02/24/2005 03:00 PM House HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB120 | |
| SB42 | |
| HB69 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 120 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 42 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 69 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 24, 2005
3:06 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Peggy Wilson, Chair
Representative Paul Seaton, Vice Chair
Representative Tom Anderson
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Lesil McGuire
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 120
"An Act relating to safety devices and sharp instruments for the
prevention of the spread of bloodborne pathogens in health care
employees; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED HB 120 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 42
"An Act extending the reporting date for and the termination
date of the Task Force on Naturopathic Scope of Practice; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED SB 42 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 69
"An Act relating to contracts for the provision of state public
assistance to certain recipients in the state; providing for
regional public assistance plans and programs in the state;
relating to grants for Alaska Native family assistance programs;
relating to assignment of child support by Alaska Native family
assistance recipients; relating to paternity determinations and
genetic testing involving recipients of assistance under Alaska
Native family assistance programs; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED HB 69 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 120
SHORT TITLE: HEALTH CARE EMPLOYEE PROTECTION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) WILSON
02/02/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/02/05 (H) HES, L&C
02/24/05 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: SB 42
SHORT TITLE: NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE TASK FORCE
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) SEEKINS
01/11/05 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/07/05
01/11/05 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/11/05 (S) L&C, FIN
01/27/05 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
01/27/05 (S) Moved SB 42 Out of Committee
01/27/05 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
01/31/05 (S) L&C RPT 3DP 1NR
01/31/05 (S) DP: BUNDE, SEEKINS, STEVENS B
01/31/05 (S) NR: ELLIS
01/31/05 (S) FIN REFERRAL WAIVED
02/10/05 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
02/10/05 (S) VERSION: SB 42
02/14/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/14/05 (H) HES, FIN
02/24/05 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 69
SHORT TITLE: PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/12/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/12/05 (H) CRA, HES, FIN
02/03/05 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
02/03/05 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/03/05 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
02/04/05 (H) CRA RPT 7DP
02/04/05 (H) DP: CISSNA, NEUMAN, KOTT, SALMON,
LEDOUX, OLSON, THOMAS
02/24/05 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
CAMILLE SOLEIL, Director
Alaska Nurses Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 120.
GREY MITCHELL, Director
Labor Standards and Safety Division
Department of Labor & Workforce Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 120.
JOE MICHEL, Staff
to Senator Ralph Seekins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 42 on behalf of Senator
Seekins.
WAYNE ADERHOLD
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 42.
KATHARINE FARNHAM, Director
Division of Public Assistance
Department of Health and Social Services
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented "Native Family Assistance
Program: Report to the Alaska Legislature on the Pilot
Projects." Testified in support of HB 69.
DEAN GEORGE, Coordinator
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF
Tlingit-Haida Central Council
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 69.
MOLLY MERRITT-DUREN, Director
Employment and Training Services
Cook Inlet Tribal Council
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 69.
DON SHIRCEL, Director
Family Services
Tanana Chiefs Conference
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 69.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR PEGGY WILSON called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:06:29 PM.
Representatives Seaton, Cissna, Gardner, and Kohring were
present at the call to order. Representatives Anderson and
McGuire arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 120-HEALTH CARE EMPLOYEE PROTECTION
CHAIR WILSON announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 120 "An Act relating to safety devices and sharp
instruments for the prevention of the spread of bloodborne
pathogens in health care employees; and providing for an
effective date."
CHAIR WILSON passed the gavel to Vice Chair Seaton.
3:08:09 PM
CHAIR WILSON, sponsor to HB 120, stated that HB 120 brings
Alaska standards into compliance with federal standards
concerning bloodborne pathogen protection. She related that
Alaska's laws are in compliance with federal standards except
concerning doctor offices with less than 25 people. At the
time, she said, "we were thinking that maybe that was an area
that it would cost too much for people ... we were kind of being
worried about small businesses and so, that's why they weren't
included at the time. Since then, we have learned so much more
about bloodborne pathogens and the possibility of not only the
patients, but the workers themselves, getting AIDS, hepatitis,
or some type of blood disease ... all of the offices are in
compliance with it anyway, this is just a way to get our
statutes into compliance with it." She said that the passing of
HB 120 will bring Alaska into compliance with federal standards,
secure federal grant funds, and will clarify the standard
practices for employees in doctor offices.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING inquired as to the number of medical
establishments affected by this bill.
CHAIR WILSON said that dental offices across the state, small
doctor's offices, and veterinarians are affected.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING asked if anyone in the medical community
objects to this legislation.
CHAIR WILSON stated that she is not aware of anyone who objects
to this legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING inquired as to the necessity of this
legislation, if everyone is in compliance.
CHAIR WILSON pointed out that legislation is necessary for two
reasons: specific grant availability, and clarification on the
interpretation of the standards.
3:12:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to sponsor statement of HB
120 repealing two exemptions, one referring to intra-oral
procedures and the other referring to health care facilities
with less than 25 employees.
CHAIR WILSON directed Representative Gardner to the Sectional
Analysis of HB 120; she explained that Section 2 exempts
employers with fewer than 25 full-time employees.
CAMILLE SOLEIL, Executive Director, Alaska Nurses Association,
(ANA), stated that the ANA supports HB 120. She explained that
the standards laid out in the statute, with the clarification of
this bill, provide clear and consistent protection for both
patients and health care workers.
GREY MITCHELL, Director, Labor Standards and Safety Division,
Department of Labor and Workforce Development, stated that he
directs the Occupational Safety and Health Program for Alaska
and that this program operates under a special jurisdiction from
the federal government. He explained that based on the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, states can apply for
and receive a special jurisdiction to cover occupational safety
and health within their state. The catch, he said, is that
when a state does apply for that, they have to agree to maintain
standards that are at least as effective as federal standards.
He said that the federal Occupational Safety & Health
Administration, (OSHA), came out with a broad set of bloodborne
pathogen protection standards that force the revision of state
requirements. He stated that the [Department of Labor &
Workforce Development] strongly supports HB 120.
VICE CHAIR SEATON inquired as to coverage for dentists under HB
120.
MR. MITCHELL stated that the federal standards were adopted
under a separate statute. He explained that [Alaskan] statute
"18.60.020" allows for the adoption of federal regulations and
the [Department of Labor & Workforce Development] has adopted
the federal guidelines on bloodborne pathogens. He said that
the state law conflicts with the adopted federal standards. The
dentists, he related, are complying with the federal standards,
because of the liabilities associated.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked what other bloodborne pathogens are
included in this legislation.
MR. MITCHELL said that hepatitis and sexually transmitted
diseases are higher in Alaska than in other states. He said
that it makes sense to make sure that the protections are in
place [through legislation] for health care businesses dealing
with blood, needles, and cutting instruments that may have been
contaminated. He continued:
[this bill] maintains our Alaska program, which in our
conversations with the dental society ... was one of
their concerns ... they wanted to make sure that the
Alaska Occupational Safety and Health Program
maintained jurisdiction in Alaska ... right now, you
can get a hearing in front of a group of people who
are Alaskans, in Alaska, on an issue that you might
dispute. If federal OSHA was to take over, you'd have
to go down to Seattle, or San Francisco to have a
hearing on an issue that you disputed ... there is a
lot of support behind keeping the program in Alaska.
3:20:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING moved to report HB 120 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying "zero"
fiscal notes. There being no objection, HB 120 was reported
from the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing
Committee.
[VICE CHAIR SEATON passed the gavel back to Chair Wilson.]
SB 42-NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE TASK FORCE
3:21:05 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced that the next order of business would be
SENATE BILL NO. 42 "An Act extending the reporting date for and
the termination date of the Task Force on Naturopathic Scope of
Practice; and providing for an effective date."
JOE MICHEL, Staff to Senator Ralph Seekins, Alaska State
Legislature, presented the sponsor statement for SB 42 on behalf
of Senator Seekins, and stated that this bill extends the
reporting date for the termination and [progress] report from
the naturopathic task force. He explained:
[Senate Bill 42] is an extension of [Senate Bill 306]
which was a product of the Twenty-Third Alaska State
Legislature ... and established a task force to study
the scope of practice of naturopathic medicine. By
statute, the task force was charged with addressing
the following six things: the comparable level of
education and training of naturopaths and medical
doctors, the appropriate scope of practice relating to
the use of legend or prescription drugs by
naturopaths, the appropriate scope of practice for
non-pharmacological treatments by naturopaths
including minor surgeries, the structure and
operations of collaborative protocols and agreements,
issues relating to joint liability between
collaborating practitioners and any other issues
determined to be relevant by the members of the
naturopathic task force. The task force was to have
nine members ... and we've met four times ... since
the task force has been formed. It was to be
comprised of one Alaska state senator, one Alaska
state representative, a member of the Alaska State
Medical Association, a member of the Alaska
Pharmacists Association, a member of the Alaska State
Medical Board, a member representing nurse
practitioners, an employee of the Department of
Community and Economic Development (Division of
Occupational Licensing) and two members who are
licensed to practice naturopathic medicine in the
state of Alaska. The task force was unable to
complete it's business within the time parameter
specified in SB 306, consequently, SB 42 extends the
task force's charge into 2005. SB 42 is identical to
the previous bill, SB 306, except for the report and
termination dates have been changed to December 1,
2005 and February 1, 2006, respectively.
3:24:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to the definition of the word
"legend" on page 1, line 11 of SB 42.
MR. MICHEL stated that the word correlates with prescription
drugs and the different levels of prescription drugs that are
allowed.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER questioned how "legend" differs in
meaning from the prescription drugs.
MR. MICHEL said that he did not know.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to the task force committee
meeting schedule.
MR. MICHEL stated the task force was not officially formed until
late November of last year. He said that the task force met
once before the New Year, and three times in Juneau via
teleconference.
3:25:49 PM
WAYNE ADERHOLD stated that he urges the passing of SB 42 and
extension of the naturopathic task force for the benefit of
constituents. He said that the naturopathic task force recently
submitted a reasonable proposal for dealing with prescriptive
rights and Senator Seekins is facilitating careful and complete
examinations of all pertinent issues. He said:
I, and a growing number of Alaskans, rely on
naturopathic physicians for a large and increasing
portion of my health care ... they clearly adhere to
the foundation of medicine ... there is a lot at stake
for the Alaskan consumers on the outcome of this task
force and the resulting legislation. I can document a
number of incidents over the past few years where the
provisions of the proposed changes and privileges for
naturopathic physicians would have benefited me
directly, both from a health care and an economic
standpoint. Please do not lose sight of the fact that
this is largely a consumer issue.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON commented that he supports extending the
timelines for the task force.
CHAIR WILSON said that she supports giving the task force more
time. She mentioned that there is a zero fiscal note attached
to SB 42.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA stated that she remembered hearing how
necessary a task force was in the past, and that it seems as
though [SB 42] should be given a chance.
3:29:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report SB 42 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying "zero"
fiscal note. There being no objection, SB 42 was reported from
the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing
Committee.
HB 69-PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
CHAIR WILSON announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 69 "An Act relating to contracts for the
provision of state public assistance to certain recipients in
the state; providing for regional public assistance plans and
programs in the state; relating to grants for Alaska Native
family assistance programs; relating to assignment of child
support by Alaska Native family assistance recipients; relating
to paternity determinations and genetic testing involving
recipients of assistance under Alaska Native family assistance
programs; and providing for an effective date."
KATHARINE FARNHAM, Director, Division of Public Assistance,
(Division), Department of Health and Social Services, stated
that she and the Division support HB 69. She explained that the
Native Family Assistance Program, (NFAP), is a state complement
to tribal temporary assistance programs. She continued:
Federal law has allowed, since 1996, tribal programs
to get direct federal block grants for public
assistance. For those programs to be fair and
equitable, in the same way the state would have served
them, a state supplement in the form of the Native
Family Assistance Program grants has been offered. In
the legislature in 2000, the legislature chose to go
ahead and pass this program, however, to put a
"sunset" on it for June of '05 ... to request that a
report be written to evaluate how successful the
program may have been and ... to limit it to only 4 of
the 13 federally authorized entities. 13 entities
were authorized by the federal Welfare Reform Act and
those were the 12 Native regional non-profits and
Metlakatla. In the bill passed in 2000, that was
restricted to Tanana Chief's Conference, Association
of Village Council Presidents, Tlingit and Haida and
Metlakatla ... 3 of them have been ... operating a
Tribal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families,
(TANF), program since '99, 2000, or 2001 depending on
when they started up. The report ... does include the
explanations on the nature of the project, the way
that they have been able to take those federal and
state programs and be very successful. The whole
emphasis on all of these temporary assistance programs
is put people to work, people moving from public
assistance, to self-sufficiency ... we're pleased with
the results of those pilot years and we'd like to see
the bill made permanent rather than temporary, and
"sunsetting."
The other thing that this bill does is it expands it
to the full 13, therefore matching the federal
authorities. It's not that all 13 are going to
immediately come on board and ask or seek to run a
tribal TANF program, however, there are a few ...
waiting in support of this expansion and ... those
that are in the wings include Cook Inlet Tribal
Council. We've been working with them ... we, the
[Department of Health and Social Services] and the
Division, have been working with Cook Inlet for about
9 months in preparation for them running a tribal TANF
program in the Anchorage area ... for all Alaska
Natives and American Indians in the Anchorage area ...
that would be a significant, new tribal TANF partner
... and takes a little over 700 cases from the State
of Alaska and puts them with Cook Inlet. This is not
completely new to Cook Inlet ... they have been a
contractor for the state on the case management
aspects of this work for a number of years and been
highly successful. The fiscal note, attached to this
bill, pertains to the Cook Inlet addition. The rest
of the budget is already in the fiscal year '06
governor's budget, which would assume continuation for
the three existing programs ... later in '06, we
anticipate discussions with two other smaller, Native
regional organizations because they've expressed their
interest formally with the federal government and
ourselves ... Bristol Bay Native Association and
Maniilaq. The two of those together are relatively
small so they are not that significant and at this
point too early in the planning stages to know when
and if that will ever take effect, as compared to Cook
Inlet.
3:34:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to fiscal note 3, showing a
general fund (GF) match of $3,685,000, and asked, "is most of
this state GF match?"
MS. FARNHAM said that when the TANF program for residents is run
as a state program, there is a maintenance of effort, which is
general fund match. She pointed out, "when it becomes a tribal
program, and we can ... give them some state monies, we can also
count that as "maintenance of effort" for the statewide program
... it was general fund when we were running the state program
and, yes, the Native Family Assistance Program is funded by
general fund, and it does count as our "maintenance of effort"."
In response to Chair Wilson's comment, Ms. Farnham stated that
the general fund portion is being moved from the temporary
assistance component to the Native Family Assistance component.
She highlighted a summary on the bottom of all four fiscal
notes:
the tribal assistance total of $4,000,093 ... it's got
two components: a general fund and an interagency
piece ... that's an addition in tribal assistance but
that's also a reduction in the line item above ATAP
(Alaska Temporary Assistance Program). There's other
ATAP reductions but they're inside there, the amount
of general fund that used to go to ATAP for Cook Inlet
Families, now goes to Cook Inlet.
3:36:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to any negative aspects of
the TANF program.
MS. FARNHAM related that there is a need to watch out for
organizations taking on all of the responsibilities associated
with a Tribal TANF program. She explained that the areas where
challenges were observed, pertained to the complexity of the
"IT" [Information Technology] systems and federal reporting.
She continued:
and some of these organizations did not have a state
"IT" department to help them produce perfect reports
so the state helped in some early years with some
funds for "IT" systems, however, the lessons learned
now tell us perhaps a better solution is to allow them
to utilize the state system. And, in fact, the Cook
Inlet Tribal Council implementation is designed with
that in mind, where they actually utilize our
technology ... and it works, and we are developing a
arrangements to share that system.
MS. FARNHAM said that some of the other existing grantees,
specifically Tanana Chiefs, are interested in moving away from
their own system to follow the Cook Inlet approach.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to training for new workers.
MS. FARNHAM stated that the complexities of eligibility
determination are significant. The training program is robust,
she said, because there are hundreds of staff who need to know
intricate details about eligibility; training resources are
available to the new start-ups. She explained that the goal
with Cook Inlet is, eventually they build their own capacity and
on an ongoing basis they can do mentoring and development with
knowledgeable staff. She said that there may be policy changes
in the future as TANF approaches federal reauthorization.
3:41:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING questioned if general fund monies support
these programs.
MS. FARNHAM stated that the program has a "maintenance of
effort" at a statewide level at 75 percent, and that is true of
both the state programs and the tribal programs.
In response to Representative Kohring, Ms. Farnham explained
that the $5.7 million in the summary table of the fiscal note is
a reduction to general funds. She referred to fiscal note 3:
it shows that the reduction of general funds comes in
2 pieces. The first piece is merely a transfer from
our ATAP component over to our tribal assistance,
that's a transfer of $3.685, however, because the
federal block grant of the state's does shrink, so too
does our "maintenance of effort floor" ... the federal
block grant that moves to Cook Inlet reduces the
state's block grant and allows us to lower our
maintenance of effort floor and that's the $2,000,070
reduction ... so, two general fund reductions there of
this component, one of which is a true reduction, the
other is a transfer ... resulting in a net fiscal
impact ... of a $2,000,000 general fund reduction.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING asked what is being done to discourage
people from going on welfare and what is the Division doing to
encourage those that are on welfare, to get off of it.
MS. FARNHAM said that the Division focuses on employment from
the moment a client seeks services. The programs offered
include: "job search," subsidized employment with an employer,
"work readiness training," and "job club." She explained that
the Division is taking some of the money saved from what was
used to pay for cash assistance, and reinvesting it as a
preventative measure. She said that the Division's funds are
invested into the kinds of preventative measures that enable
low-income families to avoid public assistance in the first
place, with work-readiness related activities.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING asked why the program had to be enshrined
in law as opposed to replacing the "sunset" date. He opined
that the program could be re-evaluated for its effectiveness in
another five years.
MS. FARNHAM suggested that it would be wise to enforce a
permanent statute comparable to the federal statute. The
federal statute is permanent, she said, and it will allow the
tribe and the state to continue to receive the temporary
assistance federal block grants. She said that the uncertainty
associated with the state match does create some unease for some
organizations. She explained that the Division has not
contemplated what might happen if the state program ended and
the federal program continued. In this case, she pointed out,
tribal organizations would see a reduction in their available
resources and potentially return programs back to the state to
run.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON stated that Alaska is behind all of the
other states in the country that have [temporary assistance]
programs. She explained that in other states, the numbers of
people transitioning off of public assistance and into the
workforce have increased and eventually reach a plateau; Alaska
is still transitioning and continues to make steady progress.
3:46:37 PM
MS. FARNHAM stated that one of the reasons that Alaska
successfully continues to reduce caseloads is because of the
strong community based programs that the tribal organizations
offer. She explained that the Division's programs combined with
tribal programs have greater flexibility than state programs.
She pointed out that Alaska is doing well and is in its third
year receiving a high performance bonus for continuing to move
families off [of public assistance]. She emphasized that the
hardest to serve families require different strategies. She
opined that a public assistance program is a viable need on an
ongoing basis and making it permanent allows the tribes to
understand the stability of their funding in the same way that
the state can.
3:48:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON opined that there are not as many
incentives to work for many of the recipients and that
translates to borough organization bills. He stated:
I think the bill is important in terms of funding and
I think your responses were fair, but ... as ...
finances wane ... and we're looking at where we spend
excess monies, and where are the incentives for jobs
... we think more in the foundational level which is,
"why can't we reduce this in half or more," ...
regardless of ethnicity, or federal mandates, or owing
... I am glad you recognize, that as legislators, it's
good to supplement these with ... success stories ...
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING noted his overall concern about this
legislation. He opined that this is yet another social program,
more welfare, more government subsidies, and more taxpayer
subsidies. He advocated for a law that would require some
repayment for services received by the state. He pointed out
that if gainful employment is achieved, then taxpayers could be
reimbursed. He inquired as to the development of a program
focused on repayment.
MS. FARNHAM clarified that this [TANF] is a federal program and
that a repayment program has not been considered at the federal
level. She underscored that a simple look at the situation
would say that this is another welfare program, but this
[program] is saving state dollars. She emphasized that it is a
more efficient approach to providing a necessary service, "while
all the time we are putting people into self-sufficient jobs, we
are able to take the savings and make sure future families don't
end up on welfare."
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON commented that though he understands the
reasoning behind trying to reduce [spending], this [HB 69] is
one way to reduce money spent and keep the number of state
workers at a minimum.
3:54:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA commented that this was the first time
that local groups were allowed to administer [assistance]
programs. She said that finally, there is less privatizing and
more emphasis on promoting local solutions. She opined that [HB
69] should be celebrated as it demonstrates this change.
MS. FARNHAM stated that the tribal organizations are the first
to take on the full scale of temporary assistance from
eligibility to case management, to employment, and retention
services; they are working well because the people in the local
areas know their community, their economy, and their employers
better than the Division. She said that she is proud of the
success of the Division. She mentioned that it is not just
about Native organizations. In the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, where
the Association of Village Council Presidents has a tribal TANF
program, she explained, they run the entire TANF program for the
region. She explained that the state is not out there,
alongside them, replicating or duplicating; they are serving
both Natives and non-Natives. She said that Bristol Bay could
develop similarly, because the [tribal organizations] have a
much stronger presence in that region, and some are successfully
serving the region, not just their shareholders.
3:57:16 PM
DEAN GEORGE, TANF Coordinator, Tlingit-Haida Central Council,
stated that he represents the Central Council and presented the
packet entitled, "Testimony on Native Family Assistance
Program." He explained that the packet was compiled by Sharon
Olsen, Director of Employment & Training for the Central Council
Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. He offered to answer
questions.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to Mr. George's opinion of why
local [public assistance] solutions are working more efficiently
and accomplishing more than state run programs.
MR. GEORGE stated that as coordinator, he has seen the success
of a local presence. He explained that the familiarity and
personal contact has brought individuals to the tribe to get
needed services when they may not have utilized state services
before.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER mentioned that in Mr. George's report,
the total number of people served drops consistently from one
month to the next. She pointed out that the number of people
served increases from June to July. She inquired as to why more
people would request assistance in the summer.
MR. GEORGE said that there weren't reportable statistics on the
number of different reporting elements and many of the
statistics were combined into one category. In order to answer
the question, he said, it would be necessary to go back and take
a look to find out.
4:02:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA offered that her business was always slow
in the summer. She said that jobs are sometimes scarce and
there isn't work available.
MR. GEORGE added that the other thing is the [value of] having
that familiar face and this might be one of those peaks where
some people looked at the tribal TANF program and said, "Now I
believe I can get either service or get the service I need."
MOLLY MERRITT-DUREN, Director, Employment and Training Services,
Cook Inlet Tribal Council, stated that she is in support of HB
69. She explained that Cook Inlet Tribal Council is a "home
away from home" for all Alaska Natives and American Indians that
live in the Anchorage area. She said that the Council currently
has programs that include employment and training, substance
abuse services, family services, youth employment in school and
out of school youth programs. She pointed out that the Council
intends to, if approved, move its tribal TANF program into its
employment and training services because the focus is the
potential of the Council's people. She stated that the Council
believes employment is the key.
MS. MERRITT-DUREN stated that the Council has been providing
TANF case management for eight years, as a state vendor. She
explained:
when you negotiate with the federal government and in
the state government, you go back to the 1994
caseload. And the 1994 caseload, in the Anchorage
area, was 1,123. Currently ... [the caseload is] 692.
Basically, during that same period, Alaska Natives and
American Indians on the ... 1990 census were listed as
12,000. On the 2000 census, if you count Alaska
Native, American Indians, and others ... that's at
46,000 ... during that time period, while we did case
management for the state, we brought that caseload
down by 62 percent, with a huge influx ... in
addition, Cook Inlet Tribal Council provides "IT"
services and accounting services for 39 non-profit
agencies ... so we have the infrastructure, we have
the experience ... in regard to comparability and
accountability ... as a vendor for the state, or
whether we become a tribal TANF provider, we're still
held to the 5 year limit for people to be on services
... it's a big responsibility to take on a program
like this, but we think we're poised, we're ready,
we're experienced ...
4:07:29 PM
CHAIR WILSON inquired as to the history of Cook Inlet Tribal
Council and how successful it was when it took over for the
state. She said that she is curious about what should be
anticipated with the changeover to locally run programs.
MS. MERRITT-DUREN stated that at the national level there is an
increase [in the amount of people seeking assistance] when local
organizations take over state programs. She said that the
Council can wrap around services because we're not a "Silo"
funding source and through the Council's board of directors and
public block 477, can put funds into system wrap around
services. She explained that the life skills of transitioning
from rural to urban need to be addressed, as well as substance
abuse issues; it is more difficult to address these issues under
state guidelines than it is under tribal TANF. She opined that
tribal TANF programs can deal with core issues effectively.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA said that it is really hard to track
success with programs that come and go because of unreliable
funding. She advocated for a stable, local based operation that
wraps around and serves the whole person. She inquired as to
the Council conducting assessments that use multiple approaches
for long-term effectiveness, so that there is a record of a
model that works and can be replicated elsewhere in the state.
4:11:27 PM
MS. MERRITT-DUREN stated that she would be delighted to conduct
assessments and eventually create a model. She said that within
her department [Employment and Training Services] there are many
services available that could serve as good models. She
explained that the Council has developed a central intake
process with state partners and when it becomes tribal TANF;
there will be one intake to record all eligibility.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA stated that she would like to meet with
Ms. Merritt-Duren and make [the Council's] recorded information
available to the legislature.
4:13:47 PM
DON SHIRCEL, Director, Family Services Division, Tanana Chiefs
Conference, (TCC), stated that he strongly supports the intent
of HB 69 as a social service professional and program planner.
He said that it makes a lot of sense to locally design and
administer services such as those provided under temporary
assistance programming. He related that TCC's tribally
administered program is currently in its seventh year of
operation, and the tribes of the Interior are proud of the
accomplishments they have collectively made to date in getting
people from welfare to work. He stated that the report to the
legislature, prepared by the "Division," indicates that what the
Native Family Assistance has been doing includes getting people
to work in Alaska's urban areas, and in some of the most
economically challenged rural areas of the state. He opined
that the report and the outcomes achieved through this pilot
program indicate that the state and the tribes are headed in the
right direction. He continued:
HB 69 enables us to collectively and collaboratively
stay [on] what clearly appears to be a good course.
Overall, HB 69 simply allows for the continuation of
local program variations and innovations that make
sense to people of diverse regions of the state. The
chances of achieving positive outcomes are greatly
increased if the programs and services we provide are
fairly, equitably and locally administered and make
sense to the people they serve. HB 69 is about common
sense, get-to-work programming that fits, but it's
about a lot more than that. HB 69 is about a sense of
community, about local control, encouraging family and
cultural values, marriage, fatherhood, work, self-
sufficiency and individual responsibility ... it's
about outcomes, and creative ways to achieve them.
It's about getting a bigger bang for the same buck and
even about reducing the state's general fund
expenditures. It's about the 33 million dollars saved
in state general funds in the past 5 years alone
because of the Native Family Assistance Program, with
a potential to save even more over the next five years
and into the future. To us, HB 69 is about continuing
one of the most successful collaborative partnerships
between the states and the tribes to date; HB 69 is
about work and it's about working together.
If there is one shortcoming of the bill, it would be
that HB 69 includes no specific reference to child
support enforcement programs that may be administered
by a tribe. The landmark Welfare Reform legislation
that enabled tribes to design and administer their own
temporary assistance programs also enable tribes to
administer their own child support enforcement
programming. The U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services has already approved a plan for the central
council's Tlingit and Haida tribe to start up a
tribally administered child support enforcement
program and tribes in the Tanana Chief's Conference
service area and the Association of Village Council
Presidents are pursuing the similar course. We hope
that the current mechanisms in place with the state's
child support enforcement division to honor foreign
orders, will be sufficient to allow tribal child
support enforcement programs adequate articulation
with the state, and that the child support enforcement
related provisions in HB 69 will not be a detriment to
the future development of these programs. Aside from
this concern, TCC fully supports the overall intent of
the bill. Our collective experience ... we feel
indicates that we, the tribes and the state, are
headed in the right direction.
CHAIR WILSON inquired as to the child support enforcement
program and if it is working in other areas.
MR. SHIRCEL stated that there are six original tribal child
support enforcement programs throughout the country that were
grandfathered in, pending the final rule, which was recently
published last spring. He said that all of the existing
programs were in the lower 48.
4:19:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER moved to report HB 69 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying four,
attached fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for the purpose of discussion.
He said that he would like to discuss the last point that was
made on tribal support. He directed his question to Ms. Farnham
and inquired as to the incorporation of tribal child support
enforcement [to HB 69] and whether it is a necessary add on.
4:20:26 PM
MS. FARNHAM stated that she is not an expert on child support
programs, but can understand the reasoning associated with if it
is run community based or culturally relevant. She explained
that after speaking with the director of the Child Support
Enforcement Division, (CSED), in Alaska, in the Department of
Revenue, it was decided that HB 69 was not an appropriate
vehicle to solve the question. She said that if, in fact, the
tribes in Alaska are going to move forward with tribal child
support, that will take more than an adjustment to this bill.
This bill deals specifically with the NAFP and TANF programs,
she related, and the only reference to child support is that
there is a relationship between child support and TANF that has
to occur if there will be future changes regarding tribal child
support. She opined that it will take a full discussion, and it
is not necessarily allowed or stopped by HB 69.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON clarified that adding an amendment
[regarding the child enforcement program] to this bill would
make it difficult to accomplish the original "work partnership"
goal of HB 69.
MS. FARNHAM stated that she agreed with Representative
Anderson's comments.
4:23:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his previously stated objection.
Therefore, HB 69 was reported out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying four attached fiscal notes
by the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing
Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting
was adjourned at 4:24:03 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|