1 / 27

Goals

Taking on Human Services Privatization Quicker and Smarter  Fran Bernstein AFSCME Legislation Department fbernstein@afscme.org Cecilia Perry AFSCME Research Department cperry@afscme.org. Goals.

shepry
Télécharger la présentation

Goals

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Taking on Human Services Privatization Quicker and Smarter Fran BernsteinAFSCME Legislation Departmentfbernstein@afscme.orgCecilia PerryAFSCME Research Departmentcperry@afscme.org

  2. Goals Understand current challenges to human services delivery systems stemming from technology and privatization Exchange information/share ideas Identify elements for good models

  3. A vicious cycle

  4. Caseworkers get blamed

  5. Privatization Pushers - 2008 1. Ideology 2. Pressure from profit making companies 3. Outdated technology and equipment 4. Fiscal problems

  6. The Bush Years

  7. Privatization Pushers 2010 1. Pressure from profit making companies 2. Outdated technology and equipment 3. Fiscal problems 4. Division of eligibility determination process tasks opening door to privatized call centers 5. Pressure from community partners

  8. Eligibility Determination Tasks Intake of client information Document Submission SNAP Interview Verify information Final determination

  9. After Final Determination Case management Foster Care Collections (Welfare, Child Welfare) Adoption Child Support SNAP/Medicaid must be public

  10. Federal Push Back Fiscal Aid to State and Local Governments Protections in federal legislation Negotiations with federal agencies Building alliances

  11. New Health Care Law States may set up Health Care Exchanges Exchanges will coordinate with Medicaid agencies State options for administration

  12. Privatized Call Centers Texas/Indiana Failures Texas: cancelled contract 1 year after implementation thousands of staff laid off 2009 – 52% staff had less than 2 yrs. experience vs. 2004, when it was 8 % Indiana: cancelled contract 1 ½ years after implementation contract costs increased 15 percent in 2 years 1500 public staff laid off to work for private vendors state implementing hybrid system with subcontractors

  13. Call centers TX & IN Private call center Public Agency intake functions interview & final determination

  14. USDA Response to TX & IN THE GOOD -- Personnel performing certification for SNAP must be merit system employees (12/29/2009) --’Division of responsibilities between public and private employees has been problematic and resulted in a more complex and difficult enrollment process that has not served our taxpayers well” 11/20/2009 THE BAD: Community partners can complete SNAP interviews, gather verifications, and submit applications to public agency (12/29/2009)

  15. 2009 Texas Waiver Dec. 2009 – USDA approved Texas waiver to permit food banks to Perform intake functions Submit applications to public agencies Conduct SNAP interview Covers about 1/3 of Texas SNAP caseload

  16. New threat - Community Partners

  17. UNION Letters – 2010USDA Response January - 3 unions (AFSCME, CWA, SEIU) sent letter to USDA protesting the Texas waiver, asserting that: Taking & verifying information is inherently governmental and core part of eligibility determination process USDA’s response: It will not grant more waivers for food banks to perform intake/interview tasks.

  18. New model - welfare office

  19. Call Centers Promoted to improve efficiency and reduce staff Not always a privatization threat

  20. Push for Call centers Nebraska – --ACCESS Nebraska - proposed implementation 2012 ---Omaha (largest city and largest number of experienced welfare workers – not chosen) --estimated to eliminate 225 jobs New York City – attempted to implement private call centers for a small population – defeated through budget process

  21. Hawaii call centers - public

  22. Hawaii Call Centers - Public Original Plan – Close 32 offices on neighbor islands, lay off 232 staff and set up 2 call centers in Oahu Second Plan – Close offices in Oahu, lay off about 131 staff and set up 2 call centers in Oahu Final Outcome – Legislature forced DHS to cancel project

  23. California – one system – TANF/SNAP/Medicaid?

  24. California 2009-2010 Budget established process to create one centralized eligibility system administered by 58 counties Committee developing plan State Legislature must approve final plan

  25. Impact on workers Agencies close offices Agencies reduce staff Agencies relocate staff Workflow changes (caseworker model eliminated) Caseloads remain high

  26. Impact on Clients Optional vs. Mandatory Access Problems Compliance with Federal timeliness standards

  27. Discussion Questions What’s working and what’s not working -- for workers? for clients? Technology – a blessing or a curse? caseworker model vs. the call center model

More Related