Serve not because of hard times, but in spite of hard times.(editor's note)

Lately there has been a slew of press reports, the overwhelming number of which were about how state public human service agencies are doing a lousy job in meeting their clients' needs. Mostly, these reports depict state agencies' delivery of welfare programs in such an incompetent and slow manner that we wonder if we ever do anything right.

Underlining most of these reports is a negative attitude that reporters seem to share about what state public human service agencies do and a lack of understanding of how well agencies actually do their jobs against seemingly impossible odds.

First, the press on the whole seems to fail to put the current economic climate in perspective. They fail to put in the important element in their stories--that the nation as a whole is facing a recession that can properly be called a depression, that unemployment is up everywhere, and that with social welfare applications rising, the negative error rate (or denials), and for that matter, any kind of measurement of welfare program delivery, is rising in practically every state in the country. Simply said, these are the signs of the times, and state agencies are fighting an uphill battle.

The general public seems unaware that public human service agencies' caseloads grow during bad times, and by necessity, errors--human or computer--are bound to increase with the caseload. Public welfare programs are probably the only "industry" that grows its business when times are bad, usually at a time when revenues to administer such programs are dwindling. The resulting higher errors become part of their business.

The other mistake that most reporters make is that they do not provide a complete picture of the administrative and regulatory side for welfare program delivery. While reporters can easily depict state agencies' alleged inefficiency that conflicting requirements and spotty funding cause, few understand the controlling presence of federal laws and regulations in creating and perpetuating this fragmentation, and the efforts of human service administrators to overcome this challenge. For years, the American Public Human Services Association has called for more compatibility among programs, consistent federal funding and less red tape. Despite some progress, multiple federal agencies and congressional committees continue to go their separate ways in creating the mandates that states must follow.

Another serious fault in the media's coverage of welfare program delivery is that certain aspects of programs like welfare and Medicaid are designed to reflect local variations in state demographics, funding mixes and health plan options. Many states have other safety-net elements such as unemployment insurance programs that supplement welfare payments. While we appreciate the coverage, often articles ignore this broader perspective.

I think the nation's citizens would be surprised if the nation's press turned its focus on how many clients our public human service agencies have been able to serve--not because of the hard times, but in spite of the hard times.

Frank Solomon is the editor of Policy & Practice and director of communications and membership at APHSA.

Print Get the Mag Weekly Updates