Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
55031434
label
Children [Folder 1] [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
55031434
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Children [Folder 1] [1]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Melanne Verveer's Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
55031434
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
2068127-20130534S-072-004-2022
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
8dc0cd7747e745a1
ocrText
file Chalden
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 7, 1996
Ramsey F. Dass, M.D.
President American Chaldean and Arab Forum
4601 Coolidge
Oak Park, Michigan 48237
Dear Dr. Dass,
I was pleased to have had the opportunity to meet with you
and the other members of the Chaldean-American community to
discuss the plight of the people of Iraq, particularly the
children. During our discussion, you raised several issues of
interest.
First, since our meeting, Iraq and the United Nations
reached an agreement on UN Security Resolution 986. As a result,
the opportunity for long-needed relief to reach all of the people
of Iraq will be created. The Resolution allows Iraq to sell up
to $2 billion of oil every six months to purchase food, medicine,
and other humanitarian supplies. In central and southern Iraq,
these goods will be distributed by the existing government
rationing system but with UN observers monitoring the process to
ensure that supplies are distributed equitably throughout the
population and are not diverted by the regime as political
favors. In northern Iraq, distribution of humanitarian goods
will be organized and implemented by the UN itself, in
conjunction with humanitarian relief organizations already
operating in this part of the country. We expect that this
carefully-watched and managed program should mean a measurable
improvement in the lives of all Iraqis and alleviate the
humanitarian tragedy created by Saddam Husayn.
Second, you asked about delivering humanitarian relief to
Chaldeans in Iraq. There is no US law or policy that prohibits
such aid deliveries. Indeed, our policy has been to encourage
private groups and other Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) to
try to provide humanitarian supplies to ordinary Iraqis.
However, because of the international sanctions, US laws and
Administration policies toward Iraq, humanitarian aid to Iraq
must conform to a number of strictures. First, as part of the UN
sanctions against Iraq, all air travel to and from Iraq is
forbidden. Second, all humanitarian goods shipped to Iraq must
meet stringent US regulations designed to help ensure that the
supplies are delivered to the intended recipients and are not
diverted by the regime to its followers. Third because of the US
1
passport ban on Iraq, US citizens generally are prohibited from
traveling to Iraq.
If the Chaldean-American community would like to send
humanitarian relief supplies, you will have to apply for an
export license through the Department of the Treasury's Office of
Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). This process is somewhat lengthy
because all such applications need to be referred to the UN
Sanctions Committee for approval. Combined with OFAC staffing
constraints, this means that requests to send humanitarian goods
to Iraq normally take 3-6 months to process and complete.
In addition, any humanitarian supplies the Chaldean-American
community would like to send to Iraq will have to be transported
in a specific fashion. First, because of the ban on air travel,
it will have to be carried by truck. Second, because American
citizens may not travel to Iraq, you will have to find others
willing to transport the supplies and oversee distribution for
them. One way to handle this would be to find friends or co-
religionists who are not US citizens but would be willing to
perform this task. Another better way, might be to entrust the
supplies to one of the NGOs already operating in Iraq. The
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Iraqi Red
Crescent, Catholic Relief Services, Caritas, and other secular
and religious-based organizations all have established mechanisms
for sending humanitarian supplies from the United States to
communities in Iraq. The Chaldean-American community might be
best served by making agreements to have one of these
organizations oversee the actual transport and distribution of
goods in Iraq.
If your community is interested in pursuing this option you
should contact Steve Pinter of OFAC at (202) 622-2480. We have
alerted Steve to your interest in this issue and he is standing
by to provide the information and forms you will need to begin
the process.
Third, you also expressed your interest in bringing sick
children out of Iraq. In this case as well, there is no US law
or international prohibition that would make it impossible to
bring sick Chaldean children out of Iraq for medical treatment.
However, there are, again, certain strictures that must be
observed. First, the children would have to be brought out of
Iraq by car or truck (or ambulance, if necessary) overland to
Jordan or Turkey. Second, US citizens could not go into Iraq to
bring them out. Third, the children would have to apply normally
for visas for medical treatment in the United States, assuming
that this is where the community would propose to treat them.
2
If the Chaldean-American community would like to pursue this
initiative, you should begin by contacting Mr. Frank Seaver of
the International Committee of the Red Cross at (202) 936-4079.
We have spoken with Mr. Seaver about your interest in this matter
and he is expecting a call. Judy Chavchavadze at the State
Department's Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration also
might be able to provide some useful information. She can be
reached at (202) 663-1036. Alternatively, the United Nations
Department of Humanitarian Affairs suggested you contact Ms. Noel
Berney of the British group Kurdish Life Aid, at (United Kingdom)
44-191-281-2608. Kurdish Life Aid has undertaken similar
humanitarian missions in the Kurdish controlled areas of northern
Iraq and Ms. Berney may be able to provide some guidance or
assistance. Likewise, the ICRC suggested that Seep Loan at the
US Catholic Conference, (202) 541-3073, amy also have information
that could be useful on such an initiative.
To begin the process of arranging for visas, you should send
a letter explaining your intentions and asking for further
information to the US Embassy either (or both) in Jordan or
Turkey, because any Chaldean-Iraqi children to be treated in the
United States will have to get US visas from our embassies in
Amman or Ankara. Copies of this letter also should be sent to
the Visa Office at the State Department's Turkish Desk in the
Bureau of European and Canadian Affairs (202) 619-6582] or to
the Jordan desk in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (202) 647-
1022].
While technically possible, our investigation into this
subject has suggested that, in practice, bringing sick children
out of Iraq for treatment will be very difficult. First, the
Iraqi regime generally opposes this practice. Saddam's officers
insist that all of Iraq's children are sick and malnourished and
the only solution is to lift the sanctions. Consequently, they
routinely deny such requests. Second, there is a huge number of
Iraqis who have applied for US and other Western visas, any of
whom are sick or have other compelling reasons to want to leave
the country. Unfortunately, they cannot all be accommodated.
Third, the overland trip from Baghdad is long and grueling (14
hours across the Syrian desert) while the routes from Iraq into
Turkey are controlled by the Kurdish Democratic Party -- who
maintain a loose order in their territory and with whom it is
never easy to make these sorts of arrangements. Northern Iraq is
also unsettled because of the pressure along the broader from PKK
terrorist elements. In short, while it may be possible to
transport sick Chaldean children out of Iraq for treatment, it
will not be easy.
3
And finally, you should be aware that it is possible to
obtain a waiver to the passport ban. There are four potential
categories of US citizens who may be considered for a waiver. In
the case of the Chaldean-American community, you could reasonably
expect to fall into the category of humanitarian assistance. If
you wanted to apply for a waiver to the passport ban to either
transport goods into Iraq or to help bring sick Chaldean-Iraqi
children out, you would have to do so through the Office of
Passport Policy and Advisory Services in the Department of
State's Bureau of Consular Affairs. Their telephone number is
(202) 955-0231. We have attached a Tab A, the State Department's
Consular Information Sheet on Iraq which contains relevant
information regarding travel by American citizens to Iraq.
Passport waivers are difficult, but not impossible to
obtain. There are, however, two importnant preconditions.
First, the United States generally only provides waivers for
travel to northern Iraq, which is the only part of the country
not under the control of Saddam Husayn's regime. Since Iraq's
seizure of Daliberti and Barloon (the two American contractors
who accidentally strayed into Iraq from Kuwait) and Saddam's
efforts to manipulate the United States and the UN to obtain
their release, we have made it a matter of policy to prohibit
travel anywhere except northern Iraq. Second, you would have to
apply for the waivers in association with one of the NGOs
providing humanitarian aid in northern Iraq. This last provision
is to ensure that anyone who applies for a passport waiver for
humanitarian reasons can provide reasonable assurances that he or
she will be in Iraq for humanitarian purposes.
I hope this information is helpful to you and the members of
your community.
With best wishes, I am
Sincerely yours,
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Attachment
Tab A Consular Information Sheet on Iraq
cc:Representative David Bonior
4
05/16/96
09:40
NEA/NGA
U.S. Department of State
Bureau of Consular Affairs
Washington, DC 20520
For recorded travel Information. call 202-647-5225.
C
To access the Consular Affairs Bulletin Board. call 202-647-9225.
For Information by tax. call 202-647-3000 from your fax machine.
Consular Information Sheet
Iraq
September 15. 1994
Warning: The Department of State warns all U.S. citizens against traveling to Iraq. Conditions
within the country remain unsettled and dangerous. The United States does not maintain
diplomatic relations with Iraq and cannot provide normal consular protective services to U.S.
citizens. U.S. passports are not valid for travel to, in or through Iraq. unless they are specially
endorsed by the U.S. Government. There is a U.S. trade embargo which severely restricts
financial and economic activities with Iraq. including travel-related transactions.
Country Description: The Republic of Iraq is governed by the repressive Revolutionary
Command Council Iraq has a developing economy that was seriously damaged in the 1991 Gulf
War. U.N trade sanctions have also affected the economy. Islamic ideals and beliefs provide the
conservative foundation of the country's customs, laws and practices. Tourist facilities are not
widely available. The work week in Iraq is Sunday through Thursday.
Entry Requirements: Passports and visas are required. On February 8, 1991. U.S. passports
ceased to be valid for travel to. in or through Iraq and may not be used for that purpose unless a
special validation has been obtained. Without the requisite validation. use of a U.S. passport for
travel to, in or through Iraq may constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1544. and may be punishable
by a fine and/or imprisonment. An exemption to the above restriction is granted to Americans
residing in Iraq as of February 8. 1991 who continue to reside there and to American
professional reporters or journalists on assignment there.
In addition. the Department of the Treasury prohibits all travel-related transactions by U.S.
persons intending to visit Iraq. unless specifically licensed by the Office of Foreign Assets
Control. The only exceptions to this licensing requirement are for journalistic activity or for
U.S. government or United Nations business.
The categories of individuals eligible for consideration for a special passport validation are set
forth in 22 C.F.R. 51.74. Passport validation requests for Iraq should be forwarded In writing to
the following address:-
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Passport Services
U.S. Department of State
1111 19th Street. N.W.. Suite 260
Washington, D.C. 20522-1705
Attn: Office of Passport Policy and Advisory Services
Telephone (202) 955-0231 or 955-0232
FAX (202) 955-0230
The request must be accompanied by supporting documentation according to the category under
which validation is sought. Currently. the four categories of persons specified in 22 C.F.R. 51.74
as being eligible for consideration for passport validation are as follows:
[a] Professional reporters: Includes full-time members of the reporting or writing staff of a
newspaper. magazine or broadcasting network whose purpose for travel is to gather information
about Iraq for dissemination to the general public.
05/16/96
09:41
02027364464
NEA/NGA
1003
[b] American Red Cross: Applicant establishes that he or she is a representative of the American
Red Cross or International Red Cross traveling pursuant to an officially-sponsored Red Cross
mission.
[c] Humanitarian considerations: Applicant must establish that his or her trip is justified by
compelling humanitarian considerations or for family unification. At this time. "compelling
humanitarian considerations" include situations where the applicant can document that an
immediate family member is critically ill in Iraq. Documentation concerning family illness
must include the name and address of the relative. and be from that relative's physician
attesting to the nature and gravity of the illness. "Family unification" situations may include
cases in which spouses or minor children are residing in Iraq. with and dependent on. an Iraqi
national spouse or parent for their support.
[d] National interest: The applicant's request is otherwise found to be in the national interest.
In all requests for passport validation for travel to Iraq. the name. date and place of birth for all
concerned persons must be given, as well as the U.S. passport numbers. Documentation as
outlined above should accompany all requests. Additional information may be obtained by
writing to the above address or by calling the Office of Passport Policy and Advisory Services at
[202] 955-0231 or 955-0232.
U.S. Treasury Restrictions: In August 1990 President Bush issued Executive Orders 12722 and
12724. imposing economic sanctions against Iraq including a complete trade embargo. The U.S.
Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control administers the regulations related to
these sanctions. which include restrictions on all financial transactions related to travel to
Iraq. These regulations prohibit all travel-related transactions. except as specifically licensed.
The only exceptions to this licensing requirement are for persons engaged in journalism or in
official U.S. government or U.N. business. Questions concerning these restrictions should be
addressed directly to:
Licensing Section
Office of Foreign Assets Control
U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Washington. D.C. 20220
Telephone: (202) 622-2480: Fax (202) 622-1657
Areas of Instability: Hostilities in the Gulf region ceased on February 27. 1991. United Nations
Security Council Resolution 687. adopted on April 3. 1991. set terms for a permanent cease-fire.
but conditions in Iraq remain unsettled. Travel in Iraq is extremely hazardous. particularly for
U.S. citizens.
Regional conflicts continue in northem Iraq between Kurdish ethnic groups and Iraqi security
forces. In southern Iraq. governmental repression of the Shia communities is severe.
U.S. citizens In Kuwait working near the Kuwait-Iraq border are in Jeopardy of detention by
Iraqi security personnel. In 1992 and 1993. a number of U.S. citizens and other foreigners
working near the Kuwait-Iraq border were detained by Iraqi authorities for lengthy periods
under harsh conditions.
Medical Facilities: Basic modern medical care and medicines may not be available. Doctors
and hospitals often expect immediate cash payment for services. U.S. medical insurance is not
always valid outside the United States. Supplemental medical Insurance with specific overseas
coverage has proved useful. The international travelers hotline at the Centers for Disease
Control. telephone (404) 332-4559. has additional useful health information.
Information on Crime: Reports of crime in Iraq are increasing. especially in the larger cities.
The loss or theft of a U.S. passport abroad should be reported immediately to local police. and
the U.S. Interests Section or the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate. Useful information on
05/16/96
09:42
2027364464
NEA/NGA
004
safeguarding valuables. protecting personal security. and other matters while traveling abroad
is provided in the Department of State pamphlets. "A Safe Trip Abroad" and Tips for Travelers
to the Middle East and North Africa." They are avallable from the Superintendent of
Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C. 20402.
Drug Penalties: U.S. citizens are subject to the laws of the country in which they are traveling.
Penalties for possession. use or trafficking in illegal drugs are severe. and convicted offenders
can expect jall sentences and fines.
Terrorism: Tension in the Persian Gulf region remains high because of continuing Iraqi
deflance of U.N. Security Coundl resolutions. As a result. the risk of terrorism directed against
U.S. citizens in Iraq remains a continuing concern.
Registration: There is no U.S. Embassy in Lraq. The U.S. government is not in a position to
accord normal consular protective services to U.S. citizens who. despite this warning, are in
Iraq. U.S. Government interests are represented by the Government of Poland. which, as a
protecting power. IS able to provide only limited emergency services to U.S. citizens.
Embassy Location: There is no U.S. Embassy or Consulate in [raq. The U.S. Interests Section of
the Embassy of Poland is located opposite the Foreign Ministry Club (Masbah Quarter): P.O. Bax
2447 Alwtyah. Baghdad. Iraq. The telephone number is (964) (1) 719-6138. 719-6139. 719-3791.
718-1840.
No. 94-219
This replaces the Consular Information Sheet dated August 31. 1993 to update the section on
areas of instability. and to show the new address and phone numbers of the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Passport Services. U.S. Department of State.
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20504
May 16, 1996
MEMORANDUM FOR THE FIRST LADY
THROUGH:
MARK R. PARRIS
FROM:
KENNETH POLLACK
IP
SUBJECT:
Your Request Regarding Humanitarian Relief to
Chaldean Iraqis
Melanne Verveer has made us aware of your desire to help the
Chaldean-American community provide some relief to their co-
religionists in Iraq. We have made inquiries into this topic and
have turned up results which can be passed on to the Chaldean-
Americans.
In response to our conversation with Melanne, we address three
issues she indicated were of interest to you:
1. Could United Nations Security Council Resolution 986 be pushed
along any faster to allow for large-scale purchases of food
and medicine for the Iraqi people?
2. Could the Chaldean-American community ship humanitarian goods
to their co-religionists in Iraq?
3. Could the Chaldean-Americans bring sick Chaldean-Iraqi
children out of Iraq for medical treatment?
UNSCR 986 Negotiations
Unfortunately, on this issue, the ball is entirely in Iraq's
court. As you are aware, the Iraqis currently are negotiating
with the UN over an implementation plan for Resolution 986. The
Iraqi regime has consistently attempted to twist the
implementation plan so that Iraq would control both the
purchasing and distribution of goods allowed under the
Resolution. This would allow the regime to purchase weapons and
other items prohibited by the UN and distribute any food or
medicine purchased to its loyalists. The Iraqi regime has
repeatedly diverted funds and supplies in this way and if they
are not forced to accept the Resolution as written, we have every
expectation that they will do the same with the proceeds of the
oil sales permitted by Resolution 986. It remains unclear
whether Saddam Husayn is willing to give up the propaganda value
he believes he derives from the suffering of the Iraqi people and
2
agree to implement Resolution 986. We are doing everything we
can to encourage him to do SO.
Delivering Humanitarian Relief to Chaldeans in Iraq
Insue
2
There is no US law or policy that prohibits such aid deliveries.
Indeed, our policy has been to encourage private groups and other
Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) to try to provide
humanitarian supplies to ordinary Iraqis. However, because of
the international sanctions, US laws and Administration policies
toward Iraq, humanitarian aid to Iraq must conform to a number of
strictures. First, as part of the UN sanctions against Iraq, all
air travel to and from Iraq is forbidden. Second, all
humanitarian goods shipped to Iraq must meet stringent US
regulations designed to ensure that the supplies are delivered to
the intended recipients and are not diverted by the regime to its
followers. Third, because of the US passport ban on Iraq, US
citizen's generally are prohibited from traveling to Iraq.
he chaldean American American community
If the Chaldean Americans would like to send humanitarian relief
supplies their co religionists in Iraq, they will have to
apply for an export license through the Department of the
Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). This process
is somewhat lengthy because the United Nations sanctions against because
Iraq necessitate referring all such applications to the UN
Sanctions Committee for approval. Combined with OFAC staffing
need tobe
constraints, this means that requests to send humanitarian goods
referred
to Iraq normally take 3-6 months to process and complete.
to
would like to send to Iraq will have to be transported in a
In addition, any humanitarian supplies the Chaldean-Americans community
specific fashion. First, because of the ban on air travel, it
will have to be carried by truck. Second because American
you
citizens may not travel to Iraq, the Chaldean Americans will have
to find others willing to transport the supplies and oversee
distribution in Iraq for them. One way to handle this would be
to find friends or co-religionists who are not US citizens but
would be willing to perform this task. Another, probably better
way, would be to entrust the supplies to one of the NGOs already
operating in Iraq. The International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC), Iraqi Red Crescent, Catholic Relief Services, Caritas,
and other secular and religious-based organizations all have
established mechanisms for sending humanitarian supplies from the
United States to communities in Iraq. The Chaldean-Americans
might be best served by making arrangements to have one of these
organizations oversee the actual transport and distribution of
goods in Iraq.
If the Chaldean Americans are interested in pursuing this option
your community 15
they should contact Steve Pinter of OFAC at (202) 622-2480. We
you
3
have alerted Steve to your interest in this issue and he is
standing by to provide the Chaldean Americans the information and
forms they will need to begin the process.
Bringing you Sick Children out of Iraq
this case as well, there is no US law or international
that would make it impossible to bring sick Chaldean
children out of Iraq for medical treatment. However, there are,
again, certain stirctures that must be observed. First, the
children would have to be brought out of Iraq by car or truck (or
ambulance, if necessary) overland to Jordan or Turkey. Second,
US citizens could not go into Iraq to bring them out. Third the
children would have to apply normally for visas for medical
treatment in the United States, assuming that this is where the Community
Chaldean Americans propose to treat them.
If the Chaldean-Americans community would like to pursue this initiative,
would
you
they should begin by contacting Mr. Frank Seaver of the
International Committee of the Red Cross at (202) 963-4079. We
have spoken with Mr. Seaver about your interest in this matter
and he is standing by for a call, from the Chaldean Americans.
Judy Chavchavadze at the State Department's Burea of Population,
Refugees and Migration also might be able to provide some useful
information. She can be reached at (202) 663-1036.
Alternatively, the United Nations Department of Humanitarian
Affairs suggested the Chaldeans contact Ms. Noel Berney of the
British group Kurdish Life Aid, at (United Kingdom) 44-191-281-
2608. Kurdish Life Aid has undertaken similar humanitarian
missions in the Kurdish controlled areas of northern Iraq and Ms.
Berney may be able to provide the Chaldean Americans some
guidance or assistance. Likewise, the ICRC suggested that Shep
Loman at the US Catholic Conference, (202) 541-3073, may also
have information that could be useful on such an initiative.
To begin the process of arranging for visas, the Chaldeans you should
send a letter explaining their intentions and asking for further
information to the US Embassy either (or both) in Jordan or
Turkey, because any Chaldean-Iraqi children to be treated in the
United States will have to get US visas from our Embassies in
Amman or Ankara. Copies of this letter also should be sent to
the Visa Office at the State Department and to either the State
Department's Turkish Desk in the Bureau of European and Canadian
Affairs [ (202) 619-6582] or to the Jordan Desk in the Bureau of
Near Eastern Affairs (202) 647-1022].
While technically possible, our investigation into this subject
has suggested that, in practice, bringing sick children out of
Iraq for treatment will be very difficult. First, the Iraqi
regime generally opposes this practice. Saddam's henchman insist
4
that all of Iraq's children are sick and malnourished and the
only solution is to lift the sanctions. Consequently, they
routinely deny such requests. Second, there is a huge number of
Iraqis who have applied for US and other Western visas, many of
whom are sick or have other compelling reasons to want to get out
of the country. Unfortunately, they cannot all be accommodated.
Third, the overland trip from Baghdad is long and grueling (14
hours across the Syrian desert) while the routes from Iraq into
Turkey are controlled by the Kurdish Democratic Party -- who
maintain a loose order in their territory and with whom it is
never easy to make these sorts of arrangements. Northern Iraqi
is also unsettled because of the pressure along the border from
PKK terrorist elements. In short, while it may be possible to
transport sick Chaldean children out of Iraq for treatment, it
will not be easy.
Waivers to the Passport Ban
As a final note, you should be aware that it is possible to
obtain a waiver to the passport ban. There are four potential
#4
categories of US citizens who may be considered for a waiver. In
the case of the Chaldean-American$ they could reasonably expect
to fall into the category of humanitarian assistance. If the you
Chaldean-Americans wanted to apply for a waiver to the passport
ban either to transport goods into Iraq or to help bring sick
Chaldean-Iraqi children out, they would have to do so through the
Office of Passport Policy and Advisery Services in the Department
of State's Bureau of Consular Affairs. Their telephone number is
(202) 955-0231. We have attached at Tab A the State Department's
Consular Information Sheet on Iraq which contains relevant
information regarding travel by American citizens to Iraq.
Passport waivers are difficult, but not impossible to obtain.
Two important preconditions exist, however. First, the United
States generally only provides waivers for travel to northern
Iraq, which is the only part of the country not under the control
of Saddam Husayn's regime. Since Iraq's seizure of Daliberti and
Barloon (the two American contractors who accidentally strayed
into Iraq from Kuwait) and Saddam's efforts to manipulate the
United States and the UN to obtain their release, we have made it
a matter of policy to prohibit travel anywhere except northern
Iraq. Second, the Chaldean Americans would have to apply for the
waivers in association with one of the NGOs providing
humanitarian aid in northern Iraq. This last provision is to
ensure that anyone who applies for a passport waiver for
humanitarian reasons can provide reasonable assurances that he or
she will be in Iraq for humanitarian purposes.
Attachment
Tab A
Consular Information Sheet on Iraq
05/16/96
09:40
82027364464
NEA/NGA
002
U.S. Department of State
Bureau of Consular Affairs
Washington, DC 20520
For recorded travel Information. call 202-647-5225.
State
C
To access the Consular Attairs Bulletin Board. call 202-647-9225.
For Information by fax. call 202-647-3000 from your fax machine.
Consular Information Sheet
Iraq
September 15. 1994
Warning: The Department of State warns all U.S. citizens against traveling to Iraq. Conditions
within the country remain unsettled and dangerous. The United States does not maintain
diplomatic relations with Iraq and cannot provide normal consular protective services to U.S.
citizens. U.S. passports are not valid for travel to, in or through Iraq. unless they are specially
endorsed by the U.S. Government. There is a U.S. trade embargo which severely restricts
financial and economic activities with Iraq. including travel-related transactions.
Country Description: The Republic of Iraq is governed by the repressive Revolutionary
Command Council Iraq has a developing economy that was seriously damaged in the 1991 Gulf
War. U.N trade sanctions have also affected the economy. Islamic ideals and beliefs provide the
conservative foundation of the country's customs, laws and practices. Tourist facilities are not
widely available. The work week in Iraq is Sunday through Thursday.
Entry Requirements: Passports and visas are required. On February 8, 1991. U.S. passports
ceased to be valid for travel to. in or through Iraq and may not be used for that purpose unless a
special validation has been obtained. Without the requisite validation. use of a U.S. passport for
travel to, in or through Iraq may constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1544. and may be punishable
by a fine and/or imprisonment. An exemption to the above restriction is granted to Americans
residing in Iraq as of February 8. 1991 who continue to reside there and to American
professional reporters or journalists on assignment there.
In addition. the Department of the Treasury prohibits all travel-related transactions by U.S.
persons intending to visit Iraq. unless specifically licensed by the Office of Foreign Assets
Control. The only exceptions to this licensing requirement are for journalistic activity or for
U.S. government or United Nations business.
The categories of Individuals eligible for consideration for a special passport validation are set
forth in 22 C.F.R. 51.74. Passport validation requests for Iraq should be forwarded in writing to
the following address:-
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Passport Services
U.S. Department of State
1111 19th Street. N.W.. Suite 260
Washington, D.C. 20522-1705
Attn: Office of Passport Policy and Advisory Services
Telephone (202) 955-0231 or 955-0232
FAX (202) 955-0230
The request must be accompanied by supporting documentation according to the category under
which validation is sought. Currently. the four categories of persons specified in 22 C.F.R. 51.74
as being eligible for consideration for passport validation are as follows:
[a] Professional reporters: Includes full-time members of the reporting or writing staff of a
newspaper. magazine or broadcasting network whose purpose for travel is to gather information
about Iraq for dissemination to the general public.
05/16/96
09:41
72027364464
NEA/NGA
003
[b] American Red Cross: Applicant establishes that he or she is a representative of the American
Red Cross or International Red Cross traveling pursuant to an officially-sponsored Red Cross
mission.
[c] Humanitarian considerations: Applicant must establish that his or her trip is Justified by
compelling humanitarian considerations or for family unification. At this time. "compelling
humanitarian considerations" include situations where the applicant can document that an
immediate family member is critically 1ll in Iraq. Documentation concerning family illness
must include the name and address of the relative. and be from that relative's physician
attesting to the nature and gravity of the illness. "Family unification" situations may include
cases in which spouses or minor children are residing in Iraq. with and dependent on. an Iraqi
national spouse or parent for their support.
[d] National interest: The applicant's request is otherwise found to be in the national interest.
In all requests for passport validation for travel to Iraq. the name. date and place of birth for all
concerned persons must be given, as well as the U.S. passport numbers. Documentation as
outlined above should accompany all requests. Additional information may be obtained by
writing to the above address or by calling the Office of Passport Policy and Advisory Services at
[202] 955-0231 or 955-0232.
U.S. Treasury Restrictions: In August 1990 President Bush issued Executive Orders 12722 and
12724, imposing economic sanctions against Iraq including a complete trade embargo. The U.S.
Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control administers the regulations related to
these sanctions. which include restrictions on all financial transactions related to travel to
Iraq. These regulations prohibit all travel-related transactions. except as specifically licensed.
The only exceptions to this licensing requirement are for persons engaged in journalism or in
official U.S. government or U.N. business. Questions concerning these restrictions should be
addressed directly to:
Licensing Section
Office of Foreign Assets Control
U.S. Department of the Treasury,
Washington. D.C. 20220
Telephone: (202) 622-2480: Fax: (202) 622-1657
Areas of Instability: Hostilities in the Gulf region ceased on February 27. 1991. United Nations
Security Council Resolution 687. adopted on April 3. 1991. set terms for a permanent cease-fire.
but conditions in Iraq remain unsettled. Travel in Iraq Is extremely hazardous. particularly for
U.S. citizens.
Regional conflicts continue in northern Iraq between Kurdish ethnic groups and Iraqi security
forces. In southern Iraq. governmental repression of the Shia communities is severe.
U.S. citizens in Kuwait working near the Kuwait-Iraq border are in Jeopardy of detention by
Iraqi security personnel. In 1992 and 1993. a number of U.S. citizens and other foreigners
working near the Kuwait-Iraq border were detained by Iraqi authorities for lengthy periods
under harsh conditions.
Medical Facilities: Basic modern medical care and medicines may not be available. Doctors
and hospitals often expect immediate cash payment for services. U.S. medical insurance is not
always valid outside the United States. Supplemental medical insurance with specific overseas
coverage has proved useful. The International travelers hotline at the Centers for Disease
Control. telephone (404) 332-4559. has additional useful health information.
Information on Crime: Reports of crime in Iraq are increasing. especially in the larger cities.
The loss or theft of a U.S. passport abroad should be reported immediately to local police. and
the U.S. Interests Section or the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate. Useful information on
05/16/96
09:42
2027364464
NEA/NGA
0 004
safeguarding valuables. protecting personal security. and other matters while traveling abroad
is provided in the Department of State pamphlets. "A Safe Trip Abroad" and Tips for Travelers
to the Middle East and North Africa." They are available from the Supertntendent of
Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington. D.C. 20402.
Drug Penalties: U.S. citizens are subject to the laws of the country in which they are traveling.
Penalties for possession. use or trafficking in illegal drugs are severe. and convicted offenders
can expect jail sentences and fines.
Terrorism: Tension in the Persian Gulf region remains high because of continuing Iraqi
deflance of U.N. Security Council resolutions. As a result. the risk of terrorism directed against
U.S. citizens in Iraq remains a continuing concern.
Registration: There is no U.S. Embassy in Iraq. The U.S. government is not in a position to
accord normal consular protective services to U.S. citizens who. despite this warning. are in
Iraq. U.S. Government interests are represented by the Government of Poland. which, as a
protecting power. is able to provide only limited emergency services to U.S. citizens.
Embassy Location: There is no U.S. Embassy or Consulate in Iraq. The U.S. Interests Section of
the Embassy of Poland is located opposite the Foreign Ministry Club (Masbah Quarter): P.O. Box
2447 Alwiyah. Baghdad. Iraq. The telephone number is (964) (1) 719-6138. 719-6139. 719-3791.
718-1840.
No. 94-219
This replaces the Consular Information Sheet dated August 31. 1993 to update the section on
areãs of instability. and to show the new address and phone numbers of the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Passport Services. U.S. Department of State.
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20504
May 29, 1996
MEMORANDUM FOR MELANNE VERVEER
THROUGH:
MARK R. PARRIS
P
FROM:
KENNETH POLLACK
SUBJECT:
Terms of UNSCR 986
As you requested, we provide below a brief description of the
terms of UN Security Council Resolution 986 as they pertain to
the question of relief for Chaldean Iraqis.
Iraq's acceptance of UN Security Resolution 986 will create the
Insell
opportunity for long-needed relief to reach all of the people of
Iraq. The Resolution allows Iraq to sell up to $2 billion of oil
every six months to purchase food, medicine, and other
humanitarian supplies. In central and southern Iraq, these goods
will be distributed by the existing government rationing system
but with UN observers monitoring the process to ensure that
supplies are distributed equitably throughout the population and
are not diverted by the regime to its cronies. In northern Iraq,
distribution of humanitarian goods will be organized and
implemented by the UN itself, in conjunction with humanitarian
relief organizations already operating in this part of the
country. We expect that this carefully-watched and managed
program should mean a measurable improvement in the lives of all
Iraqis and alleviate the humanitarian tragedy created by Saddam
Husayn.
AMERICAN-CHALDEAN AND ARAB FORUM
24601 Coolidge
Oak Park, Michigan 48237
Tel. (810) 546-9101
Fax (810) 546-4848
May 9, 1996
Mrs. Hillary Rodham-Clinton
First Lady of the United States of America
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear First Lady Rodham-Clinton:
The American Chaldean and Arab Forum is dedicated to advancing
the public policy and goals of Chaldean Americans and Arab
Americans in the United States. Promoting the cultural heritage
and education of Chaldean Americans and Arab Americans in the
United States. Strengthening the role of Chaldean Americans and
Arab American in the political process, by developing relationships
with other American groups and political organizations.
The American Chaldean Arab Forum congratulates the president
and his staff in promoting the peace in the Middle East. Also to
thank the President and his administration in their understanding
in promoting and building bridges with various ethnic Americans
including the American Chaldean and Arabs. Many of us are
disturbed with the plight of the people we left behind in the
Middle East. Whether in Lebanon due to the recent conflict or in
Iraq due to the United Nations sanction imposed on Iraq people as
a consequence of the Gulf War since 1991. On many occasions
members of our forum has met with the President, Vice-President,
and various members of legislation.
Our visit today is to talk to you as a great first lady and
also a mother about the plight of the people of Iraq especially the
children. The sanction imposed onIraq has affected the people in
every aspect. Especially in the field of health and food affecting
the children, mothers, and elderly. According to the United
Nations and other medical humanitarian reports, "*Since the end of
the Gulf War in 1991, some 576,000 children have died in Iraq as
the direct result of sanctions imposed by the United Nations. This
was the conclusion of a survey coducted in Baghdad by two
scientists for the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
According to the FAO " malnutrition among children has reached
epidemic proportions. Twenty-eight percent of Iraqi children are
stunted in growth, compared to 12 percent in 1991. Deaths related
to diarrheal diseases have tripled. Water and sanitation have
deteriorated and hospitals are functioning at 40 percent of
capacity. The mortality rate among children has increased to five
times the level before the war. Infant deaths, which have doubled
since the war, are continuing to rise at an alarming rate. The
World Health Organization quoted " five years of sanctions had set
Iraqi health care back a half a century, and most Iraqis had been
on a semi-starvation diet since the 1991 Gulf War."
AMERICAN-CHALDEAN AND ARAB FORUM
24601 Coolidge
Oak Park, Michigan 48237
Tel. (810) 546-9101
Fax (810) 546-4848
Page Two
MRS. HILLARY RODHAM-CLINTON
May 9, 1996
The International Red Cross stated " A recent WFP/FAO mission
to Iraq reported an alarming incidence of malnutrition, affecting
large sectors of the population. It stated that more than 4
million people are at severe nutritional risk, including 2.4
million children under five, about 600,000 pregnant/nursing women."
Our goal in collaboration with the Children of the War
Foundation (American based organization) is to sponsor and bring
the U.S. Iraqi sick children in 1996 for medical treatment. These
sick children will, with the government approval, come to the U.S.
at our expense and remain here for no more than 30 days. We would
like to start with five sick children, with other groups of five to
follow soon thereafter.
We respectively request your assistance through the American
embassy in Amman, Jordan in obtaining visas for these children.
We also respectively request that you also assist us to obtain
a permission from the UN so that our charted plane would be allowed
to land in Habbaniya, West of Baghdad. Our plan is to have a
number of American humanitarians and physicians to travel to Iraq
to achieve goals similar to what Peace Corp does in Third World
countries.
Americans have consistently been in the forefront of providing
humanitarian assistance for the needy world wide. As Americans,
our high morals compel us to provide as much assistance as possible
to those misfortunate children. This country was formed based on
human dignity and other basic human rights which are denied to the
children of Iraq.
May god bless you, your family, and God Bless America.
Sincerely,
Ramsay F. Dass, M.D.
President
AMERICAN CHALDEAN AND ARAB FORUM
RFD/dsm
AMERICAN-CHALDEAN AND ARAB FORUM
24601 Coolidge
Oak Park, Michigan 48237
Tel. (810) 546-9101
Fax (810) 546-4848
THE EFFECTS OF SANCTIONS UPON THE IRAQI PEOPLE
SOURCES:
Harvard University Team;
International commission on Gulf crisis (supported by
MAcArthur and Merck foundation);
Iraqi Red Crescent.
*
The Harvard University team which had visited Iraq confirmed in
it's field report, published in June 1992, that the rate of
children's mortality in Iraq had increased from 32.5 cases per
1000 live births during the period 1985-1990 to 92.7 cases per
1000 during the Gulf War period. The said team was unanimous in
stating. after it's second visit to Iraq in 1992, that such an
exceptional increase was due to the continuation of the medicine
and food embargo and the lack of medicines and antibiotics and
medical appliances.
*
UNICEF has warned that the health of children in Iraq is being
subjected to danger because of lack of funds. It went on to say
in a statement published on July 20th, 1993 that the current
situation is by far worse than it used to be before the Gulf
War, and that the children's mortality has greatly increased and
that many afflictions with plagues and maladies among children
has appeared.
*
The nutritional status of children under five years of age had
radically been affected by the sanctions.
*
Percentage rates of infants born under 2.5 kgs. of weight
(5.51b..) had increased during the sanctions years due to the
shortage in calories from monthly rate of 4.5 during 1990 to
10.8% in 1991, 17.6% in 1992, 19.7% in 1993, 19.6% in January
and 21.2% in February 1994.
*
Some of the contagious diseases that were eradicated years ago
had started to show among children specially polio, cholera and
scabies. A great increase has been registered in a number of
other diseases such as typhoid, measles, pneumonia, viral
jaundice, hydatid cysts, fever, malaira and diphtheria.
*
Iraqi hospitals also suffer from a shortage in life-saving
medicaments patients. for heart, diabetic, hypertension, asthma and glands
AMERICAN-CHALDEAN AND ARAB FORUM
24601 Coolidge
Oak Park, Michigan 48237
Tel. (810) 546-9101
Fax (810) 546-4848
THE EFFECTS OF SANCTIONS UPON THE IRAQI PEOPLE
PAGE TWO
* The above mentioned Harvard University team report states that
Iraqi children suffer from a host of emotional and mental
disturbances, troubled sleep, inability of concentration due to
the difficult circumstances caused by the Gulf War. The report
also states that 57% of women suffer from pathological cases
among them insomnia, loss of weight and migraine.
* The latest reports indicate that most of the medical equipment
related to the maladies of the eyes, heart, kidneys, internal
diseases and hypertension had stopped functioning due to the
lack of spare parts related with the maintenance operations.
These equipment that were imported from western companies can no
longer offer treatment and diagnostic services.
* Before the imposition of sanctions, Iraq used to import 400 -
500 million dollars worth of medicaments, pharmaceuticals and
medical appliances annually which were at the disposal of
patients, free of charge. International aid in this field does
not supply more than 5-10% of Iraq's actual needs for
medicaments.
Please send
to Melanne
Verveer. FOR
chernosyc File
file
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
Chapter 3:
The Economic Well-Being of Children
I
Introduction
Despite the strong growth in the economy, the share of children in poverty has increased
from 14% in 1969 to 20% in 1996. This increase in child poverty is attributable to an increase in
the share of children living in single-parent families and to a decline in wage growth at the bottom
of the income distribution.
Since 1993, however, these trends have reversed. The child poverty rate has decreased
by two percentage points from 1993 to 1996 and the share of children living in single parent
families has stabilized. These trends have been associated with improvements in other measures
of children's material well-being. Since the early 1990s, the incidence of hunger has decreased,
the share of children living in inadequate housing has decreased, and there has been an increase in
the consumption of critical health services such as prenatal care and immunizations. There have
also been notable improvements in children's health status, reflected in declines in infant and child
mortality rates and in decreases in the incidence of low birth-weight births.
Despite the improvements, many children remain economically vulnerable. In 1996, one in
five children lived in families with incomes below the poverty level, one in four lived with a single
parent, one in three lived in inadequate housing, one in seven did not have health insurance, and
one in thirty-three lived in a household with an insufficient food supply. These factors place
children at risk of both contemporary and future hardship, as many of these factors may be
critical to the social and economic development of children.
The current administration has adopted a range of strategies to improve the economic and
social well-being of children. The first is to increase financial support for single parents by
strengthening the child support enforcement system. The second is to increase support for
working parents through the Earned Income Tax Credit and through subsidies for child care
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
expenses. The third is to expand children's health insurance coverage through the Child Health
Block Grant. The final strategy is to enrich children's educational opportunities, by expanding the
Head Start program and by establishing higher standards for elementary and secondary schools.
The first part of this chapter describes recent economic. and demographic trends which
have influence the well-being of children. This section is followed by a discussion of programs
designed to improve the economic status of families with children. The second part of this
chapter includes information on specific aspects of child well-being: the availability of food, the
adequacy of housing, the accessibility of health care and health insurance, and the quality of
children's educational environment. Each of these sections also include discussions of recent
policies intended to improve child well-being.
II.
Changes in Family Composition and Work Effort of Mothers
A.
Changes in Family Structure
Although the share of children living in single parent families has increased more than
three times since 1960, it has recently stabilized, remaining at 27% from 1993 to 1995. These
trends are critical to children's well-being because children in single parent families are more likely
to be poor, and they are more likely to be disadvantaged as young adults.
As shown in figure 1, the share of children living in single parent families has increased
from 9% in 1960 to 27% in 1993 and has remained at 27% through 1995. The 18 percentage
point increase in the share of children living with a single parent from 1960 to 1995 reflects both
a 10 percentage point increase in the share of children living with a divorced or separated parent
and a 9 percentage point increase in the share living with an unmarried parent. During the same
period, the share of children living with a widowed parent declined by 1 percentage point. By
1995, 16% of all children lived with a divorced or separated parent, 9% lived with a never married
parent, and only 1% lived with a widowed parent. Although the fraction of children living with a
2
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
single father has been increasing, most children living with one parent lived with their mother in
1995 (87%).
[Insert Figure 1]
This increase in the share of children living in a places children at increased risk of
economic deprivation for several reasons. The first is that children living with a single parent
receive lower levels of financial assistance from the absent parent than children in comparable
two-parent families. Research on the impacts of divorce and separation has shown that at the
time of divorce or separation, the income of fathers (typically the absent parent) relative to their
needs increases, while the income of mothers and children relative to their needs declines.¹
Second children in single parent families receive less parental attention and guidance than
children in two parent families, because they have much lower levels of contact with the absent
parent. For example, a recent survey found that young adults raised in single mother families
reported low levels of contact with their absent fathers: 24-36% reported no contact with their
father between the ages of 1 and 18, whereas 60-90% reported that they saw their father less than
one time per week. In addition, children in single parent families may receive less attention from
the care-taking parent, who must juggle the dual roles of supporting the family and caring for
children.
Finally, children in single parent families may have weaker ties to the community because
their family is more likely to move to a new household following divorce or separation. This may
disrupt the child's ties to school and the community, and thus diminish access to critical
community resources.
Research has suggested that growing up in a single parent family is linked to longer-term
measures of the child's well-being. A recent study suggests that, even after controlling for race,
parental education, location, and number of children in the family, children raised in single parent
families are much more likely to drop out of school and to have a teen birth than children in two
3
Figure I
Percent of Children Living with One Parent
30
Widowed
Divorced/Separated
25
Never married
20
Percent
15
10
5
0
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
parent families. In addition, children in single parent families achieve somewhat lower scores on
standardized academic tests and are somewhat less likely to complete college.
Some of these difference in outcomes for children in single parent families relative to two
parent families may reflect differences in unmeasured parenting ability between parents in single
parent families and parents in two parent families rather than true impacts of marital status. To
the extent that this is true, many of these differential outcomes might still persist even if parents
were to reunite.
C.
Work Effort of Mother:
Over the past twenty years, there has been a substantial increase in employment rates of
women with children. This implies that children are increasingly reliant on their mother's
incomes as a means of economic support. In addition, these trends have substantially increased
the demand for non-maternal day care.
Since 1975, the employment rates of women with children has increased substantially,
with employment rates for all women with children increasing from 42% in 1975 to 66% in 1996.
Until recently, the largest increases have been for married women with children, who had
increases in employment rates of 23 percentage points, compared to 12 percentage points for
divorced and separated, and 11 percentage points for never married women. Since 1993,
however, the employment gains have been larger for single women. From 1993 to 1996,
employment rates increased by 6 percentage points for single women with children, and by 7
percentage points for divorced, separated or widowed mothers, compared to 4 percentage points
for married women with children.
The net result of these changes is that by 1996, a very large proportion of mothers were
working. In this year, 68% of all married women, 72% of all divorced, separated or widowed
women, and 49% of all single women with a child under age 18 were employed. The trends are
comparable for women with young children as well. As a result, 60% of all married women, 62%
4
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
of all divorced/separated, or widowed women, and 44% of all never married women with a child
under age six were working in 1996.
[Insert Figure 2 here]
One important implication of these trends is that the demand for non-parental child care
has increased substantially. Between 1977 and 1993, the number of children under 5 who had
employed mothers and who were in non-parental child care more than doubled. By 1995, there
were almost 10 million children under 6 who had employed mothers and who were in non-
parental child care. Child care can often represent a substantial financial burden to low-income
parents without access to subsidized care. In 1993, poor families with children under age 5 in
which the mother worked spent an average of 18% of their monthly income on child care; for
non-poor families the comparable number was 7%.
III.
Trends in the Economic Well-Being of Children
A.
The Link Between Income and ChildWell-Being
There are several theories for why poor children may be disadvantaged relative to non-
poor children. The first, is that they consume lower quantities of inputs which are critical to their
development, such as food, shelter, medical care, and education because their parents have less
money available to invest in them. The second is that poor children live with parents who are
under relatively high levels of economic stress, and thus may have fewer emotional resources
available to nurture their children. A final theory suggests that poor children may be
disadvantaged because they live in neighborhoods with fewer resources and fewer connections to
mainstream economic activity.
A large literature has shown that children in poor families are more disadvantaged than
children in higher income families on a broad range of indicators. This literature may over-
estimate the true impact of income on child well-being, however, if income is related to other
5
Employment Rates of Women With Children Under 18 by Marital Status
80%
70%
60%
50%
Married
Single
DI
Divorced and Separated
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
unmeasurable factors likely to influence the child's ultimate performance such as parental
orientation towards work or parental labor market productivity.
A recent study has related child outcomes to parental income measured before and after
the child outcome occurred (such as graduation from high school or the score on a cognitive test).
The study found that the impact of income measured AFTER the event occurred had a larger
impact on child outcomes than income measured before the outcome. Since it is unlikely that
income measured after the event occurred directly influenced the child's performance, it is likely
that it reflects the fact that parental income is correlated with other parental characteristics which
also influence child outcomes. The study found that once one. controls for unmeasured parental
characteristics which are associated with income, the impact of income child well being is smaller
(although it does not disappear). These results suggest that while income per se does have an
impact on measures of child well-being, such as test score performance, teen child-bearing, and
high school graduation, other differences between low income and higher income families, such as
parents' orientation to work and education, also play an important role in determining children's
chances for success.
B.
Trends in Child Poverty Rates
The poverty rate is defined as the share of the population living in families below a
defined level of need called the poverty line (which was equal to $15,911 for a family of two
adults and two children in 1996). Although there are problems with our current measure of
poverty, most of the analysis in this section will be based on this measure because there is
consistent data available for this measure.
As shown in the following figure, the child poverty rate declined sharply in the 1960s
from 27% in 1960 to 14% in 1969. Since 1969, it gradually trended upwards to 22% in 1983
and has remained above 20% since then. In 1993, nearly 23% of all children were poor, and the
child poverty rate was at its highest level in thirty years. Since 1993, poverty rates have declined
6
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
by 1.9 percentage points to 20.5% in 1996. The poverty decline from 1993 to 1996 was larger
for Black children and children in female headed families, who had reductions in poverty of 6.2
and 4.4 percentage points respectively.
[PUT FIGURE 3 HERE]
Despite the recent improvement, child poverty rates remain high in 1996. In 1996, 20% of
all children had incomes below the poverty level; in addition, 9% were in extreme poverty (less
than 0.5 times poverty level) and 43% were poor or near poor ( less than 2 times poverty level).
The poverty rate was 1.25 times higher for children age 6 than for children age 6-17, 2.5 times
higher for black and Hispanic children than for white children and nearly five times higher for
children in families with a single female parent than in families with a married couple. Over one-
quarter of children in single parent families had incomes below 0.5 times the poverty line, while
three-quarters had incomes below 2 times the poverty line.
Table I: Poverty Rate of U.S. Children
< 0.50 Poverty Line
< 1.0 Poverty Line
< 2.0 Poverty Line
TOTAL
9.0
20.5
43.2
Under 6
10.5
22.7
46.2
6-17
7.4
18.3
40.7
White
6.3
16.3
38.1
Black
20.6
39.9
68.0
Hispanic
14.7
40.3
72.0
Female Headed
25.8
49.3
76.3
Two Parent
2.8
10.1
31.0
7
Percent of Children Who are Poor
30
25
Percent
20
15
10
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
C.
The Impact of Demographic Change
The following table shows how the poverty rate of children would have changed
since 1959 if the demographic composition of children remained constant. For each of four
groups (white female headed-no husband present, white other family, non-white female-headed,
non-white other family) this analysis recomputes the poverty rate in each year assuming the
population shares remained at their 1959 levels, but allowing within group poverty rates to change
over time.
This table reveals three important points. First, demographic change does not explain the
steep decline in child poverty rates from 1959 to 1969. If family and racial composition had
stayed at its 1959 levels, child poverty rates would have decreased even more than they did from
1959 to 1969 (14.0 vs 12.7 percentage points). Second, demographic change does appear to
explain a large share of the increase in child poverty rates from 1969 to 1993. If the demographic
composition of the child population had remained at its 1959 levels, the child poverty rate would
have increased by 2.9 percentage points as opposed to 7.9 percentage points. Thus, demographic
shifts explain 63% of the total increase in child poverty over this period. Finally, demographic
change explains very little of the decline in poverty rates since 1993. Had the population shares
remained constant, child poverty would have declined by 1.7 percentage points, compared to the
actual change of 2.2 percentage points. This suggests that changes in demographic composition
explain 22% of the total decline in poverty since 1993.
Table II: Impact of Demographic Changes on Child Poverty Rates
1959
1969
1993
1996
Actual Poverty Rate
26.9
14.1
22.0
19.8
Poverty Rate Holding %White & % in
Female-Headed Households at 1959 Level
26.9
12.8
15.7
14.0
Impact of Demographic Change Since 1959
0
1.3
6.3
5.8
8
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
D.
The Impact of Macroeconomic Conditions
Table III investigates the extent to which the recent trends in poverty may be linked to
macroeconomic performance over these periods. As shown, the over 13 point decline in child
poverty from 1959 to 1959 is clearly linked to high economic growth rates and declining
unemployment rates. The changes in both the 1970s and the 1980s are more puzzling, however,
since child poverty increased in both periods despite continued rates of high economic growth.
While the increase in child poverty in the 1970s may be partially explained by an increase in the
unemployment rate, the increase in the 1980s remains unexplained, because the unemployment
rate decreased from 1979 to 1989.
Table III: Changes in Child Poverty Rate vs Unemployment and Economic Growth Rates
% Change in
Change in
Change in Child
Median Family
% Change in
Unemployment
Poverty Rate
Income
Real GNP/Pop
Rate
1959-69
-13.3
39.7
34.4
-2.0
1969-79
2.4
10.6
22.9
2.3
1979-89
3.2
4.2
18.3
-0.5
1989-93
3.1
-7.3
1.0
1.6
1993-96
-2.2
5.4
5.5
-1.5
Studies in the early 1990s have examined the cause of the higher than anticipated poverty
rates in the 1980s. These studies have concluded that the most likely explanation is an increase in
wage inequality and decline in real wages at the bottom of the income distribution. One study
compared poverty changes during two periods (1963-69 vs 1983-89) with similar economic
9
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
growth rates and similar changes in unemployment, but with very different changes in poverty
rates. After ruling out a number of potential explanations, the author concluded that the most
likely explanation for the sluggish poverty declines in the 1980s was because of failure of weekly
wages to increase with GNP for families in the bottom income quintile.
A second study directly linked poverty rates with labor market conditions (mean wages,
wage inequality, and unemployment) across the nine U.S. Census regions during the period from
1973 to 1991. This study found that changes in these labor market conditions can explain all of
the increase in the aggregate poverty rate from 1979 to 1989. However, for families with
children, the model cannot fully explain the increase in poverty from 1979 to 1989. This suggests
that there may be additional factors driving child poverty upwards over this period.
During the 1990s, the changes in child poverty rates are roughly what one would expect
given the changes in economic growth rates and unemployment. From 1989 to 1993, the increase
in child poverty rates coincided with an increase in the unemployment rate and a low level of GNP
growth. From 1993 to 1996, unemployment fell and GNP growth rates improved; and as a
consequence, the child poverty decreased by 2.2 percentage points.
E.
Impacts of transfers on child poverty
Although at any point in time, government transfers move a large proportion of children
out of poverty, changes in the generosity of the transfer system explain only a small part of the
changes in child poverty since 1979. These changes are more directly linked to changes in pre tax
and transfer income poverty, which is determined by family earnings and demographic
characteristics.
Table IV indicates the proportion of children who are poor in 1979, 1989, 1993 and 1996
under three different definitions of income. The first row indicates pre tax and transfer income,
and primarily reflects changes in family earnings and demographic composition. The second
includes cash transfers as well as other cash income; this is the income definition used in the
10
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
official definition of poverty. The third includes cash transfers, taxes and a broad range of in-kind
benefits such as housing and medical care. (Note that as the income is expanded one might also
want to expand the poverty threshold definition as well: see box on the next page).
As shown, transfers move a sizeable share of poor children out of poverty. In 1996, cash
transfers alone moved 13% of all poor children out of poverty. This calculation may be
misleading, however, since it excludes important in-kind benefits such as food stamps and medical
care insurance, as well as tax subsidies such as the earned income tax credit. When these
additional subsidies are included, the tax and transfer system moves 40% of children out of
poverty in 1996.
While transfers may have an important impact on poverty at a point in time, they do not
play a large role in explaining the changes in child poverty since 1979.
From 1979 to 1989, pre-transfer poverty rates increased by 2.2 percentage points, while post-
transfer poverty rates increased by 3.2 to 3.8 percentage points. Thus, increases in pre-transfer
poverty explain between 60 and 70% of the increase in child poverty over this period.
From 1989 to 1993, all of the increase in poverty is attributable to an increase in pre-transfer
poverty, since, during this period, expansions in transfers worked to offset the increase in poverty.
From 1993 to 1996, most of the decline in poverty is attributable to a 2.2 percentage point
decline in pre-transfer poverty. In addition, changes in the tax and transfer system decreased the
child poverty rate by nearly an additional percentage point. This reflects the expansions in the
Earned Income Tax Credit since 1993.
11
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
Table IV: Impact of Government Taxes and Transfers on Child Poverty
Income Definition
1979
1989
1993
1996
Before Taxes & Transfer
0.201
0.223
0.263
0.236
Income (primarily earnings)
Including Cash Transfers
(official defn)
0.164
0.196
0.227
0.205
Including taxes +cash and in-
kind transfers
0.114
0.152
0.175
0.140
Poverty Reduction from
CashTransfers
-0.037
-0.027
-0.036
-0.031
Poverty Reduction from all
Taxes & Transfers
-0.087
-0.071
-0.088
-0.096
IV.
Policy Initiatives to Support Families with Children
A.
Increased Child Support Enforcement
Since currently only a minority of single parent families receive payments from absent
parent, strengthening the child support system has the potential to improve the economic well-
being of children in single parent families.
Starting in 1975, the federal government has provided financial support to states to
establish child support systems. These child support programs have primarily been targeted
towards women receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children; however, they have recently
expanded to reach more of the non-AFDC population as well. Since then, legislation has been
12
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
passed to make the system more effective in establishing paternity, in imposing child support
awards, and in enforcing existing awards. Key innovations include the requirement that states
establish numerical guidelines for the courts in determining child support awards (required by
state legislation in 1984 and further strengthened in 1989), and the requirement that wage
witholding be used to collect child support payments (required for delinquent child support
accounts in 1984, for new AFDC cases in 1989, and for all other new cases in 1994). Finally,
legislation in 1993 required states to set up new procedures to establish paternity, including
hospital based programs which make it possible to voluntarily establish paternity at the time of
birth. These programs have been shown to be highly effective in locating parents and in
establishing paternity.
Figure 4 illustrates how these policy initiatives have affected the share of women receiving
child support payments by marital status and AFDC status. As shown, for all marital status
groups, there have been substantial increases in the share of AFDC recipients receiving child
support payments receiving child support payments. For non-AFDC recipients, there have also
been large increases in the share of single women receiving child support, but there have been no
gains for divorced or separated women. Since the early 1990s, there have also been substantial
increases in the number of paternities established through the child support system: the number of
paternities established has increased by 150% since 1990, and by nearly 100% since 1992.
[Insert Figure 4 here]
The Personal Work Opportunity Act of 1996 will further strengthen and enhance the child
support enforcement system. Key provisions include:
Expand Paternity Establishment: The system strengthen and expands state voluntary paternity
establishment programs, and offer states new authority to enforce mandatory paternity
establishment. States would be required to meet new federal standards with respect to paternity
establishment for nonmarital births, or face federal sanctions. Each year, states would be
13
Divorced Single Mothers Receiving Child Support
Separated Single Mothers Receiving Child Support
60
40
NonAFDC
50
NonAFDC
30
40
AFDC
Percent
30
Percent
AFDC
20
20
10
10
0
0
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996
Never Married Single Mothers Receiving Child Support
20
AFDC
15
NonAFDC
Percent
10
5
0
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
required to make progress towards the goal of establishing paternity for 90% of all non-marital
births (or to establish paternity for 90% of all children born out of wedlock who are receiving
child support enforcement services).
Expand State Administrative Powers: State child support authorities will be given new
authority to order genetic testing, to obtain information in public or private records (including
issuing subpoenas), and to secure assets to repay child support arrearages. This will help states
establish a more expedited system to enforce child support orders.
Establish Centralized Payment and Disbursement System: States will be required to establish a
centralized child support payment and disbursement unit. By consolidating payments to one
agency, states will be able to track progress in meeting child support awards more closely.
Establish Centralized Information Systems: States will be required to establish four new
centralized data bases: a registry of child support orders, a list of all paternity establishments, a
data set of all new hires in the state, and a record of all child support collections and
disbursements. Information from the registry of child support orders and the new hires data base.
will be forwarded to the federal government for creation of federal new hires and child support
awards data bases. This will make it possible to track delinquent payers across state lines.
Increased Interstate Enforcement: States will be required to implement the Uniform Interstate
Family Support Act by 1/98. This states gives one state jurisdiction in establishing and enforcing
child support orders (usually the child's home state) and requires states to cooperate with other
states in enforcing child support orders.
B.
Day Care:
The federal government subsidizes purchase of day care both through tax subsidies and
through direct subsidies to low income families with children. These programs are described
below.
14
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
The federal government offers two key tax subsidy programs to offset the costs of day
care for working families. Since most families with below poverty incomes do not have positive
tax liabilities, these programs are primarily targeted towards higher income families. These
programs include:
Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit: The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit is a non-
refundable tax credit for taxpayers who incur work-related child care expenses. Under this
program, families can receive a tax credit for up to 30% of allowable expenditures on child care.
Allowable expenditures are capped at $2400 for a family with one qualifying dependent and
$4800 for a family with two or more qualifying dependents. The 30-percent credit rate is
reduced by 1 percentage point for each $2000 of adjusted gross income above $10,000 until it
reaches its minimum level of 20 percent. An estimated 6.2 million tax filers claimed this credit in
FY96, at an average credit of $445 per claim.
Employer Exclusion for Child Care Benefits: Employers can exclude up to $5000 of
expenditures on child and dependent care from employees' taxable income and social security
earnings if: I) the employer directly provides child care services for the employee, or ii) the
employee makes direct contributions to a dependent care account to finance day care. Total
expenditures on this program are estimated to be roughly one-third of the expenditures on the
Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit for FY98.
For families with very low incomes, the federal government offers a block grant to states
to finance child care subsidies:
The Child Care and Development Block Grant Program: Reflecting this administration's
concern with the affordability of child care, the federal government consolidated four different
block grant programs into one program, the Child Care and Development Block Grant Program,
and greatly expanded expenditures available for child care subsidies. Estimated expenditures
under this program are 2.9 billion in FY 1997, and are projected to be $4 billion over the
programs it replaced over the six years FY 1997 to 20002. Under this program, states are given a
15
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
block grant to pay for subsidies for child care for parents who are working or participating in
work-related activities or education programs. States are given wide discretion in designing
eligibility thresholds and in designing the amount of the subsidy. However, they are required to
use the funds to serve families with incomes below 85% of state median income. In addition, they
must allocate at least 70% of the funds towards families who are either recently or currently
receiving public assistance, currently transitioning from public assistance or who are at risk of
going on public assistance, or who are at risk of needing public assistance without a child care
subsidy. Estimates based on experience with the previous block grant programs suggest that
states are likely to target this money to very low income families: under previous programs, over
85% of families funded were under 150% of poverty and all but 1% were below 200% of poverty.
C.
Expansions to the Earned Income Tax Credit
In order to help working families with children, the current Administration has expanded
the Earned Income Tax Credit by nearly 40% for families with one child and by nearly 120% for
families with two or more children since 1993.
The Earned Income Tax Credit is a refundable tax credit designed primarily for low
income families with children. For families with one child, the credit is equal to 34% of family
earnings to a maximum of $2210; above incomes of $25,760 the EITC is phased out at a rate of
16 cents for each dollar earned. For families with two or more children the credit is equal to
40% of family earnings to a maximum of $3656; and EITC benefits are phased out at a rate of 21
cents for each dollar of earnings over $29,290. Finally, there is also a small EITC benefit
available for families without children equal to a maximum of $332 in 1997.
D.
Welfare Reform
[to be written]
16
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
III.
Measure of Children's Material Well-Being
A.
Availability of Food:
Measures of food consumption based upon nutrient intake suggest that both poor and
non-poor children have average intakes of basic nutrients which are well above the U.S.
Recommended Daily Allowances. However, a non-trivial share of low income children live in
households in which the food supply is unstable or insufficient. The fraction of children living in
households where there is "sometimes or often not enough to eat" has decreased since the early
1990s, suggesting that the incidence of food insecurity among children has decreased.
One critical measure of child well-being is whether they live in families with an adequate
and sufficient food supply. Measures of food sufficiency have been shown to be correlated with
direct measures of nutrient intake at a household level. One study found that calory intake was
13% lower for food insufficient households and that intakes of 13 other nutrients were from 8 to
18 percent lower in households which did not have sufficient quantities of food than in otherwise
comparable households with a sufficient food supply.
Estimates based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Continuing Suvey of Food
Intakes of Individuals suggest that in 1995, nearly 3% of all children lived in households where
"there sometimes or often was not enough to eat." The incidence of food insufficiency was
substantially higher for low income children than for high income children: nearly 9% of children
in families with incomes below 133% of the poverty level lived in households with an insufficient
food supply, compared to 1% of higher income children. As shown, there appears to have been
an improvement in this measure since the early 1990s. While around 12% of low income children
lived in household without enough food to eat in the early 1990s, just under 9% lived in
households with insufficient food in 1995.
17
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
Children in Households Reporting that There is Sometimes or Often "Not Enough to Eat"
1989
1990
1991
1994
1995
All Children
5.3%
3.8%
3.5%
2.4%
2.9%
Children in Households at or
below 130% poverty
12.2%
13.1%
11.9%
7.8%
8.7%
Children in Households above
130% poverty line
3.0%
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
1.3%
Source:
Federal Interagency Forum and Child and Family Statistics, 1997; and special
tabulations of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Continuing Survey of Food
Intakes by Individuals by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Surveys
Research Group
These estimates of food security may overstate the prevalence of hunger among children,
since adults typically forgo food before decreasing the amount of food they give their children.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Division of Food and Consumer Service has recently
developed a more comprehensive measure of food sufficiency, based upon a supplementary
questionnaire added to the April 1995 Current Population Survey. In households classified as
"food insecure with moderate hunger", adults in the household have reduced food intake to the
point that they repeatedly experience hunger, whereas household who are classified as "food
insecure with severe hunger" report that both children and adults in the household have
experienced hunger.
The estimates from the USDA survey suggest that in 1995, 4.4% of households with
children under age 18 were food insecure with moderate hunger evident, and 0.9% of households
with children under 18 were food insecure with severe hunger. These proportions were
substantially higher for low income households. Nearly 5% of households with incomes below
18
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
50% of the poverty level, and 3.1% of households with incomes below 100% of the poverty level
were classified as food insecure with severe hunger.
Estimates based upon the actual nutrient intakes of children in a given day suggest that on
average children in both poor and non-poor households are consuming an adequate quantity of
key nutrients as measured by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Recommended Daily
Allowances. According to estimates from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Continuing
Survey of Food Intakes for Individuals, poor children under age 5 had adequate average
consumption levels of food calories and of 14 of 15 key nutrients in 1994-95 (the one exception
is zinc). For children age 6-11, the pattern is roughly similar, although there is some evidence
that poor children do not consume enough Vitamin E, Calcium and Zinc. These deficiencies are
much smaller for higher income children. Finally, for poor children age 12-17, there is much
stronger evidence of insufficient consumption of calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, iron and zinc;
these deficiencies are also found among non-poor children.
The federal government funds several programs which are intended to increase the
availability of food to low-income children. These include:
--Food Stamps
--School Lunch and School Breakfast
--WIC
19
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
Average Nutrient Intakes as a % of Recommended Daily Allowances
Poor Children
Poor Children
Nonpoor
Nonpoor
Age 6-11
Age 12-19
Children
Children
Age 6-11
Age 12-19
Nutrient
Males
Females
Males
Females
Males
Females
Males
Females
Food Energy
108%
83%
91%
82%
102%
94%
99%
87%
Protein
275
211
180
140
245
213
179
147
Vitamin A
150
120
119
88
149
123
114
109
Vitamin E
91
78
86
82
101
95
95
86
Vitamin C
245
191
202
151
235
223
229
179
Thiamin
184
136
145
121
176
152
150
128
Riboflavin
199
150
146
132
189
165
157
137
Niacin
164
125
135
116
164
140
148
125
Vitamin B-6
142
106
113
98
138
113
121
104
Folate
296
219
159
124
294
238
191
136
Vitamin B-12
338
358
317
248
335
272
290
187
Calcium
133
92
86
62
115
104
98
67
Phosphorus
167
123
127
90
152
137
138
94
Magnesium
164
119
86
76
148
131
94
77
Iron
164
121
152
91
160
129
173
91
Zinc
109
88
96
80
108
93
96
84
Source:
U.S. Department of Agriculture Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals,
1994 and 1995 data release.
20
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
B. Adequacy of Housing:
The following table gives estimates of the prevalence of housing problems among
households with children in the United States. As shown, low income households with children
are more likely to report structural housing problems than other families. In 1995, 13% of very
low income households with children reported moderate or severe physical problems with their
housing, compared to 7% overall. In addition, 17% of very low income household reported living
in crowded living circumstances (more than one person per room), compared to 6% overall.
Finally, 34% report that they were spending more than 50% of their incomes on rent, compared to
11% of all households with children.
The data on trends suggest that there has been a slight improvement in housing conditions
for low income households in the 1990s. In 1993 and 1995, very low income households report
somewhat lower rates of structural problems or crowding than in 1983 and 1989. In addition,
the proportion with a housing cost burden of over 50% declined somewhat in 1995. These
improvements do not appear to be related to an increase in the fraction of families receiving rental
assistance, since the percentage of families reporting that they received rental assistance has
remained relatively constant since 1989.
21
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
Housing Conditions for U.S. households with Children
1978
1983
1983
1993
1995
All Households
Any Problem
30
33
33
34
35
Moderate or severe physical
problems
9
8
9
7
7
Crowding
9
8
7
6
6
Cost Burden more than 50%
6
11
9
11
11
Very Low Income Renter
Any Problem
79
83
76
75
71
Moderate or severe
physical problems
19
18
18
14
13
Crowding
22
18
17
14
17
Cost Burden More than 50%
31
38
36
38
34
Receiving Rental Assistance
23
23
29
28
27
Source:
Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics 1997 and special
tabulations on the Annual Housing Survey and American Housing Survey for 1995
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy
Development and Research.
22
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
IV.
Health Status and Health Insurance
A.
Health Status
[to be written]
B
Health Insurance
Over the past eight years, children's health insurance coverage through the Medicaid
program has increased due to expansions in children's eligibility for Medicaid. These increases in
Medicaid coverage were offset by reductions in private health insurance coverage; and as a
consequence, the proportion of children with any health insurance coverage has remained roughly
constant since 1988. These changes are critical to the well-being of children, since they affect
both access and quality of medical care.
Health insurance is a critical factor in children's well being, because it increases access to
health care services which in turn may promote child health. Research has shown that uninsured
children receive fewer medical services than insured children. For example, one study found that,
controlling for demographic characteristics, income, area of residence, and health status,
uninsured children have 70% fewer outpatient visits and 75-85% fewer inpatient days than
children with health insurance. A second study showed that uninsured children with injuries
were 73% less likely to have medical attention for their injury than insured children. Uninsured
children are also less likely to have a routine source of medical care, to receive routine check-ups
or to have received timely prenatal care.
Some of the best evidence on the impact of health insurance on children's health outcomes
has considered the impact of expanding health insurance coverage of low income children through
the Medicaid program. Research has shown that the introduction of the Medicaid program in the
mid-1960's was associated with large increases in physician visits of low income children, while
the number of visits by high income children remained relatively constant. The net result was that,
23
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
while low income children had 40% fewer doctor visits per capita than higher income children in
1964, they had only 17% fewer visits in 1971.
Recent research on the impact of Medicaid eligibility expansions in the 1980s and early
1990s has also found that the Medicaid expansions have led to increases in children's
consumption of health care and to improvements in child health. One study has found that the
Medicaid eligibility expansions which doubled the fraction of children eligible for Medicaid from
1984 to 1992 were associated with significant increases in the number of children visiting a doctor
or entering a hospital in the prior year; and with large reductions declines in child mortality. A
second study found that expansions in Medicaid eligibility from 1979 to 1992 were associated
with decreases in late prenatal care and with decreases in the incidence of low birth weigh births
and infant mortality. This latter study, however, found that the results were largely attributable
to expansions in the early 1980s which expanded Medicaid eligibility to a targeted group of very
low income women and children, rather than to the much broader expansions in the late 1980s
which expanded eligibility to higher income women and children.
In recent years, a series of legislative mandates and options have substantially expanded
the eligibility of pregnant women and children for Medicaid. Prior to 1987, Medicaid coverage
was primarily tied to eligibility for the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program, which
meant that it was mostly restricted to children in very low income single parent families. By
1996, Medicaid was available to all pregnant women and children under age 6 with incomes
below 133% of the poverty level, and to all children under age 12 with incomes below 100% of
the poverty level. (States were required to phase in coverage of poor children born after
September 30, 1983, until all children under age 19 are covered.) In addition, many states also
chose to set their financial eligibility thresholds at levels which were above the required levels.
The net result of these expansions is that the proportion of children with health insurance
has expanded markedly. The share of all children with Medicaid coverage has increased from
16% in 1988 to 22% in 1996 while the share of children with incomes below the poverty level
24
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
covered by Medicaid increased from 57% to 63% (See following chart). However, during this
period the share of children covered by non-Medicaid insurance sources also declined, primarily
due to a decline in employer provided health insurance. As a consequence, the total share of
children with health insurance remained relatively constant, decreasing from 87% in 1988 to 85%
in 1996 for all children, and increasing from 75% to 77% for poor children.
[Insert Figure 5 here]
One critical question is why the fraction of children covered by employer provided health
insurance declined so substantially from 1988 to 1996. Since these declines coincided with
declines in employer coverage for groups not affected by the Medicaid expansions, such as single
men and higher income children and adults, some of this decrease is attributable to general labor
market developments. In addition, some of the decline in employer provided health insurance
may also result from families dropping their private insurance to take advantage of Medicaid. The
precise extent to which the Medicaid expansions "crowded out" already existing insurance is open
to contention. One study found that between 50 and 75% of the recent expansions in Medicaid
coverage from 1987 to 1992 were to pregnant women and infants who would have received
insurance from other sources. Two other studies have found much lower estimates of "crowd-
out" with estimates ranging from 0% to an upper bound of 25%.
The following table shows the proportion of children who are uninsured and the
composition of the uninsured population in 1996 by age and poverty status of children. This table
makes two points clear. First, it is evident that a substantial share of currently uninsured children
are eligible for Medicaid. Although all children under age 12 with incomes below the poverty
level are eligible for Medicaid, 19% of children under age 6 and 23% of children under age 12 live
in families which report they have no insurance coverage. These two groups of children
represent 20% of the uninsured and 63% of the uninsured poor. For these children, the failure
to enroll in Medicaid may not limit their access to hospital services, since many hospitals now are
capable of enrolling eligible children into Medicaid when they enter the hospitals. However, it
25
Chart 7-x
Insurance Coverage of Children Under 18
caption line 1
Ratio
100
Other
Private only
Both Medicaid and private
Medicaid only
80
60
40
20
0
1988
1996
1988
1996
1988
1996
Poor
Non-poor
Total
Source: Department of Commerce
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
may deter them from accessing important preventative services which could improve their health
status. Second, the table also indicates that the majority of children remaining uninsured in 1996
have incomes over the poverty level. Thus, efforts to further reduce the share of children without
health insurance will have to be addressed at higher a income population.
Share of Children Uninsured and Composition of Uninsured Population in 1996
Share of
Share of
Population
Uninsured
POOR CHILDREN
0.233
0.319
Under age 6
0.185
0.096
Age 6-11
0.229
0.106
Age 12-17
0.303
0.117
NON-POOR CHILDREN
0.127
0.681
Under age 6
0.124
0.216
Age 6-11
0.125
0.226
Age 12-17
0.131
0.239
TOTAL
0.148
1.000
Source: Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Tabulations from March
C.
Recent Initiatives to Expand Children's Access to Health Insurance
In order to make further progress in improving childrens' access to health insurance, the
Balanced Budget Act of 1997 established a Child Health Block Grant which offers states $20.3
billion in new federal funding to states over the next five years to expand health insurance
programs for low income children. States have the option of using the funding to expand
Medicaid, to start a new health insurance program or both. States must use their allocation to
26
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
cover children below 200% of the poverty level, and they must cover certain services such as
preventive and well-baby care. States must contribute some of their own funds to the program in
order to receive the federal funds allocated to them, and they must maintain Medicaid eligibility
standards which are not more restrictive than their June 1997 levels in order to receive the Child
Health Block Grant money.
IV.
Education
A.
Early Childhood Education
Research has shown that early childhood education can have an important impact on
children's test scores, and can have long-lasting impacts on child well-being. The share of
children enrolled in the Head Start program has increased dramatically over the past few years,
reflecting the current Administration's high priority on early childhood education.
Head Start is a federal program which supports enriched preschool programs for
disadvantaged children between the ages of three and five. Federal guidelines require that 90% of
all children served be from families with incomes below the federal poverty level. These programs
offer disadvantaged children and their parents a range of services which focus on education, social
and emotional development, health and nutrition.
Most studies of the short-term effects of the Head Start program have shown that
participation in Head Start is associated with large short term gains in cognitive test scores, which
typically dissipate between 1 and 3 years after entry to regular school. Studies have found that
children in Head Start are more likely than non-participants to receive medical services, such as
routine checkups, dental care and immunizations.
The most well-known studies of the long-term effects of enhanced preschool are based on
an evaluation of the Perry Preschool Project in Ypsilanti, Michigan. This program had more
intensive interventions than the typical Head Start program, and it involved a small number of
cases. However, the results are encouraging because they show large increases in the probability
27
STAFF DRAFT: November 18, 1997
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
CHAPTER 3
PRELIMINARY & CLOSE HOLD
of graduating from high school, and in the probability of being employed or in post-secondary
education after high school In addition, program participants had fewer teen pregnancies and
lower arrest rates than children in the control group.
A more recent national evaluation of the Head Start program which controls for sibling
fixed effects in measuring the impact of Head Start has found that participation in Head Start is
associated with increases in performance on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test for white and
Hispanic children over age eight. In addition, participation in Head start is associated with a
reduction in the probability of repeating a grade for white and Hispanic children. Finally, this
study found that both white and black children who participated in Head Start were more likely to
be immunized against measles than other children not in Head Start.
Due to the federal government's continued support of the Head Start program, the
number of children enrolled in the Head Start program has increased from 451,000 in FY89 to
752,000 in FY93. The current Administration has set the goal of further expanding the Head
Start program so that 1 million children are enrolled in Head Start by 2002. In addition, starting
in FY95, the Administration piloted its new Early Head Start program for children under age
three. This program served 5000 children in FY95, and an additional 5000 children in FY96.
B.
Elementary and Secondary Education
[To be written]
28
ChildServ
100
childson
file
HELPING CHILDREN BUILD
BETTER LIVES SINCE 1894
YEARS
February 9, 1995
Ms. Melanne Verveer
Deputy Chief of Staff
Office of the First Lady
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Ms. Verveer:
Mr. James Parks of the Washington Bureau of the AFL-CIO, kindly gave me your
name and suggested that you might be able to assist me.
I represent a child welfare agency, ChildServ, which recently celebrated its 100th
anniversary of helping children to build better lives. Next year we would like to sponsor a
symposium on issues most urgent to children and we would like to extend an invitation to
Mrs. Clinton to serve as our keynote speaker.
Mrs. Clinton's interest in the well-being of children along with her interest in
HIPPY (Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters) makes her an excellent
choice for our program. Mrs. Clinton, as I am sure you know, was very instrumental in
introducing the HIPPY program in the United States when she resided in Little Rock.
ChildServ was the first organization to develop the HIPPY program in Chicago and our
success rate has been phenomenal.
The president of our agency, Mr. James C. Jones and I, along with other staff will
attend the upcoming conference sponsored by the Child Welfare League of America in
Washington, March 1-3. Would it be possible for Mr. Jones to meet with you to discuss
yes
our request, in detail.
I have included information on our program, for your review. Please feel free to
contact me should you have any questions/concerns or if you are agreeable to meeting with
a member of our staff.
My thanks, Ms. Verveer, for your consideration on this matter.
Sincerely,
Loni Leteau
It will
Toni Lieteau
just be Toni.
Director
Marketing & Communications
SERVICES
R
United Way
are
Agency
8765 W. Higgins, Suite 450
Chicago, Illinois 60631
312.693.0300
FAX 312.693.0322
ACCREDITED
A special supplement to the Northern Illinois Conference edition of the United Methodist Reporter January 20, 1995
Childserv 10
ChildServ is a United Way agency affiliated with the Northern
This supplement describes a few of the agency's programs to
Illinois Conference of the United Methodist Church (UMC). It
empower children and families in disadvantaged areas of the
is licensed by the Illinois Department of Children and Family
conference. ChildServ receives generous support for its
Services and accredited by the Council on Accreditation of
programs from the United Methodist Church. We hope you will
Services for Families and Children. ChildServ has 22 loca-
be heartened by what you read here. We invite you to share in
YEARS
tions throughout Cook, Lake and DuPage counties.
our mission to serve children and families.
1994: A Year in Review
sbeena year that we will never again experience ChildServ's 100th anniver-
administrators returned ake Bluff participate in the celebration. Margaret Brooks,
secretary. Mr. Jeffords was affiliated with the agency from 1946-1966. These former
I
sary! And, we have had a celebration that will long be remembered as webegin
the senior of the previous administrators and who served as the agency's superinten-
directors recalled activities and programs under their leadership and spoke of their
our second century of helping children and providing for their well-being.
dent from 1942-1954, came from Colorado and former staff were delighted to see her.
delight in the agency's development over the years. The Centennial Brunch served
ChildServ, formerly the Lake Bluff Children's Home, began its centennial
Former exocutivedirectors Robert Beers (1954-1961), Robert Petracek (1961-1967), and
as a "kick-off" for the activities that were to follow during the year, recognizing 100
celebration last year at the Tangley Oaks Educational Center with Centennial
Coyd Taggart (1967-1984) were joined by Alice Jeffords, widow of Erskine Jeffords,
years of service by loyal and dedicated staff, friends and supporters. Let' take look
Brunch. Friends and supporters were on hand to wish the Agency well and applaud
who served not only as an executive director, but also as the agency's executive
at other festivities that made 1994 such a remarkable year for ChildServ.
the accomplishments of the past. This occasion was made more special as former
International expert on preventing child
Lake Bluff origins recalled
abuse keynotes first annual symposium
in annual July 4 parade
And hat would be more appro-
C
hildServ's Annual Meet-
problem.
Chief Counsel with the Illinois De-
ing andfirstannual Sympo-
partment of Children and Family
priate than returning tothe agency's
Cook County Public Guardian
sium featured Dr. Richard
Services, Dr. Michele A. Lorand,
birthplace to participate in the an-
Patrick T. Murphy, Attorney
D. Krugman, international expert
director of Cook County Children's
nual Lake Bluff July 4 parade.
MarilynJ. Wood, former Assistant
Friends and volunteers worked
on the prevention of child abuse, as
Hospital's Child Protective Ser-
the keynote speaker for both
vices Unit, Social Work Co-
diligently, with the assistance of
ordinator Brenda Chandler,
ChildServ Lifetime Trustee Millie
events. Held at the Bethany
Brown and devoted friend of
Methodist Home and Hospi-
also in the Cook County
ChildServ Dawn Weston, in de-
tal in Chicago, the Annual
Children's Protective Ser-
Meeting hosted over 100
vices Unit, and Ramon L.
signing a ChildServ float. Our
friends and Society of
Nieves, Jr., vice president for
participation in this event reac-
ChildServ members.
Programs, ChildServ, served
quainted ChildServ with long-
as speakers and panel lead-
standing friends of the Lake Bluff
The inter-disciplinary
Children's Home, thanks to the
ers. Dr. Agnes D. Lattimer,
Grace United Methodist Church
symposium drew a crowd
wonderful work of the Rev. Orrell
from various disciplines and
medical director of Cook
continues to be a big supporter of
Ruth and the members of the Grace
was cosponsored with Cook
County Hospital and Chair-
the agency shown by this banner
ChildServ's float displayed a favorite photo taken from the agency's
United Methodist Church
County Hospital and Cook
person of the ChildServ
designed for the July 4 parade.
County Children's Hospital.
Board of Trustees, served as
archives and enlarged just for this event.
Child Abuse and Neglect
the event's moderator.
Crisis: Interdisciplinary
The symposium was of
particular interest not only
Luncheon brings back residents who were instrumental
Challenges provided an edu-
cational forum for profession-
because of its topic and
als inchild areas, who
speakers, but because a
in laying foundation for ChildServ agency of today
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
gram, provided insightful and riv-
residents, we have
mg, out au spoke or the love re-
200 walkers 'step out for kids'
been in touch with some former
ceived.
eting comments on her experience
residents and staff who were in-
with the program.
Everyone had a great time. If you
The 1994 "Step Out for Kids"
event held along Chicago's scenic
Because of the success of this
strumental in laying the foundation
know of residents and former staff
Walk-a-Thon also highlighted the
lake shore, which raised awareness
event, ChildServ, along with Cook
for the Agency.
who have lost touch with the
agency's centennial as over 200
and funds for the programs and
Former residents and staff of the
County Hospital, will host another
Agency, ask them to contact
walkers and volunteers joined this
services of ChildServ.
Lake Bluff Children's Home and
symposium in '95.
ChildServ. Even though our cen-
ChildServ Board of Trustees and
tennial celebration is over, the new
staff spent an enjoyable afternoon
year promises to be just as exciting
100 years
reminiscing as well as looking to-
and we want to include all of our
ward the future. We were again
friends.
of ChildServ
honored to have Margaret Brooks
recipes ready
keeping with the centen-
nial theme a cookbook has been
developed: 100 Years of
Dr. Agnes D. Lattimer (left) and President James C. Jones honored
ChildServ Recipes. This book
Margaret Brooks for the time and support she has given to the Agency
includes recipes from former
over the years.
residents and staff of the Lake
Bluff Children's Home and
YEA
ChildServ staff and friends.
Featuring family favorites and
other recipes that have been
passed from generation to gen-
Nowan annual event, the ChildServ Walk-a-Thon brings out participants
eration, or friend to friend,
of all ages to support the mission of the agency.
these mouth-watering dishes
are sure to please even the
Perfect weather greets golfers
most discriminating palate.
Cookbooks areavailable for
Golf enthusiasts had a perfect
sponsored by Continental Bank
$8 by contacting ChildServ at
Lois Brooks, William Brooks and their mother Nancy Brooks (far right)
From left to right above, Rev. and Mrs. Orrell Ruth and Dawn and Arthur
(312)693-0300.
were pleased to be able to chat and recall their association with the
day during the 1994 Charity Golf
(now Bank of America), this year's
Weston joined Vice President of Church Consultation Mason E. Scholl
event raised a substantial amount
LBCH with Margaret Brooks (no relation).
event held at the Boulder Ridge
(center) to celebrate friends coming together.
Country Club.
to be added to the ChildServ cof-
Under the direction of Board of
which will enable the agency to
Trustee Marcus Acheson and
continue its mission.
Whirlwind year sets stage for second century of commitment to children
hile this has been a whirl-
W
The festivities are over, but the
agency's mission of believing that
meet the needs of children by em-
services.
wind year, festivities
commitment remains strong. The
every child is a person of worth
powering communities and fami-
With continued support and
came to a close all too
Board of Trustees and ChildServ
entitled to God's gift of wholeness
lies with children through advo-
blessings of our friends, ChildServ
soon with the Gala Celebration at
staff are focused on achieving the
oflife. ChildServ's3 programs help
cacy, prevention, early interven-
will forge ahead into its second
the Goodman Theatre. Friends and
tion and out-of-
century and lead the way in helping
supporters gathered to extend best
home treatment
children to build better lives.
wishes as ChildServ embarkson its
second century and to enjoy a
magnificent performance of the
Dickens classic, Christmas Carol.
Vice President of ChildServ Personnel Iris
Baudendistel and friend Marian Vargo joined in
the celebration.
Past President/ Dr. David Kirk
was on hand as the centennial
Friends and supporters came from far and near to
Long-standing friends and
Board of Trustee and event organizer Marcus Acheson (far right) with
came to a close and had a chance
congratulate ChildServ on its centennial. The
supporters Millie and Chuck
Reading a proclamation from Mayor Richard M.
other golfers. They are (left to right) Art Murray, Lyle Logan, Diane
to chat with a devoted ChildServ
Webbers from Wisconsin extended their best during
Brown enjoyed the performance
Daley, James C. Jones proudly announced November
Bazarian and Rem Hiller.
supporter Genevieve Kroeger.
the festivities.
and reception.
11 as ChildServ Day in the city of Chicago.
A special supplement to the Northern Illinois Conference edition of the United Methodist Reporter January 20, 1995
Childserv
100
ChildServ is a not-for-profit organization
affiliated with the United Methodist Church.
ChildServ is a United Way agency
licensed by the Illinois Department
of Children and Family Services
and accredited by
the Council on Accreditation of Services
This is a publication of ChildServ
James C. Jones
Photography:
8765 W. Higgins Road, Suite 450
President and CEO
ChildServ Archives
Chicago, Illinois 60631
Toni Lieteau
Sheryl Scavo
YEARS
for Families and Children.
(312) 693-0300
Editor
Tasha Webber
ChildServ Service
Jones takes reins of leadership
League turns 25!
The Second Time Around Gift Shop,
f celebrating its 100th birthday was
of Management, Jones began his career
staff of the Central Baptist Children's
not enough excitement for the
as an Adult Education Instructor and
Home.
opened and maintained by the agency's
agency, ChildServ also welcomed a
later as Social Worker, both in Newark,
His career with Central Baptist has
Service League members, also celebrated
new President and Chief Executive
New Jersey. His professional career in
covered nearly 20 years. During this
its 25th anniversary this year!
The work of these devoted women has
Officer this year.
Chicago began in 1975 when he joined the
time he served as a Family Counselor
James C. Jones became the agency's
and Foster Care Caseworker, Program
enabled programs and services to con-
first African-American leader when he
Supervisor; Senior Supervisor in the
tinue and expand, as this group has pro-
joined the staff this past summer.
Primary Educational Resource Center
vided nearly $1 million in financial sup-
Jones, former Executive Vice President
and Family Counseling Program; as
port to the agency over the years.
at the Central Baptist Children's Home,
both Director of Programs and Deputy
Members encourage all who have not,
and those who have visited the shop (at
is no stranger tochild welfare issues. For
Director for the Cook County Services
the past 19 years Jones has focused his
Division and as the Executive Vice Presi-
4123 Oakton Street, Skokie), to return to
career on issues that affect children and
dent. In this last position, Jones was re-
browse and pick up great bargains. The
ways to bring about positive change.
sponsible for a $12 million operational
Second Time Around Shop isopen Tues-
A graduate of Northwestern
budget encompassing 40 distinct pro-
day through Saturday, 10a.m. p.m.
University' L Kellogg Graduate School
grams for 2,000 families in 11 area sites.
In joining the staff of ChildServ, Jones
will be faced with similar challenges and
Friends of ChildServ (left to right) Marwin Spencer, Linda Zachman and Margie
In memory of
anxiously looks forward to initiating
additional innovative programs for the
Nicolson join James Jones during the initial meeting of the auxiliary group.
Board of Trustees, administrators, staff and friends of ChildServ were sad-
22 sites ChildServ comprises "I am not
dened to learn of the recent death of Ms. Margaret Brooks
only encouraged, but impressed by the
Auxiliary group begins at ChildServ
Ms. Brooks served as the Superintendent: for the Lake Bluff Children Home
dedication shown by the Board of Trust-
from 1942-1954. but remained a loyal friend and supporter until shedied
ccs, staff and supporters for ChildServ,"
We are excited that our new auxiliary
ecutives to athletes.
Last year Ms. Brooks joined the agency for its "Kick-Off" celebration and
Jones said. "This will enable the agency
group, the Friends of ChildServ, has re-
These new friends will bring new re-
later, this past summer, for the Alumni Luncheon
cently been formed This groupcomprises
memorial service was held for her in Boulder, Colorado. She was 95 years
James C. Jones
to continue to emerge as an innovative
sources and fresh perspectives, with a
commitment to help ChildServ care for
ChildServ
leader in the field of child well- being ser-
high-energy professionals from a wide
old
vices as we begin the work before us.
range of disciplines from corporate ex-
children and families in need.
President/CEO
ChildServ offers programs to empower children and families
Therapeutic Foster Care:
ChildServ administers four major programs to foster care children with special needs:
Project 90:
Teen Mom Foster Care:
Provides comprehensive care for boys who have been
Some teen moms are unable to continue living with their
sexually abused and are now abusing other children. This is
natural parents. ChildServ obtains foster care for them
believed to be the only program of its kind in the country.
which may begin during or after their pregnancy, and also
arranges for pre-natal and post-natal care.
Specialized Foster Care:
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
care-givers.
Moms' Place (Lugar Para Madres):
This drop-in center is for mothers of infants and toddlers.
life skills training while their children engage in supervised
Activities help to develop attainable goals among both
play in a nearby room.
children and mothers. ChildServ staff provides mothers with
HIPPY Graduation
HIPPY Graduation
HIPPY (Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters):
HIPPY is a family literacy program that helps parents in
Emphasis is placed on the importance of the parent's role as
disadvantaged communities prepare their four-and five-year-
the child's first teacher. The program helps parents become
old children for school.
involved in their child's education.
Kids' Place
(Lugar Para Ninos):
A drop-in center where pre-teen chil-
dren get help with their homework and
enjoy supervised play, this program en-
courages creativity and is a powerful al-
ternative to gang involvement.
Family Home Day
Care:
This program recruits and trains com-
munity residents, who become licensed
by the state, to provide day care in their
homes for the children of young parents.
Providers often become mentors for the
young mothers, helping them build their
Moms' Place
parenting skills.
Kids' Place
Parent Empowerment
Family Foster Care:
Program (PEP):
ChildServ provides family foster care for children in the
Chicago metropolitan area who are removed from their homes
This in-home program provides services to parents with
because of abuse or neglect. The goal of this program is to return
children whose ages range from newborn to three-year-olds.
the child to the natural parents, whenever possible. If returning
Young mothers are taught what to expect as a child develops,
a child is not possible, the agency explores adoption or long-
together with in-depth information concerning the impact of a
term placement. In every case, ChildServ secks to do what is in
mother's care on that development.
the best interest of the child.
Tutoring:
Group Homes:
An in-school program for children who are experiencing
ChildServ operates three group homes: two are for girls and
classroom learning problems. Tutors for this program are all
one is for boys. Each home provides a safe, home-like environ-
volunteers.
ment for children 13 to 17 who have behavioral and family
problems. The primary goal is to return the child to its natural
Interweave:
home. If this is not possible, alternative arrangements are made.
The professionals who manage the homes give the children
Professional, early intervention counseling for children who
are exhibiting emotional problems in school. Families of the
a feeling of genuine warmth and security.
Moms' Place
Moms' Place
children are involved as counselors and strive to understand
and mitigate problems.
Church-Community
Armour Child and Family
Ecumenical Child Care
Licensing and Adoptions:
Consultation:
Services:
Network:
Working with congregations and community groups
This program licenses foster home and adoption conver-
throughout Northern Illinois, this program provides technical
Providing general counseling and therapy at times of stress
A national, interdenomirational network of individuals who
sions and offers Preparation for Adult Living (PAL) a method
assistance and consultation to groups who are developing
to families withchildren, the Armour program helpsparents: and
work from a faith perspective, advocating for high quality,
of teaching children how to live independently after leaving the
programs that address community issues affecting the quality
children cope with a myriad of issues, including school prob-
affordable, equitable child care and education for all God's
foster home.
of life for children and families.
lems, difficult children, separationor divorce, and bereavement.
children.
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a publication.
Publications have not been scanned in their entirety for the purpose
of digitization. To see the full publication please search online or
visit the Clinton Presidential Library's Research Room.
Childserv 100
YEARS
HELPING CHILDREN BUILD BETTER LIVES
Vol. 1
No. 3
Fall 1994
POLO FARMERS HOST CHILDSERV KIDS
There is an old African proverb which says, "It takes an entire village to raise a child." This day was a
moment when the village for these young people expanded to include both the streets in their Chicago neigh-
borhoods and the small farming community of Polo, 125 miles away. Perhaps by reaching out often enough
to our neighbors, near and far, we may just influence the climate for a more peaceful and just world.
(Story on page 3)
REMINDER
The season is here again, when
thoughts of charitable giving seem to
affect us most. It is not too late to
ACE
take steps to receive maximum tax
benefits for donations made in 1994,
but do it now!
Charitable gifts made by December
31 can help save you dollars while
helping others.
Locations of Services
ChildServ Programs and Services
ChildServ, Beverly
Armour Child and Family Services
9415 S. Western Ave.
Chicago:
Downers Grove
Chicago, IL 60620
Beverly
Lake County
312/233-5100
Naperville
helping children build
Park Ridge
better lives since 1894
ChildServ, Group Home Services
Church Community Consultation
1555 Naperville-Wheaton Rd.
Northern Illinois
Naperville, IL 60563
Community Services North
708/778-7250
Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters
(HIPPY)
ChildServ, Hamlin
Chicago:
Humboldt Park
1633 N. Hamlin St.
Tutoring Home School Connection Interweave
Chicago, IL 60647
Chicago:
Rogers Park
312/292-4250
Kids' Place/Lugar Para Niños
Chicago:
Humboldt Park
ChildServ, Humboldt Park
Rogers Park
1845 N. Kedzie Ave.
Mom's Place/Lugar Para Madres
Chicago, IL 60647
Chicago:
Humboldt Park
312/489-7156
Lake County
Family Home Day Care
ChildServ, IIT
Lake County
10 W. 35th St., 9th Flr.
Family Foster Care
Chicago, IL 60616
Chicago:
Humboldt Park
312/567-7660
SIGA Center
Lake County
ChildServ, Lake County
Community Services South
36325 N. Maple Ave.
Family Home Day Care
Ingleside, IL 60041
Chicago:
IIT
708/587-6655
PEP (Parent Empowerment Program)
Chicago:
IIT
ChildServ, Park Ridge
IMRI
1580 N. Northwest Highway
Chicago:
Grand Boulevard
Park Ridge, IL 60068
HIPPY
708/298-1500
Chicago:
IIT
Interweave
Teen Mom Foster Care
Childserv
ChildServ, Rogers Park
Chicago:
IIT
6613 N. Ashland Ave.
Family Foster Care Services
Chicago, IL 60626
Chicago:
Home-of-Relative
Administrative Offices
312/973-3662
Regular Foster Care
8765 W. Higgins Road, Suite 450
Therapeutic Foster Care Services
SIGA Center
Chicago:
Beverly
Chicago, IL 60631
1103 Greenwood
Medically complex
HIV
Specialized
312/693-0300
Waukegan, IL 60087
Group Homes
708/662-0633
Downers Grove
Naperville
Lisle
1/94 4k
Dedicated to serving
children and families
ChildServ is a child welfare agency serv-
ing children and families in the Greater
Chicago Area.
The agency was founded in 1894
as the Methodist Deaconess Orphanage,
a refuge for homeless children from the
streets of Chicago. It later distinguished
itself as Lake Bluff/Chicago Homes for
Children, setting a standard for residen-
tial care for abused, neglected and
delinquent girls and boys.
We take a many-faceted approach to
Today, as ChildServ, we are a
cover the needs of children, families and
Community-based,
wide-ranging agency providing
communities:
human-faced
community-based programs and
services that meet the needs of children
prevention services
and families in cities and suburbs.
early intervention
ChildServ works with local community and
placement
church-based organizations to assess the
Filling needs,
counseling & therapy
need for child-and family-oriented pro-
consulting services
grams and services.
finding answers
advocacy
Based on that assessment we
At ChildServ, we believe every child is
We go where the need is, adapting and
develop programs to meet the needs of
entitled to God's gift of wholeness of life.
adjusting as we go. We develop new pro-
those communities.
grams and services as we see new problems
We practice our belief by helping
and circumstances.
We are not bound by programs and
children and families help themselves to
methods of the past. We seek innovative
a better life. When we succeed, we
new solutions to new problems. We are
prevent child abuse and neglect.
proud to pioneer new and effective ways to
serve.
Our programs attack problems at
ChildServ is a United Way Agency
the family and community level to help
Affiliated with the United Methodist Church
If it's good for kids,
people find solutions that work for them.
and accredited by the Council On Accreditation of
Services for Families and Children
we do it.
She avoided situations where she
might have to use English.
Childserv
She agreed to participate in
HIPPY because the program lets her
1580 N. Northwest Highway
"HIPPY taught
work with her four-year-old in
Park Ridge, IL 60068-1456
312-694-2727
me that I can do
Spanish. But something happened.
708-298-1500
"My boy, he began to translate
a whole lot of
things back into English for me.
Pretty soon I discovered I was
learning just as much as he was.
things I never
"After a while, my family
educator told me about a class in
thought I could
English as a second language, and
she helped me enroll. Pretty soon I
do. And you
was looking for chances to use
know what? I'm
English.
"Soon I think it will be good
enough for me to go to cosmetology
good at it, too."
school. Before HIPPY I never even
dared think about it, even though
it's something I've wanted to do for
years."
Luisa Rivera, Dorothy Taylor
and Charles Meadows are not
ChildServ is a child welfare agency affiliated
exceptions. They are typical of the
with the Northern Illinois Conference of the
United Methodist Church, licensed by the
growth and hope HIPPY brings
HIPPY:
Illinois Department of Children and Family
families in the program. Social
Services and accredited by the Council on
services professionals call this
Accreditation of Services for Families and
empowerment, helping people
Children.
Turning Lives
take control of their lives.
You support the empowerment
Around
SERVICES
of children and families through-
out Northern Illinois when you
COUNCE
United Way
ACCREDITED
Agency
contribute to Childserv.
6/91 10k
IPPY is short for Home
class, according to reports from
H
other people. It made me feel real
Instruction Program for
their teachers.
good
Preschool Youngsters. It is a
ChildServ developed the
"HIPPY taught me that I can do
home-based program that shows
program to create this kind of
a whole lot of things I never
disadvantaged parents how to help
results for the children. But equally
thought I could do. And you know
their four- and five-year-old
remarkable is what the program has
what? I'm good at it. Even got my
children prepare for success in
done for the parents who partici-
GED."
kindergarten and the classroom.
pate. Here are some of their stories
Developed in Israel with the
in their own words. The names and
Charles Meadows, Sr.,
support of the U.S.-based National
some details have been changed to
was married and a father when he
Council of Jewish Women, the
protect the privacy of the families.
was barely out of high school. A
program is active in countries on
series of frustrating, dead end jobs
five continents and 13 of the United
Dorothy Taylor is raising
strained his family life, and when
States.
ChildServ introduced the
four children in a disadvantaged
HIPPY came along, Chuck saw a
program in two Chicago neighbor-
West Side neighborhood. Some-
chance to spend quality time with
times she works two jobs to make
his son.
hoods in 1989. It has since been
ends meet. That does not leave a lot
He also discovered something
expanded.
HIPPY uses paraprofessional
of time to get involved in her
about himself he never suspected."I
children's school.
was bored in high school, and I
home visitors (family educators)
and role playing to teach parents
"Frankly, I never wanted to get
never did as well as I should've. But
involved. I hated school, and I
when I started the program with
how to teach their children. The
dropped out. But I want something
Chuck, Jr., I found out I really liked
method helps parents with poor
education succeed as their
better for my kids. I used to figure
teaching him.
children's first teacher. The Chicago
there was nothing I could do for
"It gave me a whole something
them, so I left it all up to the
new to do with my life. So now I'm
program uses specially developed
teachers, and I never went near the
in college studying early childhood
bilingual materials for Hispanic
school unless there was a problem.
development."
parents who speak little or no
English.
"My girlfriend got me into the
By the end of its first year,
program with my four-year-old,
Luisa Rivera lives in a
HIPPY children were testing on a
and I liked it. And my little girl
neighborhood in Humboldt Park
par with or above those in conven-
really took to it, too.
where she never has to speak
tional Head Start programs. The
"Then I got to be a family
English. When she had to visit
first HIPPY children also ranked at
educator, and I discovered that I
school for her older children, she
or near the top of their kindergarten
had something that could help
always took along an interpreter.
CARNEGIE TASK FORCE
ON MEETING THE NEEDS OF YOUNG CHILDREN
A Program of Carnegie Corporation of New York
4 December 1992
437 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10022
(212) 371-3200
President-elect Bill Clinton
Telex: US166776
1120 Vermont Avenue, N.W.
Fax: (212) 754-4073
Washington, D.C. 20270
Task Force Members
Dear Bill:
Richard W. Riley
Chairman
I am writing to request a meeting before the inauguration, if possible,
Diane Asselin
to share with you information on an increasingly urgent policy matter. This
Kathryn E. Barnard
country needs to develop a far-sighted and cost-effective national strategy to
Owen Bradford Butler
better meet the needs of families with children under the age of three.
Ramon C. Cortines
Ezra C. Davidson
John D. Deardourff
As you may recall from our conversation on your last visit to South
Irving B. Harris
Carolina, I chair the Carnegie Corporation Task Force on Meeting the Needs
John W. Hatch
of Young Children. The task force has clarified the vital needs of children in
Fred M. Hechinger
the earliest years and will recommend a series of actions to foster healthy child
Max M. Heller
development and constructive family functioning under contemporary American
Shirley M. Hufstedler
conditions.
A. Sidney Johnson III
Judith E. Jones
Thomas H. Kean
I have enclosed David Hamburg's essay, Healthy Development in the
Lorraine V. Klerman
Earliest Years. This brief piece reflects his current thinking about our
Eleanor E. Maccoby
country's youngest children. Other background material on the task force is
Vonnie C. McLoyd
also enclosed.
Deborah Phillips
Julius B. Richmond
Gloria G. Rodriguez
The goal of the task force is to help define a national agenda for
Kenneth J. Ryan
children under the age of three. An analysis of the following policy concerns
Jonas Salk
has been initiated: preparation for parenthood and family life; high quality
Isabel V. Sawhill
child care; primary and preventive health care; the impact of poverty and
Lisbeth B. Schorr
dangerous environments on children; family support; children with special
Michael S. Wald
needs; and services that work for children and their families. Although a
Edward Zigler
Barry Zuckerman
comprehensive report of the task force's efforts will not be issued until early
1994, David Hamburg and I would, nonetheless, welcome the opportunity to
Administration
be of assistance now to your administration.
Linda A. Randolph
Executive Director
I suggest a meeting now because the task force is in a sound position to
Kathryn Taaffe Young
offer creative and reasoned advice to inform the administration's early planning
Assistant Director
on key policy issues for children. The task force's work on two efforts could
prove especially useful to you and other policy planners. This work will be
reviewed by the full task force membership at its next meeting in late February
1993, however the following core materials will be available by early January 1993.
First, the task force is completing a survey of twenty-five recent national and state
level reports. This analysis substantiates an emerging consensus on key issues and policy
recommendations that address the multiple problems facing children and families in this
country. The report builds on the 1989 National Academy of Science's Forum on the Future
of Children and Families report, Social Policy for Children and Families and examines
closely the recommendations for the period between preconception and three years of age.
The second effort centers around three policy issues that your administration and
Congress will probably address over the next few months-family and medical leave, health
care reform, and expanded Head Start. Although it is premature for the task force to make
broad recommendations officially, we would like to share with you the following materials
that we are developing:
An analysis of state and private sector family and medical leave initiatives.
This working paper will detail what we already know about the costs of various leaves
as well as their impact on worker productivity and family functioning. An analysis of
the costs associated with state disability insurance systems will be included as well as
policy options for a step-wise approach towards a paid leave.
A "down payment plan" for health care reform. We are able to identify the
components of a comprehensive benefits package that would be beneficial for all
expectant mothers and families with children 0-3. Such a package is a cost effective
way to reduce the price of later health care coverage. Indeed these measures have
life-long significance for disease prevention and health promotion. Our working paper
will summarize the utility of specific services in relation to short-term costs and long-
term savings.
Expansion of Head Start for very young children. This working paper will
provide background information about current efforts utilizing the principles of Head
Start for children under the age of three. It will also examine the key elements for a
Head Start expansion directed towards infants, toddlers and their parents.
The new administration and Congress now have the historic opportunity to address
"the other deficit" of human capital that is threatening the economic future of our country.
For too long, we have ignored this nation's youngest children. Work that puts our nation's
youngest children first strikes me as an especially good place to start. David Hamburg and I
look forward to meeting with you to discuss these essential matters.
Sincerely,
Nick
Richard W. Riley
CARNEGIE TASK FORCE
ON MEETING THE NEEDS OF YOUNG CHILDREN
A Program of Carnegie Corporation of New York
437 Madison Avenue
HEALTHY DEVELOPMENT IN THE EARLIEST YEARS
New York, NY 10022
(212) 371-3200
David A. Hamburg
Telex: US166776
Fax: (212) 754-4073
Task Force Members
The United States is truly a great nation, yet we are inadvertently
doing immense damage to our children. In this unique society-probably
Richard W. Riley
Chairman
the most technically advanced, affluent, and democratic the world has ever
Diane Asselin
known-the crucially formative years of early childhood have become very
Kathryn E. Barnard
dangerous for millions of American children. However, now there is a
Owen Bradford Butler
terrific new opportunity to prevent much of the damage.
Ramon C. Cortines
Ezra C. Davidson
Within the scientific and professional communities, a remarkable
John D. Deardourff
Irving B. Harris
degree of consensus is emerging on the conditions that positively influence
John W. Hatch
child development. Much has become known through research about ways
Fred M. Hechinger
that parents and others can meet the essential requirements for healthy
Max M. Heller
development. Moreover, there has been an upsurge of innovative programs
Shirley M. Hufstedler
in community organizations, churches, schools, and youth-serving
A. Sidney Johnson III
Judith E. Jones
organizations providing child care, support, and guidance for parents as
Thomas H. Kean
well as growth-promoting experiences for children and adolescents. Such
Lorraine V. Klerman
useful interventions draw upon knowledge of the family crucible and child
Eleanor E. Maccoby
development.
Vonnie C. McLoyd
Deborah Phillips
Julius B. Richmond
Gloria G. Rodriguez
The Dilemma of Today's Children
Kenneth J. Ryan
Jonas Salk
Over extended years of growth and development, the human child
Isabel V. Sawhill
Lisbeth B. Schorr
experiences a prolonged period of immaturity and vulnerability-the longest
Michael S. Wald
of any known species. Much has to be acquired, much mastered, much
Edward Zigler
tried and found wanting, much discovered and put to use. Overwhelmingly,
Barry Zuckerman
this learning time is spent in close relationship with adults who offer
Administration
nurturing love, protection, guidance, stimulation, and support. Coping
Linda A. Randolph
abilities are acquired in a social context, largely through the sequence of
Executive Director
observation, imitation, and practice as well as of exploration and discovery.
Kathryn Taaffe Young
For the caregivers, it is an enduring, long-term, highly challenging
Assistant Director
commitment.
1
Historically, several circumstances have been conducive to meeting essential
requirements for healthy child development:
1) an intact, cohesive, nuclear family, dependable in the crunch;
2) a relationship with at least one parent who is consistently nurturing, loving,
enjoying, teaching, and coping;
3) easy accessibility to supportive extended family members;
4) a supportive community, whether it be a neighborhood, religious, ethnic or
political group, but some larger group beyond the family that is helpful;
5) parents experienced with child rearing during the years of growth and
development or having access to ongoing formal or informal education for
parenthood;
6) a perception of opportunity during childhood with a tangible basis for hope of
an attractive future; and
7) some measure of predictability about the adult environment that permits a
child's gradual preparation to cope with it and take advantage of its real
opportunities.
With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, however, the rate of scientific and
technological innovation in Western Europe took off, creating profound transformations in
the organization of economic, political, and social life, with psychological and other
ramifications that continue to the present day. The ancient and powerful motivation of
parents to do well by their children now occurs in a setting quite different from any that
our ancestral parents knew. In the past three decades-a moment in human history-the
change in regular patterns of contact between American children and their adult relatives
is remarkable. Not only are their mothers home much less, but there is little if any
evidence of increased time by fathers at home to compensate. Overall, the time parents
spend with children has declined by about half in the past 30 years. Moreover, only
about 5 percent of American children see a grandparent regularly, a much lower level
than was the case in earlier times. Powerful institutions of society such as business and
government have done little to facilitate family availability for children or to strengthen
the competence of families in the rapidly changing circumstances of the late 20th century.
These problems are compounded by high mobility as well as erosion of strong
neighborhood ties and other social supports. So we now live in a time of substantial
family disruption, manifested in a variety of ways and involving considerable jeopardy to
child development in all strata of society.
2
Who can provide vital growth-fostering experiences for healthy child development?
If some traditional sources of such strength have become weakened by enormous
historical changes, then how can children best be served? If substitutions are necessary,
how can they be provided? When is it sensible to intervene? Often it is necessary to
start intervention early with family-equivalent functions. The pivotal institutions are
schools, churches, community organizations, and the health care system-all augmented
by educational functions of the media.
A developmental sequence of interventions starts with early prenatal care (with
medical and educational components) and goes on to preventive and primary health care,
parent education, social supports for young families, high-quality child care, and
preschool education.
The early years can build the foundation for a long, healthy life span characterized
by curiosity and learning throughout its course. Health and education are closely linked
in the development of vigorous, skillful, adaptable young people. Investments in health
and education can be guided by research of biomedical and behavioral sciences in ways
likely to prevent much of the damage now being done to children and adolescents-and
thereby contribute substantially to a dynamic economy and flourishing democratic society
in the next century.
Meeting the Needs for Healthy Development in the Earliest Years
Of great importance is the recognition that many of the causes of damage to
children are interrelated. They are also potentially preventable at reasonable cost.
Prenatal care, a vivid example, is now weak or absent for at least one-quarter of this
nation's mothers. Yet it has a powerful capacity to prevent lifelong damage and is
dramatically cost-effective. High-quality, early prenatal care for all pregnant women,
therefore, is the first essential building block for the healthy development of children.
Vigorous outreach efforts need to be made to bring poor young women into prenatal care
early. Models that demonstrate this can be done already exist.
The essential components of prenatal care are, besides medical care, education for
health and social support services. Education helps parents understand the importance of
protecting the vulnerable brain of the growing fetus so that the child can reach full mental
potential. Utilizing the instinctive motivation of the pregnant mother as well as the
expectant father, it also imparts ways to care for themselves and their prospective baby.
The educational component of prenatal care can be expanded to include a constructive
examination of options for parents in their life course. This can lead to job training or
other opportunities likely to improve prospects for the future of the mother and father and
their new family.
3
A major facilitating factor is the ready availability of a dependable person who can
provide social support for the health and education of the mother through her months of
pregnancy and beyond. In one valuable set of innovations, pregnant girls are connected
with "resource mothers." These are women living in the same neighborhood as the
adolescent mother. They have assimilated life experiences in a constructive way, have
successfully raised their own children and have learned a lot that can be useful regarding
life skills most relevant for the young mother. They convey what they have learned about
the problems facing the young mother and in general provide sympathetic, sustained
attention as well as gateways to community resources. Such examples highlight the
crucial value of social support for health and education throughout childhood.
Evidence is accumulating on early interventions in the first few years that can
shape a person's lifelong course in a healthy, learning, constructive way. Such
interventions include well-baby care with an emphasis on disease prevention and health
promotion; parent education to strengthen competence and build close parent-child
relationships; social support networks in which parents give mutual aid to foster health
and education for their children and themselves; child care of high quality outside the
home; preschool education in the Head Start mode.
Well-baby care oriented to prevent lifelong damage is vital not only for child
health but also for building parental competence. Immediately after delivery, health-care
providers assess the newborn's health and inform the parents. The attachment between
mother and baby is fostered, and preparation for coping with predictably difficult episodes
is undertaken. In addition to providing immunizations during infancy, health- care
practitioners also monitor the child's growth carefully to detect nutritional problems and
treat infectious diseases. Pediatricians and other health-care providers nowadays provide
well-informed guidance and emotional support to help families attain healthy lifestyles.
They answer parents' questions and anticipate questions about growth and development,
stress, and coping. They provide vital services-for example, early treatment of ear
infections and correction of vision and hearing deficits that interfere with education and
normal development of language and other essential skills.
Since pediatricians and other physicians are often in short supply, particularly in
poor city neighborhoods and remote rural areas, it is essential to extend their reach. We
need to enlist the aid of nurse practitioners, physicians' assistants, home visitors, parent
support group workers, and public health workers. They can have an important role in
building parental competence-through guidance about meeting essential requirements for
healthy child development and as a gateway to community resources.
A substantial amount of research in child development makes clear that early
childhood intervention programs can also help parents to become teachers of their own
children to develop mutually beneficial parent-child relationships. Child and family
4
resource programs provide services in the home and at a center, depending on the
problem at hand. They deal more broadly with the health, education, and counseling of
families with children from infancy to school age.
Research has shown that one of the most effective ways to foster healthy
development within the first three years of life and beyond is to combine quality child
care with the building of parent competence. Quality child care for children fosters
developmental and learning gains. Enhancing the competencies of parents improves their
ability to provide and sustain the effects of cognitive, social, and health interventions for
their child. The effect is particularly striking in high-risk urban poverty populations.
Often adolescent mothers involved in these intervention efforts benefit as manifested by
going on to higher levels of education. There also is evidence of a beneficial effect on
younger siblings. This is a two-generation intervention that benefits young parents and
children, even for their entire lifetimes.
Preschool education at ages three and four, especially in the Head Start mode, has
become a symbol of hope over three decades. Overall, individuals who have been in
early education programs like Head Start have shown better achievement scores in
elementary school, are less likely to be classified as needing special education, have
higher rates of high school completion and college attendance, and lower pregnancy and
crime rates than are comparable students who were not in preschool programs.
The lessons of Head Start have wide applicability. This kind of early stimulation,
encouragement, instruction and health care-all with substantial parental involvement-can
also be incorporated into a variety of child care settings, and thereby help to reduce
casualties. This approach is spreading to younger ages, and the trend deserves support.
But Head Start is not best seen as a one-time event-akin to immunization. Rather it is a
vital part of a development-promotion sequence throughout childhood.
This sequence of developmentally useful interventions has important applicability
to the entire population, but it must be applied in a concerted way to poor and
disadvantaged communities. There is much that can be achieved if we think of our entire
population as a very large extended family-tied by history to a shared destiny and
therefore requiring a strong ethic of mutual aid.
The casualties in early life are now so heavy that they are beginning to drag down
the entire nation. The social and economic costs of severely damaging conditions that
distort growth and development are terrible-not only in the intrinsic tragedies of these
shattered lives but also in effects that hit the entire society, involving rich and poor alike.
The costs of disease and disability, ignorance and incompetence, crime and violence,
alienation and hatred can no longer be tolerated. Surely present knowledge, evidence,
and experience make clear that we can do better than we are now doing to provide
5
conditions in which all children can grow up healthy and vigorous, inquiring and
problem-solving, decent, and constructive.
In recent years, powerful individuals have begun to address the problems of
children, including members of both houses of Congress, governors, business leaders,
members of the clergy, scientists, and media representatives. If a broad public consensus
emerges on the facts, if multi-sector leadership continues to grow, and if constructive
policy options are fully considered, then we could see a real transformation in the health
and well-being of all our children. Presidential leadership is the key that could unlock the
door to a better future.
6
CARNEGIE TASK FORCE
ON MEETING THE NEEDS OF YOUNG CHILDREN
A Program of Carnegie Corporation of New York
437 Madison Avenue
MEETING THE NEEDS OF YOUNG CHILDREN:
New York, NY 10022
(212) 371-3200
A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY, A GIANT OPPORTUNITY
Telex: US166776
Fax: (212) 754-4073
Program Summary
In recent years numerous national commissions have expressed strong
Task Force Members
concern for the well-being of children and their families. Recognizing the
Richard W. Riley
links between economic and family well-being, these commissions note that an
Chairman
investment in people-especially children-is the most important investment a
Diane Asselin
nation can make. Yet even as research underscores the critical importance of
Kathryn E. Barnard
Owen Bradford Butler
the first three years of life, the United States has not been able to provide all
Ramon C. Cortines
young children with a healthy start.
Ezra C. Davidson
John D. Deardourff
During these early years, many developmental changes take place
Irving B. Harris
intellectually, socially, physically, and emotionally. Children begin mastery of
John W. Hatch
language and social and motor skills. The parent-child relationship, forged in
Fred M. Hechinger
Max M. Heller
this period, forms the basis for subsequent social relations. The nutrition and
Shirley M. Hufstedler
health care infants and young children receive determine how rapidly they will
A. Sidney Johnson III
advance physically and mentally. Child experts and society in general believe
Judith E. Jones
that children's early experiences and opportunities profoundly influence
Thomas H. Kean
development during and beyond the early years. Despite what we know, many
Lorraine V. Klerman
children and families are in trouble. Specifically, in 1992:
Eleanor E. Maccoby
Vonnie C. McLoyd
Deborah Phillips
Many mothers and young children cannot afford and are not
Julius B. Richmond
receiving adequate prenatal and preventive health care.
Gloria G. Rodriguez
Kenneth J. Ryan
The United States has no family leave policy and our child care
Jonas Salk
system is inadequate. Group care for infants is particularly
Isabel V. Sawhill
Lisbeth B. Schorr
substandard: many babies are cared for by a revolving staff that
Michael S. Wald
typically has no specialized training in the needs of very young
Edward Zigler
children.
Barry Zuckerman
Administration
Across all social classes, parental inattention of children is a growing
Linda A. Randolph
and disturbing phenomenon.
Executive Director
Kathryn Taaffe Young
Families with young children are experiencing significant economic
Assistant Director
decline. Over the past two decades, the poverty rate has increased to 23
percent for these families, while 42 percent of all first children are born
to unmarried mothers, mothers with no high school diploma, or
mothers under the age of twenty.
Common sense and research evidence tell us that how well young children develop
ultimately depends on the quality and adequacy of the resources available to them. All
adults-parents themselves, adults in the community, government, and the private
sector-share responsibility for securing promising futures for young children. Yet, current
public and policy debates reflect conflicting values about private and public responsibility for
families and children. Many Americans are reluctant to allow government intervention in
matters that are historically the purview of the family. The younger the child, the more
profound is our society's belief that his or her care and well-being are the private
responsibility of the family.
Although children from the time of birth until they enter preschool have historically
been the sole responsibility of parents, all families are being influenced by several recent
demographic trends. Most notable are the rise in single-parent homes, the increased number
of families with young children living at or below the poverty line, and the growing entry of
women into the work force. These trends are making supports to family life increasingly
necessary.
This need for new supports has contributed to a rising tide of public concern that has
prompted government, private agencies, and the business community to be involved in the
lives of certain groups of families with children. Supports include programs and services in
child care, early intervention, family support and parent education, health, nutrition, and
parental leave. As laudable as these efforts are, however, they have been developed in a
piecemeal fashion without a coherent national, multi-sector policy agenda.
Carnegie Corporation of New York has a long-standing interest in promoting
conditions that help children lead healthy, productive lives. The Carnegie Task Force on
Meeting the Needs of Young Children was created to educate parents and the country about
very young children: what they are capable of and what opportunities and experiences they
need to develop in a healthy way. This will be done through a critical analysis and synthesis
of existing information, the stimulation of promising and proven lines of inquiry, and the
dissemination of a comprehensive report. Our goal is to assist in marshalling public and
political will to help implement a comprehensive national agenda to ensure healthier child
development, paying particular attention to vulnerable children. Former governor Richard
Riley of South Carolina chairs the twenty-eight member task force that includes scientific,
corporate, and government leaders and experts on child development, education, health,
social support, and law. The group's composition reflects the different sectors of society it
hopes to mobilize for action on early childhood issues.
The task force will produce an integrative and comprehensive report describing
current knowledge on the basic needs of young children and their families beginning with
prenatal care through the first three years of life. The report will analyze characteristics of
successful intervention programs and describe proven or promising strategies that help
families to nurture their young children. The report will also focus on strategies to
implement promising approaches on a broader scale, through public policy and through
2
private initiatives.
The country must now turn the spotlight to infants, toddlers and pregnant women,
groups that receive the least supports and are the poorest and most stressed. Although this
task is daunting, we have the research knowledge and practical experience to know what to
do and how to do it. We have a historic opportunity to secure good foundations for our
youngest citizens, or face unparalleled risks if we fail to act aggressively. By investing in
young children and their families, we are investing in the economic future of our country.
Guiding Principles for the Task Force
In developing the task force's goal of a national agenda for young children, we are
guided by five principles. Each principle supports the idea of a shared responsibility among
all segments of society in securing promising futures for children.
Planned pregnancies in healthy women are the best way to ensure healthy
babies. In the broad sense, planning for parenthood includes educational approaches
to understand the responsibilities of family life and the prevention of unwanted or
untimely pregnancies. Readily available prenatal care for all pregnant couples is a
strategy proven to be cost-effective. The essential components of these enriched
services are medical care, health and parenting education, nutrition supplementation,
and social supports.
Parents are the principal caregivers and teachers of their young children.
Indeed, it is the special kind of long-term relationship with an adult who is strongly
attached to the child that fosters the development of human competence and character.
Opportunities and experiences provided by parents constitute the fundamental
ingredients for understanding oneself and others. This allows the young child to
survive and flourish in the wider world.
All mothers and fathers need a range of child- and family-oriented supports
that allow them to fulfill their roles as parents. Prenatal care, preventive health
care, high-quality child care, and family support and education are all essential. In
order to meet parents and children's needs, services much be of high quality,
accessible, and adequately financed. In sum, the advancement of social policies for
infants, toddlers, and their parents that focus on prevention rather than remediation is
a cost-effective strategy, since we know conclusively that healthy early development
leads to later school success.
Specific family-friendly work policies and practices promote the well-being of
children and families. The presence of supports such as parental leave, a children's
allowance, flexible work scheduling, career sequencing, and on-site child care
recognizes the importance of the parent-child relationship and the notion of shared
work and child care responsibilities. These policies and practices allow parents to
3
spend more time with their young children, thereby addressing a problem faced by
most working parents with young children.
Young children and parents are influenced by the community in which they
live. Safe and secure community environments, as well as neighborhood-based family
support programs and informal social networks, foster healthy child development and
strengthen families.
4
CARNEGIE TASK FORCE ON MEETING THE NEEDS OF YOUNG CHILDREN
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Richard W. Riley
Partner
Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough
Columbia, SC
MEMBERS
Diane Asselin
Asselin Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles, CA
Kathryn E. Barnard
Professor of Nursing and
Associate Dean for Academic Programs
School of Nursing
University of Washington
Seattle, WA
Owen Bradford Butler
Chairman
Committee for Economic Development
Denver, CO
Ramon C. Cortines
Superintendent (retired)
San Francisco Unified School District
San Francisco, CA
Ezra C. Davidson, M.D.
Professor and Chairman
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science
Los Angeles, CA
John D. Deardourff
Chairman
Bailey, Deardourff & Associates
Falls Church, VA
5
Irving B. Harris
Chairman, Executive Committee
Pittway Corporation
Chicago, IL
John W. Hatch
Professor
Department of Health Behavior & Health Education
School of Public Health
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC
Fred M. Hechinger
Senior Advisor
Carnegie Corporation of New York
New York, NY
Max M. Heller
Greenville, SC
Shirley M. Hufstedler
Partner
Hufstedler, Klaus & Ettinger
Los Angeles, CA
A. Sidney Johnson III
Executive Director
American Public Welfare Association
Washington, DC
Judith E. Jones
Director
National Center for Children in Poverty
School of Public Health
Columbia University
New York, NY
The Honorable Thomas H. Kean
President
Drew University
Madison, NJ
Lorraine V. Klerman
Professor
Division of MCH School of Public Health
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, AL
6
Eleanor E. Maccoby
Professor
Department of Psychology
Stanford University
Stanford, CA
Vonnie C. McLoyd
Research Scientist
Center for Human Growth & Development and
Professor
Department of Psychology
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI
Deborah Phillips
Associate Professor of Psychology
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA
Julius B. Richmond, M.D.
John D. MacArthur Professor of Health Policy Emeritus
Department of Social Medicine
Harvard Medical School
Boston, MA
Gloria G. Rodriguez
National President
Avance Family Support and Education Program
San Antonio, TX
Kenneth J. Ryan, M.D.
Chairman
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Boston, MA
Jonas Salk, M.D.
Salk Institute for Biological Studies
La Jolla, CA
Isabel V. Sawhill
Senior Fellow
The Urban Institute
Washington, D.C.
7
Lisbeth B. Schorr
Director
Project on Effective Services
Harvard University
Washington, D.C.
Michael S. Wald
Jackson Eli Reynolds Professor of Law
Stanford Law School
Stanford University
Stanford, CA
Edward Zigler
Director
Bush Center in Child Development and Social Policy and
Sterling Professor of Psychology
Yale University
New Haven, CT
Barry Zuckerman, M.D.
Professor of Pediatrics and Public Health
School of Medicine
Boston University
Director, Division of Developmental and
Behavioral Pediatrics
Boston City Hospital
Boston, MA
CARNEGIE STAFF MEMBERS
David A. Hamburg
President
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Elena Nightingale
Special Advisor to the President &
Senior Program Officer
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Vivien Stewart
Program Chair
Education and Healthy Development of
Children and Youth
Carnegie Corporation of New York
8
Michael H. Levine
Program Officer
Education and Healthy Development of
Children and Youth
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Linda A. Randolph
Executive Director
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Task Force on Meeting the Needs of Young Children
Kathryn Taaffe Young
Assistant Director
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Task Force on Meeting the Needs of Young Children
9
ID HEALTHA USA STATE SERIMAN
THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
WASHINGTON DC 20201
FEB I 3 1995
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw
Chairman, Subcommittee on Human Resources
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This letter expresses the Administration's views on the Chairman's mark for welfare reform
legislation under consideration by the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human
Resources.
The Administration shares the commitment of the Congress and the American people to real
welfare reform that emphasizes work, parental responsibility, state flexibility, and the
protection of children. Last year, the President submitted a bold welfare reform bill, the
Work and Responsibility Act of 1994, which embodied these values. It imposed tough work
requirements while providing opportunities for education, training, child care and supports to
working people. It included a stringent set of child support enforcement provisions. It
required each teen mother to live at home, stay in school and identify her baby's father. It
increased state flexibility without sacrificing accountability. And it maintained a basic
structure of protections for children.
The Administration looks forward to working cooperatively with the Congress in a bipartisan
way to pass bold welfare reform legislation this year. The Administration has, however,
serious concerns about a number of features of the Chairman's mark that appear to
undermine the values to which we are all committed. The Administration seeks to end
welfare as we know it by promoting work, family and responsibility, not by punishing poor
children for their parents' mistakes. Welfare reform will succeed only if it successfully
moves people from welfare to work.
Work
For years, Republicans and Democrats alike have agreed that the central goal of welfare
reform must be work. That is still our goal: People who can work ought to go to work and
earn a paycheck not a welfare check. The Administration believes that no adult who is able
to work should receive welfare for an unlimited time without working. The Administration
believes that from the first day someone comes onto welfare, he or she should be required to
participate in job search, job placement, education, or training needed to move off welfare
and into a job quickly. It is government's responsibility to help ensure that the critical job
placement, training, and child care services are provided. Individuals who are willing to
work should have the opportunity to work and not be arbitrarily cut off assistance.
The Administration therefore has serious concerns about the Chairman's mark before you:
It eliminates requirements that recipients participate in job search, education,
work or training as a condition of receiving welfare, and ends any
responsibility of state welfare systems to provide education, training and
placement services to move recipients from welfare to work. The proposed
legislation effectively repeals the bipartisan Family Support Act signed by
President Ronald Reagan in 1988.
The proposed legislation includes only minimal and unenforceable
requirements that recipients work. The bill requires only that persons on the
rolls for more than 2 years engage in "work activities" loosely defined by the
state welfare bureaucracy, rather than a real work requirement. The proposed
participation standards are very low. In many ways, the work requirements
are even weaker than those in current law.
The proposed legislation provides no assurance of child care to recipients who
work or are preparing to work--even if a state requires them to participate. It
offers no promise of child care for those who leave welfare for work or for
those who could avoid falling onto welfare if they had some help with child
care. While it repeals provisions of existing law that provide funding for child
care, this bill is silent on whether any additional funds will be available for
subsidized child care for low income working families.
The proposed legislation repeals the current rule that anyone who leaves
welfare for work can receive Medicaid for an additional year to ease the
transition. This would further reduce health care coverage and make it harder
for people to move from welfare to work.
The proposed legislation would deny all cash assistance to families that have
received assistance for more than five years, even if the adult in the family is
unable to find a job or prevented from holding a job because of illness or the
need to care for a disabled family member. Children would be seriously
jeopardized even if their parents cannot find any work.
The Administration supports an alternative approach that would genuinely transform the
welfare system into a transitional system focused on work. It would have strict requirements
for recipients to participate in and clear responsibilities for states to provide education,
training and placement assistance; it would have serious time limits after which work would
be required; it would ensure that children would not be left alone when parents were working
by providing assistance for child care; it would put parents to work, not just cut them off;
and it would ensure that children can expect support from two parents.
2
Parental Responsibility
The Administration believes that welfare reform should recognize the responsibility and
encourage the involvement of both parents in their children's lives. The Administration
considers child support enforcement to be an integral part of welfare reform, particularly
because it sends a strong message to young people about the responsibility of both parents to
support their children. The Administration was pleased that you had agreed to add child
support enforcement to your welfare reform bill, and sorry that your proposals are not yet
part of the bill now under consideration. The Administration looks forward to working
closely with you on this issue in the coming weeks.
The only child support provision included in the Chairman's mark is one that
allows states to reduce payments to children for the first 6 months if paternity
has not been legally established. This provision seems ineffectual and unfair.
Even if a mother fully cooperates by giving detailed information identifying
the father and his possible location, and even if the state is diligent in pursuing
the father, it can easily take 6 months to get paternity legally established.
There is no reason why the child should be punished during this period.
The Administration believes that it makes far more sense to deny benefits entirely to any
parent who refuses to identify the father or to cooperate in locating him. However, once the
mother has done all she can, the family should qualify for aid, and then the state should
establish paternity within one year.
The Administration believes that the welfare system should encourage the formation and
support of two-parent families. The Administration is therefore concerned about an
important omission in the proposed legislation:
The proposed legislation would encourage the break-up of families by
repealing the requirement that states provide cash assistance to two-parent
families in which a parent is unemployed or unable to work. It allows states
to discriminate against married, two-parent families by treating single-parent
families better than two-parent families.
The Administration supports an approach that both encourages the formation of two-parent
families and makes sure that both parents take responsibility for children in all cases.
Teen Pregnancy
The Administration and the American people agree that the best reform of welfare would be
to ensure that people do not need it in the first place. Welfare reform must send a very
strong message to young people that they should not get pregnant or father a child until they
are ready and able to care for that child, and that if they do have children, they will not be
3
able to escape the obligations and responsibilities of parenthood. We must be especially
concerned about the well-being of the children who are born to young mothers, since they
are very likely to grow up poor.
The Administration therefore has serious concerns about the bill before you:
The proposed legislation would deny all federal cash benefits for eighteen
years to any child born to an unmarried mother under 18, as well as to the
parent. This provision appears to punish children for their entire childhood--
18 years--for the mistakes of their parents.
The proposed legislation does not require that teen mothers live at home, stay
in school, and identify the child's father. It weakens requirements in current
law, and may make the prospects for mother and child even worse.
The proposed legislation establishes only minimal expectations for states to
provide services to unmarried parents, and provides no additional funds to
support them.
The Administration supports an alternative approach that would require minor mothers to live
at home, stay in school, make progress toward self-sufficiency, and identify the father of the
child. The Administration also supports a national campaign to prevent teen pregnancy. It is
time to enlist parents and civic, religious, and business leaders in a community based strategy
to send a clear message about abstinence and responsible parenting. The Administration also
supports a state option not to increase benefits for children born to mothers on welfare. This
decision should be made by the state, not the federal government.
State Flexibility with Accountability
The Administration embraces the creativity and responsiveness of states, and the
opportunities for real reform when states have the flexibility to design and administer welfare
programs tailored to their unique circumstances and needs. Already this Administration has
granted waivers to nearly half the states for welfare reform demonstrations. National welfare
reform should embody the values of work and responsibility in a way that assures taxpayers
that federal money is being spent prudently and appropriately. For reform to succeed, the
funding mechanisms for welfare should not put children or states at risk in times of
recession, population increase or unpredictable growth in demand.
In this context, the Administration has serious concerns about the proposed legislation:
The spending cap in the proposed legislation makes no allowances for potential
growth in the need for cash assistance because of economic downturn,
population growth, or unpredictable emergencies. It could result in states
4
running out of money before the end of the year, and thus having to turn away
working families who hit a "bump in the road" and apply for short-term
assistance. It could preclude states from investing in job placement, in work
programs, in education and training, and in supports for working families.
The proposed legislation removes the requirement that states match federal
funds with their own state funds. With none of their own money at risk, states
will have many fewer incentives to spend the funds efficiently and effectively
to improve performance and increase self-sufficiency.
The proposed legislation provides virtually no accountability. There are no
incentives for good performance and virtually no penalties for failure. There is
no provision for the recovery of monies paid out fraudulently or in error.
There are no mechanisms for ensuring that states are actually spending the
money on needy children rather than on state bureaucracies, or for monitoring
whether federal money is being used to help parents gain self-sufficiency,
require work, and enforce parental responsibility. Indeed, the federal
government is forbidden from taking any meaningful steps to ensure program
performance and accountability.
The Administration supports proposals that significantly increase state flexibility but also
ensure accountability for achieving national goals. The Administration supports a funding
mechanism that will not put children and states at risk down the road, and that enables states
to succeed in moving people from welfare to work and in supporting working families. The
Administration has significant doubts about the ability of a pure block grant funding
mechanism to adequately protect both children and states.
Protection of Children
The Administration recognizes that the protection of children is the primary goal both of cash
assistance programs and of child welfare and child protective services. Cash assistance
programs assist families to care for children in their own homes. Child protection services
help those children who are abused or neglected or at risk of abuse by their parents and who
need special in-home services or out of home placements to assure their safety. Strengthening
families, and where appropriate, preventing removal of children from their homes also are,
key goals of child protection services. There are problems in a number of areas.
Denial of Benefits to Children on AFDC
The legislative proposals that would reform cash assistance have a number of provisions that
would put vulnerable children at greater risk.
5
As noted above. the legislation would deny cash assistance to children of
unmarried minor mothers for their entire childhood, to children born while the
parent was on welfare, and to children whose parent had received welfare for
more than five years. whether or not a job was available or the parent was
unable to work. The funding caps could have the effect of denying cash
assistance to children when states used up their allocated funds. for whatever
reasons. Children in low income working families, who may be forced onto
cash assistance in times of economic downturn, could be most affected.
Child Protection Services
Some of these children could well come into a system of child protection services that is
already seriously overburdened and that is failing to provide the most essential services.
Reported child maltreatment and out-of-home placements have both been increasing sharply.
Many state systems are in such distress that they have been placed under judicial oversight.
The proposed legislation responds to these increasingly serious problems by consolidating
existing programs that protect children into a block grant with nominal federal oversight.
The Administration has serious concerns about this approach.
The proposed legislation caps spending for child protection programs at a level
considerably lower than baseline projections. This could lead to uninvestigated
maltreatment reports, and to children being left in unsafe homes with minimal
services. It could also seriously hamper states' efforts to improve their child
abuse prevention and child protection systems.
The proposed legislation eliminates the adoption assistance programs, and
leaves it up to states whether they will significantly sustain the subsidies that
enable many special needs children to find permanent homes, and whether they
will honor commitments to those adoptive families that now receive subsidies.
The proposed legislation virtually eliminates federal monitoring and
accountability mechanisms. It makes it impossible for the federal government
to ensure the protection of children.
The proposed legislation is silent on the formula for allocating funds to the
states. Because of serious imbalances among the states in spending on child
protection, it is hard to imagine a formula that would not disadvantage either
states that have been heavy spenders, or states that are only beginning to
improve their systems.
Substantial improvements need to be made in the child protection system and in the federal
role in overseeing that system. The Administration supports a careful and thoughtful review
of the programs before actions are taken that might seriously harm millions of vulnerable
children.
6
Denial of Benefits to Disabled Children on SSI
The Administration is deeply troubled by the changes proposed in the program designed to
help disabled children--SSI.
The proposed legislation essentially eliminates SSI benefits for children, with
the exception of a small group of children currently receiving benefits. Within
6 months, over one hundred thousand disabled children would lose eligibility
for SSI benefits--some would lose medical protection as well. And in the
future, no child, no matter how disabled, will be eligible for any cash benefits
for SSI, except if cash benefits prevent them from having to be
institutionalized. These proposals appear to penalize parents who are
determined to care for their child no matter what the economic consequences
for the family. SSI recipients are among the neediest and most vulnerable
children, in the poorest families.
Some of the money saved is put into a new block grant for services to disabled
children, which would require the creation of a new state bureaucracy to
decide on appropriate services. This idea is untested, and no one knows what
impact it will have on the most vulnerable of children and the parents who
care for them. The 5-year cut off in AFDC for all persons along with the
elimination of SSI cash for disabled children may leave these children
extremely vulnerable.
The Administration sees the need for careful reform in this area, with its potential for serious
harm to extremely vulnerable children. Last year the Congress established a Commission on
Childhood Disability to look into these issues in consultation with experts from the National
Academy of Sciences. The Commission will provide its report to the Congress later this
year. The Administration believes prudence dictates waiting for this short time until this
bipartisan commission, following a thorough review of all aspects of this important program,
has an opportunity to make recommendations.
Benefits to Legal Immigrants
The Administration strongly believes that illegal aliens should not be eligible for government
welfare support. But the blanket prohibition of all benefits to legal immigrants who are not
yet citizens is too broad, and would shift substantial burdens to state and local taxpayers.
These legal immigrants are required to pay taxes. Many serve in the armed forces, and
contribute to their communities. The Administration strongly favors a more focused
approach of holding sponsors accountable for those they bring into this country and making
the sponsors' commitment of support a legally binding contract.
7
In summary, the Chairman's mark espouses goals for the reform of welfare--work, parental
responsibility, prevention of teen pregnancy and state flexibility--that the Administration and
the American people share. But the translation of general goals into specific legislation
misses the mark in fundamental ways. The proposed legislation does not represent serious
work-based reform. It does nothing to move people from welfare to work, and it does not
require everyone who can work go to work. It neither holds state bureaucracies accountable
nor cushions state taxpayers against recession. It puts millions of children at risk of serious
harm. There are alternative approaches to reform that achieve our mutual goals in far more
constructive and accountable ways.
The Administration reiterates its commitment to real welfare reform and its desire to work
cooperatively with Congress to achieve it.
The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is no objection to the transmittal of
this report to Congress.
A similar letter was sent to Representative Harold E. Ford.
Sincerely,
D9 see
Donna E. Shalala
CC: Members of the Subcommittee on Human Resources
8
DRAFT
DRAFT
SUMMARY PAGE
Recommended appropriations/budget numbers for key programs for
children and youth
Increase needed
Total proposed
in FY 94
in FY 94
Program
$ (Millions)
$ (Millions)
Early Childhood
Head Start
1,000
3,800
Child Care
900
1,800
and Development Block Grant
Child Care Food Program
10
baseline plus
10
At-Risk Child Care Program
80
baseline plus
80
Youth Training and Employment
Job Corps
340
1,300
Youth Opportunity
100
100
Unlimited
Youth Title of JTPA
200
896
YouthBuild
60
100
Children and Families in Crisis
Title IV-B Child Welfare
305
600
Services
Family Resource and Support
95
100
Grants
Family Unification
29
104
Children's Mental Health
145
150
Services
Health
Immunizations
Universal Vaccine Initiative
600
600
Center for Disease Control
286
627
Childhood Immunization Program
Increase needed
Total proposed
in FY 94
in FY 94
Program
$ (Millions)
$ (Millions)
Health Centers
Community Health Centers
296
785
Migrant Health Centers
42
100
Homeless
37
95
National Health Services Corps
Loans & Scholarships
28
104
Title V--Maternal and Child Health
185
850
Healthy Start
88
168
WIC Program
361
baseline plus
361
Nutrition
Mickey Leland Childhood Hunger
Relief Act
600
baseline plus
600
DRAFT
DRAFT
Recommended appropriations/budget numbers for key programs for
children and youth
Targeted increases in carefully selected programs that
support children and families are essential to keeping the new
Administration's promises and meeting its goals for America's
families. This list is carefully limited, however, because we
recognize the severe constraints on total spending imposed by
the deficit and by other critical initiatives.
We have focused these proposals on:
increases needed to fund key Administration children's
initiatives (for example, Head Start, immunizations and
family preservation) ;
increases needed to improve the infrastructures essential
to accomplish other key Administration initiatives (for
example, investing in health and youth employment services
to help pave the way for health care reform, welfare
reform, and youth service initiatives);
programs that meet urgent needs; and
programs that are just building momentum and need to
sustain that.
The list both highlights the key programs for children and
provides guidance on which children's programs should be the
first targeted for growth.
Increase needed
Total proposed
in FY 94
in FY 94
$ (Millions)
$ (Millions)
Early Childhood
Head Start
1,000
3,800
This increase is the first increment in the five year
guaranteed funding plan for the Head Start program. By FY
1998 the program would assure that all eligible children can
be served in high quality programs. These programs would
reach out to involve parents; offer full day and full year
programs to children whose families need it; and provide the
support and help that families with infants and toddlers
need.
Child Care
900
1,800
and Development Block Grant
Child care is essential to help low-income parents work and
yet current federal investments in child care meet only a
fraction of the current need. Doubling the appropriation for
the child care program will assist more parents to work and
more children to thrive.
Child Care Food Program
10
baseline plus
10
Over half of all child care centers are operated by for-
profit organizations. Many poor children attend these
programs. Yet current law makes it exceedingly difficult
for for-profit programs that serve low-income children to
participate in the Child Care Food Program which provides
nutritious meals and snacks. The Child Care Food Program
should be amended to permit for-profit child care providers
to participate in the program when 25 percent or more of the
children they serve are eligible for free and reduced price
lunch. This increase is intended to cover the modest cost
of that change.
At-Risk Child Care Program
80
baseline plus
80
Carry-over provisions are common. They ensure that once
dollars are available for children, they are not lost if
states need time to start up services. However, due to an
oversight in original drafting of the statute, it is
difficult for programs to carry over At-Risk Child Care
funds from year to year. A statutory change is needed to
give states more flexibility to assure the ongoing quality
of the program. The recommended increase covers that change.
Youth Training and Employment
Job Corps
340
1,300
It is essential to build upon the proven success of the Job
Corps in reaching the nation's most disadvantaged poor
teenagers and young adults in a cost-effective way by
fulfilling the goals of the Job Corps "50-50 Plan," opening
50 new Job Corps centers by the year 2000 and thereby
increasing the program's capacity by 50 percent. This
increase moves the program in that direction.
Youth Opportunity
100
100
Unlimited
Created in 1992 as part of the legislation amending the Job
Training and Partnership Act (JTPA), this program is based
on models of proven effectiveness. It is designed to
promote intensive investment in education, training, and
supportive services in high poverty areas, both urban and
rural, with the goal of sending a powerful message of hope
and opportunity to teenagers and young adults in each
participating area. The program is authorized at $100
million and should be fully funded in FY 1994.
Youth Title of JTPA
200
896
In 1992, Congress separated the youth and adult programs in
JTPA. This action offers an important new opportunity to
improve the returns from JTPA by targetting additional
federal job investments for those disadvantaged youths who
most need help in order to become productive members of
America's workforce. This increase reflects that opportunity
and the fact that the current program reaches only a
fraction of all poor young people who need help.
YouthBuild
60
100
This program engages disadvantaged teenagers and young
adults in the construction and rehabilitation of low-income
housing. HUD should use its discretion to increase the
amount available in FY 1993 (from the Bush administration's
tenant ownership initiatives for public housing--the so-
called HOPE programs) to the maximum $40 million authorized
level for FY 1993 and overall funding should be increased to
$100 million in FY 1994.
Children and Families in Crisis
Title IV-B Child Welfare
305
600
Services
This increase would be, if Family Preservation legislation
passes, in the ensured funds portion of the Child Welfare
Services Program, authorized under Title IV-B of the Social
Security Act. It is needed for services to strengthen and
preserve families, with special attention to families with
substance abuse problems. This is the cornerstone of the
broader reforms included in the Child Welfare and Family
Preservation Act, vetoed by President Bush as part of the
urban aid/tax bill. The reforms, which address the crises
facing families and child protection agencies across the
country, should be passed again early in 1993. (These are
budget, rather than appropriations, numbers. They include
$275 million in new entitlement funds.)
Family Resource and Support
95
100
Grants
The Family Resource and Support Grant program, enacted in
1990, assists states in building and expanding statewide
networks of local family support programs designed to help
families better nurture, support, and protect their
children. The networks will provide the ongoing training and
technical assistance that local programs, both centers and
home visiting programs, need to aid families before crises erupt.
Family Unification
29
104
The Family Unification program helps families stay together
by providing housing assistance, through the Section 8
rental certificate program, to families whose children are
at risk of placement in foster care--or cannot return home
from care--because the families are homeless or lack
adequate housing. Sixteen states now receive or are elibible
for certificates. The increase will allow for further
expansion to additional states of this critically needed,
cost-effective program.
Children's Mental Health
145
150
Services
The Grants Program for Comprehensive Community Mental Health
Services for Children with Serious Emotional Disturbances,
designed to address the fact that an estimated two-thirds of
children with serious emotional disturbances in the U.S. get
no care or inappropriate care, was enacted in 1992. It
promotes the establishment of local coordinated systems of
intensive community-based services for children with serious
emotional disturbances, with the services designed to meet
their individual and family needs. The very modest
$4.9 million appropriated in FY 1993 is allowing the program
to start in a couple of states. In FY 1994, a significant
increase in funds will permit expansion to additional states.
Health
Immunizations
Universal Vaccine Initiative
600
600
In most states, less than 60 percent of two-year olds are
appropriately immunized against vaccine preventable diseases.
One reason is the extremely high price of vaccine on the
private market. The Universal Vaccine Initiative would
provide vaccines free of charge to all children in the
United States through a lower bulk purchase price negotiated
with the manufacturers. No child would miss immunizations
because his or her family could not afford the charge. The
initiative would also create a surveillance and tracking
system ($100 million of the $600 million) to remind parents
to immunize their children, to monitor local immunization
levels, and to help providers and parents know when a child
was last immunized to avoid unnecessary duplicate doses.
Center for Disease Control
286
627
Childhood Immunization Program
This investment will fully fund the Immunization Action
Plans submitted by the states to the CDC in FY 1992. The
plans involve infrastructure expansions, education, and
outreach needed to assure that at least 80 percent of all
preschool children are fully immunized. Funds are also
included to provide adequate supplies of the newly
recommended hepatitis B vaccine for the public sector and
DTaP, the new and safer pertussis vaccine that is currently
unavailable in public clinics; public education and
information; and vaccine safety research.
Health Centers
Community Health Centers
296
785
Migrant Health Centers
42
100
Homeless
37
95
National Health Services Corps
Loans & Scholarships
28
104
The increases in the health center programs and the National
Health Service Corps are designed to address the severe
shortage of providers in many areas of the country. More
than 40 million Americans live in medically underserved
areas--two-thirds of whom are children and women of child-
bearing age. Expansions in these programs are critical to
assuring that services are actually available in communities
across the country under any national health reform plan:
theoretical insurance coverage will not provide access if no
or too few providers are in the community.
Title V--Maternal and Child Health 185
850
The Maternal and Child Health Service Block Grant supports
primary and preventive health care for pregnant women and
children, services for children with special health care
needs, and public health activities such as education and
outreach. The increase recommended would provide prenatal
care to an estimated 85,000 additional women, primary health
services for an estimated 850,000 additional children, and
special health care services to an estimated 50,000
additional children with disabilities.
Healthy Start
88
168
Healthy Start provides support for infant mortality
reduction efforts in 15 cities. Since these programs are in
the second year of a five year effort to reduce infant
mortality by one half, the Clinton Administration should
continue support for existing cities. However, continued
funding for the 15 cities should be contingent upon
enactment of legislation authorizing the program.
WIC Program
361
baseline plus
361
The Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants and
Children (WIC) provides nutritional support and counseling
to low-income and nutritionally at-risk mothers and
children. WIC benefits for pregnant women save over $3.00 in
Medicaid costs for every $1 invested by preventing low-
birthweight babies. This FY 1994 appropriation moves the
program towards full funding by FY 1996.
Nutrition
Mickey Leland Childhood Hunger
600
baseline plus
Relief Act
600
In addition to full funding for the WIC program, key changes are
needed in the Food Stamp program to assure that it addresses the
needs of children and their families. The Mickey Leland Childhood
Hunger Relief Act assures that families with children can deduct
their excess shelter costs the same way that people who are
elderly or disabled already can. It also encourages the payment and
collection of child support by disregarding the first $50 paid as
child support each month from being counted as income in
determining food stamp benefits, and excluding from income, for
food stamp purposes, any legally obligated child support payments
made to children outside the household.
NATIONAL
Howard Dean, M.D.
Raymond C. Scheppach
Governor of Vermont
Executive Director
GOVERNORS
Chair
ASSOCIATION
Hall of the States
Tommy G. Thompson
444 North Capitol Street
Governor of Wisconsin
Washington. D.C. 20001-1512
Vice Chair
Telephone (202) 624-5300
February 23, 1995
The Honorable Sam M. Gibbons
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Ways and Means
United States House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Representative Gibbons:
We are writing to express our views on the Personal Responsibility Act, as amended by the
Subcommittee on Human Resources. The Governors appreciate the willingness of the
subcommittee to grant states new flexibility in designing cash assistance and child welfare
programs. We are concerned about a number of the bill's provisions, however, that limit state
flexibility or shift federal costs to states.
The Governors believe Congress has at this moment an enormous opportunity to restructure the
federal-state relationship. The Governors urge Congress to take advantage of this opportunity
both to examine the allocation of responsibilities among the levels of government and to
maximize state flexibility in areas of shared responsibility. We believe, however, that children
must be protected throughout the restructuring process. In addition, although federal budget
cuts are needed, the Governors are concerned about the cumulative impact on the states of
federal budgetary decisions. The Governors view any block grant proposal as an opportunity
for Congress and the president to provide needed flexibility for states, not as a primary means
to reduce the federal budget deficit.
The Governors have not yet reached consensus on whether cash and other entitlement
assistance should remain available, as federal entitlements to needy families or whether it
should be converted to state entitlement block grants. We do agree, however, that in either case
states should have the flexibility to enact welfare reforms without having to request federal
waivers.
Federal Standards for Block Grants
If Congress chooses to pursue the block grant approach proposed by the Human Resources
Subcommittee, the block grants should include a clear statement of purpose, including mutually
agreed-upon goals for the block grant and the measures that will be used to judge the
effectiveness of the block grant.
Page 2
Cash Assistance Block Grant
The Governors believe that a cash assistance block grant for families must recognize the
nation's interest in:
services to children;
moving recipients from welfare to work; and
reducing out-of-wedlock births.
Although the Governors recognize the legitimate interest of the federal government in setting
broad program goals in cooperation with states and territories, they also believe that states
should be free from prescriptive federal standards.
We appreciate the flexibility given to states in the bill to design programs, to carry forward
program savings, and to transfer funding between block grants. We must oppose, however,
Title I's prohibitions on transitional cash assistance to particular families now eligible for help
and ask instead that states be given the authority to make these eligibility decisions themselves.
Some states may want to be more restrictive than the bill-by conditioning aid on work, for
example, sooner than two years-while other states may decide it is appropriate to be less
restrictive.
The federal interest should be limited to ensuring the block grant is used to aid low-income
children and families. In the past federal restrictions on eligibility have served to contain
federal costs given the open-ended entitlement nature of the Aid to Families with Dependent
Children program. Such restrictions have no place, however, in a capped entitlement block
grant where the federal government's costs are fixed, regardless of the eligibility and benefit
choices made by each state.
Similarly, while Governors agree that there is a national interest in refocusing the welfare
system on the transition to work, we will object strongly to any efforts to prescribe narrow
federal work standards for the block grant. The Governors believe that all Americans should be
productive members of their community. There are various ways to achieve this goal. The
preferred means is through private, unsubsidized work in the business or nonprofit sectors. If
the federal government imposes rigid work standards on state programs, such standards could
prove self-defeating by foreclosing some possibilities, such as volunteering in the community,
that can be stepping stones to full-time, private sector jobs. A rigid federal work standard
would also inevitably raise difficult issues about the cost and feasibility of creating a large
number of public jobs, and the cost of providing child care for parents required to work a set
number of hours a week in a particular type of job.
Child Protection Block Grant
Governors view the child protection block grant as overly prescriptive and urge Congress to
refocus it on achieving broad goals, such as preserving families, encouraging adoption and
protecting the health and safety of children. We also oppose the mandated creation of local
Page 3
citizen review panels. We believe that it is inappropriate for the federal government to dictate
the mechanism by which Governors consult the citizens of their state on state policies.
Block Grant Funding
We appreciate the subcommittee's willingness to create block grants whose funding level is
guaranteed over five years rather than being subject to annual appropriations. It is essential,
however, that block grants include appropriate budget adjustments that recognize agreed-upon
national priorities, inflation, and demand for services. The cash assistance block grant does not
include any such adjustments for structural growth in the target populations. While some
growth is built into funding for the child protection block grant, it is not clear whether it will be
adequate especially given that states are likely to be required by the courts to honor existing
adoption assistance contracts. Governors will continue to protect abused and neglected
children by intervening on their behalf and we believe that federal funding must continue to be
available for these services.
Governors also ask that any block grants include funding adjustments to provide for significant
changes in the cyclical economy and for major natural disasters. An additional amount should
be set aside each year for automatic and timely distribution to states that experience a major
disaster, higher-than-average unemployment, or other indicators of distress. While the bill does
include a federal rainy day loan fund, we are concerned that this loan fund will prove to be an
inadequate means of addressing sudden changes in the need for assistance. States experiencing
fiscal problems will not be able to risk taking out federal loans that they may not be able to
repay. Furthermore, one billion dollars over five years may not be sufficient if many states
experience economic downturns or natural disasters at the same time, as was the case with the
last recession or with the midwestern floods. Finally, an unemployment rate in excess of 6.5%
may not be a sufficient proxy for identifying increases in need and should not be the sole
trigger for increased aid.
We also urge the committee to change the funding base year and formula for the two block
grants. We believe that initial allotments to states for the cash assistance and child protection
block grants should be the higher of a state's actual funding under the consolidated programs in
fiscal 1994 or a state's average funding during fiscal years 1992 through 1994. This change
would help protect states with recent caseload growth from receiving initial allotments far
below actual need.
Accountability in Block Grant Programs
We believe that block grants should include a clear statement of purpose, including mutually
agreed-upon goals for the block grant and the measures that will be used to judge the
effectiveness of the block grant. We are concerned, however, that the reporting requirements in
both the cash assistance and child protection block grant go far beyond what is necessary to
monitor whether program goals are being achieved. We encourage the committee to restrict
reporting requirements to outcome and performance data strictly related to the goals of the
program, and hope that those reporting requirements can be mutually agreed upon by Congress,
the administration, and ourselves.
Page 4
We agree that states should be required to use the block grant funding to provide services for
children and their families. We do have questions, though, about how broadly the bill's audit
provisions would be applied. Would the audit process be used, for example, to determine
whether the block grant goal of assisting needy children and families was being achieved? We
would also suggest that rather than the federal government reclaiming audit exception funds,
that these funds remain available to a state for allowable services to families and children.
Implementation
Governors also ask Congress to recognize that moving to a block grant structure raises many
implementation issues. Almost every state is operating at least one welfare waiver project. We
believe that states with waivers currently in effect should have express permission either to
continue their waiver-based reforms, or to withdraw from the waivers, and be held harmless for
any costs measured by waivers' cost neutrality provisions. Savings from individual state's
waivers should be included in the state's base. Some states have negotiated a settlement to
retain access, subject to state match, to an agreed upon dollar amount of waiver savings.
Legislative language converting AFDC to a block grant should not terminate these agreements
and thereby preclude states from drawing down the balance of these previously negotiated
amounts.
Implementation of block grants would also pose enormous difficulties for state information
systems, and we are concerned that there may not be sufficient funding or lead time to allow
states to update these systems as necessary to implement the legislation. While states that are
ready should be able to implement any new block grants as soon as possible, other states should
be allowed at least one year after enactment to implement the new programs. We also believe
that a consultative process between Governors, Congress and the administration would be
necessary to ensure that the transition to a block grant system is made in an orderly way and
that children's needs continue to be met during the transition.
Federal Aid to Legal Noncitizens and Federal Disability Benefits
The Governors oppose the bill's elimination of most federal services to legal noncitizens. The
elimination of federal benefits does not change any state's legal responsibilities to make
services available to all legal immigrants. Policy adopted by the Governors clearly states
that since the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction over our nation's immigration
policy, all costs resulting from immigration policy should be paid by the federal
government. This bill would move the federal government in the opposite direction, and
would shift substantial costs to states.
The Governors also oppose the bill's changes to the Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
program. We recognize that the program is growing at an unacceptable rate, and that serious
problems exist regarding the definition and diagnosis of disabilities. The changes in the bill go
far beyond addressing those problems and represent a substantial and unacceptable cost shift to
states. The Governors believe that Congress should wait for the report of the Commission on
Childhood Disability before acting to change eligibility for disability benefits to children. We
Page 5
also ask that Congress allow last year's amendments regarding the substance abuse population
to be implemented before enacting new changes in that area. If changes in SSI are enacted that
deny benefits to hundreds of thousands of families and children, the result may be a sharp
increase in the need for aid from the new cash assistance block grant at a time when those funds
would be capped.
Thank you for your consideration of our views on the first four titles of Chairman Shaw's bill.
We are also reviewing the child support provisions and will be forwarding our comments on
them to you separately.
Sincerely,
Hourd Dean
Jonny Vice Chair
Overnor Tommy G. G. Thompson Thompson
Governor Howard Dean, M.D.
Chair
Jon
Governor Tom Carper
Co-Lead Governor on Welfare
Jane Co-Lead Governor Governor John Eugh Engler on
Welfare
Onel Carnahan Ame A Sailson
Governor Mel Carnahan
Governor Arne H. Carlson
Chair
Vice Chair
Human Resources Committee
Human Resources Committee
The Child Advocacy Center, Inc.
1351 Springhill Avenue
Mobile, AL 36604
(205) 432-1101
CHILD
ADVOCACY
March 23, 1993
CENTER
Ms. Melanne Verveer
Deputy Chief of Staff
Office of the First Lady
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Ms. Verveer:
As promised, attached are the materials for you and your staff
to review prior to Congressman Cramer and my meeting with First Lady
Hillary Rodham Clinton and the child policy group on Wednesday,
March 31 at 9:30 a.m. at the White House.
The first attachment deals with the National Network of Children's
Advocacy Centers, Inc. and the work of more than 100 centers around
the country where child victims of sexual and serious physical abuse
receive a wide range of services "under one roof".
The second attachment explains the National Children's Advocacy
Program Act of 1992 and the implications of full-funding and full-
implementation of the provisions of this important piece of legislation.
Congressman Cramer authored this legislation last year, and as a
first-year member of Congress, got it passed with broad, bi-partisan
support.
The third attachment is our Child Advocacy Center brochure and
explains in some detail the work of a child advocacy center.
The fourth attachment explains the work of the National Resource
Center on Child Sexual Abuse, a federally funded resource center that
provides many valuable services to all disciplines who work to help
sexually abused children, their families, and their communities.
The fifth attachment deals with a controversial issue in child
abuse circles: family reunification versus child protection. Many
states, like Alabama, are under court order, based on current federal
welfare policy, to keep child victims of sexual and serious physical
abuse in the home with the abusers. The results of this policy have
caused one promiment former advocate for family reunification, Dr. Rich-
ard Gelles, to change his mind. In the attachment he explains why.
I look forward to meeting with you, your staff, and First Lady
Hillary Rodham Clinton next Wednesday. Again, thank you very much
for arranging this appointment.
Sincerely, Patrick F. Singh Guyton
Executive Director
PFG:ijn
For Further Information Contact:
The National
Jan Parks, President,
National Network of Children's Advocacy Centers
Tulsa, OK 918-585-5551
Network
Karen Hall, Treasurer
of
Huntsville, AL 205-532-3460
Claire Ellis, Standards and Membership Chair
Children's Advocacy
Philadelphia, PA 215-275-7192
Centers
Copies of Best Practices: A Guidebook to Establishing a
Children's Advocacy Center Program" are for sale through the
National Network office in Huntsville, AL (205) 533-5437.
The National Network
of Children's Advocacy Centers
106 Lincoln Street
Huntsville, AL 35801
Mission of the National Network of
Membership
Full Member Agencies
Children's Advocay Centers
The National Network of Children's Advocacy
Over the past five years, there has been a steady
Pontiac, Michigan
Centers is a not for profit organization comprised of
growth in the number of children's advocacy center
Tulsa, Oklahoma
members and affiliates whose mission is to provide
programs. From the beginning of this concept in
Honolulu, Hawaii
technical assistance, training and networking opportuni-
Huntsville, Alabama in 1985, there are now over eighty
Amarillo, Texas
ties to help communities establish Children's Advocacy
such programs either in existence or in the formulative
Centers which maintain quality services for helping
stage of development. The concern of the National
Hendersonville, North Carolina
victims of child abuse, particularly, child sexual abuse.
Network board has been that programs which call them-
Hanover Park, Illinois
selves Children's Advocacy Centers do, in fact, represent
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
The Network was formed in 1988 as a response
the ideals of the Huntsville model, and are providing
Baltimore, Maryland
to the proliferation of facility-based child abuse
comprehensive child focused intervention. The National
Gadsden, Alabama
programs and because of the demand from grassroots
Network is also concerned with regulating these pro-
Pueblo, Colorado
organizations for help and guidance. The Network,
grams and assuring that they meet minimum standards
which is made up of volunteers, was incorporated in
set by the Network board and viewed as crucial to
Santa Monica, California
November, 1990.
successful intervention in child abuse cases.
Decatur, Georgia
Birmingham, Alabama
Children's Advocacy Centers are a response to
Guidelines for full membership
DuPage County, Illinois
the inability of public and private agencies to intervene
in the lives of abused children in a meaningful way
A program must:
Huntsville, Alabama
1) be a private, not for profit or government based
Springfield, Illinois
which does not revictimize them through repetitious
interviews and examinations. In many public agencies,
agency.
Jefferson Parrish, Louisiana
the needs of the child victim have become secondary to
2) have a safe separate space with assigned personnel
the structure and demands of the bureaucracy.
designated for investigation and coordination of child
sexual and/or physical abuse cases.
Children's Advocacy Centers offer a new way
3) have an interdisciplinary coordinated systems
of serving children, designed by professionals and com-
approach to the investigative process of child
munity members who share a philosophy and goal of
sexual and/or physical abuse cases.
developing a coordinated intervention system which
4) have an interdisciplinary case review process
places the needs of the child foremost, and works to en-
for purposes of information sharing, decision
sure that children are not at risk from further revictimi-
making, problem solving, and systems
zation from the very system designed to protect them.
coordination.
5) have a comprehensive tracking system with
information from each participating agency.
6) have interdisciplinary specialized training for all
professionals involved with the victims and
families in child sexual and/or physical abuse
cases.
1st
Attachment
!
NATIONAL LISTING OF CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTERS
ALABAMA
Child Advocacy Center
P.O. Box 8582
National Children's Advocacy Center
Gadsden, AL 35902
106 Lincoln Street
933 3rd Avenue
Huntsville, AL 35801
Gadsden, AL 35901
205-533-5437
205-547-5904
Fax: 205-534-6883
Fax: 205-549-8137
Susan Riise, Exec. Director
Carolyn Gilbert, Director
Calhoun/Cleburne Children's Center
Child Advocacy Center, Inc.
1125 Christine Avenue
1351 Springhill Avenue
Anniston, AL 36201
Mobile, AL 36604
205-238-0902
205-432-1101
No Fax
Fax: 205-432-0330
June Bentley, Director
Patrick Guyton, Director
C.A.R.E. House
Child Protect
P.O. Box 874
Children's Advocacy Center
108 Blackburn Avenue
1031 Ann Street
Bay Minette, AL 36507
Montgomery, AL 36107
205-937-2273
205-262-1220
Ms. Blakely Davis, Director
Fax: 205-262-2252
Kitty Sue Greggory, Exec. Director
Prescott House
1730 14th Avenue South
Blount County Children's Center, Inc.
Birmingham, AL 35205
Eagan House
205-930-3622
P.O. Box 906
Fax: 205-325-5266
106 1st Avenue W.
Mr. Francis Sartain, Director
Oneonta, AL 35121
205-274-7226
Northwest Alabama Children's
Fax: Same Number
Advocacy Center
Patti Stephens, Director
P.O. Box 3077
215 W. Doctor Hicks Blvd.
The Tuscaloosa Children's Center
Florence, AL 35630
520 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
205-760-1140
Tuscaloosa, AL 35401
No Fax
205-752-7711
Belinda Beasley, Director
No Fax
Patty Steele, Director
DeKalb County Children's Advocacy Center
P.O. Box 173
Ft. Payne, AL 35967
205-997-9700
Elizabeth Rusk, Contact
(Prospective Site)
Stuart House
District Attorney's Office
1336 16th Street
P.O. Box 2524
Santa Monica, CA 90404
Opelika, AL 36801
310-319-4248
205-749-7148
Fax: 310-319-4809
Fax: 205-745-5161
Colleen Friend, Director
Barbara Barrington, Contact
CANADA
(Prospective Site)
4th Judicial Circuit
(Prospective Site)
Dallas County Courthouse
Metropolitan Toronto Special Committee
P.O. Box 997
on Child Abuse
Selma, AL 36701
433 Mt. Pleasant Road
Carolyn Cox, Contact
Toronto, Ontario M4S2L8
416-440-0888
CALIFORNIA
Kathy Wayne, Contact
San Joaquin County Child Advocacy Center
(Prospective Site)
c/o Mary Graham
The Children's Aid Society
500 W. Hospital Road
of Metropolitan Toronto
French Camp, CA 95231
180 Duncan Mill Road, 2nd Floor
209-468-6185
North York, Ontario M3B1Z6
Fax: 209-468-6136
416-924-4646
Robin Ringstad, Clinical Coord.
Corrie Tuyl, Contact
Child Abuse Services Team (CAST)
COLORADO
401 The City Drive South
Orange, CA 92666
Pueblo Child Advocacy Center
714-935-6390
301 W. 13th Street
Fax: 714-935-6543
Pueblo, CO 81003
Cathy Campbell-Singletary, Director
719-543-6332
No Fax
Multidisciplinary Interview Center
Teresa Cain, Director
3565 Auburn Blvd.
Sacramento, CA 95821
(Prospective Site)
916-978-2080
8101 Ralston Road
Fax: 916-978-2097
Arvada, CO 80002
Laura Coulthard, Project Director
303-421-2550, Ext. 3436
Det. Walt Parsons, Contact
C.A.L.M.
1236 Chapala
(Prospective Site)
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
18th Judicial District Child
805-965-2376
Advocacy Center
Dr. Anna Kokotovic, Contact
P.O. Box 440702
Aurora, CO 80044
303-797-2404
Nancy Feldman, Contact
(Prospective Site)
(Prospective Site)
Boulder County Department
Jefferson County CAC Committee
of Social Services
Wheatridge Police Department
P.O. Box 471
P.O. Box 638
Boulder, CO 80306
Wheatridge, CO 80034
303-441-1052
303-235-2933
Maria Ortiz, Contact
Joe Cassa, Contact
(Prospective Site)
CONNECTICUT
El Paso County Child Advocacy
Center Task Force
(Prospective Site)
15 E. Cucharras Street
Coordinating Council for
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
Children in Crisis, Inc.
303-520-7100
900 Grand Avenue
Ron Johnson, Contact
New Haven, CT 06511
203-624-2600
(Prospective Site)
Fax: 203-562-6232
Four Corners Children's Advocacy Center
Cheryl Burack-Lynch, Director
1021 N. Mildred Road, Suite A
Cortez, CO 81321
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
303-565-4436
Robert Heyl, Contact
(Prospective Site)
4222 37th Street N.W.
(Prospective Site)
Washington, D.C. 20008
350 Indiana
202-724-5375
Golden, CO 80401
Edward Drohan, Ph.D.
303-273-0732
Betty Bryant, Contact
FLORIDA
(Prospective Site)
Jacksonville Sex Assault Treatment
P.O. Box 20000-5016
Center for Adults and Children
Grand Junction, CO 81502-5016
P.O. Box 40279
Theresa Spahn, Contact
Jacksonville, FL 32203-0279
904-549-4600
(Prospective Site)
Fax: 904-549-4627
Chaffee County Child Advocacy Center
Deborah Thomas, Program Coord.
Chaffee County Department
of Social Services
The Children's Center
P.O. Box 1007
Office of the State Attorney
Salida, CO 81202
Jackson Towers
719-539-6627
1500 N.W. 12th Ave., Ste. 901
Miami, FL 33136
305-545-3331 X270
Fax: 305-547-4823
Raquel Cohen, M.D., Director
(Prospective Site)
(Prospective Site)
Deputy Court Administrator's Office
Floyd County District Attorney's Office
700 East Twiggs Street, Suite 102
12 E. 4th Avenue
Tampa, FL 33602
Rome, GA 30161
813-272-7179
706-291-5210
No Fax
Fax: 706-291-5163
Nancy Yanez, Contact
Janet Aycock, Contact
GEORGIA
(Prospective Site)
P.O. Box 2357
Augusta Child Advocacy Center
Athens, GA 30612-0357
1834 Fenwick Street
404-656-0220
Augusta, GA 30904
Carla Abshire, Contact
404-738-7863
No Fax
(Prospective Site - June 1993)
Maria Curran, Director
P.O. Box 8711
Columbus, GA 31908
Georgia Center for Children, Inc.
706-571-4790
211 Grove Street
Vicki Prophet, Contact
Decatur, GA 30030
404-377-9768
HAWAII
Fax: 404-371-8729
Nancy Copelan-Aldridge, Director
Children's Advocacy Center
3019 Pali Highway
Coastal Children's Advocacy Center
Honolulu, HI 96817
P.O. Box 9926
808-548-6021
Savannah, GA 31412
Fax: 808-595-6978
401 E. 40th Street
Judy Lind, Director
Savannah, GA 31401
912-236-1401
Children's Advocacy Center of East Hawaii
No Fax
1290 Kinoole Street
Kris Rice, Executive Director
Hilo, HI 96720
808-935-5437
Rainbow House
Cathy M. Lowder, Prog. Director
P.O. Box 1239
Warner Robins, GA 31099
Children's Advocacy Center of West Hawaii
108 Elmwood
77-6403 Nalani Street
Warner Robins, GA 31093
Kailua-Kona, HI 96740
912-923-5923
808-326-2828
No Fax
Marianne Okamura, Prog. Director
Meg Couillard, Executive Director
Children's Advocacy Center of Kauai
4332A Hardy Street
Lihue, HI 96766
808-241-1492
Sara L. Silverman, Prog. Director
Children's Advocacy Center of Maui
Child Advocacy Center
1773A Wili Pa Loop
1001 East Monroe
Wailuku, HI 96793
Springfield, IL 62703
808-244-1024
217-522-2241
Delores Lamoureux, Prog. Director
Fax: 217-522-8687
Betsy Goulet, Director
ILLINOIS
Lake County Children's Advocacy Center
Mutual Ground
323 N. West Street
P.O. Box 843
Waukegan, IL 60085
Aurora, IL 60507
708-360-6870
708-897-8383
Fax: 708-360-6850
Fax: 708-897-8439
Laura Notson, Director
Linda Healy, Director
DuPage County Children's Center
LaRabida Children's Hospital
505 N. County Farm Road, 3rd Floor
and Research Center
Wheaton, IL 60187
East 65th Street at Lake Michigan
708-682-7915
Chicago, IL 60649
Fax: 708-682-7047
312-363-6700 Ext. 534
Renee Toomey, Director
Fax: 312-363-7664
Mary Martone, Contact
(Prospective Site)
Child Protection Network
Williamson County Child Advocacy Center
102 North Center Street, Suite 303
417 N. 14th
Bloomington, IL 61701
Herrin, IL 62948
309-827-0074
618-942-3800
Fax: 309-888-5209
Fax: 618-942-6941
Ramona Alexander, Contact
Kathy Schimpf, Director
INDIANA
The Children's Advocacy Center
of Northwest Cook County
Child and Family Advocacy Center
640 Illinois Blvd.
401 South Second Street
Hoffman Estates, IL 60194
Elkhart, IN 46514
708-885-0100
219-522-6089
Fax: 708-885-0187
Fax: 219-522-0465
Ms. Erin Sorenson, Exec. Director
Melissa Steinmetz, Director
Amy Center
Children's Advocacy Center
2019 Broadway
P.O. Box 154
Mount Vernon, IL 62864
Evansville, IN 47701
618-244-2100
100 E. Sycamore
Fax: 618-244-9283
Evansville, IN 47708
Michael A. Morris, Exec. Director
812-421-5428
Fax: 812-421-5503
Virginia Combs, Supervisor
Marion County Family
(Prospective Site)
Advocacy Center, Inc.
Paducah-McCracken County
251 East Ohio Street, Suite 650
Childwatch, Inc.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
P.O. Box 1262
317-684-6300
Paducah, KY 42002-1262
Fax: 317-684-6354
502-443-1440
John Nolan, Interim Director
Sandy Fellows, Contact
LaPorte County Child Abuse
(Prospective Site)
Prevention Council
HC 67 Box 230
"Dunebrook"
Ulvah, KY 41731
7451 W. Johnson Road
Rena Brashear, Contact
Michigan City, IN 46360
219-872-4213
LOUISIANA
Fax: 219-872-4213
Betty Brewe, Director
Jefferson Children's Advocacy Center
P.O. Box 2243
(Prospective Site)
Gretna, LA 70054
2719 Marine Street
220 Lavoisier Street
South Bend, IN 46614
Gretna, LA 70053
219-234-9230
504-364-3857
Peggy King, Contact
Fax: 504-364-3703
Karen Evans, Director
IOWA
MARYLAND
(Propsective Site)
1048 Olive Street
Child Advocacy Network
Dubuque, IA 52001
10 South Street, Suite 502
319-556-5004
Baltimore, MD 21202
Joan Casey, Contact
410-396-5165
Fax: 410-528-0628
KENTUCKY
Peggy Mainor, Contact
Children First
Baltimore County Child
315 E. Broadway, 4 West
Advocacy Center
Louisville, KY 40202
One Investment Place, Suite G-21
502-629-3405
Towson, MD 21204
Fax: 502-629-3409
410-887-5744
Jean Tanner Kimberlin, Director
Fax: 410-887-5820
Carl Smith, Contact
(Prospective Site)
Children's Advocacy Center
(Prospective Site)
116 N. Upper Street, Suite 300
Center for Children
Lexington, KY 40507
P.O. Box 329
606-252-3571
La Plata, MD 20646
Fax: 606-255-7467
301-934-3111
Lou Ann Darling, Contact
Catherine Meyers, Contact
MASSACHUSETTS
MISSISSIPPI
Child Abuse Prosecution Unit
Children's Advocacy Center
21 McGrath Highway
P.O. Box 5083
Somerville, MA 02143
Jackson, MS 39296-5083
617-666-2101
753 N. President Street
Fax: 617-628-8733
Jackson, MS 39202
Janet Fine, Director
601-969-7111
Fax: 601-352-5960
MICHIGAN
Kaye Fortenberry, Executive Director
Family Resource Center
MISSOURI
2401 Gull Road
Kalamazoo, MI 49001
(Prospective Site)
616-382-7080
Children's Advocacy Center
No Fax
P.O. Box 63294
Donna Spence, Contact
St. Louis, MO 63163
314-968-3877
C.A.R.E. House
Fax: 314-961-3704
45 Franklin Blvd.
Julie Swanston, Exec. Director
Pontiac, MI 48341-1702
313-333-0999
NEVADA
Fax: 313-333-1539
Lori Johns, Coordinator
(Prospective Site)
Saint Program
MINNESOTA
3444 East Bonanza
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Cornerhouse
702-455-5371
2502 10th Avenue South
Fax: 702-455-5216
Minneapolis, MN 55404
Pat Thacker, Contact
612-872-6225
Fax: 612-872-1230
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Jocelyn Tilsen, Executive Director
(Prospective Site)
Midwest Children's Resource Center
Lakes Region General Hospital
360 Sherman Street, Suite 200
80 Highland Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
Laconia, NH 03246
612-220-6750
603-323-8095 (Home)
Fax: 612-220-6770
Nancy Palmer, Director
Carolyn Levitt, M.D., Director
NEW JERSEY
NORTH CAROLINA
Child Advocacy Center
Western North Carolina Regional
Burlington County Prosecutor's Office
Child Abuse Center, Inc.
County Court Facility
P.O. Box 5861
Mt. Holly, NJ 08060
Asheville, NC 28813
609-265-5881
704-254-2000
Fax: 609-265-5906
No Fax
Kathleen Williams, Coordinator
Ann Flynn, Exec. Director
NEW MEXICO
The Children's Center
P.O. Box 2332
Children's Safe House of Albuquerque
107 S. Johnson Street
P.O. Box 6573
Brevard, NC 28712
Albuquerque, NM 87197
704-885-7286
505-344-1465
No Fax
Fax: 505-345-0796
Martha Mondul, Exec. Director
Ms. Roe Bubar, Director
Pro-Child and Family Program
The Oasis
1335 Durwood Drive
P.O. Box 1922
Charlotte, NC 28204
Clovis, NM 88101
704-336-6088
505-769-7732
Becky Friend, Director
No Fax
Judy Feurer, Director
Northeastern Children's Co-Op
Resource Center
(Prospective Site)
P.O. Box 23
P.O. Box 358
Elizabeth City, NC 27906
Crownpoint, NM 87313
919-338-5658
505-786-6242
No Fax
Michelle Begay, Contact
Shirley Harrell, Contact
NEW YORK
K.I.D.S., Inc.
P.O. Box 693
(Prospective Site)
Franklin, NC 28734
New York State Department
704-524-3199
of Social Services
Fax: 704-524-8452
40 North Pearl Street, Floor 11D
Sandra Wade, Exec. Director
Albany, NY 12273
Tom Hess, Contact
F.O.C.U.S.- Friends of Children
United Services
P.O. Box 1026
Hendersonville, NC 28793
704-693-6287
Fax: 704-692-3931
Nancy O'Leary, Director
Family Service
OREGON
1401 Long Street
High Point, NC 27262
Children's Advocacy Treatment Center
919-889-6161
322 N.W. F Street
Fax: 919-889-3852
Grants Pass, OR 97526
Cathy Purvis, Director
503-474-5437
Fax: 503-474-5105
K.A.R.E.
Mr. Terry L. Soeteber, Director
P.O. Box 1392
104 Walnut
Children's Advocacy Center
Waynesville, NC 28786
915 West 10th Street
704-456-8995
Medford, OR 97501
No Fax
503-734-5437
Bonnie Rose, Exec. Director
Fax: 503-734-2425
Connie Skillman, Coordinator
OHIO
(Prospective Site)
Child and Family Advocacy Center
P.O. Box 8239
1320 Market Avenue North
Bend, OR 97708
Canton, OH 44714
503-383-5958
216-452-2225
Susan Robinson, Contact
Fax: 216-454-1476
Paula Smith, Director
PENNSYLVANIA
OKLAHOMA
Children and Youth Sexual Abuse Center
216 W. Front Street
Child Advocacy Center
Media, PA 19063
201 S.E. Howard
215-891-5258
Bartlesville, OK 74006
Fax: 215-891-0481
918-335-1200
Pam Hardy, Director
No Fax
Judy Houston, Coordinator
Children's Advocacy Center of
Lawrence County, Inc.
Canadian County Citizens Advisory Board
1107 Wilmington Avenue
P.O. Box 1424
New Castle, PA 16101
El Reno, OK 73036
412-658-4688
405-262-1070
No Fax
Fax: 405-262-3937
David Evrard, Exec. Director
Jeanne Hobson, Contact
Children's Advocacy Center
Child Abuse Network, Inc.
4000 Chestnut St., 2nd Floor
2829 S. Sheraton Road
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Tulsa, OK 74129
215-387-9500
918-838-3700
Fax: 215-387-9513
Fax: 918-836-7100
Ms. Chris Kirchner, Director
Rose Ewing-Guidry, Coordinator
RHODE ISLAND
Children's Advocacy Center
1808 West End Ave., Suite 709
Children's Advocacy Center
Nashville, TN 37203
29 Greaton Drive
Judy Folk, Director
Providence, RI 02906
615-327-9958
401-351-3059
Fax: 615-327-9896
Lana Israel, Contact
Child Advocacy Center
SOUTH CAROLINA
101 5th Avenue West
Springfield, TN 37172
Lowcountry Children's Center Inc.
615-384-5885
P.O. Box 20579
No Fax
Charleston, SC 29413
Ed Nicholson, Contact
1061 King Street
Charleston, SC 29403
TEXAS
803-723-3600
Fax: 803-720-7106
The Bridge Children's Advocacy Center
Elizabeth Ralston, Exec. Director
P.O. Box 624
Amarillo, TX 79105
TENNESSEE
1419 South Polk
Amarillo, TX 79101
Children's Advocacy Center
806-372-2873
of Sullivan County, Inc.
Fax: 806-372-2878
P.O. Box 867
Carolyn Porter, Interim Director
150 Blountville By-Pass
Blountville, TN 37617
Children's Advocacy Network
615-323-3914
of Tarrant County
Fax: 615-323-0972
1320 West Abram
Vicky Byrd, Exec. Director
Arlington, TX 76013
817-795-9992
Child Advocacy Center
Fax: 817-999-7795
P.O. Box 6186
Nancy Hagen, Director
Chattanooga, TN 37401-6186
615-266-6918
Travis County Children's Advocacy Center
Fax: 615-265-0620
1110 E. 32nd Street
Mary Ann Schenk, Exec. Director
Austin, TX 78722
512-472-1164
Memphis/Shelby County Child
Fax: 512-472-1167
Sexual Abuse Council
Sandra Martin, Exec. Director
P.O. Box 42203
Memphis, TN 38174-2203
The Garth House
901-525-2377
Mickey Mehaffy Child Advocacy Program
Fax: 901-526-6088
1895 McFaddin
Nancy Chandler, Exec. Director
Beaumont, TX 77701
409-838-9084
Fax: 409-833-9706
Colleen Halliburton, Director
Children's Advocacy Center
Alamo Children's Advocacy Center
3611 Swiss Avenue
P.O. Box 830586
Dallas, TX 75204
San Antonio, TX 78213
214-818-2600
210-270-3975
Fax: 214-823-4819
Fax: 210-223-1357
Claudia Byrns, Exec. Director
Marlyn Gibbs, Exec. Director
Assessment Center of Tarrant (ACT)
Point of Light Children's Advocacy Center
2000 McKenzie
P.O. Box 1393
Ft. Worth, TX 76105
Sinton, TX 78387
817-534-0216
512-364-1328
No Fax
Fax: 512-364-4978
Barbara Lamsens, Prog. Director
Ms. Linda Eichhorn, Contact
Children's Advocacy Center
Children's Advocacy Center
2127 Avenue M
of Parker County
Galveston, TX 77550-4729
P.O. Box 1747
409-765-5212
Weatherford, TX 76086
Fax: 409-765-6094
817-598-0230 or 817-596-8815
Laurie Del Bonno, Exec. Director
No Fax
Sandy Redd, Director
Children's Assessment Center
5100 S.W. Freeway
(Prospective Site)
Houston, TX 77056
Children's Advocacy Center
713-599-5655
of Bastrop County
Fax: 713-599-5583
1701 Wilson
Ellen Cokinos, Director
Bastrop, TX 78602
512-321-7512
Collin County Children's Advocacy Center
Douglas Clark, Contact
500 E. 15th, Suite 100
Plano, TX 75074
(Prospective Site)
214-516-0814
Hope House
Fax: 214-578-1720
317 Koberlin
Ms. Jamie Caperton, Director
San Angelo, TX 76903
915-653-4673
The Harbor Children's Advocacy Center
No Fax
P.O. Box 1300
Stacy Page, Exec. Director
618 N. Ann Street
Port Lavaca, TX 77979
(Prospective Site)
512-552-1982
Hill Country Children's Advocacy Center
No Fax
P.O. Box 271
Tammy Hernandez, Exec. Director
Llano, TX 78643
915-247-5737
Mary Moursund, Contact
(Prospective Site)
WASHINGTON
The School Zone
105 Doyle Street
Children's Advocacy Center
Howe, TX 75459
of Snohomish County
Kathleen Todd, Contact
3000 Rockefeller
Everett, WA 98201
(Prospective Site)
206-388-3461
1400 Woodloch, Suite 590
Fax: 206-388-3572
The Woodlands, TX 77380
Bill France, Exec. Director
713-364-1350
Fax: 713-292-1655
Kitsap County Child Advocacy Center
Diana Cromer, Contact
614 Division Street
Port Orchard, WA 98366-4676
UTAH
206-876-7148
Fax: 206-895-4949
Weber County Children's Justice Center
Diana Gates, Director
127 24th Street, Suite 10
Ogden, UT 84401
Pierce County Child Advocacy Center
801-625-3830
c/o Pierce County Prosecutor's Office
Fax: 801-393-1908
930 Tacoma Ave. South, Room 946
Katy Larsen, Exec. Director
Tacoma, WA 98402-2171
206-591-7400
Salt Lake County Children's Justice Center
Terri Dacca, Coordinator
257 11th Avenue
Salt Lake City, UT 84103
(Prospective Site)
801-355-0781
Stevens County Counseling
Fax: 801-355-3578
P.O. Box 606
Mr. Lynn Nelson, Exec. Director
Coleville, WA 99114
509-684-4597
(Prospective Site)
Donna Kraft, Contact
Children's Justice Center
150 E. Center St., 5th Floor
WISCONSIN
Provo, UT 84606
801-374-7692
YWCA Advocacy Services
Paul Curtis, Director
220 St. Lawrence Avenue
Janesville, WI 53545
VIRGINIA
608-752-5445
Lisa Furseth, Director
(Prospective Site)
Children's Advocacy Center
10417 Buffapple Drive
Richmond, VA 23233
804-741-5707
No Fax
Nancy White, Contact
(February 1993)
2nd Attachment
QCT 8 '92 10:02 FROM CONG CRAMER-DC
PAGE 002
NATIONAL CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY PROGRAM ACT OF 1992.
1) Establishes a children's advocacy program, The Administrator
of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, in
coordination with, the Director of the National Center on Child
Abuse and Neglect and the Director of the Office for Victims of
Crime, shall establish a children's advocacy program to refocus
attention on the child victim and to provide support for the
nonoffending family members by assisting communities to develop
child-focused, community-oriented, facility-based programs designed
to improve the resources available to children and families. The
program will also enhance coordination among existing community
agencies and professionals involved in the intervention,
prosecution, and investigation systems that respond to child abuse
cases.
2) Most qualified applicants will be selected to operate program.
Selected applicants shall assist in developing and establishing
children's advocacy programs across the country which provide
communities with a multidisciplinary response program to child
abuse. Selected applicants shall be experienced in providing
remedial counseling to children and their families; have experience
in serving as a center for training and education and as a resource
facility; and have a facility where children who are victims of
sexual and physical abuse and their nonoffending family members can
go for the purpose of evaluation, intervention, evidence gathering
and counseling. Proposals that will best result in developing
multidisciplinary approaches to respond child abuse cases will be
selected.
3) Requires presentation of a management plan. Applicants must
submit a management plan that outlines the activities expected to
be performed; outline who will conduct activities; establishes the
time frame over which the activities will take place and defines
the overall program management and direction.
4) Regional diversity of selected applicants. To the greatest
extent possible and subject to available appropriations, at least
1 applicant shall be selected from each of the 4 census regions.
15
5) Funding of program. $10 million is authorized to provide
applicants with the financial and technical assistance and other
incentives that are necessary to carry out the program.
6) Evaluation of multidisciplinary approach activities. The
Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, in coordination with, the Director of the National
Center on Child Abuse and Neglect shall regularly monitor and
evaluate the activities of the applicants selected.
7) Establishment of Children's Advocacy Advisory Board. Composed
of 12 members, experienced in child abuse issues, to provide
guidance and oversight in implementing the selection criteria and
operation of the program.
TOTAL PAGE
Remarks by CRAMER (D-AL) on H.R. 4729
INTRODUCTION OF THE NATIONAL CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY PROGRAM
[CR page E-925, 115 lines]
INTRODUCTION OF THE NATIONAL CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY PROGRAM
HON. BUD CRAMER
OF ALABAMA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, April 1, 1992
Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, today marks the first day of National Child Abuse
Prevention Month as designated by Congress. During this period of time, we
are reminded that millions of children are needlessly being starved and
abandoned, burned and severely beaten, raped and sodomized, berated and
belittled.
The fact that more than three children die from physical abuse or chronic
neglect each day in the United States calls into question our country's
commitment to its young. The U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect
reports the number of child maltreatment cases is increasing so steadily that
our Nation faces a state of emergency. More than 2 1/2 million children in
the United States are crying out for someone to rescue them from a life of
tortuous abuse.
Today, I hear their cries and am throwing out the life preserver. I am
introducing the National Children's Advocacy Program Act of 1992. This bill
focuses attention on the child victim by assisting communities to develop
child-focused, community-oriented, facility-based programs designed to
improve the resources available to children and families.
I come to Congress as a former district attorney in Madison County, AL. I
have seen abused and neglected children fall through the cracks of our
judicial system and be victimized by simply reporting the crimes committed
against them.
One child sexual abuse case that I prosecuted best describes the problem
facing communities throughout America. A 12-year-old girl, I will call Lisa,
had been sexually abused by her father and her step-father for most of her
life. One day she told her grandmother about the nightmare she lived. Her
grandmother notified the authorities in hopes the system could help. Instead,
the abused child was placed on a conveyor belt system that only exploited her
injury.
Lisa was taken to an intimidating and cold interrogation room at the local
police department. The male officers on duty refused to question her. They,
instead, asked her grandmother to write down what she knew about the
allegations in a report.
Lisa and her grandmother were then sent to the Department of Pensions and
Security [DPS], where four social workers with child protection services
interviewed the young girl about her abuse.
The next stop for Lisa was a medical clinic. After waiting several hours,
she was examined by a doctor who initially refused to check Lisa for sexual
abuse. She was then passed to a therapist who told her not to discuss the
abuse with anyone.
When the case came before the grand jury, almost a year had passed. Lisa
had told her story to at least 15 people. She was scared, distressed and
traumatically abused by a system that was suppose to help. The child victim
would not talk. We in the district attorney's office had no case. Another
child molester was to be set free, free to abuse again.
Who was at fault? Not Lisa. She was the victim, a victim of child abuse and
a victim of the conveyor belt system. Her grandmother best described the
injustice when she told me, "I'm trying to understand this system, but you
all are just not ready for us." She was right.
Police were uncomfortable interviewing child sexual abuse victims. Doctors,
fearing involvement in the litigation, were reluctant to do medical exams.
Social workers did not know how to prepare a child for testimony while
mental health professionals could not agree on whether it was beneficial for
the child to testify. Prosecutors failed to realize the pressure on victims
and families who had to repeatedly tell their story in front of strangers.
The conveyor belt system exists in communities from Maine to Alabama to
Hawaii. Our current policy is not adequately responding to child abuse and
neglect. The Federal Government must begin to facilitate community efforts to
protect children.
The National Children's Advocacy Program Act will redirect our Federal
policy in child abuse and neglect. It is a strong initiative that will help
minimize the trauma child victims suffer. It will provide the nonoffending
family members with needed services and assist them in regaining maximum
functioning. Moreover, my approach will help hold more offenders accountable
for their actions.
The program will enhance coordination among existing community agencies and
professionals involved in the intervention, prevention, investigation and
prosecution systems that respond to child abuse cases. It's time to replace
the conveyor belt system with a support system for the child.
The National Children's Advocacy Program calls for the establishment of a
multidisciplinary team of professionals representing mental health,
prosecution, medicine, child protective services, victim services, law
enforcement and the judiciary. Working together, these professionals can
develop an investigative protocol promoting cooperative working
relationships. The team addresses the plight of each individual child and
issues a joint recommendation in the best interest of each child.
The child is brought to a facility which is both agency-neutral and child-
focused. The building's rooms and offices provide a consistent, friendly and
supportive place for any interviews with the child and the nonoffending
family members. The center is decorated to provide a warm, comfortable and
protective environment for young children and adolescents. The purpose is to
enable the young victims to feel safe and secure while they deal with the
emotional trauma of their abuse.
To minimize the number of interviews a child must endure, the initial
interview is conducted jointly by a law enforcement detective and a social
worker. The victim and the nonoffending family members are informed of the
judicial system and the rights of the victim.
Law enforcement officials are capable of building a strong case against the
offender with dependable testimony of the abused victim and the coordination
the experts dealing with child abuse and neglect.
Huntsville, AL is blessed. We have a children's advocacy program in place
that works. However, other communities are not as fortunate. They need help,
help and leadership from the Federal Government. The Federal Government must
provide the technical assistance needed to fight this tragic social syndrome
before it consumes our country.
As novelist John Steinbeck said, "The greatest terror a child can have is
that he is not loved; and rejection is the hell he fears." Let us not reject
our children. They are the future generation that will either lead this
nation or allow its downfall. We must protect them.
The National Children's Advocacy Program Act is the child protection
blueprint our country so desperately needs if it is ever going to
successfully combat child abuse.
+
2-B-MOBILE PRESS
Friday, November 20, 1992
New law will benefit
child advocacy centers
Will eventually increase funding
By DEBBIE BRELAND
appropriated this year, Guyton
Staff Reporter
said.
A major piece of national legisla-
The legislation also authorizes
tion affecting child advocacy cen-
the federal government to evaluate
ters across the country is "an
child advocacy centers around the
exciting development for every-
United States "so we know which
one working in children's justice,"
programs work best and which
said Pat Guyton, executive director
don't," Guyton said.
of the Mobile Child Advocacy Cen-
The act sets up a children's
ter.
advocacy advisory board to guide
"It establishes the child advoca-
the program, he said.
cy center approach as the norm for
federal policy in dealing with child
"Hopefully, federal funding will
abuse issues in the United States,"
be available to us down the road
Guyton said.
through this," Guyton said.
He explained that the child ad-
"For the state of Alabama, it will
vocacy center approach is the
mean more child advocacy centers
"multi-disciplinary approach of
in the future. We have nine now.
bringing the child to one central
There is a total of about 90 opera-
location to provide a wide range of
tional right now across the United
services."
States," Guyton said.
The legislation, called the Na-
tional Children's Advocacy Pro-
"A freshman congressman from
gram Act of 1992, also emphasizes,
Alabama, Bud Cramer of Hunts-
as a federal policy, "protecting the
ville, introduced the legislation
child and the child's interests over
and got it passed, which was a
and above using extreme mea-
tremendous feat for him," Guyton
sures to hold the family together,"
said. The legislation was passed
Guyton said.
last month.
It authorizes the appropriation
Cramer was founder of the first
of federal funds in the future for
Child Advocacy Center in the Unit-
child advocacy centers around the
ed States, constructed in Hunts-
country, although no funds were
ville in 1984.
SIGNATURE
HOME PHONE
CITY
ADDRESS
NAME
BUSINESS PHONE
Friend of the Child Advocacy Center
Yes, I wish to become a
CENTER
CHILD ADVOCACY
THE
Team Review Meeting
Everything about the Center is
designed to make children feel secure.
STATE
DATE
ZIP
CENTER
ADVOCACY
CHILD
CHILD
ADVOCACY
Payment in full on
Annually for
PAYABLE:
CENTER
Sept., Dec.)
(Check One) (Mar., June, (12 months)
Quarterly
The Child Advocacy Center the sum of:
I, the undersigned hereby agree to pay
Investigative tools such as puppets
The Child
THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER
and anatomical dolls are used in team
interviews by professionals.
Advocacy Center
years.
Monthly
(205) 432-1101
Mobile, Alabama 36604
$
$
1351 Springhill Avenue
AND RETURN TO:
PLEASE MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
Printing of this brochure was made
possible in part by a Bureau of Justice
1351 Springhill Avenue
Assistance grant (BJ86-06-0001) of the
Mobile, Alabama 36604
$
Alabama Department of Economic and
(205) 432-1101
BALANCE PLEDGED
PAYMENT HEREWITH
Community Affairs, Law Enforcement
TOTAL GIFT
Planning Division, with matching local
government support from the City of
A place for children's justice.
Mobile and the Mobile County Commis-
sion.
The children photographed for this bro-
chure are not abused children.
The Child Advocacy Center provides the
terviewing reduces the number of inter-
together as a community will we be able
following comprehensive services:
views required of the child and subse-
to begin the process of reducing this men-
quently the trauma to the child.
Coordinating interviews and in-
ace. To report suspected cases of child
Following the team interview process
vestigations with all agencies and
abuse call the Department of Human Re-
the child and family may be referred for
professionals from the initial screen-
sources at 432-0553 at any time. In life
mental health therapy. Therapy is a
ing to the final disposition.
threatening situtuations, contact local law
crucial component in the child's recovery
enforcement: Mobile Police Department at
Gathering evidence, verbal testi-
from the trauma of victimization.
434-7211 or Mobile County Sheriff's Office
mony, medical documentation, and
After the initial interview is complete,
at 690-8633.
all other relevant evidence necessary
the case is presented at a weekly team
Because the Child Advocacy Center is
for criminal prosecution and custody
review meeting at the Center. Focusing on
the Mobile community's response to the
proceedings.
the best interests of the child, the team of
problem of child abuse, the Center
law enforcement officers, child protective
depends on broad community support for
THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER
Providing swift, vertical prosecution
service workers, mental health therapists,
its continued operation and success. The
in all child abuse cases referred for
physicians, and prosecutors review the
Child Advocacy Center and the children
prosecution.
The Child Advocacy Center, Inc.
cases to determine the appropriate action
we serve need your help. Please become a
Coordinating efforts in preparing
to take. This may include changing
Friend of the Child Advocacy Center by
The Child Advocacy Center, a private
child victims and their families for the
custody of the child, requesting medical
returning the attached card with your con-
non-profit agency, is a result of the coope-
criminal justice process and preven-
exams, seeking additional information
tribution today.
rative effort of local government, medical,
ting further victimization.
from law enforcement agencies, asking for
mental health, educational, and social ser-
further interviews and investigation, refer-
vices agencies. The Center is designed to
Offering mental health therapy in-
ring the case for prosecution, or holding
coordinate the Mobile community's re-
tervention for child victims and their
the case over for further review.
sponse to the problem of child abuse. Past
families SO that the healing process
If a case is considered for criminal pro-
experience has taught us that no single
can begin.
secution, a victim advocate is assigned to
agency can possibly meet all the needs of
Providing multidisciplinary training
assist the child and family through the
physically and sexually victimized chil-
in all areas of child abuse for profes-
criminal justice system, and the case is
dren and their families. Experience has
sionals from participating agencies.
referred to the Director of the Child Abuse
also taught us that taking child victims
Prosecution Unit, who is an Assistant
from agency to agency over and over for
Coordinating local efforts in child
District Attorney working full-time at the
multiple interviews traumatizes the
abuse education and prevention in-
Center.
children and, in fact, revictimizes them.
cluding educational programs in local
Working together, representatives from
schools.
the Department Human Resources, the
THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER:
Prosecutor interviews child in relaxed
Mobile County District Attorney's Office,
THE COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO
non-threatening environment.
the Mobile County Sheriff's Office, the
THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER:
CHILD ABUSE
Mobile Police Department, mental health
WORKING TO HELP
agencies, physicians, and other public and
VICTIMIZED CHILDREN
The Child Advocacy Center serves the
private agencies formed the Child Ad-
needs of victimized children and their
vocacy Center, Inc. in 1985. The Center
By interagency agreement, children vic-
families. These young people and their
became fully operational in March of 1988.
timized by sexual abuse and severe
families tell us that their experience with
The Center, located in a house at 1351
physical abuse are directed to the Child
our community's new way of dealing with
Spring Hill Avenue, provides a warm, non-
Advocacy Center after an initial deter-
child abuse is therapeutic. The profes-
threatening environment where profes-
mination is made by the Department of
sionals who serve them are working
sionals responding to child abuse reports
Human Resources. Here specially trained
together more closely than ever before and
meet with their young clients. Designed to
professionals from law enforcement agen-
finding more satisfaction in the positive
be a "special place" for any child who
cies, child protective services, and the
resolution of a greater number of cases,
walks through its doors, everything at the
District Attorney's Office conduct team in-
while more offenders are being held ac-
Center conveys that the child is important
terviews in rooms designed to appeal to
countable for their crimes.
and respected by the adults who work
children. Careful attention is given to the
Protecting children from abuse is
Joint interviews by law enforcement
here.
interview method and approach. Team in-
everyone's responsibility. Only by working
and child protective workers reduce
trauma to the child.
3rd Attachment
-
Alabama's oldest newspaper
Mar. 1, 1993
MOBILE REGISTER
Since 1813
City Edition
Child Advocacy Center celebrates a birthday
By BETTY JO LAGMAN
advocates who work for the
use as therapy and interview
center and district attorney's
rooms.
Living Today Writer
office. will be presented Points
Since its opening March 1.
The Child Advocacy Center is
of Light awards - medallions.
1988. the Child Advocacy Center
celebrating its fifth birthday this
awarded last year by former
has achieved national
year - a milestone in its fight
President George Bush, on red.
recognition in several areas.
to ensure local abused children
white and blue ribbons.
Most importantly. it is the
can celebrate their birthdays.
Three others will be
second out of 100 in the United
too.
recognized and presented
States to have all services to
Staff members, volunteers and
plaques for work they have done
children located under one roof.
community leaders will
at the center. in addition to
Guyton said he's particularly
commemorate the anniversary
helping the children.
proud to have all programs and
during an open house from 4:30
Pat Guyton. executive
services that deal with children
until 6:30 p.m. today.
director, said the new addition
who have been victims of either
A ceremony will honor two
to the facility will be used to
sexual abuse or serious physical
groups of volunteers, and a new
house investigators assigned to
abuse together at the center.
950-square-foot addition to the
the Child Protective Service
"Six child abuse investigators
rear of the facility. located at
unit. It will also provide office
and a supervisor from the
1351 Spring Hill Ave., will be
space for other legal
Department of Human
dedicated.
enforcement agents and will free
Nine women. volunteer victim
up other parts of the center for
Please see ADVOCACY on 3D
Guyton
538
News tips: 432-5627
ment."
Advocacy
Services provided by the center
In addition to the 748th Points of
to children in the community has
Light award, the center in 1990 won
grown from 270 the first year to 800
Continued from 1D
the JCPenney "Golden Rule"
each during the fourth and fifth
award for volunteer services by a
years. "That's approximately 3,000
Resources are the most recent
additions," he said. They were
group in Mobile. The outstanding
child victims served," Guyton said.
assigned full-time to the center the
group award was presented by
Volunteer Mobile and JCPenney.
Funding is provided by a federal
first of February and join other
Victims of Crime Act grant admin-
professionals from the sheriff's
The center has also been nomi-
istered by the Alabama Depart-
department. district attorney's of-
nated for full membership into the
ment of Economic and Community
fice, mental health workers and
National Network of Children's
Affairs, an appropriation from the
others who are located there.
Advocacy Centers Inc.
Alabama Legislature, contracts for
services with both the mayor and
This means, Guyton said, that a
Guyton said the Child Advocacy
child can come to one location and
Center grew out of the work of the
City Council of Mobile and Mobile
have all services within the one
Mobile County Child Abuse Com-
County Commission, and private
facility. "They won't have to go
mittee which was formed in 1983 to
donations from fund raising.
from agency to agency," and it
investigate this community's re-
Looking ahead to the next five
reduces the number of times a
sponse to the exploding reports of
child abuse, especially child sexu-
years, Guyton foresees several
child has to be interviewed. he
said. This also reduces the trauma
al abuse.
challenges:
to a child, and "the healing process
Most of the committee members
Continue training of all pro-
can begin early," he said.
fessionals who work at the center,
became founding members of the
so that all involved in child abuse
board of directors of the center in
services understand the roles and
In addition, Guyton said, "every-
1985. They will be among those
body working together under one
honored this evening at the open
responsibilities of the other disci-
roof makes for better case manage-
house.
plines working there.
Better inform the general pub-
lic and the civic, service, communi-
ty, religious and educational orga-
nizations about the facts of and
dangers of child abuse, particular-
ly child sexual abuse.
Increase mental health thera-
py services to child abuse victims
and to adult survivors of child
sexual abuse.
Fully implement the child
abuse prevention curriculum into
all Mobile County Public Schools.
A pilot program was begun in 1991
at Alba elementary. middle and
high schools in Bayou La Batre.
Fund raising - on-going and
always for increasing needs and
programs.