The ACDJFS Child Support Enforcement Agency is participating in a statewide initiative to recognize August as Child Support Awareness Month. Athens County’s theme is “Child Support: It’s more than just money.” The agency has developed public service announcements, fliers and other educational materials to raise awareness throughout the county and encourage parents in any situation to take a more active role in their children’s lives.
“Both custodial and non-custodial parents should be involved in the actual parenting of their children as much as possible,” CSEA Director Randy Galbraith said. “Of course kids need food on the table and clothes on their backs, but they also need the confidence and security that comes with knowing both parents love them. We can’t enforce that kind of child support, but we hope that raising awareness this month will help parents see how they can be a bigger part of their children’s lives, no matter what the circumstances.”
The Athens County Child Support Enforcement Agency was also recently recognized for increasing collections on current child support cases for FY05-06 at the State Child Support Training Conference on July 30 in Columbus.
Athens County CSEA Assistant Program Administrator Susan Douglas accepted the award from the State Office of Child Support on behalf of Athens County CSEA staff, whose efforts brought about the highest percentage improvement for collections on current support among counties with similar caseloads in the state.
During FY05-06, the Athens County CSEA increased collections from 61.76 percent to 63.12 percent, collecting more than $4.4 million in FFY2006. The agency maintains approximated 4,500 cases each year.
In addition to collecting child support payments, the CSEA assists Athens County residents in locating non-custodial parents, establishing paternity, and establishing and enforcing child support orders.
Showing posts with label job and family services. Show all posts
Showing posts with label job and family services. Show all posts
Aug 8, 2007
Jul 23, 2007
Reforming Welfare Reform
With the passage of the most recent budget, Ohio has remained in a pack with a great many other states who have chosen to allow their poorest children to struggle to meet their basic needs. Most states have done little or nothing to improve the benefit levels they provide for those families left on public assistance. One has to wonder when we, as a nation, are finally going to decide to stop punishing those people who must depend on the state for assistance. Oddly enough, expanding subsidies to those with higher incomes for child care or Medicaid is not considered as extending “welfare." Certainly those recipients, at the higher income levels, are not treated with the same disregard as we do the poorest of the poor families.
When Congress recently re-visited the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program through its reauthorization process, they apparently concluded that the biggest problem facing poor people was that too many who were sick, disabled, mentally ill or suffering with substance abuse, were getting off the hook from the work requirements of the TANF program and changed the requirements to limit the time allowed to address these issues. Apparently they also felt that they didn’t have enough paperwork changing hands between the state and federal government regarding documentation of work program participation. Obviously, they felt these two things were going to make life better for struggling families who live on TANF assistance.
Oddly enough, Congress seemed to pay little attention to the fact that caseloads have dropped dramatically, as much as two-thirds, and people currently on assistance are likely to fall into one of two categories. Nearly half of them are in what is known as “child only cases” in which a child on assistance is living with someone other then their natural parent, usually a grandparent, aunt or uncle. The second group would be those families who have significant barriers to employment as a result of low functioning levels, mental health problems, substance abuse, criminal records and a wide range of other serious challenges. More specifically, there are thousands of disabled parents who are waiting years for approval of SSI and must rely on TANF cash assistance in the meantime. It’s not such a stretch to understand that when you take a significant portion of the poverty population and basically filter out those that are employable, those left will have much more significant problems that must be addressed if or before they can become gainfully employed.
The states did implement a wide range of job training programs, expanded health care coverage and child care subsidies, all of which have been very helpful in removing families from cash assistance and providing support for them in their effort to survive working poverty. But nevertheless, this current welfare population, which has been relatively stable in number, has little choice but to endure their dependence on public assistance to meet their basic needs. The majority of these recipients are children.
It’s time for the federal government to take a serious look at those families left on assistance and consider the need to completely redesign the public assistance system. They need to address those families who are having the most difficulty in functioning in the workplace and perhaps, most of all must deal with the fact that there will always be some families dealing with insurmountable obstacles who must rely on public assistance to meet their basic needs. The fact that most states are providing assistance at only half of the poverty level can only amount to state-sponsored child abuse. Again we must remember, the primary recipients of cash assistance through the TANF program are children.
--Jack Frech, Director
When Congress recently re-visited the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program through its reauthorization process, they apparently concluded that the biggest problem facing poor people was that too many who were sick, disabled, mentally ill or suffering with substance abuse, were getting off the hook from the work requirements of the TANF program and changed the requirements to limit the time allowed to address these issues. Apparently they also felt that they didn’t have enough paperwork changing hands between the state and federal government regarding documentation of work program participation. Obviously, they felt these two things were going to make life better for struggling families who live on TANF assistance.
Oddly enough, Congress seemed to pay little attention to the fact that caseloads have dropped dramatically, as much as two-thirds, and people currently on assistance are likely to fall into one of two categories. Nearly half of them are in what is known as “child only cases” in which a child on assistance is living with someone other then their natural parent, usually a grandparent, aunt or uncle. The second group would be those families who have significant barriers to employment as a result of low functioning levels, mental health problems, substance abuse, criminal records and a wide range of other serious challenges. More specifically, there are thousands of disabled parents who are waiting years for approval of SSI and must rely on TANF cash assistance in the meantime. It’s not such a stretch to understand that when you take a significant portion of the poverty population and basically filter out those that are employable, those left will have much more significant problems that must be addressed if or before they can become gainfully employed.
The states did implement a wide range of job training programs, expanded health care coverage and child care subsidies, all of which have been very helpful in removing families from cash assistance and providing support for them in their effort to survive working poverty. But nevertheless, this current welfare population, which has been relatively stable in number, has little choice but to endure their dependence on public assistance to meet their basic needs. The majority of these recipients are children.
It’s time for the federal government to take a serious look at those families left on assistance and consider the need to completely redesign the public assistance system. They need to address those families who are having the most difficulty in functioning in the workplace and perhaps, most of all must deal with the fact that there will always be some families dealing with insurmountable obstacles who must rely on public assistance to meet their basic needs. The fact that most states are providing assistance at only half of the poverty level can only amount to state-sponsored child abuse. Again we must remember, the primary recipients of cash assistance through the TANF program are children.
--Jack Frech, Director
Jul 17, 2007
Letter to the Editor
Our first guest blogger is Kim Hobbs, a staff member at the Work Station. She sent in this Letter to the Editor to the Athens News. It was published Monday, July 16. We welcome your comments!
To the Editor:
Poverty definitely looks different today than it did when I was growing up. We were poor but I didn’t realize it. While we had toys, we spent the majority of our time outside creating our own “live” roll playing games, building forts out of sheets, having plays for the parents in our garage, and playing countless games of hopscotch on the sidewalk. These activities cost next to nothing. I did not have a TV in my room (remember having only three stations to choose from?), an iPod, a cell phone, Playstation, etc. A once a year trip to Geauga Lake and an occasional meal out at The Ground Round were luxuries. Today, most kids would be devastated to live this way. Believe me, I am as guilty if not guiltier than the next at spoiling my kids. We need to re-think our lifestyles and how we are bringing up our children.
Poverty is growing. Unfortunately, it is becoming a permanent part of our everyday structure. Food banks can’t keep up with the demand. Food stamp use has increased and while I applaud this assistance, it has also aided in creation a new “health hazard” for poverty stricken families. Obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes have immensely increased over the years. Why? If a family of five has to budget $300 a month for food, how is it spent? Buying lean cuts of meat? Fresh vegetables? Whole grain breads? No: most opt to stretch their dollar. A package of hot dogs, buns, bag of chips, and a can of vegetables for dinner could cost a family of five approximately $4. It's cheap and quick but the salt, fat and lack of nutrition in a meal like this can be really detrimental to a family when it's the only thing they eat. Most wages are too low to provide adequately for a family and lead a normal economic lifestyle.
There seems to be a hardening attitude from people towards the poor. People are now tending to blame the poor for their situations. While I agree some take advantage of the system, I can guarantee you that the poor want nothing more than to change their situation. DJFS has made it harder to sit at home and collect the “welfare” check. Today, most recipients must perform some type of job training or labor in order for them to maintain their benefits. This is providing the unskilled with new founded skills to take with them to new jobs or education.
While I don’t think poverty can be eliminated, it can be reduced. As parents, we should all get back to the basics with our children. We need to teach them the importance of a good education and good family values. It is so much easier to agree with your kids when they ask for something that they don’t need than to say no and create an argument. As employers, we need provide wages and benefits to our employees that they can live on. As consumers, we should purchase good and services locally and reinvest in the local economy.
I truly believe that as a team we can work towards a goal of reducing poverty.
Kim Hobbs
Work Inforcement Act Social Program Coordinator
For some recent news/opinion in the Athens News regarding poverty and food, check out these articles:
Concerned about the rising cost of food? You better get used to it by Gwynne Dyer (Pub. 7/12)
Letter: Step into the shoes of someone who's poor to really understand by Missy Cangiamilla (Pub. 7/12)
To the Editor:
Poverty definitely looks different today than it did when I was growing up. We were poor but I didn’t realize it. While we had toys, we spent the majority of our time outside creating our own “live” roll playing games, building forts out of sheets, having plays for the parents in our garage, and playing countless games of hopscotch on the sidewalk. These activities cost next to nothing. I did not have a TV in my room (remember having only three stations to choose from?), an iPod, a cell phone, Playstation, etc. A once a year trip to Geauga Lake and an occasional meal out at The Ground Round were luxuries. Today, most kids would be devastated to live this way. Believe me, I am as guilty if not guiltier than the next at spoiling my kids. We need to re-think our lifestyles and how we are bringing up our children.
Poverty is growing. Unfortunately, it is becoming a permanent part of our everyday structure. Food banks can’t keep up with the demand. Food stamp use has increased and while I applaud this assistance, it has also aided in creation a new “health hazard” for poverty stricken families. Obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes have immensely increased over the years. Why? If a family of five has to budget $300 a month for food, how is it spent? Buying lean cuts of meat? Fresh vegetables? Whole grain breads? No: most opt to stretch their dollar. A package of hot dogs, buns, bag of chips, and a can of vegetables for dinner could cost a family of five approximately $4. It's cheap and quick but the salt, fat and lack of nutrition in a meal like this can be really detrimental to a family when it's the only thing they eat. Most wages are too low to provide adequately for a family and lead a normal economic lifestyle.
There seems to be a hardening attitude from people towards the poor. People are now tending to blame the poor for their situations. While I agree some take advantage of the system, I can guarantee you that the poor want nothing more than to change their situation. DJFS has made it harder to sit at home and collect the “welfare” check. Today, most recipients must perform some type of job training or labor in order for them to maintain their benefits. This is providing the unskilled with new founded skills to take with them to new jobs or education.
While I don’t think poverty can be eliminated, it can be reduced. As parents, we should all get back to the basics with our children. We need to teach them the importance of a good education and good family values. It is so much easier to agree with your kids when they ask for something that they don’t need than to say no and create an argument. As employers, we need provide wages and benefits to our employees that they can live on. As consumers, we should purchase good and services locally and reinvest in the local economy.
I truly believe that as a team we can work towards a goal of reducing poverty.
Kim Hobbs
Work Inforcement Act Social Program Coordinator
For some recent news/opinion in the Athens News regarding poverty and food, check out these articles:
Concerned about the rising cost of food? You better get used to it by Gwynne Dyer (Pub. 7/12)
Letter: Step into the shoes of someone who's poor to really understand by Missy Cangiamilla (Pub. 7/12)
Jun 21, 2007
Budget Blues: Shortcomings of Ohio's proposed budget
The new state budget includes some program expansions and improvements that will be very beneficial to struggling Ohio families. An increase in the income eligibility for Medicaid to 300 percent of the Federal Poverty Level will help thousands of uninsured children. An increase in child care provider payments will help many deserving child care providers. Expanding child care subsidies and early learning programs for families up to 200 percent of the poverty level will be a great benefit for children and their parents. Subsidies for food banks, home energy assistance and a variety of special earmarked programs will provide valuable resources for low-income Ohioans. With the support of the governor and the General Assembly, life will be a little better for many Ohioans.
But there is another side. Who lost so these programs could grow? Unfortunately, lawmakers have chosen to help the needy at the expense of the even more needy. While expanding eligibility for Medicaid for children up to 300 percent of poverty, the General Assembly rejected the governor's proposal to restore eligibility for the parents of children between 90 percent and 100 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. While they'll offer assistance to children in families making more than $50,000 a year, they deny help to parents making less than $15,000. I'm not sure why lawmakers imagined that the children in families below the poverty level don't suffer when parents can't get health care or are forced to pay out of pocket and face destitution.
All of the child care and other program expansions were funded out of the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families block grant. While they are all beneficial, these expansions do not resolve the most severe problems that the lowest income families face. Families who must rely on TANF cash assistance are forced to live on an income of only 50 percent of the FPL. Ohio has consistently chosen to provide a grossly inadequate benefit level despite a wealth of available TANF funds. The first priority for the use of TANF funds must be to meet the basic needs for our poorest children--and they are not doing that. Ohio's poorest families will pay so those with more resources can benefit.
My concern is not whether the program expansions are needed or worthy. They are. However, it seems that the less fortunate have been forced to continue to suffer in order to pay for these expansions. Unfortunately, this decision was politically easier than asking those who are already comfortable to sacrifice more.
But there is another side. Who lost so these programs could grow? Unfortunately, lawmakers have chosen to help the needy at the expense of the even more needy. While expanding eligibility for Medicaid for children up to 300 percent of poverty, the General Assembly rejected the governor's proposal to restore eligibility for the parents of children between 90 percent and 100 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. While they'll offer assistance to children in families making more than $50,000 a year, they deny help to parents making less than $15,000. I'm not sure why lawmakers imagined that the children in families below the poverty level don't suffer when parents can't get health care or are forced to pay out of pocket and face destitution.
All of the child care and other program expansions were funded out of the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families block grant. While they are all beneficial, these expansions do not resolve the most severe problems that the lowest income families face. Families who must rely on TANF cash assistance are forced to live on an income of only 50 percent of the FPL. Ohio has consistently chosen to provide a grossly inadequate benefit level despite a wealth of available TANF funds. The first priority for the use of TANF funds must be to meet the basic needs for our poorest children--and they are not doing that. Ohio's poorest families will pay so those with more resources can benefit.
My concern is not whether the program expansions are needed or worthy. They are. However, it seems that the less fortunate have been forced to continue to suffer in order to pay for these expansions. Unfortunately, this decision was politically easier than asking those who are already comfortable to sacrifice more.
Jun 14, 2007
The Food Stamp Challenge—Part 2
Until significant changes are made, those in need will have to continue to rely on a strained support system and find whatever resources they can to supplement the $25 per week. Below is a sample of what someone might choose to buy, and along with that, here’s a challenge: the next time you’re grocery shopping, figure out how you would spend $25 to feed yourself for a week and send us the list with prices. (Post them in comments.) While you’re doing that, find a couple things you’d want to eat that you wouldn’t be able to afford on this hypothetical list, buy them and drop them off at a food bank. They’ll be much needed and much appreciated.
For $25, a week of (not necessarily balanced, or particularly filling) meals:
*Note—these prices were quoted at Athens’ local Aldi store on June 12. As their Web site states: "Aldi is an international retailer specializing in a limited assortment of private label, high-quality products at the lowest possible prices."
Meat:
-Bologna:$.99 for 16 servings
-Canned chicken breast: $1.69 for 4 servings
-Canned chicken broth: $1.17 for 3 cans
Dairy:
-Skim milk: $2.61 for 1 gallon/16 servings
-American cheese slices: $.79 for 12 slices
-Eggs: $.89 for 12
-Margarine: $1.29 for 3 lbs
Grains/carbohydrates:
-White bread: $.49 for 22 slices
-Tortillas: $.89 for 36
-Rice: $.99 for 30 servings
-Potatoes: $1.99 for 10 lbs./about 20 potatoes
-Egg noodles: $.69 for 6 servings
-Quick oats: $1.49 for 30 servings
-Macaroni and cheese: $.58 for two boxes
Fruits/vegetables:
-Dry pinto beans: $1.19 for 25 servings
-Onions: $1.29 for about 5
-Bananas: $.35 for about 6
-Fresh carrots: $.49 for 5 servings
-Canned green beans: $.78 for 2 cans, 2 servings each
-Canned corn: $.78 for 2 cans, 2 servings each
-Canned carrots: $.78 for 2 cans, 2 servings each
Condiments:
-Salt: $.33 for one canister
-Garlic powder: $.99
-Ketchup: $.99
Total: $24.52
Here is a list of local food pantries that accept donations: (They also accept monetary donations to buy what is most needed.)
HAPCAP Southeast Ohio Regional Food Center
1005 C.I.C. Drive
Logan, OH 43138
(740) 385-6813
Friends & Neighbors Community Food Center
2808 Sixth Street
Coolville, OH 45723
(740) 667-0684
Glouster Community Center Food Pantry
3 Front Street
Glouster, OH 45732
(740) 767-3829
Kilvert Community Center Food Pantry
21120 McGraw Rd.
Stewart, OH 45778
740-448-7332
Salvation Army Food Pantry
1 Townsend Place
Athens, OH 45701
(740) 593-7082
The Nelsonville Food Cupboard
83 West Washington Street
Nelsonville, OH 45764
(740) 753-3810
Let us know what you would buy with $25/week, or if you receive Food Stamps, what you do buy!
For $25, a week of (not necessarily balanced, or particularly filling) meals:
*Note—these prices were quoted at Athens’ local Aldi store on June 12. As their Web site states: "Aldi is an international retailer specializing in a limited assortment of private label, high-quality products at the lowest possible prices."
Meat:
-Bologna:$.99 for 16 servings
-Canned chicken breast: $1.69 for 4 servings
-Canned chicken broth: $1.17 for 3 cans
Dairy:
-Skim milk: $2.61 for 1 gallon/16 servings
-American cheese slices: $.79 for 12 slices
-Eggs: $.89 for 12
-Margarine: $1.29 for 3 lbs
Grains/carbohydrates:
-White bread: $.49 for 22 slices
-Tortillas: $.89 for 36
-Rice: $.99 for 30 servings
-Potatoes: $1.99 for 10 lbs./about 20 potatoes
-Egg noodles: $.69 for 6 servings
-Quick oats: $1.49 for 30 servings
-Macaroni and cheese: $.58 for two boxes
Fruits/vegetables:
-Dry pinto beans: $1.19 for 25 servings
-Onions: $1.29 for about 5
-Bananas: $.35 for about 6
-Fresh carrots: $.49 for 5 servings
-Canned green beans: $.78 for 2 cans, 2 servings each
-Canned corn: $.78 for 2 cans, 2 servings each
-Canned carrots: $.78 for 2 cans, 2 servings each
Condiments:
-Salt: $.33 for one canister
-Garlic powder: $.99
-Ketchup: $.99
Total: $24.52
Here is a list of local food pantries that accept donations: (They also accept monetary donations to buy what is most needed.)
HAPCAP Southeast Ohio Regional Food Center
1005 C.I.C. Drive
Logan, OH 43138
(740) 385-6813
Friends & Neighbors Community Food Center
2808 Sixth Street
Coolville, OH 45723
(740) 667-0684
Glouster Community Center Food Pantry
3 Front Street
Glouster, OH 45732
(740) 767-3829
Kilvert Community Center Food Pantry
21120 McGraw Rd.
Stewart, OH 45778
740-448-7332
Salvation Army Food Pantry
1 Townsend Place
Athens, OH 45701
(740) 593-7082
The Nelsonville Food Cupboard
83 West Washington Street
Nelsonville, OH 45764
(740) 753-3810
Let us know what you would buy with $25/week, or if you receive Food Stamps, what you do buy!
Jun 13, 2007
The Food Stamp Challenge—Part 1
Beginning the week of May 15, four members of Congress, including Ohio’s Representative Tim Ryan (D), learned what it was like to try to survive on food stamps for a week. (Read a Washington Post article about this experience.)
The four had $21 each, which they spent at a Safeway near Washington, D.C. They stuck to purchases such as bread, pasta, spaghetti sauce, and peanut butter and jelly. An eye-opener for these lawmakers as they introduced legislation to increase the food stamp budget in the upcoming Farm Bill, this week of poor nutrition and frequent hunger pangs certainly drew attention to the growing problem of food-stamp inadequacy. (Tim Ryan’s blog,Rep. Jim McGovern’s (D-Mass.) blog.
Nationally, according to the Washington Post article, about 26 million Americans receive food stamps. Locally, here’s what that translates into for Athens County:
Last year (FY2006: July 2005 through June 2006):
-An average of 6,614 people per month received food stamps.
-Their average allotted spending amount was $99.82 per month, which is about $25 per week.
-Food Stamp recipients don’t actually get Food Stamps anymore. The Ohio Direction Card, which works like a debit card, has replaced food stamps and removed some of the stigma attached to getting public assistance. They can be used at most local grocery stores.
Other food stamps considerations:
-ONLY food is allowed to be purchased with food stamps. Some examples of excluded items (imagine living without them): toilet paper, napkins, tissue, sanitary supplies, soap, shampoo, dishwashing soap, laundry supplies, diapers.
-Because $25 per week is often inadequate to feed a family member, families often must turn to food pantries to get supplemental food. Job & Family Services operates an Emergency Food Line in conjunction with the Athens County Food Pantry Board that allows qualifying families to receive one box of food along with a few dollars per person in food vouchers every 90 days. ($10 for a family of one to three, $20 for a family of four to six, and $30 for a family of seven or more.)
A growing trend continues to drive home the point that Food Stamps scarcely provide families with their basic needs. A "http://athensnews.com/index.php?action=viewarticle§ion=news&story_id=28408" target="_blank">recent article in the Athens News reported that local food pantries are running low on provisions to hand out as demand increases.
Four members of Congress took a weeklong challenge to get an idea of what it’s like to live on Food Stamps. It was certainly an admirable attempt to empathize with their constituents and understand what changes must be made, but the issues surrounding hunger in America are far from over.
Since their inception, Food Stamps have been intended to provide only 75 percent of the necessary food to individuals, based on the Thrifty Food Plan set by the USDA; they are expected to pay out-of-pocket for the other 25 percent. However, low income eligibility requirements to qualify for Food Stamp benefits pretty much guarantee that these people have no other resources to turn to. This is a catch-22 that needs to be addressed, because it is leaving millions of Americans—including children—hungry and undernourished.
The four had $21 each, which they spent at a Safeway near Washington, D.C. They stuck to purchases such as bread, pasta, spaghetti sauce, and peanut butter and jelly. An eye-opener for these lawmakers as they introduced legislation to increase the food stamp budget in the upcoming Farm Bill, this week of poor nutrition and frequent hunger pangs certainly drew attention to the growing problem of food-stamp inadequacy. (Tim Ryan’s blog,Rep. Jim McGovern’s (D-Mass.) blog.
Nationally, according to the Washington Post article, about 26 million Americans receive food stamps. Locally, here’s what that translates into for Athens County:
Last year (FY2006: July 2005 through June 2006):
-An average of 6,614 people per month received food stamps.
-Their average allotted spending amount was $99.82 per month, which is about $25 per week.
-Food Stamp recipients don’t actually get Food Stamps anymore. The Ohio Direction Card, which works like a debit card, has replaced food stamps and removed some of the stigma attached to getting public assistance. They can be used at most local grocery stores.Other food stamps considerations:
-ONLY food is allowed to be purchased with food stamps. Some examples of excluded items (imagine living without them): toilet paper, napkins, tissue, sanitary supplies, soap, shampoo, dishwashing soap, laundry supplies, diapers.
-Because $25 per week is often inadequate to feed a family member, families often must turn to food pantries to get supplemental food. Job & Family Services operates an Emergency Food Line in conjunction with the Athens County Food Pantry Board that allows qualifying families to receive one box of food along with a few dollars per person in food vouchers every 90 days. ($10 for a family of one to three, $20 for a family of four to six, and $30 for a family of seven or more.)
A growing trend continues to drive home the point that Food Stamps scarcely provide families with their basic needs. A "http://athensnews.com/index.php?action=viewarticle§ion=news&story_id=28408" target="_blank">recent article in the Athens News reported that local food pantries are running low on provisions to hand out as demand increases.
Four members of Congress took a weeklong challenge to get an idea of what it’s like to live on Food Stamps. It was certainly an admirable attempt to empathize with their constituents and understand what changes must be made, but the issues surrounding hunger in America are far from over.
Since their inception, Food Stamps have been intended to provide only 75 percent of the necessary food to individuals, based on the Thrifty Food Plan set by the USDA; they are expected to pay out-of-pocket for the other 25 percent. However, low income eligibility requirements to qualify for Food Stamp benefits pretty much guarantee that these people have no other resources to turn to. This is a catch-22 that needs to be addressed, because it is leaving millions of Americans—including children—hungry and undernourished.
Jun 7, 2007
A big hole in the safety net: Ohio’s TANF funding, Part 7
The final words on this topic belong to the people on the receiving end of cash assistance, because it is their lives that this meager investment affects to such a great extent. In March, we surveyed recipients of OWF and asked them what they’d do if they could get an extra $100 a month in TANF funds. (A bill introduced by State Representative Jimmy Stewart (R-92) last year would have provided this additional assistance; it was dismissed.) We heard back from dozens of recipients; excerpts from some of the most telling responses are below:
“Right now we get $410 a month and the bank takes $5 out to cash it and $400 goes straight to my landlord. So my family is left with $5.”
“$100 a month doesn’t seem like much to very many people. It does to my family and myself...I could have good roofing nails put in my roof to replace the old used ones, so maybe my roof wouldn’t leak as often. I could save and maybe have struts put on my car, then it won’t scare me when the kids ride with me. $100 could do a lot to make our lives a little nicer and even safer.”
“A trip to the zoo wouldn’t be out of the question. It’s not much fun telling your child maybe next month we’ll be able to afford it, knowing that we won’t.”
“We have to plan only the most necessary trips to town or school in our car. We have to wash clothes by hand in the bathtub instead of going to the Laundromat. I’m always scared that I’m not going to be able to keep the electricity on. My son is a freshman in high school and he’s an excellent student with perfect attendance. It breaks my heart when he feels my despair and I wish that life could be a little more fun for him.”
“My husband is disabled and I’m medically not allowed to work. With the amount of money that we get from the state, I can’t pay all of the bills. With rent, water, trash, gas, phone, electric and car insurance, we come about $200 short every month. And that doesn’t include the extra food that we have to buy with cash because the food stamps aren’t enough to feed four people fully.”
“I face utility shutoff every month. I receive $336 a month; my rent is $300 and that is the cheapest I can find. That only leaves me $36 to pay utilities and buy diapers for my two-year-old son.”
“If I had another $100 dollars I could at least fully pay my rent. My rent is $425 a month and OWF sends me $410. My rent does not include utilities and I have two small children, ages 3 and 3 months. My car needs fixed and I can’t afford a babysitter. I struggle every month, thinking that month my kids and I may not have a roof over our heads. The stress of no money makes it hard to see the little things in live anymore.”
“We are raising our three granddaughters on what my husband gets from SSI and the $410 from OWF. $100 may not seem like a lot, but it would help to get the girls clothes and shoes when they need them.”
“I struggle with keeping my baby in diapers and having enough money for bills and rent. My baby goes without diapers sometimes because I have to pay my rent and bills so I’m not homeless with four children.”
“I could buy more healthy food for my children.”
“To some people $100 is nothing. My family struggles every day to pay bills, put food on the table and the extra money would help. I have a child in kindergarten who always needs something for school. Her father works but doesn’t make enough to support a family our size. My kids are always in need of something and I hope you realize how this would help our families and our kids. I feel bad for receiving any kind of help from welfare but we do try to provide—everyone has a hard time once in awhile. Please, don’t let the children go without. Help us get by a little better.”
“Right now we get $410 a month and the bank takes $5 out to cash it and $400 goes straight to my landlord. So my family is left with $5.”
“$100 a month doesn’t seem like much to very many people. It does to my family and myself...I could have good roofing nails put in my roof to replace the old used ones, so maybe my roof wouldn’t leak as often. I could save and maybe have struts put on my car, then it won’t scare me when the kids ride with me. $100 could do a lot to make our lives a little nicer and even safer.”
“A trip to the zoo wouldn’t be out of the question. It’s not much fun telling your child maybe next month we’ll be able to afford it, knowing that we won’t.”
“We have to plan only the most necessary trips to town or school in our car. We have to wash clothes by hand in the bathtub instead of going to the Laundromat. I’m always scared that I’m not going to be able to keep the electricity on. My son is a freshman in high school and he’s an excellent student with perfect attendance. It breaks my heart when he feels my despair and I wish that life could be a little more fun for him.”
“My husband is disabled and I’m medically not allowed to work. With the amount of money that we get from the state, I can’t pay all of the bills. With rent, water, trash, gas, phone, electric and car insurance, we come about $200 short every month. And that doesn’t include the extra food that we have to buy with cash because the food stamps aren’t enough to feed four people fully.”
“I face utility shutoff every month. I receive $336 a month; my rent is $300 and that is the cheapest I can find. That only leaves me $36 to pay utilities and buy diapers for my two-year-old son.”
“If I had another $100 dollars I could at least fully pay my rent. My rent is $425 a month and OWF sends me $410. My rent does not include utilities and I have two small children, ages 3 and 3 months. My car needs fixed and I can’t afford a babysitter. I struggle every month, thinking that month my kids and I may not have a roof over our heads. The stress of no money makes it hard to see the little things in live anymore.”
“We are raising our three granddaughters on what my husband gets from SSI and the $410 from OWF. $100 may not seem like a lot, but it would help to get the girls clothes and shoes when they need them.”
“I struggle with keeping my baby in diapers and having enough money for bills and rent. My baby goes without diapers sometimes because I have to pay my rent and bills so I’m not homeless with four children.”
“I could buy more healthy food for my children.”
“To some people $100 is nothing. My family struggles every day to pay bills, put food on the table and the extra money would help. I have a child in kindergarten who always needs something for school. Her father works but doesn’t make enough to support a family our size. My kids are always in need of something and I hope you realize how this would help our families and our kids. I feel bad for receiving any kind of help from welfare but we do try to provide—everyone has a hard time once in awhile. Please, don’t let the children go without. Help us get by a little better.”
Jun 5, 2007
A big hole in the safety net: Ohio’s TANF funding, Part 6
The proposed budget
The Administration has indicated that their rationale for not providing a decent increase in the level of public assistance is that OWF children will be receiving other services that will somehow help compensate for the fact that they do not have enough money to meet their basic needs. A review of thegovernor’s budget proposal would indicate that there are several areas in which families may receive some additional help.
The largest increase in the governor’s budget for TANF is going to a fee increase for child care providers. They will receive an increase of 11 percent, beginning this May. This will increase the average payment per child from approximately $400 to about $440 a month. Only about 25 percent of OWF children receive child care assistance. Those assistance payments are made directly to the child care provider and not to the OWF family. While increasing these provider fees may be very well warranted, it does not help OWF families pay their bills and put food on the table.
The governor’s budget also calls for expansions of the Early Learning Initiative (ELI) and other child development activities. All of these activities are already available to OWF families; however, none of these programs provides any assistance to help these families meet their basic needs. Though these development activities can potentially do a lot of good, participation levels are low. In the face of possible eviction, empty dinner plates and spotty employment, it is difficult for families to find the time or energy to focus on learning activities. Recent studies regarding the long-term effects of child care on the developmental abilities of children have determined that the quality of life within the family is a more significant determinant of success for children’s development than is child care or any other activity.
Another issue that has been raised regarding the potential increase in OWF benefits is “sustainability.” There is no doubt that the TANF block grant is a fixed, limited amount of money. Even with the huge unspent balance of funds(about $403 million was unobligated before the new budget proposal), there is obviously a finite limit on how many activities can be funded through this source. It is ironic that the issue of sustainability seems to be raised more often with issues such as providing direct cash assistance to families than it does for the wide range of other services funded through TANF dollars.
In reality, cash assistance accounts for only about 25 percent of all TANF funding, despite the fact that meeting basic human needs should be the first priority for these funds. There must be a serious discussion about what the priorities for TANF funding should be as we move forward, and it should involve a discussion of the full range of services currently funded.
There is no less guarantee of “sustainability” for kinship care or child care than there is for cash assistance. For the past 30 years, while many social services programs have come and gone, we have always provided cash assistance to low-income families (albeit at an inadequate level.) It is also true that during that entire 30-year span, and in the face of serious budget challenges, no governor or general assembly has ever actually cut the level of benefits for the assistance being provided through the OWF or the former Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) program. It is highly unlikely that cash assistance benefits would be cut in the future. In fact, it is far more likely that it would be some of the other wide range of TANF-funded services that would be in jeopardy. Perhaps this is why there has been so little support throughout the human services community for an increase in public assistance benefits. Despite a lack of support, the obvious fact is that an increase in cash assistance is necessary and would improve the lives of Ohio’s neediest children.
--Jack Frech, Director
The Administration has indicated that their rationale for not providing a decent increase in the level of public assistance is that OWF children will be receiving other services that will somehow help compensate for the fact that they do not have enough money to meet their basic needs. A review of the
The largest increase in the governor’s budget for TANF is going to a fee increase for child care providers. They will receive an increase of 11 percent, beginning this May. This will increase the average payment per child from approximately $400 to about $440 a month. Only about 25 percent of OWF children receive child care assistance. Those assistance payments are made directly to the child care provider and not to the OWF family. While increasing these provider fees may be very well warranted, it does not help OWF families pay their bills and put food on the table.
The governor’s budget also calls for expansions of the Early Learning Initiative (ELI) and other child development activities. All of these activities are already available to OWF families; however, none of these programs provides any assistance to help these families meet their basic needs. Though these development activities can potentially do a lot of good, participation levels are low. In the face of possible eviction, empty dinner plates and spotty employment, it is difficult for families to find the time or energy to focus on learning activities. Recent studies regarding the long-term effects of child care on the developmental abilities of children have determined that the quality of life within the family is a more significant determinant of success for children’s development than is child care or any other activity.
Another issue that has been raised regarding the potential increase in OWF benefits is “sustainability.” There is no doubt that the TANF block grant is a fixed, limited amount of money. Even with the huge unspent balance of funds(about $403 million was unobligated before the new budget proposal), there is obviously a finite limit on how many activities can be funded through this source. It is ironic that the issue of sustainability seems to be raised more often with issues such as providing direct cash assistance to families than it does for the wide range of other services funded through TANF dollars.
In reality, cash assistance accounts for only about 25 percent of all TANF funding, despite the fact that meeting basic human needs should be the first priority for these funds. There must be a serious discussion about what the priorities for TANF funding should be as we move forward, and it should involve a discussion of the full range of services currently funded.
There is no less guarantee of “sustainability” for kinship care or child care than there is for cash assistance. For the past 30 years, while many social services programs have come and gone, we have always provided cash assistance to low-income families (albeit at an inadequate level.) It is also true that during that entire 30-year span, and in the face of serious budget challenges, no governor or general assembly has ever actually cut the level of benefits for the assistance being provided through the OWF or the former Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) program. It is highly unlikely that cash assistance benefits would be cut in the future. In fact, it is far more likely that it would be some of the other wide range of TANF-funded services that would be in jeopardy. Perhaps this is why there has been so little support throughout the human services community for an increase in public assistance benefits. Despite a lack of support, the obvious fact is that an increase in cash assistance is necessary and would improve the lives of Ohio’s neediest children.
--Jack Frech, Director
Jun 1, 2007
A big hole in the safety net: Ohio’s TANF funding, Part 5
Additional benefits that OWF families may receive
Most OWF families are also eligible to receive Medicaid and Food Stamps. County Job and Family Services offices offer a wide variety of emergency and employment support assistance through the Prevention, Retention and Contingency (PRC) program, based on each county’s individualized plan.
Fewer than 7 percent of OWF families receive subsidized housing assistance.
Families with children under the age of five and pregnant women may receive help through the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program. The average benefit is $34 per month and goes toward nutritious food.
The Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) offers financial aid for heating costs. The average benefit is $296 per heating season. The Percentage of Income Payment Plan (PIPP) offers low income consumers of regulated utilities an extended payment plan to reduce the high cost of energy during the heating season. There is no subsidy in the program and low income families participating are over $530 million in debt to utility companies in electrical services alone.
There are a number of local services such as food pantries, soup kitchens and homeless shelters intended to provide help in “emergency” situations. Unfortunately, many OWF and working poor families have been forced to rely on them on a regular, recurring basis. Only about 25 percent of OWF families receive child care services. While beneficial, these services can’t bridge the gap between OWF benefit levels and the basic needs of these families.
--Jack Frech
Most OWF families are also eligible to receive Medicaid and Food Stamps. County Job and Family Services offices offer a wide variety of emergency and employment support assistance through the Prevention, Retention and Contingency (PRC) program, based on each county’s individualized plan.
Fewer than 7 percent of OWF families receive subsidized housing assistance.
Families with children under the age of five and pregnant women may receive help through the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program. The average benefit is $34 per month and goes toward nutritious food.
The Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) offers financial aid for heating costs. The average benefit is $296 per heating season. The Percentage of Income Payment Plan (PIPP) offers low income consumers of regulated utilities an extended payment plan to reduce the high cost of energy during the heating season. There is no subsidy in the program and low income families participating are over $530 million in debt to utility companies in electrical services alone.
There are a number of local services such as food pantries, soup kitchens and homeless shelters intended to provide help in “emergency” situations. Unfortunately, many OWF and working poor families have been forced to rely on them on a regular, recurring basis. Only about 25 percent of OWF families receive child care services. While beneficial, these services can’t bridge the gap between OWF benefit levels and the basic needs of these families.
--Jack Frech
May 30, 2007
A big hole in the safety net: Ohio’s TANF funding, Part 4
Determining eligibility
The state spends millions of dollars determining eligibility for OWF. Ohio has one of the most sophisticated means testing systems in the country. Families are screened through a centralized computer system. Computer matches are run against other financial database systems as well, including reports of new hires from employers. Social Security, Internal Revenue Service, Unemployment and Workers Compensation benefits and banking records are all cross matched with public assistance data.
Recipients are required to present a Social Security number for all household members. They must also furnish written proof of identity, age, citizenship, residence, income, pregnancy, disability, or termination of employment.
Eligibility must be re-determined every six months for benefits to continue. Recipients are required to report any change in status (such as employment, household number, etc.) within 10 days.
If they are physically able, adult recipients are expected to meet a 30-hour per week work requirement.
The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services closely monitors the performance of the counties in their compliance with federal and state rules regarding the OWF program. (The only exception is the law requiring counties to offer all OWF recipients and applicants the opportunity to register to vote. There is no monitoring of compliance with this law.)
Ohio goes to great lengths to verify that the 130,000 children that remain on OWF cash assistance with their families are indeed poor and need the assistance. Nevertheless, we still provide benefits that rise to only 50 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. We are spending only about 25 percent of the TANF block grant on cash assistance. We are neglecting the needs of these families on purpose.
--Jack Frech, Director
The state spends millions of dollars determining eligibility for OWF. Ohio has one of the most sophisticated means testing systems in the country. Families are screened through a centralized computer system. Computer matches are run against other financial database systems as well, including reports of new hires from employers. Social Security, Internal Revenue Service, Unemployment and Workers Compensation benefits and banking records are all cross matched with public assistance data.
Recipients are required to present a Social Security number for all household members. They must also furnish written proof of identity, age, citizenship, residence, income, pregnancy, disability, or termination of employment.
Eligibility must be re-determined every six months for benefits to continue. Recipients are required to report any change in status (such as employment, household number, etc.) within 10 days.
If they are physically able, adult recipients are expected to meet a 30-hour per week work requirement.
The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services closely monitors the performance of the counties in their compliance with federal and state rules regarding the OWF program. (The only exception is the law requiring counties to offer all OWF recipients and applicants the opportunity to register to vote. There is no monitoring of compliance with this law.)
Ohio goes to great lengths to verify that the 130,000 children that remain on OWF cash assistance with their families are indeed poor and need the assistance. Nevertheless, we still provide benefits that rise to only 50 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. We are spending only about 25 percent of the TANF block grant on cash assistance. We are neglecting the needs of these families on purpose.
--Jack Frech, Director
May 25, 2007
A big hole in the safety net: Ohio’s TANF funding, Part 3
Living with grandparents
The most common OWF households consist of one or two children living with a relative who acts as a caregiver. Typically these caregivers are the children’s grandparents.
Of the roughly 80,000 households receiving OWF in December 2006, more than half (52.5 percent) were “child only” cases, meaning that only the children in these households receive public assistance. Child-only assistance groups have been steadily increasing over the past several years.
Of the 79,592 OWF cases in Ohio, about 52 percent are child-only cases, many with grandparents as caregivers. The average OWF household size is now two, given the larger increase in child-only cases.
More than 75.5 percent of OWF children are younger than 13. About 42 percent are under the age of six. Of the total OWF caseload in December 2006, 76 percent were children.
--Jack Frech, Director
The most common OWF households consist of one or two children living with a relative who acts as a caregiver. Typically these caregivers are the children’s grandparents.
Of the roughly 80,000 households receiving OWF in December 2006, more than half (52.5 percent) were “child only” cases, meaning that only the children in these households receive public assistance. Child-only assistance groups have been steadily increasing over the past several years.
Of the 79,592 OWF cases in Ohio, about 52 percent are child-only cases, many with grandparents as caregivers. The average OWF household size is now two, given the larger increase in child-only cases.
More than 75.5 percent of OWF children are younger than 13. About 42 percent are under the age of six. Of the total OWF caseload in December 2006, 76 percent were children.
--Jack Frech, Director
May 23, 2007
A big hole in the safety net: Ohio’s TANF funding, Part 2
There are 130,000 children who depend on the TANF-funded cash assistance program, Ohio Works First. These children’s families are very poor. We spend a great deal of money, time and effort through our local County Department of Job and Family Services offices to prove that families receiving OWF assistance don’t have other resources and comply with all the program work requirements and time limits. After all this, we give them only about half of the amount we know they need to live on according to Federal Poverty Level standards. There is no doubt that this has caused many hardships for these children and their families.
We provide a typical OWF family with about $320 a month in cash and $280 in Food Stamps, with which they cannot meet their basic needs. Ohio has accumulated the largest balance of unspent TANF funds in the nation—about $431 million in unobligated funds—because we have been unwilling to provide a decent level of assistance for these kids.
The governor’s budget, which is still currently undergoing the approval process, does a lot to help children, just not the poorest children. It calls for a “cost of living” adjustment in January 2009 for OWF families at a cost of $4.6 million. It will be 3 percent, or about $9 a month. Because of a projected drop in caseloads, the actual OWF line item will decrease by about $25 million a year. Two years from now, children relying on TANF funding clearly won’t be any better off with this increase than they are now; it’s likely they’ll be worse off.
Last year, Representative Jimmy Stewart (R-District 92) introduced a bill to raise OWF benefits by $100 a month at a cost of $100 million in TANF funds. It was dismissed as being unsustainable. The governor’s new budget increases TANF funding expenditures by $200 million a year to go towards programs such as the Early Learning Initiative and child care provider payments. These programs are all necessary and helpful to the community at large, and may require additional funding, but they won’t pay the bills for the families on cash assistance.
--Jack Frech, Director
We provide a typical OWF family with about $320 a month in cash and $280 in Food Stamps, with which they cannot meet their basic needs. Ohio has accumulated the largest balance of unspent TANF funds in the nation—about $431 million in unobligated funds—because we have been unwilling to provide a decent level of assistance for these kids.
The governor’s budget, which is still currently undergoing the approval process, does a lot to help children, just not the poorest children. It calls for a “cost of living” adjustment in January 2009 for OWF families at a cost of $4.6 million. It will be 3 percent, or about $9 a month. Because of a projected drop in caseloads, the actual OWF line item will decrease by about $25 million a year. Two years from now, children relying on TANF funding clearly won’t be any better off with this increase than they are now; it’s likely they’ll be worse off.
Last year, Representative Jimmy Stewart (R-District 92) introduced a bill to raise OWF benefits by $100 a month at a cost of $100 million in TANF funds. It was dismissed as being unsustainable. The governor’s new budget increases TANF funding expenditures by $200 million a year to go towards programs such as the Early Learning Initiative and child care provider payments. These programs are all necessary and helpful to the community at large, and may require additional funding, but they won’t pay the bills for the families on cash assistance.
--Jack Frech, Director
May 21, 2007
A big hole in the safety net: Ohio’s TANF funding, Part 1
With the implementation of the Welfare Reform Act in 1996, cash assistance caseloads have dropped dramatically as thousands of welfare recipients have taken jobs. While many of those former recipients have successfully left the welfare rolls and have improved financially as a result, some remain in poverty. In the first five years after welfare reform, caseloads dropped dramatically, but they have remained at the same level in the past five years—meaning there are people that just can’t get out of poverty through this system.
There are 130,000 children being served by the cash assistance program in Ohio. To put this number into perspective:
· If they were all in one place they would constitute the population of Youngstown, and would outnumber the populations of 67 of Ohio’s 88 counties; and
· If they held hands and formed a line it would stretch from Columbus to the Ohio River in Portsmouth, nearly 100 miles away.
The most dramatic change in the demographics of clients served by cash assistance has been the increase in “child only” cases. These are situations in which children are not living with their parents but rather with relative caregivers, usually grandparents. In these cases, as the name implies, only the children are eligible for benefits. This is now the most common family situation for children receiving cash benefits.
The average family of two on the OWF program receives only about $320 a month in cash assistance. Ohio must increase the cash assistance benefits to an adequate level. These 130,000 children live in families who comply with all of the strict rules of Welfare Reform, yet the benefits they receive are not enough to meet basic human needs.
--Jack Frech, Director
There are 130,000 children being served by the cash assistance program in Ohio. To put this number into perspective:
· If they were all in one place they would constitute the population of Youngstown, and would outnumber the populations of 67 of Ohio’s 88 counties; and
· If they held hands and formed a line it would stretch from Columbus to the Ohio River in Portsmouth, nearly 100 miles away.
The most dramatic change in the demographics of clients served by cash assistance has been the increase in “child only” cases. These are situations in which children are not living with their parents but rather with relative caregivers, usually grandparents. In these cases, as the name implies, only the children are eligible for benefits. This is now the most common family situation for children receiving cash benefits.
The average family of two on the OWF program receives only about $320 a month in cash assistance. Ohio must increase the cash assistance benefits to an adequate level. These 130,000 children live in families who comply with all of the strict rules of Welfare Reform, yet the benefits they receive are not enough to meet basic human needs.
--Jack Frech, Director
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)