
Welfare Reform in the Bay Area
Bay Area county officials are already feeling the impact of the federal welfare reform law on their communities. For instance, California is home to about 40 percent of the nation's legal immigrant population, many of whom reside in the Bay Area. A coalition of nine Bay Area counties is seeking a multi-million dollar grant to help thousands of elderly and disabled immigrants become citizens so they can keep their benefits.
Counties are worried that as welfare recipients lose their federal benefits under the new law, general assistance rolls will swell and possible lead them to bankruptcy. Thus, Bay Area counties are now working to identify issues and challenges as well as develop their own respective county plans to improve the provision of services. Below are some examples of plans and actions taken:
San Francisco County’s Board of Supervisors adopted the "Immigrant’s Non-Discrimination Act of 1996" to urge the coordination of regional and federal welfare reform efforts to insure access to services and to prevent further erosion of immigrants’ access to services.San Mateo’s "Shared Undertaking to Change the Community to Enable Self-Sufficiency" (SUCCESS) project identified major principles to guide framework development; created advisory, planning, and coordinating committees to plan for implementation; and developed a process plan and timeline for implementation.
Napa County received a federal grant last year for their "Options to Work" program to identify culture changes that will be needed as a result of welfare reform. Currently, they are working on the development of a pilot unit that would include a multi-service case manager. They are also convening 15 community groups for welfare planning, which include a Citizenship Task Force, Coalition of Napa Valley Private Non-profit Agencies, and Chamber of Commerce Task Force on Welfare Reform.
Santa Clara County began a community-based planning process to re-design its welfare system back in April 1996. As a result, the "Employment Support Initiative" was developed to lay the groundwork for helping clients become self-sufficient by providing support services such as training, child care, transportation and health services.
A public-private coalition of Bay Area governments, businesses, community, philanthropic and service leaders, called the Bay Area Partnership for Building Healthy and Self-Sufficient Communities for Economic Prosperity, has provided a forum for discussing important issues at the local level. They meet regularly to address and prioritize issues for the Bay Area as a region and examine the opportunities for Bay Area groups to work together.
ABAG’s Welfare Reform Network
To address the need to exchange information regarding the impact of welfare reform in the Bay Area, ABAG staff is working to provide pertinent information to its members at the Executive Board, Legislative & Governmental Organization and Regional Planning Committee meetings. At this point ABAG's goals are to create an electronic clearinghouse through its abagOnline website; provide a mechanism for Bay Area counties to publish their plans, resolutions, and updates regarding welfare reform; and participate in regional meetings on welfare reform issues.
Through the Welfare Reform Network website, ABAG is working to provide easier access to crucial welfare reform information at one location. Links to the statewide proposals for welfare reform, county updates, as well as links to other related websites, can be found. Key word search capabilities allow interested individuals to search using words like TANF, food stamps, etc. For more info, check out ABAG’s Welfare Reform Network site at http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/wreform/ or contact ABAG at 510/464-7922.
Legislative Update on Welfare Reform
In April, the Legislation & Governmental Organization Committee voted to support the following proposed legislation addressing welfare eligibility and benefit changes, particularly those affecting legal immigrants and children:
ASSEMBLY BILLS:
AB 67 (Escutia) - In-Home Support Services:
This measure would authorize the continuation of in-home support services (IHSS) to individuals who currently receive those services but will lose them due to changes in their SSI/SSP eligibility caused by enactment of the federal welfare reform law.
AB 72 (Knox) - Citizenship Assistance for Elderly & Disabled Refugees (URGENCY) (as amended 3/5/97): This measure would require the California Department of Social services to allocate $2 million to counties to fund citizenship assistance centers to help elderly and disabled refugees and asylees to become citizens. AB 194 (Wright et al) - AFDC/TANF Benefits: This measure would exempt "relative caretakers" receiving AFDC benefits from any employment or training program requirements imposed by the TANF block grants and from the 60-month limit on assistance under federal welfare reform law. > ACR 24 (Aroner et al) - Food Stamps: This measure would, through a resolution, urge the Governor to submit a request to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for a six-month waiver of the federal requirement that limits food stamp eligibility for unemployed persons between the ages of 18-50. The request would apply to those counties, Indian reservations, and rancheria in which the average unemployment rate in 1995-96 was at least 20% higher than the national average, or there is slow job growth and declines in occupations and industries, or those reservations or rancherias where the unemployment rate exceeds 10%.SENATE BILLS
: SB 163 (Solis) - Relative Caregivers (amended 3/6/97): This measure would exempt eligible relative caregivers from work participation requirements and the 60-month aid limitation contained in the TANF program. The bill also provides that programs implemented by counties that are evaluated and funded on the basis of foster care caseload growth be held harmless from financial participation in the costs of caseload growth attributable to the implementation of TANF. SB 173 (Watson) - GAIN Training Programs: This measure would extend from 2 to 3 years the period in which a person, required to participate in the GAIN (Greater Avenues for Independence) program, may stay enrolled in a self-initiated educational or vocational training program that is likely to lead to unsubsidized employment in an occupation in demand in order to complete the program.SB 505 (Johnston) - Welfare-to-Work:
This measure, sponsored by CSAC, would implement the Welfare-to-Work component of the welfare redesign proposal prepared by CSAC and the CA Welfare Directors Association. The bill would give counties maximum flexibility to design their own welfare-to-work systems, to provide both traditional GAIN (Greater Avenues to Independence) services and non-traditional services such as substance abuse and mental health treatment.
Check out ABAG’s Welfare Reform Network web site at:
http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/wreform/BAY AREA RESIDENTS LIVE LONGER LIVES
According to a new ABAG report, Bay Area residents live longer than people who live in other parts of California or the United States.
In 1993-- the last year comparable data is available for the region, state and nation-- the life expectancy at birth for the total population of the United States was 75.5 years; in California it was 77.0 years; and for residents of the Bay Area it was 77.3 years.
An upward trend in life expectancy is being experienced at the regional, state and national levels.
Numbers for the United States show an increase from an average 73.7 years (for the total population) in 1980 to 75.5 years in 1993.
In California, the life expectancy was 74.6 years in 1980 and rose to 77.4 years in 1994.
In the Bay Area, the life expectancy increased from 75.3 years in 1980 to 78.1 years in 1995-- an increase of nearly three years.
GENDER DIFFERENCES
The lifespan of males continues to be lower than females; in 1995, life expectancy for Bay Area males was 74.8 years and 81.4 years for females. Both figures are the highest ever reported.
LIFE EXPECTANCY AT AGE 65
Bay Area residents who reach age 65 can expect to live longer than other senior citizen populations.
Seniors in this region outlive those in other parts of the state by about one-fifth of a year, and seniors across the nation by one year.
In addition, the number of years a 65 year old resident can expect to live has increased over the past fifteen years. In 1980, Bay Area seniors had a life expectancy of 17.1 years; by 1995, that number had risen to 19.0 years. For 65 year old men, the life expectancy was 14.7 years in 1980, and rose to 17.2 years in 1995. For women, the life expectancy was 19.0 years for 65 year olds in 1980, and increased to 20.5 years by 1995.
COUNTY DIFFERENCES
While life expectancy increased in every county between 1980 and 1995, the numbers range from a low of 72.4 years for residents of San Francisco in 1991 to 80 years for residents of Santa Clara County in 1995.Napa County was ranked with the highest life expectancy for two years of the study; San Mateo for three years, and Santa Clara for six years.
Life Expectancy for Total Population by County
|
|
1980 |
1990 |
1995 |
|
Alameda |
74.3 |
75.5 |
77.1 |
|
Contra Costa |
75.8 |
76.8 |
78.5 |
|
Marin |
77.3 |
76.6 |
77.7 |
|
Napa |
76.4 |
78.1 |
79.3 |
|
San Francisco |
73.4 |
72.6 |
75.1 |
|
San Mateo |
76.2 |
77.6 |
79.0 |
|
Santa Clara |
76.3 |
78.1 |
80.0 |
|
Solano |
75.1 |
75.6 |
77.7 |
|
Sonoma |
75.4 |
77.0 |
78.3 |
|
REGION |
75.3 |
76.4 |
78.1 |
GENDER GAPS IN LIFE EXPECTANCY (by County)
For men, life expectancy at birth ranged from 66.4 years in San Francisco in 1991 to 76.8 years in Santa Clara County in 1994.
For women, life expectancy ranged from 77.8 years in Alameda County in 1980 to 82.2 years in Santa Clara County in 1995.
More striking is the difference in life expectancy between males and females in the various counties. In the eight counties other than San Francisco, the years by which females outlived males range from 4.2 years in Marin County (1992) to 8.2 years in Sonoma County (1988). In San Francisco, however, the difference in life expectancy for males and females was 8.2 years in 1980, and increased to 12.1 years in 1995-- peaking at 14.2 years in 1992. This statistical difference for San Francisco may be due, in large part, to AIDS-related deaths among younger males.
FACTORS AFFECTING LIFE EXPECTANCY
Almost all counties achieved gains in life expectancy since 1980, the first year of the ABAG study. The male population of San Francisco was the only group to face a decline (0.2 years). However, all counties and gender groups had gains from 1990 to 1995, a period which coincides with a reported historical drop in the cancer death rate.
Generally, life expectancy tables are derived from age-specific death rates, and focus on the impacts of degenerative diseases and the population makeup. While the ABAG study did not attempt to examine the causal factors underlying the variations of life expectancy around the Bay since 1980, several factors can be cited.
Ethnicity is argued to have great influence on life expectancy. Asians tend to live longer than other groups, particularly Asian women. Infant mortalities are higher among African Americans and Hispanics, and African Americans are known to be more susceptible to cardiac arrest and hypertension.
Social and economic conditions have great bearing on life expectancies. Access to quality medical care is often insufficient among low income or minority populations. Young males register high homicide rates in certain ethnic groups. Environmental pollution, which disproportionately impacts low income minorities, is also found in correlation with life expectancy.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY
In the study of life tables, there are several important implications for public policy. With a goal of maintaining or improving the high life expectancy of Bay Area residents-- and making that goal realistic for all members of the population-- policies should endeavor to help each sector of the population stay healthy.
Policies should include: (1) quality health care for every member of the population; (2) public health education; (3) advocacy of healthy lifestyles; and (4) provision of recreational facilities.In a region so diverse, effective policy programs also need to address cultural, linguistic, age, gender, and lifestyle differences.
Public policy must also focus on the graying of our population. In 1980, half of the population of our nine county region was under 30; by the year 2015, at least half will be 39 or older. The number of persons 65 or older is projected to increase about two and a half times between 1980 and 2015. And the ratios of elderly persons (65+) to those of working age (20 to 64) will increase from 16.8% in 1980 to 28.5% in 2015. For more information, contact Chin Ming Yang at 510/464-7925 or e-mail ChinY@abag.ca.gov.
Life Expectancy for Total Population
(in years)
|
|
1980 |
1990 |
1993 |
|
Bay Area |
75.3 |
76.4 |
77.3 |
|
California |
74.6 |
76.2 |
77.0 |
|
United States |
73.7 |
75.4 |
75.5 |
Sources: ABAG, California Department of Health Services, U.S. Census Bureau
Average Number of Years Females Outlive Males – 1995
|
County |
No. of Years |
|
Alameda |
6.7 |
|
Contra Costa |
6.3 |
|
Marin |
4.8 |
|
Napa |
5.4 |
|
San Francisco |
12.1 |
|
San Mateo |
5.3 |
|
Santa Clara |
4.8 |
|
Solano |
6.1 |
|
Sonoma |
5.8 |
|
REGION |
6.6 |
ABAG's WORKERS' COMPENSATION TO BOARD REBATE $400,000
At the 19th Annual Board Meeting of the ABAG Shared Risk Pool (SHARP) held in March, it was announced that an equity distribution of nearly $400,000 will be made to the Pool’s members on July 1, 1997.
ABAG’s workers’ compensation department has two administrative programs; individual self-insured third party administration and the pooled risk administration, also for self-insured public entities. Pooled risk sharing is targeted for small entities that want to enjoy the claims control of self-insurance, with pooled risk sharing.
SHARP has six members: Central Contra Costa Transit Authority, ABAG, Mendocino County Transit, El Dorado County Transit, the City of Los Altos Hills and the City of Saratoga. The pool collects a deposit premium which covers claims costs, administration, excess insurance, actuarial and audit services.
Since 1989, the SHARP members endeavored to keep losses to a minimum. The claims staff has worked aggressively to deny inappropriate claims and keep costs down on accepted losses. Additionally, the financial services staffs’ aggressive investment and financial monitoring policies have increased the value of the deposit premiums collected. These factors have resulted in the excess equity. The Pool has a targeted funding level of a 95% confidence level on an undiscounted basis. One third of the equity in excess of the target funding level will be distributed to the members.
For information regarding membership in SHARP or individual third-party administration services, contact Julie Carroll at 510/464-7940 or e-mail
JulieC@abag.ca.gov.WORKERS COMP UPDATE
Medical Marijuana Use in the Workplace
The passage of Proposition 115 last November may have impact in the workplace. Many employers have "Zero Tolerance" for illegal drug use in the workplace, allowing for employees to be dismissed for drug use. Currently, marijuana usage should be treated as any other prescription drug. Employers have the right to ask an employee if they are prescribed the use of marijuana. However, due to constraints of the ADA, employers cannot ask the employee what is physically wrong.
Ergonomic Regulations Stalled
California’s workplace ergonomic regulations, which were to have taken effect on January 1, 1997, will not be enforced until they have been rewritten. The regulations were criticized by organizations representing both workers and businesses as being vague and not based on scientifically proven research.
The regulations are being clarified by the California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board and are likely to be completed by this summer. The regulations will apply to all employers with 10 or more employees, and it is anticipated that they will require employers to make ergonomic changes to work stations if more than one employee suffers a repetitive type injury.