10
Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222 x110 [email protected]

Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

CSHB 3759Testimony

House Human Services Committee

April 19, 2007

Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222 x110

[email protected]

Page 2: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

Why reform is needed1) Recent changes in federal TANF

rules have put states in a tight spot2) Texas TANF work program

(“Choices”) is designed to help able-bodied parents with relatively low barriers to employment

3) Choices is NOT designed to help parents with greater barriers to employment become employable

Page 3: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

Why reform is needed4) Texas has done a good job getting able-

bodied parents into low-wage jobs; BUT we need to do more to support the transition from low-wage jobs to true self-sufficiency

5) Texas needs a compliance-oriented approach to improve the effectiveness of full-family sanctions. The full-family sanction policy was adopted to increase compliance with program rules and get more recipients working; INSTEAD it has pushed tens of thousand of families off of welfare, leaving them jobless and in poverty.

Page 4: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

TANF at a Glance

• Limited eligibility:– Income cannot be higher than

$188/month (family of 3) to qualify

• Small benefit:– Average benefit is $200/month;

maximum is $220

• By definition, our TANF population is hard-to-serve

Page 5: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

The Work Participation Rate

• Federal law requires states to engage 50% of adults in federally approved work activities for a minimum number of hours per week (30 for single parents, 35 or more for two-parent families).

• Feds include most adults in the calculation, with limited exceptions

• *States can exempt adults even if they are included in the WPR

NumeratorDenominator

Adults meeting the work requirement

Adults subject to work participation*

Page 6: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

Primary challenges• Over the last decade, the TANF population

has become harder-to-serve due to time limits, work rules, and strict sanctions

• Persons with serious barriers to employment now make up a greater share of our caseload, which makes it harder for Texas to meet federal work participation requirements.

• We have more hard-to-serve people in the “denominator” and fewer able-bodied adults

Page 7: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

Feds have made things worse

• Recent changes in federal rules restrict what work activities “count” and limit states’ flexibility to reduce work hours

• Rules also subjected more people to federal work participation, i.e., increased “denominator”

• This makes it harder for Texas to design effective work program for persons with barriers to employment

Page 8: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

CSHB 3759 provides solutions

• Increases the number of families meeting the work requirement (“the numerator”)– Work support program – Post-sanction review increases

compliance• Decreases the number of families

subject to federal work participation (“the denominator”)– Solely state-funded program (also

caseload reduction credit)

Page 9: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

CSHB 3759 helps low-income parents

• Gets more families to work by increasing compliance

• Helps recent welfare leavers make the transition from low-wage work to self-sufficiency

• Ensures that parents who can’t work, or who need specialized services or more time to overcome barriers to get this assistance

Page 10: Center for Public Policy Priorities CSHB 3759 Testimony House Human Services Committee April 19, 2007 Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analyst 512-320-0222

Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org

CSHB 3759 increases program integrity and effectiveness

• Establishes a standardized good cause process to ensure caseworkers are following policy and imposing sanctions fairly

• Gives the Legislature the tools to judge the effectiveness of full family sanctions