1. Senate Bill (SB) 84 Report
Ryan Fruchtenicht
Welfare to Work Division
California Department of Social Services
744 P Street, Sacramento CA 95826

2. “Who is this Guy?”
Ryan Fruchtenicht is an Associate Governmental Program Analyst (AGPA) in the CalWORKs Division Employment Bureau of the California Department of Social Services (CDSS). Ryan is a member of the Program Performance Oversight Unit which helps to bring counties together to share ideas and review a site county’s WTW program for promising practices and areas for improvement. Ryan is also the author of the SB 84 report to the Legislature. He has worked for the Employment Bureau for more than two and half years. Ryan earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology from Oregon State University in He and his wife Karen recently welcomed their baby boy Tiernan Fruchtenicht into their family. Guess which one is Tiernan in this picture.

3. History of The SB 84 Report
A Brief
History of The SB 84 Report or
Finnigan’s Law: The farther away the future is…the better it looks.

4. How did we get here?
Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) Reauthorization , Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) of 2005
Assembly Bill (AB) 1808 (Chapter 75, Statutes of 2006)
SB 84 (Chapter 177, Statutes of 2007)
Reauthorization of original TANF program (1996)
California Legislature’s response to TANF Reauthorization
Follow-up to some of the provisions in AB 1808
Signed by the President on February 8, 2006
Signed by the Governor on July 12, 2006
Signed by the Governor on August 24, 2007
Major changes to TANF program
Provisions to help state increase WPR
Response to changes to TANF program
Attempt to avoid penalties
Report to the Legislature the results of implementing strategies to increase WPR

5. TANF Reauthorization, a Closer Look (Why would we want to do that!?)
TANF Reauthorization had four major impacts on the TANF program:
Recalibration of the caseload reduction credit (CRC).
Work verification plan (WVP) requirement.
Required that work activities be defined.
Newly identified work eligible individuals.

6. Projected All Families CRC for Federal Fiscal Year 2007
The CRC Change
Caseload Reduction Credit (CRC) base year changed from 1995 to 2005
Projected All Families CRC for Federal Fiscal Year 2007
50%
Damien

7. The WVP & Defining Work Activities
Explain how states will verify that TANF recipients are participating in activities for the required number of hours
Each state must submit clear definitions for WTW activities

8. Newly Identified Work Eligible Individuals!
Adult (or minor child head-of-household) receiving assistance under TANF or Separate State Program
Non-recipient parent living with a child receiving assistance (child-only recipients)
Work-eligible individuals that are in Separate State Programs funded with state Maintenance of Effort (MOE) dollars (two-parent recipients)

9. Work Participation Rate WPR Calculation
Old WPR Calculation
County X has 1,000 one-parent cases and 500 cases are fully participating:
500 ÷ 1,000 = 50% WPR
New WPR Calculation
County X has 1,000 one-parent cases and 500 cases are fully participating; 200 two-parent cases, 45 of which are fully participating; 150 sanctioned cases; 40 exempt cases; 35 Safety Net (child-only) cases:
545 ÷ 1,425 = 38% WPR

10. Penalties!
Up to five percent reduction of the state’s federal block grant
The penalty could increase two percent per year up to 21 percent
State’s TANF MOE requirement would increase each year of noncompliance
FFY 2007 is the baseline that the penalties will be assessed starting in FFY 2009

11. CalWORKs v. TANF
Farber’s Third Law: We are all going down the same road…in different directions.

12. CalWORKs v. TANF CalWORKs Hourly Requirements TANF Hourly Requirements
Single-Parent Family: 32 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities)
Two-Parent Family: 35 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities)
TANF Hourly Requirements
Single-Parent Family: 30 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities)
Single-Parent w/ child under 6: 20 hours per week (20 hours per week must be core activities)
Two-Parent Family: 35 hours per week (30 hours per week must be core activities)

13. Assembly Bill 1808 California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
Peers’s Law: The solution to a problem changes the problem.

14. Assembly Bill 1808 California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
AB 1808 Policy Changes:
Clarified shared penalties
Required county plan addendum
Ended durational sanctions
Required data master plan and data publishing
Required county peer reviews
Accountability
Collaboration
Information/Data

15. Assembly Bill 1808 California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
County Plan Addenda Requirements:
Each county perform a comprehensive review of its existing CalWORKs plan
Include immediate and long-range actions to improve WPR

16. Assembly Bill 1808 California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
County Plan Addenda Requirements:
The addendum must address increased participation in:
Up-front engagement
Reengaging noncompliant or sanctioned individuals
Achieving full engagement
Preventing families from going into sanction status
Other strategies to increase WPR

17. Assembly Bill 1808 California’s Response to TANF Reauthorization
County Plan Addenda Requirements:
A description of anticipated outcomes
A proposed plan to measure progress in achieving the anticipated outcomes
How counties will use the single allocation
How they will work with community partners

18. AB 1808 Plan Addendum Certification Process
CDSS certified that each addendum complied with state regulations and statute, and where applicable, federal statute.
Plan Addenda were received from December 2006 through July 2007.
The last Addendum was certified in September 2007.

19. SB 84 (Chapter 177, Statutes of 2007)
Added Section to the W&I Code which required CDSS to: 
Review the AB 1808 addenda to identify promising practices for up-front and sanction reengagement
Work with CWDA to gather information on implementation and results of the strategies
Gather information on the characteristics of time-limited families

20. SB 84 (Chapter 177, Statutes of 2007)
Added Section to the W&I Code which required CDSS to: 
Work with CWDA to identify strategies used by counties to encourage participation by time-limited families
Submit a Written Update due March 1, 2008
Submit the Final Report due September 1, 2008

21. Finagle’s Laws of information:
The information you have is not what you want.
2. The information you want is not what you need.
3. The information you need is not what you can obtain.

22. SB 84 Report Methodology
CDSS in discussions with CWDA determined that it would be best if counties identified which strategies are promising practices.
CDSS clarified with Legislature that time-limited means Safety Net families.
CDSS also determined that information on implementation and results should also be requested for the Safety Net strategies.

23. SB 84 Report Methodology
CDSS developed a survey to collect preliminary information for the written update.
Did not ask for Safety Net characteristics at that time.
CDSS developed a follow-up survey for up-to-date information about the strategies.

24. SB 84 Report Methodology
CDSS asked for information on Safety Net families at that time.
Required follow-up with counties for clarification on the information provided by the counties.

25. SB 84 Findings
What we know so far…

26. What is Up-front Engagement?
Encouraging participation by an individual in the CalWORKs program up front.
Up-front engagement is the time an individual is enrolled in WTW through the development of a WTW plan.
Develop an understanding of the individual’s needs, wants, and possible barriers to employment.

27. What is Up-front Engagement?
Activities: orientation, appraisal, job search and job readiness, assessment, and the creation of a WTW plan
Applicants may volunteer to participate in the activities.

28. Up-front Engagement Voluntary Participation:
Encourage voluntary participation by applicants
Allows for completion of up-front activities by the time the individual is determined eligible for cash aid and is enrolled in the CalWORKs WTW program.
Offer voluntary orientation and appraisal; some offer Job Club also on a voluntary basis.

29. Up-front Engagement Development of Specialized Units/Case Workers:
Developed specialized units or caseworkers to manage the up front engagement of individuals 
Developed an engagement team consisting of members specializing in different aspects of up-front engagement
Creates a single point of contact for applicants and newly-approved recipients

30. Up-front Engagement Co-location of Staff and Services:
Relocated workers to a common location
Co-located county eligibility workers and WTW staff with behavioral health workers

31. Up-front Engagement Recipient Appointment Reminders:
Ensured that recipients are reminded of required activities and are encourage to participate
Case managers make two telephone contacts to remind recipients of their scheduled activities and appointments
Increased contact by telephone prior to orientation to establish relationship
All recipients leave an appointment with a written reminder of their next required activity and a follow-up call is made

32. Results of up-front Strategies
Increased participation by individuals up-front and long term
Greatly reduced no-show rate for up-front activities
A decline in up-front sanctions
Individuals seem to be better informed of their rights and responsibilities 

33. Results of up-front Strategies
Consistent enrollment in WTW activities
Increases communication about and with recipients  
Faster referrals and less time between activities .
Increased communication on shared recipient case files

34. What is Sanction Reengagement?
Encouraging an individual to again participate in the CalWORKs program after he or she has been sanctioned
When a mandatory participant fails to comply with program requirements the participant is sanctioned.
The adult’s portion of the cash aid is subtracted
Not eligible to receive supportive services.

35. What is Sanction Reengagement?
Sanction period does not count against the 60-month time limit
Reengagement is when the individual enters into and completes a curing plan
Regardless of the reason for sanction these individuals can be very difficult to engage

36. Sanction Reengagement
Home Visits or Offsite Meetings:
Conduct home visits or meetings at a neutral location to encourage sanctioned individuals to cure their sanctions.
Sometimes visit as a team or one-on-one
Contract with a case management agency to conduct visits
Social Workers visit all sanctioned or non-compliant families

37. Sanction Reengagement
Intensive Outreach:
Attempt more frequent and various types of communication with sanctioned individuals to encourage curing of sanctions.
Make contact by phone to schedule curing appointment
Send a sanction informing letters
Meet with a team of workers

38. Sanction Reengagement
Specialized Unit/Caseworkers:
Created specialized staff positions to directly manage the sanctioned caseload
Review all sanctioned cases
Perform intensive outreach
Held sanction curing orientations
Focus on recently sanctioned individuals first; then long-term sanctioned
Use multi-disciplinary teams to reengage

39. Sanction Reengagement
Reengage at Annual Redetermination (RV)/Reapplication: 
Encourage the sanctioned individual to voluntarily meet with employment workers to discuss curing sanctions
Eligibility workers contact the WTW workers prior to the individual’s visit
Co-located an employment staff worker with the eligibility staff workers

40. Results of Sanction Reengagement Strategies
Typically resulted in high reengagement rates
Some smaller counties have reengaged all, or most of their sanctioned cases
Social Workers have reported success in determining specific services to help individuals come into compliance
By using community partners some cost can be shared

41. Results of Sanction Reengagement Strategies
Increasing communication between CalWORKs eligibility and employment staff
Higher caseloads for non-sanction case workers
Many recipients returned to sanction within a few months

42. What is Safety Net Engagement?
Encouraging participation by timed-out individuals
Once an individual has received 60 months of CalWORKs cash aid, he or she is discontinued from aid
These individuals are referred to as “timed out”
Cash aid continues for eligible children

43. What is Safety Net Engagement?
Safety Net cases are not required to participate
Safety Net families are eligible for Food Stamps and Medi-Cal
Child care for up to 24 months if employed
Counties can provide WTW services
Supportive services are county option (not required)

44. Safety Net Engagement Strategies
Outreach/Marketing to Encourage Voluntary Participation:
Attempt to contact the timed-out individual to encourage voluntary participation
Discuss what services and supportive services are available to them
Invite them to a WTW orientation
Invite timed-out individuals to job club
Advertise open house events for Safety Net families

45. Safety Net Engagement Strategies
Administrative Review of Safety Net Caseload: 
Review Safety Net caseload to determine if working, attending school, or in training
Ensure they are receiving necessary supportive services
Ensure that the individual’s level of participation is reported correctly
Encourage fully employed participants to leave aid and receive job retention services to save time on their 60-month clocks (pre Safety Net strategy)

46. Results of Safety Net Engagement Strategies
Increase in WPR of Safety Net caseload
Permanent full-time positions
Not employed enough hours to be considered fully participating
Small increase to overall WPR

47. Written Update is Published
The Written Update was released to the Legislature on July 18, 2008.
It is posted on the internet at the following address:

48. What’s Next?
Final Report
Best Practices Website
County Peer Reviews

49. Questions & Comments?

50. Thank You for Coming!
Ryan Fruchtenicht Analyst, Program Performance Oversight Unit California Department of Social Services 744 P Street, Sacramento CA (916)