poverty

Meet Grant, Our Newest Intern

Hello! My name is Grant Rivet and I have the great opportunity of being an intern for Michigan’s Children this semester. My primary duties will be assisting with social media, updating our 2018 elections page, and briefing policy reports. Originally I am from Bay City, Michigan where my father was a former State Representative for the 96th district. It’s no stretch to say I have been around politics my entire life. From the fundraisers, to gathering election results after the polls close, to passing out popsicles at local parades in the summer. It’s not hard to see the influence that my father has had on my passion for politics.

I heard about the opportunity to intern for Michigan’s Children through my stepmother and Michigan’s Children board member Kristen McDonald. She has always been an advocate for the advancement of underprivileged youth throughout her entire professional career, especially in her position as VP with the Skillman Foundation, which seeks the advancement of Detroit’s youth. There, I had several opportunities to be around and volunteer, which opened my eyes to the disadvantages and harsh reality of life for many children in Detroit. I took a step back and realized just how fortunate I was growing up and realized many kids will not have nearly the opportunities I have just because of their socioeconomic status. I can honestly say I enjoyed volunteering and found the work to be extremely satisfying knowing it would benefit those who really need it. So, when the opportunity to get hands-on experience with Michigan’s Children to get a better understanding of the policy aspect of advocacy came up, it was an easy decision for me.

I find 2018 Michigan Gubernatorial election extremely intriguing as young adult. I think the state is at a crossroads between the two parties and with leadership within the state. With an increase in polarization of both parties and an eight-year term by Rick Snyder coming to an end, it will be intriguing to see if the 2016 Presidential election results will hold in Michigan’s Gubernatorial race. This election features established candidates with a long track record of success against progressive, upstart candidates who have also attracted a large base.

Personally, I would love to see the candidates talk about guns, education, and healthcare. All three of these issues affect the youth in our great state and are issues that should not be discussed lightly. Education and healthcare equity gaps are at an all-time high in this state. For a lot of families, higher education is not affordable, which leads to a generational cycle of poverty that is nearly inescapable. These two issues are fundamental rights that should be afforded to everyone regardless of socioeconomic status. It’s also critical for me to see some advancement in terms of guns this upcoming election. It’s always been a topic that I have been very passionate about and even more so in light of increasing amount of mass shootings in the U.S. It should be one of the most interesting gubernatorial races in the country next year and I am very excited to see who comes out on top. My primary role to update our followers on the 2018 election cycle is designed to help inform, engage, and update our followers on each candidate and their specific views on policies that effect Michigan’s Children.

Grant Rivet is an intern at Michigan’s Children. He is a graduating Senior at Michigan State University majoring in Political Science, and hopes to one day become a lobbyist.

What it Really Means to Put Kids First

October 2, 2017 – Community leaders and advocates convened at Wayne State University for a community forum hosted by the United Way for Southeastern Michigan and the Merrill Palmer Skillman Institute for Child and Family Development.

Dr. Herman Gray, CEO of United Way for Southeastern Michigan, shared an experience from his time as president of Children’s Hospital of Michigan. A child was being treated for an ailment which was not very serious but required several weeks of antibiotics. After keeping the child in the hospital receiving the medication through an IV, it was time to discharge the family with a prescription. When given directions to refrigerate the antibiotic, the child’s parent surprised the staff:

The family did not have a refrigerator at home.

I took two important lessons from this story:

  1. Poverty is real, and its impacts are real. How healthy can a family be if they are unable to keep perishable items at home? And, if there is no refrigerator in the house, what else might they be missing?
  2. Important instructions are given to parents and families every day for the care of their children. With what assumptions are well-intentioned professionals delivering these instructions and advice?

Writer and radio host Stephen Henderson, who keynoted the event, shared his experience with the Tuxedo Project, which he started in an effort to improve the quality of life in his old neighborhood by repurposing the house he grew up in on the west side of Detroit’s Tuxedo Street. The home had been abandoned in the years after his family moved out.

Based in part on conversations had throughout the past year with current Tuxedo Street residents, such as an elderly man living without power or running water and around the debris where a fire caved his second floor into his first floor, Henderson argued that urban poverty has become increasingly like rural poverty, characterized by isolation.

These stories stayed with me until later in the day, when an attendee shared information about a program run by her agency to benefit young children who have experienced trauma. When her team members began planning for the program’s implementation, they took a step back to think through and identify desired outcomes. Then, they determined what would be needed to achieve those intended outcomes for the children and families who would be enrolling in the program. It was then that I realized something I do not often hear in public discourse relating to social policy. We often hear about what the government’s role should be, how much funding should be allocated, and which programs and services should be prioritized. What I do not remember hearing much of, however, at least in bipartisan conversations, is what we actually want to see for all Michigan children.

Maybe we should start there. What do we want for kids? This is the conversation we need to be having. What do we want to see for Michigan’s children, and what do we need to do to get there? What do kids need to get to that point, and what policies, funding levels, and services will take them there? If we can start there – and truly prioritize those outcomes – we can begin to make long-term, positive improvements for Michigan’s children.

And, in a society where very few decision-makers have personally experienced poverty and its effects, it is critical that we think carefully about which voices are at the table when discussing solutions to these issues.

If we fail to include the voices of those most impacted, we risk wasting time and resources providing solutions which will not address the complete problems and therefore fail to be impactful – or, in other terms, we risk continuing to provide medications needing refrigeration to people without refrigerators.

Kayla Roney-Smith, Executive Director of the Hazel Park Promise Zone and College Access Network, attended the “Families First for 100 Years” community forum at Wayne State in Detroit. Here, Roney-Smith shares what major lessons she took from the event.

New Research Supports Proven Two-Gen Strategy

August 3, 2015 — There is no doubt that the Earned Income Tax Credit is one of Michigan’s most effective two-generation program strategies. It is proven to not only help working parents, but lifts more children out of poverty than any other public program and it improves their health and education outcomes. Helping families, it also helps communities by stimulating local economies. A sound investment for sure, based on research and evidence.

Now, there is new research pointing to its heavy lifting for moving more people out of poverty in ways greater than previously thought. The research, reported by the Center for Budget for Policy Priorities, points to impressive results in increasing employment and reducing welfare use for single mothers. In one study of single mothers (ages 24-48) with children and no college degree, researches found the number of such families lifted out of poverty nearly doubled due to the impact of the EITC. Sounds like a strategy worthy of investment?

Despite its proven effectiveness, the state EITC is on the list of funding sources that could be redirected from helping children and families and toward fixing Michigan’s miserable roads. This was a bad idea when it was raised in the dog days of the previous state Legislature, then becoming a cornerstone of the May 5 Proposal 1 campaign which opposed cutting EITC to fix roads, and it’s a bad idea yet again.

While Michigan’s EITC isn’t as sizeable as it once was, it is certainly true that combined with the federal credit – which amounts to $6,242 for families with three or more children — it helps supplement low-wage earners and makes a real difference in many households.

Overall, there are 820,000 families with 1 million children who benefit from the state’s EITC and many are single parents. Working full-time at minimum wage, a single parent with two children receives a tax credit of about $300 annually. Again, it wouldn’t be viewed as a windfall to someone in the middle- and upper-income groups, but it can amount to a full paycheck for the working poor.

Several years ago, the state’s EITC was more substantial, but in 2011 the then-new Snyder administration cut the credit from 20 percent to 6 percent of the federal EITC rate, effectively raising $285 million in taxes from the state’s lowest wage earners. Today, the average Michigan EITC return amounts to $143. Despite the cut in the state rate, the current state EITC alone keeps 7,000 working families out of poverty and helps all receiving families with basic needs or debt repayment.

Able to keep more of their earnings, families who qualify tend to spend more of their income on basic necessities, such as housing, child care and transportation, spreading those funds among local businesses and services, thereby strengthening local economies, as well. For a married couple with two children and adjusted gross income of $16,300, they would receive a federal EITC of $5,372 and a state EITC of $322. A single parent with two children and an adjusted gross income of $30,000 would receive a federal EITC of $2,741 and a Michigan EITC of $164.

In this case, what’s good for local working families is good for communities and the state overall. So, how can you help?

  • • Talk to your elected lawmakers and urge them to continue to invest in the Michigan EITC and help keep more dollars in the pockets of working families who need them most.
  • • Employ the facts, using important data available about Michigan’s EITC and emerging research.
  • • And use your own observations about your community and its residents in stating your case. Every community is different and you know best the struggles faced by families around you in making ends meet.
  • • Most of all, remember that public policy decisions require public input. Local lawmakers rely on hearing from constituents like you to help make up their minds about decisions like the EITC.

 

Other resources:

Save Our EITC

An analysis of the Earned Income Tax Credit by the Michigan Office of Revenue and Tax Analysis, Michigan Department of Treasury (February 2015)

‘’Understanding the Impact of the State EITC infographic, the Community Economic Development Association of Michigan”

 

— Teri Banas is a communications consultant working with Michigan’s Children.

Goal Setting=Good; Investing Toward Goals Starting Now=Better

May 26, 2015 – Last week the new State Superintendent-elect and the Education Trust Midwest announced new educational goal-setting priorities in Michigan. The purpose of these new state efforts is to improve educational outcomes that in recent years have moved further and further away from the most successful states. The new educational goal-setting priorities aim to put Michigan back on a trajectory that will lead to more success for our kids, schools and communities.

Statewide goals for improving education?  Great, let’s give that another try. There have been many state and federal goals for improving educational outcomes over the years – most recently, those goals have come with both carrots and sticks for the schools and communities who serve those lowest performing students. The Ed Trust’s Michigan Achieves initiative suggests that we continue some current efforts that have shown success, and that we also take a closer look at the efforts of states who have better outcomes than we do.  And the new Superintendent publicly agrees.

A great step, right? You set a goal for improvement, and then you shift your program investments to be able to meet that goal. Michigan’s Children is all in. As I’ve certainly said too many times to count, we absolutely know what it takes to improve educational and other life outcomes for children, youth and families. We have decades of research, we have innovative and effective practice from other states and from within our own. What we have not had is appropriate investment in what works to improve equity in these outcomes.

Relatedly, members of Congress introduced a bill that would require the U.S. to set goals for reducing child poverty – similar to what took place in the U.K. over the past several years with impressive results. The impact of economic insecurity on the well-being of children, youth and families can not be overstated. Research has shown that poverty (particularly extreme poverty and living in poverty for many years) is tied with nearly every negative outcome. Everyone from all ends of the political spectrum recognizes this. Some members of Congress are suggesting that instead of wringing our hands and continuing to pay for the consequences of those outcomes, we set a goal and move to change the situation.

What really struck me here was the intimate connection between these two goals – the clearest path to better economic security is educational success, so we won’t reach the poverty goal without focusing on the education goal. In addition, we are unlikely to move the needle on educational goals without tackling challenges that families face outside of the school building, day and year as well.

Let’s start now, in the current budget conversation. There are stark differences in state budget proposals that will be decided on by small numbers of legislators over the next few weeks. Three that we’ve pulled out that will take us closer to both goals:

  1. Investment in 3rd grade reading. The Senate included additional investments in 3rd grade reading success. Particularly important for equity is the Senate recommendation for $10 million to expand learning opportunities for the most challenged kids. This isn’t enough (we’ll be going for at least $50 million moving forward), but it is certainly a start.
  2. Investments in the most challenged kids, schools and communities. The Senate included an additional $100 million to fund programs specifically for learners with identified barriers. The House didn’t include this increase.
  3. Investments in family literacy. We will not reach either poverty or education goals if we don’t make sure that every parent can assist every child as their first and best teacher. With 34,000 young adults in Michigan (ages 18-34) without even a 9th grade education we need more investment. The Senate included an increase in the adult education program, while the House eliminated it all together.

Let’s keep talking. Moving beyond the current budget year, our Legislature and Congressional Delegation need to prioritize many supports for the most challenged, including: services that prevent later problems like child abuse and neglect prevention, home visiting support and Early On; services that improve outcomes for young people in the state’s care through the Foster Care and Juvenile Justice systems and their families; and services that best support college and career success like early learning, expanded learning, family literacy and integrated student services.

Let’s talk about setting goals and let’s keep working to meet them.

— Michele Corey

Supporting Michigan’s Poorest Families with Young Children from Birth to Age Three

Last week, the U.S. Census Bureau released its 2012 data on poverty rates across the country and the data was bleak for Michigan.  While our child poverty rate did not increase from the previous year, it remained stagnant, demonstrating that children and families continue to struggle during Michigan’s economic “recovery”.  One out of four Michigan children continue to live in poverty and we know that even higher shares of our young children from birth to age three are more likely to be living in poverty than older children.  What’s even more dire are that young children of color are still more likely to be living in poverty than white children.  The consequences of childhood poverty – particularly in the first few years of life – have long been established and we know that the outcomes are not acceptable.  With racial and economic disparities in cognitive achievement (aka the beginnings of the achievement gap) emerging as young as nine months of age, focusing on prevention efforts that mitigate the harmful effects of poverty are essential to ensuring that children are ready for school and life.

Business leaders and economists have become particularly effective advocates for high quality early childhood programming.  The Children’s Leadership Council of Michigan played a vital role in securing Michigan’s $65 million expansion of the Great Start Readiness preschool program (GSRP).  Nationally, a group of business leaders organized by ReadyNation is carrying a similar message in Washington, DC.  And earlier this week at the ReadyNation Summit, Nobel Laureate economist James Heckman presented on the return on investment from high quality early childhood programming and reiterated that the greatest returns are seen from programs that start the earliest – programs that are targeted prenatally and during the infant and toddler stages.

Michigan is well poised to support its lowest-income young learners.  We can do so by maximizing our GSRP investment to reap the greatest return by bolstering our efforts that begin before four years of age.  We already have the infrastructure in place to expand voluntary home visiting services, thanks to the federal Maternal, Infant, Early Childhood Home Visiting program and Public Act 291 which requires the state to only support evidence-based or promising home visiting programs that are backed by research.  Now, we must focus on expanding home visiting services to reach more of Michigan’s very challenged families, since we know that home visiting programs not only provide significant benefits for young children in terms of their healthy development and learning but also supports parents on a path towards economic stability.  Furthermore, we have the infrastructure to bolster our child care program through Great Start to Quality – the state’s Quality Rating and Improvement System.  Continued efforts to strengthen the child care subsidy system can ensure that parents can maintain stable employment to support their families while supporting children’s learning and development in high quality child care settings.  These are two clear tools that Michigan can better utilize to mitigate the harmful consequences of poverty that, as James Heckman has said, provide the greatest return on taxpayer dollar.  So what are we waiting for?

-Mina Hong

Child Abuse Prevention Month ≈ Month of the Young Child

This month, child advocates across the country are promoting awareness around two very important issues.  April marks the national Child Abuse Prevention Month and the Month of the Young Child.  Coincidentally, these two topics have a lot of overlap since young children are more likely to be victims of abuse or neglect than older children, particularly infants.  In fact, almost 5,000 Michigan babies were determined to be victims of maltreatment in 2011 according to the latest Michigan Kids Count Data Book.  And unfortunately in Michigan, child maltreatment has been on the rise since 2005, mainly through the rise of neglect cases.  This is directly correlated to Michigan’s rising child poverty rates as evidenced by data – young children under the age of five who are receiving food assistance has also been on the rise from 24 percent in 2005 to 37 percent in 2011.

Unfortunately in Michigan, much of this rise in child maltreatment has been the result of the state’s disinvestment in family support programs.  Ensuring that families have the supports they need to provide a safe, healthy, and nurturing home environment is a strategy that improves outcomes for children, particularly those most challenged by their circumstances.  However insufficient access to basic needs like adequate employment, housing, food, clothing, and health care have resulted in unacceptable disparities in family and child well-being that continue to grow over a child’s life, including child maltreatment.

The good news is that the best time to prevent child maltreatment is to target families with young children.  Child maltreatment typically results from parents who struggle to adequately provide for their children physically, mentally, developmentally, and emotionally.  Supports like home visiting programs and other child abuse prevention programs give parents the tools they need to provide a nurturing and safe home environment to be their child’s first and best teacher while saving taxpayer dollars.  But as a state, we have struggled to provide these critical supports.  While funding to comply with the Children’s Rights Settlement has increased support to foster care and child protective services, funding to support child abuse/neglect prevention has not kept pace.  At the same time, Michigan has put additional stress on the lowest-income families with stricter lifetime limits to the Family Independence cash assistance program, reductions in the Earned Income Tax Credit, almost complete elimination of the clothing allowance for Michigan’s poorest children, and stricter eligibility requirements to access the Food Assistance Program.  Pulling out critical safety net programs from under Michigan’s most challenged families has a detrimental impact on the well-being of young children and increases the already unacceptable disparities in child outcomes.  Reversing some of the damaging changes to basic needs programs while expanding access to child abuse prevention programs are essential to ensure that all children are safe, healthy, and ready to succeed in school and life.

As part of Child Abuse Prevention Month, the Michigan Children Trust Fund is hosting its annual Prevention Awareness Day on Tuesday, April 16th on the Michigan Capitol Steps.  This event is a time to recognize Child Abuse Prevention Month and honor all the children and families in our state.  It’s also a great time for child welfare advocates across the state to talk to legislators about the importance of prevention programs and basic needs programs and how they benefit your family and your community.  As legislators negotiate the state budget for the upcoming fiscal year, hearing about the immediate family and child benefits as well as the long-term savings to the state that child abuse prevention programs provide is critical.  Equally important for legislators to hear about are the detrimental child outcomes that result from family stressors related to income insecurity, inadequate health care, and the like.  Will you take part in Prevention Awareness Day activities on behalf of Michigan’s most vulnerable children?

More information about Prevention Awareness Day is available on the Children’s Trust Fund website.

-Mina Hong

Will We Let Michigan Fall Off the Cliff?

The elections now seem like a distant past as talk of the federal “fiscal cliff” has taken over the media.  While the political showdown in Washington, D.C. may seem like typical hoopla, folks in Michigan should care about the looming fiscal cliff.  Why, you ask?

This so-called fiscal cliff would result in a significant increase in taxes you will pay while at the same time reducing spending for critical children and family programs (and other non-entitlement programs) through automatic sequestration – aka across the board cuts to federal programs.  While neither Republicans nor Democrats want to see the U.S. go over the fiscal cliff, the two parties have different perspectives on how to battle the expiring tax cuts while cutting spending at the same time.  So why does this matter to Michigan children and families?

We know that Michigan families have been harder hit by the recession than the rest of the country with the percent of Michigan children living in poverty having increased by 64% since 2000.  Now, nearly one out of four Michigan children live in poverty and the statistics are worse for children of color.  The connection to the federal fiscal cliff?  So many programs that protect child well-being during times of hardship will be jeopardized, and in fact, many of these programs are likely to see cuts.  The question that will be debated is by how much?

It’s also important to realize just how reliant Michigan is on federal funding.  In the current fiscal year, federal dollars support 41% of Michigan’s total state budget.  For the Michigan Department of Community Health and Department of Human Services budgets – departments that support Michigan’s most struggling children and families – federal dollars support 64% and 82% of these budgets respectively.  While Michigan’s education system is less reliant on the federal budget, federal funding supports most of the education programs that work to reduce the achievement gap – an achievement gap that begins early and grows over time.

Some of the federally funded programs that may see significant funding cuts if a balanced approach isn’t taken to tackle the fiscal cliff including the following.

  • The Maternal and Child Health Block Grant and Community Health Centers both fund a large percent of Michigan’s preventive health programs for children and families.
  • LIHEAP and the Community Services Block Grant support low-income families with basic needs like heating, housing, and nutrition.
  • Head Start, Early Head Start and the Child Care and Development Block Grant promote school readiness while supporting struggling families.
  • 21st Century Community Learning Centers and Title I target school districts with high percentages of students at-risk of school failure by supporting equity promoting education programs like high quality after school programming and high school dropout prevention efforts.
  • The Workforce Investment Act for Youth engages disconnected young people to education and workforce opportunities.

All of these programs are critical in Michigan and all are in jeopardy if the federal deficit reducing solution isn’t fair and balanced.  Talking to the people who represent your interests in Washington, DC about the importance of these programs to you, your families and your communities is essential.  You can find out who your Congressperson is, as well as contact information for members of Congress and the U.S. Senate, on our website.

-Mina Hong

A Double Whammy

$492. That’s the maximum monthly Family Independence Program (FIP) benefit for a family of three in Michigan. However, between September of last year and February, more than 46,000 kids lost cash assistance due to Michigan’s new time limit.

$432. That may not sound like a lot to some people, but $432 was the average amount of the Michigan Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for low-income families in 2011. Nearly 800,000 households claimed the EITC in 2011, or 19 percent of all households in the state of Michigan.

Furthermore, according to data from the Michigan Department of Treasury in 2011:

  • The average federal adjusted gross income (AGI) of a Michigan EITC filer was approximately $17,000;
  • Over half of all filers had an AGI of $15,000 or less, meaning that many were making a wage below the poverty level;
  • Nearly 7 out of 10 filers claimed at least one child exemption; and
  • The average filer claiming 2 children had an MI EITC of $657.

However, due to action taken in 2011, the state EITC was reduced from 20 percent of the federal EITC to just 6 percent. While it is important to keep in mind that the state EITC was saved from total elimination, this decrease in the EITC starting this year will not only hurt Michigan’s economy, but hit children and families of color the hardest, since households of color tend to have lower income than their White counterparts and are more likely to live in poverty.  According to Kids Count in Michigan, child poverty for African American kids is fully three times that of White children, and poverty rates for Hispanic children are more than twice the rates for Whites.

As evidenced by data published by the Michigan League for Human Services on their EITC website, the state EITC put over $349 million back into the state’s economy. However, with tax changes in 2011, that figure will drop to an estimated $104 million and the average amount received for each family will drop to approximately $132. This is just 30 percent of what families received in 2011 and effectively a tax increase on low-income families…and for families already struggling to make ends meet, this could prove dire.

Furthermore, according to data from the report, the top five House and Senate districts hardest hit by this change were from areas that are predominately African American communities in Southeast Michigan. However, particularly for the Senate, once you move out of top five districts hardest hit by these changes, the next five areas are places that have high concentrations of people of color in West Michigan, Flint and Saginaw. This means that communities in Southeast Michigan, West Michigan and elsewhere stand to lose millions of dollars that were used to help families and drive the local economy.

Therefore, by cutting the EITC, not only will families have less money to put back into their local economy, but families and children living in low-income families will face even more economic hardship. And with approximately 86,000 EITC filers earning less than $5,000 in 2011, some of whom may have lost, or are threatened with the loss of cash assistance benefits, we are once again hurting those who are already hurting the most, and children in these families will be hardest hit. Not only will families see a reduced EITC amount, but they may also be losing cash assistance each month that is used to cover basic needs such as clothing, housing, and utilities. This double loss of assistance to parents and children may prove detrimental in the long run as children who grow up in poverty are more likely to live in poverty as adults. As Governor Snyder aims to reduce child poverty, eliminating cash assistance benefits for thousands of children and simultaneously reducing the MI EITC is no way to accomplish this goal.

-Jacqui Broughton

Hearings on Deaf Ears?

On October 1, 2011 over 11,000 families and nearly 30,000 children were removed from the state’s Family Independence Program (FIP) caseload in Michigan. However, a federal judge ordered a temporary injunction halting these cuts saying that the state did not give enough notice to the families being removed from cash assistance of the state’s intent to remove them. On November 1, 2011 however, approximately 40,000 people lost their cash assistance, which averaged just over $500 a month, just as the cold weather moves in and the holiday season is upon us.

It is possible for families to appeal their loss of benefits and receive a hearing to look into it. This sounds as if some families may be given the chance to at least understand the rationale as to why they have lost assistance, or even have the decision to cut off their assistance overturned. However, with so many appeals coming in, the Department of Human Services (DHS) has taken to reviewing cases this week—over 500 cases a day, under a “rocket docket” approach.

While it is a nice gesture to allow families to appeal their case closure, doing so in such a rapid manner gives families a false sense of empowerment and does not allow for real answers for families that are already wondering how to pay rent next month.

The timing on this couldn’t be worse. While the October 1 deadline missed the start of the school year, the loss in cash assistance benefits for so many children and families comes just as the temperatures fall. In addition, unemployment remains high, wages remain stagnant and in turn, the poverty rate continues to rise. Unfortunately, this means that communities of color, and therefore, children of color, will be hit hardest by losing assistance.

In Michigan, the African American unemployment rate has been more than double that of whites and many of those who are unemployed have children who depend on their income, or lack thereof. This goes hand in hand with data from DHS which states that of all children who were slated to lose assistance, approximately 90 percent are children of color. Families, and children in those families will be pushed even deeper into poverty and it has been shown time and time again that childhood poverty has a direct negative impact on future outcomes. This fact is striking across every racial/ethnic group, but particularly among children of color.

As people look for assistance in their community, United Way 2-1-1 call centers, a resource families were originally directed to check into, may be bearing the brunt of it. While this will place more stress on agencies that are already stretched to the bone, ranging from workforce development agencies to homeless shelters, working with 2-1-1 and other community partners may be the best way to figure out how this devastating policy changes will impact families once their cases have been closed.

-Jacqui Broughton

© 2018 Michigan's Children | 215 S. Washington Sq, Suite 110, Lansing, MI 48933 | 517-485-3500 | Contact Us | Levaire