Joint Legislative Public Hearing on 2016-2017 Executive Budget Proposal: Topic "Human Services" - Testimonies
February 11, 2016
-
COMMITTEE:
- Finance
1
1 BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE SENATE FINANCE
AND ASSEMBLY WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE
2 --------------------------------------------------
3 JOINT LEGISLATIVE HEARING
4 In the Matter of the
2016-2017 EXECUTIVE BUDGET ON
5 HUMAN SERVICES
6 -----------------------------------------------------
7 Hearing Room B
Legislative Office Building
8 Albany, New York
9 February 9, 2016
9:43 a.m.
10
11 PRESIDING:
12 Senator Catharine M. Young
Chair, Senate Finance Committee
13
Assemblyman Herman D. Farrell, Jr.
14 Chair, Assembly Ways & Means Committee
15 PRESENT:
16 Senator Liz Krueger
Senate Finance Committee (RM)
17
Assemblyman Robert Oaks
18 Assembly Ways & Means Committee (RM)
19 Senator Tony Avella
Chair, Senate Committee on Children
20 and Families
21 Assemblywoman Donna A. Lupardo
Chair, Assembly Children and Families
22 Committee
23 Senator David Carlucci
Chair, Senate Committee on Social Services
24
2
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-9-16
3 PRESENT: (Continued)
4 Assemblyman Andrew Hevesi
Chair, Assembly Social Services Committee
5
Senator Susan Serino
6 Chair, Senate Committee on Aging
7 Assemblyman Steven Cymbrowitz
Chair, Assembly Committee on Aging
8
Assemblywoman Ellen Jaffee
9 Chair, Assembly Committee on Oversight,
Analysis and Investigation
10
Senator Diane J. Savino
11
Assemblyman Andy Goodell
12
Senator Velmanette Montgomery
13
Assemblywoman Shelley Mayer
14
Assemblyman Keith L.T. Wright
15
Senator Phil M. Boyle
16
Assemblywoman Patricia Fahy
17
Senator Timothy Kennedy
18
Senator Daniel Squadron
19
Assemblyman Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes
20
Senator Roxanne J. Persaud
21
22
23
24
3
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-9-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Sheila J. Poole
Acting Commissioner
6 NYS Office of Children
and Family Services 9 14
7
Sharon Devine
8 Executive Deputy Commissioner
Krista Rock
9 General Counsel
NYS Office of Temporary
10 and Disability Assistance 134 139
-and-
11 James S. Rubin
Commissioner
12 NYS Homes and Community
Renewal 146
13
Corinda Crossdale
14 Director
NYS Office for the Aging 228 235
15
Patricia Sheehy
16 Legislative Committee Chair
Association on Aging in
17 New York 262 267
18 Laura Palmer
Associate State Director
19 AARP New York 273 279
20 Shelly Nortz
Deputy Executive Director
21 of Policy
Coalition for the Homeless 281 290
22
23
24
4
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-9-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Kirby Hannon
Legislative Coordinator
6 John Lewis
Legislative Committee Cochair
7 Veterans of Foreign Wars
-and-
8 Linda McKinnis
Legislative Coordinator
9 Disabled American Veterans
-and-
10 Bob Becker
Legislative Coordinator
11 NYS Veterans Council 303 324
12 Michelle Jackson
Associate Director &
13 General Counsel
Human Services Council 329 336
14
Rick Terwilliger
15 Director of Policy
New York Public Welfare
16 Association 340 345
17 Jim Purcell
CEO
18 Council of Family &
Child Caring Agencies 350 355
19
Renee Smith-Rotondo
20 Chair, Board of Directors
NYS Children's Alliance 373 378
21
Stephanie Gendell
22 Associate Executive Director,
Policy & Govt. Relations
23 Citizens' Committee for Children
of New York, Inc. 381 386
24
5
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-9-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 David Voegele
Executive Director
6 Jessica Klos Shapiro
Director, Policy and
7 Community Education
Early Care and Learning Council 387 392
8
Jenn O'Connor
9 Cochair
Winning Beginning New York 395 398
10
Kelly Sturgis
11 Executive Director
Alli Lidie
12 Deputy Director
After School Works/
13 The NYS After School Network 403 409
14 Anne Goldman
Vice President for
15 Non-DOE Titles
United Federation of Teachers 410 415
16
Maclain Berhaupt
17 State Advocacy Director
Supportive Housing Network
18 of New York 419 424
19 Carmelita Cruz
Director of NYS Advocacy
20 Housing Works, Inc. 432 438
21 Jeffrey Lozman, M.D.
President
22 NYS Society of Orthopaedic
Surgeons 440 449
23
24
6
1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Human Services
2 2-9-16
3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued
4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS
5 Hillary Stuchin
Senior Advocacy Advisor,
6 Govt. & External Relations
UJA-Federation of New York 450 457
7
Gerard Wallace
8 Director
NYS Kinship Navigator 458 463
9
Kate Breslin
10 President and CEO
Schuyler Center for Analysis
11 & Advocacy 472 479
12 Susan Antos
Senior Attorney
13 Empire Justice Center 481 488
14 Randi Levine
Policy Coordinator
15 Advocates for Children
of New York 494
16
Melanie Blow
17 COO
Stop Abuse Campaign 501
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
7
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good morning.
2 I'm Senator Catharine Young, chair of
3 the Senate Finance Committee.
4 Pursuant to the State Constitution and
5 Legislative Law, the fiscal committees of the
6 State Legislature are authorized to hold
7 hearings on the Executive Budget proposal.
8 Today's hearing will be limited to a
9 discussion of the Governor's proposed budget
10 for Human Services.
11 Following each presentation, there
12 will be some time allowed for questions for
13 the chairs of the fiscal committees and other
14 legislators.
15 I would like to welcome Sheila Poole,
16 acting commissioner of the New York State
17 Office of Children and Family Services.
18 Testifying on behalf of New York State Office
19 of Temporary and Disability Assistance
20 Commissioner Samuel D. Roberts, we will have
21 James S. Rubin, commissioner of the New York
22 State Division of Housing and Community
23 Renewal; Sharon Devine, executive deputy
24 commissioner of the New York State Office of
8
1 Temporary and Disability Assistance, OTDA;
2 Linda Glassman, OTDA deputy commissioner; and
3 Kristin Rock, OTDA general counsel. And
4 Corinda Crossdale, director, for the New York
5 State Office for the Aging.
6 We are joined today by my colleagues
7 from the Senate. We have Senator Liz
8 Krueger, who is ranking member on the Senate
9 Finance Committee. We have Senator David
10 Carlucci, who is chair of the Social Services
11 Committee. We've been joined by Senator
12 Diane Savino and Senator Phil Boyle.
13 And at this point I'd like to turn
14 things over to my colleague Chairman Denny
15 Farrell, from the Assembly.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you, Senator.
17 We've been joined by Assemblywoman
18 Jaffee, Assemblyman Cymbrowitz, Assemblywoman
19 Lupardo, and Assemblyman Hevesi. They are
20 each chairpeople of Social Services, of C&F,
21 of Veterans Affairs and the Aging Committee.
22 And Mr. Oaks will give you his
23 members.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Yes, and we've also
9
1 been joined by Assemblyman Goodell.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
3 At this time I'd like to begin with
4 the testimony of Sheila Poole, who is acting
5 commissioner of the Office of Children and
6 Family Services.
7 Welcome and good morning.
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you.
9 Good morning.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We look forward to
11 your testimony today.
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
13 Senator. And it's good to be here with all
14 of you today.
15 Chairwoman Young, Chairman Farrell,
16 Senate Children and Families Committee Chair
17 Avella, Assembly Children and Families Chair
18 Lupardo, and distinguished members of the
19 Senate and Assembly, my name is Sheila Poole
20 and I'm the acting commissioner of the Office
21 of Children and Family Services.
22 This year's Executive Budget reaffirms
23 the Governor's commitment to a balanced and
24 fiscally responsible budget that strongly
10
1 supports OCFS' core mission. As an agency
2 dedicated to serving the children, youth and
3 families of New York State, OCFS oversees a
4 wide range of programs and services in the
5 critically important areas of child welfare
6 and community services, childcare and
7 juvenile justice.
8 The proposed Executive Budget
9 maintains vital agency funding at last year's
10 level while making investments in key
11 initiatives that will benefit all of the
12 populations that OCFS serves. One example of
13 that funding is for Child Welfare Services.
14 The Executive Budget recommends $635 million
15 to continue supporting Child Welfare
16 Services, renewing New York's commitment of
17 62 percent state reimbursement.
18 Supplementing other available federal funds,
19 these dollars support a host of child
20 protective, child preventive, aftercare,
21 independent living, and adoption services.
22 New York is a national leader in
23 providing robust funding for these efforts,
24 which make a difference in the lives of
11
1 thousands of New York State's children and
2 families. This investment supports the
3 critical work of our local social services
4 districts. It also funds the essential
5 programs and services provided by our child
6 welfare partners in community-based agencies
7 throughout the state.
8 The Executive Budget proposal includes
9 $445.5 million in Foster Care Block Grant
10 funding, which supports foster care services,
11 including kinship programs. Local districts
12 continue to have the ability to reinvest any
13 unused portions in the next fiscal year,
14 which can be used to support locally designed
15 child welfare initiatives that strengthen
16 preventive services and better serve
17 high-needs children who can benefit from
18 independent living or aftercare services.
19 The proposed budget also includes an
20 additional $4.5 million in funding to support
21 programs that serve this population under the
22 Runaway and Homeless Youth Act.
23 The Governor's budget proposal
24 includes authority to invest adoption
12
1 assistance savings of $5 million into
2 preventive services and other post-adoption
3 services as required by federal law for
4 children at risk of entering foster care.
5 OCFS plans to use these funds to support
6 Permanency Resource Centers to provide
7 post-adoptive and kinship support to
8 families.
9 The Executive Budget continues the
10 critical investment in the Child Care Subsidy
11 Program for 2016-2017 at $799 million. These
12 funds enable low-income working families to
13 access affordable childcare and support
14 New York State's childcare providers.
15 A $5 million investment in the
16 QUALITYstarsNY program would support the
17 implementation of a quality rating and
18 improvement system to provide high-quality
19 early learning programs and enable the state
20 to mandate participation for low-quality
21 programs as a condition of receiving state
22 funding.
23 This year's budget proposal also
24 reflects the Governor's continuing commitment
13
1 to raising the age of criminal responsibility
2 in New York State from the age of 16 to 18.
3 New York State took a bold step forward in
4 December with the executive order that will
5 remove most minors from adult prisons and
6 house them in age-appropriate correctional
7 facilities with specialized programs offering
8 them a better chance to turn their lives
9 around and find a brighter future. While the
10 executive order is an important step, and
11 OCFS strongly supports this action, it does
12 not, however, raise the age.
13 The reasons to raise the age are many.
14 We know that when troubled youth are sent to
15 adult prison, it sets the stage for a life of
16 violence, recidivism, and little prospect for
17 the rehabilitation that would prepare them to
18 return to their communities as productive and
19 responsible adults. Removing young people
20 from the adult criminal system will improve
21 outcomes and make a vast difference in the
22 lives of these 16- and 17-year-olds.
23 Additionally, the Executive Budget
24 proposal increases funding for the Human
14
1 Services Call Center by $600,000, for a total
2 of $14.1 million. The call center was
3 established upon recommendation of the SAGE
4 Commission, and now answers more than 30
5 telephone lines for 10 state agencies. And
6 we anticipate a call volume of 1.2 million
7 calls in the coming year.
8 I thank you for the opportunity to
9 address you today, and I welcome your
10 questions and comments. Thank you.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
12 much.
13 Our first Senator up will be Senator
14 David Carlucci.
15 And before he begins, I do want to
16 mention that we've been joined by Senator
17 Squadron and Senator Roxanne Persaud.
18 Senator?
19 SENATOR CARLUCCI: Thank you,
20 Chairwoman Young.
21 And thank you, Acting Commissioner
22 Poole, for your testimony and particularly
23 for addressing Raise the Age.
24 And I just had a further question
15
1 about the executive order that was done in
2 December. And if you could talk a little bit
3 about how that has evolved in terms of
4 placing our 16-to-18-year-olds in
5 age-appropriate settings. Are there places
6 for them? Have we started to move them? How
7 far do we have to go? If you could address
8 that.
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Certainly.
10 I would just clarify that that
11 executive order really directed the
12 Department of Correctional Services to
13 undertake those activities. But because we
14 are working in partnership with DOCCS, I feel
15 like I can provide a good answer for you.
16 So DOCCS is currently working to
17 renovate an existing DOCCS facility to serve
18 as the place where the 16- and 17-year-olds
19 are to be moved out. I believe the plan is
20 for that to be accomplished by September of
21 2016.
22 I can also report, Senator, that as
23 part of the executive order the Governor
24 asked OCFS to work closely with DOCCS to
16
1 provide assistance in mental health
2 consultation, any curriculum retraining that
3 we have at OCFS, given our work with
4 juveniles. And so we're providing support
5 and consultation to DOCCS as they create the
6 new model for these youth in that facility.
7 SENATOR CARLUCCI: So just to clarify,
8 until we have a legislative change, the
9 custody of these children will be under DOCCS
10 and not OCFS?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: That's
12 correct, for those currently incarcerated 16-
13 and 17-year-olds who are in DOCCS, they
14 remain in DOCCS' custody.
15 SENATOR CARLUCCI: Okay. And if we
16 were to change the law, are there adequate
17 places for these children in New York State
18 right now? Do we have a lot of work to do to
19 get up and ready and build these facilities?
20 Is there room?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes. The
22 answer to that, Senator, is yes. Certainly
23 within the OCFS footprint of juvenile justice
24 facilities we do have capacity in a number of
17
1 our facilities to accept youth. Under the
2 current Raise the Age proposal, the majority
3 of newly sentenced 16- and 17-year-olds would
4 come to OCFS's secure levels of service. And
5 so I think we can work to create that
6 capacity in relatively short order. As I
7 said, given our existing footprint, I think
8 we can make that possible.
9 SENATOR CARLUCCI: So right now, 16-
10 and 17-year-olds that are under the custody
11 of DOCCS are in our correctional facilities.
12 They are being isolated from the general
13 population. And have you worked with DOCCS
14 to know a number of -- are there still these
15 children in the general population?
16 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I couldn't
17 answer that question, Senator.
18 SENATOR CARLUCCI: And then just to
19 talk about childcare, you know, one of the
20 things that is so important is accessible,
21 affordable, quality childcare here in
22 New York State. And we hear story after
23 story about how it's out of reach for most
24 families in New York State, just the
18
1 affordability option. And they're left with
2 subpar options.
3 What is your agency doing to make sure
4 that there is affordable childcare, that
5 there's safe childcare, and, to another
6 level, that there's transparency, that we
7 know, as a parent, when I drop my child off
8 at daycare, that I know if there's a
9 violation, that I know what's going on and
10 how my daycare ranks as opposed to other
11 daycares and what would be a model daycare?
12 You know, how does a parent know that, how
13 can we work towards that end?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Sure. So
15 to answer the first part of your question,
16 the Executive Budget provides almost
17 $800 million to provide subsidy support for
18 those families, as you said, who need
19 assistance in accessing safe and quality
20 care. That's a commitment that this
21 administration has sustained for a number of
22 years despite, in fact, a diminishing
23 investment on the part of the federal
24 government. There's always need for more,
19
1 you know, without question.
2 At OCFS we also do a lot, and have
3 done, in partnership with our unions -- UFT,
4 CSEA -- our childcare resource and referral
5 agencies that we also fund, to really be in
6 the communities, supporting providers,
7 providing training to further professionalize
8 the childcare workforce, so that not only are
9 we creating access, but that we're building
10 quality. You know, improving child
11 development, understanding of development,
12 well-being, safety for children, safe
13 sleeping -- all those kinds of things that
14 can help create a safer childcare
15 environment.
16 So I think we've made some good
17 progress, some good investments. And
18 certainly the federal Child Care and
19 Development Act -- that I'm sure we'll talk
20 about soon -- calls for even additional kinds
21 of training qualifications.
22 As to your last question, Senator,
23 OCFS's website -- I don't know if you've ever
24 had the opportunity to go, but you are a
20
1 parent, it's really aimed for parents seeking
2 childcare so that they can do just what you
3 described: How do I know if a childcare that
4 I'm considering, first of all, is licensed or
5 registered with the state? So you can go and
6 plug in Sheila Poole's childcare center, and
7 if it's registered or licensed by the state,
8 that will pop up, and you will be able to
9 search the enforcement history along with any
10 violations or enforcement actions that we
11 have taken.
12 We also strongly encourage you to
13 contact one of our childcare resource and
14 referral agencies, again, as a navigator to
15 help families. And we also field a lot of
16 calls at our OCFS regional offices. Those
17 are our licensers, our front-line staff who
18 are licensing, who know these providers the
19 best out in the community. So I think we try
20 and do that.
21 You know, as you are probably aware,
22 childcare centers in New York City are
23 currently under the purview of New York City
24 only. And so we also want to make sure that
21
1 if families happen to come to the OCFS
2 website seeking care, that there is, you
3 know, a large prominent note making sure that
4 folks understand that some of that care is
5 also in New York City. And they click on a
6 link, and it can take them to New York City's
7 website, which also is very transparent in
8 terms of a provider's enforcement history.
9 SENATOR CARLUCCI: My colleagues and I
10 in the Independent Democratic Conference have
11 been working towards legislation to have a
12 letter-grade system for daycare, similar to
13 the restaurants. Is that something that OCFS
14 would be in favor of, support?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
16 I think we're always interested in any
17 conversations to be had about collectively
18 trying to raise the quality of care, and
19 certainly making sure that any parent who's
20 seeking care -- I mean, that's one of the
21 most important decisions you ever make as a
22 parent, right -- is a fully informed one. So
23 we'd be happy to engage in any conversations.
24 SENATOR CARLUCCI: And just one last
22
1 point. We talked about the childcare
2 subsidies, extremely important. And we've
3 got to make sure that parents can put their
4 children in the appropriate places.
5 What are we doing to address the issue
6 of middle-class families that are not
7 qualifying for the subsidies and are just out
8 of reach of that and are paying the full
9 price? In many cases -- I know in Rockland
10 and Westchester, on average, it's $1500 a
11 month per child. For middle-class families
12 that are out of reach for the subsidy, that's
13 a big bill to pay. You know, you can take
14 out a loan for college; you can't take out a
15 loan for daycare.
16 What do we do to address that issue
17 for middle-class families?
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
19 I think the best answer to that is that local
20 departments of social services who administer
21 the childcare allocations, including the
22 subsidies that the state sends down to them,
23 I think do their very best, Senator, within
24 their means to try and balance, you know,
23
1 creating access for new families seeking
2 care, the working poor, folks looking to
3 return to work, with also maintaining
4 caseloads and continuing subsidy or other,
5 you know, parts of support for the working
6 families.
7 But again, it's really a function of
8 the available funds to local districts and
9 the fluidity of their childcare caseload.
10 SENATOR CARLUCCI: Well, even so, I
11 mean, that money wouldn't flow over to these
12 middle-class families. They would not be
13 eligible for it.
14 So this is an issue where we have
15 these silos, right? We've got Office of
16 Children and Families over here, we've got
17 Taxation and Finance over here. Maybe that's
18 something where we could use your experience,
19 your expertise to really lobby other agencies
20 to say, hey, maybe we should increase the
21 dependent care tax credit, and strategies
22 like that. That would be very helpful, to
23 say, hey, you know, we know we have our
24 function and role, but there are other things
24
1 that relate to the Office of Children and
2 Family Services.
3 And that's something I'd really
4 implore you to do, to use your expertise to
5 try to help, say, Hey, what can we do to use
6 the synergy of our enormous government to
7 work together towards addressing these issues
8 so important as childcare.
9 So thank you so much for answering my
10 questions. I really appreciate it.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You're
12 welcome, Senator. Thank you.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
14 Assemblyman?
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: The next person to
16 question will be Assemblywoman Lupardo, who
17 is the chair of the Children and Families
18 Committee.
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thank you.
20 Good morning, Commissioner. It's nice
21 to have you here.
22 I'm going to spend the bulk of my time
23 talking about the implementation of the
24 Childcare and Development Block Grant, which
25
1 from our point of view looks like a very
2 large unfunded federal mandate.
3 And, you know, while additional site
4 inspections, background checks, new
5 background checks on some 220,000 providers,
6 new training and professional development
7 requirements, and a whole new approach to
8 parental eligibility is welcome, and I think
9 many of the advocates welcome that
10 improvement in the system, estimates are very
11 troubling as to what that would cost --
12 upwards of $90 million just for the first
13 three items that I mentioned, and an unknown
14 amount for the parent eligibility.
15 So if you wouldn't mind, maybe if
16 you'd go through step-by-step some of those
17 areas and we can sort of compare notes and
18 see what you have in mind.
19 The first one has to do with training
20 and development. That needs to be completed,
21 our understanding is, by September 2016, and
22 budget estimates are about $20 million. Do
23 you have any additional information on
24 that -- whether or not we already have
26
1 something in place that would be eligible for
2 that, or whether we're doing something?
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
4 Assemblywoman. Great questions.
5 So if I could, just for a minute,
6 because I think there's a lot of questions
7 about the implementation of this act. I
8 think just to kind of set a contextual stage
9 a bit, so the act was passed and signed by
10 President Obama in November of '14, and of
11 course at that time we saw the implications,
12 as has every other state, in terms of the
13 magnitude, Assemblywoman, that you just
14 pointed out, without any federal money coming
15 to help states try to address the
16 implementation of this.
17 We've been advocating really since the
18 passage of the bill, through our Governor's
19 D.C. office, through all the advocacy groups
20 that we belong to at OCFS, really expressing
21 to the federal government just what you said,
22 Assemblywoman, that on its face, who can
23 argue, right, with increasing quality, who
24 can argue with enhanced training, all those
27
1 kinds of things -- but for the federal
2 government to expect states like New York,
3 who already make such a deep investment in
4 subsidy, to really find a way to fund all of
5 these new requirements is really -- it's
6 really, really problematic.
7 On top of that, the federal government
8 waited until December of 2015 to issue their
9 draft regulations. And all of us who are now
10 looking at those draft regulations across the
11 country are further alarmed that those
12 regulations actually seem to go far beyond
13 what the initial statute said. So that
14 public comment period is open right now; it
15 will close on February 22nd. And we are
16 putting together our comments, we're
17 imploring all of our partners, including all
18 of you, to be a strong and loud voice on
19 behalf of our families in New York State
20 that, without additional federal funding,
21 states are really left with either requesting
22 extensions for some of the provisions until
23 we really understand what the final federal
24 regulations will come out and look like, or
28
1 that we continue to advocate for more money.
2 You know, the worst possible scenario,
3 which is one that many states are facing, to
4 comply with the federal requirements absent
5 any additional federal funding, you're
6 looking at decreasing your subsidies. Right?
7 Moving your state's investment in subsidies,
8 which we all know is key for our families,
9 and using it to try and support some of the
10 unfunded mandates of this act.
11 So the final part of your question,
12 though, Assemblywoman, is as we're looking at
13 the proposed act as well as the regulations,
14 we're also making a careful list of the
15 things we currently do in New York State.
16 And so you all know we're one of the most
17 regulated states in childcare in the country
18 as it is now, and so we do a lot of
19 prequalification, we do a lot of clearances
20 for interested providers, in-state
21 clearances, SCR clearances. We check
22 providers against the Justice Center staff
23 inclusion list. We don't do the national
24 checks that are called for in the act, but in
29
1 fact we do a lot in our state. And so we're
2 trying to make that case where we can, to
3 prove that we do have that capacity.
4 Again, you know, Assemblywoman, we
5 don't have a sense whether or not the federal
6 government is going to recognize, you know,
7 those efforts.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So we seem to
9 be in a little bit of a time frame collision.
10 And our concern is that if we don't get this
11 right or understand the implications, we're
12 going to drive providers underground, risk
13 losing subsidies, as you mentioned, we're
14 going to lower quality. And, I mean, we
15 already have a fragile system. And this is
16 going to threaten and risk it even further.
17 So can you walk us through that one
18 more time? We're hoping the federal
19 government will come to the rescue, but in
20 the meantime are we at least planning to be,
21 you know, out in front of this to avoid
22 calamity in the long run?
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes,
24 Assemblywoman, we have been out in front of
30
1 it. I mean, we continue to -- and especially
2 now that the draft regulations are out there,
3 I think states have been put in a really
4 untenable position trying to implement an act
5 with so many moving parts, all of which cost
6 so much money. Not many of them are one-time
7 expenses or non-reoccurring. You know, when
8 you're into this, you're in for the long
9 haul.
10 So I want to assure you and all the
11 members here that we are advocating very
12 strongly. I think, frankly, it's going to
13 take a broader voice, including our
14 Legislature, to really help say we cannot
15 afford to do this.
16 You know, and the other fact of the
17 matter is that our administration, with the
18 support of all of you, has invested a lot of
19 money in daycare. You know, we have almost
20 $800 million in the budget, we have other
21 quality initiatives. And so it's a real
22 challenge for us, Assemblywoman.
23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So you did put
24 $10 million -- or, I'm sorry, the Governor
31
1 put $10 million in the budget toward one of
2 the components of this.
3 So again, just so I understand we're
4 all on the same track, our hope is to either
5 get an extension, to appeal to the federal
6 government to help pay for this. But by
7 April 1st, we have to have a budget that at
8 least has some additional resources put
9 toward this if need be.
10 I can't imagine we're going to be able
11 to pull this off with just $10 million.
12 Would you agree with that?
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
14 it's going to be very challenging, absent
15 additional federal money, for us to pull off
16 the requirements within the time frames that
17 the act calls for.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I see.
19 We also noticed that there's nothing
20 in the budget to address the market rate
21 change. Regrettably, certainly in my area
22 and many parts of the state, when you went
23 down to the 69th percentile, it really hurt.
24 And it doesn't reflect the cost of delivery
32
1 of service.
2 But there's no recognition of the
3 market rate in the budget, and we'd like to
4 see it get back up to the 75th percentile.
5 What's the overall game plan on market rate?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes. So
7 the overall game plan on the market rate,
8 Assemblywoman, is that we do plan and it will
9 be part of the federal plan that we have to
10 submit on March 1st or 31st to the federal
11 government. We do plan on supporting the new
12 market rate effective June 1st. Again,
13 that's 69 percent. So unfortunately, I think
14 for many of the reasons we just discussed,
15 you know, we're not able to go to 75 percent
16 as we enjoyed for a number of years. But
17 again, at the 69th percentile, which I would
18 just add is -- we're probably one of only
19 three states left in the country who are able
20 to maintain that level of support for the
21 market rate.
22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So how can we
23 help you on this federal advocacy
24 specifically?
33
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
2 I think certainly joining with us to have a
3 conversation with the feds, to have a
4 conversation with our congressional
5 delegation. I think your voices are really
6 important in this conversation. You know,
7 we've done our best to date; we need local
8 departments of social services, we need the
9 advocates. But in your positions as elected
10 officials representing thousands of
11 constituents, families, providers I think you
12 have an incredibly powerful voice that we'd
13 like to tap into very soon to really let
14 folks know that without additional support
15 we're really in a very tough spot.
16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I'd just like
17 to get your opinion about one other item
18 having to do with the background checks.
19 What's your opinion about requiring that that
20 be portable? So when someone has that
21 background check and works for a provider for
22 two months and them moves along, that we
23 don't have to keep reinventing the wheel,
24 that it could perhaps stay with them for a
34
1 period of time. It would, in light of this
2 implementation, probably drive down the cost
3 in the long run.
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes, I
5 think -- you know, I think on principle that
6 makes sense, for all the reasons, you know,
7 that you just articulated.
8 Again, the up-front costs of making
9 that happen, particularly having to navigate
10 through the requirement that you have to go
11 across the nation and check anyplace that the
12 potential provider has lived in in the last
13 five years, and there's no foundational work
14 that's been done to date by the federal
15 government in creating, you know, those
16 pathways of communication so that we could
17 create, you know, the portability of those
18 clearances. Because you're right, having to
19 re-clear people time and time again is really
20 not the most efficient way.
21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thank you.
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You're
23 welcome.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
35
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
2 We've been joined by Assemblywoman
3 Fahy, Assemblyman Keith Wright, Assemblywoman
4 Mayer.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. And
6 we've been joined by Senator Tim Kennedy.
7 Again, Acting Commissioner, thank you
8 for being here today. I'd like to piggyback
9 on what the Assemblywoman was saying, because
10 we are very concerned about this $90 million
11 unfunded mandate that's come from the federal
12 government. And as has been pointed out,
13 there's a $10 million allocation put forward
14 by the Governor in his Executive proposal
15 that covers health and safety inspections.
16 But what's not covered, for example, is the
17 first aid and CPR training, which
18 approximately would cost around $28 million;
19 federal criminal background checks costing
20 $24 million.
21 And so I guess the question is you've
22 talked about the fact that this is
23 extraordinarily difficult to pull off in the
24 time frame. And if that doesn't happen, do
36
1 you anticipate that some of those costs or
2 all of those costs would be passed on to the
3 providers?
4 And I have to tell you, I have deep
5 concerns about that. Studies show
6 consistently that in New York State we have
7 the highest childcare costs in the country.
8 We're among the top. And it's already very
9 difficult for families. And we have
10 subsidies, as you pointed out. But it's so
11 difficult for families, and oftentimes they
12 can't afford the childcare so that they can
13 go out and work and support themselves.
14 So if there's advocacy and it doesn't
15 work, the question is what does the state do
16 next. Because I don't see any further
17 allocations that put forward right now to
18 cover these costs. Would these be passed
19 along to providers?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So, you
21 know, I think the first strategy, you know,
22 that we would take is to request in the plan
23 that's due in March to request extensions
24 within the plan that would allow us more time
37
1 to really, again, when the federal
2 regulations -- which have not yet been
3 promulgated. We don't -- you know, they're
4 asking us to plan and to fund something that
5 is really not fully understood or known
6 because the regulations aren't there.
7 You know, absent that, Senator, our
8 plan is to request for an extension.
9 As to your question about, you know,
10 passing along fees to providers, we know that
11 is of concern. It's not something we have
12 historically done as a state. But this is a
13 historic piece of federal legislation that
14 may take us to conversations and places that
15 we haven't had to go before.
16 But again, I think those all open
17 difficult questions that we're going to have
18 to struggle with in the months ahead.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: How much does a
20 background check cost?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Well, the
22 SCR clearance check for us is $25. I'm not
23 sure exactly what the -- you know, the full
24 totality. But I believe it would probably be
38
1 around a hundred dollars or a little bit more
2 for providers.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Right. That's what
4 my understanding is. Again, a difficult cost
5 to pass along to providers.
6 Have you examined ways that New York
7 State's statutory and regulatory structure
8 could be amended somehow to give relief to
9 providers?
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I'm sorry,
11 Senator, I didn't --
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So because of this
13 mandate that's on the state, has the
14 department looked at possible statutory or
15 regulatory changes that could be made in
16 order to give -- you know, in light -- in the
17 context of the federal requirements, to
18 provide relief to the providers in New York
19 State of childcare?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
21 believe we have, Senator.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Do you think that's
23 possibly something that you should be taking
24 a look at?
39
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes, I
2 think we can certainly take a look at that.
3 I'm not sure where it would take us, but
4 we're happy to explore.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.
6 In addition, the federal changes to
7 eligibility rules require a 12-month
8 eligibility -- not enough coffee yet this
9 morning -- redetermination period and the
10 gradual phaseout of the subsidy if a family
11 is longer eligible. And that's likely to
12 have an impact on the overall number of
13 childcare subsidy slots in the state. And
14 you address that a little bit, but how many
15 children currently receive childcare
16 subsidies in New York?
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So in 2015
18 there were 207,000 children who received a
19 subsidy at some point throughout the year in
20 New York State.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And have you done
22 an analysis -- you know, you just asked about
23 the statutory and regulatory structure that
24 we have. But have you done an analysis
40
1 through OCFS on the available number of slots
2 in the state and what this federal mandate
3 would mean? Have you quantified that at all?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No. I
5 mean, I think we have, you know, a general
6 sense, Senator, that what you articulated in
7 terms of the new federal requirement, the
8 12-month guaranteed eligibility -- and then
9 now what we found out in reviewing the
10 regulations is that a phaseout that we
11 thought states would have some flexibility in
12 determining is really now meant by the feds
13 to mean another year of phaseout.
14 So for a newly eligible family, that
15 will mean that from the point of eligibility
16 until the end, you're looking at a guaranteed
17 almost two years of childcare subsidy. And
18 that, you know -- that's great. We've talked
19 about, you know, right, the cliff and
20 avoiding the cliff. The challenge for us is
21 that in eliminating the cliff for families
22 exiting subsidized care, the act has created
23 a mountain of a lack of access, potentially,
24 to new families needing access to subsidy.
41
1 And, you know, therein lies the challenge.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What would the
3 additional resources be that would be
4 necessary for us to actually maintain the
5 current subsidy slots? Have you done any
6 kind of analysis on that as far as what the
7 costs would be? What would the state have to
8 invest?
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't --
10 you know, until we know what the federal
11 regulations really say, once the final
12 comment period -- I think it's difficult to
13 estimate that fully, Senator.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And when does that
15 end?
16 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: The public
17 comment period ends February 22nd. But we
18 don't have a date yet when the final regs
19 will come out, despite the fact that our
20 state plan is due to them in March.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: How many counties
22 in New York currently redetermine eligibility
23 on a 12-month basis?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I believe
42
1 there are around 18 local departments of
2 social services who do.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. So for those
4 counties who don't currently redetermine
5 eligibility on a 12-month basis, is there any
6 estimate of what it will cost them to go into
7 compliance, the ones that don't right now?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
9 have that figure, Senator.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.
11 I have several follow-up questions,
12 but I'll defer to my colleagues and come
13 back.
14 So Assemblyman?
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
16 Assemblyman Hevesi.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Good morning,
18 Commissioner.
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Good
20 morning.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Good morning. So
22 I'm sorry I have to start with you, because
23 to be honest with you in the Governor's
24 budget he's done some really good things, but
43
1 not on childcare. So let me ask you a
2 question about the federal reauthorization.
3 Why don't you just fund it?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Because I
5 think it's an incredible amount of expense
6 where the administration has chosen the need
7 to prioritize expenses in other important
8 areas -- anti-poverty initiatives, other
9 things to also help working poor families in
10 the state.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: So the Governor's
12 not making this a priority.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
14 think that's fair, Assemblyman. As I said,
15 the Governor has sustained, you know, an
16 $800 million subsidy allocation --
17 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Which is flat
18 from last year, so you haven't increased it.
19 Right?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: That's
21 true.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: And the poverty
23 reduction initiative that you mentioned is a
24 $25 million -- we'll get to that later.
44
1 But you're saying because of all of
2 the other things that the Governor is dealing
3 with, he can't come up with the $90 million
4 to protect the kids who currently have
5 subsidies?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
7 the Executive Budget articulates what the
8 administration's best guess at their
9 investment is in the next upcoming fiscal
10 year, Assemblyman.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Right. So you're
12 telling us -- so let me phrase it this way.
13 The federal government comes down with new
14 regulations, we all think they're really good
15 ideas -- background checks, inspections, all
16 kinds of good stuff. We should be saying
17 this is fantastic. But if it's not funded,
18 it's the equivalent of the federal government
19 coming with a big punch about to hit the kids
20 and families in New York State.
21 Now, the state is in a position to
22 step up and take that punch, but the Governor
23 is moving out of the way so he can let the
24 children and families -- and the providers --
45
1 in this state take the hit. Why is that?
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
3 the best answer --
4 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: You knew -- sorry
5 to cut you off, but you knew this was coming
6 since November 2014.
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So again,
8 you know, I think part of what's a strength
9 for us in New York is the fact that we
10 already have to do a lot of training, we do
11 background checks, we provide a lot of
12 subsidy to families.
13 And so unlike other states, we're
14 starting --
15 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: I'm sorry to cut
16 you off. A lot of subsidies to families
17 of -- the 207,000 kids in New York State who
18 are eligible for subsidies, what percentage
19 of those kids do we currently cover that you
20 say we do a lot of subsidies? Have we
21 reached --
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: That's the
23 number of children who at some point
24 were receiving a subsidy --
46
1 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: No, that's the
2 number of children who are eligible. What's
3 the number of kids who are actually being --
4 what percentage of that 207 are actually
5 receiving services? Our estimation, it's
6 under 20 percent. So I --
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No, the
8 figures I have, Assemblyman, is that in 2015
9 there were 207,000 children who at some point
10 were the recipients of a subsidy.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay. Okay. We
12 now know that with the federal government
13 coming down with this new $90 million
14 request, okay -- and that's DOB coming up
15 with the number -- why did you guys come up
16 with $10 million? Can you explain that to
17 me?
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
19 the $10 million is an attempt to begin to
20 implement the increased inspection
21 requirement of the act with the resources
22 that the administration has.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay, let me go
24 back. And I apologize, the 207, you are
47
1 absolutely right. But that's 20 percent of
2 the eligible population. That's why I bring
3 it up. That's my mistake.
4 So let me go back to the $10 million.
5 That's only for inspections, which is only
6 one of the four pieces that the feds are
7 coming down with. How did you get to 10 when
8 DOB asked for, what was it, 34 for that? Why
9 is the Governor coming up with only 10?
10 Yeah, 34.5. Why do you guys come up with 10?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I'd have
12 to go back to the work we did with DOB in
13 creating the --
14 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Could it be that
15 you're assuming that if you don't do these
16 inspections, a lot of the families who are in
17 legally-exempt childcare are just going to go
18 under and stop receiving subsidies? Is that
19 possible?
20 Because if that's the case, that's an
21 outrage. Because what you're doing is
22 pushing these children and families -- not
23 only are they not going to get their
24 subsidies, but they're going to go
48
1 underground, which is exactly what we don't
2 want them to do.
3 So again, let me come back to my first
4 question. Why aren't we funding this?
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Well,
6 Assemblyman, the budget session isn't over
7 yet, so --
8 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Yeah, but your
9 position is. Unless you're telling me by
10 Friday, which is when you get your 30-day
11 amendments, you're going to come out with the
12 extra $80 million. Is that what you're
13 telling us?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No, that's
15 not what I'm telling you, Assemblyman.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: So your position
17 is $10 million when we know the need to be
18 90, and now the Governor is just walking
19 away; is that correct?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: What's in
21 the Executive Budget right now is what's in
22 the budget from the administration.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay. So we will
24 do our best to pick up the slack, but I've
49
1 got to tell you, what has happened here on
2 childcare is nothing short of an outrage.
3 Thank you, Commissioner.
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You're
5 welcome, Assemblyman.
6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator?
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
8 Senator Diane Savino.
9 And we've been joined by Senator Tony
10 Avella.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
12 Krueger.
13 Good morning, Acting Commissioner
14 Poole. I want to follow up on what
15 Assemblyman Hevesi said, because I've often
16 asked this question: Why don't we look at
17 childcare as an economic development tool as
18 opposed to social services? And I think it's
19 part and parcel of keeping women in the
20 workforce. Because we know interruptions in
21 childcare or the inability to obtain safe,
22 quality affordable childcare, or subsidized
23 childcare, leads to disruptions in a woman's
24 career, and it affects her not just in her
50
1 present life, but in her retirement.
2 So I do think that if we're going to
3 put money into anti-poverty initiatives, that
4 maybe the suggestion is move that money to
5 this initiative so that we can maintain
6 quality, affordable, subsidized childcare for
7 as many children as we can.
8 On the 207,000 children, does that
9 include the largest social service district
10 in the state, New York City?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes, I
12 believe it does.
13 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. So I find it
14 amazing that in a state of 19.5 million
15 people, only 207,000 children are eligible
16 for subsidized childcare. And that begs a
17 bigger question of what outreach we're doing
18 to families that could potentially be
19 eligible for it.
20 But Senator Carlucci talked a bit
21 about the level of safety that parents can
22 feel with respect to the places that they
23 send their children. And you talked about
24 the state's website. It's true, though, that
51
1 a few years ago, as a result of legislation
2 that was introduced by Senator Klein and then
3 adopted by the Senate and passed by the
4 Assembly and signed by the Governor,
5 facilities that are licensed by the State of
6 New York are required to post their latest
7 inspection.
8 The City of New York insisted on being
9 carved out of that mandate because they
10 feel -- they felt at the time that they would
11 be able to handle it on their own. And as
12 you know, daycare centers in New York City
13 are licensed by the Department of Health, not
14 by ACS. And not by your agency.
15 What we have seen in reports and
16 research is there are thousands of daycare
17 centers in New York City that are unlicensed,
18 many of them operating for years. There was
19 that horrible case of a small baby who, on
20 his first day in a daycare center, died
21 because they did not know how to provide CPR.
22 And this daycare center had been operating
23 for 14 years without a license.
24 So we're suggesting potentially a
52
1 letter-grade system. But more importantly,
2 we believe that the state needs to play a
3 bigger role in licensing and certifying the
4 daycare centers operating in the City of
5 New York are safe, that the staff is
6 adequately trained, that they are cleared
7 through these background checks. That's not
8 happening right now.
9 What role do you think the state can
10 play in forcing the City of New York to do
11 these things?
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Well,
13 Senator, I think, you know, we have a shared
14 goal of trying to improve safety. And, you
15 know, those tragedies that you just mentioned
16 I think are evidence that we should explore
17 how we can strengthen our oversight, so ...
18 SENATOR SAVINO: Good. I want to
19 shift to the Raise the Age issue, because I
20 understand the Governor's executive order was
21 really about complying with the federal
22 directive that you can no longer house 16-
23 and 17-year-olds in adult prison. So it's
24 really not the implementation of Raise the
53
1 Age, it's complying with that directive. The
2 money that's being allocated for the
3 retrofitting of Hudson Correctional facility
4 is for that purpose.
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Correct.
6 SENATOR SAVINO: But assuming we do
7 raise the age, there's a question as to what
8 role OCFS is going to play with some of the
9 children who aren't -- they're not sentenced
10 to a DOCCS facility.
11 So are we talking about pooling these
12 children with the Close to Home facilities,
13 or is it going to be a separate system?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: It would
15 be a separate system. So if we raise the age
16 according to the Governor's executive
17 proposal, you know, newly sentenced 16- and
18 17-year-olds would continue to start in
19 criminal court. It calls for the creation of
20 a new youth part, so that there's specially
21 trained judges through Supreme Court.
22 But they'll start in criminal court.
23 There's no longer the transfer of presumption
24 down, you know, to Family Court, as was in
54
1 last year's proposal.
2 So the majority of those 16- and
3 17-year-olds would be processed. The
4 difference is once they are sentenced, they
5 wouldn't go to DOCCS or to a local jail for
6 those youth who have very short sentences,
7 but they would come to OCFS. Okay? And we,
8 as part of the Governor's executive proposal,
9 would develop a classification tool, in
10 partnership with DOCCS, with the State
11 Commission on Corrections, and with DCJS, and
12 apply that rule based upon the youth's
13 history, their service needs, to determine
14 what's the right level of placement.
15 And one of the additions in the
16 Governor's Executive proposal is the creation
17 of a separate hybrid enhanced secure facility
18 that could potentially be there for youth
19 with enriched service needs.
20 The vast majority of the other youth,
21 Senator, the projection is that over time,
22 once we're fully implementing, over, again --
23 you know, the 16-year-olds would start in
24 '18, the 17-year-olds in '19 -- we would
55
1 probably be looking at creating additional
2 capacity of about 700 beds, thereabouts,
3 within OCFS's mostly secure system.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. My time
5 is up, but I would like a second round
6 because I'd like to talk to you about Close
7 to Home, where we are on the implementation,
8 and also on child protective services and the
9 effect of the opioid abuse crisis on it. So
10 I'll wait for my second round.
11 Thank you.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly.
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman
14 Jaffee.
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you.
16 Good morning, Commissioner. I know
17 that you would agree that providing access to
18 childcare significantly contributes to a
19 child's well-being, preparing that child for
20 the future socially, academically, in many
21 ways, as well as providing important and
22 successful outcomes for the working parents.
23 This should be a priority in New York
24 State. Unfortunately, we're seeing much too
56
1 much disparities that exist to access,
2 regarding access to childcare. And there are
3 a number of issues that I feel are essential
4 to be addressed. I mean, just in terms of
5 funding, we need to significantly increase
6 funding. And some of the issues in terms of
7 the 69 percent should -- we should bring it
8 back to 75 percent. I think that is
9 absolutely essential.
10 And in terms of the subsidies, too
11 many of our providers are closing down.
12 They're also cutting back on the childcare
13 services. I have programs that have very
14 long waiting lists, children and families who
15 are struggling because they are not provided
16 access to childcare. It is becoming a very
17 serious situation. I mean they're lowering
18 the eligibility below 200 percent of the
19 federal poverty levels in many, many cases.
20 Many have actually closed the application
21 process because they do not have the finances
22 to be able to offer the services.
23 And I could go on. There are so many
24 issues that are involved. So are you hearing
57
1 this from the local districts regarding the
2 administration of the childcare subsidies and
3 the finances, the issues that they face?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you
5 for your comments, Assemblywoman. Some
6 districts, yes, you know, we do hear concerns
7 about not having sufficient subsidy dollars,
8 you know, to meet the needs. So yes, we do
9 hear that on occasion.
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Because we've
11 been hearing that over and over from the
12 providers as well as the organizations in
13 support of the providers, that it's just
14 becoming a very serious situation in terms of
15 providing access appropriately to children
16 and families throughout the state.
17 Another issue, in terms of the
18 homeless -- which is also another major issue
19 in terms of assuring that the families -- are
20 we meeting the needs, the childcare needs of
21 the homeless? Is that something on the
22 agenda in terms of ensuring that there are
23 programs for the homeless in our communities?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: That's an
58
1 excellent point. In fact, that is one of the
2 elements of the federal Child Care Act, is
3 making sure that states take appropriate
4 steps to make sure that families experiencing
5 homelessness do have immediate access to
6 childcare services.
7 So our staff are working closely with
8 the Office of Temporary and Disability
9 Assistance to assess how we can strengthen
10 our partnership in that area now, regardless
11 of the provisions of the act. But yes, it's
12 on a issue with our homeless families as
13 well.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: And with the
15 federal mandate, with all the requirements
16 that the federal mandate has put in place and
17 the lack of funding that is being allocated,
18 clearly the federal government provided
19 nothing. But I really believe that we as a
20 state should at least put forward, you know,
21 significant funds to be able to respond to
22 what the providers will be providing, the
23 services.
24 They are going to be -- they're
59
1 already struggling with the subsidies and the
2 level of the subsidies, and on top of that
3 comes this mandate. We are going to lose
4 many providers throughout the state. Our
5 families are going to lose the opportunity
6 for childcare; they will not be able to work.
7 And this is a serious issue. I
8 consider this an economic development issue.
9 This is about providing families the
10 opportunity to have affordable childcare as
11 well as giving families access to childcare
12 so that they can work. It's also about jobs,
13 jobs that are involved with childcare. We
14 need to focus on this as an absolute priority
15 in New York State as we move forward. And I
16 hope that is something that you will focus
17 on.
18 (Applause from audience.)
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN JAFFEE: Thank you.
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
21 Senator.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Daniel
23 Squadron.
24 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
60
1 much. Nice to see you.
2 So I'm a little confused. Is it the
3 state's position or the Executive's position
4 that we're in favor of the new federal
5 guidelines or we're opposed to them and want
6 them not to go into effect?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
8 as I said earlier, I think on principle,
9 Senator, the concepts are very good. They
10 move away from, you know, the federal dollars
11 really being primarily a work support to the
12 federal dollars really being more child
13 development. And it's very hard to argue
14 with those principles.
15 SENATOR SQUADRON: So that's good for
16 kids.
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
18 SENATOR SQUADRON: And if we delay, it
19 means that kids won't see the benefit of that
20 until later. Some kids, because they age out
21 of childcare and go to school, will miss the
22 benefit of that entirely.
23 So, you know, I understand that it's
24 expensive and that certainly federal aid to
61
1 help with it would be wonderful. But it
2 sounds like we're talking about asking for a
3 delay.
4 Let me ask another question. Two
5 hundred seven thousand beneficiaries,
6 currently, of the subsidy. What percentage
7 of eligible is that again? Of those who
8 would be eligible for it.
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
10 know that off the top of my head, Senator.
11 SENATOR SQUADRON: I read it's about
12 22 percent. Does that sound --
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: It might
14 be, I just -- I don't know, Senator.
15 SENATOR SQUADRON: Can we have a
16 commitment here that the funding will be
17 there to ensure that there are no cuts in the
18 number of folks who are able to receive
19 subsidies, whatever happens with the federal
20 requirements?
21 (Applause from audience.)
22 SENATOR SQUADRON: Unfortunately,
23 those are not the people testifying.
24 (Laughter.)
62
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I can't
2 make that commitment here today, Senator.
3 SENATOR SQUADRON: So that may well
4 happen, then.
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I'm sorry?
6 SENATOR SQUADRON: That may well
7 happen.
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
9 know. I don't know yet.
10 SENATOR SQUADRON: Is it fair to say
11 that the choice before us is either to delay
12 improvements in quality or cut subsidies?
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
14 that's -- I think that's the dilemma that
15 states are finding themselves in, as I said
16 earlier, in trying to implement this act. So
17 yes.
18 SENATOR SQUADRON: I mean, that's not
19 an acceptable choice. It does sound like the
20 choice the Legislature is being given right
21 now with this budget proposal. That's an
22 enormous problem.
23 Just finally, just so I understand,
24 because this is the other confusing thing, is
63
1 the contention that $10 million is sufficient
2 for the new regulations, or is the contention
3 that it will be delayed and therefore we only
4 need 10 million, but 90 million is the
5 correct number?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
7 it's an initial investment to try and
8 initially comply with that element of the
9 increased inspections required by the act.
10 SENATOR SQUADRON: So we agree,
11 90 million is about the right number.
12 Because if there's debate on that 90 million
13 number, I'd be happy to know that. Is there?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I think
15 it's fair to say, Senator, that it's possible
16 once the new federal regulations are
17 promulgated, it may in fact turn out to mean
18 more than $10 million.
19 SENATOR SQUADRON: Like 90 million?
20 (Laughter.)
21 SENATOR SQUADRON: I mean, is there a
22 reason to doubt that number? Yes, no, maybe?
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No,
24 there's no reason to doubt it.
64
1 SENATOR SQUADRON: Okay, so we'll go
2 with 90 million. So we have an $80 million
3 gap; there's going to be $80 million in cuts
4 to existing subsidies.
5 Let's talk about evidence-based home
6 visiting. I notice that Healthy Families is
7 proposed at last year's level, and
8 Nurse-Family Partnership is proposed at a cut
9 from last year. Are all of the eligible
10 families for evidence-based maternal home
11 visiting, which has an enormous return on
12 investment to the state, has tripartisan
13 support in the Senate, bipartisan support in
14 the Assembly -- is there any reason to be
15 reluctant to have the funding to offer that
16 to every eligible family?
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So the
18 Nurse-Family Partnership is in the Department
19 of Health's budget, Senator.
20 SENATOR SQUADRON: And Healthy
21 Families. I'm talking about evidence-based
22 maternal home visiting, which is very, very
23 much an Office of Children and Family
24 Services issue.
65
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yeah.
2 Yeah. I think we're pleased to see that in
3 our current budget we're maintaining our
4 $23.3 million to support Healthy Families.
5 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. Do you know
6 how many families that serves?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE:
8 Approximately 6,000 a year.
9 SENATOR SQUADRON: Do you know how
10 many are eligible every year?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't.
12 SENATOR SQUADRON: About 120,000.
13 It's just confusing that we have
14 programs that are working, that (A) we silo
15 them and (B) we maintain a funding stream
16 that excludes 95 percent of eligible
17 families. I'm just confused about what the
18 policy decision is there. Would you mind
19 explaining?
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
21 Senator, the best answer I can give you is
22 that, you know, we have to make a lot of
23 decisions about which program to fund.
24 You're absolutely right, the Nurse-Family
66
1 Partnership and, you know, Healthy Families
2 have proven, you know, outcomes. But the
3 truth is there's a lot of other priority
4 needs as well. So, you know, again, it comes
5 back to if we had more money to invest, those
6 are the kinds of programs with proven track
7 records and good returns on investment.
8 SENATOR SQUADRON: I mean, I would
9 just urge, both when it comes to childcare,
10 where we have a lack of available subsidies
11 for those who are income eligible, a lack of
12 support for middle-class families, and
13 evidence-based maternal home visiting, that
14 we should really put money where we know
15 we're going to need to spend it --
16 $90 million is the new federal regulations, a
17 gap of those who are getting subsidies, and
18 programs for new families that save money and
19 save lives over time.
20 It's just strange that we just do what
21 we've always done instead of trying to
22 improve things. So I would really urge and
23 hope that in the 30-day amendments we see a
24 goal of improvement, not sort of treading
67
1 water or drowning. Thank you.
2 (Applause from audience.)
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Assembly.
4 And also could we maintain order in
5 the house, please.
6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman
7 Jaffee -- Assemblywoman Fahy, I'm sorry.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Thank you,
9 Mr. Chairman.
10 Good morning, and thank you,
11 Commissioner, for being here.
12 Just a couple of questions, but I just
13 want to start by reiterating that I do share
14 the concern about the -- no question, I think
15 there have been a number of questions
16 already -- but I do want to share the concern
17 about what I also think is a lack of funding
18 in terms of implementing the new childcare
19 regs, given the extraordinary demand out
20 there.
21 One related question to that, however.
22 What would the -- or do you know what the
23 number would be if we brought the childcare
24 market rates up to 75 percent? Do you know
68
1 what that might cost? I know you did say
2 we're at about 69 or so right now. If we
3 brought it up to the 75th percentile, is
4 there an estimate as to what that might be in
5 funds?
6 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE:
7 Assemblywoman, I don't have that figure with
8 me here. I can certainly follow up.
9 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Okay. I mean,
10 given the expense and given the needs,
11 obviously it would be another great goal in
12 addition to the needs of the impending
13 regulations.
14 Switching gears, after-school funds.
15 I know there was limited additional funds put
16 in last year. Certainly there was another
17 op-ed this morning from the After-School
18 Network, and the number that we keep hearing
19 is that there's an unmet need of about a
20 million students across the state who are
21 estimated to be not served.
22 Do you have a sense of what the
23 department might be doing now to try to
24 expand within the dollars they have, and if
69
1 that number is a number you would concur with
2 in terms of the need out there for
3 after-school?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I have not
5 read the report that, you know, you
6 referenced, Assemblywoman. So, you know, we
7 have the Advantage After-School, it's 17
8 something in our budget. And I believe
9 there's 15,000 youth across the state who are
10 able to benefit from after-school, you know,
11 programs, which is terrific. I think we have
12 117 contracts across the state.
13 So I think that's in recognition that
14 they're great programs to support, you know,
15 youth in communities. And, you know, we are
16 maintaining that in the proposed exhibit.
17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN FAHY: Okay. Thank you,
18 Commissioner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
21 Our next speaker is Senator Kennedy.
22 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you,
23 Commissioner. I want to touch base a little
24 bit about the resources for caseworkers,
70
1 childcare workers, throughout the state as it
2 pertains to investigating reports of abuse.
3 As you know, we've had some horrific
4 incidents out in Western New York. They seem
5 to have been cyclical in nature. A lot of
6 the problems and abuses that we're seeing,
7 you know, are oftentimes due to generational
8 poverty and substance abuse, mental health
9 issues that are happening. And I believe
10 it's very, very important that our state
11 provide the proper amount of resources for
12 our caseworkers on the front lines. I know
13 you share the same sentiment.
14 I'd like to hear a little bit about
15 what your office has done due to this
16 scourge, in many ways, across our community
17 in Western New York, as well as the state, in
18 providing those resources for our
19 caseworkers.
20 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So I would
21 just also make a comment, Senator, that we've
22 seen good progress in Western New York since
23 those tragedies several years ago. And, you
24 know, to the credit of the Erie County
71
1 Department of Social Services and new
2 leadership there, they've really made a lot
3 of progress in turning things around.
4 We've provided, of course, a lot of
5 support to them, a lot of training,
6 assistance, to support the caseworkers that
7 they were bringing on board.
8 But I think as a general response, you
9 know, to your question -- and thank you for
10 recognizing, you know, we too at the Office
11 of Children and Family Services take very
12 seriously the responsibilities that
13 front-line child protective service workers
14 have across the state. In many ways, they
15 are our first responders to the most
16 horrific, difficult situations that anyone
17 could be expected to walk into.
18 We're doing work with counties now
19 in -- we have a workgroup that we launched at
20 the end of last year bringing together some
21 of the commissioners and caseworkers to look
22 at our current model of training and coaching
23 and supporting caseworkers. Again, given
24 the, as the Senator mentioned, the trends in
72
1 heroin and opiate abuse, caseworkers are
2 always walking in, you know, to new
3 situations.
4 So I think we do our best to try and
5 enhance our training so that they're armed
6 with the best tools and skills. And we've
7 also invested a lot of money in recent years
8 in child protective service supervisors.
9 Right? Because you can have a great
10 front-line worker, but if there's not good
11 supervision, then unfortunately that's not
12 the kind of support that they need.
13 So we've had, with support from the
14 feds and Casey Family Programs, an enhanced
15 supervision model that a number of our
16 districts have been taking advantage of to
17 strengthen CPS practice and supervision.
18 So I think those are a couple of
19 examples, hopefully, that will address your
20 question, Senator.
21 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you. I want
22 to switch gears to the Workforce Development
23 Initiative Facilitated Enrollment Program.
24 There's a gap between job training that we're
73
1 putting a major focus on and available
2 childcare. And there's been a lot of talk
3 throughout this hearing about childcare.
4 There's a lot of funding and attention on
5 workforce development and training for
6 adults, but if they can't afford the
7 childcare or they don't qualify for subsidies
8 at 135 percent or 200 percent above the
9 federal poverty rate, they can't secure
10 childcare. And they can't go to work anyway.
11 And so, you know, in regard to the WDI
12 Facilitated Enrollment Program that allows
13 for these subsidies to be increased to
14 275 percent, and this program is implemented
15 in various counties across the state,
16 Erie County is not one of them. I've been
17 making a major push to get Erie County
18 included. There can be a case for making
19 Buffalo, which is considered one of the
20 poorest cities in the country, certainly in
21 the state, to qualify for this through the
22 WDI's program. It would bring in 300
23 families in Erie County.
24 Is there anything standing in the way
74
1 of making this happen?
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
3 Senator, I don't know. But I'm writing down
4 notes; I'll be happy to look into that for
5 you.
6 SENATOR KENNEDY: Again, the number
7 we're looking at is $2.5 million. That's
8 just for Erie County. That would bring in
9 300 families and allow these families to go
10 to work and give them the ability to afford
11 childcare. It's a major priority for our
12 community. I think it's important.
13 Thank you.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman
16 Mayer.
17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Good morning.
18 Thank you for being here.
19 Two questions. One is on the issue of
20 making after-school availability clearer to
21 parents. The department was directed by the
22 Governor's office, it's my understanding, to
23 enhance the ability of parents to actually
24 find funded after-school programs online.
75
1 And I wonder if you know the status of
2 the department's efforts to make it easier
3 for parents to simply find funded quality
4 after-school programs like they have in
5 New York City but we don't have in the rest
6 of the state. I wonder if you know the
7 status of the department's efforts on that.
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE:
9 Assemblywoman, I don't. I'll be happy to get
10 back to you on that.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Okay. I'd
12 appreciate that.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Of course.
14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: And the second
15 thing is, to the issue of the low percentage
16 of children who are in subsidized care
17 compared to the families that are eligible,
18 one of the challenges is that counties have
19 their own policies, as you know, and then
20 there's no uniform policy across the state.
21 What is the department doing to --
22 from a policy point of view to ensure that
23 children are more widely -- that families
24 know about subsidized care and that you push
76
1 counties to make every effort to ensure that
2 more children are enrolled in subsidized
3 care? I have the feeling the department has
4 a somewhat passive relationship with the
5 counties on this subject, and I wondered what
6 is your approach to that?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Sure. So
8 in terms of, you know, education for
9 families, as I said earlier, Assemblywoman,
10 we do contract with 34 CCR&Rs across the
11 state. So, you know, they are embedded in
12 communities, they should be the first point
13 of contact for families, you know, seeking
14 care.
15 So I feel like we -- and again, you
16 know, through a variety of modalities -- have
17 really tried to make sure that any families
18 seeking care, that it's not that difficult to
19 find help in answering some of those
20 questions.
21 With respect to the local departments
22 of social services, you know, certainly one
23 active step that OCFS has taken in the past
24 several years is to make sure that local
77
1 departments of social services are, to the
2 extent possible, spending all of their
3 childcare allocations. And so 10 years ago
4 we allowed for a lot of rollover, was the
5 term that we used, but in the recent years we
6 have set limits -- it's 15 percent of the
7 district's local childcare allocation.
8 Because there is fluidity, and it's okay to
9 have a little bit of wiggle room.
10 But we do watch rollover. And if a
11 district is rolling over more money than is
12 permitted, we do reduce their allocation and
13 redistribute it to other local departments of
14 social services -- you know, making sure that
15 there's not unspent childcare money on the
16 table that could be used to provide subsidy
17 to other families.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Okay. Have you
19 ever challenged any county's determination of
20 how much money they actually have to spend on
21 subsidized care?
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No, I
23 don't believe we have.
24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Okay, thank you.
78
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
2 Senator Krueger.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good morning.
4 So following up on so many of my
5 colleagues' concerns about childcare and the
6 inadequacy of funding for subsidized
7 childcare -- Senator Kennedy just raised the
8 plea for the City of Buffalo, Erie County,
9 and I would suggest that there's probably not
10 one county who doesn't share the Senator's
11 views that there's a hue and cry for more
12 available, affordable childcare throughout
13 the State of New York.
14 I'm a little confused when I try to
15 get my arms around it. And I think your
16 inability to perhaps estimate how many unmet
17 needs there are is we split it all up between
18 multiple agencies. So OCFS oversees OTDA --
19 right, you're still the ranking agency over
20 OTDA; is that correct?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I've never
22 actually heard it referred to that way.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. I think in
24 statute you are.
79
1 So in OTDA, and they'll be up next, I
2 see actually a $100 million increase in TANF
3 funding for subsidized childcare.
4 So can you help me, and perhaps all of
5 us, understand how the state in totality
6 looks at unmet need and attempts to address
7 childcare support for families in New York
8 State who may or may not be on specific
9 public benefits but are all relatively
10 low-income, trying to get into or stay in the
11 workforce? How do you do that work, and how
12 does it come out that, you know, your
13 division doesn't see an increase but there's
14 TANF money moved to it? And does somebody
15 oversee the whole thing and go, Well, this
16 will help these folks over here, but we still
17 aren't addressing these folks over here?
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Mm-hmm.
19 Right. So we do, with respect to the
20 childcare, we share the TANF fund. And, you
21 know, we work together to make sure that the
22 TANF fund is used as flexibly and as
23 appropriately as possible.
24 And so you're correct that in this
80
1 year's budget there's an additional --
2 there's an offset. There's an additional
3 $100 million of federal TANF money being used
4 to support the childcare allocation.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: And who decides
6 where that goes versus, I think, the
7 discussion so far this morning with any
8 number of us discussing how desperately we
9 need childcare funds probably not within the
10 TANF eligibility?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So we do
12 that. I mean, we share the same DOB unit, so
13 there's good consultation between our
14 departments and our unit chiefs. And I think
15 that's where the shared decision making comes
16 in, Senator, about how the TANF and FFFS
17 funds can be used to support the various
18 programs within our two agencies.
19 As to more mechanical details, I don't
20 have them right here today.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. So can I ask
22 you to do follow-up for us --
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Of course.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- with some kind of
81
1 documentation of if one looks at the various
2 funding streams that go through the state for
3 subsidies to childcare, what are they all,
4 regardless if whether they're in OTDA's
5 budget or your budget, what are the different
6 eligibility standards for those, and
7 approximate number of children being served
8 by -- (broadcast noise). Sorry. God was
9 here for a minute.
10 And is there a breakdown of numbers of
11 children being served and geographic
12 distribution? I think that would actually
13 help all of us.
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Okay.
15 SENATOR KRUEGER: Then following up on
16 the issues of the only $10 million for
17 $90 million worth of work and the concern
18 that we are actually simply placing this on
19 the providers for them to have to pick up the
20 costs if the federal government doesn't
21 either (A) allow us to delay -- which Senator
22 Squadron points out puts our children at
23 continuing risk for these things happening if
24 we're delaying -- or places the cost on
82
1 providers.
2 Does your agency evaluate how much
3 providers -- what kind of margin the
4 providers are operating on now? I mean, when
5 I hear that the state is asking them to pick
6 up $80 million of new costs, or potentially
7 asking them to pick up, I'm curious -- how
8 much of a bite is that into the actual
9 ability of these providers to remain open?
10 Because I hear constantly the
11 reimbursement for the kids is incredibly low,
12 the cost for the parents continues to grow
13 percentagewise, perhaps unrealistically for
14 many people, and now we are basically placing
15 I guess I would call it, in Albany lingo, a
16 new unfunded mandate on -- even if it's the
17 feds handing us the mandate, an unfunded
18 mandate not on the localities in this
19 situation, but on the actual providers.
20 So is there any mechanism for
21 evaluating sort of what share of their total
22 income we're asking them to have to turn over
23 for these new costs? I'm wondering if you
24 know that now.
83
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I do not
2 know that answer.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: So if you could also
4 get back to us on that.
5 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes --
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Because clearly
7 you're seeing that we're all very disturbed
8 about the concept that so, yes, the feds
9 should have given us the money if they were
10 making the mandate, but they don't seem to be
11 cooperating -- and I think you're hearing
12 here the concept that asking the childcare
13 providers to pick up these costs themselves
14 not only is unfair, but may actually be the
15 straw that breaks the camel's back and
16 results in our having fewer childcare
17 providers who are following the laws in New
18 York State.
19 So I would love if you could get back
20 to me with that also.
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes,
22 Senator.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: I'm out of time.
24 Thank you.
84
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
2 Assemblyman?
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
4 Assemblyman Goodell.
5 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: Thank you very
6 much, Commissioner, for being with us this
7 morning.
8 Of course we've talked a lot about the
9 additional $90 million cost coming down from
10 the federal government and the lack of
11 additional funding in your budget for that,
12 but that's only part of the costs that the
13 childcare providers are facing. The Governor
14 has also proposed, as you know, nearly a
15 70 percent increase in minimum wage.
16 Are we anticipating a 70 percent
17 increase in funding for childcare support or
18 a reduction in our commitment to childcare
19 support by 70 percent over the next several
20 years? Do you have any visions or
21 perspective on that?
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you.
23 It's a very good question.
24 So I do know that the administration,
85
1 you know, has the goal of raising the minimum
2 wage. But I think there's also a
3 recognition, Assemblyman, that there's got to
4 be some deep analysis and the appropriate
5 time taken to consider the impacts of that
6 analysis.
7 And so we are working with the
8 Division of the Budget I think to address
9 that very kind of analysis that you just
10 asked. It's not yet complete. But I think
11 taking all that information in will really
12 help guide the administration and the
13 Legislature about how we could raise the
14 minimum wage.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: I would
16 certainly appreciate a copy of that analysis
17 if you can provide it to me, because
18 obviously I don't want to be in a situation
19 where I'm voting for a cut in daycare
20 subsidies -- an effective cut -- by imposing
21 a substantial increase in the cost without
22 providing an appropriate level of funding.
23 So if you could provide that to us,
24 that would be great.
86
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
2 Assemblyman.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: I want to change
4 topics just a little bit and talk a little
5 bit about the Raise the Age.
6 Am I correct that under this proposal
7 we create a special Youth Division in
8 superior court and we eliminate the role of
9 all the town courts or town justices, even on
10 misdemeanors?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
12 I'm not the expert, I'm not an attorney, and
13 that was probably a great question for
14 Commissioner Green at DCJS.
15 But what I do know is that there will
16 be the creation of the youth part in the
17 existing criminal court. Those judges will
18 be trained to handle those cases. But I also
19 believe, Assemblyman, that there is a
20 recognition, particularly in some of the
21 smaller rural counties, that some of those
22 new youth parts may need to create training
23 opportunities for the existing, you know,
24 judges who wear multiple hats.
87
1 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: Well, I just
2 would point out that a lot of times the 16-,
3 17-year-olds get into minor scrapes, if you
4 will, with the law, involving misdemeanors,
5 you know, criminal mischief, petty larceny,
6 trespass -- there's a number of minor crimes
7 that are not felonies that might best be
8 handled in the local court, justice court,
9 with a town judge who knows the family, knows
10 the situation, often knows the kids.
11 And I would really encourage the
12 administration not to move those minor crimes
13 into the criminal court system.
14 The other concern I have is that
15 there's no secure detention at all operated
16 by OCFS in my county. And I represent over a
17 thousand square miles. So if we eliminate
18 any incarceration even in the local jail,
19 that means low-income families would have to
20 drive hours round-trip to visit their son or
21 daughter. And in the rural counties, we
22 don't have subways that run from Jamestown to
23 Buffalo. We don't even have aboveground
24 trains. We don't have mass transit. It's a
88
1 huge imposition and a real disservice if we
2 can't provide youth detention facilities that
3 are relatively close to the families.
4 So I would ask you -- I know you
5 mentioned in response to Senator Carlucci
6 that you thought there would be enough
7 spaces. But it's not just enough spaces,
8 it's the location of those spaces as well.
9 Can you address that issue?
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So one of
11 the things, you know, that I think we are
12 proud of in our own state-run juvenile
13 justice system -- again, we also try,
14 whenever possible, to find a placement within
15 our system that is as close to home as
16 possible for families for the very reasons,
17 you know, that you articulate.
18 And so, you know, when we would grow
19 our system, right, to accommodate the need
20 for more secure facilities in a Raise the Age
21 scenario, one of the things, Assemblyman,
22 that we would certainly look at is where are
23 youth coming into the system. Right? So we
24 try and have a strategy and build the new
89
1 capacity in those areas for proximity
2 reasons. So that's the first thing I would
3 say.
4 The second thing is that we have a big
5 focus within our current New York model and
6 our juvenile justice programs on supporting
7 family visitation. And so we provide bus
8 transportation, we pay for families and
9 siblings. And in some instances where we
10 have young people who are parents, to come up
11 to our facilities, have protected family
12 visiting time. And we really try and support
13 that, knowing that it improves the likelihood
14 of success upon reentry into the community.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: Thank you,
16 Commissioner.
17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Thank
19 you very much.
20 I'd like to point out that we've been
21 joined by Senator Velmanette Montgomery.
22 Welcome.
23 I would like to question, because I
24 have several questions and I'll probably have
90
1 to come back for a third round as chair.
2 But we've touched on it a little bit
3 that the Governor has once again included
4 Article VII legislation to raise the age of
5 juvenile jurisdiction and implement juvenile
6 justice reforms. And under the proposal, the
7 age of juvenile jurisdiction would rise to
8 16 years old on January 1, 2018, and to
9 17 years old on January 1, 2019.
10 And we've asked some questions about
11 the juvenile facilities. I would like to
12 associate myself with Assemblyman Goodell's
13 concerns about in the Western Region, all of
14 the state facilities for youth have been
15 closed. And in fact Great Valley was closed
16 by the state a few years ago; Cattaraugus
17 Limestone was closed. And so there is a
18 great deal of travel time for families if
19 they want to go visit their children in
20 another part of the state. So I just would
21 like to point that out.
22 But how many additional youth do you
23 envision being placed with OCFS as a result
24 of raising the age?
91
1 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So if the
2 bill were enacted as proposed, Senator, there
3 would be approximately 700 additional youth
4 at full implementation that would be served
5 within the OCFS system.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And as you
7 previously stated, you feel that the system
8 as it exists right now would be able to
9 handle that excess capacity?
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Some of
11 it. I mean, you know, we have some capacity
12 within the system. But I think we would also
13 look to some facilities that we may have
14 decommissioned in the past. You know, we'd
15 have to really look at the whole picture if
16 the bill were to pass.
17 But it's possible that some new
18 facilities would need to be reopened.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: How many do you
20 have as detention facilities currently right
21 now under OCFS?
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So we have
23 one reception center. That's in Brooklyn,
24 and that does assessments for youth coming
92
1 into the system -- not secure youth, but
2 youth coming in for limited secure or
3 nonsecure care. And then we have 11 other
4 facilities. We have I think four secure
5 facilities, and then the rest are a mix of
6 limited secure facilities and nonsecure.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.
8 How many of the facilities in the
9 state are operated by OCFS, and then how many
10 are voluntary agencies?
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So there
12 are approximately 88 voluntary agencies
13 across the state operating a variety of
14 foster-care and juvenile justice programs.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
16 One of the issues that I've been
17 concerned about over the years is the high
18 rate of violence within the facilities, and
19 it's been both youth-on-youth and then
20 youth-on-staff. And as a matter of fact, it
21 was a bipartisan effort, but a Democratic
22 Assemblyman and I actually looked at the
23 figures a few years ago, and workers' comp
24 cases pointed to the fact that these
93
1 facilities were the most dangerous places to
2 work in the state because of the violence on
3 the staff.
4 So could you please tell us about what
5 the current rate of violence in the juvenile
6 detention facilities is, both youth-on-youth
7 and youth-on-staff?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Certainly.
9 So I think overall last year our
10 restraints, number of restraints on youth is
11 down about 15 percent from 2014. Our
12 youth-on-youth violence is down slightly by
13 2 percent. And our youth-on-staff assaults
14 was up slightly by about 3 percent.
15 I would also just add, Senator, as a
16 point of I think important information, you
17 know, while workers' comp claims are up, you
18 know, part of our model, as you may recall
19 from our previous system and our involvement
20 with the Department of Justice, was moving
21 away from a prone restraint, that a restraint
22 was the first response as a way to manage the
23 situation. We've done a tremendous amount of
24 work in the past decade or so creating an
94
1 alternative model that balances
2 accountability and recognizes that these are
3 young people who have a lot of mental health
4 needs and other services.
5 So our restraint model that we have
6 created now is a whole continuum of
7 deescalation techniques that we have learned.
8 We've also consulted with DOCCS to help
9 improve our deescalation techniques.
10 But the fact of the matter is that a
11 fair number of our workers' comp claims are
12 as a result of a staff perhaps having a knee
13 injury while safely performing, you know, a
14 different type of restraint than they did in
15 the past. So I just -- I think that's
16 important context when we're talking about
17 the violence.
18 The other thing I would say that is
19 different is that even when there are
20 situations where the youth are having a
21 fight, one youth is going after another youth
22 in the facility, you know, those things are
23 going to happen when you have young people,
24 you know, living together. They can be
95
1 impulsive, they're living in a relatively
2 confined space, you know, with that group. I
3 think you can all appreciate that.
4 But I think what we've tried very hard
5 to do as an agency is how we manage our
6 response to those incidents so that they are
7 addressed very quickly, that they are
8 managed. And we have made tremendous
9 investments in our facilities to have
10 enhanced staffing, to have additional
11 cameras, to have specialized security
12 staff -- as I said, to have specialized
13 deescalation techniques.
14 So you know, Senator, I think our OCFS
15 system today honestly is a very different
16 system than the one some of you may recall,
17 you know, from a decade ago. And I certainly
18 would encourage all of you to come out and
19 visit some of our facilities so you can see
20 firsthand I think some of the changes we've
21 tried to make.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for that.
23 And you said there were some minor
24 reductions, 2 and 3 percent. And I would say
96
1 to you that, you know, as a state it's our
2 responsibility to keep the youth that are
3 under our care safe, and at the same time
4 it's an important responsibility to make sure
5 that our employees are safe. And I would
6 appreciate any workers' comp case statistics
7 or information that you may have. I don't
8 know if you're prepared today to give it to
9 us, but, you know, do you have that, the
10 number of claims for employees in these
11 facilities, and the value?
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
13 have it with me, Senator. We'd be happy to
14 follow up with that information.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That would be very
16 helpful.
17 As you know, we've had tragedies that
18 have occurred. One that comes to mind is
19 Renee Greco, who was murdered in a voluntary
20 agency house in Western New York by some of
21 the youth that were there, 19 years old, for
22 example. And since that time, what changes
23 have been made in those types of scenarios?
24 because she was, you know, in her early 20s,
97
1 left alone with six youth; some had a history
2 of violence. And, you know, as a result, we
3 had a tragedy.
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So have there been
6 any changes to address those situations?
7 Because it was hard to imagine why a young
8 girl was left in charge of people with those
9 kinds of criminal histories.
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes. So,
11 Senator, you may also recall that after that
12 terrible tragedy, as you just described,
13 occurred, you know, OCFS took immediate
14 action with that agency, and that particular
15 program has since closed.
16 I think, generally speaking, all of
17 our foster care providers, including those
18 that run the type of facility that you
19 mentioned, are intensively focused on
20 employee safety as well. So there's
21 additional training, there's enhanced
22 staffing. In fact, we just had a meeting
23 with COFCCA, the child and family childcare
24 agencies, to really engage in additional
98
1 conversation together, how can we continue to
2 explore improving safety.
3 But I think it's fair and accurate to
4 say that following that tragedy, where a
5 young woman was on staff alone that evening,
6 is something that you would not find today in
7 one of our agencies across the state.
8 The other thing that's changed
9 substantially, Senator, is the fact that the
10 Justice Center has also been created and
11 again is another additional level of
12 oversight, not only to certainly protect the
13 vulnerable people who are being served,
14 right, in a variety of programs, but also to
15 hold all of us accountable, and those running
16 programs, to make sure that we're doing a
17 good job keeping staff safe as well.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you for that
19 answer.
20 I've been involved heavily and very
21 concerned about juvenile justice for a long
22 time. And right after I was elected to the
23 New York State Assembly in 1999, in my
24 district, in Salamanca, we had a terrible
99
1 case: 39-year-old Penny Brown went jogging
2 on Mother's Day on a trail, so it was in the
3 middle of the day in Salamanca, with her two
4 dogs, and she never came home. She had been
5 strangled with her dog's leash, and raped.
6 So she was raped and murdered by a
7 15-year-old by the name of Edward Kindt.
8 Edward Kindt had previous violent
9 offenses and was supposed to be under the
10 supervision of the Office of Children and
11 Family Services. Obviously the ball was
12 dropped somewhere. And as a result, we
13 pushed very hard to pass Penny's Law,
14 successfully, which actually increased the
15 determinate sentencing of youth who commit
16 second-degree murder.
17 So under the Governor's current
18 proposal regarding Raise the Age, the age of
19 criminal responsibility, as I said, for 16-
20 and 17-year-olds would be raised, and there's
21 a system that would be created called youth
22 parts within a superior court in each county
23 to exercise criminal jurisdiction. It's a
24 change from what the Governor proposed last
100
1 year, but I still have concerns because the
2 result could be that people who commit
3 violent crimes could end up going to family
4 court and actually have a decriminalization
5 and a big reduction in a penalty.
6 And I just want to read some of the
7 offenses that would be included under this
8 proposal: First-degree murder; second-degree
9 murder; first-degree kidnapping; first-degree
10 arson; first-degree assault; first-degree
11 manslaughter; first-degree rape; first-degree
12 criminal sexual act; first-degree aggravated
13 sexual abuse; second-degree kidnapping but
14 only where the abduction involved the threat
15 or use of deadly physical force;
16 second-degree arson; first-degree robbery;
17 attempt to commit first- or second-degree
18 murder; attempt to commit first-degree
19 kidnapping, such conduct committed as a
20 sexually motivated felony; first-degree
21 burglary; second-degree burglary;
22 second-degree robbery; second-degree criminal
23 possession of a weapon where such is
24 possessed on school grounds, such conduct
101
1 committed as a sexually motivated felony;
2 second-degree assault; criminally negligent
3 homicide; aggravated criminally negligent
4 homicide; second-degree manslaughter;
5 second-degree aggravated manslaughter;
6 first-degree aggravated manslaughter;
7 first-degree course of sexual conduct against
8 a child; predatory sexual assault; operating
9 as a major trafficker; first-degree criminal
10 possession of a chemical weapon or biological
11 weapon; first-degree criminal use of a
12 chemical weapon or biological weapon, such
13 conduct committed as a sexually motivated
14 felony; specified offense when committed as
15 an act of terrorism; any felony-level act of
16 terrorism.
17 So that's the list. And I understand
18 that the Governor has changed his proposal so
19 that it would go to the youth parts in the
20 superior court, as I said, but there would
21 still be the opportunity -- and I understand
22 that it's with district attorneys signing
23 off, but still, the opportunity for these
24 very serious violent crimes to actually be
102
1 reduced in family court and basically
2 decriminalized.
3 So I just want to point that out to
4 you because I think that that is something
5 that many members of the Legislature are
6 concerned about, and public safety is one of
7 our most basic responsibilities as elected
8 officials. So I didn't know if you wanted to
9 comment on --
10 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yeah. No.
11 So -- and I think what you just recited,
12 Senator, I think is in recognition that I
13 think the Governor and the administration too
14 want to be certain that as we raise the age,
15 that it's done so safely, that community
16 safety is not compromised, and that young
17 people who need to be held accountable are
18 held accountable but also, at the same time,
19 are given an opportunity, given the fact that
20 they are juveniles and all the research
21 points to the need for treatment and
22 rehabilitation.
23 If it's any small comfort to you, I
24 believe that when we look at the number of
103
1 young people, the 16- and 17-year-olds who
2 have been coming to the attention of the
3 criminal court system, the jail offenses,
4 that the vast majority -- and I want to say
5 it's about 92 percent, but don't quote me on
6 that -- but nonetheless, a very high
7 percentage of those 16- and 17-year-olds who
8 have been coming to the attention of the
9 system are for nonviolent offenses, the top
10 offenses being burglary, robbery, and some
11 level of assault.
12 But again, you know, Senator, as we
13 continue to deliberate the Raise the Age
14 proposal, I think any additional information
15 about the types of youth we could certainly
16 share with you.
17 And certainly I think we recognize,
18 based upon the proposal last year, there was
19 a concern about a presumptive transfer down
20 to family court, which as you point out is
21 not part of this proposal, and that it is
22 upon the consent of the DA or a grand jury.
23 And so, you know, that control is really left
24 in the criminal court system.
104
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Thank you.
2 I still have some deep concerns about
3 this proposal, but at this point I'll defer
4 to the Assembly and come back for some more
5 questioning.
6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman Oaks.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you,
8 Commissioner.
9 In the state, the Child Care and
10 Development Block Grant requires a
11 responsibility on childcare providers to do
12 more inspections of those. And I see in the
13 budget that there is $10 million additional
14 for that. With the requirements of that
15 oversight and the inspections, do you think
16 that $10 million is going to sufficiently
17 cover all that has to be done?
18 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: You know,
19 I think it's a question that your colleagues
20 have raised. I think it's an initial
21 investment, Assemblyman, that we could begin
22 to -- you know, we already increased
23 inspections, as I think you heard me say.
24 Absent additional funding, last year OCFS
105
1 increased its inspection visits by about
2 15 percent to childcare providers. So again,
3 I think we want to continue those efforts.
4 I think the $10 million will get us
5 started, you know, on our way. Again, the
6 other part of the federal act that is a new
7 element for us is that these inspections also
8 require the legally exempt community, so
9 that's another significant group of providers
10 that we will have to plan for and address.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Are these all going
12 to be done by the state, or are some of those
13 going to be responsibilities, the
14 inspections, of the counties?
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So I think
16 the majority will be done by the state. But
17 we do have some CCR&Rs who may, you know,
18 provide some inspection visits on behalf of
19 us, particularly in a legally exempt care.
20 So again, I think it will be a mix.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
22 The other question I had was just
23 related to after-school programs. And I know
24 that we have a lot of programs run in schools
106
1 that are funded perhaps from other sources
2 and whatever. Do we -- it was brought to my
3 attention that, for instance, qualifying
4 people to work in those programs, we have
5 some staff who may work at the school during
6 the day and also work at the after-school
7 programs, but needing to be separately
8 qualified to do that.
9 Have we looked at trying to do, in
10 this program and others, more synergy between
11 the -- in cooperation between the different
12 state agencies? So if we've qualified
13 somebody here, it would seem to me that we
14 ought to be able to do that for the others.
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yeah, I
16 think that's a very similar theme to what I
17 think it was Assemblywoman Lupardo raised
18 earlier. And so I think, you know, again as
19 we contemplate how to incorporate the
20 elements of the federal act, I think we'll be
21 looking at how can we -- now that we're going
22 to be doing our needing to comply with
23 additional clearances, how do we do so in a
24 more efficient and less duplicative way?
107
1 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
4 Our next speaker is Senator Savino.
5 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
6 Young.
7 I'm back for round two. First, for
8 clarification, I just want to make the point
9 that when we discussed earlier the fact that
10 the City of New York wanted to be carved out
11 of that statewide program for posting your
12 most recent childcare inspection report, it
13 was the previous administration, not the
14 current administration.
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Okay.
16 SENATOR SAVINO: But I want to turn to
17 an issue that we started working on a few
18 years ago, and that was Close to Home. So if
19 you can give me briefly the implementation of
20 limited secure and whether or not we've moved
21 to secure detention at all in that program.
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Sure.
23 Happy to.
24 So as you'll recall, legislation was
108
1 passed I think in 2012 calling for Close to
2 Home -- which, just to recall everyone's
3 memory, allowed New York City to reclaim its
4 young people who were adjudicated needing a
5 nonsecure level of care that was called
6 Phase 1, and then Phase 2 was for youth
7 needing limited secure care.
8 So after a lot of planning and work on
9 the part of New York City and OCFS, in 2013
10 Phase 1 -- which effectuated the transfer of
11 238 youth from New York City out of state
12 facilities back to the city -- was completed.
13 So New York City created capacity within
14 their service delivery system and then also
15 had to create an after-care component. So
16 that's the post-release supervision
17 requirement of those young people leaving
18 care. So that was ended.
19 And then just recently, at the end of
20 2015, I think, frankly -- and I know if
21 Commissioner Carrion were here, she would say
22 the same thing -- New York City really wanted
23 to be very thoughtful and to slow down the
24 planning before doing the limited secure
109
1 phase.
2 You know, doing Close to Home
3 nonsecure was, as expected, in many respects
4 a learning lesson. A whole new population of
5 youth, providers learning new skills and
6 techniques. And so I think we very much
7 supported them taking the second phase very
8 slow, which they did.
9 So in December of 2015, just two
10 months ago, with the state's approval, the
11 city launched Phase 2, of limited secure.
12 And so they have, again, a very small uptake
13 of youth -- I think they have about six young
14 people who are living in limited secure
15 programs right now.
16 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, thank you.
17 I want to turn to child welfare and
18 child protective services. We are in the
19 grip of a statewide epidemic with respect to
20 opioid abuse and heroin abuse. And as you
21 know, Commissioner, 25 years ago I started as
22 a caseworker in the child welfare system.
23 Then, the drug that was ravaging communities
24 was crack. The default reaction from child
110
1 protective services then was any child that
2 was born with a positive toxicity to drugs or
3 alcohol was immediately remanded into foster
4 care, and oftentimes the siblings were as
5 well.
6 We no longer do that. But I'm curious
7 as to what the effect of the opioid abuse
8 crisis and the number of positive-tox babies
9 is having on the child protective services
10 system and the child welfare system.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: It's a
12 very good question.
13 So we obviously have been, you know,
14 watching this very closely in the past couple
15 of years.
16 You know, we know that in looking at
17 our data, approximately 19 counties are
18 seeing some increase into foster care. And,
19 you know, again, the trajectory of foster
20 care in New York State has been downward.
21 We've had about a 64 percent decrease in the
22 number of children in care in the past
23 20 years. And so we started to see a small
24 uptick and it attributed, you know, to
111
1 removals due to the opioid/heroin crisis,
2 particularly in upstate smaller
3 jurisdictions.
4 And so, you know, we've been working
5 very closely with OASAS, who I know -- and
6 you heard their testimony -- they're doing a
7 lot to try and create increased access to
8 treatment services, which is always a
9 challenge.
10 We've also been working with some
11 counties that border the State of Vermont.
12 We saw a lot of those counties being
13 particularly impacted. And so we've joined a
14 collaborative with some of those counties
15 upstate.
16 So again -- and as to your question of
17 babies born toxitive --
18 SENATOR SAVINO: Positive-tox.
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: --
20 positive-tox, I don't have that data. We
21 probably could look to the Health Department
22 to provide that.
23 But, you know, make no mistake, it's
24 having an impact, certainly, in some counties
112
1 where sibling removals are on the increase.
2 SENATOR SAVINO: But you should have
3 some sense, because a positive-tox birth
4 should trigger a call to the state's central
5 registry, if for no other reason than to come
6 in and figure out what's happening with that
7 family before you release an infant home to a
8 mother who is obviously, you know, dealing
9 with addiction issues.
10 So there should be some way for you
11 all to understand how many infants are born
12 in this state positive-tox, how many families
13 are receiving either preventive or protective
14 services, how many court-ordered supervision
15 cases.
16 And the reason I bring this up is
17 because I believe that we're going to start
18 to see foster care placements rise again, and
19 they may never reach the level that they did
20 in the early 1990s because we treat these
21 cases differently now. We don't
22 automatically take every child and put them
23 into foster care. But there's no doubt that
24 we're going to have to do a better job of
113
1 coordinating services between child
2 protective services, and maybe more
3 court-ordered supervision, if not foster
4 care.
5 So I would just hope that you and the
6 local social service agencies, you know, take
7 a better look at this and figure out how
8 widespread this problem is and what we can do
9 to preserve families and keep them together.
10 Thank you.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
12 Senator.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
14 Assemblyman?
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: That's it.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Kennedy.
17 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you again,
18 Commissioner.
19 I want to talk a little bit about
20 Healthy Families New York. In your
21 experience, can you talk about how the
22 relationship between OCFS and Healthy
23 Families New York can work to proactively
24 attack this scourge of abuse that's happening
114
1 in our communities?
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So we're
3 very proud to -- that's our program, Healthy
4 Families New York. So we are able to -- we
5 have set 37 programs, Senator, across the
6 state. It is a nationally recognized
7 evidence-based model, you know, with really
8 good returns on investment for the state.
9 And so these are for very young
10 families with newborn children, home visiting
11 model, going and teaching parents safe
12 sleeping, all sorts of child development
13 skills that have very good outcomes in terms
14 of readiness of these children being ready
15 for pre-K and kindergarten, reading
16 outcomes -- we have a whole list of, you
17 know, great outcomes. And as I said earlier,
18 we're serving right now about 6,000 children
19 in the state. So it's a program we're very
20 proud of.
21 SENATOR KENNEDY: And do you believe
22 that -- well, let me ask you this. What
23 percentage of eligible mothers are actually
24 enrolled in the program? Do you know that
115
1 percentage?
2 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
3 know the percentage, Senator.
4 SENATOR KENNEDY: Do you know if all
5 eligible mothers are enrolled, or is there a
6 gap?
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No, I
8 think it's fair to say that there would be
9 more opportunity to serve more families.
10 SENATOR KENNEDY: And do we have a
11 cost on that?
12 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
13 know what it would take to take it to
14 statewide scale.
15 And as Senator Squadron pointed out,
16 you know, there are other valuable models of
17 home visiting as well. But I don't know, you
18 know, to your precise question, the exact
19 unmet need.
20 SENATOR KENNEDY: Can you talk about
21 the relationship between the enrollment in
22 prevention services and its impact on child
23 abuse statistically?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So, you
116
1 know, I think the impact is the evidence that
2 we see that this model of intervention with
3 families, you know, and their children does
4 show that those families who fully
5 participate in the program -- and again, this
6 is a program that is an average of five-year
7 investment, so we stay with families, you
8 know, for quite a bit of time -- has shown
9 reductions in further reports to the state
10 central register. So presumably that would
11 show that there are families who have greater
12 capacity to care for their children.
13 So I think it -- to your question
14 about it as a prevention strategy, I think
15 the answer is unquestionably yes, it is.
16 SENATOR KENNEDY: A prevention
17 strategy that needs to be funded
18 appropriately.
19 The home visiting programs that you
20 had mentioned, can you talk about how those
21 home visiting programs relate to child
22 fatalities? What would be the cost savings
23 associated with universal coverage?
24 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Well, as I
117
1 said earlier, Senator, I don't have the data
2 about what would the universal coverage mean
3 in terms of numbers, you know, or cost. And
4 again, you know, none of our evidence points,
5 you know, to a correlation that this has
6 prevented child fatalities. It's -- we don't
7 know that.
8 But again, as I said, what we do know
9 from the evidence of our program is that it
10 does in fact prevent additional calls to the
11 state central register, which is an important
12 indicator that, you know, families are not
13 coming to the attention of the child welfare
14 system again.
15 SENATOR KENNEDY: Okay. I just want
16 to go back to what I had asked you earlier --
17 I'll be very brief -- because it's been
18 burning me since I first asked it. And you
19 had said that you didn't have the numbers and
20 you didn't know what would preclude New York
21 State from allowing Erie County to move
22 forward with the DWI Facilitated Enrollment
23 Program.
24 I think -- lookit, there should be a
118
1 level playing field across the state as it
2 pertains to these services; I think we can
3 all agree on that. And from a needs-based
4 perspective, Erie County is certainly teed up
5 to be in dire need of that facilitated
6 enrollment program for childcare at the
7 275 percent level that DWI facilitates.
8 So I would just like to get your
9 thoughts on how we can implement this in Erie
10 County, because the folks that I represent
11 desperately need this. But in every county
12 across the state, so that there's not this
13 mish-mosh across the state of counties that
14 have this program and counties that don't.
15 There should be an equitable playing field.
16 And I'd like to hear your thoughts on
17 that, what we can do working together to make
18 this happen.
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So, you
20 know, I can't commit, as I did earlier,
21 Senator, to going back and looking at the
22 current facilitated enrollment initiative.
23 You know, as to your larger question,
24 you know, the statewide-ness of these
119
1 initiatives, I think it's something that we
2 always aspire to, you know, given our
3 resources and other priorities. But again,
4 you know, the issue of childcare has really
5 been the number-one topic here, you know, at
6 the hearing this morning.
7 So again, I'll take into consideration
8 as we continue these conversations around
9 childcare and access for other individuals
10 across the state.
11 SENATOR KENNEDY: Great. And I'll
12 just leave you with this, just to reiterate,
13 that the city that I represent, Buffalo,
14 New York, while we have come a long way and
15 we're working to pull ourselves out of
16 poverty, there's still an enormous percentage
17 of children that are living in poverty, and
18 the working poor, that need that service. It
19 is a desperate opportunity that folks would
20 take advantage of.
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
22 Senator.
23 Senator Montgomery.
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you, Madam
120
1 Chair.
2 Good morning -- good afternoon,
3 Commissioner. I just want to ask you a
4 question regarding the Close to Home and the
5 Raise the Age.
6 You have certainly indicated in your
7 testimony and I'm happy to see that the
8 Governor has already done his executive order
9 to remove young people from adult facilities.
10 But I'd just like to ask if you have -- where
11 you are in OCFS as it relates to funding for
12 the evidence-based early intervention
13 programs that are clearly known and have been
14 successful in disrupting violent behavior and
15 keeping young people out of the system
16 altogether.
17 So I would like to know what kinds of
18 programs you now fund that do restorative
19 justice or the alternative to incarceration
20 programs for young people, programs that
21 combine employment and other aspects that
22 young people need in order to help them
23 change their lives and go in a different
24 direction.
121
1 And there are two programs that I
2 specifically know about and am very close to.
3 One of them is Youth Build, which does work
4 with young people in these categories, and
5 also Youth Courts. But I'm sure there are a
6 number of others that I'm not aware of
7 necessarily, but are found to be part of the
8 system where we invest in young people at an
9 early enough point so that we don't have to
10 pay for the back end when they're
11 incarcerated or they're in the system in one
12 way or another.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes. Yes.
14 I'm happy to.
15 And, you know, Senator, I can't take
16 credit that all of these programs reside with
17 OCFS. We certainly support some through our
18 state reimbursement; as you know, the state
19 continues to pay counties 62 cents on the
20 dollar for their investment in prevention
21 programs like the ones that you just
22 mentioned. So that's our biggest pot of
23 money to support prevention.
24 But also DCJS, the Department of
122
1 Criminal Justice Services, through local
2 probation departments, also funds an array of
3 alternatives to detention, youth restorative
4 justice practices. So I think at the local
5 level, through the Regional Youth Justice
6 Teams, there are a lot of -- if they're not
7 evidence-based -- effective programs that
8 have done exactly what you would have hoped
9 they would have done.
10 And I think that's evidenced by our
11 overall state juvenile justice profile. The
12 truth is the number of young people who are
13 being brought to the front door of probation
14 for referral, for PINS, is down dramatically.
15 It's not just upstate, it's also in New York
16 City. But I think in fact the stories are --
17 they're not penetrating further into the
18 system because probation, local departments
19 of social services, youth bureaus, other
20 important players at the local level, all of
21 our not-for-profits, have really done a
22 tremendous job in the past year trying to
23 engage these young people so that they're not
24 penetrating into our placement in the
123
1 juvenile justice system.
2 Also the Department of Labor -- you
3 know, you mentioned employment. You know,
4 the Urban Youth Jobs program, I think really
5 understanding that for many of our young
6 people in the system, you know, they've been
7 educationally disadvantaged, right, for a
8 number of reasons, and so they lose hope of a
9 college degree -- although I just want to put
10 a plug in that in our own secure facilities
11 we actually have a number of partnerships
12 with colleges. We've had a number of youth
13 in our secure facilities actually obtain an
14 associate's degree, and so forth.
15 So again, I think there is wide
16 recognition -- and, you know, the Governor
17 has been focused on reentry and removing some
18 of those barriers to adults as well as young
19 people really being successful citizens in
20 the community. So I think that's a good
21 story for New York State, Senator.
22 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. I certainly
23 would like to hear more of that from you, if
24 at all possible. And I recognize that in
124
1 order to be successful with Raise the Age, we
2 will need, in communities, some
3 infrastructure which helps us to be able to
4 deal with young people very differently from
5 just appearing at your door with a PINS
6 petition.
7 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE:
8 Absolutely.
9 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So thank you for
10 that.
11 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: And so
12 just to that point, Senator, in the state
13 fiscal plan, you know, '17 -- the outyears,
14 you know, there's $155 million in the outyear
15 state plan to support all those kinds of
16 local efforts to build capacity to serve
17 those young people. So I think the Governor
18 has extended his commitment to support that
19 development.
20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I appreciate
21 that. Thank you.
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
23 Senator.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
125
1 Senator Squadron.
2 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
3 much. And thank you for the opportunity to
4 come back.
5 Just briefly, in answer to Senator
6 Montgomery's question, Nurse-Family
7 Partnership has a 50 percent reduction in
8 participation in the criminal justice system
9 at 15 years of age, exactly the Raise the Age
10 category we're talking about, for both kids
11 and parents. So you talk about diversion and
12 prevention, Nurse-Family Partnership is an
13 extraordinary program. I was disappointed
14 you didn't raise that.
15 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
16 Senator.
17 SENATOR SQUADRON: Also, Senator
18 Kennedy asked about savings from reduced
19 child protective services or abuse and
20 neglect claims if Healthy Families was
21 expanded. Your answer was that you didn't
22 know the cost of expansion, but he was asking
23 about savings.
24 Do we know how much claims of abuse
126
1 and neglect could be reduced if Healthy
2 Families or Nurse-Family Partnership were
3 expanded?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: We have
5 not done that analysis that I'm aware of,
6 Senator.
7 SENATOR SQUADRON: The analysis, the
8 public analysis of Healthy Families New York
9 is a 49 percent reduction in cases of
10 confirmed CPS between -- in child protective
11 services between the fifth and seventh
12 years -- a 49 percent reduction in the rate
13 of confirmed child protective services claims
14 between Years 5 and 7. Nurse-Family
15 Partnership is 48 percent over 15 years.
16 So there is an answer to that question
17 that we know. And just to be clear,
18 reductions in child protective services
19 claims protect children, save lives and
20 families -- but they also save money; right?
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
22 SENATOR SQUADRON: About how much?
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: That's the
24 part of the question I don't have an answer
127
1 for, Senator.
2 SENATOR SQUADRON: What's the average
3 cost of each claim?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I don't
5 have the answer.
6 SENATOR SQUADRON: We don't know how
7 much it costs every time a family gets
8 involved in the CPS system?
9 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: No, we
10 don't. I don't have that information.
11 SENATOR SQUADRON: Is it possible to
12 try to get that to us?
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes,
14 Senator, we'll work on that.
15 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you.
16 But we know whatever that cost is,
17 it's that divided by two if we expand Healthy
18 Families and Nurse-Family Partnership.
19 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE:
20 Understood. Thank you.
21 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
23 Just a couple of quick questions
24 before we close.
128
1 Senator Savino asked about the Close
2 to Home program. And as you know, Phase 1
3 involved the transfer of the custody for
4 young people in nonsecure placements from
5 OCFS to New York City. However, there was a
6 March 2014 report that showed -- that was
7 done by you, your agency -- that showed that
8 there were more than 1,100 escapes by youth
9 during the program's first year.
10 So I was wondering what specific
11 actions have been taken to address this
12 problem.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes,
14 certainly.
15 So the report you're referring to is
16 of course published in early 2014. I think
17 it's very fair to say that in the early
18 implementation phases of the nonsecure that
19 there was an adjustment, you know, as I
20 described earlier. The escapes were in fact
21 AWOLs, the majority of which young people
22 they were now in more neighborhood settings,
23 closer to their families. They are not in
24 locked-down facilities. You know, there were
129
1 a lot of kids exiting those programs, but the
2 vast majority returned within an hour or two.
3 So just to kind of put that into some
4 context.
5 We provide very rigorous oversight
6 from the state level of the Close to Home
7 initiative. We created a special Close to
8 Home oversight team who works very closely
9 with ACS in monitoring programs performance.
10 During the initial implementation of
11 the nonsecure portion of Close to Home when
12 it became evident, Senator, that some of the
13 providers just weren't up to getting the job
14 done, New York City took appropriate action
15 in putting those agencies on heightened
16 monitoring, trying to provide technical
17 assistance to support them in stabilizing the
18 program.
19 And in instances where that was not
20 successful, the city, with urging from the
21 state, took appropriate oversight to actually
22 exit the contract for that provider.
23 And so they had a challenging
24 beginning, but I am pleased to report that on
130
1 the nonsecure portion they've actually made
2 tremendous progress in reducing the AWOLs for
3 those programs. They're getting some really
4 good educational outcomes for the young
5 people in the nonsecure programs.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Have you looked at
7 2015 statistics? Do you know what those are?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I'm sorry,
9 Senator?
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Have you looked at
11 2015 statistics? Do you know what those are
12 as far as escapes? So you said they're down.
13 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So do you have any
15 kind of report that you can give to the
16 Legislature regarding those incidents?
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Certainly
18 I can provide that to you. Yeah, it's down
19 dramatically, I do know that. But I want to
20 be accurate when I give you the number.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. That
22 would be helpful.
23 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Of course.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I just want to
131
1 touch on Phase 2 implementation. That is
2 placing youth in limited secure placements.
3 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Yes.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: As you said, you've
5 launched Phase 2 recently, and you said there
6 have been six young people who have been
7 placed through the program.
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Mm-hmm.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And just to follow
10 up, how many limited secure facilities does
11 New York City oversee, and what level of
12 oversight do you have as an agency over those
13 facilities? How does that operate?
14 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: So the
15 city contracts -- they did an RFP, a request
16 for proposal, within the city -- for the
17 provision of those limited secure services.
18 I believe there are three providers who were
19 selected. And I believe right now there are
20 probably six or seven active open programs
21 that we license. So they have to apply to
22 us, they have to go through a rigorous
23 application period, we have to make sure that
24 everything that was in that program proposal
132
1 comports with the limited secure plan that
2 the city said.
3 So there is intense state involvement
4 even before any youth go into the facility;
5 it is us who actually issues the operating
6 license for the city-contracted program.
7 And again, Senator, I think our state
8 team's oversight of the limited secure
9 portion is similarly intensive as it was in
10 the nonsecure portion. Our staff do
11 unannounced visits to Close to Home programs,
12 we receive incident reports, we meet
13 regularly with those agencies to help
14 problem-solve and provide technical
15 assistance. So there's a lot of state
16 involvement, and the city's been a good
17 partner with us.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Have there been
19 incidents of youth escaping from the limited
20 secure in New York City under the Close to
21 Home?
22 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Not to my
23 knowledge.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.
133
1 And do you have any information on the
2 rates of violence -- again, youth-on-youth,
3 youth-on-staff -- in those facilities?
4 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I do not
5 have that available.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: How could we get
7 that information?
8 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: I'll see
9 what is collected, Senator, and we'll see
10 what we can provide to you.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.
12 Thank you.
13 Anybody else?
14 I think that concludes your portion of
15 the program. Thank you for sticking with it.
16 We appreciate you being you here today --
17 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you
18 all very much.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: -- and look forward
20 to working with you in the future.
21 ACTING COMMISSIONER POOLE: Thank you,
22 Senator. Thank you all.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
24 Our next speaker -- actually, I think
134
1 we have a group. Testifying on behalf of the
2 New York State Office of Temporary and
3 Disability Assistance Commissioner Samuel D.
4 Roberts, we have Commissioner James S. Rubin,
5 commissioner of the New York State Division
6 of Housing and Community Renewal; Sharon
7 Devine, executive deputy commissioner of the
8 New York State Office of Temporary and
9 Disability Assistance; Linda Glassman, OTDA
10 deputy commissioner; and Krista Rock, OTDA
11 general counsel. Welcome.
12 So the question is, who's on first?
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Keep
14 your eyes on the center.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: To the center.
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Yes.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Welcome. And we
18 look forward to your testimony.
19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Good
20 morning, almost afternoon, to the Finance
21 Committee, Chairs Farrell and Young, and to
22 the Social Services Committee Chairs Hevesi
23 and Carlucci, and to all the committee
24 members here today.
135
1 I'm Sharon Devine. I'm the OTDA's
2 executive deputy commissioner.
3 Unfortunately, Commissioner Sam Roberts is
4 unable to be here with us this morning due to
5 an emergency back in Syracuse.
6 I want to begin by talking about
7 OTDA's core mission, which is to help our
8 most vulnerable New Yorkers get back on their
9 feet. The agency oversees a range of the
10 state's most important programs for
11 low-income residents, focusing on employment
12 wherever possible. Those programs serve over
13 4.5 million New Yorkers, and they include
14 providing cash, food and heating assistance;
15 overseeing the state's child support
16 enforcement program; supervising homeless
17 housing and services programs; inspecting
18 homeless housing shelters; and providing
19 assistance to certain refugee and immigrant
20 populations. The agency also provides
21 funding to local districts and
22 not-for-profits to assist low-income families
23 in finding and retaining employment.
24 Over the past year, major agency
136
1 accomplishments include providing more than
2 $70 million to create over 800 homeless
3 housing units; launching a statewide shelter
4 inspection initiative; collecting a state
5 record of $1.83 billion in child support
6 payments; and increasing the state's SNAP
7 participation rate to 86 percent of all
8 eligible New Yorkers -- that's up 6 percent
9 from the previous year.
10 Governor Cuomo, who started working to
11 help homelessness people over 30 years ago,
12 says he's deeply troubled by our homeless
13 crisis. We need to rally around the
14 Governor's unprecedented $20 billion housing
15 plan in his 2016 Built to Lead agenda. I
16 know my colleague Commissioner Rubin from HCR
17 covered the details of that plan in his
18 testimony, so what I'm planning to focus on
19 is the important steps my agency is taking to
20 immediately make sure that homeless people
21 come in from the cold and are housed in safe,
22 clean shelters.
23 OTDA is working closely with local
24 social service districts to help each county
137
1 comply with the executive order to protect
2 the homeless when temperatures drop to
3 32 degrees or below.
4 My agency has also launched an
5 unprecedented initiative to inspect homeless
6 shelters statewide. This effort is designed
7 to ensure that shelters are safe and
8 well-maintained, as well as fully compliant
9 with all laws and regulations. To support
10 these inspections, OTDA introduced new
11 regulations that strengthen the state's
12 oversight authority over the emergency
13 shelter network.
14 Reducing poverty is critical, and
15 we've made historic economic progress in
16 New York State since the Governor took office
17 five years ago. Unfortunately, concentrated
18 pockets of poverty still remain. The
19 statewide poverty rate is less than
20 16 percent; however, some cities have poverty
21 rates that are double that. The Governor's
22 Empire State Poverty Reduction Initiative
23 will provide $25 million to 10 targeted
24 high-poverty areas around the state. Each of
138
1 the 10 communities selected will receive half
2 a million dollars in implementation grants.
3 Then government stakeholders and nonprofits
4 will partner to apply for the remaining
5 $20 million in capital grants.
6 Governor Cuomo wants us to help
7 750,000 more households gain access to the
8 federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
9 Program, often called SNAP. He is also
10 adopting a recommendation of his Anti-Hunger
11 Task Force and raising the gross income test
12 from 130 percent of the federal poverty level
13 to 150 percent for all households with earned
14 income.
15 Those additional households could
16 receive nearly $700 million in federally
17 funded SNAP benefits each year. They'll
18 spend those funds in local markets and create
19 an economic impact of $1.2 billion annually.
20 I'm looking forward to collaborating
21 with you, along with the Governor and our
22 partner agencies, as we work to lift up and
23 fortify all New Yorkers. Our agency is
24 dedicated to helping the most vulnerable --
139
1 with no judgments attached. We welcome your
2 questions and comments.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
4 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Before
5 we take questions, I'd just like to introduce
6 the two individuals who are sitting at the
7 table with me. We have Commissioner Jamie
8 Rubin, as Senator Young has stated. We
9 collaborate a lot together on homeless and
10 housing issues, so we thought we'd bring
11 Jamie along.
12 We also have Krista Rock, who leads
13 our legal division within the agency and has
14 expert knowledge as well.
15 We're ready for any questions.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very much
17 for that.
18 Our first speaker is Senator Persaud.
19 SENATOR PERSAUD: Good morning.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Who, by the way, is
21 ranking member on Social Services. So we're
22 glad to hear from you.
23 SENATOR PERSAUD: Good morning. My
24 first question to you, it's in reference to
140
1 TANF funding. Because I didn't really hear
2 much about the funding surrounding children.
3 As we know, $19.5 million were cut,
4 and most of these cuts have to do with
5 childcare. What is the rationale for these
6 cuts, especially in a time when we know the
7 childcare subsidy is critical in our state?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: At its
9 core, OTDA is about helping families to get
10 back on their feet. And we recognize the
11 importance of childcare in that effort, and
12 so the childcare funding we look at as an
13 important tool to help our clients achieve
14 economic self-sufficiency.
15 So as such, we're working with our
16 colleagues over in OCFS on the funding that
17 has been identified. You know, as they
18 evaluate the costs and the programmatic
19 implications to their childcare needs, we
20 will be working with them to determine what
21 the best approach is moving forward.
22 SENATOR PERSAUD: Was there -- was
23 childcare specifically targeted for these
24 cuts? Because it seems disproportionate to
141
1 the other cuts.
2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Well, I
3 defer to my colleagues in OCFS on the impact
4 of those cuts. But, you know, again, OTDA
5 sees child support as an important support
6 for those families who are working and need
7 the additional support.
8 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you.
9 My other question is around the public
10 assistance caseload. We see a decrease in
11 the caseload. And what can you tell us
12 contributes to this decrease in caseload and
13 the funding? And what specific factors were
14 taken into consideration when you did the
15 budget estimates?
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: So
17 annually, as the Executive Budget is
18 prepared, caseload projections, which are
19 based on a number of different economic
20 factors models -- and it would take into
21 account current employment levels, the
22 state's minimum wage, as well as a number of
23 state and national factors.
24 So when you combine all of those
142
1 features, the Division of the Budget has come
2 up with a projected caseload. And the
3 funding that has been appropriated in this
4 year's budget is sufficient to cover that
5 caseload.
6 SENATOR PERSAUD: I am not really
7 seeing that. But I will follow up with you
8 on that.
9 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Okay.
10 SENATOR PERSAUD: The decrease in the
11 caseload, do you foresee -- this is a trend
12 going forward in the outyears. And what is
13 contributing, again, to that trend?
14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Can you
15 repeat that again?
16 SENATOR PERSAUD: The decrease in the
17 caseload, you say it will continue in the
18 outyears. And what do you think really is
19 contributing to this decrease? Because we
20 see an increase in need, but a decrease in
21 the caseload.
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
23 there -- I'm not an economist, but I think
24 that there are a lot of factors economically
143
1 that play into whether or not the caseload
2 would increase or decrease. I think it's,
3 you know, really based on having enough jobs
4 around the state in order for people to
5 maintain a standard of living. And so,
6 again, I don't work on those projections.
7 However, those would be my assumptions.
8 SENATOR PERSAUD: You say it's
9 increasing the standard of living. That ties
10 into our raising the wages, but that's a
11 different topic.
12 Getting back to TANF funding again,
13 there's -- CUNY's childcare funding was cut.
14 Can you tell me why, when there's such a
15 great need for childcare assistance within
16 CUNY?
17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I'm
18 sorry, I wish I had the answer to that. I
19 really don't know. I would have to defer to
20 the education experts on the funding levels
21 within the State University system.
22 SENATOR PERSAUD: That's all within
23 your agency. The funding for that particular
24 program was cut from your agency.
144
1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: For
2 CUNY?
3 SENATOR PERSAUD: Yeah, the childcare
4 subsidy.
5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Okay, I
6 would have to look into that.
7 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you.
8 My other question to you, it's around
9 homelessness. And we see that the Executive
10 Budget includes comprehensive affordable
11 housing and the homeless plan. Under the
12 executive's affordable housing plan, it's
13 proposed to add 1,000 emergency shelter beds.
14 Do we know the cost of each bed? And where
15 are we proposing to place each bed?
16 New York City in particular has a
17 growing homeless population. And when we say
18 1,000 beds and the amount of money that we're
19 talking about, you -- allocating 1,000 beds
20 is just a drop in the bucket. What are our
21 real plans to combat the homeless situation?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: There
23 are a number of different things that we are
24 doing to combat the homeless situation.
145
1 But to address the thousand-bed issue,
2 we are, you know, currently working to
3 identify where the greatest need is with
4 regards to the shelter beds. And so adding
5 additional shelter beds will only help us be
6 able to address the larger statewide homeless
7 issue.
8 However, this Executive Budget is just
9 a banner year for the agency with regards to
10 homelessness. As you know, there are several
11 different initiatives that are included in
12 there. We talked about the $20 billion, but
13 $10 billion of that is specifically geared
14 towards the Governor's homeless action plan,
15 which include the creation of 6,000 units of
16 supportive housing across the State of
17 New York. It also would include support for
18 several homeless housing services programs.
19 And so we're looking forward to enactment of
20 this budget this year.
21 SENATOR PERSAUD: Do you have the
22 distribution of the 6,000 units? And again,
23 can you tell me, the 1,000 beds, do you have
24 the distribution of that?
146
1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: We do
2 not have the distribution of the thousand
3 beds. However, I'd like to defer to my
4 colleague Commissioner Rubin on distribution
5 of the 6,000.
6 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Good morning,
7 Senator. I assume -- you're asking about
8 geographic? Just to be sure.
9 So I testified -- you were not there,
10 but I testified a couple of weeks ago about
11 the supportive housing plan, and I think I
12 said at the time that while we don't have an
13 exact geographic breakdown yet, it should
14 track roughly the incidence of homeless or
15 special needs populations across the state.
16 And if the past data that we've got points to
17 where we are today, which it probably does,
18 my guess is you're going to see something
19 like -- call it 75 to 85 percent of those
20 beds in New York City, and the balance in the
21 rest of the state.
22 SENATOR PERSAUD: Are you paying
23 particular attention to the rural areas where
24 there's a growing homeless population also?
147
1 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: With respect to
2 the supportive housing plan or --
3 SENATOR PERSAUD: Yes.
4 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Sure. So
5 actually -- this is going to be a little bit
6 of a ping-pong-ball exercise. But I think --
7 my guess is that with respect to the rural
8 homeless, again, there are -- we have any
9 number of programs across state agencies to
10 address them. I know that my colleagues at
11 OTDA have, through the HHAP, particularly
12 outside of New York City, very valuably, have
13 over time assisted and helped build many of
14 the smaller homeless agencies. My guess is
15 some of those are in rural areas?
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
17 Absolutely. The HHAP program has
18 successfully created thousands of units all
19 across the State of New York. And so we're
20 looking to continue that program in order to
21 address some of those rural areas as well.
22 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you. That's
23 it for now.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
148
1 Assembly?
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
3 First to question from our side,
4 Chairman Hevesi.
5 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Hi. Good
6 afternoon.
7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Good
8 afternoon.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: First, I
10 appreciate the fact that all of you are here,
11 because I know some of the issues cross both.
12 And to start with, let's give some
13 credit where credit is due. This is a very
14 good budget, and we'd like to thank the
15 Governor. Let me go through it.
16 So first, the fact that the
17 $15 million Rental Assistance Program that
18 the Assembly and the Senate put forward last
19 year has been baselined for five years.
20 Thank you for that. That is outstanding.
21 And we'll touch on a non-budget issue
22 that we are greatly appreciative of, which is
23 the sanctions, the conciliation bill that the
24 Governor signed. I know Assemblyman Wright
149
1 has been pushing for that for several years.
2 So that's great. Thank you.
3 We will be coming back, as I mentioned
4 to Ms. Devine, we'll be coming back for the
5 rest of state. I hate that phrase, "rest of
6 state." But we'll be coming back with all of
7 New York State. So that's great.
8 And then supportive housing. To be
9 perfectly honest, this is, you know,
10 historic. And the Governor, to his credit,
11 should take a bow on this one: 20,000 units
12 of supportive housing, in addition to the
13 mayor's 15,000, is remarkable. I know some
14 executives like saying "This is historic"
15 frequently, but this is actually historic. I
16 want to give the Governor credit and thank
17 him and you for your work on this issue.
18 A couple of questions I have about --
19 let me start there, with that commitment to
20 20,000. Are you guys in conversations with
21 the city to put together a New York/New York
22 IV agreement so we can make sure that those
23 20,000 come online after both Mayor de Blasio
24 and Governor Cuomo are no longer in office?
150
1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: So I
2 think our foremost concern is about getting
3 the program up and going and making sure that
4 we are delivering the units as, you know,
5 quickly as we possibly can. And so I'm not
6 sure when an agreement will be signed or if
7 it's even necessary, understanding that the
8 20,000 units are fully funded and I think
9 New York City's units are also fully funded.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay, I
11 understand that and I appreciate it. But
12 from a legislative perspective -- and I take
13 both the Governor and the mayor at their word
14 with their numbers. But they're going to be
15 out of office. So to budget long-term and to
16 make sure that there's a commitment by the
17 city and the state respectively, I would
18 really look to start looking to get an
19 agreement together. I would strongly insist
20 on that, if I could, but in the context of I
21 am incredibly grateful to your actions on
22 that.
23 Let me ask you a couple of questions
24 about the 6,000 units, if I can. Right now,
151
1 if I understood Commissioner Rubin, you said
2 that -- or my understanding of the plan is
3 most of the supportive housing units are
4 going to be matching what the city has
5 proposed? Is that the current plan with your
6 6,000? So it would be 5,000 for the city and
7 about a thousand or 1200 upstate?
8 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Assemblyman,
9 before I answer your question I want to make
10 sure you're talking about taking -- giving
11 credit where credit is due, I would be remiss
12 if I didn't thank you for your leadership on
13 this, this exact same issue.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: No problem. See,
15 when we work together, great things happen,
16 and that's everybody in the Legislature. So
17 thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
18 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Not at all.
19 As far as geographic distribution,
20 again, I -- the best we can do at the moment,
21 I think, is, you know, the way our agency
22 works, and our agency is the capital provider
23 for most of those units, for most of those
24 units we issue periodic capital RFPs, so
152
1 competitive issuances to make the world know
2 that our capital is available once they've
3 got services contracts in place.
4 My guess is that what we will see is
5 that the distribution, as I said, of
6 applicants for that capital is going to be
7 something like, I don't know, call it
8 85 percent New York City and 15 percent rest
9 of state. That just matches where our best
10 understanding is of where the capital has
11 been spent in past years.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay. So if I
13 may, a recommendation. So first, if you're
14 talking about capital units you mean that by
15 definition you're going to build new housing
16 or new units. So that means no units are
17 coming online until about 2018-2019, is my
18 understanding. Am I right?
19 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: So, Assemblyman,
20 anticipating where you're going with this, if
21 I can try --
22 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: No, no, go.
23 Please.
24 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: We
153
1 specifically -- in the 6,000 unit commitment
2 we specifically did not include funding for
3 scattered-site units, which are, as you're
4 I'm sure aware -- better aware than I am,
5 probably -- the traditional method for
6 bringing online new capacity ahead of the
7 capital -- you know, the capital cycle.
8 You know, the reason for that is
9 fundamentally we had some -- I will say we
10 had some concerns about the scattered-site
11 model just generally, and you --
12 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Agreed.
13 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: -- recall
14 conversations around it. And the Governor
15 wanted to make sure that this was a long-term
16 capital plan and that, you know, funding for
17 scattered-site may come from elsewhere.
18 My understanding is that the mayor's
19 plan has substantial funding for new
20 scattered-site, which obviously is a
21 different model.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: So we're on the
23 same page. I would recommend an addition of
24 scattered-site units on top of the 6,000 to
154
1 address the need for immediate relief, but
2 primarily upstate.
3 Now, I'm a guy from Queens, but I've
4 got to tell you, upstate has a real
5 homelessness problem too. So if you're
6 looking to do scattered-site, and even though
7 my colleagues in the city might not love
8 this, I would strongly recommend that you
9 take a look at upstate first for immediate
10 relief, and some in the city as well. Also,
11 you know, just recognizing that scattered-
12 site in the city and scattered-site upstate
13 are very different animals.
14 So I would ask you to take a look at
15 that.
16 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Thank you,
17 Assemblyman.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: If I could move
19 on to existing supportive housing units.
20 And, Ms. Devine, you and I talked about this.
21 Advocates and my colleagues in the Assembly
22 and I have estimated that there's about a
23 $4.8 million deficit for current supportive
24 housing units that we'll need an additional
155
1 $4.8 million to sort of keep them up and
2 running baseline.
3 And while we're talking about this in
4 the context of a great commitment long-term
5 for new units, I just want to make sure that
6 the units we have online that have just come
7 online here are properly funded. So we're
8 going to be looking to move on that in the
9 Assembly. I would also ask you to consider
10 that as well. We have the number at -- it's
11 $38.99 million, I'll call it. You know, 39
12 or 40. But I would ask you to keep an eye on
13 that.
14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
15 Absolutely.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: And then there's
17 some other homeless issues I just want to
18 bring to your attention.
19 First, there is language in the
20 budget, Article VII language, that permits
21 the state to withhold funds from New York
22 City. Whatever the logic is behind that one,
23 I just want you to know that's a nonstarter
24 for us. I just don't see the need for that.
156
1 And then I have some questions about
2 the thousand new emergency beds. And Senator
3 Persaud raised this. Just the plan with
4 that? What's the logic? Where do you think
5 you're going to put those beds?
6 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: You
7 know, based on the crisis that we have at
8 hand, you know, the state thought it prudent
9 to develop as many additional units to help
10 the localities as we possibly could. And so
11 a thousand units is the target that the
12 Governor has set for us. We're working
13 towards right now, identifying possible
14 locations and working towards administrative
15 red tape to possibly bring those online,
16 which will provide relief for the local
17 districts.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Which is great.
19 I would just recommend that those units don't
20 go to New York City. They're duplicative.
21 They have a robust shelter system; I know
22 it's been part of a public debate, but it's
23 robust. So if you have their system and add,
24 you know, several hundred beds on top of that
157
1 from the state, redundancies, duplicative --
2 it just doesn't make sense to me.
3 So my recommendation is to take those
4 shelter beds, which we greatly appreciate
5 that you're putting online, and look to the
6 rest of state. Again, the phrase "rest of
7 state" -- so I apologize.
8 Then can you do me a favor and talk
9 through the shelter inspections piece of the
10 budget?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
12 Absolutely. So as far as shelter
13 inspections, I think the Governor made it
14 very clear in the State of the State that the
15 conditions that we are currently experiencing
16 within the shelters, we need to do something
17 about. It's a local district's
18 responsibility to ensure that the shelters
19 are being maintained in a safe and clean and
20 well-maintained manner.
21 And we did a blitz of shelters, an
22 inspection blitz, last year, around May of
23 2015. And what that blitz told us was that
24 the conditions were not up to par and that we
158
1 need to really launch a statewide effort to
2 look at every single shelter that's out
3 there.
4 So our initiative is going to cover
5 the 900 shelters that are across the state,
6 approximately 700 of which are in New York
7 City. And as you do know, we will be
8 collaborating with the comptrollers in order
9 to conduct those --
10 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay. And with
11 the administration as well, as a
12 collaborative effort, I'm assuming and
13 hoping, because I know there's been some
14 tension on this issue. I'm just hoping, you
15 know, for this particular piece, inspections
16 of shelters and they should be done, they
17 should be robust and there should be rapid
18 reaction to it, but a coordinated effort.
19 But I appreciate that.
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Thank
21 you.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Two other
23 questions, and I know my time is getting
24 limited, but -- your anti-poverty initiative,
159
1 $25 million for upstate, $20 million capital.
2 Look, we're looking to accept it because any
3 bit we get to help deal with poverty is
4 helpful. But what are you guys thinking
5 localities, the 10 you've identified, can do
6 with that money?
7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: You
8 know, it's a start. I recognize that poverty
9 is a large issue. It hasn't happened to
10 families overnight, and we're not going to be
11 able to solve it overnight.
12 However, I'm really excited about the
13 anti-poverty initiative because it's going to
14 give seed money to those 10 communities who
15 have had high-poverty concentrations in their
16 areas. And so with the seed money, of course
17 you know, they'll be able to work with the
18 not-for-profit community as well as other,
19 you know, for-profit entities that are
20 interested in helping to pave a road for
21 recovery of poverty in these various areas.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay. And we
23 appreciate that. And we will be, in the
24 Assembly, going forward with a pretty robust
160
1 package related to anti-poverty and public
2 assistance and how the system is actually
3 working at this time. So I'd love to have
4 conversations with you on that, and maybe
5 those two can be joined.
6 One last question. And Senator,
7 forgive me, I know that I am running out of
8 time. But when it relates to HIV funding,
9 it's my understanding that the City of
10 New York included $26 million in their budget
11 for HASA, to expand HASA. And I was just
12 wondering if there's going to be a state
13 match to that money.
14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I
15 believe there is a state portion to that
16 funding, but I'm not entirely sure. So let
17 me get back to you with, you know, what
18 our --
19 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: And just --
20 sorry. Thank you. I appreciate that. One
21 last follow-up on that is there's also
22 several thousand individuals with HIV who
23 live upstate, and so I would look to have
24 conversations with you offline about dealing
161
1 with that population in a similar manner to
2 HASA.
3 But that's it for me. Just let me end
4 with this. Thank you to you, and thank you
5 to the Governor. He did an outstanding job
6 with his social services budget this year,
7 and it's greatly appreciated. Thank you.
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Thank
9 you.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
11 Assemblyman.
12 I do have some questions, and one of
13 them is that although the Executive Budget
14 assumes continued declines in overall public
15 assistance caseload through fiscal year 2017,
16 the budget proposed has a $40 million
17 increase in appropriation authority for the
18 Safety Net Assistance Program, an increase of
19 9 percent.
20 To what can this increase be
21 attributed?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
23 it's similar to what we discussed just a few
24 minutes ago, which is the projection of where
162
1 the caseload -- what the caseload's needs are
2 going to be for this coming year. At any
3 given month the caseload can go up or down.
4 And based on the solid projections that we
5 have in hand, and that has been executed by
6 the Division of the Budget, we believe that
7 those funds are necessary to support those
8 programs and those clients.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So thank you for
10 that. But then what you're saying is you see
11 the trend going up, actually. So what steps
12 is the agency taking -- you know, what steps
13 are being taken by the agency to address the
14 trend?
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Mm-hmm.
16 As you know, the agency operates numerous
17 work support programs as well as work
18 training programs, and are to help people get
19 back into the work environment in order to
20 reduce the caseloads. And we work closely
21 with our not-for-profit providers as well as
22 the local districts on some of those
23 programs. So the more that we can focus on
24 work and participation and finding people
163
1 work activities, I think the better off we
2 are in the State of New York. So I think
3 it's all about getting people back to work.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I'm very familiar
5 with the work participation groups, and I
6 know Assemblyman Goodell has done a lot of
7 work in this area.
8 As you look around the counties,
9 however, there are counties across the state
10 that have very low work participation rates.
11 And what is the agency doing to assist those
12 counties to get those numbers up?
13 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: The
14 agency works closely with all of the
15 districts. And so I'm not sure exactly what
16 district you're talking about. But if we
17 can, you know, look at it offline and talk
18 about maybe some of the initiatives in an
19 individual county -- and if you have a
20 concern about a specific individual county,
21 we should look at it and we can talk about
22 what programs we have right now and what we
23 may be able to do additionally to bring them
24 up.
164
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That would be
2 great. I know that Cattaraugus County, for
3 example, which I represent, has done an
4 excellent job in the work participation
5 program. So if there are best practices,
6 maybe we can spread those across the state,
7 with your help.
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
9 Absolutely.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I wanted to ask
11 about the fair hearing chargebacks. So in
12 the fiscal year 2015 enacted budget, there
13 was included a performance improvement
14 initiative to encourage local service
15 districts with high percentages of the
16 statewide total of fair hearings to improve
17 their administrative fair hearing practices.
18 Have any local social service
19 districts had penalties assessed against them
20 in accordance with this initiative? And if
21 so, which ones?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: No
23 local services districts have received any
24 penalties or chargebacks as a result of this
165
1 particular legislation. In fact, we have
2 seen a decline in the number of unscheduled
3 hearings continually because of the agencies
4 working with the local districts. We've
5 instituted several improvements. We've done
6 the Lean Process, in collaboration with
7 New York City and HRA, in order to come up
8 with improvements, and I think it's been
9 wildly successful. And I don't think the
10 chargeback at this point is needed.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So I'm glad to hear
12 that there have been improvements. That's
13 great news. And I was wondering, though,
14 because this initiative actually is set to
15 expire on March 31st of 2016, so in very
16 short order. And obviously there were
17 underlying issues that prompted this whole
18 effort to begin with.
19 What are your thoughts on what happens
20 after March 31st of this year? Do you see
21 that there could be a return to some of the
22 issues that previously existed? And how will
23 we address that?
24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I hope
166
1 not, and I think not. I think we have worked
2 collaboratively with the districts over the
3 last two years in order to revamp and really
4 tighten the process as tightly as we can.
5 And I think that's what has led to the
6 success in the reduction in the backlog of
7 cases.
8 So no, I hope we won't return here.
9 And I have confidence that we won't.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
11 I salute the Governor for his
12 attention to the homelessness problem. And
13 as we've seen in New York City, there's an
14 exploding issue with increased numbers that
15 are so significant. And as Assemblyman
16 Hevesi pointed out, however, there is a
17 homeless problem upstate.
18 So you touched on the 6,000 new units
19 and the fact -- and I appreciate,
20 Commissioner Rubin, that you're here today
21 too -- you touched on the 1,000 new units, I
22 believe, of supportive housing that are
23 available out there. One of the questions I
24 had, however, is that there are these
167
1 thousand units but the agency's budget in
2 this area is essentially flat.
3 So will your agency have any
4 involvement in carrying out this proposal?
5 And is there any additional information that
6 you can provide? Because obviously there's a
7 deep concern, there's a need, yet it doesn't
8 seem like the funding is there through your
9 agency. So how will that work?
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
11 the funding mechanism for those shelter beds
12 would be the same as all of our other shelter
13 beds. I mean, there is shelter costs, which
14 are paid through public assistance, and there
15 are funding formulas and reimbursement rates
16 that exist within these funding formulas.
17 And I think that the funding will come
18 from the existing funds that we use right
19 now.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, but we
21 anticipate, however, that there's probably
22 going to be an increase just because of the
23 increased population. So I just want to
24 maybe have further discussions about that
168
1 issue.
2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Okay.
3 Will do.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Also brought up
5 previously was the Empire State poverty
6 reduction initiative, and I wanted to ask
7 about that, because the City of Jamestown,
8 which I represent, is one of the 10 cities
9 selected to be part of the Governor's
10 $25 million Empire State Poverty Reduction
11 Initiative. And as you pointed out, there
12 are $500,000 planning grants that will be
13 distributed to each of these cities, with the
14 remaining $20 million to leverage
15 private-sector and foundation funding for
16 initiatives designed to reduce poverty and to
17 also increase social mobility.
18 So your agency is going to be involved
19 in overseeing this initiative, correct?
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Yes.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: You'll be
22 monitoring that.
23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Yes.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And do you have any
169
1 further information about how the grants will
2 be distributed? And I was wondering, is it
3 for capital expenses, is it for operating?
4 And you mentioned that it could be working
5 with not-for-profits, for-profits. But it
6 just seems like it's a little bit undefined
7 right now. So can you give some more
8 structure and definition to what this
9 actually will mean?
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
11 the intent here is to make it flexible. I
12 think each one of these communities that have
13 been selected have their own unique poverty
14 issues. And so the $20 million has been set
15 aside; I think it can be used for capital
16 construction as well as for implementation of
17 new programs that could help resolve some of
18 those local issues.
19 And so I think the flexibility with
20 regards to the $20 million is I think what's
21 going to help these communities in order to
22 address their needs.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What metrics will
24 you use to measure success of the program?
170
1 So, you know, the ultimate goal, I think,
2 from what you said, is just this broad vision
3 of reducing poverty, which we all support,
4 obviously, and we need to do something about
5 it.
6 But how will you measure the success
7 of the program?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
9 that's going to be part of the planning
10 process. As these communities take their
11 $500,000 and start to implement and launch
12 their planning efforts, I think that that
13 needs to be an important component of what
14 they're thinking about as they are developing
15 those plans. I think those plans will be
16 their roadmap to success in those areas. And
17 so measuring the success becomes important as
18 we look to expand that, possibly, in future
19 years or other communities are looking to
20 mimic what has been done successfully in
21 these, you know, cities that have been
22 selected.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So there are
24 several agencies that already exist in
171
1 Chautauqua County that deal with poverty
2 issues. So, for example, Chautauqua
3 Opportunities, Inc. You know, and it's
4 everything from that agency to a lot of
5 United Way agencies to Salvation Army,
6 whatever. Is part of that mobilizing those
7 organizations? They do a good job already of
8 working together. But how will you tap into
9 all of that experience and knowledge that
10 exists, currently, in those agencies?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
12 the Rochester Anti-Poverty Task Force is a
13 good example, and I think this is modeled
14 after that. I think the expectation is fully
15 that you need a wide array, you need to call
16 in and have those community-based
17 organizations, as well as United Way and
18 others, who have been successful in helping
19 some of the communities think this through.
20 So absolutely, I think it's a part of
21 the recipe for how those planning efforts are
22 supposed to occur.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Well, thank
24 you.
172
1 Assembly?
2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Next, Assemblyman
3 Goodell.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: Thank you very
5 much for being here today.
6 As you know, the federal government
7 has changed the SNAP program and reinstated a
8 work requirement for able-bodied individuals
9 who are receiving SNAP. While I appreciate
10 the Governor's initiative to increase SNAP
11 eligibility from 130 to 150 percent of
12 federal poverty, that's a meaningless gesture
13 unless the individuals who are in that
14 program can meet qualifying work experience
15 requirements.
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Mm-hmm.
17 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: Does your budget
18 include any funding or other initiatives to
19 help individuals who are able-bodied
20 receiving SNAP benefits meet that work
21 experience requirement?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: So I
23 understand that the ABAWD requirement -- that
24 is a federally mandated requirement -- is
173
1 currently upon us right now. We are, at this
2 point and stage, working very closely with
3 the districts to ensure that they have what
4 they need.
5 As you know, SNAP determinations are
6 made on an individual basis, and so as
7 individuals come in, the counties will be
8 working very closely with them to ensure that
9 they can get back into compliance with their
10 work requirements. There's a number of
11 different tools that the counties have that
12 they can use in order to make this happen.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: As Senator Young
14 mentioned, you know, the existing work
15 participation rates vary amongst counties.
16 Statewide, we're not meeting what was the
17 federal target of 50 percent; I think we're
18 around the 30 percent range. This
19 requirement is on top of existing ones.
20 So my question again is, is there any
21 additional funding in this budget to assist
22 local social services districts meeting the
23 increased work participation and obligations
24 that are a result of the SNAP amendments? Is
174
1 there any change in this budget to address
2 that?
3 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: There
4 isn't an increase in funding for the work
5 participation programs, but they still exist.
6 And I think to the greatest extent that the
7 counties can continue those efforts and, you
8 know, target those efforts to the SNAP
9 participants, I think, you know, they will
10 have a greater success of being able to
11 comply. So there's new funding.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: In looking at
13 some of your programs, I noted that all the
14 funding, 100 percent of the funding for the
15 Welfare to Careers program, the Advanced
16 Technology Training program, Career Pathways
17 program, the Wage Subsidy program, Wheels for
18 Work program, all those funding opportunities
19 were eliminated in this budget.
20 With the greater employment
21 obligation, shouldn't we be increasing
22 funding for those types of programs rather
23 than eliminating funding?
24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
175
1 Absolutely. I understand your question. And
2 so I think we all know that the Executive
3 Budget is constructed in a way that it covers
4 our core programs, and then the additional
5 initiatives are negotiated through the
6 process. And so, you know, as we've said and
7 we've talked about in the past, if those
8 funding programs are enacted, we will happily
9 administer them.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: A very
11 diplomatic way of encouraging us to restore
12 funding, and I appreciate that.
13 Looking at childcare, I appreciate the
14 Governor has increased the childcare
15 allotment by $100,000 on the childcare
16 subsidies. But at the same time, he's cut
17 $5.7 million from the childcare demonstration
18 projects, eliminated childcare subsidies for
19 SUNY and for CUNY. So it looks like we're
20 going backwards on childcare by about
21 $6 million. Is that your understanding of
22 the budget as well?
23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: You
24 know what, I think that question was asked
176
1 earlier, and I really need to check on the
2 components, the various components of the
3 program to see what was eliminated and what
4 is still there. So I really need to
5 double-check on that.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: Okay. And I
7 look forward to your response.
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Okay.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: One of the
10 greatest frustrations I have is that, one,
11 we're encouraging people to leave welfare and
12 become self-sufficient, with a higher
13 lifestyle and a better lifestyle and whatnot;
14 they run into financial barriers. You know,
15 they reach 130 percent, they lose their food
16 stamps. They reach 175 percent, they're
17 ineligible for HEAP. They go over
18 138 percent, they're ineligible for Medicaid.
19 They get a subsidy up to 200 percent, and
20 then they're on their own.
21 Every time they hit a financial
22 barrier like that, they lose money,
23 out-of-pocket benefits, net, when they take a
24 raise or when they accept additional
177
1 employment. What are we doing in the state
2 to make it possible, more feasible, for
3 people to actually be successful and move
4 ahead?
5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Mm-hmm.
6 Mm-hmm. I recognize the challenge. However,
7 the agency is doing a lot in this area.
8 Public assistance, as you know, is
9 meant to be temporary in nature. However,
10 when a family does reach the threshold or an
11 individual does reach the threshold and they
12 become ineligible for assistance, there are
13 several work supports that the agency has in
14 place in order to help transition them off of
15 public assistance and into self-sufficiency.
16 And one of those is, you know, being eligible
17 for childcare for up to a year after you are
18 off of public assistance.
19 I think the other sort of programs
20 that we have, and we've talked about, is the
21 SNAP program. There are also programs to
22 maintain a person's eligibility for health
23 insurance as well as energy assistance, as
24 well as numerous tax credits that are
178
1 available for low-income families. And I
2 think when you couple all of those together,
3 it provides a nice safety net and nice
4 assistance to help somebody transition off of
5 public assistance.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN GOODELL: Thank you. I
7 will advise you that I did couple them all
8 together and create a graph that shows the
9 impact on employment versus loss of benefits.
10 And shockingly, in many situations, you are
11 much better off in New York State by
12 declining a raise. And I'll be happy to
13 share that with you.
14 And thank you again for your comments.
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Okay.
16 Thank you.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
18 Hi, I'm going to take the next set of
19 questions.
20 Just quickly on the poverty
21 initiative, so Rochester already got, I
22 think, $550,000 last year as they were, I
23 guess, the pilot for this idea. So what have
24 they proposed -- what have they come in
179
1 recommending for themselves? And do they get
2 in line with the other nine locations? How
3 does that work? I mean, they were a year
4 ahead of the rest of us, so to speak. So
5 what happens for Rochester now, and what are
6 they asking for?
7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I do
8 not know all of the specifics of the
9 Rochester proposal. However, I do understand
10 that the task force has done a lot of work to
11 identify what their needs are and where
12 they're going. I think that they are going
13 to need additional funding. I do not know
14 what the plan is for them at this moment
15 going forward, but I do know that they'll
16 need to continue their efforts.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And the $20 million
18 that the 10 locations will be competing for,
19 that's capital money, am I reading the budget
20 correctly?
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: It's
22 capital money, yes.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: So you're giving
24 planning money and then for the communities
180
1 to come back with saying what they would do
2 with capital money to address their poverty
3 concerns.
4 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Yes.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: Is the department
6 giving any suggestions on what you would
7 build that would help with poverty issues?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
9 what the state will do -- not just OTDA, but
10 other agencies who can lend a hand as well --
11 we'll definitely be available for the
12 planning committee and the team, as we were
13 for the Rochester Anti-Poverty Task Force.
14 And I think the expertise that we did lend to
15 them helped to shape a really successful
16 planning effort and a proposal that they can
17 now move forward with.
18 So yes, we plan on assisting and
19 providing guidance where necessary.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Like my colleagues,
21 I would like to point out that overall I
22 think many of us are very happy with the
23 social services and OTDA budget this year. I
24 would like to point out, as you did in your
181
1 testimony, how pleased I am that the state is
2 moving forward to expand eligibility for
3 federal SNAP benefits. I am known to be
4 somewhat critical of the state's economic
5 development programs, but for the record,
6 expanding SNAP to people who are eligible,
7 it's 100 percent federal money, immediately
8 gets spent in poor communities in their local
9 stores, has a multiplier effect in the local
10 economy for jobs, from the local store to the
11 trucking to the store, through the
12 fields where food is grown.
13 So actually, for those of you who
14 follow regional economic development, you
15 might point out that expanding food stamps
16 probably has a better return on it than
17 almost any other program the state might
18 invest in, and it's all federal money. So I
19 applaud the Governor and your department for
20 moving forward with that change. And
21 anything more we can do to expand
22 participation of eligible New Yorkers in food
23 stamps -- excuse me, SNAP; I'm never going to
24 learn the new name -- would actually play off
182
1 the last Assemblymember's point of how do we
2 support families who are working but still
3 earning too little or moving in and out of
4 the workforce. So I do applaud you on that.
5 I don't know whether the next question
6 is for you or the housing commissioner, but
7 around funding for homelessness issues. So
8 last year's budget, we said we were putting
9 $74.5 million of JPMorgan bank settlement
10 money into programs to address homelessness,
11 and we were moving $55 million in savings
12 from the changes in the youth programs, youth
13 at home programs, we were going to move that
14 into services for the homeless.
15 My understanding is none of that has
16 been spent, and we're getting close to the
17 end of the fiscal year. Can somebody let me
18 know what happened with those monies?
19 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Sure. Senator,
20 thank you for your question.
21 My -- with respect to the $75 million
22 of the JPMorgan money, this predates my
23 arrival at the agency, but it was actually in
24 our budget and held there, I think, for
183
1 suballocation to whatever agency -- you know,
2 subject to the spending plan -- to whatever
3 agency it ultimately was used for. It's
4 actually now part of the Governor's
5 commitment to the new -- to the support
6 services for the new 6,000 units. So that's
7 included within I think it's our total of --
8 I want to say it's almost $200 million for
9 this -- I may be wrong, but almost
10 $200 million total for support in -- you
11 know, for contracts supporting those
12 6,000 units, that we're ultimately going to
13 roll out the 75 as the first chunk of that.
14 The 55, and this is now truly not in
15 my -- not only does it predate my getting
16 here, but I think it might actually not be
17 part of my agency. But I think that that 55
18 is in support of -- has gone in support of
19 some of the rental assistance programs that
20 are run in New York City. But I might be not
21 right, otherwise known as wrong, about that.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: My understanding was
23 that that was what that money was intended
24 for. But as of today, I've been advised that
184
1 we haven't spent that money. So that was my
2 question to you, and I'd be happy if you
3 could get back to me on that.
4 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: One of us will
5 absolutely do that.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay.
7 And going back to the JPMorgan
8 settlement money, it does sort of move me
9 down the road of the overall commitments on
10 homelessness funds in this year's budget.
11 It worries me, I will tell you, that
12 we are applying funds that we promised last
13 year, before we ever had this new commitment,
14 that we didn't spend them but we'll spend
15 them towards that longer-term commitment. I
16 think we all want to see us moving forward.
17 I don't think there's any debate we want to
18 see more funds out there both for more
19 supportive housing units throughout the State
20 of New York and more affordable housing,
21 which was another hearing you were at
22 recently, throughout the State of New York.
23 But it troubles me when we commit in
24 previous years' budgets to things and then we
185
1 don't spend them, but then we count them as
2 going forward as if they weren't previous
3 commitments. And meanwhile, the numbers of
4 people desperately waiting in line to get off
5 the streets just keeps growing.
6 So from my perspective, I don't think
7 last year's monies ought to count towards
8 future years' accounting. It was supposed to
9 get out there in the fiscal year that's
10 ending. And I'd be surprised if there wasn't
11 a mechanism where those providers could use
12 that money now.
13 But on that note, even in going
14 forward with the Governor's proposals -- and
15 I guess this will jump back to the OTDA side
16 of the room, but maybe not -- money for
17 homeless services is written in a way in the
18 budget that one is led to believe it's coming
19 out of the safety net budget and will somehow
20 be, at least as a formula, simply paid for by
21 the City of New York.
22 And so I'm a little confused what
23 we're doing there. Because right now, unlike
24 the rest of the state, the City of New York
186
1 is only receiving about 20 percent of its
2 costs towards its homeless system from the
3 state. And it appears, although the language
4 is complicated, it appears that the language
5 in this year's budget continues or transfers
6 even a greater amount of the cost for any new
7 programs for the homeless to the City of
8 New York.
9 So can you clarify that for me?
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
11 that the language that's included there was a
12 part of the projections for the state's
13 financial plan, and I would defer to the
14 Division of the Budget. I know that they
15 have been working with the finance committees
16 as well as the staff to discuss the funding
17 mechanisms that support the Executive Budget,
18 and I think that's included in that.
19 So I would really defer to the
20 Division of the Budget on it.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: So might you agree,
22 based on a previous question from I think one
23 of my colleagues who had to leave now -- that
24 your budget appears flat for new expansion of
187
1 homeless services, and yet there's a
2 commitment to expanded homeless services --
3 that the reason your budget is flat is
4 because Division of Budget has determined
5 they can pass that cost off to the City of
6 New York?
7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Well, I
8 would say that the homeless action plan that
9 the Governor has put forward is definitely
10 fully funded. Those funds are in a
11 miscellaneous appropriation. So we know that
12 there are funds that are available for this
13 purpose.
14 And, you know, I think that the
15 funding streams and the sources behind the
16 $20 billion are fully accounted for, and your
17 staff can again work with the Division of the
18 Budget to determine where all of those
19 funding lines are located within the budget.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. So I guess
21 for the record, for whoever from Division of
22 the Budget is watching this hearing, we would
23 love to see some kind of chart that shows how
24 all these programs for homeless New Yorkers
188
1 and expanded both capital and supportive
2 service and operating expenses are actually
3 paid for in the state budget. Because
4 frankly, I can't figure it out, holding up
5 your various budgets.
6 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: We
7 commit to getting that to you.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: So I think we really
9 need a chart that documents that. Because
10 again, I think that there is a fear that we
11 are announcing programs and either not
12 putting the money into them that would be
13 needed for you to operationalize, or counting
14 double money that we promised to others in
15 earlier years and treating it as if it's new
16 money for new programs when it was already
17 committed, or simply transferring those costs
18 down to the local level. Which we might have
19 ideological disagreement on one way or the
20 other, but we certainly want to know whether
21 that's the story or not.
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: We'll
23 give you some visibility into that,
24 definitely.
189
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
2 Assembly?
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes. Assemblywoman
4 Lupardo.
5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Yes, thank
6 you. Thank you.
7 Thank you for being here.
8 I just have a few questions on a
9 variety of topics. The first has to do with
10 the Governor's Executive Order 151. In your
11 testimony you said that you were helping each
12 county comply with that order. Can you tell
13 me how exactly you're going about doing that?
14 I just -- I'll tell you why I'm asking the
15 question. I just received a few minutes ago
16 a copy of an application my county,
17 apparently, has submitted, and I was unaware
18 that there would been monies appropriated.
19 So I'm curious as to how much you have
20 appropriated and how you're planning on
21 distributing it.
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: So the
23 agency has done a lot of outreach. When the
24 executive order was enacted and released, we
190
1 immediately arranged calls, a statewide
2 conference call with all 58 districts across
3 the state. The commissioners all
4 participated in that call. And we took a
5 couple of hours to go through with them and
6 talk about the EO 151, what it meant, how
7 they could execute it.
8 And, you know, we also provided them
9 with additional information in order to give
10 them a good framework for processing requests
11 to us for technical assistance as well as
12 funding. So they did receive the EO 151 plan
13 document. We asked every county to fill it
14 out. Whether they were applying for
15 technical assistance or resources was
16 something that we asked them to do in all
17 cases so that we would have good knowledge of
18 what their executive order practices and
19 policies are within their local communities.
20 So each one of the districts have been
21 working on submitting those plans. We've
22 received a number of them, probably 28 to 30
23 of them we've received from various counties
24 across the state, and we are currently
191
1 working to evaluate those initiatives. And
2 any costs that are over and above what the
3 county would have been spending to shelter
4 individuals, we are committing to helping
5 them fund that.
6 And so, again, we're working with the
7 counties and there are very many counties who
8 are doing a great job with execution of the
9 EO 151.
10 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So you're
11 analyzing this county by county, depending on
12 their individual needs. There isn't some
13 distribution for certain parts of the state
14 over others, it's all being done on a
15 case-by-case basis?
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
17 Absolutely.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Okay.
19 A question on the antipoverty
20 initiative. Binghamton is one of the 10
21 cities that has been designated. We also
22 were one of the initial pilot programs from
23 last year. Do you know how the cities were
24 chosen, the 10 cities?
192
1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I
2 believe the cities were chosen based on the
3 high concentration of poverty within the
4 various areas.
5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I think one of
6 the reasons why a lot of my colleagues are
7 asking you about the capital component of
8 that -- you know, we're sort of scratching
9 our heads a little bit. I think it's fair to
10 say that many of us think that we have in
11 place some really terrific programs that
12 would benefit people living in poverty.
13 Certainly through the entire economic
14 regional process and all of the hearings and
15 whatnot that we do over the years, there are
16 several themes that keep coming up --
17 childcare, of course, home visiting programs,
18 transportation.
19 So that's why you're going to keep
20 being asked about capital: Do we really need
21 to build something more? We really would
22 rather see us support the known programs that
23 have a history of doing well that are clearly
24 being underutilized. You know, every single
193
1 one of us has asked a question about the
2 potential use or potential benefit of various
3 programs and how many are not being served.
4 A question on the childcare. Have you
5 been following -- I know we've had a
6 conversation on this, but have you been
7 following the conversation about the federal
8 unfunded mandate regarding childcare and the
9 potential impact it may have on your agency
10 and ability to serve children and provide the
11 number of slots that we've become accustomed
12 to but we're also hoping to increase as we go
13 forward?
14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: We are
15 working with our sister agency, OCFS -- of
16 course you know, who was just here -- who has
17 taken the lead on that effort. And so we are
18 aware of the challenges in implementation of
19 the federal changes.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: And you are
21 part of the conversation and are also aware
22 that our estimates are well over $90 million,
23 probably twice that much?
24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Limited
194
1 visibility into it, but I am aware.
2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Okay. All
3 right. And just one last comment.
4 When you've been given a number of
5 questions about the cuts to its facilitated
6 enrollment -- SUNY, CUNY childcare and other
7 impacts -- these are typically legislative
8 adds that come out each year and get back
9 each year. I mean, ultimately I think many
10 of us would like to see a system that just
11 makes sense that we don't have to keep, in a
12 sense, playing games with this money. This
13 is just important, it should be a basic
14 component of good government, good public
15 policy. So ultimately we'd love to have a
16 conversation about developing a childcare
17 system that works on all levels that includes
18 all of these components.
19 Thank you for being here.
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
21 Absolutely.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
23 Senator Squadron.
24 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
195
1 much.
2 Thank you for being here.
3 Just briefly, I note that in this
4 proposal -- and I know that it's administered
5 by the Department of Health but comes out of
6 the OTDA budget -- the Nurse-Family
7 Partnership is proposed at a million dollars
8 less than it was last year. Is that cut
9 reflective of a feeling on the OTDA side that
10 that's not an effective program?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Say the
12 last part of the question?
13 SENATOR SQUADRON: Is that reflective
14 of a feeling that it is not an effective
15 program, not worthy of funding, or does that
16 cut reflect something else?
17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: No, we
18 believe that it's an effective program,
19 absolutely.
20 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. And
21 Settlement House funding as well, I notice,
22 you know, which helps -- Settlement House is
23 comprehensive lifelong services -- is cut
24 $2.5 million. There's a real push,
196
1 bipartisan, in both houses, to get it to 3.5.
2 Is that cut down to zero reflective that
3 there's a belief that that funding is not
4 well spent or not productive?
5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Again,
6 a great program. I think there are tough
7 choices that have to be made in development
8 of the budget, and so I think that -- you
9 know, that leaves it to the negotiation.
10 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you very
11 much. There's always a negotiation, isn't
12 there?
13 And similarly, Community Service for
14 the Elderly, Summer Youth Employment and
15 many, many of the programs we've heard about,
16 funded through the TANF -- same idea, there's
17 no belief that those programs aren't worthy,
18 they were just decisions made in the first
19 step of a negotiation dance?
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
21 Absolutely.
22 SENATOR SQUADRON: Thank you so much.
23 On homelessness and the funding, I'm
24 just trying to understand here two things,
197
1 kind of simply. And I really look forward to
2 the charts Senator Krueger asked for, and I
3 really appreciate her providing some clarity
4 into something where I've had trouble
5 understanding it myself, for sure.
6 So just if you can answer simply, I'd
7 really appreciate it. And any of the
8 commissioners up there. Is this a strategy
9 that's going to have an impact on
10 homelessness in the short term, or only in
11 the long term?
12 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
13 it's both. I think there are components that
14 help in the short term, in that it's
15 including rental subsidies that help families
16 right now stay in the homes that they're in,
17 as well as gain housing. So definitely short
18 term, but obviously there's a long-term
19 component to that.
20 SENATOR SQUADRON: And how much are
21 the rental subsidies?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: How
23 much?
24 SENATOR SQUADRON: The rental
198
1 subsidies, what's the number?
2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: It's
3 approximately $200 million in this year. And
4 that's a huge increase over where we were
5 back in 2012, for instance, which was just
6 around $100 million.
7 SENATOR SQUADRON: And compared to
8 2011?
9 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I don't
10 know what the comparison is there.
11 SENATOR SQUADRON: The number you're
12 using is post the Advantage Housing Program
13 ceasing to exist, right, for rental
14 subsidies?
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Yes.
16 It's before my tenure, but I am familiar with
17 it.
18 SENATOR SQUADRON: So it doesn't take
19 into account that cut.
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
21 it does. I think Advantage went away;
22 however, Advantage, again, was a rental
23 subsidy program. And since it's gone away, I
24 think the state has more than made a solid
199
1 commitment to rental subsidies. And so it's
2 funded at $200 million, projected at
3 $200 million for 2016-2017, which more than
4 replaces Advantage.
5 SENATOR SQUADRON: And how much of
6 that will be available in the City of New
7 York, the 200?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I don't
9 have the breakdown, but by and large, I
10 think -- Commissioner Rubin said based on
11 need. A large portion of that, of course,
12 would be in New York City.
13 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. And do we
14 know how many units that's going to help
15 fund?
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I don't
17 have that in front of me, but it's easy
18 enough to get to you.
19 SENATOR SQUADRON: But we don't know
20 how many.
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Not off
22 the top of my head, I'm sorry.
23 SENATOR SQUADRON: And in terms of the
24 rental subsidy program, the shelter beds, the
200
1 emergency shelter beds, and the supportive
2 housing, just to be very, very clear --
3 Senator Krueger was talking about a
4 formula -- at the end of the day, is that new
5 money for localities, or does that replace
6 any other funding that localities already get
7 in any program at all?
8 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: I can speak most
9 clearly, Senator, to the capital side of it,
10 which is by far the largest amount of money.
11 So the 6,000 supportive beds, the 6,000, just
12 for the next five years, is about
13 $2.5 billion of new capital funding. That is
14 entirely new money that has never been
15 appropriated before.
16 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. Thank you.
17 That's such a clear answer. I really
18 appreciate it --
19 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: We strive for
20 clarity.
21 SENATOR SQUADRON: And it's great
22 news.
23 On the other two, on the rental
24 subsidies and the emergency beds, can I have
201
1 an equally clear answer one way or the other?
2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Yes.
3 The resources are new for those.
4 SENATOR SQUADRON: Are new, and in no
5 way replace any other funding stream in any
6 program at all?
7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Well,
8 the rental subsidies are a continuation of
9 programs that have been in place and are
10 receiving increases going forward, so ...
11 SENATOR SQUADRON: Right. But for
12 example, they would not be offset in a
13 reduction in public assistance dollars or --
14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
15 Correct.
16 SENATOR SQUADRON: -- or any other
17 fund or -- the Flexible Fund for Family
18 Services or any other fund at all?
19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
20 Correct.
21 SENATOR SQUADRON: Great. So that's
22 new money. And just so I understand the
23 amount of money it is -- and I know my time
24 is up -- it's $100 million in new money for
202
1 rental subsidies eligible for localities
2 across the state. And how much for the
3 emergency shelter beds?
4 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Well,
5 that will be determined once we find the
6 locations and determine, you know, what those
7 costs will be. So undetermined.
8 SENATOR SQUADRON: But the cash is
9 sitting there, it will go somewhere and it
10 won't get offset against anything else?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Yes.
12 SENATOR SQUADRON: That's great.
13 Thank you for the clarity.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Savino.
17 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
18 Young.
19 I want to go back to the homeless
20 issue and the new policy. Not to discuss the
21 housing issue -- we discussed that
22 extensively last week. But I'm curious as to
23 who's going to do the -- so who's going to be
24 in charge of this new joint effort of
203
1 inspecting shelters? Is that going to be the
2 state, will that be OTDA?
3 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Well,
4 the Office of Temporary and Disability
5 Assistance is leading the effort. But it is
6 a collaborative effort with the comptrollers.
7 And so they will be making their selections
8 of shelters based on information that we
9 share with them.
10 So once we complete our inspections,
11 we will be sharing it with them and they will
12 be determining which shelters they would like
13 to do their own inspections on.
14 SENATOR SAVINO: As you know, the
15 majority of the shelters are in the City of
16 New York. I think earlier you said it's 700
17 of the 900 around the state. Those shelters,
18 does that also include the family hotel
19 programs, or is that just shelters
20 themselves?
21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: It's
22 going to include shelters themselves and a
23 portion of the hotels and motels will also be
24 visited.
204
1 SENATOR SAVINO: So assuming the state
2 inspects these shelters and they find the
3 conditions are as bad as some of the homeless
4 have claimed them to be, are you going to
5 then take action and order them closed, or
6 some corrective action? Ultimately the state
7 does not have a contract with those shelters,
8 it's the City of New York. So who's going to
9 demand the action, the cleanup, whatever the
10 case may be?
11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: It's
12 the state's responsibility in order to
13 oversee the districts in their provision of
14 these services. So ultimately the districts
15 are responsible for making sure that the
16 shelters are in a well-maintained condition.
17 And so the state will be working
18 directly with the district and providing them
19 with instructions as far as the conditions
20 that we find. For instance, we have done
21 shelter inspections over the last couple of
22 weeks, we have found deplorable conditions,
23 and we have directed the social services
24 districts to move those clients into better,
205
1 more well maintained housing. So.
2 SENATOR SAVINO: Where would they put
3 them, though? I mean, I'm assuming you don't
4 have empty shelters somewhere to transfer
5 them to.
6 I'm wondering, are we going to be
7 shifting people to motels and hotels? Which
8 is something that was done, you know,
9 20 years ago.
10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: There
11 is some fluidity to the way that the shelter
12 intake process works, and so they have been
13 successfully finding other locations for
14 these clients. To date, there haven't been
15 too many of those. However, as we continue
16 our inspection initiative, we expect that
17 definitely more will be found. And so
18 therefore at that time I think we will need
19 to work with New York City on a corrective
20 action plan and finding out where they can
21 identify those additional beds.
22 And so I know that that's something
23 that they are working on and something that
24 they contemplate needing to happen. But I
206
1 think our foremost concern is making sure
2 people are safe and in, you know,
3 well-maintained locations.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: As it should be.
5 I want to switch to the minimum wage.
6 We've discussed it extensively with OPWDD,
7 all of the human service agencies, the effect
8 that the raise in the minimum wage will have
9 on your partner social services agencies or
10 human service agencies and their inability to
11 absorb it. So I don't need to remind you of
12 that. And we've said it a million times.
13 And I'm sure we'll hear from some of them
14 today.
15 But I'm also concerned somewhat about
16 those working people out there who are
17 currently earning the statutory minimum wage
18 of $9 an hour. So they're earning $9 an
19 hour; if they're working a 40-hour week,
20 they're earning $18,720. As a result of
21 that, you know they're eligible for certain
22 support services. And it's been mentioned
23 more than once in the argument to raise the
24 minimum wage that the state is subsidizing
207
1 many of these corporations by improving all
2 sorts of benefits to these low-wage workers.
3 So if we raise the minimum wage to
4 $15 an hour for these workers -- which, by
5 the way, I am totally supportive of. I think
6 we need to establish a livable wage. But
7 they are going to then jump from $18,720 for
8 working a 40-hour week to $31,200 working a
9 40-hour week. Many of these jobs also, you
10 know, require overtime, so they're going to
11 go over that. There's a very real
12 possibility, as you know, that they will lose
13 all eligibility for assistance, which is
14 going to force them to do one of two things:
15 Reduce their work hours because they can't
16 afford to, you know, lose the benefits, or
17 they're going to quit.
18 And so how -- what can we do to look
19 at the eligibility standards for assistance
20 to stabilize families so that we don't give
21 with one hand and take with the other?
22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Mm-hmm.
23 I think -- and I think we discussed this a
24 little bit earlier, the fact that there are
208
1 numerous work supports that are in place.
2 And so a family who finds themselves
3 ineligible for public assistance can still
4 maintain child support -- again, childcare
5 payments for up to a year after. And so that
6 gives them a long transition time. They can
7 still be eligible for heat benefits, heating
8 assistance benefits, as well as tax credits
9 and other things.
10 And, you know, when you combine all
11 those things, I think that that is adequate.
12 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, I certainly
13 hope so. Because as I said, I would hate to
14 see where on one hand we are giving, we're
15 lifting people and on the other hand we're
16 literally pressing them back down again.
17 There's also going to be a
18 corresponding effect to workers above it.
19 You know, when you raise the floor, you raise
20 the ceiling too. You know, and I'd just like
21 to point out, just in your agencies alone,
22 the starting salary for a job opportunity
23 specialist -- which is your eligibility
24 specialist workers, the people who determine
209
1 who's eligible -- in the City of New York is
2 35,000. And those are people who have to
3 have a bachelor's degree. And they're making
4 determinations, but under this, they would
5 only be earning $4,000 more than a minimum
6 wage worker.
7 So I really think -- I've said this
8 continuously -- we as a state need to look at
9 what we're doing to attract people into the
10 social service field and how we value those
11 jobs. The idea that we're paying people
12 minimum wage, in some instances, to take care
13 of the elderly and provide home care services
14 and, you know, direct support to the
15 developmentally disabled is appalling. They
16 should not be earning minimum wage. We can't
17 recruit and retain these workers. Which is
18 critically important for the partner
19 agencies.
20 So I think as we move forward with
21 this discussion we have to take into
22 consideration the effect of low wages on the
23 delivery of social services in our state.
24 Thank you.
210
1 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Senator, for what
2 it's worth, I obviously agree with your
3 commitment to that sector. And, you know, to
4 refocus to a different part of the budget, we
5 did talk a couple of weeks ago about the
6 affordable housing plan. It is absolutely
7 the Governor's commitment to make sure that
8 the vast majority of the new units that we
9 create or preserve, in New York City as well
10 as elsewhere, are targeted to the low, the
11 very low, and the extremely low income
12 segments of the population. And it's for
13 exactly the reason you mentioned: You cannot
14 have a vibrant, growing city if you're not
15 able to provide adequate housing to the
16 people that are stuck at those income
17 levels -- for whatever reason, whether it's
18 because they're down on their luck or because
19 they've chosen to enter fields that simply
20 don't pay, you know, what other fields pay.
21 It's an incredibly important part of the
22 workforce of the city. And so that's -- you
23 know, taking it to the other part of the
24 budget, that's why the Governor made that
211
1 comment.
2 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
4 Senator Montgomery. And then we'll
5 have Senator Kennedy to close.
6 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, thank you,
7 Madam Chair.
8 I think I want to direct my question,
9 I believe, to Commissioner Rubin in terms of
10 housing because that's what I -- I know we're
11 talking about homelessness. And I just want
12 to emphasize that I'm really so excited and
13 happy about the emphasis on looking at the
14 homeless situation and the people who are
15 sort of stuck there.
16 But you know, I think we have this
17 huge crisis certainly in my district and my
18 part of the city. And it occurs to me that
19 the homelessness is a symptom of another
20 policy area that we have not really
21 successful addressed, I should say.
22 Obviously there is an increasing shortage of
23 affordable housing, and there is this
24 gentrification that is taking place, that has
212
1 taken place, and that gentrification, aside
2 from removing affordable housing and
3 replacing it with luxury housing,
4 essentially, market rate housing, it has
5 increased the affordability of the housing
6 that has not been gentrified.
7 And so there is an increased number of
8 evictions related to the fact that people can
9 no longer just simply afford to live where
10 they've lived for the last 20 years or so.
11 And so we have this homelessness. And it's
12 the homelessness of families which is the
13 most critical problem that we have. And so
14 my -- we've had this -- this is not the first
15 time that we have experienced this crisis in
16 homelessness.
17 But we continue to treat it as if it's
18 just episodic, right, and that it's going to
19 go away somehow, and if we just invest in
20 these shelter beds that we're going to begin
21 to correct this terrible situation.
22 But at that time we also begin to
23 invest much more specifically in the creation
24 of affordable housing in partnership
213
1 primarily, I believe, with the not-for-profit
2 community housing developers and many of the
3 supportive housing providers. I know about
4 our city, the city in particular.
5 So my question to you is, where are we
6 with that process? And is there -- do we
7 have projects in the pipeline? If so, where
8 are they? And, you know, how many units are
9 we talking about within that context? And
10 what part of your plan includes a specific
11 targeting of your partnering, once again,
12 with not-for-profit community housing
13 developers to develop affordable housing?
14 And I don't mean a few units in a
15 luxury building where they build a back door
16 for the poor people to go into, the poor-door
17 people. Not that. I'm just talking about
18 housing that is specifically for the purpose
19 of creating an opportunity for poor people to
20 live in our city.
21 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: So, Senator,
22 there's so many issues packed into that
23 question, we may be here --
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, I realize
214
1 that. I don't have much time, so I tried to
2 put everything into the question.
3 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: No, it's fine.
4 I'm happy to be able to talk to all of
5 them -- or some of them.
6 Let's see. So I certainly couldn't
7 agree more with your assessment of the
8 problem, from the symptom, which is the lack
9 of housing, down all through to the
10 diagnosis, which is gentrification and
11 economic conditions and just the grinding
12 poverty that so many people in New York City
13 and elsewhere suffer from.
14 So what are we doing in this budget,
15 what is the Governor doing in this budget to
16 address that? First, there's the budget
17 itself, which is really an unprecedented
18 five-year fully funded, as my colleague said,
19 capital commitment to the development of new
20 affordable housing. And it's -- as we've
21 talked about before, before you even get to
22 the special needs, it's $10 billion of new
23 funding over five years for 100,000 units,
24 both new and preserved. So that by itself is
215
1 a significant contribution to New York City
2 and outside of New York City's housing stock.
3 You asked about not-for-profits in
4 terms of the affordability. Again, I
5 understand exactly why you're asking. And I
6 think I mentioned before the Governor has
7 made it clear that his commitment is to
8 create, as you say, truly affordable housing.
9 And so we anticipate that about 85 percent of
10 the units that we create or preserve through
11 that plan will be affordable at the levels of
12 low, very low, and extremely low-income
13 people. Depending on, you know, what that
14 means in the region where the housing itself
15 is developed.
16 As far as the nonprofit sector --
17 which again, I share your commitment to the
18 nonprofit sector. They are some of our
19 greatest partners in this work -- we fund
20 nonprofits, actually, through some of our
21 grant programs. I had the opportunity just
22 now to look at the annual report that our NPP
23 and RPP program puts out to talk about the
24 good work that they've done in the last year
216
1 funding a lot of those local development
2 agencies, some of which I know Senator Young
3 knows well. Those are in many places,
4 particularly in the rural areas but also in
5 the city, some of our greatest partners in
6 the work of developing and preserving
7 affordable housing and making homeownership
8 opportunities available to people of low
9 income.
10 So -- and obviously we will continue
11 at higher levels, because that's what's in
12 the budget, to fund those agencies for the
13 coming years to take advantage of the
14 affordable housing plan that the Governor
15 laid out.
16 And then as far as just more
17 generally, even for those groups that are not
18 recipients of our grant funding, many of our
19 applicants for our funding programs, just by
20 the nature of the programs themselves are
21 nonprofits. In fact, most are. They're
22 usually either paired by themselves or they
23 are paired with a for-profit developer, and
24 we do our best to work with them. They are
217
1 some of the most sophisticated developers
2 there are, actually, and we work very closely
3 with them to make sure that they know of our
4 funding availability well in advance of our
5 issuance of the RFPs, and then how to take
6 advantage of those programs.
7 In fact, you should know we've had a
8 series of conferences in the last few
9 months -- not in New York City but in -- I'm
10 now going to blank on where we've done them,
11 but we've done three -- Utica, I think
12 Rochester and perhaps one other. And then
13 we've got about 10 others coming up over the
14 next year specifically for the purpose of
15 bringing our agency staff and other agency
16 staffs out into the field at the direction of
17 the Governor to meet with representatives of
18 local not-for-profits to explain to them
19 exactly how to take advantage of government
20 funding, for the reasons that you said.
21 Because for those agencies that haven't yet
22 gotten into our pipeline, we need to make
23 sure that they have the ability to do that,
24 and that's really critically important work.
218
1 The one thing I'll say finally, you've
2 talked at the beginning about gentrification.
3 It's a serious issue, obviously, particularly
4 in a place like New York City, where real
5 estates values continue to go up. But we're
6 also seeing it in many of the other
7 outside-of-New-York-City cities that are
8 experiencing economic growth.
9 I will take this opportunity to talk
10 about the good work that our Tenant
11 Protection Unit does, as I did at my budget
12 hearing. They're not here to take the credit
13 today as they were two weeks ago, but they do
14 an enormous amount of good work to protect
15 against illegal harassment, which often
16 results in eviction or effective eviction,
17 where somebody shuts off the heat in the
18 middle of winter or something like that.
19 We are active participants in a task
20 force with the Attorney General's office and
21 with the city HPD to do the same thing. And
22 it's all in the interest of combating the
23 dynamic that you just described.
24 So I think, if I've ticked off all the
219
1 issues, I think I agree with you on
2 everything. And I'm glad that you raised
3 those issues.
4 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, and I just
5 would like also to know if you have projects
6 that are in the pipeline that we can sort of
7 look at that and determine when we might be
8 able to look forward to some -- your
9 addressing is this in other than looking at
10 shelter beds.
11 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Sure. So we have
12 a very active pipeline, and I think probably
13 it would be best to come back to you in
14 person with our staff or something and talk
15 about it.
16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: That would be
17 very helpful.
18 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Happy to do it,
19 of course.
20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
22 Senator Kennedy, to close.
23 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you very much.
24 Deputy Director, I want to touch on
220
1 the Anti-Poverty Initiative. I'm very
2 pleased that this is underway, you know,
3 especially coming out of the district that I
4 represent, where there's a very high
5 propensity for poverty in certain areas of
6 the district.
7 So we have been working collectively
8 with the community and with various levels of
9 government to attack poverty at its base
10 root. So I want to talk about the initiative
11 and the funding for providing the planning
12 and implementation for this Anti-Poverty
13 Initiative.
14 It's at the $500,000 level. How do
15 you feel that this implementation can be
16 realized with that level, $500,000, when you
17 look at a city like Buffalo, which, you know,
18 you were funding at the $500,000 level when
19 Rochester was at $750,000 and is still in the
20 initial phases of this? Can you just talk a
21 little bit about that, where that $500,000
22 number came from and if that number is
23 adequate?
24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: We
221
1 believe that the amount is adequate to at
2 least see the planning and implementation
3 effort in each one of these communities.
4 It's a place to start. Might these
5 communities need more? Possibly. However,
6 $500,000 will allow them to bring the
7 appropriate parties together and to engage in
8 a really meaningful planning process.
9 And so we are hopeful that that seed
10 money will provide an avenue for them to
11 create a roadmap for anti-poverty within
12 their local community. But I understand
13 where you're going with that.
14 SENATOR KENNEDY: So the City of
15 Rochester just -- around its local strategic
16 plan, they're yet to move past that. And the
17 rest of the initiative is being modeled off
18 of that. Now, everything I've heard about
19 Rochester is very positive, so don't get me
20 wrong here. But it's slow in evolving into
21 the implementation phase. And we need to
22 attack this in a very aggressive nature. And
23 there's organizations like the United Way
24 that are on the front lines that are already
222
1 working in a collaborative fashion with local
2 governments, with state government, with
3 various agencies at a local level.
4 Why not allow the United Way to be the
5 leading partner in this sort of initiative?
6 And why open the process up now?
7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I think
8 that community-based organizations, including
9 United Way, will play an important part in
10 that planning effort. However, we don't want
11 to dictate statewide one particular entity in
12 order to lead that effort. I think that that
13 is more appropriately grown out of the local
14 community and what their needs are.
15 But I fully expect that United Way, as
16 well as other community-based organizations,
17 will be right there and right there leading
18 the effort and helping.
19 SENATOR KENNEDY: So there's nothing
20 precluding the United Way from, say, playing
21 a lead role in any of these various
22 initiatives in the various localities.
23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
24 Correct.
223
1 SENATOR KENNEDY: Okay. I want to
2 talk about the statewide 211 system. That's
3 a model that can be used as a resource to
4 combat poverty. It's already in place,
5 there's no cost to implementing it as a part
6 of the Anti-Poverty Initiative. However,
7 there's no state funding for the program.
8 Last year they received $1.3 million; there
9 was a request in this year for $1.4 million.
10 And the allocation that came forward was
11 zero.
12 Do you believe that this is something
13 that should be changed? And do you believe
14 that this is something that can help us with
15 this Anti-Poverty Initiative?
16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I have
17 some knowledge of the 211 system that has
18 been developed. I also know that some
19 communities have their own version of the 211
20 system. However, I do believe it's a really
21 effective and positive model. The funding
22 for the 211, I don't know where it has come
23 from. Not from our agency. So I'm not
24 really sure what's going to happen to their
224
1 funding in next year. But it is certainly a
2 good model that could be considered as
3 something that would be effective statewide.
4 SENATOR KENNEDY: Okay. But putting
5 that funding back in place you feel would be
6 helpful to the Anti-Poverty Initiative
7 statewide?
8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I
9 believe that there are certain communities
10 who would need a 211 system who don't
11 currently have one. And I think that that
12 would be very helpful for them. There are
13 communities who have other 211 systems who
14 don't need that support and help, so ...
15 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
18 We've been joined by Assemblywoman
19 Peoples-Stokes to ask a question.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank
21 you very much, Mr. Chairman.
22 And thank the panel for your comments.
23 I did get the opportunity to hear most of
24 them in the office this morning, and some of
225
1 them here. So I appreciate your thoughts
2 here today.
3 One of the things that I'm sure you
4 all know, that the Governor has done a really
5 great job with highlighting the importance
6 and the value of minority and women business
7 enterprises. And so I'm just wondering if
8 each of you could respectfully speak to the
9 role that your agency has played in fostering
10 that business development in terms of vendors
11 as well as developers.
12 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE:
13 Absolutely. I'll take a crack at that first.
14 I think the Office of Temporary and --
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: I'm
16 sorry, I can't hear you.
17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: I just
18 said I think I'll take a crack at that first.
19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Okay.
20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: The
21 Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance
22 has a robust minority- and women-owned
23 business practice, and we have been able to
24 achieve participation rates that meet the
226
1 statewide goals. And so last year we were at
2 26.5 percent, and this upcoming year we're
3 expected to exceed the 30 percent goal.
4 And so we have a program in place that
5 really is robust and reaches out to the
6 providers and makes sure that there is
7 participation through lots of outreach, lots
8 of connections with these local providers.
9 And so I think we are doing very well in this
10 area.
11 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: I'm happy to say
12 the same thing. I realize, you know,
13 Assemblymember, I'm relatively new to the
14 agency. Actually last year we were
15 successful, I believe, in exceeding the
16 Governor's goal, which was 20 percent at the
17 time. This year obviously we'll strive to
18 hit and exceed 30 percent.
19 I should say that -- two things. One,
20 the new chairman of the board of the Housing
21 Finance Authority, which oversees much of the
22 work that our agency does, is Bill Thompson,
23 who I think was the head of the Governor's
24 commission on -- task force, exactly, on
227
1 MWBE. So that obviously we're benefiting
2 from his expertise.
3 And the other is Sharon Devine, to my
4 left, spent a number of her years at our
5 agency and is responsible for whatever
6 success we've had in past years. So I can't
7 really take credit for it.
8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN PEOPLES-STOKES: Thank
9 you. And I will just add that, you know, you
10 can't measure the value of allowing minority
11 and women business enterprises to have access
12 to do business with government. It not only
13 helps them and their immediate families, but
14 it actually helps the community as well
15 because they're able to create the small
16 businesses that a lot of communities thrive
17 on.
18 So I applaud your ability to meet
19 those goals, and I'm almost sure that you're
20 going to meet the new goals the Governor has
21 set out. And there's some things that we can
22 do to be helpful to you to make sure that
23 happens; we'd be happy to.
24 The only last point I want to make is,
228
1 you know, while it's good to be a vendor,
2 sometimes we have to make sure that we get
3 minority and women opportunities to be
4 developers as well.
5 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
7 Senator?
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
9 much.
10 That concludes your portion of the
11 proceedings today. So sincerely, thank you
12 so much for your testimony. We appreciate
13 you being here and being on stage for so
14 long. So it's great to see you.
15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER DEVINE: Thank
16 you.
17 COMMISSIONER RUBIN: Nice to see you,
18 Senator. Thank you.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker,
20 from the New York State Office for the Aging,
21 Corinda Crossdale, director.
22 Welcome.
23 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Thank you.
24 Good afternoon, Chairpersons Young,
229
1 Farrell, Cymbrowitz and distinguished members
2 of the Senate Finance and Assembly Ways and
3 Means Committees. My name is Corinda
4 Crossdale, and I am the director of the New
5 York State Office for the Aging.
6 The New York State Office for the
7 Aging, established in 1961, is New York's
8 designated state unit on aging as required by
9 the federal Older Americans Act. NYSOFA is
10 the lead agency for promoting, coordinating,
11 and administering federal, state and local
12 programs and services for older New Yorkers
13 age 60 and over and their caregivers.
14 The goals and priorities of the State
15 Office for the Aging are consistent with the
16 state's vision for promoting and sustaining
17 the independence of older New Yorkers,
18 slowing the growth of Medicaid spending,
19 reducing preventable hospital readmissions,
20 and supporting New York's Olmstead
21 implementation plan.
22 In carrying out the agency's mission,
23 NYSOFA provides leadership and direction to
24 an integrated network of 59 county-based Area
230
1 Agencies on Aging and more than 1,200 public
2 and private organizations which serve and
3 help empower older adults and their families.
4 Governor Cuomo's priority to better
5 coordinate state agencies work in an effort
6 to better utilize and leverage existing
7 resources, reduce duplication, strengthen
8 service delivery, increase efficiencies and
9 improve outcomes, has led to stronger working
10 partnerships among many agencies.
11 In addition to protecting and
12 preserving core programs we administer, the
13 Executive Budget over the past two years has
14 invested an additional $8 million to increase
15 access to services statewide. This includes
16 $7.5 million to expand the Community Services
17 for the Elderly Program, which provides
18 flexible funds to counties to meet locally
19 determined needs and $500,000 to support the
20 modernization of the Long Term Care Ombudsman
21 Program. LTCOP serves as the advocate and
22 resource for persons who reside in long-term
23 care facilities such as nursing homes,
24 assisted living, and board and care homes.
231
1 The Executive Budget also supports the
2 sustainability plan for the enhanced and
3 expanded New York Connects program under the
4 state's Balanced Incentive Payment award.
5 New York Connects is a statewide, locally
6 based no-wrong-door system that provides
7 one-stop access to free, objective and
8 comprehensive information and assistance on
9 accessing long-term services and supports.
10 NYSOFA receives about $210 million
11 annually from the federal Administration for
12 Community Living and state General Fund
13 resources. These funds leverage an
14 additional $250 million from county match,
15 voluntary contributions, cost sharing, and
16 fundraising.
17 The statewide network of service
18 providers and volunteers that work to support
19 older adults and their caregivers are able to
20 be successful because of the public/private
21 partnerships that have been built as a result
22 of how the network was originally organized,
23 and the recognition that partnerships are the
24 only way to strengthen and expand services.
232
1 These services are coordinated with other
2 entities that provide similar services, such
3 as faith-based organizations, not-for
4 profits, and other municipal supports.
5 The aging services network provides
6 the following core services to communities
7 statewide: Legal services; caregiver support
8 services, such as support groups, training
9 and respite; care management and assistance
10 with everyday tasks such as bathing,
11 dressing, eating, house cleaning, laundry,
12 meal preparation, grocery shopping, errands,
13 and bill paying; social adult day services;
14 and transportation and other services that
15 you'll find in your written testimony.
16 Preliminary data has shown that when
17 compared to last year, the network has
18 expanded access to many core services.
19 Service expansion between 6 percent and
20 41 percent were realized depending on the
21 particular service. Additionally, NYSOFA's
22 partnership with the county Offices for the
23 Aging and sister state agencies to increase
24 access to services has yielded positive
233
1 results. And these include our Health
2 Insurance, Information, Counseling and
3 Assistance Program. HIICAP was able to
4 provide savings in the amount of
5 $43.6 million to low-income New York Medicare
6 beneficiaries who were seeking financial
7 assistance with prescription drugs and other
8 Medicare costs through enrollment assistance
9 into the Extra Help and Medicare Savings
10 Programs. This past year, HIICAP served over
11 158,000 Medicare beneficiaries in New York
12 State.
13 Our enhanced and expanded New York
14 Connects became operational across the state,
15 including the five boroughs comprising New
16 York City, as of September 30, 2015. Work is
17 ongoing to reach full implementation by the
18 end of 2016.
19 NYSOFA continues to work closely with
20 DOH and other state partners -- OPWDD, OMH,
21 OASAS -- as well as the local New York
22 Connects programs. An RFA to expand and
23 enhance New York Connects for persons with
24 physical disabilities will be issued in 2016.
234
1 Elder abuse/crimes against the
2 elderly. NYSOFA has partnered with OCFS and
3 other partners to pilot an enhanced
4 multidisciplinary team approach in combating
5 elder abuse and financial exploitation. The
6 addition of a forensic accountant within the
7 E-MDTs has proven to be a very successful
8 model. Training has been initiated with DFS
9 and OCFS for financial institutions on
10 financial exploitation.
11 NYSOFA is also working with DCJS to
12 update the basic course for police officers
13 in New York State to help law enforcement be
14 better equipped to identify and assist older
15 adults who are abused or are victims of other
16 crimes.
17 The Senior Farmers Market Nutrition
18 Program. In partnership with the Department
19 of Agriculture and Markets, county Offices
20 for the Aging received 25 percent increases
21 in the number and value of coupon books that
22 allows low-income, at-risk older adults to
23 purchase locally grown fresh fruits and
24 vegetables.
235
1 NYSOFA continues to be proactive in
2 working to improve service delivery and
3 advocacy for older adults by increasing
4 partnerships and integrating our work with
5 other agencies and entities. I want to thank
6 you for your commitment to aging services and
7 for your partnership. We look forward to
8 continuing to create systems that are
9 seamless for the consumer and their families.
10 And I want to thank you for the
11 opportunity to share my comments. I am happy
12 to answer any questions you may have.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Director
14 Crossdale. We appreciate your testimony.
15 I'm very pleased to announce that
16 we've been joined by the chair of the Senate
17 Aging Committee, and that's Senator Sue
18 Serino. And I believe that she would like to
19 speak.
20 SENATOR SERINO: Good afternoon. My
21 question is regarding the Community Services
22 for the Elderly program. I know that we've
23 had an additional $7.5 million for the CSE
24 over the last two fiscal years which has been
236
1 maintained in the Executive Budget. But how
2 has this funding reduced waiting lists at the
3 local level?
4 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: We've seen
5 increases in services across all of the core
6 service programs, and that was at between 6
7 and 41 percent. So it has had an impact on
8 waiting lists across the entire state in the
9 aging network.
10 I also wanted to point out, I had
11 mentioned in my comments that the funding
12 that we receive and distribute to the
13 counties through the area Agencies on Aging
14 also leverage an additional $250 million in
15 services.
16 So though an individual might be on a
17 waiting list with the area Agency on Aging,
18 it doesn't equate to no services at all.
19 They would most likely be referred to another
20 community not-for-profit organization or a
21 faith-based community organization to
22 continue to receive services.
23 We continue to track those individuals
24 through the area Agencies on Aging, but they
237
1 do receive services in the interim.
2 SENATOR SERINO: Okay. And what are
3 some of the other unmet needs local Aging
4 offices are facing?
5 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I would say when
6 we do our needs assessment or when we receive
7 the needs assessments through the area
8 Agencies on Aging, some of their top priority
9 areas are assisting caregivers in making sure
10 that they have the resources that they need
11 to continue to provide for their loved ones.
12 And another top area with the needs
13 assessment has been with transportation.
14 Our area Agencies on Aging do provide
15 us with an annual implementation plan on how
16 they're going to address the identified needs
17 in their area and what our office can do to
18 assist with that.
19 SENATOR SERINO: Can I ask another --
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Sure, Senator, you
21 still have at least eight minutes or more, as
22 chair of Aging. Even more if you need to.
23 SENATOR SERINO: Thank you. With
24 regard to New York Connects, the recent
238
1 statewide expansion of the New York Connects
2 program has been financed through one-time
3 federal balancing incentive program BIP
4 funding. Is there funding in the budget to
5 maintain support for New York Connects upon
6 the expiration of the BIP funding in October?
7 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Absolutely. That
8 initial investment was for infrastructure
9 building. And it's not in the language of
10 this year's budget, but last year's budget
11 did include the language of an investment of
12 $18 million in sustainability funds. That's
13 under the global Medicaid cap. And we stay
14 in close contact with the Department of
15 Health, and that funding is still available
16 for sustainability.
17 We had an extension through the
18 federal government this year, so we didn't
19 need the global cap this year. But it will
20 be in the language next year.
21 SENATOR SERINO: Then another question
22 I have is do you anticipate any discrepancies
23 in the availability of the services to older
24 adults who are on Medicaid versus older
239
1 adults who are not receiving Medicaid
2 support?
3 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I think that
4 there's synergies. We serve all older
5 adults, regardless of what type of source of
6 funding of assistance that they're receiving.
7 So we do serve individuals who are on
8 Medicaid and individuals who are not
9 receiving Medicaid funds.
10 With the implementations of the MLTCs,
11 we do look at transitioning individuals who
12 might be receiving services through our
13 network who are now eligible to receive
14 services through the MLTCs. So we do look
15 across the board at all funding sources as we
16 deliver services to older New Yorkers.
17 SENATOR SERINO: Okay, great.
18 And then my last question is about the
19 NORCs. The Executive proposes to prohibit
20 awarding contracts to NORC and Neighborhood
21 NORC if the program is not in compliance with
22 statutory requirements. And how many NORCs
23 and Neighborhood NORCs are currently not in
24 compliance with the statutory requirements?
240
1 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: There are seven
2 Neighborhood NORCs currently not in
3 compliance, and four NORCs not currently in
4 compliance.
5 SENATOR SERINO: And do you know where
6 the NORCs are located?
7 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I do. I can
8 provide you with that list, or I can -- I
9 could read it off.
10 SENATOR SERINO: That's okay. Thank
11 you.
12 And do you believe there could be
13 unintended consequences of not providing
14 these supports to communities, such as a more
15 expensive placement like assisted living or
16 nursing home placement?
17 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: A lot of the
18 NORCs are cofunded, so they have other
19 resources that go into their programs. The
20 vast majority of the funding goes towards
21 hiring individuals to coordinate the program.
22 The actual services are provided by local
23 service providers.
24 So when you look at the -- let's say
241
1 the nursing component, when they go in and
2 they take blood pressure, that's an existing
3 service provider in the community that's not
4 funded by the NORC, but those services are
5 coordinated by individuals hired to implement
6 the NORC program.
7 And just a portion of their funding,
8 the funding for their salary, comes out of
9 NYSOFA's budget. So you might find like a
10 program coordinator, maybe 15 percent of
11 their total salary is paid out of the NYSOFA
12 budget. So those positions won't go away.
13 We would also work with the local
14 areas Agencies on Aging to look for
15 alternatives.
16 SENATOR SERINO: Great. Thank you,
17 Director.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
19 Assemblyman?
20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman
21 Cymbrowitz, chairman for Aging.
22 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Thank you,
23 chairman.
24 Thank you, Director Crossdale.
242
1 Wonderful to see you this afternoon.
2 I think the best way to sum up the
3 Executive's proposal for NYSOFA is flat.
4 There are no significant increases in the
5 funding and a few cuts that are very
6 concerning.
7 If we're going to be serious about the
8 goal of keeping older adults in the community
9 and the fact that there is an increase in
10 seniors on a daily basis, we need to figure
11 out a way of funding those needs and how to
12 develop more service infrastructure for our
13 seniors.
14 So I'd like to follow up and talk
15 about what Senator Serino talked about, and
16 the fact that one of the programs that you're
17 cutting is NORCs. The Executive has
18 identified about a million dollars from NORCs
19 and Neighborhood NORCs as savings. That's
20 almost a 25 percent cut. Can you talk about
21 exactly where those funds are going to be
22 going?
23 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Based on the
24 current budget proposal, there's no plan for
243
1 reinvestment. But we would be open to
2 considering other options as we move through
3 the budget-making process.
4 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Now, these
5 NORCs have contracts with NYSOFA; is that not
6 correct?
7 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: That's correct,
8 yes.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: So what
10 happens to those contracts?
11 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: We would have a
12 transition plan in working with the current
13 NORC providers. It wouldn't necessarily be a
14 cliff as of April 1. We would look at the
15 time they have left in their contract period
16 and then what would happen with those
17 services as they move forward.
18 We would also work with the area
19 Agencies on Aging at the local level, because
20 there are investments at the local level, to
21 see if there are possibilities of investments
22 from other funding into those programs.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Will any of
24 the contracts that are mid-term be cut?
244
1 Those that are in the middle of their
2 contracts, will they be ended?
3 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: There's a
4 possibility. But again, we would work on a
5 transition plan. We wouldn't just drop them
6 immediately. This would be a conversation
7 that we would have with the service provider.
8 We would also go back and look at the
9 data that was presented that really
10 identified those NORCs and Neighborhood
11 NORCs, just to make sure there weren't any
12 shifts in the data since we looked at it
13 last. So that would be part of the overall
14 analysis.
15 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Could you
16 talk a little bit about exactly what NORCs
17 do? Not only classic NORCs, but Neighborhood
18 NORCs as well.
19 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: It's really a
20 coordination of services. As I mentioned, a
21 lot of the service providers that go into the
22 neighborhood NORCs and the traditional NORCs
23 already exist in the community. The
24 coordinating staff pull all of those services
245
1 together, because there is a high
2 concentration of older adults, as we know, in
3 those neighborhood NORCs and the traditional
4 NORCs, to make sure that the older adults are
5 receiving the services that they need to
6 remain in their communities and in their
7 homes.
8 So it's really about the coordination
9 of services.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: So which
11 programs would be impacted by that reduction?
12 You mentioned that there are seven
13 neighborhood NORCs and four classic NORCs.
14 Could you tell us which ones they are?
15 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Yes. So with the
16 neighborhood NORCs, in Albany it would be
17 Jewish Family Services of Northeastern
18 New York. In Monroe it would be the Jewish
19 Family Services of Rochester. In Nassau it
20 would be the Mid-Island Y Jewish Community
21 Center. In New York City, it would be the
22 Isabella Geriatric Center. Again in
23 New York, it would be the Visiting Nurse
24 Services Center. In Queens it would be the
246
1 Samuel Field YWHA. In Queens it would be the
2 Jacob A. Riis Neighborhood Settlement House.
3 And with our NORCs, in New York it
4 would be the Grand Street Settlement. Again
5 in New York, the Henry Street Settlement.
6 Again in New York, Stanley Isaacs
7 Neighborhood Center. And again in New York,
8 Samuel Field YWHA.
9 A lot of these also have investments
10 from DFTA in the tune of almost $6.5 million,
11 and they also receive funding from the
12 City Council in the tune of $2.1 million. So
13 it would be hard to say what the actual
14 impact would be. We have to look at their
15 budget and see what other investments go into
16 their programs to determine the ultimate
17 impact.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: One of the
19 requirements for NORCs is to find matching
20 funds. So you're now punishing these NORCs
21 and Neighborhood NORCs, and I find it
22 extremely interesting that most of them are
23 in New York City and most of them, it's --
24 I'm shocked, most of them are in
247
1 neighborhoods that are serving Jewish
2 communities. Because almost six out of the
3 11 or seven out of the 11 had the word
4 "Jewish" in the name of the organization or
5 serve a YMHA, which is the Young Men's Hebrew
6 Association.
7 I'm concerned that the match is being
8 punished and certain communities in New York
9 City are being punished.
10 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: The decision
11 wasn't made based on quality of services and
12 certainly wasn't made to punish any provider.
13 We think they all do a fantastic job.
14 As stewards of taxpayer dollars, we
15 can't fund programs that are out of
16 compliance with statutory requirements. We
17 would be, though, open to other options as we
18 move through the budget-making process.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: But you're
20 specifically asking for matching funds. A
21 certain amount of funds -- a certain amount
22 of dollars have to be matched. And those
23 that are receiving DFTA funds or other funds,
24 you're saying, well, they have enough money.
248
1 Isn't that what you're saying?
2 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: No, absolutely
3 not. A lot of the match that goes into the
4 NORC and Neighborhood NORC programs are
5 in-kind match. So whenever we have a
6 community provider that goes in and, say,
7 like I had mentioned, provides nursing
8 services, the value of that service can be
9 used as an in-kind match.
10 For some of our programs that are in
11 extremely impoverished areas, we do have the
12 ability to waive the match, and I sign off on
13 those. And we have, on a lot of these,
14 waived the match because of the low-income
15 neighborhoods that these NORCs reside in.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Is there
17 something wrong with DFTA and New York City
18 funding a program and NYSOFA -- you're
19 basically saying the two can't be funded at
20 the same time because they're providing
21 services -- or they're providing too many
22 services? I mean, what's the rationale
23 behind that?
24 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Oh, no, they can
249
1 absolutely provide services in tandem with
2 each other. New York City has its own
3 regulations and rules outside of what we
4 might find in the New York State Older
5 Americans Act. We have for decades provided
6 services in tandem with New York City. It's
7 not a question of whether or not we can do
8 this in partnership, because we thrive off
9 partnerships in the aging network. It's just
10 strictly a matter of not meeting the
11 statutory requirements under the Older
12 Americans -- or the New York State Elder Law.
13 It's not based on anything outside of that.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Which
15 statutory requirement are they not, you
16 know -- what are they missing? Which
17 requirements are they not matching?
18 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: It has to do with
19 the number of older adults that are residing
20 in the catchment area. For the Neighborhood
21 NORCs, they have to have 40 percent of older
22 adults, identified as those being 60 years of
23 age or older. And they also can't have more
24 than 2,000 older adults living in the
250
1 catchment area.
2 For the NORCs, it's 50 percent of the
3 residents have to be 60 years of age or
4 older, and they have to have a minimum of
5 2500 older adults living in the residence.
6 So those are the areas where the
7 Neighborhood NORCs and NORCs that are
8 identified have fallen outside of the
9 statutory requirements.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: The goal of
11 NORCs and Neighborhood NORCs is to help
12 residents maintain their independence, keep
13 them out of nursing homes, unnecessary -- you
14 know, try to avoid unnecessary hospital
15 visits.
16 By cutting these programs, these 11
17 programs, what would be the Medicaid impact
18 of reducing the availability of services?
19 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I don't know that
20 there would be a Medicaid impact. The nature
21 of all of our programs in the aging network,
22 all have the same goal as the NORCs. That's
23 to keep older adults at home, to reduce the
24 rehospitalization, to reduce the risk of
251
1 going into a skilled nursing facility. So
2 it's not that these older individuals in any
3 of these areas would cease to receive
4 services through the aging network; it just
5 might be through a different mechanism.
6 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Would you
7 have a number of how many people would be
8 affected by eliminating these 11 NORCs and
9 Neighborhood NORCs?
10 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I can certainly
11 get that data for you. I don't have it in
12 front of me this afternoon.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Okay. Would
14 you be able to give me a number also of what
15 the economic and healthcare consequences are
16 by reducing the Neighborhood and classic
17 NORCs in these communities and what the
18 impact would be on Medicaid funding?
19 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I can certainly
20 try to pull that data together. But again,
21 it doesn't mean that we couldn't put other
22 services in place for the individuals who are
23 residing in those catchment areas. That
24 would definitely be part of the analysis.
252
1 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: It just
2 doesn't seem that it's worth doing this to
3 11 neighborhoods for $951,000. I just don't
4 know what the Executive was thinking.
5 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: We're certainly
6 open to other options. The conversation is
7 not closed. We can discuss this further as
8 we move through the budget-making process to
9 see if we can come up with other
10 alternatives.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Thank you
12 very much.
13 Thank you, Chairman -- Chairwoman.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Thank you
15 for that.
16 I don't think that we have any more
17 questions, so we wanted to -- oh, I'm sorry.
18 Senator Savino. I didn't see you down there.
19 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
20 Young.
21 Just briefly, I wanted to -- first of
22 all, welcome to the hearing. By the way, you
23 have the greatest name, Corinda Crossdale. I
24 love that. It's like alliterative.
253
1 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Thank you.
2 SENATOR SAVINO: I wanted to talk
3 about two issues.
4 One, as you know, in 2013 or 2014 --
5 2014, we took the step of raising the income
6 eligibility levels for SCRIE and DRIE. But
7 those income eligibilities are going to
8 expire, sunset later this year. Would you
9 support an extension, a permanent extension
10 of raising those levels? As you know, many
11 seniors, if they lose this SCRIE benefit that
12 they've now been able to obtain, are going to
13 wind up in a scenario where they're not going
14 to be able to afford their apartments.
15 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I'm of course not
16 an expert on SCRIE and DRIE, but I do know it
17 does have a significant impact, especially in
18 the New York City area, for older adults.
19 We've worked very closely with DFTA to
20 ensure that older adults who are eligible for
21 SCRIE are aware that that benefit exists.
22 And it has had a positive impact on older
23 New Yorkers -- and, like I said, in
24 particular in the New York City area.
254
1 SENATOR SAVINO: Good. I also noticed
2 that your office is going to be working on
3 elder abuse. And I see the partners that
4 you're working with, which is OCFS and other
5 agencies and law enforcement.
6 Have you had any discussions with the
7 banking industry? And I asked you this
8 question because earlier this year I was able
9 to sponsor an elder abuse roundtable with
10 some individuals from the banking industry,
11 because they're usually the first people to
12 see this happening. So will they be part of
13 this endeavor?
14 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: They have been
15 part of it. I've been in the network for it
16 seems like forever. We've had conversations
17 with them over the last couple of decades
18 that I've worked in human services, through
19 this initiative with the enhanced
20 multidisciplinary teams. DFS has actually
21 had training for financial institutes to help
22 them further be able to identify where there
23 might be instances of financial abuse on
24 older adults, and then what do you do with
255
1 that information, who do you report that to.
2 So that training extends beyond just saying
3 this is what it is.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: Are you including --
5 in the City are you including Adult
6 Protective Services also at HRA?
7 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: They are a key
8 component across the State of New York. A
9 lot of referrals don't come into the aging
10 network. The first line of defense typically
11 is PSA -- or APS, if you're in the upstate
12 area.
13 SENATOR SAVINO: Six of one,
14 half-dozen of the other.
15 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Yeah, same thing.
16 SENATOR SAVINO: And the final thing,
17 a few years ago we were seeing, especially in
18 the City of New York, in communities where
19 you had large populations of seniors who were
20 non-English speakers who were being enrolled
21 into long-term-care programs through social
22 adult daycare programs.
23 There was a proliferation of illegal
24 social adult daycare centers. There was a
256
1 crackdown on some of them; some of the worst
2 actors have been prosecuted. But we're
3 seeing it again, and they're popping up. And
4 you just have to go into one of them and look
5 at them and you know that these are not
6 seniors who should be in a social adult
7 daycare center. We're seeing healthy
8 seniors, they're dancing -- it's basically a
9 senior center where Medicaid is paying for
10 it.
11 So I know OMIG technically is
12 responsible for investigating, but it's
13 critically important, I think, that your
14 agency cooperate with that, because, you
15 know, it's not just fraud, it's having an
16 effect also on the senior centers that are
17 licensed by DFTA. Because, as you know, they
18 keep their doors open by serving a certain
19 number of meals. And when you're siphoning
20 healthy seniors out of that process into
21 these social adult daycare centers, they
22 can't compete, they lose their license, their
23 doors shut, and then there's nowhere for
24 seniors to go.
257
1 So this is not a solved problem, it is
2 a continuing one, and we look forward to
3 working with your agency and others to fix
4 this problem.
5 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I absolutely
6 agree with your assessment. We definitely
7 work in partnership with the Department of
8 Health, OMIG. This is definitely something
9 that we've seen, primarily in the New York
10 City area. And we work very closely with
11 DFTA. Any time they receive a complaint
12 through their established ombudsman program,
13 we receive copies of all of the complaints
14 and copies of the resolution.
15 And I do share anything that comes
16 through our agency with OMIG and DOH to make
17 sure we all stay on the same page with this.
18 SENATOR SAVINO: Great. Thank you.
19 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: You're welcome.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
21 Assemblyman?
22 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Hi, Director.
23 Yeah, over here. Sorry, I switched on you.
24 Just before we thank you for your
258
1 testimony -- and we very much appreciate
2 it -- I just want to echo the comments of
3 Chairman Cymbrowitz. NORCs are especially
4 important to us, not only in New York City
5 but upstate. We had a chance under Steve's
6 leadership to talk about this in our
7 Democratic conference, and it was almost
8 universal how important the NORCs are.
9 So I just wanted to express that to
10 you, and hopefully we can work towards a good
11 resolution under your leadership and the
12 leadership of the chairman. Thank you.
13 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: I look forward to
14 working with you.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
16 Assemblyman Hevesi.
17 Senator Serino has one more question.
18 Or more.
19 SENATOR SERINO: Yes, thank you,
20 Director Crossdale. I just have one other
21 question with regard to the NORCs.
22 I was wondering about the monitoring
23 process and when did they identify that these
24 NORCs were not in compliance. And also with
259
1 a follow-up to that, have there been
2 discussions with the NORCs regarding this as
3 well?
4 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: This started
5 prior to my -- the analysis started prior to
6 my taking on my current position.
7 The agency did do due diligence, they
8 did stretch this out as long as they possibly
9 could, taking into the consideration the
10 census data -- that's how we identify the
11 number of older adults in particular areas.
12 They also took further into account the
13 American Communities Survey, which drills
14 down a little bit deeper to make sure that
15 what they were seeing in the census data was
16 accurate.
17 They did reach out to all of the NORCs
18 and neighborhood NORCs and had conversations
19 with them to further verify the data. So
20 they spent a number of years looking at this
21 and looking at the trends to see are we
22 seeing what we think we're seeing -- are we
23 seeing a reduction in older adults in these
24 NORCs and Neighborhood NORCs.
260
1 So I think the agency did a fantastic
2 job of collecting the data before any final
3 decisions were made. As both you and
4 Assemblymember Cymbrowitz mentioned, this is
5 a very vulnerable population, and we want to
6 make sure that they're well taken care of.
7 SENATOR SERINO: Absolutely. Thank
8 you.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
10 much.
11 So, Director Crossdale, I think you've
12 heard there that there is concern among the
13 members who are here today about the proposal
14 regarding the NORCs and the Neighborhood
15 NORCS. And I think that one of the concerns,
16 of course, is that we always want seniors to
17 be able to live in the most appropriate
18 setting. And this provides a home for them.
19 And as we move forward, if we could
20 take a look at that situation again, that
21 would be most helpful. Because the
22 alternative may be placing people in a higher
23 level of care that could -- that maybe is not
24 necessary and also, you know, is more costly.
261
1 So if you could take a look at it, that would
2 be great.
3 We thank you for your testimony today.
4 We appreciate you being here and look forward
5 to working with you in the future. So thank
6 you so much.
7 DIRECTOR CROSSDALE: Thank you.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That concludes the
9 state agency part of the testimony for
10 today's hearing. So it's almost 2 o'clock;
11 we've been going for nearly 4 1/2 hours. We
12 have 31 speakers left to go, just so you
13 know.
14 And I consulted with Assemblyman
15 Farrell, Chairman Farrell, and he agrees that
16 we should move into this portion of the
17 program with each participant giving five
18 minutes of testimony, if you could stick to
19 that number. Obviously if Senators or
20 Assemblymembers have follow-up questions,
21 those will be entertained. But we want to
22 make sure that everyone has the chance to
23 speak today, and we want to be sensitive to
24 people's time constraints. So the further
262
1 you are down, of course, the longer you're
2 going to have to wait.
3 So we want to make sure that this
4 moves along, but at the same time, we want to
5 hear from people. If you cannot stay, you're
6 welcome to submit your testimony, and that's
7 an option. But we do look forward to hearing
8 from you.
9 So our first speaker, moving into this
10 section of the program, is Patricia Sheehy,
11 legislative committee chair and director of
12 Putnam County Office for Senior Resources,
13 with the Association on Aging in New York.
14 Welcome.
15 MS. SHEEHY: Good afternoon, Chairman
16 Young and Assemblyman Hevesi. My name is Pat
17 Sheehy, and I am the chair of the Legislative
18 Committee of the Association of Aging in
19 New York. And I'm also the director of the
20 Putnam County Office for Senior Resources.
21 I would like to thank the Aging
22 Committee Chairs Senator Serino and
23 Assemblyman Cymbrowitz for their dedication
24 to older New Yorkers.
263
1 Our association represents 59 mostly
2 county-based Area Agencies on Aging, known as
3 the AAAs, throughout New York State. These
4 agencies design, fund, and coordinate
5 programs that maintain seniors in their homes
6 to help delay and possibly prevent the need
7 for more medically intensive and costly
8 healthcare services.
9 Our counties are seeing an
10 ever-expanding 60-plus population, in
11 addition to complex needs of those who are
12 75 and 85-plus. This cohort has put an
13 additional strain on our aging services
14 network. In 2015, 20 percent or 3.7 million
15 New York residents were 60-plus. And this
16 was the first time in history that we've seen
17 that number. By 2025, 51 counties will have
18 25 percent or more of their population over
19 the age of 60.
20 As many of you know, funding has
21 remained rather flat for the non-Medicaid
22 programs that serve older New Yorkers, such
23 as those programs provided through the AAAs.
24 The result: New Yorkers with long-term care
264
1 needs end up on a waiting list for vital
2 services such as home-delivered meals, social
3 adult daycare, transportation, and case
4 management.
5 The Governor's budget includes the
6 increased funding the Legislature added last
7 year for CSE and the Long Term Care Ombudsman
8 program. Once again, we thank you for that
9 increase. However, while the Executive
10 Budget baselines funding for certain
11 programs, there remains a significant unmet
12 need. The budget proposal includes multiyear
13 plans for a number of other agencies and
14 sectors, yet not for the seniors, the
15 fastest-growing population in New York. The
16 time has come for a focus and a serious
17 investment in our aging network.
18 The Association on Aging in New York,
19 along with our colleagues LiveOn NY and
20 Lifespan, have developed a $177 million
21 multiyear plan to modernize long-term
22 services and supports for older New Yorkers.
23 The full plan is included in our written
24 testimony, and I'd like to just highlight a
265
1 few of those initiatives.
2 First is Community Services for the
3 Elderly. There are nearly 10,000 older
4 New Yorkers on a waiting list. CSE funds are
5 used for a wide array of programs and
6 services, which include transportation, adult
7 daycare, in-home care, personal emergency
8 response systems, and others. We are
9 requesting an additional $15 million
10 annually, without a local match, to eliminate
11 these waiting lists.
12 New York Elder Caregiver Support
13 Program. We're asking for an additional
14 $25 million annually under the Medicaid
15 global cap to build on the existing Elder
16 Caregiver Support Program for Alzheimer's and
17 dementia-related individuals, and provide for
18 enhanced services for the 4 million-plus
19 family caregivers in New York State.
20 Elder abuse. Elder abuse is
21 underrecognized, underreported, and
22 underprosecuted. For every one case of elder
23 abuse reported, there are 23 cases that go
24 unreported. The Rochester-based Enhanced
266
1 Multi-Disciplinary Team has recovered more
2 than $500,000 for financial elder abuse
3 victims -- more than the previous 10 years
4 combined.
5 Ten million dollars in funding for
6 elder abuse is needed to expand the
7 multidisciplinary teams statewide and to
8 support community-based programs that work to
9 prevent elder abuse.
10 Aging services network investment.
11 Our aging services network has relied on
12 volunteers to deliver many of our programs
13 and services. While volunteers are
14 critically important, they cannot be a
15 substitute for paid staff. Increased funding
16 of $35 million over a two-to-three-year
17 period is needed to invest in this workforce.
18 Targeted EISEP. Increased funding of
19 $25 million will provide the AAAs with
20 enhanced tools to target and assist older
21 New Yorkers who are at imminent risk of
22 Medicaid spend-down and nursing home
23 placement. We have identified a potential
24 source of funding for this investment. Since
267
1 2006, $37 million in federal money has been
2 drawn down by New York State using SOFA
3 programs -- that is, EISEP and CSE -- yet
4 these funds have remained in the Department
5 of Health. These programs are the reason
6 New York has been able to draw down these
7 funds, and therefore we believe that these
8 funds should be suballocated to SOFA for
9 reinvestment in non-Medicaid aging services
10 and programs.
11 Programs and supports provided by the
12 AAAs and their community-based partner
13 organizations are an integral part of the
14 continuum of care for all New Yorkers as they
15 age. This comprehensive, multiyear, 10-point
16 plan will help ensure that older New Yorkers
17 receive the services they need to remain
18 independent.
19 I want to thank you, and we look
20 forward to working together to improve the
21 lives of older New Yorkers.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
23 Senator Serino.
24 SENATOR SERINO: Welcome, Pat. It's
268
1 nice to see you here. Thanks for taking the
2 trip up.
3 In your role at the county level, you
4 have a front-row seat as to what is needed to
5 serve our aging population -- what works
6 well, and how we can do things better. In
7 your opinion, both regionally and statewide,
8 what can we do better to help individuals age
9 in place?
10 MS. SHEEHY: I think that, you know,
11 the thing that we really can do is to look
12 over this request for the $177 million
13 modernization and provide what we're asking,
14 because all of those initiatives will help us
15 to have our citizens remain in place.
16 SENATOR SERINO: And that's so
17 important to all of us.
18 And I just have one other question.
19 In the fall you attended an elder abuse
20 roundtable that I held in Dutchess County.
21 At that roundtable, much of the discussion
22 focused on multidisciplinary teams that are
23 currently being used to address elder abuse
24 in the western part of the state. And they
269
1 do a great job. Many, if not all,
2 represented that such teams could be a
3 tremendous benefit statewide.
4 What are your thoughts, and have the
5 AAAs taken a position on the expansion of the
6 multidisciplinary teams?
7 MS. SHEEHY: The AAAs are in support
8 of the multidisciplinary teams and their
9 expansion. I'm a great proponent of them; we
10 saw how they work when I was regional
11 director for the Office of Children and
12 Family Services, and they're modeled after
13 that.
14 And I must say that just last month we
15 unfortunately had a situation in Putnam
16 County where a home health aide provider had
17 tried to cash a check of one of the people
18 she was taking care of, and the State Police
19 got involved. And it did have a successful
20 outcome.
21 But just such a case, with the
22 involvement of a multidisciplinary team and
23 the model that has the bankers involved,
24 would be a great benefit. We're seeing more
270
1 and more fiscal abuse of our seniors every
2 day. So that would be tremendously helpful
3 to us.
4 SENATOR SERINO: Yes. Thanks, Pat.
5 And I look forward to doing another
6 roundtable soon. Thank you.
7 MS. SHEEHY: We are looking forward to
8 that too.
9 And I want to thank both you and
10 Assemblyman Cymbrowitz for the work that
11 you've been doing with us. Thank you.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
13 Assemblyman Hevesi.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Chairman
15 Cymbrowitz.
16 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Thank you.
17 Thank you for being here today.
18 A lot of thought went into your
19 testimony and the organizations that put this
20 package together. There's a lot of money in
21 here over several years. I'm sure you
22 thought about where the funds would be coming
23 from and how we can fund this over -- some of
24 it is three years, some of it is five years.
271
1 Long-term funding. Our budget is one year.
2 How do you foresee us funding this
3 request?
4 MS. SHEEHY: Thank you for that
5 question.
6 As I said in the testimony, we did
7 identify that there has been money being
8 drawn down by the state. And the way they
9 were able to draw it down was through the CSE
10 and the EISEP services that we do provide.
11 And I believe that $37 million has come into
12 the state through that program since 2006.
13 I believe that there's approximately
14 $7.5 million that would be available right
15 there this year alone. So I would urge the
16 Legislature to look into that. I believe
17 it's come through a waiver for the F-SHARP
18 program.
19 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: So you're
20 talking about increases as opposed to cuts
21 that are existing. You know, for these
22 programs there are cuts in the NYSOFA budget
23 that we hope that we can find dollars
24 for first before we do a three- or five-year
272
1 projection.
2 MS. SHEEHY: Well, I hope that we'll
3 be able to be successful in finding both of
4 them. I'd like to keep in mind that most of
5 the services that we are providing are to the
6 Medicare recipients and that these have been
7 New Yorkers who have lived their whole lives
8 and paid taxes to New York State throughout
9 that time. And I think that they are
10 well-deserving of these funds at this point
11 in time.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN CYMBROWITZ: Well, I
13 couldn't agree with you more. But it's a
14 matter of finding those dollars.
15 Thank you very much.
16 MS. SHEEHY: Thank you.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
18 Okay. Well, thank you so much for
19 being here today. We truly appreciate it.
20 Our next speaker is from AARP: Laura
21 Palmer, associate state director.
22 And following Ms. Palmer we will have
23 the Coalition for the Homeless, Shelly Nortz,
24 deputy executive director of policy.
273
1 So thank you, Associate Director
2 Palmer, for being here today. We look
3 forward to what you have to say.
4 MS. PALMER: Thank you very much. And
5 good afternoon to the members of the
6 committee.
7 My statement will focus on two basic
8 areas of import to our membership, State
9 Office for the Aging-funded programs and
10 hunger-related programs.
11 The Governor's Executive Budget
12 essentially provides level funding for SOFA's
13 non-Medicaid-funded home and community-based
14 programs which support older people and their
15 family caregivers. These programs are vital
16 for keeping older people out of
17 taxpayer-funded institutions and are a great
18 value to the millions of caregivers in our
19 state.
20 The proposed flat funding is
21 unfortunate. According to the Association on
22 Aging in New York, which represents county
23 Offices for the Aging, there is a statewide
24 waiting list of close to 10,000 people
274
1 seeking non-Medicaid-funded home and
2 community-based services through programs
3 such as the EISEP, Senior Transportation
4 Services, and home-delivered meals. Many
5 counties don't keep waiting lists, and there
6 are an unknown number of people who are
7 eligible for these programs but who are not
8 aware of them.
9 New York State should make an
10 additional investment in non-Medicaid-funded
11 home and community-based care that assists
12 both older adults and their family
13 caregivers. New York State's lack of
14 commitment to older residents and their
15 caregivers frankly comes at the wrong time.
16 Our population is aging, and it leaves fewer
17 caregivers to care for a growing cohort of
18 frail elderly residents.
19 A recent survey conducted by AARP
20 New York shows that the majority of New York
21 State voters aged 50 and over would much
22 prefer to receive their long-term care
23 services at home rather than in a long-term
24 care facility. The poll shows strong support
275
1 for New York to make an investment in home
2 and community-based services that help
3 seniors to age in place and to keep them out
4 of expensive Medicaid-funded nursing homes we
5 well.
6 Our recommendations are, first, that
7 the budget include a $25 million investment
8 for SOFA to eliminate these waiting lists
9 through the Community Services for the
10 Elderly program line; and secondly, that the
11 budget include a $30 million investment in
12 the SOFA Respite Program to provide services
13 to family caregivers who are in need and in
14 crisis. These situations often arise while
15 trying to help their loved ones to age in
16 place in their communities, where they want
17 to be.
18 The Governor's Executive Budget
19 proposal also provides level funding for
20 NORCs and Neighborhood NORCs, each at
21 $2.275 million. While we're grateful that
22 this funding stream has been maintained, we
23 are very concerned that the new language
24 intends to recapture $951,000 from program
276
1 funding for the state.
2 The new language specifies that the
3 existing, successful NORCs and Neighborhood
4 NORCs that are out of compliance with
5 outdated demographic and density requirements
6 in the current Elder Law -- to Assemblyman
7 Cymbrowitz's earlier question, it's
8 subdivision 1, Section 209 -- will have
9 contracts terminated at their next renewal
10 date either in July or in January of this
11 coming year. This is estimated to affect 11
12 of the 33 state-funded NORC and Neighborhood
13 NORC programs throughout New York State.
14 AARP agrees that state funds should
15 only be provided to successful and effective
16 NORC and Neighborhood NORC programs.
17 However, the compliance issues in this case
18 are dictated by residency requirements in the
19 current Elder Law, which have not been
20 reexamined in the last 20 years. Instead of
21 taking funds from existing NORC and
22 Neighborhood NORC services, there should be a
23 focus on meeting the needs of an ever-growing
24 and aging population.
277
1 As New Yorkers age, an increasing
2 number of residents are going to require the
3 special health and social services that are
4 facilitated by NORC and Neighborhood NORC.
5 These programs and resources allow
6 New Yorkers to age in place, to thrive in
7 their communities, and to avoid unnecessary
8 hospitalization or early nursing home
9 placement.
10 Our recommendation is that the new
11 language in the Executive Budget terminating
12 contracts with effective programs should be
13 excluded in the final State Budget. However,
14 there should be a review of the NORC statute,
15 including a program review of the
16 demographics and density requirements. In
17 addition, we recommend a $9 million
18 appropriation to better serve this very
19 vulnerable population.
20 In the interests of time, I will cut
21 short my hunger testimony. I have submitted
22 the full written testimony.
23 But I will say that it's estimated
24 that three out of every five seniors facing
278
1 hunger here in New York are women, and
2 African-Americans and Hispanics are twice as
3 likely to face hunger threats than are
4 Caucasians. Many older adults here in New
5 York are living on fixed incomes and rely on
6 their Social Security benefits as the main
7 source of their monthly income.
8 A report issued by the Assembly
9 Hispanic Task Force this past May found some
10 fairly alarming statistics that showed that
11 the Latino elderly have the highest poverty
12 rates of all elderly ethnic and racial groups
13 in our state. We would encourage the
14 Legislature to take a look at this Assembly
15 Hispanic Task Force report.
16 We support the Governor's hunger
17 initiatives that include new funding and
18 extending availability and access to SNAP
19 benefits. The task force report shows a
20 fairly alarming trend, and clearly it needs
21 to be arrested.
22 I have gone over my time, so I'll say
23 thank you for allowing us to testify. I'm
24 certainly happy to take any questions that
279
1 the committee might have.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Great.
3 Ms. Palmer, first, thank you for your
4 testimony. Much appreciated.
5 I would like to agree with you as it
6 relates to the hunger prevention. And we
7 have been working in the Assembly, under the
8 leadership of Assemblyman Marcos Crespo, head
9 of the Hispanic Task Force, who is going to
10 be pushing not only to deal with the SNAP
11 issue but, more appropriately for us on the
12 state level, the HPNAP funding, and see if we
13 can address that problem that way.
14 So we agree with you, and thank you
15 for your testimony here today. I do have --
16 there is one question by Senator Krueger.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
18 And I had to leave and come back, so I
19 read the other testimony from the two senior
20 groups prior. No one's talked about the
21 issue of dementia. And I'm just curious,
22 because in my district it seems that I
23 have -- I have a very large percentage of
24 seniors who live on the East Side of
280
1 Manhattan for a variety of housing
2 demographic reasons. And you start to feel
3 like the issues of dementia and Alzheimer's
4 are impacting every other senior that comes
5 into your office for help.
6 So I'm wondering what AARP's positions
7 might be around the need for expanded
8 services to seniors for dementia issues.
9 MS. PALMER: Certainly. We know the
10 longer that we live, the more likely we are
11 to be impacted by dementia or Alzheimer's or
12 other non-Alzheimer's dementias. I think
13 certainly some of our proposals around making
14 sure that NORC continues to be an effective
15 and strong support in the community, our
16 proposals around providing robust support to
17 family caregivers who are caring,
18 increasingly, for people with dementia and
19 Alzheimer's, are going to be absolutely
20 critical.
21 I think providing broad supports
22 across the board will, by extension, help
23 people with dementia. We also offer
24 programming and all of the other things that
281
1 AARP does. But as far as our legislative
2 work, we stand by ready to help you with any
3 support that you're willing to offer to New
4 York residents living with dementias and
5 their family caregivers.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
8 I think we're all set, so we truly
9 appreciate your advocacy and your presence
10 here today.
11 MS. PALMER: Thank you.
12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: As I said, our next
13 speaker will be from the Coalition for the
14 Homeless, and that's Shelly Nortz, deputy
15 executive director of policy.
16 Following Ms. Nortz we will have a
17 panel from the New York State Veterans
18 Council.
19 Welcome. Thank you for joining us
20 here today.
21 MS. NORTZ: Good afternoon. And thank
22 you for the opportunity to testify today.
23 My name is Shelly Nortz, and since
24 1987 I've had the privilege of representing
282
1 the Coalition for the Homeless here in
2 Albany, seeking funds to address the problem
3 of homelessness and the root causes of it.
4 The members and leaders of the
5 New York State Assembly and Senate are to be
6 commended for spending the last year focusing
7 the entire state on the problem of
8 homelessness and promoting the solution we
9 all know works best: Supportive housing.
10 Assemblymember Hevesi and Senator Golden over
11 the last year organized an unprecedented
12 degree of support for their letters to
13 Governor Cuomo calling for 35,000 units of
14 supportive housing for homeless New Yorkers
15 statewide.
16 Our elected officials from across the
17 state turned out for rallies, forums, news
18 conferences, public hearings, and other
19 events to underscore the importance of
20 gubernatorial leadership to provide the
21 needed resources for this cost-effective
22 housing solution. Supportive housing, as we
23 have said time and again, solves
24 homelessness, improves neighborhoods, and
283
1 saves tax dollars.
2 A two-year grass roots campaign
3 bolstered by your enthusiastic support
4 delivered big for homeless New Yorkers in
5 this budget. Governor Cuomo has committed to
6 building 20,000 units of supportive housing
7 for homeless people over the next 15 years.
8 These units, combined with the 15,000
9 supportive housing units for homeless
10 individuals and families announced by Mayor
11 de Blasio in November, bring us to the
12 35,000 units we have been fighting for, and
13 now we all need to make it real.
14 We unequivocally support the state
15 investments in capital, service and operating
16 expenses for the first 6,000 units of
17 supportive housing for homeless individuals
18 and families, which Governor Cuomo proposes
19 to fully fund.
20 We are most grateful both to Governor
21 Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio for seeing the need
22 and addressing it, and we call on them to
23 guarantee the future of their respective
24 commitments by signing a fourth New York/
284
1 New York agreement for 30,000 supportive
2 housing units for homeless households in
3 New York City. This will help ensure that
4 the units are developed in a timely fashion,
5 and that investors and banks are confident in
6 their lending for these projects.
7 Further, we ask that the Legislature
8 add to this by appropriating additional funds
9 to fully back the commitment of 20,000
10 state-funded units over 15 years for homeless
11 New Yorkers. Governor Cuomo has provided a
12 substantial down payment to fund 6,000 of the
13 20,000 units over the next seven years.
14 These are all capital units, the first 1,200
15 of which will not be available for occupancy
16 until 2018ñ2019.
17 In the absence of a city-state
18 agreement, we recommend that funds for all
19 20,000 units be appropriated this year, and
20 include 1,000-1,500 state-funded
21 scattered-site units in at least the first
22 couple of years to help ease the shelter
23 census in New York City and the rest of the
24 state.
285
1 Further, the Legislature should ensure
2 that the operating and service rates are
3 adequate for all models of supportive
4 housing, past and future, to enable them to
5 remain financially viable and
6 programmatically effective, and that New York
7 City receives at least 15,000 of the
8 state-funded supportive housing units.
9 We all stand ready to work together to
10 make this promise to homeless New Yorkers a
11 reality, and we thank you all for your
12 steadfast leadership.
13 I'm going to turn and just take a
14 brief look at the situation of homelessness
15 in New York City and discuss a few other
16 budget-related matters.
17 More than 109,000 different homeless
18 New Yorkers, including more than 42,000
19 children, slept in the NYC municipal shelter
20 system last year, and this constitutes more
21 than 85 percent of the population in all of
22 New York State in shelters. It's about a
23 58 percent increase since 2011 when I came
24 here to testify.
286
1 And I think a picture speaks volumes.
2 The chart accompanying my testimony shows
3 that we really basically are where we were a
4 year ago. And part of the reason for that is
5 that the investments from last year in the
6 state budget actually haven't really borne
7 any fruit yet. For example, none of the
8 JPMorgan settlement funds programmed to
9 address homelessness via supportive housing
10 in the current budget year were spent, nor
11 has the cityís plan for rent supplements
12 related to the allocation of youth facilities
13 reimbursement savings been approved by the
14 state. Therefore, the two largest state
15 budget initiatives to address homelessness in
16 2015-2016 have not actually been made
17 available to help homeless people move out of
18 the shelters this year. Therefore, it's
19 unsurprising that the shelter census is
20 virtually unchanged from a year ago.
21 And as we have previously warned, city
22 investments alone are not going to get us
23 where we need to be in terms of driving down
24 the shelter census. Therefore, additional
287
1 state investment is required.
2 As Assemblymember Hevesi mentioned,
3 we're very pleased to see the continued
4 funding of the $15 million for the enhanced
5 rent supplements that he initiated last year.
6 We're very pleased to support that.
7 We support the provision of an
8 additional $1 million in General Funds for
9 emergency homeless needs, but we also ask
10 that the TANF line be restored for $1 million
11 as well, as that references the groups with
12 particular specified expertise and serves a
13 different population than the General Fund.
14 And we ask that the Legislature
15 provide $1 million for the Client Advocacy
16 Program. At one time it was annually funded
17 by the Legislature, but it has not been since
18 the recession.
19 I'm going to just speak very briefly
20 about the executive order and outreach and
21 the homeless shelters.
22 First of all, the executive order
23 created quite a bit of confusion in the
24 initial days, but I think everybody's clear
288
1 at this point that they don't have major
2 changes to make in how they handle the needs
3 of people who may be a danger to themselves
4 or others. And I think the good thing that's
5 come out of it is that some of the shelters
6 have opened up their doors on cold nights,
7 some of the communities have been able to
8 begin to see some resources from the state to
9 help them in reaching out to homeless people
10 that are staying outside, and bringing them
11 in.
12 We also welcome the Governor's
13 attention to the conditions in shelters. We
14 are court-appointed monitor for municipal
15 shelters for adults in New York City, also
16 recently appointed to monitor the shelters
17 for families in New York City by City Hall.
18 And we think more attention to shelter
19 conditions is a good thing. And it's frankly
20 refreshing because there are large and we
21 think dangerous shelters that have been left
22 unregulated altogether by the state, over our
23 objections in the past. So we welcome the
24 state's added attention to shelter
289
1 conditions.
2 We do not think that the state should
3 be operating homeless shelters, any more than
4 we should. We are a regulator of shelters;
5 we shouldn't be running them as well. The
6 same view holds with respect to the state.
7 But we think that the state should be sharing
8 equally in the nonfederal share of the costs
9 of running shelters in New York City. And in
10 recent years, the state has vastly shifted
11 that cost onto the City taxpayers alone and
12 has really cut back on the state investment
13 in operating shelters, so that should be
14 restored.
15 And we finally, as was referenced
16 earlier, ask that the Legislature reject the
17 language in the Safety Net appropriation that
18 would permit the state to withhold funds from
19 New York City in order to reimburse its own
20 costs for operating shelters. There's no
21 need for the state to fund it that way. If
22 they want to put an appropriation in to pay
23 themselves to run shelters, if that's what
24 they want to do, they can do that.
290
1 There's some additional budget items
2 in here. I would thank Senator Savino for
3 mentioning the sunset date on SCRIE and DRIE,
4 because I think that's vitally important.
5 And one of my additional recommendations
6 actually would suggest we expand to include
7 families with a disabled family member who
8 isn't head of household, for example.
9 So I thank you, and I'll take any
10 questions.
11 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Ms. Nortz, first
12 of all, thank you for your testimony. On a
13 personal note, I've just got to tell you, you
14 and your organization are fantastic, and
15 Giselle and Mary, who's been leading the
16 charge. The 35,000 units in the State of
17 New York was an idea about nine months ago;
18 with your strength and guidance, it has come
19 to fruition.
20 So I just want to thank you and
21 everybody else at the Coalition. You guys
22 are absolutely great.
23 MS. NORTZ: Thank you.
24 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: You've raised a
291
1 number of significant issues with
2 scattered-site being spent up for the first
3 year of New York/New York IV. So we agree
4 with you. I think that particularly in
5 upstate -- in the City as well, but in
6 upstate that's something that is crucial.
7 I hear you about the two largest
8 investments that we did last year not coming
9 to actually get on the ground and start
10 helping people in need, so that's something
11 we will take up with the Executive.
12 And I will tell you, just on the last
13 note, the Safety Net appropriation language,
14 yes, I am pretty confident and that will be
15 my recommendation that we reject that.
16 There's no need to be punitive about that.
17 But other than that, just want to say
18 an incredible thank you once again.
19 MS. NORTZ: Thank you so much.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Well, I don't like
21 you as much as he does, but --
22 (Laughter.)
23 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Yeah, I cornered
24 the market on this one.
292
1 MS. NORTZ: But I've known you longer.
2 SENATOR KRUEGER: That's true.
3 I actually agree with Assemblymember
4 Hevesi.
5 So I'm still confused. I understand
6 that the state is attempting to bill the City
7 via the Safety Net Program for additional
8 services for the homeless, unlike what they
9 do with any other locality in the state. But
10 do you have a sense of how much this money
11 this would be?
12 MS. NORTZ: I don't think they've made
13 that determination yet. My understanding is
14 that they've been scouting state-owned
15 properties to convert to shelter use
16 throughout New York City. I haven't heard of
17 them inspecting facilities outside the City,
18 but they could be doing that as well.
19 And not that they would charge the
20 City under the Safety Net; they would just
21 pay themselves out of the Safety Net budget
22 line for the cost of the state operating the
23 facilities. Which I just think is a bad
24 idea. If you're the regulator, you regulate
293
1 and you supervise what the localities are
2 doing in either directly operating or
3 subcontracting with not-for-profits to run
4 shelters.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: But your
6 understanding is the state would keep control
7 of the operation of these new shelter sites
8 or contract them out directly?
9 MS. NORTZ: That is on the table. My
10 understanding is that it hasn't -- that their
11 decision making is in flux. It's a bit fluid
12 about how they're going to proceed, from what
13 I understand. Which is why I think there's
14 not much detail and I haven't been able to
15 get a briefing from DOB to get what their
16 intentions are yet.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And given the way
18 the City of New York currently operates
19 intake, evaluation and location of where a
20 homeless person would be directed, wouldn't
21 that create a really complicated dual system
22 in the City of New York?
23 MS. NORTZ: I agree with the question.
24 I don't know how it would work mechanically
294
1 because -- and then there's another layer to
2 it, which is for the single adults, they're
3 governed by the Callahan consent decree to
4 which both the city and state are a partner,
5 which would mean we actually would be also
6 needing to inspect state-operated shelters.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: So when the Governor
8 did his executive order about how localities
9 should deal with street homeless, there was
10 some back and forth and a lot of discussion,
11 at least in the City of New York, about what
12 we already do and that the City -- even
13 though I'd be the first to tell you they need
14 to do more and they're not perfect --
15 actually has a system in place and they've
16 made the commitment to dramatically expand
17 the number of people on the homeless outreach
18 teams and providing supplemental services.
19 So my concern is more about what's
20 happening in the rest of the state, because
21 I've heard anecdotally stories of people
22 being swept up and taken to emergency rooms
23 in hospitals and left there. And I don't
24 know a lot about upstate emergency rooms, but
295
1 I'm going to take a wild guess that that's a
2 really bad idea.
3 And so I'm wondering whether that is
4 simply anecdotal and not really happening, or
5 whether you see this going on in counties.
6 MS. NORTZ: So I read the account of
7 that happening in Saratoga, and I'm not
8 surprised to hear it. Because police often
9 in upstate communities will transport
10 homeless people, whether they're intoxicated
11 or in psychiatric distress, to an emergency
12 room. But very often emergency rooms decline
13 to admit. And I think what Saratoga Hospital
14 said was they did it -- the reason they
15 received these people was because of the cold
16 weather and the fact that there wasn't
17 another place to take them.
18 That has not been a pattern that I'm
19 aware of. What has been happening is a lot
20 of the upstate shelters have started putting
21 mats on the floor to accommodate vastly more
22 people than they're used to having, probably
23 in violation of their licenses. And I guess
24 because their license are not withstood by
296
1 the executive order, maybe that's okay. But
2 it does create risks.
3 I mean, one of the shelters that we
4 inspected years ago at the invitation of a
5 local sponsor had had a very deadly TB
6 outbreak, and they were packing people in,
7 you know, with just inches between their mats
8 and beds, and making the spread of
9 communicable disease a very serious problem.
10 So I think -- you know, I'm glad to hear the
11 counties are submitting plans. I'm hoping
12 they're submitting plans that are adequate
13 for the purpose of having sufficient shelter
14 space that meets these standards.
15 And so the inspection thing going hand
16 in hand with the executive order may mean we
17 actually have more adequate shelter capacity
18 everywhere.
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
20 MS. NORTZ: Thank you.
21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly?
22 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: I think that does
23 it. Thank you, Ms. Nortz.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: No, actually we have
297
1 another Senator then.
2 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Oh, I'm sorry,
3 Senator.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Diane
5 Savino.
6 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
7 Krueger.
8 Shelly, nice to see you again.
9 I want to ask you the question that I
10 asked the OTDA commissioner about the state
11 intervention into the homeless system,
12 because I'm still not quite sure what role
13 they're going to play. Considering the city
14 issues those contracts, the state doesn't,
15 have they involved the Coalition for the
16 Homeless in this? Because as you stated, you
17 are the court-appointed monitor of the
18 shelters.
19 MS. NORTZ: They haven't. We're not
20 quite sure what they're thinking about. We
21 are seeking clarification. I've requested a
22 meeting to just understand the basic
23 parameters of what the intentions are in the
24 budget. And I think we'll be trying to meet
298
1 with OTDA on the shelter inspection issue,
2 just to make sure that we all understand what
3 our respective roles are currently.
4 And because they haven't yet
5 apparently decided exactly what they're going
6 to do with these thousand additional shelter
7 beds, I just think it's a little too early to
8 know.
9 I'm hopeful that what their decision
10 is is that they make those spaces available
11 to localities to do their usual process of
12 contracting and bringing in experienced
13 providers. Generally speaking, I think the
14 not-for-profits do the best job. From our
15 30-some-odd years of monitoring shelters, the
16 best-run shelters are the smaller facilities
17 that are run by not-for-profits.
18 SENATOR SAVINO: I mean, certainly we
19 all welcome the state's assistance on dealing
20 with the homeless crisis. And one of the
21 reasons it became I think a new crisis is
22 because we began to see more people on the
23 street. You know, besides the fact that we
24 have more people seeking shelter, we're
299
1 seeing them on the street and they're
2 becoming more noticeable.
3 And one of the reasons for that -- and
4 I've never understood this -- when I talk to
5 shelter operators -- you know, we have
6 Project Hospitality on Staten Island. You
7 know, Reverend Troia runs a wonderful
8 program. But every day she is required, by
9 DHS and the contract that she has, to put
10 people out in the morning. They're not
11 allowed to stay in the shelter. They have to
12 leave at 9 a.m. and they can't come back
13 until later in the evening. And many of them
14 don't have anywhere to go, and they wander
15 around and they take their belongings with
16 them.
17 And I'm just wondering as to the
18 wisdom of a policy that says that people who
19 are undomiciled, who don't have anywhere to
20 go, are afraid to leave their belongings
21 behind, some of them are dealing with mental
22 illness -- what sense does it make to force
23 them to sit out in the street all day long?
24 MS. NORTZ: It doesn't. And as a
300
1 matter of fact, you know, 30-some-odd years
2 ago I was running a shelter, and it had that
3 policy, and we changed that policy. Because
4 putting people out in the day if they don't
5 have employment or education to attend to is
6 a recipe for serious problems. And it
7 doesn't enable you to work with them on
8 problem solving, income issues, disability
9 issues, health issues, housing search, any of
10 that.
11 So I think it's not a good policy. I
12 think that it's not true of all shelters in
13 the state; there are shelters where people
14 are allowed to stay through the day. And
15 then there are shelters that have that
16 policy. And I would say I'd be delighted to
17 talk to Reverend Troia about trying to fix
18 that problem.
19 My suspicion is that some of the
20 shelters where that's the policy is because
21 they don't have sufficient community space.
22 So those are the places that, for example, do
23 things like eat in the cafeteria in shifts
24 because they don't have enough seating for
301
1 all the shelter residents to sit at one time.
2 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm. Yeah, and
3 again, it does elevate, you know, public
4 awareness because now people think about the
5 homeless population and they're looking for
6 them. And they see them. You know, and it
7 just doesn't seem to make sense that, you
8 know, they're out wandering around all day
9 long.
10 And finally, we don't have a
11 commissioner of DHS in New York City. Not
12 yet. And I'm not sure what changes will be
13 made with respect to that agency, if any. I
14 know Steve Banks is kind of handling a lot of
15 homeless policy. But I imagine at some point
16 they're going to name a commissioner.
17 But has the Coalition for the Homeless
18 and DHS and the state talked about, you know,
19 how to begin this what the Governor rightly
20 calls the continuum of care? Because as you
21 know, homelessness is a multifaceted problem.
22 It's not just not having enough money to pay
23 the rent for many of these families. So is
24 there that discussion happening as well?
302
1 MS. NORTZ: So there's a discussion,
2 for example, about the need for more safe
3 haven beds that are the lower demand, smaller
4 shelters that can be very helpful to the
5 population that stay on the streets because
6 they're fearful of the larger congregate
7 facilities. And I believe there will be
8 increased capacity, and I think maybe even
9 the state's effort could assist with that.
10 Commissioner Banks I think is very
11 clearheaded about the fact that he's got kind
12 of a system in flux right now. They've made
13 a commitment to get out of the cluster-site
14 shelter model, which is, you know, where they
15 take clusters of apartments in a regular
16 apartment building and use them as temporary
17 housing. They've made a pledge to get out of
18 those 3,000 apartment units by I believe
19 December of 2018.
20 And that will be a housing resource,
21 once renovated -- and they intend to make
22 some resources available for that
23 renovation -- that could be, for example,
24 made available with rental assistance to be
303
1 able to help people live in apartments that
2 they can keep, as opposed to having them in
3 temporarily.
4 So I think there are aspects of the
5 continuum coming together, and I think it's a
6 work in progress. But I have many, many
7 years of experience working with Commissioner
8 Banks, and I have a lot of confidence in his
9 ability to take this in the right direction.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: Me too. Thank you,
11 Shelly.
12 MS. NORTZ: Thank you so much,
13 Senator.
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
15 Assembly?
16 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Nope.
17 Thank you, Shelly.
18 MS. NORTZ: Thank you.
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
20 Our next testifier is a panel of the
21 New York State Veterans Council: Bob Becker,
22 Linda McKinnis, John Lewis, Kirby Hannan.
23 Good afternoon.
24 MS. McKINNIS: Good afternoon.
304
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: And we're just going
2 to ask you all if you can fit in with the
3 five minutes between the four of you, okay?
4 Given the fact that it is twenty to 3:00 and
5 we are on Testifiers No. 7 out of -- you
6 don't even want to know.
7 MR. HANNAN: We timed it out,
8 Senator. We come to 5 minutes and 15
9 seconds, so --
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: You can have the
11 extra 15 seconds, thank you.
12 (Laughter.)
13 MR. HANNAN: Thank you for the
14 opportunity, Senators and members of the
15 Assembly. And the panel consists of veteran
16 volunteers who greatly appreciate this
17 opportunity. We want to talk to you about
18 the most pressing and challenging issues that
19 we believe face the veteran today.
20 We're going to be brief because we
21 want to leave time for your questions. We
22 think your questions are just as important as
23 what we have to say.
24 I'm Kirby Hannan. I'm legislative
305
1 coordinator for the VFW. With me is John
2 Lewis, legislative chair of the VFW; Linda
3 McKinnis, legislative coordinator for the
4 Disabled American Veterans; and last but not
5 least, Bob Becker, who is the legislative
6 coordinator for the Veterans Council of
7 New York State.
8 And I'd like to point to our narrative
9 or our testimony. And there's a memo on top
10 of it, if you have it in front of you. The
11 memo happens to deal with the VDP program,
12 what we call the Veterans Defense Program.
13 And it's a budgetary request. But that's not
14 the only thing we wanted to come and talk to
15 you about today.
16 But what we really did want to do is
17 have you understand Bob's council and the
18 wide panoply of people that sent us here
19 today with their mission. So that's what
20 we're here to do.
21 John is going to talk about the
22 importance of a continued emphasis on
23 orientation for the returning vets of all
24 wars.
306
1 Linda and I will talk about -- very
2 briefly -- about the efforts to fully fund
3 service officers and the Peer to Peer
4 Program. And we want to urge, or Linda would
5 like to urge Senate support for a federal
6 initiative, the federal Women Veterans Access
7 to Quality Care Act, to the extent that you
8 can communicate with your counterparts at the
9 federal level.
10 And then Bob Becker, the critical
11 nature of what is commonly known as the
12 Veterans Buyback Bill, a huge message bill
13 for veterans of all wars.
14 And then, finally the groundswell of
15 support for the Veterans Defense Program,
16 which is the memo on top.
17 So please, John --
18 MR. LEWIS: Very well. My name is
19 John Pemrick Lewis, and I'm here today
20 representing the Veterans of Foreign Wars,
21 Department of New York, as their state
22 legislative cochairman. I also am a
23 legislative appointee to the New York State
24 AIDS Advisory Council. I'm employed with the
307
1 Office of Emergency Management in the
2 recovery division. I'm a 22-year Navy
3 veteran.
4 As we are aware, the United States has
5 been at war for more than 15 years.
6 Reorientation funding for our combat troops
7 and sailors is on the decline. We have found
8 many veterans with multi-tiered systemic
9 problems. These include family problems,
10 mental health problems, problems with the
11 law, and problems with living their life.
12 Veteran service organizations are
13 dealing with this the best they can, but they
14 need help. Veteran services organizations
15 pride themselves on taking care of their own.
16 We have discovered raising money privately
17 simply is not enough. Various stress
18 disorders are rampant and causing mounting
19 fiscal implications.
20 While service officers and Peer to
21 Peer mentors are available, many current and
22 former service members are falling through
23 the cracks. Many are finding problems with
24 the law.
308
1 I present to you, Madam Chair, two
2 examples of why we need a Veterans Defense
3 Program. The first example occurred here in
4 Albanyís federal court system. A married
5 veteran with a very young autistic child
6 served in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He was
7 arrested and incarcerated. He was facing
8 five years in a federal penitentiary for his
9 crime. Representatives from the Veterans
10 Defense Program engaged the court system,
11 providing extenuating mitigating
12 circumstances, as environment in his service
13 records, to which the federal judge ruled
14 favorably, resulting in a fighting chance for
15 this warrior to work towards becoming whole
16 again.
17 My second example, Madam Chair: A
18 young local veteran serving over 12
19 consecutive months in the Iraq theatre --
20 engaged in two combat patrols each day, every
21 day -- came home and began self-medicating in
22 order to cope with his experiences. He
23 nearly lost his life in a motorcycle
24 accident. The Albany County court system,
309
1 with the assistance of the Veterans Defense
2 Program, recognized the impact of his service
3 and how it played a role in his service, and
4 ruled, with the Veterans Administration's
5 assistance, to give him a fighting chance.
6 I am thrilled to convey to you today
7 both warriors are doing very well in their
8 progress. Neither has reoffended, and both
9 remain steadfast in working towards becoming
10 whole again.
11 Madam Chair, I strongly urge your
12 support for the inclusion of $1.1 million in
13 this yearís budget for the Veterans Defense
14 Program of the New York State Defenders
15 Association, which will create the
16 sustainability needed to defend those who
17 defend America.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
19 MR. HANNAN: Linda McKinnis and I
20 would like to create an awareness of the
21 importance of service officers and the
22 importance of the Peer to Peer Program, which
23 I know the Senate is very familiar with, but
24 we'd like to take a minute on it. And there
310
1 is no better way to do that than by turning
2 to Linda, who is both a service officer and a
3 Peer to Peer mentor. Linda?
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Linda,
5 for your service.
6 MS. McKINNIS: Thank you very much.
7 Again, like he said, my name is Linda
8 McKinnis. I am a two-time war -- combat
9 veteran, woman veteran. I also work with the
10 DAV, I'm a member and a legislative officer
11 for the DAV, for Chapter 38 and for the whole
12 state. I thank you today for being here.
13 As far as the Peer to Peer is
14 concerned, I do that in my community. I
15 realize a lot of veterans have a hard time
16 trying to deal with the VA system themselves.
17 They don't want to go to the VA for services,
18 they feel like it's very clinical. And as a
19 veteran myself, I understand that very well.
20 So what I have done, through the DAV
21 and through them, is also we set up Peer to
22 Peer programs. There are Peer to Peer
23 programs, mostly through the VA and through
24 other mental health facilities. But
311
1 unfortunately, people don't want to feel
2 stigmatized, and I think that's the biggest
3 problem. We're trying to break down that
4 wall of stigmatization. And the fact that
5 you're a veteran, it weighs even much more
6 heavier on you.
7 So with that being said, I have taken
8 it upon myself to be trained to be a Peer to
9 Peer specialist. I am at this moment waiting
10 for my certification to not only deal with
11 the mental illness, but to deal with the
12 person as a whole being, as whole. And
13 that's what we want. We don't want the
14 veteran to just be cured from whatever their
15 illness is, but we also want them to be able
16 to go through the rest of their lives, help
17 their families also deal with the
18 circumstances that we have.
19 We hope that you continue to support
20 the Peer to Peer programs and not only make
21 money available for myself and other
22 organizations like the DAV the VFW, and the
23 American Legion, who want to become Peer to
24 Peer specialists, that the money is there,
312
1 that we can go ahead and get certified, we
2 can continue to help our brothers and
3 sisters, especially the ones that are on
4 their way coming home right now, and the ones
5 that are here. They need our help, and
6 that's the best thing.
7 As far as service officers are
8 concerned, I also am a service officer,
9 meaning that I go out to the neighborhoods or
10 to the communities, I find resources for the
11 people, whether it be finding information on
12 the Department of Labor, whether it be
13 something on human resources, whether it's
14 finding food pantries -- those are things
15 that a lot of veterans are not aware of, so I
16 go out and I find these resources.
17 If I have to be an advocate and hold
18 their hand and go to the VA Hospital with
19 them, I do that. I'm very advocate in what I
20 do. I will sit with them in that nurse's
21 office, I will sit with them wherever they
22 need to be. And that's what we need to do as
23 veterans.
24 And I'm hoping that through this, that
313
1 you continue to fund these programs, you
2 continue to fund the Peer the Peer Program
3 and also fund the Service Officers Program,
4 because if I'm not out there in that
5 community, then there's not going to be no
6 one else to serve these veterans. And
7 without myself and my other comrades being
8 here -- we are the front-line help to all of
9 these veterans. Thank you.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
11 much.
12 MR. HANNAN: I just want to point out
13 two things, if I could, to follow up Linda.
14 One is thank you to the Senate for
15 having put money in the budget for several
16 years now that directly relates to the Peer
17 to Peer Program, and we would love to see
18 that expanded.
19 And then secondly, I just want to
20 point out that the Service Officer Program,
21 which Linda is intimately involved with, is
22 really the traffic cop involved here, and
23 that's the person who does all of the things
24 that Linda just said in a panoply of ways.
314
1 Right now we have a bill up, it's
2 Senator Addabbo's bill, S2497A. It is an
3 example of a personal income tax checkoff
4 similar to the breast cancer checkoff. It
5 would raise perhaps around $500,000. But
6 it's an example of our kind of -- in some
7 respects, maybe even naive way -- of
8 approaching the funding. But if we ever had
9 matching funding for that, wouldn't that be
10 wonderful. We could put 20 to 30 more
11 service officers on the ground.
12 Thank you.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
14 MS. McKINNIS: Just to, I guess, put
15 the icing on the cake, one of the Peer to
16 Peer services that is very strong in the
17 community is the SAGE organization, and
18 that's the Services Advocate for Gay, Lesbian
19 and Bisexual Gender Elders, and they're all
20 veterans.
21 And we understand, again, trying to
22 break down the wall of stigma. If a veteran
23 even dares to say that they have a sexual
24 orientation issue, that -- it's like they're
315
1 cut off from all services. And we don't do
2 that. You know, as brothers and sisters of
3 the services, we don't discriminate.
4 Regardless of what gender you are, what
5 service you are, or whatever you were in
6 conflict, we don't do that. And we treat
7 everybody equally. And on that level, SAGE,
8 that is working out of New York City, they're
9 asking for $200,000 to continue doing what
10 they do also. They would like to open up a
11 location in the Rochester area to expand on
12 their facility, which again, we sit here as a
13 counselor and we stand behind them on that.
14 Because again, like I said, we're all
15 brothers and sisters in arms.
16 So with that being said, I hope that,
17 you know, they can be honored with that
18 $200,000 to continue doing the fight and
19 being on the front line like we are.
20 Thank you.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
22 MR. HANNAN: Last but not least,
23 Senator Larkin's bill adds a permissive
24 component, and that is Senate 2206. It adds
316
1 a permissive component to your program, your
2 Peer to Peer Program. It would allow people
3 like Linda, service officers, to be able to
4 move into credentialing if they so choose,
5 but not to be a threshold of entry. Thank
6 you. Sorry.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Kirby.
8 I wish to thank all of the members of
9 the New York State Veterans Council for being
10 here today. And most of all, we thank you
11 with all our hearts for your service to our
12 country, for protecting our freedoms. And
13 your voice is so important to veterans all
14 across New York State, because oftentimes
15 they don't speak up -- and you speak up on
16 their behalf.
17 And you advocate, and we've gotten a
18 lot of work done together on behalf of
19 veterans. But as you point out, there's
20 further to go. We have a lot more to do.
21 Linda, thank you so much for taking
22 part in the Dwyer Peer to Peer Program. As
23 you know, it was the Senate that started that
24 effort. The fact that you are taking this on
317
1 to counsel your fellow veterans is enormous,
2 and it makes such a difference. And I'll get
3 back to that in a second.
4 But every generation who has served
5 our country and has been in combat during
6 war, comes home with wounds. And some wounds
7 we can see, because they're physical, and
8 some wounds we can't see, because of PTSD,
9 some other emotional problem that they may
10 have developed because of their service. And
11 we owe it to them to do as much as we can to
12 help them.
13 A few years ago I was talking to a
14 woman, and her brother had served in World
15 War II. And he's since deceased. But she
16 said after he came home, they had a whistling
17 teapot and her mother had to throw it away
18 because every time the teapot came to a boil,
19 it made that whistle and it reminded him of
20 incoming.
21 And that's the kind of service and
22 sacrifice that our brave veterans have made
23 over the generations.
24 And, Linda, I want to ask you about
318
1 this, because what we have found -- you're in
2 the military, you're trained to be a warrior.
3 How difficult is it to make that switch when
4 you get home and say, I've got some issues I
5 need to deal with, and I have to get help?
6 Because I have to imagine that it's an
7 enormous hurdle for some people to change
8 that whole mentality that they've been
9 trained to fulfill.
10 Could you address that?
11 MS. McKINNIS: Yes, I can.
12 Like you say, it is a challenge
13 because in the military they teach you to be
14 self-sufficient a lot on everything. And
15 when you go from military to civilian, you're
16 still stuck in that military mode.
17 Everything that you do has a time basis. You
18 wake up at a certainly time, you eat at a
19 certain time, you do something at a certain
20 time. It is very hard to transition over
21 because you're so stuck in that.
22 That's where Peer to Peer comes in.
23 And that's where we go there and we say:
24 Listen, you know, civilians are not going to
319
1 move on your command. They're not on a
2 timely basis. You know, if you ask somebody
3 to do something and they don't do it, you
4 can't get all upset, you can't start
5 exploding.
6 So it takes time. You know, some
7 people can transition very easily, and some
8 may take up to six months, maybe a year to do
9 it. And then on top of that, we have to also
10 know that these people are coming back now,
11 once their mind is starting to settle down,
12 PTSD is starting to kick in, TBI is starting
13 to kick in, schizophrenia is starting to kick
14 in.
15 And, you know, a lot of them are
16 flashbacking. And I am a true witness to
17 that; a lot of veterans are flashbacking to
18 that time when they thought it was safe,
19 thought it was safe when all the gunfire was
20 happening. That was safe for them, because
21 they knew what to expect. Now that they're
22 home, they don't know what tomorrow is. They
23 don't know what the next hour will consist
24 of.
320
1 So the transition is hard. We do have
2 some people -- not a lot, unfortunately --
3 that are on the front end trying to help with
4 the transitioning. It is difficult. Again,
5 myself, being a Peer to Peer, and I've been
6 down that dark road a lot of times. I'm out
7 there, I have no shame in telling my story, I
8 have no shame in telling somebody that I've
9 done things that I shouldn't have done. But
10 at the same time, I'm there to help you. If
11 you need help trying to get the mental help,
12 I'll be there with you. If your family needs
13 money or needs some type of resources, I will
14 work with you.
15 We need people to be out there that
16 can walk that same walk with these
17 individuals that's been there.
18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
19 much. And thank you for your service.
20 What we're seeing now with veterans
21 coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan is that
22 there is a significant issue, as you point
23 out, with traumatic brain injury because of
24 injuries due to improvised explosive devices
321
1 that have gone off. I've spent time
2 previously with my constituents who were
3 injured, at Walter Reed, and I saw the work
4 that they were doing with people who were
5 missing limbs -- you know, arms and legs --
6 traumatic brain injury.
7 I had a constituent who lost his leg
8 and almost lost his life. And I'm happy to
9 report he since has recovered and he has
10 three beautiful children.
11 But it's those types of instances that
12 we have to really assist with. So that's why
13 the Senate has done other things like
14 adaptive housing, supportive housing is a big
15 thing. And we see vets with issues with
16 heroin and opioid addiction now because
17 they're self-medicating. We see veterans who
18 are homeless because of PTSD. We see
19 veterans who are committing suicide, which is
20 a very alarming situation.
21 So I just want to say to you thank you
22 so much for what you're doing to change
23 people's lives and give them a helping hand.
24 We truly appreciate it.
322
1 And again, I want to thank all the
2 veterans organizations who are represented
3 here today for all that you do. And we look
4 forward to continuing to work with you.
5 Assembly?
6 MR. BECKER: We could not say that any
7 better.
8 MR. HANNAN: Senator, Bob Becker had
9 one 10-second request that I think you'll
10 find somewhat humorous.
11 MR. BECKER: My name is Bob Becker.
12 I'm a retired Marine, 20 years.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I didn't think
14 Marines ever retired.
15 (Laughter.)
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I thought once
17 you're a Marine, you're always a Marine.
18 Ooh-rah, right?
19 MR. BECKER: I'm not really retired.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I knew that.
21 MR. BECKER: I'm over here to support
22 the veterans from New York State here. And
23 we're -- the council has 31 veteran
24 organizations from the State of New York.
323
1 And we cover every facet of life -- female
2 veterans, black veterans, VFW, American
3 Legion, Marine Corps League, DAV. We're here
4 to support them. And we meet once a month
5 here in Albany, and we have a good thing
6 here.
7 The Veterans Defense Program, we
8 support it a hundred percent. Last year you
9 gave us $500,000 last year to support this
10 program, and this year we're asking for an
11 additional $600,000 to bring it up to
12 $1.1 million so they can expand down in New
13 York City and also expand out in the western
14 part of the state. This is a great program,
15 and they've done a marvelous job on Veterans
16 Day.
17 We support Senator Larkin's bill
18 S5937, on -- the buyback bill. And we
19 know -- we thank the Senate and we thank the
20 Assembly for supporting this for the last two
21 years. And, you know, I think every year
22 we -- in fact, this council here is the one
23 that worked so hard to get this bill
24 together, and we got it passed. But it
324
1 always got that little -- at the end there, a
2 veto from the Governor saying that he was
3 going to veto it.
4 But this year he really surprised us
5 by saying "You put it in the budget and I'll
6 sign it." And we're here to ask you to put
7 it in the budget for us and put also the
8 Veterans Defense Bill, the Peer to Peer and
9 service officers in the bill. We're here to
10 help our veterans, and they can use it, and
11 our veterans can too.
12 Thank you very much from the council,
13 the 31 members of the council. Thank you.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Very good. And
15 thank you for bringing that up. As you know,
16 there's very strong support in the
17 Legislature, both in the Assembly and in the
18 Senate for that bill.
19 And I'm also very pleased to see that
20 you mentioned so many of Senator Larkin's
21 bills. And as you know, he's a true American
22 hero who is devoted to veterans issues. So
23 it's great that you support him so much.
24 MR. BECKER: Also a retired lieutenant
325
1 colonel.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: That's exactly
3 right.
4 Senator Savino.
5 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
6 Young.
7 Speaking of Senator Larkin, Senator
8 Larkin was instrumental two years ago in
9 helping me pass the Compassionate Care Act of
10 New York State, the medical marijuana bill,
11 because he had heard from many veterans, as I
12 have heard from many veterans in my district,
13 about the level of PTSD.
14 At the time, the Governor's office
15 decided that they would wait and make a
16 decision about adding posttraumatic stress
17 disorder to the program in order to study it
18 more. For whatever reason, they decided not
19 to add it.
20 And what I was hoping is that with the
21 level of PTSD that you are seeing, knowing
22 that many of our veterans are self-medicating
23 with alcohol and illegal drugs or they're
24 being prescribed medication to deal with
326
1 anxiety, anti-anxiety drugs -- you know,
2 Ativan, Valium, you name it -- and then
3 they're given drugs to help them sleep at
4 night, Ambien or some other sleeping pills.
5 They're either self-medicating or they're
6 being medicated.
7 There are significant studies that
8 show that medical marijuana -- and you can't
9 smoke it in New York State, it's not a
10 smokeable kind -- can have a very positive
11 effect on PTSD.
12 So we're going to take another shot at
13 getting the administration to add to it. And
14 I would welcome the support of any of your
15 organizations, and your organization, in
16 helping make that case that it is time for us
17 to give veterans an alternative to what they
18 have right now when they're suffering from
19 PTSD. And it shouldn't just be highly
20 addictive, dangerous narcotics.
21 So that's more of a statement. And I
22 would solicit your assistance in this effort.
23 Thank you.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
327
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Just very quickly.
2 Cathy Young and I don't find that many things
3 we can agree on so 100 percent, so I --
4 (Laughter.)
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Come on. We're
6 getting along swimmingly.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: No, we are. But
8 actually I just wanted to say everything that
9 she said, I don't think there's one
10 legislator who doesn't agree with that. And
11 the recognition not just of your service but
12 of such a huge number of men and women coming
13 back to our state from the military, and the
14 critical needs that you have every right to
15 come to your government and ask for
16 assistance with.
17 I have the Manhattan VA Hospital in my
18 district, I think probably one of the finest
19 VA hospitals in the country. But that
20 doesn't mean that they even have adequate
21 resources to deal with the needs of people
22 coming back. And I'm a huge fan of
23 peer-to-peer programs. They are just such a
24 wonderful model, not just for veteran needs
328
1 but in so many different community
2 participation issues that you look at.
3 People who have walked the walk and lived the
4 life, not only can they offer incredible
5 service to others, but I actually think it
6 strengthens us all when we participate. So
7 we are winners as well as the givers in those
8 programs.
9 So just thank you all for what you're
10 doing, and hopefully we will actually be able
11 to accomplish what you've asked us here
12 today.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator
14 Krueger, for those eloquent remarks. So
15 thank you.
16 MR. HANNAN: Thank you very much.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: All right. Well,
18 thank you for your participation today.
19 Again, we salute you for everything you've
20 done for your country and what you continue
21 to do, and truly it's a pleasure. Thank you.
22 ALL PANELISTS: Thank you.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker,
24 from the Human Services Council, is Michelle
329
1 Jackson, associate director and general
2 counsel.
3 And following Counsel Jackson, we'll
4 have, from the New York Public Welfare
5 Association, Rick Terwilliger, director of
6 policy. So as I call your name, if you want
7 to start to migrate down toward the front,
8 we'll be able to expedite things.
9 But I want to sincerely give my
10 appreciation to Ms. Jackson. Welcome.
11 MS. JACKSON: Thank you. And thank
12 you so much for providing me the opportunity
13 to testify today. I do promise to be brief,
14 as I know there's a lot of people behind me
15 wanting me to be brief.
16 You have a copy of my testimony, so
17 I'd just like to summarize a couple of key
18 points about the human services sector in
19 New York.
20 I represent the Human Services
21 Council. We're a membership association of
22 about 170 nonprofit human service providers,
23 and we do policy and advocacy on their behalf
24 at the city and state level.
330
1 Overall, the sector is not doing well.
2 We are a partner with government in
3 delivering vital services to communities, in
4 building resilient communities, in providing
5 bridges to opportunity for individuals and
6 families. And since the recession we have
7 seen a divestment in the sector as well as a
8 continued underfunding.
9 Some of the main points pointed out in
10 a recent survey that we have done as well, as
11 the Urban Institute, have shown that
12 30 percent of nonprofits in 2013 had only two
13 months or less of operating reserves. Half
14 of their budgets showed losses between 2010
15 and 2013, even after they implemented cost
16 savings measures. And the Urban Institute
17 survey points out that across the state,
18 human service providers, 49 percent of them
19 froze or reduced employee salaries;
20 43 percent drew down on their reserves; and
21 27 percent reduced their employee head
22 counts. And there's a lot of other numbers
23 that, you know, are not good. Which we can
24 share with you.
331
1 We'll be coming back to the
2 Legislature in this session and in coming
3 sessions to talk about long-term solutions.
4 We have a report coming out about the sector
5 and the real need for reform. But in this
6 legislative session, we'd really like to talk
7 to you about three things. First is the need
8 for a minimum wage increase that includes
9 funding for human services contractors. The
10 second is the reinvestment and make the
11 Nonprofit Infrastructure Fund a reoccurring
12 fund, and fund it at $100 million, not just
13 $50 million, which is what it's currently
14 allocated at for last year. And then full
15 implementation of the OMB guidelines, which
16 is around indirect rates, a very sexy topic
17 which I'll get to at the end.
18 So first, around the minimum wage, the
19 nonprofit sector is supportive. Our members
20 in the Human Services Council support an
21 increase of the minimum wage to $15. The
22 lack of wages in the State of New York
23 prevents us from doing our jobs effectively.
24 We need an adequate wage to move people out
332
1 of our programs and into the middle class and
2 have a healthy income.
3 There's recently been articles using
4 the nonprofit human services sector as a
5 reason not to do the minimum wage. We do not
6 want to be used as a scapegoat for opposition
7 to minimum wage in that area. We will step
8 up. It will be painful in certain ways. Not
9 all of our contracts are with government.
10 We'll have to use private philanthropy,
11 private fundraising, and make staffing
12 decisions around the minimum wage -- but it's
13 long overdue. And it helps not just the
14 people that we serve, but also our workers.
15 There's a lot of data about our
16 workforce itself needing access to services,
17 the services that they provide as well as
18 public assistance programs. We are not a
19 minimum wage sector, and yet the wages that
20 we give to our staff often are minimum wage,
21 not allowing for sustainable development
22 within organizations. And so the minimum
23 wage would be incredibly important to them.
24 And also the big piece of that is for
333
1 human service contracts, they need to be
2 funded. We have estimated that for human
3 services contracts, it will be about
4 $350 million once it's fully implemented, the
5 $15 minimum wage. That does not take into
6 account the Medicaid dollars, which is much
7 more convoluted math, but that's also a
8 significant investment. But it's an
9 investment in a workforce that needs an
10 investment in our wages and is long overdue.
11 So speaking of that, along with just
12 the minimum wage, we would need spillover for
13 people who are either above minimum wage and
14 above $15. Typically I would come to you
15 with an ask around the cost-of-living
16 adjustments, COLAs. We haven't really seen a
17 statutory COLA in the last six years. There
18 has been a COLA in the last two years, but
19 it's pretty dismal; in fact, it's only a
20 certain subsector of workers. So along with
21 the minimum wage, we'd like to see investment
22 in spillover, which we think will help to
23 right-size the salaries of the workforce who
24 are under contract with the state.
334
1 So that's the minimum wage piece.
2 Secondly, the Infrastructure Fund, we
3 were very happy to see the $50 million
4 Nonprofit Infrastructure Fund that was
5 implemented last year. It's currently being
6 allocated. We don't see a new $50 million
7 allocation this year. We have assessed our
8 members, and just out of 30 responses that we
9 got, there's about $17 million in
10 infrastructure needs. So we'd like to see
11 that fund reoccur at $100 million and be a
12 reoccurring fund, because we think there's a
13 lot of infrastructure need.
14 This is another area that the
15 nonprofit sector has greatly underfunded.
16 For example, DHS has just funded $120 million
17 just for New York City shelter infrastructure
18 needs. And at the state we have a one-time
19 $50 million infrastructure for all human
20 service nonprofits as well as other
21 nonprofits across the state. So there really
22 needs to be more investment in that area.
23 And then finally, there is OMB
24 guidelines, which require, for any federal
335
1 pass-through dollars, an indirect rate of at
2 least 10 percent, or using the federal
3 indirect rate that individual nonprofits have
4 that finally went into effect at the end of
5 last year. We have not seen the state or New
6 York City implement that.
7 Indirect rates definitely speak to the
8 infrastructure needs of nonprofits. They
9 don't have adequate infrastructure, IT
10 systems, telephone systems, financial
11 reporting systems. And being able to pay an
12 adequate indirect rate is really key to that.
13 We want to thank Assemblymember Hevesi for
14 writing a letter on our behalf about the OMB
15 guidelines.
16 Again, it's people want to feed the
17 kids, no one wants to gas up the van.
18 Indirect is not the sexiest of topics, but
19 it's really crucial in terms of not just are
20 we fixing cracks in ceilings and do we have a
21 front desk, do we have security, but also in
22 terms of having financial accountability,
23 which we see the state looking more and more
24 towards, is making sure taxpayer dollars are
336
1 spent adequately. But that means paying for
2 accountants, CFOs, contract managers and
3 those kinds of positions that are not program
4 dollars.
5 So I'll stop there and take any
6 questions that you have.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
8 Assemblyman Hevesi.
9 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Thank you.
10 First, good afternoon. How can you
11 say that indirect rates from the federal
12 government are not sexy? I mean, that's as
13 good as it gets.
14 (Laughter.)
15 MS. JACKSON: You know, the indirect
16 stuff, it's just not great at cocktail
17 parties.
18 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay. Fair
19 enough. So yes, we have worked with you and
20 we will follow up with the Executive on that,
21 I do want to touch on the other two.
22 Regarding the $15 minimum wage, look, you
23 guys are on the front lines of dealing with
24 all of our critical issues -- childcare,
337
1 homelessness, foster care. We have to make
2 sure you're taken care of.
3 So I am not at liberty to tell -- not
4 at liberty. I'm not able to tell you that it
5 is definitively going to be in the Assembly
6 one-house, but I will tell you that a
7 significant coalition of members of the
8 Assembly -- I believe over 40 and growing --
9 are looking to not only include costs for
10 nonprofits in the $15 minimum wage, but also
11 address the spillover issue. So that's one.
12 MS. JACKSON: Great, thank you.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: And we will
14 continue to push because we need you guys
15 more than whole, we need you to continue the
16 great work that you do.
17 I will also suggest the Nonprofit
18 Infrastructure Fund. The Executive did not
19 put in an additional 50, and we in the
20 Assembly are looking to see if we can come up
21 with dollars for that as well. And yes, we'd
22 like to see that recurring because we
23 understand there's a need.
24 My question is about the first 50.
338
1 The distribution, has it been going well? I
2 know $50 million for every nonprofit in the
3 state is sort of difficult. I just wanted to
4 know if the parameters the Executive has set
5 geographically and otherwise make sense.
6 MS. JACKSON: So 50 million, first of
7 all, is just a drop in the bucket. I have
8 one nonprofit in Manhattan that could have
9 spent $12 million on its own on one project.
10 We're not privy to kind of how the
11 distribution is breaking out. For the most
12 part, we've heard that there's at least over
13 about -- you know, just from surveying our
14 members and knowing the needs from our
15 membership and the statewide coalition that
16 we partner with, we think there's clearly
17 over 500 applications for this $50 million.
18 And like I said of the survey, a rough
19 survey of our members with only 30
20 respondents, we came up with about
21 $18 million to $20 million in needs. So we
22 expect that fund to be spent quickly. I
23 think it was a good allocation. They
24 included a lot of different areas. And
339
1 initially they had not included DSRIP groups,
2 but they amended that. And that obviously is
3 a big deal because a lot of our members do
4 get some sort of DSRIP funding in terms of
5 running different types of clinics.
6 They did not include HEAL funding,
7 though. If you received HEAL funding, that's
8 one area -- and we'll follow up with a
9 one-pager around some of the areas we'd like
10 to see fixed. But we do have a number of
11 organizations who would have liked to apply
12 but felt that they weren't eligible based on
13 getting HEAL, being a HEAL recipient or a
14 subrecipient.
15 And of course that's an RFP system, so
16 we didn't get all of our questions answered
17 in the process, so we'll probably flesh some
18 of that out on the tail end once the awards
19 are made.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: And we'll look to
21 follow up with you just to ask those same
22 questions. And, you know, looking to see how
23 the first 50 is spent is not in any way
24 precluding the fact that we go after more
340
1 money, because we certainly understand the
2 need.
3 But thank you for your advice and
4 counsel. We appreciate it, and your
5 testimony.
6 MS. JACKSON: Thank you.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,
8 Director. Appreciate you being here today.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Next, from the
11 New York Public Welfare Association, Rick
12 Terwilliger, director of policy.
13 And following that director, we have
14 Jim Purcell from the Council of Family and
15 Child Caring Agencies. If you could get
16 ready, please.
17 Welcome, Director. Glad to have you
18 here.
19 MR. TERWILLIGER: Nice to be here.
20 Thanks for getting my name right. It's a
21 rare thing.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Is it really?
23 MR. TERWILLIGER: Yes.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. I do have
341
1 Terwilligers who live in my district, so I
2 have practice. So thank you very much.
3 MR. TERWILLIGER: Good afternoon. My
4 name is Rick Terwilliger. I'm director of
5 policy at the New York Public Welfare
6 Association. I'm honored to testify here
7 before you today.
8 The NYPWA represents all 58 local
9 districts -- departments of social services
10 statewide. Our members are dedicated to
11 improving the quality and effectiveness of
12 social welfare policy so that it's
13 accountable to taxpayers who protect
14 vulnerable people.
15 For the sake of time, my remarks will
16 focus on a few key budget areas, but our
17 written testimony will delve into a little
18 bit more detail. And I did time it; I think
19 I can make it under five minutes.
20 Our first area of concern surrounds
21 the issue of food, shelter, and the state
22 safety net program. The Governor has
23 announced plans to expand the SNAP program
24 for more households with earned income,
342
1 adding a projected 750,000 eligible
2 households. SNAP administration is a 50/50
3 split between federal and local governments,
4 without any state support. Therefore, NYPWA
5 recommends that the state restore its past
6 practice of sharing the administrative costs
7 of this program.
8 Under the property tax cap, counties
9 are not in a position to hire the staff that
10 will be or may be needed, without state
11 funding.
12 NYPWA also supports permanent low-cost
13 supportive housing and emergency shelters.
14 Local DSS commissioners are committed to
15 serving people who are homeless and every
16 other vulnerable person in New York State.
17 The best way to keep people safe is to
18 prevent homelessness in the first place.
19 Attached to our written testimony, on
20 the back end of the testimony, is a broader
21 look at the issue and NYPWA's recommended
22 actions to meet the challenges of
23 homelessness. One of those recommendations
24 is our call for a restoration of the state's
343
1 commitment to safety net assistance. New
2 York State only funds 29 percent of
3 recipients' benefits, and none of the
4 administrative expenses.
5 The program, which is entirely
6 controlled by the state, was funded at a
7 50/50 state and local share until five years
8 ago. The time has come to gradually restore
9 the 50/50 share of funding.
10 A second area of concern revolves
11 around issues affecting childcare and child
12 welfare. Recent changes to the federal Child
13 Care and Development Block Grant Act are
14 designed to promote stability and quality but
15 were delivered without the necessary
16 financial support. Although well-
17 intentioned, efforts to promote quality
18 childcare may shift funding away from other
19 struggling families who may stay on childcare
20 wait lists longer.
21 Due to the property tax cap, most
22 counties are not able to raise funds to pay
23 for additional childcare. As the state
24 considers how to best address childcare
344
1 needs, it is important not to take the funds
2 away from other social services and child
3 welfare programs that serve families in need.
4 On juvenile justice issues, NYPWA
5 supports efforts to raise the age of juvenile
6 jurisdiction to age 18, and the Governor's
7 commitment to fund 100 percent of the costs
8 associated with this change. Attached to our
9 testimony -- towards the back end again -- is
10 a list of several recommendations regarding
11 the Raise the Age issue.
12 However, it is important to note that
13 in the past the state has stepped back from
14 its original financial support for programs
15 serving the needy. Therefore, statutory
16 language may be needed to hold counties
17 harmless for the costs associated with Raise
18 the Age. Fiscal caps must also be removed
19 for foster care and youth detention as part
20 of that reform.
21 In addition, Raise the Age will shift
22 the burden of care to the child welfare
23 system, making it all the more important to
24 fund services to contain that expense and to
345
1 keep children from harm. That's why the
2 NYPWA supports continued open-ended funding
3 for child preventive and protective services
4 and calls for a return to the prior 65/25
5 state and local share of the funding levels.
6 In closing, the NYPWA wishes to thank
7 the Legislature for its leadership in
8 bringing attention to the challenging fiscal
9 and policy issues affecting social services.
10 Thank you.
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly?
12 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: {Inaudible mic}.
13 Thank you for your testimony. Wow, that was
14 aggressive.
15 (Laughter.)
16 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Let me start by
17 suggesting to you one piece of your
18 testimony, the safety net, since the Assembly
19 is taking a very hard look at the rationale
20 behind those percentages and maybe even
21 beyond even the reason for the way it's
22 funded right now. We will get back to you on
23 that.
24 And I will tell you that, under the
346
1 leadership of my colleague Chairwoman
2 Lupardo, that we are going to be very
3 aggressive as well about the impact of the
4 federal Child Care Block Grant. We will not
5 leave it as it was proposed in the Executive
6 Budget.
7 So I very much appreciate the other
8 issues that you raised, and those two in
9 particular, and I look forward to working
10 with you in the future.
11 MR. TERWILLIGER: Thank you.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
13 Senator Montgomery.
14 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: A brief question.
15 Thank you for including Raise the Age in your
16 testimony as being one of the issues that
17 you're intending to focus on.
18 I'm just wondering if you have looked
19 at some of the ramifications of Raise the Age
20 as it relates to the community where these
21 young people generally will be -- come from
22 now and will be hopefully able to remain.
23 What do we need to do to make sure that we're
24 able to support them and sustain them being
347
1 out of the system?
2 MR. TERWILLIGER: Right. There's
3 going to be a big influx of 16- and
4 17-year-olds back into the child welfare
5 system. So those services that will be
6 needed to turn things around for their lives
7 need to be in place. That's why the 100
8 percent funding by the state is so vital.
9 And that extends through all types of
10 preventive services.
11 So as we move forward, it's still a
12 little bit unclear at this point how that
13 that's going to play out. Our association is
14 very concerned that the state does their part
15 and fulfills their obligation to meeting all
16 the preventive and all the other services
17 that this group of kids are going to need.
18 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So I would hope
19 that one of the things that will happen,
20 based on the discussion around Raise the Age,
21 is that we begin to work on a plan for
22 accommodating this new policy in the best
23 interests of the children that we're trying
24 to help.
348
1 MR. TERWILLIGER: Absolutely.
2 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So I look forward
3 to work with you as well.
4 MR. TERWILLIGER: Thank you.
5 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. Just one
7 comment. Some of us sit here day in, day
8 out, through all of these hearings. Looking
9 around, Senator Savino and I win the award, I
10 think, so far.
11 So two themes that you actually hit on
12 in your testimony without necessarily
13 realizing you were hitting on them was two
14 things I've seen from throughout all the
15 hearings. One, the state continues not to
16 invest in its infrastructure at the local
17 level or recognize that local governments are
18 actually the women and the men who actually
19 deliver the service to the real people.
20 And two, we keep balancing our budget
21 by putting more and more of the costs on you.
22 So I appreciate that your testimony laid out
23 on a number of different categories how we
24 have reduced the formula match to the
349
1 counties, and again, even more so to the City
2 of New York.
3 You also pointed that out in your
4 testimony, that we keep just shifting more of
5 the burden to you all and pretending that
6 we're reducing our funding streams or costs
7 for these programs. We're not reducing the
8 costs of delivering the services, we're just
9 making you pay more of it. And you of course
10 have your own caps to deal with. So I
11 appreciate your going through and reminding
12 us all of some of the history of what used to
13 be 50/50 matches and are now radically
14 changed. So I appreciate your reminding us
15 all of that. Thank you.
16 MR. TERWILLIGER: Thank you, Senator.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And our next
18 testifier, Jim Purcell from the Council of
19 Family and Child Caring Agencies.
20 And if people want to move down, if
21 they're following their schedule, after that
22 will be Renee Smith, New York State
23 Children's Alliance, followed by Stephanie
24 Gendell of the Citizens Committee for
350
1 Children of New York.
2 Hi.
3 MR. PURCELL: Hi. Thank you. I am
4 Jim Purcell. I'm the CEO of the Council of
5 Family and Child Caring Agencies. We have
6 about a hundred nonprofit agencies across the
7 state that provide foster care, family
8 preventive support services, juvenile justice
9 services, and adoption. And we appreciate
10 this opportunity to speak with you today.
11 I will actually stop in mid-sentence
12 at five minutes, because I can't imagine the
13 last two weeks that most of you have spent
14 here.
15 So I think that -- I just want to
16 outline. I'm going to skip the testimony;
17 you've got it. I trust you're all going to
18 read it, you know, because you may not be
19 able to sleep tonight, so I recommend it.
20 We have a couple of key priorities
21 related to foster care this year. One is we
22 so appreciate the support that the
23 Legislature gave us last year after the
24 budget in getting the first rate increases
351
1 for foster care in seven years. They were
2 greatly appreciated. It was 2 percent, but
3 as people on our boards of directors said, at
4 least they were reminded that the state
5 actually cares. And they had begun to lose
6 hope in that, and so that was vitally
7 important.
8 This year our first request, frankly,
9 is that you continue to do that. We
10 recognize that there is a -- the human
11 service COLA is back in the budget this year.
12 But that was not a typo. It's -- I thought
13 it was a typo, I told my members it was a
14 typo, but it's actually .002. On a $35,000
15 annual salary, that's $70 a year, which is
16 about $2.57 in every paycheck. Which may or
17 may not get you a cup of coffee once every
18 two weeks.
19 So while we appreciate it, we need to
20 begin to restore the salaries that we've lost
21 over the last seven years when there were no
22 adjustments in the rates.
23 Which brings us to the minimum wage.
24 As others here have testified, the nonprofit
352
1 agencies are concerned about the impact of
2 the minimum wage and how they'll fund it for
3 their staff, but there can be no doubt that
4 we support the increases. In our case,
5 virtually all the families that we work with
6 are poor or very poor. How could we say, No,
7 we shouldn't increase the minimum wage, when
8 we're working with families who can't pay
9 their rent, they run out of food stamps and
10 they stop feeding their kids because maybe
11 the food pantry said, Don't come back here
12 again?
13 And it's our job in our preventive
14 services to work with those families and say,
15 No, you can go back there again. But that's
16 our answer. The refrigerator breaks; we
17 can't help replace it.
18 So the families we work with who are
19 working -- and many of them are -- deserve to
20 be paid a salary on which they can try to
21 support their families. At the same time, we
22 have a lot of workers who are making way
23 under $15 an hour. We're currently doing
24 some analysis with our hundred members to see
353
1 what they think it will cost. I think the
2 cost in the first year will be relatively
3 minimal because right now, although, with the
4 fact that the fast-food workers just got
5 their first minimum wage, we're now competing
6 directly, dollar for dollar, with Ben &
7 Jerry's and Dunkin' Donuts for the people who
8 will care for our kids who have some pretty
9 serious problems.
10 We too are looking for some additional
11 capital investment. Because of all those
12 rate freezes over the last seven years, we've
13 deferred a lot of maintenance. Our lengths
14 of stay for kids in residential care are
15 getting shorter, which means we're moving
16 more and more 15- and 16- and 17- and
17 19-year-old kids through buildings which are
18 quite old, and kids that age, the buildings
19 and the furniture pay a price. And so we
20 need to reinvest in that.
21 And finally, we're looking for a
22 million dollars to begin to try to support
23 our workers in getting degrees -- a
24 bachelor's degree for some of our childcare
354
1 staff, a master's degree for some of our
2 caseworkers -- and for some loan forgiveness.
3 So a million is just a way to start this, I
4 think. Child welfare is sort of an
5 entry-level position for people coming out of
6 school, out of high school with an
7 associate's degree, like the Senator here
8 who's done so well.
9 But they often -- they spend a couple
10 of years with us. They've just developed the
11 ability to gain the trust of some of these
12 kids we're working with, and then they say,
13 Look, I just have to leave, my $300 a month
14 student loan bill is just not something I can
15 pay when I'm making $33,000 a year.
16 There are several other pieces in the
17 budget that I want to reference. The
18 Governor included -- we are thrilled with
19 language that would create some protection
20 for our foster parents and childcare workers
21 who last year you required that they begin to
22 use a reasonable and prudent parenting
23 standard. That means not saying no to
24 everything a kid asks for, like can I go on a
355
1 sleep over with all the rest of the girls in
2 my class, because it's Judy's birthday, and
3 we say: No, you can't, because we need to do
4 an SCR clearance on their parents.
5 Or "I can't play on the school soccer
6 team." We need a little bit of protection
7 here, or that language is going to turn out
8 not to mean very much. As there will be
9 lawsuits, because somebody will get hurt
10 playing soccer, and then there will be a
11 lawsuit about it. And we need to support
12 these volunteers in doing that.
13 And I'm going to stop, although I have
14 a number of other things to talk to you
15 about.
16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Diane
17 Savino.
18 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.
19 And, Jim, thank you for your
20 testimony.
21 And, you know, I'm not going to harp
22 on the issue of the minimum wage and the
23 effect on the agencies, because I'm getting
24 tired of hearing myself think.
356
1 But I'm just startled in your
2 testimony where you talk about the starting
3 salary for many of your field staff at $11.33
4 an hour. That is absolutely outrageous.
5 When I started 25 years ago, my starting
6 salary was $24,670, which worked out to
7 $15.77 an hour. Nonprofit agencies at the
8 time were paying caseworkers about
9 $4,000 less than the city was.
10 MR. PURCELL: Right.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: This gap, though, has
12 gotten enormous between the nonprofit
13 sector -- and your agencies are the ones who
14 are providing foster care. The city doesn't
15 do foster care anymore.
16 MR. PURCELL: None.
17 SENATOR SAVINO: That's a different
18 argument, a different discussion to have.
19 But I'm very curious about the
20 effect -- and I asked Sheila Poole about the
21 effect of the opioid abuse crisis and the
22 rise in heroin and the number of cases that
23 your agencies are now dealing with doing
24 preventive services, having to make hard
357
1 decisions about very complicated drug
2 problems with families. And how can you
3 recruit and retain people if this is the only
4 thing you can pay them?
5 MR. PURCELL: It's an increasing
6 challenge. Sheila spoke, I thought, really
7 well to the fact that where we've seen
8 increases in foster care -- the foster care
9 numbers are at record low numbers. I've been
10 doing this for --
11 SENATOR SAVINO: That's because of
12 very good preventive services.
13 MR. PURCELL: Because of preventive
14 services. But now our preventive services
15 workers are working with families that used
16 to be in foster care. And you're right,
17 where the parents are using opiates, that
18 creates a huge challenge.
19 Just last week I asked 10 of our
20 New York City executive directors if they too
21 were seeing the impact of heroin and opiates,
22 because we hear it upstate all the time.
23 Interestingly -- now, I only had 10 people in
24 the room, and the answer back was not a huge
358
1 impact that we're seeing in Brooklyn or the
2 Bronx, but a big impact in Queens and Staten
3 Island. I don't know what that means yet,
4 it's not a scientific study, it was just a
5 question that I asked. And the people who
6 work in those two bureaus both responded that
7 they're seeing more and more of the impact.
8 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, unfortunately,
9 Staten Island has earned the dubious
10 distinction of being the heroin capital of
11 the state right now.
12 But I do think we're going to see a
13 corresponding rise in placements or more
14 intensive social services. So I think, you
15 know, we've got to make sure that we provide
16 enough assistance to your agencies so that
17 you can do that kind of work.
18 I'm very happy to see you include the
19 idea of a child welfare worker tuition
20 forgiveness. As you know, I think it was
21 about six years ago --
22 MR. PURCELL: Yeah.
23 SENATOR SAVINO: -- we started the
24 Social Work Loan Forgiveness Program. It's
359
1 been somewhat successful, because again,
2 we're -- you know, it's hard to keep social
3 workers in the public sector, even in the
4 nonprofit sector, because this pay is not a
5 lot and, you know, the tuition for graduate
6 school is about $40,000 on average. And the
7 starting salary for a social worker in these
8 fields is about $40,000, on average.
9 MR. PURCELL: That's right. Actually,
10 with master's degrees, it's still lower than
11 40 right now.
12 SENATOR SAVINO: In the city, for city
13 social workers, it's about 40. In your
14 agencies, it's lower.
15 MR. PURCELL: Yeah.
16 SENATOR SAVINO: And I do agree we
17 should try and add child welfare workers into
18 this, and I look forward to talking to you
19 about ways to kind of expand this tuition
20 loan forgiveness program, because it is
21 important that we attract people to this
22 field. And if we can't raise the salary,
23 maybe we should lower their debt.
24 MR. PURCELL: You know, the state has
360
1 funded loan forgiveness programs for
2 engineers, for farmers, for 10 or 12
3 different professions, and this would be an
4 opportunity to keep some of these people who
5 have spent a couple of years, whose heart is
6 still in the work with these kids, but who
7 just can't do it.
8 And I'm glad you mentioned Raise the
9 Age, because Senator Montgomery will get mad
10 that I didn't mention it, but it was the next
11 thing on my list, Senator.
12 SENATOR SAVINO: But on the loan
13 forgiveness, since we already have one
14 created for social workers, it might be
15 easier just to expand it from social workers
16 to child welfare workers as well, so we don't
17 have to create a whole new program. I mean,
18 I think we should talk about that.
19 MR. PURCELL: Absolutely. Our
20 proposal is very much modeled after the
21 programs that already exist. And I agree
22 with you, we don't need a second mechanism if
23 the mechanism is already existing.
24 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. Great. Thank
361
1 you.
2 MR. PURCELL: Thank you.
3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
4 Assembly?
5 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Mr. Purcell, good
6 to see you.
7 MR. PURCELL: Good to see you again.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: And I'd like to
9 thank you for all of your advice and guidance
10 that stemmed from an Assembly roundtable that
11 we did together.
12 MR. PURCELL: Thank you for asking.
13 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: No, my pleasure.
14 So I wanted to also express some
15 similar sentiments, that we are very happy
16 with the Governor putting in the reasonable
17 and prudent parenting standard in the
18 Executive Budget. That's a fantastic step.
19 And I just want to say I hear you on
20 the rate increases and understand the
21 particular nature of how that would impact
22 your agencies and your workers who we
23 desperately need to keep providing the
24 services that they are providing.
362
1 And I look forward to continuing to
2 work with you on issues like MSAR and some of
3 the others that you raise.
4 MR. PURCELL: We look forward to it.
5 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: But I just want
6 to say a personal thank you. I don't have
7 any questions --
8 MR. PURCELL: I think we're on speed
9 dial.
10 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: We are on speed
11 dial, which is great. And I appreciate the
12 advice.
13 MR. PURCELL: Thank you.
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Montgomery.
15 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you. I
16 didn't see in your testimony where the Raise
17 the Age is. But I'll just ask very quickly,
18 could we get a list or some idea of which of
19 your members actually are in the -- I guess
20 the front end of the Raise the Age issue? In
21 other words, trying to look at building the
22 infrastructure in the community --
23 MR. PURCELL: The diversion end of it.
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, diversion.
363
1 Yes, exactly.
2 Could we have some sense -- could I
3 get that from you?
4 MR. PURCELL: Of course. Not right at
5 this moment I can't, but we will get it back
6 to you.
7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Exactly. I would
8 appreciate that, because we're going to need
9 a lot more of that discussion.
10 MR. PURCELL: Yeah, and they report
11 that they've been quite successful in keeping
12 a number of these kids safely at home without
13 recommitting offenses, working with their
14 families. So a number of evidence-based
15 models being used in those programs as well.
16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. Yes. And
17 families really are going to need a lot of
18 support with that, I think.
19 And the last part of my question is on
20 the whole issue of foster care. Where are we
21 in terms of supporting young people who are
22 out of foster care but still need housing,
23 need a lot of supports, they're not ready to
24 just go off and be on their own?
364
1 MR. PURCELL: I think that's one of
2 the huge issues. And you know, again,
3 we're -- even as we all begin to try to work
4 across lines, not be so siloed, the fact is a
5 number of kids stay in foster care until
6 they're 21. New York State has always
7 allowed that. I'm very proud of that. Other
8 states are still struggling with it, in some
9 cases.
10 But whether you just throw kids out at
11 18 or you tell them they've got to leave at
12 21 -- you know, somebody just told me that
13 the average age across the state, all income
14 levels, for children becoming independent of
15 their parents is closer to 26 or 27 now. And
16 yet these kids, who don't have that parental
17 resource behind them, are -- you know, we get
18 them an apartment, we get them a job, but
19 typically there's two or three kids sharing
20 an apartment, and all it takes is one of them
21 losing their job and then they don't pay the
22 rent and they lose the apartment, and then
23 the second one loses his or her job.
24 So we've got to find a better way for
365
1 some transitional services. Nobody wants to
2 keep these kids in care after they're 21.
3 That is not -- that is never part of our
4 agenda. But cutting off all the supports --
5 so in many ways, and I'm no expert on
6 supported housing, but using supported
7 housing, perhaps tying in the child welfare
8 caseworker support into that so that we can
9 help these kids stay on track and, frankly,
10 help them with those short-term emergencies.
11 I mean, how many kids would not end up
12 back in a homeless shelter if in fact when
13 the third kid in the apartment lost his job
14 and couldn't pay the rent, we were somehow
15 able to subsidize that until either somebody
16 got him another job or we moved another young
17 person in there with a job?
18 We end up with three kids in homeless
19 shelters because of one unforeseen --
20 although job losses and a fire in an
21 apartment is not so unforeseen. But that's
22 where those numbers come from. We're not
23 discharging kids to homeless shelters, we're
24 discharging them to apartments. But somebody
366
1 just -- one of my own execs just showed me
2 data that said that the failure rates in
3 NYCHA for former foster care kids is higher
4 than for any other segment of their
5 population that they target.
6 We've got to figure out how to -- I
7 mean, now that we know that, let's do
8 something with that information.
9 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
10 MR. PURCELL: Thank you.
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
12 Assembly?
13 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Chairwoman
14 Lupardo.
15 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Yes, thanks.
16 Hi, Jim.
17 MR. PURCELL: Hi.
18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: In your
19 testimony you said that there are 60
20 residential foster care programs in need of
21 capital investment.
22 MR. PURCELL: We surveyed -- like
23 Michelle mentioned a few minutes ago, we
24 surveyed four of our agencies last fall who
367
1 were working with us on a workgroup about if
2 they could apply for all the funds they
3 needed for capital -- which is mostly
4 deferred maintenance, but it also includes --
5 the Justice Center often indicates cases and
6 then tells the agencies they ought to
7 purchase cameras to put in public areas. A
8 number of our agencies have been able to do
9 that; some have not, they don't have the
10 money. So they might want to put cameras in
11 public areas, which tends to make the kids
12 and the staff safer.
13 And a number of our residential
14 programs were built with a cottage that had
15 two kids in a bedroom, or maybe three. We're
16 not serving kids today in residential care
17 who we should be putting two and three in a
18 room. So they need to not build a new
19 building, but they need to remodel the
20 cottage that they're using so that we get
21 maybe eight or nine single rooms instead of
22 four or five double or triple rooms.
23 We surveyed four agencies; they came
24 up with $9 million of requests. So our
368
1 request was for $15 million this year,
2 $15 million next year. That would be 30. If
3 I just extrapolated that out, I would have
4 been saying $120 million. But I'm willing to
5 recognize that perhaps the state wouldn't
6 think some of the things our agencies
7 identified were such high priorities. A
8 little competition isn't the worst idea in
9 the world. But the $50 million last year
10 across all of human services is just so far
11 from being enough. And so we need an
12 increase in that.
13 Let me say, in response to some
14 concerns I've heard, whether that was
15 15 million for the child welfare system or
16 whether that was 100 million for human
17 services, I defer to your judgment on that.
18 We just need some money, access to some money
19 to improve these programs.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: I hear you.
21 Do you know how many of the 60 applied
22 for the $50 million?
23 MR. PURCELL: I don't know that yet.
24 Actually, I think the proposals were just
369
1 due. They extended it a couple of times.
2 The Human Services Council mentioned a couple
3 of the problems. You know, you might gotten
4 $20,000 in a HEAL grant three years ago and
5 that disqualified you from filing here, which
6 doesn't really make any sense.
7 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So have you
8 ever had a capital improvement funding line
9 in the budget?
10 MR. PURCELL: No.
11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: This would be
12 something new?
13 MR. PURCELL: The only thing that's
14 related to us at all in that regard were many
15 of our schools were written into DASNY and
16 got DASNY-funded new school buildings 15 and
17 20 -- 20 years ago or so. That's been the
18 only capital funding for any of these
19 residential programs.
20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: So how have
21 they been doing any capital improvements?
22 MR. PURCELL: Try to raise some money
23 and name a building after somebody who wants
24 to give you some money.
370
1 We don't have a lot of people who want
2 to give us that kind of money.
3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN LUPARDO: Thank you.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: I want to thank
5 you -- oh, excuse me. We have one more.
6 Roxanne Persaud.
7 SENATOR PERSAUD: Good afternoon. One
8 quick question for you.
9 I see that you're advocating for many
10 things in the foster care system, but I just
11 don't see anything specifically about kinship
12 care, which is a growing issue.
13 MR. PURCELL: It's part of the foster
14 care system. It's funded through foster
15 care. In fact, too much of it's funded
16 through foster care right now. The KinGAP,
17 which is built -- has grown more slowly than
18 either we or at least New York City would
19 have expected it to, and ACS is now working
20 with our agencies to try to clear some of the
21 hurdles out of the way for KinGAP, which
22 would allow some of the kids in kinship
23 foster care to be permanently discharged to
24 their relatives, where the conclusion is that
371
1 that family no longer needs caseworkers and
2 all of that.
3 The problem from a structural
4 perspective is when that got approved several
5 years ago, the funding was stuck into the
6 foster care block grant, which was a fine
7 short-term expedient. The problem is that as
8 it grows, that means that a larger and larger
9 part of what should be funding foster care is
10 funding families that are now out of foster
11 care.
12 There's a separate appropriation for
13 adoption subsidies. We ought to move the
14 KinGAP program into the same funding stream
15 as the adoption subsidies and stop --
16 frankly, it takes money away from the
17 counties again, the point that was just made
18 with regard to the prior speaker.
19 SENATOR PERSAUD: Thank you.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: I want to thank you
21 for your testimony today.
22 MR. PURCELL: Thank you.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: And I just want to
24 throw in, when Velmanette -- Senator
372
1 Montgomery was discussing the issues and you
2 were answering about ending up putting kids
3 from foster care into the homeless shelters,
4 I've always thought we should just pay for
5 them to go to college.
6 MR. PURCELL: Actually, one of the
7 things we're supporting is --
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: It's got to be a lot
9 cheaper than any of these other ridiculous
10 stories.
11 MR. PURCELL: Absolutely. And you
12 funded -- this is amazing to me, but you
13 funded last year a million and a half dollars
14 for FYSA, the Fostering Youth Success in
15 college. That money was included in the
16 Governor's budget this year. And those of us
17 who follow state budgets know that it doesn't
18 matter much who the Governor is, they seldom
19 put in what the Legislature has added. I see
20 that as they saw this was a great idea too.
21 I think everybody did. I think the group
22 putting that together has done a fantastic
23 job. They're back asking for increase to
24 support some additional kids this year, and
373
1 we support that as well.
2 But you're absolutely right, we could
3 get these kids into college instead of
4 homeless shelters, we get our workers to stay
5 longer on the job than the kids stay in
6 foster care, the kids will stay a lot shorter
7 because they won't keep changing workers.
8 So thank you.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
10 Our next testifier is Renee Smith,
11 chair of the board, New York State Children's
12 Alliance.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Welcome.
14 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: Thank you. Thank
15 you for having me.
16 Good afternoon, and as I said, thanks
17 for this opportunity. My name is Renee
18 Smith-Rotondo. I am the chair of the
19 New York State Children's Alliance, which is
20 the membership organization for New York
21 State's 40 Child Advocacy Centers, and I am
22 here representing our membership to ask again
23 for your support for the critical work that
24 we do with child victims of abuse.
374
1 But first I want to thank this body
2 for its strong support of our programs. In
3 2014, you added a legislative appropriation
4 of $2.57 million to the state budget that
5 year that greatly helped our programs provide
6 immediate responses and quality services to
7 our child victims. And then last year you
8 again added that same amount to the 2015-2016
9 budget. So we are really grateful that you
10 recognize the importance of the work that we
11 do in our communities and the children and
12 families that we serve.
13 This year NYSCA submitted a formal
14 request to the Governor's office to, at a
15 minimum, include that funding in this year's
16 budget, and unfortunately the proposed
17 2016-2017 budget does not include these
18 funds. So the result is that we are here
19 again to ask for your support in maintaining
20 state funding for CACs at at least the level
21 of last year's funding, which was
22 $7.779 million.
23 You have been very generous to our
24 mission over the years, and in a very real
375
1 sense what we ask you to invest in is really
2 the children of our state. We work with one
3 of the most vulnerable populations, abused
4 children. And last year we saw approximately
5 18,000 children in our 40 programs -- 18,000.
6 We understand that, as you have to
7 decide where to put your state dollars, that
8 you need to consider return on your
9 investments. So I just wanted to take my
10 time here to run through a few things that
11 you could expect to get from investing in our
12 Child Advocacy Centers.
13 The first thing is that we provide a
14 proven, effective approach to child abuse
15 cases by employing a collaborative,
16 multi-disciplinary approach to these cases.
17 We have team members that are specially
18 trained in all types of services and all
19 aspects of these cases, and the team works
20 collaboratively to provide an immediate
21 response in a safe and comfortable
22 environment for the children and the families
23 who are coming in having been subjected to
24 trauma.
376
1 Secondly, what you can expect in
2 return for the investment is programs that
3 now use a single state-of-the-art case
4 tracking system that allows us to monitor our
5 cases, collect data, analyze that data,
6 determine if there are patterns, trends,
7 gaps, and then adjust our programs
8 accordingly.
9 Third, we have centers that now have
10 the ability to survey our clients for their
11 feedback on the services that we provide
12 through the use of a web-based outcome
13 measurement system that allows all of our
14 programs to see how they're responding to the
15 community's needs and adjust accordingly.
16 And you can also expect that we share
17 all of these program dollars with a myriad of
18 agencies in our communities that have an
19 obligation to respond to a child abuse case.
20 So your support provides cutting-edge
21 training and equipment to prosecutors, to law
22 enforcement, to child protection, child
23 protective workers, to victim advocates,
24 mental health and medical health providers.
377
1 We share our dollars with our very dedicated
2 team members, and the result is that we have
3 a better, more immediate response when we
4 need to respond to a case.
5 And further, we are -- oh, and I'm out
6 of time. I'm pretty much reading --
7 SENATOR SAVINO: Sure, if you could --
8 if you could just continue --
9 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: I'll just --
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Sure. A little
11 bit. But, if you could summarize, that would
12 be helpful.
13 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: I'll just -- okay,
14 I'll just finish by saying our programs are
15 really expert at responding to trauma, and
16 there's a whole section in my testimony about
17 when you are able to address trauma at a
18 young age and how much that helps a person
19 later on in life in terms of health, and that
20 we're not re-traumatizing children in our
21 programs because we provide the type of
22 multidisciplinary, sensitive approach that's
23 very helpful to them.
24 I could go on. The returns, I think,
378
1 are obvious for the investment in our
2 programs. We ask you to continue to support
3 us the way you have been. We are very, very
4 appreciative. We do this hard work every
5 single day, and we see these children every
6 single day -- they come in traumatized, as do
7 their families. And we could really use the
8 support, the financial support, from the
9 state to be able to continue what we do.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very
11 much, and I couldn't agree more. We have
12 Child Advocacy Centers in Chautauqua,
13 Cattaraugus, and Allegany Counties, and I've
14 been personally involved with their efforts.
15 And I remember they brought in this
16 speaker several years ago, and it was -- I
17 can't recall her name -- but it was one of
18 the most notorious child abuse cases from the
19 1950s. It was very shocking. And she was
20 tied in a closet, severely abused; her
21 brother was tied to the shower and was
22 already dead, but they used to sing to one
23 another to communicate.
24 But she said that after she was
379
1 finally discovered, they had nowhere to take
2 her except to the local police station, and
3 she ended up spending the night in a jail
4 cell. So if you can imagine the horror that
5 she had been through, and the fact that
6 that's where she ended up because there was
7 nowhere to put her -- really, it's something
8 that takes your breath away.
9 So I want to thank you for what you
10 and your member organizations do to take
11 children who are abused into a safe, homelike
12 setting -- multidisciplinary, as you said,
13 healthcare, law enforcement, counselors all
14 working together on behalf of the children.
15 And I think it's an extraordinarily
16 compelling and important program. So I want
17 to thank you for your testimony today.
18 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: Thank you. And I
19 just want to say that I was going to include
20 stories, but I knew there wasn't time, so
21 yours was perfect.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We're all set.
23 Thank you so much.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
380
1 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: Thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker,
3 Stephanie Gendell, Esquire -- oh, I'm sorry.
4 Velmanette, if you have a question,
5 sure.
6 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I only wanted to
7 identify -- I just only wanted to identify
8 the fact that the New York State Children's
9 Alliance is located in my district.
10 320 Schermerhorn Street is around the corner
11 from my office. So welcome.
12 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: That is the Child
13 Advocacy Center in your district --
14 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. I just
15 wanted to acknowledge that.
16 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: Gena is here, but
17 would not come down with me --
18 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Who is here?
19 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: -- who runs that
20 Child Advocacy Center.
21 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Who is here from
22 there?
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Raise your hand.
24 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: Gena Diacomanolis.
381
1 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Oh, there.
2 Hello. Welcome.
3 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: She's on the board
4 as well.
5 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
6 MS. SMITH-ROTONDO: Thank you.
7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
8 Next is Stephanie Gendell, Esq,,
9 associate executive director for policy and
10 government relations from the Citizens'
11 Committee for Children of New York. Glad to
12 have you here.
13 And following you there will be David
14 Voegele, executive director, the Early Care
15 and Learning Council. So if you could get
16 ready.
17 MS. GENDELL: Good afternoon. I'm
18 Stephanie Gendell, from Citizens' Committee
19 for Children.
20 We don't accept any government
21 funding, so I'm not asking for any funding
22 for myself. However, we are multi-issue, so
23 I actually have a slew of --
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Could you summarize
382
1 it, though? Because I see --
2 MS. GENDELL: Oh yeah, yeah. Of
3 course.
4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: -- that you have
5 some thick testimony here.
6 MS. GENDELL: Yeah, yeah, I was
7 actually going to say -- and I'm going to
8 mention as many as I can in five minutes.
9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: We appreciate it.
10 Thank you.
11 MS. GENDELL: Starting with -- we were
12 really disappointed to see all of the cost
13 shifts in the Governor's budget for New York
14 City, and we urge you to reject all of those,
15 including whatever's going on in the safety
16 net language, which we don't fully
17 understand.
18 With regard to childcare, I appreciate
19 everyone's support this morning for
20 childcare. We discussed the $90 million.
21 Our estimates are that it's actually
22 significantly higher than $90 million,
23 probably closer to $190 million, to also
24 account for the 12-month eligibility and some
383
1 other changes.
2 On income security, we support the
3 raising the minimum wage, and we also ask
4 that you ensure that state contracts include
5 the money to actually maintain employees when
6 they raise the minimum wage. Unlike the
7 private market, the nonprofits can't raise
8 prices.
9 We support paid family leave.
10 We support Raise the Age, and we urge
11 you to use this session to raise the age. It
12 will keep communities safer, has been proven
13 to do so elsewhere -- as you know, we're one
14 of only two states that treat all 16- and
15 17-year-olds as adults, and we urge you to
16 pass comprehensive Raise the Age legislation
17 this session.
18 With regard to child welfare, the
19 budget once again cuts the state's share for
20 preventive and protective from 65 percent to
21 62 percent. We urge you to think about
22 restoring that funding or, instead,
23 reallocate the 3 percent for primary
24 preventive services. Right now, the money
384
1 that you get through this open-ended
2 reimbursement scheme is for prevention where
3 there's an open case against the family. If
4 you could have primary preventive services,
5 somebody wouldn't have to have a case open
6 and people might be more open and not
7 concerned about the stigma. It would also
8 ensure that the money was used for something
9 different and not just a cost shift.
10 We support what Jim Purcell discussed
11 about KinGAP, moving it out of the foster
12 care block grant. Also, the subsidy should
13 go to age 21 for all young people, as well as
14 we'd like to see the definition of "relative"
15 consistent with the definition we use for
16 foster care.
17 There was some discussion about
18 helping youth age out of foster care.
19 Assemblymember Hevesi's bill, A7756, would be
20 helpful in that regard. It raises the
21 housing subsidy from $300 to $600 per month
22 and enables youth to receive it until age 24,
23 and have roommates, and we urge you to pass
24 that bill this session.
385
1 We were happy to see post-adoption
2 language and $5 million for post-adoption
3 services in this bill. That's a federal
4 requirement that we've been waiting for the
5 state to implement. We're concerned that the
6 appropriations language makes it sound like
7 OCFS can use the money for whatever they'd
8 like and also reduce it if they'd like to,
9 and so we just urge you to make that language
10 more specific.
11 We support adding more resources for
12 home visiting, runaway and homeless youth,
13 and the Summer Youth Employment Program.
14 And then -- I have so much time left
15 that I'll end going back to one of the things
16 I left out, which is on the income security.
17 Helping New Yorkers save for college, we
18 think, is critical. And the best way to help
19 families get -- and young people get -- out
20 of poverty ultimately is to go to college.
21 And so we've long supported the proposal to
22 allow New Yorkers to put a portion of their
23 tax refund directly into a 529 college
24 savings account at the time they do their
386
1 taxes, which if you get EITC, it's the only
2 time you really have the money to do that.
3 And so we actually have the bill in
4 both houses, A9065 and S6229, which is Hevesi
5 and Carlucci, and we urge you to pass that
6 bill this session. And then, once
7 New Yorkers are able to do that, those on
8 public assistance would need to be able to
9 have 529s waived from the asset limit test or
10 else they wouldn't really be able to save
11 through this mechanism.
12 So that is the quickest summary of my
13 18-page testimony that I could do. Thank
14 you.
15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Very
16 good.
17 Any questions?
18 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Yeah, I have one.
19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Assemblyman.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Thank you,
21 Senator.
22 Yeah, I just -- there's too many
23 things to agree on, so I'm just going to say
24 thank you so much for all of your advice and
387
1 guidance. And I continue to look forward to
2 working with you, and there should be some
3 real results. Thank you.
4 MS. GENDELL: Thank you for your
5 support.
6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker,
9 as I should say, is David Voegele, executive
10 director from the Early Care and Learning
11 Council, and he will be joined by Jessica
12 Klos Shapiro, director of policy and
13 community education.
14 Very happy to have you with us. How
15 badly did I butcher your name?
16 MR. VOEGELE: I'm David Voegele.
17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Oh, okay. Good.
18 MS. SHAPIRO: You got mine perfectly.
19 So thank you.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. I'm glad to
21 hear that. It's good when that happens.
22 MR. VOEGELE: Well, we appreciate very
23 much the opportunity to be speaking today.
24 The Early Care and Learning Council is the
388
1 state association of 35 childcare resource
2 and referral agencies that serve every region
3 of New York State. Our purpose is to promote
4 excellence in early learning.
5 We do this united in purpose and in
6 partnership with the 35 CCR&Rs. The Child
7 Care Resource and Referral programs are in
8 fact the linkage between the parents and
9 providers throughout the state, between the
10 need for childcare and the services that meet
11 that need.
12 Parents utilize CCR&Rs to identify and
13 obtain resources and childcare that meets
14 their needs. Providers utilize the CCR&Rs
15 for quality improvement, for training and
16 technical assistance, and to access resources
17 and to be connected to the consumers they
18 want to reach.
19 Our CCR&Rs know where the regulated
20 childcare exists in the regions they serve,
21 they're aware of what capacity needs to be
22 developed to better meet the needs of a
23 region. Childcare is infrastructure support
24 for children, for families, and for
389
1 communities. CCR&Rs are a critical tool in
2 making that childcare available and effective
3 throughout the state.
4 Quality childcare, which is needed in
5 order for children to thrive, is expensive,
6 particularly in New York State. The recent
7 report by Child Care Aware of America in the
8 fall of 2015 documented again how expensive
9 it is in New York State. There's a report
10 that I believe we may have distributed to
11 just about everyone in the Capitol, so
12 hopefully you do have that. But it cites --
13 I'm just going to cite two of the factors
14 that show up in this report.
15 One is that the average annual cost of
16 full-time care for an infant in a childcare
17 center is over $14,000. For a 4-year-old,
18 it's nearly $12,000. Combined, for a
19 two-child family, that would be almost
20 $26,000 a year in childcare costs. If you
21 are a single parent, the average income of a
22 single parent does not cover that. The
23 average income of a childcare worker does not
24 cover that.
390
1 So it is very expensive. New York is
2 the least affordable state in the country for
3 center-based care for 4-year-olds. It is the
4 third least affordable state for center-based
5 infant care.
6 As I've stated in a different
7 testimony this year, the cost of a year of
8 center-based care for an infant in New York
9 is nearly double the cost of tuition at a
10 public college. This is the widest gap in
11 any state in the country. And while parents
12 will pay about 60 percent for the childcare
13 costs for the family, they actually only pay
14 about 23 percent of the costs associated with
15 a public college education, with the
16 remainder subsidized by state and federal
17 funds.
18 Given how expensive childcare is, in
19 New York State in particular, if it did not
20 have the public support that it has, parents
21 would not be able to go to work, employers
22 would not be able to operate or expand their
23 businesses. There's a wonderful five-minute
24 video circulating somewhere that we can
391
1 provide a link to, about -- I think it's
2 entitled "A Day Without Childcare." And it's
3 a very poignant demonstration of how the
4 world collapses if there's not quality
5 childcare available.
6 Reliable, regulated childcare
7 increases employee attendance, punctuality,
8 and productivity. Quality childcare is
9 necessary for parents, for children, and for
10 our communities.
11 This year we call upon the Legislature
12 to invest an additional $190 million in
13 childcare. Ninety million dollars of this is
14 necessary in order to cover the costs of the
15 new health, safety, and quality initiatives
16 required by the block grant, in order for no
17 children to actually lose subsidies. We also
18 are asking for $100 million that we perceive,
19 and our experts perceive, will be necessary
20 to also maintain current levels of slots
21 because of the market rate increases that are
22 due in June of this year, and because of the
23 new -- the expanded eligibility rules that
24 will take effect in October of this year.
392
1 What, time's up already? Wow. Okay.
2 I'm happy to take questions. You have
3 most of my testimony, so I don't want to go
4 beyond the time I had allowed.
5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I just had a couple
6 quick questions.
7 So we heard a lot of concern earlier
8 today out of legislators about the Executive
9 Budget and the fact that we have this federal
10 $90 million mandate that's coming down on
11 childcare agencies. And I was wondering, you
12 know, you're talking about increasing funding
13 and how expensive childcare already is in
14 New York State, and it does put working in
15 some cases out of reach for some families, in
16 having that ability.
17 I was wondering what you felt the
18 impact of the increase in the minimum wage
19 would have on childcare providers in the
20 state.
21 MR. VOEGELE: We have heard from
22 several of our CCR&Rs of concerns that
23 providers have raised about how it would
24 impact their payroll and their ability to
393
1 continue business. I heard a comment earlier
2 today related to -- I don't believe the term
3 "profit margin" was used, but it was a
4 reference to how much money is being made and
5 to what extent are providers able to cover
6 this cost of additional wages.
7 The reality is the childcare world is
8 not a high-profit enterprise. Many, many
9 childcare providers already struggle. There
10 are concerns -- we absolutely believe that a
11 childcare worker should be making probably,
12 on the average, $10,000 a year more than they
13 currently make. However, at the moment,
14 we're not aware of a way to make that -- to
15 accomplish that.
16 ECLC, the Early Care Learning Council,
17 has not taken an official position on the
18 minimum wage proposal, but we do know that
19 some of our CCR&Rs have heard concerns from
20 providers as to how this may in fact put them
21 out of business.
22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
23 MS. SHAPIRO: I just wanted to add to
24 that, if that's possible.
394
1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Go ahead.
2 MS. SHAPIRO: The difference -- these
3 campaigns that we would be supportive of are
4 the Fiscal Policy Institute, like the 15 and
5 Funded, because a lot of the contracts happen
6 between childcare workers and the state. If
7 you just mandated that a person be paid $15,
8 and they're not funded, we'd put businesses
9 out and there would be less childcare
10 available for families. So those are
11 something we'd support.
12 Thank you.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Assemblyman Hevesi.
14 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Just a comment.
15 First, thank you for your testimony.
16 But I just want to go on record and say,
17 Ms. Shapiro, thank you for your advice and
18 your guidance. I would not understand these
19 issues even close to what I do now if it
20 wasn't for your advice. So thank you very
21 much.
22 MS. SHAPIRO: Thank you very much.
23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: No one else?
24 Thank you for being with us.
395
1 MR. VOEGELE: Thank you.
2 MS. SHAPIRO: Thank you.
3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
4 Jenn O'Connor, cochair of Winning Beginning
5 New York.
6 And following her we will have Kelly
7 Sturgis, executive director of After School
8 Works.
9 MS. O'CONNOR: Good afternoon.
10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Good afternoon.
11 Welcome, Chair.
12 MS. O'CONNOR: They made us take the
13 sticks out of our signs so we wouldn't use
14 them as weapons, so I'll just hold this for
15 you (showing).
16 I feel like I'm preaching to the
17 choir. I want to thank you all for your
18 attention to all of our issues today. I will
19 say very briefly we wanted to talk today
20 about home visiting, childcare, and
21 after-school.
22 In terms of home visiting, nearly
23 70,000 children a year are abused or
24 neglected. That would fill Madison Square
396
1 Garden nearly four times. We know that
2 maternal, infant, and early childhood home
3 visiting can help to prevent child abuse and
4 neglect.
5 We would urge you to look not just at
6 Healthy Families and the Nurse-Family
7 Partnership program, but also at the Parents
8 as Teachers and the Parent/Child Home
9 Program. These are four research-based
10 programs, and the reason that we support them
11 is we look across the continuums at different
12 eligibility levels, different demographics
13 across the state. And we are fully
14 supportive of all four getting a little
15 funding this year.
16 In addition, obviously we would like
17 the $90 million for CCDBG implementation. We
18 disagree with the Governor's office, with
19 their strategy, to let the feds take care of
20 it. And so we are meeting with them about
21 30-day amendments, but we do hope that we can
22 come to some sort of resolution on that.
23 In particular, passing the cost of
24 background checks down to providers is
397
1 unconscionable to us. We're talking about
2 12,500 small businesses and a number of
3 low-wage workers. One hundred million
4 dollars for subsidies, that would just
5 maintain the number of childcare slots right
6 now to keep parents working.
7 And we are asking for an increase in
8 Advantage After School funding by
9 $49.9 million, and also asking for a
10 restoration of $2 million from last year. My
11 colleagues from After School Works and the
12 New York State After School Network are
13 following me immediately, so I'll let them
14 get specific on that.
15 I will tell you that the only reason
16 that I found after-school programming for my
17 12-year-old a while back was calling on those
18 folks at the After School Network to help
19 hook me up -- because there's nothing out
20 there, and the last thing you want is a
21 12-year-old home alone.
22 So I thank you very much, and I'm
23 happy to entertain any questions.
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Krueger.
398
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
2 You're the second testifier in a row
3 to bring up the fact that New York State's
4 early childcare is much more expensive than
5 anywhere else in the country.
6 MS. O'CONNOR: Sure.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: We're certainly not
8 paying our childcare workers much more, so
9 why are we so much more expensive?
10 MS. O'CONNOR: I think my colleagues
11 are actually better versed in that piece than
12 I am. I mean, what the cost of childcare
13 right now is what people can afford to pay.
14 It's not based on a real valid market rate.
15 So it's not based on what childcare providers
16 should be paid.
17 It still ends up being much more
18 expensive -- I mean, you're going to pay more
19 for childcare then you would for a four-year
20 college at a state university. So there
21 should be something in place, we would hope,
22 to help with those costs.
23 SENATOR KRUEGER: So again, your
24 testimony says the average cost of
399
1 high-quality infant care is $14,000 per year.
2 Implying that in other states it would be
3 less than expensive than $14,000 a year?
4 MS. O'CONNOR: We also have pretty
5 good regulations around ratios, so --
6 child-to-provider ratios, and infant care is
7 just a lot more expensive.
8 I will say that as we move 3-year-olds
9 into pre-K programs, we would like to see
10 them served in community-based organizations,
11 because that will help defer the cost of the
12 infants and toddlers. So our concern with
13 pre-K, while we're completely supportive of
14 it, is to not move too many kids into
15 school-based settings because infant and
16 toddler care is so expensive.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And the older kids
18 subsidize, in some way, the younger kids.
19 MS. O'CONNOR: Right.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
22 Senator Montgomery.
23 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, thank you.
24 You are at least the second of the
400
1 testimonies that deals quite extensively with
2 child abuse issues. And I am just -- you
3 know, I'm interested because child abuse
4 often is an indication, a symptom of a much
5 larger issue in a family. And all of those
6 stresses are being, I guess, delivered on --
7 at the expense of a child, the children.
8 So I'm wondering where are we in terms
9 of looking at child abuse as an indication of
10 a much larger issue and that there is a way
11 of beginning to deal with the larger issue --
12 if there is a housing issue, if there is
13 spousal abuse, if there's family violence of
14 any sort, on and on and on.
15 Where are we in -- do we have a system
16 that uses child abuse as an indication that
17 we need to be doing much more with any given
18 family situation?
19 MS. O'CONNOR: I don't think we do a
20 good enough job of connecting the dots. I
21 think we still look at child abuse as a
22 punitive situation, and we don't necessarily
23 look at poverty and homelessness and domestic
24 violence.
401
1 I would love to come by with a
2 colleague -- I sit on the board of Prevent
3 Child Abuse New York, and I'd love to come by
4 with the executive director and talk to you
5 more about kind of the specifics of that.
6 But I do think programs like home
7 visiting can help by making supported
8 referrals to other programs. And having
9 someone -- the benefit of home visiting --
10 completely voluntary, but if you have someone
11 come into your home, they're not just looking
12 at the child that is in the program, they're
13 looking at the whole structure and they're
14 looking at all the people in the home and
15 around the home, and they're sometimes really
16 good first responders.
17 But I would love to talk to you
18 offline about some more specifics.
19 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I would love to
20 talk to you about that.
21 There was a very, very outstanding
22 issue in my own district with a child that
23 was killed, and one of the indicators for
24 that -- for stress in that family was that
402
1 the child missed so many school days.
2 And so there are things that it seems
3 to me we could do to act, as you know -- to
4 have an emergency response team, so to speak,
5 to a crisis that a family is experiencing,
6 which we know could very well, probably would
7 lead to child abuse or the death of a child.
8 And so I look forward to working with
9 you. We've tried to do that. There are some
10 other places where that's done, and it makes
11 a tremendous difference in dealing with the
12 whole -- the degree to which child abuse and
13 child homicides have become so prevalent.
14 MS. O'CONNOR: Sure.
15 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And we're
16 concerned about that, so I look forward to
17 working with you.
18 MS. O'CONNOR: That would be
19 fantastic.
20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: If you don't
21 mind.
22 MS. O'CONNOR: I think it could
23 definitely work to shore up the safety net.
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you.
403
1 MS. O'CONNOR: Thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.
3 Thank you very much for your testimony
4 today.
5 Our next speakers are from After
6 School Works/The New York State After School
7 Network, and that would be Kelly Sturgis,
8 executive director, and Alli Lidie, deputy
9 director.
10 Thank you for being here.
11 MS. STURGIS: Thank you.
12 Good afternoon. I'm Kelly Sturgis,
13 the executive director of After School Works
14 New York/The New York State After School
15 Network. And first, not only do we want to
16 thank you for allowing us to testify today,
17 but also staying this late in the day and
18 committing your time to this. So thank you
19 very much.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: This is nothing.
21 (Laughter.)
22 MS. STURGIS: There's still more
23 people.
24 At ASWN/NYSASN we believe that all of
404
1 New York's students deserve the chance to
2 reach their full potential no matter where
3 they are from. Each year, studies
4 demonstrate the impact and value of
5 after-school and summer programs in helping
6 youth reach that potential. These benefits
7 are outlined in the written testimony that
8 we've provided to you, so we'll try to keep
9 this short.
10 To build an innovation-focused
11 economy, ensure our children are graduating
12 high school ready for college and career, and
13 keep them on track for healthy adult lives,
14 New York needs to increase investment in
15 high-quality after-school and summer learning
16 experiences.
17 Furthermore, as the state turns to the
18 community schools strategy to support school
19 turnaround, a strategy in which 90 percent of
20 schools include after-school programming or
21 expanded learning time, there is increasing
22 interest throughout the state in greater
23 access to these programs.
24 While we strongly support the
405
1 community schools strategy, we are deeply
2 concerned that schools attempting to add in
3 needed after-school and summer programs will
4 further stretch the already overextended
5 funding streams. Even without considering
6 potential increased demand, 1.1 million
7 New York students want an after-school
8 program and do not have access to one. That
9 number remains unchanged from 2009.
10 Similarly, a report based on the same
11 survey, from the 2014 America After 3 P.M.,
12 revealed that 500,000 New York children are
13 still without access to high-quality summer
14 programming. Fortunately, the state has the
15 opportunity to make a difference.
16 We ask that you appropriate
17 $69.2 million to the Advantage After School
18 program. This will restore $19.3 million in
19 funding to this past fiscal year and increase
20 funding by an additional $49.9 million to
21 this coming fiscal year. This increase will
22 allow the program to serve 20,000 students,
23 which is an increase of 5,000 students over
24 current capacity, and expand the funding
406
1 stream to allow for full-day summer
2 programming for 20,000 youth.
3 Additionally, this funding will align
4 per-student allotment for these programs with
5 national best practice standards, which is
6 also aligned with 21st-century community
7 learning centers. A portion of this
8 investment will also ensure quality by
9 leveraging statewide knowledge, resources,
10 and supports through technical assistance,
11 allowing for data collection and evaluation
12 to make evidence-based quality improvements,
13 and providing state-level data on
14 after-school and summer programming.
15 Additionally, we request that you
16 provide an additional $190 million in
17 childcare to maintain and expand subsidies.
18 More than a third of childcare subsidies in
19 New York support care for school-aged
20 children, including after-school programs.
21 An additional $90 million is needed to ensure
22 that no current children lose childcare
23 subsidies as the state implements these new
24 federally mandated health, safety, and
407
1 quality initiatives.
2 Furthermore, an additional
3 $100 million is needed to expand childcare
4 subsidies to reach an additional
5 13,000 children in income-eligible families
6 that are waiting to be served. Investing in
7 childcare subsidies helps families ensure
8 that their children are safe after the school
9 day ends, and the need is currently much
10 higher than the available funding.
11 MS. LIDIE: I'm Alli Lidie; I'm the
12 deputy director. I just wanted to highlight
13 a couple of the great programs that we have
14 across the state doing after-school and
15 summer programs already.
16 One of them is the Comet Design
17 Company in Carthage. It's actually an
18 entrepreneurial program for high school
19 students where they get to create a business
20 plan, develop a product, use 3D printers and
21 other high-tech machines to actually create
22 these products, and then they sell them to
23 support the after-school program.
24 Another is a partnership in Massena,
408
1 which is a community that has an increasing
2 heroin and prescription drug addiction
3 problem among youth, where the Boys and Girls
4 Club has teamed up with the police department
5 to provide a positive alternative through
6 their after-school program.
7 And these are just a couple of the
8 opportunities that are currently in the state
9 that need support.
10 In addition to the recommendations
11 that Kelly mentioned, we also hope that you
12 consider a few other recommendations that
13 support these programs, including the
14 addition of $28.33 million to the Youth
15 Development Program to expand the
16 out-of-school-time program services, and then
17 growing that eventually to $85 million.
18 We also urge you to accept the
19 Governor's proposed increase in the Summer
20 Youth Employment Program to $31 million, and
21 to increase that program by $17.2 million to
22 add an additional 10,000 jobs and pay the
23 increased minimum wage.
24 We also urge you to accept the
409
1 Governor's proposal for a continued 250,000
2 to increase enrollment in the Child and Adult
3 Care Food Program.
4 And finally, to support baselining the
5 $2.1 million legislative add for the Runaway
6 and Homeless Youth Act programs, which would
7 bring total state support to $4.48 million,
8 and then, in addition, $5.5 million to bring
9 total support to $10 million.
10 Thank you.
11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
12 Questions?
13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Assemblyman?
15 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Yeah, just very
16 quickly.
17 First -- there we go -- first, thank
18 you, it's good to see you again, and thank
19 you for all your work and to be part of, at
20 least for me and I'm sure others of my
21 colleagues, an understanding that
22 after-school is not just good for the kids,
23 but it's also sort of daycare that is crucial
24 for parents to stay at work. It's an
410
1 economic development tool which is incredibly
2 important for us.
3 So your guidance on these issues has
4 been invaluable. I just want to say thanks.
5 MS. STURGIS: Thank you.
6 MS. LIDIE: Thank you for all of your
7 support.
8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.
9 Well, thank you for participating
10 today. We appreciate it.
11 MS. STURGIS: Thank you.
12 MS. LIDIE: Thank you.
13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Our next speaker is
14 from the United Federation of Teachers, Anne
15 Goldman, vice president for non-DOE titles.
16 Following Ms. Goldman, Vice President
17 Goldman, we'll have Maclain Berhaupt, state
18 advocacy director for the Supportive Housing
19 Network of New York.
20 Welcome.
21 MS. GOLDMAN: Hi. Good afternoon.
22 So I've had the opportunity to hear
23 the very informative debate, discussion, and
24 I've learned a lot from all of you by sitting
411
1 here today. So I will be succinct and
2 rephrase the reason for my appearing before
3 you, which is to talk about the federall
4 unfunded mandate on childcare providers from
5 the lens of the provider.
6 I can't emphasize enough what a
7 mistake this is. As someone who's been on
8 the end of trauma teams as a registered
9 nurse, intervention in homeless shelters, and
10 worked for many, many years through different
11 aspects in society, let me be clear: There
12 is no way for us to succeed in New York if we
13 don't start with leveling the playing fields
14 for the multicultural children and poor
15 people who need this service.
16 I heard the discussion this morning
17 and many of your questions with OCFS. Bottom
18 line: Of course the providers who are
19 legally exempt will go underground. How can
20 they survive? They cannot compete and
21 survive. And, quite frankly, as some of your
22 questions have indicated, of course they're
23 attracted to the $15 minimum wage in other
24 areas. Childcare, if we really value it, we
412
1 have to understand it's more than just
2 watching a child or the so-called
3 babysitting. It is indeed meeting the
4 society's and the community's needs in a
5 culturally sensitive, proficient manner.
6 Getting that child the chance to compete in
7 life, to understand what it is to sit in a
8 classroom, eat a hot meal, be with other
9 children.
10 When we don't do that correctly, we
11 pay for that later if we don't pay for it
12 up-front. And when we talk about costing
13 items, let's go to the emergency room. Let's
14 look at the children and the prices we pay
15 for the recovery of a lost opportunity.
16 Those opportunities are lost when we don't
17 recognize it's not fair to consider legally
18 exempt in the number of vouchers we need for
19 children serving 21 or 25 percent, depending
20 on who does the math, of those eligible --
21 it's ridiculous. How do we consider
22 ourselves prudent by investing in the
23 economics of our state when we disadvantage
24 the very people who are trying to succeed who
413
1 we claim we're trying to move forward? How
2 can that possibly happen?
3 I have seen in my time different
4 mandates that are unfunded or that are
5 untimely. This cannot work. There is not
6 the ability because we do not know the rules,
7 the inspectors do not know the rules, we do
8 not have a timeline. And as so many speakers
9 before me were very clear in articulating,
10 are we kidding? We're going to put
11 background checks and fingerprinting,
12 additional costs, on the backs of very poor
13 people? These are not enforceable mandates
14 in legally exempt -- you're walking into
15 someone's home. How do you walk in someone's
16 home and enforce all of these things?
17 Do we just want to feel good by saying
18 these are the great rules New York has? Or
19 do we want to do it right the first time?
20 And doing it right the first time starts by
21 understanding we need a timeline, we need a
22 rollout, we need an action plan, and we need
23 to give support to those people there. And
24 we need to remember there is no time to do it
414
1 over. How many times do we sit and
2 contemplate the do-over, the do-over because
3 we did not correctly implement the first
4 time?
5 In effect, there's a lot of planned
6 remarks and a lot of learned people in the
7 room, but that's the points I feel I wanted
8 to emphasize.
9 I do want to also say about
10 special-needs children -- and again,
11 culturally proficient, this is a very serious
12 skill mix, that we need to be sensitive to
13 the public health needs of our children and
14 the ability to react to children who need
15 additional guidance, support. And that will
16 not happen if we do not treat poor children
17 in the same way we treat children who have
18 the opportunity to be in our healthcare
19 system.
20 All of that said, we hope that you
21 will review -- and I'm sure from your
22 comments today and your concerns and your
23 interests, you already know these things, but
24 we want to emphasize to you those are the --
415
1 I think the summary that I wish to
2 articulate, based on a long day of hearing
3 very interesting remarks.
4 So thank you.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senators?
6 Senator Diane Savino.
7 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator
8 Krueger.
9 Hi, Anne. How are you?
10 MS. GOLDMAN: Good.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: I'm just curious.
12 When we did the legislation a few years ago
13 to allow for collective bargaining rights for
14 daycare workers, the family-based daycare
15 workers, the UFT has the workers in the city
16 and CSEA has them everywhere else. One of
17 the reasons why we wanted them to have
18 collective bargaining rights was so they
19 could band together for the purposes of
20 making the argument that we needed to raise
21 the subsidies, which basically is how they
22 earn their living.
23 Has there been any success with that,
24 with the effort to bring awareness to how low
416
1 the subsidies are so we can elevate them?
2 MS. GOLDMAN: No. And with the market
3 rate being rolled back, in effect, that
4 wasn't helpful either.
5 There's been a series of discussions,
6 and it isn't even a fair formula. If we were
7 bargaining wage and talked about the
8 providers, it's under the $11 that you
9 remarked about before because they're doing a
10 12-, 13-hour day.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
12 MS. GOLDMAN: So no, we have not
13 succeeded in that area. We talk about a lot
14 of things, but there's no progress that I am
15 aware of.
16 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm. And I know
17 that other people have raised the concern
18 that if we raise the minimum wage, you know,
19 over this period of time to $15 an hour,
20 childcare workers are entitled to that too,
21 and there's a concern that that will somehow
22 elevate the cost of childcare to working
23 parents. Although most of your members,
24 their childcare -- their actual salary comes
417
1 through the subsidy that the parent receives;
2 correct?
3 MS. GOLDMAN: Yes.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. So how would
5 raising the state's minimum wage affect them?
6 MS. GOLDMAN: It would be a welcome
7 opportunity for the families they're serving,
8 and for them, to participate in a more viable
9 career.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
11 MS. GOLDMAN: This is actually -- it
12 can become a career, where we have talked
13 about PD -- I heard other speakers talk about
14 it.
15 The UFT administers those programs,
16 and I think what it does is offer the
17 opportunity, the launch pad, if you will, for
18 someone to nurture and develop into a worker
19 with some respect and some dignity.
20 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
21 MS. GOLDMAN: In a lot of areas where
22 it's just considered women's work, and we're
23 still doing that based on the way this
24 particular budget has reacted to childcare.
418
1 SENATOR SAVINO: And you have
2 15,000 --
3 MS. GOLDMAN: Yes.
4 SENATOR SAVINO: -- members in the
5 City of New York? Do you know how many --
6 how many children are being served by the
7 home-based childcare system?
8 MS. GOLDMAN: Oh, my goodness. About
9 200,000.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: Two hundred thousand.
11 MS. GOLDMAN: Yes.
12 SENATOR SAVINO: Because earlier today
13 deputy -- acting commissioner --
14 MS. GOLDMAN: That's through that
15 system --
16 SENATOR SAVINO: Right.
17 MS. GOLDMAN: But remember, now,
18 that's vouchered, and there are so many
19 others. But in terms of framing the question
20 in that way, that's about the number.
21 SENATOR SAVINO: So through that
22 voucher system, that's 200,000.
23 MS. GOLDMAN: Yes.
24 SENATOR SAVINO: Because earlier today
419
1 we were told there's 207,000 children
2 statewide that are given a -- eligible for
3 subsidy, but not that subsidy.
4 MS. GOLDMAN: That's correct.
5 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.
6 MS. GOLDMAN: Thank you very much.
7 Thank you very much, everyone.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: Good night, Annie.
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
12 Our next speaker is Maclain Berhaupt,
13 Supportive Housing Network of New York.
14 And then for people who are watching,
15 next up will be Carmelita Cruz from Housing
16 Works.
17 Hi.
18 MS. BERHAUPT: Thank you. Thank you
19 all for the opportunity to testify this
20 afternoon.
21 My name is Maclain Berhaupt. I'm the
22 state advocacy director of the Supportive
23 Housing Network of New York. The network is
24 a member association representing over
420
1 200 nonprofit providers and developers who
2 operate more than 50,000 supportive housing
3 units across the state.
4 Supportive housing is permanent,
5 affordable housing linked to on-site services
6 for individuals and families that are
7 homeless, disabled and at-risk. It is the
8 proven, cost-effective, and humane way to
9 provide stable homes to individuals and
10 families who have difficulty maintaining
11 housing due to disabling conditions.
12 Supportive housing allows disabled
13 individuals who have spent years living on
14 the streets or in institutions to live
15 fulfilling, rewarding lives integrated into
16 the community. It gives them the stability,
17 support, and sense of community they need to
18 reunite with their families, become
19 healthier, and in many cases secure
20 employment. It changes and saves lives every
21 day.
22 That is why the network strongly
23 supports the Executive Budget's proposal for
24 20,000 new units of supportive housing
421
1 statewide over the next fifteen years. The
2 five-year program is set to invest
3 $2.6 billion for 6,000 new units of
4 supportive housing over the first five years
5 of this 15-year commitment.
6 The Governor has said that over the
7 15 years, the plan will result in 20,000 new
8 supportive housing units. We commend the
9 Governor for this commitment and urge the
10 Legislature to stand with him and continue to
11 support the need for the state to fund the
12 20,000 units over 15 years, specifically to
13 build the first 6,000 units over the first
14 five years. This plan is exactly what the
15 Legislature and the Campaign 4 NY/NY
16 envisioned when we stood together asking the
17 state to support 35,000 units across the
18 state.
19 And while we are overjoyed with this
20 long-term commitment to build 20,000 new
21 units, we must not forgo a commitment to fund
22 the state's existing units that are housing
23 formerly homeless persons today. Otherwise,
24 we are not expanding the pipeline to address
422
1 the crisis -- rather, replacing old units
2 with new units. Adequate funding for units
3 that are open now is just as critically
4 important to funding the new units.
5 OTDA supports the New York State
6 Supportive Housing Program, which is one of
7 the state's most important funding sources
8 for innovative and effective solutions to
9 keeping people from becoming or remaining
10 homeless. It is the primary funding stream
11 for the ongoing operation of supportive
12 housing in New York State. It pays for
13 critical on-site services that make it
14 possible to house multi-disabled and
15 vulnerable individuals, families and children
16 in supportive housing. Services include case
17 management, counseling and crisis
18 intervention, employment and vocational
19 assistance, parenting skills development, and
20 building security services.
21 This year the Executive Budget
22 flat-funds this program at $29.1 million.
23 This is just -- this is about $4.8 million
24 short of what is needed to adequately fund
423
1 all existing supportive housing residences
2 and all new residences opening up in 2016.
3 This funding shortfall jeopardizes the
4 housing stability of over 6,300 homeless
5 individuals, families, and children across
6 the state.
7 Without this additional 4.8 million,
8 just under 100 supportive housing residences
9 are either not receiving this critical
10 service funding or are underfunded by
11 10 percent. About roughly half have been cut
12 10 percent, and the other half have not
13 received any of this service funding.
14 I did leave a few examples in the
15 testimony of how these cuts will impact
16 existing residences and future residences
17 about to open, and I would just conclude with
18 asking the Legislature to consider that at
19 this time we're facing record homelessness;
20 we must stand together to ensure that the
21 programs currently serving this population --
22 that the most vulnerable maintain minimal but
23 critical support services to keep high-risk
24 tenants safely housed.
424
1 Thank you.
2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. I'm
3 going to start.
4 So in earlier today's testimony we
5 learned that $75 million of the JPMorgan
6 settlement money that was supposed to be in
7 the 2014-2015 budget -- I mean the 2015-2016
8 budget --
9 MS. BERHAUPT: Right.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- has never been
11 released. And that was for supportive
12 housing. What did you think you were getting
13 that money for, and what's happened since you
14 didn't get that money?
15 MS. BERHAUPT: Sure. It was our
16 understanding last year that money was kind
17 of the down payment for 5,000 units of
18 supportive housing that the Governor had
19 announced a year ago.
20 It's our understanding now that that
21 funding has been kind of lumped into this new
22 five-year commitment of 6,000 units. So it
23 was never -- it wasn't spent. There were --
24 are -- a piece that went out, I think it's
425
1 been wrapped up now into this new commitment.
2 So essentially last year's commitment is part
3 of this year's commitment, if that makes
4 sense.
5 SENATOR SAVINO: So last year's
6 commitment was 5,000 units over five years,
7 and that became 6,000 units over five years,
8 but we lost a year.
9 MS. BERHAUPT: Yeah. Right. But the
10 difference is that last year there was a plan
11 for the city and the state to share in that
12 commitment, and now it's our understanding
13 that the state is fully funding those
14 6,000 units -- 100 percent with all state
15 funding, no local match. So that would be
16 the difference.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And also from
18 earlier testimony, of the money for
19 supportive housing, it was broken down X
20 amount for capital and Y amount for services.
21 MS. BERHAUPT: Mm-hmm.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: So you're showing
23 today that you've actually been flat-funded
24 or actually are short almost $5 million for
426
1 ongoing supportive services.
2 MS. BERHAUPT: Right. The specific
3 program, the New York State Supportive
4 Housing program. Correct.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: Right. But the
6 Governor's people said that they actually
7 have lots of new money for the services to go
8 along with supportive housing.
9 So is there somewhere else in the
10 budget where we can find that money that will
11 address both your shortfall and your
12 expanding needs?
13 MS. BERHAUPT: Sure. It's our
14 understanding the commitment for the 6,000
15 units was, I believe, $2.6 billion, of which
16 $200 million was for the support services.
17 That RFP has not gone out yet. So
18 we're not sure how they will be rolling out
19 the services funding for that. I would
20 anticipate, you know, maybe it would be
21 through the NYSHIP program; maybe it would be
22 a brand-new program. We just don't know the
23 details of that.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: And is it your
427
1 understanding that that $200 million includes
2 money for existing supportive housing, or
3 just new units?
4 MS. BERHAUPT: For new units.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: So no matter what
6 they roll out, that wouldn't apply to the
7 shortfall you're suffering from now.
8 MS. BERHAUPT: Correct.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: And that
10 hypothetically wouldn't be available until
11 X number of years into the future when new
12 supportive housing units came online.
13 MS. BERHAUPT: Correct. Those 6,000
14 units are all for new construction, which
15 will take a couple years to be built. So
16 that -- you're correct.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: And again, as you've
18 described, we're actually a year behind when
19 the first commitment was made a year ago for
20 5,000 units.
21 MS. BERHAUPT: Right.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: So we have actually
23 a -- we've taken a step backwards when we're
24 supposed to be taking big steps forwards.
428
1 MS. BERHAUPT: Sure. I mean, we at
2 the network -- we're very excited to hear
3 this 15-year commitment. We're even more
4 excited to see the 6,000 units that's fully
5 funded in the budget. But we would like to
6 see some type of way that the 15,000
7 commitment be memorialized and realized over
8 the next -- I'm sorry, the 20,000 units over
9 the next 15 years.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
11 Assembly? Assemblymember Hevesi.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Thank you. Thank
13 you.
14 First I've just got to get the
15 pleasantries out of the way. Maclain, thank
16 you and Laura Mascuch and everybody at the
17 network for being incredible over the last
18 year. If it was not for your work, the
19 members of the Legislature wouldn't have an
20 understanding of what supportive housing is,
21 what you do, how it is the answer to our
22 current homeless crisis, and every step of
23 the way it's been a long, difficult process
24 to get to the 35,000 units. You guys have
429
1 been great. So I just want to say thank you.
2 MS. BERHAUPT: Thank you so much.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: We agree with
4 you, or I agree with you, specifically about
5 the need for a New York/New York IV agreement
6 with respect to both Mayor de Blasio and
7 Governor Cuomo, who've done an outstanding
8 job on this issue. They will no longer be in
9 office when these units come online, and so
10 we agree with you at the need to lock down
11 that deal. Also, it allows people in your
12 network to plan and to go after other money
13 to make sure that these units come to
14 fruition.
15 And I can tell you, from the Assembly
16 point of view, that we are really going to be
17 focused on the $4.8 million shortfall for
18 existing units. And I believe, based on
19 conversations publicly and also privately
20 with the commissioner, that they acknowledge
21 that need.
22 MS. BERHAUPT: Thanks.
23 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: So we're ready
24 to stand with you. And again, you guys have
430
1 been great, and you need to take a bow for
2 the incredible work you've done to get us to
3 35,000 units. We have some concerns about
4 how they're coming out, but that's a good
5 problem to have.
6 So thank you, Maclain, for all your
7 work.
8 MS. BERHAUPT: Thank you.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
10 Senator Velmanette Montgomery.
11 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, thank you,
12 Madam Chair.
13 Hello.
14 MS. BERHAUPT: Hi.
15 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you for
16 your testimony.
17 You named in your -- you listed
18 several examples, one from Rochester, one
19 from Montrose, New York, one from the
20 Finger Lakes. And, you know, for me and for
21 us in the city in particular, it is very
22 difficult to site special-needs supportive
23 housing --
24 MS. BERHAUPT: Mm-hmm.
431
1 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: -- and impossible
2 to do it without the supportive parts.
3 MS. BERHAUPT: The services.
4 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So -- and you
5 mentioned that there are cuts. Is there --
6 can I find out? Because I have a number of
7 supportive housing projects in my district.
8 They are all extremely important, very well
9 run, so far no problems, but it's because
10 they have the supportive housing arm there.
11 Can you give us -- can you give me a
12 list of the housing developments that I
13 represent or that are in Brooklyn and that
14 we'll be losing funds based on this?
15 MS. BERHAUPT: Sure.
16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And so that we
17 can all work together. I'm sorry, I'm not --
18 not that I don't support these, but you
19 understand.
20 MS. BERHAUPT: Yeah. Absolutely. I'm
21 happy to talk with you after, and we're happy
22 to give you that information relative
23 specifically to your district, of course.
24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you. I'd
432
1 appreciate that.
2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Assembly?
3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much
5 for your testimony and all your work through
6 the Supportive Housing Network.
7 MS. BERHAUPT: Great. Thank you so
8 much. I appreciate it.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
10 Our next testifier will be Carmelita
11 Cruz, director of New York State advocacy for
12 Housing Works.
13 And for those of you keeping track,
14 we've had a number of cancellations. So next
15 up, in preparation, Jeffrey Lozman, New York
16 State Society of Orthopaedic Surgeons, along
17 with Babette Grey, followed by UJA
18 Federation. For just preparing yourselves
19 for moving down, because there have been
20 quite a few cancellations.
21 Hello. Good afternoon.
22 MS. CRUZ: Good afternoon. So thank
23 you so much for sticking around, and I
24 promise to be as short as I possibly can.
433
1 My name is Carmelita Cruz. I'm the
2 director for New York State advocacy at
3 Housing Works. Housing Works is a healing
4 community of people living with and affected
5 by HIV/AIDS. Our mission is to end the dual
6 crises of homelessness and AIDS through
7 relentless advocacy, the provision of
8 life-saving services, and entrepreneurial
9 businesses that sustain our efforts.
10 So over the past few years, Housing
11 Works has worked tirelessly to support the
12 New York State plan to end the HIV and AIDS
13 epidemic here in our state. On June 29th,
14 the Governor announced a very ambitious plan
15 for New York State to end our AIDS epidemic
16 by the year 2020. We were the first
17 jurisdiction in the world to set this goal,
18 so it's really historic.
19 And the plan basically focuses on
20 three pillars that the Governor announced.
21 One is identifying people who are
22 HIV-positive and getting them into care; the
23 other is identifying folks that know they're
24 HIV-positive and have fallen out of care, and
434
1 really bringing them back into care; and then
2 also facilitating access to PrEP and PEP.
3 Our goal in how we determine if we are
4 able to succeed and end the AIDS epidemic by
5 2020 is to reduce the number of new
6 infections that we have here in the state
7 each year. So last year we had around 3,000
8 new HIV infections. We're trying to get that
9 to below 750 by 2020. That's the CDC's
10 definition of ending our epidemic here in the
11 state.
12 As you probably know, there's no cure
13 to end -- there's no cure for HIV and AIDS,
14 but with effective antiretroviral treatments
15 that suppress the virus level in someone's
16 blood, we can really maintain the health of
17 person and make it virtually impossible to
18 transmit HIV to others.
19 So what I wanted to focus on today
20 were two specific housing items that were not
21 included in the budget, and that is expanding
22 HASA services. So the HIV and AIDS
23 Administration in New York City provides a
24 series of benefits for people living with
435
1 AIDS -- that's enhanced rental assistance,
2 nutrition and transportation assistance -- so
3 expanding those services to anyone in
4 New York City who is HIV-positive.
5 Right now those services are only
6 available if someone has an advanced HIV
7 diagnosis, so we're really waiting for people
8 to get sick before we're willing to help
9 them, and we'd really like to see that
10 expanded to anyone who's HIV-positive.
11 So Mayor de Blasio included
12 $26 million in his preliminary budget to
13 expand HASA services to anyone who's
14 HIV-positive, and that's really contingent
15 upon the state putting up their share, which
16 is about another $30 million. So I really
17 want to urge you to include that in your
18 budget.
19 It would really be a missed
20 opportunity -- we've been fighting to see the
21 city even be willing to include this money
22 for a number of years. So I am hoping that,
23 you know, the state can put that money
24 forward and that will ensure social services
436
1 to an estimated 7,300 HIV-positive New York
2 City residents that are currently ineligible
3 for HASA services because they aren't sick
4 enough to access those services.
5 The other thing that I wanted to bring
6 up was that there is no HASA-like benefits
7 for people that are HIV-positive living
8 outside of New York City. Right now, each
9 county has the opportunity to participate in
10 that program, but because of the county match
11 for funding, the program is so expensive that
12 many counties just don't have the funds to do
13 that.
14 We would really love to see money
15 included in the budget to fund 100 percent of
16 the expansion of HASA services to people
17 living with HIV outside of New York City.
18 There is a lot of information included
19 in here, including research and some return
20 on investments, but the return on investment
21 is really, you know, potentially billions of
22 dollars if we are able to meet our goal of
23 reducing the number of new infections to 750
24 by the year 2020 and in the years after that.
437
1 You know, it costs so much to house and care
2 for and provide medical care for people with
3 HIV that we can realize billions of dollars
4 in Medicaid savings, potentially.
5 So I wanted to highlight those things,
6 and this is my last 45 seconds. I just want
7 to bring up two areas where we have been
8 really, really successful in the state with
9 reducing an infection by really investing in
10 effective interventions, and that's with
11 injection drug users.
12 At one point, about 7,500 new
13 infections per year were attributable to
14 injection drug use. In the last reported
15 year, which is either 2013 or 2014, we only
16 had 69 new infections that were attributable
17 to injection drug use. And that's really
18 because of the success of our harm reduction
19 program.
20 And then, also, mother-to-child
21 transmission. A number of years ago
22 mother-to-child transmission was around
23 500 per year for newborns, and within the
24 past year we have not had a single child that
438
1 was born HIV-positive, just because we have
2 changed the law and started testing pregnant
3 women for HIV and getting them on ARVs.
4 So I just wanted to point out the
5 success that we can really see when we invest
6 in preventing new infections in the state.
7 SENATOR KRUEGER: Any questions?
8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Any questions?
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: Diane Savino.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: I just have one
11 question. I should know this, and I don't, I
12 don't remember. But do the other counties
13 around the state have a HASA equivalent?
14 MS. CRUZ: No.
15 SENATOR SAVINO: They don't. So
16 New York City is the only social service
17 district that has an agency directly --
18 MS. CRUZ: That pertains just to HIV
19 and AIDS.
20 SENATOR SAVINO: -- to HIV and AIDS.
21 That's interesting. So how -- if you live
22 outside the City of New York and you are
23 HIV-positive or you're HIV-positive and
24 you're symptomatic, where do they go for
439
1 assistance?
2 MS. CRUZ: You go to the regular
3 social service agency and you're provided
4 with the same assistance that anyone else
5 would --
6 SENATOR SAVINO: So there's no
7 additional assistance provided to them?
8 MS. CRUZ: No.
9 SENATOR SAVINO: In the almost
10 30 years since New York City created what was
11 then a division of AIDS services?
12 MS. CRUZ: Yes. Yeah.
13 SENATOR SAVINO: That's amazing.
14 MS. CRUZ: I mean, at some point I'm
15 going to point out that 80 percent of the
16 epidemic resides --
17 SENATOR SAVINO: True.
18 MS. CRUZ: -- 80 percent of the people
19 with HIV reside in New York City. But that's
20 still 20,000 to 30,000 people living outside
21 of the city with HIV or AIDS that, yeah,
22 don't have these enhanced benefits.
23 SENATOR SAVINO: Right.
24 I actually do have a second question.
440
1 It's about the 30 percent rent cap. As you
2 know, the Governor instituted it I think two
3 years ago. Has it been successful in the
4 City of New York? Are we seeing the --
5 MS. CRUZ: Yes. So far, we've seen it
6 be successful. There are a couple of issues
7 that have come up, but the administration has
8 been very open and willing to kind of
9 overcome those obstacles when they've been
10 identified.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: Great. Thank you.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
13 MS. CRUZ: Okay, thank you.
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Appreciate your
15 testimony.
16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
18 And the next testifier is -- it's a
19 twofer, Jeffrey Lozman and Babette Grey, of
20 the New York State Society of Orthopaedic
21 Surgeons.
22 DR. LOZMAN: Thank you very much. I
23 will not be sitting here asking for any
24 funding allocation, I can assure you.
441
1 My name is Dr. Jeffrey Lozman. I'm an
2 orthopedic surgeon here in Albany, I'm a
3 professor of orthopedics at Albany Medical
4 Center, so I'm very familiar with this area.
5 And I'm here today serving as president of
6 the New York State Society of Orthopaedic
7 Surgeons.
8 On behalf of the New York State
9 Society of Orthopaedic Surgeons and the
10 1,600 orthopedic surgeons that we represent,
11 thank you for providing us with this
12 opportunity to present our views on the
13 sweeping changes to the workers' compensation
14 program as proposed in the Governor's budget.
15 The New York State Society of
16 Orthopaedic Surgeons maintains a specific
17 focus on improving access to care, promoting
18 public health, and facilitating improvement
19 of patient safety and quality of care. It is
20 estimated that employers spend as much as
21 $15 billion to $18 billion a year on direct
22 costs for musculoskeletal disorder-related
23 workers' compensation, and up to three to
24 four times that much for indirect costs, such
442
1 as those associated with hiring and training
2 replacement workers.
3 A United States Department of Health
4 study showed that from 1996 to 2004, managing
5 musculoskeletal disease, including lost
6 wages, cost an average $850 billion annually,
7 making it the largest workers' compensation
8 expense. For employers paying workers'
9 compensation claims, the economic strain has
10 reached a tipping point.
11 Eighty percent of all claims under
12 workers' compensation are musculoskeletal
13 sprains, strains, injuries, with low back
14 injuries consuming more than 33 percent of
15 every workers' compensation dollar. Back
16 pain causes more than 300 million bed days
17 and 187 million lost work days yearly, from a
18 review from the Department of Labor. Nearly
19 all orthopaedic surgeons treat workers'
20 compensation patients. The New York State
21 Society of Orthopaedic Surgeons believes that
22 properly designed and efficiently run
23 workers' compensation managed-care programs
24 can provide high-quality healthcare to
443
1 injured workers and minimize their
2 disabilities.
3 The proposed changes in the Governorís
4 Executive Budget seek to ensure the system
5 provides more timely and appropriate medical
6 and wage replacement benefits to workers.
7 While we support these general concepts, we
8 are concerned several of the proposals will
9 result in broad authority for the Workers'
10 Compensation Board in decision making without
11 oversight, and continued marginalization of
12 physician participation in the program. This
13 type of shift has grave potential to
14 negatively impact access to care for the
15 injured worker.
16 The proposals of specific concern
17 include provisions that would expand existing
18 categories of healthcare providers to
19 non-physicians, create an authorization
20 agreement without specification, remove the
21 role of medical societies not only from the
22 approval process but for removal of providers
23 from the system, and extend the opt-out
24 period from employer-selected preferred
444
1 provider organizations from 30 days to
2 120 days.
3 The New York State Society of
4 Orthopaedic Surgeons represents orthopaedic
5 physicians who best serve injured workers
6 with the highest quality of care and provide
7 easy accessibility. According to the
8 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons,
9 musculoskeletal injury accounts for
10 30 percent of all workplace injuries
11 requiring time away from work, and is the
12 leading cause of disability claims.
13 Orthopaedic surgeons enable injured
14 workers with sometimes devastating injuries
15 to return to the workforce, improve and
16 restore function, and foster active lives.
17 Studies have shown that early intervention by
18 the specialist, the orthopaedic surgeon, for
19 musculoskeletal injuries decreased the
20 overall cost of care by allowing the
21 musculoskeletal expert to develop a treatment
22 plan that may or may not involve surgery.
23 Studies also show that delays in direct,
24 appropriate care can result in high
445
1 percentages of patients not returning to
2 work, essentially increasing the costs to the
3 overall system.
4 The proposed Executive Budget would
5 now define providers in the system to include
6 acupuncturists, chiropractors, nurse
7 practitioners, occupational therapists,
8 physical therapists, physician assistants,
9 podiatrists, psychologists, and clinical
10 social workers. Clarification as to how
11 these non-physicians will coordinate with
12 other practitioners when these patients are
13 in need of specialized care is crucial.
14 The proposal would permit those
15 non-physician providers to render treatments
16 and offer opinions on issues such as causal
17 relationship of the injury to the accident
18 and level of disability. These
19 non-physicians will serve as independent
20 medical examiners, and have the ability to
21 contradict the recommendation of the injured
22 worker's treating physician.
23 There's no clarity as to how this
24 broad expansion of non-physician providers
446
1 will benefit patient care. Rather, it leaves
2 tremendous uncertainty as to how these
3 non-physicians will coordinate patient care
4 delivery and only dilutes the care received
5 by the injured worker.
6 The proposal goes on to expand the
7 Workers' Compensation Board's authority with
8 the creation of an "authorization agreement"
9 which will cause steep fines to physicians
10 who do not follow the proposals. We have
11 significant concerns that this type of broad
12 authority may result in unilateral decisions
13 not in the best interest of the patient or
14 the treating physicians. This centralization
15 of power, in concert with the imposition of
16 the board's medical treatment guidelines,
17 relegates the care delivered to these
18 patients and ultimately marginalizes the role
19 of the physicians.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: And Doctor, because
21 you're at zero, if you could just summarize
22 the remainder of your testimony.
23 DR. LOZMAN: I would be very happy to
24 do that, thank you.
447
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
2 DR. LOZMAN: What we see in the
3 treatment of these patients is that the time
4 that is allowed for their treatment in the
5 physician's office is more than double any
6 other type of treatment of the patients. In
7 fact, in some physicians' office --
8 40 percent -- it's even more than doubled.
9 The budget concerns that we have right
10 now are significant. We have polled all of
11 the orthopaedic surgeons by a survey in
12 New York State. We have proposed to them
13 options that they can select from that deal
14 with the new proposed fee schedules, that
15 deal with the things that I've just
16 addressed. Eighty-two percent of the
17 orthopedic surgeons in this state have
18 responded by saying they will cut down
19 significantly the number of workers'
20 compensation patients that they see. We've
21 received a tremendous feedback -- both in my
22 position and the position of our executive
23 director, Babette, who's sitting next to
24 me -- from orthopedic surgeons in the state
448
1 in the form of phone calls: How do I resign
2 from workers' compensation?
3 To just jump to the end, if I may, we
4 strongly recommend reforms that preserve
5 access to the physicians most qualified to
6 care for injured workers. We do not believe
7 that the New York State Workers' Compensation
8 Business Reengineering Process has addressed
9 these concerns between orthopedic surgeons
10 and other stakeholders.
11 The orthopedic community throughout
12 the state has spoken in no uncertain terms.
13 We fear the proposal will result in access to
14 care issues and poorer quality of care. This
15 is the very opposite of the workers'
16 compensation mission and all that has been
17 invested in the interests of getting the
18 injured patient back to a healthy, active,
19 and productive lifestyle.
20 I'm not going to be a fearmonger. I'm
21 here to inform you that I believe the
22 direction we're heading is not safe for
23 patient access, for patient quality, for
24 patient care.
449
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: So I think that you
2 ended up in this hearing because the Labor
3 hearing, which would deal with worker's comp,
4 had already come and gone.
5 I just want to let you know that I
6 represent the East Side of Manhattan, and
7 shockingly, there are some doctors who live
8 in my district also. And I had received an
9 email with very parallel concerns today and
10 had forwarded it on to our Healthcare ranker
11 and our Labor ranker and staff. So I know
12 that we're actually looking at this issue.
13 So I appreciate your coming and
14 testifying, even though perhaps some people
15 in the audience aren't quite sure why this is
16 in this hearing today.
17 So I want to thank you.
18 DR. LOZMAN: I can't answer that last
19 question as to why it's in the hearing today
20 either. But that's where we were placed, and
21 we felt it was important enough to be here.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Fair enough. And
23 this is the last hearing, so frankly it's the
24 only place anybody who wanted to get our
450
1 attention was going to get it.
2 But I wanted to assure you that I
3 moved it along to the Labor staff and
4 Senators and the healthcare policy people as
5 well.
6 DR. LOZMAN: Thank you for listening
7 and paying attention. I appreciate it.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
11 Our next testifier, Hillary Stuchin of
12 United Jewish Appeal, UJA-Federation. And I
13 probably destroyed your name, so you'll
14 correct me.
15 MS. STUCHIN: Actually, you got it
16 quite right.
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Oh.
18 MS. STUCHIN: And you're one of the
19 few. So thank you.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: Just luck.
21 MS. STUCHIN: So thank you for
22 allowing me to testify today. My name is
23 Hillary Stuchin, as you said. I'm the senior
24 advocacy advisor with UJA-Federation of
451
1 New York. In case you don't know, UJA-
2 Federation of New York is one of the nation's
3 largest local philanthropies. We have a
4 network of over 80 nonprofit organizations
5 and agencies that serve New York's most
6 vulnerable individuals and help build
7 communities.
8 Considering the length of how things
9 have gone today, I'm just going to draw
10 attention to a few things, mostly the needs
11 of aging New Yorkers and proposed programs to
12 help combat poverty, health, and social
13 service issues affecting this population.
14 I'll start with an issue that you may have
15 heard about already today, NORCs and
16 Neighborhood NORCs.
17 So New Yorkers are aging. An
18 increasing number of residents will require
19 special health and social services
20 facilitated by these Naturally Occurring
21 Retirement Communities, as well as the
22 Neighborhood NORC model. These vital
23 programs and resources help enable low- and
24 middle-income New Yorkers to age in place, to
452
1 thrive in their communities, and to delay
2 hospitalization, assisted living placement,
3 or nursing home placement.
4 The programs and services that NORCs
5 provide support a group that we really think
6 might otherwise fall through the cracks. And
7 in our conversations with directors of these
8 programs, we learned that the resources that
9 they provide -- many seniors have come to
10 rely on them. This includes case management,
11 socialization programs, social worker-
12 assisted transportation services, shopping
13 assistance, and basic health services. This,
14 again, allows seniors to remain in their
15 homes and greatly improves their quality of
16 life.
17 In this year's Executive Budget we've
18 been provided with level funding for the NORC
19 and Neighborhood NORC programs. And while
20 this is great, it is only $2,027,500 for each
21 program. Worse than this, we're very
22 concerned with new language that intends to
23 cut funding by an estimated $951,000. And
24 this is to programs that are really vital and
453
1 successfully serve seniors and allow them,
2 again, to age in place.
3 We recommend that at a minimum the
4 Executive Budget terminate these -- that the
5 language in the Executive Budget terminating
6 these contracts should be either excluded
7 from the final budget and also seriously
8 reconsidered.
9 We feel that it's essential that the
10 state adopt significant changes to the
11 Elder Law, and this includes a review of the
12 program demographic and density requirements
13 and an increase in funding statewide to
14 $10 million. This is $5 million for the NORC
15 program and $5 million for the Neighborhood
16 NORCs program. This will better serve this
17 vulnerable and aging population.
18 These changes will actually more
19 adequately finance the existing programs and
20 increase eligibility for essential services
21 like this throughout the state. The intended
22 program cuts evaluate the NORC programs based
23 on, as I said, out-of-date density and
24 demographic requirements. The current
454
1 Elder Law hasn't been reviewed for the past
2 20 years. This is something that we urge you
3 to consider. This means that programs whose
4 numbers do not meet these statutory
5 requirements, even by 1 or 2 percent, have
6 their contracts terminated at their next
7 renewal date. And this proposal is estimated
8 to affect a substantial number of the NORCs
9 throughout the state.
10 Instead of taking funding away from
11 existing services, we urge you to be focused
12 on meeting the needs of your seniors and
13 expanding services for this ever-growing
14 cohort.
15 The next item I'll discuss is actually
16 a new funding request, and that's the
17 Survivor Initiative for New York State.
18 New York State is home to nearly 60,000
19 Holocaust survivors, just over half of the
20 110,000 survivors in the United States. And
21 while the majority of this population
22 actually does live downstate -- in New York
23 City, the five boroughs, Long Island, and
24 Westchester -- we've actually found in our
455
1 discussions that the Mid-Hudson Valley,
2 Western New York, and Central New York
3 regions also have a significant group.
4 According to the Claims Conference,
5 just the general definition of a survivor, a
6 Holocaust survivor, is a person, Jewish or
7 non-Jewish, who was displaced, persecuted or
8 discriminated against due to racial,
9 religious, ethnic and political policies of
10 the Nazis and their allies. In addition to
11 the former inmates of concentration camps,
12 ghettos, and prisons, this definition
13 includes, among others, people who were
14 refugees or were in hiding.
15 Survivors experience complications
16 beyond the normal scope of aging, and the
17 needs of this group can actually be more
18 complex than those of the senior community at
19 large. They live with the aftermath of
20 trauma and experience higher rates of
21 depression, anxiety and distrust of others.
22 They have experienced childhood malnutrition
23 and inadequate medical care growing up, and
24 as a result they have brittle bones, poor
456
1 oral health, and other health issues. Some
2 actually will not shower, and many do need to
3 keep food close by at all times.
4 Many survivors live in poverty,
5 subsisting on fixed incomes that do not
6 adequately cover the cost of care or basic
7 necessities like housing, food, and
8 utilities. We found that New York's
9 survivors, many of them live 200 percent
10 below the federal poverty guidelines and
11 nearly 35 percent cope with chronic illness
12 and require assistance.
13 Seeing the amount of time, I'm just
14 going to get to the ask. We request that
15 following the support of both the federal
16 government and the New York City Council, we
17 hope that the Legislature will fund the
18 Survivor Initiative at $4 million. This will
19 provide funding for specialized case
20 management, caregiver training, mental health
21 services, transportation services,
22 socialization and legal services statewide,
23 as well as end-of-life care. These critical
24 supports enhance the quality of life for
457
1 Holocaust survivors as they live out their
2 remaining years.
3 Thank you.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: Any questions?
5 I want to thank you for your
6 testimony. I do have one question; it's not
7 within your testimony.
8 I think I read a story today that
9 UJA-Federation is trying to get $40 million
10 back from FEGS which went out of business.
11 Do you know any details about that?
12 MS. STUCHIN: I can't speak to that,
13 but I can bring the question back with me.
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.
15 MS. STUCHIN: Thank you.
16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you for your
17 testimony.
18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Next to testify,
20 Gerard Wallace, director, New York State
21 Kinship Navigator.
22 And following, for people getting
23 lined up, Yolanda McBride, Children's Aid
24 Society, followed by Kate Breslin, Schuyler
458
1 Center. Thank you.
2 Good afternoon.
3 MR. WALLACE: Good afternoon. Thank
4 you for the opportunity to speak.
5 I noticed that Assemblywoman Lupardo
6 was here before, and I want to express my
7 gratitude to her for the good work that she's
8 done in the past two years in getting a
9 million dollars added to kinship funding.
10 And Senator Montgomery was here, and she was
11 way back in the heyday of kinship funding in
12 2009-2010, when we had a grand total of
13 $2.9 million for the kinship population.
14 And Senator Savino, who has always
15 been a friend and a champion of kinship care.
16 Kinship care --
17 SENATOR KRUEGER: That leaves the
18 three of us {inaudible} --
19 (Laughter.)
20 MR. WALLACE: I know. What wonderful
21 people.
22 (Laughter.)
23 MR. WALLACE: I'm sure you're all
24 supporters, okay?
459
1 I'm Gerard Wallace. I started in
2 kinship care in 1997, first at Albany Law
3 School, then at Hunter College. Since 2006,
4 I'm the director of the Kinship Navigator
5 Program, the only statewide program serving
6 this community, funded in the Governor's
7 budget for $220,000.
8 I've had a federal grant for the past
9 three years with the Center for Human
10 Services Research. It's been a lot of
11 surveying and studies, and I'm going to be
12 referencing some of their data as we go
13 forward. I also will try and cite to the
14 page in case that's helpful if someone wants
15 to look at the graphic. Okay?
16 Kinship care -- grandparents,
17 relatives raising kids, even family friends.
18 It is not foster care. To associate it with
19 foster care is to really misrepresent and do
20 an injustice to the kinship population.
21 Estimates, page 6 -- 150,000 to
22 250,000 children -- the census data there
23 shows 218,000 kinship families. We really
24 don't know, but the number is huge.
460
1 Kinship care causes are in the
2 literature. Abuse, neglect, abandonment,
3 mental illness, incarceration, death of the
4 parent -- these are the causes that are very
5 similar to the reasons that children could be
6 in foster care. The informal kinship
7 population that I'm referring to is a child
8 welfare system. It just happens to be one
9 that isn't funded.
10 On page 13, part of our survey, the
11 Center for Human Services Research has a
12 table there of the causes of kinship care.
13 You'll note that the two largest causes are
14 mental illness of the mother and -- the
15 largest one is child protective services
16 involvement. Clearly our children are
17 similarly situated to children in foster
18 care.
19 On page 14, in another part of our
20 survey, in a cohort data mining of child
21 welfare data in five upstate counties, of the
22 459 children, 86 percent of them had CPS
23 investigations. Clearly our children are
24 similar to children in foster care, but they
461
1 are not in foster care.
2 Kinship caregivers, their
3 circumstances -- clinically high levels of
4 stress, 40 percent. Trauma and loss, I have
5 Center for Disease Control data in here
6 showing that the ACE study, the Adverse
7 Childhood Experiences, these kids have those
8 experiences.
9 And poverty. The study that we have
10 in the federal grant, 40 percent poverty rate
11 for families upstate. These families are in
12 tough shape.
13 Now, the worst thing we hear is "Child
14 Protective Services gave me this child eight
15 years ago. This is the first time I've found
16 out there's help." That's what our programs
17 do. We're the only outreach out there.
18 What are our programs? On the Kinship
19 Navigator, the Kinship Navigator Information
20 Referral, a warm line, a website with a lot
21 of resources on it, advocacy, legal
22 assistance, and policy work. Local kinship
23 programs, funded by the good work of the
24 Legislature -- 13 programs serving 17
462
1 counties. Some of the counties left out, for
2 the benefit of the chair: Bath, Jamestown,
3 and elsewhere in the state. Dutchess County,
4 Poughkeepsie, and all the mid-level
5 municipalities upstate are left out of the
6 situation. And yet they are suffering
7 tremendously, particularly along the Southern
8 Tier, with the opioid epidemic, the heroin
9 epidemic that's going on.
10 We deserve to do better for our
11 kinship families. We can do better to them
12 by providing the small ask that we have. The
13 Kinship Navigator wants to implement, in the
14 45 counties that it is the only resource,
15 techniques that it learned in its federal
16 grant that increased referrals from DSSs by
17 600 percent. We want to collaborate in those
18 counties.
19 In the local programs we deserve to
20 have more, and the ones that are there
21 deserve to have more too. You'll see in my
22 recommendations what our ask is.
23 One other ask that I'd like to
24 highlight is we need the Legislature to be
463
1 more involved in the kinship community.
2 Whether it's hearings, whether it's
3 roundtables, whether it's funding a study,
4 this huge population is so badly served and
5 in such dire straits, they deserve better
6 attention -- for us to look at the reasons
7 why child protective services is giving kids
8 to relatives and to look at what we can do to
9 serve them better.
10 I'm out of time. Thank you.
11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Well, you did a lot
12 in that very short period of time.
13 MR. WALLACE: Thank you. Okay.
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senators?
15 Diane Savino.
16 SENATOR SAVINO: Hello, Gerry. How
17 are you?
18 MR. WALLACE: Hi.
19 SENATOR SAVINO: I'm just curious, do
20 you have -- how many children in the state
21 are living in kin-care, kinship -- not
22 kinship foster care, but living with
23 relatives that are not -- where the children
24 aren't in foster care. Do you have a sense
464
1 of that?
2 MR. WALLACE: I would say -- yes,
3 well, the numbers range. Annie E. Casey
4 estimates 153,000 children in kinship care,
5 of which they say 5,000 are in foster care.
6 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
7 MR. WALLACE: We know the number in
8 foster care -- which is an approximation,
9 because the data is bad -- is under 6,000.
10 But the range upward -- you can go from a low
11 of 153,000 to other estimates over a
12 quarter-million children living with
13 relatives.
14 And again, this is a snapshot in time.
15 One in 10 of all children will live with
16 relatives during their childhood.
17 SENATOR SAVINO: And because these
18 children aren't in foster care, you don't
19 have a court order over them, you don't have
20 a support rate. We may have court-ordered
21 supervision, I guess.
22 MR. WALLACE: Prior to Article 6.
23 SENATOR SAVINO: Right.
24 MR. WALLACE: And there may be some
465
1 direct custodies, which is final for that
2 10-17 outcome.
3 SENATOR SAVINO: Right.
4 MR. WALLACE: But for the most part,
5 they've either gotten it on their own -- now,
6 Erie County's a good example, where lawyers
7 up there tell me that the county gives
8 children to relatives and then cuts ties and
9 they wind up in the legal service arena up
10 there, going to family court.
11 SENATOR SAVINO: That's how we've
12 wound up with kinship foster care to begin
13 with. There was a landmark lawsuit brought
14 against the City of New York --
15 MR. WALLACE: I'm sorry?
16 SENATOR SAVINO: That's how we wound
17 up with kinship care to begin with.
18 MR. WALLACE: Only if they come into
19 care and are subject to an Article 10.
20 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. But if you
21 recall --
22 MR. WALLACE: They're not subject to
23 Article 10 --
24 SENATOR SAVINO: I know that, Gerry.
466
1 But 30 years ago, that was --
2 MR. WALLACE: Yeah.
3 SENATOR SAVINO: -- this was the
4 subject of a huge lawsuit against the City of
5 New York.
6 MR. WALLACE: Yup. Mm-hmm.
7 SENATOR SAVINO: Because at that time
8 the child welfare worker, the protective
9 services would take children, drop them off
10 with a relative, and leave them there. And
11 provide no support services, no judicial
12 oversight of the case -- actually, no service
13 plan whatsoever.
14 And that led to a lawsuit against the
15 city for not providing children with
16 relatives with the same level of services as
17 children in traditional foster care.
18 MR. WALLACE: Well, the same level of
19 services is the key. If they're in the
20 system, they have to get the same level of
21 services.
22 What I'm portraying here is they don't
23 get in. And that's what our data in our
24 federal work backs up. So that's the
467
1 distinction.
2 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
3 MR. WALLACE: The distinction is
4 they're not in the database, they're in the
5 CPS record, the case record that goes no
6 further than the desk of the CPS worker. No
7 one understands or can give a real estimate
8 as to how much of this is going on. But we
9 hear it anecdotally all the time.
10 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh, that's
11 outrageous.
12 MR. WALLACE: It is. It truly is.
13 SENATOR SAVINO: We should -- well,
14 you know, we -- we've had a long
15 relationship, and I think we should probably
16 talk more about this post-budget.
17 MR. WALLACE: Yeah. Really, the
18 investigation by the Legislature into this
19 practice -- and I would say on both sides.
20 CPS wants to do the job right, they're
21 overwhelmed. Kin are a resource, the
22 counties are strapped for money, you know.
23 Depending on the county you're in, there are
24 wholesale practices to use kin on the cheap.
468
1 SENATOR SAVINO: But foster board rate
2 is predominantly reimbursed by the federal
3 government.
4 MR. WALLACE: Administrative costs,
5 court costs. You know, caseloads.
6 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm.
7 MR. WALLACE: And -- an dit's gone.
8 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm-hmm. Okay.
9 Thank you.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: A follow-up on
11 Diane's question.
12 So why do you think you end up in a
13 better situation if you get pulled out of
14 foster care eligibility and move into the
15 adoption subsidy category? Won't --
16 MR. WALLACE: Well, that's KinGAP.
17 KinGAP again applies to that small sliver of
18 foster parents who are kin.
19 The KinGAP report has not been
20 released by the Governor, but the last one I
21 saw, which is at least two years ago, there
22 are less than 2,000 KinGAPs done in a year --
23 Kinship Guardian Assistance Program. And the
24 counties resisted it when it was enacted,
469
1 because they were using the same money from
2 the social services block grant that they had
3 to use for other purposes.
4 So the idea is they'd be more willing
5 and there would be less roadblocks to kin
6 exiting foster care as guardians with that
7 grant if the funding stream was part of the
8 adoption subsidy.
9 That's all well and good, and we
10 support that. My emphasis here is to say
11 that's missing the target.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: I guess I've been
13 here in the Senate for about 14 1/2 years.
14 Before, I spent 20 years in direct service.
15 And at that time, even up to say the year
16 2000, what we would see in the City of
17 New York, despite the court case that Diane
18 is correct about, would be the grandparent or
19 other relative would take the child because
20 Mom, Dad went to jail, went to a psychiatric
21 hospital, were incapable of caring for them.
22 The adult would eventually come and
23 say "I can't afford to keep this child, I
24 can't afford the rent with an additional
470
1 child or children, help me." They would be
2 advised to go on, add the children to the
3 public assistance case. When that was
4 inadequate -- because it was -- they would
5 say, "I heard a rumor I could be eligible for
6 something called kinship foster care," and
7 they would be told "You have to say you're
8 giving up the kids unless you get the kinship
9 care. And if you threaten to give up the
10 kids, we'll determine you aren't qualified to
11 be the kinship adult." Therefore --
12 MR. WALLACE: That practice continues.
13 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- therefore it's a
14 lose-lose. And we used to have to fight that
15 day and night.
16 And you're telling me nothing has
17 changed 15 years later?
18 MR. WALLACE: I'm telling you that the
19 practice of surrender, the threat by some
20 counties is you'll never get the kid back.
21 And they -- there are many ways in which they
22 dissuade families, kinship families, from
23 wanting to be in foster care.
24 And I've written papers on it, I've
471
1 written one recently for the Child Welfare
2 League of America on these practices. And
3 I'm not even -- I'm saying everyone's
4 overwhelmed. We need to make better
5 decisions about who gets into foster care and
6 who doesn't.
7 And the only way to do that is to get
8 good assessment tools and to put in place
9 good practices for CPS to at least figure
10 this out and not worry about mom sneaking in
11 the back door and doing something crazy
12 because they dumped the child and there's no
13 oversight. You know?
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: So I know that OCFS
15 happens to still be in the room. So consider
16 this a request, that OCS come and visit
17 myself and the other Senator who'd like to
18 join us to explore why we're still hearing
19 the same stories 15 and 20 years later
20 statewide.
21 MR. WALLACE: Thank you. Yeah.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much
23 for your testimony.
24 MR. WALLACE: Thank you.
472
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Any other?
2 No. Thank you for your testimony.
3 MR. WALLACE: Thank you very much.
4 SENATOR KRUEGER: And our next
5 testifier I think is Yolanda McBride from
6 Children's Aid Society. Is she here?
7 Because we didn't see any testimony.
8 Oh, somebody's coming down? No?
9 Okay, goodbye, Children's Aid Society. You
10 had your chance.
11 Kate Breslin --
12 (Laughter.)
13 SENATOR KRUEGER: I get mean at the
14 end of the day. I'm sorry, folks.
15 Hello, lovely Kate Breslin from the
16 Schuyler Center. Come and testify. Thank
17 you.
18 MS. BRESLIN: Hi, there. Thank you.
19 Thank you all for sticking it out.
20 I'm Kate Breslin, from the Schuyler
21 Center for Analysis and Advocacy, and with me
22 is our senior policy person, Kari Siddiqui.
23 And because we were just talking about
24 it and I was going to mention it anyway, I
473
1 just want to support what Gerry Wallace just
2 said about kinship care. And I think it
3 sometimes gets left out because, as Gerry
4 says, it really is part of what we think of
5 as our child welfare system, but we don't
6 think about it in our child welfare system,
7 and all the problems that Gerry talked about
8 are things that we hear too.
9 And I know that several of you have
10 asked questions during the day about the
11 opiate epidemic and things like that, and I
12 think it would not surprise me if we continue
13 to rely on kinship caregiver arrangements
14 even more in that context. And we just don't
15 know, we don't know what the numbers are, we
16 just know they're big.
17 So I want to just call out that over
18 the last several years, particularly in the
19 areas of funding for programs for children
20 and families, we really haven't seen a lot of
21 attention to those things from the Governor,
22 and we're very concerned about it.
23 So our testimony -- I won't get into a
24 lot of detail -- I do know, I've been here a
474
1 lot of today and I know that they've been
2 touched upon. But I want to support your
3 interest and what I heard from many of our
4 advocate friends around increasing funding
5 for childcare for all the reasons -- both,
6 you know, for parents, for kids, and for
7 economic development.
8 I also want to call out that we've
9 been coordinating a maternal/infant early
10 childhood home visiting workgroup for
11 probably 10 years, and the reason we've been
12 doing that is because the benefits of those
13 programs are very clear. In New York State
14 we fund them in different ways. We fund them
15 out of different agencies, and so there's
16 always a lot of confusion. So we felt
17 like -- we felt as though there was a reason
18 to bring people together to try and come up
19 with some unity around articulating the
20 benefits and advocating for cohesive funding.
21 So we are, together with many of our
22 friends, advocating for some thought put into
23 where there is need. Many of you asked
24 questions about to what extent do those
475
1 programs meet demand. Not at all. We worked
2 with the Council on Children and Families and
3 developed some great maps that kind of show
4 need and then capacity, and it's pretty clear
5 that there are some pockets in the state that
6 have great home visiting programs and then
7 huge swaths of the state that really don't
8 have any. And we know that they have
9 benefits, they've been proven over years.
10 In child welfare, it's a massive
11 system and it's really complicated, and I
12 know that people have touched on parts of it
13 today. We're one of the folks, you know,
14 we're one of the folks who come here not
15 asking for funding for our agencies. We're a
16 nonprofit organization that is funded with
17 private philanthropic dollars.
18 We think that we need to pay attention
19 to preventive services so New York does
20 invest in what we call preventive services.
21 However, those are only available once a case
22 is opened. So when we had a convening that
23 brought together families and parents, young
24 people and service providers, they called
476
1 that -- at that point, you're five minutes to
2 foster care. So once you are able to access
3 these preventive dollars, those so-called
4 preventive dollars, you're kind of already,
5 you know, tipping and on the way in.
6 So we are advocating that we as a
7 state should -- two things. We should be
8 investing in real prevention and
9 community-based prevention that can be used
10 before cases are opened, and also a closer
11 look at the effectiveness of how the
12 preventive dollars are spent.
13 We have no idea. So we do know that
14 foster care numbers have gone down in the
15 last decade or more. We do know that we have
16 preventive programs. We have zero
17 measurements in New York about whether those
18 preventive dollars are doing anything. I'm
19 not suggesting that they're not. We don't
20 know.
21 We want to support the addition of the
22 $1.5 million that you all put in to get young
23 people in foster care or who had been in
24 foster care to go college. And that's
477
1 been -- from what we have heard, it's been a
2 success. And we urge you to add to that.
3 The Governor put money in this year, which is
4 great. We urge you to increase that funding
5 to support kids going to college.
6 We also want to call out the
7 importance of -- there's a housing subsidy
8 for young people in care or who have aged out
9 from foster care. You won't see this in our
10 testimony, simply because we neglected to put
11 it in. But we urge you to increase the
12 housing subsidy. We'd hoped to kind of grab
13 on to all the excitement about housing and
14 the rest of the budget. And we are very
15 appreciative, we know Assemblyman Hevesi's
16 supportive of this. But we think it's
17 important.
18 The subsidy right now is $300
19 throughout the state, and a young person
20 essentially can't have a roommate and has to
21 prove that that $300 will stabilize their
22 housing. So we need to increase it. And
23 just as a side note, 1,300 young people age
24 out of care every year. And so when we're
478
1 talking -- and we know that many of them are
2 likely -- you know, we have some statistics
3 nationally and in the state -- but many of
4 them are likely to become homeless, either
5 officially homeless or couch surfing. So
6 there's great reasons to put some more money
7 into that.
8 Let's see. We talked about kinship
9 care, so I will skip our piece on that. And
10 then we support raising the age again this
11 year.
12 And then finally, at the end of our
13 testimony, we look at issues relating to
14 family economic security. While those may
15 not be in the OCFS or OTDA budgets, many of
16 the programs and services upon which families
17 rely, especially at-risk families, they rely
18 on them because they're living in poverty.
19 And they wouldn't be at risk of being in the
20 child welfare system or in any of these
21 systems if they had economic stability.
22 So that's why you'll see that we call
23 attention to the importance of raising the
24 minimum wage and funding it for human
479
1 services, of paid family leave, and of an
2 increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit for
3 low-income families.
4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
5 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
6 Any Senator questions? Assembly
7 questions?
8 I just have one. So you talked about
9 the money for post-foster care rental
10 assistance. It's only $300 dollars a month,
11 and they can't have a roommate. Why would we
12 have a rule like that?
13 MS. BRESLIN: It doesn't officially
14 say they can't have a roommate, but it's so
15 administratively -- it's administratively
16 burdensome if you do have a roommate. So
17 there are efforts underway to try and
18 streamline that. And it would take -- it
19 would take a change in statute.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: So, I mean, the $300
21 amount is absurd to start with, but we --
22 MS. BRESLIN: And then the strings --
23 so it's both.
24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Yes, then to
480
1 actually say, So you've aged out of foster
2 care, you've got nobody else out there in the
3 world, and guess what -- don't you dare find
4 somebody to help you with --
5 MS. BRESLIN: To share rent with.
6 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- board and
7 housing.
8 MS. BRESLIN: You're right.
9 SENATOR KRUEGER: So, you know, some
10 strange devil wrote that statute. We should
11 look into that also.
12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Somebody from the
13 1940s.
14 (Laughter.)
15 SENATOR KRUEGER: But wait. You've
16 been here since the 1870s --
17 (Laughter.)
18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: I remember my
19 amendments.
20 SENATOR KRUEGER: We went down this
21 road, Denny.
22 I'm sorry, we're all a little, you
23 know -- we spend too much time together in
24 this room.
481
1 MS. BRESLIN: We are too.
2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much,
3 both of you, for your testimony.
4 And our next testifier, and I see her
5 there, Susan Antos from the Empire Justice
6 Center.
7 And, for those tracking, followed by
8 Advocates for Children, Randi Levine,
9 followed by Center for Children's
10 Initiatives, Betty Holcomb.
11 Hello, Susan.
12 MS. ANTOS: Good evening.
13 SENATOR KRUEGER: Good evening.
14 MS. ANTOS: Thank you for staying.
15 And thank you for your interest in these
16 very, very important issues. The work you do
17 is so important to us. Thank you so much.
18 Since it's late in the day and my
19 remarks are in writing, I'm just going to
20 highlight a few points that are in our
21 testimony.
22 As you know, the Empire Justice Center
23 is a multi-issue organization. And on page 2
24 of our testimony we list the seven areas that
482
1 are in our testimony, including increasing
2 funding for a managed-care consumer
3 assistance program; continued investment in
4 the disability advocacy program; expanded
5 categorical eligibility of SNAP benefits --
6 which the Governor has recommended and we
7 support; increased fuel and shelter
8 allowances; elimination of asset tests; and
9 two childcare items.
10 I am only going to talk about the last
11 four items. I don't believe, although I
12 didn't listen to everyone -- but I don't
13 believe that anyone has spoken about the fuel
14 and shelter allowances, and I think that's an
15 important piece of the homelessness puzzle.
16 We are thrilled with the homelessness
17 initiatives that people are talking about,
18 and we're glad that there is this interest in
19 increased investment in homelessness. But we
20 can't be sheltering people on one side and
21 pushing them off the cliff on the other.
22 And that's what's happening in the
23 public assistance system. On page 6 of our
24 testimony there's a box highlighted in green
483
1 about a woman who came to our office a short
2 time ago. She's 58 years old, and she has an
3 apartment that costs $575 a month. A
4 bargain, right? Except she's a single
5 individual, and that shelter allowance for a
6 single individual in Albany County is
7 under -- well, if you were -- I'm sorry, if
8 you're a family of three, it's $309. I
9 believe it's about $190 if you're a single
10 individual. So with her living allowance --
11 her total shelter allowance and living
12 allowance does not even total what her rent
13 is.
14 So her landlord for a while let her
15 stay because she kept looking for work, she'd
16 find a job. She had a very difficult time,
17 and she's facing eviction. She's going to be
18 in a shelter soon, I'm sure. Because the
19 total of her grant, living and shelter
20 allowance, was only $425 a month.
21 The shelter allowance for a family of
22 three in New York City is $400 a month. So
23 as you're sheltering people on one side --
24 when a family's in crisis, giving them $400
484
1 to pay for rent in New York City is not going
2 to find them a house. I think you all know
3 that.
4 The upstate -- the family of three in
5 Albany is $309, in Erie County it's $301.
6 It's really between $300 to $400 just about
7 in every county of the state.
8 So we have a proposal. We've written
9 a report called "Turn up the Heat," and some
10 of that is available on our website. What we
11 are proposing is that we use the fair market
12 rent as a standard by which to set our
13 shelter allowance.
14 We have a modest request that right
15 now shelter allowances be set at 50 percent
16 of the fair market rent. Right now, you can
17 see that the one-bedroom fair market rent
18 rates are much, much lower. So we'd like you
19 to consider that, as well as an increase in
20 the fuel allowance.
21 Part of the public assistance grant
22 for people who pay for their own heat is an
23 allowance to pay for fuel. It varies
24 depending on whether or not you pay for
485
1 electric or whether or not you pay for your
2 heat by oil. But our recommendation is that
3 these allowances be raised. They have not
4 been raised since 1987.
5 And so what I wanted to -- so that's
6 over 30 years ago, and since that time the
7 cost of heating oil -- even though it's come
8 down, the cost of heating oil is four times
9 what it was in 1987. And the cost of natural
10 gas is double what it was in 1987.
11 So families who pay for their own heat
12 outside of New York City -- that's a
13 substantial number of people -- are really
14 squeezed by very inadequate shelter
15 allowances. We believe that the low shelter
16 allowance and the cost of fuel -- I'm sorry,
17 the low rental allowance -- are pushing
18 people into homelessness.
19 Our other recommendation has to do
20 with the asset test. Another recommendation.
21 We're in a minority of states now that have a
22 very low asset limit for automobiles. If in
23 fact we are what we say we are, which is a
24 temporary assistance program, we need to do
486
1 everything we can to make sure that families
2 that need to rely on public assistance can
3 get out and can get to work. And one way
4 they can do that is with a reliable car.
5 There are only 11 other states in the
6 country that do not exempt a car totally.
7 And we need to not be in the forefront in
8 this area.
9 Additionally, our rental allowance
10 discriminates against people with
11 disabilities, because we have a higher
12 resource level for people who are able to
13 work and a lower resource level for people
14 who are not able to work.
15 Finally -- and I know I'm out of time
16 here, I'm just going to walk you through -- I
17 know you've had a lot of people testify about
18 childcare today. We join everyone with the
19 ask for $190 million. I want to let you know
20 what resources are in our testimony for you.
21 If you want a detailed explanation of
22 what's required by the federal law, if you
23 start on page 12 of our testimony we've given
24 you a breakdown, including all the federal
487
1 and statutory and regulatory citations,
2 including the citations to the New York State
3 plan to the federal government which explains
4 in detail the new requirement for a 12-month
5 eligibility period regardless of income
6 unless the income goes over 85 percent of
7 state median income.
8 The requirement for a graduated
9 phase-out of childcare subsidy assistance as
10 long as the family is under 85 percent of
11 state median income.
12 A requirement that childcare subsidies
13 be portable across counties -- this is huge
14 for us upstate, and we're so glad to see it,
15 but there needs to be money to pay for it.
16 We're also thrilled that there's a
17 greater emphasis on serving homeless
18 families. Under the plan, the draft plan
19 that OCFS proposes to file with the feds,
20 there is a priority given to homeless
21 families, which we're thrilled about, but
22 that means that we need to protect low-income
23 working families as well who have subsidies,
24 so we're not taking subsidies from low-income
488
1 working families to pay for subsidies to
2 homeless families.
3 The federal law also requires that
4 absences be paid for, just like those of us
5 who have paid for childcare had to pay for
6 absences. They'll be on a footing with other
7 people in the private marketplace. There are
8 provisions for fluctuations in earning.
9 There are priorities for special-needs
10 children.
11 And just to add into the mix, our
12 market rate is up for readjustment in June.
13 We want to keep it at a rate that keeps
14 providers whole, not see providers lose money
15 to pay for these federally mandated changes
16 that don't come with a lot of money behind
17 them.
18 So I hope you find this a resource.
19 I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you
20 for hanging in; I know it's been a long day.
21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
22 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much,
23 Susan. I believe we have a question from --
24 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: We do.
489
1 SENATOR KRUEGER: -- Assemblymember
2 Hevesi.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: We do. I will go
4 quick.
5 First, Susan, hi.
6 MS. ANTOS: Hi.
7 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: A thank you to
8 you and Christopher for all of your work.
9 And I think my guys reached out to you, I
10 actually need you tomorrow, so thank you.
11 Okay. So I just want to drill down on
12 one thing, the shelter allowance. Okay, so
13 once we get a sense of an issue, we can be
14 relatively aggressive, and that's what we're
15 here to do. The shelter allowance we have
16 sort of not been aggressive about, because --
17 I may be under some false impression, but
18 maybe you could help it with me. It's my
19 understanding that there's a legal case
20 against the state regarding the shelter
21 allowance right now because it hasn't been
22 raised since 1987. And that case was
23 brought, what, like a month ago, or two? Is
24 that right?
490
1 MS. ANTOS: I believe it's just in
2 New York City.
3 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Oh, okay.
4 MS. ANTOS: And it only involves
5 families with children. Because there's a
6 statute that says that the shelter allowance
7 has to be adequate to allow children to
8 remain in their homes. And so that's why
9 people like Ms. V, who's in our testimony,
10 have a much lower shelter allowance because
11 when the first shelter allowance case, which
12 was caused Jiggetts, was litigated and
13 settled, that applied to families with
14 children.
15 Those shelter allowances went up, the
16 shelter allowances for singles stayed much
17 lower. That's why it's virtually impossible
18 for a single individual to find a place to
19 live on the current shelter allowance.
20 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Right. So I
21 agree with you that the shelter allowance or
22 FEPS or any rental subsidy should be
23 somewhere close to the fair market rate.
24 That's the only logical way to do it. So I
491
1 agree with your proposal.
2 The reason that I have not been
3 advocating or going full force for the
4 shelter allowance at this point is because my
5 understanding is that if you introduce a bill
6 or go after it budgetarily while there's
7 litigation, the judge can actually -- if that
8 doesn't pass, if your bill doesn't pass or
9 your budget ask doesn't pass, the judge in
10 the case can actually say no, we're not going
11 to rule on this because the Legislature
12 didn't pass it, and therefore it's out of the
13 jurisdiction of the courts. It only goes
14 back to the Legislature.
15 So I didn't -- part of the hesitation
16 for me is the legality of it. I don't want
17 to go for it, possibly not get it, and then
18 screw up a court case. Does that make sense?
19 MS. ANTOS: Well, let me talk to my
20 colleagues in New York City.
21 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Okay. Please.
22 Because otherwise, to be honest with you, I
23 agree the shelter allowance, 1987 -- it's
24 ridiculous. And we would go after it
492
1 wholeheartedly; I'm just afraid going after
2 it and losing affects not only losing in the
3 legislative and executive branch, but would
4 cause a loss in the judicial branch as well.
5 And I don't want that. So if you could let
6 me know.
7 MS. ANTOS: I will.
8 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: I could be
9 completely misinformed.
10 MS. ANTOS: I'll talk to my colleagues
11 and get back to you.
12 ASSEMBLYMAN HEVESI: Thank you very
13 much.
14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
15 Although I just want -- Susan, you're
16 free to go -- I want to also thank you from
17 the Empire Justice Center for everything you
18 do, and the testimony is extremely detailed
19 and complete.
20 One thing that you, I think, didn't
21 have a chance to go over, but it ties into
22 earlier testimony -- and I was actually
23 speaking to the chair when someone else was
24 testifying. So we are making people put
493
1 their children in infant care slots so they
2 can go work somewhere that pays them far less
3 than $14,000 a year, and we are paying
4 $14,000 a year for an infant care slot -- or
5 you had charts actually showing the range.
6 That's crazy in its own perspective.
7 But your point that you didn't have a
8 chance to make tonight, but I just wanted to
9 highlight for us, if we stopped mandating
10 that women on public assistance leave their
11 children in infant care slots, which
12 government pays for to the tune of 10,000 to
13 14,000 a year, to seek out work experience or
14 jobs that don't even pay them what we're
15 paying for childcare slots, they could stay
16 home providing better care for their infants.
17 And as you pointed out in your testimony, we
18 could turn that money into up to three times
19 as many subsidized slots for older children
20 for working mothers.
21 So I think that is such a critical
22 sort of tie-in for this legislative body to
23 grasp. So I wanted to highlight that.
24 MS. ANTOS: Thank you for raising
494
1 that. That is the last section of our
2 testimony. And we do have detailed charts
3 calculating the savings so that for each
4 infant slot that's freed up, over three slots
5 are freed up for working families.
6 Because remember, families on public
7 assistance don't have a copayment. Working
8 families actually do have a copayment, so the
9 cost of their slot is less.
10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
11 MS. ANTOS: Thank you.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: And as the chair
13 returns, our next testifier is Advocates for
14 Children, Randi Levine.
15 MS. LEVINE: Good afternoon.
16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Welcome.
17 MS. LEVINE: I think I'm last. Betty
18 Holcomb is not here.
19 SENATOR KRUEGER: We've added some.
20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: There are
21 actually -- right, there are three remaining
22 people.
23 MS. LEVINE: Okay.
24 Thank you for the opportunity to speak
495
1 with you today. My name is Randi Levine, and
2 I am the policy coordinator at Advocates for
3 Children of New York.
4 For more than 40 years, Advocates for
5 Children has worked to promote access to the
6 best education New York can provide for all
7 students, especially students from low-income
8 backgrounds. Every year we help thousands of
9 New York parents navigate the education
10 system, and we use our on-the-ground
11 experience to identify barriers to education
12 and to work to pursue systemic change.
13 We support increased funding for
14 several of the programs that have been
15 mentioned throughout the day, including home
16 visiting programs. But I want to focus today
17 on childcare.
18 As an education advocacy organization,
19 we know that the first five years of
20 children's lives have a profound impact on
21 their education and future. Long-term
22 research shows that children from low-income
23 backgrounds who are left out of high-quality
24 early childhood education programs are more
496
1 likely to be retained a grade, to be placed
2 in special education classes, and to drop out
3 of school than children who have access to
4 such programs. And leading economists have
5 found substantial savings by participating in
6 early childhood education programs.
7 For many families with low incomes,
8 subsidized childcare provides the only
9 opportunity to access early childhood
10 education for their children. And of course
11 it also helps families to work. However, due
12 to limited funding, only 22 percent of
13 income-eligible children have access to
14 subsidized childcare in New York State.
15 As you heard today, the recent
16 reauthorization of the federal childcare law,
17 the Child Care and Development Block Grant,
18 or CCDBG, brings significant opportunities as
19 well as significant challenges. We are
20 pleased with a lot of the changes in the law;
21 however, we understand that these changes
22 have substantial financial costs.
23 Unfortunately, the Executive Budget
24 includes a mere $10 million in additional
497
1 funding for childcare. This funding falls
2 far short of the investment we need to
3 prevent children from losing access to
4 subsidized childcare.
5 And that's why we're joining with the
6 many others who have spoken today in calling
7 on the Legislature to increase childcare
8 funding by at least $190 million. As you've
9 heard, the state has estimated that it will
10 cost at least $90 million to implement only
11 the health and safety new requirements of the
12 law -- the inspections, the background
13 checks, the training on health and safety.
14 Additional funding is needed because
15 the market rate will take effect, the new
16 market rate will take effect based on the
17 state's market survey in June 2016, and we
18 want to ensure that childcare providers are
19 paid an adequate rate.
20 We also want to note that in its draft
21 childcare plan, OCFS mentioned that it is
22 assessing the market rate that it pays for
23 children with special needs. And we think
24 that this is an important area to address as
498
1 well, to make sure that childcare providers
2 can serve all children regardless of ability
3 and disability.
4 And Susan Antos mentioned a number of
5 the other changes that are being made because
6 of requirements in the federal law. I'll
7 just highlight one. The federal law has
8 several new provisions aimed at providing
9 increased access to children who are
10 homeless. Currently, in New York State,
11 children who are homeless are eligible for
12 subsidized childcare only if their parents
13 fall into an existing category of
14 eligibility, such as receiving public
15 assistance or meeting certain work and income
16 requirements.
17 We have received calls from families
18 who are experiencing homelessness and are
19 desperate for childcare for their young
20 children but do not meet the current
21 eligibility criteria. We are very pleased
22 that the draft childcare plan released by
23 OCFS included the state's intent to make
24 children who are homeless categorically
499
1 eligible for childcare, in line with the new
2 federal priority in serving children who are
3 homeless.
4 This change would have a significant
5 impact on the lives of young children
6 experiencing homelessness. Childcare is
7 critical for these children. It provides
8 them with a safe, developmentally appropriate
9 place to learn and prepare for kindergarten,
10 and it allows their parents to be able to
11 look for housing and jobs.
12 Furthermore, a disproportionate number
13 of children who are homeless experience
14 delays in their development. Connecting
15 these children to high-quality childcare
16 programs not only helps them prepare for
17 kindergarten, but also allows educators to
18 monitor their development and connect them
19 with services when appropriate.
20 But we must ensure that there is
21 adequate funding for children who are
22 homeless to access childcare subsidies, along
23 with making these additional required
24 changes. Therefore, we are asking
500
1 legislators to invest at least $190 million
2 in new funding for childcare. Given the
3 significant unmet needs that already exist,
4 we want to ensure that the state does not
5 fund these new requirements by decreasing the
6 number of children who have access to
7 childcare. Rather, we need new funding.
8 We look forward to working with you as
9 the budget season progresses. Thank you for
10 the opportunity to testify, and I'd be happy
11 to answer any questions that you have.
12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
13 Any Assembly? Any Senate?
14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
15 MS. LEVINE: Thank you.
16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much
17 for your testimony. It's not lack of
18 interest, it's the time.
19 And our next testifier, Betty Holcomb,
20 Center for Children's Initiatives. And there
21 was no testimony submitted, so it's possible
22 she wasn't here? Correct, she wasn't here.
23 And then we have one additional
24 cancellation, so I believe our next and last
501
1 testifier is Melanie Blow -- I'm probably
2 reading it completely wrong -- chief
3 operating officer of the Stop Abuse Campaign.
4 Blow? Well, you're going to cover it
5 here, and you're going to tell me your name
6 if I've done it wrong.
7 MS. BLOW: No, it's Blow.
8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
9 MS. BLOW: It's very logical and it
10 confuses people all the time, so take no
11 offense.
12 Thank you so much for hearing me
13 today. My name is Melanie Blow. I'm the COO
14 for Stop Abuse Campaign. We protect children
15 by preventing trauma, particularly
16 life-altering traumas such as child abuse,
17 neglect and maltreatment.
18 Everybody knows that child abuse is
19 bad. The Centers for Disease Control
20 conducted the Adverse Childhood Experience
21 study in the '90s, which proved that it was a
22 lot worse than we thought it was. It proved
23 that any and all child abuse, neglect, and
24 maltreatment harms a child for their entire
502
1 life. We had known for a long time that
2 abused, neglected, and maltreated children
3 were more likely to be criminals, suffer
4 mental illness, suffer drug addiction. We
5 didn't realize that they're also more likely
6 to die from cancer, heart disease, diabetes,
7 things like that. Which means prevention is
8 absolutely, positively the most important
9 thing.
10 And I completely -- introducing
11 myself, I completely forgot to start off with
12 our ask, our one and only ask, which is that
13 you kindly invest at least 4.5 million new
14 dollars in maternal home visiting throughout
15 the state.
16 Okay. So adverse childhood
17 experiences harm children for the rest of
18 their lives. Flint, Michigan, did something
19 similar that everybody in this room has heard
20 about; they made a decision that very
21 predictably was going to expose children to
22 lead. Lead functions much like an adverse
23 childhood experience. Lead causes short-term
24 physical harm to children, long-term physical
503
1 harm to children, cognitive issues to
2 children, educational disabilities to
3 children, and makes them more likely to be
4 arrested as adults. So do adverse childhood
5 experiences.
6 With Flint, there was the word
7 "poisoning," so people got very excited about
8 that and really, Hey, somebody's purposefully
9 doing something bad to children, we've got to
10 stop that. When we don't invest in maternal
11 home visiting, we've actually harmed many
12 more children than Flint has, in 20 years, by
13 not investing in these programs the way we
14 need to invest in them. But that's
15 considered business as usual.
16 We always say we can't afford to
17 invest in maternal home visiting. We don't
18 like spending money on CPS, but we do it.
19 CPS costs more. We don't like spending money
20 on special education, but we do it. That
21 costs more. Right now, something I've heard
22 us talk about quite a bit today, we don't
23 like spending money on treating opiate
24 addiction right now. That costs a lot more.
504
1 All of those things are preventable by
2 maternal home visiting.
3 It costs about $1 million to
4 investigate a murder in New York State.
5 There are about 250 children who die directly
6 from abuse, neglect, or maltreatment. Two
7 hundred fifty million dollars would enroll
8 about 81,000 children in -- in one of the --
9 average price of the maternal home visiting
10 services. That would not quite provide
11 universal access, but it would come awfully
12 close. And this is money we already spend.
13 In October I went to the funeral for
14 Vernay-lah Laventure, who was a
15 four-month-old baby beaten to death by her
16 mother. They had to bury her with this
17 little white cap that masked how her skull
18 was broken. Her mother was desperate. We
19 know how to keep mothers from being
20 desperate, and maternal home visiting
21 services do that.
22 In January I met with a bunch of women
23 who were enrolled in one of the programs.
24 One of them told me about how her baby was
505
1 born with serious complications. This woman
2 is an abuse survivor, she was a recovering
3 drug addict, she didn't know what to do.
4 This was her first baby. She had no idea how
5 to parent him.
6 One of the home visitors told her to
7 read to him, so she did. She read to him in
8 the NICU. Three other babies were born with
9 similar complications in the NICU that day;
10 hers is the only one that lived.
11 And this is -- to me, those two
12 stories represent the choice New York is at
13 right now. We can invest in preventing
14 abuse, or we can invest in mopping up its
15 consequences. Preventing it is a lot cheaper
16 and yields much better results, and it's the
17 compassionate thing to do.
18 I guess that's why we're asking for an
19 investment of at least 4.5 million new
20 dollars in maternal home visiting, which has
21 been flat-funded for the last decade.
22 Thank you very much. Nine seconds.
23 (Laughter.)
24 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Any questions?
506
1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: No questions?
3 Well, thank you so much for
4 participating today. And we certainly
5 appreciate everyone who took the time to
6 educate us about the impact of the Executive
7 Budget on human services.
8 So that concludes our hearing. And
9 there is just one more that needs to be set
10 up regarding the MTA, but other than that, we
11 have achieved a lot of the work through the
12 hearing process.
13 So I want to thank all of my
14 colleagues for their patience, for their hard
15 work and participation, and look forward to
16 continuing onward through the state budget
17 process for this year. Thank you.
18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.
19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.
20 (Whereupon, the budget hearing
21 concluded at 5:45 p.m.)
22
23
24
Hearing Event Notice:
http://www.nysenate.gov/calendar/public-hearings/february-09-2016/joint-legislative-public-hearing-2016-2017-executive
Archived Video:
Hearing Transcript:
Newsroom
Go to NewsroomStatement from NYS Senator Catharine M. Young (R,C,I-57th District)
February 28, 2019
Town of Mansfield Slated to Receive $300,000 State Grant
February 27, 2019
