Director Hendrick: Okay. Here's our June 30th program review.
We'll do an agency overview for the organization, look at service divisions, 
budget, employees and providers.
We'll get a description of the services by division.
We'll look at program data, family data by division and that's what we'll try to do.
Here's the org chart, just to kind of... if you get a chance and you want to go 
spend some more time on it we won't cover the whole thing right now 
but this group here is all the administrative activities that
has historically been led by Paula Hearn but will be led by Sandra Harrison.
Office of General Counsel the Information Services group led by Connie Schlitter, 
all the Data Services, IT, Research those folks.
Human Services Centers led by Marq Youngblood and this brown area here
includes all the six areas across the state and the more than ninety offices 
that deliver food stamps, Medicaid, Child Care, Child Welfare Services, 
Adult Protective Services, all the things that are out there in the field across the state.
Chief Financial Officer Phil Motely and then over here are 
the Vertically Integrated activities that have been led by Raymond Haddock who is,
as you heard earlier, is retiring to be replaced by Mark Jones. 
And they include the four activities I mentioned earlier.
Aging Services led by Lance Robertson, Child Care Licensing led by Leslie Blazer
Child Support Services led by Gary Dart and Developmental Disabilities led by James Nicholson.
So that's just kind of a big picture of the overview, we won't spend a lot of time on that.
Human Services Centers takes... let's talk a little bit about the org chart just so
you can appreciate a little bit about the history here.
The agency's been through different kinds of organizational structures over the years 
but to give you a little... probably the two most pronounced differences so you can
understand those differences are probably going back 20 years ago or so, 
all of the people who worked in a local office reported up to the program chain of command 
and basically a County Director was essentially a figure-head and didn't really have 
any control or programmatic accountability.
That went all the way to the other extreme where the County Directors became responsible 
for everything in the county and they had to know the policy for licensing and... 
not everything, it didn't take in DD and it didn't take in Child Support, but everything else.
And then a few years ago we kind of hit the middle of the road approach and said, 
"Well let's let the Human Services Centers take care of the core business
then we'll vertically integrate these other services so that County Directors can take care of 
the core business and then we'll have subject matter experts take care of 
the programs that are not as involved for local activities."
So that's kind of the history of, in a word, of the way in which we've tried to hit 
the middle ground between the two extremes in the organizational structure.
Here is the appropriations and expenditures over the last decade or so.
You can see... I really want to focus on 2008 and beyond.
You can see $6.9 billion, $7 billion, $6.5 billion, $6.1 billion; 
these are the appropriations to all state agencies over the last four or five years.
I think the 2012 number which is not on this chart would look... 
this is, because all these numbers are as of June 30, 2010, the 2012 numbers aren't on here,
but if you were looking at the 2012 numbers it'd be like 6.4, 6.5.
So we are, really over the last four or five years in the $6.1-7 billion range 
for all the appropriations.
We've been up and down in here, you can see, especially in 2010 we took
about a $160 million appropriation cut primarily because a lot of that cut was
replaced with Federal Stimulus dollars.
But nevertheless our Budget Work Program was reduced substantially in that year. 
And Phil did a very good job last week of running through all that with you, 
so I'm not going to repeat all that here. 
But this gives you a sense... almost all of this growth and total expenditures 
in the last four or five years was due to food stamps.
To give you some sense of the magnitude of that, probably four or five years ago 
in an average month we might spend $40 million or so,  or between $35-40 million 
a month in just food assistance.
Last month we spent $80 million in just food assistance.
So it just tells you the significance of the working poor... 
the volumes of working poor people are really taking off quite a bit 
in the last two or three years.
Our employees, who are about 7,128 employees, 75% of our employees have a college degree.
Starting salary is $2,354.00 for a Family Support Worker. 
With benefits, the average salary of all of our employees is about $57,000.00 
but about $35,000.00 without benefits.
So, one of the things that is a big frustration for me is our benefit package 
is so expensive that... our employees like their benefits but they also would like 
to have some money to take home. 
And one of the frustrations is we spend so much in benefits we're not able 
to send enough money home with our employees to take care of their immediate needs. 
And so we don't really have any control over that but I've worked, and still I'm working, 
with various members of the Legislature to see what we can do to manage those costs 
a little better and hopefully be able to find good ways to improve the take home pay for our staff.
This is the chart you saw earlier, I'm not going to spend too much time on it again.
Besides all of our employees, there are lots of private sector employees 
that are supported by our work and employees.
So one thing I think people will be surprised to realize when the Federal Budgets begin 
to be contracted and all of us get excited about the fact that we're going to live 
within our means, which we have to do, there's no question about that, it has to happen.
But, a lot of times you're going to hear a lot of rhetoric about public employees 
versus private employees and what's good or bad about one or the other.
What I don't think people appreciate is the volume of private sector jobs that are
funded 100% with tax payer funds. Okay?
People are not going to appreciate the volume of private sector jobs funded 100% 
with taxpayer funds. Let me give you some examples.
Everybody in the state that we contract with who delivers Developmental Disabilities Services.
Those jobs are funded 100% with tax-payer funds. They're all private sector jobs.
All the people who deliver ADvantage Waiver services funded 100% with taxpayer funds
but they're all private sector jobs.
When the budgets begin to get balanced at the Federal level and we begin to see these cuts,
you're not going to just see reductions in the public sector, which we've already seen - 
1,000 less employees in our agency.
You're going to see a lot of private sector employers who are really going to begin 
to struggle very severely about their ability to actually deliver the service.
And as you saw on the budget request that's one of our big key issues is being sure 
that we pay our private sector vendors enough.
It's like Lee Iacocca said when he took over Chrysler,
"If the dealers don't make money, we're not going to make money." 
And if our vendors don't make money we're not going to be able to deliver service.
So, it's very important for us to take care of our private sector vendors 
but at the same point, if we don't have the money to do it, 
people are not going to get the services.
That's really the big risk that I'm concerned about.
Human Services Centers, these are all of the different activities inside the agency
Field Ops, the six geographic areas, the ninety-four local offices.
Family Support and Child Welfare do the program work.
They also include, Family Support includes Adult Protective Services, 
the Aged, Blind & Disabled, Child Care.
Let's talk a little bit about some of these programs 
because some of you know them well and some of you don't know them at all.
Adult Protective Services- Adult Protective Services is essentially the same kind of 
a service as you have for Child Welfare, except for the fact that you don't have a lot 
of Federal financial participation, in fact you have no Federal financial participation 
in the funding of Adult Protective Services 
and the standards for confirmation are quite a bit a different.
We'll run through all those as we go through these data here in a little bit.
Whether vulnerable seniors or vulnerable persons are left in the community, 
or reconnected with some kind of family or kin, is a very important service 
and our people really...
All of these programs are really being strained right now because of the reduction of staff. 
So Adult Protective Services, kind of the same thing that we have for Child Welfare 
but it's just for adults.
Aged, Blind & Disabled- Aged, Blind & Disabled are payments made to persons 
who are aged, blind or disabled.
But what you really need to know about Aged, Blind & Disabled payments are that 
we spend about $39 million of 100% state funds to fund Aged, Blind and Disabled payments. 
That $39 million has been the same number probably for 30 years.
And 30 years ago we might have been... I don't know what the numbers are 
but in round numbers we might have been funding 25,000 or 30,000 people with that $39 million.
Today we fund about 70,000 people with that $39 million.
The monthly payment is a fraction of what it used to be. Why do we do that?
We do that because in 1963 or 4 or 5, whenever Oklahoma agreed to join the Federal Medicaid program, 
one of the conditions of joining the Federal Medicaid Program was we would never cut
our total dollars being spent on Aged, Blind & Disabled payments.
So we still spend $39 million on Aged, Blind & Disabled payments because if we don't spend 
$39 million on Aged, Blind & Disabled payment, the state is no longer eligible 
to participate in a $4-5 billion Medicaid program.
So that's what Aged, Blind & Disabled payments are.
It's worth $39 million to stay participating in the Federal Medicaid program.
Child Care, Soonercare, or Medicaid, however you, and SNAP eligibility
all these, which are food stamps, these are your basic family support benefits.
They're all in kind benefits. In other words, they're not cash transfer payments.
Child Care, we help persons get child care to go to work.
The other circumstances are: foster parents, we pay for their child care for their foster kids
while they work, adoptive families until the child is six, we take care of that child care
while they go to work. But it's all about going to work.
So it's really a very important support for families who work.
Medicaid- most of you know the Health Care Authority is the Medicaid agency.
We do help the Health Care Authority with parts of their Medicaid Eligibility,
parts of their Medicaid Eligibility they handle themselves.
SNAP- food stamp eligibility has not changed for I don't know, 25 years probably.
It's always been 130% of the Federal poverty guidelines.
And is still 130% of the Federal poverty guidelines, but as the consumer price index goes up, 
the absolute dollar amount changes but the percentage of poverty standards hasn't changed 
in I don't know how long.
TANF is the welfare reform language for cash assistance payments.
In the early 1990s, our state would spend around $170 million a year 
in cash assistance payments to 35,000-40,000 adults in an average month.
And you'll see the numbers in a little bit.
We don't spend near that amount of money and we only have 4-7,000 adults in an average month.
So, welfare reform meant people went to work and the good thing about that 
is when you have a recession like we've been going through, 
one of the good things about going to work is in some cases, a lot of cases, 
people go to work at places where they earn the right to get Unemployment Benefits 
so that when they lose their job, they'll at least have cash assistance 
through Unemployment Benefits for a while.
But, if the Federal Government were ever to terminate or reduce or cut back on their commitment 
to fund the Unemployment Benefits, our TANF budget could really get a pretty big hit.
So, I think that's another good reason to think about that $12.5 million and what should happen 
with the $12.5 million because of the risk that I think we have to some degree in the event, 
emergency funds for Unemployment Benefits were terminated.
Then there's lots of other specialty programs. 
Probably the biggest one that comes to mind is Low Income Home Energy Assistance Programs, 
which twice per year we help people with their energy bills either in
winter or in summer cooling programs.
Child Welfare- Child abuse prevention, child abuse assessments, investigations, 
family reunification, foster care, swift adoptions services, all the things 
that most of you know quite a bit about and we'll cover more as we go along here.
TANF- we've talked a little bit about already let's talk about what the numbers are in TANF.
Go back a little here, I've jumped ahead.
So, we have to check to make sure the accuracy of these cases are correct 
and we have our lowest error rate ever.
Really about 3% of the benefits paid out are erroneous... 
maybe too much, maybe not enough, either way.
Commissioner: Will OKDHS Live provide the kind of broad detection that will help to see
continual decreases or are we likely to see a bump because we are going to more technology?
Director Hendrick: Uh... I don't think we know the answer to that question yet.
I think we will actually see less fraud for a couple of reasons.
We still will have human intervention in the process.
So, the main thing that the OKDHS Live effort does is electronically gather 
the information, so that the worker will have the same experience they presently have 
in determining the eligibility. Okay?
So, we're trying to minimize or at least not have too much change in their work experience 
so that they're not having to learn a whole new system.
So the good... where I think there will be less errors is we won't have transposition errors,
because we won't have their social security messed up.
We won't have to be re-keying information in, because it will automatically populate screens
and we'll have a lot less of those kind of typing errors.
So, I think from that way it will be better.
We will also have some background efforts in terms of matching other databases. 
But we'll have to wait to see whether or not... 
we are not going to just certify somebody we don't know.
For example we will still require a face-to-face interview, 
we don't know who this person is who has come through the internet... 
Well, we don't certify them. We'll have them come see us.
So, we still have the ability to make sure that we are not just
certifying people without making sure we know who they are.
Commissioner: Even though our error rates are the lowest they've ever been for the agency, 
hasn't our error rate been the lowest for the region for the number of years?
Dir. Hendrick: Well, we've won the top award for five years in a row in our region, 
but... well, what is interesting about that is that in some years 
we were the second best on lots of factors and we didn't win the lowest error rate 
necessarily in some cases. Sometimes we did.
But, it's on a compilation of your overall administration of the program 
and we've won that the last five years.
I said 70,000 ABD, actually it's up to 89,000.
That's the number of people in June, 89,000 people in June that were receiving ABD payments.
Okay, we go now into Adult Protective Services.
These are the number of persons who got an investigation in June of each of these years, 
this is just one month.
15,000 assessments or investigations of people who were less to be vulnerable adults.
17,000 during the year referrals in the course of a year for vulnerable adults this last year.
These allegations had 11,000 that were substantiated, 16,000 that were not substantiated 
and 1,800 pending, something...
Oh, allegations may include more than one type per incident.
So, you can have multiple allegations in the same case, so that's why you have some 
that were substantiated and some that were not substantiated.
Some of our folks are vulnerable, have the ability to consent, 
some don't have the ability to consent, and some we couldn't determine.
So, you can imagine when you go out to talk to somebody, whether they can really communicate 
to you about what is going on in their situation. So, capacity is a big issue.
Most of the confirmations are self-neglect.
People get their medicationsmixed up, they get disoriented, they walk around in the neighborhood 
and we go out and try to get them reoriented, connected to their family members.
So you can see a lot of this work really is self-neglect.
An overwhelming majority of it is. Most of the services are voluntary.
Occasionally we will come across somebody who doesn't want help
and they need help and they are at risk to themselves and that happens in those cases as well.
Different vulnerabilities... they are unable to participate in activities of daily living, 
they have chronic health problems, mental illnesses, all these different ailments.
Allegations may include more than one type, so these are all the different kind of vulnerabilities
that were identified in the cases last year.
Commissioner: I would strongly suggest our new commissioners, if you get a chance to go 
with an APS worker and spend the day, it is a sobering, eye-opening experience 
and I think we are probably going to see our Adult Protective Services needs steadily incline.
Director Hendrick: Right. Okay. We move onto child care subsidies.
Child care subsidies of course as we mentioned earlier is what we spend for people to go to work 
and these are the number of people who received assistance during June.
This is end of year numbers, this is June 2011- 38,245 different children 
during the month of June 2011 that received subsidies. Last year it was 39,739.
Our participation rates on a monthly average are 39,107.
So even though we were down in June of 2011, on a average month in 2011 we actually served 
more people than we did in 2010.
Authorized placements for adoption- every year we do authorizations and finalizations, 
so the timing of these are a little bit different, but we try to track both.
We want to know whether or not we authorize a child to be adopted 
and then some of those children are adopted that year and some of them 
aren't adopted 'til the next year.
These are the numbers of adoptions that were finalized in each of the last four years.
So you can see adoptions happening there and this is kind of a bar chart that matches 
the adoptions... the placements with the finalizations.
Adoption subsidies you can see in June of 2011, 12,384 children
were receiving adoption subsidies, up from 11,924 in June of the year before.
Now we get into abuse and neglect referrals.
These are family-based referrals, which means we get calls that say, 
"This family is in some kind of a trouble and you need to go do an assessment
or there are allegations that something is going on in this family." 
66,541 different families, I'm sorry, but in those families... 
in those 66,541 families, there were 103,000 children. 
So some of those families obviously have more than one child per household.
And so you can see the number of families were up to 66,000, a new high, 
the number of children was not a new high.
There were actually 8,000 less kids that what we had in 2008, but not a big swing here.
The number of investigations completed were up in 2011 over 2010, 
but that's what you'd pretty much expect.
Part of this has to do with differential response, assessments I think are included 
in this as well, it's not just investigations, it would include assessments as well.
Investigations completed 48,393 in the last year... children were the subject of an investigation 
and the number of confirmed cases for families was up a little bit over 2010.
4,613 families had a confirmation of an allegation of abuse or neglect. 
8,110 children were confirmed to be victims of abuse or neglect, 
which is not as much as these other years, but is above our all time low, which was in 2010, 
when we had  7,248 children last year confirmed to be child abuse victims to neglect.
Commissioner: What do you think... why between 2007 and 2011 do we have such a drastic reduction?
Director Hendrick: Several reasons. The number... there are a lot of things that go into this.
The number of children living in fragile families is very high.
I don't think we can... by fragile families I mean families that are single-parent households,
have a lot of indications of poverty, those kinds of things.
But if you will notice in that same period of time we had two or three things 
that were happening that I think really ameliorate the risk that those families have.
We've had record increase in food stamp participation, record increase in child support collections, 
record levels of participation in Medicaid.
So, even though the natural family is not doing very well, the artificial supports for the families 
are actually performing at better rates than they've ever performed.
So, actually a lot of pressure economically that those families would otherwise had experienced, 
when they didn't get as much food stamps or they didn't get child support 
or they weren't participating in Medicaid, those are reducing some of the stress 
and I think that's a good reason for why we see some reduction here. It is a good sign.
Commissioner: Following up on that Director...the bar chart 
for abuse and neglect referrals, showed in '07 about 64,000 referrals 
and this chart that we're looking at says, investigations completed that year were 35,000.
So, you had quite a... so you cleared out quite a few referrals, about half 
and we don't see that percentage as high in this last fiscal year?
Director Hendrick: What chart are you referring to?
Commissioner: Child welfare, abuse, and neglect referrals family-based.
This shows 64,000 referrals in fiscal year '07 and the investigations completed in fiscal year '07.
Director Hendrick: On a family-based?
Commissioner: Uh-huh.
Director Hendrick: Okay.
Commissioner: So we had quite a high clearance rate.
Director Hendrick: Oh, Okay, Okay.
Commissioner: In '07 and our clearance rate isn't quite as high as it used to be.
Director Hendrick: Clearance rate? I don't know what you mean by "clearance rate."
Commissioner: Well, the amount of confirmed.
Director Hendrick: No, let's clarify, let's clarify what this means. Okay?
Referrals means somebody called. 
Not all referrals qualify for an allegation of abuse or neglect.
They're screened out.
To have an allegation of abuse or neglect the allegation must state facts that indicate 
that a person responsible for the child under the statute is engaging or exposing a child 
to harm or risk of harm. We have a very broad definition of abuse or neglect.
A lot of those referrals may not even be for a person responsible for the child.
Those referrals go directly to law enforcement, they don't even stay with us.
So, for example someone calls and says, "Well, I think my school teacher may be abusing my child."
Well, that's not a PRFC, a "Person Responsible For a Child".
Those referrals go directly to law enforcement. From our hotline to them.
So, those cases would be  screened out, or maybe they don't allege facts 
that would be abuse or neglect.
So the referrals that are accepted then become investigations that are assessed
and then we can either confirm or not confirm those investigations or assessments.
So, that's why investigations completed on a family-basis
would be something smaller than what was a referral.
Okay, I'm sorry I jumped around there a bunch, but let me go on here to this.
This kind of combines those referrals received, investigations completed 
and confirmed for each of these years involved... 07', 08', and '09. 
My buzzer keeps jumping ahead.
This is true for family... you can see it's not a big variation 
from year to year, it's pretty straight.
Prevention cases open- this is a new initiative that I think we feel very good about.
These are the kinds of cases that we are trying to use to safely keep kids at home 
without them unnecessarily coming into care.
And you can see June 30, 2011 we had 1,121 cases of families during the year 
who got prevention services instead of having to be removed.
Now, just so you can appreciate what that means, that means less kids are going 
to come into foster care, that also means the length of stay in foster care is
going to be longer, because the families that don't come into care for short lengths of stay
aren't there to lower your average length of stay.
So, it may appear that things are taking longer, but in reality it's a better thing for
the kid because the kid's not being... having to be removed.
They can avoid the trauma of that removal unnecessarily.
This is just June 30 numbers for pending referrals in excess 
of 60 days within the year, family-based.
Kinship unpaid— okay what we went through here... this is kind of a break point 
to see a little bit of the next pieces of data.
We're going to run through a whole series of slides here 
that all will say, "duplicated year to date numbers" at the top 
and then we will run through those same slides that will say, "unduplicated year to date".
And so what that means is take, for example, kinship unpaid. 
We had 239 different times during the year, during 2011,
children were placed with a kinship that wasn't paid.
So an aunt or uncle or grandparent that was determined to be a safe placement, 
they didn't want to become foster parents.
We determined it to be safe, the child went there, we didn't pay them for it.
So for some part of that year 239 different placements were made.
Now when we get to the unduplicated count, what we do is count the child in the last placement, 
so we don't duplicate the number of kids in care.
This gives you some sense of the number of different placements the kids go through 
and at the same time it gives you the number of different children 
that are served during the course of the year.
Here are 239 different children duplicated that were placed in kinship unpaid, 
5,656 children were in kinship paid on a duplicated basis.
Non-kinship regular foster care- 4,409 duplicated.
Therapeutic foster care- 1,165 on a duplicated basis. Level B- 10, level C- 25. 
And each of these levels are group homes based upon the acuity level of the child, 
which has a different licensing standard for the acuity needs of that child.
D plus and D- 276 different children duplicated. 213 on E. 
And group homes and shelters- 3,341 different placements in group homes 
and shelters during the course of the year.
Psychiatric- 576 different placements during the year for psychiatric placements.
Trial reunification- 2,729 children, on a duplicated basis. Trial adoption- 2,312.
And other kinds of placements, Tribal placements, etc. 2,289 different children.
So, 20,511 different placements in the course of the year.
Now if we go to unduplicated totals including trial reunifications- 23,240.
Trial reunification is counted as a placement. That's why we also number it here.
I'm going to look at unduplicated kinship for 158, so if you go and pair each 
of these groups back to their group before, you can see these numbers will all be smaller.
The big number to look at is this 23,240 number and we'll 
get to a smaller number in a moment.
158 in kinship unpaid, unduplicated.  3,243 in kinship paid, unduplicated. 
9 kinship regular, 2,228 regular kinship.
Therapeutic- 677, Level B- 5, C- 17, D and D plus- 133, E- 136, group homes and centers- 798.
Uh, sorry, I went through those pretty quick.
Trial reunification- 2,468, trial adoption- 2,273, and other- 1,239.
Total of 11,077 different children that were in care for at least one day 
during the year including trial reunification.
Now, why that's important is this: many of the kids who are counted 
in this 11,077 different children that were in care for at least one day 
during state fiscal year 2011 were kids that actually went home during 2010.
And we didn't have any physical custody of those kids at all during 2011, 
but because they were in trial reunification and trial reunification counts...
I'm sorry this does not include trial reunification, 
the next one does include trial reunification 13,545.
The difference between the two would be a... sorry.
The difference between the 11,077 and the 13,545 is about 2,500 kids who actually 
went home in the prior year, and because they were in trial reunification they still count
in the way in which the Federal Government counts. 
And these are all numbers that we verify with
our methodology for the Federal Government.
Commissioner: There won't be a quiz on this?
Director Hendrick: There won't be a quiz on this. There won't be a quiz .
There won't be a quiz. Okay, that's pretty much child welfare.
You are going to see a presentation in a little bit on child welfare in more detail
than that, but that's just a big picture to look at the data for the year.
Aging Services, Child Care Services, and Child Support DD, Aging Services, Personal Care,
ADvantage Waiver, and a couple of the bigger programs here we also have meals programs 
that we will talk about as well.
Adult day services- 264 people receiving DD services were involved in... do you understand
what adult day services... adult day care, sometimes referred to as adult day service, 
Daily Living Center if you are in Oklahoma City, would be a good example of adult day service.
And these are the number of different people in the course of a year who got the service.
1,118 different people in the course of the year received adult day services.
Senior nutrition- 293,000 people at the end of June in 2011 
were receiving senior nutrition services.
Let's talk a little bit about this so that you can appreciate... 
I don't know if I've got a slide on this or not, but these are food that... 
these are meals that are either home delivered or congregate meals for persons 
who are not on the ADvantage Waiver.
There are other home delivered meals that are funded with the Adult ADvantage Waiver.
So when we had to make budget choices a few years ago that included cutting senior nutrition, 
the reason why we had to cut senior nutrition was because, we had to preserve the state dollars 
that were necessary to get the federal dollars to actually deliver more food 
through the ADvantage Waiver Program.
Not always caught by everybody in the public, but we actually delivered more food 
by making the cut that way, because we preserved the federal dollars
that were actually being delivered for home delivered meals 
through the ADvantage Waiver Program. So, you can see...
Commissioner: I'm sorry...
Director Hendrick: No, go ahead.
Commissioner: It makes me think of this Meals on Wheels program,
which I believe was cut and so what you are saying is that when that program 
or when that funding piece was cut it was so that meals in another direction...
Director Hendrick: Right. Would avoid the cut.
Because the Meals on Wheels that were cut were funded with 100% state dollars.
If we would have cut the other place we would have lost the state dollars 
and the federal matching on those dollars, so we would have had to cut even more meals.
Commissioner: So as a result of that the state funding that was cut, 
did any seniors miss meals out of that loss...
Director Hendrick: There was quite a bit of effort on the part of everybody to minimize
where that happened, there were some sights that closed.
The Legislature actually came back in later and refunded a large portion of those funds, 
so I think that today we would say that this growth actually in 2011 is really reflective 
of the restored funding that we actually got from the Legislature after those cuts.
But in 2010 we had no choice but to cut there to preserve the state dollars we needed 
to get the federal match to get more meals in the ADvantage Waiver Program.
So, these meals here are just the federal funded... let me clarify one more thing here.
These meals are funded with three funding sources.
They are funded with the state dollars needed to get the Older American's Act federal dollars,
so you have both of those funding sources, and then you have what is called "over match"
which means state dollars over and above what was necessary to get the federal match. 
And the over match state dollars were what were cut, because we didn't
loose any federal dollars by making those cuts.
But they did result in a loss of meals, there is no question there.
And the Triple A's had to make other choices is the reasons why it's probably 
not fully cut is because Triple A had cost increases that go along at the same time.
Commissioner: What is Triple A?
Director Hendrick: Triple A is the Area-wide Aging Agencies, which do most 
of the home delivered services for the Older American's Act Funds that are
contracted through the council of governments. Okay.
ADvantage Waiver- these are the number of people on the ADvantage Waiver, June 30th,
2011- 17,179, down from 19,000.
I've got quite a bit on the ADvantage Waiver already prepared, 
but I think I'll save it for next month when we run through maybe 
that whole program in a little bit more detail.
You can see we've had a drop in ADvantage Waiver participation, 
but we've also had an increase in... this is unduplicated count in
the course of a year or the last two or three years.
We aren't spending as much money in the ADvantage Waiver Program,
but what's not on here are our State Plan Personal Care Services, which are up.
So, together, the utilization rate is about flat, but the dollars are down some 
and actually it's cost us about $20 million more state dollars in 2011 to just sustain 
what we already have in this program. Okay.
Child care licensing- we license out of home care for childcare centers, family childcare homes,
children's shelters, residential facilities, child placing agencies. 4,300 facilities.
We're the only state in the nation that has three unannounced visits per licensee per year 
and we have about a 93% compliance with that expectation.
We've been ranked by the National Association of Childcare Resources and Referral Agencies 
as the top state in the nation for licensing standards and for monitoring the quality
of care for childcare licensing.
Even with all of those things we still also acknowledge we have a lot of things 
we would like to do with childcare even though I think we are doing a really bang-up job here.
If we had more resources, we could do even more to improve the quality of childcare, 
which we are all committed to doing.
You can see the number of childcare homes is continuing to decline. 
Our licensing of those homes is going down.
The number of childcare centers is fairly flat over the last couple of three years.
Total facilities is down a little bit.
Childcare home slots are down. Childcare licensing center slots are up.
So, even though we're licensing less centers, the number of slots per center is more. 
And so when you look at the total licensing childcare slots, we actually increased 
in the number of childcare licensing slots even though the number 
of licensing childcare sights for childcare decreased.
Two-star facilities- We've increased a little bit this last year.
We've continued to maintain between 1,017 and 1,043. 
Pretty flat, really, when you look at the overall program on two-star licensing facilities, 
two-star homes, which is a trend for home declines as you'd expect.
Total facilities for two-star down a little bit. Three-star centers up 169.
Continuing to get national... to be a three-star center you have to be nationally accredited.
The number of nationally accredited facilities continues to increase.
When we started this program, probably ten years ago we had less than 20
nationally accredited childcare facilities in the state, now we have more than 200.
Child support services- These are administered geographically.
We had both our staff, we have some DA offices that help us out, 
we have some private vendors that run some offices...
these are federally mandated with a lot of detail on the accountability 
to the Federal Government on how these services work.
Just to give you some sense, payments are by income withholding 
and lots of other enforcement mechanisms to try to collect the child support.
We have financial institution data matches, new hires, we have a certified automated system,
even though... but just a little footnote here about one part of our budget request 
and about how it ties in here-
We have a budget from Mosaic, if you remember in the budget request.
Even though we have a federally certified automated child welfare information system, 
the system is still antiquated.
It still is a COBOL system and our long-term vision is, if we could develop... 
if we could get the funding for the infrastructure we could do an even better job, 
even though we're doing a really good job with what we've got.
We could do an even better job of collecting child support,
which would be a big help in terms of reducing that economic pressure.
Holding non-custodial parents accountable and help getting paid for those families, 
as the families need it.
Probably, we are the best state in the nation for paternity establishment, 
in terms of the... paternity establishment is measured by...  numerators is 
the number of paternities that you establish and denominators is 
the number of children that are born out of wedlock.
We have a Central Payment Registry that I want to talk about.
A little bit about this Central Payment Registry.
If you get a chance to go visit that operation I would encourage you to do it.
It is a fairly impressive operation, it's an... every day we get about a million dollars 
in child support collections every day.
Those child... we may get let's say $100,000 from Hertz that they've withheld 
from all of their employees.
We have to allocate that among all of the employees that had the money withheld 
from their paychecks to pay their child support, that goes electronically.
Then we have to re-allocate it to all of the kids to which they are paying 
the child support, including all of their different partners, 
and all of that money has to be redirected within 48 hours to a debit card 
that is in the possession of the custodial parent.
So, you talk about changing a million dollars every business day 
and having to account the payers and the recipients, so that the recipients can have 
the money available to buy groceries and do whatever they need to do within 48 hours.
It's a fairly impressive operation to see how well that money gets administered and managed.
Total collections in the last year are $318 million up about $20 million over last year.
Of the $318 million, $77.5 million of it is current assistance and this is really
one of our long term strategies, we want to improve current assistance.
If the non-custodial parent will be consistent with their payments,
it really is more valuable to a custodial parent to knowingly get a certain amount
every month than to sporadically get big chunks and nothing, big chunks and nothing.
So we really want to try to improve our consistent regular payment.
We do collect $156 million in former assistance,
that means that this is... child support was owed for a previous month.
Commissioner: How does our child support collections compare nationally?
Director Hendrick: In terms of rate of growth over the last few years, 
we're one of the best in the nation, I think we are number one.
There have been a couple of years when we were two or three.
Texas is really knocking the ball out of the park. 
I hate to admit Texas is doing anything better than we do, 
but they've got a really good operation down there.
We've learned a lot from working with those guys.
But they have some better tools, they have more modern automated system than we have 
and so I think if we were able to get better automation we would be able to do just as well.
Our folks really do a terrific job and remember this is with less staff overall, 
agency-wide we have less staff and we are still making these progresses.
In-state collections $59 million, almost $60 million of... 
folks - I'm sorry I skipped through that -I got ahead - I skipped there, 
I've got a happy trigger on my thumb here. $59.9 million of folks never had assistance.
Let's talk about what that means is...if you have been on Medicaid 
or TANF or something like that than you've had assistance. Okay?
So, of the $312 million or whatever it was that we collected, all but $60 million 
of it was for people who have had some assistance.
But we did collect almost $60 million of the $312 million
for people who had never been on any benefit program.
Why would that happen? Why is that a good thing?
We know that the poverty rate for kids being reared in single-parent households is about 38%. Okay?
So even though a kid may not be on assistance, because they are being reared in a single-parent
household with a financially responsible, non-custodial parent paying child support 
on a regular basis, if that non-custodial parent loses their job, 
what is the custodial parent going to do?
Now you have a dispute as to whether or not... when did the child support stop and not start?
The value of paying your child support through the Central Payment Registry 
is we have a legal record as to when child support was and wasn't paid. 
And so even people who don't... aren't even in our system for public assistance 
are benefited by paying their child support through our system, because once they get... 
they avoid the lawsuit and dispute between their former partner as to whether, 
"Did you pay me that month or did you pay me this other month. Which month did you pay for?"
By having a common record of paying this through the Central Payment Registry it really helps
both sides of to avoid the dispute of who is going to be responsible for months later on
when someone loses their job or we do know they are probably...
Even good paying customers sometime in life, because of their single-family status, 
are going to hit some bumps in the road.
It's much better for them to have paid it through the Central Payment Registry and
avoid the dispute than to have to litigate down the road as to whether or not 
payments were made or not made.
So, $60 million of the $300 million or so that was paid through our Central Payment Registry 
for people that did not have or have any public assistance before.
Total in-state collections, $294 million, out-of-state collections, $9.4 million of current support,
$4 million of former support, $10 million out-of-state for never having support,
$24 million for out-of-state or out-of-county collections total.
198,000 cases in an average month this last year. Let's talk about what a case is.
A case may be a case for a child who is no longer a child.
So let's say child support was owed and now the child has become 24, that's still a case
if we still have an active collection effort on that case.
However, if we were to... I don't think we have this chart on the number of children, 
but if we were to look at the number of children, so we took all of the adults out of the cases 
and said, "How many people who are still children are we collecting child support on?"
In round numbers, we'd have about 215,000 children who are still children 
for whom we are collecting child support.
Now we have about 920,000 children in the state.
So literally two out of nine children in the state have child support cases 
for whom we are collecting child support, who are still children.
So I think it's important to appreciate... and again if you go back to '05 
or '06 that 215,000 or so would be maybe 150,000 or so.
So we've had an enormous increase over the last five or six years in terms of 
the number of children for whom we collect child support.
And it's probably been a good thing to do that, because it helps... 
we have a very robust system to be able to take care of that.
Paternity established- record number of paternities established.
We are, as I mentioned earlier, the best in the nation right now, 
at least in paternity establishment.
Developmental disabilities- SoonerStart is a birth to 36-month initiative 
for persons with developmental disabilities.
We take care of the in home supports Medicaid Waiver, the Home Community Based Waiver,
group homes, private intermediate care facilities and then our facilities 
in Northern Oklahoma Resource Center in Enid.
You can see we didn't have any change in census- 117 people in June of both years, 
living in Enid.
128 down about 7 in Pauls Valley at the Southern Oklahoma Resource Center in June.
Greers consistently at 51 and Enid. 
Group homes- 812 persons receiving group home participation during the year.
Shelter Workshop- 929 persons receiving Shelter Workshop Participation.
This does not count shelter workshop services funded through the DD
Waiver, this is only the state-funded shelter workshop slots.
Home and community based waivers- 2,686 persons receiving home 
and community-based waiver services.
Homeward bound waivers down to 713 persons.
The in-home support waivers down to 1,697 persons.
Total persons receiving waivers is 5,096 and that's it.
Can we take a deep breath?
Commissioner: You said the Greer center is flat, because they are at maximum capacity.
Director Hendrick: That's right. That's all they can...that's right.
They have a very active discharge policy and they do a very good job.
They help us out on lots of dually diagnosed persons with
mental illness and mental retardation.
Okay. Any questions? Steven?  Commissioner?
Commissioner: Back on the plan and really elaborate on the plan for SORC and NORCE
in terms of what is going to happen in the next few months and then, 
when the commission will see the final plan and then also in that, 
I think you had mentioned before and I am curious about really seeing the numbers 
on the idea that we're not going to ultimately reduce cost by moving actually toward
community-based services and I know your point that the capital costs that it cost 
to maintain the facilities, but just really looking at the numbers of what potential 
reduction or closing would mean in terms of...
Director Hendrick: I'm not saying that we wouldn't realize some savings.
We might realize a little bit of savings, maybe a million or two.
But if you look at the overall, it could go the other way too, just because of the
dynamics of what those plans of care could be.
We just don't know the acuity level... our initial assessment of the acuity level 
of those plans of care, some could be more, some could be less.
But overall... the reason why is because almost all of the costs in those facilities 
we've already pulled out, that's how we have been able to keep our budget cut.
A lot of the FTE's that were down are right-sizing the staffing for those facilities.
Some of the VOBOs went to those facilities.
We still meet licensing standards for those facilities,
but a lot of the reduction in census means reduction in staff.
So a lot of the savings that are theoretical savings that you might could have found 
on a worksheet a couple of years ago aren't there today, 
because the savings have already been realized as our budget reductions.
The plan... it will be in the hands of the staff working with our outside vendor.
Jim may be able to tell you more about that, Jim's here, was here if I didn't put him to sleep.
He may have gone out and said, "This is enough." I don't know.
But I would say sometime, probably in November or December,
we'll have something for everybody to look at.
We should at least have a working draft.
Commissioner: So, there will be something in November or December?
Director Hendrick: I would say that there would be something that people will look at.
That will be up to how you guys want to work that.  
I mean, I think that we'll have something there that people can look at.
Certainly our responsibility is to deliver something to the Legislature, 
but I don't think there is a problem...
Commissioner: It seems to me that the commission ought to review and...
Director Hendrick: That's fine.
Commissioner (continues): ...approve that before it is submitted to the Legislature.
That would be my preference.
Director Hendrick: Fine.
Commissioner: ...and then I guess the other issue that I wanted to recognize 
that we are going to be talking about is the details of the personnel actions
in the surrounding Deal affair in the executive sector, so I don't want to be at risk 
of doing anything there.
But I would like to know whether or not as a result of the conclusion of the investigation,
you anticipate that there will be any policy changes brought forth to the commission 
and/or recommendations for management changes as a result of what we've learned.
Director Hendrick: At this point, I'm not aware that there would be any policy changes 
and not really a policy change. 
We can talk about the management issue as part of the personnel issues later on maybe, 
but the policy as we understand it to be adequate.
We just had the situation that happened that we've reported on quite a bit.
Okay? Any other questions?
Commissioner: That'll be it.
Director Hendrick: Okay, good.