Agenda - 09-03-1996 - X-A - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

31 REPORT FROM THE ADULT WORKGROUP TASK FORCE ON HUMAN SERVICES/WELFARE REFORM JULY 1996 I. INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS Members of this group began their almost-four-month deliberations by considering elements of the so-called"Safety Net" of basic human services necessary to a positive quality of life. Not surprisingly, participants found it difficult to agree on what is actually basic and what is strongly desirable. One group member, Ed Siebert, undertook the task of preparing a matrix to illustrate the essential elements of well-being; that visual presentation(see attachments)was accepted and used by the entire Task Force. It also provided direction for this group's process as well as its outcome(goal) statements and recommendations. Early on, the workgroup took seriously "reform's" promise of more flexibility leading to use of funds according to local needs. Members focused on what agencies might do to increase efficiency immediately as well as on long term improvements that could be undertaken once federal and state reform measures are clearer. To do this, the group looked at one program(adult protective services) in depth as an example of excessive and duplicative paperwork, overly restrictive procedures, and lack of client accountability leading to poor use of staff time. (See attachments for more detailed descriptions of this example and the ones to follow.) Another analysis considered one developmentally delayed individual being served by at least eight (8) federal, state and local agencies and (10) different staff persons. Close scrutiny revealed there was no clear oversight responsibility and little or no collaboration, coordination, cooperation, or even contact among agencies and personnel. A third example illustrated the fact that a community action agency could succeed too well and be punished for it! A two-year training program student excelled to the point of being awarded a scholarship for a four-year degree. Because she did not fit the program's established goal of finding a job, the agency's future funding for that program is affected. These examples(and allusions to other similar ones) made a convincing case that there has to be a better way to serve human need than is presently being utilized. The question is,"How can funding sources, public and private agencies and their staffs break out of the boxes into which service delivery is now crammed?" Ultimately, drastic surgery will probably be reTA*. Also necessary will be tolerance for a temporary state of chaos and the willingness 19 face the fact that spending money upfront can lead to eventual savings and increaNA efficiency.