As children grow and develop, child care workers play a vital role in fostering learning and providing support in a safe and nurturing environment. High-quality child care jobs, where workers are valued and respected, benefit both workers and the children and families they serve. Child care workers are also essential to the broader economy, as children need to be cared for in a safe place when parents go to work, school, training, or meet other needs. But child care workers cannot provide adequate care if they can’t take time off when they’re sick, must care for too many children at once, or receive such low wages that they can’t feed their own families, among other issues.

Unfortunately, the United States has historically undervalued the child care workforce and failed to foster healthy labor conditions in this industry. In addition to more federal and state investments, strong unions for child care workers are part of the solution. This brief walks through some of the history and current landscape of the child care workforce, including which states have collective bargaining policies in place for home-based child care providers, who fall outside the traditional employer-employee bargaining model and lack a mechanism for collectively organizing and advocating for themselves. It also outlines how such policies benefit workers, families, and the economy, sharing successes from across the nation. State policymakers, child care advocates, and labor leaders can use these lessons to develop similar collective bargaining rights for these vital workers.

>> Read the full brief here

The post Unionizing Home-Based Providers to help Address the Child Care Crisis appeared first on CLASP.

Overview

Millions of people in the United States want to work but cannot access employment and quality job opportunities due to many factors rooted in structural inequity. Such challenges disproportionately harm Black, Indigenous, and Latinx individuals, other people of color, women, youth, people with disabilities, and individuals with intersectional identities. Despite economic growth, the Black male unemployment rate remains consistently high.[i] In fact, it is about twice as high as white male unemployment, a ratio that has stubbornly persisted for over 50 years.[ii] Young workers (ages 16 to 24 years old) have also experienced unemployment at extraordinarily high rates, especially during economic downturns.[iii] Even when the economy is strong, these and other workers with intersectional identities face unrelenting challenges in getting and keeping quality jobs.

Recent shifts in federal guidance and an influx of new federal investments have created opportunities to leverage and coordinate funding streams across the federal government to address racial and racial-gender economic inequality. Subsidized employment and transitional jobs are proven workforce strategies that reduce poverty and inequality – specifically for Black and Hispanic workers. These programs are poised to have significant positive impacts for workers if coordinated and deployed in strategic ways.[iv]

The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) believes that aligning subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs across the federal government effectively requires that the federal government take a whole-of-government approach. Such an approach can:

1. Ensure that more communities and individuals have access to subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs;
2. Guide implementation toward best and promising practices; and
3. Advance effectiveness with an explicit focus on equity, inclusion, and building programs that work best for people who are economically marginalized.

We also believe that taking this approach is in keeping with the Biden Administration’s goals of leveraging comprehensive approaches across the federal government to advance equity for all. That includes people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.[v]

This brief offers perspectives from CLASP on how the Biden Administration can advance a whole-of-government approach to managing and directing these resources.

Background                                        

Since the Great Depression, policymakers have leveraged federal funding at various times to subsidize wage-paying, real work opportunities for people who want to work but cannot access employment. The goals of these investments have been to connect people to work in times of high unemployment, increase income for individuals and families, and support pathways to unsubsidized employment, among others.

These programs have been called subsidized employment, transitional jobs, and paid work experience. They have also been referred to as publicly funded jobs or jobs of last resort. Currently, smaller uncoordinated pots of federal funding for these programs are housed in the U.S. Departments of Labor; Health and Human Services; Agriculture; Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice. Notably, these pots of federal resources are not specifically dedicated to these strategies. Rather, these federal funding streams are used on a discretionary basis to implement subsidized employment, transitional jobs, and wage-paid work, among other uses of funds. Therefore, the whims or political vagaries of the times can limit or derail the use of this funding for these employment strategies. (The table in the Appendix on page 9 lists current funding streams and target populations.)

Subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs have been rigorously evaluated for over 40 years, demonstrating a range of positive impacts for workers, families, communities, and employers.[vi] These positive effects have included stabilizing and increasing income among workers; reducing housing instability; supporting transitions from incarceration to community for people returning from incarceration; improving health and wellbeing; bolstering the educational attainment of children whose parents participate in these programs; and reducing gun violence, among others. Wages paid to program participants stimulate local economies and have been shown to improve access to public services.[vii] Employers routinely articulate the benefits of these programs.

Above all, these programs have a demonstrated ability to directly reduce poverty and economic inequality. Multiple models have shown that subsidized employment and transitional jobs can reduce poverty by double digits—with higher impacts for Black and Hispanic workers.[viii]

More recently, we anticipate seeing increased implementation of these programs by states and localities and higher likelihood and need for federal coordination. This is in part because of new federal guidance and initiatives, along with new or increased funding.

Specifically:

• Federal guidance for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Employment and Training Programs has increased state flexibility[ix] to use federal dollars for subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs.
• The use of American Rescue Plan and the Department of Justice funding for community violence interventions also includes flexibility for the use of funds in subsidized employment.[x]
• Once-in-a-generation federal investments through the Inflation Recovery Act (IRA) and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to create green infrastructure and climate resiliency jobs as well as investments in built infrastructure. This funding provides an opportunity to link subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs with education, training, and quality jobs in communities nationwide.
• President Biden established the Justice40 Initiative[xi] to ensure that 40 percent of the federal investments for climate and clean energy will benefit communities that have been disadvantaged. This could include funding set-asides, funding prioritization, or providing more general guidance that instructs agencies to maximize benefits for communities or workers in ways that can and should—if properly implemented—complement the Justice40 objectives. This includes prioritization or targeting of resources to communities negatively impacted by decisions to transition from fossil fuels to renewable sources. Interim implementation guidance for the Justice40 Initiative identifies that an “increased percentage of good job training programs within energy communities, such as those that include paid employment and that measure and report participant outcomes” should be considered by agencies when determining the benefits of a covered program.[xii] Subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs are, by definition, paid employment programs. Therefore, federal and state agencies and communities should consider these interventions in determining the benefits of covered programs in meeting Justice40 goals.
• Finally, in addition to flexibility through federal guidance, federal lawmakers and the public are supportive and eager to find ways to further invest in these strategies.[xiii] Indeed, 9 in 10 Americans favor a national initiative that creates paid work and job training opportunities.[xiv]

Whole-of-Government Approach

A whole-of-government approach refers to a set of joint activities performed by diverse public agencies to support a common or aligned solution to issues. CLASP recommends the following elements for applying a whole-of-government approach that leverages subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs to reduce economic inequity and marginalization:

• Common goals and principles across federal funding streams to help guide the design, implementation, and use of program funds over time.
• Common or aligned performance measures across programs whenever possible.
• Appropriate capacity-building resources at the federal, state, and local levels to support implementation that aligns with best and promising practices and equity goals.
• Leadership and coordination across the federal government to support a coordinated communications and public engagement strategy, guide implementation of best and promising practices, and measure effectiveness in advancing equity goals.

Employing a whole-of-government strategy to leverage these resources can support the Biden Administration’s economic and racial equity goals. Moreover, this approach can link current investments for workers with new and emerging jobs and economic development investments galvanized through the implementation of IIJA and IRA.

Goals and Principles

Depending on the funding stream and the federal agency jurisdiction, the goals of subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs can differ. When advancing a whole-of-government approach, there is value in identifying a set of primary goals and principles to guide how these programs are designed and implemented across the federal government. A common set of goals and principles can support efforts to blend funding to implement these programs at the state and local levels and focus the goals of stakeholders. This practice can also help measure the effectiveness of these programs in increasing income and advancing more equitable access to employment and quality jobs.

Program goals should inform program design. The following three goals should guide subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs across the federal government. At the same time, not every program or funding stream used for subsidized employment or transitional jobs programs will share each of these goals:

• Redress economic inequity by increasing income; ensuring access to the workforce and quality jobs; and improving the short and long-term employment, wage, and earnings outcomes of people who have been economically marginalized. Such communities include youth and young adults; people experiencing homelessness; people impacted by the criminal legal system; people living in poverty; and others who are economically marginalized as a result of race, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.
• Support economic development for communities facing historic and current divestment, and build more inclusive economies; and
• Increase earned income for individuals and families with low incomes and reduce poverty.

The following principles should constitute the foundation for these programs across the federal government:

• Target programs to groups and communities that have been economically marginalized. Research and practice show that these jobs programs are most effective in improving employment and earnings outcomes when targeted to individuals who have been economically marginalized. These programs can and should contribute to racial and racial-gender economic equity goals and anti-racist economic development goals.
• Center worker and community voice. Incentivize and hold accountable states and local communities in advancing the goal of authentically engaging people who are economically marginalized. People and communities experiencing economic marginalization should drive the design and implementation of subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs. Provide technical assistance resources to support such engagement. Model authentic engagement at the federal level across federal partners.
• Do no harm. Subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs should pay wages to participants that allow them to meet their basic needs. The federal government should provide states and communities the flexibility to protect any existing income supports that participants may already be receiving. Finally, agencies should adopt common protections for ensuring that subsidized employment and transitional jobs workers do not displace current workers.
• Screen in people for services and promote harm-reduction and therapeutic practices. Commit to engaging people most likely to benefit from subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs. Incentivize the use of practices and policies that encourage states and partners to use therapeutic and harm-reduction principles.
• Promote a variety of employer types and hiring models. Promote job placements across a variety of employer types including private, public, nonprofit, and employment social enterprises. Incentivize subsidized and transitional jobs employment placements within minority and women-owned businesses and worker co-operatives. Incentivize the use of quality job settings and set job quality floors. Black job seekers and other job seekers who experience economic marginalization are often guided toward lower-paying jobs. Monitor, disrupt, and hold accountable any effort to push workers to such jobs.
• Collect performance data, disaggregate it, and use it to advance equity goals. Program administrators should recommend or require common or aligned performance data (see below section), depending on the funding stream. They should disaggregate the data by race, ethnicity, gender and other characteristics to track the effectiveness of these programs for individuals who have been economically marginalized. Programs should use disaggregated data to improve or change programs over time to advance equity goals.
• Incentivize pipelines to quality jobs. Ensure that subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs pay adequate wages. In addition, incentivize the use of funds and programs by employers that are upholding commitments to job quality.[xv] Ensure that programs include seamless connections to quality, inclusive, and equitable pre-apprenticeship programs that pay wages and offer wrap-around services, as well as to registered apprenticeship programs leading to quality jobs.

Many of these principles are reflected in a national framework endorsed by nearly 30 national organizations and are included in recent frameworks by national research and policy organizations. [xvi] [xvii]

Common or Aligned Performance Measures

As policymakers conceptualize and design subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs funded by the federal government, they can build common or aligned performance measures into funding opportunities. Incentives can support data collection and monitoring over time to understand the impact of these programs on the above-mentioned goals. In some cases, such as the use of TANF funds, programs are prohibited from collecting data beyond the statutory requirements. However, where federal flexibility exists or new programs are established through competitive grants, common aligned data can and should be collected.

Program evaluators have recommended the following performance measures that may offer a template for federal partners to use. Programs and data should be disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, and other participant characteristics, such as:

• The number of people engaged in programming;
• The number of people placed in subsidized employment or transitional jobs;
• Change in total earnings of participants over time in the program;
• The job type that participants are placed in for subsidized employment and the characteristics of that job placement including the employer size, job sector, role or job type, and job quality characteristics—among others;
• The number of people who transition into unsubsidized employment, either at the job where they were placed or another job; and
• Characteristics of the unsubsidized job that a participant transitions to, including employer size, job sector, role or job type, job quality characteristics, and more.

Requiring or recommending that programs collect these data is not enough. The federal government should incentivize the use of these data in tracking program effectiveness and improving programs over time. Programs should supplement this quantitative data with regular, consistent opportunities for workers and other stakeholders to provide feedback on program structure, design, and effectiveness through qualitative mechanisms. Federal partners should incentivize and support the collection and monitoring of both quantitative and qualitative data. In addition, programs should leverage capacity, technical assistance, and resources to support these goals.

Capacity-Building Resources

It will be critical for stakeholders to identify and leverage resources at all levels of government to support capacity-building efforts that ensure programs are effective and aligned with identified goals. New resources and increased flexibility will allow an increased number of states, cities, intermediaries, and providers to implement subsidized employment programs.

Policymakers should identify and set aside funds to provide technical assistance to support states and communities in leveraging these resources; designing programs; building data capacity; engaging in cross-agency collaboration; educating on best and promising program practices; conducting program monitoring and compliance; implementing communications; and ensuring worker voice is supported, compensated, and incentivized in program development and implementation.

Programs should also dedicate capacity to support cross-learning among subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs nationwide, as well as lift up implementation profiles and examples of quality programs. Moreover, programs should identify federal agency staff to support capacity-building efforts in alignment with the goals stated here.

Federal Leadership and Coordination

To support a whole-of-government approach to these resources, the White House Domestic Policy Council should establish or identify dedicated staff and leadership to promote a vision for these programs and their transformative possibilities. These individuals should share a commitment to building the infrastructure necessary to support this vision for people and communities who have been economically marginalized. Staff should leverage federal leadership across agencies to support program and policy development and alignment and ensure that worker voice is centered in program design.

Leaders selected to steward these resources should also possess the authority and ability to:

• Leverage the full power and position of the White House to ensure the fidelity of implementation to congressional and presidential intent; amplify the historic moment for these investments to reduce hardship for people; and raise the opportunity for states and communities to develop programs, blend funding, and engage in these efforts;
• Support federal agencies and leadership toward these goals for subsidized employment and transitional jobs, as well as link these investments with other critical goals of the administration, including climate resilience, infrastructure development, and job creation;
• Establish implementation goals in partnership with federal agencies and to communicate progress and success;
• Engage across the administration to track and measure the effectiveness of these programs in advancing equity goals; and
• Partner with national and local experts and leaders to support program development, technical assistance, or capacity-building needs, along with supporting local and state engagement and communications efforts.

Conclusion

Regardless of the business cycle, far too many people face chronic unemployment and poverty. Federal leaders can help people most in need—and advance economic and racial equity goals—by seizing this extraordinary moment. That is, policymakers can leverage a whole-of-government approach for supporting and managing current and future investments and new federal flexibility for subsidized employment.

Using this comprehensive strategy can ensure that these investments have maximum positive impact for individuals, families, and entire communities.

>> View full brief and appendix

[i] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Databases, Tables, and Calculators by Subject, 2022, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000006.

[ii] Valerie Wilson, “Racism and the Economy, Focus on Employment,” Economic Policy Institute, 2020, https://www.epi.org/blog/racism-and-the-economy-fed/.

[iii] Elise Gould, Melat Kassa, Young Workers hit hard by the COVID-19 economy, Economic Policy Institute, 2020, https://www.epi.org/publication/young-workers-covid-recession/.

[iv] Kye Lippold, Reducing Poverty in the United States: Results of a Microsimulation Analysis of the Community Advocates Public Policy Institute Policy Package, table B-3, Urban Institute, March 2015, https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/48586/2000151-reducing-poverty-in-the-united-states.pdf.

[v] Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, White House, Presidential Actions, 2021,

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government/.

[vi] Indivar Dutta-Gupta, Kali Grant, Matthew Eckel, and Peter Edelman, Lesson Learned from 40 Years of Subsidized Employment Programs, Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality, Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality, 2016, https://www.georgetownpoverty.org/issues/employment/lessons-learned-from-40-years-of-subsidized-employment-programs/.

[vii] Jonah Kushner, Chicago Neighborhood JobStart evaluation report: A transitional jobs response to the great recession, Chicago: Social IMPACT Research Center, 2012, https://peerta.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/public/uploaded_files/Chicago%20Evaluation_LK.pdf.

[viii] Kye Lippold, Reducing Poverty in the United States: Results of a Microsimulation Analysis of the Community Advocates Public Policy Institute Policy Package, table B-3, Urban Institute, March 2015, https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/48586/2000151-reducing-poverty-in-the-united-states.pdf.

[ix] Elizabeth Lower-Basch, Melissa Young, Subsidized Employment: A Strategy to Address Equity and Inclusion in SNAP E&T Programs, Center for Law and Social Policy, 2022, https://www.clasp.org/publications/report/brief/subsidized-employment-strategy-address-equity-and-inclusion-snap-et/.

[x] Melissa Young, Nia West-Bey, Designing Equitable Community Violence Intervention Strategies with Employment and Workforce Supports, Center for Law and Social Policy, 2022, https://www.clasp.org/publications/report/brief/designing-equitable-community-violence-intervention-strategies-with-employment-and-workforce-supports/.

[xi] FACT SHEET: President Biden Takes Executive Actions to Tackle the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, Create Jobs, and Restore Scientific Integrity Across Federal Government, The White House, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/01/27/fact-sheet-president-biden-takes-executive-actions-to-tackle-the-climate-crisis-at-home-and-abroad-create-jobs-and-restore-scientific-integrity-across-federal-government/.

[xii] Office of Management and Budget, Interim Implementation Guidance for the Justice40 Initiative, July 20, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/M-21-28.pdf.

[xiii] Maxine Joselow, Vanessa Montalbano, “The Climate 202: The Civilian Climate Corps was dropped from the climate bill. Now What?” Washington Post, September 8, 2022. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/08/civilian-climate-corps-was-dropped-climate-bill-now-what/.

[xiv] Back to Work: Listening to Americans, Gallup and Carnegie Corporation of New York, 2021, https://www.gallup.com/analytics/329573/back-to-work-listening-to-americans.aspx.

[xv] Sapna Mehta, Emily Andrews, Updating WIOA to Empower Workers and Create Shared Prosperity, Center for Law and Social Policy, 2022, https://www.clasp.org/publications/report/brief/updating-wioa-to-empower-workers-and-create-shared-prosperity/.

[xvi] Caitlin C. Schnur, Chris Warland, Melissa Young, Framework for an Equity Centered National Subsidized Employment Program, Heartland Alliance, 2021, https://nationalinitiatives.issuelab.org/resources/37934/37934.pdf.

[xvii] Algernon Austin, Annabel Utz, Toward Black Full Employment: A Subsidized Employment Proposal, Center for Economy and Policy Research, September 2022, https://cepr.net/report/toward-black-full-employment-a-subsidized-employment-proposal/.

The post Addressing Economic Inequity with a Whole-of-Government Approach: Recommendations for Aligning Federal Subsidized Employment Investments appeared first on CLASP.

Earlier this week, the Center for Law and Social Policy and Governing for Impact submitted a comment to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) explaining our support for its proposed rule on the independent contractor versus employee classification. Our comment is supportive of the DOL’s proposal. Specifically, it applauds the Department’s decision to affirm its long-standing use of the multi-factor “economic realities” test and to explicitly discuss the impact of worker surveillance technology on a determination of employer “control.”

The proliferation of independent contracting, gig work, and worker misclassification has imposed significant harm on workers in low-wage industries and has undermined federal and state labor protections. The 2017 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Contingent Worker Supplement to the Current Population Survey, which measures workers in alternative work arrangements, estimated that 14 percent of gig workers earned less than the federal minimum wage and 29 percent earned less than the applicable state minimum wage. Gig workers face economic insecurity and rely heavily on public benefits. According to the BLS, 30 percent of gig workers used the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) within a month of the survey, which is twice the rate of employee-designated service sector workers. Accordingly, 1 in 5 gig workers could not afford enough to eat, and 31 percent of gig workers could not afford to pay the full amount of their utility bills in the month prior to the survey.

It is crucial that DOL’s Wage and Hour Division enforces the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) evenly and fairly—and that the “economic realities” of the working arrangement determine independent contractor versus employee status. One of the six factors that contribute to this analysis is a consideration of the level and nature of control the employer has over the worker. Companies classify workers as independent contractors, in part, to avoid the costs and liabilities associated with having employees (e.g., paying a minimum wage and compensating them for overtime, as required by the FLSA). Simultaneously, some of these companies implement worker surveillance technologies that provide them the authority to exert control over their supposed independent contractors. If companies benefit from workers’ labor and integrate it into the company’s overall enterprise through control and supervision, that should weigh in favor of a finding of employee status.

Moreover, and as the proposal notes, the rule should weigh in favor of employee status regardless of whether the supervision is technological or in-person. While the “economic realities” test does not require direct supervision to find employee status, when it is present, that supervision is often key to courts making such a finding. Worker surveillance technology makes this type of supervision possible even without a supervisor physically present. Previous FLSA litigation helpfully illustrates why.

For example, a 2017 FLSA case that framing and drywall installers brought against their employer resulted in the Fourth Circuit highlighting the daily, on-site supervision of the workers as key evidence to find that they were employees. The supervision went well beyond the “oversight necessary to ensure that a contractor’s services meet contractual standards of quality and timeliness.” Instead, the supervisors provided frequent feedback and instruction about the pace and quality of their work. The supervisors repeatedly held meetings to direct the workers on which projects they needed to complete and the methods by which they should do so. Imagine if the employer had used worker surveillance technologies to accomplish these same objectives. Rather than requiring an in-person supervisor to provide frequent feedback about the pace and quality of work the employer could have implemented which would direct the workers to their next projects, optimize their route, and alert management to deviations.

As this example illustrates, worker surveillance technology replicates the same types of control that in-person supervision does. The presence of such surveillance should weigh in favor of employee status in the same way that in-person surveillance would.

Misclassification of workers as independent contractors is costly to workers, the government, and responsible employers who correctly classify their workforce. As our comment explains, the DOL’s proposed rule reaffirms the centrality of economic dependence based on multiple factors to determine employment status in a manner the DOL, Wage and Hour Division, and courts have used for decades. This would reduce the confusion for workers and employers arising from the anomalous rule proposed by the previous administration and benefit the public as a result.

Emily Andrews is the director of education, labor & worker justice at CLASP.

Lorena Roque is a senior policy analyst at CLASP.

Reed Shaw is a policy counsel at Governing for Impact.

The post Employers should be held accountable for worker surveillance, employee status appeared first on CLASP.

Executive Summary

Public benefits such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provide critical care and support for families with low incomes. However, they also reinforce structures of oppression. Historical context shows “welfare reform” in America is rooted in anti-Blackness, xenophobia, and other forms of racism. False racist narratives have left an ingrained mark on the system of public benefits and disproportionately affect communities of color with low incomes.

Our public policies far too often focus on scrutinizing individual people experiencing poverty rather than identifying systemic barriers, the root causes of poverty, and solutions for ending poverty. This report offers recommendations for changes to the SNAP program that move it in an anti-racist direction. This includes examining issues around sufficiency; availability; trauma; trust; respect; promotion of opportunity; and the perspectives of participants. By rejecting racist assumptions and not limiting ourselves to what is politically possible today, we can envision a program that truly centers what people with low incomes, of all races and ethnicities, need.

This paper was written as a partnership between CLASP staff and people with direct lived experience of poverty who are members of the Community Partnership Group.

To Meet the Need, SNAP Benefits Must Be Sufficient   

SNAP must offer benefits that are adequate enough to provide healthy meals and allow people to purchase food that honors varied cultures. This includes considering special diets that cost more.

Addressing the need for sufficiency will require that SNAP administrators make the necessary adjustments to meet the needs of all recipients. Those adjustments must include defending the improvement to the Thrifty Food Plan, increasing overall benefit levels, improving deductions that SNAP recipients can take to increase their benefits, ensuring that all the food plans include culturally appropriate foods and spices, and expanding farmer’s market benefits to all grocery stores for fresh fruits and vegetables.

SNAP Must Be Available to All Who Need It

Making the program available and accessible to all who need it is essential. But it requires SNAP administrators to make changes to SNAP rules that are currently restrictive and block access to benefits for many potential recipients.

Those changes must include removing the five-year bar for qualified immigrants, making SNAP available to residents in Puerto Rico, removing the ban on SNAP benefits to people with prior drug felony convictions, and lifting restrictions like work requirements.

Using A Trauma-Informed Lens to Better Meet the Needs of Recipients

State Administrators of SNAP and other public benefits programs must train workers in trauma-informed services. This includes recognizing that people are not stereotypes – they are human beings who deserve respect, trust, and kindness. Administrators should use feedback loops to gather input directly from SNAP recipients on the agency’s effectiveness, its customer service, and asset-based language. They should conduct mandatory and ongoing unconscious bias training for workers in their agency.

Trust and Respect in The Application/Renewal Process

Increasing trust and confidence in the application and renewal process for recipients means getting rid of the administrative barriers that make it more difficult for people to apply for or renew their SNAP benefits. This should include less frequent renewals, elimination of unnecessary verifications, and a more simplified application process.

Trust and Respect from Policymakers on The Use of SNAP Benefits

To demonstrate trust and respect in SNAP recipients who are fully capable of making the best choices for their families, legislators must lift the restrictions on prepared foods, better support online purchasing by mandating free delivery for SNAP recipients, and take away the stigma attached to EBT cards.

Promote Opportunity Among Recipients

Administrators and policymakers should use strategies that provide access to greater opportunities for education, better jobs, and supportive services. Voluntary Employment and Training (E&T) programs help to connect people to high-quality jobs. Raising the gross income limit, eliminating asset limits for all, and mandating a simplified self-employment deduction are ways that administrators and policymakers can better promote opportunity within the SNAP program.

Value SNAP Participant’s Perspective

In all dimensions of the SNAP program, what matters is the feedback and consultation with community members who receive SNAP. Administrators must acknowledge and incorporate the important perspectives that comes from those who are directly impacted by the program. States should seek advice from participants on program design, effectiveness, and evaluation. They should track and report on customer satisfaction, and be required to meet face to face rather than just surveying them.

Taken together, these recommendations can make substantive changes to SNAP, helping to redress the racist underpinnings of the program. These critical changes are necessary to move SNAP toward becoming an anti-racist program.

>> Read the full executive summary

>> Read the full report

The post Executive Summary: A Community-Driven Anti-Racist Vision for SNAP appeared first on CLASP.

(Excerpt)

The post COVID-19 Relief Spending Pushed Poverty To Record Low In 2021 appeared first on CLASP.

(Excerpt)

Parents are having a hard time making ends meet after the end of monthly Child Tax Credit (CTC) payments, according to a new survey from the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP). The survey, which documented responses from low- and moderate-income families, found that nearly 80% of eligible families received CTC payments, and those extra funds went primarily to paying for necessities. While this data is no surprise — a number of surveys have been published since the expiration of the CTC program — it serves as a stark reminder that the CTC helped keep families afloat and that its end harmed families deeply.

Read the full article here.

The post 66% Of Child Tax Credit Recipients Struggled To Afford Food After Program Expired appeared first on CLASP.

(EXCERPT)

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Office of Partnership and Engagement (OPE) hosted a virtual stakeholder engagement Aug. 3 with more than 30 individuals representing various nongovernmental organizations – the engagement was held at the request of stakeholders to expand on the July announcement updating the policy, procedures, and requirements for agency officers and special agents to preserve access to family visitation and child welfare services and to hear feedback. A follow up meeting will be held in Q4 of the calendar year to continue to dialog and provide feedback to comments received.

Read the full article here. 

The post ICE Hosts NGOs to Discuss Parental, Guardianship Rights for Minor Children, Incapacitated Adults appeared first on CLASP.

In a perfect world, Congress reauthorizes child nutrition programs every five years. However, the last reauthorization was passed in 2010. This delay is significant because recent rates of food insecurity are higher in households with children (14.8 percent) than households without children (8.8 percent). On July 20, 2022, the House Committee on Education and Labor introduced the well-anticipated Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill, Healthy Meals, Healthy Kids Act.

This measure will help more children and families access healthy, nutritious, affordable foods. With the goal of eliminating child hunger at the forefront, the act has many provisions that would:

• Expand community eligibility for free school meals;
• Modernize the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC);
• Increase reimbursement rates for school lunch programs;
• Address food insecurity during the summer; and
• Strengthen the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP)

The prevalence of food insecurity has long been disproportionately higher for families with lower incomes and families of color. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the food hardships that some children face. Research shows that the number of children facing food insecurity rose from 10 million in 2019 to nearly 12 million in 2020.

The pandemic also expanded preexisting levels of food insecurity to unprecedented rates among Native American, Black, and Latinx communities. Nearly 4 in 10 Black and Latinx families with children experienced food insecurity in 2020.

Federal waiver authority granted school nutrition programs resources to keep feeding children during virtual learning. These waivers helped to reduce childhood hunger during a time of high food insecurity. While schools are no longer closing, it is important to use lessons learned from the pandemic to create resilient, equitable, long-lasting food programs. In addition, the push for schools to return to previous operations does not consider inflation or continuous challenges faced in school meal operations — high grocery bills; increased costs of living; staff shortages; and supply chain disruptions.

“It’s hard for students to learn when they are hungry,” stated Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici (D-MI), who helped introduce the new legislation.

Advocates are rallying behind food insecurity because it can damage children and communities. Hunger can impose consequences on children that last into adulthood. Therefore, it is essential to highlight some of the detrimental effects of child hunger.

• When children do not have enough access to healthy foods, it hurts their development and leads to health problems. Financially struggling parents will have competing demands and must choose if the household income goes toward medical care for their child or feeding their family. No parent should have to choose between feeding their family or paying for medical expenses. The correlation between food insecurity and poor health raises the nation’s health care expenditures.
• Family factors such as access to food, socioeconomic status, and parents’ level of education have an enormous influence on students’ school success. When a student has low academic performance, it can lower their test scores, raise their chances of repeating a grade, and make it less likely that they will graduate from high school. Students’ academic performance is often a predictor of future earnings and success.
• Child hunger can lead to behavioral issues and the need for intervention support. To make matters worse, 14 million students are learning in schools without a nurse, counselor, child psychiatrist, or social worker, but they have police or resource officers. Many schools lack trained personnel with holistic, restorative practices to defuse behavioral disruptions.
• Parents’ stress due to lack of resources and inability to provide basic needs can influence children’s mental health conditions. For example, childhood depression will likely progress into adulthood if left unaddressed.

Food insecurity has adverse, long-term effects on children, impacting them in adulthood. The improved Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill takes a critical step to creating a solid foundation that allows students to flourish and grow. The marathon to eradicate childhood hunger must continue to implement bold, transformative advancements.

The post Childhood hunger does lasting harm. This new bill can help end it. appeared first on CLASP.

“If you teach a man to fish, you can feed him for a lifetime.”

My sophomore year of college was a challenging one. My motivation and grades slipped as my post-graduate plan of going to law school became less certain. An internship and college courses that I took revealed that the legal practice was not my passion, and systemic issues beyond the courtroom were not being addressed. I informed a mentor of mine of my dilemma. He encouraged me to apply to the Institute for Responsible Citizenship. It’s a fellowship that enhances the career direction of undergraduate Black men through paid internships, briefings with prominent leaders, and seminars on economic and constitutional principles. I took his advice, applied, and was accepted. The network and insight that I have gained through the Institute and my internship with the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) is why I believe that policymakers must invest in Black youth through paid internships.

Dr. William Keyes established the Institute after witnessing how wealth disparities between white and Black Americans influence unequal access to opportunities such as internships. Research shows that internships allow people to explore different careers, gain valuable work experience, and network with professionals in various fields. This, in turn, makes one a more competitive candidate for post-graduate employment, increasing the likelihood of financial security.

In fact, studies show that college seniors with internship experience are more likely to secure post-graduate jobs and perform better in job fairs than those without internship experience. However, according to the same research, Black youth are less likely to participate in internships. This is because nearly half of all internships are unpaid, limiting access to young people from more privileged backgrounds who can afford to take an unpaid internship. Black youth are often unable to afford the costs of travel and living when performing unpaid work. Meanwhile, those who do participate often have to take out loans, widening the wealth gap.

The Institute was designed to combat this problem. Not only are scholars provided paid internships in our fields of interest, but we are given free housing, a free college course, and a stipend to cover food and transportation. Participating in the Institute has given me access to information and leaders that I would not have been able to access otherwise.

In addition to seminars and trips to cities such as Chicago to learn about the various policies that have historically marginalized the Black community, I have been able to form relationships with government officials and chief executive officers like John Rogers, co-founder of the largest Black-owned investment firm in the country. Through these conversations, I have been exposed to so many things, including corporate finance and the tech industry, which has broadened my worldview.

Additionally, I was able to acquire valuable skills and perspectives through my internship with CLASP. As an intern, I conducted policy research and attended meetings with other nonprofits, policymakers, and White House staff. These meetings gave me a better understanding of what government jobs look like and the role that stakeholders play in policy decisions. Moreover, I was able to travel to Atlanta, Georgia, for a leadership conference. The event in Atlanta gathered youth activists from across the country for a town hall to voice issues affecting their communities. Hearing their stories reminded me of the conditions that I faced as a child. It also reminded me that despite coming from different backgrounds, Black youth are often unified through a common struggle that is perpetuated through systemic racism.

My involvement in the Institute and CLASP is testimony to the notion that “if you teach a man to fish, you can feed him for a lifetime.” I was filled with a determination to pursue public policy and construct systems that will help others feed themselves through the Institute. At the same time, I was able to obtain the tools and capital necessary for my own success through my paid internship with CLASP. I am dedicating the rest of my life to ensuring that policy is working for the benefit of all. In doing so, I hope that one day everyone will be able to feed and invest in themselves. In the meantime, I urge policymakers to invest in Black youth through paid internships and subsidized jobs for young people. Youth are the future leaders of tomorrow. Let’s invest in them today.

The post Why We Must Invest in Black Youth through Paid Internships appeared first on CLASP.

CLASP recognizes the important ways in which climate change impacts the people and policies we advocate for. This blog is the sixth in a series exploring the intersection of environmental justice and economic security for people living with low incomes. Explore the series here.

Immigrant workers have been overrepresented among our essential workers, and particularly those who keep our nation fed. More than 50 percent of meat packing workers and 75 percent of farmworkers are immigrants. Yet, despite being essential, they continuously are subjected to fewer worker protections and unsafe working environments, which are only worsening with our warming climate. These threats call for new federal policies and investments to protect all workers across the food supply industry, support immigration rights, and transform our agricultural system. 

Extreme heat environments are known to place physical risk on workers by increasing workplace injuries. These environments also lead to greater risk of developing health conditions such as asthma, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. Heat-related illnesses are the leading cause of death for farmworkers, who are 20 percent more likely to die from them than are other workers. The continued record-breaking heat has also contributed to an increase in natural disasters, such as wildfires, during which farmworkers are expected to continue to work despite the increased risk of harm and exposure to wildfire smoke. 

Rising temperatures also create economic risks for weather-exposed workers. County-level wages drop across all industries, but workers in highly exposed industries experience the greatest drop. As noted by the Environmental Protection Agency, workers in weather-exposed industries tend to have lower incomes and thus are more reliant on their incomes to meet basic needs. For them, the climate crisis is simultaneously an economic crisis. About 30 percent of farmworkers and over 12 percent of meat packing workers live below the poverty line.

Additionally, immigrant workers face systemic barriers to addressing the harms of those environmental inequities. Workers whose homes may have been impacted by wildfires or flooding may be ineligible for economic or housing assistance due to their immigration status. Immigrants who develop health conditions from exposure to toxic chemicals at work are often not eligible for health care coverage. 

The COVID-19 pandemic helped bring attention to the poor working conditions in America’s food supply sectors. However, exploitation has long been the norm in these industries, and immigrant workers are particularly vulnerable to labor abuses. Both the meatpacking and farming industries aggressively recruit undocumented workers precisely because their status can be used against them. Companies pay them lower wages, provide fewer benefits, and cut costs through subpar working conditions. Immigration raids have been used by employers to retaliate against employees that strike or unionize, further discouraging undocumented workers from advocating for their rights.

Furthermore, farmworkers are excluded from many federal labor standards that protect the rights of workers in other sectors, including collective bargaining rights. Although farm work is subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and other limited federal policies, employers frequently violate these standards with no repercussions. Even within FLSA standards, farm work is exempt from certain rules, including those concerning child labor. This means child farmworkers have no hour limits and are subject to hazardous conditions such as exposure to pesticides, which can compromise child development.

This lack of legal protections means that immigrant food supply workers are particularly vulnerable to worsening labor conditions as a result of climate change. With minimal action from the U.S. Department of Labor to enforce workers’ rights, and no protection for workers’ self-advocacy, employers will only continue to disregard immigrant workers’ rights and safety.  

These complex issues require comprehensive solutions from the White House and Congress. Food supply workers must be granted full legal rights, including the right to organize and protection from retaliation; benefits and livable wages; and safe working conditions including shade, water, ventilation, and rest periods. The Colorado Farmworkers Bill of Rights provides a strong model for a potential national policy.  

Additionally, the Biden Administration should communicate with workers in these industries to ensure they know their rights. The administration committed to ending workplace immigration raids. However, officials must build trust with immigrant communities to ensure workers know about these changes and feel safe to organize or report dangerous workplace conditions without fear of deportation.  

In tandem with increased labor protections for food supply workers, Congress must implement a pathway to citizenship so the disproportionate numbers of undocumented and temporary workers employed in these fields are covered by these policies. No worker in any industry should be subject to labor abuses. It is particularly egregious that the essential workers who feed our nation are often most at risk. 

On a broader scale, we must address the urgent climate crisis and the unsustainability of our food supply industries. Agriculture accounts for more than a third of man-made greenhouse gas emissions. Modern farming and livestock practices can cause erosion, waterway pollution, and other harms on local ecosystems. The administration and Congress should make it a priority to invest in transformative agricultural practices through the upcoming Farm Bill and other legislation. Funding can be used to support research; incentivize farmers to implement sustainable practices like using cover crops, rotational grazing, and integrated pest management to improve soil health and carbon sequestration; and provide stricter regulation of companies’ environmental impact. Through a comprehensive approach, we can put an end to the harm our food systems are causing to the immigrant workers these industries depend on and to our global climate.

The post Immigrant Workers Supplying our Food Chain Face Climate Threats, Unmet Needs appeared first on CLASP.