Travis County Commissioners Court
October 31, 2006
Item 9
Let's see if we can quickly lay out nine. If we need to take another week we can. 9. Consider and take appropriate action on the ex-offender workforce development work plan for fiscal year 2007 from criminal justice planning and health and human services and veterans services.
>> [one moment please for change in captioners] here in Travis County, what we would like to start doing is posted job description, we have met or spoken with human resources on several different options. This person would also be responsible to -- to network with the city and county human resources departments on strategies to hire ex-offenders. They would network with the local chamber of commerce, private and non-profit advocacy groups, churches and see if they can recruit volunteers. Work closely with the -- with the Texas department of criminal justice, with the state jail division, parole division, Travis County adult probation. Travis County sheriff's office, all of the departments with ex-offenders, performance measures in a more detailed work plan. We would little like to see this position work closely with project rio and work source and I strongly believe that we need to develop and implement a scroaning process that -- screening process so that we have appropriately placing these ex-offenders with employers in the community. Also we would like to work closely with health and human services on its volunteer development program and it's rapid employment model. With our budget, we would like to obviously with the $100,000 is have that one f.t.e. And with -- with being midpoint with benefits is wonderful 68,000. What we have looked at was the basic needs services, we compared what we are actually serving with the ex-offenders with, the commitment to change program at the community justice center. So we budgeted $20,000 for that and remaining money really just start at costs such as computers and training and mileage, which this person would obviously be in the community quite a bit. That's really just in a nutshell what we on the criminal justice planning side wanted to do with this. Also what I would like to point out to the court, in our research over the past couple of months, we learned that the national institute of corrections, nic, actually has an offender workforce development specialist training program that's available for a 10 man team and the next one is sable in 20:07 now is the time for us to apply, no cost to the county, actually a 185 hour training program spread over a five-week program. Also another opportunity that we've had to expand this program with health and human services and some of our other partners in the community.
>> I guess the one thing that I don't see highlighted that's critical is to solicit employers, major and minor, to participate. Did I overlook that part? We touched oaferg else, resource mapping, force available, there are a lot of agency that's do a lot of stuff now that's probably a little bit more fragmented than preferrable. But the employer component seems to me to be critical, rio has some employers, the challenge I think is to find those that are participating and get them to participate more and then try to get a whole lot of those not participating interested. There are some incentives available. I am not -- I am not absolutely sure how to access those or why -- whether they are important. But whatever it takes it seems to me that it's hard to get jobs unless you got people hiring.
>> that's correct. I have touched on it a little bit. I didn't expand very much on it. But the private non-profit sector. We currently have job fairs at the community. I think we really need to expand on that, make a more concerted effort of going out in community trying to get these employers.
>> part of our conversation has been with the resource we are thinking not just form, but also who are the employers in the other private sector resources out there. Critical. Also conversations are ongoing with the work source board and conversations with their employment specialists. They are a services team as well as with the chamber of commerce ongoing, the chambers of commerce are ongoing to try to create more and more opportunities out there.
>> I have got in mind just a whole lot more action than observable in the recent past. And almost like a blitz over the next well the rest of this fiscal year, but you have got to have somebody out there doing it.
>> one of the challenges that we -- that we -- that's ongoing, in doing employment work with ex-offenders, is balancing our interests in having attention and bringing, you know, putting the spotlight on work that's being done, the good things that we have done, but with also from the employers side, particularly some reticence -- not reticence so much to take a role to hire, but more reticent to say, to be spotlighted for that. We have to effect a balance of getting what we need without putting someone in a place they don't feel comfortable being at this time. We have to get some small successes, in a good track rate. Saying this is going to work for me, I'm going to get a bang out of this. We are going to strike that balance.
>> if we believe in it, we ought to do it. And that means hiring folks.
>> yes.
>> I would think that there are some advantages for us and the city of Austin. When I speak of major employers, you almost have to start with to us and then go to the other public sector employers and then -- then the private sector. And -- and we do -- we do some good now. I don't know that we can quantify it. And seems to me that we could be a lot more systematic and so -- so in addition to the determining what to do, part of this effort is to do it. So -- so clearly unless you have somebody who's only job is to make this happen, you know, it's -- I think it becomes secondary real soon. And so that's my thinking. If we do all of this, though, we will have -- we will have done a world of good, I think, over the last -- over the next 8 to 9 months. The other thing the city and county and other public entities fund non-profit agencies to do some of this. I don't know that we know exactly what they do. I don't know that ex-offenders know that services and programs are available see what I'm saying? Then the end result needs to be either a better job or a job. So that's what we really ought to be reporting back.
>> I applaud you. And this court for -- and the staff for -- for going into this area. We have been discussing this for -- for a little while, it's not like it just happened today. We have been hashing this around for a while, trying to see what type of initiative we can take and do to assist in this area. Now we've got a little funding set aside to -- to do this as far as dealing with this type of workforce. My question, though, is that during this process and during this workforce plan is that I want to make sure that whoever we end up deciding, dealing with in this particular arena, that they have their hands on type of approach to ensure that we have success. One of the things that we asked some time ago is that -- I think the judge
>> [indiscernible], we asked this question, well, employers here we are trying to ensure an opportunity for ex-offenders to have employment opportunities. I mean, that was something that we asked but when we looked in the mirror, we looked back at ourselves, Travis County what are you going to do about it, you are asking us to hire, what are you going to do? This is an attempt to see what Travis County is going to do about it. Hopefully these steps we have here in place will assist us in getting to that end. So I'm kind of concerned to make sure that what we're doing here today is deep enough where it could take root, we could have some kind of success stories, of course you have got to put the infrastructure together to make it happen. This is basically the structure itself. As far as moving forward, the court during the last suggest cycle, to set aside moneys to accommodate the -- these particular requests, I do know there are some hurdle that's we still have to cross. In the meantime I think that my question is, is this enough to make sure that -- that we have -- have enough deep -- deep rooted effort to go forward. I need to hear from you because I looked at this, I wanted to make sure that -- that it's deep enough for us to go forward to have some type of success story. Whoever that first person is, that we are a part of going through the process, even the coordinator whoorks ever that person is, we need to make sure that we are aggressively make change. To ensure this. Can you basically tell me what it is that may need to be beefed up or is this enough to get me started or what? I need to hear from you, staff.
>> sherri flemming, executive manager for health and human services. Commissioner, I think this is certainly a substantial start. I agree with judge Biscoe's comments certainly having someone whose job it is to develop these positions for potential ex-offenders to seek out and be placed in is a critical component to having some impact in this area. From a health and human services perspective, we are hoping to supplement this person by working with the retired senior volunteer program. So that we have access to volunteers. One of the things that we are seeing is somewhat of a change in the workforce, if you will, in the volunteer area. A lot of our -- of our retirees are younger, they are looking for more challenging volunteer assignments and so we are hoping to be able to attach some of those persons to work along with this individual to develop those employers. But -- but this is certainly a start. And we have also -- already begun conversations both with the city and with our internal h.r. About what our criminal background check requirements are and, you know, do those criminal background checks, are they required for certain positions, what would be the pros and cons to not having them. What decisions the court would have to make in order to -- to remove those barriers in certain positions. So those conversations have begun. I believe this is a significant start.
>> anybody else?
>> I just think that it's crucial that the person that we do hire is able to work effective with the ex-offenders population, but also be able to work effective with department heads and people with the county and the city. I agree with sherri, this is an excellent start.
>> judge, -- owe I'm sorry, go ahead.
>> I --
>> I will come back.
>> I have a number of things that I'm going to need another week on this. I apologize, I didn't get some of the backup until late yesterday, it was just too late to get some questions called. I'm trying to recall whether we have said that in terms if there was $100,000 was absolutely going to be in the cjp arena. But on the other $100,000 I'm not sure I recall, I choose to be reeducated that we specifically said it was only for he could offenders. I don't remember it being that narrow related to the health and human services end of things. Now, it could be that that was what the discussion was. But I wasn't remembering it this narrow. It was to add another $100,000 specifically in the health and human services arena. I don't remember --
>> it was for justice and public safety to fund really what I just said a moment ago.
>> exactly.
>> the second $100 thousand was for workforce development.
>> I wasn't expecting there to be a second opportunity because I think a lot of challenges that we have with that population are things that I think more appropriately need to be handled on the cjp side of the ladder. I was looking for the other $100,000 to do the set aside for ex-offenders, work with them, established communities and working on those specific challenges. I thought the other $100,000 was going to be for other things and given our situation with cdbg funds, lessening and that that was going to be another opportunities for us to kind of reapply some of those things. Also, if you are going to go -- on the hhs side of the ledger for ex-offenders, some of the biggest challenges of ex-offenders have to do with the fact that they have literacy issues. So rather than something you urban youth core, not to be confused with youth works, where you are not working on things that will get you to a better job, things that I was surprised there wouldn't be more emphasis if you are going with ex-offenders on things like literacy Austin, the esl, especially Austin academy. The Austin academy works with folks who do not even have the skill set to get into capital idea. Capital idea will get you down the path. But there are folks that do not even have the basic literacy issues and that's really -- really the safety net to the safety net to the safety net to get people to a very basic level, so they can then get into realistic job programs. So I would like to take another week, especially on the hhs side of it, judge, because I was -- I don't remember us saying that we were doing that for ex-offenders. We were doing the other --
>> we didn't say what we were doing it for. I never thought we would exclude ex-offenders, but I never thought that we would limit it to ex-offenders, also, it does seem to me on the second $100,000 we really ought to dry to do basic workforce development stuff. One criticism that I have had of the work source board and I told the board this in executive record or whoever else would listen, I don't think they really dedicated enough resources to the real needy folk in our community. And we ought not to criticize them for that if we are not doing it. We need to see our contract agencies whoorks they serve, what programs and services they have, what impact they are having, also. On the second 100,000, I do agree. We did not say we would limit that funding to ex-offenders. I don't think we ought to exclude ex-offenders either.
>> not at all.
>> I think we ought to use that second $100,000 to help the very, very needy folk in our community and one challenge is identify them, second challenge is to make sure that they come forth and receive services that are available. Now, part of our job is to determine eligibility for social services. When we do that, we identify you as a needy person before we serve you, right?
>> that's correct.
>> to meet the financial standards you have to be in need.
>> that's correct.
>> so we ought not to have to look real hard to find participants.
>> I don't disagree with what anyone is saying here. But what I do know, during the budget cycle, wanted to beef up as much money into the workforce effort as we could get. I didn't get exactly what I was hoping for, that was an additional $100,000 for what we are having today. It didn't happen. But in saying all of that, saying all of that, the -- the intent of what we are doing here today was not only to, judge said, Commissioner Sonleitner, to help ex-offenders, stuff like that. But also set aside to see what we can deal with as far as people needing the basic needs to become viable working employed person within Travis County. Now that was I think was a big step. Right now is -- it's a challenge for us to address that. But really I wanted to put more money into this particular workforce development thing because of the broad need of this particular type of program. That is very, very broad. So again I'm looking forward to moving forward, Commissioner Sonleitner if you need another week I don't mind. If that's what we need to do but -- but I'm still concerned that what we are doing here is to address also the ex-offenders and also the other folk. We are not trying to separate it. We have got, I think what we are trying to do is make sure that they both are taken care of.
>> well, one thing about ex-offenders, though, once we have identified them and -- and done whatever we could to screen them, determine their commitment to improving their lives, then we already fund numerous programs that are supposed to help people find jobs. So part of this strategic ought to be simply to have them access programs at the city and county and probably at -- that the state already paid for. And work source. So my thinking was that -- that you know we would focus a bit more energy on really identifying ex-offenders with skills, those without skills we would try to funnel them toward programs that would help them. Commitment, motivation, then on the other hand, though, you have got to have employers whoomp saying we will give you jobs if you meet these criteria. And the other thing is in addition to finding employers I mean part of that is finding out where the jobs are. Now in the construction industry, I mean,, you know, last night during the construction boom they were hiring folk who really should show up on time and work eight or nine hours a day. They would give you the training. So if that is so, it seems to me an easy thing to identify those physically fit for construction work and committed to working 40 hours a week or 48 or whatever the number is.
>> I think for me in terms of -- where all of our heads are at. I don't know whether I thought the 100,000 on the cjp side that most of it would be sucked up with one employee as opposed it going into the services it's being sucked up by the personnel and the benefits and their exoourt, their training and mileage. That's helping one person find a job. But it's not really where I thought this was headed. The other thing on the list that I got late yesterday from hhs, the line item related to opportunity Austin, it was not really in my mind subject to the 5% increase. We made a two year commitment for $100,000. It wasn't like it was supposed to be inflated. We are just trying to get the first piece of that done. It wasn't supposed to be applied to the extra $2,500 in my mind. Just one person here. I'm still trying to get last year's commitment related to that going and -- and so anyway, there's just all sorts of embedded things in here that I think if I had more time. Judge, I'm going to be out of town unfortunately well fortunately Thursday through Monday. If we could have two weeks, that would be helpful for me. Because next --
>> I have a little problem with that on the criminal justice part.
>> I'm cool on the criminal justice.
>> there's no way to get done what I think we ought to do without a person doing it. On the rest of this, this is a whole lot broader than I anticipated. If we carve out the criminal justice piece.
>> that's cool. I could do that.
>> we need to post that position and hire that person and get that work done, otherwise we don't get to it.
>> right.
>> it needs to be a -- a person to get the job done and --
>> so is it possible that the cjp we can just put that for next Tuesday
>> [multiple voices]
>> either do it or not.
>> the following week the hhs because I think that's going to take some more time.
>> another week, two weeks whatever we need to take on that.
>> that would be helpful for me. Est. Me.
>> post the job, find the right person, the hiring is done probably 30 days later or 45.
>> right.
>> my problem is we are kind of looking at if we are not careful January 1 or -- so if that's all right --
>> next week and then the following week for hhs.
>> could I just briefly say I think we can get to the court's interest certainly. I believe that hhs's position was in the '07 budget process we requested expansion so that we could add capacity related to ex-offenders because we knew that was an interest on the table. In addition, in having available funding to follow, if you will, the ex-offenders as they move through some of these programs because I think what you will hear from some of our providers is that they are very well to work with this population, but they are at capacity in terms of resources. So that was I believe the motivation for us to look at the two pots of money as a method to -- to ensure that we had dollars to -- to go along with the services that we were trying to move people into.
>> okay.
>> but I believe we can get there.
>> do we know whether or not -- I'm -- Travis County in my opinion -- I guess depending on how the court deals with this, but I
>> [indiscernible] support it as far as this particular program is concerned. Now, what I need to find out if Travis County ends up dealing with the ex-offenders, not only that, but we have these other things to deal with later as far as workforce development, for -- other than ex-offenders, is there any other entity other than Travis County that's doing similar to what we are doing here today? That we know of? Anybody else --
>> not a program that's -- that's specific --
>> support the way we have done historically.
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> that's the problem.
>> exactly, judge. That's the bottom -- that's what I'm trying to --
>> [multiple voices]
>> we are not doing the right thing.
>> I think that if Travis County moves forward with this type of initiative, I really feel very comfortable that we will see other governmental entities once they have a model to follow, I think that probably will be a pervasive movement if it's something that they can look at and follow because as the judge said articulate and, you know,
>> [indiscernible] not doing anything.
>> remind us that 8 years ago that we amended all of the c.a.n. Contracts to make ex-offender status a priority. But I don't know that I can say today that one ex-offender benefited. Now, I know that the will was there, everybody intended to do the right thing. But over the past 8 years, I have become more convinced that we have got to be more targeted, a lot more specific, and we have got to have a dedicated worker to make this happen. That's -- that's -- and we have to start in Travis County.
>> yes, sir.
>> I mean that's -- that's clear.
>> I think that we would be remiss if we did not say out loud that we are talking about one-time money being used to the cjp site. If indeed this is successful, we hope that it will be, that will be an effect that next year's court will have to deal with. Saying it out loud because christian likes us to talk about the use of one-time money. The other thing that I wanted to ask about -- oh, sherri you asked about -- you said just a second ago about everyone says we are at capacity. Does at capacity mean we don't have another space even if you send funding with it? Or we just have the funded slots if you would, we can take on more but you need to send money with it.
>> what it means is the population of folk that we would be referring to the -- to the agencies require a hair level of case management, staff volume and so when you are faced with -- with say person a, who who doesn't have the constraints of maybe having a criminal history or other challenges like that, you have someone who needs more intensive case milam county, how do you justify not moving forward with this person as opposed to taking on something that maybe is almost equal to taking on two clients. So I think there is great intent on the part of our providers, I know that many of them do tremendous work. But there are so many case managers, so much capacity that each employee brings to the table in order to serve these folks, if we are saying to the agencies we want you to in addition to what you are already doing, take on this higher need population of folks, I think that creates for them the capacity issue in terms of the number of people they can reasonably serve on a daily basis with the existing staff that they have.
>> is it a capacity issue that can be resolved with them hiring more people and having the funds to do that? Because more dollars are being sent for those special needs clients.
>> it will vary across, depending on the type of service they are offering. In some cases fairly simple to say here's an extra, you know, we will pay you 22,500, 3,000, whatever that unit comes out to be for an additional seat. In some cases that is going to be viable. In other cases really are very hard and fast capacity issues around, for example construction gateway program I'm sure many of you are all familiar with where it's a partnership with -- between one of our contracted providers and a.c.c. They can have psycho many classes a year, so many -- they can have so many classes in a year, so many seats in a year. With that a larger investment, an entirely new paralegal track to that. That is going to be a mix of what we can and can't do across our partners.
>> I would like to work with you on the hhs side.
>> I understood a more narrow charge, I will be happy to come back, be more responsive to your current request.
>> okay.
>> anything else today? We will have the cjp part back on next week and maybe allow another couple of three weeks on the other part. Is that thanks.
>> thank you.
>> thank you very much.
>> by the way, there is something -- something is -- something is -- this is the josh description --
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic] job description.
>> let's let them look at it between now and next week. See if they have input.
>> thanks.
>> thank you all.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, November 1, 2006 11:30 AM