Think Tank Grades DHHS Intake Employee, Process Revealed in Second Undercover Video
PORTLAND - The Maine
Heritage Policy Center (MHPC) has extensively reviewed the latest
undercover video of an intake coordinator at Maine's Department of
Health and Human Services Portland office, released today by
videographer James O'Keefe. The Think Tank is giving the employee mixed
grades. The video can be seen here.
"This latest tape gives us a better
perspective of the welfare intake process," said MHPC Chief Executive
Officer Lance Dutson. "The Portland employee was far more in command of
the intake process than a DHHS employee at the Biddeford office shown in
an earlier video, which helps us examine the welfare process more
closely. The intake culture is far too focused on getting people into
the system, and this is something that clearly needs to change."
MHPC broke the interview down into four categories:
1- Training/ Program Knowledge
Grade: A -
In contrast to the first video, the employee who was secretly filmed by an actor in the Portland DHHS office was obviously very well trained and knowledgeable of Maine's vast welfare bureaucracy and eligibility requirements.
In contrast to the first video, the employee who was secretly filmed by an actor in the Portland DHHS office was obviously very well trained and knowledgeable of Maine's vast welfare bureaucracy and eligibility requirements.
Despite making some clear errors in her explanation of Medicare vs. Medicaid, this employee was able to appropriately articulate the processes and programs available to applicants for welfare services.
2- Efficiency
Grade: D
Similar to the process shown in the video of Biddeford DHHS employees, the length of time spent-nearly one hour-with this likely ineligible welfare applicant was excessively long. DHHS should train intake coordinators to ask simple means-test questions at the beginning of these interviews, to be able to efficiently and honestly process applicants. This interview should have ended in 5 minutes, after the DHHS employee was told the potential applicant could afford to purchase his own private health insurance. Also, once the applicant established that he had access to a bank account with $250,000 in it, and that he had a debit card that he could use "any time" for "anything he needed", it should have become clear to the employee that this applicant was not someone who needed state assistance.
Similar to the process shown in the video of Biddeford DHHS employees, the length of time spent-nearly one hour-with this likely ineligible welfare applicant was excessively long. DHHS should train intake coordinators to ask simple means-test questions at the beginning of these interviews, to be able to efficiently and honestly process applicants. This interview should have ended in 5 minutes, after the DHHS employee was told the potential applicant could afford to purchase his own private health insurance. Also, once the applicant established that he had access to a bank account with $250,000 in it, and that he had a debit card that he could use "any time" for "anything he needed", it should have become clear to the employee that this applicant was not someone who needed state assistance.
3- Stewardship of Taxpayer Funds
Grade: C
The DHHS employee took precautions to
outline the specific parameters for an applicant to receive taxpayer
funded services. By drawing these clear lines, the employee set an
appropriate standard for eligibility, which is conducive to guarding
against abuse of scarce welfare funds. The employee also spoke frankly
to the applicant about the perils of unreported income, noting that it
would be detrimental to their social security benefits in the long-term.
In stark contrast to the Biddeford employee, who twice told the
applicant that unreported income is not a factor in application for
welfare benefits, this Portland employee made it clear that all income,
cash or not, needs to be declared during the application process.
However,
the employee provided far more detail than was necessary for an
applicant that had already identified sufficient means. The interview
should have been cut short on the basis that means were available, and
that welfare services should be a last resort. This interaction is less
indicative of poor performance by an employee, and more indicative of a
system with inappropriate goals. The overall goal of DHHS employees
should be to help Maine's less fortunate get on their feet through
employment opportunities, and not lead them toward long-term dependence
on the welfare system.
4- Fraud Vulnerability
Grade: D
Though
the DHHS employee was articulate and had a strong command of
bureaucratic parameters, the interview could have opened the door for
future fraudulent activity. The employee, through her thorough
explanation of eligibility requirements and the intake process,
effectively coached the applicant on the best way to answer questions in
order to receive benefits. The applicant left the interview with advice
from the employee that removing his name from his parents $250,000 bank
account was "one way to get around it."
In the case of the Biddeford tape, the applicant presented a clear picture of illegal dealings through his "offshore pharmaceutical imports" operation. In the case of this latest tape, however, the scenario of a drug dealing cash-rich applicant wasn't laid out so plainly. The concern for the applicant perpetrating fraud would naturally have been less in the Portland scenario. Nevertheless, DHHS employees should take precaution that they are not providing advice that could be used as part of future attempts to defraud the system.
"This
investigation shows how a 'Secret Shopper' program, used extensively in
the private sector to improve employee performance, could be an
effective tool in reforming our welfare intake process." Dutson said.
"While the first video released showed a clear breakdown in the function
of front-line DHHS processes, this video provides examples of both good
and bad practices that should be used as educational tools for DHHS
employees."
MHPC
has offered a series of suggestions to the LePage Administration to
help improve the efficiency of the welfare intake system, as well as
protect against fraud. One suggestion was to establish a 'Secret
Shopper' program, to monitor employee performance. In addition, MHPC has
urged Maine DHHS to adopt diversion programs, to make employment and
self-sufficiency a primary goal, as well as strict penalties for
fraudulent activity by welfare recipients and DHHS employees.
"We
have seen both through our years of research, and this recent
investigation that the primary goal of DHHS has been to enroll
applicants into the system," continued Dutson. "In order to stem the
out-of-control increase in welfare dependency, we must fundamentally
change the DHHS culture to one focused on getting Mainers back on their
feet. It's critical we constantly audit our processes to ensure
taxpayer funds are not being wasted or abused, while at the same time
advance reforms to free Maine families from welfare dependency."