Senate Bill (SB) 84 Report

1. Senate Bill (SB) 84 Report Ryan Fruchtenicht Welfare to Work Division California Department of Social Services 744 P Street, Sacramento CA 95826

2. “Who is this Guy?” Ryan Fruchtenicht is an Associate Governmental Program Analyst (AGPA) in the CalWORKs Division Employment Bureau of the California Department of Social Services (CDSS).  Ryan is a member of the Program Performance Oversight Unit which helps to bring counties together to share ideas and review a site county’s WTW program for promising practices and areas for improvement. Ryan is also the author of the SB 84 report to the Legislature. He has worked for the Employment Bureau for more than two and half years. Ryan earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology from Oregon State University in 1998. He and his wife Karen recently welcomed their baby boy Tiernan Fruchtenicht into their family. Guess which one is Tiernan in this picture.

3. A Brief History of The SB 84 Report or Finnigan’s Law: The farther away the future is…the better it looks.

4. How did we get here?

5. TANF Reauthorization, a Closer Look(Why would we want to do that!?) • TANF Reauthorization had four major impacts on the TANF program: • Recalibration of the caseload reduction credit (CRC). • Work verification plan (WVP) requirement. • Required that work activities be defined. • Newly identified work eligible individuals.

6. The CRC Change • Caseload Reduction Credit (CRC) base year changed from 1995 to 2005 Projected All Families CRC for Federal Fiscal Year 2007 50%

7. The WVP & Defining Work Activities • Explain how states will verify that TANF recipients are participating in activities for the required number of hours • Each state must submit clear definitions for WTW activities

8. Newly Identified Work Eligible Individuals! • Adult (or minor child head-of-household) receiving assistance under TANF or Separate State Program • Non-recipient parent living with a child receiving assistance (child-only recipients) • Work-eligible individuals that are in Separate State Programs funded with state Maintenance of Effort (MOE) dollars (two-parent recipients)

9. Work Participation Rate WPR Calculation Old WPR Calculation County X has 1,000 one-parent cases and 500 cases are fully participating: 500 ÷ 1,000 = 50% WPR New WPR Calculation County X has 1,000 one-parent cases and 500 cases are fully participating; 200 two-parent cases, 45 of which are fully participating; 150 sanctioned cases; 40 exempt cases; 35 Safety Net (child-only) cases: 545 ÷ 1,425 = 38% WPR

10. Penalties! • Up to five percent reduction of the state’s federal block grant • The penalty could increase two percent per year up to 21 percent • State’s TANF MOE requirement would increase each year of noncompliance • FFY 2007 is the baseline that the penalties will be assessed starting in FFY 2009

11. CalWORKs v. TANF Farber’s Third Law: We are all going down the same road…in different directions.

12. CalWORKs v. TANF • CalWORKs Hourly Requirements • Single-Parent Family: 32 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities) • Two-Parent Family: 35 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities) • TANF Hourly Requirements • Single-Parent Family: 30 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities) • Single-Parent w/ child under 6: 20 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities) • Two-Parent Family: 35 hours per week (30 hours per week must be core activities)

13. Assembly Bill 1808California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization Peers’s Law: The solution to a problem changes the problem.

14. Accountability Collaboration Information/Data Assembly Bill 1808California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization AB 1808 Policy Changes: • Clarified shared penalties • Required county plan addendum • Ended durational sanctions • Required data master plan and data publishing • Required county peer reviews

15. Assembly Bill 1808California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization County Plan Addenda Requirements: • Each county perform a comprehensive review of its existing CalWORKs plan • Include immediate and long-range actions to improve WPR

16. Assembly Bill 1808California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization County Plan Addenda Requirements: • The addendum must address increased participation in: • Up-front engagement • Reengaging noncompliant or sanctioned individuals • Achieving full engagement • Preventing families from going into sanction status • Other strategies to increase WPR

17. Assembly Bill 1808California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization County Plan Addenda Requirements: • A description of anticipated outcomes • A proposed plan to measure progress in achieving the anticipated outcomes • How counties will use the single allocation • How they will work with community partners

18. AB 1808 Plan Addendum Certification Process • CDSS certified that each addendum complied with state regulations and statute, and where applicable, federal statute. • Plan Addenda were received from December 2006 through July 2007. • The last Addendum was certified in September 2007.

19. SB 84 (Chapter 177, Statutes of 2007) Added Section 10534.5 to the W&I Code which required CDSS to:  • Review the AB 1808 addenda to identify promising practices for up-front and sanction reengagement • Work with CWDA to gather information on implementation and results of the strategies • Gather information on the characteristics of time-limited families

20. SB 84 (Chapter 177, Statutes of 2007) Added Section 10534.5 to the W&I Code which required CDSS to:  • Work with CWDA to identify strategies used by counties to encourage participation by time-limited families • Submit a Written Update due March 1, 2008 • Submit the Final Report due September 1, 2008

21. Finagle’s Laws of information: • The information you have is not what you want. 2. The information you want is not what you need. 3. The information you need is not what you can obtain.

22. SB 84 Report Methodology • CDSS in discussions with CWDA determined that it would be best if counties identified which strategies are promising practices. • CDSS clarified with Legislature that time-limited means Safety Net families. • CDSS also determined that information on implementation and results should also be requested for the Safety Net strategies.

23. SB 84 Report Methodology • CDSS developed a survey to collect preliminary information for the written update. • Did not ask for Safety Net characteristics at that time. • CDSS developed a follow-up survey for up-to-date information about the strategies.

24. SB 84 Report Methodology • CDSS asked for information on Safety Net families at that time. • Required follow-up with counties for clarification on the information provided by the counties.

25. SB 84 Findings • What we know so far…

26. What is Up-front Engagement? • Encouraging participation by an individual in the CalWORKs program up front. • Up-front engagement is the time an individual is enrolled in WTW through the development of a WTW plan. • Develop an understanding of the individual’s needs, wants, and possible barriers to employment.

27. What is Up-front Engagement? • Activities: orientation, appraisal, job search and job readiness, assessment, and the creation of a WTW plan • Applicants may volunteer to participate in the activities.

28. Up-front Engagement Voluntary Participation: • Encourage voluntary participation by applicants • Allows for completion of up-front activities by the time the individual is determined eligible for cash aid and is enrolled in the CalWORKs WTW program. • Offer voluntary orientation and appraisal; some offer Job Club also on a voluntary basis.

29. Up-front Engagement Development of Specialized Units/Case Workers: • Developed specialized units or caseworkers to manage the up front engagement of individuals  • Developed an engagement team consisting of members specializing in different aspects of up-front engagement • Creates a single point of contact for applicants and newly-approved recipients

30. Up-front Engagement Co-location of Staff and Services: • Relocated workers to a common location • Co-located county eligibility workers and WTW staff with behavioral health workers

31. Up-front Engagement Recipient Appointment Reminders: • Ensured that recipients are reminded of required activities and are encourage to participate • Case managers make two telephone contacts to remind recipients of their scheduled activities and appointments • Increased contact by telephone prior to orientation to establish relationship • All recipients leave an appointment with a written reminder of their next required activity and a follow-up call is made

32. Results of up-front Strategies • Increased participation by individuals up-front and long term • Greatly reduced no-show rate for up-front activities • A decline in up-front sanctions • Individuals seem to be better informed of their rights and responsibilities 

33. Results of up-front Strategies • Consistent enrollment in WTW activities • Increases communication about and with recipients   • Faster referrals and less time between activities . • Increased communication on shared recipient case files

34. What is Sanction Reengagement? • Encouraging an individual to again participate in the CalWORKs program after he or she has been sanctioned • When a mandatory participant fails to comply with program requirements the participant is sanctioned. • The adult’s portion of the cash aid is subtracted • Not eligible to receive supportive services.

35. What is Sanction Reengagement? • Sanction period does not count against the 60-month time limit • Reengagement is when the individual enters into and completes a curing plan • Regardless of the reason for sanction these individuals can be very difficult to engage

36. Sanction Reengagement Home Visits or Offsite Meetings: • Conduct home visits or meetings at a neutral location to encourage sanctioned individuals to cure their sanctions. • Sometimes visit as a team or one-on-one • Contract with a case management agency to conduct visits • Social Workers visit all sanctioned or non-compliant families

37. Sanction Reengagement Intensive Outreach: • Attempt more frequent and various types of communication with sanctioned individuals to encourage curing of sanctions. • Make contact by phone to schedule curing appointment • Send a sanction informing letters • Meet with a team of workers

38. Sanction Reengagement Specialized Unit/Caseworkers: • Created specialized staff positions to directly manage the sanctioned caseload • Review all sanctioned cases • Perform intensive outreach • Held sanction curing orientations • Focus on recently sanctioned individuals first; then long-term sanctioned • Use multi-disciplinary teams to reengage

39. Sanction Reengagement Reengage at Annual Redetermination (RV)/Reapplication:  • Encourage the sanctioned individual to voluntarily meet with employment workers to discuss curing sanctions • Eligibility workers contact the WTW workers prior to the individual’s visit • Co-located an employment staff worker with the eligibility staff workers

40. Results of Sanction Reengagement Strategies • Typically resulted in high reengagement rates • Some smaller counties have reengaged all, or most of their sanctioned cases • Social Workers have reported success in determining specific services to help individuals come into compliance • By using community partners some cost can be shared

41. Results of Sanction Reengagement Strategies • Increasing communication between CalWORKs eligibility and employment staff • Higher caseloads for non-sanction case workers • Many recipients returned to sanction within a few months

42. What is Safety Net Engagement? • Encouraging participation by timed-out individuals • Once an individual has received 60 months of CalWORKs cash aid, he or she is discontinued from aid • These individuals are referred to as “timed out” • Cash aid continues for eligible children

43. What is Safety Net Engagement? • Safety Net cases are not required to participate • Safety Net families are eligible for Food Stamps and Medi-Cal • Child care for up to 24 months if employed • Counties can provide WTW services • Supportive services are county option (not required)

44. Safety Net Engagement Strategies Outreach/Marketing to Encourage Voluntary Participation: • Attempt to contact the timed-out individual to encourage voluntary participation • Discuss what services and supportive services are available to them • Invite them to a WTW orientation • Invite timed-out individuals to job club • Advertise open house events for Safety Net families

45. Safety Net Engagement Strategies Administrative Review of Safety Net Caseload:  • Review Safety Net caseload to determine if working, attending school, or in training • Ensure they are receiving necessary supportive services • Ensure that the individual’s level of participation is reported correctly • Encourage fully employed participants to leave aid and receive job retention services to save time on their 60-month clocks (pre Safety Net strategy)

46. Results of Safety Net Engagement Strategies • Increase in WPR of Safety Net caseload • Permanent full-time positions • Not employed enough hours to be considered fully participating • Small increase to overall WPR

47. Written Update is Published • The Written Update was released to the Legislature on July 18, 2008. • It is posted on the internet at the following address: http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/cdssweb/entres/pdf/AB1808IncreasingWPR.pdf

48. What’s Next? • Final Report • Best Practices Website • County Peer Reviews

49. Questions & Comments?

50. Thank You for Coming! Ryan Fruchtenicht Analyst, Program Performance Oversight Unit California Department of Social Services 744 P Street, Sacramento CA 95826 Ryan.Fruchtenicht@dss.ca.gov (916) 651-9958