This document provides an overview of the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) program in Massachusetts. It describes the organizational structure of the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), which administers the CSBG program. It also profiles the 25 community action agencies (CAAs) that receive CSBG funds from DHCD to operate anti-poverty programs across the state. The document discusses CAA service delivery, goals of the CSBG program, DHCD's community action planning requirements for CAAs, and results data from CSBG-funded programs.
This document provides an overview of the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) program in Massachusetts. It describes the organizational structure of the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), which administers the CSBG program. It also profiles the 25 community action agencies (CAAs) that receive CSBG funds from DHCD to operate anti-poverty programs across the state. The document discusses CAA service delivery, goals of the CSBG program, DHCD's community action planning requirements for CAAs, and results data from CSBG-funded programs.
This document provides an overview of the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) program in Massachusetts. It describes the organizational structure of the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), which administers the CSBG program. It also profiles the 25 community action agencies (CAAs) that receive CSBG funds from DHCD to operate anti-poverty programs across the state. The document discusses CAA service delivery, goals of the CSBG program, DHCD's community action planning requirements for CAAs, and results data from CSBG-funded programs.
Organizational and Program Profile 2-5 Description of CSBG Data Collection and Analysis Methods 6-8 Results Oriented Management and Accountability in Massachusetts 8-11 Community Action Planning and Preliminary Data Analysis 11-13 Clients Served by the CAA Network in Massachusetts 13-16 Evidence of Resource Development 16-19 Use of CSBG funds by Eligible Entities 19-21 Management of CSBG Discretionary Funds 22-23 Selected Project Descript ion CSBG Discretionary Funds 24-29 v CSBG Scholarships Program v CSBG Scales and Ladders Project Phase II v Skills Development and Information Technology Access Centers v Family Enrichment Program v Neighborhood Planning and Environmental Justice Pilot Project v Community Food and Nutrition Program (CFNP) A Report on the National Goals and Outcome Measures 29-36 Anecdotal Evidence of Clients Achieving Self-Sufficiency 36-42 Description of Innovative Programs 42-50
Future Direction
50-51 Appendices 52-56
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
2 ORGANIZATIONAL AND PROGRAM PROFILE
The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) is a state agency established by Chapter 23B of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts General Laws. By investing over $470 million in state and federal operating, capital and trust funds, DHCDs numerous programs address the Commonwealths need for affordable housing, as well as community and neighborhood development. The mission of DHCD is to strengthen cities, towns, and neighborhoods and enhance the quality of life of Massachusettss residents. To accomplish this mission, DHCD provides leadership, professional assistance, and financial resources to promote safe, decent affordable housing opportunities, economic vitality of communities and sound municipal management. DHCD forges partnerships with regional and local governments, public agencies, community-based organizations, and the business community to achieve common goals and objectives. In all of these efforts, DHCD recognizes and respects the diverse needs, circumstances, and characteristics of individuals and communities.
The Department of Housing and Community Development is committed to:
Programs and funding that target populations of low to moderate incomes and those with special needs;
Coordinated, integrated and balanced agency responses to address the comprehensive needs and interests of communities;
Programs and technical assistance designed to facilitate informed decision-making at the local level, and to encourage self-sufficiency of residents and communities; and
Sound business practices that ensure the highest standards of public accountability and responsibility.
DHCD implements its mission of strengthening cities, towns, and neighborhoods and enhancing the quality of life of Massachusettss residents through the Office of the Director, the Office of Administration and Finance and four programmatic divisions: the Division of Neighborhood Services, Division of Municipal Development, Divisi on of Public Housing and Rental Assistance, and the Division of Private Housing. The Director of DHCD is a cabinet-level official appointed by the Governor of the Commonwealth to administer and maintain executive authority over all phases of departmental activities and coordinate policy with the Governor and Administration. The Office of the Director includes the Deputy Director, Chief of Staff, Chief Counsel, Deputy Director for Policy Development, Deputy Director for Administration and Finance, and the Director of Communication.
Through its four divisions, DHCD operates programs that benefit non-profit organizations, local housing authorities, private and non-profit housing developers, and many municipal governments across the Commonwealth. There are also several Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
3 commissions and quasi-public agencies affiliated with DHCD such as, the Housing Appeals Committee, Commission on Indian Affairs, Manufactured Housing Commission, Community Development Finance Corporation, Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation, Massachusetts Housing, and the Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund.
Some of the major programs and activities funded by DHCD include:
Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Program Community Enterprise Economic Development (CEED) Program Community Food and Nutrition Program (CFNP) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Construction and rehabilitation of public housing Federal (Section 8) and state (Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program) subsidized housing Fuel Assistance Homeownership opportunities for low and moderate income people Housing certification for municipalities Housing Consumer Education Centers (HCEC) Housing rehabilitation Local economic development Low Income Housing Tax Credit Municipal government capacity building Neighborhood Housing Services program Oversight of the operation and management of 254 local housing authorities Special needs housing Technical assistance to municipalities Weatherization Assistance Program
Due to the passage of the Massachusetts Economic Opportunity Act of 1984, the Governor of the Commonwealth has designated the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) as the lead agency for administering the Community Services Block Grants (CSBG) in Massachusetts.
There are 25 community-based, nonprofit organizations, designated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Director of DHCD, to serve as community action agencies (CAA) in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Private, nonprofit CAAs must have tri-partite boards of directors, consisting of one-third public officials, at least one-third representatives of the poor, and the remainder of the board seats of the private sector. The historical and enabling source of funding for these CAAs is the CSBG Act. Since 1981, Congress has annually appropriated, through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) funds to the state, which in turn distributes it to Community Action Agencies. DHCD distributes CSBG funds to the Commonwealths network of 25 CAAs based on a historical funding formula. CSBG funds support CAA core operations and many anti-poverty services. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
4
CAAs are mandated to develop, implement, coordinate, and evaluate the effectiveness of a variety of anti-poverty programs, and to assist low income families and individuals residing in their designated service area to achieve greater economic self- sufficiency. Community Action Agencies are the only non-profit organizations that are uniquely positioned in their respective local communities to identify and mitigate conditions of poverty that prevent people from becoming self-sufficient. Lack of sufficient income and affordable housing, homelessness, nutritional risk, or a lack of affordable transportation are just a few of the barriers that affect people from moving from poverty to self-sufficiency. The mission of the CSBG program: to provide a range of services and activities having a measurable and potentially major impact on causes of poverty in the community or those areas of the community where poverty is a particularly acute problem 1 , calls for a comprehensive service delivery system to address these issues.
There are seven (7) broad anti-poverty goals outlined in the CSBG Reauthorization Act of 1998, Section 676, Application and Plan that stipulate a variety of purposes. The activities are:
to remove obstacles and solve problems that block the achievement of self- sufficiency...;
to secure and retain meaningful employment;
to attain an adequate education, with particular attention toward improving literacy skills of the low-income families in the communities involved which may include carrying out family literacy initiatives;
to make better use of available income;
to obtain and maintain adequate housing and a suitable living environment;
to obtain emergency assistance through loans, grants, or other means to meet immediate and urgent family and individual needs; and
to achieve greater participation in the affairs of the communities involved, including the development of public and private grassroots partnerships with local law enforcement agencies, local housing authorities, private foundations, and other public and private partners.
To ensure compliance with the CSBG Assurances and other related administrative and programmatic guidelines, DHCD established a community action planning system, which requires each CAA to develop a Community Action Plan (CAP) every three years. Each CAP includes:
a Mission Statement;
1 From Sec. 6759(c)(1) (A) of the CSBG Act. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
5 community needs and internal assessment that will identify strengths and weaknesses of an organization;
a description of the service delivery systems developed to assist low income families and individuals;
a description of National Goals and Outcome Measures to be used to monitor and evaluate the CAAs success in promoting self-sufficiency, family stability, and community revitalization;
a description of how linkages will be developed, coordinated, and maintained to fill identified gaps in services through information, referral, case management, and follow-up consultation;
a description of how CSBG funding will be coordinated with other public/private resources to maximize the efficiency of programs and activities and a description of how the CAA will use the funds to support innovative community and neighborhood-based initiatives, which may include fatherhood initiatives and other initiatives with the goal of strengthening families and encouraging effective parenting; and
a vision statement that identifies how the organization anticipates operating and servicing its clients.
With the 1993 passage of the Government Performance Reform Act (GPRA) and the CSBG Reauthorization Act in 1998, Community Action Agencies (CAAs) and state agencies are now required to implement performance measurement systems at every aspect of the CSBG program including Community Action Planning. The Result Oriented Management and Accountability (ROMA) as described in the CSBG Reauthorization Act of 1998 is a response to the GPRA. There is an increased level of need to document and demonstrate the performance of the CSBG program, as it is scheduled for reauthorization in 2003. The CSBG Information System, multi-year strategic planning and program outcome report will become more and more important in demonstrating that CSBG has been effective in helping people move out of poverty and also that the CAAs are uniquely positioned in their respective communities to achieve this very important goal.
Keeping these important changes in mind, two years ago the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) began presenting CSBG data in a more coherent and meaningful fashion. Last years CSBG Performance Measure Report was an important turning point in this endeavor. The goal of this years report is to measure the efficacy of the CSBG program at three levels: individual client/family self-sufficiency, agency capacity, and community revitalization. In other words, presented information should not only highlight the pervasiveness of poverty in the state, but also measure the impact and benefit of this very important public investment.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
6 DESCRIPTION OF CSBG DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODS
For the purpose of this report, DHCD reviewed information from a variety of sources. In addition to the 2000 Census, one of the key sources of information was data from the annual CSBG Information System (IS) Survey. The IS Survey, for the most part, uses forms developed by the National Association for State Community Services Program (NASCSP), except for in two instances where DHCD developed forms to capture additional local level information 2 . Even though it is not required by the NASCSP, each year DHCD asks CAAs to provide client counts from each city and/or town represented by the CAA network.
The CSBG Information System Survey in Massachusetts collects a comprehensive set of data in three major categories:
(1) Use of CSBG funds in relation to other federal, state, local public and private resources;
(2) Individual and family-level demographic characteristics 3 of CAA clients; and,
(3) Program outcome data using the National Goals and Outcome Measures and other outcome measures developed by the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).
DHCD also collects and reports to the National Association for State Community Services Program (NASCSP) and the Office of Community Services, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services fiscal and program administrative data on the use of the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) funds at the state-level, including a complete accounting of CSBG discretionary funds. Two of the most important pieces of information that DHCD highlights in its final report are the anecdotal evidence of clients achieving self-sufficiency and examples of innovative programs operated by CAAs.
For the purpose of analyzing the CSBG demographic and fiscal data, where applicable, DHCD compared data for the last three fiscal years. Information from the 2000 Census was also taken into consideration in analyzing individual and family demographic characteristics. Since, the Census Bureau has yet to release poverty data, this report will not analyze poverty and poverty-related issues in Massachusetts from the Census standpoint. However, DHCD will continue this approach of analyzing Census data with data from the CSBG IS Survey, as more poverty and income related data is made available by the U.S. Census Bureau. The correlation between Census information and the CSBG data was not explored as it was outside the scope of this report.
2 Number of individuals served by cities and towns, information on CSBG carry-over funds, and a brief summary of individual/family level client outcomes. 3 Gender, Age, Ethnicity/Race, Education Level, Health Insurance, Disability, Family Type, Family Size, Source of Family Income, Level of Family Income, and Housing Characteristics. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
7 DHCD compared information provided during the last two fiscal years to identify and correct any major anomalies. Any major change in data outside the normal range was verified directly with CAAs. All CSBG carry over funds and CSBG discretionary grants were verified internally with the Division of Neighborhood Services Fiscal Affairs Unit. Client demographic data was verified with CAAs when there was a variation of 10% or more between the subtotal of any individual or family demographic characteristic and the total individual or families served. The average demographic data reporting rates for individual and family characteristics are outlined as follows:
Gender 99.96% Age 98.30% Ethnicity 82% Health Insurance and Disability 87.30% Family Type 94.20% Family Size 99.83% Source of Family Income 95.71% Level of Family Income 94.7% Housing Characteristics 95.10%
Even though these collection rates were high compared to previous years, there were variations within individual and family demographic characteristics. This variation in data collection rate can be largely attributed to a number of factors ranging from incomplete intake to the very nature of a CAA program where it is often very difficult to obtain all the necessary information that makes up the CAA demographic report. During fiscal year 2001, DHCD noticed a large increase in the total number of individuals served through the CAA network in Massachusetts due to inclusion of all Fuel Assistance household members in the demographic report for the first time in Massachusetts. This change has also caused a drop in the collection rate for the Ethnicity category as the Fuel Assistance program requires that CAAs collect race or ethnicity related data from only from head of Fuel Assistance recipient households. However, the 30% increase in CAA clients is not solely due to the change in Fuel Assistance reporting.
For program outcome data, DHCD relied on the six (6) CSBG National Goals and Outcome Measures developed by the Monitoring and Assessment Task Force (MATF) headed by the Office of Community Services (OCS), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Outcome measures developed by DHCD for major programs 4 were also measured and reported. DHCD first developed these outcome measures in 1998 and revised them during 2001 to capture consistent program specific outcomes across the state. Outcome data from CAAs were grouped by each of the six (6) National Goals and then sorted by outcome measures and then by CSBG service categories and units of measurement 5 . These units of measurement were used consistently throughout all 25 CAAs so that an accurate outcome report can be prepared for the state.
4 Child Care, Head Start, Women Infant and Children, Nutrition, Housing Assistance, and Information and Referral programs. 5 Housing Units, dollars raised, number of adult individuals, number of families/households, number of board members, and number of partnerships/coalitions. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
8 The CSBG Information System (IS) Survey collects a comprehensive set of valuable client demographic, fiscal, and program outcome data. This data, in combination with narratives provided by CAAs as anecdotal evidence of effectiveness of CSBG program, became the foundation of this Massachusetts CSBG Annual Performance Measure Report.
RESULTS ORIENTED MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY (ROMA) IN MASSACHUSETTS
Since 1998, DHCD has been addressing ROMA in a statewide and coherent fashion, allowing CAAs to strengthen their identified assets, mitigate deficiencies, and develop a comprehensive service delivery mechanism for low income individuals and families.
DHCD approached the implementation of ROMA by recognizing and supporting the development of Information and Technology capacity at local levels, ROMA training and technical assistance, piloting the Scales and Ladders model for service delivery and community action planning.
As part of DHCDs on-going ROMA implementation process, representatives from DHCD and the Massachusetts Community Action Program Directors Association (MASSCAP) met with representatives from the Office of Community Services (OCS), Administration for Children and Families to discuss the status of ROMA implementation in Massachusetts. Although it was recognized that Massachusetts is implementing ROMA successfully, a general concern for OCS was that only 28 percent of the Board of Directors of the 25 Community Action Agencies have participated in formal ROMA training. The need for further ROMA training was agreed upon and became part of Massachusetts ROMA implementation plan. In response to this finding, DHCD applied for and received a $35,300 Training, Technical Assistance and Capacity Building Program grant from OCS. Awarded jointly to DHCD and MASSCAP, this grant is for a board training project focusing on the Board of Directors function and capacity building for all 25 Community Action Agency boards. The training will be reinforced by an interactive forum on the MASSCAP website that will provide on-going ROMA support and training to the Boards. DHCD has decided to retain the services of Rensselaervile Institute, a New York based training and technical assistance institute, for the purpose of ROMA board training.
Furthermore, DHCD used $100,000 in CSBG discretionary funds to further integrate implementation of ROMA at CAA staff level. DHCD, along with the Rensselaerville Institute, just concluded the process of implementing a very comprehensive and ambitious training and technical assistance project. During fiscal year 2001-2002, DHCD staff met with CAA and MASSCAP representatives and developed a ROMA Vision Statement for Massachusetts. Consultants from the Rensselaerville Institute conducted the forum and presented an outline of a regional ROMA training for Massachusetts CAAs. Recognizing that the CAA planners are key to the development of agency objectives, in July 2001, DHCD hosted its first CSBG annual application workshop
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
9 session for CAA planners and planning department staff. Held at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, the workshop was attended by 24 out of the 25 CAAs in Massachusetts. Consultants from Rensselaerville Institute and DHCD staff jointly conducted the session that included topics such as: outcome overview and mindset shifts, preparing fiscal year 2002 CSBG Annual Application, and further integration of outcome thinking. The workshop ended with a brief CAA self-assessment on outcome thinking and management. The session was attended by 53 people representing DHCD and CAAs staff members, including six executive directors. Later that year, DHCD hosted four and half day long regional CORE ROMA training sessions. Over 200 staff members, including several executive directors attended these sessions. One of the CAAs from each region hosted these regional sessions in Boston, Hadley, Carver, and Lowell, Massachusetts. Following the Core ROMA training, all 25 agencies prepared performance target outlines for selected programs and presented the outlines to DHCD. The outlines were reviewed by DHCD staff and consultants from the Rensselaerville Institute. During the months of March through May 2002, individual agency training and technical assistance site visits were conducted by a consultant paired with DHCD staff. DHCD is revising the existing CSBG annual application and reporting process so that it is more in line with the new outcome framework developed by DHCD and Rensselaerville Institute.
Information Technology has been an integral part of DHCDs ROMA implementation plan. Since 1998, DHCD has been allocating CSBG discretionary funds to CAAs to develop their information technology capacity so that a better service delivery and reporting system can be developed. Last year, the Director of DHCD authorized the use of an additional $100,000 in CSBG discretionary funds for the creation of a DHCD- CAA E-Government network initiative. The project, which is slated to be completed by the end of 2002, is designed to achieve at least three major performance targets: (1) all 25 Community Action Agencies will be able electronically transfer CSBG fiscal, client demographic, and outcome data to DHCD; (2) staff members at all 25 CAAs will be able to compile, analyze, and transfer CSBG data to DHCD with limited supervision and technical assistance; and (3) DHCD will have access, without compromising strict client confidentiality standards, to a statewide CSBG database from which further analyses and snapshot reports may be generated for policy and decision making purposes. At present, DHCD is working with a software company to develop a customized web-based application that will facilitate this new data collection and data analysis environment for CSBG program in Massachusetts.
On the programmatic side, DHCD for the second time awarded a total of $120,000 in CSBG discretionary funds to implement a Scales and Ladders Pilot program at eight CAAs in Massachusetts. With this second round of Scales and Ladders Pilot grants, 11 out of 25 CAAs in Massachusetts will have the capacity to run family self- sufficiency projects using the Massachusetts Family Self-Sufficiency Scales and Ladders tool. This intense matrix-based case system allows case managers at local CAAs to develop an intervention strategy for low-income clients using a tool that initially assesses and plots clients on a five-step assessment system: (1) Thriving; (2) Safe; (3) Stable; (4) At-Risk; and (5) In-Crisis. A matrix is defined as a measurement tool that can measure movement or progress along this continuum or range from a beginning point, for example In Crisis, to an end point, Thriving. The matrix measures incremental progress, stabilization or decline of a clients condition. The Massachusetts matrix involves 11 Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
10 scales ranging from Employment to Community Participation. Within each Scale there are several indicators that are used for determining a clients assessment step. For example, according to the Employment scale, an unemployed client with no or a bad work history that is not looking for a job will be assessed as being In Crisis. On the other hand, the same client may be assessed as being Safe according to Health Scale if the person has access to subsidized or free medical care and has the ability to deal with health related needs. On the Housing Scale, a homeless person with no mailing address will automatically fall under In Crisis category. Even though each scale to some extent provides an accurate picture of client situations, it is important to understand the inter- relationship among these scales. Therefore, no one scale is sufficient to move a client from poverty to self-sufficiency the best approach is to apply a number of scales on each family or individual client during the initial intake and then develop a comprehensive service delivery strategy involving several scales. Several scales, such as Housing, Education, Employment, Health, and Transportation should be applied concurrently. CAAs are currently utilizing scales at several major CAA programs, i.e., Head Start, Child Care, Adult Education, Employment and Training, Family Homeless Shelter and Family Self-Sufficiency. It is anticipated that by the end of this second phase of pilot program, close to 900 individuals in family setting will have benefited from this initiative many of whom are refugees and immigrants, have children in the Head Start and subsidized child care programs. Some families are living in homeless shelters and some are in individual shelters. A small number of clients are from family self-sufficiency type programs.
The following table summarizes the Massachusetts Family Self-Sufficiency Scales and respective indicators for each Scale:
Table 1: The Massachusetts Family Self-Sufficiency Scale and Indicators
SCALES INDICATORS Employment Employment Type, Wages, Benefits, Skills/Work History Education and Literacy Child Education Attendance, Parent Involvement, Academic Performance, and Development Adult Education Learning/Credential, Planning, Literacy, Skills, and Values Health Health Coverage, Affordability, Family Health, Substance/Alcohol Abuse, and Mental/Behavioral Health Youth and Family Development Childcare Choice, Availability, and Overall Quality Family Development Safety, Family/Social Network, Goal Setting, Support and Household Composit ion. Housing Affordability, Options, Threat, In-Transition, and Quality of Housing Income Management Basic Needs, Debt, Budgeting, Savings, and Credit Transportation Access, Affordability, and Vehicle Safety Resident Participation Participation/Involvement, Community Support, Perception of Safety, and Voting Nutrition Emergency/Supplemental Food, Access, and Nutritional Practice
In order for the states Community Action Agency network to efficiently promote self-sufficiency for CSBG clients, DHCD requires that each CAA develop and submit a Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
11 comprehensive Community Action Plan every three years. The last plan developed in 2000, expires in 2002 and CAAs are currently going through their fiscal year 2003-2005 Community Action Planning process. The overall goal of the planning process is to identify local needs and develop appropriate service delivery strategies including strategies for measuring program results. DHCDs Community Action Planning process, which predates the ROMA Act, requires each CAA to submit their planning documents in three batches: (1) Action Planning or an outline of the proposed planning process; (2) Needs Assessment Rationale including tools for collecting internal and external needs assessment data; and (3) a complete Community Action Plan.
COMMUNITY ACTION PLANNING & PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS
Results from the 2002 needs assessment process will not be available for review until late this year. During the last planning process, an overwhelming number of CAAs identified lack of affordable housing, lack of good paying jobs, and transportation as the major issues. Risk of losing housing, high cost of food, lack of available childcare, fear of crime, lack of job skills and literacy also were identified as major barriers to self sufficiency.
In spite of some major successes in the CAA network, poverty and the conditions of poverty remain problems in Massachusetts. Statistical reports and anecdotal evidence indicate that the definition of poverty is taking a new turn. More and more working class people are experiencing conditions of poverty as the cost of living, especially housing costs both in terms of property price and rents, has increased disproportionately in Massachusetts. According to an estimate, between 1994 and 2005 approximately 25% of the jobs with most projected growth pay poverty wages 6 . The high cost of food and health care, especially for seniors, is also becoming a determining factor in moving people out of poverty.
A white paper 7 published by the Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund indicated that Massachusetts home prices are higher than any other state in the nation. During 2000, new home prices were 48% higher than the national average in 2000. The paper indicated that local zoning restrictions and resistance to housing construction is a major reason for such high housing prices in Massachusetts. It is true that often restrictive local zoning laws make it difficult for a developer to build multi-family housing or convert an existing single family home into multi-family units.
Furthermore, demographic shifts in many cities and towns in Massachusetts will now require review and redesign of service delivery strategies. A Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research (MISER) analysis 8 indicated, Compared to the racial composition of the Commonwealth in 1990, the population in 2000 was more diverse. When comparing the 1990 race and ethnicity categories to the one race only categories from Census 2000, it was noticed that the highest rate of growth was among the Asian/Pacific Islanders. That group showed a 67.8% increase since 1990. Hispanics
6 The State of the States: Massachusetts 2000, Grassroots Factbooks, Vol 3, Series 1, Jan. 2000. 7 Edward Moscovitch, Why Are Massachusetts Home Prices So High?, Housing Debate, Spring 2001. 8 Census 2000, Press Release, MISER, March 21, 2001. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
12 showed a growth rate of 49.1%, Native Americans experienced a growth rate of 22.7%, and Blacks had a growth rate of 14.4%. In contrast, the White population showed a decline of 0.7% since 1990. DHCD observed an increase among White CSBG clients by 2.53%, compared to fiscal year 2000. Clients in all other ethnic/racial categories increased by less than one percentage point, expect for African Americans. There has been a 1.54% drop among African American client population in 2001.
The following chart further illustrates these changes.
Chart 1: CAA Clients by Ethnicity/Race
Change in CAA Clients by Ethnicity/Race - 2000 vs. 2001 -1.54 0.05 2.53 0.76 0.32 0.46 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 % Changed Ethnicity/Race P e r c e n t
C h a n g e d BLACK WHITE HISPANIC N.AMERICAN ASIAN OTHER
A comparative analysis of 1990 and 2000 Census information shows that Massachusetts ranked 28 th in the nation in terms of population increase. Massachusetts reported 332,672 more people in 2000 Census than in the 1990 Census demonstrating that Massachusetts' population grew by only 5.5% during the last 10 years. Regionally, this change is not very significant, as the states of New Hampshire and Vermont gained population at the rate of 11.4% and 8.2% respectively. However, further analysis of Massachusetts Census information shows some significant demographic variations in the states population growth. For example, the Cape and Islands region experienced the highest growth, while many areas lost population. The three counties that make up the Cape and Islands area experienced the highest population growth on average a growth rate of approximately 35.4%, which is significantly above the states average population growth rate of 5.5%. The population growth rates for these three counties were as follows: Barnstable County 19.11%; Dukes County 28.88% and Nantucket County 58.30%. On the other hand, Berkshire county lost residents compared to 1990 census. Further analysis indicated that 13.5% of the total population for the Commonwealth could be identified as senior citizens (65 years or older). Barnstable and Berkshire County has the highest elderly population in the state approximately 23% and 18% of the population in these two counties respectively fall within the senior citizen category. In all other counties, approximately 14% to 15% of the total population is elderly. Approximately 12.5% of the CAA clients in fiscal year 2001 came from the 70+ years old age group. Twenty-two percent of all clients served by CAAs were from the 55 years or older age group. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
13
More analysis of Census and primary data collected during CAA needs assessment and intake process will be conducted. It is important to understand that resources can no longer be allocated in a traditional manner given the fact that public funding for human service industry is shrinking due to economic slowdown and financial crisis looming from the tragic events of September 11. More and more collaboration among public, private, and the non-profit sector is necessary in maximizing existing resources and overcoming the effects of budget cuts.
The CAAs on-going community action planning process must stress the importance of linking and coordinating services within a CAAs service area. In simplistic terms, the CAA planning process should be redefined as a continued process for identifying and prioritizing needs. Strategies must be developed to meet existing and unmet new needs of the low-income population. In this process, CAAs need to identify gaps in services and develop linkages with other service providers in situations when the CAA alone cannot meet all the needs. The needs assessment process combined with the CSBG fiscal, demographic, and outcome data should show the pervasiveness of poverty and the positive impact of CAA anti-poverty initiatives in Massachusetts.
CLIENTS SERVED BY THE CAA NETWORK IN MASSACHUSETTS Each of the 25 CAAs collected individual and family level demographic characteristics of clients served by the CAA and reported to DHCD in January 2002, for services provided during the months of October 1, 2000 through September 30, 2001. Overall, these individual and family characteristics both at the individual CAA and at the State levels offer some interesting and intriguing trends. During fiscal year 2001, a total of 382,225 unduplicated numbers of individuals from 227,774 families received services from CAAs in Massachusetts. There has been a 33% increase in clients served by CAAs during fiscal year 2001. In other words, CAAs reported 94,031 more individuals in fiscal year 2001. This increase can be attributed largely to the reporting of additional members of Fuel Assistance households. Nevertheless, DHCD has observed a steady growth in CSBG clients for the last three fiscal years.
DHCDs analysis 9 of family level data indicated that 37,595 families reported no income at all. Another 31,193 families reported income derived from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Even though 42,527 families reported that they derived income from employment only, an additional 58,229 families reported income from employment and some other sources. It can be inferred that more than half of all CAA clients were employed and yet were eligible for CAA services. A review of the family income levels of these clients may validate this observation. A li ttle over 21% of all families reported income fell within the very low-income range or under 50% of the federal poverty level. An astounding 74% of all families reported an income within 125%
of federal poverty level. For a family of four, the 125% of federal poverty level for fiscal year 2001 was $22,625, which was significantly below the Massachusetts Self-Sufficiency
9 Actual percentage could not be determined as families report both single and multiple income sources. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
14 Standards 10 for that year. Furthermore, growing trends of income inequality makes it more difficult for families to strive in this environment. A recent report 11 from the Economic Policy Institute/Center on Budget Policy Priorities indicates that between the late 1980s and the late 1990s, the average income of the poorest fifth of families decreased by approximately 7% or $1,190. At the same time, the average income of the richest five percent of families increased by almost 18%. The richest five percent families made $38,760 more in late 1990s than what they made in late 1980s.
Chart 2: Level of Family Income 1999 through 2001
TRENDS IN FAMILY INCOME LEVEL (% OF HHS POVERTY LEVEL) 42.22 37.18 39.14 24.95 25.03 22.06 16.57 16.14 12.51 9.53 16.07 10.53 10.2 10.53 6.73 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 1999 2000 2001 FISCAL YEAR %
O F
F A M I L I E S Up to 75% 76-100% 101-125% 126-150% 151% and above
The majority of individual CAA clients were women. One third or 33% of families were single parent female head of households. Of the remaining two thirds of families almost another one third (32%) of households reported that they were single person households and another one third of households reported to be single parent male, two parents, or no children households.
Children continue to be a major client group for CAAs in Massachusetts. During fiscal year 2001, CAAs served a total of 108,932 children under the age of 18, which is almost one third (32%) of all clients served by CAAs. The client population for this age group has increased by 57,227 individuals from that of the previous year. During 2001, the number of children served between the ages of 6-11 years and 12-17 years increased 19,491 and 18,556 individuals respectively.
The following chart illustrates CSBG clients by age groups for the last two fiscal years.
Chart 3: CAA Clients by Age Groups
10 Jean Beacon, Laura Henze Russell, The Sufficiency Standard: Where Massachusetts Families Stand, Womens Education and Industrial Union, January 2000. 11 Pulling Apart: A State-by-State Analysis of Income Trends, Economic Policy Institute/Center on Budget Policy Priorities, April 2002. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 2000 2001 FISCAL YEARS INDIVIDUAL CLIENTS - BY AGE GROUP (PERCENT OF TOTAL) 0-5 yrs 6-11 yrs 12-17 yrs 18-23 yrs 24-44 yrs 45-54 yrs 55-69 yrs 70+ yrs
Fifty-five percent (55%) of all families served by CAAs reported to have at least one child. A U.S. Census Bureau estimate 12 from 1997 showed that 17.0% of Massachusettss children were below poverty level, which was three percentage points lower than the nationwide average of 19.9% for that year. Poverty among children continues to be a problem. In fact a report 13 published recently showed that the United States, with more than one in five children living in poverty, has the highest rate of childhood poverty among many industrialized western nations. Even though the average rate of poverty among young children (0-6) in Massachusetts was 15.6% for a three year period between 1994 and 1998, still it was significantly lower than the national average of 23.1%. The poverty rate among children will even be significantly higher, if poverty among the under 18-age group is considered. There are reports indicating that the overall poverty rate in the United States is declining even though the existing poverty rate is still very high. There has been a 3.83% increase in CSBG clients from 2000 to 2001 for the under 18-age group. The rates of increase for three age groups, i.e., 0-5, 6-11, and 12- 17 years were 2.89%, 4.67% and 3.92% respectively. CAAs are reporting more and more clients for the under 18-age group when the total number of clients for other age groups 14 remained largely unchanged.
DHCDs CSBG information system survey further revealed that:
Thirty-three percent (33%) of all families served were single parent/female head of households. Actually there has been a drop in
12 County Estimates of People in Age Under 18 for Poverty in Massachusetts, U.S. Census Bureau, http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/25000.html>
13 Paul Scherrer, US has highest childhood poverty rate of industrial countries, WBS, <http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/march 2001/pov-m14.shtml>.
14 18-23 years, 24-44 years, 45-55 years. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
16 single parent/female head of households and an increase in single parent/male and single person households during fiscal year 2001. Almost one-third (32%) of all CAA client households were single persons. The family size of CAA clients remained unchanged except for slight increases (less than 1%) in single person families and families of six. Nineteen percent (19%) of all families reported no income. Even though the proportional share of families with no income remained unchanged from fiscal year 2000, there were additional 4,030 client families who had no reportable income. CAAs served an additional 8,844 homeowners and 10,824 renter families during fiscal year 2001. This increase is proportionate to the overall increase in CSBG client families. At the same time, there has been a 1.22% drop in homeless client families. The following charts highlight additional individual and family characteristics: Chart 4: Family Housing Characteristics in 2001 FAMILY HOUSING STATUS - 2001 OTHER 11% HOMELESS 3% RENT 61% OWN 25% OWN RENT HOMELESS OTHER
EVIDENCE OF RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
In addition to CSBG dollars, CAAs in Massachusetts leveraged a total of $448 million from non-CSBG federal, state, local public and private sources this is a $74 million or 19.85% increase from the previous fiscal year. On average, for each CSBG dollar spent, CAAs leveraged thirty-four dollars. The largest increase in federal funds to CAAs was noted in the Fuel Assistance program followed by increases in Head Start, Section 8 subsidized housing and the Women Infant and Children (WIC) programs. As in previous years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services remained the largest federal funding source.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
17 Funding for State housing and homeless, early childhood education, and senior programs all increased during fiscal year 2001. Overall, funding from state sources increased by $15.6 million dollars, which is a 12% increase from the previous fiscal year.
An analysis of funding from local government and private sources indicates a three-fold increase in funds appropriated by local governments. Yet the overall funding from local government sources remained largely unchanged due to a drop in in-kind resources.
Total non-CSBG funding from the federal, state, local private and public sources for the last three fiscal years is illustrated in the chart on the following page: Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
18 Chart 5: Non-CSBG Funds Leveraged by the CAA Network
Volunteerism is one of the major segments of any non-profit operation. DHCDs analysis showed a significant growth in volunteer activities during fiscal year 2000 through 2001 period. During fiscal year 2001, CAAs reported a total of 545,978 in donated volunteer hours, which represents 307 full-time jobs 15 . There has been a steady growth in this area for the last four years. CAA reported 140,061 more in volunteer hours in fiscal year 2001 than they reported in fiscal year 2000.
The following chart illustrates the donation of volunteer hours for the last four years:
15 Based on average weekly hours in private, non-agricultural industries, in December 2001, Economic Report of the President, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C, 2002.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
19 Another important area of private sector resource development is raising funds from foundation, corporations, the United Way and other non-profits. There has been a steady growth in CAA funding from this sector. During 1998 and 2001, funding from foundations, corporation and non-profits increased by approximately $10 million. The average annual growth rate in funding from these sources for the last four years has been 38%. Fundraising from the private sector experienced the most growth during the 1998-1999 and 1999-2000. Between 2000 and 2001, funding from foundations, corporations and non-profits increased by 5%.
CAAs often charge a small co-payment or fees for services to child care, day care and transportation clients. For many programs, these fees are often determined on a sliding scale basis. During 2001, CAAs reported $9.3 million in client fees. During the last three years, the total amount of dollars reported through client fees have increased mainly due to an increase in client volume.
Overall, the state of resource development from non-federal sources remained strong among Massachusetts CAAs. Recently released data 15 from the National Association for State Community Services Program (NASCSP) for fiscal year 2000 showed that the network of CSBG funded agencies exceeded goals set by the Office of Community Services for leveraging non- federal resources for low income communities. For each CSBG dollar invested, the CAA network in Massachusetts leveraged $14.90 from non-federal sources. This ratio is significant as it is more than three times of the nationwide average of $3.72 dollars. In fiscal year 2000, only two other states, Colorado and Minnesota exceeded Massachusetts ratio. This ratio is also significantly higher compared to many large CSBG states 16 . During fiscal year 2001, for each CSBG dollar invested, the CAA network leveraged $14.80 from non-federal sources.
USE OF CSBG FUNDS BY ELIGIBLE ENTITIES
The CSBG Information System Survey and DHCDs contracting process track detailed use of CSBG funds in 11 different service categories. Each of the service categories has been designed in a way that can produce detailed information about programs that were offered to low-income people and the service area in general. These service categories are: Employment, Education, Income Management, Housing, Emergency Services, Nutrition, Linkages and Coordination, Self-Sufficiency, Health, Youth, and Senior Programs.
The top five areas of CSBG expenditure in Massachusetts were:
Linkages and Coordination of Services 19.43% Education and Literacy 18.22% Emergency Services 14.05% Housing 12.70% Employment 8.24%
15 Meg Power, FY 2000 Non-Federal Funding in the CSBG Network And the CSBG Performance Goals, The National Association for State Community Services Program, Center for Community Action, April 2002.
16 The states of New York, California, and Illinois. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
20
A significant portion of remaining CSBG funds were spent on Income Management, Nutrition, Self-Sufficiency, and Youth related activities. Due to a change in the way CSBG funds are reported at the national level, for the first time, DHCD tracked the use of CSBG funds for two demographic categories: Youth and Seniors. During fiscal year 2001, a total of $454,583 and $202,512 were spent for these two demographic groups respectively. It is important to mention that both Youth and Senior Citizens get benefits from other CAA programs. Therefore, the actual delivery of services for these two demographic categories is much larger than what is reflected here.
CAA budget data from fiscal year 2001 shows that on-average CAAs spent 26.16% of their CSBG allocation for administrative purposes and the range of administrative expenditures across the board remained justifiably low in spite of increases in CSBG allocations. The median administrative budget for a CAA was only $112,326. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
21
Table 2: CSBG Allocation Vs. Actual Expenditure
Table 3: Actual Expenditure of CSBG Funds by Service Categories (Eligible Entities)
SERVICE CATEGORY TOTAL CSBG OTHER FEDERAL STATE LOCAL PRIVATE TOTAL
17 CSBG discretionary actual allocation included carry-over funds from FY00. 18 Some CAAs are reporting their prior years carry-over funds. ALLOCATION CATEGORIES PLANNED ACTUAL TOTAL Carried Over to FY02 Eligible Entities $13,379,300.00 $13,379,300.00 $0.00 State Administrative Cost $743,295.00 $485,837.00 $ 284,458.00 Discretionary Projects 17 $743,294.00 $867,607.00 $0.00 FY 01 TOTAL $14,865,889.00 $14,705,744.00 $284,458.00 Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
22
MANAGEMENT OF CSBG ADMINISTRATIVE AND DISCRETIONARY FUNDS
The Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Statute mandates DHCD to spend a maximum of 5% of the total state allocation for administrative purposes. Therefore, DHCD retained a total of $743,295 or five percent (5%) of the total allocation to support salaries and fringe benefits of 10 program and management staff members. Due to several staff vacancies vis--vis hiring freeze of state employees, $458,837 was expended on 7.05 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions. The remaining $284,458 was carried over to fiscal year 2002 and should be depleted by the end of the current fiscal year. DHCD is also mandated to spend five percent (5%) of the total allocation on projects and programs at the local levels at the discretion of the Director of DHCD. Utilizing fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2000 carry-over CSBG discretionary funds, DHCD allocated a total of $867,607 in grants, primarily to community action agencies. This is approximately $103,462 more than the previous fiscal year. Funds were allocated for the following purposes:
Information Technology Access Centers, CAA staff training and Mentoring project Massachusetts Community Action Program Directors Association - $ 75,0000
Scales and Ladders Pilot Demonstration Grants (Phase II) - Eight Community Action Agencies - $120,000
Result Oriented Management and Accountability (ROMA) Training Rensselaerville Institute - $100,000
CAA-DHCD Electronic Government Network Project - Community Networks Corporation - $100,000
CAA Scholarships Program - Seven Community Action Agencies - $70,000
Community Food and Nutrition Program (CFNP) supplemental grants - Eight Community Action Agencies - $27,607
Homeless and Crisis Prevention Program Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance - $90,000
Neighborhood Planning and Environmental Justice Grants Four Community Development Corporations - $85,000 19
Grants to CAAs, Community Development Corporations and other non- profits - $210,000
19 FY02 CSBG discretionary account paid for $10,000 of these grants. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
23 - Brightwood Development Corporation (Springfield) Organizational Development - Community Teamwork, Inc. (Lowell) Focus Groups - Hungry Hill Community Development Corporation (Springfield) Organizational Development - Mattapan Family Service Center (Boston) Small Business Development - Montachusett Opportunity Council (Fitchburg) Youth Tutoring Program - North County Community Development Corporation (North Adams) Organizational Development - Springfield Neighborhood Housing Services (Springfield) Organizational Development - Working Capital Network/Peer to Peer Program (Worcester) Small business development
The following chart further demonstrates the use of CSBG discretionary grants in Massachusetts:
Chart 7: Allocation of CSBG Discretionary Grants
ALLOCATION OF CSBG DISCREATIONARY GRANTS 20% 18% 14% 12% 10% 9% 8% 6% 3% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% I n f o r m a t io n
&
T e c h n o lo g y E c o n o m ic
D e v e lo p m e n t R O M A
I m p le m e n t a t io n R O M A
T r a in in g F u e l A s s is t a n c e E n v ir o n m e n t a l P la n n in g S c h o la r s h ip s
P r o g r a m O t h e r N u t r it io n
The top five service categories for the CSBG discretionary allocation were:
Income Management (ROMA and Information Technology project) 33% Linkages and Coordination (small business development and Neighborhood Planning and Environmental Justice projects) 19.50% Other (CDC and CAA capacity building) 15.62% Self-Sufficiency (including Scales and Ladders Pilot projects) 14.20% Education and Literacy and Emergency Assistance (CAA scholarship programs and supplemental support for LIHEAP clients) 10.65% Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
This pilot scholarship program was developed by DHCD in fiscal year 2000 to provide CAA clients with funds (maximum of $1,000 per client) so that they could pursue formal higher education. This includes general education, e.g., literacy skills, short term training in occupational skills, or general post-secondary education. During fiscal year 2001, DHCD allocated a total of $100,000 in Scholarship Program funds to renew the following seven grantees fiscal year 2000 grants. Each CAA received a $10,000 Scholarships grant during fiscal year 2001:
Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. (Boston, MA); Action, Inc. (Gloucester, MA); Community Action Agency of Somerville, Inc. (Somerville, MA); Franklin Community Action Corporation (Greenfield, MA); Quincy Community Action Programs, Inc. (Quincy, MA); Southern Middlesex Opportunity Council, Inc. (Framingham, MA); and Tri-City Community Action Programs, Inc. (Malden, MA).
The remaining $30,000 in Scholarship Program funds will be distributed to three additional CAAs selected through an application process.
CSBG SCALES AND LADDERS PILOT PROJECT PHASE II
In cooperation with the CSBG Scales and Ladders Committee, DHCD has developed a Scales and Ladders tool for use throughout the CAA network. To date, the committee has developed the Massachusetts Family Self-Sufficiency Scales and Ladders Assessment Matrix encompassing 11 scales and five ladders. During fiscal year 2000, six (6) CAAs were awarded grants to operate a pilot program utilizing the 11 scales. During fiscal year 2001, DHCD continued its support by awarding additional $120,000 to eight CAAs through a state-wide competitive grant process three of these CAAs also received a similar grant in fiscal year 2000. This brought the total number of CAAs that are implementing the Scales and Ladders Pilot project to 11. The following CAAs received a Scales and Ladders Pilot grant in fiscal year 2001 and 2000:
Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. (Boston, MA) Fiscal Year 2001 - Asian American Civic Center - $18,000 Fiscal Year 2000 - Jamaica Plain Area Planning Action Council - $28,898
Citizens for Citizens, Inc. (Fall River, MA) - $10,500
Community Action Inc. (Haverhill, MA) Fiscal Year 2001 - $7,500 Fiscal Year 2000 - $30,000
Community Action Committee of Cape Cod and Islands (Hyannis, MA) - $15,000 Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
25
Community Teamwork, Inc. (Lowell, MA) Fiscal Year 2001 - $18,000 Fiscal Year 2000 - $30,000
Community Action Programs Inter-City (Chelsea, MA) - $18,000
Greater Lawrence Community Action Programs, Inc. (Lawrence, MA) - $15,000
Montachusett Opportunity Council, Inc. (MOC, MA) - $27,287
Self-Help, Inc. (Avon, MA) - $18,000
Valley Opportunity Council, Inc. (Holyoke, MA) - $11,050
Worcester Community Action Council, Inc. (WCAC, MA) - $3,200
SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACCESS CENTERS
In order to bridge barriers that exist for low-income people gaining access to information technology (IT), the Massachusetts Community Action Program Directors Association (MASSCAP) in collaboration with several CAAs, has developed pilot programs across the state to provide CAA clients with computer access and training so that they can acquire the comfort level and skills necessary to succeed in the new information age economy. Each pilot program addresses its own unique local need. In addition to training clients, CAA staff (when necessary) are also trained in computer usage in order for all staff to meet a basic level of computer proficiency. A total of $100,000 was awarded to MASSCAP in fiscal year 2000 and a contract extension was granted in fiscal year 2001 using $75,000 in CSBG discretionary funds.
MASSCAP continued the development of the IT access centers in fiscal year 2001 by expanding the project to an additional three CAAs i.e., Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc. (Lawrence, MA), Hampshire Community Action Commission (Northampton, MA), and the North Shore Community Action Program (Peabody, MA). The increase resulted in expanded geographical coverage and increased customer service opportunities for 10 CAAs. The Greater Lawrence Community Action Council established a Computer Clubroom with the goal of bringing computer access/literacy to teens in order for them to advance their academic and vocational skills. The Hampshire Community Action Council developed a rural IT access project based in two small existing multi-service sites in rural Hampshire County. The goal of this project is to increase job skills and access to job opportunities. The North Shore Community Action Council (NSCAP) enhanced its existing Transition to Work program. Working with seven family shelters serving families on the North Shore, NSCAP used a system of floating sites (Action, Inc., a sister agency and the Peabody public library) to bring training on computers and the Internet to over 200 people.
The following agencies are part of MASSCAPs IT Access Center initiative:
Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. (Boston, MA) Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
26 Community Action, Inc. (Haverhill, MA) Franklin Community Action Corporation (Greenfield, MA) Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc. (Lawrence, MA) Hampshire Community Action Council, Inc. (Northampton, MA) Montachusett Opportunity Council, Inc. (Fitchburg, MA) North Shore Community Action Program, Inc. (Peabody, MA) Tri-City Community Action Program, Inc. (Malden, MA) Valley Opportunity Council, Inc. (Holyoke, MA) Worcester Community Action Council, Inc. (Worcester, MA)
In addition, MASSCAP is working with the Center for Social Policy at the McCormack Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Boston to assess and evaluate the program. The assessment design for the program included site visits, interviews, various reporting mechanisms and group presentations.
In cooperation with the Asset Development Institute, Center on Hunger and Poverty, MASSCAP recently, held a Digital Age conference at Brandeis University. DHCD organized two workshops highlighting its involvement in the Commonwealths E- Government initiative explaining how the state government will become more accessible to the public via the Web, and what role Community Based Organizations (CBO) can play to make this initiative a success. The second workshop presented a more specific description on DHCDs on-going E-Government CSBG data collection initiative. DHCD underwrote part of the cost of this conference using fiscal year 2001 CSBG discretionary funds.
SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
Mattapan Family Service Center (Boston, MA)
The Mattapan Family Service Center received a $25,000 CSBG discretionary grant in fiscal year 2000. During fiscal year 2001, the agency received an additional $50,000 to continue its development of the Mattapan Business Assistance Center that provides a place for existing area business owners so that they can maintain and expand their businesses. The new grant supported the expansion and continued development of the center. The center conducts monthly workshops, as well as daily in-depth or tailored assistance to clients, in: business plan development, licensing, product marketing, advertising, signage, zoning, accounting, taxes, workforce development, business technology and the internet, legal issues, customer relations, bid preparation and project estimating, records keeping, business management, loan packaging, insurance and risk management, networking, and conflict resolution.
Working Capital Network/Peer to Peer Partnerships (Worcester, MA)
To support the development and start-up of a Peer-to-Peer small business development program that aims at assisting low-income entrepreneurs in the Worcester area, DHCD awarded a $25,000 CSBG discretionary grant to the Working Capital Network in fiscal year 2001. The program assists those individuals who fall under 80% of the areas median family income, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standards, are self-employed or would-be self-employed, who are Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
27 not able to access credit from mainstream financial resources. In other words, the organization helps people who are un-bankable. The Working Capital Network has similar programs operating in the Greater Boston, Lawrence, Springfield, Gloucester, Brockton, New Bedford, and Palmer areas. The goal of the program was to recruit between 75 and 100 members to the organization and to administer 25-35 loans ranging from $500 through $25,000. The organization offered a business education and training program, which included topics such as, how to write a business plan, how to produce a cash flow statement, and how to develop a marketing strategy.
FAMILY ENRICHMENT PROGRAM
Springfield Partners for Community Action, Inc. (Springfield, MA)
The Springfield Partners for Community Action, Inc.s (SPCA) Family Enrichment/Education Program operates in conjunction with the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and the Preschool Enrichment Team. Both of these affiliated agencies provide parenting programs and teacher education on the issues of family literacy and family stabilization. The program offers a monthly family literacy newsletter; take home reading materials for children to share with their family members; and family style meals on a bi-monthly basis to SPCAs day care program participants. The meals are followed by a short program featuring family literacy activities, parenting workshops (on family issues, life skills and/or health and nutrition issues), and family support groups. SPCA received a $20,000 grant in fiscal year 2000 and an additional $20,000 to continue this initiative throughout fiscal year 2001.
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING/ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PILOT PROGRAM
CAAs and other community-based organizations on a day-to-day basis confront a variety of environmental and development issues that adversely affect the neighborhoods in which families live. In order to address this, DHCD developed a program aimed at offering pilot grants for consultant assistance to organizations in identifying strategies to address specific conditions that threaten the environment of a neighborhood. The two purposes of this initiative were: (1) to provide resources to organizations for studies that others (e.g., municipal governments) are unable to provide and (2) to serve as a way of increasing the visibility, currency and viability of organizations as a source of planning for neighborhoods (which may in turn increase the attractiveness of serving in these organizations and strengthen some boards/organizations). Through a statewide competitive grant application process, DHCD awarded grants to the following Community Development Corporations (CDC) to carry out this one-year pilot initiative:
Greater Holyoke CDC (Holyoke, MA) - $10,000 Lawrence Community Works (Lawrence, MA) - $25,000 Main South CDC (Worcester, MA) - $25,000 Weir Corporation (Taunton, MA) - $25,000
COMMUNITY FOOD AND NUTRITION PROGRAM (CFNP)
During fiscal year 2001, DHCD was awarded $63,212 from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to administer the Community Food and Nutrition Program Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
28 (CFNP) in Massachusetts. Due to this limited amount of resource for CFNP purposes, the Director of DHCD approved the use of a total of $25,000 in Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) discretionary funds to supplement the program. The combined allocation brought the Community Food and Nutritional Program to a total of $88,212. Eight CAAs were selected as CFNP grantees through a statewide competitive application process. Fiscal year 2001 CFNP was designed to encourage community action agencies (CAAs) to link CFNP to an established program that lacked a nutrition education component. In addition, applicants were asked to demonstrate how the existing program, with the inclusion of CFNP, would be marketed to residents in the designated service area. The purpose of the Community Food and Nutrition Program in fiscal year 2001 was:
To coordinate existing private and public food assistance resources to better serve low-income communities.
To assist low income communities to identify potential sponsors of child nutrition programs and initiate new programs in underserved and unserved areas, and
To develop innovative approaches at the State and local levels to meet the nutritional needs of low income people.
The following is a brief description of grants and respective outcomes that were adopted for the CFNP initiative in Massachusetts:
Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. (Boston, MA) received a $12,202 grant to translate nutrition education materials making them more accessible to non-English speaking or bilingual area residents. The project also involved completion of nutritional related training and providing resources to 22 social service/mental health supervisory staff and 6 neighborhood case managers.
Action, Inc. (Gloucester, MA) received an $8,000 grant to assist 15 area youths in obtaining five credits towards their high school graduation through completion of a for- credit nutritional course.
Community Action, Inc. (Haverhill, MA) received $12,202 to assist a total of 1,000 individuals increase their access to nutritious food and/or nutritional education, increase the purchase and consumption of healthy foods by low-income residents, increase the level of participation in the agencys Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) nutritional program by 10%, and to increase the overall public knowledge of the nutritional program.
Community Action Programs Inter-City Inc.s (Chelsea, MA) $12,000 grant was designed to integrate the CFNP into its existing scales and ladders program. The goal of the program was to assist 25 participants in demonstrating movement up one or more steps on a scale and to help 5 out of 35 participants complete career training program as a result of case management services.
Franklin County Community Action Corporation (Greenfield, MA) designed the program to assist 295 households increase their access to nutritious food and/or nutrition information and education. An additional 60 families per month were to increase their Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
29 access to nutritious food and nutrition education through the West County Food Bank. According to the goal set up by the CAA, 10% of Food Pantry clientele who are Hispanic should report that the Food Pantry stocks food and offers culturally appropriate nutritional education. Twenty-five (25) families in Even Start were targeted to participate in high quality nutrition education and consume nutritious food during parenting education activities. FCAC received $12,202 in CFNP grant in fiscal year 2001.
Self-Help, Inc. (Avon, MA) received a $12,202 grant to assist 150 individuals increase their access to ethnically and culturally appropriate food and information. The agency also helped clients understand how this can be incorporated into a well-balanced diet. SHI is also helping five area food pantries to increase their supplies of ethnic and culturally appropriate food.
Springfield Partners for Community Action, Inc. (Springfield, MA) received a $12,202 grant to help 30 families complete nutritional workshops and receive a free SERVE food package. The goal of the program is to increase awareness of good nutritional practices and how those practices impact health issues. These workshops were designed to address meal-planning ideas, given the fact that many low-income families often have to cut down on their food budget.
CFNP has been a valuable, but limited nutrition-specific resource for CAAs. DHCD makes an effort to maximize the resource either by supplementing the CFNP with an additional allocation from the CSBG discretionary funds or by taking a variety of priority approaches for the state. For example, during fiscal year 2001, DHCD encouraged CAAs to coordinate services with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health to augment their Food Stamp Outreach effort.
Due to full integration of the Results Oriented Management and Accountability (ROMA) system, agencies were required to complete a workplan of activities, which included identification of the CSBG National Goals and Outcome Measures as well as measurable CFNP goals and outcomes. By utilizing this system, CAAs were able to track and report on the number of individuals whose lives were benefited and improved through the utilization of CFNP related services.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL GOALS AND OUTCOME MEASURES 20
In 1996, in response to the Government Performance and Reform Act, the Office of Community Services (OCS), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recruited representatives from local community action agencies, state associations, state offices, and national associations to provide direct input on ROMA implementation process at the national level and formed the Monitoring and Assessment Task Force (MATF). The MATF developed six National Goals and Outcome Measures to measure outcomes of the CSBG program at individual, community, and agency levels. Each National Goal has several outcome measures from which state administering agencies and CAAs choose appropriate outcomes to measure the impact of their CSBG program.
20 It was likely to have more than one Outcome Measure as well as National Goal assigned to an individual and/ or family. Therefore, numbers reported in this section are not 100% unduplicated. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
30
DHCD has adopted all six National Goals and Outcome Measures and has mandated CAAs to adopt at a minimum, National Goals 1, 3, and 6. These three National Goals are: (1) Low Income People Become More Self-Sufficient; (2) Low Income People Own a Stake in Their Community; and (3) Low Income People Especially Vulnerable Populations Achieve Their Potential by Strengthening Family and Other Supportive Systems. CAAs in Massachusetts were also mandated to adopt at least one National Goal and Outcome Measure for each CAA workplan activity. In spite of the comprehensive nature, these six National Goals and resulting outcome measures cannot capture the essence of every single CSBG funded programs. Therefore, DHCD developed some additional outcome measures for most common CAA programs in 1998 and revised those outcomes in 2001. These additional outcome measures are:
CHILD CARE/DAY CARE
Number of parents able to train for, seek, obtain and/or maintain employment as a result of services.
HEAD START
Number of children who experience healthy growth and development and whose families are strengthened through participation in Head Start.
FUEL ASSISTANCE
Number of low-income households who have increased their disposable income through receipt of Fuel Assistance. Number of households in crisis whose emergency needs are ameliorated.
WEATHERIZATION
Number of households who reduce their annual energy costs through energy conservation measures.
FOOD AND NUTRITION PROGRAM
Number of households who have increased access to nutritious food and/or nutrition information and education.
Number of households in crisis whose emergency needs are ameliorated 21 .
Number of at risk mothers who improve their pre-natal health and/or health of new born and young children through participation in the WIC program.
21 can also be used for emergency Food Pantry and emergency food distribution programs.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
31
INFORMATION REFERRAL
Number of requests for assistance that result in increased access to resources.
HOUSING
Number of participating families moving from substandard housing into stable standard housing, as compared with the total number of participating families.
Number of participating families who are near homeless or at-risk of homelessness who maintain their tenancy as a result of program intervention.
Number of families placed in safe, permanent housing who maintain this status for at least six (6) months.
Number of participants better able to negotiate a first time home purchase through successful completion of a 1st time homebuyers program.
VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
Number of individuals who actively participate in their community through volunteer services.
The following section provides a snapshot of actual measured performance of client, community, and agency outcomes as reported by CAAs during fiscal year 2001:
GOAL 1: LOW INCOME PEOPLE BECOME MORE SELF-SUFFICIENT
ACTUAL OUTCOMES (SELF SUFFICIENCY)
Four thousand seven hundred twenty-three (4,723) participants obtained employment.
Thirteen hundred (1,300) participants maintained employment for a full twelve months.
Adult members obtained and maintained employment for at least ninety days in 83 households.
Seventeen (17) households experienced an increase in their annual income as a result of earnings.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
32 One thousand one hundred fifty-seven (1,157) participating families moved from substandard housing into stable standard housing.
Nine hundred four (904) people progressed toward literacy and/or GED.
One thousand four hundred two (1,402) people made progress toward post-secondary degree or vocational training.
Agencies helped 18,232 people become self-sufficient as verified by other outcome measure(s). Some of these outcomes were:
Made educational opportunities available for 13,048 people including parents who were able to train for, seek, obtain, and/or maintain employment as a result of childcare services.
Assisted 2,597 people move into or maintain better housing;
Assisted 1,333 people address their immediate needs through emergency services.
RESULTS FROM CLIENT SURVEYS
Eleven thousand five hundred fifty one (11,551) clients considered themselves more self-sufficient since participating in services or activities of the agency.
Twenty-one (21) clients reported an increase in income since participating in the services of the agency.
GOAL 2: THE CONDITIONS IN WHICH LOW INCOME PEOPLE LIVE ARE IMPROVED
ACTUAL OUTCOMES (COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION)
One hundred (120) accessible, living wage jobs were created and/or retained.
The assessed value of eight homes increased as a result of rehabilitation projects.
Six thousand four hundred and seventy (6,470) low-income people experienced an increase in access to community services and resources. This included:
access to health care for 905 individuals; access to nutritional resources for 587 households; access to self-sufficiency type resources for 820 households; and access to better housing related resources for 2,077 households.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
33 CAAs increased availability and affordability of essential services. This included:
access to medical care for 1,802 families; access to better housing for 798 families; and access to services made available by non-CAA providers for 1,813 individuals.
In addition to this, CAAs made 4,250 childcare slots available for low-income people. At one agency, low-income clients completed 520 transportation trips.
Forty three thousand six hundred fifty one (43,651) individuals and families reported positive outcomes specific to the work done by individual agencies. This included:
increased access to nutritious food and/or nutrition information and education for 33,133 households; increased access to 19,606 nutritionally appropriate school lunches; increased access to health services for 1,206 households; and increased access to better housing for 1,390 individuals and families.
Furthermore, 2,937 individuals mitigated their emergency situations due to agency services.
RESULT FROM CLIENT SURVEYS
Three thousand eight hundred and thirteen (3,813) households believed that the agency helped improve the conditions in which they lived.
GOAL 3: LOW INCOMEPEOPLEOWNA STAKE INTHEIR COMMUNITY
ACTUAL OUTCOMES (COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION)
Seven hundred eighty six (786) households owned or actively participated in the management of their housing.
One hundred ninety six (196) people completed advocacy and intervention type activities regarding funding levels, distribution policies, oversight, and distribution procedures for programs and funding streams targeted for the low-income community.
Two thousand three hundred and forty (2,340) households participated or volunteered in one or more groups, which included 844 households in housing and 1,444 in linkages and coordination related programs.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
34
RESULT FROM CLIENT SURVEYS
Three hundred and eleven (311) households felt that they are part of the community.
GOAL 4: PARTNERSHIPS AMONG SUPPORTERS AND PROVIDERS OF SERVICES TO LOW INCOME PEOPLE ARE ACHIEVED
ACTUAL OUTCOMES
Five hundred sixty eight (568) partnerships were established and/or maintained with other public and private entities to mobilize and leverage resources to provide services to low-income people. In addition to this, CAAs invested 22 staff hours. A total of 500 community residents helped achieve this outcome.
Five hundred ninety (590) partnerships were established and/or maintained with other public and private entities to complete the continuum of care for low-income people.
Sixty-one (61) partnerships established and/or maintained with other public and private entities, which ensure ethnic, cultural, and other special needs considerations are appropriately included in the delivery service system.
Other outcome measure(s) specific to partnerships created by local agencies included:
Development of 15 new agreements regarding coordinating services with other providers;
Development of 360 partnerships regarding linkages and coordination of services;
Creation of 25 new childcare slots;
Investment of 100 staff hours in creating and maintaining partnerships; and
Development of partnerships around nutritional issues by four agencies.
RESULTS FROM CLIENT SURVEYS
Twenty eight (28) principal partners were satisfied with the partnership.
Ninety nine (99) partners rated CAAs as being responsive. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
35
GOAL 5: AGENCIES INCREASE THEIR CAPACITY TO ACHIEVE RESULTS
ACTUAL OUTCOMES (AGENCY CAPACITY)
Agencies mobilized a total of $125,000.
A total of $15,601,000 dollars mobilized by two agencies as compared with CSBG dollars ($5,067,228).
Three agencies (3) agencies increased their funding from eight funding sources thus increasing the total value of resources available for services to low-income people. A total of 5,089 people with special needs showed improvement as a result of programs aimed at that population.
Other outcomes specific to agency capacity building included:
improving efficiency in 28 programs; improving program efficiency instituted by 587 staff members; making 2,805 child care slots available; making three new funding sources available; and publishing four new newspaper articles.
GOAL 6: LOW INCOME PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE POPULATIONS, ACHIEVE THEIR POTENTIAL BY STRENGTHENING FAMILY AND OTHER SUPPORTIVE SYSTEMS
ACTUAL OUTCOMES (FAMILY STABILITY)
Two thousand two hundred and fifty (2,250) elderly households maintained an independent living situation.
Three hundred (351) disabled or medically challenged persons maintained an independent living situation.
Emergency needs of 88,480 households were ameliorated. In addition to that, 12,193 individuals were able to ameliorate their emergency needs mainly through health and nutritional programs. Furthermore, 1,387 instances of Information and Referral needs of low income people were met.
Seven hundred twenty nine (729) participating families moved from homeless or transitional housing into stable standard housing - 7,500 families maintained subsidized housing.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
36 One thousand five hundred eighty three (1,583) households reported an increase in childrens involvement in extracurricular activities.
Seventy three thousand eight hundred three (73,803) high consumption households realized a reduction in energy burden.
30 households moved from cultural isolation to involvement with their cultural community.
Other outcomes specific to the work done by CAAs included:
Five thousand three hundred and forty nine (5,349) children 22
experienced healthy growth and development and their families were strengthened through participation in the Head Start program.
Four thousand seven hundred eighteen (4,718) individuals and families were able to attend and complete Adult Education programs.
Twenty thousand nine hundred ninety three (20,993) requests for assistance resulted in increased access to resources.
Seven thousand six hundred twenty eight (7,628) individuals addressed health related issues.
Four thousand five hundred nineteen (4,519) households indicated improved family functioning since participating in the services or activities of the agency.
ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE OF CLIENTS ACHIEVING SELF-SUFFICIENCY AND ADDRESSING CONDITIONS OF POVERTY
Poverty remains an obvious problem for many CAA clients. Poverty is an umbrella term to capture abject conditions in which many people live. For example, unemployment, homelessness, lack of proper health care and nutrition, unaffordable child care, and transportation are a few examples of the effects of poverty.
The CAA network is full of success stories, which demonstrate that the CSBG and other CAA programs are working to combat poverty and address the conditions of poverty at the local levels. There is strong evidence to demonstrate that the CSBG network in Massachusetts is not only addressing the day to day poverty related issues but also is at the forefront of responding to the ever changing needs of clients including customizing their service delivery strategies when needed making them one of the most important service providers of their local communities. Therefore, CSBG must rely not only on statistical analysis but also on every-day anecdotal evidence of the fact that there are many low-income families who move out of poverty and become self-sufficient.
22 This does not necessarily include all Head Start children in Massachusetts. This aggregate number is from Head Start programs where the Bureau of Neighborhoods Head Start measure was applied. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
37 The following segment of this report summarizes the best practices as well as anecdotal evidence of the CSBG Program at Work in Massachusetts.
COMMUNITY ACTION COMMITTEE OF CAPE COD & ISLA NDS, INC. (HYANNIS, MA)
A married couple with three children, one of which is handicapped, that had a previous eviction for rent non-payment called Community Action Committee of Cape Cod and Islands, Inc. (CACCCI) due to their eviction situation, with an understanding that the agency would help the family. Their landlord refused to renew the lease and the family requested services from the Housing Assistance Program, a homeless prevention program funded by the Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance.
The landlord who had been renting to the family had begun the process of a court eviction. The landlord planned to move into the residence himself, and therefore had refused to renew the lease. There was a court date scheduled, but the family had no legal representation, and was unsure what should be done.
During the initial client intake, CACCCIs housing advocate was able to provide appropriate information regarding tenants rights' during the eviction process. The advocate immediately explained the various steps involved, and an information packet was sent to the family with specific details. They were also referred to Legal Services so that they could obtain legal representation.
The family was able to gain legal representation and was protected from being unfairly evicted. For several weeks, CACCCI provided ongoing housing search support by providing rental listings, as well as guidance and tips on increasing the odds of finding permanent housing.
Finally, the clients located a rental unit and the landlord was requesting first and last months rent and a security deposit, totaling $2,550. CACCCI continued to work with the family by providing additional financial resources to help with the up front cost. They received assistance from various agency contributions, and were able to move into the unit within a month and the eviction process was discontinued.
COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS INTER-CITY, INC. (CHELSEA, MA)
A few years ago, Luis and Maria came to the United States under political asylum from Cuba with hopes of seeking better opportunity in the United States. They were well educated the wife was a Registered Nurse and the husband was a radiologist in Cuba. Upon arrival to the U.S., they were faced with many limitations due to a language barrier and their inability to continue working in this new environment. Shortly after, they received assistance from the International Rescue Committee in Boston. The agency worked with the couple to find temporary housing, and build a foundation for their new life in the U.S. The couple rented a room in Chelsea with other families who were also striving to find permanent housing.
Once in Chelsea, the couple utilized resources that would help them achieve their goals of self-sufficiency. They both attended English-as-a-Second Language classes Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
38 for refugees in Chelsea. They felt this would benefit them when searching for stable employment. The couple was committed to becoming self-sufficient and knew a stable job was the key to their goal.
Luis eventually received a temporary job at Boston University. With this new achievement the couple was ready to continue their search for a better living situation. In February 1998, the International Rescue Committee referred the couple to the Housing Assistance Program at Community Action Programs Inter-City, Inc. Soon after, CAPICs housing advocate worked closely with the couple and placed them in permanent housing. The couple moved into a comfortable apartment, and continued to receive advocacy support from CAPIC. During the Housing Assistance Programs stabilization period, the CAPIC staff guided them to attain permanent employment. Both Maria and Luis found secure jobs and worked long hours to continue their dream for self- sufficiency. In December of 2000, they were both recognized for their hard work and received Employee of the Year awards from their employers.
Less than three years after moving to the United States, the couple became new property owners in Chelsea. Throughout the years, CAPIC has maintained contact and established a trusting relationship with the couple. They are both extremely grateful for CAPICs on-going assistance. As a way to show their gratitude and to give back to the organization that helped achieve their dreams, the couple currently rents three units in their home to CAPIC families who seek permanent housing.
Luis and Maria are a great source of pride for CAPIC and its employees. The couple agreed to share their story because they believed so strongly in the American Dream and saw that this country truly did give them the opportunity, through hard work and commitment, to fully realize their dreams. They came to the U.S. a little over four years ago with nothing and are now proud property owners, giving back not only to their community but also to the people who helped them along the way. They are not only self-sufficient but are now a resource for CAPIC.
CSBG funds have been a necessary source of support for CAPICs housing program, offering continued administrative support to the program allowing for structured program operations that help many homeless and at-risk families.
COMMUNITY ACTION, INC. (HAVERHILL, MA)
Alicia is a divorced mother of two children, 8 and 11 years old. Alicia grew up in subsidized housing in Somerville and moved to Haverhill after her marriage broke up. Her child support payment has been limited due to her former husbands disability. Alicia is employed, but recently her housing costs began to escalate beyond her limited income. Rent prices that were barely affordable at $850 per month increased over a two- year period to $1,250.
Last July, Alicia enrolled in the Community Action, Inc.s Coastal First-Time Homebuyer Program funded by CSBG. Alicia attended all four classes, was a model student and successfully completed the program. Alicia contacted a realtor who found a three-bedroom condominium in Amesbury for her. Alicia and her children wanted to purchase the condo with large bedrooms, new kitchen cabinets, central air conditioning Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
39 and a screened balcony but the problem was that Alicia only earned $24,000 a year. The condo cost $115,000. Alicia had only $550 in the bank and her income did not satisfy the strict debt-income ratios required by the typical mortgage lenders.
CAI staff first assisted Alicia with her application to the Coastal First Time Home Buyer mortgage program, which offered a seven-year fixed-mortgage rate at 5 percent with reduced closing costs and no points. The loan lowered the income limit needed to qualify for the mortgage. Next Alicia secured a $10,000 second mortgage grant from the Federal Home Loan Bank as a down payment and was finally able to buy the condo. Her mortgage, taxes and condo fee payment is $950 per month, $300 less than her rent payment. Her housing costs are now stable and she is building equity with every payment. Alicia and her children have realized a dream they never thought was possible.
FRANKLIN COMMUNITY ACTION CORPORATION (GREENFIELD, MA)
Maria did not speak English when she first contacted the WIC office for services. She was pregnant and had two children with her when she moved to Turners Falls from Central America to be with her migrant worker husband. FCACs Spanish-speaking staff, had to call a taxi for her and explain to the driver where to pick her up and drop her off so she could get to the WIC clinic. When she left the WIC appointment, she took a note with her destination to show to the bus driver so she would get on the right bus home. Throughout her pregnancy, Maria came to rely on the information and help that FCAC staff offered.
When she went into labor, Maria called FCACs WIC office because she had no ride to the hospital. She was home alone with no money and had no insurance to pay for an ambulance. The FCAC staff member left work to drive her to the hospital and stayed with her during labor and delivery. Maria was bewildered and frightened in the hospital where no one spoke her language and the child delivery customs were so different from her native Central America.
After delivery, Maria felt even more comfortable with the FCAC staff and asked for help with a variety of problems over the next several weeks. FCAC was called when the heat went out in the apartment, when the family lost electricity, when Maria had questions about breastfeeding, and when they needed warm clothes for the children. Ultimately, Maria and her family were referred to a Spanish-speaking caseworker at First Call for Help, who was able to provide additional services to the family. He discovered that the family had no beds or blankets at their apartment and arranged for bunk beds and blankets to be delivered. He helped with paperwork for MassHealth, birth certificates, and school immunizations for the older children and even got them on a list for housing.
This familys experience illustrates how sometimes the food and nutrition information that WIC provides is only a small part of the benefits available from WIC. The referrals provided to other services are often critical to the health and well being of the entire family. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
40
HAMPSHIRE COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC. (NORTHAMPTON, MA)
Helen is a 38-year-old single mother of an eight year old child. She has an Associate degree but does not work because of multiple disabilities. She is a low-income person and has been living in subsidized housing at Meadow Brook since her child was born. She is very concerned about losing her subsidized housing. She says, Living at Meadow Brook means I can pay my rent, my bills and buy food to feed my family. If I had to move, I couldnt meet all these obligations. Helen does not own a car and relies on buses and taxis for transportation needs.
The lack of affordable housing in Northampton is a major issue for the low- income population. Over the last few years, the amount of affordable housing stock has declined.
When it became clear that Meadow Brook Apartments would be sold, with 252 units, 80% reserved for low and moderate income tenants, HCAC knew it had a role to play in preserving the affordability of those units. In partnership with the City of Northampton and others, HCAC worked at a variety of levels to see that the new owners did not reduce the number of affordable units.
Using CSBG funds, HCACs Organizing Program helped the Meadow Brook tenants create a tenants organization and learn the skills necessary to advocate for their own needs. After working with the Mayor of Northampton and the tenants for several months, HCAC organizers taught the tenants how to become proactive in addressing their concerns with an incoming management company. Through staff support and technical assistance, HCAC helped the tenants elect officers, take positions and conduct community actions. As a result of these and other actions, including negotiations between the new owners, HCAC expects that these units will become 100% affordable for thirty years. The tenants have new skills and an organization to help them look out for their own interests and HCAC is helping to eliminate a significant condition of poverty in the area.
MONTACHUSETT OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL, INC. (FITCHBURG, MA)
Mrs. T is an elderly resident of Fitchburg, lives alone on a fixed income of approximately 100% of the poverty level for a single-person household, and suffers from Spinal Stenosis, an orthopedic condition, which affects her mobility. She owns a mortgage-free home, but has not been able to maintain it properly for some time, largely because her prescription drug costs have continually increased.
MOC's Elder Home Repair Program is funded with a $25,000 grant from Central Massachusetts Agency on Aging. It provides essential repairs to improve the safety, accessibility and energy efficiency of the homes of elders, making it easier and less expensive for them to carry out daily activities. Such repairs include the installation of hand rails and grab bars; screen, window or door repairs; hot water tank replacement and roof repairs and have included projects which range from the inexpensive replacement of a storm door to more expensive roof repairs required to prevent major Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
41 damage to the rest of the house. To date, 46 elderly people have participated in the program.
Mrs. T's circumstances are typical of the clients MOC serves. She participates in MOC's Division of Elder Services Home Delivered Meals Program. MOC staff helped her apply for assistance and was made aware of the Division's Elder Home Repair Program. She needed to replace decayed gutters and broken drain spouts, leaks from which had damaged the house's foundation, caused minor flooding in the cellar and threatened the operation of the furnace. In addition, several broken and malfunctioning windows were replaced with energy efficient windows that are considerably easier to open, close, and clean. The total cost of repairs was approximately $1,250, of which Mrs. T contributed 20%. As a result, she expects to be able to remain in her home rather than selling it and should see a savings in her winter heating bill, which she can apply to her health care costs.
The program helped to maintain the client's independence, eliminated a significant threat to her self-sufficiency and stabilized a drain on her existing assets that would have eventually resulted in her descent into increasing poverty.
WORCESTER COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL, INC. (WORCESTER, MA)
Lana is a twenty-five-year-old single mother who is in her second year of Worcester Community Action Councils Americorps (CityWorks) program. Lana is a long time resident of the Great Brook Valley public housing complex and has been on her own since her mother died of AIDS when she was sixteen. She recently became the guardian of her younger sister. While Lana attempted to go to college right after high school, she did not have the parental support and finances necessary. Before entering Cityworks, Lana had been on transitional assistance for several years. As a teachers aide in a local public elementary school, she assists first year members who are placed at her school, acts as their advocate, and helps Cityworks staff with the development of member training programs. She has started night classes at the community college and it is expected that she will finish her Associates Degree in Criminal Justice by the time she leaves the CityWorks program. Lanas long-term goal is to become a correctional officer and she has already passed the Civil Service examination. As a Cityworks member, by working with children who come from high risk backgrounds, she is gaining a better understanding of many family and social issues.
Another Worcester Community Action Council (WCAC) client, Alice, is a sixteen- year old high school drop out low-income, single mother of African American descent. About three years ago, Alice started school in WCACs United Way funded pre-GED and GED program entitled, Project Excel. Her reading level was acceptable, but had difficultly with writing and math skills. At first, her attendance was good and she made some progress in the pre-GED program. Then her attendance started to deteriorate. Her mother was having problems at home and Alice was expected to help her even at the expense of her education. About four months after she started Project Excel, she had to move to Florida with her family.
Alice returned to Massachusetts last year with her new baby and re-enrolled into Project Excel. Although her writing skills improved, she still needed more remedial work Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
42 in Math and Social Studies. She was not satisfied with just going to school and taking care of her baby. She joined WCACs Americorps National Service program Cityworks. With a struggle, she was able to attend Project Excel, take care of her child, and be a teachers aide in a local public school. Alice finally obtained her GED. Her Cityworks educational award will give her financial assistance to continue her education at a local community college.
DESCRIPTION OF INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS
Work Pathways Project - Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. (Boston, MA)
ABCDs Work Pathways project provides services predominantly to women between the ages 18-30, but the program is not exclusive to women. All program participants are either custodial or non-custodial parents, who are receiving and/or have children receiving TAFDC. Participants usually face barriers such as low self-esteem, poor educational skills, alcohol/ substance abuse, and mental health issues.
The Work Pathways Project began in 1999 with a $2.8 million grant from the U.S. Department of Labor to provide welfare recipients with comprehensive support that enables them to find and keep jobs. This program provides valuable services to CSBG funded program clients. The majority of the outreach and referrals come from the Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA). Through case management, there are cross referrals made to other programs within ABCD.
The program components consist of job readiness training, transportation, pre- placement support and case management. Work Pathways collaborates and maintains relationships with many prospective employers offering a variety of opportunities for their constituents. The key to obtaining the goal of self-sufficiency is job retention. This program provides participants with a 12-month post employment follow-up, which facilitates positive maintenance rates. Case managers conduct job site visits and provide ongoing support to their participants.
Eighty percent (80%) of the clients in fiscal year 2001 either had a high school diploma or GED. However, not all with the aforementioned credentials were fully literate or possessed the necessary skills needed to obtain jobs that would propel them out of poverty. Therefore, one key benchmark for success in this program is obtaining a job. During fiscal year 2001, 80 participants obtained employment. Four of the 80 clients not only obtained employment, but also obtained their GED, housing, and were promoted to higher positions at their workplace. The Work Pathways project stabilizes the family unit, eliminates poverty, and produces self-sufficiency for Boston residents.
Compass Youth Program Action, Inc. (Gloucester, MA)
Jane dropped out in the middle of her senior year of high school. She had no place to live and was staying in her grandparents basement or in her friends houses. She spent two years surviving. Two years later she became pregnant and her whole attitude changed. A friend referred her to the Compass Youth Program of Action, Inc., an education, training and employment program for at-risk youth. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
43
It was a hard point in my personal life, she said. But then I thought about my baby. I knew he was going to need me. I wanted to get my life going again. In the spring of 2001, Jane turned to the Compass program. She had no hope or vision about her future. Coming to Compass gave her a place to go and an advocate to help her get what she needed. Before Compass, she had very little outside help and was trapped in an unhealthy relationship.
Before the program, I had such a bad attitude, said Jane, who is now 20. But through Compass, I learned to control that and to take everything in before I make a decision. Through Compass, Jane completed a Life Skills/Job Readiness course and a computer program, acquiring credits towards her high school diploma.
Being a single mother without a high school education created many problems for Jane. When she first came to Compass, she did not know what to do next and for a while she remained unemployed. Less than a year after she entered the Compass program, Jane obtained a job as a teller at a local bank and is preparing to take the high school equivalency exams to get her GED.
Soon after she got the job, she ran into the problem of not having daycare for her son. She was at-risk of losing her job because of this. Childcare providers repeatedly told her she was no longer eligible for childcare vouchers because she was earning too much to qualify. She would come into Compass on her lunch break and work with the staff to fight for a voucher and then to find a local agency that would accept the vouchers for her sons care. Finally, this campaign was successful in obtaining childcare and she was able to maintain her employment at the bank.
After getting her GED, Jane is planning to continue her education and study early childhood education. I never thought that Id have this many hopes and goals, she said. But I do, and I plan to meet them all. Coming to Compass gave Jane the services and advocacy to live a decent life.
CSBG grant leveraged the funding for this program under the Workforce Investment Act. CSBG funds also leverage private funds for this program to support needy youth who are low-income, but over the federal poverty guidelines.
Advocacy Program Community Action Agency of Somerville, Inc. (Somerville, MA)
Paul was a 46 year-old single man. He was disabled and renting a subsidized apartment. His income from SSDI was between 76% and 100% of poverty.
During this program year, the CAAS Advocacy Program began the fifth year of its innovative homeless prevention project called the Eviction Prevention Project. Through an arrangement with the local district court, the Advocacy Program obtains names of tenants who must appear in court for an eviction hearing and sends letter to each tenant, in four languages, offering assistance. CAAS screen and refer clients to a legal services organization, a private attorney, or are assisted by a CAAS advocate. Advocates Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
44 assist the tenant in filing the necessary paperwork with the court, negotiating with the landlord and maneuvering through the court system. Many tenants come to settlements with their landlords that allow them time to move or to make payment arrangements that allow them to remain in their homes. In some cases, an advocate will assist the tenant in raising money for rent arrearages through local charities or other programs. Many tenants at imminent risk of eviction are provided services at the last moment through this project.
In the case of Paul, he contacted the Advocacy Program after receiving an outreach letter. Paul, who is blind, relies on SSDI as his sole source of income. He fell behind in his rent after his live-in companion, with whom he shared the rent and utility bills, died. Paul, who had been a tenant in the subsidized buildi ng for 14 years and had never been late with the rent, was quickly moved by the management company to a smaller unit. In order to pay the unexpected moving expenses, Paul used his rent money. He was served with an eviction notice and then a summons to appear in court. After responding to the outreach letter from CAAS, an advocate met with him immediately to ensure that all the required court paperwork was completed. Paul was assisted in applying for a loan from the citys Renter Revolving Loan Program to pay for the rental arrearage. The advocate also referred Paul to grief counseling services, food pantries, and local social groups. On the trial date, the advocate was able to negotiate an agreement with the management company that Paul could remain housed, pending approval of the loan. The loan was approved and Paul was able to stay in his apartment and pay $10.00 toward the loan.
Without the services of the Eviction Prevention Project, Paul would likely have become homeless and at risk due to the lack of appropriate shelters available to him. Many of the unfortunate results of homelessness were avoided and Paul has become a part of the community by visiting a drop-in center for physically challenged adults. He has not needed additional services from CAAS and considers himself stable. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
45
The New Entry Farmers Project Community Teamwork, Inc. (Lowell, MA)
The New Entry Farmers Project is a partnership between Community Teamwork, Inc. (CTI), Tufts University, and several other organizations to provide Southeast Asians with agricultural backgrounds or interest to grow fruits and vegetables that appeal to Cambodians and other Asians, but are not generally available. The farmers are given access to land in the suburbs and provided with the tools, equipment, training and technical assistance they need to successfully grow food. The food is then made available to the Asian residents of Lowell through CTIs own Farmers Market on Fridays and at a new market established at the Cambodian American League of Lowell, Inc., a local Community Development Corporation, and other means. John Ogonowski of Dracut was one of the suburban landowners who made land available to these new farmers, but he went much further. He ploughed the land, set up an irrigation system and built a greenhouse.
Mr. Ogonowski was better known to the world as the pilot of the first plane that was hijacked from Boston Logan Airport and crashed into the first tower one of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. He became involved with the New Entry Sustainable Farming project at its very inception over three years ago when the local Farm Service Agency in Westford contacted him looking for land to make available for Southeast Asian families living in nearby Lowell. Mr. Ogonowski immediately recognized this as an opportunity to help a worthy group of beginning growers to practice another kind of agriculture. He not only made farmland behind his home available to them, but his White Gate Farm became the first all-commercial "mentor farm" - a training site for these beginning growers. In practice, Mr. Ogonowski was involved in every activity on the project involving his farm. He ordered and set up a greenhouse so the growers could raise seedlings and do extended season production. He provided advice to them on managing production, pest control, harvesting, and other production practices and participated in project steering committee meetings.
Mr. Ogonowski did all this while he was a full time pilot for American Airlines. He raised his own crops on an additional 200 acres spread throughout Dracut. He was active in other farming committees and was a founder and active member of the Dracut Land Trust that has helped to save a substantial amount of local farmland in the town from development. This year, the trust negotiated the purchase of about 50 acres of land about a mile from his house. With much of Mr. Ogonowski's own land out of commission due to a major gas pipeline installation, he made this land available to the project; as a result a dozen Cambodian households got a new start farming this year.
CTI dedicated its Local Heroes Award ceremony to Mr. Orgonowski. Mrs. Ogonowski, family members, and several New Entry Farmers attended the Local Heroes dinner. The New Entry Farmers Project was funded by a number of sources. The largest was $270,000 from the U.S. Department of Agricultures Community Food Project.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
46 Access to Technology Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc. (Lawrence, MA)
The Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc., through funding from the Community Service Block Grant (CSBG), has established a technology center in Lawrence, Massachusetts to address the needs of low-income residents many of whom (almost 70%) are Latinos. The center is equipped with 14 computer stations that are being used for computer training and Internet access for GLCAC employees, clients, and the general public. The following description highlights two GLCAC program that use the Technology Center:
GLCAC recently conducted a survey of Head Start parents that indicated many parents have an interest in taking computer classes. The results also indicated that only 10% of the Head Start households had computers at home and very few had Internet access. This confirmed GLCACs assertion that low-income households are feeling the affects of Digital Divide and the widening gap of access to computers and the Internet between low- and high-income households. In response to this survey, GLCAC developed a pilot project with 20 Head Start parents with introduction to computer classes. Parents received 14 hours of computer training in Microsoft Windows 98, Word 97 and Internet Explorer. The opportunity to take computer classes was met with great interest and enthusiasm by most Head Start parents. A waiting list had to be developed due to the high demand. Most of the parents who signed up for the classes were beginner computer users with little or no experience in information technology.
Students who successfully completed the 14-hour workshop series were eligible to continue on to a 4-week session of higher-level computer training offered during the summer. Six months after this pilot project, early feedback from a follow-up survey of participants indicated many positive outcomes. Two parents reported that they have been able to use their newly acquired computer skills in the workplace. One parent commented that participation in the course gave her the incentive to acquire a home computer in order to continue and improve her computer skills. Another parent proudly reported that she has been able to assume responsibility for the Newsletter at her church as a result of her new computer skills. Outreach continues to the other participants to obtain additional feedback on the outcomes of this project. Plans are underway to expand training opportunities to other GLCAC, program clients such as WIC, Child Care, Family Support, Spanish Program and Community Partnership for Children.
GLCAC has also established a Teen Tech Center to provide teens between the ages of 12 and 18 with access to 14 Internet-ready computers, computer literacy classes, assistance with homework, and exploration of computer related professions. This innovative new computer lab is also located in Lawrence. The Teen Tech Center is centrally located and within walking distance from several area schools including the High School. The Tech center currently offers three training modules:
Teen Coalition/Peer Leaders Web Site Development: the goal of the Teen Coalition is to develop computer skills needed for developing and maintaining a program web site for the Coalition.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
47 Classroom Training: this component will teach and train students in Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint).
Open Access: this third and final component will allow students to access the Tech Center between the hours of 3:00 p.m to 6:00 p.m Monday through Thursday. The Center will be staffed and offer technical assistance to teens with either no access to computers or act as an extension to their current programming.
The Teen Tech Center has become a community-wide resource. Through this effort, collaborations with several area youth groups have been created. These groups utilize the center as an extension of their current programming to develop special projects which otherwise would not be possible without the center.
Better Access to Organizations Network Hampshire Community Action Commission, Inc. (Northampton, MA)
Kathy is a low income, single parent with three children. While she was applying to the Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA) for benefits and food stamps, she was also trying to find $200 to move her belongings out of a storage facility so that she could settle in a newly found apartment. She contacted the local United Way office, HCACs First Call For Help and DTA to secure these funds. Unknown to each other, each of these organizations dedicated staff time in finding the necessary resources to assist Kathy and her family. With a single point of entry for referrals, Kathy would have received these funds more rapidly and without the duplication of effort. Better Access to Organizations Network (BATON) addresses the need for a one stop shopping for clients like Kathy.
BATON is a three-year pilot project designed to increase access to health and human services for people with multiple needs. The project is intended to serve those who often fall through the cracks and get lost in the system. Finding help can become impossible when illness, trauma and poverty control ones life. Through this innovative project, BATON hopes to develop a model that can be replicated for improving access to needed services, thereby reducing a condition of poverty.
The BATON project is part of the states e-government initiative funded by the Mass Cares office of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services through a grant from the U.S. Commerce Departments Technology Opportunities Program. BATON operates through HCACs First Call For Help program. First Call also operates with CSBG support.
Using Internet technology, newly developed software to identify resources and check for eligibility, inter-agency collaboration and case coordination, BATON staff is prototyping new service delivery systems. In a prototype conducted with the Department of Transitional Assistance, HCAC BATON case coordinator has been able to provide customers with a safe gateway to DTA services, improve eligibility screening, streamline the appointment scheduling process and overcome barriers to services. The case coordination prototype was determined to be a success by outside evaluators from Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
48 the Donahue Institute of the University of Massachusetts and the model is being replicated with other providers.
If the three-year BATON project continues to be successful, it will be replicated in other western Massachusetts counties and eventually in the entire state. There will be streamlined access to state and other services for some of the most needy families, those with a need to use the services of a variety of agencies.
Food and Nutritional Programs South Shore Community Action Council, Inc. (Plymouth, MA)
During 2001, SSCACs Board of Directors initiated an Ad Hoc Board Committee to coordinate the efforts of a consultant hired to work on the issue of hunger and local food resources for low-income clients. This was prompted by client responses to SSCACs 1999 Needs Assessment in which two-thirds of client respondents reported having trouble affording food for their families, as well as from anecdotal accounts about a lack of awareness of existing local food resources. The Consultant began by investigating existing food resources in the towns of Plymouth and Carver. SSCACs Ad Hoc Board Committee on Hunger, in conjunction with the consultant, determined that there was a need to develop and produce Food Resource Information and Referral cards for the Towns of Plymouth, Carver, and Plympton. These separate, town-specific cards list telephone numbers for food pantries, meals, vouchers and other food programs. The backs of the cards list Emergency 800 numbers, as well as other low-income resource telephone numbers. Plymouth South High School volunteered to print 7,000 cards for the Committee for reimbursement of expenses only. Another component of the program was to determine the appropriate method of distribution of the cards for maximum outreach. Two thousand Plymouth Food Resources cards were initially distributed to members of the Greater Plymouth Council of Human Service Providers, SSCACS Fuel Assistance Program, Head Start and Day Care Programs, and an additional 1,500 cards were distributed to Plymouth town departments and school nurses. One thousand Carver cards were also printed and distributed. Feedback from local legislators and town officials has been very positive. The goal for 2002 is to develop, produce, disseminate and track these Information and Referral cards for the Towns of Kingston, Duxbury, Halifax, Pembroke, and Marshfield. This initiative was funded by CSBG.
Cyber Caf Tri-City Community Action Programs, Inc. (Malden, MA)
The Tri-City Work Force Development Task Force had as its precursor the Tri- City Skills Assessment Task Force, a community and public agency partnership that assessed the existing low-income work force preparedness to assume jobs in a planned Telecommunications Park development. The Tri-City Skills Assessment Task Force, utilizing some CSBG Special Projects funding and $40,000 of private foundation and industry funding, issued a report in September 1999 entitled Bridging the Gap: Industry Needs and Employment Opportunities for Tri-City Residents in TeleCom City. The Mystic Valley Development Commission (MVDC), the public entity charged with the development of TeleCom City, unenthusiastically received the report. Some Task Force members engaged in an eight-month planning process to develop a plan to implement some of the recommendations issued by the Report. This group is now known as the Tri-City Work Force Development Task Force. Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
49
To date, the Work Force Development Task Force has two principal accomplishments the development and promulgation of a set of principles to expand adult education and training programs in the tri-city area, and secondly, the initiation of training and educational opportunities for local low-income residents. CSBG funds have allowed Tri-CAP to continue its coordination and leadership role for the Task Force. A $20,000 private foundation grant allowed for a lengthy and exhaustive planning process for community residents, labor representatives and local non-profits. A $10,000 grant from the City of Medford provided local training opportunities for 20 Medford residents in English as a Second Language and an introduction to electronics. The courses were held at the local high school. Instructors were hired through a contract with the local community college. Later, CSBG Special Projects funds were utilized to send 30 residents from the tri-city area to the local community college with course scholarships. The funded courses focused on increasing the English-communication skills of many who face a significant language barrier in the labor market. The barrier affects both employability and advancement opportunities. Several course scholarships advanced individuals knowledge of computers and/or electronics. CSBG special projects funds will continue sustain this effort in fiscal year 2003.
With a $10,000 CSBG Special Projects grant, $10,000 of agency CSBG funds, and $20,000 of private funds, a coalition composed of the local access cable TV program (MATV); a technology program of high school students (Youth Tech Entrepreneurs); the areas volunteer group for senior citizens (AARP); a one-stop career center (Career Place); a state representative; a private individual and the local community action agency (Tri-City Community Action Program, Inc., (Tri-CAP) the coalition launched the communities first free cyber caf. The Coalition pledged resources to pay for rent and utilities for three years. The community action agency oversaw and paid for the necessary improvements to the rented space. The one stop career center donated computers for the stations and the server. The local access TV station provided the painting and a new computer. The high school youth refurbished the computers, pulled cables to network the computers and developed necessary software for the Caf. The private businessperson designed a web site and secured the domain name. The State Representative assisted with funding. The senior volunteers provide morning coverage and assistance.
There is something different about this caf. It is the work of a coalition whose only interest is to make sure that low-income residents affected by the digital-divide are afforded access to the information highway via the Internet and e-mail. Located between a McDonalds and Dunkin Donuts, it is truly a downtown operation. Users are allowed to establish e-mail accounts and to store information on diskettes. There are links established to the job bank of Career Place. A small conference room allows for e- mail training, resume writing, and interview preparation. Uses have included prescription drug ordering by members of Massachusetts Senior Action Council; e-mail to family members living abroad for the areas increasingly immigrant community members; finding the best fishing hole for a retired person, and a place to reduce isolation for many of the areas homeless clients. All of the personnel support, to date, has been provided by volunteers! The caf features only twelve computer stations. Yet, more than 1,000 unduplicated community residents have availed themselves of this community service since May 16, 2001! Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
50
The Cyber Caf has helped reduce isolation among the homeless, immigrants and the elderly. It has been of assistance to many in their job search. The low tech atmosphere has created an environment where the elderly and those intimidated by technology have come to explore the Internet and learn skills preparing them for life in the 21 st century.
FUTURE DIRECTION
During fiscal year 2001, DHCD worked closely with CAAs and the state trade association; MASSCAP on a number of initiatives such as ROMA training, workforce investment, CAA scholarships programs, and the Information Technology Access Centers. DHCD also invested a significant amount of CSBG discretionary funds in Information Technology capacity building, Scales and Ladders, and ROMA training and technical assistance projects. Several of these projects will continue throughout fiscal year 2002.
DHCD will continue to improve the quality of data presented in its Performance Measure Report and the CSBG Information System Survey by working toward the goal of full automation of the CSBG data collection and reporting process. By December 2002, all 25 CAAs will be able to access a web-based secure application, that is currently being developed, to send CSBG data electronically to DHCD. This secure network will give DHCD access to a statewide CSBG demographic, fiscal and outcome database without breaching the confidentiality of an individual CAA client. The database will be maintained by a DHCD vendor who will also create the ability for DHCD to review electronic data from individual CAAs and develop statewide trends and snapshot reports.
The data analysis methodology of comparing data from the CSBG Information System Survey and the Census 2000 shows prospect. As more and more data becomes available from the U.S. Census Bureau, DHCD will continue this approach of analyzing Census data in combination with data made available by CAAs thought the Community Action Planning and the CSBG Information System Survey process.
The ROMA training will continue as well during fiscal year 2002. DHCD is currently negotiating with the Rensselaerville Institute to train CAA board members on their Roles and Responsibilities, using a ROMA framework. On-site training will be offered at a number of pre-selected CAA locations. The remaining CAAs will be offered a train the trainer training opportunities. As a part of the recently concluded ROMA staff training, board members from three CAAs have already been trained. In order to further integrate ROMA in CSBG grant application and reporting process, DHCD is currently reviewing the outcomes of the recently concluded ROMA staff training process. Changes will be made to the CSBG grant application and reporting process to reflect the lesson learned from the ROMA staff training process.
As noted elsewhere in the report, Community Action Agencies in Massachusetts are completing their 2003-2005 Community Action Plans. DHCD has begun implementing a new process of linking and fully integrating the planning process with the overall CSBG grant management activities including the federally mandated monitoring of Community Action Agencies. The Community Action Plan will be the basis for CSBG Annual Application development, outcome reporting, and performance review and Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development CSBG Performance Measure Report - 2001
51 monitoring process. DHCD will integrate priorities and intervention strategies identified during the community action planning process with workplan activities, semi-annual and annual program progress reports, and with the monitoring of community action agencies.
The CSBG program in Massachusetts shows many strengths, as evidenced by a strong resource development and service delivery CAA network, a sound partnership between the state and the CAA network, consistent needs assessment and planning at the local levels and the states ability to steer changes in a positive direction during this fiscally difficult time. The CSBG program needs to be closely reviewed, given the current environment of state and federal budget cuts. DHCD is committed to continue its efforts in administering an effective CSBG program in Massachusetts. DHCD views its existing partnership with and continued support from the Massachusetts CAAs, MASSCAP, the National Association for State Community Services Program, and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as the critical success factors in administering yet another year of successful CSBG program in Massachusetts. DHCD welcomes comments and suggestions regarding the implementation of its mission of strengthening cities, towns, and neighborhoods and enhancing the quality of life of Massachusetts residents.
52
Appendices
Table 1: Total Federal Resources Leveraged and Administered
Table 2: Total State Resources Leveraged and Administered
Table 3: Total Local Public and Private Resources Leveraged and Administered
Table 4: Fiscal Year 2001 CAA Characteristics
Table 5: Distribution of CSBG Administrative Funds (eligible entities)
53 Table 1: Total Federal Resources Leveraged and Administered
Programs/Sources Amount Received
Community Services Block Grants (CSBG) $ 13,379,300.00 Weatherization $ 5,406,567.00 LIHEAP - Fuel Assistance $ 91,161,571.00 LIHEAP - Weatherization $ 3,823,546.00 Head Start and Early Head Start $ 62,376,431.00 Older American Act $ 544,110.00 Social Services Block Grant $ 283,691.00 Medicare/Medicaid $ 844,095.00 Community Food and Nutrition Program $ 54,133.00 Temporary Assistance to Needy Families $ 870,270.00 Child Care Development Block Grant $ 34,352,197.00 Other Resources from U.S. HHS $ 11,337,606.00 Women Infant and Children (WIC) $ 7,065,506.00 Non-Food Programs - USDA $ 1,779,009.00 Food Programs - USDA $ 2,712,661.00 Community Development Block Grant $ 459,679.00 Section - 8 Housi ng Program $ 17,978,580.00 All Other Housing and Homelessness Prevention Programs $ 2,858,113.00 Employment and Training Programs $ 2,374,376.00 Other U.S. Dept. of Labor Programs $ 536,357.00 Corporation for National Services Programs $ 1,892,176.00 Federal Emergency and Management Agency Programs $ 445,292.00 Transportation Programs $ 14,271.00 All Other Federal Programs $ 1,300,924.00
TOTAL FEDERAL RESOURCES $263,850,461.00
54 Table 2: Total State Resources Leveraged and Administered
Programs/Sources Amount Received
Housing and Homeless Prevention Programs $ 13,898,499.00 Nutrition Programs $ 2,207,318.00 Day Care and Early Childhood Education Programs $ 99,258,624.00 Energy Programs $ 596,076.00 Health Programs $ 9,782,337.00 Youth Development Programs $ 2,694,519.00 Employment and Training Programs $ 2,137,253.00 Head Start Program $ 7,337,221.00 Programs for Senior Citizens $ 2,089,465.00 Transportation Programs $ - Education Programs $ 1,590,179.00 Community and Economic Development Programs $ 20,000.00 Other State Resources $ 3,919,572.00
SUBTOTAL $145,531,063.00
Table 3: Total Local Public and Private Resources Leveraged and Administered
Programs/Sources Amount Received
Unrestricted Funds From Local Government $ 1,608,870.00 Value of Contract Services $ 10,298,924.00 Value of In-Kind Goods/Services Received $ 1,274,634.00
SUBTOTAL - LOCAL PUBLIC SECTOR $ 13,182,428.00
Foundations, Corporations, United Ways & Other Non- Profits $ 16,837,998.00 Other Donated Funds $ 1,369,705.00 Value of Other Donated Items, e.g., food, clothing, furniture $ 1,572,921.00 Value of In-Kind Resources Received from Businesses $ 2,361,692.00 Fees Paid By Clients for Services $ 9,392,810.00 Payments By Private Entities $ 8,757,165.00 SUBTOTAL - PRIVATE SECTOR $ 40,292,291.00
55 Table 4: CAA Characteristics CAA Location Client Served 23
Fiscal Year 2001 CSBG Budget Non-CSBG Budget 24
TOTAL BUDGET Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. BOSTON 74,097 $ 5,184,479 $ 103,057,603 $ 108,242,082 Action, Inc. GLOUCESTER 5,253 $ 248,855 $ 11,871,000 $ 12,119,855 Berkshire Community Action Council, Inc. PITTSFIELD 6,002 $ 341,172 $ 5,599,590 $ 5,940,762 Community Action Agency of Somerville, Inc. SOMERVILLE 957 $ 318,427 $ 2,787,770 $ 3,106,197 Community Action Committee of Cape Cod & Islands, Inc. HYANNIS 2,059 $ 310,400 $ 6,697,704 $ 7,008,104 Community Action, Inc. HAVERHILL 9,029 $ 258,220 $ 8,434,074 $ 8,692,294 Community Action Programs, Inter-City, Inc. CHELSEA 4,982 $ 272,938 $ 7,499,845 $ 7,772,783 Cambridge Economic Opportunity Council, Inc. CAMBRIDGE 18,637 $ 378,634 $ 1,888,566 $ 2,267,200 Citizens for Citizens, Inc. FALL RIVER 28,151 $ 474,965 $ 20,477,682 $ 20,952,647 Community Teamwork, Inc. LOWELL 19,134 $ 446,869 $ 38,943,798 $ 39,390,667 Franklin Community Action Corporation GREENFIELD 12,668 $ 246,179 $ 11,578,474 $ 11,824,653 Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc. LAWRENCE 16,930 $ 301,034 $ 21,026,245 $ 21,327,279 Hampshire Community Action Commission NORTHAMPTON 2,486 $ 310,400 $ 9,470,775 $ 9,781,175 Lynn Economic Opportunity, Inc. LYNN 10,332 $ 388,000 $ 7,261,467 $ 7,649,467 Montachusett Opportunity Council, Inc. FITCHBURG 25,773 $ 343,848 $ 14,377,453 $ 14,721,301 North Shore Community Action Council, Inc. PEABODY 9,538 $ 295,683 $ 4,247,670 $ 4,543,353 People Acting in Community Endeavors, Inc. NEW BEDFORD 23,701 $ 420,110 $ 39,540,610 $ 39,960,720 Quincy Community Action Programs, Inc. QUINCY 9,700 $ 246,179 $ 20,141,406 $ 20,387,585 Self-Help, Inc. AVON 10,881 $ 400,041 $ 21,263,922 $ 21,663,963 South Middlesex Opportunity Council, Inc. FRAMINGHAM 25,400 $ 271,600 $ 43,280,002 $ 43,551,602 Springfield Partners for Community Action, Inc. SPRINGFIELD 1,105 $ 454,896 $ 1,687,571 $ 2,142,467 South Shore Community Action Council, Inc. PLYMOUTH 20,298 $ 246,179 $ 11,581,245 $ 11,827,424 Tri-City Community Action Program, Inc. MALDEN 9,989 $ 362,579 $ 6,371,962 $ 6,734,541 Valley Opportunity Council, Inc. HOLYOKE 11,919 $ 305,048 $ 16,227,684 $ 16,532,732 Worcester Community Action Council, Inc. WORCESTER 23,204 $ 552,565 $ 13,169,902 $ 13,722,467 TOTAL 382,225 $ 13,379,300 $ 448,484,020 $ 461,863,320
23 Unduplicated number of individual clients reported in fiscal year 2001 CSBG IS Survey. 24 Source: As reported by CAAs in their fiscal year 2001 CSBG IS Survey.
56 Table 5: Distribution of CSBG Administrative Funds (Eligible Entities)
CAA Program Budget % OF TOTAL
Administrative Budget % OF TOTAL FY'01 CSBG Expenditure Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. $4,811,873 92.81% $372,606 7.19% $5,184,479 Action, Inc. $101,240 40.68% $147,615 59.32% $248,855 Berkshire Community Action Council, Inc. $273,923 80.29% $67,249 19.71% $341,172 Community Action Agency of Somerville, Inc. $226,746 71.21% $91,681 28.79% $318,427
Community Action Committee of Cape Cod & Islands, Inc. $129,681 41.78% $180,719 58.22% $310,400 Community Action, Inc. $258,220 100.00% $0 0.00% $258,220 Community Action Programs, Inter-City, Inc. $272,938 100.00% $0 0.00% $272,938 Cambridge Economic Opportunity Council, Inc. $198,375 52.39% $180,259 47.61% $378,634 Citizens for Citizens, Inc. $289,711 61.00% $185,254 39.00% $474,965 Community Teamwork, Inc. $446,869 100.00% $0 0.00% $446,869 Franklin Community Action Corporation $168,308 68.37% $77,871 31.63% $246,179 Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc. $244,991 81.38% $56,043 18.62% $301,034 Hampshire Community Action Commission $158,010 50.91% $152,390 49.09% $310,400 Lynn Economic Opportunity, Inc. $165,489 42.65% $222,511 57.35% $388,000 Montachusett Opportunity Council, Inc. $343,848 100.00% $0 0.00% $343,848 North Shore Community Action Council, Inc. $183,357 62.01% $112,326 37.99% $295,683 People Acting in Community Endeavors, Inc. $389,021 92.60% $31,089 7.40% $420,110 Quincy Community Action Programs, Inc. $0 0.00% $246,179 100.00% $246,179 Springfield Partners for Community Action, Inc. $105,482 23.19% $349,414 76.81% $454,896 Selp-Help, Inc. $400,041 100.00% $0 0.00% $400,041 South Middlesex Opportunity Council, Inc. $110,780 40.79% $160,820 59.21% $271,600 South Shore Community Action Council, Inc. $0 0.00% $246,179 100.00% $246,179 Tri-City Community Action Program, Inc. $258,707 71.35% $103,872 28.65% $362,579 Valley Opportunity Council, Inc. $219,942 72.10% $85,106 27.90% $305,048 Worcester Community Action Council, Inc. $122,284 22.13% $430,281 77.87% $552,565 TOTAL $9,879,836 73.84% $3,499,464 26.16% $13,379,300
57
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Jane Swift, Governor
Department of Housing and Community Development
Jane Wallis Gumble, Director
Fred Habib Phillip Hailer Sarah Young Deputy Director Chief of Staff Deputy Director for Policy Development
Division of Neighborhood Services
Sandra L. Hawes Acting Associate Director, Division of Neighborhood Services & Director, Bureau of Neighborhoods
Debra L. Michaud, Administrative Assistant
Bureau of Neighborhoods
Akm M. Rahman Information and Contracts Coordinator
Juanita Zerda Field Monitoring Coordinator
Program Representatives
Phillip DeMartino; Carlos Luna; Judith McConnell; and Emily McLaughlin
One Congress Street, 10 th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02114 (617) 727-7004 (617) 727-4259 (fax)
http://www.mass.gov/dhcd A copy of this report is available on-line Fiscal Year 2000 Massachusetts CSBG Performance Measures Report
Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Neighborhood Services, Bureau of Neighborhoods
Some People Believe That Government Money Should Be Spent On Important Things Rather Than Arts Such As Painting and Music. To What Extent Do You Agree or Disagree?