Datasets:
Download benchmarks/govdocs/thread0/017444.html from zal-analytics-core/zontologize-data: direct link, hf CLI and curl.
- Browser
- Download file 99 kB
-
https://huggingface.co/datasets/zal-analytics-core/zontologize-data/resolve/main/benchmarks/govdocs/thread0/017444.html
- Command line
-
hf download hf://datasets/zal-analytics-core/zontologize-data/benchmarks/govdocs/thread0/017444.html
-
curl -L -o 017444.html https://huggingface.co/datasets/zal-analytics-core/zontologize-data/resolve/main/benchmarks/govdocs/thread0/017444.html
99 kB
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
<meta name="ProgId" content="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
<title>H.R. 782, THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT</title>
</head>
<body>
<b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">H.R. 782, THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT: TITLE V- COMMUNITY SERVICE
EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="3"></font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="6">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">HEARING</p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">BEFORE THE</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="4">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">SUBCOMMITTEE ON POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION,</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER">TRAINING AND LIFE-LONG LEARNING</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">OF THE</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER">THE WORKFORCE</p>
</font><b><font SIZE="3">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="4">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="2">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">FIRST SESSION</p>
</font><b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="3">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="2">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MAY 19, 1999</p>
</font><b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="3">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font><b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">Serial No. 106-40</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">Printed for the use of the Committee on Education</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER">and the Workforce</p>
<hr>
</font>
<blockquote>
<b>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">H.R. 782, THE OLDER
AMERICANS ACT:</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">TITLE V-COMMUNITY
SERVICE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM</font></p>
</b>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Wednesday, May 19,
1999</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">House of
Representatives,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Subcommittee on
Postsecondary Education, Training and Life-Long Learning,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Committee on Education
and the Workforce,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Washington, D.C.</font></p>
</blockquote>
<b>
<p></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Marnie S. Shaul,
Associate Director, Education And Employment Issues, U.S. General Accounting
Offices, Washington, D.C. <a HREF="#_Toc459626882">*</a></font>
<blockquote>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Robert F. Mizerak,
National Director, Seniors In Community Service Program, National Urban
League, Inc., New York, NY <a HREF="#_Toc459626883">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Andrea Wooten,
President, Green Thumb, Arlington, Virginia <a HREF="#_Toc459626884">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Clayton Fong, Executive
Director, National Asian Pacific Center On Aging, Seattle, WA <a HREF="#_Toc459626885">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Mary Ellen Saunders,
Management Analysts, Division Of Services For Aging And Adults With Physical
Disabilities, New Castle, DE <a HREF="#_Toc459626886">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix A - The Written Statement Of
Marnie S. Shaul, Associate Director, Education And Employment Issues, U.S.
General Accounting Offices, Washington, D.C. <a HREF="#_Toc459626887">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix B - The Written Statement Of
Robert F. Mizerak, National Director, Seniors In Community Service Program,
National Urban League, Inc., New York, NY <a HREF="#_Toc459626888">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix C - The Written Statement Of
Andrea Wooten, President, Green Thumb, Arlington, VA <a HREF="#_Toc459626889">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix D - The Written Statement Of
Clayton Fong, Executive Director, National Asian Pacific Center On Aging,
Seattle, WA <a HREF="#_Toc459626890">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix E - The Written Statement Of
Mary Ellen Saunders, Management Analysts, Division Of Services - Aging And
Adults With Physical Disabilities, New Castle, DE <a HREF="#_Toc459626891">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix F - The Written Statement Of
Gema G. Hernandez, D.P.A., Secretaary, Florida Department Of Elder Affairs <a HREF="#_Toc459626892">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendx G - The Written Statement Of
Walter G. Hoefer, Director, New York State Officer For The Aging <a HREF="#_Toc459626893">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Table Of Indexes <a HREF="#_Toc459626894">*</a></font></p>
</blockquote>
<b>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">H.R. 782, THE OLDER
AMERICANS ACT:</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">TITLE V-COMMUNITY
SERVICE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM</font></p>
</b>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Wednesday, May 19, 1999</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">House of
Representatives,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Subcommittee on
Postsecondary Education, Training and Life-Long Learning,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Committee on Education
and the Workforce,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Washington, D.C.</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
<p> </p>
</font>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The subcommittee met, pursuant to call,
at 2:00 p.m., in Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Howard P.
"Buck" McKeon [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Present: Representatives McKeon,
Barrett, Castle, Deal, Ehlers, Isakson, Martinez, Tierney and Kind.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Staff Present: Cindy Herrle,
Professional Staff Member; Victor Klatt, Education Policy Coordinator; Michael
Reynard, Media Assistant; Lynn Selmser, Professional Staff Member; Bailey Wood,
Legislative Assistant; June Harris, Minority Education Coordinator; Cheryl
Johnson, Minority Legislative Associate, Education; Mary Ellen Ardouny, Minority
Legislative Associate, Education; and Roxana Folescu, Minority Staff Assistant,
Education.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
[Presiding] The hearing of the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, Training
and Life-Long Learning will come to order.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">My name is Bill Barrett, a member of
the committee. Mr. McKeon, the chairman of the subcommittee, has been called
away to a markup. A roll call vote has been requested, and he had to rush out
and do his duty in that regard. So, I would like to share with the subcommittee
and others in the room Mr. McKeon's opening statement.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Good afternoon.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">As most of you know, this is the sixth
and final hearing in what has become an informative series of bipartisan
hearings on the reauthorization of the Older Americans Act. Today, we have saved
one of the best topics for last, Title V- the Senior Community Service
Employment Program.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">However, before we begin, I think it is
important to note that, as we listen carefully to what each of the witnesses has
to say about how the program is run and how it should be run, we should
constantly ask ourselves, are we meeting the needs of our Nation's seniors and,
if not, how can we do better?</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In other words, whether we are talking
about ensuring the equitable distribution of job slots, updating the hold
harmless provision or instituting performance standards, what we are really
talking about is providing low-income seniors with jobs.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I would like to yield to the ranking
member of the subcommittee, Mr. Martinez.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The Senior Community Service Employment
Program has always been one of my favorite programs, and probably because I have
seen it at work in my own district, particularly in the city of Montery Park,
where I was the mayor. I would never have thought to see a program like this
one, in which senior citizens serve, as patrolmen, almost like an active
community watch. The seniors are actually trained by the police department and
are responsible for duties that would otherwise consume many man-hours of the
regular police force. These senior participants are doing it in a very effective
way and have been doing it for a good number of years.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">That program is run by one-of-a-kind
organizations, not by the State. So I have seen how effective they can be. As a
result, I am a strong supporter where initially I was one of these people who
wondered why the States only got 22 percent of the funds while 78 percent of the
money went to the 10 organizations.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Well, after studying this outstanding
phenomena for a number of years, I now understand why and how, in every aspect
they do a better job than the States do with the monies they get.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Having said that, I want to explain
that it not only provides economically disadvantaged older Americans with a
source of income and a sense of self-worth_ and if you don�t believe me, look
at the seniors wearing police uniforms and badges, it certainly does provide
pride for them_ this also is a very needed service in the community.</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The program has been working
exceptionally well for over 30 years, and it provides a win-win situation for
everyone involved. That is why I have never understood why some continue to call
for a massive overhaul of the program.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We have an old saying around here, if
it ain�t broke don't fix it; and sometimes I don't think that we adhere to our
own wisdom. As many of you are aware, the previous chairman and I often
disagreed over the extent to which Title V should be altered. For instance, we
had many lively discussions over the funding split. We had reached some
accommodations in the last Congress, although the whole thing fell apart at the
end.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">However, I still believe that we are
going to be able to, and now have a better chance of, reaching some agreement on
it than we had then. The issue concerned the funding split between the national
sponsors and the States, which, as currently set by appropriations language, is
78 percent and 22 percent respectively.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">My opinion was, and it still remains,
that any shift in funding should involve much deliberation, because any hasty
change would certainly displace seniors currently participating in the program.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We were also able to reach common
ground on the issue of performance standards. This is something that the
organizations do not object to.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">It is my understanding that most of the
national sponsors and the States already meet the unsubsidized goals set by the
Department of Labor. Nevertheless, the sponsors are not opposed to the
performance standards that we had suggested during the last session of Congress.
However they contend, and I agree, that these standards should not only take
into account the special circumstances of certain sponsors and their enrollees,
such as limited English-speaking ability and the low level of education
attainment, but also we disagreed on the use of the other enrollee cost fund.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">This fund provides program participants
with things like training and transportation and other services necessary to
gain employment. These services should not have to compete with equally
necessary administrative costs, such as office space and telephone service.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Fortunately, this Congress I have had
the extreme pleasure of working Chairman McKeon, with whom I agree on a number
of matters. For instance, I think that the Chairman and I agree that this
program, while highly successful, can be improved upon.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I also think it is safe to say that we
agree that any changes to Title V should be made with great care and for good
reason. There is no need to upset or displace the thousands of seniors currently
participating in the program just for the sake of change. And in order to ensure
that the changes that we make to Title V are well informed, we have solicited
input from the Department of Labor and from program participants.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">And we look forward to your input
today. I hope that you will share with us your thoughts on what currently works
well in the act and what we can do to improve upon it.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">With that, I yield back the balance of
my time.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
[Presiding.] Thank you, Mr. Martinez.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We have been informed that we will have
a vote on the floor shortly. So, when that happens, we will have to leave, and
we appreciate your patience with us.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Our witnesses are a good panel today.
We have, first, Dr. Marnie Shaul, the Associate Director of Education and
Employment Issues for the U.S. General Accounting Offices. Prior to joining the
GAO, she was with the State of Ohio's Department of Development, where she led
efforts in business and community development and international trade. She holds
a Ph.D. in economics from Ohio State University.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Then we will hear from Mr. Robert
Mizerak, the National Director for Seniors in Community Service for the National
Urban League, Incorporated. Mr. Mizerak has been with the National Urban League
since 1971, where he has held the positions of Director of Program Operations
and Deputy Director of Apprenticeship Outreach. Prior to that, he was with the
Board of Fundamental Education, with a Master's Degree from Keene College. He
currently is working on his postgraduate certificate in gerontology at Rutgers
University.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">And then Ms. Andrea Wooten, the
President and CEO of Green Thumb, Inc. with a law degree from the University of
the Pacific and a Bachelors of Science from Colorado State University. She spent
3 years in private practice with the firm of Orrick, Harrington & Sutcliffe
in Sacramento, California. She also served as a clerk to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">And then Mr. Clayton Fong, the
Executive Director of the Seattle-based National Asian Pacific Center on Aging.
He has served as Deputy Assistant to the President for Public Liaison in the
White House, Deputy Director of the U.S. Office of Consumer Affairs and as a
marketing and media consultant.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">And, finally, Ms. Mary Ellen Saunders,
who I am not going to introduce because I understand Mr. Castle may be here. If
he is not here when we get to you, I will introduce you. If he is here, being
the former governor and your Congressman, he would like the pleasure of
introducing you.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">So we will begin with Dr. Marnie Shaul.
You all understand the rules, how that green, yellow and red light work. We will
put your total statement in the record. If you could contain your comments
within 5 minutes, we would appreciate it. The green light runs for 4 minutes,
the yellow for one minute, and then the red says time's up.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
We will hear first from Dr. Shaul. Thank you.</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font><b><i>
<p><a NAME="_Toc459612977"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></a><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a NAME="_Toc459626882">STATEMENT
OF MARNIE S. SHAUL, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT ISSUES, U.S.
GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICES, WASHINGTON, D.C.</a></font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
</font></i>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to be
here today to assist you as you discuss the reauthorization of Title V of the
Older Americans Act. For over 30 years, the Senior Community Service Employment
Program known as SCSEP has been an important source of jobs for needy, elderly
Americans.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Currently about 100,000 people annually
work in subsidized community service jobs and are given an opportunity to
acquire skills sufficient to leave the program for an unsubsidized job. My
comments today are based on the findings from our 1995 report and additional
work that we recently performed for the subcommittee.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In summary, we found that two separate
legislative provisions result in the distribution of SCSEP funds among and
within States that does not always match the distribution of the needy, elderly
population. First, because the 1978 hold harmless provision guarantees that
national sponsors can carry out the same level of activities today as they did
in 1978, a majority of SCSEP funds are not responsive to changes in population
that have occurred since 1978.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Second, although 55 percent of the
funds over the 1978 appropriation were designated to go to States, this level of
funding has never occurred because annually national sponsors are appropriated
78 percent of total program funds. This provision can create conditions whereby
some areas within States can be overserved and underserved. Legislative action
could correct both of these problems.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I would like to briefly elaborate on
each of these points.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The hold harmless provision enacted as
part of the 1978 OAA amendments and as interpreted by the Department of Labor
guarantees that national sponsors can carry out on a State-by-State basis the
same level of activity as they did in 1978. Because of this guarantee and
because of the changes in population over the past 20 years, the distribution of
positions today does not correspond to where the needy elderly live.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In program year 1998, 63 percent of
program funds were subject to the hold harmless provision. To overcome this
situation, the hold harmless provision could be modified in one of two ways. It
could be amended to maintain the national sponsor's level of activities on a
nationwide basis instead of the 1978 State-by-State basis or it could be
repealed altogether.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Both options would allow all of SCSEP's
resources to be targeted to the various States based on the most currently
available data. However, repealing the provision would eliminate the guarantee
to national sponsors.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The second legislative provision that
affects the distribution of SCSEP resources is annual appropriation statutes
that specify for 10 national sponsors collectively should receive 78 percent of
total program funds. In 1978, it was envisioned that States would gradually
begin playing a larger role in the program and would be responsible for ensuring
a more equitable distribution of funds within their boundaries. States were to
receive 55 percent of funds above the 1978 appropriation.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">This provision has never been
implemented. Because State agencies receive only 22 percent of current annual
SCSEP funds, it is more difficult for them to fulfill their responsibilities to
ensure an equitable distribution of all SCSEP positions within their States.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">One option for more fairly distributing
SCSEP positions within the States is to increase the percentage of funds
dedicated to State governments. Had the 55 percent provision been in effect in
program year 1998, the State's share of program funds would have increased to
about 39 percent.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In conclusion, the SCSEP program
continues to operate in the same manner as it has since 1978, even though the
States where elderly Americans reside has changed over that time. This has
resulted in a mismatch between where elderly, needy people live and where the
subsidized jobs are provided. The matters for consideration by the Congress that
we offered in 1995 could help solve this problem.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">As I said, the Congress could amend or
eliminate the hold harmless provision and increase the portion of SCSEP funds
State governments receive. We believe these are still valid today.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">While these represent major changes in
SCSEP, if the changes are properly phased in over a period of time, States,
national sponsors and program participants will benefit, because funds would be
awarded to serve locations where needy older Americans live.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Chairman, that concludes my
statement. I would be happy to answer any questions that you or members of the
subcommittee might have.</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">See Appendix A For The Written
Statement Of Marnie S. Shaul, Associate Director, Education And Employment
Issues, U.S. General Accounting Offices, Washington, D.C.</font></p>
</b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</font><b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you very much. Mr. Mizerak, please.</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font><b><i>
<p><a NAME="_Toc459612978"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></a><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a NAME="_Toc459626883">STATEMENT
OF ROBERT F. MIZERAK, NATIONAL DIRECTOR, SENIORS IN COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM,
NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE, INC., NEW YORK, NEW YORK</a></font></p>
</i></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font><b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to
provide testimony on the reauthorization of the Older Americans Act and, more
specifically, the Seniors in Community Service Employment Program, Title V.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The National Urban League has a
distinguished 89-year record of combating racial injustices and securing
employment opportunities for African Americans and other disadvantaged
constituents.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Since 1978, the National Urban League,
through a competitive bid process, has sponsored the Seniors in Community
Service Program. This testimony reaffirms the important role Title V plays and
should continue to play in providing low-income older Americans with job
training and meaningful employment opportunities while helping to meet the
social service needs of local communities across the country.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Those who enroll in the Title V program
are the poorest of the poor among older Americans. Because of age, racial
discrimination, deficient education, lack of skills or disabilities, the
prospects for employment are grim for many of them. Tragically, many older
African Americans, because of a long history of employment discrimination and
underemployment, now receive little or no Social Security or pension benefits.
They face the double jeopardy of age and race.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Older blacks are more than two times as
likely to be unemployed than aged whites and nearly three times more likely to
be poor than older whites. Seven out of 10, 71 percent, of older blacks are
considered economically vulnerable because their income does not exceed twice
the Federal poverty level. Fifty-seven percent of older black women living alone
live in poverty, 57 percent. Twenty-one percent of the participants in our
program rely exclusively on the modest earnings they receive from the subsidized
training through Title V.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Chairman, these older Americans are
desperate for the employment opportunity, because the income is needed. It is
needed for their survival. They want to work, and they want to continue to
contribute to their communities.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The Title V program provides its
participants who are 55 years and older with important and needed community
service experiences as well as job training, educational upgrading, counseling,
which gives them a strong motivation and incentive to acquire new skills and
assume useful roles in society. The program enables participants to reenter the
work force and the mainstream of community life by combining meaningful work
experience and skill acquisition in training assignments that help to fill
community service gaps.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">By merging the needs of the
participants for job training and employment with the service needs of the
community, the program contributes to the growth and well being of both.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Employers who hire these dependable,
job-ready workers also reap the benefits of the program. Moreover, society at
large benefits from productive, tax-paying workers.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In each of the 16 States and 24 local
areas that the National Urban League programs operated, we have cooperative
working relationships and linkages with the State Office on Aging, Area Agencies
on Aging, other State and local and Title V sponsors and with a cross section of
other service delivery agencies.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The National Urban League and its local
projects will continue to build upon these working relationships with local,
State and national organizations to promote the equitable distribution of Title
V slots and to assure coordinated services under the new Workforce Investment
Act.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We have a few recommendations. We
believe that the Title V program only needs fine-tuning. It doesn't need a major
rehaul.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Under the authorization levels, we urge
that the Title V program, which now serves less than 1 percent of the eligible
senior population, we encourage Congress to increase the authorization level to
70,000 positions from its current level of 61,000.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We also urge that we better assure
targeting of services to those most in need. We strongly urge that the Congress
affirm that Title V is designed and implemented primarily to reach
disadvantaged, low-income persons, particularly minorities, 55 years and older
and that recruitment emphasize reaching those in the community most in need.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We also recommend that the income
eligibility remain at 125 percent of poverty.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We also recommend that the 72 percent
national sponsor and that the 22 percent State distribution be maintained.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The program has consistently exceeded
all goals established by Congress and the Department of Labor, surpassing the 20
percent placement goal for the past 8 years. There is no basis, repeat no basis,
for suggesting that the removal of the 78/22 percent distribution between the
national sponsors and the State's sponsors will provide a greater incentive to
administer positions in underserved areas.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In closing, Mr. Chairman and
subcommittee members, we would like to state that the Title V program is a vital
program that has earned unprecedented bipartisan support. Minorities and other
poor adults who have been hardest hit by cuts in social service programs would
be the major casualties of any assault on the Older Americans Act. As you
reconsider or as you consider reauthorization, Mr. Chairman, please give serious
consideration and priority to strengthening and expanding the program under the
Older Americans Act that will equitably serve older Americans who are in most
economic need.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Thank you.</font></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">See Appendix B For The Written
Statement Of Robert F. Mizerak, National Director, Seniors In Community
Service Program, National Urban League, Inc., New York, New York</font></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you. Ms. Wooten</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font><b><i>
<p><a NAME="_Toc459612979"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></a><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a NAME="_Toc459626884">STATEMENT
OF ANDREA WOOTEN, PRESIDENT, GREEN THUMB, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA</a></font></p>
</i></b>
<p><b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Next year, Green Thumb will celebrate
its 35th anniversary; and I am quite sure that when our founders established
Green Thumb back in 1965, they had literally no idea that it would evolve into
what has become the Senior Community Service Employment Program. Because of
Green Thumb's instrumental role in establishing this program almost 35 years
ago, we feel that we have a particular responsibility to make recommendations
that will ensure that this program continues to be successful and to keep up
with a rapidly aging population that is living longer and healthier lives than
ever before.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">During the hearing that you held in
Nebraska, you heard from one of our participants, Mary Rucker, and she told you
how important this program has been to her and the impact that it has made in
her life. We have lots of Mary Ruckers across the country who will tell similar
stories, and they do so much better than I. So, this morning, I would like to
confine my remarks to what I consider to be probably the most controversial
issues concerning Title V.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Even though Title V is one of the most
successful programs I believe that the Department of Labor has ever operated, it
can be improved. And there are a number of ways that it can be improved, but I
think when we began to look at changes, we need to sort out what really needs to
be changed and what needs to remain the same.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">One of the areas that I would like to
address is the 78/22 percent split in funding. The General Accounting Office has
questioned the longstanding practice of allocating 78 percent of the funding to
the nine private sector organizations that operate the program along with the
U.S. Forest Service and 22 percent to the State government; and they have done
so based on its perceived impact on the equitable distribution of positions
within States and between States.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In doing so, they missed the point.
They missed the key issue, I believe, and a reason why we are all here and that
is what is going to make the most difference to the people that we are here to
serve?</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">And let me focus on this just a minute,
because I really think that this is where we need to be headed. The answer to
this question is not to shift more money to the States, clearly. And the reason
for that is you can just look at the facts. For the past 10 years in a row, the
national private sector organizations have achieved the placement goal
established for them; and, yet, the States have achieved that goal only 4 out of
10 years.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Now, what does this mean in real human
terms? The bottom line is that an additional 33,000 people have been served
because of the outstanding results produced by the private sector grantees.
Those are real people with real impact on their lives.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">To illustrate the wide gap in
performance between the national private sector grantees and the States, just
look at last year's results.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Last year, the States achieved a
placement rate of 22.9 percent, compared to 31.9 percent produced by the private
sector grantees. Once again, in human terms what this means is that an
additional 4,400 people found jobs.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The disparity in results between the
private sector and State grantees becomes even more apparent when you subtract
out the results produced by the private sector grantees under contracts and
subcontracts with the State agencies. According to our calculations, you can
take between 1 and 2 percentage points in addition off the results produced by
the State when you do that.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Now, let us just focus on another key
indicator and that is the participant characteristics. You may say, well, if you
are producing such great results, are you creaming, are you serving those most
in need? Clearly not. The national sponsors have served those who are most
economically disadvantaged, those who are older, those who are experiencing more
disabilities, who represent more minority groups, who are less educated and who
are inclusive of more veterans. Historically, that has been the case.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Their costs per participant has been a
lot lower than the States. Their administrative costs are lower than the States,
and they serve more of the general community as opposed to just focusing on
aging services out in those local communities.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Given these results, you may say, well,
why don't we give all the money to the national grantees? And that is not what I
am suggesting for this important reason. We have a great public-private
partnership with the States. Because of the limited role that the States play,
we can do more with the funding. We bring strengths, each of us bring strengths
to the program that we don't have alone.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Privatizing the entire program would
certainly be consistent with the philosophy that government's role should be
limited and that the traditional government functions that had been performed by
this program over the years so well by the national private sector organizations
should be performed by them in the future. But, again, the public-private
partnership is a real strong reason for continuing the current allocation.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Chairman, I will conclude my
remarks at this point by also just pointing out that I do not concur with the
General Accounting Office's assumption that more money would necessarily be
equitably allocated if a larger share of the funding went to the States. There
are a number of reasons for the disparity in funding, and it is not a
significant problem. Only 3 percent of the counties in this country are
underserved; and for 3 percent of the counties, we are suggesting a wholesale
shift potentially of massive amounts of funding from organizations that have
historically performed excellently to State government; and I don't believe that
that is the solution to that problem.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">See Appendix C For The Written
Statement Of Andrea Wooten, President, Green Thumb, Arlington, Virginia</font></p>
</b>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you. Mr. Fong.</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font><b><i>
<p><a NAME="_Toc459612980"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></a><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a NAME="_Toc459626885">STATEMENT
OF CLAYTON FONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC CENTER ON AGING,
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON</a></font></p>
</i></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font><b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am honored and pleased today to
have the opportunity to share the National Asian Pacific Centers on Aging's
views on SCSEP.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">NAPCA is the only national organization
dedicated to the needs and concerns of Asian and Pacific Island elders in the
United States. As an organization, we are committed to improving the access of
our constituents to existing community health and social service programs for
the aged. We serve as one of 10 national sponsors of SCSEP, and this really is a
critical program to our serving elders in the country.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I just want to quickly make five
points.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">First of all, I want to emphasize that
the Asian Pacific community really is the fastest-growing segment of the senior
community in the country. If you look at the next 50 years, there will be an 80
percent growth in the aging population generally between 1990 and 2040; and you
will see at the same time as the 80 percent growth in the population as a whole,
you will see 1,000 percent growth in the Asian Pacific elder population. You
will see similar growth numbers in the Hispanic community.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">What does that mean? It means that we
have a challenge not only to meet the needs of an aging baby boom and the
graying of America, but we have a challenge to meet the needs of a changing face
of the aging population and that is critically important.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I want to emphasize that, in order to
do that, it is going to require that we put more emphasis on serving
hard-to-reach populations, people with language barriers, people with cultural
barriers, people that just don't reach things through the same one-size-fits-all
process. And I want to emphasize that in the SCSEP program that really is the
national sponsors that have done the best job of doing that.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We work across the U.S. government with
regard to programs for the aged; and I will say in the case of Asian Pacific
elders, we are underserved in just about every single area. This is one of the
few areas where we have managed to do a pretty good job, and it is really
because we have a national sponsor-type program to create, one, the economies of
scale necessary in order to_imagine asking every single county to translate for
26 different subgroups in the Asian community, let alone the dialects and other
things. If you don't create the critical mass, it is a structural impediment to
our community being served. So that is an important part of it.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I want to also emphasize that, along
those lines, if you want to meet those challenges, I believe that it is more
about focusing more resources on the national sponsors, not less resources on
the national sponsors.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">A couple of other points I want to
make. I want to address the issue of, whatever you do decide, there are two very
small national sponsors, the National Indian Counseling on Aging and NAPCA. And
it is really critically important that we have a minimum city mass. We try to
run a national program on very limited resources. If we don't have a minimum
size, in whatever you to decide to do, it makes it very difficult to effectively
and efficiently run the program.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Thirdly, I want to address the issue of
performance criteria. They are important, but we believe that it is important
they be administratively determined for primarily one reason_flexibility. You
need to have the flexibility to stand the test of time on any criteria, and that
means when the economy is good, when the economy is bad. That means if you are
in an area where the economy is not doing as well versus another. It also means
if you serve a primarily harder to serve population, like those with limited
English-speaking skills.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">So it is very important. I will say if
you do create some guidelines or what have you at the national level, I think it
further important not to just emphasize placement alone. That does, in my
opinion, encourage creaming.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I think, in addition to placement, you
need to talk about those with the poorest employment prospects; and I think
there needs to be some accountability along those lines.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Let me close by just emphasizing how
important this program has been for Asian Americans and Asian Pacific elders. I
just want to do it with three examples. Not only have they been critical in
helping elders with an employment training program, but the impact in the aging
network as a whole has been tremendous in terms of helping them to build the
infrastructure, change the infrastructure, and bridge the gaps of language and
other things.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">For example, a senior center located
right in the middle of the largest Cambodian population in the country in LA
County was unable to reach a single Cambodian for many years until we were able
to place a bilingual Cambodian speaking elder in that program and therefore
bridge the gap of language in addition to culture.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I have to say, one of the quotes that
one of the Cambodians said was that, you know, Cambodians just don't play bingo,
just to make a point of the culture competency as well.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Two other examples, if you will indulge
me. In the San Fernando Valley, which I understand includes a good part of the
chairman's district, two SCSEP enrollees have taught ESL and citizenship
assistance classes, and over 1,000 Korean elders have gone through that class,
and 700 of them have realized the dream of becoming an American citizen. That is
an intangible community service aspect to this program that you just cannot
overemphasize.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The last one I want to say is there is
a general_or a former vice minister of commerce in Vietnam was unable to find
work in the United States until NAPCA placed him as an enrollee in a mental
health center in Long Beach. The center hired him. But I want to quote him. He
said, "I would not have been given the chance had I not been given the
opportunity to prove myself first as a SCSEP enrollee."</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I think that sums it up. Thank you very
much.</font></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">See Appendix D For The Written
Statement Of Clayton Fong, Executive Director, National Asian Pacific Center
On Aging, Seattle, Washington</font></p>
</b>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you. Mr. Castle, would you care to introduce your constituent?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Castle</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I would.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mary Ellen Saunders has joined us. She
is a management analyst with the Delaware Department of the Health and Social
Service Division of Services for Aging and Adults with Physical Disabilities.
Previously, she worked at the Delaware Department of Labor.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">She began her career as a public school
teacher. I hate to lose teachers, but she does a wonderful job in the State and
has a Bachelor of Arts degree from Chestnut Hill College in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. She represents Delaware. We are delighted to have her here.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you.</font></p>
<font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p> </p>
</font><b><i>
<p><a NAME="_Toc459612981"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></a><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a NAME="_Toc459626886">STATEMENT
OF MARY ELLEN SAUNDERS, MANAGEMENT ANALYSTS, DIVISION OF SERVICES FOR AGING AND
ADULTS WITH PHYSICAL DISABILITIES, NEW CASTLE, DELAWARE</a></font></p>
</i>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you, Congressman Castle.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Chairman and members of the
subcommittee, on behalf of the State of Delaware Department of Health and Social
Services, Division of Services for Aging and Adults with Physical Disabilities,
I appreciate the opportunity to testify before this committee in support of the
reauthorization of the Older Americans Act and about Title V, the Senior
Community Service Employment Program in Delaware.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The mission of Delaware Health and
Social Services embraces older citizens, and this program is one piece of the
investment Delaware is making in support of them.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The State of Delaware, Delaware Health
and Social Services is the only grant recipient of Title V funds in Delaware and
has been since the program's inception. To carry out the program at the local
level, we contract with a number of indigenous community-based groups. Besides
Title V funds, our division is the grant recipient of other Older American Act
funds which provide congregate and home-delivered meals, respite and personal
care services, transportation and other support services to seniors.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We are proud of our Title V program's
long success in meeting the employment needs of Delaware's eligible seniors, the
tremendous support it provides to community agencies and our good relationship
with our sponsors and our representatives at the United States Department of
Labor Older Worker Programs.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We have been continually refining and
improving this program over the years. Most recently, in 1997, in order to
foster competition, we started an open bid process to select service providers.
This process consists of typical open bid procedures: request for proposals,
pre-bid meeting, bid presentation, evaluation and award.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Our Division created an independent
review committee to evaluate the bids. We looked for people who had knowledge
and experience with employment issues, people who were representative of each
county of the State and knowledgeable of that county's population, geography and
industry.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Delaware, a small State, is made up of
three counties. Each county is unique. The county at one end of the State is
very rural, the county at the other end of the State is typical of a larger
urban area, and the county in the middle is a mixture of both. We wanted that
geographic diversity to be reflected in our selection of members of the
technical review committee.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Another primary objective of this
process was to maintain an equitable distribution of the slots throughout the
State so that the proportion of eligible seniors to be served in an area
continued to be comparable to the number of eligible people in that area. We
have a long history of maintaining an equitable distribution, and we wanted to
keep that focus.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The executive director of the Delaware
Private Industry Council and two Department of Labor office managers, each
representative of a different county of the State, all participated on that
committee. Our staff provided administrative and technical assistance to this
committee.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">After an evaluation of the bidder's
proposals, the review committee made recommendations for funding. We implemented
these recommendations, and contracts were negotiated and signed. Selected
service providers are community-based agencies who are experienced, capable and
knowledgeable.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Community-based agencies have served
our clients over the years. The experience and knowledge of these agencies,
along with their willingness to work cooperatively with us, has facilitated the
growth and the development of the Title V program. Some of the results of that
growth and development are an introduction of the 502(e) program, consistent
equitable distribution of program slots, effective management of program costs,
achievement of performance goals, and program linkages.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The 502(e) program focuses on
employment in private industry at a competitive wage. The training takes place
on the job. We started this as a pilot project in one county last year. This
year it is running successfully Statewide.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Our statistics give evidence of its
success. Our placement goal for the current year, program year '98, is 75
percent. At the end of April, we reached 65 percent of that goal. There are
additional slots at various stages of training; and if all of these enrollees
achieve placement, we will exceed our goal.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Any change in slot distribution, when
needed, is part of our annual planning process. Contractors in each county are
notified as increases and decreases in slot levels are needed in order to
maintain an equitable distribution of slots throughout the State. Adjustments
are made and contract dollars reflect those changes as well.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Because our sponsors understand the
slot level must reflect the number of eligible seniors in the area of the State
and because there is always turnover in enrollees through placements or other
terminations, these statewide adjustments in the slot distribution have never
been a problem.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Delaware also has a long history of
good, effective management of costs. The program allows 13.5 percent of the
grant free administrative costs. Over the past contract years, the average total
administrative charges to the grant have been an average of 11 percent.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In the past 3 years, we have exceeded
our placement goal of 20 percent. In '96, our placements were 22; in '97, 25
percent; and, in '98, we are already at 24 percent of our goal.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We also have a long-standing
cooperative work relationship with the Delaware Department of Labor. Besides the
participation of the Department of Labor and Private Industry Council officials
on our committee, we have older workers assigned to the local offices. We have a
memorandum of agreement with the JTPA program; and, currently, our director is
working with Delaware's Secretary of Labor as a member of the Planning and
Implementation Committee for the Workforce Investment Act.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">See Appendix E For The Written
Statement Of Mary Ellen Saunders, Management Analysts, Division Of Services
For Aging And Adults With Physical Disabilities, New Castle, Delaware</font></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
[Presiding.] Thank you very much, Ms. Saunders. Dr. Shaul, for the most part
all of the panelists talked about the 78/22 split, 78% of the funding for this
program goes to the national organizations, 22% of the funding for this
program goes to the State Aging organizations. How do the services provided by
the national organizations and the State organizations differ, the services
provided?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
I am sorry, I really cannot answer that question in any detail. When we
evaluated this program in 1994 and reported in 1995, we were not specifically
looking at service differences. It is true that the kinds of things that the
States and national sponsors do can be similar, but we didn't do an evaluation
of the services of the national sponsors and the services of the State agencies.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Can either of the members of the three national organizations answer that
question? Ms. Wooten?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Yes, I think we can.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The State focuses their services on
aging services, services to the aging community, whereas the national grantees
focus services more on services to the general community, which Maya portion of
their funds_actually, I can give you the percentage. There are, actually, about
73 percent of the national grantees' positions are in service to the general
community. The balance is in service to aging services.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">That is compared to about_well, it is
just almost the opposite for the States. The States put by far the most
resources into staffing their services, like aging_like senior centers and
nutrition programs and those sorts of services.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Then how do the services offered within the national organizations differ?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Those services_they can range from tutoring_assigning enrollees to a school to
tutor children, to manning a local library, to working at the Red Cross, like
Mary Rucker did in Nebraska, serving general organizations that do not focus
necessarily on services to an aging population.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Now, national organizations, if I am not mistaken, are asked to provide under
the regulations, 10 percent matching funds.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Correct.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Is that matching fund in cash?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Generally not. Generally, it is in in-kind contributions, which is allowed.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Then a noncash contribution could be an enrollee in a library, is that what you
are saying?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
No, the noncash contribution could be the value of the supervisor's time that
supervises that enrollee who is assigned to a library. But it could be other
kinds of in-kind contributions, like donated office space and telephone
expenses. And, in some instances, we co-locate with other community service
organizations that will donate space to us and donate use of telephone and Xerox
machines and those sorts of things. So it is wherever we save money that
normally we would have to spend to support the program, that is basically an
in-kind contribution.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
A few other things, too, like physicals. We grant physicals to our participants
each year. There are some agencies like clinics where our participants work they
get free medical physicals each year from that agency. They would get like a
discount in their prescription drugs.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Some people also provide free training
for our participants. In other words, if they have a training course for their
staff, like computers, they will bring and allow our participants to go along
and they will pay for that service.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Good move, Governor_why is Delaware so different? Why is Delaware, I believe,
the only State that doesn't have a national sponsor; isn't that correct? Yes_no,
I think Alaska also doesn't have a national sponsor.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Hawaii.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Alaska and Hawaii. I was informed by counsel. What makes you different and why?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
We are not really dissimilar in terms of the description of how our
enrollees_what kind of positions they have in the community and the kind of
support we get from some doctors for physicals for our enrollees and things like
that. But how it had happened, I don't know the exact history. I know that our
director was head of the Division at the time that the decision was made, and
she was offered the opportunity to run the program as part of our senior
programs.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Do you see this as a problem? Is it an advantage, a disadvantage?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Well, we see it as an advantage to all of the services we can provide the
seniors.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Okay. Thank you very much. My time is about to expire.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The ranking member, Mr. Martinez.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Is it true that one of the reasons your
program works so well, Ms. Saunders, is because you contract the funds you
receive out to community-based organizations?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
We do contract our money out.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
In fact, you are doing what they are doing, except they are doing it from the
Federal level, whereas you are doing it from the State level, yes?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
We are contracting out to communities.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
So community-based organizations are really the basis of your operation. They
are very similar in the regard that you are the only provider in your community.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul, in your testimony you talked
about equitable distribution. How did you arrive at the conclusion that there is
inequitable distribution in the State by the 10 national groups?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
When we did our work, we compared the equitable distribution reports that the
State_that are filed on behalf of States in the years 1989 and 1994, and we
looked at the distribution of positions at that time. And we compared_we looked
at whether the distribution had been equitable in '99 and whether any
improvement had been made in 1994. And in some cases we did not see very much
change.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">That still leaves me in a quandary. How
can you make that deduction from the information supplied to you by the States
and then determine what is equitable and what is inequitable? To me, in order to
determine what is equitable and what is inequitable, you must find the
population centers and determine whether one population center is being denied
or another population center is being favored. Did you do that?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
As I understand it, the States_the reports that talk about States_</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
I am not talking about the States. You were doing the investigation.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Our investigation was looking at the grant award process. It was looking at the
administrative costs. It was not designed to evaluate the performance of either
of the States.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">If you are trying to suggest that
something is inequitable, then you ought to have some real, bona fide evidence
as to whether it is inequitable or not. It doesn�t surprise me though, that
your data is unreliable. When I first came to Congress 17 years ago, I had the
greatest confidence in the GAO, but since then, I have seen the GAO conduct two
investigations in my district. Now I have no more confidence in the GAO and
their conclusions than I have in the man in the moon.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">For every statistic that you quoted in
your testimony, Ms. Wooten, you point out where the 10 national groups have been
more successful than the States.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Let me tell you where I am coming from.
When I first became acquainted with this particular situation, I wondered why
the 10 groups get so much more money than the States. Well, now I understand
why. They are more effective with the money they get. The States have a tendency
to be more bureaucratic in the distribution.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">In fact, one of the things on which I
agree with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is the idea of
privatizing a lot of government operations. Because privatization gives rise to
competition, and with competition comes the drive to excel. So in this instance,
I can say that that is what happened.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Earlier, I talked about one of the
national organizations in my district about bringing forth the concept of a
civilian police patrol. They wear uniforms and badges, are recognized as an
authority, however they are trained in such a way that they are not in harm's
way and know how to respond to a situation quickly. They have, in several
instances, saved citizens and saved property. They have done an outstanding job.
I would have never thought to see a program like it. And I doubt that the States
could run such a program.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Can you just expand on what the main
differences are between the State and grantee-run programs? From my perspective,
I see a lot of differences in the way the States their programs. They run them
in conjunction with area agencies on aging, mostly providing personnel for
senior centers or helping out with nutritional programs and things like that,
which are not at all related to providing real, meaningful employment that
creates pride in an individual like your organizations do.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Yes. Mr. Martinez, I believe that one of the reasons why the national sponsors
as a group do a better job, and I can only speak for Green Thumb obviously, is
because we are more bottom-line focused. We are not bureaucratic. We can be
innovative. We can be responsive. And we know that if we don't do a good job,
you are going to de-fund us. You should hold us accountable for our results, and
if we don't do a good job, you should take that money away.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">But here we have got a situation where
we have done an excellent job, and so the opposite is true. If you have got
great organizations that have done a terrific job over the years, you should
reward those groups, if anything. You shouldn't be talking about taking money
away and giving it to a group of State organizations that are bureaucratic for
the most part.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">And I know Delaware has done a terrific
job, and I am not specifically talking about you, but there are States that have
not done a good job, and it brought the statistics down. And if you are talking
about shifting the funding to some of these States, then you are going to have a
result that I don't think you want.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">One other reason for our success, real
briefly, is Green Thumb is nonpartisan; and we work with both sides of the aisle
very effectively. Our bottom line is we want to help the people we are here to
serve. And too often in State government, and government in general, service to
people gets overshadowed by partisan political concerns. And it is really a
shame. It is really a shame, because we need to keep our eye on the ball; and,
that is, how are we going to help those older people out there who want to
remain independent and productive well into their 60s and 70s and 80s, live
better lives? And if we all focus on that, I think the result here is clear.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Martinez</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
[Presiding.] Thank you.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I am trying to learn kind of more about
this program. Ms. Saunders, how much money does your State get for this program?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
This year, about $1.8 million.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
$1.8 million. And what? You then help people get jobs? How do you do that? Take
just one person. Do they subsidize the job? Does the employer pay some out of
their funds and you pay some out of your funds?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Well, we have both parts of the Senior Community Service Employment Program. The
regular program is people are placed into subsidized jobs, gain the training,
and some are placeable and find placement.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Then we did start the 502(e) component
of the program last year as a pilot, and this year a whole State does it. And
that is where they are immediately placed in private industry or nonprofit
agency. But, anyway, right on the job where the employer that will eventually
hire them if they are satisfactory in their performance.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
So they go to work for a while totally subsidized?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Yes. They start out subsidized, and if they_</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
And the employer has free labor. And if they decide, how much time do you have
to make a decision?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
It can vary. Most approximately 3 months has been our format at the moment, but
it can be whatever the job requires. If there is a greater skill and demands a
longer training period, that is something we can adjust to.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Let us say it is one that requires 3 months. At the end of the 3 months, then
they hire or don't hire that person?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
That is correct.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
If they hire that person, does the employer take over full responsibility or do
you continue to subsidize?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
No, the employer takes full responsibility at that time. It becomes an
unsubsidized placement.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Okay. Do you have other jobs where you continue subsidy or is your total goal to
get people totally into unsubsidized jobs?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
In the 502(e) program, it is to totally get them into jobs. But in the regular
program, our goal is twofold, as the law allows, which is some are placed in
unsubsidized employment and some support community agencies.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Okay. You said that your overhead is about 13 percent?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
The law allows about 13-1/2 percent. Ours has been around 11 percent.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Eleven. Thank you.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong, what does your overhead run
percentage-wise?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
The last_for the last few years, we have stayed under the 13.5 percent, and it
has usually been between about 12-3/4 and 13-1/2.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
And how many people_how much money do you get?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Ours is a pretty small program, comparatively speaking. We have about a $6
million budget, and it is_we serve a little over a thousand seniors a year. The
allocation_</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
$6 million, you get work for a thousand people?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Yes.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
How many jobs do you get for your $1.8 million?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Saunders</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
We get 262 slots.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Okay. Ms. Wooten, what is your percentage overhead?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Our overhead runs around 12.1, 12.2 percent, consistently has for the last
several years.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
And how much money do you get?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
$109 million this year to serve 44 States and Puerto Rico.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
And how many jobs have you helped people get?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Out of our_our authorized level is about 16,000. Our placement rate_I don't have
the number on the top on of my head. That is why I am translating it. We
actually placed_last year, we placed about 35 percent of the people that we were
authorized to serve. So I guess that would be_</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
To save time now, could you each get me those numbers at a later date so they
can be included in the record??</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Sure.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Sure.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Mr. Mizerak.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
I have it right here.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
I have got it here.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
If you can get them for me for the record, I am running out of time.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
All right. The Urban League had $15 million.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
And you state in your testimony that you got that through a competitive bid
process?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
That is right, in 1978.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Have you had to rebid at all?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
No, we have not.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
You bid one time in 1978?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
That is correct.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
There has been no change on any of the people performing this service since
1978?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
No, the Asian Pacific Islanders and the Native Americans came in, I believe, in
1989.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
1990, I believe.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Did somebody drop out then and you replace him or her?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
No.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Or is there an additional?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
It was additional.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Is that competition made each year? Does anybody else have a chance to get into
this? So that it is a closed-shop type thing?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Yes, it hasn't been opened.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
We reapply every year.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
But no competition?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
But there is no competition. And I think the reason for that is as long as_at
least what I have been told, is that as long as we are meeting our goals_</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
So we have to assume that all 10 groups are doing an excellent job?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Yes.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
And there is no reason to run any competition?</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Okay. Mr. Kind.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Kind</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I thank the witnesses for their
testimony today. It has been very interesting.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">To follow up on that line of
questioning, let�s take a moment to explore the competitive bidding proposal
and the pros or perhaps the cons of why it may not necessarily work all that
well. Do any of you have any thoughts on that?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
I will take a shot at that.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">I feel very strongly that there needs
to be an accountability when grantees are not performing. This is a program
where you have people in community service jobs on an ongoing basis. So it would
be very disruptive to rebid the program every year, and so I support the
philosophy at least that if a grantee is producing excellent results, then you
need to continue with that grantee.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">But if you are not producing, then
there needs to be competition. I think competition is healthy in that
circumstance; and, in fact, that is one of our recommendations, Mr. Chairman. If
grantees are not producing, whether they are State grantees or grantees of the
national program, we believe that competition would be healthy if they fall
below, you know, certain performance goals that are established. But to have
competition every year in this kind of a program would be very disruptive.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Kind</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
What if it weren't every year? What if it was over a period of time, perhaps 2,
3, 4 year process?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Wooten</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Well, it would be less disruptive if it is extended over a period of time, that
is for sure. But I think the question becomes, you know, again, if you have got
grantees that are performing in an outstanding manner, what is the justification
for competition?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Kind</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Perhaps getting someone in whom could be a little bit more efficient or a little
more effective.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong, did you have anything to add?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Yes, I would want to add a couple of things.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">One, I think the process_we are kind of
new to this game. We came in 1990, which is relatively newer, and I will say
that it took quite a bit of time to ramp up, establish the program, get seniors
placed and improve the placement rate.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">So, for example, our placement rate
really in the first 3 years we ran the program was quite low, in the single
digits; and we didn't start to crack the single digits until I think we have
been running the program for 4 or 5 years. Now, we happened to have a unique
situation with a large percentage of nonEnglish-speaking elders and other
things. But, nonetheless, the trend line is very relevant. And so I think when
you pull that out, I think that becomes_the uncertainty becomes problematic.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Too, I would also want to mention that,
at least from our perspective where we serve a community that is very, very
difficult to serve, as a matter of fact, I think often there are a number of
other national sponsors and States who send their_they refer people to us,
because of the language barriers and/or other things. And what happens is, I
think, that_I used to do children's health work, and my analogy would be,
children's hospitals are kind of a regional facility that serves_that creates an
infrastructure that is not replicable in every single hospital.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Well, in a lot of ways, I think
especially with the minority groups as a whole, the ability to reach minority
groups that are very isolated, you don't reach them through the same mechanisms.
You need to have that, and you need to have a predictable infrastructure that
can reach those folks, and that is what is the success in reaching minorities,
particularly, and those with_the hardest to reach.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Actually, I think rural areas are
another good example of folks that wouldn't otherwise be reached if you didn't
have these kind of dedicated efforts. And so I understand the desire for
competition and the desire for accountability, but it may be accountability is
more important than competition.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Kind</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Dr. Shaul, in regards to the cost
shifting proposal, let me ask you the policy reasons behind it. I assume what we
are hearing today is indisputable in regards to the private sponsors having
better performance rates and placements, per participant costs, and
administrative costs, therefore, what is the policy reason for shifting more of
the funds to the States?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Congressman, we had our discussions with the subcommittee staff about coming to
testify today. We did talk about the fact that we had not done a current_we had
not done an evaluation of the national sponsors, nor have we done a recent look.
We came today because we believed our message, particularly around the hold
harmless issue, was a very important one for you all to think about.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Because I think everyone in the panel
would agree that we would like to have the jobs, the programs subsidies be where
the needy, elderly live; and that is not true when 63 percent of the funds are
held harmless in the same distribution as they were in 1978. So we are not
prepared to comment on the performance, statistics that Green Thumb has
introduced.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">One of the things I would say is that
when we looked at the program in 1994, we did look at some program
characteristics, such as minority served and so on; and we did not see
significant differences. But at that time what the State's performance was and
what the performance was with the national organizations with regard to the
participation_the placement rates, and I think some people were talking about
figures going back 10 years, what we found in 1994 was that there was no common
definition among the national sponsors about what was a valid placement. You
could have someone go to a job for one day, and that would be counted as a valid
placement. In some other organization, it might be 30 days. In another
organization, there may be not time limits.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">So at that time we did not believe it
was possible to do a valid comparison. It was like apples and oranges among the
organizations.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Kind</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
If the chairman will indulge me, is the GAO planning on doing some type of
contemporary study on these performance statistics so we have a chance to
compare apples and apples?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Ms. Shaul</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
We had not been asked to do that.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Kind</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
It sounds like it would be difficult if they are all working from a different
standard, very hard to make that.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
May I comment that I believe since the GAO report there has been a common
definition of unsubsidized placement. So we are all looking at what we call an
unsubsidized placement. A person has to be working 30 days, and we do actually
check to make sure they are actually working 30 days to count that as a bona
fide placement.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
So they can make a study now that would be able to make a valid comparison?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Mizerak</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Excuse me, just another_</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
The time is up.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong, I was particularly interested
in your comments about the Asian elderly, and I think you suggested that you had
had some trouble in the past in gaining slots for Pacific Islanders and Asians
and so forth, which reminds me of a problem that I have in a rural area in the
plains with the Native Americans. This is a very, very serious problem.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Have you any suggestions for the good
of the order, if you have gone through with it some of your folks?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
I want to be clear on the question. The question is with regard to whether we
are able to meet our needs given the fact that_I think it is primarily an issue
of_how do I put this? I think the funding for the program really has been flat
for a long time, at least from the perspective of slots and what have you. And I
think that it is very true that if you take a look at the growth of the Asian
Pacific population since 1978, it would be quite astounding.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">But I think we_I think the key is as an
organization we wouldn't advocate that we take slots away from another
organization, because we know that would displace another senior. So I think
what we are waiting for is that the distributions and what have you to be dealt
with in a time of growth, and that is a practical reality from the side of
exercising some compassion in terms of wanting to accomplish it. It is very
difficult to accomplish it in terms of_at the expense of another individual.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Well, then in thinking about formulas and so forth, shifting, there are some who
would argue that urban America is entitled to more money because of additional
or higher rents, higher costs of doing business in the inner city or whatever,
and there are those who would argue that rural America also has some problems in
terms of distances, in terms of 25-year-old vans that are worn out and where do
we go to get a new one. How do we bus our seniors 25 and 30 miles to a center?
Isn't there something to be said for that as well?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Oh, absolutely. And what I would say is that what I think a lot of national
sponsors and I know what we do is we counter that very simply with we haven't
seen increases in the costs allocable for running the slots, so to speak, or a
position. And, quite frankly, we beg, borrow and steal. We work with other
organizations. They bring in additional in-kinds.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We get_we have other ways of doing it.
We get folks to give us free office space. We get folks to donate the rent. We
get folks to_I mean, and I think that is an ability that a private sector
sponsor has that is a little harder for a government entity. Because who wants
to go in and subsidize the government entity? Whereas if you are a CBO that is
community based, folks, United Way and fund-raising and all of those other
things, you are able to kind of leverage support.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Now, I will say that I think in the
case of especially the Indian community and the Asian community, there really
are some special costs. There are special costs around language and
transportation and special costs around translation and all of those kinds of
things, but we just find a way to get it done. We write grants. We get
additional support. We would love to see additional support come for those
factors.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Your bottom line is flexibility, because you can do it better than the States?</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Fong</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Well, yes. It sounds a little self-serving, yes.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Barrett</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you, sir.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time,
someone else might like to ask a question before we have to leave.</font></p>
<b>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Chairman McKeon</font></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">.
Thank you, Mr. Barrett.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Tierney has no questions at this
time.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Well, we got through it. You know, we
said we were going to have a vote about an hour ago, and they held it off, and
we were glad to hear your testimonies.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We want to thank you for being here and
for helping us in this process, and our plan is to get a bill written and to get
this done before the August break. So if you think of something that you didn't
say that you want to say, if you will get it to us, we will get it in the
record. And if you will watch the process as we go through and continue to be a
part of it, we appreciate your ongoing input. Thank you very much.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">We stand adjourned.</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the
subcommittee was adjourned.]</font></p>
<b><i>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The following testimony was included as
part of the printed record:</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The Statement Of Gema G. Hernandez,
D.P.A., Secretary, Florida Department Of Elder Affairs (Appendix F)</font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The Statement Of Walter G. Hoefer,
Director, New York State Officer For The Aging (Appendix G)</font></p>
</i></b>
</body>
</html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
<meta name="ProgId" content="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
<title>H.R. 782, THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT</title>
</head>
<body>
<b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">H.R. 782, THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT: TITLE V- COMMUNITY SERVICE
EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="3"></font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="6">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">HEARING</p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">BEFORE THE</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="4">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">SUBCOMMITTEE ON POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION,</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER">TRAINING AND LIFE-LONG LEARNING</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">OF THE</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER">THE WORKFORCE</p>
</font><b><font SIZE="3">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="4">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS</p>
</font><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="2">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">FIRST SESSION</p>
</font><b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="3">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="2">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MAY 19, 1999</p>
</font><b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="3">
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font><b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="5">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">Serial No. 106-40</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"> </p>
</font></b><font FACE="Century Schoolbook" SIZE="1">
<p ALIGN="CENTER">Printed for the use of the Committee on Education</p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER">and the Workforce</p>
<hr>
</font>
<blockquote>
<b>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">H.R. 782, THE OLDER
AMERICANS ACT:</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">TITLE V-COMMUNITY
SERVICE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM</font></p>
</b>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Wednesday, May 19,
1999</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">House of
Representatives,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Subcommittee on
Postsecondary Education, Training and Life-Long Learning,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Committee on Education
and the Workforce,</font></p>
<p ALIGN="CENTER"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Washington, D.C.</font></p>
</blockquote>
<b>
<p></b><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Marnie S. Shaul,
Associate Director, Education And Employment Issues, U.S. General Accounting
Offices, Washington, D.C. <a HREF="#_Toc459626882">*</a></font>
<blockquote>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Robert F. Mizerak,
National Director, Seniors In Community Service Program, National Urban
League, Inc., New York, NY <a HREF="#_Toc459626883">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Andrea Wooten,
President, Green Thumb, Arlington, Virginia <a HREF="#_Toc459626884">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Clayton Fong, Executive
Director, National Asian Pacific Center On Aging, Seattle, WA <a HREF="#_Toc459626885">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Statement Of Mary Ellen Saunders,
Management Analysts, Division Of Services For Aging And Adults With Physical
Disabilities, New Castle, DE <a HREF="#_Toc459626886">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix A - The Written Statement Of
Marnie S. Shaul, Associate Director, Education And Employment Issues, U.S.
General Accounting Offices, Washington, D.C. <a HREF="#_Toc459626887">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix B - The Written Statement Of
Robert F. Mizerak, National Director, Seniors In Community Service Program,
National Urban League, Inc., New York, NY <a HREF="#_Toc459626888">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix C - The Written Statement Of
Andrea Wooten, President, Green Thumb, Arlington, VA <a HREF="#_Toc459626889">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix D - The Written Statement Of
Clayton Fong, Executive Director, National Asian Pacific Center On Aging,
Seattle, WA <a HREF="#_Toc459626890">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix E - The Written Statement Of
Mary Ellen Saunders, Management Analysts, Division Of Services - Aging And
Adults With Physical Disabilities, New Castle, DE <a HREF="#_Toc459626891">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendix F - The Written Statement Of
Gema G. Hernandez, D.P.A., Secretaary, Florida Department Of Elder Affairs <a HREF="#_Toc459626892">*</a></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Appendx G - The Written Statement Of