Arizona Department of Economic Security: sunset review

              J
•
Courtney Riddle
Legisktive Research Analyst
(602) 926-3860
Arizona House of Representatives
House Majority Research
MEMORANDUM
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
FAX (602) 417-3099
•
To: JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE
Representative L~ur3::£(napete1qCo-Chair
Senator RobertBlendu,Co-Chair
RE: ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY- SUNSET REVIEW
Date: December 2005
Attached is th~ [mal n~port of the sunset review of the Arizona State Department of Economic
Security, which'W~ c~ndlJ.£t~d l:>y.the Bouse of Representatives Hllffian Services and the Senate
Family Seprices Committee of Reference. This report has been distributed to the following
individuals and agencies:
Governor of the state of Arizona
The Honorable JanetNapolitano
President of the Senate
Senator/Ken Bennett
Senate Members
Senator Ka[em.Je.Hnson, Co-Chair
Senator Linda Gray
Senator Rebecca. Rios
Senator Victor Soltero
Senator Thayer Verschoor
Speaker/of the House of Representatives
Representative James/P. Weiers
House Members
Representative Pete Hershberger, Co-Chair
Representative ManuelAlvarez
Representative MarkAnderson
Representative David Bradley
Representative Warde Nichols
•
Miscellaneous
Arizona Department of Economic Security
Office of the Auditor General
Department of Library, Archives &Public Records
Office of the Chief Clerk and Secretary of the Senate
Senate Republican Staff House Majority Staff
Senate Research Staff House Research Staff
Senate Democratic Staff House Democratic Staff
• COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE REPORT
House ofRepresentatives Committee on Human Services
Senate Committee on Family Services
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
To: JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE
Senator Robert Blendu, Co-Chair
Representative Laura Knaperek, Co-Chair
Date: December 2005
Pursuant to Title 41, Chapter 27, Arizona Revised Statutes, the Committee of Reference, after
perfonning a sunset review and conducting a public hearing, recommends the following:
• J.
2.
The Arizona Department ofEconomic Security be continuedfor five years.
The Arizona Department ofEconomic Security reportto the House ofRepresentative
Committee ofHuman Services andSenate Committee on Family Services Committees
ofReference after one year, then again after two years.
•
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE
Representative Peter Hershberger, Co-Chair Senator Karen Johnson, Co-Chair
Representative Manuel Alvarez Senator Linda Gray
RepresentativeMark Anderson Senator Rebecca Rios
Representative David Bradley Senator Victor Soltero
Representative Warde Nichols Senator Thayer Verschoor
•
•
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE
House ofRepresentatives Commiuee on Human Services
Senate Commiuee on Family Services
Arizona Department of Economic Security
Final Report
I. Background
Pursuant to §41-2953, Arizona Revised Statutes, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee
(JLAC) assigned the sunset review ofthe Arizona Department ofEconomic Security to the House of
Representatives Human Services and the Senate Family Services Committee of Reference.
[Attachment A]
II. Committee of Reference Sunset Review Procedure
The Committee of Reference held one public hearing on Monday, November 28, 2005, to
review the performance audit ofthe Arizona Department ofEconomic Security by the Office by the
Auditor General and to receive public testimony. [Attachment B]
At the public hearing, the Committee heard testimony from the following:
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
Melanie Chesney, Director, Performance Audit Division, Office ofthe Auditor General
David Berns, Director, Department of Economic Security
Vince Wood, Assistant Director, Division ofBenefits and Medical Eligibility, Department of
Economic Security
Tracy Wareing, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Children, Youth and Families,
Department ofEconomic Security
Mary Gill, Deputy Director, Operations, Department of Economic Security
Mikayla Bailey-Null, Family Advocate, Family Advocacy in Reunification (FAIR)
Robin Scoins, Director, Arizona Family Rights Advocacy Institute
•
Stafffrom the Office ofthe Auditor General provided a power point computer presentation
outlining information regarding the Department of Economic Security [DES], including the
Department's statutory responsibilities and six performance audits of various aspects of the
Department. The audits conducted related to Welfare Programs, Division of Employment and
Economic Security Unemployment Insurance Program, Service Integration Initiative, Information
Security, Division ofDevelopmental Disabilities, Sunset Factors and CPS Data Integrity Process.
Final Report
Page 2
The Department ofEconomic Security was established by the State Legislature in July 1972
by combining the Employment Security Commission, the State Department ofPublic Welfare, the
Division ofVocational Rehabilitation, the State Office ofEconomic Opportunity, the Apprenticeship
Council, and the State Office of Manpower Planning. In 1974, the State Department of Mental
Retardation joined the Department. .
The Department is organized into divisions that provide protective, social, and community
services; employment and economic assistance; and operations support as follows:
• The Division of Children, Youth and Families [DCYF] provides child protective services,
foster care services, kinship care, independent living services for young adults, adoption
services, in-home family services, intensive family services, and substance:-abuse treatment
services for families whose children are at imminent risk of out-of-home placement.
• The Division of Child Support Enforcement [DCSE] administers Arizona's child support
enforcement program. The division provides services that include locating absent parents,
establishing legal paternity for children born out of wedlock, and establishing legal
obligations to pay child support. The division enforces and collects child support through a
variety ofadministrative and judicial remedies and is responsible for the State Disbursement
Unit, which processes and distributes child support payments.
• The Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility [DBME] administers the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Cash Assistance, Food Stamps, and state-funded
General Assistance programs. In addition, the division determines eligibility for the state's
medical assistance program (AHCCCS), as well as supplemental security income through its
Disability Determination Services Administration.
• The Division of Employment and Rehabilitation [DERS] administers Arizona's
Unemployment Insurance, Job Service, and Vocational Rehabilitation programs; provides
job-training opportunities through administration of the Workforce Investment Act (WlA)
and the Jobs program; and administers cruldcare programs and independent living
rehabilitation services.
• The Division of Developmental Disabilities [DDD] provides services to individuals with
developmental disabilities through a 100 percent state funded program and the Arizona Long
Term Care System (ALTCS). Both programs provide home and community based services,
residential and day programs, children's services, and services to children in foster care. In
addition, the ALTCS program provides acute medical care to eligible individuals.
• The Division ofAging and Community Services [DACS] provides and contracts for services
such as emergency and energy-related assistance, food distribution information for the
hungry, rural food banks, shelter and supportive services to victims of domestic violence,
refugee resettlement services, and shelter for the homeless. Adult services programs include
adult protective services, the supplemental payments program, home care, congregate and
home-delivered meals, case management, long-term care ombudsman program, the State
Health Insurance Assistance program, legal assistance, the Senior Community Service
Employment program (Title V), the Foster Grandparent program, and the Family Caregiver
Support program.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Final Report
Page 3
The Auditor General's office noted several areas DES could improve its performance and
noted that the agency agreed with the recommendations, and stated that many ofthem have already
been implemented.
The Director ofthe Department ofEconomic Security noted that, in the past two years, DES
has embarked on a cultural shift in the way business is conducted by focusing on helping families
and individuals build on their strengths and increase their capacity to become self-sufficient. He
noted several ofthe steps DES has taken to achieve this goal.
III. Committee Recommendations
The Committee of Reference recommends that the Department of Economic Security be
continued for 5 years and that the Department report to the House ofRepresentative Committee of
Human Services and Senate Committee on Family Services Committees ofReference after one year,
then again after two years relating to the progress of implementing the Auditor General's
recommendations.
IV. Statutory Report Pursuant to Section 41-2954, Arizona Revised Statutes
[Attachment C]
V. Attachments
A. Meeting Notice
B. Minutes of Committee of Reference Hearing
C. Department ofEconomic Security Report to Committee of Reference.
•
• Attachment A
•
Printer Friendly Version Page 1 of 1
• Interim agendas can be obtained via the Internet at http://www.azleg.state.az.us/lnterimCommittees.asp
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
INTERIM MEETING NOTICE
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
SENATE FAMILY SERVICES AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITIEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET REVIEW OF:
FOSTER CARE REVIEW BOARD
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Date:
Time:
Place:
Monday, November 28, 2005
9:30 a.m.
House Hearing Room 4
•
AGENDA
1. Call to order
2. Opening Remarks
3. Foster Care Review Board
• Presentation by the Office of the Auditor General
• Response by the Foster Care Review Board
• Public Testimony
• Discussion and Recommendation by the Committee of Reference
4. Department of Economic Security
• Presentation by the Office of the Auditor General
• Response by the Department of Economic Security
• Public Testimony
• Discussion and Recommendation by the Committee of Reference
5. Adjourn
Members:
People with disabilities may request reasonable accommodations such as interpreters,
alternative formats, or assistance with physical accessibility. If you require accommodations,
please contact the Chief Clerk's Office at (602}.926-3032, TOO (602) 926-3241. •
Senator Karen Johnson, Co-Chair
Senator Linda Gray
Senator Rebecca Rios
Senator Victor Soltero
Senator Thayer Verschoor
11115/05
jmb
Representative Pete Hershberger, Co-Chair
Representative Manuel Alvarez
Representative Mark Anderson
Representative David Bradley
Representative Warde Nichols
httn://www.azlep_state.az.uslFormatForPrint.asn?inDoc=/iaQenda/house/112805+house+hu...l/4/2006
•
•
•
Attachment B
•
Printer Friendly Version
---------- l)()C:~~I1]j}\J[)~Jt----------
---------- l)()C:~NTI1]j}\J[)~Jt----------
ARlZ()NA STATE L~GISLATURE
Forty-seventh Legislature - First Regular Session
Page 1 of 14
•
SENATE FAMILY SERVICES AND MOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET REVIEW OF
FOSTER CARE REVIEW BOARD
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Minutes of Meeting
Monday, November 28,2005
House Hearing Room 4 -- 9:30 a.m.
Chairman Hershberger called the meeting to order at 9:42 a.m. and attendance was noted by the
secretary.
Members Present
Senator Gray
Senator Soltero
Senator Verschoor
Senator Johnson, Cochair
Senator Rios
Representative Alvarez
Representative Anderson
Representative Bradley
Representative Hershberger, Cochair
Members Absent
Representative Nichols
Speakers Present
•
Jessica Tucker, Senior Performance Auditor, Office ofthe Auditor General
Bill Stanton, Division Director, Dependent Children's Services Division, Administrative Office of the
Courts, Supreme Court
Bruce Brannon, Chairman, State Foster Care Review Board
Tracy Candelaria, Foster Care Review Board, Apache County; Member, State Foster Care Review
Board
Melanie Chesney, Director, Performance Audit Division, Office ofthe Auditor General
David Berns, Director, Arizona Department of Economic Security
Lynne Smith, Assistant Director, Division of Business and Finance, Arizona Department of Economic
Security
Vince Wood, Assistant Director, Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility, Arizona Department of
Economic Security
Tracy Wareing, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Children, Youth and Families, Arizona Department
ofEconomic Security
httn:llwww_azlep_state_az_lL<;;lFonnatForPrint.asn?inDoc=/iminute/House/112805+COR+SU... 1/4/2006
Printer Friendly Version Page 7 of 14
setting. A few months later, a note was made in the CPS file that the grandparents did not know about
the abuse and desperately wanted the child; however, the child was not returned to the grandparents and
is now out of state with a paternal grandmother who had never been around the child. If the FCRB saw •
a mistake was made that was not brought to the judge's attention during adjudication by CPS, even
though the Legislature asked that it be brought to the judge's attention, she wondered if the FCRB could
do anything about it. Mr. Brannon answered that he is not sure the FCRB would have been able to
detect interplay between whether someone knew something at some time or did not and what the
reaction and action would have been by CPS.
Tracy Candelaria, Foster Care Review Board, Apache County; Member, State Foster Care Review
Board, relayed to Senator Johnson that she believes parents who attend the meetings are complying,
want their children back, and attend the required programs. Parents who do not attend were notified and
choose not to attend because they are not complying. She believes the FCRB is very important and a lot
of work, but the volunteers participate because they care.
DiscussionlRecommendation
Senator Soltero moved that the Committee of Reference recommend to the
Legislature that the Arizona Foster Care Review Board be continued for
10 years.
Senator Johnson moved a substitute motion that the Committee of Reference
recommend to the Legislature that the Arizona Foster Care Review Board be
continued for five years.
Senator Johnson said the legislators only serve an eight-year term limit if they are fortunate enough to be •
elected during that time, so to give 10-year recommendations to agencies and boards is not wise. There
should be some semblance of continuity, and with a five-year continuation some people who
experienced this review would still be around when the next hearing takes place.
Senator Soltero acknowledged that there may be some problems, but he did not see strong evidence that
the FCRBs are having major problems. He is concerned about the Auditor General and others having to
go through this process again in five years.
Senator Johnson responded that it is not that she believes there are major problems, but it is incumbent
upon the legislators as watchdogs for the citizens of Arizona to oversee programs properly, which is
very difficult when brand new people" are not aware of issues brought up in the previous review.
Question was called on the substitute motion that the Committee of Reference
recommend to the Legislature that the Arizona Foster Care Review Board be
continued for five years. The motion failed.
Question was called on the original motion that the Committee of Reference
recommend to the Legislature that the Foster Care Review Board be continued for
10 years. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 4-3-1-2 (Attachment 4).
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Presentation by Office of the Auditor General
Melanie Chesney, Director, Performance Audit Division, Office of the Auditor General, stated that
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatForPrint.asp?inDoc=/iminutelHouse/112805+COR+SU...1/4/2006
•
Printer Friendly Version Page 8 of 14
•
•
•
audits were conducted in DES for the Welfare Programs (April 2004) (Summary, Attachment 5; Report
to the Legislature, Attachment 6), Unemployment Insurance (January 2005) (Summary, Attachment 7;
Report, Attachment 8), Information Security (July 2005) (Summary, Attachment 9; Report, Attachment
10), Service Integration Initiative (July 2005) (Summary, Attachment 11; Report, Attachment 12),
Division of Developmental Disabilities (September 2005) (Summary, Attachment 13; Report,
Attachment 14), and Sunset Factors (September 2005) (Attachment 15). An audit was also conducted of
Child Protective Services' (CPS) CHILDS Data Integrity Process (May 2005) (Attachment 16). She
added that DES agreed with the recommendations, many of which have already been implemented.
Ms. Chesney related that in FY 2004, DES had a total budget of about $2.7 billion, including $1.9
billion in federal funding, $484 million in state funding, and $194 million in unemployment insurance
contributions from employers. As of June 30, 2005, DES had nearly 11,000 full-time equivalent (FTE)
positions, of which about 1,100 were vacant. She proceeded to review the audits (Presentation,
Attachment 17).
In relation to the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) waItmg list for services being
incomplete and inaccurate, Ms. Chesney clarified that some people on the list already received services,
and people who would not receive services for years due to limited state funds were not included on the
list. As a result, DES cannot indicate the total unmet need for services for the DDD population.
Davis Berns. Director. Arizona Department of Economic Security, stated that DES was created in 1972
to provide quality human services to all Arizonans in need. In the past two years, DES embarked on a
major cultural shift in the way business is conducted, focusing on helping families and individuals build
on their strengths and increase their capacity to become self-sufficient. To do this, DES is building
relationships with clients, families, neighborhood organizations, faith communities, .and other
government partners to maximize the resources and strategies that will improve outcomes resulting in a
number of successes such as:
• The number of individuals on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance
decreased from 54,563 in September 2003 to 44,200 in September 2005. One of the principal
strategies used was grant diversion whereby 1,292 families were given one-time assistance, such
as help with car repairs or purchase of tools for jobs lined up, diverting those people from TANF
cash assistance.
• The number of families DES was able to assist in entering employment increased from 15,490 in
2003 to 20,940 in 2005 with modest increases in the hourly wages from an average of $7.75 per
hour up to $8.03 per hour. Those that obtained jobs with health insurance benefits increased by
44.5 percent.
• Collaboration was increased among programs, partners and services to focus on innovative ways
to maximize resources, such as the Title IV-E waiver. Federal child welfare monies generally
cannot be used unless children are removed from the home, but the first waiver for reunification
services was recently approved by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to allow
that federal money to be used to return children more quickly and provide services to children in
the home.
• Efforts were increased to hire and train people to provide in-home supports, for which the
Legislature allowed 137 additional staff this year. By focusing specifically on in-home services
and supports, there has been an actual reduction in children in out-of-home care. This year it is
anticipated that there will be about a five percent reduction in the number of children in out-of­home
care.
• Six blended units were formed in the state, a child welfare staff, assistance payments staff, and job
staff to provide early intervention and services for families with multiple barriers and issues that
could not be served previously because the services were only available for families that entered
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatForPrint.asp?inDoc=/irninute/House/112805+COR+SU...l/4/2006
Printer Friendly Version
the child welfare system.
Page 9 of 14
Mr. Berns indicated to Mr. Anderson that legislation was introduced several years ago to privatize the •
JOBS program. When he became director, there was a Request for Proposal (RFP) for what he believed
was a broken system, so the Legislature was asked for another year to redesign. the system, which was
authorized. The RFP was out on the street, the bids closed, and the bids received are now in the review
process. Between January and the end of June 2006, bidders will be selected, and the programs will be
implemented based on the new model of service integration and providing a more holistic set of
servIces.
Chairman Hershberger recalled that at some point privatization was delayed pending reauthorization of
welfare reform by the federal government, which was not done, so DES proceeded with the date of July
1,2006.
Senator Gray noted that 137 new positions were added this past year, but the Auditor General's report
shows at least 947 vacancies. She wondered what is done with the vacancy savings.
Mr. Berns responded that the positions she referred to are across the board in various divisions. Some
vacant positions are being filled, but there are others for which funding was not sufficient.
Lynn Smith, Assistant Director, Division of Business and Finance, Arizona Department of Economic
Security, acknowledged that a number of positions at DES are not fully funded. As with all large state
agencies, there is a large vacancy rate. DES has more FTE position authority than funding to fill the
positions, which is done by the budget offices based on the fact that state agencies always have turnover
and cannot keep all of the positions funded. If those positions were fully funded, the extra positions
would not be needed. That is complicated by the fact that the salaries for many of the positions are not
up to market, so it is difficult to recruit. There is always some vacancy savings accrued that is used to •
augment other areas of DES.
Senator Gray asked the average salary of the vacant positions in the Division of Children Youth and
Families (DCYF) and wondered if the vacancy savings can be used to reward other employees for
performance. Ms. Smith said she will let her know the average salary for the CPS positions; however,
those are in the covered system, so unless the Legislature grants an increase, which has happened, DES
cannot use vacancy savings to increase the salaries.
Senator Gray recalled a TV investigation regarding misuse of cash assistance by grocery stores and
clients. She asked what has been done to correct the problem. Mr. Berns responded that conversion
from a food stamp coupon to an Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system and other system changes
have made fraud much more difficult.
Vince Wood, Assistant Director, Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility, Arizona Department of
Economic Security, stated that food stamps are for food and cannot be used to purchase alcohol or
tobacco; however, the card contains two accounts. If a family is eligible for food stamps and TANF
cash assistance, there is a cash value that is TANF-related and intended for shelter costs. The average
TANF family receives $230 per month, but while DES can restrict what food stamps are used for, the .
agency cannot restrict how TANF cash assistance funds are spent.
Senator Gray remarked that she resents tax money being spent for tobacco and alcohol.
Mr. Wood clarified that DES does not have a policy stating that TANF cash assistance cannot be used •
for tobacco or alcohol. He related to Chairman Hershberger that the TANF benefit is a block grant
received from the federal government, to which the state contributes maintenance of effort funds.
http://www.azleg.state.az.uslFormatForPrint.asp?inDoc=/iminutelHouse/112805+COR+SU...1/4/2006
Senator Johnson noted that a few hundred new CPS caseworkers were requested and granted along with
an appropriation. She wondered how that interacts with the vacancies. Mr. Berns answered that a
special pot of money was provided during the Special Session that was not mixed with the other
vacancies, so a new worker would be hired under that pot of money or assigned to an existing vacancy.
Generally speaking, when new money is obtained it is not earmarked in that fashion, so DES is hiring
staff to fill vacancies and add to the increased number of positions the Legislature authorized. The
turnover rate in child welfare is very high, and a position will be shown as vacant even when someone is
hired and in training because the person is not able to perform the job until the rather extensive training
period is completed. The intent is to hire people, but he does not believe there will ever be zero
accuracy because of the turnover, the length of time it takes to fill a position, and the time a person is not
covering a caseload while in training.
•
Printer Friendly Version Page 10 of 14
•
•
Tracy Wareing, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Children, Youth and Families, Arizona Department
of Economic Security, advised Senator Johnson that many changes have been made at the Child Welfare
Training Institute, in large part to address the issue of turnover of CPS workers. It was discovered from
exit interviews that staff did not experience in training exactly what the job entailed, so over the past
year, efforts were made to provide a more hands-on experience. People still leave after going through
the training institute, which is being looked at by office locations. Some offices have a much higher
retention rate because of effective and good supervisors. DES is involved in a national effort to recruit
and retain CPS workers since it is not only a problem in Arizona.
Senator Johnson said she understands DES pays for hotel rooms and meals for people in training. She
asked the cost and how many people do not complete the training. Ms. Wareing answered that generally
people leave early in the eight-week course and additional field work totaling
22 weeks of training. Most people remain for a significant period oftime, but not as long as DES would
like. Some people may go through the training and decide a year later to move into another area of
social services, butpeople are not dropping out immediately after training to go to another job. She can
track the information to equate the dollars.
Senator Johnson said it was brought to her attention that after training is completed people are
sometimes assigned far from their residence. Ms. Wareing said the issue was brought to DES'
attention. Part of the difficulty has been the high turnover rate in certain offices where staff was
requested to fill slots that are not close to their home. More conversation among middle management
staff around the state is needed to be sure assignments are more appropriate.
Senator Johnson said it became apparent from testimony at hearings that some supervisors are very
difficult to work with or not doing the job correctly. She wondered what is done with those people. Ms.
Wareing answered that there are many individualized circumstances, but regular reviews are done by
supervisors and program managers who oversee the supervisors. When issues are raised and
performance becomes a problem, the situation is dealt with appropriately. Some people have been let go
due to inadequate performance, which happens at the case manager and supervisory level.
Ms. Wareing advised Senator Johrison that there are six in-home family service units operating in
Maricopa County, but not yet fully staffed. Workers hired as a result of the 137 FTEs authorized last
year are fmishing training. A RFP for in-home services was on the street and is in the final negotiation
stages, so new providers around the state will help deliver intensive wraparound services for families to
keep children safely in the home. The salary is essentially the same as other CPS case managers,
although in-home workers do not receive a
10 percent investigative stipend given to workers who conduct CPS investigations; however, if the in­home
worker has a master's degree in social work (MSW), a 10 percent MSW stipend may be received.
Printer Friendly Version Page 11 of 14
The in-home workers go through the same basic training institute as the CPS investigators and ongoing
workers, but supplemental training is being developed with national consultants.
Ms. Wareing stated that the Family to Family Initiative overlays many initiatives across the board, and
in-home service units are just one aspect of a family-centered practice. There are Family to Family
initiatives through the Annie E. Casey Foundation, and offices in
Maricopa County will roll out the Family to Family Initiative by the end of 2005. Efforts are underway
to begin that project in Tucson. Probably the most important piece is team decision- making meetings
where the idea is to bring families in early, hopefully, before a child is removed to talk about placement
and safety issues and reach an agreement for the child, and wherever possible, when it can be done
safely, to keep the child in the home.
Senator Johnson surmised that with all of the new services many more children will be able to remain in
the home and not be traumatized by removal.
Senator Soltero remarked that many of the people that are hired and trained work a few months and fmd
that the private sector pays more for doing the same job, which makes it difficult to retain people, so
supervisors with no people skills who make it difficult for the employees to remain in their jobs are not
needed and should be looked at closely. He encouraged DES to check into situations where the turnover
is high.
•
Senator Gray asked how many children died in the past year while in foster care and the reason. Ms.
Wareing responded that the last report to the Legislature, which would have been through March 2005,
identified 13 fatalities while in care; however, none of the children died as a result of abuse or neglect.
Over the summer, a few children died while in foster care in the Tucson area and there are concerns that
the cause may have been abuse, so DES will conduct an investigation as law enforcement continues to •
look at those cases.
Chairman Hershberger pointed out that the 13 children were discussed in a meeting of the Joint
Legislative Committee on Children and Family Services.
Senator Gray said she is not on the Committee, and therefore, did not receive the information. She
noted that she heard about an investigation last year relating to felons working at DES and asked what
happened with those individuals. Ms. Wareing answered that as a result of new fingerprint clearance
cards DES was asked to implement a few years ago, it was discovered that about 37 CPS employees had
a criminal background involving a misdemeanor or felony who were required to apply for a good cause
exemption with the Fingerprint Clearance Board. There were 31 who were given a good cause
exemption for an offense committed 20 some years ago or the circumstances could be explained, four of
the employees were fired, one individual resigned, and one contract employee received a good cause
exemption. There were also 18 people with valid clearance cards that had driving restrictions, probably
due to Driving Under the Influence (DUI), who are either no longer required to transport vulnerable
individuals, including children, left the department, or now have a valid fingerprint card without the
driving restriction. She advised Senator Johnson that if someone had a record in another state, it would
show up in Arizona.
Mary GilL Deputy Director, Operations, Arizona Department of Economic Security, conveyed to
Senator Gray that foster care application and reapplication forms are scheduled to be on-line by January
31,2006.
Public Testimony
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatForPrint.asp?inDoc=/iminutelHouse/112805+COR+SU...1/4/2006
•
Printer Friendly Version Page 12 of 14
•
•
•
Mikayla Bailey-Null, Family Advocate, Family Advocacy in Reunification (FAIR), stated that she
represents the 70 to 80 percent of mentally disabled who are afraid to seek help for fear of losing their
children. She never realized the mentally ill were discriminated against in such a way Until her child
was taken from her last year. CPS does not even need a warrant to take the children, but is free to use
imminent danger as a reason to remove the children for conditions they do not understand. CPS, the
CASAs, the court appointed attorneys, and judges do not have the training or knowledge to make
lifelong decisions about the welfare of mentally disabled families.
She related that she established FAIR in order to work with CPS, Value Options, and parents to meet
compliance goals and service plans. Mental health recovery can be achieved through medication,
therapy, recovery programs, and education, but it will not work without the cooperation of CPS.
Services need to be provided before children are ripped from their parents and the family goes into
crisis. Her service is free of charge to CPS. She stated that these families are afraid to come forward for
fear of retaliation from CPS and some that have come forward were retaliated against.
She added that CPS is forcing mentally disabled parents to take the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
Inventory (MMPI) test, which should not be taken in a time of crisis as the results will be distorted. She
asked that it not be used as a means since it is not a true evaluation of the family. She knows parents
who were told they are unfit and will never get their children back as a result of the testing.
Robin Scoins, Director, ArizonaFamily Rights Advocacy Institute, related that federal mandates state
that CPS must meet reasonable efforts to obtain federal funding for reimbursement for child welfare and
related costs for all children placed out of home. Mr. Berns reported at one hearing during the summer
that up to 80 percent of CPS cases involve drugs, which would equate to about 8,000 out of 10,000. The
most recent statistics on drug programs offered in Arizona show that about 1 out of 1,000 people
actually receive proper treatment, specifically mothers with children; therefore, reasonable efforts are
not being met by CPS, and federal money is being obtained fraudulently. Testimony was provided by
many parents this summer who were severed from their children forever because they did not have
appropriate case plans to remedy the situation in their home. Reasonable efforts are basically efforts and
services to prevent removal of a child from the home or ensure the speedy return home if that is at all
possible in reasonable situations. Children are forever losing their parents based on a service that could
and should be provided.
DiscussionlRecommendation
Senator Verschoor stated that based on the discussion and information received from members of the
community, he would like to extend the sunset for one year. Any longer would not give citizens a
proper accountability of the agency.
Senator Verschoor moved that the Committee of Reference recommend to the
Legislature that the Arizona Department of Economic Security be extended for one
year.
Chairman Hershberger commented that a one-year continuation would be very disruptive to the progress
that has been made as a result of changes and reforms over the last two or three years. He would accept
a substitute motion for a five-year continuation.
Mr. Anderson asked if the entire process would have to be repeated in a year and whether more funding
would be necessary.
Debbie Davenport, Auditor General, stated that in order to place DES back on the schedule, the Joint
l/A./?OOh
Printer Friendly Version Page 13 of 14
Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) would have to detennine if it would be the best use of Auditor
General resources. The problem with a one-year extension is that the audits JLAC designated for review
for the July 1, 2007 sunset date have already begun, so to pull off those audits would constitute a waste •
of resources already invested in those particular agencies. If the Members are concerned about
implementation of the recommendations, JLAC instituted a follow-up procedure in which the auditors
go back into an agency every six months for a period of two years to see how the recommendations are
implemented and report back to JLAC and the COR. Also, Committees have extended the life of an
agency for five years, but requested reports at one and two-year intervals.
Mr. Anderson moved that the Committee of Reference recommend to the
Legislature that the Arizona Department of Economic Security be continued for five
years with additional reports to the Committee of Reference at one year and two
years on the progress.
Senator Verschoor asked if there is some way to separate CPS. Ms. Davenport answered that during the
Special Session when CPS was given additional funds for case workers, the Auditor General's Office
was mandated to put together a three-person audit team that is in CPS on a permanent basis. This year,
that team will put out three audit reports in the fonn of infonnational briefs that will contain
recommendations for action, but will update the Legislature on certain activities occurring within CPS.
Besides the status of recommendations on reports presented today, reports on CPS that the Members
specifically have issue with could be presented during that time frame.
Senator Soltero stated that he believes DES has been doing a good job in the last year or two. There are
problems, but it is a large agency that deals with tough issues. The director is doing a good job, but he
will support five years to address concerns by some Committee Members.
Senator Johnson agreed to go along with a five-year sunset with the caveat of reports for the next few
years, including in-depth reports on CPS.
Question was called on Mr. Anderson's substitute motion that the Committee of
Reference recommend to the Legislature that the Arizona Department of Economic
Security be continued for five years with additional reports to the Committee of
Reference at one year and two years on the progress. The motion carried.
Without objection, the meeting adjourned at 12:42 p.m.
Linda Taylor, Committee Secretary
December 13, 2005
(Original minutes, attachments, and tape are on file in the Office of the Chief Clerk.)
http://www.azleg.state.az.uslFonnatForPrint.asp?inDoc=/iminute/House/112805+COR+SU...1/4/2006
•
•
•
•
•
Attachment C
• ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
------- 1717 W. Jefferson - P.O. Box 6123 - Phoenix, AZ 85005 ------'----
Janet Napolitano
Governor
David A. Berns
Director
SEP 292005
The Honorable Peter Hershberger
Chair, Committee of Reference for DES
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2844 /!
Dear Representative Hershberger:
•
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the sunset review process. Pursuant to
A.R.S. §41-2954 F, the Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES) has prepared the
attached response addressing the four factors identified in this statute. A copy of our most
recent annual report may be downloaded from the Department's website at
http://www.azdes.qovninks/reportsipdf/2003-2004.pdf. The Department looks forward to
providing testimony to your committee.
If you need any further information, or have any questions regarding the enclosure,
please contact Mary Gill, Deputy Director of Operations and Special Projects at
(602) 542-3873.
Sincerely,
J1t;li~
David A. Berns
Enclosure
c: Courtney Riddle
•
Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES)
Additional Information for Sunset Review A.R.S. §41-2954 F
1. An identification of the problem or the needs that the agency is intended to address.
The Department was created to address the need for improved coordination of economic
opportunities and the delivery of human services. The Department addresses the social and
economic problems of child and adult abuse and neglect; homelessness; lack of basic
subsistence and income as a result of poverty and unemployment; and avoiding
institutionalization and retaining maximum independence for individuals with physical and
developmental disabilities and the elderly.
•
Pursuant to AR.S. §41-1953, the State Legislature established the Department in 1972 by
consolidating the authority, power, and duties of the employment security commission of
Arizona and its divisions, the state department of public welfare, the division of vocational
rehabilitation, the state office of economic opportunity, and the state office of manpower
planning. The state department of mental retardation joined the Department in 1974.
A.R.S. §41-1954, as added in 1972 and later amended, stipulated more powers and duties and
authorized the Department to provide a broad range of human service programs such as social
service programs for children, adults, and families; income maintenance services, including •
child support collection services and services to needy families with children; unemployment
compensation; rehabilitation services; work training; and services for individuals with
developmental disabilities.
Although integration of services has always been a key direction for DES, the current
administration is more aggressively pursuing this methodology for delivering services. The
current administration views service integration as not only an effective model for improving
outcomes for the families that are served, but also as an efficiency measure to maximize the
amount of services that can be provided with the limited resources available. Integration
includes not only how clients receive services but also how programmatic design and delivery
can maximize the funds that are available for providing these services. .
2. A statement, to the extent practicable, in quantitative and qualitative terms, of the
objectives of such agency and its anticipated accomplishments.
The Department's mission is "to promote the safety, well-being, and self-sufficiency of
Arizona's children, adults, and families." To accomplish its mission, DES works closely with a
network of community organizations and providers as well as federal agencies that oversee
Department programs, other state agencies, and Native American tribes in providing the
following wide array of services:
• Protection and Safety - The Department provides child and adult protective services, •
oversees services to victims of domestic violence, and administers prevention programs
designed to address the root causes of abuse and neglect.
1
•
•
•
o Anticipated Fiscal Year 2006 Accomplishments
• Continue maintaining a 100 percent Child Protective Services (CPS)
response rate and investigating 100 percent of calls to the CPS Hotline
that qualify as reports of abuse or neglect.
• Investigate 80.6 percent of Adult Protective Services reports.
• Serve 11,600 victims of domestic violence and their children in emergency
shelters.
• Strong and Stable Families and Individuals - The Department provides employment,
rehabilitation, and training services, economic assistance through administration of the
Unernployment Insurance program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
cash assistance, general assistance, food stamps, medical assistance eligibility, child
care assistance, and child support services, as well as contracts and services for
emergency and utility-related assistance, food banks, refugee resettlement, and the
homeless.
o Anticipated Fiscal Year 2006 Accomplishments
• Assist over 22,200 TANF clients to obtain employment.
• Provide child care assistance to 47,000 children monthly.
• Serve over 571,000 food stamp recipients monthly.
• Increase child support collections to $303.6 million.
• Assist 928,500 individuals with medical assistance eligibility monthly.
• Maximizing Individual Independence - The Department ac:iministers services to
individuals with physical and developmental disabilities and the aging through a network
of home- and community-based services that serve to promote client-centered,
consumer-directed assistance in maintaining maximum independence and prevention of
institutionalization.
o Anticipated Fiscal Year 2006 Accomplishments
• Provide services to over 27,000 individuals with developmental disabilities.
• Successfully rehabilitate and assist 1,900 vocational rehabilitation clients
to enter employment.
• Provide family caregiver services to 340,500 caregivers.
In addition, the Department's service integration initiatives improve DES programs' efficiency
and effectiveness through the coordination of services that meet families' needs by means of a
more holistic, inclusive, and strengths-based approach. This integrated approach is designed
to improve the client experience and reduce service fragmentation bymanaging the delivery of
many client services through a single coordinated point. During Fiscal Year 2006, the
Department will continue to expand and enhance its three service integration components,
Family Connections, TANF/Jobs Improved Outcomes for Clients, and Integrated Local Offices.
3. An identification of any agencies having similar, conflicting or duplicate objectives,
and an explanation of the manner in which the agency avoids duplication or conflict
with other such agencies.
The Department recognizes the need for coordination in the areas of program planning and
service delivery to assure there is no duplication of effort and that limited resources are used in
the most efficient and effective manner. In order to provide such a wide array of services to
such a diverse population, the Department regularly coordinates with many other
2
• The Department is an active player in an interagency task force with the Office of the
Governor, the Department of Education, and the Department of Commerce to
coordinate manpower and economic development activities. This effort ensures that
persons entering the workforce or who are seeking training to adjust their skills to
changes in workforce demands receive services that will actually help them compete in
the existing and future labor markets.
• The Department works with the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence (ACADV)
and the Department of Health Services (DHS) to conduct stakeholder meetings to
strategize and coordinate applications for Rural Domestic Violence and Child
Victimization Enforcement Grants. The Department also coordinates with the Maricopa
County of Government Regional Domestic Violence Council to assess the need for
shelters for domestic violence victims.
4. An assessment of the consequences of eliminating the agency or of consolidating it
with another agency.
Terminating the Department would significantly harm the public health, safety, and welfare. It
is the Department's responsibility to protect and provide critical assistance services to
Arizona's most vulnerable children and adults, including the elderly and individuals with
disabilities, which if left unreported and untreated, could result in harm to individuals. Victims
of domestic violence would have fewer options for shelter services and supports. The absence
of prevention programs would remove critical initiatives that address the root causes of abuse
and neglect, resulting in an increased escalation of abusive' behavior and family and societal
violence and placing increased burdens on law enforcement systems.
•
The Department also provides employment, rehabilitation, and training services to assist
persons in attaining economic self-sufficiency and administers the Unemployment Insurance
program, which collects taxes from employers and provides benefits to eligible workers. The
provision of these and other economic assistance services and supports, such as Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance, food stamps, and medical assistance
eligibility determinations, fill basic human needs for food, medical care, and subsistence
expenses. In addition, child support services are needed for the welfare of affected parents
and children by establishing paternity and child support orders and enforcing support orders
and the responsibility of parents to provide financially for their children. Without these
services, people could go hungry, more individuals and families would be homeless, and the •
health and well-being of people in need would be adversely affected.
3
•
•
•
In addition, vulnerable individuals, especially the elderly and individuals with disabilities, need
to be assisted in retaining their independence and preventing institutionalization where at all
possible. The Department administers a broad network of client-centered, consumer-directed
home- and community-based services that provide vulnerable individuals a high degree of
control and independence, contributing to their overall welfare.
The existing Department structure enables it to provide coordinated service delivery to its
customers. The Department was formed by combining several existing state human service
delivery agencies into a single umbrella agency. By doing so, the Legislature established a
mechanism for the state not only to provide services to clients in an integrated and more
efficient process, but also to maximize the use of any flexibility in federal funding to provide
more services with existing resources. The Department is building on this foundation by
developing a new service delivery model to improve the outcomes of the families we serve.
The Department believes that by integrating the services we provide, we will help strengthen
Arizona's most vulnerable families.
4
•
•
•
Arizona
Department of
Economic
Security
SFY
2003- 2004
Annual
Report·
Governor
Janet Napolitano
DES Director
.David A~ Berns
Mission ,
The Arizona Department of Economic Security promotes the safety, well-being,
and self-sufficiency of children, adults, and families.
Vision
Every child,·adult and family in the State of Arizona
will be safe and economically secure.
Guiding Principles
System of care must:
.r be customer and family-driven
.r be effectively integrated
.r protect the rights of families and individuals
.r aDow smooth transitions between programs
.r build community capacity to selVe families and individuals
.r emphasize prevention and early intelVention
.rrespect customers, partners, and·fellow employees
Services must:
.r be evaluated for outcomes
.r be coordinated across systems
.r be personalized to meet the n.eeds of families and individuals
.r be accessible, accountable, and comprehensive
.r be culturally and linguistically appropriate and respectful
.r be strength-based and delivered in the least intrusive ~er
Leaders must:
.r value our employees
.r lead by example
.r partner with communities
.r be inclusive in decision making
.r ensure· staff are trained and supported to do their jobs
•
•
•
• _______ ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
1717 W. Jefferson· P.O. Box 6123· Phoenix, AZ 85005 --~~---
Janet Napolitano .
Governor
JAN 27 Z005
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Governor of Arizona .
State Capitol,'WestWing
Phoenix,Arizona 85007
David A. Berns
Director
•
•
Dear Governor Napolitano:
The Arizona Department of Economic Security's Annual Report for the period
July. 1,.2003, through June 30,2004, is enclosed.. This report is submitted'
pursuant to A.R.S. §41-1960,- which requires the Department to make an annual
report of Arizona's economic security needs and resources, including the use,
training, and placement of manpower, and recommendations for the
forthcoming fiscal year for the .state's developm~nt of relevant programs. The
report is due to the Govemor and Legislature by the end of each calendar year.
During State FiscalYear 2004, the Deparnnetit began moving in a new
direction to improve the delivery ofhuman services in Arizona. The Department
implemented reforms in child protective services and started to integrate
services and improve coordination among programs to help vulnerable children,
families, and adults achieve better outcomes.
Sincerely,·
j)~~
David A. Berns
Enclosure
TABLE OF CONTENTS
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND OvERVIEW••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1
ORGANIZAnON AND SERVICES PROVIDED IN STATE FISCAL YEAR 2004 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••1
Organizational Chart...•......................•.........................•......................................................••...•.........4
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND OUTLOOK 5
MAJOR INlnAT1VES 6
AWARDS :••.- 17
KEY PERFORMANCE RESULTS 18
Family Assistance Administration Client Satisfaction with Quality of Services ...............•....•.......•.19
Percentage of Employment Placements for TANF Participants 20
Average Length of Cash Assistance Spell (TANF) ...............•........••...........•.....•.............•.........•...21
Child Protective Services Response Rate :...•...........•....•.................22
Child Support Amount Collected ........•..........•.........................................................•.......•..•...........23
STATlSTlCS· 24
Comparison between Arizona and United States Population .....................••.....................••..........25
Comparison between Arizona and United States Per Capita Income.....•..•...•..........•...............•....26
Expenditures by Function and Funding Source ....•.....••.•........•...•....•.............................................27
Revenues by.Funding Source ,....•.......28
Comparison between Arizona and United States Unemployment ........•......................•.....••.•........29
Unemployment Insurance Financial Transaction Summary........•..•...................................•........••.30
Food Stamp Benefits ........................•...........................................•..•.•.......••..•..•...................•..........31
General Assistance .........•.................•...•...........•................•...................•....••.......•......................•..32
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families................•.................................•..................................33
Comparison of Participants to Participants Employed and the
Percentage with Retained Employment 35
Child Support Enforcement Collections...............................................••.........................................36
APPENDIX A ••..••••••••••••••••••••••••••••��•••••••••••��•••••..••••••..••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••.•••••37
Children and Family Services Training Program Fund Status Report ...................................•.......38
•
•
•
•
•
•
Historical Perspective and Overview
The Department was established by the State Legislature in July 1972 by
combining the Employment Security Commission, the State Department of
Public Welfare, the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, the State Office of
Economic Opportunity, the Apprenticeship Council, and the State Office of
Manpower Planning. The State Department of Mental Retardation joined the
Department in 1974.
The Department has approximately 10,686 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions
and provides services in 207 offices throughout the state. Six main district
offices are located in Phoenix, Tucson, Flagstaff,. Yuma, Casa Grande, and
. Bisbee.
Department staff training is conducted in two ways. First, program-specific
training is conducted by each program using classroom, computer-based
training and on-the-job training mediums. Corporate training is conducted by the
Department's Office of Organization and Management Development, in
coordination with the Arizona Government University.
Organization and Services Provided in State Fiscal Year 2004
The Department is organized into divisions that provide protective, social, and
community services;· employment and economic assistance; and operations
support as follows:
Programs
• The Division of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) provides child
protective services, foster care services; kinship care, independent living
services for young adults, adoption services, in-home family services,
intensive family services, and substance-abuse treatment services for
families whose children are at imminent risk of out-of-home placement.1
• The Division of Child Support Enforcement (DCSE) administers Arizona's
child support enforcement program. The division provides services that
include locating absent parents, establishing legal paternity for children born
out of wedlock, and establishing legal obligations to pay child support. The
division enforces and collects child support through a variety of
administrative and judicial remedies and is responsible for the State
Disbursement Unit, which processes and distributes child support payments.
• The Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility (DBME) administers the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Cash Assistance, Food
Stamps, and state-funded General Assistance programs. In addition, the
division determines eligibility for the state's medical assistance program
) As of December 2003, this division has been elevated to report directly to the DES Director•
1
(AHCCCS), as well as supplemental security income through its Disability
Determination Services Administration.
• The Division of Employment and Rehabilitation Services (DERS) administers
Arizona's Unemployment Insurance, Job Service, and Vocational
Rehabilitation programs; provides job-training opportunities through
administration of the Workforce Investment Act (W1A) and the Jobs program;
and administers child care programs and independent living rehabilitation
services.
• The Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) provides services to
individuals with developmental disabilities through a 100 percent state­funded
program and the Arizona Long Term Care System (ALTCS), which is.
funded by the Centers for Medicare and .Medicaid Services (formerly the
Health Care Financing Administration) through the Arizona Health Care Cost
Containment System (AHCCCS). Both programs provide home- and
community-based services, residential and day programs, children's
services, and services to children in foster care. In addition, the ALrcs
program provides acute medical care to eligible individuals. .
• The Division of Aging and Community Services (DACS) provides and
contracts for services such as emergency and energy-related assistance,
food distribution information for the hungry, rural food banks, shelter and
supportive services to victims of domestic violence, refugee resettlement
services, and shelter for the homeless. Adult services programs include
adult protective services, the supplemental payments program, home care,
congregate and home-delivered meals, case management, long-term care
ombudsman program, the State Health Insurance Assistance program, legal
assistance, the Senior Community Service Employment program (Title V),
the Foster Grandparent program, and the Family Caregiver Support
program.
• In addition to the divisions and programs listed above, the Arizona Early
Intervention Program (AzEIP) is also located in the Department. AzEIP was
established by Executive Order 89-11 and A.R.S. §8-652, which designated
the Department as the lead agency responsible for the administration and
supervision of the comprehensive interagency system of early intervention
services. AzEIP is governed by the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA), Part C (P. L. 105-97).
Operations
• The Division of Employee Services and Support (DESS) provides support
services to all employees and programs. The division comprises appellate
services, internal audit, special investigations, licensing, risk management,
economic research, training, and volunteer services.
• The Division of Business and Finance (DBF) provides office and general
business services to the Department, including accounting, finance, budget,
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
collections, procurement, facilities management, purchasing, payroll, printing,
records retention, supplies distribution, and mail management. The division
is also responsible for the implementation of the federally mandated Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). DBF also provides
development and coordination of Department policy development, strategic
planning, project management, and administrative rules.
• The Division of Technology Services (DTS) provides technical and systems
services for. the development. maintenance, and enhancement of the
Department's automated systems in compliance with the Government
Information Technology Agency (GITA) and agency standards.
3
Arizona Department ofEconomic Security
Economic Security Advisory Council Governor .. _._ ... -._ .. _.... _--_.-.:,--O-f-fi-ce--o-f t-h-e-A-I-Io-r-ne-y-G--e-ne-r-a-l --,:
,, I ~ ~ J
"'"
I GoVernor'sAdvlSOryCOU~IIS~ - -\. _••• _. _•• _;
Director Office of Equal Opportunity
I Office of Communications
Govemor's Advlsory Coundl on Aging ...... -- .... __ . Office of Ombudsman
Governor's Councll ori Developmenta' DlsabflKles Legislative Services
Deputy Director Deputy Dlrec.tor of Deputy Director of
AIrnizteornvaenEtaiornly "- of Programs Division of Children Operations & Office of Department of Youth & Families Special Projects - Personnel , .." ... Program Administration
o Children, Youth & Families
o Comprehenslve Medical & Dental Program
o Finance & Business Operations
o progrem Services
I
DIvision of Division of Division of DIvision of Division of Aging I Special I Division of Division of Division of
Child Support Benefits & Employment & Development & Communlly Projects Business & Technology Employee
Enforcement Medical Eligibility Rehabilitation Dlsebflllles Services Finance Services Services &
Services Support
o Systems &
Automation
o Flnence
o Policy & Resources
o legal Services
• Service Quellty
Menegement
Dated: December 2004 •
o Disabllily
Determlnetlon
o Femlly Assistence
o Program
Eveluellon
o Child Cere
o Employment
Security
o Jobs Prog,am
o Workforce
Investment Act
o Rehabllilellon
Services
o Business
Operatlonl
o Meneged Cere
• Program
Operellonl
• Aging &Adu"
• Community Services
• Intergovemmental
OperationI
•
o Effldency
Relltew
o RevMex
o HIPAA
o Accounllng
• Business
Systems
o Flnanelel
Services
• Operellons
Support
• Fadlllles
Menagement
o Accounts
Receivables &
Collections
• Procurement
• Policy, Planning
& Project
Control
• Systems &
Programming
• Dete Center
• Teehnlcal
Support
o CUltomer Service
Solution Center
• Resource
Plennlng Services
• Appellate Services
• Audit & Menegement
Services
• Risk Management
• licensing,
Certlftcellon&
Regulellonl
• Organlzetlon &
Management
Development
• Research
" Speelal
Invesllgallons
• Volunteer' Services
•
•
•
•
Economic Conditions and Outloo~
..
Arizona's economy should continue to expand through the forecast period
covering Calendar Year 2004-05. Arizona's nonfarm jobs are forecast to grow
by 2.4 percent in 2004 and 3.0 percent in 2005. Over the two-year period,
nonfarm job growth is forecast to total more than 125,000.
Construction is projected to increase by 28,000 jobs over the forecast period. A
rising population, coupled with affordable housing and low interest rates, has
provided a strong stimulus to construction job growth.
Educational and health services are also expected to see good growth with an
increase of more than 29,000 jobs over the forecast period. Growth in Arizona's
communities is driving the employment increases in this industry.
.Natural resources and mining are projected to be essentially flat with a slight
loss of 100 jobs. Gradual improvements in global demand for industrial
materials and rising energy costs have incr:eased the need to use local sources
of raw materials.
The forecast calls for continued job losses in manufacturing in 2004 before
showing minor improvement of 1,100 jobs in 2005. Manufacturing gains will help
to improve overall job gains in 2005. Trade, transportation, and utilities are
projected to gain more than 19,000 jobs. Higher energy prices and stagnant
wages have limited the ability of consumers to increase their spending. Rising
consumer spending would have generated greater levels of demand required to
have higher rates of growth in this industry group.
Information jobs should continue to decline with a projected loss of more than
3,300 jobs. Outsourcing. overcapacity. and enhanced productivity are expected
to continue limiting job growth in this industry. Financial activities are forecast to
have fewer jobs created as a result of a slower pace of expansion in the overall
economy. Soine of the fast-growing sectors related to mortgage financing and
real estate are expected to have more consolidation over this period.
Professional and business services are projected to add more than 23,000 jobs.
The attempt of firms to control rising· costs with the outsourcing of many
functions, especially labor, is expected to create new jobs in this industry group.
Job gains in leisure and hospitality are expected to number more than 10,000.
Despite stretched budgets. consumers and businesses are still expected to
spend on travel, dining-out, and recreation. Improvement in this tourism-related
industry is ant,cipated in Arizona as the economies of other states continue to
expand.
Employment growth in other services is projected to increase by more than
3,600 jobs. Government is forecast to gain more than 13,000 jobs as a result of
2 Source: Department of Economic Security Research Administration "Forecast Update
2004-05" press release, dated September 2004.
5
· an increasing population creating greater demand for public services such as
education, police, and fire.
Major Initiatives
During State Fiscal Year (SFY) 2004, the Department continued, initiated,and
planned a number of projects aimed at fulfilling the Govemor's initiative to reform
Arizona's Child Protective Services, streamlining processes, improving customer
service, and securing and guaranteeing the privacy of health-related data. The
most significant projects are outlined below.
Govemor's Initiative to Reform Child Protective Services (CPS)
During SFY 2004, the Division of Children, Youth and Families implemented a
structure to fulfill Governor Napolitano's initiative to reform Arizona's Child
Protective Services. Representatives of state, county, and municipal agencies;
·communities; providers; foster and biological parents; and foster youth
participated in 27 work groups engaged in the reform process. All of the work
groups continue to move forward with policy implementation and training in
areas related to CPS field practice.
Accomplishments include:
• Submitted joint investigation protocols to the Governor's Office.
• Expanded the Child Advocacy Center in Gila County.
• Developed a Risk Assessment Tool.
• Completed a report entitled uArizona Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention
System: A Report of the Prevention Subcommittee: This report is an
inventory of effective prevention systems in Arizona and a look at effective
strategies and program models both locally and nationally.
• Completed medical guidelines for use by pediatricians statewide to provide a
consistent approach for serving mothers and their substance-exposed
newborns. .
• Completed Community Network Team plans by five counties.
• Restored the Employee Assistance program.
• Organized a State Foster Youth Advisory Board.
• Established open court hearings in all counties.
• Replaced Family Builders Assessments with 100 percent investigations by
CPS.
• Hired 104 new CPS case managers.
• Completed redesign of the Family Builders program.
Service Integration
Service integration is the delivery model that helps programs effectively and
efficiently meet needs of families through a more holistic, inclusive, and
strengths-based approach. Strategies being used are process-oriented and
6
•
•
•
•
•
•
utilize relationships with community partners. The goals of service integration
are to:
• Reduce the number of children entering the foster care system
• Reduce the number of children in congregate care
• Reduce the TANF caseload
Systemic strategies include:
• Reduction in backlog of TANF recipients waiting for employment assistance
• Implementing a local office model that coordinates delivery of multiple
Department and community programs at the point of client intake
• Implementing a local office model that highlights coordination between the
TANF program and the child welfare programs
Many Department offices are already co-located and many employees work with
other staff jointly on cases, The service integration effort is taking the now­informal
processes and formalizing them as a standard service delivery model.
The anticipated outcomes from service integration efforts are:
• Reduction ofTANF cases
• Increase in the number of people served in employment assistance
programs
• Reduction of the number of children entering foster care
• Increase in the number of persons entering employment
• Reduction of the barriers that create family dependence on welfare programs
such as drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, and other potentially
catastrophic family issues
• Reduction of the recidivism of persons needing financial and family
assistance
In October 2003, as a part of this effort, the Department iinplementeda new and
innovative strategy to assist TANF participants in finding employment more
quickly, thus stopping a dramatic growth in the TANF caseload. The new
measures enabled the Department to cut the waiting list for TANF clients to
receive Jobs employment services by 87 percent. These improvements
included:
• Requiring 100 percelltengagement for adult clients who apply for TANF
Cash Assistance. Previously, the Department had used a waiting list and
only pulled new clients into Jobs services as slots became available. Making
this change has greatly reduced the number of clients and the length of stay
on the waiting list.
• Ensuring that clients who receive job and life skill training also receive
targeted, client-based training sessions. This was changed from the prior
process that enrolled a client in a longer-term course that may have covered
topics that were beyond those specifically needed for job placement.
7
• Performing a more intensive review of the clients to identify those clients who
were job-referral ready and coordinating with other employment services
offered by the Department to reduce the length of time clients remained on
TANF Cash Assistance.
Prior to the SFY 2004 improvements to the Jobs program, many clients were
held on a waiting list before receiving services. The length of time clients spent
waiting on this list prior to October 2003· was approximately four months. This
has been drastically improved to now reflect only a wait of under one month.
As a result of these activities, the Jobs caseload has increased, and the TANF
adult caseload has declined.
•
16.000
14.000
12,000
10,000 .
1 i,ooo
u
6.000
4.000
2.000 •
Jul-02 Oet-02 Jan-03 Ap,-03 Jul·n Oet-03 Jon-D4 Ap,-D4 Ju~ 0_
lIo..th·
8 •
•
•
•
40,000
35,000
3C.000
10.000
5,000
.u-ll2 Clc:IoII2 _ Apro03 Jul.03 0Cl-ll3 _ ~ JuI.ll4 - 'ThoTANF anlyllJe-___
'Tho Jabs_IsloIgor""'IIJeTNlF...- in ............. due 10 !he_inJabs stlll'iIIII_-.g.--ianiIO a1fTNlF. This is 10Jabs,._IIJe_ot__1Ild~__.. .-.sary.
Work teams have been formed to modify local office processes to enable and
encourage the needed collaboration among Department staff and community
partners to ensure that clients receive the needed services in the required time
frames. .
The focus of one initiative is to coordinate the delivery of TANF arid child welfare
services. Anticipated outcomes include the ability to identify client needs earlier
and to ensure that available services are provided at the point the need is
identified.
Another initiative is to develop a set of strategies to ensure an integration of
services between the TANF worker, the Jobs employment worker, and the child
care worker. This model focuses on employment as the primary client goal to
continue to reduce TANF caseload growth. The design ensures that clients who
can work are given the services so they can find work and that those who are
not job-ready receive services to provide them an opportunity to become job-ready.
.
Finally, a third initiative has been established to address issues related to
identifying families that are at risk of being closed from TANF Cash Assistance
for failure to comply with programmatic requirements such as work participation
or cooperation with establishing achild support case.
Service integration activities in the local offices have begun in Phoenix and
Tucson. Field staff were empowered to develop a local office service integration
model that addresses delivery of several Department programs along with those
of community partners. Several other office transitions are now in planning and
implementation phases.
9
Efficiency Initiatives
Governor Napolitano announced in January 2003 the establishment of a
Statewide Efficiency Review (ER) project with a mission of finding practical and
sensible solutions to improve customer service, reduce costs and eliminate
duplication. This effort was enhanced in SFY 2004 with the initiation of the
Revenue Maximization (RevMax) project. The purpose of the RevMax project is
to seek out aU opportunities for revenues, including enhanced federal funding, so
that agencies can better serve the needs of the people of Arizona. Consistent
with the purposes of the Governor's ER project, the Department initiated activity
during SFY2003 to pursue internal efficiencies, investments to draw down
additional federal funding, and improved outcomes for customers that keep them
out of more expensive systems of care. The Department's Efficiency Review
initiatives resulted in cost avoidances of $4.2 million during SFY2003 and $17.8
million during SFY 2004.
During SFY 2004, one major long-term initiative to offset state .funding was
completed. This initiative increased the number of children in foster care who
were eligible for federal Title XIX Medicaid funding by restructuring the eligibility
determination process. The initiative made use of improvements in the
information systems processing to streamlirie the eligibility determination
process, expedite initial Title XIX eligibility determinations, and improve
transmission of eligibility determinations to AHCCCS. As a result, Title XIX
eligibility increased from 85.43 percent of children in SFY 2003 to 91.14 percent
of children in SFY 2004. This generated a total SFY 2004 cost offset of
$294,700 and a projected SFY 2095 offset of $1.7 million. .
Healthy Families Arizona Program
Healthy Families Arizona (HFAz), the nationally credentialed home-visiting
program administered by the Division of Children, Yo~th and Families, is in its
thirteenth year of operation. The program is a home-based, voluntary program
serving at-risk families during pregnancy and after the birth of the baby. The
goals of the program are to enhance parent-child interaction, promote child
health and development, and prevent child abuse and neglect.
The program undergoes an intensive independent annual evaluation that is
exemplary in its many positive outcomes over the years. The most recent
evaluation in 2004 finds that 97 percent of children in the program are linked to a
medical doctor, and the immunization rate for infants in the program is 94
percent {compared to the state average of 77 percent}. Parents with the highest
stress scores improved the most, and 98.4 percent of program participants did
not have a substantiated CPS report during SFY 2004.
The program received increased funding in the SFY· 2004 legislative session and
has been expanding across the state. The two largest metropolitan areas,which
have the highest populations, have increased their number of sites. Maricopa
County is increasing from 8 to 22 sites, and Pima County is increasing from 5 to
8 sites. Many rural communities were able to add staff, which is enabling them
to serve more families in their communities. There are also several rural
10
��
•
•
•
•
•
communities across the state that were able to start Healthy Families sites for
the first time. These communities are Kingman, Bullhead City, Winslow, Globe,
Safford, Stanfield, Apache Junction, and the Gila River Indian Reservation.
HFAz recently received its second four-year multisite credential from Prevent
Child Abuse America. This credential attests that HFAz meets nationally
established research-based, best practice standards for quality service delivery,
management, and operations.
Arizona Families F.I.R.S.T.
Arizona Families F.I.R.S.T. (Families in Recovery Succeeding Together) is an
innovative, community-based approach to the provision of substance-abuse
treatment that is built on research, best practiCes, and community involvement.
The program provides the opportunity for families referred to CPS or participants
in the Jobs program to overcome the barrier of substance abuse in order to
reach the outcomes of permanency for children, family reunification, and self­sufficiency.
The framework of the Arizona Families F.I.R.S.T. (AFF) program was designed
to do business through collaboration and innovation while weaving the goals of
child welfare, TANF, and family-centered practice into the delivery of substance­abuse
and recovery services and emphasizes outreach, engagement, aftercare,
and supportive services in addition to a continuum of traditional substance­abuse
treatment. Programmatic accomplishments include:
• Over 8,000 individuals have received an opportunity to be screened and
assessed for substance-abuse treatment since program implementation in
March 2001.
• Engagement rates continue to be moderately high for the program. Since the
program's inception, about tiNo-thirds of referred individuals received
substance,..abuse assessments.
• AFF continues to improve retention rates, as nearly 66 percent of
participating clients in SFY 2004 remained in treatment six months or longer.
These patterns are promising, given research emphasizes the longer a client·
stays in treatment, the more likely that treatment will result in long-term
behavioral change.
• Recent data suggests that recurrence of child abuse and neglect among
program participants is low. Only 10 percent of AFF clients had a CPS
report filed since their referral to the program, and only 2 percent of clients
had substantiated reports.
• The partnership between DES and the Department of Health Services
continues to be an effective means for systemic examination by the partner"
agencies to review sufficiency of services and utilization of best-practice
approaches, including outreach and engagement strategies consistent with
the AFF model. .
• The University of Arizona, Applied Behavioral Health Policy Division,
contracted with DES through an Interagency Service Agreement (ISA) in
January 2004 to provide a mandated program evaluation. This agreement
11
will strengthen the quality of program data collected at the provider level in
support of program improvement activities. '
According to the program evaluators, AFF continues to meet and improve upon
the programmatic goals of increasing the availability, timeliness, and
accessibility of substance-abuse treatment.
National Family Caregiver Support Program
The Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000 established a National Family
Caregiver Support program. Arizona received an allocation of $2.56 million to
implement the Arizona Family Caregiver Support program for SFY 2004. The
program calls for all states, working in partnership with Area Agencies on Aging
and local community-service providers, to provide five basic services for family
caregivers, including the following:
• Information to caregivers about available services.
• Assistance to caregivers in gaining access to supportive services.
• Individual counseling, organization of support groups, and caregiver training
to assist caregivers in making decisions and solving problems relating' to
their caregiving roles.
• Respite care to enable caregivers to be temporarily relieved from their
caregiving responsibilities.
• Supplemental services, on a limited basis, to complement the care provided
by caregivers.
Services are to be provided to family caregivers of older adults and grandparents
and other relative caregivers of children not more than 18 years of age. The
statute' requires states to give priority consideration to persons in greatest social
and economic need (with particular attention to low-income, minority individuals)
and older individuals providing care and support to persons with mental
retardation and related developmental disabilities.
In SFY 2004, the Family Caregiver Support program provided information and
direct assistance to 215,603 caregivers, including grandparents or relative
caregivers over age 60 for children not more than 18 years of age. As part of
the activities of the Family.Caregiver Support program, the Division of Aging and
Community Services awarded $416,000 to six of Arizona's Area Agencies on
Aging for nine special caregiver projects. These projects provided additional
focus on support for grandparents raising grandchildren, extended respite care,
establishment of caregiver support groups, and the provision of "survival kits· for
caregivers. All total, over 770 caregivers and 200 grandchildren being raised by
a grandparent were assisted by the support offered through the special grant
awards. -
12
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fatherhood Program
The goal of the Division of Child Support Enforcement's (DCSE) Fatherhood
program is to help low-income, noncustodial parents attain self-sufficiency and
become financially and emotionally responsible patents.
DCSE began its partnership with the collaboration of agencies known as the
Arizona Fatherhood Network (AFN) in July 1998. AFN is committed to providing
a service-delivery system that empowers men and strengthens families to
ensure a transformational and sustainable quality of life. The vision of AFN is
accomplished through collaborations, mentorships, education, and employment.
In October 2002, DCSE was awarded funding by the federal Office of Child
Support Enforcement to implement the proposed Arizona Fatherhood Parenting
Academy.
The academy's curriculum is designed to help fathers increase their employment
opportunities and earning potential and to improve their relationships with their
children and the mother of their children. The six-month classroom instruction is
facilitated by the Division of Child Support Enforcement, First Institutional Baptist
Church of Phoenix, Child and Family Resources, Inc., Maximus Arizona Works,
Valley Christian Center, and the Women and Youth for Self-Reliance (WYSR)
Academy.
The customized curriculum includes 42 individual classes offered each week,
two hours per week, in six distinct sections·: child support overview, life skills
development, relationship building and the benefits of marriage, workforce
development, financial literacy, and computer literacy.
The academy opened its doors on July 10,2003. Since its inception, 60 fathers
have enrolled in academy classes, and 28 fathers have graduated.· The
academy is now in its third semester and expects to graduate 15-20 fathers in
March 2005.
Ticket to Work Program
Ticket to Work increases the choices of Social Security beneficiaries with
disabilities for obtaining employment, vocational rehabilitation, or other support
services from public and private providers. The program issues a ticket to Social
Security beneficiaries with disabilities that they can use with either an
Employment Network or the state's Vocational Rehabilitation program to obtain.
the services needed to become successfully employed. During SFY 2004, the
Division of Employment and Rehabilitation Services and Employment Networks
completed focus groups for a congressional panel on Ticket to Work and
reported to the panel on the successes within the program. Arizona, along with
two other states, was chosen to have a Social Security Administration-funded
marketing program.
13
Establishment Grants
In the Spring of 2004, the Division of Employment and Rehabilitation Services
awarded 39 grants to providers statewide to establish, expand, or improve
services or service capacity in eight different project areas. The project areas
included workforce investments, transportation, assistive technology for persons
with disabilities, blindness, nonprofit community rehabilitation programs, and
services to individuals with severe mental illness.
Navigator Grant
The Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) successfully competed for a
u.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Disability Program Navigator grant for a second
year that allowed the program to expand the number of Navigator positions from
8 to 13. Navigators are change agents within Arizona's One-Stop Centers.
Their task is to make those centers a destination of choice for persons with
disabilities who are looking for work. Navigators also assist individuals with
_ disabilities with accessing the wide variety of programs available to them.
Through the assistance of RSA's grants, One-Stop Centers were able to hire
three additional Navigators to work in centers that did not already have such a
position. Built into another assistive technology grant was assistance to One­Stop
Centers to help make the centers' resource rooms accessible to persons
with disabilities. This combination of DOL and Vocational Rehabilitation grants
has had a significant impact on One-Stop Center accessibility and access to
persons with disabilities.
Grant Awards from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
The Division of Developmental Disabilities was awarded one Systems Change
grant from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in SFY 2004. One
three-year grant is to fund a study of the efficacy of Human Service
Cooperatives as a means of self-determination and empowerment of persons
with developmental disabilities. The other grant is to fund a study of peer-review
monitoring of home- and community-based services.
Fiscal Intermediary
The Division of Developmental Disabilities awarded the first contract for fiscal
intermediary services. In doing so, the division is supporting persons with
developmental disabilities and families in the continued use of the individual
independent provider network. The role of the fiscal intermediary is to assist
persons with developmental disabilities and families in managing the
authorizations of service and the payments to those. providers who work in the
home of the individuals the Department supports.
14
•
•
•
•
•
•
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act (HIPAA) of 1996.HIPAA mandates significant changes in the legal and
regulatory environment to guarantee the security and privacy of health-related
information and to standardize the format of electronic transmissions of health­related
data. The Department is working collaboratively with other state agencies
to accomplish the mandated changes. The Department completed training
during SFY 2004 and is now compliant with HIPAA training requirements.
Improvements to the information technology systems to make the Department
fully HIPAA compliant continue in SFY 2005.
Online Certification Process for Home- and Community-Based Services
The Office of Licensing, Certification and Regulation (OLCR) is responsible for
certifying that qualified vendors comply with certification requirements of state
and federal agencies. DES will automate the Home- and Community-Based
.Services (HCBS) certification process by July 1, 2005.
The OLCR system is a Web-based application currently available through the
Qualified Vendor Application and Directory System (QVADS). QVADS is a Web­based
system that allows a potential vendor to fill out and submit an application,
receive an agreement, and be placed on a qualified vendor list to provide
services to individuals with developmental disabilities.
Arizona Virtual One-5top Project (VOS)
The Division of Employment and Rehabilitation Services (DERS) replaced the
Workforce Investment Act's Participant Tracking System with the Virtual One­Stop
(VOS) application. DERS implemented the VOS system in Arizona to
.facilitate public access to a variety of employment and training programs, as well
as related supportive services, all under one roof. VOS has revolutionized the
delivery of one-stop services at a state and local level. It provides access to a
comprehensive array of services for job seekers, employers, training providers,
benefit applicants, students, and other one-stop customers in one location, by
means ofthe Internet.
An additional benefit of the project is that VOS' allows the Local Workforce
Investment Areas (LWIAs) to work on the same database. Prior to the
implementation of the Virtual One-Stop, all the LWIAs had individual databases,
and client data was not shared between local areas.
Internet Employer Registration System
The Division of Employment and Rehabilitation Services (DERS) Unemployment
Insurance (UI) Tax Section, in conjunction with the Arizona Department of
Revenue (ADOR), implemented an Internet-based application that enables new
15
employers to meet the statutory provIsions of registering with both the
Department and ADOR online rather than submitting a paper form.
Phase one of this project, implemented in January 2004, allows the UI Tax
Section to receive an electronic file from ADOR. This eliminates the sharing of
the paper application between the two agencies.
Phase two, slated to be implemented in January 2005, provides for the
automated workflow of the electronic documents, status determinations, and
information processing for the UI '-tax registrations. This will complete the
transformation of a manual paper-driven process to a fully automated, paperless
operation.
Interactive Voice Response System
The Department implemented an Interactive Voice Response System that
supports child support enforcement program queries from various entities,
including custodial and noncustodial parents, other child support agencies,
employers, attorneys, and mortgage companies. The system is available 24
hours, 365 days a year, and information is available in both English and
Spanish.
Prepaid Medical Management Information System
The Department automated. the interface with the Arizona Health Care Cost
Containment System (AHCCCS) Prepaid Medical Management Information
System. The state averages 900 individuals per month who apply for medical
assistance and are currently eligible. At an average of $80 per person to
process applications manually, the new interface provides savings of
approximately $72,000 per month.
Internet Application for the Arizona Early Intervention Program (AzEIP)
The Department implemented a new Internet application for the Arizona Early
Intervention program. The Internet application allows interested parties to refer
children under the age of three with developmental disabilities or delays to the
AzEIP.
Unemployment Insurance Fraud Database
The Office of Special Investigations (OSI) has developed a tracking system of
known suspicious addresses and Social Security numbers potentially used in
Unemployment Insurance (UI) fraud schemes. In cooperation with the three
Arizona UI Call Centers and the UI Tax Office, information on newly submitted
UI claims are checked against the. OSI tracking system. If it is determined that
the information is falsified, the claim is denied, and an investigation is opened. If
16
•
•
•
•
•
•
the information is verified and found valid, the claim is processed through normal
channels.
Health-E-Arizona
A partnership between AHCCCS, the Department, and federally qualified health
centers is operating a new Web-based enrollment application called aHealth-E­Arizona"
at 65 health center locations and two hospitals in Pima County. Health­E-
Arizona is a paperless .application process for pUblic health insurance. It was
designed for use by application workers in community-based organizations,
clinics, and private businesses to help individuals and families apply for public
health insurance.
The application process is more efficient for both administrators and clients.
Preliminary eligibility determinations and identification of. health plan/provider
preference are completed during the application process, and supporting
documents are faxed and associated electronically with the application data.
The application·is available in both English and Spanish.
Using the Health-E-Arizona application. the Department has been able to
. increase its rate of approval for medical assistance applications from below 50
percent to 57 percent. Additionally, using the Health-E-Arizona process,
applicants who are found ineligible for federal services are automatically
considered for eligibility for local medical services.
Disaster Recovery Plan
The Division of Technology Services continued its efforts. within existing
resource limitations, to alleviate concerns regarding potential data loss by
developing and implementing various procedures in the Department's Data
Center to improve data security. During the year, the division. in cooperation
with the Arizona Department of Administration and the Department of Public
Safety. received Information Technology Authorization Committee (ITAC)
approval of Phase I of a three-phased Tri-agency Disaster Recovery Plan. This
approval resulted in the release of an Request for Proposals (RFP) for disaster
recovery ahot site" services.
Awards
The Department received a $4 million Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) High Performance Bonus from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services. The Department received this award for achieving
improvement in the job entry rate for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2003 over FFY
2002.
11
Key Performance Results
The Department of Economic Security reports monthly to the Arizona
Department of Administration on Key Performance Results (KPRs). The KPRs
focus on critical issues that are important to the agency. The KPRs are shared
. with the Governor's Office to demonstrate agency progress and success in
providing quality services to Arizona residents.
18
•
•
•
•
Department of Economic Security
SFY 2004 Monthly Key Performance Results
• •
By June 30, 2004, DES wlll have client satisfaction with the quality of services received from the Family Assistance Administration at 88.20%.
FAMILY ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION
Client Satisfaction with Quality of Services
94%
92% _
90% __
88%
86%
84%
82%
80% .... . \0 1st 2nd
Quarterly
3rd 4th
~SFY 2002 Actual
-tt-SFY 2003 Actual
-&-SFY 2004 Target
___SFY 2004 Actual
This is apoint-in-time measure and represents the percentage of clients who rated services from 1 to 3 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1being
the highest rating and 5 being the lowest rating. Ratings are based on a sampling of all active TANF, Food Stamps and Medical customers.
Approximately 2500 individuals are sent a customer satisfaction survey each quarter.
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
SFY 2002 Actual 90.80% 90.10% 89.90% 92.00%
SFY 2003 Actual 90.40% 89.90% S9.80% 90.20%
SFY 2004 Target 88.20% 88.20% 88.20% 88.20%
SFY 2004 Actual 90.00% 90.00% 88.20% 88.80%
Client satisfaction data are collected on a quarterly basis only.
Note: The Department has experienced a greater than 50% caseload increase in the Food Stamp program since SFY 2002. This Increase
has had a negative Impact on the Department's ability to mt:let client needs. The Department has begun to deliver services In a more inte­grated
manner In an effort to Increase its customer satisfaction rating.
Department of Economic Security
SFY 2004 Monthly Key Performance Results
By June 311, 2004, DES will schleve 46% employmenl plscement rot the TANF populsllon.
Percentage of Employment Pla.cements for TANF Participants
No
70%
SO%
80%
40%
30%
20%
'0%
011
h' 2nd 3rd 4'"
___ SFY 2003 Aclual
___ SFY 2004 Targat
-.- SFY 2004 Aclual
This measure reprennts the cumulallve number or employment plecements for TANF perllclpenls .. compered 10 the conslenl TANF populetlon
.. or July 31, 2002, of 25,348 (TANF popu'ellon defined .. adulls 18 years snd older, excluding tribal CUBS).
SFY 2003 A.'uII
SFY .2004 Toru"'
SFY 2004 A.lull
hi
14%
10%
11%
2nd
28%
22%
25%
3rd
44%
35%
41%
41h
tl3%
48%
5S%
•
Placement numbers ere Iypfcelly avllliable 45 deys following Ihe close of Ihe querter. Actual da.e may change as system-generllled Information's updllled.
• •
• •
Department of Economic Security
SFY 2004 Monthly Key Performance Results
Average Length of Cash ABI'stance Spell
(TANF)
•
N.....
15
14
M 13
a 12
NT
11
H 10
S 9
8
7
6
. .;-a- - - ~ -
__SFY 2002 Actual
___ SFY 2003 Actual
-I!r- SFY 2004 Actual
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Spy 2002 A.lull 1.0 7.1 7.1 7.1 1.0 7.1 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.2
SPY 2001 A.lul' 1.1 U 1.7 1.0. 1.2 1.0 7.1' 7.1 1.0 1.0 I.e I.e
SFY 2004 A.tuI' I.e 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 I.e 1.2 1.2 9.2 1.0 •.4 '.3
This measure repres.ents the cumulative monthly average of the length of a Cash Assistance Spell for cases closed each month.
A Cash Assistance Spell means the period from the first month benefits are paid unllithe case Is closed.
Data have been collected sInce November 1995 and are typically not available until 45 days following the close of the month.
Effective September 2003. the change from monthly to bl·ennual reporting Impacts the reported Average Length of Cash AssIstance Spell.
Actual data may change as system-generated Informallon Is reported.
~
•
Department of Economic Security
SFY 2004 Monthly Key Performance Results
By June 30, 2004, DES will malnteln the Child Protectlva Services and Family Builders combined response rilte of 100%.
CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES
Response Rite
100%
99%
__SFY 2002 Actual
98% __SFY 2003 Actual
97% --&'- SFV 2004 Targe
___ SFY 2004 Actual
98%
95%
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
...
This measure represents the number of CPS reports BSslgned fOf Investigation plus the number of fepofts fefeffed to Family Bulldefs
compafed to thelotalliumbef of C~S repofts fecelved.
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
llFY 2002 A.IUII '00% 100% 100% 100'll. 100% 100% 100% '00'll. 100% 100% 100% 100%
llFY 200S A.IUI' 100% 100% 100% 100'll. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
llFY 2004 Tlrgt' 100% 100% 100'll. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
SFY 2004 A.,uI' 100% 100'll. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Monthly date efe liveliable 80 deys lifter the IllSt day of the month.
Dlltll lire reported lifter resolution of fluctulltlons between reporting periods.
• •
~
• •
Department of Economic Security
SFY 2004 Monthly Key Performance Results
By June 30, 2004, DES will melnleln lolel N.D collecllons of $256,600,000.
CHILD SUPPORT
Amount Collected
$295,000.0
T $270,000.0
H $245,000.0 .......-:...0
0 $220,000.0
___ ':-IT ---- --SFY 2002 Actual
U $195,000.0
S $170,000.0 ~ --SFY 2003 Actual
A
$145,000.0 -.- SFY 2004 Targe
$120,000.0
N $95,000.0
~ --SFY 2004 Actual
D $70,000.0 .-.tt""'" .-
S $45,000.0
~
$20,000.0
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
This measure represenls Ihe lolel yeer·Io·dsle amounl of IY·D dollars colle clad under TlUe IY·D of Iha Social Slcurlly Act.
(TIIOUSArIDS, JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
aFY 2001 "clua' $20,OS5.0 $4I,t51.5 $80,ta2.2 112,280.2 1100,UU $111,51'" $131,101.0 $1n,051.1 $11',tT2.3 $203,880.3 $22',343.1 1214,0'1.0
SFY 2003 "clua' 122,213.0 $43,03\.2 '82,111.1 $8S,041.8 $100,830.3 $120,812.3 1140,184,1 $,.I,44U $183,440.1 $201,281 .1 1231,'94.2 $258,151.0
aFY 2004 T"r,"1 $12,292.4 $43,021.1 $82,114,4 $",on.8 $100,822.5 1120.808.5 $140,150.8 $119,443.2 $1 83.2tT.2 $201.30404 $232.028.2 $218,800.0
aFY 2014 "clul' $22,85G.5 $41,481.0 $85,11U $88,131.8 $108,21U $121,483.2 $141,038.4 tl88,182.1 .193,182.' $221,182.' U48••••.0 U13,411.3
Monlhly dele ere typlcelly evelleble 45 dey. e"er Ihe lesl dey 0' Ihe monlh. Aclue' dell mey Chenge .. eyslem·genereled In'ormetlon Is updaled.
•
Statistics
24
•
•
•
•
Percentage
Change
in U.S.
Population
United States
Population
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Comparison Between Arizona and United States
Population
For the Calendar Years Ended December 31
(2003 is the most recent data available)
Percentage
Change
in Arizona
Population
Arizona
Year Population
Note: The information contained in the sources used for this table is revised on a continuing
basis and, accordingly, the amounts in the above table have been revised. Therefore,
amounts presented for some years may not match the amounts reported for prior years.
Source: The United States Census Bureau Population Estimates •
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
4,065,440
4,245,089
4,432,499
4,586,940
4,736,990
4,883,342
5,023,823
5,165,765
5,297,684
5,441,125
5,580,811
259,918,588
263,125,821
266,278,393
269,394,284
272,646,925
275,854,104
279,040,168
282,177,754
285,093,813
287,973,924
290,809,777
3.82%
4.42%
4.41%
3.48%
3.27%
3.09%
2.88%
2.83%
3.68%
2.71%
2.57%
1.33%
1.23%
1.20%
1.17%
1.21%
1.18%
1.15%
1.12%
0.95%
1.01%
0.98%
Population Growth
5%------------------..,
4%
CD
g' 3%
III
z:;,
o 2%
1%
0%
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Calendar Year
rg Arizona tI United States
• 25
•
Percentage
Change in
U.S. Per
Capita Income
u.s. Per
Capita Income
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Comparison Between Arizona and United States
Per Capita Income
For the Calendar Years Ended December 31
(2003 is the most recent data available)
Percentage
Change in
Arizona Per
Capita Jncome
Arizona Per
Year Capita Income
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
18,293
19,212
19,929
20,823
21,861
23,216
24,057
25,661
26,189
26,406
26,931
21,346
22,172
23,076
24,175
25,334
26,883
27,939
29,847·
30,580
30,795
31,459
2.90%
5.02%
3.73%
4.49%
4.98%
6.20%
3.62%
6.67%
2.03%
0.83%
1.99%
2.36%
3.87%
4.08%
4.76%
4.79%
6.11%
3.93%
6.83%
2.36%
0.70%
2.16%
Source: The United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, September 2004
Note: The information contained in the sources used for this table is revised on a continuing
basis and, accordingly, the amounts in the above table have been revised. Therefore,
amounts presented may not match the amounts reported for prior years. •
Change in Per Capita Income
7%~------------=;-------'
6%
& 5%
; 4%
o~ 3%
"$. 2%
1%
0%
oS~":> o.:,~ o.:,o.:,~ o.:,o.:,ro o.:,~ 0.:,0.:,'0 0.:,0.:,0.:, ~r§' ~f::;"'" ~f::;'), ~f::;":>
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Calendar Year
• Arizona 13United States
• 26
• ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Expenditures by Function and Funding Source
(Governmental Funds and Unemployment Insurance Benefits)
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30
HEALTH AND WELFARE:
State
Year Funds
Federal
Funds
Other
Funds
Total
Funds
•
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Source:
Note:
$ 372,114,400 $1,129,460,885 $ 240,231,124 $ 1,741,806,409
386,169,400 1,092,763,240 225,288,163 1,704,220,803
370,757,400 1,072,660,950 216,699,361 1,660,117,711
400,340,700 1,018,548,228 202,518,001 1,621,406,929
425,235,500 1,045,925,462 220,049,050 1,691,210,012
422,155,816 1,134,907,352 241,950,698 1,799,013,866
442,940,537 1,215,771,799 278,444,218 1,937,156,554
449,946,977 1,406,217,101 511,087,455 2,367,251,533
434,725,701 1,350,528,136 856,181,840 2,641,435,677
472,442,402 1,420,389,817 846,938,314 2,739,770,533
The Arizona Department ofEconomic Security, Audited Comprehensive Annual Financial·
Report, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,2000, and 2001; and Audited Financial Statements,
2002, 2003, and 2004.
The Federal Funds amounts include amounts·for food stamp benefits distributed.
Expenditures.by Function and Funding Source
(In millions)
Fiscal Year
•
• State Funds IjFederal Funds
27
oOther Funds
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Revenues by Funding Source
(Governmental Funds and Unemployment Insurance Benefits)
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30
State Federal
General Fund Financial Employers UI Interest on
Year Appropriations Assistance Contributions Investments Other Total
1995 $ 379,581,100 $ 1,142,831,235 $ 235,800,076 $ 30,346,709 $ 45,731,486 $ 1,834,290,606
1996 397,217,300 1,110,112,146 239,480,340 38,861,761 48,154,973 1,833,826,520
1997 373,669,400 1,078,901,892 225,101,956 43,414,155 47,406,581 1,768,493,984
1998 409,640,900 1,016,492,399 223,517,434 51,591,704 49,907,366 1,751,149,803
1999 425,530,200 1,045,521,174 191,326,704 58,281,429 56,212,888 . 1,776,872,395
2000 434,171,319 1,143,846,770 177,603,712 64,010,350 57,845,055 1,877,477,206
2001 434,834,859 1,267,241,399 175,736,341 69,609,832 61,579,318 2,009,001,749
2002 463,456,900 1,604,700,337 162,157,379 66,619,568 76,573,245 2,373,507,429
2003 422,581,074 1,683,066,873 160,962,888 58,776,481 72,830,370 2,398,217,686
2004 484,037,500 1,893,683,834 194,894,098 46,839,769 51,605,255 2,671,060,456
Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security, Audited Comprehensive
Annual FinancialReport, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,2000 and 2001; and
Audited Financial Statements, 2002, 2003 and 2004.
Note: The Federal Financial Assistance amounts indude amounts for food stamp
benefits distributed.
Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund revenues and expenditures do not
directly correspond within a single fiscal year. The fund balance "self­balances
· through a funding formula set in accordance with federal law.
Revenues by Funding Source (In millions)
•
•
2,800
2,400
e 2,000
.! 1,600
'0 1,200
C 800
400
o
B':>Bfo ~
,,~ ,,~ ,,~
B'O BO) _C\<:l S;)" s;)'), s;)":J cl"
,,~ ,,~ '),IJ' '),~ iJ iJ iJ
Fiscal Year
Ii State General Fund Appropriations (]J Federal Financial Assistance
IiEmployers U I Contributions • Interest on Investments
GOther
28 •
•
•
•
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Comparison Between Arizona and United States Unemployment
For the Calendar Years Ended December 31
(2003 is the most recent data available)
Number of Number of Unemployment Unemployment
Unemployed - Unemployed - Rate- Rate-
Year Arizona u.s. Arizona U;S.
1993 120,365 9,613,000 6.30% 6.90%
1994 133,936 7,996,000 6.40% 6.10%
1995 115,316 7,404,000 5.10% 5.60%
1996 126,839 7,236,000 5.50% 5.40010
1997 106,230 6,739,000 4.60% 4.90010
1998 98,233 6,210,000 4.10% 4.50010
1999 109,930 5,880,000 4.40% 420%
2000 98,449 5,692,000 4.00% 4.00010
2001 121,418 6,801,000 4.70% 4.70%
2002 164,757 8,378,000 6.20% 5.80%
2003 150,935 8,774,000 5.60% 6.00010
Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security, Research Administration,
Economic AnalySis; and the United States Department of Labor,
Monthly Labor Review.
Note: The information contained in the sources used for this table is revised on a continuing
basis and, accordingly, the amounts in the above table have been revised. Therefore,
amounts presented for some years may not match the amounts reported for prior years.
Unemployment Rate
I •Arizona I11lI United States I
29
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Unemployment Insurance Financial Transaction Summary
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30
•
Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security, Unemployment Insurance
Financial Transaction Summary Report.
Year
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Note:
Total Total
Employer Benefits Fund
Contributions Paid Balance
$ 236,679,799 $ 173,317,247 $ 504,536,522
240,046,970 1n,755,864 613,437,439
227,644,491 172,336,147 711,845,399
228,236,334 159,930,580 831,262,488
200,221,238 169,265,609 919,819,409
188,348,457 1n,980,914 993,052,630
182,095,014 202,900,332 1,038,116,687
338,555,460 407,021,875 1,033,275,970
237,542,722 467,411,646 860,871,706
247,481,831 394,987,858 759,016,265
The total benefits paid amount for all fiscal years has been adjusted to indude
interstate benefits. .
Unemployment Insurance Contribution to Benefits and
Fund Balance (In millions) • 1200
1000
.f.I.) 800
~ 600 "0 c 400
200
0
~~ ~lO ~
,,~ "Q> ,,~
~~ S:l~ S:l"
,,~ '1-<:5 '1-<:5
Fiscal Year
~ Employer Contributions - Benefits Paid .....- Fund Balance
30 •
• ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Food Stamp Benefits
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30
Average Average Average Average Average
Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly
Number of Number of Allotment Allotment Benefits
Year Households Persons Per Household Per Person Distributed
1995 182,782 494,637 $ 195.05 $ 72.08 $ 35,651,359
1996 161,415 434,542 200.91 74.63 32,429,993
1997 141,981 385,061 199.34 73.50 28,302.483
1998 112.345 311.142 201.11 72.61 22.593,553
1999 95.938 260.736 207.73 76.43 19,929.511
2000 95,238 257.989 208.83 77.09 19,889.001
2001 102,307 277.192 211.04 77.89 21.590.998
2002 134,135 355.722 217.64 82.07 29,193,426
2003 171.247 442.320 223.06 86.3S 38.198.140
.2004 204.010· 521.992 227.63 88.96 46,438.594
• Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security. Family Assistance Administration.
Food Stamps Benefit Participation
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004.
Fiscal Year
fl Average Monthly Number of Households
• 31
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
General Assistance
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30 •
Year
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Average
Monthly
Number of
Recipients
7,618
6,655
3;631
2,883
2,627
2,566
2,912
2,847
2,615
3,125
Average
Monthly
Payment
Per Recipient
143.73
141.97
147.25
146.87
146.67
151.93
152.13
152.67
153.74
155.87
Average
Monthly
Payments
1,094,888
944,841
534,679
423,430
385,315
389,855
443,007
537,348
453,103
485,900
Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security, Family Assistance
Administration.
Average Monthly Number of Recipients • 8,000
~.. 6,000 Q. 4,000
U~
2,000
o
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Year
I_Average Monthly Number of Recipients
Average Monthly Payment Per Recipient
$160
i. c$155
c .!! $150
GlE-E
g$145
c1.;' a:: $140
$135
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Year
I_Average Monthly Payment Per Recipient I
32 •
•
Year
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30
Average Average Average Average
Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Average
Number of Number of Payment Payment Monthly
Cases Recipients Per Case Per Recipient Payments
73,2n 201,019 296.57 108.11 21,731,910
67,784 183,274 292.15 108.05 19,803,335
57,526 155,037 296.30 109.94 17,045,065
43,601 119,011 290.35 106.37 12,659,966
35,730 95,556 282.66 105.69 10,099,685
34,211 89,nO 283.82 108.16 9,709,791
36,146 93,857 282.66 108.86 10,216,987
42,102 109,547 286.99 110.30 12,082,660
47,298 121,193 282.76 110.35 13,373,618
51,318 122,5n 284.92 119.28 14,621,497
Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security, Family Assistance Administration.
III
Gl
III
III o
54,000
53,000
52,000
51,000
50,000
49,000
48,000·
47,000
46,000
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
State Fiscal Year 2004 by Month
T A NF Cas e s
.., .., .., .., .., .., ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,.
0 0 0 0 ~ 0 C? 0 0 0 0 C? "5 a. Q. t; .., c 1> ~ ~ >. c
., :l G> 0 G> III G> III Q. III :l
< f/) 0 z 0 .., ~ :E < :E ..,
Yea r
'_Total TA N F Cases I
34
•
•
•
• ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Jobs Program
Comparison of Participants to Participants Employed
and the Percentage with Retained Employment
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30
•
Percentage
Retained
Number of Total Employment For
Year Participants Employed at Least 90 Days
1995 19,544 3,984 66%
1996 21,263 5,905 72%
1997 21,734 7,433 57%
1998 30,520 10,930 N1A
1999 25,209 9,604 N1A
2000 23,802 9,950 52%
2001 23,290 12,405 46%
2002 23,818 12,513 46%
2003 32,008 15,490 46%
·2004 42,565 20,185 44%
Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security, Jobs Administration.
Jobs Program Participants
Employed to the Percentage Retained
0%
60%
40%
"CD c
80% i­ii
CD
~
CD
Cll
Sc
CD
.~
CD a.
20%
~C
t'll
~ 50,000
1:: 40,000
:. 30,000 a 20,000
:; 10,000
~ 0
;j B~ Bre ~ Bib B~ I:)~ 1:)" I:)"\, I:)~ ~
z "OJ "OJ "OJ "OJ "OJ rtS rtS rtS rtS rtS
Fiscal Year
~ Number of Participants IWJMl Employed ......- Retained After 90 Days
• 35
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
Child Support Enforcement Collections
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30
TANF TANF Non-TANF Non-TANF
Collected Collected for Collected Collected for Non-IV-D Total
Year for Arizona Other States for Arizona Other States Collected Collections
1994 20,691,200 4,773,300 53,339,300 11,696.800 90,500,600
1995 23,826,900 5,047,300 65;478,200 12,983,200 107,335,600
1996 23,479,800 5,920,500 87,364,900 13,220,700 129,985,900
1997 25,075,000 6.187,200 103,245,200 12,632,300 147,139,700
1998 21,938,000 7,205,600 117,104,400 13,532,600 159,780,600
1999 22,739,900 7,326,300 145,367,800 13,791,700 143,074,200 332,299,900
2000 25,100,000 8,212,400 165,356,200 16,248,800 251,380,400 466,297,800
2001 26.106,500 - 8,538,800 186,167,200 17,225,100 262,336,000 500,373,600
2002 28,407,500 8,193,600 199,834,500 17,659,300 270,510,400 524,605,300
2003 26,262,600 8,267,100 204,043,700 -17,981,500 281,660,900 538,215,800
2004 29,889,000 8,061,600 217,531,600 17,989,100 290,084,200 563,555,500
Source: The Arizona Department of Economic Security, Division of Child Support Enforcement
600
500
400
~
.c.!;! 300
Q
200
100
0*--=::::"-'---==.,.--=::::"-'--
•
•
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
FJSCaI Year
2002 2003 2004
• Arizona TANF S
E3ArizonaNon-TANF S
IINon-IV-D S
oOther States TANF S
ED Other States Non-TANF $
TANF Collected consists ofTANF and Foster Care Collections.
36 •
•
•
•
Appendix A
Children and Family Services
Training Program Fund
Status Report
37
Arizona Department of Economic Security
Administration for Children, Youth and Families (ACYF)
Children and Family Services Training Program Fund
STATUS REPORT
The Child Welfare Training Institute (CWTI) was commissioned by the Arizona
State Legislature in January 2001. In February 2003, the Office of the Governor
instituted a Child Protective Services Reform Committee. In June and October
2003, the steering committees presented their comprehensive reports and
recommendations to the reform committee, which led the CWTI to developa six­week
initial and intensive training curriculum, "Life of a Case: This was
accomplished through a collaborative effort between field case managers, cwn
trainers, and community partners. The purpose is to make training more
applicable and practical with hands-on case management experience as well as
advanced and ongoing training.
The CWTI has also extended its current contractual agreement with Arizona
State University to evaluate the training's effectiveness.
Institute training goals include the following:
1. Emphasize family-centered child welfare best practices that are
consistent with existing national standards. The case manager core
training curriculum has been revised to include two weeks of
"foundational" training. The foundation includes a section on the
"cognitive perceptual shift" in the agency's philosophy involving the shift
to best practices. Throughout the six-week training curriculum, best
practices are emphasized by:
• A section entitled "Family to Family."
• A section on disproportionality.
• A section emphasizing the continuation of outcomes, which involves
a critical decision-making exercise using a strengths-based
perspective.
• A section that focuses on the Governor's reform plan and the refocus
on family-centered practice.
The sections listed above are some tangible ways that the emphasis on
best practices will be reinforced; however, the continual thread of the case
manager core training will be family-centered practice in all sections
taught.
2. Emphasize cultural competency, substance abuse, domestic
Violence, mental health, and secondary trauma. CWTI has partnered
with the Arizona Coalition against Domestic Violence (ACADV) to provide
training on "Bridging the System between Domestic Violence and Child
Welfare" for the case manager core training. ACADV has aligned the
curriculum with best practices recommended by the National Council of
Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the U.S. Department of Health and
38
•
•
•
•
•
•
Human Services, the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Violence
Against Women Office. Training has also been developed with Chicanos
Por La Causa, Inc. on substance-abusing families, which incorporates
the DCYF policy on sUbstance-exposed newborns and the use of agency
tools to assess family situations for strengths, risks, and safety.
Beginning in January 2005, case manager core training will include
sessions with a M.S,W.-Ievel psychotherapist who will cover definitions of
mental health diagnosis, separation and loss issues, elements of a
psychological evaluation, and psychological consultation. In addition,
beginning with the January 2005 case manager core training class,
training participants will also receive training on secondary-trauma and
self-care.
3. Support the professional growth and development of ACYF staff. In
August 2004, CWTI staff attended a regional training of the trainers _for
State Child Welfare agencies jn Mesquite, Nevada. The cwn staff took
an active role with the planning and development of the annual regional
training of the trainers planned for August 2005. In addition, all field
training supervisors will be attending the 40-hour forensic interviewing
training in 2005. -
4. Involve field staff in decision making on training issues. In January
2005, Tucson offices will have a new field coaching and mentoring phase
combining field workers and training staff to provide the learning
experience. In addition, CWfI has made a conscious effort to develop
the partnership model to involve field staff in the decision-making process
on training issues. As a result of these efforts:
- Youth Advisory Board members will speak to trainees during the sixth
week of the case manager core training curriculum.
-Supervisors will participate in· a panel on the last day of case
manager core training to answer questions, hear the supervisory
needs of new staff, and facilitate the transition from the classroom to
the field..
- Provider agencies, including other DES divisions, will participate in an .
"expo" day where they can describe the services that they provide,
answer questions, and present infonnation about making referrals.
5. Provide a more comprehensive evaluation tool to measure training
effectiveness. CWTI has extended the existing contractual relationship
with Arizona State University (ASU) to develop a means of measuring the
effectiveness of training. A Ph.D.-level professor has been designated to
work with this project and to create and implement measurement tools.
One- and two-day advanced in-service workshops are conducted throughout the
year in statewide locations to ensure ongoing training for experienced case
managers and supervisors. CWfI also conducts parent aide and supervisor
core training. CWTl's Supervisor Core is provided to new supervisors to instruct
them in the most up-te-date supervisory practices.
39
The Department encourages staff to pursue a bachelor's or master's degree in
social work to further improve the quality and professionalism of services.
SUMMARY OF CWTI TRAINING
Type of Training Number of Number of Days Total Number of Number of
Weeks oerGrouo Davs Classes Started
Case Manager 6 Average of 29.5 1n 21
Core
Suoervisor Core 8 16 32 7
Parent Aide Core 7 2 14 12
Specialized -
Advanced 23 1-2 35 23
TraininQ
Note: Training costs are paid for by the Child Protective Services Training Fund with
.Title IV-E training reimbursement of federal grant funds.
New case managers receive the Introductory Guide, which includes reading materials
and assignments. The Introductory Guide is intended to be completed within the first
month of employment by the new case manager.
New supervisors receive a supervisor handbook as part of the revised Supervisor Core
Training. A Revised Supervisor Core Curriculum was developed as a collaborative effort
of cyvn staff and field supervisors. Other supervisory training such as "Excellent Staff
Through Example Education Motivation" (ESTEEM) Evaluation training and Cultural
Competency is offered through the Office of Management and Development within the
Department.
40
•
••
•
•
DES Service Delivery Presence by District
e
T=cN Pas
e
CbiJlle
W"mdow
e l..owe: Rock
Greasewood
~
eWllkox
BtmOIl
--""'VJSS-f'=a". VI
B~ ,Douglas
.eMat:arla
e
TUCSON
ePast
e
TubaOly
eLittlefieid
District Offices
District I
815 North 18th Street
Phoenix, AZ 85006
(602) 307-9016
Districtll
400 West Congress, #420
Tucson, AZ 85701
(520) 628-6810
Districtm
220 North Leroux
Flag~AZ 86001
(928) 779-2731
Director's Office
1717 West Jefferson Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85007
(602) 542-5678
District IV
350 West 16th Street, #232
Yuma, AZ 85364 ' .
(928) 782-4343
•
District V
2510 North Trekell Road
Casa Grande, AZ 85222
(520) 836-2351
•
District VI
209 Bisbee Road
Bisbee, AZ 85603 .
(520) 432-5703
DES Service Delivery Presence by District •
Director's Office
1717 West Jefferson Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85007
(602) 542-5678
District Offices
District I
815 North 18th Street
Phoenix, AZ 85006
(602) 307-9016
Districtn
400 West Congress, #420
Tucson, AZ 85701
(520) 628-6810
District ill
220 North Leroux
Flagstaff: AZ 86001
(928) 779-2731
District IV
350 West 16th Street, #232
Yuma, AZ 85364
(928) 782-4343
District V
2510 North Trekell Road
Casa Grande, AZ 85222
(520) 836-2351
District VI
209 Bisbee Road
Bisbee, AZ 85603
(520) 432-5703
• T=cN Pos
�� CbiDIe
• VJDdow
• SlmdcI$
Holbrook
St. .lotms
Sbowlow ••
.~
Lab:side.
Whiu:iw:r. •
•