« PreviousContinue »
Answer. In FY 1990, 29 Basic Center grantees competed successfully for Transitional Living Program grants. of the 337 currently active Basic Center grantees, 103 also receive funding under the Drug Abuse Prevention Program for Runaway and Homeless Youth. Fifteen agencies currently receive funding under all three programs.
WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON AGING
What is the status of the White House Conference on
Answer: A decision about whether to convene a 1991 White House Conference on Aging is pending within the Executive Branch.
Question. Under Title III-B, the largest amount of monies provided are being used for transportation services. Obviously, transportation is a critical service for the elderly, especially in rural areas where there are no public transportation services. What is the unmet need in this area?
Answer. Transportation is a critical service in itself for some clients. However, transportation is usually part of another service or used to facilitate another service or make it possible for some other service to be provided. Therefore, the unmet need for transportation must be considered in the overall context of the service needs of an expanding and increasingly frail and vulnerable elderly population. We have no specific projections of the unmet needs of the elderly for services. There are huge variables, such as national health policy, national income maintenance policy, employment trends and national economic conditions that complicate estimation of service needs.
Question. What steps are being taken by the Administration on Aging to deal with the lack of transportation services to the elderly?
Answer. The Administration on Aging has supported a number of grants for studies, demonstrations and training on a range of approaches to improve special transportation services for the elderly. These efforts and experiences have been widely disseminated and have been helpful in the development transportation services throughout the title III program.
Transportation remains an important area of concern because it is critical to any system of services and so much of our program funds are spent on transportation. We have an interagency agreement with the Urban Mass Transportation Administration to work collaboratively in several areas to improve transportation for the elderly, particularly the coordination of transportation services.
Question. How many congregate meal sites were in place in FY8 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, and 1990, and how many people were served at these sites?
Answer. In FY 1986, States reported that 2,853,953 elderly persons were served at 14,772 congregate meal sites. During the following two years, FY 1987 through FY 1988, the number of elderly who participated in congregate meals programs dropped from 2,780, 101 to 2,748,985 while the number of congregate meal sites rose from 15,087 in FY 1987 to 15, 222 in FY 1988. In FY 1989, the Administration on Aging eliminated collecting information about the number of congregate meal sites. The number of persons served congregate meals rose slightly in FY 1989 to 2,763,273 and declined to 2,749,626 in FY 1990.
Question. How many congregate meal sites are assumed in the FY 1992 request and how many people will be served?
Answer. While we cannot make any assumptions about the number of congregate meal sites for FY 1992, we anticipate no major changes from the FY 1991 figures in the number of elders served.
Question. How much of the office of Human Development Services FY 1992 Budget request includes funding for administrative costs, other than those monies requested under program administration?
Answer. Approximately $500,000 of program funds across Human Development Services are used for printing. These costs include the printing of such publications as children Today and Aging.
Question. The budget requests $16, 249,000 in increased funding to support an additional 115 FTE's for the office of Human Development Services. This represents a substantial increase in staffing over the past years. Why is such an increase requested for FY 1992 especially when most accounts within HDS received little or no increases?
Answer. Over the past ten years, the office of Human Development Services (OHDS) has suffered a continual reduction in Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) levels (from 1,507 FTE in 1981 to 975 in 1991) while program responsibilities have increased. As a result, OHDS is operating with a bare bones staff, an aging work force which has increased the average grade and salary, and limited support and developmental staff.
During most of Fiscal Year 1988 and 1989, OHDS operated under a limited hiring freeze because of Salary and Expenses (S&E) constraints (severe, unexpected increases in uncontrollable costs, i.e., rental of space, employee benefits, etc.). During Fiscal Year 1990, to increase staff while reducing the average grade and staffing costs, OHDS implemented a new policy of hiring only entry level staff from outside the agency. In August of 1990, the office of Management and Budget's anticipation of a 31.9% sequester for Fiscal Year 1991 forced OHDS to curtail its recruiting effort to avoid increases in liabilities against the Fiscal Year 1991 budget, and OHDS ended the year with 969 FTE. In Fiscal Year 1991, OHDS received funds to fill 1,006 FTE; however, because of the departmental S&E reduction and the 2.41% Graham-Rudman reduction, OHDS can afford only 975 FTE. During the past few years, OHDS has
maintained the stewardship of programs through the reprogramming of funds from other accounts.
Simply put, OHDS cannot continue to provide needed services with the spiraling reduction in critical staff and FTE. For example, one of the areas which is reflective of the diminishing resources OHDS has suffered over the past decade is the grants monitoring activity. A recent review was conducted in all programs, except Head Start. As a result of that review, OHDS has declared a material weakness under the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act in every program reviewed. The ability to correct the weakness depends on providing the grants management function with added staff and travel dollars for monitoring.
In addition to requesting more staff, OHDS has established a Workforce Planning Group to look at work processes, long term needs, to identify ways to improve the use of resources, and to plan for the future.
QUESTIONS SUBMITTTED BY SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER
HEAD START PROGRAM
Question. What steps has the Department taken to prepare the Head Start programs for the number of children who have been exposed to drugs and the developmental problems associated with that exposure?
Answer. The Head Start Bureau has developed a substance abuse initiative, and has identified the needs of children who have been exposed to drugs as a key issue to be addressed in this initiative. The substance abuse initiative includes the establishment of a national Head Start Substance Abuse Workgroup, consisting of national substance abuse experts both inside and outside the Federal government, as well as a representation of Head Start grantees. This Workgroup has met twice, and has assisted Head Start in developing a substance abuse agenda to address this and many other issues.
By September 30, 1991, the Head Start Bureau will award up to $10 million in FY 1991 discretionary quality improvement funds to Head Start grantees to develop their capacity to address 18sues of substance abuse. We expect to fund between 75 and 100 grantees through a competitive process. children affected by exposure to substances will be a critically important issue to be addressed by these projects.
Several Regional Offices, in conjunction with Regional Resource Centers, have conducted substance abuse conferences for Head Start grantees. A key topic addressed during training workshops at these conferences has been working with children exposed to substances, and their families.
Head Start will publish a Head Start Substance Abuse Resource Guide in early summer, 1991. This Guide will be a desk reference for Head Start grantees and other community, State and Federal programs which address substance abuse and want to understand Head
Start's involvement in this issue. The Guide will feature information and resources which address Head Start substance abuse issues of staff, families, children and community partnerships.
Head Start is planning to contribute to the production of a video and manual which will bring together national experts who work with (1) infants who have been prenatally or postnatally exposed to alcohol and other drugs, as well as (2) preschool aged children whose behavior suggests they have been harmed by the effects of exposure to substances. These experts will share the latest information and strategies for working with these affected preschool children.
HEAD START TRAINING FUNDS
Question. Does your budget contain adequate funding to train Head Start personnel to deal not only with these developmental problems but with problems associated with drug abuse of family members?
Answer. The increased funds available to local Head Start programs for training this year will improve their ability to deal with these difficult issues. In addition, the various national Head Start training and technical assistance resources, including Regional Resource Centers which provide general training to grantees, Resource Access Projects which support services to children with disabilities, and our health support providers, the Public Health Service and the Indian Health Service, are all Including substance abuse issues in their training and technical assistance agendas with grantees.
In addition, the Head Start Bureau (HSB) 18 working with the Office for Treatment Improvement (OTI) and the office for Substance Abuse Prevention (OSAP) to develop collaborative partnerships which will assist Head Start in addressing training needs for staff. A specific collaboration has been developed between OTI and HSB concerning the OTI Target cities grants. HSB plans to offer Head Start grantees located in the eight Target cities the opportunity to compete for funds (up to a total of eight awards) to develop collaborative efforts with the Target cities grantees. A key issue to be addressed in this collaboration is training for Head Start staff in identification and early intervention with families. are also exploring ways in which OSAP's Community Partnership and Pregnant Post Partum Women and Their Infants grantees can work collaboratively with Head Start grantees on prevention and early intervention issues.
Head Start has funded 13 demonstration Family Support Centers to Head Start grantees to address innovative strategies for helping families with issues of literacy, substance abuse and employability. In FY 1991, we anticipate funding an additional 16-20 Family Support Centers, along with an evaluation of their process and results.
HEAD START-DRUG EXPOSED CHILDREN
Question. Are Head Start programs adequately staffed to deal with the problems associated with drug exposed children as well as the use of drugs by family members?
Answer. Head Start grantees have capacities to address all four of the Head Start components, (education, health, social services and parent involvement). Performance Standards for each of these components are established and the performances of one third of the grantees are monitored each year. There is no question that issues of abuse of alcohol and other drugs have strained the capacities of grantees to help families, which is why the Head Start Bureau has established a Substance Abuse Initiative.
We are encouraging grantees to increase program resources, where necessary, to add qualified consultant or staff capacities to help address these problems. of the increased funding available in FY 1991 to improve program quality, more than $80 million can be used by grantees for this purpose, as well as to meet needs in other areas. Up to an additional $10 million in substance abuse demonstration funds will also be awarded by September, 1991 and collaborative arrangements with community State and Federal resources to help grantees enhance their staff capacities will be encouraged.
YOUTH GANG DRUG PROGRAMS
Question. How many young people do you estimate are being reached through the Youth Gang Drug Abuse Prevention Program?
Answer.We are in the process of collecting data on the number of youth being served by the 84 grantees funded under this program. This information should be available within the next year. In general, however, we estimate that each of 16 community-based consortium grantees is reaching between 200 and 600 youth. Smaller grantees normally propose to serve between 50 and 200 youth. It is difficult to calculate the exact number of youth being reached because of the nature of many of the projects. For example, the Los Angeles Unified School District grantee is developing a self-esteem enhancement curriculum which is aimed primarily at a targeted group of young at-risk children and their parents. However, the curriculum is also being taught to many teachers and administrators throughout the school system and may have a ripple effect throughout the Los Angeles School District. It is virtually impossible to measure the impact this training will have on non-targeted students.
Question. How are youth Gang Drug Abuse Prevention projects coordinating their activities among the various agencies and programs that serve young people, such as schools, the juvenile justice system, employment agencies, and other social services agencies?
Answer. The most successful coordination activities are occurring in the so-called youth gang consortia projects. Since FY 1989, ACYF has awarded over $19.6 million in discretionary grants to 16 community-based consortia to conduct innovative, comprehensive approaches to the current and emerging problems of youth gangs and their involvement with illicit drugs. Each consortium is a broadbased partnership which draws upon the resources, expertise, energies and commitments of many different groups within a community.
For example, the Denver Consortium, which is headed by the Governor's Job Training Office, brings together the school districts