Latest news with #MDRC
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Politics
- Gulf Today
Adding work needs to Medicaid isn't a bad idea
Over the past 46 years that I've been part of America's job training system, work requirements for government benefits have been proposed several times. Each time these work rules have been initially denounced by opponents as 'cruel,' 'punitive,' 'blaming the victim' — with accompanying fears that benefit recipients were not ready to be employed and would lose needed benefits. Yet each time work requirements have been implemented, they have resulted in increased employment and other life benefits for a significant segment of participants, their families and local communities. Those are the metrics by which to measure success; reducing the rolls of benefit programs has not been the main goal sought by advocates of previous work requirements. The results have been documented over the years by scholars representing a range of viewpoints: Harry Holzer of Georgetown, Lawrence Mead of New York University and the professional research staff at MDRC, to cite a few. These results have been seen with work rules imposed for welfare recipients, recipients of various General Assistance benefits and parents who owe child support. They will be seen again if the proposed Medicaid work rules go forward and are implemented seriously and with purpose. Individuals on welfare and other benefit programs often need a push into the job world. They may lack confidence, have become discouraged or have no idea how to get started. Work rules provide that push. They also provide a support network for job placement and retention. America Works is one of the nation's largest job agencies serving unemployed people, referred by various government benefit programs. Each participant is assigned a job counselor and develops an individual employment plan. The counselor is to identify job openings, assist the participant in applying, advocate for the participant to employers. The counselor is also trained to be the coach whom all job seekers need: keeping spirits up through the (likely many) rejections, serving as a problem solver during the placement process and troubleshooting when job issues inevitably arise after placement. At each stage, the participant is no longer on their own. Since the early 1980s, work rules have been most extensively tested, studied and monitored in the welfare system, first as pilot projects by individual states and later under the federal welfare reform of 1996. Welfare scholars of the 1980s, including Manpower Demonstration Research Corp. President Judith Gueron would highlight how much previous welfare policies divorced from work requirements had underestimated the work orientation and strengths of welfare recipients. Researchers of welfare-to-work programs of the 1990s and early 2000s at the Urban Institute and with a consortium of university centers would confirm the widespread work orientation of welfare recipients, as well as their abilities to function in the work world. This is not to romanticize welfare-to-work. Despite the counseling and supports (transportation subsidies, child-care subsidies), a good number of participants drop out during the placement process or within a year of job placement. They do so because of chaotic personal lives or mental illnesses or developmental disabilities that the job placement system is unable to address. They do so because of an absence of a family network, or because they don't want to risk the other housing, healthcare and food stamp benefits they receive beyond the welfare payment. Even those who obtain jobs often struggle economically. At the same time, for those who are able to maintain a job, the job frequently brings values beyond the income. Jason Turner, the architect of the early Wisconsin welfare-to-work successes and later commissioner of New York City's Human Resources Administration, references the power of the job, drawing on his experiences over four decades. A job brings structure to participants in work requirement programs, somewhere to go every day. It brings a new confidence, which can translate into addressing daily life responsibilities that previously seemed overwhelming. In theory, the importance of employment is hailed across the political spectrum. In practice, though, the ties of government benefits to employment have been weakened in the past two decades — and so many opportunities to demonstrate the value of this connection have been missed. Welfare-to-work requirements have been diluted in major cities and blue states. Employment efforts for recipients of Supplemental Security Income and Social Security Disability Insurance have stalled. Guaranteed incomes schemes removed from employment have gained currency.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Contributor: Adding work requirements to Medicaid isn't a bad idea
Over the past 46 years that I've been part of America's job training system, work requirements for government benefits have been proposed several times. Each time these work rules have been initially denounced by opponents as 'cruel,' 'punitive,' 'blaming the victim' — with accompanying fears that benefit recipients were not ready to be employed and would lose needed benefits. Yet each time work requirements have been implemented, they have resulted in increased employment and other life benefits for a significant segment of participants, their families and local communities. Those are the metrics by which to measure success; reducing the rolls of benefit programs has not been the main goal sought by advocates of previous work requirements. The results have been documented over the years by scholars representing a range of viewpoints: Harry Holzer of Georgetown, Lawrence Mead of New York University and the professional research staff at MDRC, to cite a few. These results have been seen with work rules imposed for welfare recipients, recipients of various General Assistance benefits and parents who owe child support. They will be seen again if the proposed Medicaid work rules go forward and are implemented seriously and with purpose. Individuals on welfare and other benefit programs often need a push into the job world. They may lack confidence, have become discouraged or have no idea how to get started. Work rules provide that push. They also provide a support network for job placement and retention. America Works is one of the nation's largest job agencies serving unemployed people, referred by various government benefit programs. Each participant is assigned a job counselor and develops an individual employment plan. The counselor is to identify job openings, assist the participant in applying, advocate for the participant to employers. The counselor is also trained to be the coach whom all job seekers need: keeping spirits up through the (likely many) rejections, serving as a problem solver during the placement process and troubleshooting when job issues inevitably arise after placement. At each stage, the participant is no longer on their own. Since the early 1980s, work rules have been most extensively tested, studied and monitored in the welfare system, first as pilot projects by individual states and later under the federal welfare reform of 1996. Welfare scholars of the 1980s, including Manpower Demonstration Research Corp. President Judith Gueron would highlight how much previous welfare policies divorced from work requirements had underestimated the work orientation and strengths of welfare recipients. Researchers of welfare-to-work programs of the 1990s and early 2000s at the Urban Institute and with a consortium of university centers would confirm the widespread work orientation of welfare recipients, as well as their abilities to function in the work world. This is not to romanticize welfare-to-work. Despite the counseling and supports (transportation subsidies, child-care subsidies), a good number of participants drop out during the placement process or within a year of job placement. They do so because of chaotic personal lives or mental illnesses or developmental disabilities that the job placement system is unable to address. They do so because of an absence of a family network, or because they don't want to risk the other housing, healthcare and food stamp benefits they receive beyond the welfare payment. Even those who obtain jobs often struggle economically. At the same time, for those who are able to maintain a job, the job frequently brings values beyond the income. Jason Turner, the architect of the early Wisconsin welfare-to-work successes and later commissioner of New York City's Human Resources Administration, references the power of the job, drawing on his experiences over four decades. A job brings structure to participants in work requirement programs, somewhere to go every day. It brings a new confidence, which can translate into addressing daily life responsibilities that previously seemed overwhelming. In theory, the importance of employment is hailed across the political spectrum. In practice, though, the ties of government benefits to employment have been weakened in the past two decades — and so many opportunities to demonstrate the value of this connection have been missed. Welfare-to-work requirements have been diluted in major cities and blue states. Employment efforts for recipients of Supplemental Security Income and Social Security Disability Insurance have stalled. Guaranteed incomes schemes removed from employment have gained currency. The current proposed Medicaid work rules exclude Medicaid recipients with disabilities, mental health conditions and adults with young children. They also exclude the large number of Medicaid recipients who work part time or full time. None of these Medicaid recipients are at risk of losing health benefits. For the remaining group, the 'able-bodied' without young children, America has a vast workforce network at the ready to provide job placement services. No new bureaucracy is needed. It is a network of community-based agencies, workforce intermediaries and local American Job Centers, with lengthy experience in placing workers who have been outside the job mainstream. Though the first jobs that Medicaid recipients obtain will mainly be entry-level, lower-wage jobs, the recipients will be better off economically and at least on a path to the workforce system's goal of 'a job, a better job, a career.' Medicaid work rules are not cruel or punitive. They help Americans to reclaim the power of the job. Michael Bernick, a former director of the California Labor Department, serves on the state's Behavioral Health Oversight Commission. If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
7 days ago
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Adding work requirements to Medicaid isn't a bad idea
Over the past 46 years that I've been part of America's job training system, work requirements for government benefits have been proposed several times. Each time these work rules have been initially denounced by opponents as 'cruel,' 'punitive,' 'blaming the victim' — with accompanying fears that benefit recipients were not ready to be employed and would lose needed benefits. Yet each time work requirements have been implemented, they have resulted in increased employment and other life benefits for a significant segment of participants, their families and local communities. Those are the metrics by which to measure success; reducing the rolls of benefit programs has not been the main goal sought by advocates of previous work requirements. The results have been documented over the years by scholars representing a range of viewpoints: Harry Holzer of Georgetown, Lawrence Mead of New York University and the professional research staff at MDRC, to cite a few. These results have been seen with work rules imposed for welfare recipients, recipients of various General Assistance benefits and parents who owe child support. They will be seen again if the proposed Medicaid work rules go forward and are implemented seriously and with purpose. Individuals on welfare and other benefit programs often need a push into the job world. They may lack confidence, have become discouraged or have no idea how to get started. Work rules provide that push. They also provide a support network for job placement and retention. America Works is one of the nation's largest job agencies serving unemployed people, referred by various government benefit programs. Each participant is assigned a job counselor and develops an individual employment plan. The counselor is to identify job openings, assist the participant in applying, advocate for the participant to employers. The counselor is also trained to be the coach whom all job seekers need: keeping spirits up through the (likely many) rejections, serving as a problem solver during the placement process and troubleshooting when job issues inevitably arise after placement. At each stage, the participant is no longer on their own. Since the early 1980s, work rules have been most extensively tested, studied and monitored in the welfare system, first as pilot projects by individual states and later under the federal welfare reform of 1996. Welfare scholars of the 1980s, including Manpower Demonstration Research Corp. President Judith Gueron would highlight how much previous welfare policies divorced from work requirements had underestimated the work orientation and strengths of welfare recipients. Researchers of welfare-to-work programs of the 1990s and early 2000s at the Urban Institute and with a consortium of university centers would confirm the widespread work orientation of welfare recipients, as well as their abilities to function in the work world. This is not to romanticize welfare-to-work. Despite the counseling and supports (transportation subsidies, child-care subsidies), a good number of participants drop out during the placement process or within a year of job placement. They do so because of chaotic personal lives or mental illnesses or developmental disabilities that the job placement system is unable to address. They do so because of an absence of a family network, or because they don't want to risk the other housing, healthcare and food stamp benefits they receive beyond the welfare payment. Even those who obtain jobs often struggle economically. At the same time, for those who are able to maintain a job, the job frequently brings values beyond the income. Jason Turner, the architect of the early Wisconsin welfare-to-work successes and later commissioner of New York City's Human Resources Administration, references the power of the job, drawing on his experiences over four decades. A job brings structure to participants in work requirement programs, somewhere to go every day. It brings a new confidence, which can translate into addressing daily life responsibilities that previously seemed overwhelming. In theory, the importance of employment is hailed across the political spectrum. In practice, though, the ties of government benefits to employment have been weakened in the past two decades — and so many opportunities to demonstrate the value of this connection have been missed. Welfare-to-work requirements have been diluted in major cities and blue states. Employment efforts for recipients of Supplemental Security Income and Social Security Disability Insurance have stalled. Guaranteed incomes schemes removed from employment have gained currency. The current proposed Medicaid work rules exclude Medicaid recipients with disabilities, mental health conditions and adults with young children. They also exclude the large number of Medicaid recipients who work part time or full time. None of these Medicaid recipients are at risk of losing health benefits. For the remaining group, the 'able-bodied' without young children, America has a vast workforce network at the ready to provide job placement services. No new bureaucracy is needed. It is a network of community-based agencies, workforce intermediaries and local American Job Centers, with lengthy experience in placing workers who have been outside the job mainstream. Though the first jobs that Medicaid recipients obtain will mainly be entry-level, lower-wage jobs, the recipients will be better off economically and at least on a path to the workforce system's goal of 'a job, a better job, a career.' Medicaid work rules are not cruel or punitive. They help Americans to reclaim the power of the job. Michael Bernick, a former director of the California Labor Department, serves on the state's Behavioral Health Oversight Commission.
Miami Herald
24-04-2025
- Sport
- Miami Herald
Cote: Our live NFL Draft analysis & ongoing Mock Draft report card -- right here, tonight at 8!
COUNTDOWN! CHECK BACK HERE JUST BEFORE 8 P.M. FOR THE KICKOFF OF OUR 'NFL DRAFT NIGHT LIVE!' OUR FULL 34TH ANNUAL OFFICIAL MIAMI HERALD MOCK DRAFT Welcome to our online-only NFL Draft-night analysis, live and as it-happens, updated within seconds of every pick in the first round of Thursday night's talent show in Green Bay. You heard it talked about on today's Dan Le Batard Show and discussed by The Athletic's NFL insider Diana Russini -- now experience it for yourself. We'll have a reaction to every selection and give you an ongoing MDRC (Mock Draft Report Card) on how my 34th annual Miami Herald mock is faring (just for laughs) vs. that of ESPN's Mel Kiper Jr., arguably the king of mock drafts ... or at least the most noted. Last year I scored a whopping nine Exactos a.k.a. Zagacktos a.k.a perfect bull's-eye picks: Exact player to exact team or in exact draft order. That beat Kiper. Can I do it again? We differ on 22 of 32 1R picks, so it's anybody's game. Couple of quick notes: I do one and only one mock draft per year, first round only, do not attempt to predict 1R-related trades, and do not change what first appears online. I have a personal disdain for mockers who do multiple drafts, (Mock 7.0!), pick all seven rounds or try to predict trades. It's asinine. The past eight years my mock drafts have totaled 49 Exactos. Overall last year I correctly had 26 of 32 first-round selections. Explaining the three symbols you'll see below tonight: The red bull's-eye is an Exacto -- a perfect pick. The green check mark is a correct first-round player, but not to the right team. A black X mark indicates a player drafted who was not in my first round. I'll be on the clock all night and hope you'll join us for the fun ride or check back in frequently. Almost time... ▪ 1. Tennessee Titans: Cam Ward, QB, Miami — Ward almost certainly will be the Miami Hurricanes' third-ever overall No. 1 selection, joining QB Vinny Testaverde in 1987 and DT Russell Maryland in 1991. ▪ 2. Cleveland Browns: Travis Hunter, WR/CB, Colorado — ▪ 3. New York Giants: Abdul Carter, Edge, Penn State — ▪ 4. New England Patriots: Will Campbell, OT, LSU — ▪ 5. Jacksonville Jaguars: Mason Graham, DT, Michigan — ▪ 6. Las Vegas Raiders: Ashton Jeanty, RB, Boise State — ▪ 7. New York Jets: Armand Membou, OT, Missouri — ▪ 8. Carolina Panthers: Jalon Walker, LB/Edge, Georgia — ▪ 9. New Orleans Saints: Shedeur Sanders, QB, Colorado — ▪ 10. Chicago Bears: Colston Loveland, TE, Michigan — ▪ 11. San Francisco 49ers: Kelvin Banks Jr., OT/G, Texas — ▪ 12. Dallas Cowboys: Tetairoa McMillan, WR, Arizona — ▪ 13. MIAMI DOLPHINS: WILL JOHNSON, CB, MICHIGAN — Mentioned as other possibilities if they are available and if Fins stay at No. 13: Texas OT Kelvin Banks Jr., Alabama OG Tyler Booker, South Carolina S Nick Emmanwori, Texas CB Jahdae Barron and Ole Miss D-lineman Walter Nolen. However a trade-down looms possible, a hint Miami does not love its likely options here in an overall down-year draft. ▪ 14. Indianapolis Colts: Tyler Warren, TE, Penn State — ▪ 15. Atlanta Falcons: Mike Green, Edge, Marshall — ▪ 16. Arizona Cardinals: Jahdae Barron, CB, Texas — ▪ 17. Cincinnati Bengals: Mykel Williams, Edge, Georgia -- ▪ 18. Seattle Seahawks: Tyler Booker, OG, Alabama — ▪ 19. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Jihaad Campbell, LB, Alabama — ▪ 20. Denver Broncos: Omarion Hampton, RB, North Carolina — ▪ 21. Pittsburgh Steelers: Jaxson Dart, QB, Ole Miss — ▪ 22. Los Angeles Chargers: Matthew Golden, WR, Texas — ▪ 23. Green Bay Packers: James Pearce Jr., Edge, Tennessee — ▪ 24. Minnesota Vikings: Trey Amos, CB, Ole Miss — ▪ 25. Houston Texans: Josh Simmons, OT, Ohio State — ▪ 26. Los Angeles Rams: Maxwell Hairston, CB, Kentucky — ▪ 27. Baltimore Ravens: Nick Emmanwori, S, South Carolina — ▪ 28. Detroit Lions: Shemar Stewart, EDGE, Texas A&M — ▪ 29. Washington Commanders: Nic Scourton, EDGE, Texas A&M — ▪ 30. Buffalo Bills: Walter Nolen, DT, Ole Miss — ▪ 31. Kansas City Chiefs: Luther Burden III, WR, Missouri — ▪ 32. Philadelphia Eagles: Malaki Starks, S, Georgia —
Boston Globe
12-02-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
DOGE cuts $900 million from agency that tracks American students' academic progress
Advocates for students raised alarms the cuts could hurt the accountability of America's education system, leaving the nation in the dark about schools′ effectiveness. Historically, achievement gaps have shown low-income students and students of color falling behind their peers. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The cuts are counterproductive and destructive, said Rachel Dinkes, CEO of the Knowledge Alliance, a coalition of education research firms. Advertisement 'Cutting out at the knees the one independent agency that helps improve student outcomes is ridiculous,' Dinkes said. 'Education is the economic engine that fuels the US economy, and everything they cut is what helps make our education system better.' Biedermann declined to share the names of vendors whose contracts were cut. In response to questions, she referred to a social media post from DOGE that said Musk's team had terminated 89 contracts worth $881 million, including $1.5 million to a contractor hired to 'observe mailing and clerical operations' at a mail center. Another post said 29 grants totaling $101 million for training in diversity, equity, and inclusion had been cut. The Institute of Education Sciences is a central source of information on the health of America's education system. Across the country, it tracks student progress over time and across demographics. It evaluates the effectiveness of federal programs, and colleges and schools rely on its research to improve student outcomes. Among the contracts being cut is a study exploring how to accelerate math learning for students in fourth and fifth grade. Known as ReSolve, the project was led by research group MDRC. A federal notice obtained by the Associated Press ordered MDRC to halt the project immediately 'for the government's convenience.' Advertisement Last month, IES released the latest NAEP results, revealing that America's children have continued to lose ground on reading skills and made little improvement in math in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Congress gave the institute about $800 million last year, roughly 1 percent of the Education Department's annual budget.
