Wages Work! An Examination of NYC’s Parks Opportunity Program and Its Participants A Research Project by Community Voices Heard March 2004

Workfare vs. Transitional Job Workfare – a welfare recipient “works off” benefits in a job in the public or private sector. Education, training and support services may be available. Transitional Job – a welfare recipient works in a time-limited job with pay. Education, training and support services are a key part of the program.

What is a Transitional Job? Provides work experience: time-limited, publicly subsidized job with wages Provides case management: address barriers, assist in accessing work supports Provides skill development: on the job and through education and training Provides job placement support: job search assistance & job retention services

Transitional Jobs: National Scope 40 programs nationwide 3,500 individuals at any given time 81-94% of individuals completing programs found employment

Parks Opportunity Program (POP) Largest paid transitional jobs program Run by NYC Dept. Parks & Recreation Started Spring 2001 Initial phase of program had: – 3,500 Participants – Paid $9.38 an hour – 11 ½ month positions – Workers were District Council 37 members

Distinctions Between POP & WEP Parks Opportunity Program Work Experience Program Hourly Wage$ $12.50$0.00 Salary$19,510 - $26,000$0.00 EITC EligibilityYesNo Job TitleCSA / CPW / PEP / PANone Union StatusDistrict Council 37 MemberNone Sick Leave & Vacation TimeAccruedNone Received On-the-Job Training76.9%19.9% Learned New Skills70.7%39.2% Felt Good About Self87.9%22.4%

POP Testimony #1 Euline Williams

Research Design Multiple contact with POP participants Development of 10-page survey instrument – Personal background, history prior to POP, placement process – Experience during POP: at job site, at job services site, in relation to salary & work supports, quality of life – Experience post-POP, current situation, general feedback Random sample of 200 former workers from 3,403 list of participants

Research Sample Response Rate: 50% – 101 surveyed- 35 not found at home – 36 had moved- 12 refused – 13 unknown at address - 2 unable to complete Demographics – Gender: 100 women & 1 man – Age Range: 79% 25 – 44 years old 22% 45 – 64 years old – Race/Ethnicity: 54% African-Americans/Blacks 42% Latinas/Hispanics – Education:57% less than High School 42% High School / GED / Beyond

Major Research Findings Finding 1: Wages are Important Finding 2: POP Workers Did Real Work Finding 3: POP Improved Lives of Participants Finding 4: POP Prepared People Better than WEP Finding 5: POP Lacked Critical Elements of TJPs Finding 6: POP Failed to Connect Many to Jobs

Finding 1 Wages are an Important Component in Motivating Welfare Recipients to Move Off Welfare A. Wages Matter B. POP Motivated Participants to Leave Welfare

Finding 1: Wages Important Wages Matter Best things about POP: – being off of public assistance (90.9%) – getting a paycheck (77.4%) Program aspects that changed the way POP participants felt about work: – earning a paycheck (97.6%) – having a job title (96.2%) – having a supervisor (83.8%) – having a clear work plan (87.5%)

Finding 1: Wages Important POP Motivated Participants to Want to Leave Welfare 98% would have liked to keep working in a full-time job 93% would have liked to keep working in a full-time permanent Parks job 79% were actively looking for work and had applied to an average of 10 jobs each 78% felt confident that they could get a job post-POP, while only 60% did post-WEP

Finding 2 POP Workers Did Real Work Needed for the City A. POP Workers Did Critical Work for the City B. POP Workers Were Often Asked to Work Overtime

Finding 2: Real Work POP Workers Did Critical Work for the City WORK DONE BY POPs AT 1,700 CITY PARKS Maintenance/Cleaning89.9% Painting77.8% Landscaping/Horticulture51.5% Recreational Coordination/Planning23.2% Clerical/Administration19.2% Security14.1% Customer Service13.1% Driving8.1% Other6.9%

Finding 2: Real Work POP Workers Were Often Asked to Work Overtime The importance of the work is also reflected in the fact that… – 61% were asked to work overtime – Of those asked to work overtime, 70% asked to work overtime between 3 & 10 times

Finding 3 The Parks Opportunity Program Improved the Lives of Most Welfare Recipients Participating in the Program A. POP Workers Had More Monthly Income B. POP Workers Saw their Quality of Life Improve C. POP Workers Gained Greater Self-Esteem

Finding 3: Improved Lives POP Workers Had More Monthly Income than Welfare Recipients 90% had more monthly income during POP Eligible for up to $3,888 in EITC 36.4% were even able to save money

Finding 3: Improved Lives POP Worker Income Compared to Other Benchmarks

Finding 3: Improved Lives POP Workers Saw Their Quality of Life Improve 93% felt their quality of life had improved Responses pointed to: – increased economic security, – rising self-esteem, and – positive family spillover effects

Finding 3: Improved Lives POP Workers Gained Greater Self-Esteem 87.9% of POP respondents felt above average (good or terrific) while in POP Only 22.4% felt this positive while receiving public assistance

Finding 4 The Parks Opportunity Program Prepared People for Work Better than Unpaid Workfare/WEP A. POP Workers Gained Skills On the Job B. A Variety of New Skills Were Learned

Finding 4: Prepared People>WEP POP Workers Gained Skills On the Job 72% considered POP a useful program 71% said they learned new skills on the job 39% felt they had learned new skills in WEP

Finding 4: Prepared People>WEP A Variety of New Skills Were Learned

Finding 4: Prepared People>WEP A Variety of New Skills Were Learned

Positive Elements of POP Wages are an Important Component POP Workers Did Real Work for City POP Improved Lives of Participants POP Prepared People for Work Still, some elements need improving…

Finding 5 POP Program Model Fails to Incorporate Critical Elements Typical of Most Effective Transitional Jobs Programs A. Work Supports Were Not Sufficient or Accessible B. Job Search & Employment Services Were Poor, Education & Training Was Limited C. POP Failed to Address Individual Barriers to Employment D. Program Length is Insufficient to Achieve Stated Goals

Finding 5: Missing Elements Work Supports Were Neither Fully Accessible Nor Sufficient 93% had their cash assistance cases closed 69% drew on additional benefits to help make ends meet Even with a wage of $9.38 an hour and up, additional supports were necessary

POP Worker Testimony #2 Zoila Almonte

Finding 5: Missing Elements Work Supports Were Neither Fully Accessible Nor Sufficient Without supports, an average family would fall short almost $2,000 each month in paying their expenses [Self-Sufficiency Standard & Calculator, P.26] Yet, despite clear need for additional supports, not everyone received additional benefits… – Earned Income Tax Credit 88.3% received – Medicaid81.9% received – Food Stamps64.7% received – Childcare45.6% received – Rental Assistance27.9% received

Finding 5: Missing Elements Job Services Were of Poor Quality & Education and Training was Limited 92% attended JAC & PACT 2-8 times per month Bulk of services received focused on: – job readiness (time, behavior, hygiene, dress, etc.) – job search (resumes, interviewing, etc.) Only 50% felt they were better equipped or skilled to get a job at the end of receiving the job services

Finding 5: Missing Elements Job Services Were of Poor Quality & Education and Training was Limited SERVICE/TRAINING TYPEPERCENT RECEIVED Job Readiness87.5% Job Search Workshops88.6% Job Search Activities61.4% Job Retention Services11.4% English as Second Language50.0% Adult Basic Education11.0% GED Preparation10.9% Drivers License Preparation12.3% Commercial Drivers’ License3.5% Civil Service Exam Preparation2.3%

Finding 5: Missing Elements POP Program Failed to Address Individual Barriers to Employment INDIVIDUAL BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT CITED Lack of GED45.8% Lack of Education/Certification34.9% Lack of Job Experience31.3% Lack of Childcare30.1% Lack of English Proficiency20.5% Lack of Transportation Money16.9% Poor Health Condition9.6%

Finding 5: Missing Elements POP Program Failed to Address Individual Barriers to Employment Differentials in Disadvantages Mentioned Based on Education Level – A high percent of non-graduates mentioned their lack of education as a major barrier to employment (80%) – Non-graduates mentioned certain barriers (lack of job experience and pay not being enough to support a family) more often than graduates Based on Race/Ethnicity – Consistently across categories, Latinas cited each barrier at a higher level than African-Americans – More focused education/training options were not offered as frequently to Latinas as African-Americans

Finding 5: Missing Elements POP Program Failed to Address Individual Barriers to Employment ADDITIONAL TRAINING THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL Computer Training73.2% Driver’s License Training52.4% GED Preparation37.8% Civil Service Exam Training36.6% Vocational Education30.5% English as Second Language13.4% Professional Training11.0% Landscape/Horticulture Training7.3% Basic Education4.9%

Finding 5: Missing Elements Program Length is Insufficient to Achieve All Stated Goals Participants felt that a year or more was necessary in a transitional job – 49%2 years – 30%1 ½ years – 21%1 year Extra time can help participants… – Stabilize their finances – Learn to juggle work & family – Complete both basic education and job training – Demonstrate ability to maintain long-term job to prospective employers – Provide increased value job placement sites

Finding 6 POP Failed to Connect Most Participants to Paying Jobs Thereby Forcing Many to Return to Welfare A. Design May Have Resulted in Limited Post-Program Placement B. High Unemployment Put Hard-to-Employ at Disadvantage C. When in Need, Program Leavers Return to Public Support

Finding 6: Failed Connection Program Design May Have Resulted in Limited Post-Program Placement Only 15.5% of those surveyed were employed when the surveys were taken A slightly higher percentage (22%) had held at least one job since POP

Finding 6: Failed Connection Program Design May Have Resulted in Limited Post-Program Placement JAC & PACT PLACEMENT NUMBERS & AVERAGE WAGES FY 01FY 02FY 03TO DATE JAC1 $7.39/hr 83 $7.95/hr 167 $8.32/hr 251 PACT9 $ $9.20/hr 196 $10.11/hr 332 TOTAL PLACEMENTS

Finding 6: Failed Connection Program Design May Have Resulted in Limited Post-Program Placement Critical program elements were missing or of a low quality in POP: – Formal screening & assessment at start – Intensive case management with low advisor-participant ratios – Education and job skills training – Job placement assistance – Job retention assistance Difference in skills participants obtained on the job and jobs available in the market

Finding 6: Failed Connection High Unemployment Rates Put Hard-to-Employ at Disadvantage SOCIETAL BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT Lack of Jobs Available in Community80.7% Pay Isn’t Enough to Support Family42.2% Lack of Jobs Available in Occupation34.9%

Finding 6: Failed Connection High Unemployment Rates Put Hard-to-Employ at Disadvantage Unemployment Rates were high – 8.2% in NYC in 2002 Non-High School Graduates Disadvantaged – 9.7% unemployment in 2002 People of Color Disadvantaged – 9.6% for Latinas in 2002 – 11.0% for Non-Hispanic Blacks in 2002 Single Mothers w/ Less than High School – In 2003, only 39.4% employed Figures based on CSS tabulations from Current Population Survey

Finding 6: Failed Connection When in Need, Unemployed Program Leavers Return to Public Support Though most were looking for work throughout (79.1%), some needed public support… – 85% accessed unemployment benefits – 68% were receiving assistance when surveyed Food Stamps 90.6% Medicaid91.9% Cash Assistance57.8%

Conclusion The Parks Opportunity Program was an excellent public sector jobs program – Employed large numbers in good paying city jobs However, as a transitional jobs program, it failed to provide participants with the comprehensive supports necessary for success

Needed Fusion of large-scale living wage paying public jobs initiative with positive elements of higher quality transitional job support elements Critical improvements to move beyond simply being good temporary jobs program and toward an effective transitional jobs program

Recommendations 1: Diversify positions available 2: Provide links to long-term employment 3: Make available training and education 4: Extend program length 5: Incorporate flexibility into program model 6: Expand work supports