This has been quite a week for revelations about the mismanagement of funds at the MS Department of Human Services (DHS). It should be noted that, while arrests have been made, there have been no convictions yet. This may be just another news story to some, but to others this is a story about their lives and how this agency has operated for years. State Auditor Shad White and the DHS staff who brought this misuse of funding into the daylight should be congratulated for having the best interest of those for whom this money is intended at heart and, most importantly, the integrity to act on their knowledge. As of last report, two of those involved allegedly stole more than $4.15 million from the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program for personal use.
To put this in perspective, the definition of TANF is in order. Mississippi can use federal TANF funds allocated to the state and State Maintenance of Effort (MOE) dollars to meet any of the four goals set out in the 1996 Federal law: “(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; (2) end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage; (3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out of wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and (4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two parent families.” It should be noted that in Mississippi there is currently an extensive list of eligibility requirements a family must meet to be approved.
TANF guidance allows states to spend the federal funds in a variety of ways. It can be used for eligible families to receive child care so they can participate in work activities (such as job search, community service, education, or training), or for respite purposes. Families can receive child care during a temporary period of unemployment, if a state chooses to allocate funds for that purpose. Pre-kindergarten or kindergarten education programs (allowable if they do not meet the definition of a “general state expense”), expansion of Head Start programs, or other school readiness programs are also allowed.
Funding for home visiting programs for families with young children and a host of other options states can choose to implement that have proven to support families as they work to earn a living wage are permissible as well. All of the allowable expenditures are critical to work force development, a focal point of those promoting economic development in the state. The TANF funds that have been identified as being directly disseminated elsewhere, leaves those for whom it was intended without the supports to raise themselves and their children out of dead-end jobs earning less than $8.00 an hour. This upper level decision of allegedly embezzling funds is a slap in the face to work force program advocates and undermines the work of the boards and commissions charged with developing future workers.
In a knee jerk reaction, the Senate Finance Committee has passed legislation that would give the State Auditor’s office new authority to examine income tax returns of recipients to determine eligibility for public assistance programs such as Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (SNAP), or as the public calls it, the “Food Stamp” Program. Given the complexity of such an endeavor and the fact that multiple pieces of information are already required of anyone attempting to receive legitimate services funded by TANF or SNAP, why place the burden on the recipients of the funds rather than focus on the process that allowed for these misappropriations of funds to occur? The Department of Revenue could verify income tax filing without requiring more paper work to be provided by those seeking assistance.
Perhaps the audit process being proposed in legislation should be restricted to an internal review of the DHS procedures of how contracts are awarded, managed and audited as well as the internal auditing of TANF and SNAP program spending such as transfer of funds from one program to another within the agency. Regardless of the processes put into place, if the Director of an agency is at the center of any mishandling of funds, it may be more difficult to detect without unannounced independent audits.
Having worked in the early care and education field in Mississippi for over 40 years, I thought I had seen it all. I was wrong. As a state, what has to happen to wake us up to the fact that not all poor people are lazy and undeserving of support from the state (in this case the majority of funds were from the federal government) to make a life that will lift them out of poverty any more so than not all people in powerful and trusted positions are honest? No individual recipient of TANF or SNAP funds ever has been alleged to have embezzled over $4 million from DHS. Ever.
by Dr. Cathy Grace