CSBG

replace generic title image and alt description

Community Services Block Grant
Program

Report to Congress

Fiscal Year 2005

This report is submitted to the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions of the Senate, in accordance with provisions of the Community Services Block Grant Act (CSBG Act).

The report complies with Sections 678B(c) and 678E(b)(2) of the Act that require the Secretary to prepare each fiscal year a report on performance measurement and a report on compliance with the goals of the Community Services Block Grant program (CSBG), and to submit those reports together to the Committees. This report provides the information requested for fiscal year 2005.

Introduction
The information contained in the report is taken from various evaluations by the Office of Community Services (OCS) on the implementation, performance, compliance, and outcomes of CSBG programs. OCS, with the support of the National Association for State Community Services Programs (NASCSP): 1) maintains a statistical database of information regarding the program; 2) assists States in complying with the Results-Oriented Management and Accountability (ROMA) program or a similar system to measure performance; 3) assesses the implementation of the States’ programs; and 4) provides technical assistance and training where appropriate. Below is a summary of the required reports.

Summary of Statistical Evaluation Report
The CSBG Act at Section 678E(b)(2) requires the Office of Community Services to provide certain statistical information regarding the implementation of the program. This section also requires reporting on the performance and compliance of the States with an evaluative system such as the Secretary’s model performance initiative, the ROMA program. The statistical database is maintained by the Office of Community Services and the National Association for State Community Services Programs. The report describes services and programs funded by States for Community Services Programs and extracted from the statistical database. The report includes an accounting of funds spent by entities in the delivery of CSBG funded services. The report also provides the number and characteristics of low-income individuals and families served with CSBG funds.

Summary of State Performance Report
The CSBG Act at Section 678B(c) requires the Office of Community Services to conduct an evaluation of State compliance with the goals set forth in the Act. The Office of Community Services is required to submit to the Congress an annual report detailing the findings of the evaluation of States’ compliance. Beginning in fiscal year 2001, the statute required that States report to the Secretary on the implementation of performance measurement practices. To complete this report, OCS conducted evaluations of State compliance among all 50 States, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia during the reporting period through: 1) a State-by-State survey and assessment and 2) summaries of several State CSBG agencies. The results of the States’ CSBG implementation are provided in the Performance Measurement Report. Program Implementation Assessment summaries are provided in Appendix A of the report.

Community Services Block Grant
FY 2005

The Community Services Block Grant program provides assistance to States and local communities, working through a network of community action agencies (CAAs) and other neighborhood-based organizations, for the reduction of poverty, the revitalization of low-income communities, and the empowerment of low-income families and individuals to become fully self-sufficient. CSBG-funded programs create, coordinate, and deliver a broad array of programs and services to low-income Americans. The grant’s purpose is to fund initiatives to change conditions that perpetuate poverty, especially unemployment, inadequate housing, poor nutrition, and lack of educational opportunity.

The fiscal year 2005 program data was gathered by the Community Services Block Grant Information System (CSBG/IS) survey, administered by the National Association for State Community Services Programs (NASCSP). Fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico provided information about the level and uses of CSBG funds, their activities, and the number and characteristics of families and individuals participating in CSBG programs.

The CSBG Act at Sections 678E and 678B require the Office of Community Services to report on the topics below, which are presented in this combined report:

A summary of the planned use of funds by each State and the eligible entities in the State;
A description of how funds were spent by the State and eligible entities, including:

A breakdown of funds spent on administrative costs, and
On the direct delivery of local services by eligible entities;

Information on the number of entities eligible for funds, including:

Number of low-income persons served, and
Demographic data on low-income populations served by eligible entities;

A comparison of the planned uses of funds by each State and the actual uses of the funds;

A summary of each State’s performance results and the results for the eligible entities as collected and submitted by the States, including:

Any information collected by the State relating to performance measurement and outcomes achieved;
An accounting of the expenditure of funds received through the CSBG program;
An accounting of funds spent on administrative costs by the State and eligible entities;
Funds spent by eligible entities on direct delivery of local services;
Number and characteristics of clients served based on data collected from the eligible entity; and
A summary describing training and technical assistance offered by the State to help correct deficiencies during the year covered by the report;

Results of fiscal year evaluations conducted in several States on the use of CSBG funds (Program Implementation Assessments).

Summary of the Planned Use of Funds by Each State and the Eligible Entities in Each State
In FY 2005, States planned to use CSBG funds to provide resources for direct services or assistance to individuals and families participating in eligible entities’ programs. In most instances, the largest categories of CSBG expenditures were emergency services and self-sufficiency programs. Uses of CSBG funds are reflected in the data tables contained in this report (Tables 1-3).

A Description of How Funds Were Actually Spent by the State and Eligible Entities
Reflected in Tables 1 and 2 and summarized below is a breakdown of State spending by program services category.

Employment Programs
In FY 2005, States reported spending $57.4 million in CSBG funding to support a range of services designed to assist low-income individuals in obtaining and maintaining employment. These services include:

Support for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients who are preparing to transition to self-sufficiency or former TANF recipients who need additional support to find or maintain employment;
Support for job retention, including counseling, training, and supportive services, such as transportation, child care, and the purchase of uniforms or work clothing;
Skills training, job application assistance, resume writing, and job placement;
On-the-job training and opportunities for work;
Job development, including finding employers willing to recruit through the agency, facilitating interviews, creating job banks and providing counseling to employees, and developing new employment opportunities in the community;
Vocational training for high school students and the creation of internships and summer jobs; and/or
Other specialized adult employment training.

Education Programs
In FY 2005, States reported spending $69 million in CSBG funds to provide education services such as:

Adult education, including courses in English as a Second Language (ESL) and General Education Development (GED) preparation with flexible scheduling for working students;
Supplemental support to improve the educational quality of Head Start programs;
Child care classes, providing both child development instruction and support for working parents or home child care providers;
Alternative opportunities for school dropouts and those at risk of dropping out;
Scholarships for college or technical school;
Guidance about adult education opportunities in the community;
Programs to enhance academic achievement of students in grades K–12, while combating drug or alcohol use and preventing violence; and/or
Computer-based courses to help train participants for the modern-day workforce.

Housing Programs
In FY 2005, States reported spending $45.4 million for CSBG-coordinated housing programs to improve the living environment of low-income individuals and families. CSBG-funded activities may include:

Homeownership counseling and loan assistance;
Affordable housing development and construction;
Counseling and advocacy about landlord/tenant relations and fair housing concerns;
Assistance in locating affordable housing and applying for rent subsidies and other housing assistance;
Transitional shelters and services for the homeless;
Home repair and rehabilitation services;
Support for management of group homes; and/or
Rural housing and infrastructure development.

Emergency Services Programs
In FY 2005, States reported spending $96.4 million for emergency services to combat many kinds of crises. Crisis management services may include:

Emergency temporary housing;
Rental or mortgage assistance and intervention with landlords;
Cash assistance/short term loans;
Energy crisis assistance and utility shut-off prevention;
Emergency food, clothing, and furniture;
Crisis intervention in response to child or spousal abuse;
Emergency heating system repair;
Crisis intervention telephone hotlines;
Linkages with other services and organizations to assemble a combination of short-term resources and longer-term support; and/or
Natural disaster response and assistance.

Nutrition Programs
In FY 2005, States reported spending $41.9 million in CSBG funds to support nutrition programs. Services provided may include:

Organizing and operating food banks;
Assisting food banks of faith-based and civic organization partners with food supplies and/or management support;
Counseling regarding family and children’s nutrition and food preparation;
Distributing surplus United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) commodities and other food supplies;
Administering the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) nutrition program;
Preparing and delivering meals, especially to the homebound elderly;
Providing meals in group settings; and/or
Initiating self-help projects, such as community gardens, community canneries, and food buying groups.

Self-Sufficiency Programs
States reported spending $102.1 million in FY 2005 on self-sufficiency programs. Self-sufficiency programs offer a continuum of services to assist families in becoming more financially independent. Such programs generally include:

An assessment of the issues facing the family or family members and the resources the family brings to address these issues;
A written plan for becoming more financially independent and self-supporting; and/or
Services that are selected to help the participant implement the plan (i.e. clothing, bus passes, emergency food assistance, career counseling, family guidance counseling, referrals to the Social Security Administration for disability benefits, assistance with locating possible jobs, assistance in finding long-term housing, etc.).

Health Programs
In FY 2005, States reported spending $25.1 million on CSBG-funded health initiatives that are designed to identify and combat a variety of health problems in the community served. CSBG funds may be used to address gaps in the care and coverage available in the community. Eligible entities may use CSBG funds for such health initiatives as:

Recruitment of uninsured children to a State insurance group or State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP);
Recruitment of volunteer medical personnel to assist uninsured low-income families;
Prenatal care, maternal health, and infant health screening;
Assistance with pharmaceutical donation programs;
Health-related information for all ages, including Medicare/Medicaid enrollment and claims filing;
Immunization;
Periodic screening for serious health problems, such as tuberculosis, breast cancer, and HIV infection, and mental health disorders;
Health screening of all children;
Treatment for substance abuse;
Other health services, including dental care, health insurance advocacy, CPR training, and education about wellness, obesity, and first-aid; and/or
Transportation to health care facilities and medical appointments.

Income Management Programs
States reported spending $28.9 million on income management programs in FY 2005 using CSBG grant funds. Services supported include:

Development of household assets, including savings;
Assistance with budgeting techniques;
Consumer credit counseling;
Business development support;
Homeownership assistance;
Energy conservation and energy consumer education programs, including weatherization;
Tax counseling and tax preparation assistance; and/or
Assistance for the elderly with claims for medical and other benefits.

Linkages:
In FY 2005, States reported spending $94 million on Linkage initiatives. Linkage programs can involve any or all of a variety of local activities which CSBG supports. Examples of linkage initiatives include:

Coordination among programs, facilities, and shared resources through information systems, communications systems, and shared procedures;
Community needs assessments, followed by community planning, organization, and advocacy to meet these needs;
Creation of coalitions for community changes, such as reducing crime or partnering businesses with low-income neighborhoods in order to plan long-term development;
Efforts to establish links between resources, such as transportation and medical care and programs that bring services to the participants, such as mobile clinics or recreational programs, and management of continuum-of-care initiatives;
The removal of the barriers, such as transportation problems, that keep the poor from jobs or vital everyday activities; and/or
Support for other groups of low-income community residents who are working for the same goals as the CAA.

Programs for Youth and Seniors
In FY 2005, States and eligible entities reported spending $56.3 million on programs serving youth, and $55.9 million on programs serving seniors. Services noted under these categories were targeted exclusively to children and youth from ages six-to-17 or persons over 55 years of age. Table 2 provides the expenditures made by each State for programs serving youth and seniors.

Seniors’ programs help seniors to avoid or ameliorate illness or incapacity; address absence of a caretaker or relative; prevent abuse and neglect; and promote wellness. They include:

Home-based services, including household or personal care activities that improve or maintain well-being;
Assistance in locating or obtaining alternative living arrangements;
In-home emergency services or day care;
Group meals and recreational activities;
Special arrangements for transportation and coordination with other resources;
Case management and family support coordination; and/or
Home delivery of meals to ensure adequate nutrition.

Youth programs in many cases include such services as:

Recreational facilities and programs;
Educational services;
Health services and prevention of risky behavior;
Delinquency prevention; and/or
Employment and mentoring projects

Definitions of Direct and Administrative Costs Used for the CSBG Program
The CSBG Act requires that HHS detail the CSBG expenditures by grantees on "direct" and "administrative" functions, along with the definitions used by the program in discerning the application of these terms. OCS offers guidance regarding direct program costs and administrative costs to help ensure consistency among grantees in assigning costs to these categories. The operational definitions provided by OCS are:

Direct Program Costs for CSBG Reporting: Direct program costs can be identified with delivery of a particular project, service, or activity intended to achieve an objective of the grant award. For the CSBG award, those purposes and eligible activities are specified in the authorizing statute and reflected in the national ROMA performance measures. Direct program costs are incurred for the service delivery and management components within a particular program or project. Therefore, direct costs include expenditures on some activities with administrative qualities, including salaries and benefits of program staff and managers, equipment, training, conferences, travel, and contracts, as long as those expenses relate specifically to a particular program or activity, not to the general administration of the organization.

Administrative Costs for CSBG Reporting: In the context of CSBG statutory reporting requirements, administrative costs are equivalent to typical indirect costs or overhead. As distinguished from program administration or management expenditures that qualify as direct costs, administrative costs refer to central executive functions that do not directly support a specific project or service. Incurred for common objectives that benefit multiple programs administered by the grantee organization or the organization as a whole, administrative costs are not readily assignable to a particular program funding stream. Rather, administrative costs relate to the general management of the grantee organization, such as strategic direction, Board development, Executive Director functions, accounting, budgeting, personnel, procurement, and legal services.

Funds Spent on Administrative Costs
The CSBG statute requires that 90 percent of State block grant funds be allocated to local eligible entities. Of the block grant distributions made to eligible entities in FY 2005, States allocated on average 92 percent of Community Services Block Grant funds to local eligible entities. Table 3 identifies the categories of State expenditures witha breakdown of funds spent on administrative costs.
States may use as much as five percent of their CSBG funds for their administrative costs. Any remaining funds may be used at the State’s discretion for programs that help accomplish the statutory purposes of the CSBG. States used about four percent of their CSBG funds for administrative expenditures in FY 2005.

Funds Spent on Direct Delivery of Local Services, by Eligible Entities
The local agencies that receive CSBG funds via their State categorize their expenditures of CSBG funds according to the statutory list of program purposes:

Securing and maintaining employment;
Securing adequate education;
Improving income management;
Securing adequate housing;
Providing emergency services;
Improving nutrition;
Creating linkages among anti-poverty initiatives;
Achieving self-sufficiency; and
Obtaining health care.

The Number of Entities Eligible for CSBG Funds
The CSBG statute requires States to provide block grant funds to “eligible entities” that provide services to individuals. Eligible entities are primarily community-based organizations, of which the majority are Community Action Agencies (CAAs), serving nearly 99 percent of the counties in the nation. In the tables 4 and 5 below, is a breakdown of the type of eligible entities that served communities with CSBG funds.

Demographic Data on Low-Income Populations Served by Eligible Entities
and Number of Low-Income Persons Served
Eligible entities that received CSBG funds from States reported serving approximately 15 million individuals in fiscal year 2005. These individuals were often members of the same households. More than half of the CSBG program participant families included children younger than 18 years old. Just over a third of these families had both parents present. Single mothers headed most of the families with children receiving CSBG-funded assistance. Single fathers headed about five percent of families receiving assistance. Full demographic data for the Fiscal Year is identified in the tables 7 through 13, and in charts on the following pages.

Age Characteristics of CSBG Clients
In FY 2005, 40 percent of individuals who received assistance under the Community Services Block Grant were children, ages zero-to-17. The second largest group, at 35 percent, were adults ages 24 to 54. Seniors 55 and older were the third largest category, at 17 percent.

Number and Characteristics of Clients Served in the CSBG Program
The State-by-State tables on the following pages identify each State’s report for the National Information System on the number and characteristics of individuals and families served by the Community Services Block Grant program, as required in the CSBG law. On the following pages, these data are detailed, including information on age, race, ethnicity, housing status, and education level.

Level of Family Income as a Percentage of Federal Poverty Guidelines (table 8)
In FY 2005, over 70 percent of clients served by the eligible entities of the CSBG network had income levels below the HHS poverty guideline for a family of three, which in FY 2005 was $16,090.

Housing Status of Families Served (table 9)
About 2.4 million clients reported they were renters in FY 2005. A total of 1.2 million clients reported they were homeowners. Nearly 188,000 clients reported they were homeless.

Sources of Household Income (table 10)
Families reported their sources of household income, which could have included employment, disability insurance (SSI), Social Security, pension, TANF benefits, unemployment insurance, general assistance, or no income. A total of 1.5 million clients reported that they had a household income generated by employment and/or other sources.

Family Structure (table 11)
A total of 2.2 million families served by the CSBG network lived in a family that includes children. Of these families, over 1.3 million were headed by a female, single parent.

Education Levels, Adult Participants (table 12)
In FY 2005, 1.8 million individuals served did not have a high school diploma, while about 2.4 million recipients had a diploma, GED, or some postsecondary education.

Race and Ethnicity (table 13)
The majority of individuals served by the CSBG program were White and not of Hispanic ethnicity. In FY 2005, the program served approximately 5.3 million White clients.

Comparison of the Planned and Actual Uses of Funds by Each State
States report in their plans submitted to the Secretary the proportion of their block grants that will be distributed to CAAs in the State to provide services at the local level in any given fiscal year. States also propose in their plan how much of their block grants will be spent for discretionary projects and administrative expenses. States must pass through to the local entities at least 90 percent of the block grant, using no more than five percent for the States’ administrative expenses.

States also provide an accounting of CSBG funds used for administrative expenses by their eligible entities. The “administrative costs” self-reported to the States by CAAs are based upon the Federal grants management requirements for denoting direct and indirect costs. Federal accounting systems consider indirect costs for grant program activities such as transportation, self-sufficiency mentoring, outreach activities for food banks, and housing repair.

In Fiscal Year 2005, States reported on their spending plans and actual expenditures. Actual spending was approximately $615.3 million, four percent less than the $638.1 million planned.

Training and Technical Assistance Offered by OCS to States
In accordance with the CSBG Act, States are responsible for carrying out corrective action activities and monitoring to resolve programmatic deficiencies of eligible entities. States are mandated to provide training and technical assistance prior to any termination procedures. Whenever possible, entities are stabilized and programmatic deficiencies are corrected before more serious problems arise. OCS assists States in carrying out corrective action and monitoring activities to rectify programmatic deficiencies of problematic CAAs within a State. In 2005, OCS recognized that, in some instances, the problem to be addressed was of such a complex or pervasive nature that it could not be addressed adequately with the resources available to the State CSBG program. Pervasive nature takes into account the amount of time that has been allowed for corrective action and whether the problems can be resolved in the time allowed. Complex problems, such as deficiencies rooted in major systems inadequacies and staff replacement require specific on-site consultative technical assistance efforts through the use of peer-to-peer or intervention groups. On-site technical assistance helps to assure CSBG funds are being protected.

If a State finds a need for corrective action, the State must: 1) inform the entity of the deficiency and require corrective action; 2) offer training and technical assistance and report to OCS on that assistance or explain why providing such assistance was not appropriate; and 3) receive an improvement plan from the entity within 60 days and approve such plan. If the entity fails to remedy the deficiency, the State must initiate proceedings to terminate the entity or reduce funding.

In an effort to avoid the need for termination hearings and proceedings, OCS supported State interventions with special training and technical assistance funding. Further intervention is provided through CSBG training and technical assistance for implementing programs to ensure responsiveness to entity quality improvement and financial management needs. In FY 2005, the following were special training and technical assistance initiatives provided by OCS to improve program quality.

Community Services Block Grant Program - Special State Technical Assistance

Grantee:           West Virginia Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity
                        950 Kanawha Boulevard, East
                        Charleston, West Virginia 25301

The Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) manages the CSBG, Department of Energy Weatherization, and other Federal programs. OEO conducts monitoring of each entity at least once every two years. Opportunities, resources, and direct services are provided through 16 community action agencies. This project provided a series of workshops through the National Community Action Management Academy. Agencies sent teams of five to four 2 ½ hour sessions. Several workshops were identified by the State office based on monitoring results and past performance. Workshops targeted agency leadership teams consisting of the executive director, finance director, and directors of major programs or divisions.
Board officers and members were encouraged to attend the workshops wherever it was appropriate. Workshops were expected to enable the State office to address its responsibility for monitoring agencies, strengthening board governance, and improving agencies’ capacity to achieve results.

Grantee:           South Carolina Association of Community Action Partnerships
            2700 Middleburg Drive, Suite 213
            Columbia, SC 29204-2416

The South Carolina Association of Community Action Partnerships (SCACAP) is a private non-profit organization that aims to develop and advocate for programs to promote self-sufficiency and improve the quality of life for the low-income children, individuals, and families in the communities in South Carolina. SCACAP is a vital and crucial partner in the South Carolina Community Action Network. The organization is recognized regionally as the State association with the Community Action Agencies and Head Start Programs who collectively work together to improve program performance and better outcomes for children, families, and their communities.

In FY 2005, SCACAP continued its efforts to further strengthen and improve the capacity of the State network to provide professional training, crisis intervention, and development activities to the local community action agencies in crisis or at risk based on program deficiencies. SCACAP worked with four agencies in South Carolina that had been identified as at risk. These agencies experienced governance, administrative, board and/or fiscal management problems. In addressing these problems, SCACAP provided on-site training, electronic technical assistance, group facilitation, workshops, self-assessment, material development, research, peer-to-peer mentoring, internet based training, and computer media (CD and/or disk). The overall goal was to sustain agencies in crisis by employing various training and technical assistance and crisis intervention activities.

Grantee:           North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
                        2013 Mail Service Center
                        Raleigh, NC 27699-2013

The Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) is the entity of North Carolina State government responsible for administration of CSBG. It is a division of the State Department of Health and Human Services. OEO contracted with a national peer-to-peer group for delivery of a workshop series. OEO advanced its efforts with goal #5 of the National Results-Oriented Management and Accountability Initiative (ROMA): agencies increase their capacity to achieve results, by sponsoring a series of three management workshops for six community action agencies. The workshops focused on more extensive and demanding oversight responsibilities. Selected CAAs received training in financial management, fund accounting, board governance, and challenges of managing several funding sources.

Grantee:           Louisiana Association of Community Action Partnerships, Inc.
                        2576 Toulon Drive, Suite 4
                        Baton Rouge, LA 70816

Assistance was provided to refine its eligible entities administrative systems, implement new programs, measure outcomes, improve organizational capacity and program design, and train staff. Assistance was provided in the areas of ROMA training at the local, Statewide, regional, and national levels.

A series of board training sessions were provided, which were preceded and followed by intense technical assistance which focused on agency assessment, planning and achievement of specific measurable changes. Agency boards were selected to attend sessions. The process included an organizational assessment which indicates strategic direction. To assure that those agencies at risk would be removed from the at-risk category, board members and new directors received training and a mentoring program was developed.

Grantee: Florida Association for Community Action, Incorporated
820 E. Park Avenue Building
E Suite 200
Tallahassee, FL 32301

The Florida Association for Community Action provides its network of CAAs with education programs, an information exchange system, support services, and advocacy services. Networking with other groups to develop management and committee structures, the organization helped to develop standards of practice and evaluation. An infrastructure of a peer network was established to continuously address early warning signals, such as audit findings, and eliminate CAA deficiencies identified during mandated State monitoring. A reporting and electronic data system was developed. A clearinghouse of information exchange was established along with a Statewide alert network at the State, regional, and national levels to assist in preventing in-crisis situations for the agencies within the State.

Program Implementation Assessments
FY 2005

Appendix A

Program Implementation Assessments (PIAs)
The statute governing the Community Services Block Grant stipulates that the Secretary conduct evaluations in several States each fiscal year regarding the use of funds received under the CSBG Act; compliance with the provisions of the law regarding applications for CSBG funds and public hearings on the proposed use of such funds; and the State compliance with assurances (1) through (13) in Section 676 of the Act. In FY 2005, to fulfill this responsibility, the Office of Community Services (OCS) conducted reviews of the States of New Jersey and Washington.

Additionally, OCS used its training and technical assistance authority to provide for and focus on leadership and governance, financial management training, and coordination among other Federal funding sources. The purpose of this effort was to promote the continued focus, effectiveness, and accountability of States and the network of eligible entities. The overall finding of this effort was that some States reported that they already were working closely with specific agencies in their State to strengthen performance management, administrative standards, financial management obligations or other States requirements. This information was not limited to specific CSBG-funded programs, but was instead an assessment of the overall health of the entire entity. Entities made a variety of financial and management decisions each year which impacted multiple funding sources rather than just a single program. It was possible that CSBG potentially could become fiscally problematic because of financial irregularities or disallowed costs uncovered in other Federal or State funding sources. Thus, this information provided a focus (early identification of problem areas, preventive strategies: board training, program governance, financial management, fiscal oversight) for which OCS needed to respond to assure the smooth operation of the CSBG at the State and local levels.

The following PIAs for the States of New Jersey and Washington include information about the States’ program operations and each sub-grantee operation.

State of Washington
Program Implementation Assessment

In June 2005, a Program Implementation Assessment (PIA) was conducted in the State of Washington regarding activities conducted with FY 2004 CSBG funds. From the analysis of the information received during interviews and documentation received during and after the PIA, the State is operating in compliance with the provisions of the CSBG Act.

Program Operations
Washington reported that for FY 2004, 571,009 individuals were served using CSBG funds. More than 900,000 of Washington’s over 6.1 million residents live in poverty, with the largest percentages of poor residents generally located in the eastern part of the State. The 2004 poverty threshold for a family of four was $18,850 in annual income. Nearly 38 percent of individuals served did not complete high school, and only 18 percent were enrolled in postsecondary education. Although 41 percent of families reported income from current or former employment, 10 percent of participants had no source of income. Approximately 30 percent of families were headed by a single parent. Fourteen percent of the service population was aged 55 or older. Forty-three percent of the services population lacked health insurance. Twenty percent own their own homes, while 10 percent were homeless. The CSBG is administered by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED). CSBG funds are sent as a pass-through to 31 CAAs for service delivery.

In accordance with the 2005 Washington CSBG State Plan, each eligible entity is required to conduct a community needs assessment of the low-income persons in their areas. The eligible entity is required to hold a public hearing to provide the public an opportunity to comment on the proposed use and distribution of CSBG funds based on the results of the needs assessment. As a result of the hearing, the Board of the eligible entity must adopt a Statement of Purposes and Strategy that indicates the primary poverty problem area. The Statement then serves as the basis for the service project proposed by the local eligible entity.

Washington State officials and CAAs reported the following program activities associated with FY 2004 CSBG funds:

Employment Programs
Washington reported spending $568,851 in CSBG funding to support a range of services designed to assist low-income individuals in obtaining and maintaining employment.

Education Programs
Washington reported spending $565,154 in CSBG funds to provide education services.

Housing Programs
Washington reported spending $615,322 for CSBG-coordinated housing programs to improve the living environment of low-income individuals and families.

Emergency Services Programs
Washington reported spending $595,517 for emergency services to combat many kinds of crises.

Nutrition Programs
Washington reported spending $390,747 in CSBG funds to support nutrition programs.

Self-Sufficiency Programs
Washington reported spending $461,957 on self-sufficiency programs. Self-sufficiency programs offer a continuum of services to assist families in becoming more financially independent.

Health Programs
Washington reported spending $496,019 on CSBG-funded health initiatives that are designed to identify and combat a variety of health problems in the community served. CSBG funds may be used to address gaps in the care and coverage available in the community.

Income Management Programs
Washington reported spending $53,581 on income management programs using CSBG grant funds.

Linkages
Washington reported spending $1,634,373 on Linkage initiatives. Linkages programs can involve any or all of a variety of local activities which CSBG supports.

The State, the Washington State Community Action Partnership (WSCAP), and all eligible entities have adopted the Results Oriented Management and Accountability (ROMA) principles. WSCAP is participating in a Statewide pilot of the Washington State Family Agency and Community System (WAFACS) of ROMA outcome reporting based on the best practices of other States. A 14-member ROMA Outcomes Committee has guided the effort to implement ROMA-reporting and has conducted an evaluation of the pilot in 2004. The committee has suggested methods of improving data quality and further aligning the State report on the 12 national indicators by December 2005.

There are 31 CSBG operating eligible entities in Washington State. During the assessment, the following seven CAAs were visited to ensure compliance with program guidelines:

Coastal Community Action Program, located in Aberdeen, Washington;

Kitsap Community Resources, located in Bremerton, Washington;
Neighborhood House, located in Seattle, Washington;
Central Area Motivation Program, located in Seattle, Washington;
Fremont Public Association, located in Seattle, Washington;
Snohomish County Community Action Agency, located in Everett, Washington; and
Skagit County Community Action Agency, located in Mount Vernon, Washington.

Coastal Community Action Program
The Coastal Community Action Program (CCAP) is located in the town of Aberdeen. Aberdeen is approximately 50 miles West of Olympia, Washington. The Coastal CAP operates four outreach offices located in Ilwaco, Aberdeen, South Bend, and Long Beach. The conditions of poverty have been attributed largely to the loss of timber, fishing, and mining industries in the area. Residents in the area often have stayed in the area for generations. The CCAP service population consists primarily of the elderly, children, youth and families, and people with disabilities in Grays Harbor and Pacific counties. In 2004, the CCAP reported that 45,813 Meals of Wheels were prepared and delivered to the homes of homebound senior citizens. In that same year, 33,506 hot meals were prepared and served to seniors at six meal sites thought out the county. The CCAP operates a transportations services program that provided 2,569 medical transports for seniors to and from medical sites. CCAP also provided housing services to 367 families including transitional housing, rental assistance, case management, motel voucher, children and family shelters, and weatherized homes. Emergency services included energy assistance, food through area food banks, and other services where families are overwhelmed and unable to obtain their basic needs. Employment services offered were employment coaching and special assistance to individuals with developmental disabilities. Additional CCAP services included: STOP, a domestic violence prevention program; day care workshops; and a long-term care ombudsman program. The CCAP produces a newsletter as well.

Kitsap Community Resources
Kitsap Community Resources (KCR) serves more than 10,000 low-income individuals yearly in such areas as early childhood education; employment and training; housing and homeless services; energy assistance and weatherization; Women Infants and Children (WIC) nutrition; parenting education; and youth services. KCR recently has secured the funding for a 12-unit apartment complex for additional transitional housing for homeless and very low-income families. KCR has outreach centers in Port Orchard and Silverdale. KCR administers the Head Start and Early Childhood Development (ECEAP) program. Head Start and ECEAP offer comprehensive pre-school and family development programs. These programs provide health and dental screenings, nutritious foods, family support services, and childcare. Early Head Start is a full day, full year child development service for at risk children and their families from birth to age three and pregnant moms.

Although the State of Washington offers the highest State minimum wage in the country at $7.35, many of the clients served at KCR are the working poor. KCR provides WorkFirst and Community Jobs programs that provide employment readiness, job retention, life-skill training, and work experience opportunities for families receiving TANF.

The KCR has developed a Family Development Matrix that is used to assess family needs and services. This is a comprehensive approach to self-sufficiency that coordinates with the community. All families complete a Family Development Survey and are rated as being in crisis, needing help, O.K., safe, or everything is great. Areas examined include: income, employment, staying employed, education, training, housing, health insurance/medical, transportation, and household budgeting. This initiative has been helpful in preventing families from falling through the cracks of service provision.

Neighborhood House
Neighborhood House is located in Seattle, Washington. Neighborhood House was founded in 1906 to provide services to Jewish immigrants arriving in Seattle. In 1948, it was renamed Neighborhood House and the agency began providing a broad range of self-sufficiency and support services in response to a growing low-income housing community. For the last half-century, Neighborhood House has been a primary social service link for low-income residents in Seattle and King County. Neighborhood House has six outreach offices located at Yesler Terrace, Rainier Vista, New Holly, High Point, Park Lake, and Burndale/Green River. The service population at Neighborhood House represents more than 30 different languages and cultures. Nine percent of families served are immigrants from 169 different cultures. Many of the immigrant clients served are refugees from countries such as Russia, East Africa, and Asia. Neighborhood House has a staff that speaks 32 different languages. The services provided by Neighborhood House include employment and education, family and social services, child development services and transportation.

Neighborhood House’s Child Development Head Start and Early Head Start programs, literacy-focused early education classes, and health and family support services help pregnant mothers and their children from birth to age five. Data compiled from 2004 revealed that 248 families took part in comprehensive early childhood development programs such as Head Start and Early Head Start. Ninety percent of the families served were immigrants and refugees. Neighborhood House has a multicultural and multilingual Head Start Policy Council, comprised of the parents of Head Start and Early Head Start children.

Central Area Motivation Program
The Central Area Motivation Program (CAMP) has provided resources for Seattle community residents for over 39 years. According to a 2003 statistical report, CAMP has served over 15,000 individuals of various ethnic backgrounds. Fifty-one percent of the service population is from female-headed households and more than ninety percent met the federal income poverty guidelines. The food bank is one of the most impressive services offered by CAMP. The food bank distributes perishable and non-perishable bags of food for low-income residents and seniors. The program also provides food for pick-up and home delivery for the elderly and immobile individuals. There is a distribution of over 500 bags of food per week. The facilities accommodate a large area in which clients can come and select their food. Many of the staff that participate in operating the food bank are residents of the local community. According to 2003 statistics, CAMP’s food bank has fed more than 30,000 individuals.

The Housing Assistance program provides emergency housing assistance with first month’s rent, extended emergency shelter, and motel vouchers for families with minor children. Over 6,600 households received subsidies for heating and utility bills.

CAMP provides a youth program called Youthbuild. The Youthbuild Program assists youth interested in entering the construction trade. Also in partnership with the Seattle Team for Youth, CAMP provides case management services to Seattle’s low-income youth ages 11-18 who are involved in or at-risk for: gang or criminal activity; substance abuse; the juvenile justice system; dropping out of school; teenage parenting; and/or being homeless, or living in a shelter, foster, or group home. CAMP offers a program to ensure that youth are ready to learn and do well in school by providing youth with services designed to encourage a commitment to learning, strengthen positive values, develop social competencies, and increase community responsibilities. As a result of these services, 86 percent of enrolled students showed improved academic performance and 65 percent had improved attendance over the course of the school year.

CAMP receives funding from various sources. Approximately 72 percent of its funding comes from various government sources. Over nine percent is received from private corporations, foundations, and individuals. Nineteen percent is received from in-kind support. CAMP’s tripartite board is active with its focus on community building by establishing collaboration and partnerships within the community.

Fremont Public Association
Fremont Public Association (FPA) began in 1974 as an organization designed to address poverty. Presently, FPA offers more than 25 different programs for low-income individuals and families throughout Seattle and King County. The three major obstacles that block achievement of individual and family self-sufficiency are lack of a living wage job, the high cost of housing, and lack of wrap-around services.

FPA provides comprehensive case management services to homeless individuals seeking to secure employment. FPA provides financial skills education to over 300 individuals annually. FPA distributes over $350,000 in direct emergency assistance, providing eviction/foreclosure assistance to over 400 households. FPA also provides shelter to over 250 households annually, along with comprehensive case management.

FPA operates the largest national service program in the State of Washington, providing opportunities for nearly 200 people to serve in AmeriCorps. More than 2,000 seniors volunteer via FPA with the Retired Senior Volunteer Corps.

FPA staff stated that there are numerous opportunities for training on ROMA provided by the State CSBG. Types of training include element and tracking methodology, software systems, and case management.

Snohomish County Community Action Agency
The Snohomish County Community Action Agency is located in Everett, Washington. It is guided through an ordinance-based Board called the Community Services Advisory Council (CSAC). The ordinance requires a tripartite board with equal representation between public elected officials or their representatives, community private sector, and low-income residents.

Snohomish County CAA subcontracts about two-thirds of its CSBG allocation to qualified community based agencies. Forty-three percent of these agencies are faith-based.

The Snohomish County CAA provides the following services: energy assistance; weatherization; project self-sufficiency; veterans assistance; community teams; and liaison for public assistance recipients and child protective services clients who access drug and alcohol treatment and recovery support services.

To secure and retain meaningful employment for low-income individuals, the Snohomish County CAA participates in the Workforce Development Council to develop funding priorities and determine programming. The Snohomish County requires selected community action programs and subcontractors to use a comprehensive case management model that assesses needs and refers to appropriate providers in the community.

The Snohomish County CAA funds a variety of services to prevent homelessness and provide emergency shelter. They also participate in collaborations with the Homeless Policy Task Force, Snohomish County Housing Authority, Everett Housing Authority and Office of Housing and Community Development.

Skagit County Community Action Agency
Skagit County Community Action Agency (SCCAA) was established in 1979. SCCAA is located in Mount Vernon, Washington. It operates under an 18 member board of directors, equally comprised of representatives from the private, public, and client sectors. Staffing varies between 80-90 employees. SCCAA is an active member of the Community Action Partnership at both the State and national level. The SCCAA provides literacy services and a four-apartment emergency family shelter. SCCAA supports two outreach centers located in Concrete and Oak Harbor, Washington.

According to SCCAA, the State has used the allocation of its five percent discretionary funds during the past two fiscal years for the following purposes:

To provide training and technical assistance;
To coordinate State operated programs and services targeted to low-income clients with service programs operated by eligible entities;
To analyze the distribution of funds and propose improvements to the allocation formula;
To support innovative programs and activities conducted by eligible entities or other neighborhood-based organizations to eliminate poverty, promote self-sufficiency, and promote community revitalization;
To improve access to information about jobs, health and other services for low-income people;
To respond to sudden and unexpected crises that threaten the health and security of families in poverty;
To support the Statewide community action association and the Washington State Community Action Partnership (WSCAP); and
To support ROMA training and scholarships for the sixth Annual Grant Funded Management Conference.

SCCAA provides a number of activities, programs, and services that assist low-income individuals. SCCAA provides literacy and transitional housing programs designed to secure and retain meaningful employment. The literacy program provides educational services to adults and family members throughout Skagit County. In 2004, 514 adult learners were enrolled.

SCCAA has coordinated and established various linkages between governmental and other social services programs to assure the effective delivery of services to low-income individuals. SCCAA has partnerships with the following organizations: Skagit County government; the school system in the County; United Way of Skagit County; Skagit Valley College; local Bar Associations and Dental Society; Family Resource Centers; Catholic Community Services; Head Start; food banks; employment security; WorkForce Development Council; local ministerial associations; veteran’s associations; SeaMar Community Health Center; and the Northwest Medical Team International.

SCCAA has worked extensively with private land-owners, realtor associations, and groups in their housing program to set up cooperative agreements to develop transitional housing services, and the expansion of the emergency family shelter. SCCAA has worked with the local lawyers and dentists to provided services pro-bono. The volunteer action center leverages many services and products from local contractors and building suppliers to provide services to the elderly and homebound. The literacy program has worked with private businesses to conduct on-site education.

State of New Jersey
Program Implementation Assessment

A Program Implementation Assessment (PIA) was conducted in the State of New Jersey in July 2005 regarding activities conducted with FY 2004 CSBG funds. From the analysis of the information received during interviews and documentation received during and after the PIA, the State is operating in compliance with the provisions of the CSBG Act.

Program Operations
The New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (DCA) has been identified as the designated lead agency to administer the State’s CSBG program. Its mission is to improve the quality of life for the citizens of New Jersey and serves as a comprehensive resource for people, places, and progress. The program provides a wide range of services that have both a measurable and potentially major impact on the causes of poverty. In FY 2004, New Jersey served a total of 209,377 clients using CSBG funds. Activities focused on assisting low-income participants; including children and the elderly, improve the conditions in which they live. Specific program goals that coincide with the National CSBG goals include: increase self-sufficiency of individuals; improve community conditions; increase collaboration with other community-based organizations, State agencies, and local county governments; improve data collection and analysis for the purpose of strengthening and improving programs and achieving measurable outcomes; and identify and resolve problems through the community needs assessment.

In accordance with the 2004 State government census, of the 8,414,350 New Jersey residents, approximately 8.5 percent lived below the Federal poverty level. Of this number, a disproportionate percentage, 10.8 percent, were under the age of 18 (according to the 2000 census, individuals 18 years of age and older made up 7.6 percent of the U.S. population living below the poverty level). Approximately 89 percent of New Jersey’s total population, per the 2000 census, resided in urban areas, while the remaining residents resided in rural areas. The home ownership rate for 2000 was 6.5 percent. The median household income was $55,146, while the median value of owner occupied housing units in 2000 was $170,811.

Twenty-seven designated community-based entities (24 CAAs and three Limited Purpose Agencies) work with the State to advocate efforts to address the causes of poverty. These entities receive 90 percent of the CSBG funding, and provide essential services that impact the needs of low-income individuals and the causes of poverty. To the extent possible, these agencies work with the State towards State legislative and policy changes that will improve opportunities for the poor. The State encourages the eligible entities to coordinate their planning and service delivery with each counties’ Human Services Advisory Council (HSAC) planning process. Such coordination is designed to ensure that local resources are used effectively to address the most pressing needs of low-income people.

Activities funded by the CSBG program include, but are not limited to: attaining self-sufficiency through comprehensive case management; securing employment through job readiness counseling, job skills development, job training programs, support services (i.e., transportation, resume preparation, access to job banks and fairs, life skills preparation, etc.); and receiving adequate education through educational programs and initiatives that help the unemployed or underemployed gain access to the job market. Other activities include linkages with the Private Industry Council; partnerships with local community colleges; making use of available income through credit counseling; economic literacy training; budget counseling; Individual Development Accounts (IDAs); weatherization services; obtaining safe and secure housing through the provision of home repair service, housing counseling, and home maintenance education; and providing emergency assistance through service stipends (to avoid evictions, utility cutoffs); loans and grants; emergency food; and medical and dental services. Several CAAs administer youth programs that give priority to the prevention of youth problems and crime through summer youth camps and work programs, summer youth leadership and empowerment programs; college-week trips; after school programs; and youth mentoring programs.

Other activities include the operation of food pantries, referrals to food pantries in the CAA service area, and feeding programs. One agency has capitalized on the over-abundance of deer by having local hunters donate deer meat to further bolster the food distributed by their regional food bank, while another offers kosher meals to low-income seniors at one of its feeding sites.

The State Office of Community Services has participated in the New Jersey Workforce Investment Task Force and actively advocated for CAA inclusion in Statewide workforce investment initiatives to provide comprehensive job training and placement for New Jersey residents, especially the unemployed and underemployed. Through coordination between local welfare agencies and business training enterprises, low-income individuals are able to receive marketable skills training, literacy training and counseling services to assist with building foundations that allow individuals to obtain employment. Many eligible entities are providing multi-faceted services that can enhance employment opportunities for the unemployed and/or underemployed.

New Jersey State officials and CAAs report the following FY 2004 program activities associated with CSBG funds:

Employment Programs
New Jersey reported spending $1,408,771 in CSBG funds to provide employment services that included: job readiness counseling, job skills development, job training programs, support services including transportation, resume preparation, access to job banks and fairs and life skills preparation, on-site job training activities, Coach USA, and the Paterson Task Force program leading to licensure and secure employment.

Housing Programs
New Jersey reported spending $1,336,093 in CSBG funds to support their housing programs. Services provided included: home service repair, housing counseling, weatherization, home energy assistance, and home maintenance education.

Emergency Services Program
New Jersey reported spending $2,384,917 in CSBG funds for emergency services. Services included: emergency services stipends, emergency food, emergency medical and dental services, distribution of emergency non-food items (i.e., diapers and baby products), providing loans and grants to meet immediate and urgent individual and family needs.

Nutrition Programs
New Jersey reported spending $1,198,688 in CSBG funds to support nutrition programs. Services included: Farmers Against Hunger, operating food pantries, congregate feeding programs, gleaming activities, operating regional food banks, emergency food distribution, hunger awareness program, pantry link website, best practice booklet publication and distribution, and referral services.

Youth Services
New Jersey reported spending $1,876,798 in CSBG funds to support youth services. Services included: summer youth camps, drug education youth summer camps, college tours, summer youth work programs, recreational educational and social community centers for youth, summer youth leadership and empowerment programs, crime prevention youth programs, youth mentoring programs, Youth Ex-Offenders Support Services (YESS program), youth career and employment programs, and tutoring programs for children.

Senior Programs
New Jersey reported spending $934,695 in CSBG funds for seniors. Those services included: feeding programs for the elderly, kosher meal programs, and hot meal programs.

Of the 23 CSBG operating eligible entities in New Jersey State, the following six CAAs were visited during the assessment to determine whether eligible entities met the performance goals, administrative standards, financial management requirements, and other requirements of the State:

Bergen County Community Action Partnership (BCCAP), located in Hackensack, New Jersey;
Hoboken Organization Against Poverty & Economic Stress, Inc. (HOPES), located in Hoboken, New Jersey;
Northwest New Jersey Community Action Program, Inc. (NORWESCAP), located in Phillipsburg, New Jersey;
Middlesex County Economic Opportunities Corporation (MCEOC), located in North Brunswick, New Jersey;
United Progress, Inc. (UPI), located in Trenton, New Jersey; and
Mercer County Division of Community Health and Senior Services, located in Trenton, New Jersey.

Bergen County Community Action Partnership
Bergen County Community Action Partnership (BCCAP), located in Hackensack, New Jersey, is a non-profit, urban, single county agency. It has a staff of 200 and a budget of over $12 million. The agency served more than 15,000 individuals in FY 2004. Its 18 member Board of Directors is appointed or elected from within the county and represents local government, concerned private sector entities, and the low-income population served by the agency. The agency maintains partnerships with county-wide social service providers, businesses, government, faith-based organizations, schools, hospitals, civic organizations, community leaders, and volunteers. An example of such a collaborative partnership is the formalization of the relationship between BCCAP and Christ Church Community Development Corporation, the Inter-Religious Fellowship for the Homeless (IRF), and the Englewood, Teaneck and Vicinity Black Clergy Council to provide a program of direct services for the chronically homeless.

BCCAP delivers services through five operational and support divisions including: Crisis Services, Education and Training, Real Estate and Economic Development, Finance, and Research Development. The Education and Training Division of BCCAP includes all Head Start and Day Care programs, vocational training, job placement, adult basic education, faith-based initiatives, English as a Second Language (ESL), and the New Americans Program.

BCCAP serves as the lead agency for a youth-focused collaboration, Project ACES (Access to Careers, Education and Supports). The Project offers a full range of services including providing out-of-school youth (ages 16-21 who are unemployed, underemployed, and/or undereducated) with the educational, career and other supports needed to be successful in the work place. Other services include basic skills and vocational training with certificate, job counseling, job placement, GED preparation, training in health related fields and other supports to help 60 of Bergen County’s out-of-school youth successfully transition to adulthood and careers.

Hoboken Organization Against Poverty and Economic Stress, Inc.
Hoboken Organization Against Poverty and Economic Stress, Inc. (HOPES) is located in Hoboken, New Jersey, is a relatively small agency that was established as Hoboken’s Community Action Program in 1965. Its Head Start Program was incorporated in 1966. The program began with 82 children and families and has more than doubled since its founding. The Agency has entered into a long-term relationship with the Hoboken Board of Education for collaborative early childhood education services. HOPES also supervises, coordinates, and monitors daily operations of the Head Start Program, operated with non-CSBG funds.

Northwest New Jersey Community Action Program, Inc.
Northwest New Jersey Community Action Program, Inc. (NORWESCAP) is located in Phillipsburg, New Jersey, is a rural, non-profit corporation, established in 1965. The agency provides cost-effective, coordinated services to low-income people in Hunterdon, Morris, Somerset, Sussex, Passaic, and Warren Counties. The agency’s goal is “to build self-esteem, encouraging people to achieve all that they are capable of and ultimately improve their self-sufficiency.”

NORWESCAP serves approximately 39,000 persons in its six county service areas, employs approximately 230 people, and operates 30 programs among which are: Child and Family Resource Services Program, Family Loan Program, Family Self-Sufficiency Program, First Call for Help Program, Food Bank Program, Head Start and Early Head Start Program, Housing and Energy Services Program, Phillipsburg Family Resource Center Program, Preschool Children’s Center, Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP), Safe Shores Program, Transition Center for Women Program, and Women, Infants and Children Supplemental Food Program.

NORWESCAP also has an Individual Development Account (IDA) program for children ages eight-to-18. The program provides matched savings accounts that allow children to save for approved assets such as: college, vehicle purchase, athletic equipment, musical lessons, and camp. Frequently, the program is the first exposure that youth have to the budgeting process. It also provides credit to youth that complete volunteer work.

The agency is guided by a 25 member Board of Trustees that represents elected officials, low-income participants, and the private sector.

Middlesex County Economic Opportunities Corporation
Middlesex County Economic Opportunities Corporation (MCEOC), located in North Brunswick, New Jersey, is a single county, non-profit agency. The agency was incorporated in 1965 to help low-income and disadvantaged families in Central New Jersey become economically and socially self-sufficient. MCEOC operates four divisions: Children’s Programs, Basic Needs, Community Services, and Housing and Economic Development.

MCEOC is governed by a tripartite Board of Directors. It oversees the organization’s programs and their effectiveness in meeting the needs of Middlesex County residents. The agency also operates a Head Start Program.

United Progress, Inc.
United Progress, Inc. (UPI), located in Trenton, New Jersey, is a large, non-profit city agency. Founded in 1964, the agency’s goal is “to help eliminate poverty through community outreach, substance abuse counseling and treatment, HIV/AIDS education and case management, employment counseling and development, utility assistance and homelessness prevention.” UPI serves the Trenton community and Mercer County. Programs include: Emergency Food, Energy Assistance, Housing, Employment, and
Counseling and Case Management.

Mercer County, Division of Community Health and Senior Services
Located in Trenton, New Jersey, Mercer County, Division of Community Health and Senior Services provides social and financial services and technical assistance to community based organizations of Mercer County. The agency has five divisions: Aging, Child Care and Neighborhood Centers, Disabled, Homeless, and Youth Services. Primary services include, but are not limited to: information and referral, emergency assistance, employment, education, income maintenance, youth programs, case management, senior, and neighborhood centers, and a range of other human services. Secondary prevention services emphasize programs to serve high-risk populations identified in the local service areas. Agencies requesting funding emphasize their ability to bring together all segments of the community.

The John O. Wilson Hamilton Neighborhood Services Center, Inc., located in Hamilton, New Jersey, is one of the Mercer County Service Centers visited by the PIA team. The Center provides coordinated services that strive to improve the quality of life for low-income individuals and other persons in need within Hamilton Township and strengthen the communities in which they reside. Programs include: General Services, Emergency Services, Senior Services, Health Services, and Youth Services.

Mercer County offers youth mentoring programs that address the community’s needs by reaching out to low-income youth in crisis. An example is the Youth Ex-Offenders Support Services (YESS), which works with young males up to the age of 18 that have had or are at risk of having contact with the criminal justice system. Volunteers that are positive role models from the community serve as mentors. The program includes supervised recreation, career and employment, and counseling. The County also offers tutoring and computer enrichment programs to local youth. Those who participate in the program go on to attend a summer camp and participate in other events at the agency, such as Girl Scouts and Raising Young Ladies. They partner with the local schools, colleges, and businesses to obtain tutors and mentors. As a result of this program, many of the participants have made the honor roll. Children who are otherwise unable to attend tutoring programs because of financial issues are able to participate and excel through the Mercer County tutoring program.

Last Updated: August 19, 2008