Social Services

San Bernardino County officials are touting a call center set up to communicate with welfare recipients as an innovative and efficient approach to handling cases. In the month of September alone, the county’s transitional assistance department call center handled 36,000 calls. The center has a little over 100 employees. By having welfare recipients call the center when they have a question, case workers at offices have more time to see individuals in person without being bogged down by phone calls. Therefore, wait times are expected to be shorter and those who call the center should have their questions answered quickly under the center’s goal of having a response in 40 seconds or less. The call center opened up in August and slowly clients have been told to find answers by phone as opposed to from one individual case worker. While the approach may be less personal, it is being called much quicker. June Hutchison, deputy director of the department, commented the following:

“We feel the speed and the accuracy and the improved customer service is more valuable than having an individual worker serving a case load of a couple hundred.”

Many welfare recipients are required to provide updates in order to continue receiving assistance and the call center allows recipients to give updates or get an answer to a question about any forms. Notably, San Bernardino has about 24 percent of its residents receiving some type of aid. The Press Enterprise points out that residents “receive more than $837 million a year in state and federal benefits.”

When Californians apply for food stamp assistance, they no longer have to be fingerprinted, thanks to a bill (AB 6) that Governor Brown recently signed into law. However, one supervisor calls the bill a big mistake due to concerns about fraud and misuse. San Bernardino Supervisor Neil Derry wants county staff to look into whether or not the county can continue to fingerprint people, which would violate the new law. Derry contends that fingerprinting does not prevent eligible applicants from receiving aid and provides some measure of assurance that taxpayers will not be defrauded. The supervisor may find some resistance in his own county, however, as San Bernardino has an unemployment rate of more than 14 percent. In addition, the county government has a very large deficit and the process of fingerprinting is quite expensive. The Daily Bulletin reports:

“Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes, D-Arleta, authored A.B. 6. He said the change in law is expected to create $850 million in increased federal benefits to low income Californians, translating into more than $1.4 billion in increased economic activity statewide and nearly $10 million in additional local tax revenue.  Derry, however, wants to keep the practice in San Bernardino County, even if it means dipping into the county's general fund to do it. He said he doesn't know how much it would cost the county to continue the practice, or what the potential blowback would be. ‘If this is a deterrent for people to commit fraud, then the only reason that you would get rid of the program is you think fraud is OK,’ Derry said.”

Derry commented that “Instead of making it easier to make people more dependent upon government, the governor should spend more time getting rid of the burdensome red-tape and regulation that discourages businesses from coming to California and providing jobs to the unemployed.” Food policy advocates have been critical of the supervisor’s proposal. More here.

In the state of California, Los Angeles County has the highest rate of residents without health insurance with a rate of 23.5%. The data was compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau for the 2010 American Community Survey, and it was found that Massachusetts had among the highest rates of employer-based health insurance coverage for both people who worked full time and those who worked less than full time, year round in 2010 (86.4 and 62.6 percent, respectively). New Mexico had the lowest rates of coverage and the South had very poor coverage rates. Studies have shown that when those with coverage live in areas with high uninsured rates, there is lower satisfaction with medical care.

In Orange County, 18 percent of residents lack health insurance and from 2008 to 2010, the county's free or low-cost clinics have seen reportedly anywhere from a 30 to 50 percent increase in patients. The OC Register reports that Isabel Becerra, chief executive officer of the nonprofit Coalition of Orange County Community Health Centers, commented “[The uninsured are] using that emergency room as their primary care doctor. When insured individuals get sick and our kids break their legs or have an accident on the soccer field, we're going to get that limited access and wait longer in the emergency room."

Some highlights from the report are as follows:

• “The percentage of people covered by private health insurance decreased in 2010 to 64.0 percent, while the number of people covered by private health insurance was not statistically different from 2009, at 195.9 million. The percentage of people covered by private health insurance has been decreasing since 2001.
• The percentage and number of people covered by government health insurance increased to 31.0 percent and 95.0 million in 2010 from 30.6 percent and 93.2 million in 2009.
• The percentage of people covered by employment-based health insurance decreased to 55.3 percent in 2010 from 56.1 percent in 2009. The number of people covered by employment-based health insurance decreased to 169.3 million from 170.8 million.
• The percentage and number of people covered by Medicaid in 2010, 15.9 percent and 48.6 million, were not statistically different from 2009 estimates. The percentage and number of people covered by Medicare increased in 2010 to 14.5 percent and 44.3 million.
• In 2010, 9.8 percent of children under age 18 (7.3 million) were without health insurance, not statistically different from the 2009 estimates. The uninsured rate for children in poverty (15.4 percent) was greater than the rate for all children (9.8 percent).” 

Highlights from the report can be seen here and here.

As fall turns to winter, Sacramento County has typically funded homeless shelters so those in need can find relief from cold and rainy nights. However, as budget deficits continue to take their toll on county services, it appears the county will no longer be able to afford funding the seasonal shelters this year. Homeless advocates are outraged and are pressuring officials to rethink funding priorities. However, supervisors for the county have noted that the management of such social services is in the process of transitioning to a non-profit organization so that programs for the homeless can continue. That being said, many representatives from concerned groups believe that the non-profit will lack the ability to operate winter shelters. The Bee reports:

“Ben Burton, the new director of Sacramento Steps Forward, said foundations, private citizens and businesses must work to fill the funding gap. ‘This is a community issue, not just a governmental issue,’ he said. ‘We need to ring the alarm that winter is coming. Instead of pointing fingers, we need to all join together and help.’ Cassandra Jennings, a former assistant city manager who is working with homeless advocates on the issue, said she is confident that some form of winter shelter will evolve in the coming weeks. ‘Churches are gearing up, people are applying for grants, conversations are happening among public and private entities,’ Jennings said.”

It is estimated that there are over 2,300 homeless people in Sacramento County. Around $150,000 was budgeted for shelters last year, which is far less than the $700,000 the county has spent in past years. Current shelters in operation reportedly are already full and faith organizations are attempting to make more room for the needy.

At the conclusion of the legislative session, the issue of lost VLF money was not taken up by lawmakers, so Orange County’s fight for $48 million continues. The state grabbed the VLF revenues from local governments under SB 89 and Orange County officials warn that without such funds, as many as 250 county employees could lose their jobs. In addition, cuts to critical public health programs including community clinics and social services may be necessary. Consequently, Orange County has now reportedly hired the law firm Best, Best & Krieger to pursue whatever legal options the local government may have to reclaim the $48 million. Supervisor Shawn Nelson commented that “We want to find a way to get all or at least some of the money back. But no one is itching to pick a fight with the state Legislature just to pick a fight.” The OC Register provides background on the county’s budget dilemma:

“County supervisors in June approved a $35 million increase in spending as part of the $5.6 billion 2011-2012 budget. The 2.7 percent spending boost came at a time when many other counties were making drastic cuts and laying off employees to survive rough economic times. Hours later, Orange County lawmakers got word that the state budget proposal was targeting $48 million that Orange County receives from California vehicle license fees as part of a guarantee while the county pays off its bankruptcy debt. What was a balanced budget suddenly threatened to be $48 million in the hole. To put it in perspective, the county would have to make a 5.48 percent cut across the programs it pays for to make up the $48 million.”

On September 20th, the Board of Supervisors will hear from the firm about its options. Vice Chairman John Moorlach had strong words about the loss in VLF revenue, stating that “It’s a dysfunctional relationship where we are a subdivision of the state and the state decides when and if it wants to pay us for the services rendered. Now do we not only have nonpayment but we have theft.”

And on a related note, Supervisors out in Riverside County have commented that the cities of Menifee, Wildomar, Eastvale and Jurupa Valley will need help because the loss in VLF revenues means the state’s newest cities will struggle to find their footing. Supervisor Marion Ashley recently stated that “We're all in this together and have to work this out together. These cities are losing a tremendous amount of funds. Will they be able to survive, or will they disincorporate and come back to the county? We're going to have to engage in discussions with each city and evaluate their status.” Collectively these cities will lose $14 million. For more, see here.