--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Youngphillypolitics.com has posted the legislation
> in its entirety.  There are
> some strings attached, of course.  But even if
> there's a little corruption or
> the program ends up needing a few tweaks, it still
> seems like a good incentive
> to hire ex-offenders, given that there's no
> incentive (that I know of)
> currently.
> 
>
http://youngphillypolitics.com/goode_introduces_nutter_prep_legislation
> 
> Andrew
> 


Andrew,

I feel a bit more positive.  The bill seems to be
trying to set this up for success.  Assessing
participants and networking CBH and other services and
agencies is very important.  

There are many details that the enabling bill,
understandably, does not address.  These are lofty
goals to coordinate.  Implementation of this system
will have many barriers just like the ex-offenders
have many potential life problems that will become
barriers to maintaining employment.  

It is very important that the correction agensies and
CBH staffs are properly trained and engaged with
making the program a success.  I'm a bit out of touch
and don't know how well these agencies are functioning
in general.  I would strongly recommend that they have
a portion of their staffs become specialists with the
program/networks, and not just give it out for the
entire staff to figure out.  When I was more involved,
the case loads were too high for meaningful engagement
and getting higher.

I would like to see this succeed.  In all my years
working in the area of behavioral health care
research; taking a comprehensive approach with this
population by integrating literacy and employment
services was my primary interest.  Funding was not a
priority for the research or making comprehensive
services widely available when I left the field.

The general population is not generally aware that not
only is the quality of life improved for families and
individuals but for society too, when the problems of
this population are addressed.  And the real cost of
not addressing the problems of disadvantaged citizens
is much higher than the cost of helping them.  

But it needs to be done correctly with a comprehensive
approach matching the agencies and services to the
individual needs of these ex-offenders with varying
severity of problems in different life areas.  To keep
the employers interested, proper screening, matching,
and follow-up services must be part of the program. 
Otherwise, the employers will drop out.

I will send a letter to Mr. Goode and Mr.Nutter and
give a copy to my ward leader.  There aren't many
people in Phila. with as much experience with this as
me.  I'll try to bring up very important issues to
make it a success and offer to help them before it
gets set up. I worked closely with researchers
developing the materials they will need. Some of my
old co-workers might be advising this project. The
goals are in the right direction.

Thanks for sharing the info,
Glenn









 





> 
> 
> Quoting Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > Hey Andrew,
> >
> > Yesterday
>  in the Inky was an interesting article about
> > the police commissioner, Sylvester Johnson.  He
> > believes the stop and frisk policy would be a
> > disaster.  His focus is how this will turn the
> clock
> > back on police/community relations and destroy,
> > perhaps in months, the gains which have taken
> years to
> > forge.  He cites the recent request for community
> > volunteers and getting 10,000 people to show up as
> > evidence of improving relations.
> >
> > I have not seen details of this $10,000 tax credit
> > first alluded to in the primaries.  In my
> experience,
> > this tax credit strategy sounds much better than
> it
> > turns out to be.
> >
> > Over a decade ago, I looked for employers for
> > individuals with chronic substance abuse disease. 
> I
> > think all those I worked with counted as
> ex-offenders
> > too.
> >
> > The employers weren't interested in the federal
> tax
> > breaks available.  As a large industrial
> janitorial
> > contractor explained to me, when the details come
> out:
> > there is so much work and little hope for actually
> > qualifying.
> >
> > This same employer was very interested in the
> program
> > I was offering to help bridge the gap to
> employment.
> > For 6 months, I maintained case management
> services
> > for the referrals with an up-front agreement for
> > three-way open communication to assist the
> individuals
> > maintain their jobs.  My referrals succeeded very
> well
> > but in almost all cases minor problems arose that
> > could have easily caused termination in those
> first
> > six months.
> >
> > Now does this reward only kick-in after the first
> six
> > months of employment?  That would suggest to me
> lots
> > of hoops for legitimate employers, lots of fraud,
> and
> > very little impact on maintaining employment or
> > reducing recidivism.
> >
> >  The intervention I worked on was a small pilot
> > project but was successful because it was a good
> > design based on previous empirical evidence not
> sound
> > bites.  Unfortunately, there is no political will
> > among the people to expand good policy when sound
> > bites are available to our political leaders.
> >
> > I believe these tax break strategies are akin to
> > "creaming."  The individuals most at risk for
> criminal
> > recidivism will be those most at risk to lose
> their
> > jobs in the first six months.  These strategies
> look
> > like some incredible attempt to solve the problem
> > around elections yet do almost nothing for the
> problem
> > while distracting society from looking at the
> > underlining problems and implementing sound
> policy.
> >
> > Then, the reports come about the brilliant plan
> > failing because the individuals are beyond all
> hope.
> > I've seen this pattern repeat so many times that
> now
> > the fear in society has become so extreme that we
> are
> > considering policies to end civil liberties and
> the
> > bill of rights for the majority of
> people/criminals in
> > our midst.
> >
> > I'm sorry I feel compelled to disagree so strongly
> > with something that sounds so positive.
> >
> > I would very much like to see the full plan.  If
> the
> > details for the employers are not available, I
> will
> > continue to dismiss it as political rhetoric and
> poor
> > policy.  I saw this tax credit suggested in the
> > primary without any details which I could find.
> >
> > Andrew you seem good at this. If you can get the
> > details, please share.  I'd love to change my mind
> or
> > get folks to talk to the next mayor about the
> problems
> > I outlined.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Glenn
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I don't know if anyone else made it to Michael
> > > Nutter's community forum the
> > > other night, but he mentioned a bill that I
> believe
> > > will be before city council
> > > this week.  Somehow it had escaped my notice
> thus
> > > far.  It calls for a $10,000
> > > credit against the business privilege tax for
> > > companies that hire ex-offenders
> > > for 6-months or more.  He also cited a
> staggering
> > > 72% recidivism rate in the
> > > city.  The proposal was extremely popular with
> the
> > > crowd, and he couldn't
> > > resist adding a couple of pull-up-your-pants
> > > applause lines at the end.  I
> > > posted a video clip here:
> > >
> > > http://malcolmxpark.org/?p=494
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > > ----
> > > You are receiving this because you are
> subscribed to
> > > the
> > > list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for
> archive
> > > information, see
> > > <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> 
> 
> ----
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to
> the
> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive
> information, see
> <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

Reply via email to