MINNESOTA. I. Introduction to the State

Transcription

1 MINNESOTA I. Introduction to the State A. Highlights The State of Minnesota has several powerful information systems available to departments serving public assistance clients. The two largest statewide systems are MAXIS and MMIS. Though the systems are fairly new (MAXIS is the older system, having been phased-in seven years ago), they were originally designed to interface with existing older state and county systems, rather than to interface directly with each other, and this fact has presented some problems for the state. After the implementation of welfare reform, the systems were reconfigured to interface with each other, and this reconfiguration process has been problematic. Given the unique nature of administrative data reporting protocols in Minnesota, efforts are underway to improve communication links between these two very important systems. Currently, while data from individual systems can easily be extracted for reporting purposes, it is very difficult to retrieve information that requires data extracts from any combination of the two systems. On a positive note, this problem is expected to be rectified by the next fiscal year. Before MAXIS and MMIS were reconfigured to interface with each other, it was not possible to do total data extractions without causing major time delays within primary systems. With the upcoming system overhauls, it will be possible to provide real-time retrieval of administrative data across systems. As mentioned above, reporting protocols in the state of Minnesota are unique in that state agencies set policy, make rules, monitor local practice, and offer technical assistance. Counties, on the other hand, have the major responsibly for service delivery, whether it is offered by county employees or contracted out. Counties have the ability to decide how to organize caseloads for social services and how to collect data; this fact presents some difficulty in linking administrative data. The social service programs organized at the state level include TANF, Food Stamps, Medicaid Eligibility, and Child Support Services. The programs organized at the county level are Foster Care, the new JOBS program, and Child Abuse and Neglect. Statistical information generated at the county level are reported to the state monthly. In Minnesota, there are several information systems operated by most of the counties. These systems are SSIS and CSIS. Because protocols, functions, and program monitoring capabilities are not consistent among Minnesota s 87 counties, these systems have not been discussed in detail for the purpose of this report. However, where data from these subsidiary system are obtainable by state master systems, it will be noted. B. Demographics and Caseload Descriptions The population of Minnesota was 4.7 million in Minnesota has a relatively high percentage of youth under 18 years of age (26.8% in 1996), ranking the state eleventh overall. Minnesota possesses some of the best health statistics in the country, with very low infant

2 mortality rates (7.0/1,000 live births in 1994) and births to teenage mothers (8.5% in 1996). Minnesota s poverty rate is below the national average, with 9.2% of the population living below the federal poverty level in The percentage of the population receiving public assistance was 5.4 in 1994, ranking thirty-fifth out of the 50 states. Reports from the Department of Human Services indicate that the actual number of public aid recipients is dropping due both to changes in the welfare program and to a significant upturn in the state s economy. The information contained in this report was obtained through interviews with several key individuals working in the state departments of Human Services, Economic Security, and Medicaid. All interviews were conducted in the spring and fall of II. Data Systems for Social Program A. Names of Data Systems AFDC/TANF Food Stamps Medicaid Eligibility JOBS Medicaid Claims Child Abuse Foster Care Child Support Unemployment Insurance MAXIS (this is an automatic cash eligibility system and the front end for county administered systems). MAXIS MMIS (Minnesota Medicaid Information System) MAXIS (some functions) County-operated Programs MMIS County-operated Programs County-operated Program Providing Resources to Improve Support in Minnesota (PRISM) Re-employment Insurance Claims Data System B. Description of Data Systems MAXIS MAXIS is an online automated system used for a variety of human service programs for Minnesotans. MAXIS automates eligibility determination, benefits calculation and issuance, and case management for the TANF, Food Stamp, General Assistance, Emergency Assistance, Minnesota Supplemental Aid, and Refugee Assistance programs. The system also provides eligibility and case management for the Medicaid and General Assistance Medical Care programs and serves as a data entry system for Minnesota Care, the state s medical insurance program for the working poor and low-income residents. This system is also used to track any transition of participants between programs.

3 MAXIS is maintained by the Department of Human Services (DHS) and is accessible by all human services caseworkers in Minnesota s 87 counties, as well as DHS state employees. MAXIS was initially developed in Vermont, expanded in Rhode Island before being transferred to South Dakota, and finally to Minnesota. Before MAXIS was introduced statewide in 1991, the state relied on several county-based information systems for statistical reporting. The inconsistency in information reporting resulted in federal quality control sanctions. With statewide program development, MAXIS has introduced greater efficiency of county eligibility caseworkers. Other specific benefits that the implementation of a statewide system include: consistency in the application of program policy across 87 counties; reduction in AFDC, Food Stamp, and Medicaid overpayments; simplification of the assistance application process through the use of a combined application form; reduction in routine paperwork; better connectivity between the counties and the Department of Human Services (DHS); and better interfaces with other systems (e.g., Child Support (PRISM) and SSIS). MAXIS generates a nine-digit unique identifier that is provided to counties. There is a great deal of information that is routinely collected by this system, including Social Security number, case references number, first and last names, date of birth, sex, race ethnicity, tribal affiliation, and a geographic code consisting of either a zip code or Indian Reservation territory code. Please note that this information is obtained by the state through the efforts of county employees; when data are absent, it is due to a lack of reporting by county intake offices. Other information routinely collected by MAXIS are: the monthly TANF grant amount, size of household, eligible/ineligible members of the unit, participation in job training, reasons for exiting from aid, work activity (including the number of hours worked per week), educational activities, educational attainment level, and earnings data. All state systems capture this information, but the information is not necessarily retrievable by all systems. In the case of MAXIS, all relevant identifiers are retrievable by data extracts. Although data extracts are possible in MAXIS, they are not routinely performed because the data are stored to maximize efficiency for online retrieval, rather than reporting. It is hoped that in the next few month the problem will be rectified. The database architecture is longitudinal, and no cross-sectional extracts are possible. Information in the system dates to September Real-time changes are recorded and available as they are entered. All records are organized at the person level. To date, no data are ever overwritten, and archiving of files has not begun (except notices for 1995 and older). Currently, no data are lost after archiving, but as the state is currently changing protocols for ease of extract and report-generating functions, this procedure may change. MAXIS s database is the population of everyone who has applied for state or federal/state aid since 1991, and this database is approximately 120 gigabytes. Currently, MAXIS has approximately 400,000 to 500,000 records in its active database. The geographical area covered is the entire state of Minnesota, with the smallest geographic identifier being the zip code.

4 The system uses ADA-BAS software and operates on a 3090 model 920 IBM-MVS. MAXIS supports approximately 7,500 personal computers, including 2,500 that are county-operated. Employees in the county-operated child support program have full access to this system, as do medical assistance workers and all fraud control supervisors. Information from MAXIS is batched processed weekly to send to county-operated social service systems, including SSIS. Nightly batch processing is provided to both MMIS and PRISM. Universities and other researchers may obtain access to the data only if a data privacy agreement is in place with the state. There are no public use files, but requests for anonymized data should be directed to the reports and forecasts division of the Department of Human Services. Minnesota Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS) The first Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS I) began operation at the Department of Human Services (DHS) in In the late 1980s, MMIS I was deemed to be at risk because the technology used in the system was out of date and difficult to maintain and upgrade. There were also concerns about the inability of the system to provide the necessary summary information and reports to effectively manage the programs administered with the system. In May 1994, MMIS II was implemented, though some planned features were not functional until Key staff indicated that MMIS II has enabled DHS to save money through increased operational efficiency, and allowed DHS staff to handle increased transaction volumes without hiring additional staff. MMIS is used to process Medicaid, Minnesota Care (the state s insurance program for lowincome residents), and General Assistance claims, and to determine participant eligibility (in conjunction with MAXIS). The system is maintained by the Department Human Services. MMIS uses an eight-digit, randomly assigned Medicaid identification number (generated by MAXIS) to identify cases within its records. Social Security numbers for all individuals in a case are maintained in MMIS. The system contains case numbers that may become common to other statewide systems, but extracts based on the Social Security number are not routinely available. Other data routinely collected by this systems are: first and last name of all claimants, date of birth, sex, mailing and residence address, tribal affiliation, zip codes, and race. No data in this system are overwritten unless they are determined to be in error. Three years of claims data are maintained online. After that time, the data are purged from the online system but are readily accessible on tape, and demographic data are maintained in the historical file. Archived records are stored for ten years.

5 Data from this system are routinely shared with MAXIS, PRISM, CSIS, and SSIS. Providers have call-up capability to determine date-of-service eligibility. Access to outside researchers is usually not granted unless specifically contracted by the state. Re-employment Insurance Claims Data System -- Unemployment Insurance Wage Record System The Re-Employment Insurance Claims Data System is maintained by the Department of Economic Security. The identification number of individual wage earners for this system is the Social Security number, with a three-digit identifier used to identify the year the claim was filed, geographic area, and the specific office. All employers are identified by a ten-digit employer account number. Individual earning records in this system include the employer identification number, which is the Employer s Federal Identification Number. This system routinely collects duration of employment, wage record, education level, occupational codes, veteran status, county, and the community within a county (city). The system collects four years of wage detail, but only the last six quarters are available online. Queries to this system are made against the Social Security number. Records are archived to tape monthly, and records extend back to the early 1980s. Data are routinely exchanged with human services systems, the Internal Revenue Service, Child Support Enforcement, and some NGOs contracted to provide employment development services to public assistance recipients. The Re-employment Insurance Claims Data System has a database that is relational for employment information and can be downloaded by quarters, but this process can be very timeconsuming. Some cross-sectional extractions are possible. Files are updated daily, and a weekly routine report is downloaded and made available to those agencies requiring this information. Providing Resources to Improve Support in Minnesota (PRISM) PRISM is operated by the state Department of Child Support Enforcement and is a case management and financial management system for the enforcement of child support. The system was piloted in July 1997, and went statewide in October of that same year. PRISM replaced a statewide system that did not meet the requirements of the Family Support Act of The system operates on a mainframe IBM 3090, and is accessible by state workers through desktop PCs. The data architecture used is relational, and data are obtainable online in real time. Caseworkers may also access this system from home using a dial-in procedure. This allows caseworkers to maintain accurate data for employees working in the office, allowing for current, accurate information on individual cases. PRISM uses a unique client identification number that is generated by PRISM. This number is not the same as the identification number used by other statewide systems. PRISM receives

6 information (batched nightly) from MAXIS, MMIS, Department of Pubic Safety (DMV), Department of Revenue, and Economic Security. PRISM cross references with these other systems by use of the Social Security number and name, and some other identifying information. Cases consist of the custodial parent, the noncustodial parent, and the child. Custodial parent could potentially have multiple case numbers, depending on the number of identified fathers or children. The client identification number is a 10-digit unique number that is the same as the individual identification number, followed by two digits to indicate the number of cases that may be attached to the custodial parent. Other information collected includes physical descriptions of the noncustodial parent and other useful demographic information. Information from PRISM interfaces with the Department of Economic Security in order to obtain employment and wage information on noncustodial parents. This information is sent in the form of a batch process nightly. There is a hierarchy of who owns the information and how reliable this information from other sources may be. Thus, PRISM verifies information based on a number of identifying elements. This hierarchy will determine if data are automatically updated. The only information routinely deleted from system is information from the caseworker s worklist. The worklist is a list of tasks that are performed by a caseworker, and this information is deleted as it is completed. No archiving has occurred in PRISM, as the system is very new. To date, all data are saved, and no data have been purged from the system. Over the next two years, PRISM will be changed to meet the requirements of welfare reform. Changes include Financial Institution Data Match interface, Federal Case Registry interface, and changes to accommodate Native American Tribal program options. No information is currently interfaced with the courts, as the child support worker acts on behalf of the courts and the child. There are plans, however, to interface with the courts in the future to meet some of the requirements of welfare reform. The following are systems that report to the state but are county-operated. Protocols vary by counties. Social Services Information System (SSIS) SSIS is a case management and data collection system for county child welfare and children s mental health workers, and will be expanded to all county social services programs. SSIS is currently under development and will be implemented in all counties in mid-1999 Community Services Information System (CSIS)

7 CSIS collects child welfare data in many counties (other counties have custom systems). Most case management functions of CSIS will be replaced by SSIS (see above); however, as the contingency system for SSIS, CSIS is currently reprogramming all codes to interface with SSIS. New JOBS Program This program is operated by the old, JTPA county-operated programs. Decisions about data elements to be captured are determined independently by the state county. Various systems are used to monitor this program, and data are sent in the form of a monthly report to the State Department of Human Services, which is then entered into the MAXIS system.

8 III. Linked Databases A. The Minnesota Family Investment Program (M-FIP) M-FIP is the welfare reform initiative developed by the state and the demonstration was launched in 1994 in the seven largest counties. M-FIP was implemented on a field trial basis on April 1, 1994, in the three urban counties of Hennepin (which includes Minneapolis), Anoka, and Dakota, and the four rural counties of Mille Lacs, Morrison, Sherbume, and Todd. In January 1998, Minnesota extended a modified version of M-FIP statewide as Minnesota s version of TANF program. M-FIP includes two components: financial incentives to encourage and support work and mandatory participation in employment-focused services for long-term welfare recipients. The program requires that employed parents be allowed to keep part of their welfare benefits while earning a salary to ensure that families are financially better off working than not working. Individuals who have received benefits for two years or more (six months under the statewide program) are required to participate in employment and training services in order to receive full benefits. Also, this program simplifies welfare rules and procedures by consolidating several programs into one. For example, instead of receiving separate Food Stamp coupons, families receive the value of Food Stamps as part of their cash welfare grant. M-FIP tracks the percentage of participants who are earning income and any reduction in cash assistance. M-FIP also tracks, at six-month intervals, the percentage of participants achieving total income above the federal poverty guidelines. This tracking continues after participants have left M-FIP. The state has contracted with the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC) to: (1) assess how M-FIP is implemented; (2) measure whether the program is meeting its stated goals; and (3) determine the program s cost-effectiveness. Throughout the program s first five years, MDRC will compare results of the existing welfare system and M-FIP as they operate side-by-side in the pilot counties. In its evaluation covering M-FIP s first 18 months, MDRC found that M-FIP substantially increased employment and earnings for long-term welfare recipients. After 18 months, the proportion of recipients in M-FIP who were employed was nearly 40 percent higher than the proportion in the AFDC programs. Because working families in M-FIP were allowed to supplement their earnings with partial welfare grants, there was a 13 percent increase in total family income and a 16 percent reduction in poverty for these families. M-FIP was not as successful for new applicants and long-term welfare recipients in rural areas. To test M-FIP against the traditional AFDC system (the predecessor program to the new TANF program), M-FIP and AFDC have been operated side-by-side in the counties under evaluation, with public assistance applicants and recipients randomly assigned to each of the two systems. The use of random assignment ensured that there were no systematic differences between the two groups members when they entered the study. Thus, any differences in outcomes, such as employment and earnings, that emerge between the M-FIP and AFDC groups during the followup period can reliably be attributed to the M-FIP program. The different outcomes between the two groups reflect the impact of M-FIP.

9 The evaluation focuses on two types of single parents who participated in the program: (1) applicants, or those participants who were applying for welfare for the first time when they entered the program, and (2) long-term recipients, or those who had been receiving welfare for two or more years when they entered the program. The primary reason for looking at applicants and long-term recipients separately is that M-FIP s mandatory activities are conditional on two years of welfare receipt. Thus, the applicants were not mandated to participate during the follow-up period for this report, while long-term recipients were required to participate immediately after entering M-FIP. Although long-term recipients are defined in this evaluation as those who received welfare for at least two years during the previous three years, this sample of long-term recipients also contains families with much longer stays on welfare. At the time they entered the study, over one-half of the long-term recipients had received welfare for at least five years, and one-fifth had received welfare for at least ten years. In addition, only one-third had worked in the year prior to random assignment. Findings To determine the effects of M-FIP compared with AFDC, the 18-month evaluation used data on employment, earnings, and welfare receipt for more than 9,000 individuals randomly assigned to M-FIP or to the traditional AFDC program from April 1, 1994, through December 31, about two-thirds of the full sample that will eventually be studied. The data are used to track the outcomes of individuals for the first 18 months after they entered the study, focusing primarily on M-FIP s effects on single-parent families. The findings, based on field observations and interviews, staff surveys, surveys of families in M- FIP and AFDC, and administrative records data, indicate that M-FIP was implemented as intended and produced important changes in the way benefits and services are provided to new welfare applicants (those applying for welfare when they entered the study) and recipients (those already receiving welfare when they entered the study). In addition, after 18 months M-FIP met its goals for single parents living in urban areas who were long-term welfare recipients when they entered the program. These individuals, who were receiving welfare for at least 24 of the prior 36 months when they entered the study, represent the most disadvantaged segment of the welfare caseload and one that has traditionally been hard to serve. To date, the results suggest that the increases in income and reductions in poverty come, in large part, from M-FIP s financial incentives. Adding a mandate to participate in employment-focused activities along with a reinforced it pays to work message is primarily responsible for generating the employment and earnings gains. Thus, it is the combination of these two policies that achieves the multiple goals of increased employment and earnings and reduced poverty for long-term recipients. Although the results so far indicate success for one group and mixed results for others, it is important to remember that these results are short-term and that the pattern of M-FIP s effects could change over time.

10 B. WorkFIRST and M-FIP-S Program Evaluation M-FIP-S is the statewide program of M-FIP (which has been piloted in seven counties since 1994), and has completely supplanted AFDC in the state as of January 1, 1998 (see discussion of M-FIP above). WorkFIRST is a program that has been piloted in two counties since November 1996 and represents the state s new JOBS program. WorkFIRST uses a welfare reform program that emphasizes immediate labor force attachment for first-time applicants to state aid. WorkFIRST operates somewhat differently in each of the 87 counties. In general, however, WorkFIRST requires nonexempt applicants to participate in immediate job search (for example, finding unsubsidized employment) and this must be done even before TANF eligibility has been determined. Preplacement and transitional support services, such as child care and transportation assistance, are made available to clients immediately and continuously to support job search, employment, and job retention. MAXIMUS is evaluating WorkFIRST and will compare it with M-FIP-S. This comparison began on January 1, 1998, and will last for five years. The purpose of the study is to assess the impact of the two different approaches to welfare policy on first-time welfare applicants in two WorkFIRST and four M-FIP-S counties. The study will determine whether there are any differences in the impact of WorkFIRST and M-FIP-S on the entry and exit of first-time applicants to welfare and on the earned income of these applicants at one-year and eighteenmonth intervals. The study will look at administrative data from several state agencies and participating counties on approximately 4,000 welfare applicants over the five years. MAXIMUS also will conduct telephone and face-to-face interviews with an estimated 2,000 clients who leave the welfare rolls, for whom administrative data may no longer be available. MAXIMUS will conduct site visits to participating county welfare agencies and contract employment services providers in order to obtain information about process and implementation issues. While on site, MAXIMUS also will conduct focus sessions with current and former welfare clients in order to obtain their perspectives on services and program policies. MAXIMUS will submit the final report to the Department of Human Service in December C. Child Support Non-Compliance Study This is a study, sponsored by the Child Support Enforcement Division, to identify the reasons for child support noncompliance in Minnesota. The project examined three major issues: the reasons why paternity does not get established in cases where paternity is an issue; the reasons why support orders do not get established; and the reasons for nonpayment of support in cases where support orders have been established. The goal of this study was to determine the number of paternities and support orders that were established and for improving the rate of collections. MAXIMUS conducted the study of a sample of 900 child support cases in which establishment or enforcement activities have been unsuccessful. The evaluation was to determine the reasons for unsuccessful case outcomes and to estimate how many cases might be successfully processed with more effective policies or approaches. MAXIMUS conducted a mail survey of 5,000

11 custodial and noncustodial parents to gather information on the barriers to successful case processing in cases requiring paternity establishment, support order establishment, and enforcement. D. Data Warehouse A data warehouse is currently being development by the Reports and Forecasts Division of the Department of Human Services. A data warehouse will allow DHS employees to customize reports to answer specific questions and those of outside agencies, rather than relying on the routine reports generated from the larger statewide systems. Funding for the development of a warehouse was granted by the Medicaid program because this program has a greater need for very specific reports that are not easily available given the current limitations of existing systems. The data warehouse will also facilitate the linking of information needed by the Evaluation Division of DHS. Data sets will be available from MAXIS, MMIS, Medicaid (county-operated system), and the Economic Security Office s system. In addition, several county-operated systems will download data sets into the warehouse. A new computing environment will then be used to make use of large client-server technology and graphic user interfaces. It is hoped that the data warehouse will also provide county workers with greater autonomy by being able to access full data sets without going through the state. Because the warehouse is being piloted, and much of the following information should be considered tentative. For the pilot, data consisted of the last three years of eligibility and claims information from MMIS. Currently, records from MAXIS and the Food Stamp program are being added. Data from the Department of Economic Security will be added over the summer. Records are organized at the person level; however, the case number from both MMIS and MAXIS will also available. The system uses a relational database and GQL (general query language), both of which are standards for most of the larger operating systems in the state. The database currently has approximately 300,000 files of individuals who have used services in the past. Full data warehouse availability will begin in E. Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE) and Welfare Reform Program Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE) is a voluntary public school program, sponsored by the Family and Children Services Division of the Department of Human Services, for all Minnesota families with children between the ages of birth and kindergarten enrollment. The program recognizes that families provide children s first and most important learning environment and parents are children s first and most significant teachers. It is the largest and oldest statewide family education program for young children and their families in the country.

12 Early Childhood Family Education combines parent education, early childhood education, and parent-child interaction in a common program. It builds on research that indicates the effectiveness of involving parents and children together in early education. Outcomes include: (1) increasing parents involvement in their children s learning and development, and (2) improving children s opportunities for success in school and life. The most recent outcome study of Early Childhood Family Education, funded by the McKnight Foundation, focused on learning more about outcomes of lower-income participants. Data for program participants was culled from the MAXIS system to ascertain level of public assistance received by individual families. The study showed that ECFE s universal access approach is effective with many different low-income families. The evaluation found that families with different characteristics exhibiting low levels of knowledge or parenting behavior demonstrated positive change. In addition, families that came with moderate or high skills maintained those skills as their children continued to grow and create new parenting demands. This outcome study revealed that both children and parents benefited from feeling they were part of the larger community and thus were able to develop ongoing social support networks. IV. Contacts Mary Arvesen, Director Information Management Services Division Department of Human Services 121 E. 7 th Place St. Paul, MN Mary.Arvesen@state.mn.us PRISM, Child Support Enforcement Gus Avenido, Manager of WorkFIRST Department of Human Services 444 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN Gus.Avenido@state.mn.us WorkFIRST Bruce Borgh, Program Coordinator Employment and Training Division Department of Economic Security 390 N. Robert Street St. Paul, MN

13 New JOBS Program John E. Berglund, Research Analysis Specialist Research and Statistics Department of Economic Security 390 N Robert Street St. Paul, MN Re-employment Insurance Claims Data System Betty Cooke, Early Childhood and Family Initiatives Specialist Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning 992 Capitol Square Building 550 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN betty.cooke@state.mn.us Child care subsidies Lois Engstrom, Supervisor of Early Childhood and Family Initiatives Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning 992 Capitol Square Building 550 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN Lois.Engstrom@state.mn.us Child care subsidies George Hoffman, Research Director Reports and Forecasts Division Department of Human Services 444 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN George.Hoffman@state.mn.us Data warehouse Joel Kvamme, Director Economic and Community Support Strategies Department of Human Services 444 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN Joel.Kvamme@state.mn.us

14 MAXIS Mary Poe, Program Administrative Manager Minnesota Medicaid Management Information System Department of Human Services 444 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN MMIS II Sharon Radman, Technical Manager Child Support Enforcement Division Department of Human Services 121 E. 7 th Place St. Paul, MN Sharon.Radman@state.mn.us PRISM, Child Support Enforcement Bob Roy Department of Economic Security 390 N Robert Street St. Paul, MN Bob.Roy@state.mn.us Re-employment Service Information System Rick Schara, Project Consultant Department of Economic Security 390 N Robert Street St. Paul, MN Rick.Schara@state.mn.us Re-employment Service Information System Kathy Tuzzolino, Technical Manager MAXIS Division Department of Human Services 444 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN Kathy.Tuzzolino@state.mn.us MAXIS