DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 309 845 PS 018 142

TITLE New Partnerships: Education's Stake in the FamilySuppo-t Act of 1988.

INSTITUTION American Public Welfare Association, Washington,D.C.; Center for the Study ofSocial Policy,Washington, DC.; Children's DiSense Fund, Washington,D.C.; Council of Chief State School Officers,Washington, D.C.; Grant (W.T.) Foundation, New York,N.Y.

PUB DATE 89NOTE 32p.AVAILABLE FROM WTG, 1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 301,

Washington, DC 20036-5541 ($1.00).PUB TYPE Guides - Non-Classroom Use (055) --

Legal /Legislative /Regulatory Materials (090)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Adult Basic Education; *Agency Cooperation;

Comprehensive-Programs; Educational Change;*Educational Responsibility; Family Involvement;Federal Government; *Federal Legislation; GovernmentRole; High Riik. Students; Local Government; *LowIncome Groups; iPOverty; Resource Materials; SchoolBusinest Relationship; State GOvernMent; *WelfareServices

IDENTIFIERS Aid to Families with Dependent Children; *FamilySupport Act 1988

ABSTRACTThe Family Support Act of 1988 (FSA) provides a means

by which federal, state, and local governments can worksystematically and comprehensively to provide the support people needto escape poverty. The act mandates that appropriate educationalservices be made available to at least some welfare recipients aspart of the effort to help those receiving public assistance becomeself-supporting. The document: (l highlights aspects of the FSA thatare relevant to both the education and the public welfarecommunities; (2) describes the opportunities that FSA offers for bothsystems to meet their own and shared goals for populations at risk;(3) emphasizes the Importance and benefits of collaboration betweeneducation and the human services in the implementation of FSA; and(4) offers suggestions that may abet the implementation process.Appended are a summary of the major provisions of the FSA, anoverview of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)program, resources for additional information and assistance, and areference list. (RH)

** ** ******************************************************************* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

* from the original document. *

******,****************************************************************

U.S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOlhce of Educattonai Research and improvement

414EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER IERICI

Ttus document has been reproduced as

00received horn me person or organizationoriginating it

C Minor changes have been made to rmorovereproduction Quality

O Points Ot view Or OpiniOnSstatedinthisdocumerit do not necessarily represent officialOE RI chunton or Racy

rambeeid11/1/11

in . Mem

.....4110-

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

Sa_VA

vex' \Y-\

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

0

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

A STATEMENT OF

American Public Welfare AssociationCenter for Law and Social Policy

Center for the Study of Social Policy

Children's Defense FundCouncil of Chief State School

Officers

Institute for Educational LeadershipNational Alliance of Business

National Association of State Boards

of EducationNational Governors Association

or

a

Copies of this statement are available by mail or in person from WTG, 1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.,&lite 301, Washington, DC 20036-5541 for a handling charge of $1.00 each, postpaid.

23

NEW PARTNERSHIPS:EDUCATION'S STAKE IN THEFAMILY SUPPORT ACT OF 1988

:Contents-4. Introduction

6 Owirview of the Family Support Act

10 Helping People Succeed: Strategies for Success

11 How Welfare and Education Systems Are Organized: Different Roles for Federal, State, and

Local Government

12 The Family Support Act: Opportunities to Address Common Concerns

To forge critical cennectiorts between school and support services

To eXpand the range and capacity of educational mans for learners at risk

To make the right match between people, their needs, and the programs designed to help

them

- To reduce the future number of at-risk learners by developing innovative and more effective

early intervention and prevention approaches

To begin lb build a more comprehensive and effective system for all youth and adults at risk.

12 Successful Educational Programs for Young People At Risk

14 Succeishrl Educational Programs *Adults At Risk

18 Principles to Guide Joint Action

18 Next Steps

20 An Illustration: FM in the Life of One Family

23 Appendix A: Summary of the Major Provisions of the Family Support Act

27 Appendix-8: An Overview of AFDC-The Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program

28 Appendixt: Resources-for Additional Information and Assistance

30 Appendix D: For Further Reading

INTRODUCTION

"Educational activitiesunder JOBS couldeventually improvethe education andemployment skilleatMillions of todaywelfare recipient, awl:help them to escapepoverty and achieveeconomic sell-sufficiency:'

ith the passage of Public Law100-485, The Family SupportAct of 1988 (FSA), federal,state, and local governmentsprepare to take a major step on

the long road toward reform of the publicwelfare system. More than a simple effort toreduce costs and caseloads, this new legisla-tion seeks to strengthen families and helpthem move toward self-sufficiency. Thecontributions of many partnerseducation,employment training, health, public welfareand otherswill be needed to achieve thesefar-reaching goals.

Key among the partnerships that must beformed is one between the welfare commu-nity and education, for FSA clearly recognizeseducation as a central element in helping fami-lies avoid long-term dependence on publicassistance. In a marked departure fromearlier welfare-to-work programs, FSArequires states to make educational servicesavailable to participants under its new JobOpportunities and Basic Skills TrainingProgram (JOBS) and provides federalmatching funds to assist in these efforts.Depending upon the level of state investment,educational activities under JOBS could even-tually improve the education and employmentskills of millions of today's welfare recipientsand help them to escape poverty and achieveeconomic self-sufficiency.

Enactment of the Family Support Actcomes at a time when education and thehuman services are under increasing fire.Business demands for a better preparedworkforce and the taxpayers' need to reducethe escalating human costs and fiscal burdenof welfare dependency converge on boththese people-serving systems. As each hasstruggled separately to find more effectiveways of helping children and families at risk, ithas betome increasingly clear that the prob-lems to be tackled reach beyond the purviewof any one system. Poverty and its effectspose barriers to classroom success; pooracademic achievement limits job opportunities

4

and the chance for financial independence.Clearly, helping welfare recipients gain theskills they need requires the very best effortsof the edudation and human service sectorsworking together.

Collaborative efforts can help each of thesesystems deal more effectively with some oftheir most vexing problems. Public schoolsneed partners to provide the non-academicsupports that will keep high-risk students,like teen parents, in school and encouragedropouts to return. Welfare agencies needallies to ensure that their clients have theeducation and employment training necessaryto survive in the labor market. In recentyears, both education and welfare adminis-trators have recognized these mutualconcerns and have sought greater collabora-tion between their respective sectors. As aresult, a number of creative and Unportantpartnerships have already been forged.

Now, the Family Support Act, which mustbe implemented by October 1,1990, offers achance to build on this promising beginning. Itprovides an avenue through which each sectorcan systematically contribute to a comprehen-sive effort that incorporates the range ofsupports people need to escape poverty.Acknowledging that poor basic skills, languagedifficulties, and inadequate educational attain-ment can pose virtually impenetrable barriersto self-sufficiency, the Family Support Actmandates that appropriate educational servicesbe made available to at least some welfarerecipients as part of efforts to help thosereceiving public assistance to become self-supporting. In large measure, the success ofFSA will depend on the willingness of statelegislatures to provide matching funds foressential services, and the quality of commu-nication among educators and human serviceproviders. Both systems will benefit if theyunderstand the mutual advantages and oppor-tunities inherent in the Act's implicit call forinnovative, cooperative mechanisms.

The organizations which have workedtogether to author this statement (American

5

Public Welfare Association, Center forLaw and Social Policy, Center for theStudy of Social Policy, Children'sDefense Fund, Council of Chief StateSchool Officers, Institute,for Educa-tional Leadership, National Alliance ofBusincas, National Association of StateBoards of Education, and NationalGovernors' Association, with the supportof thersord Foundation, the Foundationfor. Child Development, and Youth andAmerica's Future: The William T. GrantFoundation Commission on Work,,Familyand Citizenship) representpolicymakerspolicy analysts, administrators,and welfare advocates. Convinced that theeducation-provisions of the Family SupportAct offer an important means to address commonconcerns, we urge cooperation among ourconstituencies at the state and local levels inorder to help the greatest number of familiesbecome truly independent. To aid in thiscollaboration, the following pages":

highlight the aspects of the Family SupportAct (FSA) that are relevant to both theeducation and the public welfare communi-ties. For many educators, this may serve asan introduction to the FSA. Welfareadministrators are already familiar with the

law, of course, but may find it useful to havea summary of those provisions that mustbe addressed jointly with their colleaguesin education;describe the opportunities that FSA. offersfor both systems to meet their own andshared goals for populations at risk: toforge critical connections between schooland support services; to expand the rangeand capacity of educational programs forlearners at risk; to make the right matchbetween people, their needs, and theprograms designed to help hem; to reducethe future number of at-risk learners bycreating innovative and more effective earlyintervention and prevention approaches,and to begin to build a more comprehensiveand effective system for all youth andadults at risk; andemphasize the importance and benefits ofcollaboration among education and thehuman services in implementing FSA, and offersuggestions that may aid in that process.

We hope that this information will assisteducators and welfare administrators as theycome together to explore their respectivegoals, air differences, assess resources, andplan strategies for producing a strongercitizenry and a more productive workforce.

5

"Convinced that theeducation provisionsofthe Family Support Actoffer an importantmeans to addresscommon concerns, we

urge cooperationamong ourconstituencies at thestate and local levelsin order to help thegreatest number offamilies become trulyindependent

"All the provisions of the

Family Support Act . . .are based on the

Conviction thatparents have an

obligation to supporttheir children:

OVERVIEW OFTHE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT

The Family Support Act shifts theemphasis of Aid to Families withDependent Children (AFDC), thenation's primary welfare program,from simply providing income

support to building strong families and helpingthem become truly self-sufficient. FSA isbased on thebelief that mutual obligationsexist between society and its citizens. Parentshave a basic obligation to support themselvesand their children. If they cannot, they havean obligation to,prepare themselves for and toseek employment. Government, in turn, hasan obligation to provide financial support andassistance through education, training,support services, and employment- relatedactivities to those who need special help.

The new FSA law recognizes that theneeds of welfare families vary. Many welfarerecipients are on public assistance for only ashort time and then become permanentlyself-supporting. Others move on and off publicassistance, often within a year or two, as theirlife circumstances change. But welfare use isnot short-term for everyone. A substantialsubgroup remains poor for a very long time,frequently a decade or more: Although rela-tively small, this group receives a dispropor-tionate share of resources, in large partbecause they lack the basic educationalpreparation to participate competitively intoday's job market. The Family Support Actplaces particular emphasis on these latterindividuals and on removing the barriers totheir financial independence.

What are the molar program components of theFamily Support Act?

Child Support EnforcementAll the provisions of the Family Support

Act, including those with special significancefor educators, are based on the convictionthat parents have an obligation to supporttheir children. The law underscores this viewby strengthening procedures for assuring that

child support isTaid by absent parents. £state agency, usually located in the welfaredepartment, currently attempts to collectchild support for all children receiving public.assistance, and will help anyone else who paysa small fee. FSA will buttress these efforts byrequiring that courts use numerical formulasin setting support amounts and by requiringthe use of wage-withholding to collect childsupport in most cases.

Comprehensive Education, Training, andEmployment-Related Services

The Job Opportunities and Basic SkillsTraining Program (JOBS) consolidates andreplaces existing welfare/work provisionS. Forthe first time, federal law mandates thateducational services must be available toparticipants in welfare-to-m*1? programs.

At a minimum, educational4ervices mustinclude high school or studies leading to anequivalency diploma (GED), remedial educa-tion to achieve a basic literacy level, andeducation for individuals with limited Englishproficiency. States may also choose to offeradditional educational services, includingcollege or other postsecondary education ortraining. Employment-related services mustinclude job skills training, job-readiness activi-ties, and job placement and may include avariety of other activities. In some cases,welfare agencies may encourage privatesector employers to hire recipients byproviding a salary subsidy in the initial monthsof employment.

Within federal guidelines, each state willdecide which education and employmentservices it will provide, how they will heprovided and to whom, the resources that willbe devoted to various activities, and whetherthe services swill be available statewide or onlyin certain areas. States will also specify thecriteria for referral to education and training,and the intensity of services that will beoffered to individual welfare recipients andtheir famllies. These decisions will reflect choices

7

and necessary tradeoffsfor example, willresources be stretched, to provide at leastsome service ta as many people as,possible,or will fewer individuals receive more inten-sive services? Is the primary goal reducingwelfare rollsby moving people as quickly aspossible into jobs that may offer little future,or can time be taken to enhance long-termemployability by increasing skills?

States will be required to assess the educa-tional, child care, and other supportive serviceneeds of each JOBS participant. An individu-alized employability plan based on this assess-ment 01 list the specific activities in whichthe recipient will participate and the servicesto be provided, including education programs,child care, and other support services. Theparticipant may be required to negotiate andenter into a contract specifying both theparticipant's and the agency's obligations. Inaddition, a case manager may be assigned tothe participant and participant's family toobtain or broker services for the family, tomonitor progress, and to review the employa-bility plan with the participant. The employa-bility plan would be used as a guide to reviewthe participant's progress toward educationgoals.

Child CareThe law specifies that states must guar-

antee child care not only for JOBSparticipants, but for every AFDC parent whois satisfactorily participating in an approvededucation, training, or employment activity,even if the program itself is not fundedthrough JOBS. New federal resources Will beprovided for this purpose. Child care can beprovided through contracts or voucheis topurchase care, by cash reimbursement, or inchild care programs administered.directly bysocial service agencies, schools, or alternativeeducation programs.

Transitional ServicesThe law also recognizes the importance of

easing the transition from welfare to employ-ment, since many entry-level jobs do not offerbenefits. Under FSA, individuals who leavepublic assistanceIor employment may qualifyfor transitional benefits, including up to 12months of subsidized child care and healthcare coverage, if their income is still low and

they meet certain other requirements.

Assistance for Two-Parent FamiliesFSA provides that states that have previ-

ously denied AFDC benefits to unemployed,two parent families must begin to provideassistance tathese families for at least sixmonths in each year.

Who will participate in the JOBS program?

Most healthy adult and adolescent parentsreceiving welfare can be allowed or requiredto participate if child care is available. What isexpected in terms of participation will dependon an individual's degree of job readiness andher/his career goals.

It is unlikely that everyone potentiallysubject to JOBS requirements will be includedright away. Within certain parameters, the federallaw permits a state to phase in theJOBS programand to tailor program designs and require-ments to fit the needs of recipients and theservices available in various parts of the state.

Although states are provided considerablediscretion in determining whom to serve first,the law stipulates that a state may receive itsfull share of federal funding only if at least 55percent of JOBS funds are expended on fourtarget groups considered especially at risk:

parents under age 24 who have notcompleted and are not enrolled in highschool or its equivalent;parents under age 24 who have little or nowork experience;individuals who have received publicassistance for at least 36 of the last 60months; andmembers of a family who will lose AFDCeligibility within two years because theyoungest child, by virtue of age, will nolonger qualify as a "dependent child."

FSA provides that, within target groups,those who volunteer must be served first.

Who will receive educational serviced

With few exceptions, some form of educa-tion must be offered to any JOBS participantwho lacks a high school diploma or equivalent.Under that broad umbrella, the Act specificallycites several groups whose past educationalexperience and/or current circumstancessuggest that they will need special help:

7 8

"The law specifiesthat states mustguarantee child careno.,only for JOBSparticipants, but forevery AFDC parentwho is satisfactorilyparticipating in anapproved education,training, oremployment activity.... New federalresources will beprovided for thispurpose

'bung AFDC parentsoften face the

bleakest job.prospects .... The

typical AFDC mother'between the ages of17 and 21 has reading

skills below the sixthgrade lever

adolescent parents of school age;young pirents just beyond traditional schoolage, ages 18 and 19, who'have not completedhigh school or its equivalent; andparents over age 20 who lack a high schooldiploma, to the extent they are requiredunder the state plan to participate in theJOBS program.

In addition, states may choose to offerspecial services to those who have a diplomaor GED but who still lack the basic literacyskills needed for employment. States mayalso choose to offer postsecondary educationas a JOBS option.

How many participants are likely to neededucational services?

AccurateTztate-by-state data do not exist.,However, several sources suggest thatsubstantial numbers of AFDC recipients willneed remedial education in order to meet theentry requirements for a training program or ajob with a future. According to the ChildredsDefense Fund, three-fifths of all adults onAFDC have-not completed high school. Esti-mates by Robert Lerman of Brandeis Univer-sity based on the most current U.S. CensusBureau data show that roughly half of allAFDC recipients age 16 or older were highschool dropouts in March 1988. By compar-ison, one-quarter of all non-recipients in thesame age group were dropouts in that month.

Even with a diploma or equivalency certifi-cate,,however, some individuals may still lackneeded employment skills. California's state-initiated welfare, education, training, andemployment program found that almost 60percent of participating adults required someform of remedial education before they couldbe considered job-ready. In a separate study,the Educational Testing Service found that themajority of adults subject to AFDC workrequirements in 1983 had reading and mathskills below the eighth or ninth grade level,less than the proficiency required by manyentry-level jobs. Young AFDC parents oftenface the bleakest job prospects. Analyses ofdata from the National Longitudinal Survey ofYoung Americans by Andrew Sum of North-eastern University indicate that the typicalAFDC mother between the ages of 17 and 21

8

has reading skills below the sixth grade level.FSA provides a good opportunity for states

to compile accurate information on the educa-tional status of recipients in order to designand implement effective services. The Actallows each state to conduct a demographicstudy to deterfnine the educational andemployability needs of its AFDC populationand the availability of programs to addressthose needs. The federal government will pay50 percent of the cost of those studiescompleted by October 13,1989.

,Are educational services available for childrenwhose parents are in JOBS?

Although FSA does not mandate servicesother than child care for dependent children in'AFDC households, states may elect toaddress, the educational needs of this group aswell. Both the education and welfare systemshave reason to welt me this opportunity.Research indicates that children in povertyare more likely to drop out of school than theirmore affluent peers. Those who experienceschool failure increase the risk of continuingto need public assistance, an outcome thatthe Family Support Act seeks to avoid.

Children receiving AFDC constitute overhalf of the school population in some urbanareas. In Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, forexample, officials estimate that almost 60percent of elementary and secondary schoolstudents receive such aid. Since, according tothe U.S. Department of Education, studentsin schools with a ;sigh concentration of low-income students tend to do less well, whetheror not they themselves are poor, thanstudents in schools with more balanced popu-lations, targeted efforts to assist youngstersfrom AFDC households together withbroad-based school reform effortscouldhave a major impact on the education system'sability to realize the overall gains in schoolperformance that the nation demands.

When will the JOBS program be implemented?

FSA requires all states to implement theJOBS program by October 1, 1990, but theymay begin operations as early as' July 1, 1989.Planning may proceed on the basis ofproposed regulations published by the U.S.Department of Health and Human Services

9

(HHS) on April 18,1989. Following a 60-dayperiod for public comment, final regulationswill be published by October 13,1989.

Preliminary activity is already underway insome states and is likely to begin rapidly inothers. Some jurisdictions whieh are currentlydeveloping or operating their own state-initiatedwelfare, education, training, and employmentprograms have had a head start. Others aremoving quickly to take advantage of theincreased federal support offered under JOBS.

What new federal revenues are available andhow will they be spent?

The Family Support Act commits thefederal government for the first time to theprovision of increasing levels of funding foreducation, training, and employmentprograms for AFDC recipients, as well as forthe support services necessary to enablerecipients to participate in these activities.There are two new sources of revenue under theActone for JOBS and the other for child care.

JOBSfunding will be provided to states asa capped entitlement that is available up to anestablished maximum. The extent to whichJOBS funding is available foreducationalactivities will depend on the priority given tothose activities in each state's JOBS design,as well as on decisions about target populationsand program entry and exit criteria.The federal authorization for Federal FiscalYear (FFY) 1989 is capped at $600 million.However, since the program will not beginoperations until the last quarter of FFY 1989,$150 million in funds will be available. Fundingis authorized to increase to$800 million inFFY 1990, $l billion in FFY 1991, 1992, and1993; $1.1 billion in FFY 1994; $1.3 billion inFFY 1995; and $1 billion in FFY 1996 andsubsequent years.

Each state's maximum JOBS allocation willbe based on a formula reflecting, in part, itsshare of the adult AFDC population. To obtainfederal JOBS money, a state will be requiredto provide matching funds of approximately 40percent. The ability of states to do so willvary. Some are already contributing a level offunding to state-initiated efforts that exceedsthe required match, and these states shouldeasily secure their full federal allocation.Other states may not have sufficient state

revenue for the match, and consequently mayhave to rely more heavily on existing fundingsources, like the Job Training Partnership Act,to carry out JOBS mandates. Early andcontinuing welfare agency collaboration witheducation and employment training systemswill be needed to assess the full range ofresources that are actually available and todetermine how they can be packaged toprovide the greatest returns for participants.

States must observe a maintenance of effortrequirement. FSA stipulates that federal fundsfor educational activities under JOBS may notbe used to supplant state and local outlays forexisting services and activities, even thoughthey promote the purpose of the JOBSprogram, nor for activities which are routinelyprovided on a non-reimbursable basis, e.g.,free public school K-12 classroom instruction.

FSA child care funds, unlike JOBSrevenues, are "open-ended!' This means thatfederal funds will be provided for child carefor AFDC recipients participating in JOBS oranother approved education, training, oremployment program at a matching amountthat would vary from 50 to 80 percent amongthe states.

The recipient of both sources of FSA revenue

will be the state AFDC agehcy, which mayexpend the dollars directly or contract for servicesfrom other agencies or providers, includingschools or postsecondary institutions.

Who is responsible for implementing FSA?

FSA places primary administrative respon-sibility with the state agency responsible formanaging the Aid to Families with DependentChildren program and allows that agency toarrange for state or local education agencies,Job Training Partnership Act agencies, orother public or private organizations toprovide JOBS activities and services.

In addition; at both the federal and statelevel, the AFDC agency is required to consultwith the education agency. This mandate,together with the leadership of the Governor,is intended to promote the coordination ofJOBS planning and programming with othereducation and training programs in the state.The mandate also points to the importance ofproviding comprehensive services to meet themultiple needs of AFDC recipients trying tobolster their future employability.

91

"The Family SupportAct commits thefederal governmentfor the first time to theprovision of increasing

levels of funding foreducation, training, and

employment programsfor AFDC recipients,as well as for thesupport servicesnecessary to enablerecipients toparticipate in theseactivitiesr

"Comprehensiveservices have beenshown to be key inhelping many

individuals overcomebarriers to academicachievement andfinancial'independence. Singlesolutions and one-shot treatments

cannot resolve themultiple problemsthat most long-termwelfare recipients face

HELPING PEOPLE SUCCEED:STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS

Comprehensive services have beenshown to be key in helping manyindividuals overcome,barriers toacademic achievement and financialindependence. Single solutions and

one-shot treatments cannot resolve the multipleproblems that most long-term welfarerecipients face. It generally takes a range ofserviceseducational opportunities to increasebasic skills; training and on-the-job experienceto enhance employability; and supportservices, including child care, individual andfamily i:ounseling, housing assistance, healthcare, transportation, and transitional incomeand benefitsto enable individuals to benefitfully from available opportunities.

Not everyone will need or want everyservice,:but if a broad menu of education,family, and job-related supports is available,the most effective mix for each individual canbe selected. This underscores another char-acteristic of successful effortsthey offerindividualized and flexible services. Ratherthan adhering to uniform rules that mightdirect a person to an inappropriate program,or exclude her/him from a necessary one,they attempt to respond to each person'sunique circumstances.

The relationships between staff and clientsin successful efforts tend to be characterizedby mutual trust and obligation, respect, closecontact, and cooperation. These programs alsoput a high premium on working collaboratively

10

- other agencies and institutions; they lookkir allies as well as new resources in welfare,education, health, social services, andemployment agencies, and involuntary, reli-gious, civic, and business organizations.Often, a staff person in one organization willserve in a case management or coordinatingrole with the family to identify and secureservices from multiple providers.

Fmally, effective interventions to aidindividuals and families with multiple needsare sustained over a relatively long period,often as much as a year or more. The staff ofprograms that "make a difference" understandthat the problems of many families on welfare,particularly those given priority by the FamilySupport Act, did not arise overnight and,therefore, they do not expect solutions to bequick or simple. Program policies and evalua-tions are based on the recognition that, whileno "silver buller exists, long-term efforts payoff in long-term gains.

The Family Support Act offers opportuni-ties to create programs or combinations ofprograms that possess these essential ingre-dients of success. FSA's ultimate achieve-ments, however, will depend on the extent towhich states balancing the tradeoffs neces-sary because of resource constraints andexisting institutional environmentsuse thelessons of research and experience as startingpoints to design their own best programs.

11

,(

HOW WELFARE AND EDUCATIONSYSTEMS ARE ORGANIZED:DIFFERENT ROLES FOR FEDERAL,STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

ollaboration among sectors will bean important element: in takingadvantage of the opportunities FSAoffers. Effective collaborations arebased \on mutual' understanding. To

make their partnerships work, education andwelfare administrators will need to appreciatethe significantly different ways in which theirrespective systems are structured.

In the welfare system, primary responsibilityrests at the federal and state levels. Federallaws and regulations largely govern programdesign, although the Family Support Actallows state discretion in some areas, notablythe specific elements of the JOBS program.

States are the chief administrative authorityfor welfare programs. Local welfare offices areeither offices of the state agency or county,offices operating state-supervised programs.Except for benefit levels in some states, thereis virtually no local variation in the Aid toFamilies with Dependent Children program.Under FSA, this will still be true with respectto major rules -like eligibility. However, localJOBS programs may vary across a state, toaccommodate differences in economic condi-tions and the availability of services. Localwelfare agency officials will be responsible towork with their education counterparts todesign a suitable JOBS program.

In contrast to the organization of the welfaresystem, elementary and secondary educationis largely state- and locally-controlled. Federalgovernment involvement is generally limitedto efforts that are designed to assure equaleducational opportunity for all studentsthrough, for example, supplemental fundingfor disadvantaged students (Chapter 1 of theEducation Consolidation and Improvement

Act), the Education for All Handicapped Chil-dren Act, and the Bilingual Education Act.The states, through appointed or electedboards (except for Wisconsin) and stateeducation agencies, set and administer broadgoverning policies in matters of attendance,instruction, teacher certification, and gradua-tion requirements. In addition, state educationagencies provide a wide range Of technicalassistance services, such as curriculum and-staff development; implement accountabilitysystems to ensure the appropriate expendi-ture of state and federal funds; and prescribesystems for collecting and reporting educa-tional data for the evaluation and assessmentof educational progress in the state.

Local school boards make specific policiesfor local school systems, and superintendentsadminister the schools under those policies.Local school districts offer adult educationprograms and may have alternative schools.The boundaries of a local school system, ordistrict, are rarely coterminous with countylines, so a given local welfare agency mayneed to deal with multiple school districts.

With respect to JOBS, the "educationcommunity" of interest to welfare agenciesalso includes community colleges, vocationaland technical area schools and institutes,four-year colleges, non-profit and for-profit`providers of education and training services,and community-based organizations. Thesefunction on a highly diverse, independentbasis. The local Private Industry Councilswhich oversee thcfederal Job Training Part-nership Act (JTPA) can be helpful in iden-tifying the available resources for educationand training in their area of service.

D. 12

.1"Effective

collaborations arebased on mutualunderstanding. To

make theirpartnerships work,education acid welfare

administrators willneed to appreciate thesignificantly differentways in which theirrespective systems

are structured:"

THE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT:OPPORTUNITIES 1D ADDRESSCOMMON CONCERNS

oth tducation and welfare are grap-pling with how to help those at riskand are seeking ways to overcomebarriers which limit chances forsuccess. Schools want to assure

not only that a greater proportion of studentsgraduate, but that students who graduatemeet a higher standard of achievement thanpreviously. Welfare agencies want to assurethat people are prepared for and move intojobs that offer the prospect of long-term finan-cial independence. Through the collaborativeefforts that will be encouraged, the FamilySupport Act offers important opportunities forboth systems to deal more effectively withthese related concerns. Joint action can

support attainment of each system's uniquegoals and, at the same time, help to meetobjectives they have in common.

OPPORTUNITY #t

To forge critical connections between schooland support services.

More than academic assistance is necessaryfor many students to succeed in school. Thisis particularly critical in the case of adolescent-parents, for whom child care, transportationassistance, and help iii coping with theirvarious responsibilities can be the keys tostaying in school or resuming their education.

"Older, out-of-school young people and adults

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMSPEOPLE AT RISK

of the- Fan*,

F.414*;'e.e.90104theOt Pf6Ode`aCces%,

4,4.og4*-aiict 'ilte04fiv006010001?di0Pients

.underage Zitii;116 riothaVea highichcioldegreeor its eqtiivalent. That

Offecti ***4eVCOPing*following education plan

each FSA student: It a*mean OividiOi..ipPrOP,Oafe programs

and SergiceAjeztbOtbee:e OW010itad4t01",f0;Tibilik. .theit

:GED,brenterpOstspOnage.00-,.iiOn tt4004'10grOnik. theli aideto become P0*CtiVP'0*.ne' Oct,effec4:061.00b*Oe0,»students mustmaiterl.ilide range,or, Once",

0042aonal;=arid independent

liVing

What:Will.this Mean for schools?*the local sehOoldistrictieVel,.programs Should "exist in iegular andalternative sChObl§ that are flexible and.attuned to the Pee40 and Ort0P

-stances of:participants, Such programsshouldhave cleargoalS and'strategies;be aligrePriifelY.'cleOgnecl theneeds of "school -age .*** OeePle atrisk; including school -age parents, andhave qualified-Staff: Famly andedtication Services anclnupport:§hould

-,be integral r. thitioninti-of a school'sCoinprehensive response to.AFDC.reCipierits,who stay in Or return to

$6beel,fOrtheYOM* castodial paitent,

Usually fernale;barriers to participa-

Lion in-an educational program must beASseismentsites should be

conveniently,. plated; non- intimidatingplaces, filled with Caring and.lmowledgeablerole models,and professsionala mho can properly asseSstthestudent's-need § ande§tablish a foun-dation for, shared, goal- setting and plan-:ling.:tie staff should have good.-working relations .with their counter;Parts in other agencies, so that servicesfor clients_ are easily obtained: To theextent that the.range of services iden-tified in a' plan arereadily accessible in-one .or a-few sites,-rather than at inanydispersed loCatirins, they are morelficely-to be-used::--

The plan should also coordinatesupport servicessuch as transporta-

12 13

with limited skills and complex problems alsoare likely to need a broad array of supportsand services to deal with housing, health,financial, or other concerns, so that they cansucceed in education and training programs.

Recognizing the impact of non-schoolcircumstances, many teachers-and adminis-Arators are concerned that reform efforts to"restructure" the schools by changing certainschool practices will not be enough, in them-selves, to improve the academic performanceof a substantial number of students. In arecent Institute for Educational Leadership surveyof urban schools, for example, teacherspreferred additional staff to help students withsocial and personal problems over use of thesame resources to reduce classroom size.But to date, schoOls and other educationalproviders generally have not reached farbeyond their usual scope of instructionalresponsibility. Now, the FSA offers newopportunities for education and humanservices whose responsibilities complementone anotherto plan and work together sothat the full range of an individual's needs can

be met without any single institution having totake a broader role than is appropriate orfeasible.

FSA will make necessary social and othersupport services available to adolescent andadult parents participating in JOBS-relatededucational activities. In addition, if resourcespermit, special support services can also beprovided in instances where dependent chil-dren may be at risk of developing majorschool problems or of dropping out altogether.

The law is flexible about who actuallyprovides these services and permits schoolsand welfare agencies to determine the bestreferral and delivery arrangements for theirparticular community and client needs.

OPPORTUNITY #2

To expand the range and capacity of educational programs for learners at risk.

The Family Support Act creates an oppor-tunity and a strong incentive for states toaugment and expand existing programs forlearners at risk and to design new educational

"The Family SupportAct creates anopportunity and astrong incentive forstates to augment andexpand existingprograms for learnersat risk and to designnew educational

strategies whichinclude AFDC

recipients amongthose served:"

.tion and'cluld,Care for young parents:attending a regular or alternative highSchool. Child care provided at, or

.near,,the school site is.Preferable toAuld care arrangements involvingtompliCated, transportation for both-parent and child; On-Site child carearrangements have been shown to be

IpartieulattsuccesSfillmechanisms forkeeping parenting teensin school;-while Offering them additional opportu-nities fOr parenting,kealth, nutrition,and homeroaking training..HaVingParents on site also offers opportuni-tieS for superVited Want stimulation-activities:,activities that are essentialto rhe'develOPInent of young children.Whó are at riskofdevelopmental,-delaysbi- virtue of their parent.?youth, inexperience, .and poverty.

Problems of providing sufficientfaalities, space,_and,programs inWiliicliturriaila and Staffing ra6s are

.developmentally appropriate for infantsand toddlers can limit the availability ofon-site child care. Successful on-sitechild care exists where there has beencareful planning and coordination amongeducation, health, human services,and appropriate licensing agencies.

In addition to day care, other on-siteservices for at-risk students areneeded, including health careprograms; prograMS which remediate_skills-deficiencies, provide enrichment,and build self-esteem; and counselingfor occupational and personalconcerns. 'Counseling loads at regular-high schools are often too high to-provide the type of support and infor-mation that at-risk students need. Thelevel of staff resources should be suffi-cient to provide'social and healthservices, as well as to meet theacademic.and occupational trainingneeds of AFDC Clients. Mechanisms

should also be established to helpmonitor student progress, resolveproblem's, and respond quickly tochanging student needs.

Above all, schools must seek toengage FSA-supported participants inall aspects of school life, whileaddresSiiig the special needs of thesestudentS and their right to a qualityeducation. Poor school performanceand lack of interest often predateparenting and dropping out of school.Successful efforts to reclaim theSestudents must include programs toreniediate poor.-basic skills, providechallenging Curricula, and acceleratestudents to competitive performance

Such programs should use flexible

and creative instruetionacapproaches,frequently assess student perfor-mance, and monitor student progresstoward specific instructional goals.

13: 14

strategies which incline AFDC recipientsamong those served.

Many of those in the groups targeted byFSA are at -risk learners and are likely to needspecial academic supports, such as tutoringor counseling, to function well in a regularschool setting. Others, not well- suited totraditional classroom- methods, may thrive inprograms that emphasize hands-on learning inanon-classroom setting, computer-assisted'learning, or another alternative educationalapprbach. This may be especially true ofstudents who are significantly over-age fortheir grade level or who have a history ofdifficulties in school.

Unfortunately, most communities have notdeveloped as wide an array of supports andalternatives for school-age individuals as isneeded: Programs for those-beyond school-age generally are even more limited, and what

does exist often is fully used, particularly withthe increased demand resulting from literacycampaigns and the English language require-ments of the Immigration Reform and ControlAct of 1986. Filling these gaps will be critical,if those subject to FSA requirements are tobe offered a real chance at academic success,rather than compelled to return to or stay in asituation which may be poorly suited to theirindividual needs, and which in the past mayhave meant only frustration and failure.

The education community is now grapplingwith the issue of how it can better serve theacademic needs of a diverse range of learners.As answers-and options are developed, FSAcan help make the most of state and localcommitments to adopt changes. For example,federal matching funds can be used to increasethe wide diversity of education services thatwill keep at-risk JOBS participants moving

y are firbc overtime, '-dericienciesasPr:* of tfrirOvOi inadequacy Second-

s, :wial` chance edix4600410rOgfa*need tonenced.the' help people regain:their self-eSteernd knvv.seff: and belief is their bwni:ability: torelated with Ceeed:-Sui:Ceinifulayindividuals Prop* fotAFDC-r-050s

ut cif" :defiti00/21*** 4400(1.136victual needs, t4red10:047401040 can master the

curricula .4..01.4#.004610:04r4c§.gtainmodel stiwl add tO'..their Self-cdnirdence and

enable *pi to bui dal> s oiyofsuccess.

-1o=

and mods..what they

aF0_tautOt.the.et4'a specific andNW hi irinnediate need iiittfoe lives.. A prag-

niatia;:go*oriented approach to

14

tOr-1#1g*effeONelYiiPtivate-OultAFDC -stocknts:motivated tOleihr.to-that .,*heyread theirOw4 cl*treikiAsloii=seekers, they are: motivated:

tfr* lack of 0.04.PFeve4ts.thc* km*attaMMiajob.-

AdoftrI*404 4!,elilcelYt6encounter self-doubt and anxiety,especially atthe'beginning:bf the.progOrn-A OOP ul)Port iipiwOrk and**NOP f6r counseling oftenessential to ensure student entryretention in a ptogram.

The physical OrPoiir*ilsto.0.1#0-44: -ithijOrt44t r01.0 i44010.ing".4091t .

learners Rather than holding,c1444e4 in a traditional scfloo!,site, consideration should be given toh914041e1,10eS'ik* more neutral:

public

pit), Onter,'51i4144Win4ie44 ofettintii1J:0-assrboti*Witkro* of

individual desks, all facing the teacher--Up front, _it may be useftd.to rise otherriasSroom anangernents more conduciveto group interaction and learner--

toward their particular educational objectivesand, ultimately, toward self-sufficiency.

In addition to programs for school-agestudents, remedial education for adults, andcourses in English as a Second Language (ESL),states may also support postsecondary educationat community. colleges, four-year colleges, orvocational-technical schools. Direct support maybe provided to institutions to operate specificprograms in which AFDC recipients are enrolledIndividual tuition assistance will be allowed to the

extent that it is not available from other, federalor state sources.

While FSA gives states broad latitude in howfunds are used for education, there are somerestrictions, Funds cannot be used to meet thenormal costs of public education or to supplantstate and local expenditures foreadsting programs;the restriction on supplantation also extends tonon-federal postsecondary student aid sources.

FSA further specifies that financial support forpostsecondary education can be given only if theeducation is initiated as part of aJOBS employa-bility plan. An AFDC recipient already enrolledin a program will be eligible for support services,like child care and transportation, butJOBS fundsMay not be used to p-7/ for her/his education costs.(Regardless of how participaats are placed incollege, states may count them in determining theJOBS participation rate.)

Funds available through FSA must be used onlyto offset costs incurred by AFDC recipients.However, perhaps alert to the dangers ofcreating a two-tiered,system one for thepoor and one for the restthe Act does notrequire that programs supported by FSAfunds be open only to JOBS participants.Costs in "mixed" programs are reimburseable,so long as accurate accounting is maintained.

Joint efforts between education and human

'Joint efforts betweeneducation and humanservice officials todevelop creativefinancing strategies formixed programs...can ensure that AFDC

,ecipients are notsegregated from theirpeers, and that abroader segment of

the at-risk populationhas access to neweducational options'.'

centeredAdults who haVebeen away from

formal education for a long time andWho are anxious about their- ability to-

--learwinay geteasilyfriistrated.:Many,adults at least initially -tend t5 dobetter in aclaSs or Sing group setting-that Meets at a Set:time and place thanthey do in a-Self-Paced,, completelySelf-struCtured learning environment.Having clear expectations about theirattendarice and performance, andregUlarand-freqUent interaction withinstructors and instructional aides alsohelps, to keep adult learners motivatedand on target.

-Low teacher to student ratios canpromote success especially inprograms for students at the low endof the skill continuum. WhenStudent/teacher ratios are-high,computer - assisted instruction, self-directed learning centers, and peertutors can be cost-effective comple-ments-to classroom instruction.

!Awning experiences (especially the

:PPee of WOW should be tailoredlithe needs el the-14114641.Increasingly, adult zdrication and

training progranis across,the country

are modifying traditiOnal course-basedofferings by adopting elements ofcompetency-based instruction aridassessment. The primary charac-teristic of such prograinS is that the:learning process begins not with asyllabus but with a set of very clearlearning objectives and well- definedand demonstrable measures for deter-mining whether the objectiYes havebeen met. Competency-based instruc-tional systems are particularlyappropriate for welfare training andplacement programs since the instruc-tional objectives can be closely relatedto the employment goals of thelearners.'FurthermPre, they reinforcethe necessary, emphasis on growth,rather than deficiency,hy focusing onmastery of necessary skills.

Renee LerChe, in her book, Effective.Adult Literacy Programs, concludesthat successful programs are thosedesigned as total educational systemsunder which there is a balancedemphasis on: -11 clearly stated learningobjectives, 2) assessment of leanerneeds and progress,_3) instructionalprocess, 4) guidance and counseling,and 5) program management andevaluation. Specifically,_ she finds that

successful programs:are clear about their overall goalsand their philosophy of instruction;develop measurable goals for everycomponent of the program (e.g.,recruitment, orientation, coun-seling) so that they can monitortheir success in meeting these goals;assist potential learners in deter-mining if the program is well-suitedto the learners' goals and expec-tations;are explicit and open. withparticipants about intended learningoutcomes for participants and stan-dards for judging success inachieving outcomes;carefully diagnose each learner'seducational needs and strengths anddevelop an individually-tailoredlearning plan for each participant;tie learning objectives to instruc-tional methods and materials and toassessment strategies;provide continual feedback tolearners about their progress andcarefully document that progress;frequently evaluate their program'seffectiveness in meeting its goals ineach of the component areas, and usefindings to improve their program.

15 1 6

*mployabilityplan' based on...individual assessment[makes] participantsaware of the range of

options available to-them, their own goalsand preferences canbe taken into account,and they, can receive

guidance in makingsound choices amongthe options'

service officials to develop creative financingstrategies for mixed programs, while admit-tedly not an easy process, can ensure thatAFDC recipients are not segregated fromtheir peerS, and that a broader segment ofthe at-risk population has access to neweducational options. Possible funding sourcesto complement JOBS' state and local dollarsinclude the Job Training Partnership Act(JTPA), the Carl Perkins Vocational EducationAct, the Vocational'RehabilitatiOn Act, andChapter 1 of the Education Consolidation andImprovement Act, among others.

OPPORTUNITY #3

To make the right match between people, theirneeds, and the programs designed to help them.

For a student at risk to succeed,.whether ayoungster or adult, it is important to identify andaddress the unique set of concerns she/hefaces. Some of the concerns will be academic,others related to personal or family issues.

As we have stressed, FSA offers the oppor-tunity to create greater capacity in educa-tional programs and support services, so thatWhen a need is identified, the resources willbe there to respond. Just as important is astrategy to ensure that individuals receive theright mix of services and that all necessarysupports are effectively coordinated.

FSA encourages states to developmechanisms to do this by requiring an accurateassessment of every JOBS participant's priorwork experience, skills, and potential employa-bility, educational needs, and needed supportservices at the time they enter the program.

An "employability plan" basedon that individualassessment is to be developed jointly by theparticipant and a staff person. Through the plan-ning process, JOBS participants can be madeaware of the range of options available to them,their own goals and preferences can be taken intoaccount, and they can receive guidance in makingsound choices among the options. In contrast toapproaches that rely extensively Or exclusivelyon sanctions, an effective assessment and plan-ning process can help provide JOBS participantswith incentives and the confidence to pursuepositive goals they set for themselves.

Individualized planning in education is

16

already used for students with disabilitiesunder the federal Education for All Handi-capped Children Act (P.L. 99-142), and hasbeen recommended for other students at riskby the Council of Chief State School Officers.As yet, however, most schools systems havenot undertaken this broader approach, oftenbecause of concern about potential costs inschools with a high concentration of students atrisk. The Family Support Act can help to provideresources for individual'assessment and plan-ning for at least a portion of these students,as well as for many adults for whom in thepast there has not been any source of supportfor planning related to educational services.

At a minimum, welfare agencies will needthe advice and guidance of educa6on officialsto ensure that appropriate methods are usedin determining literacy levels and educationalneeds. Alternatively, they may wish to haveeducational agencies perform directlysome or allof the assessment and planning. Orapproachesmay vary by the type of recipient. Forexample, primary responsibility for assess-ment and plan development for adults mightrest with a welfare agency case manager,while the schools could have a more centralrole with adolescent parents, for whoin theeduca-tion portion of the plan would be primary.

Whatever approach is selected, collaborationamong agencies will enable the client and thestaff person helping her/him to consider theentire range of individual needs and goals at onetime and to developan integrated plan thatmakes logical connections and transitions.

OPPORTUNITY #4

To reduce the future number of at-risk learnersby developing innovative and more effectiveearly intervention and prevention approaches.

Public policymakers in both education andwelfare strongly agree that the most desirableand least costly point to provide services isearly, before serious problems develop. Neverthe-less, these systems generally have specialresources available to help children and fami-lies only after difficulties have developed.

The Family Support Act offers the opportu-nity to begin changing this situation in two ways.The individualized assessment, discussed

17

above, can consider not only the needs andgoals of the individual JOBS participant, butfamily circumstances as well. It provides agood opportunity to explore with the parentwhat a child may need, including, for example,quality child care, tutoring or other interven-tions for school-age youngsters, and earlychildhood education programs for three- andfour-year-olds. Close communication amongstaff in education, welfare, employmenttraining, and other service systems, likehousing,:can ensure that the personconducting the-assessment knows the rightquestions to ask, where referrals can bemade, and how to secure services for fr.:lilymembers as well as JOBS participants.

A second opportunity to, increase earlyintervention and prevention is the FSA provi-sion for state and local demonstration projects.In the area of education, the law authorizesdemonstration projects to test:

financial incentives and interdisciplinaryapproaches to reduce schoordropout rates,encourage skill development, and avoidwelfare dependency;non-academic approaches (e.g., counseling,services, recreation) to reduce rates ofteen pregnancy, suicide, substance abuse,and school dropout among high-risk teens.(A "high-risk" teen is one defined as havinga history of academic or behavioral prob-lems, coming from a single-parent house-hold, or being pregnant or a parent.)Although calling for "non-academic"approaches, these demonstrations must belinked to a local school system;early childhood development approaches to

enhance the cognitive skills, linguisticability, communications skills, and theability to read, write, and speak Englisheffectively among children under age five inAFDC households.A total of $Z5 million has been authorized

for these demonstrations but, unlike JOBSfunding, monies have not yet been appropri-ated. The American Public Welfare Associa-tion and' others have placed priority onsecuring appropriations for this purpose inthe current session of Congress. If appropria-tions do become available, applications will besubmitted to the Secretary of Health andHuman Services according to proceduresspecified in the FSA regulations.

OPPORTUNITY #5

To begin to build a more comprehensive andeffective system for all youth and adults at risk.

Taken together, the opportunities outlinedabove can initiate changes to meet the educa-tional needs of AFDC recipients in the shortterm and, over time, can provide the building

blocks for a more effective education systemfor all state residents.

Aithough not enough by itself to transformeducational systems, positive and successfulaction under the FSA can boost and lendfocus to the dropout prevention and at-riskyouth initiatives many states are alreadyundertaking. More tangibly, this action canalso expand educational programs, stimulategreater cooperation among agencies to meetthe multiple needs of students, and supply theimpetus for creative new approaches to betterserve at-risk youth and adults.

17

8

"Although not enough

by itself to transformeducational systems,positive and successful

action under the FSA

can boost and lend

focus to the dropoutprevention and at-risk

youth initiatives manystates are already

undertaking:"

"High-level leadershipcan lower many of thepotential barriers to

collaboration, securethe commibnent ofthe various agencieestaffs, and buildpublic confiClncef

PRINCIPLES TO GUIDEJOINT ACTION

States are starting from very differentpoints as they approach implementa-tion of the Family Support Act.Some already have in place a widearray of services that can support

JOBS activities, while the resources of othersare few or already stretched to capacity. Eachstate, therefore, will need to use the Act'sopportunities to organize joint efforts in waysthat beSt suit its particular situation. At thesame time, if the potential of the Act is to bemet, we believe that certain principles mustguide action in every state.

The visible commitment of top-level officialsis a crucial first step.

An endorsement of mutually agreed-upongoals by the Governor and the Governor'scabinet, especially the human service andemployment/training commissioners, the chiefstate school officer, and the state board of

education chairperson is essential. They mustsupport-an interagency process to demon-strate that the JOBS program transcendsnormal categorical and organizational bound-aries. High-level leadership can lower many ofthe potential barriers to collabOration, securethe commitment of the various agencies'staffs, and build public confidence.

A strong interagency and intergovernmentalplanning process is logy b effective collaboration.

FSA is most likely to help families achieveself-sufficiency in state and local,programs ifthere is interagency and intergovernmentalcooperation that extends from the earlieststages of planning and priority-setting to thedelivery of services. An effective planningprocess mustactively involve state and localrepresentatives of at least the education,welfare, social service, and employment

at well ISIMP0011110090u11100S,aillamilijendee$,-4411 boa viol-pad of*04 WO r0.10 of

-''CO#4134!r:c9u.ntOkOtrt(s)*OduqttiOnand tOlieliar.t of the process

-,Shate materials and infOnnationonf,S4Under;

-standingtfikl*, 440 OgOlatiO4s,Familiaaziie yourself with your:current 04000 004ivOst,ki something

clear,** about 414404'0:n9,PIO;thing as a:"dumb question'

/..s0e0bk'and'OffateiVO your ebOW-P44infOr#4001-thP*0004P00 and'60404060 of the- FPC:014atiOn'iPyour state =

St* i0 09tact*it-k3'**, 1000 -01**zations,to.8et`information PkiOufs th4t#isO'Od '1"? :aFe-iwr own' experience

.you.haVerityetbeen contacted; callyour corniterPartin vielfare and expressVotir interOtin FSAFainitianze iturself yritli the Aces provisions;

4f0Oietijing.i.s4c11* 454'0944=t*e's Oink !cli01;0.'questioifBegin tO assess your systems 6VerPilcOicitiit0-se0C-lcOliets at risk;-sk;- Ohainformation" about. your sijstetris resources

'A*40 4ii*fre. 'fir at-441001.PP- With-yOtir COunterparts inptOlicffisi4ance

'S4Fil! wjt..4skOrnaiiO4'corg*-,iatioii*,tkget:inknhatioir On issues That-ariie andlO Share, yOur Own experience _

18 19

systems. Direct service staff, welfarerecipients, and their advocates should alsohave input. This early communication willensure that:

everyone understands both FSAs strictrequirements as well as its broad options;a wide range of expertise is used in framing thestate's JOBS objectives and approaches;the structure, operating realities, andcurrent priorities of each system are under-stood and accommodated; andthe foundation is laid for mobilizing andlinking the programs of various systems inthe implementation phase.Collaborative planning will also help to

eliminate unnecessary duplication of services,avoid the repetition of mistaken strategies,and prevent the creation of new layers ofdiscrete categorical programs. Further, an effec-tive planning model developed at the statelevel can guide local communities in their ownplanning and implementation efforts.

Program priorities should be based on an

accurate assessment of resources availablein all key systemswelfare, education, socialservices, and employment and training - and

of the variation in program availability andconfiguration throughout the state.

Limited resources and the challenges ofstarting a new and very different kind ofprogram will make incremental implementa-tion desirable in most cases. Within federalguidelines, statc.is will need to cfecide whenand where in the state to begin JOBS activi-ties, which groups of recipients to include, thetypes of services to offer, and how newresources can best be used Ideally, thesechoices will be made jointly by the partici-pating education and human service systems,and will reflect a cross-system view of currentcapacity, gaps to be filled, and the opportuni-ties for greatest effectiveness in achievingjoint goals.

Consultation with education personnel caninsure that JOBS planners do not mistakenlyassume that schools already have adequateresources for serving AFDC .recipients.Recent state experiments with programs to linkeducation and AFDC underscore the need for

close communication, so that schools takingon new responsibilities receive commensurateassistance from the state. In a worst casescenario, schools might have to absorb someor all of the costs related to new reportingrequirements; increased demand for teachers,counselors, supplies, and transportatiotandthe creation of program alternatives neces-sary to serve dropouts and at-risk students.Such a school might well be forced to choosebetween meeting these costs or simply notrendering crucial services.

With accurate assessment information athand, however, a state might focus first onareas where there is a good combination ofeducation programs and support services,well matched to client needs, and where thereis an existing pattern or strong likelihood oflocal interagency cooperation. Or, a statemight begin in an area where most but notquite all of the elements already are present,and where the addition of extra resources cancomplete the picture. Establishing compre-hensive programs in. rural areas and otherlocations where only a limited infrastructure (currently exists will require more time to planand put in motion.

Implementation plans and schedules that recog-

nize the inherent complexities of interagencycollaboration will lessen subsequent problems.

Interagency collaboration is not an easyprocess. Differences in training, professionalorientation and vocabulary, competing pres-sures and priorities, restrictive laws and regu-lations, and the time and rescurces that thecollaborative process itself takes all posepotential barriers. The situation is madeharder because, even with the addition of theFSAs new resources, hard choices will haveto be made. Yet, the reward in terms ofimproved outcomes for people and for thesystems serving them will be well worth theinvestment of effort that is required. More-over, a thoughtful process that understandsand allows for the difficulties that will arisecan help minimize their impact.

Each system will need to assess the impactJOBS will have on present operations. Willthere be increased demand on current

19 20 .

1111111"Collaborative planning

will also help toeliminate unnecessaryduplication of services,

avoid the repetition ofmistaken strategies,and prevent thecreation of new layers

of discrete categoricalprograms'

resources, including programs, facilities, staff,and other components? Will JOBS change thedemographics of their clientele? Willimplementation bring changes in the time, place,and manner in which services are provided?Will staff need different skills and capabilities?Can inservice training provide those skills ormust new staff be hired? The combined

answers to these questions should frame thestructure for initial implementation plans.

Differences in policies, procedures, andmanagement structures among the varioussystems must also be accommodated. Forexample, any attempt to monitor school atten-dance by AFDC recipients will require welfareagencies to deal with a wide variety of practices

yad beefy**191).01*F144.0.014teirilO*Ocle

On:* current:P00:309k,t4e

'-'..t.idOif-101*-.3.0504caila'§:fOro* 0004at similariatopaii0;

It,

440;*04W.'Neficrto exeiicise `its,91#k tO give priority

0:41*.W44:*****;,:,CTen'glOscnot ill'0400t-filtOP;._ '00;".-01able to 60;il iii JOBS:.

04111 s..**20.,40,sig*cl *4 with.41-1401k,fijijulY044-,* 0100Pi.

st.4:04490 110*...1:40000001.fi01.9P§.010400,0*-' CO*

,0:8110.family.

'000cer04' it'10iin t,fiej)F9gram

individual confeiiences ;:ttie,:cOO;

ciamine

.

mgy had beenfrustrated at_:41.1!),OtYlo d9-** ikse-,406) 00'

4r9130c1A).# age. 7...$00A after,-illeand ,d'iw,b4100,i4,40ck*Ito. get00'0E1.4 cgl#:** born i',Year laterahcr.J4110*-11*-****.et- th*:, wasa

.the!Y.AYeCemanaging u4t4.*:_fr4 husband 00:skled; an innodent,bystander Caught inneighborhood'.violence:young cluklieri,;n0 day care, and'nei0kr the.edUCatiOn nor Work-experience needed to'find a )oblhat.WO* pay the family's-basic food and--shelter cOits,;1Viaryfeltforced-to.apPlYfor

:,0*-6hiiiPcttel! Year% Mary*944*:0YeA'ai i9iT4Yingiob§,'none of 04004 insurance orother On.0, ended when her

010100tOdOeitlk:Weftt.Out of 'NO-600; when a subse-t-merit einplayerieduced itaff.size.

20 21

and'transportati

c.liffic004:agect.044*150**11r*

te-As06104,

**IS el***.0,'-016.440::training she'needed.to, find.paid:enough'The coaaieloij a

'1100i)1**.016**1.1iWc94410'1.)01Ped*ucki#0;613** fOrihe highschool.***** 0** while **itthem as computer.operators.'Was very *created. The tonnaelorSpOkewith,the Olege,to make Ore:that space-Aint'atatiable and refitted

Mary 14x_kr:,liF9cOdiOs 0004,;vhe The,Coilifselot.al.so.arialikect kir the trans-pOrtatiOn.Mary WoUld'aeid to.get toher-program.

The welfare agency counselorstayedin touCh,WitkMary,-at,litstevery other-week andlesS-frequentlyas'she progressed. ,Mary appreciatedhis concern and-encourageinent andfelt conifortable Caliathan.,8vith 00-tiona:"She also relied On the college's,own counseling program in moil each.101APartiCipant,was,assigned,to afacility itienOet,whO was, available forguidance of acaderniCniattersfor justto have a cup of coffee-and talk.

in the way schools define, record, and report"absences" and "attendance;" for schools, thelinkage of school attendance and incomebrings a very new perspective to the atten-dance monitoring they have traditionally done.

Anticipating these issues and spending thetime in advanceof implementation to developprocesses that are equitable to clients and

acceptable to the various institutions canminimize later disruption and discomfort foreveryone. Further, recognizing that newdirections are being set, often on the basis ofimperfect information, continuing interagencyand intergovernmental communication tomonitor progress will ensure that programcomponents are adjusted as needed.

'Cada'Mary's daughter;-Carla, hada long

'history of school problems. ,School--recOrds-,Showed-thatsbewas readingatonly a Sixth-grade level and was'often OS*. After-0e birthof herbaby,' the absences'becathe moreireigtent. The.cotinSe.lOrSuggestedthat an alternative program Seemed-*" beStwaY to help Carla deal withthe combined demands of sChoOl andteen parenthood. FertiniatelY, spacewas aVailable-ia a high-quality prograinWhose, capacity had been expandedWithFSA"fundS.

In the alternative program, most ofCarla% daSses have no more thaneight students,and extra help is avail-ableboth from teacheri and on-sitetutors:The'Program iSlocated on aregular high school campus, so.Carlacan Participate in the sthool chorus. Ifshe wants to, she can also take someother course's that are not offeredwithin her alternativeprogram. Acounselor, who is paid by the welfaredepartment but who Works full-time atthe schoolriuris a weekly dischssion4:Mup'for Carla and,the other teenparents and,keens an "open door" -fortheyoungirr-±thers to stop by if theyneed anything. The counselor whohelps with school,, health, and SocialService problems is seen by the girlsas a friend; but also as someone who

holds high expectations for them. An*absence fronischool alWays brings acall, and there are few problems forwhich the counselor cannot help tofind a solution.

Carla'sbaby istared kir in the newday care center which the school sheattendS onened-retently;an amend=inent to state law permits her to bringthe baby to school on the regularschool bus. At lunch time, Carla andthe otheryoung mothers come to thecenter to feed and play with their chil-dren. The center director, trained inchild-development.uses the opportu-nity to observe the interactionsbetween the mothers and their chil-dren and to talk with them aboutactivities they can do with their chil-dren. Her-suggestions are alwaysmade in a gentle, caring way, and mostof the mothers readily turn to her foradvice about their babied health,nutrition, and general development.The director also visits each youngwoman at home at least twice duringthe year, as a way to make the linkbetween what is learned in the centerand caretaking at home.

JimmyDuring their first conversation, the

case manager asked about how Mary's14-year-old son Jimmy was doing.

Mary reported that although he gener-Inaintained i'"C" average,.xnuth

and English were, giving him,troublethis year had also gotten into hisfirst fight at school. The counselorreferred Mary to a volunteer tutoring,program that could help Jimmy withdifficult subjects, and told her aboutthe local Boys `1.7.;ub where Jimmy

could find supervised recreationalprograms, friends, and caring adults tospend time with. The counselor alsoencouraged Mary to contact him ifthere were more incidents at school.Further, with Mary's permission, hearranged for a regular school coun-selor to keep an eye on Jimmy and lethim know if more serious problemsdeveloped. In subsequent conversa-

lions with Mary, the JOBS counselormade apoint of asking about Jimmyperiodically.

Neither Mary nor Carla will leaveAFDC immediately, but supported bynecessary services, they are gainingthe self-confidence and skills'they willneed forfinancial independence. And,with early action to prevent smallproblems from becoming big ones,Jinunyl§ "staying on track in school.

21 22

This Statement is itself an example of the kindsof close professional cooperation andcollaboration which we hope will_emerge in the wake of the Family Support Act. Thefollowing persons, affiliated with 11 organizations; participated in various ways toconceive, write, edit, critique, and produce the statement: Martin .1: Blank, Cynthia

G. Brown, Peter E. Carlson, Michael Cohen, Jacqueline P. Danzberger, Lynne Fender, EvelynGanzglass, Mark Greenberg, Samuel Halperin, Alan W. Houseman, Tom Joe, Clifford M.Jo luilOn, Janet E. Levy, David Long, Atelia Melaville, Glenda Partee, Cheryl Rogers, ArlocSherman, Bard Shollenberger, and Beverly Yanich. Funding from the Ford Foundation, theFoundation for Child Development, and Youth andAmerica's Future:-The William T. GrantFoundation Commission on Work, Family and Citizenship made it possible to publish anddisseminate this document.

23

22

APPENDIX ASummary of the MajorProvisions of the Family Support Act

he Family Support Act of 1988 (FSA)requires for the first time that welfareagencies make available educationalservices as ,a component of the new Job

Opporpiiities and Basic Skills Program (JOBS).Whom Will States Serve? States'have many

options, but must establish educational services forat least some members of the following two groups:

Custodial parents under age 20 who havenotcompleted high school or its equivalent. Statesmay exempt younger teen parents under age 18kohl participation requirements, subject toregulations to be issued by the U.S. Departmentof Health and Human Services (HHS) byOctober 13, 1989.1-Parents age 20 or older who have not completedhigh school or its equivalent, to the extent thatthe state has decided to require such parents toparticipate in JOBS. This simply means thatstates that choose to run a mandatory work ortraining program for older dropout parents mustprovide them with a basic education first.Members of this group may be enrolled concur-rently in other JOBS activities, but those mustnot interfere with their education.

The statutory requirements are not rigid. Statesonly have enroll as many members of the abovegroups as their resources permit. FSA leavesstates much leeway in targeting services towardparticular groups and in deciding that educationalor other services are not feasible in particular locali-ties. However, HHS regulations could constrainstate flexibility, particularly a state's ability to limitthe geographic scope of its JOBS program?

Beyond these requirements, states are given theopportunity to serve high school graduates whowish to enroll, or have already enrolled, in post-secondary education or training. This couldinclude enrollment in community colleges,vocational-technical schools, community-basedinstitutions, and four-year colleges. Further, statesmay provide remedial educationnr skills training toparents who have a high school diploma but still

lack basic skills. And states may require childrenages 16 or over in-AFDC families to participate ineducation or other JOBS activities if they are notcurrently attending an academic or vocationalschool full time.

Federally-Specified Target Groups. FSAestablishes specific target groups to which statesmust give priority. These are:

parents under 24 who have not completed highschool and are not enrolled in high school or itsequivalent;long-term recipients, i.e., those who havereceived AFDC for at least 36 months duringthe last five years;parents under 24 with little or no recent workexperience;members of a family in which the youngest childis within two years of being ineligible for AFDCbecause of age, i.e., age 16 in a state that endsAFDC eligibility at age 18.

A state could lose a portion of the federal matchingfunds for its AFDC program unleas it expends atleast 55 percent of its JOBS funds on these targetgroups. Within the target groups, states must givepriority to those who volunteer to participate.

What Services Must States Offer? The FSAmandates that states make available a broad rangeof educational and work- related services. Theeducational services must include high school orequivalent education (combined with job trainingas needed), basic and remedial education toachieve a basic literacy level, and education forindividuals with limited English proficiency.

States may add college and other educationalservices to this list. Each state can deeideprecisely what kind of educational activities it willoffer, whether they will be available statewide oronly in certain areas, how such educational activi-ties will be provided, and when they will begin.

Will Participants Volunteer or Will TheyBe Required to Participate? This decision islargely up to the state. States may choose torequire that various groups of AFDC recipients

, °The Departnient issued. aft regulations for public comment in Apnl of 1989. The draft regulations make it relatively difficult for states to exempt parents under 18,

They pernut a state to exempt a custodial parent under 18 from the requirements only if: the parent is beyond the states compulsory attendance laws, and if the statesJOBS plan contains criteria which (a) provide for individualized rather than categorical exemptions: (b) do not rely solely on grade completion: and (c) provide forparticipa-tion in another educational activity from whic -Ne individual could benefit. In accompanying comments. HHS explains that excusing custodial parents from high school attendance should be 'rare:' and that. in such instances, the state must provide for assignment to available educational alternatives.

°The draft regulations, for example, would require states to establish a statewide JOBS program by October of 1992 in all major urban (Metropolitan Stausticall areas andenough other areas to serve 75 percent of the adult AFDC population: in addition, states would have to establish a more minimal program (o(fenng at least job search, highschool education, and one of four optional components to be chosen by the state) in areas sufficient to serve 95 percent of its AFDC adults, to be considered a statewideprogram. If this guideline is not met. states would be required to justify why their program is not avidable statewide.

2324

participate in the JOBS program, including mostparents with children overage three (or over ageone at state option). Further, FSA indicates that

-states must require young AFDC parents, ages 18or 19, to participate in an educational activity ifthey have not finished high school, regardless ofthe age of their child. The law, however, modifiesthis mandate to say that states must serve volun-teers first within the federally designated "targetgroups" noted above, which encompass all dropoutparents under age 24, including those ages 18 and19. Moreover, states cannot requhe participationunless child care is available.

Indeed, the Ad includes enough other exemp-tions and qualifications that a state can legitimatelyrun a "volunteers first" program for all personswithin or outside the target groups. The onlyrestrictions are that 55 percent of its resourcesmust go to serving members of the target groups;and that federal participation quotas most be, met.However, most persons who enroll voluntarily inthe JOBS program will still be subject to penalties,in the form of benefit reductions, if they later dropout of the program without "good cause." (Seesection on Sanctions below.)

Other JOBS Activities. Besides education,JOBS services must include job skills training, jobdevelopment, and placement and readiness activi-ties, plus at least two of the following: job search,on-the-job training, work supplementation, orcommunity work experience.

Assessment and Orientation. To determinewhat education services will be provided toparticipants under the FSA, state agencies mustassess the educational needs and child care andother supportive service needs of each non-exempt family member or voluntary participant.Based on this assessment, an employability planwill be developed for each participant that will setforth the activities in which the participant willtake part, including education programs, childcare, and other supportive services. The statemay require the participant to negotiate and enterinto a contract specifying the obligations of bothparticipant and agency, including the activities tobe conducted and services to be provided. Thestate may also assign a case manager to theparticipant and participant's family to obtain orbroker services for the family, monitor progress,and review the employability plan.

Child Care. FSA requires states to guarantee childcare to participants who need it whenever a JOBSparticipant is satisfactorily participating in anapproved educational activity. The state must alsoprovide transportation and other support services thatit determines to be necessary to particitiation?

States can assure child care byAiiiividingcare directly, arranging care adough providiirs,providing cash or vatic:hers in advance to thecustodial parent, reimbUrsing the custodial parent,arranging with other agencies ad communityvolunteer groups for nOmeimbursed care, oradopting other methods the state agency deemsappropriate. States must ply at least the lesser ofthe actual cost of child care or the dollar amount ofthe AFDC "child care disregard; i.e., $175 permonth for a child over age two or $200 for a childunder two. The state may pay a greater amountfor child care so long as it does not exceed thelocal market rate.

Transitional Beni:fits. FSA requires states,by April 1,1990, to offer child care and medicalbenefits to persons losing AFDC due to-employ-ment. Former recipients will be entitled to up toone year of child care if the state determines the careto be necessary for employment, and if the recipientloses AFDC eligibility due to increased hours ofeniployment, wages from employment, or loss ofAFDC earnings disregards. Beneficiaries of this caremust have re.' T'ed AFDC for at least tine of the sixmonths.- detigibility, contribute tothe cot t. '4ing scale established by,the ail lin other requirements.

FornierA also be entitled tocontinued niecuCal assistance for up. to oneyear.Generally, states must provide the first six monthsof coverage without a fee. After that, states mustoffer an additional six months of coverage to fami-lies with income below 185 percent of the federalpoverty threshold, but may impose a premium forfamilies with earnings over the poverty level.

Sanctions. States must sanction persons whofail without "good cause" to participate in the JOBSprogram, unless they fall within one of thefederally-exempt categories (e.g., ill or disabled) inFSA. Non-exempt persons in the JOBS programmay be sanctioned even if they enrolled as volun-teers, i.e., without the state specifically requiringtiv;rn to participate. Exempt persons are not sanc-tioned, but exempt persons who drop out of the

sflraft /MS regulations track the language of the FSA but accompanying comments by the Department ruse questions about theextent of the sate duty to provide childcare.

'Draft federal regulations do not add to this exemption from program participation, The FSA itself includes further goodcause reasons for a participant not accepting em.pinyment. The law specifies that participants shall not be sanctioned for failing to accept a job offer that would result in a net kiss of pay, nor for refusing to take a job formore than 20 hours per week if she is the caretaker to a child under 6.

'Alt is not yet dear what educational activities will be included within this state maintenance of effort requirement. Draft regulationsare ambiguous in their treatment ofprograms serving both AFDC and nonAFDC participants.

25

JOBS program without good cause after havingcommenced participation will be denied priority solong as other individuals are actively seeking toparticipate. The definition of 'good cause"go'erning participation is left mostly to the states.The FSA does kovide that no sanction can beinposed on a parent who refti4s to participate inan lucation Program itui to a lack of child care'Each state most establish a conciliation procedurefor resolving disputes about program participation,and for a hearing with respect to the dispute if it isnot resolved through conciliation.

Funding. Additional federal tends are made,available to match state expenditures for JOBS,programs, including educational activities, under acapped entitlement formula. The central provisionof this formula provides a federal match of at least60 percent for the bulk of a state's program, up toa maximum amount, based on the state's relativenumber of adult AFDC recipients. The cappedfederal funds begin with $600 million in FY (fiscalyear) 1989, rising to $1.3 billion by FY 1995.

State welfare expenditures for administrativecosts, costs of transportation, and other work-related supportive services are matched at 50percent and are also subject to the cap. Child carecosts are matched at the state's Medicaid rate,with no cap on these expenditures.

Federal funds for educational activities underJOBS-may not be used to supplant non-federalfunds for existing services and activities whichpromote the purpose of the JOBS program. Stateand local expenditures for such activities must bemaintained at least at the level of such expendi-tures for FY 19865

Participation Quotas. Unless a state satisfiesfederal participation quotas, federal matching fundsfor the state AFDC program will be reduced to 50percent, from the higher rate of 60 percent or more.The quotas follow a specific schedule: seven percent101' 1990, U percent in FY 1992 and FY 1993,15percent in FY 1994, and 20 percent in FY 1995.

FSA leaves it to the U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services (HHS) to define "participa-tion" but provides that it must involve more thanmere registration, i.e., actual participation in somecomponent of theJOBS program!' In certaincases, the Secretary of HHS may waive the fiscalpenalties against a state that has not met its quota.

Planning. Planning for the JOBS program isblely to begin immediately and in many states iswell under way. Planning is made difficult by thelack of final federal regulations, however. HHSpublished proposed regulations on April 18 and finalregulations are, due by October 13,1989. Some statesmay need to enact new legislation that will likelybe considered during the legislative session bagiii-

ning in 1989. Most states will likely need additionalappropriations either this yearor next.

States must haYe aJOBS prosipm in place,including educational activities, by October 1,1990. Initially, the program may operate in only aportion of the state. States must have the programavailable in each portion of the state where it isfeasible to do so by October 1,1992. States couldimplement much earlier if they complete thechanges required in their state AFDC plan: a numberof states plan to implement their programs by July

1,1989, the earliest allowable date.Demecimibie, Study. States may conduct a

preliminaq F:zinographic study of potentialJOBSparticipanti, funded with a 50 percent federalmatch. The study would analyze the educationalattainment and skill deficits of potentialparticipants, the capacity, of existing institutions tomeet their educational needs, and any changes oradditions needed in the service delivery'system.

Every state must use the services of localPrivate Councils to make estimates of thetypes of jobs available or lilcely to become availablein the service delivery areas.

State Plan. A state cannot begin receivingfederal JOBS funds until it submits a JOBS andSupportive Services plan that is approved by HHS.In developing these state pans, the welfare agencymust consult with the educatliin agency as well asthe agency responsible for administering jobtraining programs in the state. This plan must esti-mate the number of pertons to be served ineducational activities; a description of the servicesto be provided and the educational and skill needsto be addressed; the extent to which the servicesare expected to be made available by state andlocal educational agencies, community-basedorganizations, and other agencies; and the extentto which such educational services are to theprovided or funded by theJOBS program. Thestate plan must be published and made reasonablyavailable to the general public through local newsfacilities and public announcements.

Child Support Provisions. Besides creatingthe JOBS program, the FSA also makes importantchanges in child support enforcement, designed toimprove the identification of absent parentsparticularly but not solely parents of children inAFDC and other low income familiesand thecollection of child support payments from them.

FSA toughens requirements, imposed byCongress in 1975 and 1984 as a condition ofparticipating in the AFDC program, that stateshave a statewide child support enforcementprogram to help locate absent parents, establishpaternity, obtain and enforce support orders. ByOctober of 1989, for example, courts and other

'HHS has proposed to define participation in most Cases as receiving AFDC and taking part in at least one of the sute's designated JOBS components (other than on en-!anon. assessment, use management or erimknability developmert) for a monthly average of at kast 20 hours per week. The primary exception is that. for educationalactivities. no hourly minimum is imposed but the participant must be making satisfactory progress by the standards of the educational prodder.

decision makers must use the state's child supportguidelines in establishing or modifying supportawards unless doing so would be unjust orunreasonable. (Federal officials estimate Ais provi-sion will triple the size of the r:serage child supportaward.) These state guidelinei must be updated atleast once every four years.

Further, all new support orders must provide forautomatic collection through immediate wage with-holding unless both parties agree to an alternatearrangement or there is a finding of good-cause fornot ordering it. If the case is being handled by thestate's "Title IV-D" child support enforcementsystem (which encompasses all AFDC-cases), thisprovision takes effect in-Noveniber of 1990 andcovers modifications as well as new orders; in allother child support' cases the provision takeseffect in January of 1994.

By November of 1989,all parties to a contestedpaternity_ action must submit to genetic testing.By November of 1990, parents must furnish theirSocial Security number to the state's birth recordsagency as part of the proCess involved in the issu-ance of a birth certificate.

While these provisions_ potentially_ affect-all fami-lies with an absent parent, other provisions of heFSA apply only to AFDC recipients. EffectiveJanuary 1989, for example, the FSA clarifies thatstates must give custodial parents on AFDC atleast $50 per month of the total amount collectedby the state from an absent father. (States may-keep the remainder to defray costs of providingAFDC.) EffeCtive October, 1989, the law extendsfor an additional year a federal provision givingMedicaid coverage for four months to familiesleaving the AFDC program due to increasedincome from child support. Lastly, effectiveJanuary 1993, FSA requires states to send AFDCfamilies monthly notices of the amount of supportcollected froin an absent parent.

Benefits for Unemployed Two-ParentFamilies.. Currently, about half of all statesOperate an AFDC-UP (unemployed parent)program, which provides benefits to two-parentfaimlies whose income is limited due to a parent'sunemployment. The FSA requires the remainingstates to establish at least a limited AFDC-UPprogram by October 1,1990.

Specifically, a state which did not have an _

AFDC-UP program on September 26,1988; maylimit the number of months of AFDC-UP eligibilityto no less than sun months in any 12 month period.Ti a state imposes time limits On benefits, it stillmust provide Medicaid coverage to familymembers who would be receiving benefits but forthe time limits.

States may, except as otherwise provided byother provisions of the JOBS program, requireAFDC-UP parents to participate in JOBS up to 40hours per week.

26

Changes in Disregards. Under present law, acertain amount of earned income is disregarded incalculating AFDC benefit levels as an incentive forworking. As of October 1 of 1989, the standardmonthly earned income disregard goes up from$75 to $90.

-On the same date, the child care disregard goesup from $160 per child to $175 per child two yearsand older, and to $200 per child underage two.The child cam disregard is to be applied as the laststep in AFDC budgeting. Further, the earnedincome tax credit-must be completely disregardedfor AFDC purposes.

Option to Require Minor Parents to Live-atHome. Effective January 1,1990, states maychoose to require a parent or pregnantwoman under18 who has never married to live in a specified'setting to get AFDC. If the state takes this option,the AFDC benefits, where possible, will be paid tothe adult relative instead of the minor parent.

The minor parent would have to live in eitherthe home of her parent, guardian or adult relative,or in a foster home, maternity home or other adult-supervised supportive living arrangement. Therequirement would apply unless (a) there was noliving parent or guardian whose whereabouts wereknown; (b) the parent or guardian would not lei.the minor parent live in the home; (c) theemotional or physical health or safety of the minorparent or her child would be jeopardized by livingin the home; (d) the minor parent had lived apartfrom her parent or guardian for at least a yearbefore having a child or applying for AFDC; or (e)tha state found "good cause; in accordance withHHS regulations.

Pre-eligibility Fraud Detection. By October1, 1989, states,are required to provide forappropriate measures to detect fraudulent applica-tions for AFDC before eligibility is established.

Demonstration Projects. FSA authorizesnumerous possible state demonstration projects.Most of these experimental projects will requirefederal funds to operate effectively. FSA autho-rizes, but Congress has not yet appropriated, thefunds for projects such as the following:

1) Demonstration Projects to Test theEffect of Early Childhood DevelopmentPrograms. Up to ten states may devise suchdevelopment programs to enhance the cognitiveskills and linguistic abilities of children under five,to improve the communication skills of such chil-dren, and to develop their ability to read, write,and speak English effectively.

2) Demonstration Projects to EncourageInnovative Education and Training Programsfor Children. Any state may conduct a project totest financial incentives and interdisciplinaryapproaches to reducing school dropouts, encouragingskill development and avoiding welfaredependency.

27

3) Demonstrations to Ensure Long-TermFamily Self - Sufficiency through Community-Based Services. Any state may test more effectivemethods of providing coordination and services forconiprehensive family support services.

4) Demoiistraition Projects to ProvideCoUnseling and Services to High RiskTeenagers. Four states may devise projects toprovide 'a Teen Care plan, including a clearing-house, and other services, for teenagert with ahistory of academie or behavioral problems, orwho come from one-parent families, who areparents, or pregnant.

Benefit Levels. The FSA does not requirestates to raise benefits nor does it create anational minimum benefit level. However, eachstate must reevaluate its standard of need andpayment level at least once every three years, andreport this information to the federal governmentand the public under a schedule set by HHS. Thereport must include a statement of how the needstandard is determined, the relationship betweenthe need standard and payment standard, and anychanges in these standards during the past threeyears. The Act also requires studies of alternativeminimum benefit approaches.

APPENDIX BAn Overview of AFDCThe Aid to Families With Dependent Children Program

id to Families with Dependent Children-(AFDC) is the basic cash welfareprogram for families with children. To be

le, a family must contain at leastone child under age-18-or, in certain circum-stances, under 19. The -family must be deprived ofparental support or care due to the death,absence, or incapacity of a parent. Some stateshave also permitted two-parent families to receiveAFDC in limited situations after awaking parent haslost employment (the AFDC-Unemployed ParentProgram). Under the Family Support Act, all stateswill be required to extend benefits for at least part ofeach year to these two-parent families. (The averageAFDC- fan* in 1987 contained three people.)

The federal government pays about 54 percent-of the cost-of AFDC payments to eligible families.Each state is free to set the level of assistance tofamilies in the state. In 1988, the typical (median)-state payment for a family.of three with no otherincome'was $359 per month, or $4,308 per year.This amount was less than half the federal povertyline for a family of three. Most families receivingAFDC also receive Food Stamps, which coverpart, but not all of monthly food costs. They arealso eligible for Medicaid coverage.

If a parent receives any unearned income, theamount of this income is subtracted from the familygiant A parent who works is permitted to keep an

amount of earnings equal to certain work expenses;above this, most of her earnings will also result ina dollar-for-dollar reduction in benefits.

Federal law imposes resource limits on AFDCfamilies. A family is ineligible for aid if its countableassets exceed $1,000 (or a lower limit if set by thestate). Countable assets include cash and liquidresources. Resource guidelines often make it hardfor a family to establish AFDC eligibility if thefamily owns a car.

The Family Support Act does not change benefitlevels or asset/resotute limitations. It doesprovide that many families leaving the rolls afterparticipation in JOBS will be eligible for transitionalhealth care and child care subsidies.

Since 1967, there have been requirements in theAFDC law that most recipients with children overage six participate in state employment andtraining programs as a condition of receivingAFDC. The primary program for this purpose was theWork Incentive (WIN) program. Because of limitedand, in fact, &dining federal financing, however,relatively few AFDC recipients received substan-

, tial help in securing, employment through WIN inrecent years. The Family Support Act will changethis by providing new federal money for states toexpand or re-establish employment and trainingprograms for more of their AFDC populations.

APPENDIX CResources for Additional Information and Assistance

American Public Welfare Association (APWA)

Beverly Yanich, Associate DirectorBard Sholienberger, Senior Policy Associate810 First Street N.E.Suite 500Washington, DC 20002(202) 682-0100

APWA represents state and local human service departments and individual members. It advocates sound, effec-tive, and compassionate social welfare policy and bringsstate and local policy leadership into national decision-making. APWA carries out a comprehensive agenda of social welfare policy research, developthent, an "analysis, andprovides information and technical assistance to state and local officials and others on all aspects of the FamilySupport ACt of 1988.

Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)

Alan W. Houseman, Executive DirectorMark Greenberg, Senior Staff AttorneyArloc Sherman, Research Associate1616 P Street N.W.Suite 350Washington, DC 20036(202) 328-5140

CLASP works to establish effective linkages between U.S. welfare and education systems to help address theproblems Of poverty in America's poor families. The Center provides information and technical assistance to stateand federal officials, school personnel, and legal and policy advocates in meeting the requirements of the FamilySupport Act of 1988.

Center for the Study of Social Policy (CSSP)

Tom Joe, DirectorCherylRogerS, Senior Research Associate1250 Eye Street N.W.Suite 503Washington, DC 20005(202) 371-1565

The Center proVides information on the principles of interagency and intergovernmental planning, budgeting, andservice delivery.

Childrent Defense Fund (CDF)-

Clifford M. Johnson, Acting Director, Division of Family Supports122 C Street NW.Washington, DC 20001(202)' 628-8787

CDF, a private, non-profit organization, gathers data, publishes reports, and provides information On key issuesaffecting children. It also monitors the development and implementation of federal and state policies, provides technicalassistance and support to a network of state and local child advocates, organizations, and public officials, pursues anannual legislative agenda, and litigates selected major cases.

Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)

Cynthia G. Brown, Director, Resource Centeron Educational Equity"Glenda Partee, Assistant Director400 North Capitol StreetWashington, DC 20001(202) 393-8159

CCSSO is a non-profit organization composed of the heads of the 57 departments of public education in everystate, the District of Columbia; the Department of Defense DependentSchools, and five extra-state jurisdictions.The CCSSO Resource Center on Educational Equity is responsible for implementing various CCSSO leadershipinitiatives to priivide better educational services to children and youth at risk of school failure. It provides technicalassistance in policy formulation, develops programs and materials, holds conferences, monitors civil rights issues,and provides training. The Center also publishes a quarterly newsletter.

2829

Institute for Educational Leadership (lEL)

'Jacqueline P. Danibeiger, Director of Local Improvement ProgramsMartin J.-Blank, Senior Associate1001 Connecticut Avenue NW.

.Sriite 310-Voirshington, DC 20036'(202) 822-8405

Theins:Inite for Educational Leadership (IEL) is a non-profit organization dedicated to collaborative problem-solving_strateilea for education. The Institute's programs focus on leadership development, demographic analyses,

'business-education partnerships, school restructuring, and programs concerning at-risk youth.

Joining Forces,

Janet E. Levy, Director400 North Capitol StreetSuite 379'Waihington, DC 200011202)393-8159

Joining Forces promotes collaboration between education and social welfare agencies on behalf of children andtathilies at risk. Information is available on strategies and programs for successful collaboration.

'Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC)

--David Long, Senior-Research AssociateThree Park AvenueNew York, NY-10016

- (212) 532=3290'MDRC, an independent non-profit organization, designs, manages, and evaluates programs intended to increase

the selfiufficiency of disadvantaged groups. Its studies of programs for welfare recipients, teen parents, and dropoutyouth have picsjidedinformation about the implementation and effectiveness of different program approaches across_a range of conditioni.

Natio!tal Alliance of Business (NAB)

'Peter E. Carlson; Director, Economic and Policy AnalysisSteven Golightly, Director, Training and Consulting Services1201 New York Avenue N.W.Suite 700Washington,-DC 20005

- (202) 289-2888The Mimi& .works With the business community to promote and inform employer involvement in planning,

marketing, and hiring from effective welfare-to-work efforts.

National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE)

Janice Earle, Program Director, Youth Services1012 Canierbn StreetAlexandria, VA 22314

-(703) 6844000-NASBE provides information on: educational policy-setting at the state level; successful programs for youth at

especially adolescent parents; and early childhood programs. Publications on these subjects are-available.

Motional Governors' Association (NGA)

Michael Cohen; Program Director, -Education Program,Lynne Fender, Program Director,-Social Services ProgramElielyn_Ganzglass,,Program Director, Training and Employment Program400 North Capitol StreetSuite 250'Washington; DC 20001(202) 624-5300

NGA; representing the Governors of the 50 states and the territories, seeks to influence the shape andimplementation of national policy and to apply creative leadership to the solution of state problems. NGA provides'assistance to Governors and their staffs in the areas of education, social services, employment/training, and health:policy through research, publications, conferences, and consultation.

-Public/Private Ventures (PIPV)

Michael A-. Bailin, PresidentGary C. Walker, Vice President

399 Market Street%PliilidelPiiii,PA 19106-..p5)592-9039

P/PV, a non-profit corporation focused on economic development and training issues, develops and manages,tiemoirsiration projects, conducts research and policy analysis, provides technical assistance to organizations andzbusireises, and performs program assessments and evaluations.

3029

APPENDIX DFor Further ReadingThe following recent publications provide useful information about education, training foremployment, and the poor.

Education,-Training and Economic Opportunity

Gordon Berlin and Andrew Sum, Toward a More Perfect Union: Basic Skills, Poor Families, and Our EconoMicFuture. New York: Ford Foundation, 1988.

Committee for Economic Development, Children in Need: Investment Strategies for the Educationally Disadvan-taged. New York: 1987.

William T. Grant Foundation Commission on Work, Family and Citizenship, The Forgotten Half: Non-College Youth inAmerica. Washington, DC: 1988.

Milani T. Grant Foundation Commission on Work, -Family and Citizenship, The Forgotten Half: Pathways to Successfor America's Youth and Young Families. Washington, DC: 1988.

S.M. Miller, et al., Too Late to Patch: Reconsidering Second-Chance Opportunities for Hispanic and Other Dropouts.Washington, DC: Hispanic Fblicy Development Project, 1988.

Public/Private Ventures, A Practitioner's Guide: Strategies, Programs, and Resources for YouthEmployability Develop-ment. Philadelphia, revised 1988:

(Additional valuable resources may be found in Public Welfare, a publication of the American Public Welfare Association.)School Reform for All Students

Came* Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, An Imperiled Generation: Saving Urban Schools. Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988.

Thomas Corcoran,-Lisa Walker and Lynne White, Working in Urban Schools. Washington,-DC: Institute for Educatonal Leadership, 1988.

John I. Goodlad, A Place Called School: Prospects for the Future. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984.

National-Association of State Boards of Education, Educational Accountability: Improving Schools, Informing thePublie. Alexandria, VA: 1988.

National Association of State Boards of Education, Rethinking Curriculum: A Call for Fundamental Reform. Alexan-dria, VA:1988.

National Association of State Boards of Education, Right from the Start. Alexandria, VA: 1988.

Theodore R. Size; Horace's Compromise: The Dilemma of the American High School. Boston, MA: HoughtonMifflin, 1984.

Students At Risk

Center for Human Resources, Heller Graduate School, Brandeis University, "Case Management with At-RiskYouth." Youth Programs. Fa111988.

Children's Defense Fund, The Lessons of Multi-Site Initiatives Serving High-Risk Youths. Washington, DC: 1989.Council of Chief State School Officers, Elements of a Model State Statute to Provide Educational Entitlements for At-Risk Students. Washington, DC: 1988.

Council of Chief State School Officers, School Success for Students At Risk: Analysis and Recommendations of theCouncil of Chief State School Officers. Orlando, FL: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1988.

Andrew Hahn and Jacqueline Danzberger, Dropouts in America: Enough is Known for Action. Washington, DC:Institute for Educational Leadership, 1987.

MDC, Inc., America's Shame, America's Hope: Twelve Million Youth At Risk. Chapel Hill, NC: 1988.National Association of State Boards of Education, What's Promising: New Approaches to Dropout Prevention forGirls. Alexandria, VA: 1987.,

Margaret Terry Orr, Keeping Students in School. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1987.

Comprehensive Services

American Public Welfare Association and National Council of State Human' Service Administrators, One Child inFour. Washington, DC: 1986.

Annie E. Casey Foundation, A Strategic Planning Guide for the New Futures Initiative. Greenwich, CT:1988.Sar A. Levitan, Garth L. Mangum, and Marion W. Pines. A Proper Inheritance Investing in the Self-Sufficiency ofPoor Families. Washington, DC: Center for Social Policy Studies, The George Washington University, June 1989.Denise F. Polit, et al., The Challenge of Serving Teenage Mothers: Lessons from Project Redirection. New York:Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, 1988.

National Association of State Boards of Education, Joining Forces: A Report from the First Year. Alexandria, VA: 1989.Jolie Bain Pillsbury, "Changing the System fmm Within: Reform at the State Leyel." Public Welfare (Spring 1989).Public/Private Ventures, Summer Training and Education Program (STEP): Reporton the 1986 Experience. Philadel-phia, PA: 1987.

Lisbeth B. Schorr, Within Our Reach: Breaking the Cycle of Disadvantage. New York: Doubleday, 1988.

30 31.

Ensuring Familyinvolvement

James P. Comer, "Educating Poor Minority Children!' Scientific American, Vol. 259, No. 5 (November 1988).

C04101 of Chief State School Officers, "Early Childhood and Family Education: Foundations for Success!'Vika hingtOn, DC: 1988.

-Council of Chief, State School Officers, A Guide fir State Action: Early Childhood and Family Education.Washington, DC: 198&NatiOnal School Boards Association, Fird Teachers: Parental Involvement in the Public Schools. Washington, DC: 1988.

SchoeUBusiness Partnerships

Center for Human Resources, Heller Graduate School, Brandeis University, A Guide to Working Partnerships.Waltliam,-MA: 1988.

Margaret Hunt and Daniel W. Merenda, Creating& Managing a Corporate School Volunteer Program. Alexandria,-VA: National Association of Partnersin Education, 1983.Marsha Levine and Roberta linchtman, eds., American Business in the Public Schools: Case Studies of CorporateInvolvementvenient inPublic Edication. New York: Teachers College Press, 1988.Daniel W:Merenda, A Practical Guide to Creating & Managing School/Community Partnerships. Alexandria, VA:National Association of Partners in Education, 1986.zDaniel W. Merenda, How to Organize and Manage School Volunteer Programs. Alexandria, VA: National ASsociation-Of Partners in-EduCation,,1987.

Publid/Private %bnturet, Allies in Education: Schools and Businesses Working Together for At-Risk Youth, Vol. 1:Findings from the National ASsessment. Philadelphia: 1987.

z Adult Basic Education

Association for Community Based Education, Adult Literacy: A Study of Community Based Literacy Programs.Washington, DC: revised 1986.Arelene Firigeret, Adult Literacy Eduiation: Current and Future Directions. Columbus, OH:-National Center forReSearch in %bcational Education, 1984..Renee S.-Lerche, Effedive AdultLitenziy Programs: A Practitioner's Guide. New York, NY: Cambridge Book Co., 1985.

U.S. Department of Labor and U.S. Department of Education, The Bottom Line: Basic Skills in the Workplace.Washington, DC:1988.

Welfare Recipients and .College

Chancellor's Office, California Community Colleges, GAIN Survey/Study: Summary Report. Sacramento, California:1988.

Douglas M. North, 'AFDC Goes to College' Public Welfare (Fall 1987).DaleParnell, The Neglected Majority. Washington, DC: Community College Press, 1985.

The Washington Office of the College Board, College Opportunity and Public Assistance Programs: Ideas forResolving Conflicts: Washington, DC: College Entrance Examination Board, 1984.

Demographics of Poverty and Education

Center for Law and Social Policy, Poverty Picture. A series of fact sheets. Washington, DC: 1988.

Clifford M: Johnson, Andrew M. Sum, and James D. Weill, Vanishing Dreams: The Growing Economic Plight ofAmerica's Young Families. Washington, DC: Children's Defense Fund, 1988.Harold L.-Hodgicinsmi, All One Syitem: Demographics of Education, Kindergarten Through School. Washington, DC:Inititute for Educational Leadership, 1985.Harold L. Hodgldnson, Demographic Analyses of Individual States and Their Educational Systems. (Reports availableon Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida,. Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota,New York; Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texai, and Wyoming.) Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.

U.S.-Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-70 No. 11, What's It tifoth? Educational Back-ground and Economic Status: Spring 1984. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1987.

U.S. Department of Health and Human ServiceS, Family Support Administration, Characteristics and FinancialCircumstances of AFDC Recipients, 1986. Washington, DC: n.d.,

Family Support Act

Josie Foelienbach, Preparing for Learnfare: Setting the Conditions for a Questionable Experiment. Washington, DC:Center for Lai and Social Policy, 1988.Mark Greenberg, JOBS Provisions of the Family Support Act of 1988: Ten Early Choices. Washington, DC: Centerfor Lai, and Social Policy, 1988.

Mark Greenberg, Family Support Act of 1988: JOBS Program and Related Amendments: Requirements, Issues andOptionS. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy, 1988.

Alan W. Housenian acid Arloc Sherman, *Ore Reform and the Education Provisions: Programinatic Options andReionsmendations. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy, 1989.

:Bard Shollenbetter, *Family Support(.*Zt of 19887 W.Memo. Memorandum W.12 -14 (November 1988).

liard Shollenbemer, *Highlights of Pre posed Regulations to Implement the Family Support Ace' W-Memo. (June 1989).

31 32