S4098, and, 86275, would 2 provide that cap. 3 Interestingly enough, though it -- though 4 there is a cost of $3 million, because the rent cap 5 would require additional government funds, State 6 funds, to address that, it's actually an annual 7 savings of $50 million for New York State, because 8 that's reduced Medicaid and emergency room usage. 9 So, thank you so much for the Committees' 10 time. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: I just have one question 12 about this [inaudible] -- this Benefit Bank. 13 So, if I were a person in need, I would go 14 on-line; I would call somewhere, and they would 15 direct me to the appropriate service that I need? 16 BICH HA PHAM: Yes, the way the system works 17 in the other states, including Ohio, is, you have 18 two choices. 19 I could go on-line myself, and do -- enter in 20 the -- my information: my household information, 21 income, so on. And then it would say -- and it has 22 all the programs that -- again, that are available 23 in your locality, in your city, in your state, and 24 including federal government benefits. 25 And it would say: Ms. Pham, based upon the 1 income and information you've entered, you're 2 eligible for the following, let's say, 3 ten programs. Check which ones you'd actually 4 like to apply for. 5 And, so, if I check, let's say, five of those 6 ten programs, it would then immediately start 7 the -- start -- populate the application for those 8 five programs. 9 With -- and, then, I would just need to, 10 maybe, add a few additional information -- 11 information, per the different benefit, and then I 12 would hit "Submit." 13 That information would go directly to the 14 state agency that -- that is pertinent to it. 15 And -- you know, whether it's Department of Health, 16 and so on. 17 And, then, that agency immediately -- that 18 goes into the agency's computer system, back end, 19 and that application is then filed. And then the 20 regular processing works. 21 It -- in Ohio, where the Benefit Bank was 22 first up and running, it's brought down a lot of 23 money for that state. 24 But, again, like, I think 25 90-something-percent of it is federal funding. 1 And it's really helped the struggling 2 Ohioans, especially in this great recession, 3 get -- you know, get food, get education, get 4 housing, get child care, get medical help; just, so 5 many important programs. 6 Now, New York State, unfortunately, because 7 O- -- because the OTDA -- OTDA's web page doesn't 8 include senior programs, and doesn't include a lot 9 of these other programs, so it's not just OTDA. 10 On top of that, many of the benefits that are 11 on the web page -- it's mainly a screening web page 12 right now. 13 You can just go on, and they'll say: 14 Ms. Pham, you're -- it looks like you might be 15 eligible for these five benefits. And if you want 16 to apply, click here, and then we'll show you where 17 the nearest office is to your -- you know, to your 18 home. 19 And that's the case for five different 20 agencies, or five different benefits. 21 So, this is a much more comprehensive system. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Presumption of eligibility 23 is limited, obviously, based to the amount of 24 information you input. It still has to go 25 through -- 1 BICH HA PHAM: That's right. 2 So, the State agencies get your information, 3 just as if you'd gone in and written your 4 application, and hand-submitted it. And they would 5 still do the interview. You would still have to 6 submit the documents. 7 There's -- the Benefit Bank in Ohio, they 8 actually, currently, scan -- have the ability for 9 the non-profit group to scan your documents, so 10 that can get submitted at the same time to the State 11 agencies. So that just cuts down on the State 12 agency's work, and the time. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: There are some benefits, 14 though, that, in order for them to be administered, 15 they have to be evaluated by a person who's been 16 tested for merit and fitness. That's part of 17 social-service law. 18 BICH HA PHAM: Yes, so, all -- all the other 19 requirements, whether it's face-to-face 20 meetings, physical examinations, still will occur. 21 And, this just streamlines the process. And, it 22 increases the number -- the number of people, 23 especially working families out there who aren't as 24 familiar with the social-services system, to have 25 that entree. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Sounds kind of like a more 2 enhanced 311 system. 3 BICH HA PHAM: That's right. 4 And, actually, in New York City, the 5 ACCESS NYC Program is similar to myBenefits, in 6 that, there are many, many programs that you can 7 apply for on-line. 8 Great, thank you. 9 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 11 Next is, Jim Madison. 12 Is Jim Madison here? 13 No? 14 And then -- well... 15 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Okay. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: One second, just got to 17 change the tape. 18 (Pause in the proceeding.) 19 (The proceeding resumed, as follows:) 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Judith Kahan, from...? 21 JUDITH KAHAN: ...Center Against Domestic 22 Violence. 23 Shall we go? 24 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Yes. 25 JUDITH KAHAN: Okay. 1 We're going to read fast so we can then talk. 2 We're reversing who speaks first. 3 Thank you for the opportunity to address you 4 today. 5 My name is Judith Kahan. I am the 6 chief executive officer of the Center Against 7 Domestic Violence. 8 For 35 years, the center has worked towards 9 a society free from violence, by transforming the 10 lives of victims, and raising awareness in our 11 communities. 12 Our organization opened the first 13 domestic-violence emergency shelter in 14 New York State, and the provision of safe shelter is 15 at the core of the center's mission. 16 I am also the founder and co-chair of the 17 New York City Coalition of Residential -- of 18 Domestic Violence Residential Providers, which 19 represents all 28 domestic-violence residential 20 agencies. 21 In addition, there are numerous survivors 22 attending today, in the audience. 23 The coalitions' positions are guided by one 24 principle: safety. 25 We advocate, so that women, children, and, 1 yes, men, who turn to us for refuge from unspeakable 2 abuse, can enter our shelters safely, and can 3 leave with the tools to secure a life free of 4 intimate-partner violence. 5 In addition, I am one of two 6 representatives that represents New York City on 7 the New York State Coalition. 8 TED MCCOURTNEY: And I am Ted McCourtney. I 9 work for Sanctuary for Families as the director of 10 Sarah Burke House, a Tier II domestic-violence 11 shelter in the Bronx. 12 Sanctuary for Families is the largest 13 non-profit agency in New York State, dedicated 14 exclusively to serving domestic-violence and 15 sex-trafficking victims and their children. 16 I am also a member of the steering committee 17 of the New York City Coalition of DV Residential 18 Providers, as Judy said, a coalition that includes 19 all of the organizations providing domestic-violence 20 services in New York. 21 JUDITH KAHAN: We are here to advocate for an 22 additional 45-day shelter allowance for clients in 23 DV shelters. 24 The maximum stay in domestic-violence 25 emergency shelters is currently 90 days, with the 1 possibility of one 45-day extension; therefore, 2 domestic-violence victims and their children must 3 leave the shelter after 4 1/2 months. 4 In contrast, families staying in general 5 homeless shelters run by New York City Department 6 of Homeless Services are permitted to remain in 7 shelter, based on goals, and not constrained by 8 mandated length-of-stay limits. 9 TED MCCOURTNEY: In order to grasp the full 10 significance of this time limit, it is important to 11 understand that domestic-violence victims are 12 running for their lives, choosing to gather up 13 their children and escape a violent, abusive, and 14 dangerous home, where they may be killed, and their 15 children may be harmed. 16 Moving to a confidential domestic-violence 17 shelter protects them from their batterer, but 18 they give up an enormous amount of personal freedom 19 in exchange, just to ensure the batterer will not 20 find them. 21 They cannot tell family, friends, 22 neighbors, or employers where they are. 23 If they do, we have to discharge them because 24 the indiscretion threatens everyone's safety. 25 The women entering shelter often suffer from 1 depression and anxiety as a result of the severe 2 abuse they have endured. They are often haunted by 3 grief and a sense of failure; shame about the failed 4 relationship or marriage. 5 As shelter providers, we do everything 6 possible to assist our clients in addressing the 7 challenges they face, and to provide them with the 8 support they need to transition to independent, 9 violence-free lives. 10 We provide emotional support, comprehensive 11 case management, counseling for both the mothers and 12 the children, emergency food supplies, emergency 13 cash, legal advice and representation, and help 14 entering the workforce, and, we must do all of this 15 in an unreasonably short time frame. 16 In order to ensure the safety of our 17 clients, it is vitally important that they have 18 safe, stable housing at the time of their discharge. 19 With the elimination of the Advantage NY 20 housing program last spring, almost all of our 21 clients are now forced to assume the full market 22 rents for their apartments. 23 This means, that within 135 days, 24 clients must obtain a job that pays enough for 25 them to afford an apartment, a daunting, if not 1 unrealistic task, considering, most of our clients 2 have limited education and limited work histories. 3 If they are able to find a job, they will 4 need to secure child care, hopefully near the 5 shelter and near the place of employment. 6 For those who are not superwomen, and unable 7 to get it all together and find a high-paying 8 full-time job, an apartment, and child care within 9 135 days of leaving their abuser, the alternatives 10 are, the general homeless system, which does not 11 provide the safety measures or the clinical 12 services of the DV system, moving from couch to 13 couch of friends or relatives, or, desperately, 14 returning to the batterer who will surely punish her 15 mightily for leaving the first time. 16 JUDITH KAHAN: Given the tremendous challenge 17 our clients face, it is clear that the 135 days in 18 shelter is not adequate time for them to stabilize 19 and discharge into a safe environment. 20 The only proven protection from domestic 21 violence is safe shelter. The investment in the 22 first 90 to 135 days of emergency shelter is 23 tremendous. 24 Increasing shelter stays by another, 25 optional, 45-day extension will increase the return 1 on the initial investment enormously, and, very 2 important, longer stays are cost-neutral. 3 There are a finite number of spaces available 4 for domestic-violence shelters seeking emergency 5 shelter. Allowing some of these people to stay 6 longer does not add any cost to the system. 7 Also, reducing the number of times a family 8 is transferred from shelter to shelter reduces the 9 trauma of these families, increases their 10 stability, and prevents them from going to the 11 already overburdened homeless system. 12 Two years ago, the State Senate unanimously 13 passed, and last year the State Assembly passed, 14 legislation, permitting an additional, optional, 15 45-day extension in domestic-violence shelters. 16 It is our experience that longer stays in 17 shelter lead to better outcomes for clients, 18 allowing them to achieve self-sufficiency and 19 security. 20 For this reason, we strongly urge you to 21 again supporting legislation to allow for the 22 optional extension in domestic-violence shelter 23 stays. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Judith. 25 One -- (coughing). 1 SENATOR GALLIVAN: While you're recovering, I 2 want to ask some questions. 3 How are you fund -- how your organizations 4 funded? 5 JUDITH KAHAN: There are about 2,000 beds in 6 our system. And, we're funded, 50 percent by the 7 feds, 25 percent by the State, and 25 percent by the 8 City. 9 We're licensed by the State. And HRA is the 10 conduit, in terms of paying for the -- sending money 11 to the various agencies. 12 There are about 20 agencies involved; 13 43 shelters. 14 SENATOR GALLIVAN: If you had the ability for 15 the additional, optional, 40-day -- 45-day period, 16 would you then have to turn other people away? 17 Would that take up all of your beds -- 18 JUDITH KAHAN: Not at all. 19 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- and not be able to deal 20 with others in immediate need? 21 JUDITH KAHAN: Right, that's been the big 22 issue, you know: Are we clogging up the system, in 23 effect? 24 And we say no; because, first of all, not 25 everyone comes into a shelter, stays. 1 Most of the research shows that it takes a 2 woman seven tries before she permanently leaves an 3 abuser. 4 So, some people come in; they're shocked. 5 They've made themselves homeless, unlike the folks 6 who come into the homeless loop knowing that they're 7 homeless. 8 So they say: You know, what? I think I'm 9 going to go back to my mother. Or maybe I'll go 10 back to the batterer. 11 So there's -- a large percentage of people do 12 not stay, 90 days, forget about 135. 13 So we feel, that for those few people who 14 want to stay the 180 days; in other words, to 15 hopefully discharge a permanent person into 16 permanent housing and employment, so that they do 17 not return to the shelter system. 18 SENATOR GALLIVAN: How does an additional 19 45 days of services stay cost-neutral? 20 Doesn't it -- I mean, isn't there some costs 21 associated with the additional entire variety -- 22 JUDITH KAHAN: There are no more beds. 23 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- of services being 24 provided? 25 JUDITH KAHAN: There are no more beds, and 1 we're discharging people into the homeless-shelter 2 system. There would -- we are not -- the City is 3 not going to fund more beds. 4 I mean, that's a general understanding. 5 When I founded the coalition, we had only 6 600 beds in New York City. Today we have 2,000. 7 It's believed, that one-third of the people 8 in the homeless-shelter system are victims of 9 domestic violence. 10 SENATOR GALLIVAN: So does that then -- I 11 mean, so, then, are you saying, in different words, 12 that, if you're discharging, there will be a cost 13 somewhere? It's either a cost in the 14 homeless-shelter system, or -- 15 JUDITH KAHAN: Right, or into the 16 homeless-shelter system. 17 TED MCCOURTNEY: Or back to their batterer. 18 SENATOR GALLIVAN: And that's not even -- 19 TED MCCOURTNEY: And that's even at a greater 20 cost. 21 SENATOR GALLIVAN: -- that's not even the 22 human costs. I'm talk -- 23 JUDITH KAHAN: Right, but we didn't bring you 24 this -- we gave you a folder about our -- the 25 coalition, and who we are, and what we represent, 1 and about, safety in and safety out. 2 I'm sorry that one page we didn't bring, is 3 how many women have been murdered this year. 4 That is really the big difference between the 5 homeless and the survivors of domestic violence, 6 is the murder rate. 7 TED MCCOURTNEY: But that's exactly right: 8 If they reach their final day; if they hit that 9 135 days, that means they don't have secure 10 housing to move into. So, then, they're just 11 transferring, but they're going to the Path Center, 12 and going into the general homeless shelter, which 13 does not provide the protections of the DV system, 14 but it still costs the system -- it still costs the 15 same amount of money. 16 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Understood. 17 Thank you. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: I think what makes it hard 19 to understand, is, what drives people into the 20 domestic-violence shelter system as opposed to 21 general shelter system. 22 I think you pointed out, correctly, Judith, 23 they've made themselves homeless. 24 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: It's a different population 1 that you're dealing with. 2 But I -- he -- I understand what he keeps 3 trying to come back to. 4 If you have a limited number of beds, and a 5 limited number of dollars, and a limited number of 6 days, and we extend them for people who are there, 7 what happens to the people who are in the pipeline, 8 coming in? 9 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Right? 11 That -- 12 JUDITH KAHAN: But we're never -- 13 SENATOR SAVINO: -- that's -- that's what 14 they're -- 15 JUDITH KAHAN: But we're never 100 percent 16 filled. 17 We're never 100 percent, because, people 18 come, they go. They transfer out on the weekends, 19 when most of the administrative staff is not there 20 to discuss these issues. 21 So, it's not that we're 100 percent filled. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: And I think what makes -- 23 JUDITH KAHAN: So that's one -- 24 SENATOR SAVINO: -- the difference is, that 25 the population that you're servicing is different 1 than the population that DHS is servicing, in the 2 city of New York, or any other shelters. 3 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. Right. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: They're not economically 5 homeless. They're homeless as a result of violence 6 in their life. 7 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: And, if they can find 9 somewhere else to go. 10 And I think what might be helpful, going 11 forward -- 12 JUDITH KAHAN: Sure. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: -- because, again, the 14 Legislature didn't object to this. The Senate 15 passed it unanimously -- 16 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: -- twice, actually -- 18 JUDITH KAHAN: But then the Assembly, also. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Assembly passed it. 20 The City seems to think that there's a magic 21 number, at this 135 days. 22 And I don't know why. I don't know what they 23 expect; because what we're really trying to do, is, 24 uhm, not just give people that -- that safe period, 25 where they can kind of change their life 1 circumstances, but we know we're dealing with a 2 therapeutic model of homelessness here. You know, 3 it takes time for people to change their habits, 4 and, you know -- 5 JUDITH KAHAN: Correct. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: -- gravitating back towards 7 the violence, or the instability, is part of 8 breaking the cycle. You know, getting women to stop 9 gravitating back. 10 We gravitate towards what we're comfortable 11 with. You know, and that's safe. They understand 12 that. 13 They don't understand this new life, where 14 they may have to be responsible for themselves, or 15 find housing. 16 JUDITH KAHAN: Of course. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: That's why the 45 extra 18 days may make a tremendous difference. 19 JUDITH KAHAN: For some people. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah. 21 JUDITH KAHAN: Not everyone wants to stay. 22 But, for some people. So, the idea is, to give them 23 the option to stay. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 25 JUDITH KAHAN: And I don't think you're 1 talking about that many people. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 3 JUDITH KAHAN: So -- so we would like -- and, 4 I think Amy Barasch, who represents the State, in 5 Albany, Domestic Violence had called a meeting, of 6 which Ted and I participated, in reviewing the 7 regs. And there was a general consensus for the 8 180 days among the providers throughout the state. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: Do you know, what was the 10 impetus of the original 90-day restriction, with the 11 one 45-day extension? 12 How did they arrive at the idea -- 13 JUDITH KAHAN: I have -- 14 SENATOR SAVINO: -- that 90 days was enough? 15 JUDITH KAHAN: The regs are over 35 years 16 old. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh. 18 JUDITH KAHAN: And I think, that when people 19 came into the system, years and years ago, people 20 moved out faster, there was Section 8, there was 21 ERP, there were tons of NYCHA; there were numerous 22 housing options. People didn't stay in the system 23 that long. 24 And, I think, that's its history. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh. 1 JUDITH KAHAN: I believe. 2 I mean, when I went -- 3 TED MCCOURTNEY: Now, none of those exist for 4 our clients. 5 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. 6 TED MCCOURTNEY: They don't have access to 7 NYCHA. There's no Section 8. Advantage is gone. 8 So there's a lot more to do in those 135 days 9 to obtain some degree of stability. 10 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. 11 TED MCCOURTNEY: So, we certainly need the 12 extra time. 13 JUDITH KAHAN: Right. 14 I mean, when -- I think the first homeless 15 family was housed in the Waldorf Astoria, and it 16 made "The New York Times." 17 I still can't get -- I've been trying to get 18 a copy of that article for years. 19 And, Henry Street became one of the first 20 shelters to serve the homeless. 21 So -- but people stay in the shelter system 22 very short [inaudible]. But, you're talking, at 23 least 40 years ago. At least. Pre-us. 24 But, I did start out life in the Bureau of 25 Child Welfare, 250 Church. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Ah, BCW. 2 Oh, all right. 3 JUDITH KAHAN: Life is chance -- has -- well, 4 it's unfortunate. I grew up with a war against 5 poverty. 6 It seems to be a war against the poor, kind 7 of. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 9 And we've cycled back to it. 10 JUDITH KAHAN: Yes. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you both for your 12 testimony. 13 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: And our final speaker is, 15 Jim Madison, the executive director of the 16 Brooklyn Kindergarten Society; where everything we 17 ever needed to know, we learned in kindergarten. 18 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. 19 JIM MADISON: Perhaps. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Be nice, share. 21 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Don't run with 22 scissors. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Don't run with scissors. 24 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Don't eat paste. 25 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Don't stand on the swivel 1 chair. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Don't stand on swivel chair, 3 and don't eat paste. 4 Anything else? 5 I want to know where you went to school. 6 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Catholic school. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Go ahead, Jim. 8 JIM MADISON: Thank you. 9 I've already been introduced, so I don't have 10 to say who I am, and what I'm from, but I should 11 say, briefly, what the Brooklyn Kindergarten Society 12 is. 13 It's a 120 -- almost a 121-year-old, 14 not-for-profit that was founded, to provide some 15 positive experiences for young immigrant children 16 who were living on the street. 17 It's managed through depressions, 18 recessions, two World wars, and is still 19 flourishing, with five centers in low-income 20 neighborhoods in Bedford-Stuyvesant, 21 Brownsville, and Crown Heights. 22 I'm here today because of the evolution of 23 funding of our early childhood education. 24 That, I heard you talk at the Federation of 25 Protestant Welfare Agencies sometime, so you are 1 aware of some of these issues. 2 The City has, for the longest time, been 3 stating that it wanted to improve the quality of 4 early childhood education. And has been talking 5 about a program called "Early Learn NYC," which, I 6 don't know how many other people have spoken about 7 today, but, if none, I could go into details about 8 it. 9 But, the bottom line on this is, is that, as 10 of next October, the City will have discarded all 11 existing contracts, and re-contract with quality 12 programs around the city. They are reducing, by 13 about a third, it appears, the number of children 14 who will be covered. 15 And they said they're doing this so they can 16 provide sufficient funding for high-quality 17 programs. 18 It appears they are doing just the 19 opposite. 20 I am in close touch with an awful lot 21 agencies, similar to mine, and smaller ones, who 22 say: It doesn't matter how they cut the numbers, 23 the new funding formula that the City has come up 24 with -- a lot of it's State money -- is insufficient 25 to run any program, much less a quality program. 1 If you are like ours, one that wants to 2 hire high-qualified -- highly qualified teachers, 3 who, I would point out, the highest-scale teacher we 4 can bring aboard, who has a masters's degree, and 5 experience, is making less than the lowest-paid 6 entry-level teacher in the Department of Education. 7 People who work in early childhood education, 8 increasingly, are dedicated to the premise, that 9 what they do is the most important thing they can do 10 in education. 11 If, in fact, Early Learn goes through the way 12 it has been proposed, I know that there will be 13 dozens, and perhaps hundreds, of centers who 14 will be unable to open. Or, even worse, will open, 15 and discover at the end of a month, that they don't 16 have sufficient money to make payroll. 17 A lot of these organizations never raise 18 money. 19 Fortunately, with the roots of my 20 organization, we raise about -- well, 25 percent 21 more than we are given by the federal, state, and 22 city governments, which gives us some leeway. 23 Even with that, there is insufficient money 24 for us to be able to run the kind of programs that 25 we've been running all along. 1 So, with that as a background, I would point 2 up something that we're all aware of, but I doubt 3 that anybody presents it in this way, because the 4 perspective is different: That, this past 5 September, about 50,000 dropouts-to-be entered the 6 New York City school system. 7 SENATOR GALLIVAN: How much -- what's the 8 number? 9 JIM MADISON: 50,000 dropouts-to-be entered 10 the New York City school system. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: That's about how many they 12 drop out at. 13 JIM MADISON: Yeah. We know there are, 14 approximately, 100,000 children moving through each; 15 a little less in some grades, a little more. And we 16 know that, depending upon the neighborhood, but, 17 overall, the number is between 45 and 50 percent 18 dropouts. It depends upon how you count, and 19 whose numbers you use. 20 And when you go into low-income neighbors, 21 like ours, the dropout rate amongst males is 22 approaching 90 percent. 23 We are talking significant numbers. 24 Add to that, the separate statistic that is 25 chilling, in every way; that, if you are -- and this 1 doesn't relate necessarily to Brooklyn low-income 2 neighborhoods. The statistic was based on 3 research done a few years ago, in Harlem: That if 4 you are an African-American male, age 35, who had 5 dropped out of high school, never got a high school 6 diploma, the odds were even, that you would spend at 7 least two years in jail. 8 So, we take a deep breath, and we look back 9 at, 50,000 children, dropping out. More than half 10 of them, let's say, 30,000, will be males. 11 And are we saying that, approximately, half 12 of those? In other words, 15,000? 13 We don't have to say dropouts-to-be. We 14 could say, incarcerated males, of about 15,000, 15 every year, are being moved, from age 4, into age 5 16 and 6, kindergarten and first grade. 17 We know that. And, yet, based on my 18 experience, which -- and, is strange, in some 19 ways. 20 I started as a teacher in the days of 21 decentralization, back in the late '60s. And I 22 was in education for a dozen years, and then moved 23 into the business world. 24 And then, came back recently, and discovered 25 that the same horrors that existed 40 years ago -- 1 I can say that -- 40 years ago, still exist. 2 Politicians continue to say -- I make no 3 offense here -- to say the same things, that, you 4 know: We will make a difference. We will do the 5 following. 6 Every President that I have watched run, has 7 said: I will be the "education" President, 8 including our current President. 9 And nothing changes. 10 And the reason nothing changes, is, because 11 everyone is focusing on the wrong place. 12 If we spend so much money -- $2 billion a 13 year, on special education programs in the 14 Department of Education -- if we spend $2 billion on 15 that, how much do we spend on juvenile justice? on 16 truancy prevention? on teenage pregnancies? on just 17 the criminal justice system? lost wages for people 18 who never we want through high school? 19 And you go down the list of all the costs 20 that are out there, and then you look at the few 21 hundreds of thousands -- hundreds of millions 22 of dollars in a very large budget, that are put 23 into early childhood education, saying: We don't 24 have money for that. 25 We would rather have all of these children 1 move out, and become wards of the Department of 2 Education, which was never equipped to handle so 3 many children with so many deficiencies. 4 Statistics we have, because we work with 5 our children, and do a lot of measurement: 6 Approximately two-thirds of the children come to us 7 at age 2 or 3, and they are, you know, significantly 8 below age-group norms. 9 By the time they leave, the last two years, 10 we've averaged 92 percent are at or above age-group 11 norms. 12 We get there because we have additional 13 family workers, we have additional teachers; we do 14 music, we do science, we have literacy programs. 15 We do things that the system, as a whole, would 16 never fund. 17 And I can't argue, that, well, you should 18 turn around and let's fund all of these programs. 19 But, if we, as an organization, can do this, there 20 is no reason that we cannot do this on a broader 21 scale. 22 Right now, about a third of the children who 23 are eligible in New York City are actually in early 24 childhood education programs. 25 So, if we extrapolate from my two-thirds, 1 come in, at or below age-group norms, then those 2 who do not have the pleasure of being in a program, 3 arrive in kindergarten and first grade, and they are 4 below. And those are the ones who are almost 5 immediately labeled "Special Ed children," and they 6 require additional services and additional costs. 7 If you ask the Department of Education to 8 identify and specify, they will never do that. But, 9 it is a huge cost, that, I would guess, within 10 two or three years, we would be -- if we provided 11 universal early childhood education, we would 12 eliminate enough to be able to fund, properly, early 13 childhood education for every child who was eligible 14 in New York City. 15 It's -- it's -- you know, it's been an 16 ongoing tragedy, because it falls very much into 17 that -- the, "you can pay me now or pay me much more 18 later." 19 So, in the spring, I'm sure you're aware, the 20 City cut $90 million off the budget for early 21 childhood education. 22 And there was the Emergency Coalition to 23 Save Child Care that went out and battled, and got a 24 negative editorial for the Mayor in the 25 "New York Times." 1 And, the daily news came on, and said: 2 Mr. Mayor, when you got elected, first time, you 3 said you were going double the number of children 4 who would be covered. And with these cuts, it's 5 going to be half. 6 All of this went on. And, finally, the Mayor 7 put $42 million back in, and the City Council put 8 $40 million in. 9 The City Council money will disappear next 10 year. 11 So, we are at a point where we are, at the 12 very time we should be doing more, we are doing 13 less. 14 If I had a leak in my apartment, I would not 15 ignore it, saying, Well, maybe it will go away. Or, 16 we'll just put a little bucket under there. -- 17 realizing, at some point, it's going be a disaster. 18 And we do that with bridges in New York. 19 We do that with our own health care. 20 We have consistently been in a position, 21 where, if we don't do preventive health care, then 22 we pay a whole lot more. And, somehow, we turn a 23 blind eye to that when it comes to low-income 24 neighborhoods. 25 Uhm, I'm -- I'm -- you know, these are random 1 notes. I mean, I speak from the heart with this, 2 because it is something that I -- I consider to be a 3 tragedy for the city; that there are so many 4 opportunities to make a difference. 5 And, when it comes to early childhood 6 education, the amount of dollars we are talking is 7 tiny, compared to the cost, going forward. We're 8 talking about a few hundred million dollars a 9 year, compared to billions and billions. 10 The statistic that people are putting around 11 lately, is that, for every dollar you spend in early 12 childhood education, two things happen: 13 $1.86 is generated, because you're paying 14 more salaries, and things, almost immediately; 15 And, you are reducing, by $7, over time, the 16 cost of having this child enter the school system, 17 and have a very negative path for the rest of his 18 life. 19 I'll leave with you a conservative quote from 20 David Brooks, who said, and I'll read this, quote: 21 "By age 5, it is possible to predict with 22 depressing accuracy, who will complete high school 23 and college, and who won't." 24 And I could add to that: We can predict 25 who's going to jail. Who is going to be a ward of 1 the state. And, who's is going to cost us far more 2 money, that comes out over other positive program 3 we could possibly have. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 5 Thank you, Jim. 6 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Very salient points. 8 Just to let you know, in case you didn't get 9 the information: On the, 3rd -- 12th -- 10 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: 12th. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: -- December 12th, right 12 back here in this room, we, the Children and 13 Families Committee, will be doing an oversight 14 hearing on Early Learn. So, we hope you will come 15 and testify again. 16 JIM MADISON: I am. I'm signed up. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: But, before you leave, 18 though, one -- two questions I have for you. 19 I think Nancy... uhm... 20 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Wackstein? 21 SENATOR SAVINO: Yes, thank you. 22 JIM MADISON: Yes, Nancy Wackstein. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: -- testified earlier about 24 the inflexibility in universal pre-K. And they had 25 some recommendations on that, that it -- it's -- you 1 know, while it's well-intended, it really doesn't 2 serve enough children because of the limitation on 3 the number of hours per day. 4 And we -- we're going to be exploring, 5 whether or not we can provide some flexibility in 6 it. 7 The problem with UPK, just so you guys 8 know, is it's a very politically driven agenda item, 9 which is why we've not been able to look at it, and 10 amend it. 11 It took a very long time to get universal 12 pre-K in New York State, and the people who were 13 behind it are loath to have anybody criticize it. 14 But, I think we need to spend some time educating 15 members of the Legislature, that, it's -- a 16 well-intended program is useless if you can't adapt 17 it. 18 And we need to provide that flexibility. 19 So, I know people, like you, will help with 20 that. 21 JIM MADISON: On the issue of UPK classes, 22 for many years, school -- preschools, such as 23 mine, had UPK classes. 24 And, in the last couple of years, the 25 Department of Education said: We actually have 1 classroom space, let's do this. 2 So we now have a dual system, where you have 3 some children going into the public schools, who 4 are taught by licensed teachers, doing the exact 5 same thing that our teachers do, except, they're 6 making 15,000 to 40,000 dollars more a year. 7 It is a bizarre system that is based on what 8 is perceived as, this being babysitting and nursery 9 school, not being education that is terribly 10 relevant for the children. 11 The statistic, I'll throw out another one; 12 these are favorites: 13 That, if you have a low-income family, a 14 child, by age 3, has been read to, on average, 15 25 hours by the family. 16 If you go to a better-educated, higher-income 17 family, the equivalent period of time, it's 18 1,700 hours. 19 If those children enter the school system at 20 the same time, who is going to do well, and who is 21 going to be struggling? 22 And, at least, when they go into quality 23 preschools, they are read to every day, they are 24 worked with. We work with families to instruct 25 them, that they have to read to their children, read 1 with their children, every single night. 2 It does make a difference. 3 The perceptions, and public relations, is 4 important. 5 The perception of day care, is that it's 6 still day care, it's not a school. And, it is a 7 school. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: The other question I have 9 for you, since you're involved in the kindergarten 10 system: I think it was three years ago -- either 11 three or four years ago, the City of New York, in 12 its infinite wisdom, decided to eliminate 13 center-based kindergarten. 14 JIM MADISON: We are called the 15 "Brooklyn Kindergarten Society." They took all of 16 the kindergartens away from us. So we are -- 17 SENATOR SAVINO: And the reason, for 18 Senator Gallivan, was, that we would shift children 19 to the public school system, to DOE, and all 20 children, because, kindergarten is not a 21 requirement, you know, under education law; but, 22 that there would be ample seats for every child who 23 needed one. 24 Well, that is just not the case. And what we 25 thought would happen then, has, in fact, happened. 1 Do you have any statistics on -- 2 Of course, if we ask DOE, of course, they 3 will not give us the correct information. 4 -- how many children are inable -- unable to 5 get a kindergarten seat in the New York City Public 6 School System, that could be -- 7 JIM MADISON: Do not know. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: -- serviced by the centers? 9 JIM MADISON: Do not know. 10 I have no idea. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: We need to find that out. 12 JIM MADISON: Okay. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: And then, maybe, perhaps we 14 need to explore whether or not kindergarten should 15 be required, under the law, as opposed to optional. 16 JIM MADISON: I think every educator, 17 anywhere, would say yes. 18 I mean, that's -- 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, I think it's time for 20 that. 21 JIM MADISON: -- that's not a debate. That's 22 a given. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Are we done? 24 SENATE AIDE: Two more coming in. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh, wait, we have two more. 1 SENATE AIDE: Yes, we weren't sure if we'd 2 have time, but -- 3 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Thank you. 4 JIM MADISON: Thank you. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 6 SENATE AIDE: Judith Kahan. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Judith Kahan was here. She 8 just -- 9 SENATE AIDE: No, I'm sorry. 10 Louise Feld, and -- is it, Sienna? 11 SIERRA STONEMAN-BELL: Sierra. 12 SENATE AIDE: -- Sierra? 13 If you want to just, both, come up, I guess, 14 at the same time? 15 SENATE AIDE 2: Yeah, this way we can -- we 16 don't have to shuffle you the around. You guys can 17 [inaudible]. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh, we have 19 Citizens Committee for Children. 20 So, who is first? Louise? 21 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: However you want to -- 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Louise? 23 LOUISE FELD: Sure. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Citizens Committee for 25 Children. 1 So, we'll tell you the same thing: You don't 2 have to read the testimony. You can summarize for 3 us, the points that you think are most important, 4 that we should be aware of. 5 We would be very appreciative. 6 LOUISE FELD: Okay. 7 Good afternoon. 8 My name is Louise Feld, and I'm the policy 9 associate for food and economic security at 10 Citizens Committee for Children. 11 CCC is a multi-issue child-advocacy 12 organization dedicated to ensuring that every child 13 in New York is healthy, housed, educated, and safe. 14 Thank you so much, Senator Savino and 15 Senator Gallivan, for holding this hearing today, 16 because, as recent census data shows, there is a 17 great deal of striking poverty in New York City and 18 State. And, it has grown during the past couple of 19 years. 20 I have submitted written testimony. And, so, 21 as you asked, I will try my best to be brief. 22 So, I'll start by just saying: That, in our 23 testimony, there are several -- or, many 24 statistics that show the real extent of how dire 25 poverty and food insecurity and housing insecurity 1 is in New York City and State at this time. 2 I'll just pick out, perhaps, one of the most 3 striking, which is, that: Now, 1 out of every 5 4 New York State children is living in poverty; and, 5 almost 1 out of every 3 New York City children is 6 living in poverty. 7 And, so, at this time, when, yes, difficult 8 decisions need to be made in relation to the budget, 9 we must remember how great the needs are in both our 10 city and state, and do our best to protect those 11 children and families who are struggling so much. 12 We really do believe that a key component to 13 addressing the State's financial problem is to take 14 a more balanced approach, that combines 15 progressive tax increases with prudent public 16 investments. 17 And we really urge the Committees to work 18 with the Assembly and the Governor to enact 19 legislation that raises revenue needed to balance 20 the budget while protecting services for children 21 and families. 22 Specifically, New York State could raise 23 $5 billion annually by extending the current 24 income-tax surcharge on the wealthiest of 25 New Yorkers, which is due to expire at the end of 1 this year. 2 We've heard a lot already today about 3 two areas which CCC is very concerned with, and 4 very involved in advocacy on; and that's, child-care 5 and youth services. So, I won't belabor the 6 points which were so ably stated by earlier 7 colleagues. 8 But, I do want to underscore how vital these 9 services are, as economic engines for our 10 communities, both in the city and the state; 11 enabling working parents to stay engaged in the 12 workforce, and, also, helping children, both, for 13 example, with early childhood education, and 14 child care, getting children prepared to enter 15 school, as we've heard already today. And, also, 16 with the after-school programming, really helping 17 kids, not just continue -- further their education, 18 further their enrichment activities, but, also, in 19 the long term, keep them out of trouble, both, with 20 the juvenile justice system, and then, ultimately, 21 the criminal justice system. 22 There is one notable statistic that we 23 include in our "Youth Services" section of our 24 lengthy testimony; and that is, that every dollar 25 invested in youth services saves $40 in future 1 criminal justice costs. 2 So, I think that is a very telling statistic. 3 We all know that children are most likely to 4 get in trouble after school hours, when, perhaps, 5 their parents are still at work. And, so, these 6 services are truly vital to helping kids remain 7 engaged in school, and on the right track. 8 So, I won't belabor those points. 9 Moving on to child welfare: As we heard 10 earlier today from Jim Purcell, the child-welfare 11 financing scheme is due to expire on June 30, 2012, 12 and must be addressed as part of this year's budget. 13 Now, our testimony does have, not only a 14 lengthy section in its body on child-welfare 15 financing, but also an appendix attached, with all 16 of our recommendations related to child-welfare 17 financing. 18 So, I will try and just pick out a few very 19 salient -- salient points from that. 20 We did hear, already, a lot today, but we do 21 want to join in on the position, that, 22 preventive-services financing must remain 23 open-ended, and should be restored to 65 percent. 24 And, to add to some of the information that 25 Jim Purcell shared, in terms of numbers, he provided 1 a contrast between the system -- the foster-care 2 system 20 years ago, and today. 3 We can even go back just a few years, to 4 see, really, how large of an impact the 5 preventive-services system has made in keeping kids 6 out of foster care. 7 So, for example: In 2002, there were over 8 25,000 New York City children in foster care. 9 Today, there are almost half as many, as of 10 June 2011. 11 So, we really see what a large impact the 12 preventive services have; and, not just keeping 13 families together, but, also, they have an economic 14 impact because they are so cost-effective. 15 So, for example: In New York City, 16 preventive services cost a fraction of the price of 17 foster care, with an average annual cost of $10,000 18 per family, for preventive services; and an annual 19 average cost of $36,000 per child, for foster care. 20 So, you can certainly see where preventive 21 services are just simply more cost-effective. 22 So, we are very concerned, and we urge you to 23 ensure that the open-ending funding stream is 24 maintained, and that the reimbursement rate is 25 restored to the level of 65 percent. 1 I don't believe anyone touched upon the 2 foster-care block grant today. 3 This is intended to fund the State's share 4 for children in out-of-home placements, including 5 foster homes, kinship foster homes, residential 6 foster-care placements, and private 7 juvenile-justice placements. 8 As of April 2011, the foster-care block grant 9 is also supposed to contribute to the State's share 10 for kinGAP subsidies. And New York City has 11 reported spending approximately 70 million above 12 their foster-care block-grant allocation this past 13 year; meaning, that New York City would have 14 received an additional $35 million from the State if 15 there was a true 50/50 reimbursement, or a 16 foster-care block-grant cap that was high enough to 17 accommodate the City's actual spending needs. 18 Now, while we at CCC appreciate the State's 19 efforts to create disincentives for localites to 20 rely on foster care, and for localities to expedite 21 permanency, there are some children and youth who 22 will always be in need of foster care, so that they 23 can be safe, and receive the services they and their 24 families needs. 25 So, it is imperative that New York's 1 foster-care system have the resources it needs. 2 Now, almost all children who are adopted from 3 New York's foster-care system are eligible for an 4 adoption subsidy. 5 Historically, the State had reimbursed 6 counties 75 percent of the non-federal share for 7 adoption subsidies. 8 But, in the State fiscal year, 2011/2012 9 budget, the State reduced its commitment and support 10 to these children, by reimbursing -- by reducing the 11 reimbursement down to 62 percent. 12 And, we urge the Committees to adopt a 13 budget that restores the State funding match, back 14 to 75 percent, for adoption subsidies. 15 Now, many advocates, providers, and 16 counties believe that kinGAP should be funded by the 17 State in the same manner as adoption subsidy, given 18 that it is a permanency arrangement that should be 19 incentivized over foster care. 20 Notably, the number of children receiving 21 adoption subsidies is starting to decrease, because, 22 (a) the declining foster-care census means there are 23 fewer children eligible to be adopted, and (b) those 24 children who were adopted at the height of the 25 foster-care census are beginning to age out of 1 adoption-subsidy eligibility, in that, they're 2 turning 21 years old. 3 Thus, the State's savings on adoption subsidy 4 could be redirected to the kinGAP subsidies without 5 increasing the OCFS State budget. 6 So, finally, to truly ensure permanency for 7 children touched by the child-welfare system, the 8 State and localities must invent in post -- must 9 invest in post-permanency services, including, 10 after-care for children reunified with their 11 families, post-adoption services to children who are 12 adopted, and post-kinGAP services to children in 13 subsidized guardianship arrangements. 14 So, as I said. There is a full list of our 15 child-welfare finance-reform recommendations 16 attached to our testimony. 17 We also want to talk about the juvenile -- 18 the issues of juvenile justice. 19 CCC does appreciate the efforts that the 20 Senate; particularly, the Children and Family, and 21 Social Services, Committees have made thus far to 22 try and improve New York's deeply troubled juvenile 23 justice system. 24 Now, while these steps have certainly 25 triggered much progress, we do believe that there's 1 more reform needed. And we're hopeful that the 2 Senate Committees will be key allies in these 3 reform efforts. 4 Specifically, we're supportive of increased 5 investments in programs that keep young people out 6 of the juvenile justice system, as well as, 7 community-based alternative to detention-placement 8 programs; 9 Raising the age of criminality to 18; 10 And, the full realignment of the juvenile 11 justice system, such that New York City would be 12 responsible for New York City's youth. 13 As you know, over 60 percent of the youth in 14 facility care come from New York City, and are 15 typically placed incredibly far from their homes and 16 their families, their communities, their lawyers, 17 and their schools. 18 Now, in addition, OCFS's own research shows 19 that the State placement system has a recidivism 20 rate of 81 to 89 percent, suggesting that the system 21 fails to rehabilitate youth as required. 22 Furthermore, the cost of State placement now 23 averages $266,000 annually, per youth, with little 24 positive or negative impact on the youth. 25 A locally controlled juvenile justice system 1 for New York City would allow greater numbers of 2 youth to reside at home, while engaging an 3 alternative to detention and incarceration services, 4 and ensure that youth in need of placement would 5 live in a facility that is close enough to their 6 home, so that, they can benefit from visits and 7 engagement with family members, regular contact 8 with their attorneys, and, that educational 9 credits, that they earn while they're in placement, 10 could transfer upon their discharge so that they can 11 move forward with their education. 12 Being treated within their communities would 13 allow for more comprehensive and meaningful reentry 14 for so many youth. 15 So, for these reasons, CCC urges you to 16 support a system that would allow New York City to 17 have local control over its juvenile justice system. 18 We also ask you to support proposals to raise 19 the age of criminality in New York. 20 New York is one of only two states in the 21 entire country that treats 16- and 17-year-olds as 22 adults. Yet, anyone who has ever acted -- 23 interacted with a 16- or 17-year-old, or perhaps 24 remembers being a 16- or 17-year-old, is well 25 aware that these youth are not quite yet adults. 1 And it's not just a perception. Of course, 2 there have been many studies on the signs of brain 3 development that bears out this fact. 4 So, with that said, we certainly support a 5 proposal that would raise the age of criminality 6 to -- in New York State. 7 I do want to touch upon an issue that was 8 raised very, very briefly early this morning, when 9 Bobbie Sackman was still testifying; and that's the 10 finger-imaging requirement in New York City. 11 CCC is very opposed to the continuation of 12 this requirement. There is -- we overwhelmingly 13 support its elimination. 14 We had noted, that New York City is the only 15 place in New York State has continues this. 16 It's actually the only place in the country, 17 besides the state of Arizona, to continue this 18 practice. 19 California and Texas, both, most recently, 20 had done away with it. 21 And, so, now only New York City remains; 22 and, therefore, we are urging the Committees to, 23 either, pass a law, banning New York City from this 24 practice, or, to urge -- or we urge the Governor to 25 use his discretion, to instruct OTDA to end this 1 procedure. 2 There are estimates out there, that there 3 are at least 30,000 eligible New Yorkers in 4 New York City, alone, who are being -- who are being 5 dissuaded, or -- this is really a barrier to their 6 participation. 7 And, of course, besides the number of people 8 who could really benefit from extra access to food, 9 there's also a great loss to local economies, 10 because there's an estimate of about $54 million 11 that is not coming through to our localites from the 12 federal funding that's now provides to be used in 13 local supermarkets and farmers markets. 14 So, we do think that this is really a -- an 15 inefficient and harmful practice that should be 16 eliminated. 17 We also ask the Committees to pass 18 legislation that amends the State Social Services 19 Law, so that it permits public-assistance 20 recipients to fulfill their work-activity 21 requirements through their attendance at four-year 22 college or at advanced degree programs. 23 There have been changes to TANF regulations 24 that permit states to count for your college 25 attendance as an activity that satisfies the work 1 requirement. 2 And, New York should seek to implement this 3 change. 4 And the last issue area that I wish to talk 5 about, is homelessness and housing. 6 Now, while CCC had concerns about the 7 ability of New York City's Advantage rental-subsidy 8 program to permanently address housing stability for 9 families, the loss of federal and state funds for 10 the program, and then the resulting loss of the 11 program itself, has compounded the homelessness 12 problem in New York City. 13 Now that there is, essentially, no 14 rental-subsidy program, the number of families with 15 children in homeless shelters continues to increase, 16 as does the length of time children are living in 17 the shelter system. 18 This instability impacts children's 19 education, connections to community, and their 20 mental health. 21 While these subsidy programs may seem 22 expensive, they're actually more cost-effective than 23 shelter. 24 The cost of shelter is $3,000 per month, 25 compared to the cost of the rental subsidy, which 1 would be approximately a $1,000 per month. 2 CCC urges the Committees to work with the 3 Governor's Office, and New York City, to support a 4 housing subsidy program for homeless families. 5 And, in addition, it's much more 6 cost-effective to prevent homelessness than to 7 support homeless families in the shelters. 8 State programs currently funded with TANF, 9 such as the Supplemental Homeless Intervention 10 Program, Supportive Housing and Emergency Homeless 11 Services, are critical to helping families stay 12 housed. 13 Supportive housing has been proven to be a 14 cost-effective housing solution for homeless 15 families facing substance abuse or mental illness, 16 as well as for youth aging out of foster-care 17 system. 18 Supportive housing is cheaper than shelter 19 care, and allows formerly homeless individuals and 20 families the ability to receive housing and 21 supportive care in their communities. 22 So, we -- once again, we really appreciate 23 the ability to speak to you here today. 24 We understand that the state of our economy 25 creates immense budgetary challenges, but, we 1 are really looking forward to working with you, to 2 continue to try to protect needed human services 3 during this very difficult time. 4 Thank you. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Louise. 6 And just to point out, you're the only person 7 who mentioned juvenile-justice reform, which is 8 something we will be working closely on, going 9 forward, over the next couple of months. 10 I just want to make one point about the 11 Advantage program, just in case anybody gets the 12 wrong idea. 13 It wasn't the State that took it away. 14 In fact, it was a program that -- when it was 15 considered for the extension of funding, it was the 16 City of New York that said it didn't work. They 17 didn't want to continue it. 18 And so, said, "Fine." 19 And, then, at the last minute, they came 20 running to Albany, and said: Oh, my God. You can't 21 do this to us. 22 They did it to themselves. 23 I don't know what the answer is. 24 And, I'm assuming they'll be coming to us, 25 hopefully, with some proposals, and some 1 recommendations, on how we can fill that gap. 2 And, now, our final speaker is, 3 Sierra Stoneman-Bell. 4 SIERRA STONEMAN-BELL: Thank you. 5 Thanks, last, but not least. 6 I'm Sierra Stoneman-Bell, co-director of 7 Neighborhood Family Services Coalition. 8 And, I just want to thank you both for 9 holding this forum today, and allowing me to speak 10 at the end of a long session. 11 I'm going to kind of hone in on one issue 12 today; that is, the -- is, GED testing, and pathways 13 to an equivalency diploma, which was mentioned 14 earlier by Nancy Wackstein. 15 Uhm -- but -- and I'm speaking today on 16 behalf of the Campaign for Tomorrow's Workforce, 17 which is a coalition that we co-lead, along with 18 United Neighborhood Houses and Community Services 19 Society. 20 And, it's really focused on advancing policy 21 solutions to reconnect young adults to education 22 and work. 23 And, so, the GED is, obviously, an important 24 issue there. And, we have been convening 25 providers in the adult-literacy field for the last 1 couple of years, really trying to look at the 2 GED-testing service system, and how it works, and 3 doesn't work. 4 And, you know, while this is a -- primarily, 5 an education issue, I wanted to speak about this 6 topic here today, because it has, you know, 7 potentially, great impact on the human-services 8 sector. 9 There are 2.8 million adults in the state who 10 are out of school and lack a high school credential. 11 And many of these New Yorkers rely on 12 human-services organizations to develop their 13 skills, continue their education, prepare for the 14 workforce. 15 And, for those who left high school without a 16 diploma, the test of general educational 17 development, the "GED," has been a really important 18 gateway to post-secondary education and professional 19 advancement. 20 And, you know -- and it's also a tool, the 21 GED, that is -- that the workforce system relies on 22 to show progress, and show gain, for both youth and 23 adults. 24 And, so, we're -- and it's also -- we're at a 25 time where graduation requirements in K through 12 1 are, really, kind of, increasing. 2 And, also, you know, the expectation of 3 having some sort of post-secondary education in the 4 workforce is more and more important. 5 So, having pathways to an equivalency 6 diploma for those who not complete high school, the 7 diploma is very important. 8 In recent years, budget cuts have 9 threatened GED testing and adult-literacy programs. 10 And there is a -- the disruption of State funding 11 for GED testing in 2010. 12 And, there are very big changes that are 13 coming to the GED test in the next couple of 14 years, which, I think we all just need to start 15 being aware of. 16 It -- there's going to be a new GED test in 17 2014, which sounds far away, but it's really not. 18 It's going to be more difficult, and more expensive. 19 The GED test is developed, and administered, 20 by the GED Testing Service. That's a national 21 entity, and they're redoing the GED test to be 22 aligned with common-core standards, which are 23 aligned with college-and-career-readiness standards. 24 And, so, the reality is, that, what's 25 happening, is that, because the GED test is changing 1 now, in 2014, it's, actually, the bar is being set 2 higher for adult learners in the adult-education 3 system, before even the K through 12 system has 4 really shifted to have the common-core standards be 5 what, you know, we're really going for. 6 And, so, you know, given the fact that this 7 is going to make the test much harder, I mean, if, 8 you know, barring more investment and supports for 9 adult learners, who generally have less time to, 10 you know, go to school, and kind of bring up their 11 skills, and, there are, obviously, much less 12 investment in an adult-education system, overall, 13 than in K through 12, there's -- it's going to 14 result in many fewer people being able to pass the 15 test. 16 And, this also has impact for the workforce 17 system, which, again, looks at the GED as a key 18 outcome. 19 So, what happens there? 20 Another issue, is that, the tests will be -- 21 probably, going to be cost -- costing twice as much. 22 And the way it works now, is the New York 23 State Education Department contracts with test 24 centers around the state, to administer the test. 25 And they pay a small amount of reimbursement to test 1 centers who administer the test. 2 About 50,000 GED exams are given each year in 3 New York City -- I mean, in New York State. Excuse 4 me. And this, still, does not take into 5 consideration many people who are on the waiting 6 list. 7 The -- what's happened is, that the GED has 8 recently moved to a for-profit operation, 9 nationally. 10 So, basically, the GED is a tool; it's an 11 assessment tool, that's used. And states can 12 honor that -- passing that test to get a high school 13 equivalency diploma. 14 Most of us understand the GED as, like a, 15 diploma itself, but it's actually not. So, there's 16 a lot of, kind of, reeducation around what the GED 17 actually is, and how it's used. 18 But -- so, the American Council on Education, 19 which is the national non-profit that has developed 20 and administered the GED for a decades, has merged 21 with Pearson, which is a for-profit publishing 22 company. And, this is -- just kind of raises 23 further questions and concerns around, you know, 24 the increased costs: Are people going to have 25 access to it? 1 And, the interplay with state policy. 2 So, there's been a move in the field; and, 3 the State Education Department is also moving to 4 look at alternative pathways to a high school 5 equivalency diploma. 6 Right now, the GED test is the main way that 7 people in New York State can get a high school 8 equivalency diploma, but it's not the only way, 9 actually, right now. 10 And, so, there's a lot of interests, given 11 the changes to the GED tests, especially around 12 cost, in terms of the State's interest, that, you 13 know, if the cost of the test doubles, you're 14 going to have half as many people being able to even 15 take the tests, given the same budget allocations. 16 So, that's really concerning. 17 So, the -- I'll just run through the 18 recommendations, really quickly, which is -- you 19 know, really represents a lot of the 20 adult-education providers in the city. 21 I mean, one is, obviously, that, in the short 22 term, we need to maintain the current funding for 23 GED testing and preparation services. 24 And this is, you know, the GED test 25 centers, adult-literacy education, and 1 employment-preparation education, which are two 2 other funding streams that come out of the 3 State Ed Department. 4 And, there's also going to probably be a 5 surge in people who want to take the test before it 6 changes in 2014. And, so, you know, we need to 7 make sure, in the short term, we can deal with that 8 demand. 9 We also believe that free access to the GED 10 test should be maintained. 11 There have been some proposals to start 12 charging a fee, or to require that people pass a 13 pre-test before they can even sit for the test. 14 But, we oppose these proposals, especially, 15 given that we're moving toward this new test, which 16 has all sorts of other implications. 17 But, finally, and probably most important for 18 the long term, is, to really look at, and support, 19 developing alternative pathways to a high school 20 equivalency diploma. 21 And, we're really pleased that the State is 22 starting to look at this. 23 And, I think, as a human-services sector, we 24 just need to really understand what these changes 25 mean, and, you know, begin to think about how 1 human-services programs are going to adapt to this, 2 and respond. 3 And, uhm -- and, you know, we just look -- 4 really look forward to working with members of 5 your Committees, as well as the 6 Education Committee, to make sure that we have a 7 stronger set of pathways to an equivalency diploma. 8 So, thank you. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: One question: How much does 10 a GED cost now? 11 SIERRA STONEMAN-BELL: So, the GED test, 12 there's no charge to the test-taker. And New York 13 is, actually, one of the few states who has 14 offered free access. 15 The State Education Department has a -- it -- 16 they have a budget that pays for -- they pay 17 $20 per reimbursement -- sorry, per test, to 18 reimburse the test centers. That doesn't cover the 19 whole cost. 20 And then they have, about, triple that, to 21 administer the test, and pay for their own costs. 22 So -- and it was a long answer; but, 23 basically, if you added that all up, the State of 24 New York pays about $60 per test. 25 And the projected cost for the new tests, is 1 about double that. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: About 120 per person? 3 SIERRA STONEMAN-BELL: Per battery of 4 tests, per person. 5 Yes. 6 SENATOR GALLIVAN: Will that cost go down, or 7 does that cost have to do with the implementation of 8 something new? 9 SIERRA STONEMAN-BELL: Well, the reality is, 10 that the -- the cost is determined by the owner of 11 the GED test, which is a national group, which is 12 now Pearson. It's called the "GED Testing Service." 13 They define their costs. There's no regulation on 14 that. 15 I mean, they are -- you know, they look to 16 the states as their market for their tests. 17 So, you know, there's an interesting decision 18 now that the State has to make, about how much 19 subsidy, or how much to pay, to test centers to 20 offer that test. And, how much to rely on that test 21 as the one -- or, the main way to offer a 22 high school equivalency diploma. 23 So that's kind of -- those are the 24 considerations that we're looking at now. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 1 SIERRA STONEMAN-BELL: Thank you. 2 MR. GERMAIN: Thank you both. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: I think that's it. 4 I want to thank everyone for coming, and 5 staying, and thank you for sitting here. 6 SENATOR GALLIVAN: We didn't miss anybody out 7 there, did we? 8 Thank all for being here. 9 10 (Whereupon, at 1:48 p.m., the 11 Joint Committee Roundtable concluded.) 12 ---oOo--- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

New York State Forum a Roundtable Discussion on the Current and Future Issues and Concerns of Human Services Administrators, Advocates, and Clients

Transcript