Statement of Mr. Ismael Ahmed, Director, Michigan Department of Human Services, Lansing, Michigan
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support
of the House Committee on Ways and Means
October 08, 2009
Good morning, Chairman McDermott, Ranking Member Linder, my dear friend, Representative Levin, and other distinguished members of the subcommittee. I consider it an honor to share with you how the state of Michigan is fighting to serve vulnerable children, adults and families in the toughest economic times since the recession of the 1930’s.
My name is Ismael Ahmed. Since 2007, I have served as the director of the Michigan Department of Human Services. In this role, I provide leadership and direction for streamlining and accessing social services, reforming child welfare, licensing child day care and adult care facilities and ensuring financial support for families.
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
Our Governor, Jennifer M. Granholm, has resolved more than $6 billion in budget deficits since 2003. She has trimmed more from state government than any other governor in Michigan’s history.
This does not include the FY 2010 budget, where we are still resolving a budget shortfall of $2.8 billion that threatens child care, state matches for federal human services programs, family preservation programs, child day care and the capability of our delivery system by cutting staff.
At this time, I would like for you to please look at the charts in your packet or on the screen to learn more about Michigan’s tough economic conditions.
In 2002, the national unemployment rate was 5.8 percent. For Michigan, it was 6.2 percent. For August 2009, the national unemployment rate was 9.7 percent. For Michigan, it was 15.2 percent.
In 2002, 11 percent of Michigan’s population lived in poverty. In 2008, the most recent data available, 14.4 percent of Michigan’s population lived in poverty. In 2002, 15.3 percent of Michigan’s children lived in poverty. In 2008, the most recent data available, 19.4 percent of Michigan’s children lived in poverty.
In 2002, the total food assistance program recipients in Michigan were 748,421. Now, the total number of recipients is 1.57 million. In 2002, the total Medicaid recipients in Michigan were 1.21 million. Now, the total number of recipients is 1.75 million.
RECOMMENDATIONS
We would like to continue to partner with you and suggest policy changes which will enable us, and other beleaguered states like us, to provide services more effectively to our clients.
Michigan was recently informed that we did not meet the TANF work participation rate requirement for FY 2007. The financial penalty will be $24.2 million, unless we receive a waiver or reduction based on meeting the federally defined status of reasonable cause or a needy state. The “reasonable cause” definition may take into consideration how current TANF rules were written in a time of economic prosperity. The “needy state” definition may take into consideration the economic downturn due to the automobile industry.
Many of our long-standing clients face significant barriers that must be overcome before they can have any hope of competing for career opportunities. Not the least of these barriers is the need for education.
Currently, federal policy requires that clients participate in a required number of “core” activities. Unfortunately, basic adult education, English as a Second Language, or ESL, and high school completion for adults do not qualify as core activities.
We strongly recommend that the definition of core activities be expanded to include any type of educational component with no time limit attached to it provided the client is making acceptable progress in the activity. Other recommended changes to acceptable core activities include:
· Separate job search/job readiness so they are two different activities and allow additional time for each.
· Simplify the way in which job search/job readiness time limits are calculated.
· Eliminate the concept of core/non-core activities entirely, recognizing any activity that is moving a client toward self-sufficiency as acceptable.
In addition to redefining acceptable core activities, we would like to see the work participation rate requirement relaxed. As noted previously, Michigan and many other states were able to reduce the number of people on assistance significantly during the 1990’s and into the new century.
Unfortunately, this has resulted in our remaining clients often being those who are hardest to serve. We recommend the following options for your consideration in meeting the work participation rate requirement:
· Return the base year to the original year—1995. Making the base year 2005 in effect penalized states that had been successful in reducing their caseloads in the 1990’s.
· Tie the work participation rate percentage to a state’s unemployment rate.
· Remove from our count of work eligible individuals, those who count toward the work participation rate, those clients who are potentially disabled based on a medical review while they are pending with Social Security.
· Change the two-parent work participation rate to be the same required for single-parent households.
· Give partial credit for people who are participating but may not be meeting their required hours.
CONCLUSION
Thank you again for this opportunity to testify. And thank you for your continued support as we seek better—and more efficient ways—to serve Michigan’s most vulnerable children, and adults and families.
I welcome any questions you may have at this time.