1981 Study: Coordination of Human Services

I

Human Serv1ceS

vOtAMUIvI~

!

~ !

I

I'"

v~

J..~

\

III ~~

t~

-~

~O

~o

~

ÂŁ?

~

~ ~r0.1)

A Report to the Citizens of Jacksonville. Summer 1981

SCOPE

OF THE STUDY

=

This study was undertaken to. determige what mechanism(s) sho~ula be used to 1mprove the coordination o~ human services in Jacksonville.

Without good coordination and planning, clients cannot find their way to needed services and human service dollars do no~ yield maximum benefi ts.

The scope of the study i nc1uded a review and analysis of:

--.. ""' -"" ;>.

.

The shifting services.

.

The flow of human services

roles

and funding of human dollars.

. Existing planning and coordination mechanisms. ~...

- ~- ~ . ~Howclients can identify and obtain needed se~vices (information and referral).

. New approaches to human services coordinafion from other communities.

~ ~

Although human services may refer to all programs or projects which are designed to help peop1e improve the economic and soc i a1 qua1ity of their lives, in this study human services are limited to income maintenance, employment and training, health, recreation, education, and social and rehabilitative services.

Programs which consist primarily of bricks and mm"tar, such as public housing and hospital buildings, are omitted.

Also excluded are the traditional programs of the school system (K-12), and higher educat ion. Because it is probab ly not feas i b1e to bring about coordination of the profit-making sector or of churches, their part in human services receives minimal attentio~ in ~his.s~~gy. ~~,.."" ~ "!" o!!" :,!,,,,:II -Coordination involves cooperation and sharing of information at all levels of the human services spectrum ranging from the funding sources, planners, and top administrators to the counselors and providers of services to clients.

~

HI GH L I G H T S MAJOR

.

PROS-LEMS

'"

RECOMMENDED

.

No overall planning and coordil1a~ion ~

~

."..--.

No formal ongoing major funders

communic-ation among

~

A coalition

United

of major funders

Way)

leading

to

community-wid~vehicle for:

(State,

City,

an

ongoing

Problem solving

.

A lack of commonterminology

.

Different fiscal years

.

A lack of dissemination of up-to-date information on available services

.

A lack of clearly

Development of a jointly funded centralized information and referral system

'"

identified

SOLUTIONS

access ~oints

for;,.c 1i ents

and eligibility . Complicated funding requi r,e~ents . A lack of flexibility and decision-making ability at~ the local level

Development of common app 1i cat i on forms and hearings for~gencies seeking funds

Examination of service areas for greater efficiency and effectiveness = Increased local decision making through state/local agreements for administering block grants Improved client

access

to services ..

FINDINGS Findings represent the data base of the committee. They are derived from the published materials listed in the references, facts reported by resource persons or from a consensus of committee understanding as reported by resource persons.

Shifting

Human Services

humanservices. In Jacksonville, Federal revenue sharing funds are allocated entirely to University Hospital to supplement and partially replace local funding of that institution.

Many communities designate at least part of general revenue sharing funds for human services.)

Picture

THEHUMANSERVICESFIELD HAS UNDERGONE MAJOR CHANGES IN THELASTTWENTY YEARS. As a result, the relative roles of those involved in coordinating, funding, planning, or delivering human services have been shifting. The actors include:

As an example of the increasing role of government in human services, the United Way reports that seven years ago it funded 50 percent of member agency budgets, on the average.

Today, in contrast, United Way funding accounts for approximately 25 percent of member agency budgets with 44 percent coming from public funding, and the remainder from other sources.

Government at all levels Mechanismsmandated by government to plan, coordinate, and/or allocate funds Private nonprofit organizations Private for profit organizations Private practice professionals The United Way Foundations Corporations Fraternal and service clubs Churches Families and individuals

The proposed Reagan budget spending for human services. programs are to be consolidated grants to be administered by

addition, President Reagan recently appointed a Federalism Advisory Committee as a first

~~uman~v~ces

were prov~ded' Way. During the Depression, the Federal govern--

~ ~~Jr~~,:~"~o=the~l~~O'

prlmar 11Y"'OYsma11 1ocahgenc

reduces Federal Many categorical into large block the states.

In step in

sorting out the roles of Federal, state,

TeS=and~th~~lIffit-ed--c-~~ ~-aJ~gov~r.JIments~. .

ment moved heavily into human services with New Deal reform programs. Social Security, Federal work programs, and Federal and state cashwelfare programs were begun at this time.

In the 60's the Great Society saw the beginning of the non-cash welfare programs such as food stamps, and a tremendous expansion of Federal categorica 1 grant programs and block grants. * The community action agencies, designed to enable the poor to move beyond poverty, began at this time.

Complicated

-

~Oc

~

~

and

~'"

Funding

TODAYTHEFUNDING OFHUMAN SERVICES IS EXTREMELY COMPLEX, OVERLAPPING, INTERTWINED, ANDOFTEN TIED TO REGULATIONS ANDELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. Monies for humanservices coming into Jacksonville from the Federal government originate from diverse sources such as the Department of Labor, the Department of Housi ng and Urban Development, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Agriculture, and numerous others.

These Federal funds follow many circuitous routes on their way to clients . in the Jacksonville area. (See Chart on pg. 3).

During the 70's the Federal government put into place a number of distinct planning mechanisms and coordinating bodies and made efforts to improve the management of human services through Federal regulations and requirements attached to the Federal monies. At the same time, there was also a trend towards giving local communities greater flexibility in spending Federal monies, primarily through Federal general revenue sharing funds. (These are administered by local governments for local public purposes, including

Some monies coming from the Federal government are blended with state general revenue funds and given to the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS). HRSDistrict IV, which includes Jacksonville, may administer its share of these funds directly or pass these funds on to the Jacksonvi lle community either through or to the 1oca1 government or to agencies which contract directly with HRS. In contrast, Community Action funds go directly from the Federal government to the local community acti on agency.

Most Comprehensive Employmentand Training Act (CETA) funds for manpower development go directly to the community-designated sponsor, rather than

*Categorical grants are those awarded for a specific purpose, as defined in legislation (i.e., family planning) Block grants are awarded for r e general purposes (i.e., health).

The grantee then makes plans for dividing the money among specific programs

.

2

FLOW OF FEDERAL FUNDS TO CLIENTS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

STATE

GOVERNMENT

r I

:

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

.

f f J

~.

1

PRIV ATE AGENCIES

i.

i II ~

CLIENTS

I. I! I

t

L-

3 .....

through state government.

In addition, local private agencies often obtain grants from the Federal government directly, without passage through the state or local government bodies, except in most cases, through a review mechanism. The end result is that individual programs and staff sa 1ari es may be funded by many different sources.

For example, Hubbard House, an agency which provides temporary shelter and counseling to abused spouses and their children, receives funding from HRS, the City and the United Way. In HRS Hubbard House falls under the Aging and Adult Services Program, while the United Waycategorizes it as Family Care and Assistance.

In city government miscellaneous appropriations to Hubbard House are administered by the Division of Community Services, Department of Human Resources.

Adding to the complexity is the fact that the allocation bodies for these funds, as designated by the Federal or state governments, represent different geographical areas, most of which encompass more than one county. For example, the Florida Department of HRS allocates funds by districts.

District IV includes Nassau, Baker, Clay, St. Johns, Flagler, and Vo1usia counties, in addition to Duval County. The Area Agency on Aging, which coordinates, plans and allocates funds for the aging through HRS, serves these same seven counties.

But the region served by the Mental Health Board for District IV of HRS includes Putnam County in addition to the seven counties named above.

The Northeast Florida CommunityAction Agency, which allocates Federal funds for poverty programs, has as its geographic boundaries four counties: Duval, St. Johns, Baker and Nassau. Funds from the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA)are coordinated by the Department of HumanResources of the City of Jacksonville, for Duval, Nassau, and Baker Counties. CommunityMental Health Funds are distributed through a geographical deSignation known as catchment areas.

There are three of these primarily located in Jacksonville.

However, the catchment areas spillover the county line.

Pine Castle Center, which provides sheltered employment for mentally retarded adults, is also funded jOintly by HRS, City and United Way. HRS calls it vocational rehabilitation; the City, Community Services; while the United Way designates Pine Castle as Hea1th/Handicapped Care and Assistance.

The Flow

of

Dollars

TODAY THE MAJORFUNDER ANDPRIORITY SETTEROF HUMANSERVICESIS GOVERNMENT, WITHTHE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PLAYING A PRIMARYROLE. In general terms, this is where the money for human services in Duval County comes from:

In 1980/1981 a total of $171.39 expended on human services in Federal and state funds coming into and used for human services over $149.88 million, including:

million was Jacksonville.

Jacksonville amounted to

(In mi11ions) $96.82 mixed Federal and state funds (64% federal, 36%state) through HRS (from U.S. Dept. of Health and HumanServices, Dept. of Agriculture, Dept. of Justice and others, plus Florida general revenue) $16.30 Supplemental security income from Social Security Administration $13.60 U.S. Comprehensive Employment and Training Act $ 8.30 U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (for school lunches and breakfasts) $ 7.83 U.S. general revenue sharing (allocated to University Hospital) $ 3.43 U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (to Northeast Florida CommunityAction Agency, University Hospital and CommunityMental Health Centers) $ 1.78 U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (to City) $ 1.38 U.S. CommunityServices Administration (to Northeast Florida CommunityAction Agency) $ .21 ACTION(U.S.) $ .12 'U.S. Department of Justice $ .06 U.S. Department of Energy $ .05 Florida Department of Community Affairs (to City)

This overlapping of geographical boundaries for different programs and services makes it very difficult to identify those funds which are expended only in the Jacksonville area.

Different fiscal years add to the complexity.

The Federa1 government's fi sca 1 year runs from October 1 to September 30, as does that of Jacksonville's local government. However, the State of Florida's fiscal year runs from July 1 to June 30. And the United Wayand most private agencies operate on a fiscal year which coincides with the calendar year, from January 1 to December 31. This creates confusi on and uncertainty for agencies in their planning processes.

Agency budgets and financial statements are therefore comp1i cated and diffi cu1t to comprehend.

Differing terms are used by each major funding body to describe and categorize human services.

Any specific program may be categorized differently by each of the different funding sources.

Even when the same term is used, it may have a different meaning as defined by each funding source. It is, therefore, impossible to compare the different programs as designated by the different nomenclatures.

.

TOTAL $149.88

4

MILLION

In 1980/1981 the City Government allocated local funds to human services amounting to $17.13 million, (including $7.9 million to University Hospita 1) .

matchi ng funds.

Loca1 and state governments also provide limited funding for programs of their choice, independent of the Federal government. Although the United Wayhas no formal or legal restrictions on its allocation_of funds, it, too, attempts to make the most of its dollars by providing matching funds where necessary.

In 1980, the United Way collected and distributed to human services private local funds amounting to $4.01 million in addition to $.36 million for United Wayoperations.

(NOTE:These figures are approximations, including only the human services defined in the scope of this study. The fiscal years of these different funders vary, geographical areas covered vary, and funding for certain projects may have changed since these figures were compiled.

The reader is cautioned not to use these figures in any other context before consulting the funding sources.

They are placed in this configuration in order to give a general picture.

Who Does

The Planning

THE PLANNINGFUNCTIONFOR HUMANSERVICES IN JACKSONVILLE HAS CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE LASTTWENTY YEARS. Planning is nowperformed by at least nine different bodies.

Most of these have been mandated as a part of Federal and state programs.

Nevertheless, planning is done in isolation.

There are no ongoing efforts to share the data (i .e. needs, social indicators) on which plans are based.

Not included are $24.5 million in Federal funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development nor hundreds of millions through contributory programs, such as retirement, disability and survivors benefits through the Social Security Administration, and unemployment payments.)

I n the 60 I s the Commun i ty P1anni ng Council was created, evolving from a planning mechanism previously contained within the United Way. Its purposes included the planning and coordination of human serv ices.

It developed plans for specific program areas and served to bring agencies and citizens for the purposes JACKSONVILLE HUMAN SERVICES $ BYSOURCE together of sharing information and for problem solving.

However, with the i nfl ux of Federal funds for human servi ces, the Community P1anning Counci1 U.W.I 2.6\ became involved in seeking Federal funds and CITY" 10\ administering Federal programs.

This emphasis tended to obscure the p1anni ng function of the STATE 20.6\ agency.

The Commun i ty P1anni ng Council developed the Information and Referral Service which 66.8\ FEDERALwas later assumed by the Central Crisis Center.

Similarly, it developed plans for the aged in Jacksonville and eventually spun these off to TOTAL FUNDS $171.39MILLION the new Area Agency on Aging. After p1anni ng and initiating CommunityCoordinated Child Care, Charts on page 6 indicate where the money from the CommunityPlanning Council transferred this major funding sources went as described by responsibility to the City of Jacksonville. broad program areas. See the appendix for addiA new agency, Volunteer Jacksonville, was created to coordinate volunteer services. tional information describing funding and a110cati on of funds by the Northeast Flori da In 1975, a successor organization, the CommunityAction Agency.

Jacksonville Council on Citizen Involvement, Since all Federal funds, with the exception of Inc. (now the Jacksonville CommunityCouncil, general revenue sharing, are designated for parInc.) was set up with the goals of fostering broad citizen participation and involvement, ticular program areas or populations to be served or for very specific projects, the developing community leadership, and ensuring a Federal government sets the priorities of dialogue among diverse elements of the community overall human services' spending for the around important community issues.

Jacksonville community. That is, the Federal government determines the relative amounts which Meanwhile, planners proliferated in specific may be spent for aging, poverty, employment and training, etc.

State governments then deterprogram areas: mine which available Federal monies they will app1y for and match and how the funds wi11 be The Northeast Florida CommunityAction Agency allocated with i n these program areas.

Loca1 (formerly Greater Jacksonville Economic communities determine how local funds will be Opportunity) was created to plan, coordinate, allocated within these funded program areas, if and allocate funds for poverty programs and they choose to comply with requirements for to empowerthe poor.

-

5

DISTRIBUTION

OF HUMAN SERVICES DOLLARS IN JACKSONVILLE

BY MAJOR FUNDING SOURCES (1980-81)

H.R.S. Health (including Medicaid) Developmental Services 28% Adult and Aging Services Childrens Medical Services Vocational Rehabilitation Mental Health Social and EconomicServices 45.5%

$96,809,736

~

-=-=-~-

-

- --

United Way

$4,014,500

-

CommunityOrganization Aging Misce11aneous

.3 % .5%

Youthand FamilyServices

) ill

NOTE:

The City does not categorize

humanservices except by departments and divisions of City Government.

The assignment of programs to these categories was performed by JCCI.

$17,131,203

6

The Area Agency on Aging was created to plan, coordinate, and allocate funds for the aging population.

source at separate times of the year, part i cipate in separate hearings, and submit separate applications and monitoring forms. This means that agencies ordinarily cannot plan a budget for an entire year with a reasonable degree of certainty.

Agencies must appear separately before each all ocat i ng body in order to secure funds.

Agencies with similar programs are I10t ordinarily asked to prepare a comprehensive proposal.

Competition for funds gets in the way of inter-agency cooperation which is essential for 'the effective del ivery of services to the clients.

A Manpower Consorti um was mandated by CETA and created by the city to plan, coordinate, and allocate funds for manpowerprograms.

Withi n HRS a process was developed to plan, coordinate, and allocate funds authorized by Title XX of the Social Security Act, which includes programs such as day care, family planning, meals on wheels, etc.

The Mental Health Board was created by HRSto plan, coordinate, and allocate funds for the delivery of mental health services.

Although ideally a process for allocating funds should be a rational one based on community needs, in practice this does not often happen.

The definition of needs and prioritization of needs is not an exact science.

Rather, value judgments are i nvo1ved.

Who gets what, when there is not enough to go around for all, is often a political decision, although the nature of the politics varies in the different arenas.

The Health Systems Agency was created to plan and coordinate health programs and facilities.

(This agency does not allocate funds.)

The Metropolitan Criminal Justice Advisory Council was created to plan for, coordinate and allocate funds from the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration.

LEAAhas essenti ally been dissolved and is operating through 1981 with residual funds.

The Council remains intact but inactive.

The Elusive

Big Picture

THEFUNCTIONOFCOORDINATING AT THEADMINISTRATIVE AND PLANNINGLEVEL IS MANDATED

BY THE FEDERALORSTATEGOVERNMENTS FORMANY AGENCIES. The agencies listed as planners and fund a1locators are also coordinators within their service area.

Most of these admit to performing a less than adequate job of coordination for several reasons.

Lack of adequate funding is one.

Another is the complexity of coordination due to the size of some human service bodies such as HRS and the number of agenci es and programs to be coordi nated.

No one coordi nates the coordinating bodies.

The United Waycontinued to monltor the plans of its 54 member agencies and to plan for the allocation of its funds.

Within the City of Jacksonville, planning for human serv ices is fragmented.

The Human Resources Department plans for some community services such as day care, children and youth services, etc., and the Department of Health, Welfare and Bio-Environmenta1 Services plans for its areas.

The City P1anni ng Department has developed a comprehensive plan for Jacksonville, which does not, however, i nc 1ude a soc i a1 or human services element.

AS A COROLLARY OF THE PLANNINGFUNCTIONS OCCURRING IN A VACUUM,THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES FOR THE ALLOCATIONOF FUNDSALSO OCCURIN ISOLATION. Each planning body, as listed above, has its own allocation process and operates on its own timetable.

It may not be aware of the decisions of the other a110cators of funds, except perhaps after the fact.

In 1969, the Federal government created a coordinating mechanism for Federal funds coming into a community. This is known as the A-95 Review Process.

In Jacksonville, the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council serves as the A-95 clearinghouse.

All requests for Federal grants except for educational researcn and training projects, must be reviewed by this clearinghouse.

Appropri ate community agenci es are notified and invited to comment on each grant request so that the Federal government can determine whether that grant duplicates an existing service and whether it is likely to be well received in the community. There are several factors which limit the effectiveness of this process.

The A-95 review is limited to Federal funds.

In addition, the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council reports that frequently it is not notified by the Federal government as to whether proposals are actually funded.

Without this information the review of future requests cannot be adequately coordinated.

Since most agencies today receive funding from several sources, they must apply to each funding

As a result of planning and funding decisionmaking in isolation, no one seems to have the

There is no overall p1an for human services in Jacksonvi lle.

Currently, there is no formal effort to link together the planning processes or information used by these different planning bodies.

Fund Allocations

7

big picture of human services.

Because of a

Bio-Environmenta1 Services receives 144 information and referral calls daily, on the average.

The City of Jacksonville also lists a general information number in the Southern Bell telephone directory.

However, this information service is minimally staffed and does not attempt to provide follow up activity to determine if the caller was successful in obtaining the desired service.

lack of formal communication regarding budgetary priorities, actual funding, and needs ases sments, areas of needed serv ices whi ch are not funded are not clearly identified.

There is no established formal vehicle with responsibility and authority to review the total human services effort in Jacksonville.

Each funding and coordinating body has a limited domain. Colocation of ~gencies, a better geographical location of services relative to the needs of c1ie~ts, centralization vs. decentralization of services and agencies, sharing of staff or equipment, unnecessary duplication of activities such considerations are rarely by agencies exp1ored or acted upon.

Agenci es themse1ves, having been placed in a competitive posture for funds, are ~n1ike1y to pursue these concerns on their own initiative.

HRS is s~ large and departmentalized that it is extremely difficult for clients or social workers to fi nd the answers they need through this agency.

There is no centralized information telephone number at HRS. If a c1i ent happens to know in which program area his needs wi11 fall he may be fortunate enough to select the right number and to find someone who is able to refer him. Previously HRS purchased information and referral services as indicated above.

Following this, it used a decentra1 ized internal information and referral plan which required each HRS staff person to perform this service.

Recently, the program component of Specialized Family Services has been designated as the official information and referral service of HRS. However, this designation is not widely known within HRS nor in the community nor is it so listed in the Southern Bell telephone directory or the Directory of Community Services.

An average of 213 information and referral calls per day are received by Specialized Family Services in Jacksonville.

---

Client-Service

Linkages

IN AN EFFECTIVEHUMAN SERVICES SYSTEM, CLIENTS MUST BE ABLE TO LOCATE AND OBTAIN THE SERVICES

I:

t..

~

j,

THEYNEED. Information and referral services exist for that purpose.

A centralized information and referral system compiles the necessCiry information on available programs and set~jces in the communj:tyand makes this information available to those~worklng wifR""c1fents as well as to clients themselves.

In Jacksonville the Central Crisis Center serves as the centralized information and referral service for the community.

That agency began its operations to provide suicide and drug hot-lines and counseling, and later added information and referral to its functions.

The training of volunteers, the name of the agency, and its telephone listings still reflect an emphasis on crisis intervention.

As a result, many service providers and clients are unaware of its services in information and referral.

In addi ti on to the Central tti si s Center, HRS and the City of Jacksonvi lle, almost all agencies rendering human services provide limited information and referral 5ervices.

In most program areas, inter-agency coordinating mechanisms or organizations exist at the management level for the purpose of sharing basic information about programs.

It is generally agreed that such organizations provide a useful function in establishing interpersonal contacts.

These contacts pave the way for effective cooperation.

The disadvantage of these groups is that the information is usually shared only among agency directors and does not filter down to staff members who work directly with clients.

In addition, agency directors have their own turf and autonomy to protect.

They are re 1uctant to share information whfch might threaten their success in obtaining funds.

The Central Crisis Center is funded primarily by the United Wayof Jacksonville but receives some City funding and some funds through the Mental Health Board. HRSdiscontinued its purchase of information and referral services in 1978-79.

The Central Crisis Center's budget of $72,000 has been supp1emented by CETAworkers and the extensive use of volunteers.

Records are maintained manually.

An average of 122 calls are received daily and a majority of these are for i nformati on and referraL Information on calls received is tabulated but this information is not detailed or specific enough to provide comprehensive client-based needs assessments.

There are few organized in-service training programs or formal linkages for social service professionals and paraprofessionals to keep them informed about current programs, agencies, eligibility requirements and available community resources.

The Directory of CommunityServices, pub1i shed by the Central Cri sis Center, is the most commonlyused tool for this purpose.

Potential clients for human services also may turn to the City of Jacksonville for direction and assistance.

The Welfare Division of the Department of Health, Welfare and

Multi-problem families have the most difficult time locating and obtaining needed services.

The lack of clearly identifiable access points,

iJ

[

8

It is helpful to have a neutral third party to convene and facilitate collaborative efforts.

the 1arge number of spec i a1i zed agenci es, complex eli gibi 1ity requirements which differ for most programs, and transportation problems present barriers to these clients.

In 1976 HRS piloted in District IV a case management system designed to help these clients.

Specially trained social workers were assigned to these families to guide and support them in obtaining servi ces.

Although the program was consi dered successful, funding was not provided by the legislature.

.

An organization created with a broad or vague charge will most likely fail.

Rather, the organization must have specific tasks or charges to accomplish.

New Approaches DURING THE

LAST

SEVERAL

YEARS

A

The major publ ic and private funders of human services must be included in any cooperative effort.

.

The development of a comprehensive social services plan has usually not been an effective tool.

Rather, issue-focused research and planning is both more appealing and practical.

.

Although needs assessments. may provide useful information for identifying needs, setting priorities and general planning purposes, it is wise to recognize that funding decisions are basically political in nature and based parti ally on value judgments.

NUMBER OF

COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE UNITED STATES (i.e, COLUMBUS, OHIO; LOUISVILLE, KY.; ROCHESTER, N.Y.; FRESNO, CA.;) HAVE ATTEMPTED TO IMPROVE THE EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF HUMAN

SERVICES. Usually these attempts have included a coa1it i on of pub1i c and pri vate funders of human services.

The vehicles created have ranged from informal meetings for sharing of data, plans and funding decisions through use of existing staff, to super agencies with broad planning and coordinating authority and large budgets.

Staff support must be adequate.

Funding for the cooperative effort should be provided by the major funders of human services.

Funding should be local, rather than Federal, in order to assure local commitment and input for the coalition.

The benef its res uIt i ng from cooper at i on often add up to savings in money and/or time.

In Broward County, luncheon meetings of seven major funding partners were held monthly.

By sharing information and working together creatively for the most effective matches of money sources, within 18 months they were able to parlay $585 million to $750 million.

Human services defined with boundaries.

In Fresno, California, the City, County and United Way developed a commonappl ication form for agencies seeking funding.

As a result, agencies now fill out 15 pages of questions and information as opposed to the 38 pages previously required.

Combined application hearings held by the three partners take about three days as contrasted with 14 days when the hearings were held separately.

.

should agreement

be on

clearly service

The relationship of the organization to participating policy-making bodies must be clear from the beginning.

Legal, political and administrative arrangements must be stated.

. The need for autonomy of each participating organization must be recognized and dealt with sensitively.

From the success stories as well as the mistakes and disappointments from the experience of other communities, a number of guidelines have emerged:

. An incremental approach to collaboration works well. Success in one step may lead to further areas of cooperation.

Each community is different.

It is necessary to identify and capital ize on the forces and momentumexisting in a specific community.

It is important to develop a tangible product or tool as early as possible.

Initial success is important.

Communityleaders must be convinced of the need for such an organization.

Broad based community leadership and support, including business and political leaders, is essential for its success.

Ultimately, success depends upon persona 1it i es and the wi11i ngness and eagerness of each funder or organization to be involved.

9

GUIDELINESFORINFORMATION ANDREFERRAL SYSTEMS

system of tasks and programs. Tasks shoul d be equated with client needs.

Dr. Lisa Lekis, the developer of a computerized information and referral system in Ft. Lauderdale, was the primary resource person in this area. Dr. Lekis also serves as the United Way of America's consultant on information and referral.

Ideally a centralized computerized and referral system can provide:

It is essent i a1 to deci de what i nformat i on or data are needed from the computer and how that information will be used before deciding on input.

One should resist the temptation to over-computerize as expenses increase rapidly.

information

Telephone referral and follow-up clients to appropriate agencies.

Since agency cooperation is essential in providing the data, agencies must be convinced that they will benefit from the system.

of

A midd1eman or interpreter is needed between social workers and data processors.

They speak different languages.

An up-to-date directory of human services programs for use by counselors and social workers in making referrals.

Even after computerization it is necessary to retain the use of a complete and detailed resource directory.

Many agencies will not be able to afford computer terminals.

A data system yielding client-based needs assessments which serve as a planning tool for human services funders and program planners.

This is one of the few ways in which unmet needs can be clearly identified.

It is preferable to use aggregate data only and not to identify clients or to become involved in a client-tracking system. This kind of system is extremely expensive and may conflict with regulations for client confidentiality.

Before beginning a computerized system it is necessary to develop a commonclassification

CONCLUSIONS Conclusions express the value judgments of the committee, based on the findings.

There is no centralized mechanismresponsible

To be successful, a coalition for planning and coordinating human services should:

for providing planning around specific issues and problems, coordination, assessment of needs, and establishing priorities for effective, and efficient delivery of human services in Jacksonville.

Although needs assessments are performed in specific service delivery areas, no overall community needs assessments are performed.

capitalize on existing forces and momentum in the community.

i nvo1ve the major funders vices.

of human ser-

have broad-based community support.

There

is

currently

no regularly scheduled exchange of information amongthe major funders of human services (HRS, the City, the United Way) regarding funding priorities, needs assessments, or the provision of services.

A public/private partnership of the funding sources is necessary for a coordinated human services system.

be funded on a shared bas i s by the major funders at a 1oca1 or reg i ona1 1eve1, to assure commitment. be adequately staffed. initially existing

A vehicle for coordination at the local level is essential to facilitate the most effective use of private and public resources.

Current and projected cutbacks in the Federal funding of humanservices and planning will intensify this need.

develop clear relationships policy-making bodies.

to

be based on an incremental approach, starting with a limited number of tasks and building to additional areas of mutual concern. have specific tasks to accomplish, rather than an emphasis on broad long-range goals of comprehensive planning and coordination.

10

concentrate on issue-focused planning, rather than the development of a comprehensive social services plan.

in very making shou1d decision be able

be sensitive to the need for autonomy of each organization, most particularly in the area of funding.

little room for flexibility and decision on a local level.

Local communities have a greater degree of contro lover making for human services in order to to mold local services to local needs.

Professionals and paraprofessionals who work directly with clients, while often able to attain some measure of comprehensive knowledge about community resources, have no -source of readi ly avail ab1e current informati on, despite the limited efforts of the Central Crisis Center and its directory.

Major funders of human services operate on several different fiscal years, and require different application forms and procedures for funding.

This complicates funding decisions, agency bookkeeping, and the understanding of agency budgets and financial statements.

Clients in need of services frequently do not know where or how to begin. * The Central Crisis Center, which performs some centralized information and referral services for Jacksonvi lle, is known more for suicide and crisis counseling than for information and referral.

Funders (HRS, the City of Jacksonville, the United Wayand private sources) categorize human services in different terms. This makes it diffi cult to compare the serv ices prov i ded and to detect duplicate services or unmet needs. This also creates additional feelings of frustration and helplessness in the client community.

*

The domination of human services funding and priority setting by the Federal government and to a lesser extent by state government results

NOTE: This is not unique to Jacksonville.

Many cities with exemplary efforts in coordinating human services report that the problem of linking clients with services remains unsolved.

RECOMMENDATIONS "" ""

Recommendations are the committee's specific conclusions.

1.

suggestions

Top 1eve1 repres ent at i ves of three major funding sources of human services (the state of Florida, the City of Jacksonvi lle, and the United Way) should convene in regularly scheduled meetings to provide for issue-focused planning, coordination, assessment of needs, and the establishment of priorities"'for effective and efficient delivery of human services in Jacksonville.

'!!O~...

~-

:!if

for change, based on the findings

~

and

(a) Agreement on a definition of the scope of human services to be included in its domain. (b) The use of a commonterminology to describe and categorize human services so that comparable information can be exchanged. (c) Bringing about greater fiscal years.

Included should be: from the State of Florida, the District Administrator of HRS and the Chairman of the Duval Legislative Delegation; from the City of Jacksonville, the Mayor and the President of City Counci1; and from the United Way of Jacksonville, the President and Executive Director.

The services of an outside consultant (with a background in human services administration and planning and considerable experience in similar coalition efforts) should be engaged initially.

uniformity

of

This group should form a permanent and adequately staffed body with broad community participation, to: (a) work together on mutual, specific, timely human services problems to enable the most efficient use of available resources to fill human needs (for example, planning for meeting the needs of poor people for fuel and household heating during the winter months).

The consultant I s fee should be shared by

the funding partners.

Included among initial tasks to be accomplished are:

11

(b) develop commonapplication forms for

devise methods to allocate funds from Federal block grants to local communities.

The distribution method should be equitable and local communities should have greater decision-making ability in determining how funds are spent.

agencies seeking funding, a common hearing process for fund applications, and the sharing of funding priorities, a lthough each agency wi11 retain. its autonomy and criteri a for funding decisions.

3.

(c) address the problem of insufficient information for social workers and paraprofessionals through in-service training programs developed by educational institutions and professional associations such as the Florida Association for Health and Social Services and the National Association of Social Workers.

(a) The Southern Bell Telephone Company should be asked to include in its directory a guide to human services, preferably color-coded, to make it eas i er for persons to locate needed services.

(d) Periodically examine given areas of human services (Aging, Welfare, etc.) to determi ne whether greater efficiency and effectiveness and avoidance of duplication could be obtained by such options as shared equipment, colocation of agencies, or administrative mergers.

(b) The Central Crisis Center should review its TV spots, telephone listings and other advertising to give greater emphasis to its information and referral function. (c) HRS should provide a general information telephone number to be listed in the Southern Bell directory and in the Community Services directory so that its c1i ents can determi ne where to call for direction to services within HRS.

(e) Improve the existing central ized information and referral system with the ultimate goal to be a computerized, centralized information and referral system with fund i ng by all three partners.

2.

Immediately, the following more specific and limited improvements can and should be made in information and referral services:

(d) The City of Jacksonville should improve the quality of information provided by its Information Center.

The Duval Legislative Delegation should initiate action by the State of Florida to

REFERENCES Austin, David M., I & R: ~ Social Services, pp. 38-43

Public

!W:l ~

Welfare,

fQ,L ~ 1980,

Mastrine, Barry, The Development and Implementation of the Metropolitan Human Services CommisSlon--Qf Columbus/FraOkTln County, Ohio, Coordinating Human Services at the Local Level: Proceedings of the First National Network Building .Conference, Denver, Colorado, 1980, pp. 144-166

-

Delahanty, Delores, Lessons Learned A Guide to Social Service Coordination, - Sharln~ Project Share, Vol. 1, No.1, Winter 1976-77 Fresno

Tri-Funding

Review

Process:

~

Case

Study, Institute for Local Self-Government, Berkeley, California

Lekis, Lisa, Using .L~~ Data for Planning: The Process, Problems, and Potentials, Journal of the Alliance of-ynformation and Referral Systems, Vol. II, No.1, Fall 1980, pp.15-29

And numerous unpublished documents and data from HRS, the City of Jacksonville, the Mental Health Board, the United Wayand others.

12

RESOURCE PERSONS

TO THE COMMITTEE

The JCCI".Study Process relies upon information supplied by knowledgeable resource persons, in addition to published reference materials.

Wewish t1) thank the following resource persons for their very valuable contributions to this report.

Virginia Borrok Executive Director,

Richard Gray President, Mental Health Board

Mental Health Board

Virgil Green Chief, Welfare Division, Department of Health, Welfare and Bio-Environmental Services City of Jacksonville

~ie em or Bowden Coordinator-P 1anner, Area Agency on Aging

Betty Carley Supervisor, Client Support Services Department of Health and Rehabilitative Daniel H. Cook Executive Director,

Sk itch

Ho11 and

Chief, Division of Training and Development, Department of Human Resources, City of Jacksonvi lle

Services

Fred Huerkamp Director, Health Systems Agency

Daniel Memorial

Coralie Chronister Regional Planner for Housing, Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council

Lynne Gabbe-Harkcom Administrative Assistant, Springfield Neighborhood Housing Service, Inc.

George W. CorriGk, Ed.D. President, Jacksonville CommunityCouncil, Inc.

Bonnie H.Jacob Executive Dire~tor,

Richard Covey (xecutive Director,

Geneva Johnson Senior Vice-President,

United Wayof Jacksonville

Central Crisis ~ente~ United Wayof America

Patricia Cowdery, M. D. Director, Department of Health, Welfare and Bio-Environmental Services, City of Jacksonville

Lisa Lekis, Ph.D Consultant, United Wayof America

Rudolph Daniels Director, HumanResources Department, City of Jacksonville

Barry Mastrine Executive Director, Commission

Tony Folcarelli Executive Director,

Reverend Gene Parks Urban Minister, Jacksonville United Methodist Church

United Wayof Fresno County

Stephanie Fox Supervisor, Special Family Unit Department of Health and Rehabilitative

Metropolitan HumanServices

District,

The

Pat Phillips District Intake Counselor, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services

Services

Moses Freeman Director, Northeast Florida CommunityAction Agency, Inc.

Don Pierce FresnQ County Department

Sallie Garlington Social Worker, Children's

John Stokesberry District Administrator,

HomeSociety

of Social

Services

Department of Health and

Rehabilitative Services, District IV Kenneth Goldman Director of Plan Development, Health Systems Agency

David Swain, D.P.A Chairperson, Social and Behaviorial Division, Edwards Waters College

Sciences

13

...

APPENDIX

NORTHEAST

Allocation

FLORIDA

COMMUNITY

ACTION

of Funds to Jacksonville

AGENCY

1980-1981

FUND SOURCES:

U.S. Community Services Administration U.S. Department of Energy

U.S. Department of Labor

- CETA

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services U.S. ACTION State of Florida (Several Departments) City of Jacksonville

Early Childhood Development 57%

$4,970,000

TOTAL

ALLOCATIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP AND WORK

Chairman:

Pat Hannan

The full committee met weekly from December, 1980 through May, 1981, for a total of 24 meetings.

It received information from 28 resource persons, plus additional materials provided by JCCI staff research.

After gaining a picture of existing coordination and problems in Jacksonville, the committee heard from a number of cities with experience in collaborative efforts toward human services coordination.

In April and May, conclusions and recommendations were formulated.

Jacquelyn Bates Arthur Bolte Virginia Borrok Jani s Bri 11 Sarah Bowers Barbara Brooks J. Shepard Bryan, Jr. Ida Cobb William Colledge Richard Covey Frances Davis Larcie Davis Margo Fugeman Lynne Gabbe-Harkcom Sallie Garlington Dale Gatz Gay Gold Lois Graessle Pat Griffiths

Membersof the Committee: Pat Hannan, Management Team David Busse, Management Team Carolyn Gentry, Management Team David Hicks, Management Team AmyMcCombs, Management Team Anne Ross, Management Team Frank Satchel, Management Team

Ercel D. Hanley Gail Henley Daniel Hoffman Fran Isabelle Susan Jaskwhich Anne McIntosh Adrian Oliver Pamela Y. Paul Gloria Rinaman Kerrean Salter Rando1ph Silas Liese Steinhaus John Sulik I. M. Sulzbacher William Sulzbacher David Swain Lee Van Va1kenburgh Joyce Weather up Theodore Wendler

JCCI Staff Support: Marian Chambers, Executive Director Lavada C. Dockery, Secretary

14

THE JACKSONVILLE

COMMUNITY COUNCIL, INC.

The Jacksonville CommunityCouncil, Inc. (JCCI) was formed to anticipate, identify and address the complex issues of urban life.

JCCr is a community-based nonpartisan, nonprofit organization providing the vehicle for in-depth, objective, citizen analysis of community problems and issues.

It seeks broader community awareness and understanding of the issues and provides Jacksonville a diverse citizen forum reaching across the traditional dividing lines of a complex and diverse urban community.

tions, and individual members. Occasional grants have been obtained for specific projects or conferences.

The primary goal of JCCI is a better quality of life in Jacksonville through positive change.

It has a short but impressive record for the quality, objectivity, clarity, and practicality of its studies of community problems, and its advocacy for the solutions it develops.

Jacksonville has experienced the benefits of numerous improvements growing from these citizen studies.

JCCI Reports

Other JCCI goals grow largely from its focus on positive change. High on the list are the education and dialogue the studies themselves provide to participants.

The work of JCCI strengthens citizen competence and awareness, provides for ongoing dialogue amongdiverse elements of the community, and serves as a catalyst for bringing together decision-makers.

Public Authorities

JCCI is founded on a deep faith in the ability of citizens to set aside their differences and join together to learn and reason about problems of mutual concern. Its growth and success offer renewed hope for this basic democratic concept as a means of addressing the complex issues of modern urban communities.

The JCCI membership now exceeds 450 citizens representative of all parts of the Jacksonville community.

Chairperson

Local Government Finance

Robert D. Davis Thomas Carpenter

Housing Public Education (K-12)

--Strengthening

Robert W. Schellenberg HowardGreenstein

the Family

Jacquelyn Bates

Capital Improvements for Recreation

---

Ted Pappas

Citizen Participation in the Schools

Susan Black

Youth Unemployment

Roy G. Green

Civil Service

MaxK. Morris

Planning in Local Government .. I. M.Sulzbacher But Not in MyNeighborhood

JCCI receives Jacksonville,

funding from the United Wayof the City of Jacksonville, corpora-

The Energy Efficient

Jacquelyn Bates James Borland Patricia Cowdery Robert D. Davis Edward W. Dawkins George Fisher Moses Freeman

Roderick M. Nicol

JCCI STAFF

JCCI BOARD OF MANAGERS George w. Corrick HowardGreenstein Betty S. Carley Robert T. Shircliff

City

Pamela Y. Paul

Marian Chambers, Executive Director

President President-Elect Secretary Treasurer

Annette Brinson Cathy Cartica Linda Collins

Daniel L. Lauray Flo Nell Ozell Espie Patrinely Pamela Y. Paul James Rinaman Robert Schellenberg Suzanne Schnabel Stephen Wise 15

Lavada Dockery John Hamilton Frances Kling Kay Nelson

~

.,

=

""C ~~~

;~

~,

--, -~

'" e

~~

JACKSONVILLE

COMMUNITY COUNCIL, INC.

1045

Avenue,

Riverside

Jacksonville,

Florida

Suite

"

1IIi!~,"

'

180

f

32204

U. S. POSTAGE

PA,

0

,

Permit

!

i'1cksonvil~,Fl .

'

(904)

Non-ProfitOrg., No.1999

356-4136

_."

---,

-"",---

~

~.- --;'

Dr. David Swain 5400 LaMoyaAvenue, # 17 Jacksonville, FL 32210 J

...........

'-

~

A JCCI

~

Study: ~

Coordination

of Hl,IlTIan ~~;Hvrces

- - --

~ '"

:,~

United Way

I