Social services seem to be in the news and a topic of conversation lately, so I looked in the phone book. If I counted correctly there are 44 social service agencies listed in Davenport. Most were what I expected; Anchorage House, Bethany Home, Bickford Cottage, Big Brothers, CASI, CADS, Cesar Chavez Center, Clarissa Cook Home, Community Action of Eastern Iowa, Community Health Care, Inc., Department of Corrections, Edgerton Woman's Health Center, Family Resources, Friendly House, Frontier Community Support, Goodwill, Handicap Development Center, Head Start, Humility of Mary Housing, Inc., Iowa East Central Train, Jaycee's, John Lewis Community Service, Junior League of the Quad Cities, Lend-A-Hand, Lutheran Service, Lydia Home Association, Meal Service, Project Renewal, Quad-Cities Interfaith, Quad-Cities Harvest, Retired Senior Volunteers Program, Salvation Army, Services for Seniors, 7th. Judicial District of Correctional Services, Socail Security Adm., Student Hunger Drive, United Neighbors, United Way, VFW Auxilliary, WIC Program, and YMCA. A couple not mentioned caught my eye- Children's Specialized Assessment and Referal Center, and the Davenport Refugee Resettlement OFC. I don't have a clue on what the last two are all about. Obviously, the Refugee Resettlement must have something to do with refugees; but are we a destination for these people? And if we are; why? As for the Children's center, I'm clueless. My next question is- do we really need any more social services? There has to be some duplication of services already I would think. And since these are, for the most part, non-profit; how much is costing us taxpayers. I didn't do the rest of the Quad Cities, but I figured most people have a phone book handy. So, when is enough, enough?
--------------Addendum-------------
I thought I would look around cyberspace to hone the search as I felt there were more than 44 Social Service organizations in Davenport. Unfortunately, I was right.
On the AOL Yellow Pages website I found 120 listings for Social Services in Davenport. Go to AOL Yellow Pages. While I was at it I thought I would also look up Non-Profit Organizations in Davenport, for the listing of 156 Non-Profit listings go to Non-Profit listings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Cruiser, I see your point in duplication of services, but I have just one question. Why are people still in need? It seems to me that the only time you woudl consider having 'too many' services is when people are no longer utilizing their services.
In America we hold so strongly to capitalism. Even more so than we do to democracy or christianity. But yet what is a fundamental problem of capitalism? In order to get to the top, you have to exploit everyone else. It is a system that focuses purely on personal needs. It ignores the needs of others. In capitalism the main goal is to make yourself rich, damn the consequences.
Yet we still wonder why people are stuck in situations that require assistance. Sure there are some people out there working the system, but they are far less than I think you assume.
fglqj
robbie,
Your right most people are after the almighty buck, and some people get screwed in the process. That's life. I do wonder why people are stuck in these situations. But I do believe you can have too much help. Ever heard homeless guys arguing over where to get the best free lunch? Ever wonder why the city condones it? And the people that do abuse the system cost us millions locally. I can think of one family that's cost us a bundle for generations. I also don't have the answers. I know there are people who need and deserve these programs; but how do you humanely separate them from the others? People alot smarter than me have said the system is broke and they don't know how to fix it either.
Robbie,
The social services are not a capitalist project. They get funding from state and federal authorities.
In fact, many have accused these non-profits of only looking to make money for the directors by obtaining as much funding as possible whether it's needed or not.
How many homeless have you sat and talked with? I have talked to many. I think a lot of them are more appreciative of our area than some citizens. The riverfront is a favorite for them. One gentleman comes through our homeless shelters every year because fall here is so beautiful. But the majority of the people I have spoken with are not even from here. This could be a coincidence. But it's a very overwhelming majority of non-natives. Why are we attracting people here to be dependent on our social services?
And should one neighborhood shoulder the burden for the whole city? the whole Quad Cities? the whole county(no other homeless shelters exist in scott county)? a large chunk of the midwest(people come from all over)? How big of a net should our city be forced to deal with?
I think the deterioration of these neighborhoods on the backdoor of our downtown business district is a hindrance to our progress. They need to be allowed to move forward so we can clean things up and be proud of our downtown.
We can be compassionate and protect our city at the same time. We just need to plan better.
I like how all of you experts can quote one person that you talked to and somehow that is supposed to representative of all. The fact is that the data provided to the city for its annual Consolidated Plan (required by HUD) shows that the vast majority of homeless are from the Quad Cities and the overwhelming number are children UNDER 17. The Quad Cities Shelter and Transitional Housing Council updates its Continuum of Care annually as required by HUD for any funding received in the whole area.
Children are not responsible for the bad decisions that their parents make and deserve a safe and warm place to rest. The data from the JLCS shelter (again required data collection) also shows that most of the folks who stay there have jobs. The social service agencies are required by ALL funders to show that they DO NOT duplicate services and that they must provide "Outcomes" data to United Way. United Way has been using this method of linking funding to measurable outcomes for many years now. The FACT is that agencies must show to the City,County,Federal Government, and any other funder that they provide a "Continuum of Care" that links services and does not duplicate.
Keep hanging on to your limited exposure, that one person that you heard of, overhearing the couple of jerks that did work the system. The dedicated people that work with those truly in need don't have time to read your ramblings, but it really isn't fair to characterize a whole group of people based on a limited view. The Snarky statement that grants are applied for to enrich directors of programs shows a real lack of practical knowledge of the requirements for any grant for any program. I'm so glad that the Lord lives in your heart, especially at this time of year.
I have to agree with snarky. Anon at 9:53, first off, I never said they spoke for all homeless. Since you seem to work for one of these Social Services; where's your numbers? I happen to know that Davenport has exactly as many Social Services listed on this site as Des Moines, which has 100,323 more people; I also know we have 32 more Social Services listed as Cedar Rapids and they have 22,399 more residents than we do. You make some points, but you forget the State is playing with our tax dollars, not their own money. The head of Health and Human Services testified before Congress the system isn't working, some of us want it changed.
Cruiser - I had a totally good rebuttle to your point about free meals when I wrote my first comment this morning. But I can't think of it now. Stupid work getting in the way of my blogging!!! If I think of it I will post again.
Snark Chicky - I am going to try and take what you said with a grain if salt since you imply that you are 'snarky.' (Sidenote - snark really seemed to explode in popularity as a word. Its way too trendy. I had to boycott its use on that principle alone.)
I never said social services were a capitalist project. I said our society is a capitalist one and that system creates an inherent need for social services because of the exploitation of the lower class. (not that any system has seemed to do much better for the low class)
I have worked for a non profit before and still volunteer my time. In my experience dealign with that group and the associated groups I have found that most all of the people involved are realyl ther to help others. Sure there are people out to make a buck, but that is not reflective of social services, that is reflective of human nature. Some people are simply out for themselves.
Let me first say this, I am not from the QC. I visit a couple times a year for variosu reasons but I have no idea of the specifics of the QC poverty/homelessness. I live in Galesburg where homelessness is a much smaller problem.
WIth that said, I still have plenty of experience dealing with people in extreme need. I recall at my time at the non profit dealing with a Katrina evacuee. His glasses were broken and he couldnt see very well. So we talked to an optometrist and he agreed to fix them for him. I drove him there and we talked a lot while we waited. But that in no way makes me an expert on Katrina victims. I dont even have 1% of the understanding of how those people had to sacrifice. Just like you talking to homeless people doesn't give you an insight on what it really means to be homeless.
We can have compassion. I applaud that. But to say we can judge these people based on our minute understanding of them is a farse. Because face it we are spending our time typign on computers while they are spending their time figuring out how to get food, shelter, and survival.
pajymsd
That's pretty much been my experience with them too windinghills. It's like when they stopped SSI payments to alcoholics and addics because they spent all they money on booze and drugs. Are the programs really helping who they're intended for? What I mean is, are the poor people any better for being in the programs? Or, are they just fed and housed.
robbie,
I think you people are missing the point. I didn't say all the poor people were using the system, just that the system is broke. This is a problem nationwide, just not in Davenport. I just can't see how you can call it exploitation when the people are getting something for nothing.
Does looking at numbers on a piece of paper give me any insight into what it's like to be homeless? Does reading a blog about problems in an area I seldom visit make me an expert on their problems? Nope.
My comments on the conversations I've had with many homeless people did not imply I was an expert either. But if the numbers from the association who would be receiving money do not match up with anecdotal evidence, doesn't that imply the data could possibly have errors? Or should we trust that our government, who can pay $500 for a toilet seat or a hammer, is doing adequate fact checking for all of us?
This is a problem that affects my city greatly. We have a large amount of money going to these non-profits. If we are not reviewing them and making sure they are accomplishing what they say they are trying to do then we are not being good citizens. In that review we should be making sure that they ARE providing information on success. Who else will look out for the homeless and less fortunate of our area to make sure they are being taken care of as promised? It's relatively easy to say, sure, take my money and take care of this and never offer a second look at whether it is carried out.
And anon - I wasn't making the implication that I believe you are attempting to raise your own salary, I was reporting what others have said numerous times in the past in response to Robbie's comments about capitalism's goal "to make yourself rich, damn the consequences." It is important to note that this capitalist attitude can be present within nonprofits, too. They may have noble intentions but they are not immune to greed.
And if it makes me an immoral person without "the Lord" in my heart to question the effectiveness of organizations using my tax dollars then so be it. I could quote you your own scripture "Judge not, that you be not judged." This began as a discussion on social programs, not any specific person and I apologize since you obviously took my remarks as a personal insult. I tend to stick to criticism of processes and programs. It's rare one person has a large enough effect to bother with personal attacks.
LOL! Yeah, I kind of got that from his posts but you know what, that's ok. I believe in debating to learn. If I didn't put my ideas out there for people to criticize I wouldn't ever learn a darn thing.
Winding hills - Nice comment. You put me between a rock and a hard place. Either a) I argue and you prove your point or b) I agree that I am what you say. So no matter what the response, I end up being someone who just argues to hear his own voice.
But as the the meat of your comment. I am a 'extreme leftist liberal' because I beleive in social services for the poor??? Well you know what then? I will proudly wear that label. If you would like to wear the label of rich, snooty, conservative a$$hole, that would be great. We can go around wearing our labels on our backs and the world will be blissful.
Believe it or not WH, not everyone is as close minded as you. Not all of us had the priveledge of knowing some poor people when we went to college. You use the same faulted logic we talked about earlier. Just because you happen to know a few people that abuse a system doesn't make it a bad system.
For instance, companies like Enron have abused the stock market. They fudged numbers in order to pump up prices and make themselves rich. But because they abused the system should we close down the Dow Jones??? Should we abolish the Nasdaq???
But yet I get the vibe that you want to end social service just because you knew a few people that were wasteful with their money. I will support social services to my dieing day because as a child I was a receiver of such services. Our family situation was bleak when I was a child and without the help we received from the government and other voluntary organizations, I could only imagine where I would be.
Now before you accuse me of using 1 instance to justify a concept, I will say this. It can go either way. Some people really benefit and some people really waste. But because of my life experience I will always err on the side of caution. (sidenote - is err even a word??? it sounded right while typing but looks all wrong on the screen)
I better stop now because apparently typing long drawn out thoughts get you called mean names on this blog...
wowth
WH - feeding Africa, I don't know. But we owe them something. Its hard to say they have brought the famine and civil strife of the last 100 years on themselves. I would have to think the european colinization had just a little bit to do with it.
Its similar to the current situation in Iraq. As much as we may want to get out and save American lives and taxpayer dollars, we have created the problem and are responsible for fixing it.
Now even though I am young, I am not naive enough to think we can simply give Africa, Iraq, poor people, or anyone else some money and hope it gets better. That proverb you quote does ring true. I am not implying that we can magically cure everyones problems. But we owe it to the poor, starving, homeless people of the world to try.
Can you honestly say you beleive in a economic, religious, social, governmental, or moral system that allows a handful of people to have more money/power/resources than most of the world??? Call me liberal, call me communist, whatever you feel like. But I still beleive in the human race's ability to help each other. I think that it is absolutely disgusting that we allow people to store millions or billions of dollars away in various tax free ways and yet there are Americans that can't afford to buy food, clothing, or shelter.
(now as soon as i come up with a perfect system to redistribute that wealth, i will let you know)
ndigk
Spoken like a truly niave social service provider 9:53. The last real study done to support the consolidated plan was called a windshield survey. It was a drive around by the social service providers (the ones who apply for the tax moeny) and they determined based upon the drive around that we here in Davenpot lack affordable decent housing. So scientific - I can handly stand it. I went to the meetings and paid attention. The cosolidaed plan meetinsg were a joke. The agencies sent as many employees as possible who in turn were given little dots by Gavin Schermer and Rita Prybl. They thne placed the dots on the areas on need. Of course the dots coincided with their agencies' services. SO, JLCS sent say 10 people and ten dots went to homeless services, and Family Resources sent 14 people and 14 dots went on their services, etc. Not a real needs assessment but a gimmy grab. More staff, more dots = more needs and more money.
We are on to you. Stop the BS and the crap about how fair the assessment process is. It is garbage. It keeps telling us that we need more and more and more low income housing when we actually don't know. When the residents in the areas where the housing is developed, the central city, spoke up about the lack of appropriate tenants, they were ignored.
The market studies are the same. Hae you ever actually looked at a market study for these tax credit projects. Let me tell you that these studies are ALWAYS in support of this housing. No matter what the demographics of a neighborhood, we need low income housing. Everywhere. Low income housing is needed everywhere - it will make blighted neighborhoods unblighted and unblighted neighborhoods - well more unblighted. The neighbors in an area are always wrong and above all always NIMBY. No matter if they have poverty and mixed races in the area already in their backyard - they are NIMBY. God forbid we speak of the proven connection between crime and poverty, we are then racist and don't forget classist. That's a good one.
Hey - did you see that Habitat is hitting it again south of locust. Where are the residents there? Why isn't anyone fighting this funky agency.
It seems like there's only a few of us who don't like habitat. I think they ruin the older neighborhoods putting up those ranch houses, but that's just me.
NO - that's a lot of people. But, they haven't placed it in the wrongarea just yet/ Just wait,.
Post a Comment