Resolved, That the Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, representing organized Jewish philanthropic services in communities throughout the country, is opposed to length of residence requirements for public or private assistance, and urges the removal of such limitations where they exist." This resolution has been reaffirmed by our general assembly. We welcome the proposed increase in Federal participation in Stateadministered public assistance programs which will make it possible for the individual States to strengthen rehabilitative efforts. We note the importance of safeguarding the work training programs so that they may contribute to the respect and dignity of the individuals, and their restoration to self-support. We believe that the measures for extending the aid to dependent children will strengthen the integrity of family life. Finaly, we welcome the encouragement of experimentation and demonstration of new methods of administering public welfare programs. These have as their aims the prevention and reduction of dependency, better coordination between private and public welfare agencies, and increased effectiveness of services. We are pleased that the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee is sponsoring these important measures, urgently needed and forward looking, and it is our hope that the committee will report favorably on this legislation. Respectfully submitted. IRVING KANE, President. RESOLUTION ON PUBLIC WELFARE, ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, All citizens have a deep and profound stake in the health and welfare standards and services of the Nation. For the voluntary agencies serving these needs, there is a special concern and interdependence with the scope and quality of governmental programs. And there is a particular responsibility at this time to strengthen public welfare services and to resist the weakening of these services by undocumented charges of waste of tax funds. We recognize that the general welfare is set in the foundation of a virgorous economy and sound social conditions which assure to all persons the opportunities for their fullest development, and which prevent and minimize dependence and disabilities. For those who do require help, financial aid alone is not enough; with it must be provided skilled service which strengthens self-respect and restores these persons to independence as quickly as possible. In furtherance of these purposes, we note with commendation the measures endorsed by the board of directors of this council and enacted by the last session of Congress: "Strengthening of the social security system through raising the levels of benefits and broadening the scope of eligibility; "Doubling the appropriation for research and demonstration projects on the causes of family need and social disability; "Extension of aid to dependent children to benefit families with unemployed fathers, and to include foster home care for children whose own homes are not suitable; "Improvement of community health services through increased aid for contruction of most urgently needed facilities, for personnel training, technical services, and research in noninstitutional programs." We urge the next session of the Congress to continue this progress by enactment of legislation endorsed by the board of this council which would: "Provide medical care for the aged through the mechanism of old-age and survivors insurance program; "Extend Federal participation to assure public assistance financing and services for all needy persons not now covered under Federal law, with no restrictions based on citizenship or residence requirements; "Provide grants for professional training of social workers to help overcome the staff shortages in public welfare agencies across the country, and to assure the skilled services required for the earliest rehabilitation of those in need: "Increase further the appropriations for research and demonstration projects in social welfare beyond the modest beginnings which have been made." Hon. WILBUR MILLS, FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, DEAR MR. MILLS: As general director of the Family Service Association of America, I should like to comment on H.R. 10032, the Public Welfare Amendments of 1962, which is currently before your committee. The Family Service Association of America is a federation of over 300 voluntary family counseling agencies in almost 300 key cities throughout the United States. Supported mainly by united funds and community chests, Family Service is the voluntary social welfare organization which has as its main purpose the building of strong family life and the prevention of family breakdown. Family service agencies know all too well the importance and impact which public policies can have on social conditions affecting family life. We, therefore, seek to encourage the kind of public programs which foster strong family life so necessary for the well-being of a modern society. In these times when family breakdown is one of the serious problems of our way of life, the consideration of sound legislation and effective public welfare services is of utmost importance. Thus, in addition to providing skilled counseling and various social services, our member agencies and our association have a second responsibility to work toward the improvement of community conditions that affect family life. Since the intake and information desk of the local family service agency is a constant barometer of family distress and need, the family agency is in a strategic position to know the extent of family troubles in a community, the complex problems that cause family breakdown, and the degree of effectiveness of local programs to help families in trouble. Our agencies see families threatened by such problems as economic dependency, physical or mental illness, marital conflict, disturbed child-parent relationships, juvenile delinquency, and other symptoms of family disorganization. As well-known pioneers in helping people help themselves by the use of skilled methods of rehabilitation, our experience has shown that in many family situations casework and counseling service do help to solve the social problems which contribute to economic dependency. With such help, dependency may often be prevented or reduced. Over the past years, the Family Service Association of America, through action duly authorized by its board of directors, has issued policy statements in certain areas of public concern, such as unemployment, social security, public assistance, and the like. Many of these statements are pertinent to H.R. 10032, the bill currently before the Ways and Means Committee. Our concern for family welfare and our knowledge based on past experience in the prevention of family breakdown by the use of trained and skilled counseling personnel lead us to support the provisions in this bill which require the supplying of social services, in addition to basic financial assistance, to families requiring public aid. In particular, we applaud the proposals which will help to provide the skilled personnel for the public welfare services by providing funds for their training. We are gratified to see the proposals in the legislation which will encourage States to provide services to troubled families by increasing the Federal share of administrative funds. We note with approval the provisions for financing the training of public welfare personnel in State programs with increased Federal matching shares. In addition, we support the provisions for wholly federally financed and directed programs for training workers for the aid to dependent children program. From our experiences in providing casework services to families, we can attest to the usefulness and value of such services when they are provided by personnel trained and skilled in this field. We believe that in many cases skilled help will prevent a family from becoming dependent, and that with such help many families already dependent may be returned to self-support. However, in some situations, such as those of the aged, the chronically ill, and certain cases of dependent children, it may not be possible, despite the best services, to eliminate the need for continued financial support. Even under such conditions, counseling and other social services may prevent a family situation from deteriorating even further, and thus eliminate further hardships and future dependency for the children of the family. Along with our strong support for social services to welfare recipients, we would want the public to remember that adequate maintenance grants are a necessary prerequisite for the success of such services. We are pleased to note that in the provision permitting "protective payments" under title IV, there is a requirement that 100 percent of the budgetary need must be met before such restrictive action may be taken, and that help would be provided to improve the family's ability to manage money. Because family service agencies have seen the tragic results of arbitrary restrictions in the granting of public assistance, based on residence requirements, the association since 1956 has been active in working toward the elimination of such residence restrictions by the States. We have participated in the work of the subcommittee on residence laws of the National Social Welfare Assembly. Since we believe that assistance should be granted on the basis of individualized need and should not be dependent upon the place of residence, we are pleased to note the Federal leadership implicit in H.R. 10032 which would lower the permitted maximum residence requirements to 1 year and, by offering a financial incentive, would further encourage the States to eliminate such requirements entirely. The association's policy statements on unemployment and public assistance call for public assistance adequate to maintain decent standards of living, and to meet minimum family needs when unemployment compensation is either insufficient or unavailable. In addition, the policy statements call for efforts to modify existing restrictions which exclude "employable persons" from receiving public assistance when unemployment benefits expire. Since no compensation system can be expected to meet all needs, it must be supplemented by a public program of financial assistance sufficiently flexible to meet the gaps in family need. In view of these goals, and because of Family Service interest in the prevention of family breakdown, we are encouraged by the provisions of H.R. 10032 pertaining to title IV of the Social Security Act. The amendments would permit payments to include both parents of a child, dependent for reasons of unemployment or incapacity of its parents. We are also pleased to note that the bill would make permanent the now temporary provision for payments under “aid to dependent children" to children of unemployed fathers. We are hopeful that more States will be encouraged to participate in this aspect of the ADC program. We believe that both these provisions are sound public policy because they assist families to stay together in times of economic stress and unemployment. We note that the bill would authorize Federal funds for services provided by the State public assistance agency through contracts with nonprofit private agencies if, in the judgment of the State agency, these could not be as economieally or effectively provided by the staff of the Government agency, and if these services were not otherwise reasonably available to individuals in need of them. Although the standards for membership in the Family Service Association of America require that the major source of support of a member agency must be private funds, this requirement does not preclude the acceptance of some public funds by our member agencies under certain conditions. At this time it may be appropriate to experiment in working out cooperative arrangements between the public and voluntary services. Since the Family Service Association of America believes that a strong and adequate public welfare program, which includes social services as well as economic assistance, is a necessary basic resource in our total welfare structure, we believe this new provision in the law should be sufficiently safeguarded to enhance the sound administration of a public service program. The Family Service Association of America, over the years, has been an advocate of strong citizen participation in the promotion of welfare programs. We, therefore, also note with approval the recommendation in the bill for the appointment of an advisory council on public welfare which would have members representative of various interests concerned with public and nonprofit private welfare programs. In conclusion, we commend the constructive approach of this bill, which emphasizes services to help strengthen families troubled by economic and social problems so that they may reach their maximum potential. We commend, too, the realistic provision for the training of the skilled workers who are essential to the success of these services. We believe that the recommendations contained in H.R. 10032 would be a sound step forward in the improvement of the public welfare program. I hope these comments will be useful to your committee as you deliberate on this bill. If this letter raises any questions that require clarification, or if we can be of any assistance in any other way, please call on us. Sincerely yours, CLARK W. BLACKBURN, General Director. STATEMENT BY ALVIN T. PRESTWOOD, COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA STATE INTRODUCTION I am Alvin T. Prestwood, commissioner of the State Department of pensions and security in Alabama. This department is responsible for the administration of public assistance (old-age assistance, medical assistance for the aged, dependent children, blind, and permanently and totally disabled) and child welfare programs authorized by titles I, IV, V, part 3; X and XIV of the Federal Social Security Act, as amended. The pensions and security program in Alabama is primarily State-Federal financed and is administered by the 67 county departments under the supervision of the State department. GENERAL COMMENTS This department is in general agreement with the purposes which H.R. 10032 seeks to accomplish. We agree also that the nature and objectives of our public assistance and child welfare programs must be adapted to conditions and problems of today. We regret, however, that the legislation as now written is not as broad as we believe it should be. For example, very little or no action is apparently included which would benefit the three adult categories of public assistance, i.e., the blind, disabled, and aged. SPECIFIC PROPOSALS Preventive and rehabilitative services Throughout its history this agency has sought to provide services other than the determination of eligibility for and the granting of payments to public assistance recipients. Heavy caseloads and limits on funds for administrative purposes, however, have prevented our discharging fully these responsibilities. We, therefore, are pleased that this bill proposes to separate administration from services and to authorize higher Federal participation in the cost of certain services. If enacted and broadly interpreted it will do much to implement and underpin the 1956 amendments to the Social Security Act relating to self-care, self-support, and strengthening of family life. Likewise, it will be of real benefit in helping to carry out the services authorized and prescribed in this pending legislation. We believe that the determination of eligibility should be included in services for which the Federal Government will pay 75 percent of costs. We are glad to see further emphasis on the need for funds for training public welfare personnel. We note the provision of 75 percent Federal participation in the cost of training of personnel as contained in section 101 of this bill. As we understand it, this applies to persons employed or preparing for employment by State and local agencies administering public assistance programs for the aged (OAA and MAA), families with dependent children, the blind, and the permanently and totally disabled. We note section 121 of the bill which provides for 100 percent Federal funds in training personnel for family welfare services and child welfare services. We would like to see 100 percent Federal funds made available for training all welfare personnel. We question whether authority should be given for States to purchase services from other public agencies. Instead, the services should be performed on a cooperative basis. Child welfare services The changes proposed in title V, part 3, for child welfare services would Inake it possible for States to expand and strengthen their programs of services in behalf of children in an orderly manner. The increase in authorization is badly needed, but, of equal importance, is the appropriation of the full authoriza tion. While we realize appropriations are not the responsibility of this committee, we know of its great influence in matters pertaining to social security legislation. In general, we like the broadening of the concepts of (1) what constitutes child welfare services; (2) where such services should be given and to whom; and (3) the need for coordination of these services with those for families with dependent children under title IV. We support this specific authorization for day care services. We would urge again, however, that authorizations and appropriations be sufficiently large to enable the States to provide adequately for the protection of children whose parents are working or seeking work or are otherwise absent from the home. Needy families with children We concur in most of the recommended changes in title IV relating to families with dependent children. To accomplish some of these objectives, however, we believe that Federal participation in average payments to needy families with dependent children should be raised. We urge that the provisions for community work and training programs be permissive as now provided in the bill. It appears to us that real care will need to be exercised to assure that public welfare departments do not infringe upon the responsibilities of other agencies in this regard. As we see it, the role of the public welfare departments in job training is primarily one of interpreting to coramunity groups the need for appropriate projects and referring welfare recipients to such projects when they are established. For community work programs, we believe that the costs of planning for, approving, and assurance of continuous adherence to standards on each project are appropriate costs in which the Federal Government should participate. We question the soundness of provisions in the bill for making protective payments under the dependent children program. Would public welfare agencies be able to determine whether the relative of a child is unable to manage funds? Is not that responsibility a function already delegated to duly constituted courts? Another problem with which this department would be confronted if this legislation is enacted is that of interpretation. Alabama could not make protective payments because, due to lack of funds, it cannot meet all the needs of recipients of aid to dependent children. We are delighted that the bill proposes to make permanent the temporary authority for payments for children of unemployed parents and for children in foster homes. Likewise, we favor the authority (1) to provide aid for a spouse of a relative with whom the dependent child is living; and (2) to continue or resume payments to relatives under certain conditions in instances where the child has been removed from the home. We believe this may prove a means whereby children may be returned to their own or relatives' homes. Improvement in administration We believe that advisory councils and committees as proposed in this pending legislation are of great importance. Programs which touch so intimately our disadvantaged citizens need to be continuously examined and reexamined. Advice from various groups with knowledge of and interest in these people can do much to assure that the programs keep pace with changing times and conditions. As indicated previously, we favor the extension of the temporary provisions for aid to dependent children payments, for children of unemployed parents, and for children in foster care. We are disappointed that provision is made only for continuing the increases in the Federal share of public assistance payments for the aged, the blind, and the disabled. We were hoping to see them increased still further so that payments might approach adequacy. For a long time this department has been concerned about needy people who lose residence in one State before gaining it in another. The proposal in this bill to reduce maximum residence requirements which States can impose would do much to offset this problem. We recognize that the optional plan for combining old age assistance, medical assistance for the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to the permanently and totally disabled might simplify administration and provide equity of payments. It also would provide for the equalization of Federal matching for medical care by extending the old age assistance formula to include the other two categories. We note, however, that under the proposal a differential would continue to exist |