Posts About Federal Budget

Yesterday, President Obama released his Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Budget, outlining the administration’s policy agenda and budget requests for federal spending in the upcoming year. As the guide for every major spending and revenue decision, the President’s budget request is a significant policy vehicle for supporting children and families.

With the release of the President’s budget comes an opportunity to emphasize how policymakers can advance equity through the budget process at the federal level – but also through state and local budgets.

The President’s budget proposal includes notable efforts to increase equity by improving access to education, including dedicated funding for universal pre-kindergarten, increasing opportunities for low-income schools through Title I funding and tuition-free community college.

At the community level, the proposal introduces the Upward Mobility Project – a new initiative that will provide up to 10 communities with the opportunity to flexibly spend federal funding from four existing programs in an effort to invest in programs and resources that meet the specific needs of its residents. These investments – as well as a host of others – have the ability to promote equity and provide communities with the flexibility to create opportunities for low-income children and families.

In CSSP’s new brief “Aligning Resources and Results: Increasing Equity Through the Budget,” we highlight equitable budget strategies from Portland, Oregon; Chicago, Illinois; and an example from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

As outlined in the brief, the President’s FY2016 budget includes funding for key programs that impact communities:

• Preschool for All: $75 billion over 10 years
• Preschool Development: $500 million
• English Language Acquisition: $36 million
• America’s College Promise: $1.36 billion
• Promise Neighborhoods: $150 million
• Choice Neighborhoods: $248 million
• Community Development Block Grant: $2.8 billion
• Housing Choice Voucher Program:  $21.1 billion

By proposing investments in programs like early child care and universal preschool, including tax credits for working families, the President’s FY2016 budget includes strategies to advance equity in the coming year. Making investments to advance equity is an important way to ensure all children and families have the opportunity to succeed.

For more information on the President’s FY2016 budget release, please read CSSP’s statement here. 

Why is child welfare finance reform so important? Because we want federal financing to reinforce good practice and provide incentives to ensure that children and youth grow up in safe, stable and loving families.

Currently, there are numerous prevention programs and evidence-based practice models being implemented across the country to keep children safe and families together. As a result, fewer children and youth are entering foster care. Consequently, as fewer children and youth enter foster care, states receive less federal funding to support child welfare practices.

In order to encourage healthy development for children and youth, it is essential to support and fund efforts to keep families together and reunite them quickly and safely when children do enter foster care. To achieve these results, federal financing must support the services and best practices that have a positive impact on children, youth and their families. Reforming federal financing to provide dollars for prevention and post-permanency services will incentivize child welfare systems to implement best practices that support the healthy development and well-being of children and youth.

A new infographic from The Annie E. Casey Foundation highlights the decrease in two key federal funding sources, Title IV-E and Title IV-B, over the last decade and provides projections for the funding decreases if federal financing does not change. The Cost of Doing Nothing will result in this projected decrease in federal financing for children, youth and families in need of supports and services to live in safe, stable and loving families.  

The over-prescription of psychotropic medication among children in foster care is an important issue with far-reaching consequences for the young people being prescribed these medications, their families, and communities. The research indicates that youth involved in the child welfare system are more vulnerable to behavioral and mental health disorders, and the use of psychotropic medication, which alters brain chemicals related to mood, behavior, and thinking, has been a popular form of treatment.

However, one of the problems with psychotropic medication is that it is commonly used to treat trauma as opposed to significant mental health problems, which is what it was originally intended for. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 90 percent of children in foster care have some exposure to trauma, which is significantly higher than children not in care.  Confusing trauma with mental health problems can result in a mismatch of treatments and can hinder child well-being. Often times, trauma can be mitigated through therapy and other well-being services.  Successfully improving child well-being outcomes for children in care requires screening, functional assessment, and effective treatments. It is also necessary to work with children and their caregivers to understand what is triggering the behavior that might be considered necessary for medication. When children are not properly screened, assessed, or treated before being prescribed psychotropic medications, and trauma remains unaddressed, it can have adverse effects on child development – both now and in the future.

Bryan Samuels, the former head of the Administration on Children, Youth and Families, and current Executive Director of Chapin Hall, has stated his concern regarding the use of psychotropic medications, “The medications tend to be the stopgap measure. We are making significant investments in medication that have limited evidence of effectiveness and rarely address the issues of trauma."

The President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 budget highlights the importance of reducing the reliance on psychotropic medications, disproportionately prescribed to foster children, by targeting improvements to the Medicaid program to increase access to mental health services and by establishing a new Medicaid demonstration project in partnership with the Administration for Children and Families to encourage States to provide evidence-based psychosocial interventions to children and youth in foster care, with the goal of improving outcomes for these young people.

For more resources on psychotropic medication, read our policy brief on Pregnant and Parenting Youth in Foster Care: The Complexities That Surround the Use of Psychotropic Medications.

On Tuesday, March 4, President Obama released his Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 Budget, which outlines the administration’s policy agenda and budget request for federal spending in the upcoming year and sets the tone for the national policy agenda moving forward. As the guide by which every major spending and revenue decision is made, the federal budget is a significant policy vehicle for supporting children and families.

The FY15 budget proposal adheres to spending levels outlined in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, which set discretionary spending at $1.014 trillion for FY15. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 provided $63 billion in sequester relief over two years and is likely to minimize the impact the sequester has had on vulnerable families by increasing funding above the drastically reduced FY 2013 spending levels. In addition, the agreement addresses sequestration by increasing revenues as opposed to only additional cuts, which should result in a positive impact on important programs for families.

Each year, the release of the President’s budget becomes an opportunity to emphasize how and why policymakers and communities should work together to maximize resources and ensure that supports for children and families are sustained. In CSSP’s new brief “Aligning Resources and Results: The Importance of Meaningful Partnerships,” we highlight the increased collaboration between policymakers and communities throughout the country and how these partnerships are resulting in smarter investments and improved outcomes for children and families. With a relentless focus on results, accountability and diverse representation across multiple sectors, these partnerships have demonstrated their commitment to securing the resources needed to address the unique needs of their communities.

The President’s FY2015 budget includes funding for key programs that impact communities:

• Early Childhood Programs: $650 million
• Now is the Time Initiative: $164 million
• Race to the Top: $300 million 
• Promise Neighborhoods: $100 million
• Choice Neighborhoods: $120 million
• Community Development Block Grant: $2.8 billion
• Housing Choice Voucher Program: $20 billion
• Workforce Innovation Fund: $140 million
• State Paid Leave Initiatives: $5 million

While the President’s FY 2015 budget follows the 2015 spending levels agreed to in the Bipartisan Budget Act, it also builds on this progress with a fully-paid for $56 billion Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative.  Evenly split between defense and non-defense priorities, the Opportunity, Growth and Security Initiative provides additional investments in the critical areas of education; research and innovation; infrastructure and jobs; opportunity and mobility; public health, safety and security; more efficient and effective Government; and national defense.

When Child Welfare Works: A Proposal for Financing Best Practices

Recently the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative released a report on child welfare finance reform entitled, When Child Welfare Works: A Proposal for Financing Best Practices. The report highlights strategies for the reinvestment of federal child welfare funding aimed at supporting better outcomes for children and families — while maintaining the existing overall funding level. The current child welfare funding system was created 30 years ago, and is based on outdated parameters that do not adequately support state’s efforts to meet the unique needs of children and families. The report includes strategies aimed at transforming child welfare financing so that it better supports efforts to meet the needs of children and families in contact with the child welfare system.

The report focuses on four major goals for the child welfare system and provides detailed restructuring recommendations for each. The goals and strategies in the proposal include:

• Promoting the Permanence and Well-Being of Children and Families by:
  • Limiting the number of years of federal reimbursement for a child’s time in foster care.
  • Prohibiting federal reimbursement for a child’s time in shelter care or group homes.
  • Creating an Individual Development Account for children in care at the age of 16.
• Increasing the Use of Quality Kinship and Family Foster Care by:
  • Increasing flexibility for the licensing of kin for kinship care.
  • Enhancing reimbursement for the recruitment, development, and support of foster families.
  • Increasing tax credits for foster families with: teens, sibling groups, and children with special needs.
• Preparing and Supporting a Capable Child Welfare Workforce by:
  • Allowing for caseworker loan forgiveness after 4 years of working in the field.
  • Allow for reimbursement for competency-based training.
  • Separating overhead from casework in budgets.
• Increasing Access to and Accountability for Social and Therapeutic Services by:
  • Requiring a state plan for using Medicaid to meet therapeutic needs of children in care and their families.

The report states that reinvesting federal child welfare funds so that they directly support children, families and child welfare professions should improve kinship and family foster care programs. These funding strategies will also reduce the amount of time children spend in congregant care and put an end to federal spending on shelters and non-therapeutic group homes, while also preparing and providing an effective, competent, and motivated workforce.

The need for comprehensive child welfare finance reform will require national policymakers to deliberate over several important issues. For state policymakers, potential changes to child welfare financing will have serious implications for the way that they are supported to serve families – and what will be reimbursed by the federal government. This report can be used as a springboard for deliberation and as a reference to inform thoughtful action.

For more information on results-based policies that support children and families in the child welfare system, please click here.

While the government shutdown is well into its second week, it is important to keep in mind the devastating consequences that are continuing to impact the most vulnerable children and families. Though programs that directly ensure public health and safety have avoided the spending freeze, including Medicaid and Social Security, most of the programs that are affected are still vital supports and services that help sustain young women and children, low-income families, and the elderly.

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which provides temporary financial assistance to help pregnant women and families pay for food, shelter, utilities, and expenses other than medical costs, has stopped awarding new funds, however states have the option to continue providing benefits with state dollars. Since TANF provides significant services in addition to cash assistance, such as GED preparation, vocational training, postsecondary education, vocational rehabilitation, help with child care, work stipends, job retention services and more, discontinuing the program during the shut-down – particularly if it continues for much longer - would be a devastating for families in need.

Head Start programs will also be affected by the shutdown—a total of 23 programs serving 19,000 children will be affected as their grants begin to expire. Those cuts are in addition to the 57,000 children pushed of Head Start as a result of the sequester, on top of a $400 million mandatory cut to the program nationwide. The longer the shutdown continues, the more Head Start programs and young children will be adversely impacted. 

Implications of the government shutdown to nutrition programs are equally alarming. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which helps over 47 million low-income Americans, will continue providing benefits, but only until the end of October. States have the option of continuing the SNAP program through 2014, but the $2 billion available for contingency funds that would be used to compensate the loss of funding would not be enough to support the program in the long-term, since SNAP provides about $6 billion in support to families per month.

The Special, Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which assists over 9 million at-risk mothers, infants, and young children in accessing healthy food, nutrition information, and health referrals, will also continue until the end of October. Like SNAP, most states have funds to continue WIC for a week or so, but the program won’t be able to continue for very long, with emergency funds running out by the end of the month.

The impact on supplemental nutrition programs is also impacting the elderly. Senior Nutrition Programs have stopped as a result of the shutdown. The Department of Health and Human Services can no longer fund Meals on Wheels, which provides more than one million home-delivered meals to seniors who need them each day. This crucial service has also been impacted by the sequester, which is discussed in this previous post.

The government shutdown is risking the basic supports and services low-income families need to survive. Although there are emergency funds to continue certain programs in the meantime, the long-term consequences will be harmful and widespread. State policymakers should use their discretion to continue the programs that can provide supports and services to vulnerable families; however, the only sustainable solution is for the government to go back to work in serving children and their families as soon as possible to minimize the impact.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Community Population Survey, in 2012 46.5 million people lived in poverty – 16.1 million of them children. The report showed that Black and Hispanic families continue to have disproportionally higher poverty rates and lower incomes than White families.

While the national data provide a sense of the magnitude of poverty and disparities in the U.S., it is often difficult to imagine what that means for communities. However, the subsequent American Community Survey (ACS) data - which was released today - provides a more detailed look at demographic characteristics in cities and states. 

CSSP believes that place matters and strongly impacts the health, safety, educational and employment opportunities of children and families. We work in a number of communities that face significant challenges due to years of disinvestment, including unemployment, failing schools and housing instability. These communities are trying to take a more comprehensive approach to addressing these issues. The ACS data highlight some of the significant obstacles in place.

• California is one of only three states that has seen an increase in poverty since 2011. In 2012Fresno, CA – a recipient of Promise Neighborhoods planning grant and a Building Neighborhood Capacity Program (BNCP) grant – faced a poverty rate of 31.5 percent, up from 28.8 percent in 2011. In Fresno, nearly half of all Black residents (47.1 percent), 30.1 percent of Asian residents and 38.1 percent of individuals identifying as Hispanic lived in poverty.
• Though median incomes in the state of Wisconsin remain unchanged in 2012, residents of Milwaukee, WI – a BNCP grant recipient –  continue to experience an unacceptable level of disparity. More than 42 percent of Milwaukee’s children lived in poverty, including 55.2 percent of Black children. An immense gap remained across income levels as the median household income for Black families was $24,994, compared to $45,268 for White families.
• Tennessee’s poverty level in 2012 was not statistically different from the 2011 rate. In Memphis, TN – also a BNCP grant recipient – 28.3 percent of residents lived in poverty including more than a third (33.6 percent) of Black residents and 14.7 percent of White residents. In Memphis 27.1 percent of households relied on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (SNAP) benefits at some point in 2012. 

The data released today provide a snapshot across several indicators and capture information that can be used to make informed public policy and funding decisions – critically important in the midst of sequester cuts. State and local poverty rates can only be significantly and sustainably reduced if opportunity gaps are addressed. A growing number of communities are learning how to help policymakers better understand what is actually happening in their neighborhoods and the kinds of resources required to address local needs.

Earlier today, the U.S. Census Bureau released the 2012 data on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage. For the second consecutive year, neither the official poverty rate nor the number of people in poverty at the national level were statistically different from the previous year’s estimates—the poverty rate remained at 15 percent – amounting to 46.5 million people living in poverty. While there was not an increase in the poverty rate, the 2012 data still indicated significant racial disparities in both poverty and income. The poverty rates among non-Hispanic Whites and Asians were 9.7 percent and 11.7 percent respectively, while the poverty rates for Blacks and Hispanics were 27.2 percent and 25.6 percent respectively.

Poverty and Income Data Highlights

• The percent of people in deep poverty, with incomes below 50% of the poverty threshold, remained at 6.6 percent from 2011, which is still a substantial increase from the 5.2 percent rate seen in 2006 and 2007 (prior to the recession) and even from the data collected in 1967 where deep poverty was at 4.4 percent.
• The poverty rates for children, those under the age of 18, was 21.8 percent, not statistically different from 2011.
• Median household income in 2012 was $51,017, not statistically different from the 2011 median income of $51,100.

Health Insurance Data Highlights

• The percentage of people without health insurance coverage decreased to 15.4 percent from 15.7 percent between 2011 and 2012, while the number of uninsured people in 2012 was not statistically different from 2011, at 48 million people.
• The percentage and number of people covered by government health insurance increased to 32.6 percent and 101.5 million people in 2012 up slightly from 32.2 percent and 99.5 million people in 2011.
• The percentage of Asians and Hispanics without health insurance decreased from 16.8 percent and 30.1 percent to 15.1 percent and 29.1 percent respectively.
• The percentage of uninsured children decreased from 9.4 percent to 8.9 percent in 2012.

Safety Net Programs

• Unemployment insurance was able to raise 1.7 million people out of poverty in 2012.
• Social Security income helped 15.3 million people aged 65 and older out of poverty in 2012 – if these payments were excluded - it would quadruple the number of elderly people living in poverty.
• The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), while not included in the poverty calculations used for the data today, if considered, would have reduced the number of people in poverty by 4 million people in 2012.
• The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) also reduced the number of children classified as living in poverty in 2012 by 2.9 million children.

The Important Role of Public Policy. Public policy helps create pipelines of educational opportunity and new jobs. It also creates the supports and services that help poor individuals and families while they work toward those opportunities. As evident in the data, the most noticeable statistic changes that occurred in 2012 were in health insurance coverage – with the number of uninsured children dropping from 9.4 percent to 8.9 percent in 2012.  This demonstrates the critical value of policies that make a public investment in children and families. Public investments have proven to have a real impact on reducing poverty – and subsequently improving the quality of life for millions of children and families. Unfortunately, the $85 billion in cuts to supports and services as a result of sequestration are likely to only exacerbate the conditions of poverty and increase the percentage of those living in unacceptable conditions – unable to meet their basic needs.

The Need for a Focus on Equity. The racial disparities in the poverty data indicate that Black and Hispanic families have continued to have disproportionately higher poverty rates and lower incomes compared to White families, which has been consistent for more than three decades. This inequity shows the need for innovative solutions and public investments aimed at supporting real change.  Policy strategies should take into account the existence of disparate opportunities and outcomes—attention to equity creates solutions that best meet the needs of the entire community.

To read CSSP's Statement on the New Poverty Data and Implications for Children and Families please click here.

For more strategies to Ensure Children Grow Up in Safe, Supportive and Economically Successful Families visit PolicyforResults.org.

Last week the House Budget Committee held a hearing marking the War on Poverty’s 50th anniversary. The testimony provided, and the following discussions, included a wide variety of opinions regarding the effectiveness of safety net programs. Of the heavily debated, SNAP drew a significant amount of attention. Policy for Results has previously posted on the significance of SNAP, but in light of the hearing, here are a few important facts to keep in mind:

• Snap is targeted at the most vulnerable families
• 76% of SNAP households included a child, an elderly person, or a disabled person
• The majority of households have income well below the maximum allowed for eligibility
• SNAP benefits do not last most participants the whole month
• 90% of SNAP benefits are redeemed by the third week of the month
• 58% of recipients currently receiving SNAP benefits turn to food banks for assistance at least 6 months of the year 

Despite the support that SNAP provides to working families, in November, SNAP benefits will be cut for all participants. For families of three, the cut will be $25 to $30 a month—a total of $300 to $360 a year. Nationally, the total cut is estimated to be $5 billion in fiscal year 2014. 

The SNAP program is intended to provide supplemental support to families and research shows that it does. However, the statistics also highlight another important factor addressed at last week’s hearing. A majority, 60%, of households receiving SNAP have someone who is employed, and 90% of households receiving SNAP have a family member who finds work within a year. While this demonstrates the importance of what a crucial support the program provides to working families, this also shows the inefficiency of the current minimum wage to provide families with the opportunity to meet their basic needs.