wages work! an examination of nyc’s parks opportunity program and its participants a research...

Wages Work!An Examination of NYC’s

Parks Opportunity Program and Its Participants

A Research Project by

Community Voices HeardMarch 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 & WEPParks Opportunity Program

Work Experience Program

Hourly Wage $9.38 - $12.50 $0.00

Salary $19,510 - $26,000 $0.00

EITC Eligibility Yes No

Job Title CSA / CPW / PEP / PA None

Union Status District Council 37 Member None

Sick Leave & Vacation Time Accrued None

Received On-the-Job Training 76.9% 19.9%

Learned New Skills 70.7% 39.2%

Felt Good About Self 87.9% 22.4%

POP Testimony #1

Euline Williams

Research Design

Multiple contact with 1000+ 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 workingin 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/Cleaning 89.9%

Painting 77.8%

Landscaping/Horticulture 51.5%

Recreational Coordination/Planning 23.2%

Clerical/Administration 19.2%

Security 14.1%

Customer Service 13.1%

Driving 8.1%

Other 6.9%

Finding 2: Real Work

POP WorkersWere 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 ImproveC. 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


POP Worker Income Compared to Other Benchmarks

$8,244

$15,394$17,650

$22,584

$48,936

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

Welfare Full-TimeMinimum Wage

FederalPoverty Line

POP Worker Self-SufficiencyStandard


POP WorkersSaw 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


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 JobB. 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


A Variety of New Skills Were Learned

71%

49%44%

31%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Equipment Usage MaintenanceCleaning

Painting LandscapingHorticulture

New Parks-Focused Skills Learned by POP Workers On the Job


A Variety of New Skills Were Learned

New Transferable Skills Learned by POP Workers On the Job

11%

7%

6%

6%

3%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%

Driving

RecreationalCoordination/Planning

Customer Service

Clerical/Administration

Security

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


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– Medicaid 81.9% received– Food Stamps 64.7% received– Childcare 45.6% received– Rental Assistance 27.9% received


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


Job Services Were of Poor Quality & Education and Training was Limited

SERVICE/TRAINING TYPE PERCENT RECEIVED

Job Readiness 87.5%

Job Search Workshops 88.6%

Job Search Activities 61.4%

Job Retention Services 11.4%

English as Second Language 50.0%

Adult Basic Education 11.0%

GED Preparation 10.9%

Drivers License Preparation 12.3%

Commercial Drivers’ License 3.5%

Civil Service Exam Preparation 2.3%


POP Program Failed to Address Individual Barriers to Employment

INDIVIDUAL BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT CITED

Lack of GED 45.8%

Lack of Education/Certification 34.9%

Lack of Job Experience 31.3%

Lack of Childcare 30.1%

Lack of English Proficiency 20.5%

Lack of Transportation Money 16.9%

Poor Health Condition 9.6%



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



ADDITIONAL TRAINING THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL

Computer Training 73.2%

Driver’s License Training 52.4%

GED Preparation 37.8%

Civil Service Exam Training 36.6%

Vocational Education 30.5%

English as Second Language 13.4%

Professional Training 11.0%

Landscape/Horticulture Training 7.3%

Basic Education 4.9%


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



JAC & PACT PLACEMENT NUMBERS & AVERAGE WAGES

FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 TO DATE

JAC 1

$7.39/hr

83

$7.95/hr

167

$8.32/hr

251

PACT 9

$8.82

127

$9.20/hr

196

$10.11/hr

332

TOTAL PLACEMENTS 10 210 363 583



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


High Unemployment Rates Put Hard-to-Employ at Disadvantage

SOCIETAL BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT

Lack of Jobs Available in Community 80.7%

Pay Isn’t Enough to Support Family 42.2%

Lack of Jobs Available in Occupation 34.9%


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


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% Medicaid 91.9% Cash Assistance 57.8%

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

wages work! an examination of nyc’s parks opportunity program and its participants a research...

Documents

pop workers

welfare slide

pop testimony

pop participants development

job site

jobs slide

pop motivated participants

way pop participants