2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Texoma Council of Governments

2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

A Study of Unmet Needs for Low-income Texomans Who Seek Self-sufficiency

October 31, 2010

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 5 SUB-RECIPIENT PROFILE ...... 10 1. METHODOLOGY ...... 11 1.1 RESEARCH DESIGN ...... 13

1.1.1 STUDY POPULATIONS ...... 13

1.1.2 STATISTICAL RESEARCH ...... 14

1.1.3 CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS...... 15

1.1.4 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS ...... 17 Key Informant Interview Guide ...... 23

1.1.5 SURVEY ...... 41

SURVEY DISTRIBUTION ...... 46

SURVEY CODING AND ANALYSIS ...... 50

Test Surveys ...... 52

Survey Instruments ...... 56

1.2 PLAN OF ACTION ...... 73

1.2.1 OUTREACH ...... 75 1.3 TIMETABLE FOR CONDUCTING RESEARCH...... 82 2. RESEARCH RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...... 84 2.1 COOKE COUNTY ...... 85

2.1.1 PROFILE OF PUBLIC STATISTICS ...... 89 Housing ...... 89

Household Economic Security ...... 97

Education and Literacy...... 107

Crime, Family Violence, and Child Abuse ...... 113

Youth ...... 116

2.1.2. KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS COOKE COUNTY ...... 117 Conditions of Poverty ...... 118 2 Unique Observations ...... 133

Critical Needs ...... 142

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.1.3 SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...... 144 2.2 FANNIN COUNTY ...... 147

2.2.1 PROFILE OF PUBLIC STATISTICS ...... 147 Housing ...... 147

Household Economic Security ...... 151

Education and Literacy...... 159

Crime, Family Violence, and Child Abuse ...... 164

Youth ...... 166

2.2.2 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS FANNIN COUNTY ...... 168 Conditions of Poverty ...... 168

Unique Observations ...... 174

Critical Needs ...... 175

2.2.3 SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...... 177 2.3 GRAYSON COUNTY ...... 180

2.3.1 PROFILE OF PUBLIC STATISTICS ...... 180 Housing ...... 180

Household Economic Security ...... 184

Education and Literacy...... 196

Crime, Family Violence, and Child Abuse ...... 202

Youth ...... 206

2.3.2 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS GRAYSON COUNTY...... 207 Conditions of Poverty ...... 207

Unique Observations ...... 215

Critical Needs ...... 222

2.3.3 SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...... 224 2.4 TEXOMA (TRI-COUNTY) ...... 227 3 2.4.1 CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS...... 227 2-1-1 Taxonomy Statistical Report (2008) ...... 228

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2-1-1 Taxonomy Statistical Report (2009) ...... 237

Examination of Gaps in Service ...... 246

2.4.2 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS TRI-COUNTY ...... 270 Conditions of Poverty ...... 270

Unique Observations ...... 292

Critical Needs ...... 308

4. SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...... 312 3. CONCLUSIONS ...... 319 REFERENCE LIST ...... 322 4. APPENDIX ...... 325 APPENDIX A. OUTREACH DOCUMENTS ...... 326 REPORT ON PROGRESS JUNE17, 2010 TEXOMA COG GOVERNING BODY ...... 326 APPENDIX B. KEY INFORMANT PROFILES ...... 343

COOKE COUNTY ...... 343

FANNIN COUNTY ...... 346

GRAYSON COUNTY ...... 347

TRI-COUNTY ...... 348 APPENDIX C. KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW CODES ...... 359 APPENDIX D. SURVEY CODE GUIDE ...... 361 APPENDIX E. SURVEY- DETAILED TABLES OF RESULTS ...... 369

TYPES OF TESTS PERFORMED ...... 369

TEXOMA TABLES ...... 370

COOKE COUNTY TABLES ...... 392

FANNIN COUNTY TABLES ...... 415

GRAYSON COUNTY TABLES ...... 438 APPENDIX F. STATISTICAL RESEARCH DATA TABLES ...... 460

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS

4H – Head, Heart, Hands, Health

AAA – Area Agency on Aging of Texoma (Texoma Council of Governments) ACLU – American Civil Liberties Union ACS – American Community Survey AIRS – Alliance of Information and Referral Systems AMI – Area Median Income AMTRAK – American Track (National Railroad Passenger Corporation) APS – Adult Protective Services

BEDCO – Bonham Economic Development Corporation BLS – Bureau of Labor Statistics BNSF – Burlington North Santa Fe BPLS – Basic Prose Literacy Skills (National Assessment of Adult Literacy)

CASA – Court-Appointed Special Advocates CATE – Career and Technical Education CEDS – Community Economic Development Strategy CHAS – Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) CHIP – Children’s Health Insurance Program CLF – Community for a Livable Future CNA – Community Needs Assessment CNS – Texas Community Needs Survey COG – Council of Governments CPPP – Center for Public Policy Priorities CPS – Child Protective Services 5 CSBG – Community Service Block Grant

DADS – Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

DDA – Denison Development Alliance DFPS – Texas Department of Family and Protective Services DSHS – Texas Department of Social and Health Services

ESL – English as a Second Language

FB – Food Benefits FFA – Future Farmers of America FG – Focus Group FICO – Fair Isaac Corporation FMR – Fair Market Rent FPL – Federal Poverty Line FSS – Family Self-Sufficiency Program (Texoma Council of Governments)

GATE – Gifted and Talented Education GCC – Grayson County College GED – General Equivalency Diploma GEDCO – Gainesville Economic Corporation

HAMFI – Household Adjusted Median Family Income HFC – Housing Fund Contingent HHS – United States Department of Health and Human Services HHSC – Texas Health and Human Services Commission HMIS – Homeless Management Information System HUD – United States Department of Housing and Urban Development

ISD – Independent School District

LEP – Limited English Proficiency 6 LIPP – Low Income Protection Plan LMCI – Labor Market and Career Information (Texas Workforce Commission) LMI – Low to Moderate Income Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

LPAC – Language Proficiency Assessment Committee LQ – Location Quotient

MHMR – Mental Health Mental Retardation Services of Texoma MYC – Muenster Youth Council

NAAL – National Assessment of Adult Literacy NAICS – North American Industry Classification System NCTC – North Central Texas College NCTCOG – North Central Texas Council of Governments NOFA – Notice of Funding Availability (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) NSLP – National School Lunch Program

PHAS – Public Housing Assessment System (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) PPLP – Percent of Population Living in Poverty

QCEW – Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages

RSVP – Retired Senior Volunteer Program

SEDCO – Sherman Economic Development Corporation SNAP – Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program SSI – Social Security Income SSL – Austin College Social Science Lab STAR – Services to At-Risk Youth SWAT – Skills for Workforce Advancement

TAKS – Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills TANF – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 7 TAPS – Texoma Area Paratransit System TCOG – Texoma Council of Governments TDDS – Texas Donated Dental Services Program (Texas Dental Association) Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TDHCA – Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs TEA – Texas Education Agency TEC – Texas Education Code TJPC – Texas Juvenile Probation Commission TMC – Texoma Medical Center TRACER – Texas Rapid Access to Career and Economic Resources (Texas Workforce Commission) TSAHC – Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation TWC – Texas Workforce Commission TWS – Texoma Workforce Solutions TWU – Texas Women’s University TXU – Texas Utilities Company

UIL – University Interscholastic League UNCHS – United Nations Centre for Human Settlements UNDP – United Nations Development Programme UNICEF – United Nations Children’s Fund USDA – U.S. Department of Agriculture

VA – Veterans’ Affairs

VAWA – U.S. Violence Against Women Act VISTO – Volunteers in Service to Others

WHO – World Health Organization WIC – Women, Infants, and Children

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study explores and identifies the top needs for low income Texomans who gain self- sufficiency. The researchers sought to explore the facets of poverty in each county of Texoma: Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson; and identify the top needs and most critical services in each. In order to explore these issues, the research process focused around 3 primary and secondary research questions:

1. What are the elements of poverty and the services that assist Texomans to achieve self- sufficiency? 2. Have conditions changed since 2005, the most recent assessment of poverty and self- sufficiency in Texoma? 3. Are there differences in the perceived experience of poverty and the actual conditions or experience of poverty?

The primary staff that prepared this study employed a number of qualitative research methods in order to explore and collect information concerning the identified research questions. Staff chose to use contextual study, semi-structured key informant interviews, and a community- wide survey for their investigation. These various techniques were used in succession, progressing through three stages: first, a period of information gathering of relevant background information; second, a period of gathering information; and third, a period of analyzing and interpreting findings.

The results of this study produced a list of identified needs and critical services for each county in Texoma and provides insights into the causes of poverty. Results demonstrate that there is very little variance among the three counties of Texoma, but that further study should be conducted to explore the causes of the identified critical needs facing low income Texomans. We have concluded that the most critical need for low income Texomans is employment 9 opportunities. This includes increased employment opportunities and employment skills.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

SUB-RECIPIENT PROFILE

The Texoma Council of Government (TCOG)

TCOG is responsible for the planning and development of the coordination of economy and efficiency for low-income individuals within a tri-county region consisting of Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties. The submission date for the CSBG Community Needs Assessment is, September 31, 2010.

The primary staff that prepared the 2010 CSBG Community Needs Assessment:

Brenda Smith Program Manager, Utility Assistance 903- 813- 3567 [email protected]

Katy Cummins Community Development Planner 903-813-3530 [email protected]

Chérie Brown Community and Economic Development Research Assistant August- October 2010

Claire Balani Community and Economic Development Intern February- August 2010

Sarah Soret Community and Economic Development Intern February- August 2010

Special thanks to the following: Austin College Social Science Research Lab and Dr. Nathan Bigelow who assisted primary staff with the results and analysis of the Texoma Needs Assessment Survey.

Jaron Hogenson, TCOG Economic Development Intern, who assisted primary staff with data tables, graphs, and proofreading. 10

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1. METHODOLOGY

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The methodology section of the CSBG Community Needs Assessment (CNA) outlines several strategies and techniques chosen by the researchers to obtain accurate and reliable data concerning the barriers that exist for low-income Texomans who seek self-sufficiency. An effective and successful research project “has a clearly defined purpose, in which the coherence between the research questions and the methods or approaches proposed, and generates data which is valid and reliable”1. The 2011-2015 Texoma CNA is a research study that asses and analyzes the conditions of poverty in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties in an attempt to understand the most critical needs facing low-income Texomans. Requirements set by the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Act dictate that each county in the Texoma region be compartmentalized into three separate studies, even though the CNA is understood as a “regional” assessment. Research for this CNA was conducted to meet the guidelines and requirements of Community Needs Assessment guidance packet that was provided to TCOG by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA).

Based on this guidance packet, the researchers developed a design matrix (discussed further in the Step 3- Plan of Action section) that outlined a strategy for answering the primary research question. Next, the researchers defined secondary research questions that would define sub- questions and sub-components for more focused research. These sub-questions dictated what areas of the population were targeted and the appropriate research techniques necessary to gain information and understanding about the most critical needs facing low-income Texomans. Then, research was broken down into two key components: background and primary research. The first component involved the collection of free, public statistical information about each county to assess and analyze current and historical conditions of poverty. This information provided background and contextual information about the nature of poverty and human service programs in Texoma that informed primary research conducted later in the study. The second research component implemented techniques that generated information about poverty and services in each county that did not already exist. To do this, researchers conducted key-informant interviews with social service providers in each county and deployed 12

1 Lewis, Jane. “Design Issues”. Qualitative Research Practice. Ed. Jane Ritchie and Jane Lewis. London: Sage Publications, 2003. Pg. 47. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

a survey that concentrated on key segments of the population that gathered information about the opinions and concerns of critical needs and services in each county. The paragraphs below provide the detailed methodology of each research component for the 2011-2015 CSBG Community Needs Assessment.

1.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

1.1.1 STUDY POPULATIONS Targeted Community Populations: Low-income Citizens: In terms of this study, low-income individuals are defined as members of the community who receive assistance from one or more service provider within the tri-county area. The following range of dimensions, as well as others that will become more clearly defined with further research, will need to be addressed in order to gain an accurate depiction of poverty in the area, as well as the services that are needed. 1. Age 2. Familial Status/Size 3. Immigrant, Hispanic 4. Veteran 5. Disabled Service Providers: For the purposes of this study, a service provider will be an organization or institution that provides services to or is in daily contact with low-income residents. A list of actual agencies and organizations will be compiled in order to understand available services. Elected Officials: In this study, elected officials are individuals that hold community elected offices in the tri-county area. However, this can also include people who were not necessarily elected by the community, but are community leaders, such as a local Chamber of Commerce. This encompasses a wide range of entities, such as: County Judges, Sheriffs, school boards, and other county officials. Community Members: A valuable target population in this study will be the community at 13 large. However, this population will simply encompass members of the community that do not fit into the other three target populations.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1.1.2 STATISTICAL RESEARCH Statistical research was employed as a background component of this study to develop contextual and descriptive analysis of each county in the Texoma region. The Contextual analysis involved in this phase of research focused on the extent to which social services are used and needed in each county. The Descriptive analysis involved researching characteristics associated with low-income individuals that are available through such sources as the United States Census Bureau. Specific data elements collected for each county includes:

 Population  Income, earnings, employment figures  Education, school district lists, drop-out rates, literacy rates  Health Care, CHIP, Medicare, Medicaid enrollment figures, number of health facilities and professionals  TANF, CHIP, enrollment  Teen pregnancy figures  Crime rates

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1.1.3 CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS

Before investing time and other resources in the collection of original data, secondary or already available sources of information about specific settlements or populations in which you are interested should be investigated. In the context of surveying environmental health problems in the Third World from which much of the following material is borrowed this would include the following possible sources: a) Local and national government offices, especially the Ministries of Health, Housing, Public Works, Planning, etc. b) National Census Bureau for a breakdown by settlement if available. c) Registration sites for vital statistics about births, deaths, etc. d) Utilization of other records held by hospitals, clinics, etc. e) International agency offices such as UNICEF, WHO, World Bank, UNDP, UNCHS, etc. f) Universities/research centers for published and unpublished (student theses) material relating directly to environmental health issues, population characteristics for the settlement in question. Recently compiled computerized data sets relating to socioeconomic detail of settlement residents may be available for consultation. g) Newspaper archives.

The aim is to build up a broad contextual picture of the environmental health context in which the people live -- for example population size and age distribution, services enjoyed, principal disease problems, legal status of land, particular problems associated with the community, the names of the most important local leaders, etc.

Specific data can also be gleaned from secondary data sources: patient treatment records, mortality data, and Census information. Depending upon local regulations and customs relating to confidentiality these records can be analyzed. Where individual records are confidential then 15 summary tables in which data are aggregated at a wider level may be available instead.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The researchers used data collected though the Texoma Area Information and Referral (Texoma 211) program at TCOG to assess the types of calls for service information. This analysis lists the top 20 calls for service in 2008 and 2009 and includes the frequency of calls and whether or not the request for service was successfully referred.

The Texoma 211 also keeps an updated resource book of services and service providers as a resource to the public. This resource guide uses a nationally used taxonomy to classify and categorize services and service providers. The researchers used this resource guide to gain a sense of services not offered in the Texoma Region and which types of services are only found by travelling outside of the region.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1.1.4 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS The researchers employed a series of key informant interviews with a semi-structured format. These interviews are comprised of open discussions with particular individuals with an informed knowledge about a particular issue.

According to Keith Carter and Lionel Beaulieu2, the purpose of key informant interviews is to obtain information from community residents who, due to their professional training and affiliation with particular organizations and agencies, possess informed opinions regarding likely needs facing the community. The interview should be brief and conducted by the researcher. Interviews were administered to service providers identified as key informants. The data derived from these interviews were used by the researcher to formulate a comprehensive outlook on critical needs in the community.

The researchers also chose a semi-structured format for the interviews. According to Peter Ward at the University of Texas at Austin, semi-structured interviews contain a list of topics around which the interviewer seeks to develop a conversation. There are no “correct” questions to be asked. Instead, the questions that the interviewer asks should develop the conversation as the respondent reveals his or her feelings, knowledge, and reactions to any given issue. The interviewer must allow the respondents to develop opinions and offer anecdotes on their own, and should explore points only as they arise. The focus is on the respondent and his or her expertise.

Why did we choose it? The key informant semi-structured interview method was chosen because it is a common technique used in community needs assessments. The researcher had a background in qualitative research, and she used this technique previously, so it was also used based on

17 2 Keith Carter and Lionel Beaulieu, “Conducting a Community Needs Assessment: Primary Data Collection Techniques,” Florida Cooperation Extension Service, June 1992, http://www.virtualcap.org/downloads/VC/US_Needs_Assessment_FL_Coop_Extension_Primary_Data_Collection_ Techniques.pdf. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

expertise. According to the original CNA Research outline provided by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA), the goals of using this method is twofold: “to identify causes and conditions of poverty in each county, [and to] gain a better understanding of services already provided to help residents gain self sufficiency and existing gaps in needs/service.”

Key informant interviews were also a suggested component in the CSBG Community Needs Assessment Guide. Interviews were chosen as a precursor to surveys in order to qualitatively assess needs in the CSBG service area. From a researcher’s point of view, the advantages of conducting interviews as a methodology include their “flexible and interactive nature, their ability to achieve depth,” and “the generative nature of the data.”

Advantages and Disadvantages The key informant interview approach was also chosen for its several advantages as a research method. Compared to other participatory research methods such as focus groups and public forums, it is a less labor-intensive and less costly way to assess needs. It gave the researcher an opportunity to meet with service providers, inform them of TCOG and its Community Needs Assessment, and ask them for assistance on other research methods such as the distribution of surveys, which ultimately helped to initiate and strengthen the lines of communication between service providers. In addition, the key informant interview approach can be effectively combined with other techniques. The depth of information gathered concerning the causes of poverty is more than what can be obtained through surveys. The process of interviewing permits continual clarification of ideas and information.

There are also several disadvantages to the key informant interview approach. The information obtained from this method may represent a biased perspective, as data is typically derived from service providers, rather than clients or consumers of those services. Due to time constraints, 18 ease of access and confidentiality concerns, only service providers were interviewed and not clients. Although the majority of service providers interviewed were not prior acquaintances

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

with the researcher, there remains the disadvantage of personal relationships between researchers and informants that may influence type of data obtained. Finally, representativeness of the total community is difficult to achieve. Even knowledgeable observers cannot sense all needs and concerns of all people in a community, and the viewpoints of those who are less visible may be overlooked. Finally, the interviews were not drawn randomly, and therefore generalizations cannot be made from them.

Selection of Interviews Interviews drew from a combination of convenience sampling and snowball sampling. Convenience sampling is when “the researcher chooses the sample according to ease of access.” Snowball sampling involves asking respondents for contacts and repeating the cycle in order to gain more contacts. The researcher initially compiled a list of service providers in the Texoma region. However, most contacts were developed from snowball sampling. The researcher asked the initial respondents at Utility Assistance for suggestions on suitable interviewees, and they provided the researcher a list of organizations and contact information. From these contacts, the researcher set up interviews using convenience sampling. The researcher simply chose which organizations to interview based on scheduling and other preferences. Attention was also paid to the distribution of interviews throughout the three counties. For example, there were more interviews in Grayson County than both Cooke County and Fannin County due to the higher density of service providers in Grayson County. In addition, some organizations were unavailable for interviews, and the researcher had a limited amount of time and resources to pursue all contacts.

Process of Interviewing The interviews were structured as semi-structured interviews. This allows the researcher to “have some sense of the themes they wish to explore.” Interviews are based on a general topic guide, which presents the key topics and issues to be covered during the interview. 19

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

For each interview, the researcher referenced an interview guide, which contained a list of broad topics. These topics were not questions presented to the respondent in verbatim, but were themes used to guide the researcher during the interview. The interviewer did not make it a priority to ask each and every question on the guide, but rather asked certain questions based on the flow of the conversation. The researcher also prioritized questions based on personal interest and time constraints. In most cases, the interviews covered each defined section of themes and the majority of such themes in each section.

Interviews were primarily conducted at the respondent’s office. Each interview was attended by two members of the research team. One interviewer was interviewing the respondent and one research assistant was taking notes. The primary researcher took the role as the main interviewer, maintaining a relationship with the respondent throughout the entire interview. The second member of the research team took the role of a ‘note taker’, making sure to record the interview’s questions and interjections, as well as the responses given. The interviewer made clear at the beginning of each interview that the interview would resemble less of a question-and-answer session, and more of an informal conversation about the topic at hand. Interviews were immediately looked over after the interview and summarized. No tape or recording of the interviews exist except for the notes presented in this report, created by the research team. Due to the semi-structured conversational format of the interviews, not all topics were mentioned during the interviews. Interviews generally ranged from 45 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the time and interest of the respondent.

Interview Questions According to Carter and Beaulieu, the instrument administered to key informants should contain questions that will successfully obtain the information needed to identify needs in the community. Several types of questions can be found in key informant interviews of this nature, such as the respondents’ attitudes of general community needs, or needs that might exist 20 within specific condition domains such as education or health; the respondent’s perceptions of

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

what is currently being done to meet those needs; and finally, the respondent’s ideas as to what should be done towards meeting unmet needs.

The broad topics within each interview guide were determined from a list of condition domains established in CSBG Section 676 and CSBG application guidelines. Each interview guide contained four categories. The first category involved the respondent’s personal background and their role within their organization. This was always the first set of questions asked in order to get the respondent comfortable with the interview setting, as well as to build rapport between the respondent and researcher. The second category of topics involved the organization itself, such as mission, history, funding, and leadership. The third category focused on the organization’s service delivery and their current and future programs. Topics included: the populations they served; the challenges they faced in providing services to their clients; and the characteristics of their clients. The final category of topics was about changes within the organization and the general environment that occurred within the last 5 years, as well as their opinion on the 5 most critical needs in their region. The researcher deemed this the most vital category since the Community Needs Assessment itself focuses on changes in critical needs within the last 5 years.

Each interview with a particular organization was different based upon the type of organization they were. Organizations were asked different questions about their mission and history based on whether they were a funder or service provider. Each organization also had very different ways of how they operated in terms of service delivery. The researcher, in developing these questions, researched the organization on their website, drew from personal knowledge of the subject and the organization, and used other resources in order to specifically cater to that organization’s work. The category on changes within the last five years did not change from interview to interview, since it focused on the same variables such as number of programs available, budget, and number of clients served. This final category of topics also required a 21 broad perspective on the part of the respondent, since it contained opinion questions on the causes and conditions of poverty, as well as characteristics of clients that reinforced the cycle of

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

poverty. The researcher considered this the most important part of each interview. The purpose of asking about the respondent’s agency, clients, and service delivery was to ultimately understand their biases, understanding, and background regarding their opinion of the top 5 critical needs in their region.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Key Informant Interview Guide

TCOG Utility Assistance Interview (Administered 2/23/10)

Tell me about yourself and your organization - How long you have been here, previous experience - What does your organization do?

1. Organization a. Case managers  Total number  Weekly/monthly caseload (# of clients)  Are there an adequate number of case managers to meet needs? b. Clients  Eligibility criteria for assistance- any clients home owners?  Frequent service clients- Do clients feel needs are being met?  Positive/negative encounters c. How does this compare to similar services- in region, if any & out of region d. Partner organizations  Who are they? Public/Private/Non-profit?  How are they effective partners? (or not)

2. Organization’s Service Delivery a. Energy Assistance  Qualifications for energy assistance 1. Delinquent bills, payments > $100-$500  Sources of energy: electricity only? Propane, gas, etc.?  Counsel on energy use or how to obtain energy efficiency upgrades? 23 b. Housing- UA is like homelessness prevention Housing

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

 Quality of housing: safe, affordable, appropriate # of bedrooms c. Education/ Tuition Reimbursement  Why did you start this program and when?  Eligibility/Qualifications  How do you measure success?  Barriers to education/ common skills clients seek to improve

3. General Poverty and Unmet Needs a. Poverty (opinion questions)  Common behaviors that reinforce poverty  What would our community look like without poverty?  Cause of poverty in community; factors that keep families impoverished  Solutions? b. Needs (opinion questions)  Most pressing needs in this community?  Are current programs/services meeting needs? Over-used programs, missing?  What are the unmet needs  Obstacles in meeting needs c. Changes between 2005 - 2010  Changes in the last five years- public policy/community/social.- Program budget adequate?  New successful and/or unsuccessful strategies?  And other changes in services delivery offered locally?  Number of clients- up or down?

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Sherman Housing Authority Interview (Administered 3/15/10)

Tell me about yourself and your organization How long have you been here, previous experience? What does your organization do? Your role in the organization

I. Organization a. Sherman Housing Authority i. Total number of staff 1. Case managers? ii. Total # of clients) iii. Are there an adequate number of staff members to meet needs? b. Clients i. Eligibility criteria for assistance ii. Frequent service clients- Do clients feel needs are being met? iii. Positive/negative encounters c. How does this compare to similar services—in region, if any and out of region d. Partner organizations i. Who are they? Public/Private/Non-profit? ii. How are they effective partners? (or not)

II. Organization’s Service Delivery a. Housing stock i. Increasing/decreasing? ii. Increasing on part with household growth changes? iii. Age of houses 25 iv. Lead paint problems? (if built before 1978) b. Vacancy rates: how have they changed over time?

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

i. Compared with overall state vacancy rates? c. Housing turnover rates i. How many clients on the wait list? d. Connection to TCOG Texoma Housing Partners’ Public Housing Program e. Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center i. How many clients take advantage of the center’s programming?

III. General Poverty and Unmet Needs a. Poverty (opinion questions) i. Common behaviors have reinforce poverty ii. What would our community look like without poverty? iii. Cause of poverty in community; factors that keep low- income individuals impoverished iv. Solutions? b. Needs (opinion questions) i. Most pressing needs in this community for clients seeking public housing? ii. Are current programs/services meeting needs? Over-used programs, missing? iii. What are the unmet needs iv. Obstacles in meeting needs c. Changes between 2005-2010 i. Changes in the last five years—public policy/community/social. ii. Program budget adequate? iii. New successful and/or unsuccessful strategies? iv. Any other changes in service delivery offered locally? v. Number of clients-up or down? 26

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Analysis of Interviews: Theory Grounded theory is the leading method of qualitative analysis. According to Strauss and Corbin, the “founders” of grounded theory, “a grounded theory is one that is inductively derived from the study of the phenomena it represents. It focuses on generating theoretical ideas, or hypotheses, from the data, rather than having these specified before. They key focus is a reflective reading of text and the application of codes.”

The core elements of grounded theory are based on inquiry shaped by the aim to discover social and psychological processes. The analytic process prompts theory discovery and development rather than verification of pre-existing theories, which reflects the inductive nature of grounded theory.

Theoretical sampling is another aspect of grounded theory, which refines, elaborates, and exhausts conceptual categories. The generation of data expands the researcher’s thoughts on what that sample should be. For example, if the researcher is studying young people and generates ideas based on his research, then theoretical sampling allows the researcher to expand the sample based on your ongoing analysis during data collection. The researcher may decide to pursue studies on the elderly in order to enrich his sample. Therefore, in the Community Needs Assessment study, the sample size for the key informant interviews for qualitative analysis was never fixed.

In this study, there was a modified approach to grounded theory. While the research team had no prior experience working with Texoma area service providers or with the Community Needs Assessment, there was some prior research done on what a community needs assessment entails and what are the primary condition domains of the region. However, it made no assumptions on what the results, or needs, of the community would be. Rather, the prior research was based upon the categories, or condition domains, found in the community, as well 27 as research into the organization, which was necessary to construct the interview guides. Theoretical sampling was used, but it depended on both the researcher’s and the service

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

provider’s availability. While the majority of data analysis took place after all data was collected, theoretical sampling was used in order to develop ideas after reflecting on the interview write-up, which affected what kinds of questions were asked and what kind of data was collected in future interviews. Casual data analysis enabled the researchers to develop explanations that suggest further cases to sample.

Introduction to Coding Coding is an essential part of grounded theory and qualitative data analysis. It allows the researcher to categorize and make sense of large amounts of data by taking pieces of data, or text, and retrieving materials of interest later in the research project.

Unit of Analysis for Coding The text appropriate for coding will vary within each document or interview. A given code category may be applied to textual materials of quite different lengths because respondents’ references to certain issues or themes may be brief, or lengthy. Whereas standardization is a key principle in quantitative analysis, this is not the case in qualitative analysis.

Coding and Grounded Theory According to Strauss and Corbin, there are three sequential stages of coding in grounded theory, and the stages that this research process follows: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding.3

Open coding is the initial classification and labeling of concepts found in textual passages. The technique requires the researcher to read and reread the interview materials in order to uncover, name, and develop concepts in the text with the ultimate goal of exposing the thoughts, ideas, and meanings contained in the respondent’s answers. The researcher reads each sentence and paragraph and repeatedly asks the question: “What is this about?” The 28 researcher applies labels that describe the word, sentence or paragraph, such as schools,

3 http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/grounded.html Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

mothers, or health. These concrete labels describe the world as it is. However, there is an additional part of the analytical process that seeks to identify more general categories that the sentences or paragraphs refer to, such as institutions, social roles, or social expectations. It is important in the process of open coding to have both concrete and abstract categories, as the abstract categories help to generate general theories that become useful in the later stages of analysis. In brief, this process is a procedure for developing categories of information.

Axial coding is a reanalysis of the results of open coding aimed at identifying the important, general concepts. More concepts can be identified through continued open coding after the axial coding has begun. This step involves regrouping the data and categories created in open coding and looking for more abstract analytical concepts. It is a procedure for interconnecting the categories.

Selective coding identifies the primary code in the study, which is the code that all other codes relate to. The premise of selective coding is that patterns of relationships can be determined from an extensive analysis of a large body of data. In this process, the researcher identifies broad codes found in reanalysis of textual materials and adds new ones as appropriate.

During the selective coding process, the researcher selects certain codes in order to develop the theory and identify certain themes that are central to the explanatory framework of the research study. This is a procedure for creating a narrative that relates the categories together, which in the end produces theory. The primary central codes identified during the second pass of coding were “needs” and “lack of” as well as “service provision” and “communication”.

Process of Coding: The Mechanics Creating codes is a technique that allows for the possibility of coding data in order to test hypotheses that have been generated by prior theory. This would be creating categories based 29 upon the condition domains outlined in the CNA Research Design Matrix, drawn from CSBG

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Section 676 and the CSBG application guidelines, and coding interviews for terms, themes, and opinions that cover those condition domains.

In all cases, the first task for researchers processing of qualitative data is to convert the information into a format that lends itself for categorizing. Interview notes and other sources that are hand-written should be transcribed and stored to a computer in order to make them easy to read and organize. This produces texts that can be stored both electronically and in a physical location. These texts can be organized by type, such as notes, diaries, and interviews. After organizing and storing the texts, the researcher is ready to commence coding.

The first stage involves the researcher reading whole text of the interview or observation in order to get an overall impression of the data. This involves summarizing the text, making notes in the margin or by use of memos, and identifying significant words, phrases, or passages that might be used as quotations or in more detailed analysis. The text is also corrected for transcription errors, omissions, or irrelevancies.

The next stage is identifying and classifying the categories and concepts to be found in the texts. The researcher reads the texts again and looks for words, phrases and paragraphs describing events, concepts, relationships and categories. Through this process, the researcher devises a coding scheme for the data with the identified words and phrases. Each word or phrase is part of a potential theme.

When all texts have been processed, the resulting lists of words and phrases are examined and further refined, especially refining categories for completeness and avoiding redundancy. During this process, the researcher may test out patterns within the text in order to address any ideas or questions about the subject he or she is studying. These stages of qualitative analysis are repeated until the researcher is satisfied that the data has been fully explored and 30 interpreted, which is a keystone of the grounded theory approach. Interpretation also involves

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

returning to the original texts in order to compare the completeness of certain explanations. Thus, the processes of coding, data analysis and interpretation coincide with one another.

Qualitative Data Analysis Programs After reviewing the available qualitative data analysis software in qualitative analysis academic literature, the researchers chose Qualrus to code and help interpret the interview data. According to the manual, Qualrus is a qualitative analysis computer program. Researchers use Qualrus to mark segments of text, pictures, video, or audio with qualitative codes. Qualrus then retrieves and analyzes those codes, from which they can produce useful summaries and graphical representations of their data. Qualrus emphasizes intelligent strategies through its programming that assists the researcher in a wide variety of qualitative data analysis.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualrus Manually assigning codes in qualitative research is always labor-intensive and can be very difficult even for seasoned researchers. The most costly expenses in qualitative research projects are preparing the sources for coding, assigning codes, and revising those codes over time. The advantage of Qualrus is that it helps with the coding process by making it easier, faster, and more predictable. The researcher can manually devise codes and apply them to the text, or the program can suggest codes to apply to the text using a number of intelligent computational strategies based upon the researcher’s early coding procedures of the text. These computational strategies aim to recognize patterns in the research, and use those patterns to recommend codes to the user. Qualrus also allows the researcher to track the assignment of codes to each paragraph or segment, and documents who assigned the code as well as whether the researcher adopted any code recommendations from the program. Other advantages of Qualrus are that it is, compared to older qualitative data analysis software packages, more user-friendly and intuitive. The program can manage a very large amount of data and can obtain a large amount of information from the text quickly. 31

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

There are also several disadvantages to using Qualrus. There is a learning curve to learn qualitative data analysis software programs that takes valuable time away from research. Qualitative data software packages are not inexpensive. Finally, some academics prefer coding by hand in order to categorize pieces of text with more flexibility and specificity than software is capable of.

Components of Qualrus The following are the primary components and features of Qualrus that the researchers in this study work with. The following information is excerpted from the Qualrus manual.

Qualrus organizes research into projects. A project is a file that contains all of the information needed to code and analyze data towards a specific purpose of the user. Generally, a project consists of data sources, segments within sources, codes, links among codes, and code assignments to segments. The user can generate components within a project such as graphical views, lists of codes and links with certain properties, and reports. In summary, the project has all the information for the researcher to make sense of the data, and enables anyone else to review what was done in the project or continue with the analysis. In the Community Needs Assessment, a project contained all interviews done for a particular county or region.

A source is an entire piece or document of data located within a project. This body of data can be an interview transcript, field notes, an image, an audio recording, or even a movie file. Each data file imported into Qualrus is treated as a separate source. A single study may have multiple sources, as is the case with most of the projects found in the CNA analysis.

Each source contains segments differentiated and divided by the researcher. A segment is typically viewed as a paragraph within a document, but it can also be any contiguous section within a source that is to be coded by the researcher. During coding, the researcher can select 32 those segments that represent a coherent thought or concept, so that a code can be assigned to it. Segments can also be formed by a single or multiple words, sentences and paragraphs.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

They can overlap one another, or be nested within one another, such as having segments within segments within segments. Segments can be marked for texts, audio and video.

Codes are categories the researcher creates and uses to classify segments within a source. Every default project opened in Qualrus will have a limited list of possible codes that may be applied to segments. Each code is either assigned to a segment, or not assigned to a segment, which reflects how coding is done in qualitative research studies: codes are often simple Boolean items that are either present or not present in a particular segment. In Qualrus, codes cannot be assigned a segment until the segment is highlighted in the program.

Codes are related to one another through links. Codes typically have relationships to one another, and rarely exist in isolation. Some codes are examples or typify more general codes, such as “John is a freshman,” “John is a man,” or “John is a student.” Other codes may reflect a more complex relationship, such as “John is a member of a fraternity.” There is a wide range of additional relationships among codes, reflecting association, causation, or almost any linkage that the researcher determines necessary for the study. In Qualrus, links represent relationships among codes. Each link type is a specific kind of phrase or link that can occur between two codes. By default, Qualrus includes common link types such as “is a,” which can link codes together such as “John is a student”), as well as “causes,” which can link codes together causally, such as “X causes Y.”

The views function of Qualrus can allow researchers to view the network of codes and links within a project. In the focused view, for example, all direct links between one code and another code are displayed. Researchers can click on any code linked to the code of primary focus, and the new code becomes the focus of the diagram. Researchers can visually navigate through a complex network of codes and links. Views can be exported to a bitmap file, or to a report generated by Qualrus. Views can be found in the analyses displaying prominent themes 33 of needs, service providers, and other codes where they fit best.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Through the use of scripts, or computer programs designed to accomplish specific tasks, Qualrus can perform a wide variety of analyses on the data. Generic scripts include automatically adding or suggesting appropriate codes to the researcher for a wide range of coding schemes. Scripts are often used to search for and display requested information. They can be developed independently. The researcher for the Community Needs Assessment took advantage of scripts that were developed by the Qualrus developers. The primary scripts used were, by default, contained in the program. The most important scripts were:

Synonyms: User inputted synonyms in the Code Editor. For example, if the code is “service providers”, then a synonym would be “agencies.” When highlighting a segment, Qualrus would run a script finding that synonym in that segment, and if it were present, it would turn up in the list of Recommended Codes. The user must manually input the Recommended Code in order to apply the code to the segment.

Carry Over: This script would recommend a code if that code was present in the previous segment.

Suggest by Similar Code: This script will suggest a code if it appears in other segments with similar codes. For example, if, in one segment, “Workforce Solutions Texoma” and “child care” were present in a particular segment and the user codes a segment as “child care,” then Qualrus will recommend “Workforce Solutions Texoma” as a code. Codes will also be recommended if they are linked together; since “child care” is linked to the condition domain of “youth”, then Qualrus will recommend “youth” when a segment is coded with “child care.”

Suggest by Similar Words: This script is similar to Suggest by Similar Code, but instead of analyzing just codes, it analyzes words within a segment. For example, a paragraph talking about clients, particularly children, being motivated by receiving school supplies donations so 34 they can go to school. Another segment mentioning school supplies will have Qualrus suggesting “motivation” because school supplies will be similar.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Finally, the memos feature in Qualrus is essential to the coding process. Throughout the entire process of qualitative data analysis, it is a good idea to engage in memoing, or recording reflective notes about the researcher learns from the data. The researcher should write memos to themselves when they have ideas and insights. These memos should guide the research process and be included as additional data to be analyzed. Throughout the interface of Qualrus, there are objects to which memos can be opened, saved and attached to the project. Memos often help remind the researcher of why they took an action, the significance of an object or to explain to an outside observer why a particular action was not taken. Memo fields are possible to attach within entire projects, segments, codes, links, views and scripts.

List of Codes The researcher may decide to use a set of already existing codes with their data. These are called a priori codes. A priori codes are codes developed before examining the current data and any work that researchers have conducted to code their project. Therefore, an initial master list of codes was determined from the researcher’s prior research on poverty in the Texoma region, as well as the CNA Design Matrix. This list of codes divided by county is found in the Coding Appendix.

A list of codes developed in each step and examples of coded interview write-ups will be presented with the list of developed codes. Here is also a clear account of what the researchers mean by the codes used in the analysis. The codes will be differentiated codes according to whether they are related to needs or conditions, for example, that this code or group of codes refer to the conditions of poverty. This information can be found in the Coding Appendix.

List of Link Types and Descriptions A list of link types and their descriptions can be found in the Coding Appendix. All of the links 35 were found in the example projects that the developers of Qualrus provided.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Coding Process Performed in Qualrus This section describes the coding process undertaken by the researcher using Qualrus.

The interviews were transcribed by the researcher on either a writing pad or laptop. The notes were cleaned up and organized for clarity. They were reviewed by the primary interviewer in order to correct for accuracy, clarity and organization. Once data collection was complete, the interviewers were converted into a file format proper for Qualrus and imported into projects. The researcher created four projects entitled Grayson, Fannin, Cooke and Tri-County. Each interview was imported into its respective county projects.

As stated above, the researcher devised a master list of codes containing important concepts related to the general structure of the Community Needs Assessment, with a particular focus on the condition domains. Another master list of links was devised by taking link types and their descriptions from examples provided by the developers of Qualrus, as well as relevant scripts.

When everything was inputted into the projects consistently among the four projects, the researcher commenced with open coding. Open coding, or coding what you see, was done for each individual source or interview. Codes were as specific as possible, because codes could be combined and linked to the general concepts during the second pass of coding. Segments were also assigned to the general master list of codes. After an entire source has been coded, the researcher then went back to list of codes and linked them up to related codes and concepts. There was particular attention paid to linking the new open coding codes to the general codes created in the master list.

Linking codes after coding all segments within a source is important to the coding process because it helps the researcher identify related codes and concepts for the automated Recommended Codes scripts. These scripts are described in the Components of Qualrus section 36 under Scripts. Linking codes also helps to visualize data seen in the county reports with views,

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

particularly detailing the county service providers and conditions of poverty found in the county.

This process of open coding was repeated until all sources were fully coded and all codes linked up as much as possible. After a project and all of its sources was completely coded in this manner, the researcher moved on to the next project.

However, it was soon apparent that there needed to be another stage of coding. Coding during the first pass treated each project as its own independent entity. “Coding what you see” involved using the direct language of the participant in order to create codes, or categories and themes. For example, one project may use the terminology of needs and service providers, and another project may have the terminology of gaps in services and agencies. While these differences are small, it became necessary to recode a second time in order to gain consistency across the four projects so that they can be analyzed compared to one another.

After all projects were completely coded the first time, the researcher then made a second pass at coding. She reflected on what she determined from the results of the project, and identified important general themes that were not in the Master List of Codes but needed to be included. The researcher examined the major concepts and codes from her experience, and then made a list of all of these codes. The outcome had around 61 codes in total, located in the final master list of codes found in the Coding Appendix. As a comparison, the original master list of codes had 30 codes.

Axial coding meant identifying the important, general concepts, in terms of regrouping the data collected and looking for more analytical concepts. She then went through all the sources again to clarify codes and combine codes through Qualrus’ generalize tool. An example of the use of the generalize tool is in Cooke County. In previous projects and interviews, primarily in Grayson 37 and Fannin, the word ‘service provider’ was used and subsequently coded. In Cooke County, however, respondents used the language of “agencies.” Since these two terms are different but

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

referred to the same concept, in order to stay consistent with the coding of the other projects, both “service providers” and “agencies” were generalized, with “service providers” replacing all segments where “agencies” were coded. The same thing was also the case in Cooke County in the use of “gaps in service.” While “gaps in service” is not exactly the same thing as “needs” because it is a comparative look at what is available and what is not available, compared to “needs” that is simply measuring the lack of a service in an area, the researcher decided to generalize both concepts in order for it to be standardized between all four projects, and also give the researcher an easier time in identifying segments that consisted of the general idea of “needs,” where a service was lacking and was identified as needed in a community.

The researcher also sought to clarify the links between the codes. She tried to standardize the list of codes between the four projects as much as possible. The second time, due to the large and unwieldy list of codes in completed projects, the researcher often created links between two codes while adding new codes to each segment. As opposed to the first pass of coding, where the researcher waited until all segments were coded to link codes together, she did not wait to link codes at the end, but during the second pass at coding.

Selective coding took place sparingly. To reinforce the objective of the Community Needs Assessment, which is to identify needs and gaps in services in the community, she stressed attention to the codes “needs,” as well as the “lack of” social services that service providers referenced. In addition, during the selective coding phase, which was combined with the axial coding phase, there was the process of refining concepts. The Qualrus manual gives the example of the difference in industrial societies than developing societies. If segments that contain “society” reference those two different types of societies, industrial and developing, then those codes need to be replaced by the two types of societies, “industrial” and “developing.”

38 This process was what was done with codes related to “needs”. Transportation coded in terms of needs is different from transportation coded in terms of a condition of poverty. There

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

became a need to separate “transportation” into “transportation,” which refers to the condition of poverty, and “lack of transportation”, which could then be linked to “needs.” This was helpful for the interview analysis because in the beginning of the county reports, when the conditions of poverty are discussed, they discuss every aspect of that condition that was in the report, including needs. However, by refining needs and conditions thanks to the addition of “lack of” codes, critical needs in the region can be adequately isolated and addressed at the end of each report.

Analysis in Qualrus Several tools were used in Qualrus to assist in the analysis of the interviews. The first related to the Views editor. Qualrus can create “conceptual maps of relationships between codes” displayed as graphical views. Julia Maintz, in her dissertation, details the different views you could make in the Views editor. The ‘star view’ focuses on a single code and its direct links to other codes. The ‘network views’ shows all selected codes and their interlinked structure without adopting a central code as in the star view. In this report, network views were adopted to provide the reader a concise view of what the conditions of poverty were in each county, and what service providers were mentioned in the interviews.4

The last two functions used to analyze data in Qualrus are part of QTools, which the Qualrus manual names as “intelligent tools for qualitative analysis.” The primary tool is Search, where Qualrus can search for “Boolean combinations of codes and features in text to identify segments for further examination.” This is why creating the master list of codes before coding took place was essential, because it helped the researcher to categorize data and bring it up in the Search function. For example, when writing about the conditions of poverty such as Health, then the user would ask Qualrus to search for the code “health.” Qualrus would then bring up any segments coded that contain the code “health.” In order to ensure that the researcher has an exhaustive idea of all the aspects of “health” that were mentioned in the interview, the 39

4 Maintz, Julia. Blending Spaces: Actor-Network Interactions of An Internet-Based E-Learning Course. London: Transaction Publishers, 2008. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

researcher can also ask Qualrus to search for segments with the code “health” as well as codes linked to that code, whether incoming, such as “drugs are associated with health,” or outgoing, such as “health is a condition of poverty.” This would return a larger number of segments, but it is helpful to make sure that there are no missing aspects of that condition in the analysis. This also reflects how important it is to properly link related codes together. Segments containing the code “education” may include segments also coded with “schools,” but not necessarily, “job training.” However, if all those codes, “education,” “schools” and “job training” were linked, then Qualrus would recognize that in the search for codes and links and present that in the results.

The final tool used to aid analysis in Qualrus is the Categorize tool. In the Categorize window of QTools, the right side of the window contains all the segments are located in a section called “Workspace.” The researcher can drag the segments of the source into “Stacks” that she creates. For example, the user can create a stack called “Needs” and drag segments from the Workspace to the stack. Gathering segments in one stack makes it possible to recode the segments all at once, or even remove a particular code from the group of segments. The most useful thing in terms of this report is that Qualrus can export the segments in a particular stack. In the county reports, the researcher has included the Categorize tool output of the codes “needs” and “unique observations.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1.1.5 SURVEY

Community- Wide Survey A questionnaire was designed using the information gathered while using the aforementioned qualitative techniques. Surveys are a frequently used mode of observation in the social sciences that measures attitudes and opinions of a population too large for direct observation5. The intent of this survey was to assess the opinions of a large sample of Texomans, a limitation we faced while using the other techniques. A well managed and strategically administered survey can yield generalized conclusions for broader understanding of the research question: What are the critical causes and conditions of poverty and economic hardship for individuals seeking self-sufficiency in Texoma?

The survey featured both open-ended and closed ended questions. Both types of questions were necessary to gather the particular type of information that is required for this research. Questions were tested with sample populations similar to the ones targeted in the actual survey administration in order to gauge whether the questions were constructed in a fashion easily interpreted in the same manner by all individuals taking the survey. This helped to standardize the collected data so that the researchers could be confident when making conclusions based upon survey results.

Survey Design The survey method was used to collect data from four general target populations: clients, service providers, elected officials, and the community. Researchers utilized the survey design application website called “Survey Monkey” and solicited participation through a number of avenues including mail, email, and through organizational websites. Assurance of participation from each identified target population meant making the survey available in both electronic and paper form. Low-income populations have less access to the internet and therefore the assistance of human service agencies who serve this population were contacted to coordinate 41

5 Babbie, Earl. “Survey Research” The Basics of Social Research. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth, 2005. Pg. 270. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

with the administration of surveys through mail-outs and special meeting or intake events. The various methods of solicitation are listed on page 57.

In constructing each survey, the researchers attempted to collect a rich and diverse set of data. However, attention was paid to the time required to complete the survey with the intent of generating a larger response rate. The most important questions appear on all four surveys and attempt to capture the respondent’s opinions about the most critical needs facing low-income individuals who seek self-sufficiency.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Both open and close-ended questions were used to ask essentially the same question: what are the most critical needs facing low-income Texomans? The purpose of this mixture was to gather data that would be simple to analyze, but would not limit the respondents in their answers.

All solicitation communication clearly stated that the goal of the survey was to assess the nature of poverty and social services in their communities. Solicitations also conveyed the estimated time necessary to complete the survey. Each survey displayed an introduction that reassured respondents that all responses would be kept anonymous and that the data was being collected by the Texoma Council of Governments for the purpose of helping low-income individuals and the agencies that serve them.

Client Surveys The objective of the client surveys is to capture a direct and accurate picture of poverty in the tri-county area. The clients of service providers in the area were assumed to meet level of income qualification that is based upon federal poverty guideline. Some agencies use the actual FPG and others use a multiplier, anywhere from 125% to 300% FPG. If they are utilizing these resources, surveying them will provide a sample of opinions from people living in poverty Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties. The full-length version of the Client Survey can be found on page 58.

This survey had 12 questions with most of the questions collecting background information regarding the demographics of the respondent. Normally such questions should be placed near the end of a survey in an effort to “hook” respondents with the most interesting questions first. However, the researchers elected to place these questions both before and after the opinion gathering questions in order to encourage respondents to complete the survey. This structure of the survey was chosen after examining the test surveys and their question completion rates. Two questions ask participants to list the service providers they are using. This question will provide crucial pieces of information concerning poverty in the area. Knowing the types of 44 services that are being utilized will allow for an approximate answer for how much money each participant makes yearly. Every service provider has certain economic criteria that must be met Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

in order to participate. General knowledge of yearly income for a large sampling of the low- income community will provide a baseline measurement of the reality of poverty in the area. The overall purpose of these particular surveys is to receive direct information about poverty from the low-income community. Research carried out based on answers from these surveys are a direct source, and therefore will offer the best information concerning poverty in the area. Again, a full-length version of the Client Survey can be found on page 58.

Service Provider Surveys The objective of the service provider is similar to that of client surveys. Service providers offer valuable and direct information about the state of poverty in a community because these members of the community work with low-income individuals daily to provide assistance and improve quality of life. The Service Provider Survey had the seven questions that included the two main questions about the most critical needs as well as a few background questions about the expertise of the respondent and opinions about low-income access to information about services. The respondents of this survey were singled out for their expertise on issues facing low-income individuals. Human service organizations and their staff were solicited through email, local service provider organizations and supporters such as the Grayson County Social Services Association and United Way of Cooke County. Agencies volunteered to take the survey.

Elected Officials Survey The objective of this survey will be to receive information about the direct needs of low-income individuals in the particular elected official’s jurisdiction. An elected official is the perfect person to collect this information from as he or she’s office is in direct contact with low-income individuals and handle requests for information or assistance on a daily basis. Therefore, experience with these interactions will have allowed the elected individual to identify the top needs in the elected official’s jurisdiction, as well as gaps in service that exist.

Community Surveys

The objective of the community survey is to gather information concerning poverty from the 45 community at large. A survey of community opinions and concerns will allow information to be collected that could have otherwise been missed by polling only clients of service providers. For

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

whatever reason, members of the low-income community may not be clients of the service providers that were selected to conduct the survey, or perhaps, are clients but were not able to participate in the survey. A survey sample of the community will allow for a better understanding of poverty because it can provide information from resources that may have been missed by prior research. For instance, community members that work in churches or the school district that deal with a different aspect of poverty may provide rich resources that can potentially be captured in this survey.

SURVEY DISTRIBUTION The surveys were made available from Monday, August 2 to Friday September 3, 2010.

The statistical program, SPSS, was used to analyze all four types of surveys. SPSS is a computer program that allows for data entry and statistical outputs based on the data. The program allows the user to set up predetermined variables (such as gender, marital status, etc…), therefore, making data entry for every survey simple. Descriptive statistics can then be used to determine such occurrences as data frequencies and cross tabulation between variables. The ability to enter data in this way will greatly reduce the time that it will take to compile and analyze the results of the surveys.

The nature and quality of the data collected from research is based on the implementation of an effective sampling strategy. Samples, therefore, “need to be selected to insure the inclusion of relevant constituencies, events, processes, and so on, that can illuminate and inform that understanding”6 Surveys, in this project, were developed for the various sectors of the population, particularly the three target populations of this study: low-income individuals, service providers, and elected officials. Surveys will be based on data and knowledge gained from county data profiles, content analysis, and key informant interviews. Sampling for the target populations was conducted in the following way: 46 6 Elam, Gillian and Jane Lewis, Jane Ritchie. “Designing and Selecting Samples”. Qualitative Research Practice. Ed. Jane Ritchie and Jane Lewis. London: Sage Publications, 2003. Pg. 82.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Client Surveys

Cooke Fannin Grayson Counties All Notes

Workforce Solutions Texoma 400 Mailed Envelopes to Clients Section 8 Choice 21 33 Vouchers 2 7 Mailed Envelopes to Clients 11 36 Texoma Public Housing 0 0 Mailed Envelopes to Clients North Texas Youth Paper Surveys Administered to Clients at Meeting Connection- STAR 30 Dates Grayson County College Paper Surveys Administered to Students at Class Adult Education 30 meetings August 1- August 10 Paper Surveys Administered to Clients at Meeting Abigail's Arms 30 Dates Grayson County Habitat Paper Surveys Administered to Clients at Meeting for Humanity Dates 1,14 TCOG Utility Assistance 0 Mailed Envelopes to Clients 15 Paper Surveys to Clients at Meeting Dates Will Pick Project United 0 UP Grayson County Shelter 50 Paper Surveys w/ Business Reply Envelopes Grayson County Head 22 Start 5 Fannin County Head 13 Start 9 Paper Surveys Administered at Parent Counseling

TOTAL SURVEYS 3213

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Service Provider Survey Distribution

Cooke Fannin Grayson Counties All Notes Workforce Solutions 15 Online Link Emailed to Fannin County Head Start 28 Staff Fannin Children's Crisis Center Fannin County Food Pantry TCOG Utility Assistance 5 Paper Survey TCOG Section 8 5 Paper Survey TCOG Public Housing 7 Paper Survey Project United 2 Paper Survey North Texas Youth Connection Salvation Army Meals on Wheels of Texoma 45 Paper Survey Sherman Housing Authority 200 Children's Advocacy Center of Grayson County 20 MHMR Services of Texoma Online Link Emailed to United Way of Grayson County Program Recipients 22 Organizations American Red Cross Grayson County Head Start 25 TOTAL SURVEYS 331

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Community Survey

Electronic Format? Cooke Fannin Grayson Counties All Notes 140 Meals on Wheels of Texoma 0 Paper Surveys Administered to Clients 100 TAPS Buses 0 Paper Surveys Left on Buses TCOG- RSVP 740 Mailed to Volunteers Workforce Solutions Resource Link to surveymonkey site on X Centers computer kiosks Sherman Parks and Recreation Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Office 50 Envelopes Grayson County Vehicle Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Registration 50 Envelopes Sherman Water Utility Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Department 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Denison City Hall 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Denison Public Library 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Sherman Public Library 50 Envelopes Grayson County South Gov. Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Center (VA) 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Whitesboro City Hall 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Whitesboro Public Library 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Collinsville City Hall 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Pottsboro City Hall 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Fannin Co. Tax Office 50 Envelopes 60 Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Quik Chek Locations 0 Envelopes McCraw Oil Distributers 30 Paper Copies Left with Business Reply (Fannin Co.) 0 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Goodwill Industries in Bonham 50 Envelopes Bonham Chamber of Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Commerce 50 Envelopes 49 Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Bonham Public Library 50 Envelopes Cooke Co. Vehicle Registration 50 Paper Copies Left with Business Reply

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Envelopes Gainesville Chamber of Commerce 50 Paper Copies Left - Will Pick Up Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Gainesville Water Utility Dept. 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Muenster Public Library 50 Envelopes Paper Copies Left with Business Reply Cooke County Public Library 50 Envelopes TOTAL SURVEYS 4790

SURVEY CODING AND ANALYSIS The research team collaborated with the Austin College Social Science Lab (SSL) and Dr. Nathan Bigelow to process the data collected in the surveys. This process utilized the software program, SPSS, which provides a specialized platform to process, manage, and analyze data of this nature.

The SSL assisted with the time consuming tasks of editing the data for analysis and of coding the open-ended responses of the ‘top needs’ question that appeared on each survey so that SPSS could run descriptive statistic analyses. Data editing simply consisted of ‘cleaning’ up responses so that SPSS would read such responses as ‘sherman’ and ‘Sherman’ as the same answer and formatting each question response within the SPSS platform.

In order to gather information from open-ended responses, which can garner a wide variety of responses, a coding scheme of broader themes or categories assigned to each response transforms the data into a form more suitable for analysis. The SSL focused primarily on coding the open-ended responses of the ‘top needs’ question that appeared on every survey. They started by reading each response and assigning a numeric code. Responses that were very similar such as ‘employment’, ‘Employment’ were coded the same while ‘employment’ and ‘need better employment’ were coded as separate answers. This process coded down 50 approximately 5000 unique responses to 321 codes. The researchers call this list of codes the ‘mid-level’ code categories because these codes were individual reconsidered for further

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

collapsing into broader themes and subjects. After considering each mid-level code, the researchers and the SSL created a list of 14 broad categories and one ‘other’ category that each mid-level code was placed. A copy of these mid-level and collapsed codes with their frequencies can be found in Appendix D.

Once the response data was cleaning and coded the research team and SSL conducted a series of crosstabulations, frequency tests, and found the mean distribution. These tests were primarily focused on the data collected in the open-ended ‘top needs’ question and the critical services question that asked respondents to indicate the importance of 16 different services or solutions in helping low income individuals become self sufficient. These tests looked at all responses collected in the Texoma region, responses from each county, and responses from each type of respondent: client, service provider, elected official, and community. A list of each test performed and the tables of outputs of each test appear in Appendix E. These outputs represent only some of the ways to crosstabulate the data collected through the survey. These table outputs in this report provide the researchers with a rich set of information that specifically addresses the research question by identifying the top needs and most critical solutions in each county.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Test Surveys

The following survey was tested with clients and services providers of the Texoma Council of Governments Energy Assistance program in July 2010. The responses gathered through this test survey helped the researchers understand how the survey and question design would be interpreted by respondents. Researchers reduced the length of the survey and modified a number of questions for clarity of interpretation by the respondent based upon the results of this test. The researchers also combined the use of open-ended and closed response questions to ask about critical needs and services or solutions in the respondent’s community.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Survey Instruments

The following pages are exact copies of the survey instruments used to collect data about the defined target populations: clients, community, service providers, and elected officials. The client and community surveys were also translated into Spanish.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1.2 PLAN OF ACTION

The plan of action for collecting and analyzing data is represented in this study’s design matrix, which is attached at the end of this section. The matrix was a starting point for identifying and assessing research questions that would later be answered through further research and analysis. The matrix also served as an identifying mechanism for further research sources and tools that would be essential in this project. The main function of the study design matrix was to direct the qualitative research that was conducted in this project. There are certain difficulties associated with making qualitative observations based on data collected in a research process. Because of these difficulties, a variety of qualitative methods were employed in order to fully address the main goals of this study and encompass a wide variety of data. The purpose of using an array of techniques was to understand and gauge the attitudes and behaviors of the general public, and then further apply these findings to the overall research project. The techniques used during this study were: contextual analysis, semi-structured interviewing, and surveys. These techniques were used to analyze the research gathered in order to explore, describe, and explain the nature of poverty and self-sufficiency services in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties.

Community Needs Assessment staff members formulated the following research question as the primary question of this study: What are the critical causes and conditions of poverty and the services available for individuals seeking self-sufficiency in Texoma? The researchers used a two-fold approach to answering the research question: 1) collect and analyze facts about poverty where possible and 2) supplement that knowledge with a gauge of citizen’s concerns and opinions about needs and services in their communities. The first approach sought to gather existing data about the conditions of poverty in each county using readily available information via such varied sources as the United States Census Bureau, U.S. Department of

Housing and Urban Development, the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report and the Center for Public 73 Policy Priorities. This information was analyzed and assessed in order to understand the state of poverty and human services in the tri-county area. Information learned in this phase of primary

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

research then guided the researchers in the design and execution of key information interviews with service providers in Texoma. In order to explore the depth and breadth of issues apparent from the public statistical data and to gather more insight into local issues not captured by public surveys, the researchers set up a series of key informant interviews with service providers in each county. The questions and topics explored in these interviews were informed by the statistical research and interviewees were encouraged to offer their opinions and concerns about local needs and services.

The second approach, or phase, of research sought to gauge and assess concerns, attitudes, and feelings concerning areas of need and the role of human services within the tri-county region. This was achieved through a community-wide survey that targeted key segments of the population administered through mail-out surveys and electronic distribution with the aid of survey monkey, an online survey design and collection tool.

The target populations for this study are: low-income individuals that may be seeking or receiving public assistance, service providers, and elected officials. These three target populations are in each of the TCOG CSBG service area counties: Cooke, Grayson, and Fannin. Other population targets include the public at large.

The design matrix is divided into specific steps in order to identify critical causes and conditions of poverty and economic hardship in the Texoma region. These steps attempt to discover the contextual background of poverty and economic hardship in Texoma. They seek to map the range of elements and dimension of the target population. Additional steps in the design matrix also seek to discover the conditions and causes of poverty changed since 2005; the primary causes that make individuals or families seek self-sufficiency services; and the primary conditions affecting poverty. The design matrix was essential in determining the flow of research in particular areas of the CNA. The matrix was particularly helpful in creating the 74 county profiles as it raised important questions that needed to be addressed in each research technique. Overall, the matrix served as a reference guide for what type of research needed to

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

be conducted and what questions needed to be asked in order to gain valuable information towards answering the primary research question.

1.2.1 OUTREACH Outreach to the community was provided largely through participation in local agency council meetings in order to inform key service groups and agencies about the existence of the 2010 CNA as well as progress with the project. These meetings were also helpful in identifying service providers interested in providing key informant interviews. CNA researchers met with the following groups:

Texoma Homeless Coalition The Texoma Homeless Coalition is program that was conceptualized by HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) that works to “facilitate a comprehensive system-wide approach that meets the many complex needs of homeless people. The implementation of such an approach often requires systemic change in a community's recognition that homelessness is not the problem of ‘some other agency,’ but the concern of the entire community.”7 The Texoma Homeless Coalition strives to meet this aim through many different avenues. In terms of the Community Needs Assessment, Texoma Council of Government (TCOG) was able to partner with the Coalition through attending its monthly meetings. These meetings are used as a networking tool for the coalition and other service providers that deal with the homeless. Service providers are able to meet monthly and discuss the reality of homelessness in the area and what the agencies can do, collaboratively, to combat this problem. Researchers for the TCOG CNA have been attending these meetings in order to network with service providers in order to set up interviews and gain valuable information regarding poverty in all three counties.

Grayson County Social Services Association The Grayson County Social Services Association is a service provider association that meets monthly for networking purposes. Services providers in the county send representatives to the 75

7 Texoma Homeless Network. “Theory of Homeless Coalition”. . Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

meeting to network with other service providers regarding the issue of poverty in Grayson County. This allows agencies to receive direct information about other service providers and the help that they provide. The chief aim of these meetings is for agencies to meet each other and become familiar with one another’s services in the hope of better serving the collective low-income community within the county.

United Way The mission of United Way is “to improve lives by mobilizing the caring power of the people of Grayson County”. 8 United Way of Grayson County serves as a service funder, meaning that they provide monetary support to service providers in the area so that the agencies will be better able to serve their clients. TCOG and The United Way have partnered in order to conduct and administer community surveys throughout the tri-county area. The United Way Board meets once a month and consist of local elected officials, community leaders, and service providers. This meeting occurs so that these three entities can network together in order to better serve low-income individuals in the area.

TCOG Governing Body Presentation The TCOG Governing Body Presentation was a chance for the researchers for the CNA to share the progress that had been made at the halfway point of the project. A copy of this presentation appears in Appendix A. The presentation also provided an opportunity to reach out to officials and representatives across the region for feedback on the Community Needs Assessment process and development. The presentation that was used to explain the CNA development is available at the end of this section. The TCOG Board is made up of elected officials and respected community members that oversee and assess work that is being conducted by TCOG departments. The Board consists of fifteen members and meets monthly to review various projects that are happening throughout TCOG. The research team for CNA was able to network with the TCOG Governing Body about the progress that had already been made 76 on the CNA project, and the steps that would be taken over the next few months in order to

8 United Way. “Mission and Vision”. < http://www.unitedwaygrayson.org/Mission_and_Vision.php>. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

complete the project. A description of the members of the TCOG Governing Board is as follows and was made available by Texoma Council of Governments9:

The Honorable John Roane County Judge Cooke County

The Honorable Pat Hilliard County Commissioner Fannin County

The Honorable Johnny Waldrip County Commissioner Grayson County

The Honorable Roy Floyd Mayor City of Bonham

The Honorable Robert Brady Mayor City of Denison

The Honorable Glenn Loch Mayor City of Gainesville

The Honorable Cary Wacker, President Council Member City of Sherman

The Honorable Frances West Mayor City of Callisburg

The Honorable Robert Stephens Mayor City of Bailey 77

9 Texoma Council of Governments. “Governing Body”. < http://www.texoma.cog.tx.us/about.html>. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Honorable Thomas Carter Mayor City of Bells

The Honorable Al Smith, Vice President Community Representative Cooke County

Reverend Cecil Jones Community Representative Fannin County

The Honorable Bill Lindsay Community Representative Grayson County

Bob Thomas Trustee Bonham ISD

Janet Gott Trustee Grayson County College

News Release Staff members at TCOG issued a news release to each county within the scope of this study to inform the public of places they could find community surveys and announce to the other target populations that the client, service provider, and elected official surveys could be obtained through TCOG staff. A copy of this press release appears in Appendix A.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1.3 TIMETABLE FOR CONDUCTING RESEARCH

•Outline Intern Duties December •Interview Interns •Turn in Project Budget to Brenda by 1/15 2009 •Draft a working research study design

•Continue developing research design matrix January •Obtain supplies necessary for early stages of research •Begin Key Informant Interviews •Structure work for Interns through creation of a 2010 and spring 2010 workplan

•Continue Refinement of Work Plan and Weekly Goals February •Exploratory stage of research •Outline research for background data to be used for county profiles •Schedule interviews with service providers and community members 2010 (exploratory research to provide info on target population)

•Quantitative research- data collection (complete attachment D) March •Begin writing attachment B, conduct outreach for CNA •Outline sub-groups of target populations: Low-Income, Public Officials, Service Providers 2010 •Conduct service provider and LMI interviews

•Quant. research- write data profile narratives for each county •Supplement Attachement D requirements w/ perinent data April 2010 •LMI interviews, finish final service provider interviews •Analysis of Interviews- Coding 82

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

•Quant. research- write data profile narratives for each county •Identify focus group composition for Cooke, Fannin, May 2010 and Grayson Counties •Summarize interview results •Design materials for surveys

•Complete Data Profile Narratives •Prepare data tables for appendices •Complete Interview Results and Analysis Write-up June 2010 •Begin survey sample construction and design •Draft surveys for each county's clients, service providers, elected officials, and community members

•Consider types of questionnaire delivery- electronic (email/survey monkey), mail, etc... •Compile 'contact' lists for each county's respective July 2010 questionnaire types: client, service providers, elected officials, and community. •Send out questionnaires, first week of August

•Gather Questionnaire responses •record data electronically August •Create frist draft of the report by combining all documents of report minus Survey Response, Results 2010 and Analysis. •Review and revise report as needed.

• Complete Processing of Survey Response, Results and Analysis September •9/16:TCOG Governing Body Reviews Final Report and Approves Submission. 2010 •Send the Texoma CNA to be printed and distributed to 83 community over October 2010

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2. RESEARCH RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.1 COOKE COUNTY

Cooke County is located in north Texas near the Texas-Oklahoma border. The county is dissected in to four quadrants by US Highway 82 running east and west and Interstate 35 running north-south. Flowing along the side of I-35 is the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad, which, along with the many cargo trains, runs AMTRAK’s Heartland Flyer. The Heartland Flyer is a passenger train that runs between Oklahoma City and Ft Worth.

The county seat of Cooke County is Gainesville. The population is approximately 39,000 residents and covers nearly 900 square miles, of which 874 square miles is land and 25 square miles is water.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

As of the 2000 census, there were 36,363 people, 13,643 households, and 10,000 families residing in Cooke County but those numbers have increased sharply with an estimated population of 38,847 in 2005. This 6.5 percent growth ranks Cooke County 60 out of 254 counties in Texas for growth. With the influx from the ever-growing Dallas Fort Worth Metropolis and the ease of access to Interstate-35, Cooke County is set for even more growth in the future.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Figure 1 Map of Cooke County Jurisdictions Map Location Entity Type Population (05-07 est.) A Callisburg City 365 B Gainesville City 15,583

C Lindsay City 788 D Muenster City 1,556 E Oak Ridge City 224

F Valley View City 737

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

42672 44974 46490 36363 39409

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Figure 2 Cooke County Population Projections

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.1.1 PROFILE OF PUBLIC STATISTICS

Housing

Housing is one of the most important measures of individual or household self-sufficiency. The recent economic recession has shown how volatile the housing market and home prices can be Though owning your own home is often considered a sound investment, many cannot afford the associated rents and mortgage in their communities.

In 2008, there were 15,815 housing units in Cooke County.10 Approximately 89.1 percent of these units were occupied, while remaining

10.9 percent were vacant. Of the total 14,085 Total Housing Units: 15,851 occupied units, 72.3 percent were owner occupied, while 27.7 percent were rented by Vacant Housing Occupied Units: the occupant. The homeowner vacancy rate Units: 14,085 (89.1%) 1,730 (10.9%) in Cooke County is 2.2 percent and about 4.4 percent of rental units remain vacant. The Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Housing Units: Housing Units: average household size is 2.68 percent, while 10,188 (72.3%) 3,897 (27.7%) the average family size is 3.12 persons11. Figure 3. Cooke County Housing Characteristics, American Community The average household size of owner Survey 2006-2008, U.S. Census occupied housing units is 2.70 while the average household size for renter occupied housing units is 2.62. The majority of houses in Cooke County are valued $50,000 to $99,000 with 2,972 owner-occupied units being reported at this dollar amount. The median house value for the county is $109,600.12

10 American Community Survey 2006- 2008, U.S. Census Bureau. 11 The U.S. Census defines a family as a group of two or more people who reside together and who are related by 89 birth, marriage, or adoption. A household is defined as including all the people who occupy a housing unit as their usual place of residence. 12 This figure represents the home value that separates the higher half of all home values in Cooke County from the lower half. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The following data was gathered using the 2009 State of Texas Low-income Housing Plan and Annual Report13. This report is broken up into 13 distinct geographical regions known as Uniform State Service Regions. This report uses data collected from the 2006 State of Texas Community Needs Survey (CNS). Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties appear in region 3 along with 15 other counties. Although and therefore have the same data for the following issues. However, this data is useful as it creates a regional profile for housing in this area.

Cost burden is a ratio rent or mortgage to household income and is used to interpret financial stability of households. The industry standard in new home financing usually provides affordable mortgages for homebuyers who earn approximately one third or greater of the cost of the home. Household cost burdens that are above 30 percent experience great financial strain and have less financial flexibility for unforeseen costs and financial emergencies. Based upon a cost burden of 30 percent, only 41.9% of families in Cooke County can afford the median price of a single family home in Cooke County ($109,600). The extreme cost burden for renter households is 206,011, while the extreme cost burden for owners is 216,038. These extreme cost burdens pose a significant problem for low-income individuals in the county. However, this data should be taken lightly as it applies to an area much larger than Cooke County individually. Extreme cost burden affects low-income individuals due to the up-keep and miscellaneous expenses that are associated with this cost burden. These expenses, in turn, create areas of need.

More specific information about housing affordability and housing problems in Texoma can be found in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)14. CHAS data was sought after interesting findings when the researchers put together income and housing cost burden data from the U.S. Census.

13 Website: Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, 2010 State of Texas Low-income Housing Plan 90 and Annual Report, accessed April 30, 2010, available from http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/housing-center/docs/10- SLIHP.pdf. 14 HUD CHAS data and other housing information can be accessed on the HUD USER website, Data Set page: http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/pdrdatas.html. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Monthly Housing Costs Cooke County Residents

36 32 28 24 Owner Occupied- Less than 20% 20 16 Renter-occupied Less than 20% 12 Owner- occupied 20-29% 8 of HouseholdofIncome Renter-occupied 20%- 29% 4

Housing Costs Housing as Percentage a 0 Owener-occupied 30% or More Less $20,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000 Renter-occupied 30% or More than $34,999 49,999 $74,999 or More $20,000 = Marginal to Severe Housing Cost Burden Household Income

Figure 4 Monthly Housing Costs as a Percentage of Household Income of Cooke County Residents. Source: ACS 2006- 2008.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

HUD CHAS data indicates that the poorest households in Cooke County tend to experience marginal to severe housing costs burden more than they tend to experience marginal to severe housing costs burden more than households that earn closer to the local median family income.

Households with Severe Housing Problems Cooke County , 2009

Housing cost burden 30%- 50% HAMFI

Housing cost burden more than 50% of <30% of HUD MFI HAMFI 30%- 50% HAMFI More than 1 person per room 50.1- 60% HAMFI 60.1%- 80% HAMFI Lack complete plumbing/kitchen 80.1- 95% HAMFI

0 500 1000 1500 2000

Figure 5 Households with Severe Housing Problems Cooke County 2009. HAMFI- Household Adjusted Median Family Income. Source: HUD CHAS2009 Data Set.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Of the households that are experiencing moderate to severe housing cost burden in Cooke County, a large proportion of those households are small families (with 2-4 persons). Single parent households with a female head of household have the single highest poverty rate of any family-type according to the US Census Bureau (reported in the next section of this report). This household type falls within the definition small family and can explain why small families in Cooke County have much higher numbers of housing cost burden.

Cost Burden by Household Type Cooke County , 2009

Severe Cost Burden Moderate Cost Burden

200 Non-Family, Elderly 340 395 Non-Family, Non- Elderly 340 245 Large Family 47

1045 Small Family, Non- Elderly 925

55 Small Family, Elderly 275

Figure 6 Cost Burden by Household Type Cooke County 2009. Source: HUD CHAS 2009 Data Set.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fair Market Rent Cooke County, 2005- 2011 1000 950 881 900 2011 855 850 800 2005 693 750 674 694 700 650 550 600 548 546 550 500 432 433 450 400 350 300 Efficiency 1 2 3 4

Figure 7 Fair Markets Rents Cooke County 2005- 2011. Source: HUD Fair Market Rent. NOTE: FMR is the 40th percentile rent of the standard- quality rental housing units in the defined location and includes shelter rent plus the cost of all tenant-paid utilities, except telephones, cable or satellite television service, and internet service.

Monthly Housing Costs Cooke County 30 Cooke 25 Texas 20 US

Housing Housing Units 10

Percentage of All PercentageofAll Occupied 5

0 Less $300- $400- $500- $600- $700- $800- $900- $1,000- More than $399 $499 $599 $699 $799 $899 $999 $1,499 than $300 $1,500 94

Figure 8 Cooke County Monthly Housing Costs for All Occupied Housing Units 2006- 2008. Source: ACS 2006- 2008.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Housing Needs 2009

6% 7% Housing Assistance Energy Assistance Capacity Building Assitance 25% Development of Apartments 60% Homeless Assitance

Figure 910 Housing Needs 2009. Source: Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, 2010 State of Texas Low-income Housing Plan and Annual Report.

According to the 2006 CNS, one of the two greatest needs for this region was housing assistance with 51 percent of respondents reporting in this need. The next highest area of need was energy assistance with 21 percent of respondents reporting on this need. Of the remaining respondents, approximately 6 percent indicated that capacity building assistance was the priority need, 5 percent of respondents indicated that the development of apartments was the priority need and only 2 percent indicated that homeless assistance was the priority need. Overall, out of the 1,988,135 households in the region, 610,655 owners and renters have housing problems; this represents 30.7 percent of all households. However, this figure encompasses both rural and urban housing developments and therefore is open to room for interpretation. There are distinct differences between rural and urban housing needs. For instance, development of apartments is a greater need in urban areas than in rural areas. This is due to the fact that there are more socioeconomically disadvantage people, generally, living in urban areas as compared to rural areas. Housing assistance, it seems, is a need that affects both 95 rural and urban housing development. There are a number of multifamily units in the region financed through state and Federal sources such as TDHCA, HUD, PHAS, Section 8 Housing Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Choice Vouchers, USDA, and local HFCs including the Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation. The total number of these multifamily units in this region is 144,504 units, which make up 27.5 percent of the total number for the state of Texas.

There are multiple aspects of owning or renting a home for which data is not readily available, but which can play an important role in the long-term sustainability of a family’s housing situation. The Center for Neighborhood Technology argues, however, that you must factor in the cost of transportation associated with the location of homes to gauge their affordability.

Value-to-income ratio: This is the cost of a median house divided by the median-family income (both from census data). Depending on interest rates, a value-to-income ratio of less than 2 is generally affordable while a ratio greater than 3 is unaffordable.

Payback period: This is the number of years that a median-income family would need to pay back a loan equal to 90 percent of a median home value at prevailing mortgage interest rates. Fewer than 10 years is very affordable, 10 to 20 is affordable, 20 to 30 marginal, 30 to 40 unaffordable, and more than 40 severely unaffordable.

House price index: The Department of Commerce maintains a home price index for every metropolitan area extending as far back as 1975. This is an index of changes in the value of individual homes and thus does not reflect changes in size or quality over time as some other measures do.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Household Economic Security

The federal measure of poverty, better known as the 2010 Federal Poverty Guidelines Federal Poverty Line (FPL), was developed in the 1960s Family Annual Monthly Hourly** and was based solely on the food budget necessary to Size Income* 1 $10,830 $902 $5.20 meet basic nutritional needs since the average family at 2 14,570 1,214 7.00 3 18,310 1,525 8.80 that time spent nearly one third of their budget on food. 4 22,050 1,837 10.60 Clearly, there are many more costs associated with a 5 25,790 2,149 12.39 6 29,530 2,460 14.19 family living today depending upon family constellation and other costs that include housing, transportation, childcare, health care and taxes. There is a significant disparity between the FPL for a family of one, two or three people. Agencies and professionals who try to apply the FPL to their eligibility standards find the threshold to be too low causing Percent of Cooke County families with at least one Population Living in Poverty worker in the household who cannot meet their own needs People in Families 10.8 to be turned away from 65 Years and Over 6.5 assistance. For this reason, 18 Years and Over 10.1 Under 18 Years many agencies adopt a level of 17.9 All People 12.1 income qualification using a Female Single Head of Household 56 multiple of the FPL. For Married Couple Families 4.4 instance, Children’s Health All Families 12.5

Insurance Program sets their Figure 11 Percent of Cooke County Population Living in Poverty. Source: 2006- 2008 ACS. eligibility at 300% of FPL and the Texoma Council of Government’s Utility Assistance Program 97 In 2006, 12.1 percent of people in Cooke County were living at or below the federal poverty level. Of all families in the county, 12.5 Percent were living at or above the federal poverty

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

level. As far as age brackets, the under 18 years bracket has the highest percent of people living in poverty with 17.9 percent of people living below the federal poverty line. The next highest level is the 18 and over bracket with 10.1 percent of people living in poverty. The most staggering statistic is that families with a female-headed household, no husband present, represent more than 50 percent (56.0%) of households living in poverty. As evident by the data, women who run households with the absence of a husband struggle significantly with poverty. There are approximately 1,108 families in Cook County that have female-headed households and are living at or below the federal poverty level15. Of these households, 774 of these families include children under the age of 1816. (1999)

The ethnic breakdown of poverty in Cooke County is very similar to patterns at the state and national level. In regards to minority ethnic groups, Hispanic Americans are experiencing the highest rate of poverty, with 3,475 people at or above the federal poverty level. The next highest group is African Americans with 953 living in poverty. American Indian and Asian were the next highest groups with 153 and 99 people living in poverty respectively. There are approximately 31,497 people living in poverty who categorize themselves as white.

Title Cash Assistance programs are an area of particular interest in regards to poverty in Cooke County. Enrollment levels of such programs are often used as socioeconomic indicators. Enrollment requires that an individual or family meet certain income qualification standards. In the last eighteen months, national enrollment in assistance programs have hit all-time highs as income qualifications are raised, allowing more families to qualify for services and more families are feeling the effects of a national recession.

15 This figure comes from the U.S. Census Bureau data from 1999 16 This figure comes from the U.S. Census Bureau data from 1999 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Percentage of FPL for a family of three, 100= Poverty Line

300 Full-time min. wage: $42,703 250 $15,080 per year (82% of poverty) 200 $33,874 $33,874 $27,465 150 $23,803 $23,803

100

50 $2,256 185% 185% 130% 130% 243% 150% 12% 0 WIC Reduced-Price Free School Food Stamps Max. Child Care Typical Child TANF Cash School Meals Meals (SNAP) Care Assistance*

Table 1 Texas Eligibility for Family Support Programs. *Income limit shown is for applicants only. Once on TANF, some families with earnings disregards and other allowances for work related expenses can have higher incomes yet continue to receive some cash assistance. Source: Center for Public Policy Priorities (CPPP) Policy Point, Poverty 101, September 28, 2010.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) is the oversight agency for the state’s health and human services system. HHSC also administers state and federal programs that provide financial, health, and social services to Texans. The major HHSC programs for the state are17:

1) Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP): Designed CHIP Enrollment Sept. 2009- for families who earn too much money to qualify for Feb. 2010 Medicaid health care, yet 700 697 690 cannot afford private 690 691 682 insurance. 680 672 670 CHIP Enrollment 2) Temporary Assistance for 660 666 Needy Families (TANF): Sept. 2009- Feb. 650 Program provides basic 2010 financial assistance for needy children and the parents or caretakers with whom they live. Caretakers Figure 12 CHIP Enrollment Cooke County, Source: Texas HHSC. must sign and abide by a personal-responsibility agreement. Time limits for benefits have been set by both state and federal welfare reform legislation.

3) Medicaid: This program Medicaid Enrollment July 2009- provides healthcare coverage for one out of February 2010 three children in Texas, 5,000 pays for half of all births 4,000 and accounts for 27 3,000 percent of the state’s total 2,000 budget. 1,000 0 4) Food Stamp: This Total Total Total TANF Adults TANF program is a federally Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Children funded program that in Children's of Children assists low-income Medicaid under 19 families, the elderly and single adults to obtain a Jul-09 Feb-10 100 nutritionally adequate Figure 13 Medicaid Enrollment Cooke County. Source: Texas HHSC.

17 Detailed tables of historical enrollment and payments size data can be found in Appendix F. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

diet. Those eligible for food stamps include households receiving TANF or federal Supplemental Security Income benefits and non-public assistance households having income below 130% of the poverty level.

5) WIC and Retail Grocery Stores: This program is a supplemental nutrition program for infants, children, and mothers who are at nutritional risk. The program provides nutritious snacks, nutrition counseling, and referrals to health care and social services. WIC serves, on the yearly bases, about 8.1 Million People and is available in all 50 states.

Income Caps for Texas Medicaid & CHIP, 2010

CHIP 200 $33, 874 Annual Income Longterm Care 74 220 $24, 352 Limits: Income is for SSI (aged or disabled) 74 $18,310 a family of Working Parent of 2 20.2 $2,256 three in child 12.2 & parent TANF Parent of 2, No Income $3,696 categories. Ages 6 to 18 100 $7,884 SSI & Long- Term Care, 133 Ages 1 to 5 $23,826 income cap 133 is for one Pregnant Women & … 185 $36,620

0 50 100 150 200 250

Federal Minimum State Option

Table 2 Income Caps for Texas Medicaid and CHIP, 2010. Source: CPPP Policy Point, Poverty 101, September 28, 2010.

Cooke County’s participation in these programs is quite significant. There were 4,098 people registered for CHIP from September 2009 to February 2010. As evident from the graph, the participation in CHIP began to decrease in September and hit its lowest point in November with enrollment reported at 666 people. However, the number began to rise steadily the next month and has continued with this pattern. Average monthly enrollment in TANF for the County was 63 recipients, which make for an approximate yearly figure of 756 recipients. Comparatively, the state of Texas reports an average monthly figure of 104,693 recipients of TANF enrollment for the state as a whole. Total enrollment in Medicaid for Cooke County in July 2009 was 4,267 101 recipients. This figure had decreased significantly by February with 3,784 recipients enrolled in the program. Total enrollment in children’s Medicaid for July 2009 was 3,234 compared with

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

the 2,599 children that were enrolled in February 2010. Food stamp enrollment in Cooke County for a six-month period (September 2009 to February 2010) was 21,170 recipients. As evident by the graph, enrollment in the food stamp program was on a decline and reached its lowest point in December of 2009. However, the figures then began to steadily increase for the next few months. A particular trend in all four of these programs is that they all experienced a particular decrease of enrollment for the month of December and then experienced an increase in enrollment for the next few months. The only program that had a slightly different experience was TANF enrollment that simply experienced a significant decrease in enrollment over time.

Homelessness is a particular area of poverty that is certainly experienced in Cooke County. A survey conducted by the Texoma Homelessness Coalition studied the condition of homelessness in Texoma and other surrounding counties. The survey used a sample size of 92 respondents and was conducted through the help of local agencies that deal directly with homelessness, such as the Red Cross. The majority of these respondents were male, white, and single individuals. However, the difference between the number of homeless men and women was not very significant. Another significant finding from this data is that 2/3 of the respondents were veterans. The majority of these veterans tour of duty was in Korea with 10 of the 92 respondents reporting this figure.

There are also a significant number of children that are in the legal custody of their grandparents. This is likely a Figure 14. Source: Texas HHSC financial burden due to the fact that many elderly people rely on assistance programs such as social security and Medicare. There are approximately 1,276 grandparents living with their grandchildren who are under that age of 18. 676 of these grandparents are legally responsible for their grandchildren, which are 52.3% of all grandparents living with grandchildren. The majority of these grandparents, 26.8%, 102 have been responsible for their grandchildren for less than a year. About 63% of these grandparents are female and 73.10% of these grandparents are married.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the American Community Survey for 2006-2008, the Cooke County Civilian Labor

Force was 19,848. This figure Seasonally Adjusted reflects the total available Unemployment Rates 10 workforce age 16 and over in Cooke County. The number 8 Cooke Fannin employed within the civilian 6 Grayson labor force for the county was 4 Texas

18,808, which means the 2 US number of unemployed 2000 2007 2008 Dec-09 workers within the civilian labor Figure 15. Source: Texas Workforce Commission, LCMI TRACER force in Cooke County is 1,040, or 3.5% of the workforce. While the unemployment rate is quite low, employment figures are on the rise in Cooke County. Figure 3 shows the seasonally 24-Month Average Unemployment Rate adjusted unemployment rates reported by the Texas Workforce (period ending 01/10) % Commission LCMI Department. Cooke County has seen the Cooke County 4.90 Fannin County 7.33 largest rise in unemployment rates over the last decade that Grayson County 6.78 Texoma Region 6.40 started around the time of the national economic recession. The U.S. 7.73 Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the 24-month average Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics unemployment rate for Cooke County from January 2008 to January 2010 is 4.90 percent. This 24-month period matches closely the period of increases in unemployment seen in Figure 3. Again, although there has been a steady increase in unemployment in Cooke County, figures remain below national, state, and regional percentages.

Based on income data for Cooke County, the percent of people living in poverty is 12.6 percent. The following data is based on U.S. Census Data for the year 1999. The number of households in the three lowest income brackets totals to 14,320 households. The number of households in 103 the three highest income brackets totals to 3,202 households. The number of families in the three lowest income brackets totals to 6,977 families. The number of families and households

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

in the three highest income brackets totals to 2,800. Based on the data, it becomes very apparent that there is a significant gap in sheer number of families and households in the lowest strata of income, compared with those in the highest strata of income. When the mid- range of income strata is analyzed with the lowest income bracket, there does not appear to be as high of a discrepancy.

The ACS 2006-2008 reports the same income data with notable differences in results. The number of households in the three lowest income brackets totals to 10,787 households. The number of households in the three highest income brackets totals to 6,250. The number of families in the three lowest income brackets totals to 5293 families. The number of families in the three highest income brackets totals to 5,733 families. Based on the data, the conclusion can be drawn that the gap between the gap between both families and households in the highest and lowest income brackets narrowed significantly in a seven-year period. This decrease can be explained, partially, by changes in industry that occurred between 1999 and 2006.

Income Comparison 16,000

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000 Lowest Income Brackets 6,000 Highest Income Brackets 4,000

2,000

0 Households Families (1999) Households Families (2000) (1999) (2006) 104

Figure 17 16. Sourc e: 2000 U.S. Census and ACS 2006-2008

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Texoma Area has historically had a strong manufacturing base with several nationally recognized companies including Oscar Mayer, Johnson & Johnson, Pillsbury, ALCOA, and others. In the First Quarter of 2000, Manufacturing made up 21% of the labor market with almost 13,000 jobs. By the First Quarter of 2004 Manufacturing jobs had dropped to just over 9,300, 15% of the local labor market. According to First Quarter 2008 statistics, Manufacturing has dropped to just over 9,100 jobs and 14% of the labor market. The Location Quotient Report shows the current competitive advantage for the area, in an attempt to determine which industries hold the most promise for the future.

105

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Texoma Industry 2006

Government Other Services (Except Government) Leisure and Hospitality Services Education and Health Services Professional and Business Services Financial Activities Texas Information Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Manufacturing Construction Natural Resources and Mining

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

Figure 18. Source: Texoma CEDS

One sector, Leisure and Hospitality shows a slight competitive advantage for the Area in both lists, and appears to be increasing according to the 2000 – 2008 comparison. Members of the Texoma Regional Consortium recently held a Lake Development Summit to discuss proposed development around Lake Texoma. The members of the Regional Consortium have determined Accommodation & Food Services should be a targeted industry as the area becomes more of a destination.

106

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Education and Literacy

Individuals seeking self- sufficiency must have a Regional Literacy Overview certain level of pre- 2003 93% employment skills and 91% 89% competencies. Basic literacy, 87% 85% as understood by the 83% Cooke County 81% 79% Fannin County National Assessment of Adult Literacy Rate Grayson County Literacy (NAAL), means an Cooke County 89% adult is able to read and Fannin County 85% Grayson County 89% understand basic written Figure 19. Source: NAAL information in English including the ability to locate easily identifiable information in short, commonplace prose text. The NAAL calculates that, in 2003, 89.7 percent of Cooke County Residents have prose literacy skills at a basic or higher level. This figure is based upon the NAAL Basic Prose Literacy Skills, or BPLS. The NAAL is a nationally representative assessment of English literacy among American adults age 16 and older. The Assessment also includes the literacy rate for the state of Texas, which is 81% (2003) of the adult population. Therefore, the literacy rate for Cooke County is well above the national average. However, this figure is lower than the national average of 99% (2003) of all US adults.

107

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the Texas Drop-Out Rates 2006-2007 Education Agency 3.00% annual report on 2.50% 2.00% dropout and completion 1.50% 1.00% rate, the dropout rate 0.50% 0.00% Drop-Out Rates for Cooke County in the 2006-2007 school year was 0.2% for grades 7- 12. The highest dropout rate in terms of student Figure 20. Source: TEA Annual Drop-Out Report groups was African Americans with a dropout rate of 2.6% that year. The next highest groups were the economically disadvantaged and at risk both reporting dropout rates of 0.3%. White and Hispanic group’s dropout rates were reported at 0.1% and 0.0% respectively.

The population of children three and older enrolled in School in Cooke County is 9,414 students. In the 2006-2008 period, the group that School Enrollment 2006-2008 accounted for the most 14,000 12,000 students enrolled was 10,000 elementary school (grades 8,000 6,000 1-8) with a total of 4,128. 4,000 This number could reflect 2,000 0 the age of the population in Elemen High College Nursery tary Kinderg School or Cooke County, but is also School, School arten (grades Gradua Pre-K (grades explained by the fact that 9-12) te 1-8) students begin to dropout at School Enrollment 1,647 1,602 12,322 6,477 6,938 the high school level. The Figure 21. Source: ACS 2006- 2008 108 number of students enrolled in college or graduate school is 1,576 total students. This number can be explained,

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

predominantly, by Cooke County’s proximity with Grayson County College in Grayson County. Overall households and demographics featuring high levels of educational attainment are also among the highest in household income and wealth. Therefore, educational attainment can be used as an indicator of personal self-sufficiency. There are approximately 24,632 Cooke County residents over 25 years of age. Based on this population, the American Community Survey estimates there are 7,871 total high school graduates in Cooke County over the age of 25, including equivalency markers such as the GED. This translates to about 31 percent of the adult population in Cooke County with only a high school education. Approximately 23 percent of residents have some college and 24 percent have at least an Associate’s degree. As expected, the number of residents with graduate and professional degrees is the smallest group of educational attainment is graduate or professional degree, which totals at 1,193 people. The next lowest level of educational attainment is completing less than the 9th grade, which totaled at 1,870 people.

Educational Attainment 2006-2008 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Less than 9th 9th to 12th High school Some Associate's Bachelor's Graduate or grade grade, no graduate college, no degree degree professional diploma (includes degree degree equivalency)

109

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

In terms of ethnic breakdown of school enrollment, Hispanic ethnicity makes up the highest percentage in Gainesville ISD, Cooke County’s largest 2008-2009 School school district, with 48.0% of students K-12 reporting. Enrollment by Ethnicity The next largest ethnicity was Caucasian (white) with a (Gainesville ISD) 41% of students reporting. African American 1% 1% accounted for 9.30% of the total population followed African 9% American by Asian/Pacific Islander and Native American 41% Hispanic reporting 1.10 and .50 percent respectively. There is a 48% White significant change occurring in Cooke County that is evident by the ethnic breakdown in the school population. The Hispanic population has grown Figure 22. Source: TEA Annual Report significantly over a four-year period. This growth is reflected in the particularly large number of students enrolled in certain programs such as ESL, English as a Second Language. The total population of Hispanic students in the 2005-2006 school year was 36.5% compared to the 48% of the school population that it now accounts for in the School population of Gainesville ISD. This is relatively proportional with figures for the state of Texas, which report similar figures of 47.9% of all students reporting a Hispanic ethnicity.

Approximately 12.1 percent of Cooke County residents live below the established federal poverty line, which is based on household and income and number of persons occupying the household. This number reflects, along with the increased Hispanic population in schools, accounts for the particularly high amount of students in the following categories: economically disadvantaged, Limited English Proficiency (LEP), Students with Disciplinary Placements, and At Risk students. Economically disadvantaged is a term to describe the percent of economically disadvantaged students is calculated as the sum of the students coded as eligible for free or reduced-price lunch or eligible for other public assistance, divided by the total number of students. Approximately 69.10% of students in Gainesville ISD qualify as economically 110 disadvantaged. Students in the LEP program are identified as limited English proficient by the Language Proficiency Assessment Committee (LPAC) according to criteria established in the

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Texas Administrative Code. Not all pupils identified as LEP receive bilingual or English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction, although most do. Approximately 21.8% of students are placed in this program, which almost directly matches the number of students that are enrolled in ESL, which is 21.60%. At risk students are identified as at risk of dropping out of school based on state-defined criteria, and 60.30% of students in Gainesville ISD qualify under these conditions. Students with Disciplinary Placements are students placed in alternative education programs and total out to 3.0% of the school population Gainesville ISD.

Student Qualifications Gainsville ISD 2007-2008

At-Risk 1,607

Students w/Disciplinary 95 Placements

Limited English Proficient (LEP) 580 Student Programs

Economically Disadvantaged 1,841

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Figure 23. TEA Annual Report

Student Enrollment also partially reflects the influx of Hispanic students over the past few years to Gainesville ISD. The enrollment in the ESL program was 21.6% in the 2008-2009 school year. Other noteworthy programs were Career and Technical Education and Gifted and Talented Education with enrollment at 14.5% and 7.40% respectively. Enrollment in the Special Education Program accounted for 11.3% of students in the district.

Another socioeconomic indicator concerning education is enrollment in free or reduced lunch programs. The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is a federally assisted meal program 111 operating in more than 99,800 public and non-profit private schools across the nation. The

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

United States Department of Agriculture funds this program and provides the following description of its service: It provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to more than 2.3 million Texas school children each school day. In 1998, Congress expanded the National School Lunch Program to include reimbursement for snacks served to children in after-school educational and enrichment programs to include children through 18 years of age. School lunches must meet the applicable recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which recommend that no more than 30 percent of calories come from fat and less than 10 percent from saturated fat. Regulations also establish a standard for school lunches to provide one-third of the Recommended Dietary Allowances of protein, vitamin A, vitamin C, iron, calcium and calories. School lunches must meet federal nutrition requirements, but decisions about the specific foods to serve and their preparation are made locally. A student cannot be charged more than 40 cents for a reduced-price lunch. After-school snacks are provided to children on the same income eligibility basis as school meals. However, programs that operate in areas where at least 50 percent of students are eligible for free or reduced-price meals serve all snacks free. In the 2008-2009, the state served 791,708,247 total meals as a part of the free or reduced lunch program18.

112

18 United States Department of Agriculture: Report on National School Lunches: http://www.squaremeals.org/fn/render/channel/items/0,1249,2348_2363_0_0,00.html Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Crime, Family Violence, and Child Abuse

The number of violent crimes known to the police in 2006 Violent Crimes 1995-2006 was 191 cases, according to the 250 U.S. Census Bureau. The 200 150 number of violent crimes 100 reported to the police in 2006 50 for the state of Texas was 0 199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006 121,468. The number of crimes Series 1 fluctuated between 1995 and Figure 24. Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2001, but showed an overall decrease. However, this number spiked again in 2002 and began to steadily rise which ended in an all time high for 2006. Robberies and aggravated assaults have experienced the biggest increase in reported cases since 1995. Burglaries have also steadily increased overtime with 326 cases being reported in 2006. Some offenses, such as motor-vehicle theft and larceny theft, were experiencing a steady increase until 2006 with both figures rapidly decreased.

Although hard data are difficult to obtain because of Reported Crimes (2006) the covert nature of the Reported Crimes (2006) problem, there is a known link motor vehicle thefts known to … 89 between violence against larceny-thefts known to police 753 burglaries known to police 326 women and poverty. property crimes known to police 1,168 aggravated assaults known to … 153 According to the Children’s robberies known to police 23 Advocacy Center of Sherman, forcible rapes known to police 12 murders and manslaughter 3 one in three women are a 113 victim of violent abuse. The Figure 25. Source: ACS

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

number of these cases that go unreported are 1 in 4. This data relates to the current state of conditions for women and children in Texoma and was gathered in 2009. There were between 1000 and 2000 law enforcement arrests involving abuse in this year. 800 victims and children were seen at the advocacy center, and these victims included both men and women. However, the center deals primarily with women and children who are suffering from abuse. The actual number of abuse incidents, both reported and non-reported, in 2009 was almost 2000 cases.

In the United States, domestic violence is conclusively linked to homelessness among women and children. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reports that domestic violence was cited by 50% of U.S cities surveyed in 2005 as a primary cause of homelessness.19 Further, the ACLU notes that 50% of homeless women in San Diego, California, reported being the victims of domestic violence, and that in Minnesota, one-third of homeless women indicated that they left their homes to escape domestic violence. Overall, according to the National Network to End Domestic Violence, 92% of homeless women in the United States have at some point been the victims of severe physical and/or sexual abuse.

The 2005 version of VAWA enhanced the provisions of its earlier version, with increased funding for violence-prevention programs, emergency shelter for women and children, and long-term housing solutions for low-income women and their children. The act also mandates that abused women be allowed to take ten days off from work each year to attend court or to look for housing, and it provides greater access to law enforcement and the justice system for abused immigrant woman who would otherwise have no legal recourse and might have to leave the country with abusive partners. Because violent relationships tend to affect poor women disproportionately in the United States, the provisions of the VAWA that allow time off from work and help for immigrant women mean that more poor women will be able to keep

114

19 http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/dvhomelessness032106.pdf Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

their jobs and remain in the country while they arrange to leave and/or prosecute their abusers.20

Child Abuse Statistics: There were 122 confirmed cases of child abuse/neglect in Cooke County in 2008. That is 12.4% confirmed cases per 1000 children. There were 376 completed CPS investigations. There were no child abuse related fatalities reported in Cooke County in 2008. There were 90 children in that year that were the legal responsibility of the state. There were 85 children in substitute care and 58 children in foster care. Substitute care refers to a home that includes children that are over the age of 18. There were 60 paid childcare clients in this year, which totaled to $786,525 in foster care expenditures for the state. The ethnic breakdown of abuse includes all 122 children for which abuse has been confirmed. The majority of these children are Anglo with 79 victims. The next highest ethnic group was African Americans with 20 victims.

Victims of Child Abuse- Ethnic Breakdown

2008 90 80

70 60 50 40 Victims of Child Abuse- Ethnic 30 Breakdown

20 10 0 African Anglo Hispanic Native Other

American American

Figure 26. Source: Texas Dept. of Family and Protective Services

115

20 Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women. Available from http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/index.html. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Youth

Teen Pregnancy There were 53 reported births to teens age 15 to 17 in Cooke County in 2005, according to the Texas Department of Health and Human Services.

Child Care Statistics According to the Sherman Homelessness Coalition, in 2008 the population of children age 0 to 13 was 7,435. The number of licensed day care operations in the county was 19 with a total capacity to care for 700 children. The number of registered childcare homes was 15. There is, also, only one residential licensed 24-hour care operation for the county.

116

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.1.2. KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS COOKE COUNTY

Organizations Interviewed The organizations interviewed were Abigail’s Arms of the Cooke County Family Crisis Center, Cooke County United Way, and Volunteers in Service to Others (VISTO).

The three organizations interviewed were contacted through snowball sampling. This type of sampling uses existing study participants to recruit future participants from among their acquaintances. Both contacts at Abigail’s Arms and United Way Cooke County were retrieved via snowball sampling. The researcher obtained a list of contacts from TCOG Utility Assistance recommendations. Three respondents were interviewed at Abigail’s Arms: the executive director, the shelter project manager and the primary prevention specialist. The respondent interviewed from Cooke County United Way was the executive director. The shelter project manager at Abigail’s Arms recommended that the researchers contact VISTO. This contact from VISTO was also obtained through snowball sampling. The respondent interviewed at VISTO was the executive director. For more information about each organization, see Appendix B.

117

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Conditions of Poverty As explained in the methodology section, according to Jim Masters, President of the Center for Community Futures, analyzing poverty issues can be separated into two components: the causes of poverty and the conditions of poverty. The conditions of poverty are the result of the causes of poverty. They are the representation, or static snapshot, of the problem within the community. They represent the people who are actually “in” poverty and the problems they face.21 While Masters discusses statistical representations of conditions, in these interviews the researchers attempted to qualitatively describe poverty in their communities and the Texoma region through separate condition domains. Each condition domain reflects aspects of a poverty that affects the residents who live on the margins. The complete list of condition domains can be found in the Methodology section.

This section includes the conditions of poverty and the services provided to address each condition domain. The conditions mentioned in the interviews are included below:

Crime Abigail’s Arms is the only non-profit organization assisting victims of crime in Cooke County and provides services to any victim of crime, regardless of age, race, or sex. Abigail’s Arms offers 118 counseling for crime victims in the form of a part-time therapist, a victim’s rights therapist, and

21 http://www.cencomfut.com/ Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

a liaison for judicial services. The executive director described some of their other current programs, such as the Batterers Intervention Program, in which Abigail’s Arms works with the actual perpetrators. Before, batterers had to go to Denton for intervention services, but now Abigail’s Arms can provide intervention services for batterers in the region. Abigail’s Arms recently formed a sexual assault response team, which takes victims to Denton for crime assistance services, including forensic interviews.

In terms of public assistance, Abigail’s Arms can assist crime victims by sending them a letter verifying that the client is in a domestic violence situation and is in need of housing. At that point, the client can receive crime victim compensation.

Abigail’s Arms has a direct prevention specialist who works with the community to address issues such as sexual violence, dating, and domestic violence. This program uses strategies such as raising awareness, prevention, and intervention. Her outreach includes working with Hispanic parents in the Latinos con Fuerza program, schools, and business owners, in order to promote understanding about Abigail’s Arms and crime prevention. In regards to the Hispanic community, the direct prevention specialist said that domestic violence and sexual assault are critical issues.

Abigail’s Arms commented further on the organization’s relationship with elected officials. The direct prevention specialist said that elected officials view Abigail’s Arms as a political and monetary asset. Meanwhile, the shelter project manager said that county officials only see the bottom line. They perceive Abigail’s Arms as being a positive aspect of the budget since the county does not have to spend as much on prison because of Abigail’s Arms’ services. And yet, county officials are reluctant to discuss violent crime occurring in Gainesville as they fear it will impede new business. Meanwhile, the shelter project manager argued that it is not the amount of violent crime occurring in a city that matters. Rather, what is important is how the city reacts 119 to that violent crime.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

With regard to changes in crime statistics over the last five years, Abigail’s Arms said that their organization analyzed changes that took place between 2004 and 2008. The shelter project manager said there was an average 9% increase in violent crime since 2004, which included an increase in the number of reported child sexual assault cases. There was also a statistical increase in both reported domestic violence and sexual assault cases.

VISTO’s respondent also mentioned that domestic violence is an issue in Cooke County and their organization refers clients suffering under domestic violence to Abigail’s Arms.

Crime Relationship to Other Conditions Drug-related crimes were mentioned as being, statistically, the largest crime occurring in Cooke County. These crimes often include burglary and theft carried out by individuals wanting money for drugs.

Drugs also affect victims of crime. There have been numerous assault cases in which the victim is either under the influence or otherwise mentally impaired due to drug-use. The victims, often female, are unable to give consent when impaired by drug-use. One example of this would be a female claiming that she has been raped, but because she was impaired at the time, she was unable to give consent. Because of the victim’s impairment, the incident cannot be made into a legal case.

Additionally, the shelter project manager of Abigail’s Arms said that the vast majority of perpetrator participants in the organization’s Batterers Intervention Program have a history of substance abuse. So, before perpetrators can even enroll in the Batterers Intervention Program, they must be drug-free and complete treatment programs such as Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous. Furthermore, if these perpetrators are on probation, then they receive random drug tests. These are the only options for perpetrators with 120 substance abuse problems in Cooke County.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

There is no drug court in Cooke County, but there is interest in forming one that serves mothers with substance-abuse problems. However, the lines of communication with the district judge are closed at this time. This lack of having a drug court is common in all of Cooke County and Gainesville, in particular, because it is such a small community. Not to mention, there is only one district judge. Occasionally, the attorney’s offices, the probation officers, and Abigail’s Arms are disconnected. However, the executive director said that the relationship between these agencies is generally positive.

The executive director of Cooke County United Way mentioned that at one point in time, there had been a drug trafficking problem along the border of Oklahoma at the intersection of Highway 82 and Highway 35.

With regard to youth and crime, there is a need for youth enrichment programs in Cooke County. As mentioned previously, Children who are not participating in school activities such as UIL, 4H, FFA or athletics need to have other extracurricular outlets. Cooke County does not have a mall or a movie theater. She went on to say that having a lack of youth enrichment programs contributes to problems, such as: teen pregnancy, substance abuse, and juvenile truancy.

Also in regards to youth, the executive director at Cooke County United Way pointed out that youth gangs used to be a problem in the past, but now she simply does not hear about gang violence anymore. It may possibly still be a big problem, but she has not heard of it.

Education As mentioned previously, Abigail’s Arms was unable to place approximately 79 women and children in shelters either because there was no space, or because there would be ramifications if these women and children were placed in shelters outside of the county. In addition to a loss 121 of jobs, the loss of education was also mentioned as a ramification. Women and their children

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

can either lose their ability to continue their education, or they could not afford gas travel from their new shelter to school in Cooke County.

Education’s Relationship to Other Conditions Employment is related to education. As mentioned previously, Cooke County United Way’s executive director said that North Central Texas College (NCTC) started offering vocational technology classes again after a prolonged absence. In response to this, the executive director thought it was valuable for people to learn the skills necessary for becoming a mechanic or learning another trade skill, rather than focusing solely on becoming doctors and engineers. VISTO’s executive director also felt that clients should be encouraged to obtain job training at North Central Texas College.

Another aspect of education that relates to crime reduction is the work done by the direct prevention specialist at Abigail’s Arms. Because of the large increase in the size of the Hispanic community in Gainesville, this specialist tries to facilitate educational programs that deal with domestic violence and sexual assault within the Hispanic community, where those are big issues.

Nutrition is also important for youth in education. The direct prevention specialist at Abigail’s Arms noted that many children in the county qualified for free or reduced lunches at school. Cooke County United Way also confirmed this. The direct prevention specialist said there was an unbelievable percentage of children qualifying for free and reduced lunch in the Gainesville, Valley View, and Callisburg Independent School Districts.

Transportation affects education. The direct prevention specialist at Abigail’s Arms also mentioned that the Gainesville trolley provides transportation for students living at NCTC and is particularly valuable since many of the students there do not have their own personal, reliable 122 transportation. The trolley travels to Downtown Gainesville, along highway 82 to the mall, and to and from the college.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Elderly Cooke County United Way refers elderly clients in need of assistance to the TCOG Area Agency on Aging. When a client calls the Cooke County United Way executive director, she asks the client for his/her age. If the client is elderly, then the executive director refers that client to the Area Agency on Aging.

VISTO pointed out funding priority disparities between Grayson and Cooke Counties. The executive director said that although there are more elderly people in Cooke County, Grayson still gets a larger percentage of funding. At VISTO, clients are usually served by multiple agencies; for example, if VISTO is helping an elderly client, most likely, that client is also being helped by the TCOGs’ Area Agency on Aging.

Emergency Assistance VISTO provides emergency assistance, in the form of energy assistance, food assistance, housing assistance, and medical bill assistance. Abigail’s Arms also mentioned that VISTO possesses emergency funds to assist the elderly and households with infants. They help pay for emergency shelter for clients, as well. Abigail’s Arms is working towards building an emergency shelter for crime victims. Currently, they provide emergency shelter for a very limited number of nights in a motel.

Emergency Assistance and Other Conditions According to VISTO, emergency healthcare assistance is lacking and that emergency dental care is unavailable in Cooke County.

Employment Employment as a cause of poverty factored strongly for all three service providers interviewed 123 in the way that they work with clients. The shelter project manager at Abigail’s Arms said that, in 2009, Abigail’s Arms was unable to place approximately 79 women and children in shelters

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

either because there was no space or because there would be ramifications if these women and children were placed in shelters outside of the county. The loss of jobs was mentioned as a ramification because clients could not find jobs as easily in a new area, or because clients could not afford gas to drive from the new shelter to their job in Cooke County. Also, the shelter project manager at Abigail’s Arms commented on clients’ ability to gain employment. She said that clients must be mentally prepared to take the next step to gain employment, even if they were already relatively prepared financially, with a good FICO credit score and no-interest loans. Furthermore, the program manager stated that clients must have the skills necessary to maintain a job because clients that lack job skills will lose his/her job within two weeks. For this reason, it is difficult for service providers to simply tell clients to get a job.

The executive director of Cooke County United Way commented on the state of jobs in the county. While there were few jobs available in Cooke County, the executive director was still surprised to find clients who thought that Cooke County had many jobs available. She thought this might be due to the fact that Gainesville is at the crossroad between Highway 35 and Highway 82 and because it is midway between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth. She suggested that clients who are looking for jobs continue their search south towards Fort Worth. The executive director was surprised that people expect Cooke County to have more jobs and housing than it actually does. In addition to Cooke County lacking in job opportunities, she said that there was a lack of highly skilled workers, but many low-skilled, blue-collar workers.

Employment and Other Conditions

The executive director of Cooke County United Way saw a relationship between transportation and employment. She pointed out that Gainesville has a trolley system that has been improving in service, but that public transportation in the area is still insufficient. The trolley service is limited. TAPS Public Transit only accepts calls in advance for rides. Not to mention, TAPS closes 124 at 6:00 PM.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Employment is also related to education. Cooke County United Way’s executive director said that NCTC started offering vocational technology classes again after a prolonged absence. In response to this, the executive director thought it was valuable for people to learn the skills necessary for becoming a mechanic, rather than focusing solely on becoming doctors and engineers. VISTO’s executive director also felt that clients should be encouraged to obtain job training at North Central Texas College.

Employment is also related to housing. VISTO’s executive director said that there has been an increase in the number of people on wait list for public housing in neighboring counties and, as a result, people have begun to move to Cooke County in search of available public housing in Cooke County. However, the consequence of this is that clients are on multiple wait lists for public housing and the people who manage to get on the wait list for Cooke County will continue to be on wait lists in other counties at the same time. Furthermore, as people move to Cooke County in search of public housing, they find that there are even fewer jobs available and a lack of resources in Cooke County, as compared to other counties.

As for employment as it relates to health, VISTO’s executive director mentioned the most in demand jobs were to be found in nursing.

Health According to Cooke County United Way’s executive director, dental care assistance is a critical need for many adults in Cooke County. If someone is elderly, he/she can be covered by Social Security Income (SSI). If someone is a child, then he/she is covered by CHIP. But, there is not a dental care assistance program for adults.

As mentioned before, there are major health concerns surrounding youth today. Cooke County United Way pointed out various fundraisers taking place in the community for children with 125 health conditions such as cancer or leukemia. Many children in this community experience catastrophic illnesses and they have since died. The Cooke County United Way executive

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

director said that she gets a lot of calls from parents or other people affected by these childhood health issues asking them what they can do to help.

The Cooke County United Way executive director said that she has seen support groups rise up in the community. This is in response to the lack of support, particularly financial support that The American Cancer Society or the patients’ doctors have provided. She explained that service providers in the area do not have the tools necessary to address this type of client concerns. Cooke County United Way has clients that are either insured or uninsured. However, most of the organization’s clients are either uninsured or with limited insurance coverage.

VISTO provides emergency assistance to cover medical expenses. And yet, according to the executive director, 40% of VISTO’s client deaths are a result of suicide. People lose hope and they face compounding problems, most of which are medical. VISTO’s respondent said that Cooke County has a critical need for a full-service clinic. There is no preventative or emergency dental care available at this time in Cooke County. VISTO refers clients to St. Joseph Hospital in Fort Worth and the Texas Women’s University (TWU) in Denton for dental cleanings. Currently, the hospital emergency room is the only functioning clinic in Cooke County. And, as a result, this is the only option for clients who cannot afford to see a doctor. Some clients have Medicare or Medicaid, but many clients do not. With that said, even if a full-service clinic were to be built in Cooke County, encouraging clients to use the clinic’s services would be a challenge.

Drug-related crimes were mentioned as being, statistically, the largest crime occurring in Cooke County. These crimes often include burglary and theft carried out by individuals wanting money for drugs.

Drugs also affect victims of crime. As mentioned previously, there has been numerous assault cases in which the victim either is under the influence or otherwise mentally impaired due to 126 drug-use. The victims, often female, are unable to give consent when impaired by drug-use. One example of this would be a female claiming that she has been raped, but because she was

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

impaired at the time, she was unable to give consent. Because of the victim’s impairment, the incident cannot be made into a legal case.

Housing According to the shelter project manager at Abigail’s Arms, housing is one of the top critical needs facing Cooke County. This category includes emergency housing, transitional housing and permanent housing. She explained that many of her clients did not know when they would be moving from transitional to permanent housing. She also commented on the lack of skills that clients had regarding housing, such as not knowing how to sign a lease. She said that housing is available in Gainesville, but work that goes into buying a house and moving in is too much for some clients to handle. Financial, emotional and mental stability are all necessary for securing permanent housing.

The executive director of Cooke County United Way also commented on the state of housing in Cooke County. She was surprised to find clients who expected Cooke County to have adequate housing, but she speculated that this might be the case because Gainesville is at a major highway intersection with highway 82 and highway 35 and because it is midway between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth.

127 The executive director observed how the loss of housing can compound with other problems facing clients. She mentioned an elderly client whose wife had died. He spent most of his

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

money on her funeral and was now unable to make housing payments. As a result, he was being evicted. Not to mention, he was in desperate need of dental care but could not afford it either. While Cooke County United Way does not provide services to clients directly, the organization does refer clients to the Gainesville Housing Authority, which is the only avenue for clients seeking affordable or transitional housing in the area.

VISTO’s executive director noted that rent in Cooke County has increased, as well as the need for public housing, which reflects an overall increase in the need for housing. She also mentioned that VISTO’s definition of homelessness is different from the State’s definition of homelessness. VISTO defines homelessness as “a client not knowing where he/she is going to sleep that night, or living somewhere not fit for long-term human habitation.”

Housing and Other Conditions Housing relates to employment. As mentioned previously, the executive director of VISTO said that public housing wait lists have increased in size for adjacent counties and, as a result, clients move into Cooke County. However, those clients then realize that there are even less jobs and resources available in Cooke as compared to other counties.

Income While income is a criterion for eligibility at VISTO, it is not a criterion for eligibility at Abigail’s Arms. Abigail’s Arms does not actively track client income, but it does estimate income while clients are applying for grants. Furthermore, Abigail’s Arms estimates that 75% of its clients are low-income and that their clients do actually provide income levels or the fact that their children receive free lunches at school. The executive director of Abigail’s Arms said that if a client is jobless, they feel threatened when asked to fill out an application asking how much income they make.

128 Nutrition

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Nutrition is important for the entire population. Cooke County United Way executive director said that throughout the state, 1 out of 5 people live in hunger. In Cooke County, 1 out of 3 people live in hunger. She went on to explain that a large number of those people in Cooke County are elderly.

Nutrition affects youth. As mentioned previously, the direct prevention specialist at Abigail’s Arms noted that many children in Cooke County qualified for free or reduced lunches at school. Cooke County United Way also confirmed this. The direct prevention specialist said there was an unbelievable percentage of children qualifying for free and reduced lunch in the Gainesville, Valley View, and Callisburg Independent School Districts.

VISTO has a special interest in hunger. The executive director said that childhood hunger is a problem across the entire State of Texas. Getting food is a daily struggle for those living in poverty. In order to receive food assistance services, most people have to travel to Sherman, which is not financially feasible for most people. She went on to say that food stamp enrollment has recently increased and that food stamps, TANF and WIC all need major improvements.

Transportation Transportation was identified as the biggest need in Cooke County, according to the shelter project manager at Abigail’s Arms. Transportation is a key factor for preserving client livelihood. As stated previously, Abigail’s Arms was unable to place approximately 79 women and children in shelters either because there was no space, or because there would be ramifications if these women and children were placed in shelters outside of the county. In addition to a loss of jobs, the loss of education was also mentioned as a ramification. Women and their children would either lose their ability to continue their education, or they could not afford gas to travel from their new shelter to school in Cooke County.

129 Transportation is a burden to those who need access to services within Cooke County, especially for individuals and families that do not speak English. For example, because Abigail’s

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Arms does not have a complete Spanish-speaking staff, the organization cannot facilitate all of its services for Spanish-speaking families. As a result, these families must travel to Denton to obtain the services that they need. Abigail’s Arms has seen an overall increase in referrals for Spanish-speaking clients, which now make up 1 out of 4 clients that the organization sees.

The executive director of Abigail’s Arms said that TAPS public transit is the only transportation service available in the area. It has improved, but the main problem is that there is not a regularly scheduled bus service available to the whole community. In order to use their transportation services, one must call TAPS 24 hours in advance to make an appointment. However, scheduling an appointment is not possible for people who need immediate, urgent services. Additionally, the TAPS public transit has limited hours of use. So, for example, this service is unavailable for clients who need transportation at 3 AM or for clients who have had a court docket change and need immediate transportation as a result.

VISTO’s executive director confirmed the need for transportation in Cooke County. VISTO’s clients often use TAPS, but cannot always get transportation provided. TAPS routes do not always go across the county. However, VISTO’s executive director did say that their organization’s clients have not had many problems with TAPS in the past. She did note that clients treat TAPS like a cab service. For a short time, VISTO had a cab service on Fridays for clients to run errands, but this did not last long. Also, VISTO will pay client bus fares when they ride on TAPS. The executive director commented on the trolley in Gainesville, saying it had been created for tourism, not community use. Furthermore, if transportation is unavailable, clients cannot get to VISTO for food assistance. As a result of transportation barriers, VISTO’s executive director said that many of the organization’s clients must travel to Sherman for services. This is both time consuming and financially unfeasible for clients.

Transportation and Other Conditions 130 Cooke County United Way also commented on transportation needs, saying that transportation relates to employment. The executive director re-emphasized that that public transportation is

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

improving, but still limited. She also felt that Gainesville’s trolley system limited and mentioned the time constraints associated with using TAPS as being an issue for people with jobs. For example, she mentioned a client who had a job at WinStar Casino, but had no way to get there.

Transportation affects education. As mentioned before, the Cooke County United Way executive director said the Gainesville trolley does help students living at North Central Texas College since many students there do not have transportation. The trolley travels to Downtown Gainesville, down highway 82, to the mall, and to the college.

Youth The direct prevention specialist at Abigail’s Arms commented on youth, specifically with regard to the Hispanic community. She said that there are children who now have a dance team at schools. Moreover, she tries to educate teens on sexual violence and parents on crisis intervention. Another issue among youth is the rising numbers of teen pregnancy.

In terms of children’s services, there is no children’s center or children’s services for crime victims in Cooke County. Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) may only take children’s cases when appointed by a judge. Abigail’s Arms cannot provide counseling to youth if they have a court case coming up. Until the case is settled, Abigail’s Arms can only offer educational services to youth involved. If there is no court case, then Abigail’s Arms can provide therapy for children. When Abigail’s Arms new shelter opens, there will be a child therapy play area, which will be dedicated to serving children with a greater capacity than previously. Once the shelter opens, Abigail’s Arms may become a Children’s Advocacy Center. Abigail’s Arms wants to include forensic interviews as well.

These comments highlight the fact that there is no advocacy agency specifically for children in 131 Cooke County. Child Protective Services will sometimes send cases to the Sherman Children’s Advocacy Center. Abigail’s Arms said they prefer to send their cases to the Lewisville Children’s

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Advocacy Center. One of the investigators at the Lewisville Children’s Advocacy Center is on the board of directors of Abigail’s Arms.

MHMR was mentioned as an agency that clients have frustrations with, because clients do not like to drive to Sherman and then wait for their services. MHMR is an example of frustrations that some service providers in Cooke County have against service providers in Grayson County. This issue is addressed in more detail in the Unique Observations section.

Regarding CPS, Abigail’s Arms respondents noted that there had been problems with long wait lists and a generally over-burdened system within Cooke County.

Abigail’s Arms respondents pointed out the need for foster homes and foster parents in Cooke County. Children are being uprooted and taken away from individuals and support groups that they trust. For example, if a child has a trusting relationship with a teacher, taking that child out of the county and to a foster home in a different county would mean ripping that child away from a source of support. The executive director at VISTO also mentioned this as being a problem.

The executive director of Cooke County United Way said that a notable youth organization called Muenster Youth Council illustrates a particular small community’s attitude toward outside service providers. The Muenster Youth Council handles all youth activities in Muenster, including: baseball, softball, swimming, and boys and girls scouting programs. Any child can register for free for any of these programs. The Muenster Youth Council (MYC) is an example of a small community taking care of its own.

The Cooke County United Way executive director explained that there is a need for youth enrichment programs. Children who are not participating in school activities such as UIL, 4H, 132 FFA or athletics need to have other extracurricular outlets. Cooke County does not have a mall

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

or a movie theater. She went on to say that having a lack of youth enrichment programs contributes to problems, such as: teen pregnancy, substance abuse, and juvenile truancy.

Youth and Other Conditions Nutrition is important for youth. As mentioned before, the direct prevention specialist of Abigail’s Arms said that many children in Cooke County qualify for free or reduced lunches at school. Cooke County United Way also confirmed this. There are an enormous percentage of children who qualify for free and reduced lunch In Gainesville, Valley View, and Callisburg ISDs. She said that VISTO’s Backpack Buddies program helps to provide food for children and their families on the weekends.

There are also major health concerns surrounding youth today. Cooke County United Way pointed out various fundraisers taking place in the community for children with health conditions such as cancer or leukemia. Many children in this community experience catastrophic illnesses and they have since died. The Cooke County United Way executive director said that she gets a lot of calls from parents or other people affected by these childhood health issues asking them what they can do to help.

Unique Observations

The causes of poverty in Cooke County were not discussed in depth. Instead, during the interviews many aspects of service provision in Cooke County were discussed, such as services provided, funding, politics, etc. There are three main reasons why the causes of poverty were not included in the Cooke County interviews.

First, the interviews were only somewhat structured in nature. While the interviewer had an interview guide with a broad list of topics, the interviewer never felt obligated to focus on every potential topic, especially due to the organic nature of topics arising from the flow of 133 conversation between two individuals.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Secondly, service provision in Cooke County is sparse. There are only a handful of service providers in Cooke County and the three service providers interviewed (Cooke County United Way, Abigail’s Arms and VISTO) can be considered the three largest in Cooke County. The interviews frequently referenced the need for client travel assistance in order to obtain specific services. Therefore, the larger issue of being able to address needs broadly is difficult because of the sparse nature of services available. Services are not localized.

Finally, due to the sparse nature of services and client needs, many service providers allocate assistance for emergencies. This means that service providers will serve clients sparingly and when the client has a very specific emergency. In contrast with other counties, Cooke County service providers do not provide long-term assistance to clients. Therefore, when working with clients on a long-term basis, there is more interaction and, thus, a greater likelihood of discussing the causes behind that client’s poverty situation because the service provider involved sees that particular client on a regular basis. At that point, the service provider can begin to take note of certain patterns, behaviors, or situations that impact the client’s long- term causes of poverty. On the other hand, when service providers work with clients in need of emergency (or short-term) assistance, the service providers have less interaction and less likelihood of discussing the causes of poverty for that particular client. This is because the service provider does not have regular interaction with clients receiving emergency assistance. This entire dilemma is compounded by the fact that services in Cooke County are spread out sparsely. Overall, the interviews focused on immediate services being provided and the obstacles in providing these types of services in Cooke County.

Although the causes of poverty were not directly addressed, the executive director of Abigail’s Arms mentioned a program called Pathways, which is run jointly by VISTO and Abigail’s Arms. Pathways is a comprehensive program designed to bring victims out of crime and the cycle of poverty. Clients attend workshops and meet with a life coach twice a month. 134

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

In the interview with the executive director of VISTO, self-sufficiency was mentioned briefly. The executive director said that building a food pantry on every street corner will not solve hunger. Self-sufficiency needs to be taught to and understood by clients. However, she did not go into depth on the definition of self-sufficiency or how to teach self-sufficiency to clients so that they understand and apply it to their lives.

Top Client Needs Abigail’s Arms composed a list of the top client needs. The first top need was transportation. The second top need was emergency housing, transitional housing, and permanent housing. The third top need was permanent, secure communication. The respondent explained that one of the challenges in doing follow-up with clients is that many clients have access to a cell phone or landline, but that it can either be accessed by perpetrator, or could be turned off due to nonpayment. The respondent said that one potential solution to this problem would be acquiring community voicemail, in which the victim could dial in a 1-800 number from any location to access their personal voicemail to check for messages from caseworkers or attorneys. The concept of community voicemail was originally developed for homeless shelters. However, one problem specific to Cooke County is a lack of phone numbers available within the county. Furthermore, facilitating community voicemail for approximately 2,500 clients within the tri-county area is something that may not be feasible either since there is not a phone system capable of handling such a capacity in the area.

VISTO’s representative spoke on clients’ use of TAPS public transit. As mentioned previously, VISTO pays for bus fare for its clients. In theory, the clients should be able to call TAPS 24 hours in advance and schedule a ride, but this does not always happen. In addition, TAPS is supposed to be willing to travel across the county to transport clients, but this has not always been the case. However, the executive director did mention that VISTO’s clients have not faced many problems using TAPS. Although, on occasion, clients treat TAPS as if it is a taxicab service as 135 opposed to public transit.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Services Outside of the County Abigail’s Arms, VISTO, and United Way of Cooke County addressed the issue of sending clients to receive services outside of the county. These agencies expressed concern about the strain and discouragement caused by the length of travel required to get services from agencies that operate out of Grayson County. There are high levels of dissatisfaction surrounding this topic because clients from Cooke must drive to Sherman and wait to receive assistance that they cannot receive anywhere else nearby.

The executive director of Abigail’s Arms spoke on behalf of some agencies in Cooke County regarding their frustrations towards Grayson County. They see a lot of service providers moving into Grayson County and staying there. While these service providers may send representatives to Cooke County once or twice a week, it is not enough. The executive director thought this was most likely due to the fact that Grayson County has a much larger population. However, Cooke County residents have to go to Grayson County to get services over and over again because outsiders believe that Cooke County does not have enough clients to merit receiving more services. The executive director said Cooke County does have a large enough number of clients in need of services. However, frustration is high at this point because when Cooke County residents go to get services, they have to drive over to Grayson County and wait. Clients do not want to do this.

In addition, the shelter project manager at Abigail’s Arms said that in her conversation with the county judge, county officials were hesitant to cede power through TCOG to Grayson County on issues such as water. Elected officials saw an unequal partnership with TCOG. She said there is a very definite feeling, just by talking to people in the area, that because Grayson County gets all the money, they have all the resources and power.

VISTO also pointed out funding priority disparities between Grayson and Cooke Counties. The 136 executive director said that although there are more elderly people in Cooke County, Grayson still gets a larger percentage of funding.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

United Way Cooke County’s respondent shared the view that, regarding some of the agencies that are managed out of the county, Cooke County service providers feel like they get the leftovers. There is a long established view that Grayson County gets most of the grant money, while Cooke County only gets a small percentage. Despite this, United Way Cooke County executive director said that attitudes towards Grayson County have greatly improved in recent years. Still, Cooke County has learned from the experience, saying, we will take care of our own.

Frequently Needed Services Outside of Cooke County VISTO’s respondent stated that Cooke County is in need of a general clinic. The hospital emergency room is the only option for many clients because they cannot afford to see their own doctor. However, VISTO’s executive director did mention that getting clients to actually use the clinic services would be another challenge, as well.

Abigail’s Arms works with the Sherman Crisis Center in Grayson County and, when necessary, Abigail’s Arms uses the Sherman Crisis Center as an emergency shelter. The Sherman Crisis Center shelter is the first choice for Abigail’s Arms because it receives the Regional Assistance Victims grant. Abigail’s Arms also use space from the shelters in Denton, Ardmore, and Fort Worth.

As previously mentioned, there are no children’s services for crime victims in Cooke County. There is a gap in crime victimization services for children. For example, Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) only takes children’s cases, unless a judge or court refers a documented case to the agency. Even though there is not a Children’s Advocacy Center in Cooke County, Child Protective Services (CPS) will occasionally send Cooke’s cases to the Children Advocacy Center in Grayson County. The executive director of Abigail’s Arms said that their organization prefers to send its cases to the Lewisville Children’s Advocacy Center. 137

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Abigail’s Arms refers many clients to Weatherization and Utility Assistance at TCOG, which operate out of Sherman. Abigail’s Arms mentioned that TCOG came to Gainesville in late 2009 and had a good response from clients. However, at this point in time, accepted clients have to travel to Sherman for assistance.

VISTO said that Cooke County has a critical need for a full-service clinic. There is no preventative or emergency dental care available at this time in Cooke County. VISTO refers clients to St. Joseph Hospital in Fort Worth and the Texas Women’s University (TWU) in Denton for dental cleanings.

Regarding substance abuse, clients may come to Abigail’s Arms under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, in which case the organization will not provide those individuals with assistance until they are sober. Even still, there are limited resources to refer these individuals to. Abigail’s Arms cannot fund therapy intervention for these clients due to grant restrictions.

Changes in the last five years Regarding crime statistics and changes within the last 5 years, Abigail’s Arms said that for its own purposes, the agency analyzed changes that took place between 2004 and 2008. The shelter project manager said there was an average 9% increase in violent crime since 2004, which included an increase in reported child sexual assaults. There was also a statistical increase in both reported domestic violence and sexual assault cases. For the number of clients that Abigail’s Arms sees versus the total number of reported cases, there is a 67% rate of underreporting of crime in the county.

Community Contribution Abigail’s Arms has volunteer attorneys that assist clients. For example, the agency has an attorney from Arlington that comes up to their office on Wednesdays. He serves rural counties 138 to provide legal aid free of charge. Also, Abigail’s Arms holds its Batterers Intervention Training

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Program at a local church. As for the Pathways program jointly run by Abigail’s Arms and VISTO, life coaches volunteer their time to work with clients.

Volunteerism and community contribution are at the core of Cooke County United Way. The executive director does her part in contributing to the community by referring clients to various service providers in Cooke County. Cooke County United Way does not directly provide services to clients.

Changing Demographics Abigail’s Arms observed that the clients it sees are not reflective of Cooke County demographics. It has very few black clients, but their Hispanic clients are fairly reflective of Hispanic demographics in the county. Abigail’s Arms increased its Hispanic client base and, now, 1 out of 4 of its clients is Hispanic and has considered requesting grant funding to serving ethnic minorities. However, in order to receive that type of funding, the agency must already serve a predominantly ethnic community.

Multiple respondents noted that the Hispanic community was starting to come out and be a part of the community, as a whole. Before, Hispanic citizens were not very involved in the community. She said the children have a dance team now through the school. She stressed that it takes time to gain their trust and to join the community. She tries to educate them on sexual violence, because they have seen an increase in teen pregnancy. They are trying to do crisis intervention, educating parents on what is available.

Elected Officials As mentioned previously, Abigail’s Arms commented on its relationship with elected officials. The direct prevention specialist said that the county officials view Abigail’s Arms as a political and monetary asset. The shelter project manager said that county officials only see the bottom 139 line, like Abigail’s Arms having a positive impact on the budget since the county does not have to spend as much money on prison as a result. Yet, county officials are reluctant to discuss

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

violent crime taking place in Gainesville because they believe it will ward off businesses. However, the shelter project manager argued that it is not about the amount of violent crime in a city that matters, it is about how the city reacts to that violent crime.

As mentioned previously, Abigail’s Arms has been trying to convince the county judge to support their programs. The agency’s argument is that if services such as drug rehabilitation and educational programs about substance abuse and parenting were available, then agencies, their clients and the city would benefit. Agencies will work together and the city will save money on prison expenses and court cases. However, it is still an uphill battle. Unless these types of programs are implemented, the impact they can have will not be seen.

The respondent from Abigail’s Arms said that county officials were hesitant to cede power to TCOG. Elected officials were said to express concerns about an unequal partnership with TCOG. The respondent said there is a very definite feeling, just by talking to people in the area, that because Grayson County gets all the money, they have all the resources and power.

Cooke County United Way had a somewhat different view on elected officials. The executive director had very strong relationships with municipalities and counties. She said that in a small community, it is necessary to form personal relationships and that makes it easier to get things done. However, she did believe that, as a general statement, municipalities and the public do not understand what non-profits have to offer or how they function. If cities are not supporting service providers, then the problems that service providers would otherwise address end up on the city’s doorstep. Service providers are saving cities thousands of dollars by offering their services. If the non-profits are not there, then people who are in need will go to churches, cities, and the county for support.

Small Community 140 The theme of small community appeared many times throughout the interviews. The main reference to small communities came from Cooke County United Way. The respondent

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

explained that there are small communities in Cooke County that have a strong, traditionalist bent. These populations tend to have strong cultural differences from the rest of Texoma. A non-profit organization or business from the outside coming in would find it difficult to do business in a community like Muenster, for example. In that particular community, an individual must be from there and live there in order to gain the acceptance of the community. Small communities are interested in relationships. They are interested in who you are, where you are from and what do you want to do with the locals.

The executive director from Cooke County United Way believed that Abigail's Arms is the only agency that has ventured out into the smaller communities in Cooke County. It is possible that a small community may be reluctant to allow service providers to come in because that community may not want to face the realities of the problems that its population is facing. In towns with strong cultural traditions, they may not want to hear about statistics on alcoholism. Substance abuse prevention in Gainesville has worked well, but in smaller communities, the issue is very personal. Discussing negative issues with a small community may be very personal because it affects someone’s family member of close friend. The most closely-knit, multi- generational, small communities with strong cultural traditions tend to be very self-reliant, especially if that community is located over an hour away from the nearest large town.

According to Cooke County United Way executive director, the key to working with small communities is understanding the audience, working with that audience, and finding a commonality between your agency and that audience to build upon. She explained that in small communities, it is necessary to form personal relationships if you want to get things done. She went on to say that in these small communities, there is resentment towards the cities of Denton and Dallas. Small communities view such cities are big, corporate, and wealthy.

Another characteristic of small communities that arose highlighted the fact that there is no 141 duplication of human services, which is often typical in larger communities. For example, there may be several non-profit home hospices in Tarrant County and Dallas County, but there is only

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

one home hospice in Cooke County. Therefore, agencies are not competing with another for funding to provide the same goods and services to clients.

Critical Needs Below is a list of critical needs provided by the service provider respondents from Cooke County: Assistance for Spanish Speakers

Children’s Services

Health Clinic

Emergency Dental Care

Foster Homes

Housing

Hunger

Information on Services

Lack of Recreational Activities for Youth

Secure Communication for Victims of Crime

Crisis Shelter Capacity 142 Transportation for Low Income Residents Seeking Services, Education, and Employment

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Affordable Treatment for Catastrophic Illnesses

143

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.1.3 SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

A full list of tables appears in Appendix F.

Cooke - #1 Need (Open-ended answers) 0.3

0.2

0.1

0 PercentageofRespondents

All Service Providers Community Clients

144

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke - Top Five Needs (Open-ended answers) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

0 PercentageofRespondents

All Service Providers Community Clients

Client Top Needs by Hopefulness-Cooke Not at All Somewhat Unsure Hopeful Hopeful Very Hopeful

Employment 0.17 0.5 0.5 0.48 Financial Security 0.42 0.14 0.33 0.22 Housing 0.08 0.14 0.17 0.11 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 0.5 0.64 0.42 0.22 Transportation 0.08 0.07 0.33 0.26 Education 0.08 0 0.25 0.15 Food/Clothing 0.17 0 0.17 0.19 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.15 Utilities 0.33 0.29 0.08 0.41 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 0.08 0.21 0.17 11 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 0.04 Domestic 0 0 0.08 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0.43 0.42 0.11 N Value 12 14 12 27 145 Rank #1 Rank #2 Rank #3 Rank #4 Rank #5

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

‘Very Important’ Services by Employment Status (Employed, Unemployed, Retired) - Cooke Service Type Employed Unemployed (%) Retired (%) (%) Employment (need a job) 79.6 56.9 56.9 Living Wage Employment (need better 63.5 49.0 43.3 paying job) More Education (for better 50 46.9 33.3 employment) Enrichment Programs for Youth 45.3 42.9 42.6 School Readiness 51.9 44.9 34.0 Affordable Childcare 42.3 46.0 35.2 Summer Childcare 38.8 39.6 29.4 Family Services 42.6 39.1 34.0 Use Public Transportation 17.6 42.0 30.2 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 30.2 50.0 29.4 Temporary Shelter 21.6 20.0 22.4 Rent Assistance 23.5 58.1 32.0 Utility Assistance 30.2 74.5 50.8 Improvements to Heating and A/C in 19.2 58.1 38.9 home Emergency Food Assistance 37.7 43.5 42.6 Emergency Healthcare 41.5 48.9 55.4 Preventative Healthcare 39.6 47.9 54.4 Health Insurance 44.0 62.2 56.9

146

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.2 FANNIN COUNTY

2.2.1 PROFILE OF PUBLIC STATISTICS

According to the American Community survey for 2006-2008, Occupied Housing Units there were a total of 13,571 housing units in the county. Of Vacant Housing Units these 13,571 housing units, 11,425 (84.2%) are occupied, while 2,146 (15.8%) are vacant. Of the 11,425 occupied units, 16% 8,369 (73.3%) are owner-occupied units, while 3,056 (26.7%) 84% are renter-occupied units. There is a homeowner vacancy rate of 2.6% and a renter vacancy rate of 8.5%. The average household size is 2.68 in an owner occupied unit, and 2.79 in a Figure 27 Housing Units in Fannin County. Source: 2006- 2008 ACS. renter occupied unit, while the average family size was 3.14

22 Occupied Housing persons . The majority of houses in Fannin County are valued Units 2006-2008 $50,000 to $99,000 with 3,361 owner-occupied units being Owner Occupied Units reported at this dollar amount. The median house value for Renter Occupied Units the county is $77,500. The Industry standard in new home financing usually provides affordable mortgages for 27% homebuyers who earn approximately one-third or greater of 73% the cost of the home based upon this standard of

Figure 28 Occupied Housing Units Fannin County. Source: 2006- 2008 ACS. 147 22 A family is defined as a group of two or more people who reside together and who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption. A household is defined as including all the people who occupy a housing unit as their usual place of residence (U.S. Census Bureau).

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

affordability, only 25.5% of families, therefore, could afford the median price of a single family home in Fannin County. This number was gathered using the accepted rate among banks and mortgage lenders of a family, or person, needing an income of at least a third of the actual price of the house. Less than 25 percent of families in Fannin County meet this criterion.

The extreme cost burden is calculated and understood by the CNS, to be the extreme cost of upkeep of both owner and rental property. The extreme cost burden for renter households is 206,011, while the extreme cost burden for owners is 216,038. These extreme cost burdens pose a significant problem for low-income individuals in the county. However, this data should be taken lightly as it applies to an area much larger than Fannin County. Extreme cost burden affects low-income individuals due to the up-keep and miscellaneous expenses that are associated with this cost burden. These expenses, in turn, create areas of need. According to the 2006 CNS, one of the two greatest needs for this region was housing assistance with 51 percent of respondents reporting in this need. The next highest area of need was energy assistance with 21 percent of respondents reporting on this need. Of the remaining respondents, approximately 6 percent indicated that capacity building assistance was the priority need, 5 percent of respondents indicated that the development of apartments was the priority need and only 2 percent indicated that homeless assistance was the priority need. Overall, out of the 1,988,135 households in the region, 610,655 owners and renters have housing problems; this represents 30.7 percent of all households. However, this figure 148 encompasses both rural and urban housing developments and therefore is open to room for interpretation.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

There are distinct differences between rural and urban housing needs. For instance, development of apartments is a greater need in urban areas than in rural areas. This is due to the fact that there are more socioeconomically disadvantaged people, generally, living in urban in areas as compared to rural areas. Housing assistance, is seems, is a need that affects both rural and urban housing development. There are a number of multifamily units in the region financed through state and Federal sources such as TDHCA, HUD, PHAS, Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, USDA, and local HFCs including the Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation (TSAHC). The total number of these multifamily units in this region is 144,504 units, which make up 27.5 percent of the total number for the state of Texas.

Housing Needs 2009

6% 7% Housing Assistance

Energy Assistance Capacity Building Assitance 25% Development of Apartments 60% Homeless Assitance

Figure 27 Housing Needs for Region 3 of Texas. Source: 2009 Texas CNS.

There are multiple aspects of owning or renting a home for which data is not readily available, but which can play an important role in the long-term sustainability of a family’s housing situation. The Center for Neighborhood Technology argues, however, that you must factor in 149 the cost of transportation associated with the location of homes to gauge their affordability.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

150

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Household Economic Security

The FPL was developed in the 1960s and was based solely on the food budget necessary to meet basic nutritional needs since the average family at 2010 Federal Poverty Guidelines that time spent nearly one third of their budget on food. Family Annual Monthly Hourly** Clearly, there are many more costs associated with a Size Income* 1 $10,830 $902 $5.20 family living today in Howard County. Depending upon 2 14,570 1,214 7.00 3 18,310 1,525 8.80 family constellation, other costs include housing, 4 22,050 1,837 10.60 transportation, childcare, health care and taxes. There is a 5 25,790 2,149 12.39 6 29,530 2,460 14.19 significant disparity between the FPL for a family of one, two or three people and the Self Sufficiency Standard especially when considering the family constellation and whether it includes children requiring childcare.

In 2006, 16.3 percent of people in Fannin County were living at or below the federal poverty level. Of all the families in the county, 12.8 percent were living in poverty. As far as age brackets, people under the age of 18 Percent of Population accounted for the highest percent of Living in Poverty people living in poverty with a total of ACS 2006-2008 19.7 percent of the population. The next highest bracket is people over the People in Families 12.8 65 Years and Over 11 age of 18 with a total of 14.7 percent of 18 Yeears and Over 14.1 Under 18 Years 19.7 the population. The most staggering All People 15.4 Families with female … 50.5 statistics is that families with a female Married Couple Families 6.2 All Families 13.7 lead household, no husband present, Figure 28 Percent of Population Living in Poverty Fannin County. Source: 2006- 2008 ACS. are experiencing more than 50 percent (50.5%) of households living in poverty. As evident by the data, women who run households 151 with the absence of a husband face struggle significantly with poverty. There are approximately

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1,108 families that have female lead households and are living at or below the federal poverty level.23 Of these households, 774 of these families include children under the age of 18. 24

The ethnic breakdown of poverty in Fannin County is very similar to patterns at the state and national level. In regards to minority ethnic groups, Hispanic Americans are experiencing the highest rate of poverty, with 1,342 people at or above the federal poverty level. The next highest group is African Americans with 1,330 living in poverty. American Indian and Asian were the next highest groups with 262 and 7 people living in poverty respectively. There are approximately 2,923 people living in poverty who categorize themselves as white.

152

23 This figure comes from the U.S. Census Bureau data from 1999 24 This figure comes from the U.S. Census Bureau data from 1999 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Percentage of FPL for a family of three, 100= Poverty Line

300 Full-time min. wage: $42,703 250 $15,080 per year (82% of poverty) 200 $33,874 $33,874 $27,465 150 $23,803 $23,803

100

50 $2,256 185% 185% 130% 130% 243% 150% 12% 0 WIC Reduced-Price Free School Food Stamps Max. Child Care Typical Child TANF Cash School Meals Meals (SNAP) Care Assistance*

Table 3 Texas Eligibility for Family Support Programs. *Income limit shown is for applicants only. Once on TANF, some families with earnings disregards and other allowances for work related expenses can have higher incomes yet continue to receive some cash assistance. Source: Center for Public Policy Priorities (CPPP) Policy Point, Poverty 101, September 28, 2010.

1) Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP): Designed for families who earn too much money to qualify for Medicaid health care, yet cannot afford private insurance.

3) Medicaid: This program provides healthcare coverage for one out of three children in Texas, 153 pays for half of all births and accounts for 27 percent of the state’s total budget.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

4) Food Stamp: This program is a federally funded program that assists low-income families, the elderly and single adults to obtain a nutritionally adequate diet. Those eligible for food stamps include households receiving TANF or federal Supplemental Security Income benefits and non-public assistance households having income below 130% of the poverty level.

Fannin county’s participation CHIP Enrollment Sept. 2009- in these programs is quite Feb. 2010 significant. As evident by the 520 500 499 501 503 graph, there were 2,884 480 476 460 454 people registered for the 451 CHIP Enrollment 440 Sept. 2009- Feb. CHIP program from 420 2010 September 2009 to February 2010. There was a steady increase in participation in Figure 29. Source: Texas HHSC the program from October to December. The data then Medicaid Enrollment July experienced a leveling off 2009-February 2010 and has remained such since 5,000 4,000 December. Although, 3,000 2,000 membership for January 1,000 0 dropped more than in the Total Total Total TANF TANF Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Adults Children two preceding months. in of Children Children's under 19 Medicaid 154 Average monthly enrollment Jul-09 Feb-10 in TANF for the County was Figure 30: Source: Texas HHSC Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

96 recipients, which make for an approximate yearly figure of 1,152 recipients. Comparatively, the state of Texas reports an average monthly figure of 104,693 recipients of TANF enrollment for the state as a whole. Total enrollment in Medicaid for Fannin County in July 2009 was 3,837 recipients. This figure had decreased slightly by February with 3,559 recipients enrolled in the program. Total enrollment in children’s Medicaid for July 2009 was 2,319 compared with the 2,007 children that were enrolled in February 2010. Food stamp enrollment in Fannin County for a six-month period (September 2009 to February 2010) was 20,669 recipients. As evident by the graph, enrollment in food stamps began to steadily decrease from September 2009 to January 2010 and experienced its lowest enrollment in this month. However, enrollment started to increase again in February.

Homelessness is a particular area of poverty that is certainly experienced in Fannin County. A survey conducted by the Texoma Homelessness Coalition studied the condition of homelessness in Texoma and other surrounding counties. The survey used a sample size of 92 respondents and was conducted through the help of local agencies that deal directly with homelessness, such as the Red Cross. The majority of these respondents were male, white, and single individuals. However, the difference between the number of homeless men and women was not very significant. Another significant finding from this data is that 2/3 of the respondents were veterans. The majority of these veterans tour of duty was in Korea with 10 of the 92 respondents reporting this figure.

There are also a significant number of children that are in the legal custody of their grandparents. This is likely a financial burden due to the fact that many elderly people rely on assistance programs such as social security and Medicare. There are approximately 695 grandparents living with their grandchildren who are under that age of 18. 363 of these grandparents are legally responsible for their grandchildren, which are 52.2% of all grandparents living with grandchildren. The majority of these grandparents, 23.0%, have been 155 responsible for their grandchildren for less than a year. About 59.0% of these grandparents are female and 66.7% of these grandparents are married.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the American Community Survey for 2006-2008, the Fannin County Civilian Labor force was 14,914. This figure reflects the total available workforce age 16 and over in the county. The number employed within the civilian labor force for the county was 13,940, which means the number of unemployed workers within the civilian labor force in the county was 974 or 3.7 percent of the population. While the unemployment rate is quite low, employment figures are on the rise in Fannin County. Figure 3 shows the seasonally adjusted unemployment rates reported by the Texas 24-Month Average Unemployment Rate Workforce Commission LCMI Department. Fannin (period ending % County has seen a significant rise in unemployment rates 01/10) Cooke County 4.90 over the last decade that started around the time of the Fannin County 7.33 national economic recession. The Bureau of Labor Grayson County 6.78 Statistics reports that the 24-month average Texoma Region 6.40 unemployment rate for Fannin County from January U.S. 7.73 2008 to January 2010 was 7.33 percent. This 24-month Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics period matches closely the period of increases in unemployment seen in Figure 3. Again, although there has been a steady increase in unemployment in Fannin County, figures remain below national, state, and regional percentages.

Based on income data for Fannin County, the percent of people living in poverty is 15.4 percent. The following data is based on U.S. Census Data for the year 1999. The number of households in the three lowest income brackets totals to 4,109 households. The number of households in the three highest income brackets totals to 2,148 households. The number of families in the three lowest income brackets totals to 3,583 families. The number of families and households in the three highest income brackets totals to 534. Based on the data, it becomes very apparent that 156 there is a significant gap in sheer number of families and households in the lowest strata of income, compared with those in the highest strata of income. However, this discrepancy seems

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

to be worse in the data concerning families. When the mid-range of income strata is analyzed with the lowest income bracket, there does not appear to be as high of a discrepancy.

The ACS 2006-2008 reports the same income data with notable differences in results. The number of households in the three lowest income brackets totals to 3,503 households. The number of Income Brackets households in the 4,500 three highest income 4,000 brackets totals to 3,500 1,191. The number of 3,000 2,500 families in the three 2,000 lowest income 1,500 brackets totals to 1,000 500 1,962 families. The 0 number of families in Households (1999) Families (1999) Households (2006) Families (2006) the three highest Lowest Income Brackets Highest Income Brackets income brackets totals Figure 31 Income Brackets Fannin County. Source: 2000 Decennial Census and 2006-2008 ACS. to 1,119 families. Based on the data, the conclusion can be drawn that the gap between families in the highest and lowest income brackets narrowed significantly in a seven-year period. This decrease can be explained, partially, by changes in industry that occurred between 1999 and 2006. However, the discrepancy between households has increased slightly between the two surveys.

Industry in Fannin County has experienced a significant amount of change between the 2000 and 2006-2008 American Community Surveys respectively. Between these two periods, the manufacturing industry experienced a loss of 701 workers. This is due to the fact that Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson counties are experiencing a change from an economy largely based on the 157 manufacturing industry. This is due to the lack of expansion and growth in this sector over the

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

past decade. The region has experienced many closures of major manufacturing plants such as Johnson & Johnson and The Pillsbury Corporation. In an order to combat this loss, area leaders have worked on capitalizing on the economic development and growth of Lake Texoma. Lake Texoma is a major tourist attraction that generates about 6 million dollars worth of tax revenue every year. Therefore, mush effort has been put into developing this region. This development is reflected in the chart with a 761 increase in the number of workers from 2000 to 2006 in the leisure and hospitality sector.

158

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Education and Literacy

Individuals seeking self-sufficiency must have a certain level of pre-employment skills and competencies. Basic literacy, as understood by the National Regional Literacy Overview Assessment of Adult Literacy 2003 93% (NAAL), means an adult is able 91% 89% to read and understand basic 87% 85% written information in English 83% Cooke County 81% 79% Fannin County including the ability to locate Literacy Rate Grayson County easily identifiable information in Cooke County 89% Fannin County 85% short, commonplace prose text. Grayson County 89%

The NAAL calculates that, in Figure 32. Source: NAAL 2003, 85 percent of Fannin County residents have prose literacy skills at a basic or higher level. This figure is based upon the NAAL Basic Prose Literacy Skills, or BPLS. The NAAL is a nationally representative assessment of English literacy among American adults age 16 and older. The Assessment also includes the literacy rate for the state of Texas, which is 81% (2003) of the adult population. Therefore, the county’s literacy rate is slightly above the state average. However, this figure is lower than the national average of 99% (2003) of all US adults.

159

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the Texas Education Agency annual School Enrollment 2006-2008 report on dropout and 4500 4000 completion rate, the 3500 3000 dropout rate for Cooke 2500 County in the 2006-2007 2000 1500 school year was 0.0% for 1000 grades 7-12. Given the 500 0 Elementa High relatively small number of Nursery College Kinderga ry School School School, or rten (grades (grades children that are enrolled Pre-K Graduate 1-8) 9-12) in school between these School Enrollment 504 734 4,128 2,472 1,576 grade years, it is not Figure 33 School Enrollment Fannin County. Source: ACS surprising that the dropout figures would be extremely low or none existent. The population of children that are enrolled in Fannin County, 2006-2008 period was 7,081 students. During this period, the age group of students that accounted for the highest percent of enrollment was elementary school (grades 1-8) with 3,501 students. This number could reflect the age of the population in Fannin County, with the fact that there are significantly larger numbers of elementary age children in the county as compared to other age brackets. The number of students enrolled in college or university in the county was 907 students. This number can be explained, predominantly, by Cooke County’s proximity with Grayson County College in Grayson County. Overall households and demographics featuring high levels of educational attainment are also among the highest in household income and wealth. Therefore, educational attainment can be used as an indicator of personal self-sufficiency. There are approximately 22,638 Fannin County Residents over 25 years of age. Based on this population, the American Community Survey estimates there are 9,003 total high school graduates in

Cooke County over the age of 25, including equivalency markers such as the GED. This 160 translates to about 39.8 percent of the adult population in Cooke County with only a high school education. Approximately 20.3 percent of residents have some college and 6 percent

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

have associates degrees. However, 10.4 percent of the population held a college degree and graduate and professional degrees are at 4.3 percent.

Educational Attainment 2006-2008

10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Less than 9th to 12th High school Some Associate's Bachelor's Graduate or 9th grade grade, no graduate college, no degree degree professional diploma (includes degree degree equivalency)

Figure 34 Source: ACS

In terms of Ethnic breakdown of students enrolled in school, Caucasian ethnicity makes up the highest percentage in Bonham ISD, Fannin County’s 2008-2009 School largest school district, with 74.90 percent of students Enrollment by Ethnicity K-12 reporting. The next largest ethnicity was (Bonham ISD) 1% Hispanic with 15.7 percent of students reporting. 1% 7% African African Americans accounted for 7.5 percent of the American 16% population, followed by Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic

Native American with percentages of 1.3 percent and 75% White .7 percent respectively.

161 Approximately 15.4 percent of residents living in Figure 35. Source: TEA Annual Report Fannin County are living below the federally established poverty line. This is based on household and income and number of persons Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

occupying the household and reflects, along with the slight increase of the Hispanic population in schools, the particularly high amount of students in the following categories: economically disadvantaged, Limited English Proficiency (LEP), Students with Disciplinary Placements, and At Risk students. Economically disadvantaged is a term to describe the percent of economically disadvantaged students is calculated as the sum of the students coded as eligible for free or reduced- Student Qualifications Gainsville ISD price lunch 2007-2008 or eligible

At-Risk 808 for other

Students w/Disciplinary public 60 Placements assistance, Student Programs Limited English Proficient (LEP) 138 divided by

Economically Disadvantaged 1,146 the total number of 0 400 800 1,200

Figure 36. Source: TEA Annual Report students.

Approximately 56.10 percent of students in Bonham ISD qualify as economically disadvantage. Students in the LEP program are identified as limited English proficient by the Language Proficiency Assessment Committee (LPAC) according to criteria established in the Texas Administrative Code. Not all pupils identified as LEP receive bilingual or English as a second language instruction, although most do. Approximately 6.8 percent of students in Bonham ISD are placed in this program, which almost directly matches the number of students that are enrolled in ESL, which is 6.6 percent. At risk students are identified as at risk of dropping out of school based on state-defined criteria, and 39.6 percent of students in the district qualify under these conditions. Students with Disciplinary Placements are students placed in alternative education programs and total out to 2.6 percent of district students. Other noteworthy programs were Career and Technical Education and Gifted and Talented Education with 162 enrollment at 24.9 percent and 4.40 percent respectively. Enrollment in the Special Education Program accounted for 13.1 percent of students in the district.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Another socioeconomic indicator concerning education is enrollment in free or reduced lunch programs. The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is a federally assisted meal program operating in more than 99,800 public and non-profit private schools across the nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture funds this program and provides the following description of its service:

It provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to more than 2.3 million Texas school children each school day. In 1998, Congress expanded the National School Lunch Program to include reimbursement for snacks served to children in after-school educational and enrichment programs to include children through 18 years of age. School lunches must meet the applicable recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which recommend that no more than 30 percent of calories come from fat and less than 10 percent from saturated fat. Regulations also establish a standard for school lunches to provide one-third of the Recommended Dietary Allowances of protein, vitamin A, vitamin C, iron, calcium and calories. School lunches must meet federal nutrition requirements, but decisions about the specific foods to serve and their preparation are made locally. A student cannot be charged more than 40 cents for a reduced-price lunch. After-school snacks are provided to children on the same income eligibility basis as school meals. However, programs that operate in areas where at least 50 percent of students are eligible for free or reduced-price meals serve all snacks free. In the 2008-2009, the state served 791,708,247 total meals as a part of the free or reduced lunch program.25

163

25 United States Department of Agriculture: Report on National School Lunches: http://www.squaremeals.org/fn/render/channel/items/0,1249,2348_2363_0_0,00.html Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Crime, Family Violence, and Child Abuse Violent Crimes 1995-2006 The number of violent crimes known to 120 the police in 2006 was 73 cases, 100 80 according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The 60 40 number of violent crimes reported to the 20 police in 2006 for the state of Texas was 0 199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006 121,468. The number of violent crimes in Series 1

Fannin County from 1995 to 2006 has Figure 37. Source: U.S Census Bureau increased at a steady rate with a few yearly decreases occurring within the data, but has now begun a dissent. The first decrease occurred in 2000 but quickly increased again in 2001. However, violent crimes experienced a two-year decrease between 2002 and 2003. This number rose again in 2004 but has now started a steady decrease.

Aggravated assault and larceny theft Reported Crimes (2006) have steadily increased in this eleven- Reported Crimes (2006) year period. In 2006, the numbers of motor vehicle thefts known to … 26 aggravated assault and larceny theft larceny-thefts known to police 404 burglaries known to police 255 were 63 and 404 respectively. property crimes known to police 685 Although hard data are difficult to aggravated assaults known to … 63 robberies known to police 3 obtain because of the covert nature of forcible rapes known to police 7 the problem, there is a known link murders and manslaughter 0

Figure 38. Source: ACS between violence against women and poverty. According to the Children’s Advocacy Center of Sherman, one in three women are a victim of violent abuse. The numbers of these cases that go unreported are 1 in 4. This data relates to the current state of conditions for women and children in Texoma and was gathered in 2009. There were between 1000 and 2000 law 164 enforcement arrests involving abuse in this year. 800 victims and children were seen at the advocacy center, and these victims included both men and women. However, the center deals

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

primarily with women and children who are suffering from abuse. The actual number of abuse incidents, both reported and non-reported, in 2009 was almost 2000 cases.

In the United States, domestic violence is conclusively linked to homelessness among women and children. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reports that domestic violence was cited by 50% of U.S cities surveyed in 2005 as a primary cause of homelessness. Further, the ACLU notes that 50% of homeless women in San Diego, California, reported being the victims of domestic violence, and that in Minnesota, one-third of homeless women indicated that they left their homes to escape domestic violence.26 Overall, according to the National Network to End Domestic Violence, 92% of homeless women in the United States have at some point been the victims of severe physical and/or sexual abuse.27

The 2005 version of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) enhanced the provisions of its earlier version, with increased funding for violence-prevention programs, emergency shelter for women and children, and long-term housing solutions for low-income women and their children. The act also mandates that abused women be allowed to take ten days off from work each year to attend court or to look for housing, and it provides greater access to law enforcement and the justice system for abused immigrant woman who would otherwise have no legal recourse and might have to leave the country with abusive partners. Because violent relationships tend to affect poor women disproportionately in the United States, the provisions of the VAWA that allow time off from work and help for immigrant women mean that more poor women will be able to keep their jobs and remain in the country while they make arrangements to leave and/or prosecute their abusers.28 Child Abuse Statistics:

There were 116 confirmed cases of child abuse/neglect in Fannin County in 2008. That is 24.9% confirmed cases per 1000 children. There were 269 completed CPS investigations. There were

165 26 http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/dvhomelessness032106.pdf 27 http://www.nnedv.org/pdf/Homelessness.pdf 28 Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women. Available from http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/index.html. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

two child abuse related fatalities reported in Fannin County in 2008. There were 80 children in that year that were the legal responsibility of the state. There were 75 children in substitute care and 68 children in foster care. Substitute care refers to a home that includes children that are over the age of 18. There were 69 paid childcare clients in this year, which totaled to $763,058 in foster care expenditures for the state. The ethnic breakdown of abuse includes all 116 children for which abuse has been confirmed. The majority of these children are Anglo with 68 victims. The next highest ethnic group was African Americans with 31 victims.

Victims of Child Abuse- Ethnic Breakdown 2008

80 70 60 50

30 20 10 0

African American Anglo Hispanic Native American Other

Victims of Child Abuse- Ethnic Breakdown

Figure 39. Source: Texas Dept. of Family and Protective Service

Youth Teen Pregnancy There were 24 reported births to teens age 15 to 17 in Fannin County in 2005, according to the Texas Department of Health and Human Services.

166 Child Care Statistics

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the Sherman Homelessness Coalition, in 2008 the population of children age 0 to 13 was 7,435. The number of licensed day care operations in the county was 19 with a total capacity to care for 700 children. The number of registered childcare homes was 15. There is, also, only one residential licensed 24-hour care operation for the county.

167

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.2.2 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS FANNIN COUNTY

Organizations Interviewed Only one interview was conducted for Fannin County service providers due to time constraints. The organization interviewed was the Project United branch in Honey Grove, Fannin County.

Conditions of Poverty

As explained in the methodology section, according to Jim Masters, President of the Center for Community Futures, analyzing poverty issues can be separated into two components: the causes of poverty and the conditions of poverty. The conditions of poverty are the result of the causes of poverty. They are the representation, or static snapshot, of the problem within the community. They represent the people who are actually “in” poverty and the problems they face.29 While Masters discusses statistical representations of conditions, in these interviews the researchers attempted to qualitatively describe poverty in their communities and the Texoma region through separate condition domains. Each condition domain reflects aspects of a poverty that affects the residents who live on the margins. The complete list of condition domains can be found in the Methodology section.

This section presents the conditions of poverty that were mentioned in the interview taken in Fannin County. 168

29 http://www.cencomfut.com/ Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Some conditions of poverty were mentioned in the context of the services that Project United provides. These include the condition domains of the elderly and housing. These conditions were mentioned in the context of Project United’s planned services for the community. Although these services are still being planned, the fact that they are included in the organizational growth structure still reflects important needs in the community. For example, the respondent mentioned that while the organization is focused on services for children right now, it is also providing educational services for senior citizens. Project United also hopes to expand housing opportunities through a variety of methods, such as transitional housing for the homeless and housing for senior citizens.

Also, there are other conditions of poverty mentioned in detail in the interview that require further elaboration. The descriptions include the direct experiences of the respondents to the condition domains and what the respondents see in the community. In addition, the descriptions will highlight the relationships between the conditions of poverty.

Crime Crime was mentioned in the interview, but specifically in the context of youth and juvenile delinquency. Both respondents believe that Project United has a positive effect on juvenile delinquency. They both link juvenile delinquency with children having a lack of positive programming and direction in their lives. The president and volunteer feel that Project United’s program provides children both of these things.

Youth Positive communication and thinking skills were important to both respondents. The volunteer commented on the state of youth in Honey Grove. He said that children in Honey Grove had no direction because there were no opportunities for them. Adopting the perspective of the children he worked with, he said the scariest thing for children was looking into a future with 169 no opportunities for themselves. He went on to explain that some people in the community

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

held the view that, when children turn 17 years of age, parents are no longer responsible for those children.

Project United told the interviewer that it conducted a small community needs assessment in Honey Grove in order to determine what services were needed in the community. The respondents said that the following complaint they heard again and again was, “children do not have anything to do.” Project United’s focus on youth is a direct response to what they perceive is needed in the community.

Youth and Other Conditions Project United’s focus on youth affects crime. The volunteer from Project United commented on the relationship between youth and law enforcement, since some of Project United’s clients included youth delinquents. The volunteer said that Project United had a good relationship with Fannin County law enforcement. Juvenile delinquency rates went down, potentially in part because of Project United’s youth program. For example, the volunteer mentioned that there had been a youth vandalizing an old high school building, which is now the Project United building. However, after Project United arrived in Honey Grove, the vandalism stopped. The volunteer personally works with children who have gotten into trouble with the law, such as those recently released from juvenile hall.

Education The main program provided by Project United is an after-school program based in Honey Grove. The president of Project United felt that the organization provides positive programming for children, as well as an outlet for children whose parents are busy with work or school. The president works with schools to inform individuals about the outreach program. The schools that Project United interacts are mostly in Honey Grove, although program participants come from all around Fannin County. A major part of Project United’s relationship with the schools is 170 how it works with teachers. The Honey Grove teachers themselves come to the center to volunteer. The president said that the teachers volunteer at the after-school program because

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

they find value in being able to spend more time with their students. Teachers would explain that, during the school day, they did not get to spend enough time with their students, especially if some of the students had issues that needed to be addressed.

Education and Other Conditions Project United has a programmatic focus on education that ties into truancy and crime prevention. By providing youth with constructive after school and weekend activities, they reinforce academic learning and promote good life-skills in an environment where they are less likely to get into trouble. Their education programs include after-school programs, mentoring relationships, and constructive recreational activities.

Employment Employment was mentioned as a community need and as a future service that could be provided by Project United. When asked about critical needs in Fannin County, the respondent said that the area needs more jobs and more businesses to provide those jobs. With regard to future plans, Project United intends to create programs that encourage employment for adults in the community. These programs would focus on topics such as job training and career development. Although these types of programs have not yet been implemented, the fact that they exist as plans represents a need for them in the community.

Generational Differences The president started the Project United branch in Honey Grove because he, himself, grew up in Honey Grove and felt a personal connection to the community. At the beginning of the interview, he commented on some changes he saw in youth today. When he was a child, he felt like the entire town of Honey Grove was his playground, but observed that children do not have that luxury now. He believed that children should have a centralized area for recreation. Also, he observed how important technology is for youth today. Children stay inside their homes 171 more than when he was a kid. Children playing video games and spending their time sending text messages throughout the community. He went on to say that, children do not seem to

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

work well in groups anymore, whereas, when he was a kid, he engaged in group activities with other children that helped him build communication skills and feel comfortable in large groups. These generational differences are part of what motivated the respondent to create the community center in Honey Grove. The center is a centralized location where children can work on positive communication and thinking skills, which is what he believed children today need most.

Health Project United runs programmatic activities for health, such as exercise for teenagers and nourishment for mothers and young children. However, the respondent admits that these programs are not at the level they should be. Nutrition

Nutrition came up sparingly during the interview. Project United does provide food for children during the after-school program, but like Project United’s health programs, the respondent said that the levels of these types of nutritional programs are not where they should be. The volunteer commented that he sees children come to the community center hungry, which reflects a need for nutrition in the community.

Substance Abuse As mentioned in the Methodology section and for the purposes of this Community Service Needs Assessment, issues relating to drugs and substance abuse are categorized under the condition domain of health.

The respondent mentioned that there was a major substance abuse problem in Fannin County. To some degree, he attributed this problem to a lack of recreational activities for both adults and children. And, as a result, substance abuse in Fannin is seen as a hobby or a form of leisure. 172

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Substance Abuse and Other Conditions

Regarding drugs and rehabilitation, the respondent said that transportation is a barrier for individuals who need substance abuse rehabilitation because the facilities for this are located outside of Fannin County.

Transportation Transportation was a need cited by the respondent. In order to facilitate children coming to the community center, Project United provides transportation for these children. He said that in the community, most families only have one car. People are limited if they cannot drive, especially if they are elderly or disabled.

Case management and Service Delivery According to the president of Project United, trust is important for effective case management. An example he gave was drug rehabilitation. He said that clients who need rehabilitation may not trust the caseworker enough to actually get the help that they need. The respondent said he knew of clients who saw agencies and caseworkers as simply providing services in order to make income from it. As a result, clients felt as though they were being treated like numbers. Ultimately, some clients may not improve because, ultimately, the agencies do not care if their clients improve or not. The respondent wanted non-profit organizations to be accountable and to provide services for reasons other than solely earning an income from these activities.

Causes of Poverty

This section addresses the questions: what causes poverty and what keeps poverty in place? The previous section addressed the conditions of poverty, or what poverty looked like in the community. This section explains how this community came to be afflicted by poverty. 173

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

When asked what they believed to be the causes of poverty, the volunteer immediately said it was the community’s mindset. This reflects a multi-generational pattern of thinking that coincides with the concept of a cycle of poverty. The volunteer explained that, for example, if a grandmother and mother were low-income, than most likely the children and children’s children will be low-income, as well. This type of dilemma stems from mindsets about life that are passed down from generation to generation. The volunteer explained that agencies can continue to provide services to clients, but people will not be lifted out of poverty unless those agencies can help to change the mentality that low-income individuals have. One solution is to provide counseling about positive thinking skills for low-income individuals.

Unique Observations

Elected officials The president said that Project United faces opposition from elected officials. He pointed out that many of the elected officials were the same church members who opposed the community center. The president said that, even if a project is going in a positive direction, unless certain individuals in the community have control over that project, they will struggle with its existence. This is the reality of small communities in Texas.

Familiarity complex The president explained that there is a need for a grocery store in Honey Grove, but not a local brand. The community needs a neighborhood Wal-Mart due to the familiarity complex. Rather, the community will support a corporation like Wal-Mart because it is familiar to them. If an individual from outside the county moved in and opened a grocery store, the community would not feel comfortable shopping there because the owner is from outside the area. The familiarity complex is endemic to small communities. The president said that a grocery store should come as a service to the community, not as a way to generate income. 174 Role of Churches

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The president said that although Project United is an outreach ministry of his church, churches in Honey Grove do not cooperate with the organization. Often, churches want to use the community center, but do not take responsibility for cleaning up after their activities or assist in paying utility bills. They want to use the community center to further their own organizations. But, the president does not want churches to make the community center into a church. However, Project United does facilitate prayer services in the community center. The president felt Project United faces opposition from churches because churches do not want the community center to take people away from their church services. The churches may feel this way because Project United provides services to the community that churches would otherwise provide to their own members. If church members are asked to do something that does not benefit their own church directly, then they do not do it, even if it is for the good of the community, as a whole. He hated to admit this, especially because he is a pastor, himself.

Critical Needs Below are Fannin County’s top needs according to the interview respondents:

Drug rehabilitation facility Substance abuse is a major problem in Fannin County due in part to the lack of other recreational activities. Adults and teens turn to substance abuse as a hobby or as a form of leisure. Rehabilitation facilities are outside the county and are so spread out that it is difficult for clients to get to the facilities, especially if they do not have reliable, personal transportation.

Employment opportunities There needs to be more businesses that come into the area and create a large amount of jobs.

Food bank The respondent noted that many children come to the community center hungry. The community center does help by providing snacks to children during its after-school program, 175 but there is more that could be done to address this issue.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grocery store Honey Grove needs a corporate grocery store that will be familiar to the community. Outside individuals who come into the community and set up a grocery store will be less welcome by the community. The grocery store needs to operate as service provider rather than an income generator.

Recreational activities A recurring theme throughout the interview was the lack of recreational activities for both children and adults, which had connections to substance abuse and delinquency. There needs to be more recreational activities such as a movie theater, sports facilities for volleyball, tennis, a gym, and others.

Transportation system As the respondent said, most families only have one car, which limits family members from going to places. Also, the elderly and disabled have no other means of transportation.

176

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.2.3 SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

A full list of tables appears in Appendix F.

Fannin - #1 Need (Open-ended answers) 0.6

0.4

0.2

0 PercentageofRespondents

All Service Providers Community Clients

177

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin - Top Five Needs (Open-ended answers) 0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 PercentageofRespondents

All Service Providers Community Clients

Client Top Needs by Hopefulness-Fannin

Not at All Somewhat Unsure Hopeful Hopeful Very Hopeful

Employment 0.21 0.21 0.49 0.54 Financial Security 0.16 0.21 0.29 0.37 Housing 0.18 0.12 0.17 0.12 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 0.63 0.67 0.27 0.31 Transportation 0.21 0.23 0.34 0.29 Education 0.05 0.05 0.2 0.25 Food/Clothing 0.26 0.28 0.17 0.16 Info On Services 0 0 0 0.01 Childcare/Youth Services 0.03 0.07 0.12 0.22 Utilities 0.26 0.3 0.29 0.26 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 0.24 0.33 0.07 0.05 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0.03 0 0 0.01 Domestic 0 0.02 0.02 0.04 Substance Abuse 0 0.02 0 0 Other 0.13 0.14 0.22 0.19 N Value 38 43 41 93 178

Rank #1 Rank #2 Rank #3 Rank #4 Rank #5

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

‘Very Important’ Services by Employment Status (Employed, Unemployed, Retired) - Fannin Service Type Employed Unemployed Retired (%) (%) (%) Employment (need a job) 56 55.9 34.3 Living Wage Employment (need better 62.2 45.9 35.6 paying job) More Education (for better 59.3 52 31.7 employment) Enrichment Programs for Youth 45.2 32.5 25.4 School Readiness 52.8 47.5 25.4 Affordable Childcare 50 41.1 22.8 Summer Childcare 41 34.1 16.4 Family Services 30.6 23.8 30.4 Use Public Transportation 20.4 28.1 26.7 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 34.5 39.7 31.3 Temporary Shelter 12.3 20.2 12.3 Rent Assistance 28.1 46.5 31.0 Utility Assistance 42.3 59.5 64.5 Improvements to Heating and A/C in 33.8 42.7 44.6 home Emergency Food Assistance 32.6 45.3 37.1 Emergency Healthcare 42.2 47.6 42.4 Preventative Healthcare 41.5 43.7 50.0 Health Insurance 46.1 57.0 58.7

179

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.3 GRAYSON COUNTY

2.3.1 PROFILE OF PUBLIC STATISTICS

Housing Housing is one of the most important measures of individual or household self-sufficiency. The recent economic recession has shown how volatile the housing market and home prices can be Though owning your own home is often considered a sound investment, many cannot afford the associated rents and Housing Units mortgage in their communities. 2006-2008 Occupied Housing Units According to the American Community Survey for 2006-2008, Vacant Housing Units there are a total of 51,733 housing units in Grayson County. Of 14% these, 44,630 (86.3%) are occupied, while 7,103 (13.7%) are vacant. Of the 14,085 occupied units, 31,741 (71.1%) are owner 86% occupied, while 12,889 (13.7%) are renter occupied. There is a homeowner vacancy rate of 3.3 percent and a rental vacancy of Figure 42 Housing Units Grayson County. Source: 2006- 2008 ACS. 7.6 percent. The average household size is 2.55 percent, while the average family size is 3.07 persons30. The average household Occupied size of owner occupied housing units is 2.61 while the average Housing Units household size for renter occupied housing units is 2.43. The 2006-2008 majority of houses in Grayson County are valued $50,000 to Owner Occupied Units Renter Occupied Units $99,000 with 11,795 owner-occupied units being reported at this dollar amount. The median house value for the county is 29% $93,300. Industry standard in new home financing usually 71% provides affordable mortgages for homebuyers who earn approximately one third or greater of the cost of the home based Figure 43 Occupied Housing Units Grayson County. Source: 2007-2008 ACS 180

30 A family is defined as a group of two or more people who reside together and who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption. A household is defined as including all the people who occupy a housing unit as their usual place of residence (U.S. Census Bureau). Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

upon this standard of affordability, only 35.8% of families, therefore, could afford the median price of a single family home in Grayson County.

The following data was gathered using the 2009 State of Texas Low-income Housing Plan and Annual Report. This report is broken up into 13 distinct geographical regions known as Uniform State Service Regions. This report uses data collected from the 2006 State of Texas Community Needs Survey (CNS). Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties appear in the same region (region 3) along with 15 other counties, and therefore have the same data for the following issues. However, this data is useful as it creates a regional profile for housing in this area. The extreme cost burden is calculated and understood by the CNS, to be the extreme cost of upkeep of both owner and rental property. The extreme cost burden for renter households is 206,011, while the extreme cost burden for owners is 216,038. These extreme cost burdens pose a significant problem for low-income individuals in the county. However, this data should be taken lightly as it applies to an area much larger than Grayson County individually. Extreme cost burden affects low-income individuals due to the up-keep and miscellaneous expenses that are associated with this cost burden. These expenses, in turn, create areas of need. Housing Needs 2009

6% 7% Housing Assistance Energy Assistance Capacity Building Assitance 25% Development of Apartments 60% Homeless Assitance

181

Figure 40. Source: Texas CNS

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the 2006 Texas CNS, one of the two greatest needs for this region was housing assistance with 51 percent of respondents reporting in this need. The next highest area of need was energy assistance with 21 percent of respondents reporting on this need. Of the remaining respondents, approximately 6 percent indicated that capacity building assistance was the priority need, 5 percent of respondents indicated that the development of apartments was the priority need and only 2 percent indicated that homeless assistance was the priority need. Overall, out of the 1,988,135 households in the region, 610,655 owners and renters have housing problems; this represents 30.7 percent of all households. However, this figure encompasses both rural and urban housing developments and therefore is open to room for interpretation. There are distinct differences between rural and urban housing needs. For instance, development of apartments is a greater need in urban areas than in rural areas. This is due to the fact that there are more socioeconomically disadvantage people, generally, living in urban in areas as compared to rural areas. Housing assistance, it seems, is a need that affects both rural and urban housing development. There are a number of multifamily units in the region financed through state and Federal sources such as TDHCA, HUD, PHAS, Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, USDA, and local HFCs including the Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation. The total number of these multifamily units in this region is 144,504 units, which make up 27.5 percent of the total number for the state of Texas. Because Grayson County is a much more urban area in relation to the other counties incorporated in Region3, housing needs such as capacity building assistance and development of apartments is probably a much bigger issue in this county compared to others. The population in Grayson County is certainly larger than the other counties, and therefore would need more apartments and building capacity. Homeless assistance is more than likely, a bigger problem in Grayson County than the other counties simply due to the fact that it encompasses the most urbanized cities in the area, which include the cities of Sherman and Denison. People that have become homeless are more likely to migrate to Sherman sue to the resources that are available in comparison with smaller towns with less resources that are in the area. 182

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

183

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Household Economic Security

In 2006, 12.6 percent of people in Grayson County were living at or below the federal poverty level. Of all families in the county, 10.2 Percent were living at or above the federal poverty level. As far as age brackets, the fewer than 18 years bracket had the highest percent of people living in poverty with 18.0 Percent of Population Living in percent of people living Poverty 2006-2008 below the federal poverty line. The next highest level is People in Families 11 the 18 and over bracket with 65 Years and Over 9 10.8 percent of people living 18 Yeears and Over 10.8 Under 18 Years 18 in poverty. The most All People 12.6 staggering statistics is that Families with female households, … 31.3 families with a female lead Married Couple Families 5.2 household, no husband All Families 10.2 present, are experiencing Figure 41 Poverty by Household Type Grayson County. Source: ACS 184 more than 30 percent (31.3%) of households living in poverty. As evident by the data, women who run households with the absence of a husband face struggle significantly with poverty. In Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1999, there were approximately 1,117 families in Cook County that have female lead households and are living at or below the federal poverty level31. Of these households, 1,009 of these families include children under the age of 1832.

The ethnic breakdown of poverty in Grayson County is very similar to patterns at the state and national level. In regards to minority ethnic groups, Hispanic Americans are experiencing the highest rate of poverty, with 3,475 people at or above the federal poverty level. The next highest group is African Americans with 953 living in poverty. American Indian and Asian were the next highest groups with 153 and 99 people living in poverty respectively. There are approximately 31,497 people living in poverty who categorize themselves as white.

185

31 This figure comes from the U.S. Census Bureau data from 1999 32 This figure comes from the U.S. Census Bureau data from 1999 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Percentage of FPL for a family of three, 100= Poverty Line

300 Full-time min. wage: $42,703 250 $15,080 per year (82% of poverty) 200 $33,874 $33,874 $27,465 150 $23,803 $23,803

100

50 $2,256 185% 185% 130% 130% 243% 150% 12% 0 WIC Reduced-Price Free School Food Stamps Max. Child Care Typical Child TANF Cash School Meals Meals (SNAP) Care Assistance*

Table 4 Texas Eligibility for Family Support Programs. *Income limit shown is for applicants only. Once on TANF, some families with earnings disregards and other allowances for work related expenses can have higher incomes yet continue to receive some cash assistance. Source: Center for Public Policy Priorities (CPPP) Policy Point, Poverty 101, September 28, 2010.

1) Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP): Designed for families who earn too much money to qualify for Medicaid health care, yet cannot afford private insurance.

2) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): Program provides basic financial assistance for needy children and the parents or caretakers with whom they live. Caretakers must sign and abide by a personal-responsibility agreement. Time limits for benefits have been set by both state and federal welfare reform legislation. 186 3) Medicaid: This program provides healthcare coverage for one out of three children in Texas, pays for half of all births and accounts for 27 percent of the state’s total budget.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County’s participation in these programs is quite significant. There were 2,884 people registered for CHIP from September 2009 to February CHIP Enrollment Sept. 2009- 2010. As evident from the Feb. 2010 graph, enrollment in CHIP was 520 501 503 on a steady increase from 500 499 480 476 October to December. 460 454 451 CHIP Enrollment 440 However, it leveled off in Sept. 2009- Feb. 420 2010 January and started a slight decline in February. Average monthly enrollment in TANF for Figure 42. Source: Texas HHSC the County was 184 recipients, which make for an approximate yearly figure of 2,208 recipients. Comparatively, the state of Texas reports an average monthly figure of 104,693 recipients of TANF enrollment for the state as a whole. Total enrollment in Medicaid for Grayson County in July 2009 was 13,414 recipients. This figure had decreased significantly by February with 12,500 recipients enrolled in the program. Total enrollment in children’s Medicaid for July 2009 was 8,558 compared with the 7,814 children that were enrolled in February 2010. Food stamp enrollment in Grayson County for a six-month period (September 2009 to February 2010) was 20,970 recipients. As evident by the graph, enrollment in the food stamp program is on a steady decline starting in September 187 of 2009 and continuing on though February of 2010. All HHSC programs seem to be on a decline at this particular moment. However, there could be a spike in enrollment during the summer Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

months due to the fact that summer is about to start and energy and food prices, due to children being home from school, will be much higher for families already living in poverty. Enrollment of children in the WIC program in Grayson County consists of 2,867 children of 35.9 percent of the child population in the county. This figure reflects children ages one to four.

There are also a significant Medicaid Enrollment July 2009- number of children that are in February 2010 the legal custody of their 16,000 14,000 grandparents. This is likely a 12,000 10,000 financial burden due to the fact 8,000 6,000 that many elderly people rely 4,000 2,000 on assistance programs such as 0 Total Total Total TANF Adults TANF social security and Medicare. Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Children in Children's of Children There are approximately 2,495 Medicaid under 19 grandparents living with their Jul-09 Feb-10 grandchildren who are under Figure 44. Source: Texas HHSC that age of 18. 1,428 of these grandparents are legally responsible for their Food Stamp Recipients grandchildren, which are 4500 4000 4074 57.2% of all grandparents 3733 3816 3500 3339 3212 living with grandchildren. The 3000 2996 2500 majority of these 2000 Food Stamp 1500 grandparents, 15.6%, have Recipients 1000 been responsible for their 500 0 grandchildren for one to two years. About 60.9% of these 188 grandparents are female and Figure 43. Source: Texas HHSC

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

64.0% of these grandparents are married.

189

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the American Community Survey for 2006-2008, the Grayson County Civilian Labor

Force was 59,821. This figure Seasonally Adjusted reflects the total available Unemployment Rates 10 workforce age 16 and over in Grayson County. Approximately 8 Cooke Fannin 35.6 percent of residents over 6 Grayson 16 are not counted. This can be 4 Texas

explained in a variety of ways. 2 US First, housewives would 2000 2007 2008 Dec-09 Source: TRACER

certainly account for a large Figure 46. Source: Texoma CEDS

percentage of this figure. However, disabled and elderly people, 24-Month Average still under the age cap for the civilian labor force, would Unemployment Rate certainly account for a percentage of this figure. Approximately (period ending 01/10) % Cooke County 4.90 1,400 students attending Austin College in Sherman, Texas Fannin County 7.33 Grayson County 6.78 make up a percentage of people in the county not participating Texoma Region 6.40 in the workforce. These students are considered residents of U.S. 7.73 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics the county, and thus members of the civilian workforce, by the U.S. Census Bureau die to the Labor Force Statistics fact that they spend the 70000 majority of their time at their 60000 address in Grayson County. 50000 40000 While the unemployment rate 30000 is quite low, employment 20000 10000 figures are on the rise in 0 Grayson County. Figure 3 Civilian Labor Force Population Population Employed Unemployed shows the seasonally adjusted 190

2000 2006-2008 unemployment rates reported

Figure 45 2000 Decennial Census and ACS Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

by the Texas Workforce Commission LCMI Department. Grayson County has seen the largest rise in unemployment rates over the last decade that started around the time of the national economic recession. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the 24-month average unemployment rate for Grayson County from January 2008 to January 2010 was 6.78 percent. This 24-month period matches closely the period of increases in unemployment seen in Figure 3. Again, although there has been a steady increase in unemployment in Grayson County, figures remain below national, state, and regional percentages. However, the recent, 2008 financial crisis has more than likely effected workforce data in Grayson County as it has in the rest of the country. Therefore, unemployment in the county could potentially be steadily increasing. Civlian Labor Force Based on income data for Grayson County, the percent of 2006-2008 people living in poverty is 12.6 percent. The following Employed Unemployed data is based on U.S. Census Data for the year 1999. The Not in Labor Force number of households in the three lowest income brackets totals to 14,320 households. The number of 35% households in the three highest income brackets totals to 61% 3,202 households. The number of families in the three lowest income brackets totals to 6,977 families. The 4% number of families and households in the three highest Figure 47. Grayson County Civilian Labor Force. Source: ACS income brackets totals to 2,800. Based on the data, it becomes very apparent that there is a significant gap in sheer number of families and households in the lowest strata of income, compared with those in the highest strata of income. When the mid-range of income strata is analyzed with the lowest income bracket, there does not appear to be as high of a discrepancy. Therefore, the majority of the population exists in the middle range of income earnings. 191 The ACS 2006-2008 reports the same income data with notable differences in results. The number of households in the three lowest income brackets totals to 10,787 households. The Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

number of households in the three highest income brackets totals to 6,280. The number of families in the three lowest income brackets totals to 5,293 families. The number of families in the three highest income brackets totals to 5,733 families. Based on the data, the conclusion can be drawn that the gap between the gap between both families and households in the highest and lowest income brackets narrowed significantly in a six-year period. This decrease can be explained, partially, by changes in industry that occurred between 2000 and 2006.

Income Comparison

16,000

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000 Lowest Income Brackets 6,000 Highest Income Brackets 4,000

2,000

Households Families (1999) Households Families (2006) (1999) (2006)

Figure 48. Source: ACS

Industry in Grayson County has experienced significant changes in certain sectors between 2000 and 2006 (see attachment B). There was a significant decrease in the number of workers in the manufacturing industry with a loss of 3516 workers from 200 to 2006. This is due to the fact that Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson counties are experiencing a change from an economy largely based on the manufacturing industry. This is due to the lack of expansion and growth in this sector over the past decade. The region has experienced many closures of major manufacturing plants such as Johnson & Johnson and The Pillsbury Corporation. 192

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

In an order to combat this loss, area leaders have worked on capitalizing on the economic development and growth of Lake Texoma. Lake Texoma is a major tourist attraction that generates about 6 million dollars worth of tax revenue every year. Therefore, mush effort has been put into developing this region. This development is reflected in the chart with a 761 increase in the number of workers from 2000 to 2006 in the leisure and hospitality sector. The benefits reaped from this transformation would certainly be felt primarily in Sherman as the part of the lake that is on the Texas side of the Texas-Oklahoma border is located within the Grayson County limits. Money that is spent here by tourist using the lake generates tax money that is then available to the county. Further development of this region could ultimately lead to the creation of new jobs and a vast amount of economic resources for the county. There was also an increase in people working in industries that provided for a mid-level of income earnings. This can mostly be explained by population growth, but partially by increases in certain industry sectors such as health and human services. Many insurance companies, such as the Cigna Corporation, have moved into the area and created jobs for many people within the county. The new hospital, which opened at the beginning of this year, Texoma Medical Center, also certainly has the potential to create new jobs and provide an economic resource for the county

The mission of Texoma Workforce Solutions is to provide educational, job training and employment opportunities to employers, job seekers and future workers. There overall purpose is to create workforce solutions within Texoma. TWS provides workforce solutions for employers, job seekers and economic developers. The three primary goals and initiatives of the Texoma Workforce Development Board, in coordination with local partners, are as follows: 1. Coordinate Regional Planning 2. Literacy 3. Aligning Education and Industry

193 With these goals in mind, The Development Board identified its target industries in relation to Texas Workforce Commission (TWC)/ Labor Market and Career Information (LMCI) target industries. These target industries include, but are not limited, to the Governor’s industry clusters. This list of target industries was created through talking with the major Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

local economic development organizations to determine which industries they are currently targeting. Economic Development Corporations take direction from their city council, and therefore the industries they are targeting have been adopted in conjunction with their city’s strategic planning. For this part of the analysis, Workforce Solutions Texoma consulted with Sherman Economic Development Corporation (SEDCO), Denison Development Alliance (DDA), Bonham Economic Development Corporation (BEDCO), and Gainesville Economic Corporation (GEDCO). In order to develop a comprehensive list of industries from which to begin the targeting analysis, Workforce Solutions Texoma utilized three existing lists, the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), Texas Governor Rick Perry’s Industry Cluster Initiative and Ray Perryman’s list of targeted industries in his report Texas Our Texas. Economic developers were asked to indicate the industries on the NAICS and Perry lists they are targeting. In addition to input provided by the economic development partners, the occupations included on Workforce Solutions Texoma’s current Demand Occupations List was reviewed to more fully analyze the industries33.

Target Industries, Sectors, and Occupations:

Between March, 2000, when Beatrice Foods announced it would be closing its Denison Facility, and mid 2005, the Texoma Workforce Development Area saw over 4,700 workers laid off – over 2,600 of those layoffs were due to plant closures. Because of this, Workforce Solutions Texoma saw a need to compare the First Quarter of 2000 with the First Quarter of 2006 in order to create “before” and “after” pictures of the local labor market.

194

33 Texoma Workforce Board: Workforce Texoma Strategic and Operational Plan Fiscal Years 2009-2010 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Texoma Industry 2006

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

Figure 49. Source: Texoma CEDS

195

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Education and Literacy

Individuals seeking self-sufficiency must have a certain level of pre-employment skills and competencies. Basic literacy, as understood by the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL), means an adult is able to read and understand basic written information in English including the ability to locate easily identifiable information in short, commonplace prose text. The NAAL calculates that, in 2003, 89 percent of Grayson County Residents have prose literacy skills at a basic or higher level. This figure is based upon the NAAL Basic Prose Literacy Skills, or BPLS. The NAAL is a nationally representative assessment of English literacy among American adults age 16 and older. The Regional Literacy Overview Assessment also includes the 2003 literacy rate for the state of 93% Texas, which is 81% (2003) of the 91% 89% adult population. Therefore, the 87% 85% 83% Cooke County literacy rate for Grayson County 81% 79% Fannin County is well above the national Literacy Rate Grayson County average. However, this figure is Cooke County 89% Fannin County 85% lower than the national average Grayson County 89% of 99% (2003) of all US adults. Figure 50 Literacy Rate Grayson County Source: NAAL. The slightly higher level of literacy in this county can be attributed to the resources that are available in this county in comparison with surrounding counties. The county encompasses two colleges and a variety of industries, which would explain a higher literacy rate than other counties in the area.

196

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

According to the Center for Public Policy Priorities (CPPP) annual report on dropout and completion rate, the dropout rate for Grayson County in the 2009-2010 school year was 10.5% percent. This number is based on the following definition of dropout and completion rates that is available on the (CPPP) website and is based on TEA guidelines and definitions.

Graduation status for entire cohort of 9th students at the time the class graduates. Includes the following four categories: graduated, dropped out, GED, and continued.

TEA began rolling introduction to the NCES dropout definition with the class of 2006. Because the methodology is new, comparisons to rates for Class of 2005 or earlier are invalid. Furthermore, dropout rates for the classes of 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009 cannot be compared to each other because the new definition is being implemented on a rolling basis. In other words, the 2006 longitudinal dropout uses the old state definition for the freshman through junior years and the new definition for their senior year34.

The definition of a dropout, in regards to the 2009-2010 rate, can be understood then as “the number of students enrolled at a single point in time in the fall of the school year, or "snapshot" enrollment. Under the TEA definition, the denominator is the cumulative number of students in attendance at any time during the school year.”35 School Enrollment 2006-2008 The population of children 14,000 three and older enrolled in 12,000 10,000 School in Grayson County is 8,000 29,986 students. In the 2006- 6,000 2008 period, the group that 4,000 2,000 accounted for the most 0 Elemen High College students enrolled was Nursery tary Kinderg School or School, School arten (grades Gradua elementary school (grades 1- Pre-K (grades 9-12) te 8) with a total of 12,322. This 1-8) School Enrollment 1,647 1,602 12,322 6,477 6,938 number could reflect the age Figure 51 School Enrollment Grayson County. Source: ACS 197

34 “The Texas Kids Count Project”. Center for Public Policy Priorities, Austin, TX 35 Secondary School Completion and Drop-outs 2007-2008 Report. Texas Education Agency.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

of the population in Grayson County, but is also explained by the fact that students begin to dropout at the high school level. The number of students enrolled in college or graduate school is 6,938 total students. This number can be explained, predominantly, by the presence of Grayson County College and Austin College in Grayson County. Overall households and demographics featuring high levels of educational attainment are also among the highest in household income and wealth. Therefore, educational attainment can be used as an indicator of personal self-sufficiency. There are approximately 78,541 Grayson County residents over 25 years of age. Based on this population, the American Community Survey estimates there are 26,861 total high school graduates in

Educational Attainment 2006-2008 30,000 25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0 Less than 9th to 12th High school Some Associate's Bachelor's Graduate or

9th grade grade, no graduate college, no degree degree professional diploma (includes degree degree equivalency)

Figure 52. Source: ACS

198

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

In terms of ethnic breakdown of school enrollment, Caucasian ethnicity makes up the highest percentage in Sherman ISD, Grayson County’s largest 2008-2009 School school district, with 52.50% of students K-12 Enrollment by Ethnicity reporting. The next largest ethnicity was Hispanic with (Sherman ISD)

29.0% of students reporting. African American 2% 1% accounted for 15.40% of the total population followed African 15% American by Asian/Pacific Islander and Native American Hispanic reporting 1.90 and 1.20 percent respectively. There is 54% 29% White a significant amount of growth among the Hispanic ethnicity in the school population. There has been a steady increase in the growth of the Hispanic Figure 53. Source: TEA Annual Report population within the school system since the 2003 school year. Therefore, there has been an increase in enrollment in programs geared primarily toward Hispanic students. In the 2008- 2009 school year, approximately 14.4 percent of the school population was enrolled in ESL (English as a Second Language)36. The Language Efficiency Program also focuses primarily on Hispanic students. “Students in the LEP program are identified as limited English proficient by the Language Proficiency Assessment Committee (LPAC) according to criteria established in the Texas Administrative Code. Not all pupils identified as LEP receive bilingual or English as a second language instruction, although most do.”37 Approximately 14.6 percent of students in Sherman ISD are placed in this program, which almost directly matches the number of students that are enrolled in ESL, which, again, is 14.4 percent.

Approximately 12.6 percent of residents living in Grayson County are living below the federally established poverty line. This is based on household and income and number of persons occupying the household. This number reflects the particularly high amount of students in the

199 36 Number and percentage of students in all grades receiving bilingual or English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction. CPPP “The Texas Kids Count Project”. Definition Provided by TEA. 37 TEA Glossary for The Academic Excellence Indicator System 2008-2009 http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/2009/glossary.html Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

following categories: economically disadvantaged, Students with Disciplinary Placements, and At Risk students.38 Economically disadvantaged is a term to describe the percent of economically disadvantaged students is calculated as the sum of the students coded as eligible for free or reduced-price lunch or eligible for other public assistance, divided by the total number of students. Approximately 57.60 percent of students in Sherman ISD qualify as economically disadvantage. At risk students are identified as at risk of dropping out of school based on state-defined criteria and 47.2 percent of students in the district qualify under these conditions. Students with Disciplinary Placements are students placed in alternative education programs and total out to 1.80 percent of district students.

Other noteworthy programs within Sherman ISD were Career and Technical Education and Gifted and Talented Education with enrollment at 18.30 percent and 10.5 percent respectively.

38 The statutory criteria for at-risk status include each student who is under 21 years of age and who:

1. was not advanced from one grade level to the next for one or more school years; 2. is in grades 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12 and did not maintain an average equivalent to 70 on a scale of 100 in two or more subjects in the foundation curriculum during a semester in the preceding or current school year or is not maintaining such an average in two or more subjects in the foundation curriculum in the current semester; 3. did not perform satisfactorily on an assessment instrument administered to the student under TEC Subchapter B, Chapter 39, and who has not in the previous or current school year subsequently performed on that instrument or another appropriate instrument at a level equal to at least 110 percent of the level of satisfactory performance on that instrument; 4. is in prekindergarten, kindergarten or grades 1, 2, or 3 and did not perform satisfactorily on a readiness test or assessment instrument administered during the current school year; 5. is pregnant or is a parent; 6. has been placed in an alternative education program in accordance with §TEC 37.006 during the preceding or current school year; 7. has been expelled in accordance with §TEC 37.007 during the preceding or current school year; 8. is currently on parole, probation, deferred prosecution, or other conditional release; 9. was previously reported through the PEIMS to have dropped out of school; 10. is a student of limited English proficiency, as defined by §TEC 29.052; 11. is in the custody or care of the Department of Protective and Regulatory Services or has, during the current school year, been referred to the department by a school official, officer of the juvenile court, or law enforcement official; 12. is homeless, as defined by 42 U.S.C. Section 11302 and its subsequent amendments; or 13. resided in the preceding school year or resides in the current school year in a residential placement facility in the district, including a detention facility, substance abuse treatment facility, emergency shelter, psychiatric hospital, halfway house, or foster group home. 200

(Sources: PEIMS, Oct. 2008; Texas Education Code, 79th Texas Legislature)

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Enrollment in the Special Education Program accounted for 13.0 percent of students in the district.

Student Qualifications Sherman ISD 2007- 2008

At-Risk 3,094

Students w/Disciplinary Placements 131

Limited English Proficient (LEP) 959

Economically Disadvantaged 3,775

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000

Another socioeconomic indicator concerning education is enrollment in free or reduced lunch programs. The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program operating in more than 99,800 public and non-profit private schools across the nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture funds this program and provides the following description of its service: It provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to more than 2.3 million Texas school children each school day. In 1998, Congress expanded the National School Lunch Program to include reimbursement for snacks served to children in after-school educational and enrichment programs to include children through 18 years of age. School lunches must meet the applicable recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which recommend that no more than 30 percent of calories come from fat and less than 10 percent from saturated fat. Regulations also establish a standard for school lunches to provide one-third of the Recommended Dietary Allowances of protein, vitamin A, vitamin C, iron, calcium and calories. School lunches must meet federal nutrition requirements, but decisions about the specific foods to serve and their preparation are made locally. A student cannot be charged more than 40 cents for a reduced-price lunch. After-school snacks are provided to children on the same income eligibility basis as school meals. However, programs that operate in areas where at least 50 percent of students are eligible for free or reduced-price meals serve all snacks free. In the 2008- 2009, the state served 791,708,247 total meals as a part of the free or reduced lunch program39.

201

39 United States Department of Agriculture: Report on National School Lunches: http://www.squaremeals.org/fn/render/channel/items/0,1249,2348_2363_0_0,00.html Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Crime, Family Violence, and Child Abuse

The number of violent crimes known to the police in 2006 was 301 cases, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The number of Violent Crimes 1995-2006 violent crimes 600 reported to the 500 police in 2006 for 400 300 the state of Texas 200 was 121,468. The 100 number of crimes 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 fluctuated Figure 54 Source: ACS between 1995 and 2001, but showed an overall decrease. However, this number spiked again, slightly in 2001 but then decreased and has leveled off since 2002. Every area of crime has decreased during this eleven-year period but has remained stagnant at the 2002-year mark.

Although hard data are difficult to obtain because of the covert Reported Crimes (2006) nature of the problem, there is a Reported Crimes (2006) known link between violence against women and poverty. motor vehicle thefts known to police 222 larceny-thefts known to police 2726 According to the Children’s burglaries known to police 1,006 Advocacy Center of Sherman, one property crimes known to police aggravated assaults known to police 221 3,954 in three women is a victim of robberies known to police 53 violent abuse. The number of forcible rapes known to police 26 murders and manslaughter 1 202 these cases that go unreported are Figure 55 Source: ACS 1 in 4. This data relates to the current state of conditions for women and children in Texoma

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

and was gathered in 2009. There were between 1000 and 2000 law enforcement arrests involving abuse in this year. 800 victims and children were seen at the advocacy center, and these victims included both men and women. However, the center deals primarily with women and children who are suffering from abuse. The actual number of abuse incidents, both reported and non-reported, in 2009 was almost 2000 cases.

In the United States, domestic violence is conclusively linked to homelessness among women and children. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reports that domestic violence was cited by 50% of U.S cities surveyed in 2005 as a primary cause of homelessness.40 Further, the ACLU notes that 50% of homeless women in San Diego, California, reported being the victims of domestic violence, and that in Minnesota, one-third of homeless women indicated that they left their homes to escape domestic violence. Overall, according to the National Network to End Domestic Violence, 92% of homeless women in the United States have at some point been the victims of severe physical and/or sexual abuse.41

Juvenile Felony Charges- The 2005 version of VAWA enhanced the 2009 provisions of its earlier version, with 30 increased funding for violence-prevention 25 programs, emergency shelter for women 20 and children, and long-term housing 15 10 solutions for low-income women and 5 their children. The act also mandates that 0 abused women be allowed to take ten Figure 56. Source: Texas Juvenile Probation Commission days off from work each year to attend court or to look for housing, and it provides greater access to law enforcement and the justice system for abused immigrant woman who would otherwise have 203

40 http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/dvhomelessness032106.pdf 41 http://www.nnedv.org/pdf/Homelessness.pdf Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

no legal recourse and might have to leave the country with abusive partners. Because violent relationships tend to affect poor women disproportionately in the United States, the provisions of the VAWA that allow time off from work and help for immigrant women mean that more poor women will be able to keep their Juvenile Class A and B jobs and remain in the country while Misdemeanors-2009 they make arrangements to leave 60 42 and/or prosecute their abusers. 50 40 30 Juvenile crime is an area of particular 20 importance when discussing crime 10 statistics and poverty. There is an 0 overwhelming correlation between the children living in poverty and committing crime. The most commonly committed felony charge that minors receive in Grayson County Figure 57. Source: Texas Juvenile Probation Commission is for burglary. There were twenty- four confirmed cases of this offense in 2009 as reported by the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission. The next highest offenses were sexual assault and aggravated assault with 13 and 12 cases reported respectively. The most commonly committed class A and B misdemeanor was theft with 56 cases being reported in 2009. The next most common misdemeanors were violation of probation order and assault with 53 and 38 cases respectively. There were a total of 306 juvenile delinquents in the county in 2009. Juvenile crimes obviously refer to crimes that were committed by children under the age of 18. There is a richer amount of data in Grayson County simply due to the fact that it is a more industrialized area with more resources that are able to track and control crime data efficiently. Data is simply harder to collect in rural areas due to the fact that not all county sheriffs’ offices report to the state of Texas every year with 204

42 Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women. Available from http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/index.html. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

their crime rate statistics. The higher crime rate that is experienced in Grayson, in comparison with the other two counties is based on tow factor: The first obviously being that the population in Grayson is significantly greater than that of Cooke and Fannin. The second is that Grayson is a more industrialized city and with a more urban setting comes a larger amount of crime. Child Abuse Statistics: There were 340 confirmed cases of child abuse/neglect in Grayson County in 2008. That is 12 confirmed cases per 1000 children. There were 376 completed CPS investigations. There were no child abuse related fatalities reported in Grayson County in 2008. There were 90 children in that year that were the legal responsibility of the state. There were 85 children in substitute care and 58 children in foster care. Substitute care refers to a home that includes children that are over the age of 18. There were 60 paid childcare clients in this year, which totaled to $786,525 in foster care expenditures for the state. The ethnic breakdown of abuse includes all 122 children for which abuse has been confirmed. The majority of these children are Anglo with 79 victims. The next highest ethnic group was African Americans with 20 victims.

Victims of Child Abuse- Ethnic Breakdown

2008 90 80

50 40 30

20 10 0 African American Anglo Hispanic Native American Other

Victims of Child Abuse- Ethnic Breakdown 205 Figure 58. Source: Texas Dep. of Family and Protective Services

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Youth Teen Pregnancy: There were 250 reported births to teens age 13 to 19 in Grayson County in 2006, according to the Texas Bureau of Vital Statistics.

206

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.3.2 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS GRAYSON COUNTY

Organizations Interviewed The organizations interviewed were the Sherman Housing Authority and United Way of Grayson County.

Conditions of Poverty As explained in the methodology section, according to Jim Masters, President of the Center for Community Futures, analyzing poverty issues can be separated into two components: the causes of poverty and the conditions of poverty. The conditions of poverty are the result of the causes of poverty. They are the representation, or static snapshot, of the problem within the community. They represent the people who are actually “in” poverty and the problems they face.43 While Masters discusses statistical representations of conditions, in these interviews the researchers attempted to qualitatively describe poverty in their communities and the Texoma region through separate condition domains. Each condition domain reflects aspects of a poverty that affects the residents who live on the margins. The complete list of condition domains can be found in the Methodology section.

This section will include the conditions of poverty and the services provided to address each condition domain. Conditions mentioned in the interviews include the following: 207

43 http://www.cencomfut.com/ Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Crime The executive director of United Way of Grayson County said that substance abuse leads to crimes such as child abuse and domestic violence. He also mentioned that gang violence in small rural communities is a problem. But, as with substance abuse, many small communities ignore the root of the problem.

Education The Sherman Housing Authority runs GED and ESL programs for its residents and the general public. These programs are facilitated by the Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center. The Sherman Housing Authority has partnered with Grayson County College to provide these educational programs. While the executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority said that the GED program is excellent, it is still difficult to motivate people to take advantage of these educational opportunities. And yet, the ESL and GED classes still have a large turnout of participants. However, most of the participants are not residents in public housing. The executive director stressed the importance of education. She said that a lack of education results in client self-doubt and disrespect for the housing that clients reside in. The executive director explained that some clients ended up jeopardizing their leases simply because they did not have respect for themselves. This type of mindset encourages multi-generational poverty.

She explained that many successful clients pursued post-secondary education at Grayson County College (GCC). For example, she mentioned one particular female client that ended up pursuing nursing studies at Grayson County College. This client received direct assistance from GCC representatives who came to the Sherman Housing Authority to help Sherman Housing Authority clients pursue their career interests.

The executive director of United Way of Grayson County also placed great importance on education. Education is a critical need for United Way clients, especially with regard to youth. 208 He explained that United Way of Grayson County promotes education in the form of job training and works with a program called Skills for Workforce Advancement (SWAT). He said

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

that because many clients lack a high school diploma they are intimidated by formal institutions and classroom settings. So, United Way of Grayson County decided to hold the SWAT programs at local Boys and Girls Clubs. Doing so resulted in the additional advantage of being able to provide a flexible schedule and childcare.

Education and Other Conditions The executive director of United Way of Grayson County brought up the relationship between schools and substance abuse, which are located within the condition domain of health. The executive director said he was aware that drug dealing occurs in high school classrooms and that there are certain adults who turn a blind eye to these illegal activities. The executive director makes a point of talking with schools about the dangers of substance abuse.

Employment is an important condition related to education because many adult clients from both the Sherman Housing Authority and United Way of Grayson County obtain job training at educational centers. This type of training includes the GCC representatives who come to speak to residents about career training and help clients register for appropriate classes and United Way of Grayson County’s support of the SWAT program.

Elderly Public housing at the Sherman Housing Authority caters to elderly needs, with two-thirds of its housing units being reserved for the elderly and disabled. For the elderly and disabled, public housing is often their permanent home, as compared to other types of clients. Turnover in the public housing units is usually a result of elderly and disabled clients leaving public housing to go to assisted living or nursing homes. The executive director also referenced the elderly as being victimized and likely to jeopardize their public housing leases. Elderly clients may live in single-occupancy apartments, but if their adult children want to move in with them, then the elderly clients usually do not say no. This type of situation jeopardizes elderly clients’ lease 209 agreements.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Housing Public housing is the main service provided by the Sherman Housing Authority. The executive director said that the agency manages 298 public housing units, with two-thirds of the units reserved for families and the remaining one-third of the units reserved for the elderly and the disabled. The housing property types ranges from efficiencies to 4 bedroom apartments.

Public housing tenants have a utility expenditure allowance in order to accommodate clients who are already indebted to utility companies. As mentioned previously, there are also incentive programs for tenants, such as the Earned Income Disallowance, to prevent tenants from spending too large of a percentage of their income on housing. Eligibility for public housing is based on federal poverty income guidelines. If clients do not have a regular source of income, then they must report it to the Sherman Housing Authority.

Wait lists are a common problem for people who are in need of public housing. The executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority said that wait lists are longer than usual because of the recent economic downturn. To make matters worse, there are no new public housing developments being built due to a lack of funding. If clients are unable to receive public housing assistance from the Sherman Housing Authority because they are on a wait list, then the executive director points them to other resources such as TCOG, Bonham Housing Authority, and the Grayson County Housing Authority. The executive director said clients should stay on multiple wait lists if they are in need of public housing.

Housing was cited by the executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority as a pressing need in the community. There is a need for more family and elderly public housing units, but, ultimately, this translates into a need for more funding.

Income 210 Income factored most strongly with the Sherman Housing Authority in the way that it assists clients. The executive director of Sherman Housing Authority pointed out that, regardless of

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

whether or not clients are employed, the agency still accepts those who have a source of income. If a client does not have a regular source of income, then he/she must to report how much he/she has earned each month. Furthermore, if a client does not have a regular source of income or works less than 30 hours a week, then he/she is required to perform community service. This typically means volunteering at the Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center, which is part of the Sherman Housing Authority.

For public housing residents, there are incentive programs, such as the Earned Income Disallowance, which is run by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. This program allows the Sherman Housing Authority delay taking client income into account for a certain period of time when charging clients rent. This type of program is available to clients who have been unemployed for 12 months, on TANF, or in school for training. At some point, the Sherman Housing Authority will begin to take 50% of earned income into account when determining payment for rent. This type of program makes moving into public housing more manageable for clients because they do not have to spend their entire income on housing. Income also relates to client eligibility for public housing.

Nutrition Nutrition is a need addressed by the Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center and the Sherman Housing Authority. Several churches bring food banks to the community center. Also, the community center provides snacks to children who participate in the after-school program, but these contributions are funded through the community center, not donations. The community center has two staff members who work in the kitchen to feed the children.

As for United Way of Grayson County, it ranks child nutrition as one of the top critical needs for Grayson County.

211 Nutrition and Other Conditions In these interviews, youth and nutrition were complimentary condition domains of poverty.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Substance Abuse United Way of Grayson County places great importance on substance abuse. The executive director said that, upon conducting its own needs assessment, United Way of Grayson County determined that substance abuse is a huge problem. Their survey respondents frequently cited a lack of good jobs as a major need in the community. However, when United Way of Grayson County spoke with human resource departments, it found that there is not a lack of jobs. Rather, the issue is that job applicants do not pass drug tests. When people cannot pass drug tests to get employment, it becomes clear that substance abuse is a problem.

The executive director of United Way of Grayson County said that substance abuse impacts many other issues, such as domestic violence, child abuse, and the need for counseling. Furthermore, there are no substance abuse facilities in Grayson County. The closest facility is in Fort Worth. This is a major problem because for someone needing immediate rehabilitation going to Fort Worth means a turnaround of 30-45 days, which is too long. He said that a critical need of Grayson County is a treatment facility that will work with patients on a daily basis.

The executive director mentioned that there is a facility called the Four Rivers Outreach that is new to the area. He said United Way is giving Four Rivers Outreach a total of $50,000 over the next four years in order to build a transitional housing program. This means that, instead of getting out of prison and going right back into a negative environment with drugs and alcohol, individuals with substance abuse problems can go to Four Rivers and get treatment. At this time, recently released inmates with drug charges have no place to go.

Substance abuse is a problem among youth as well. Drug dealing goes on in classrooms and children are overdosing on drugs. The executive director of United Way of Grayson County says certain adults turn a blind eye and say, “kids will be kids.” The executive director went on to say 212 that the drugs being abused are not just methamphetamines, but now prescription drugs are being abused by youth. This type of substance abuse is even harder to detect because the drugs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

are originally obtained through legal means. In addition, youth face peer pressure regarding substance abuse and drug trafficking. He mentioned one young girl who was trying to improve her life, but was still pressured by friends to traffic kilos of marijuana to Dallas. These individuals would insist that marijuana is not an illegal drug, which represents delusion and misinformation on their part.

United Way of Grayson County executive director tries to deal with this problem by working with programs such as Services to At-Risk Youth (STAR) and North Texas Youth Connection. He also focuses on communicating with the court systems and schools about substance abuse.

The executive director recognizes the challenges associated with impeding substance abuse in small rural communities. Other United Way branches in small rural communities deal with substance abuse problems, but, often times, the community refuses to admit that the problem exists. The executive director said that denying that substance abuse is a problem starts with elected officials and continues on into the community itself. On the other hand, small rural communities that do recognize the problem still do not attempt to resolve the problem because they believe that their communities are too small to make a difference.

Transportation The Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center at the Sherman Housing Authority was built at a centralized location where residents can enjoy activities and programming. The location of the community center eliminated the need for transportation to distance locations, such as Grayson County College, that people without reliable, personal transportation could not get to easily. The community center’s location is also convenient because it helps reduce the need for public transportation.

Lack of transportation is an obstacle for clients who need substance abuse rehabilitation and 213 treatment. As mentioned previously, the executive director of United Way of Grayson County said there are no substance abuse rehabilitation facilities in Grayson County and the closest one

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

is in Fort Worth. Even if transportation were available, the turnaround time of 30-45 days is too long for a patient to receive daily ongoing treatment.

Youth The Sherman Housing Authority and the Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center offer youth programming to the public. They offer a “Kids Club” where children can do their homework and use the computer lab. The executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority said that many children take full advantage of the community center, as they come right to the center after- school. Many times, the center provides snacks to children during the after-school program.

After filling out a community need assessment, the respondent from United Way of Grayson County said that it placed youth services at the top of the list of critical needs for the community. The executive director believes that the future rests with today’s youth. For this reason, youth services are the largest portion of investment within United Way of Grayson County’s program funding.

Youth and Other Conditions The executive director of United Way of Grayson County had a lot to say about youth and substance abuse, which relates to the condition domain of health. He said that drug dealing goes on in the classroom, and some adults do not care. United Way of Grayson County supports youth substance abuse treatment programs such as the Substance Abuse Treatment and Recovery (STAR) and the North Texas Youth Connection. Furthermore, the executive director tries to inform the court systems and schools about substance abuse programs that are offered.

The executive director mentioned how youth are susceptible to substance abuse and peer pressure because drugs are perceived to be such a common activity. He knew of one client who was pressured to traffic marijuana to Dallas, with the perpetrators insisting that the drug was 214 not illegal.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Youth also relates to the condition domain of education. The Sherman Housing Authority supports an after-school program and United Way of Grayson County supports youth-related educational activities.

Unique Observations

Causes of Poverty The executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority observed that many of their clients lack self-respect, which ultimately prevents self-sufficiency and keeps these clients in poverty. As a result of this lack of self-respect, clients begin to disrespect their housing environment. She said she saw a trend of young mothers who possessed no practical skills and were unaware of social mores, such as coming to the rental office in appropriate clothing. She said these types of clients are the hardest to get to cooperate with the lease.

Clients who lack self-respect “burn bridges” with the Sherman Housing Authority and these clients’ housing applications are rejected. The executive director said that clients will lie on their application about where they have lived, in order to get into public housing. Although, why people lie about these types of things is unknown. The executive director did not know where these clients end up after getting rejected by the Sherman Housing Authority.

The executive director went on to say that the cause of the lack of self-respect she saw in clients was an effect of poor education. She felt that young mothers were not aware of their situation and how to solve it because they were too consumed by their own problems. For example, a young mother may allow her boyfriend to move in with her, even though this jeopardizes her leasing agreement.

From the perspective of United Way of Grayson County executive director, repetition of learned behaviors is the cause of the cycle of poverty. He said that clients who are in poverty 215 are often people who keep doing something the same way and expect a different result. These clients learn behaviors from their families, such as the experience of growing up on welfare and Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

government assistance. He said there was a stark difference between a family who expects welfare checks from the government to put food on the table, as opposed to families who work and earn the food that they put on the table.

Self-sufficiency and solutions The executive director of Sherman Housing Authority said that, despite imagining a scenario where she had unlimited funding and collaboration, the challenge of solving poverty is trying to motivate people to become self-sufficient. This lack of motivation to achieve education and self-respect has resulted in generations of families in poverty.

In addition, the executive director said that public housing is not a permanent solution, but rather a step along the road towards self-sufficiency. For this reason there is generally more funding available to Section 8 programs than to public housing programs.

The executive director of United Way of Grayson County said that one solution that could stop the cycle of poverty is awareness. People lose hope and feel as though the American Dream is no longer achievable. He wants to help people believe in the American Dream and know that it is alive and well. He wants to instill hope in people. Changing the mindset of clients will create hope, but people must stop depending on government assistance and manipulating government assistance. People must adopt responsibility, accountability, and ownership of their own behaviors and actions. The executive director called responsibility, accountability and ownership core American values, but said that a strong work ethic, pride in hard work and reaping the benefits of hard work are core values too. He said that ending the cycle of poverty starts with the youth. If children hold themselves accountable and stop blaming the system, then the country will get on track.

Clients at Sherman Housing Authority 216

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Clients and the experience of being a client were an important point of interest for the service providers interviewed. The Sherman Housing Authority works directly with clients who need public housing assistance. In order to receive public housing, clients must fill out an application. Client eligibility is determined based on client income categories. Next, clients are interviewed and told their position on the Sherman Housing Authority wait list. When this interview was conducted, the Sherman Housing Authority’s wait list was closed and there was a 3-4 month wait to receive public housing. The wait list for single occupancy units is longer than the wait list for units for elderly or disabled individuals.

Clients who do not have a regular source of income are required to report their monthly earnings and budget to the Sherman Housing Authority. The executive director considers every client to have a source of income regardless of whether or not he/she is employed, since contributions could be made by family members, Social Security, or disability payments. Clients who do not have a regular source income or work less than 30 hours a week are required to do community service. Community service is usually done at the Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center. Exceptions to the community service rule are made for students, the elderly, and the disabled. Initially, there was a great deal of resistance to this program, even though it provides many benefits to the community.

With regard to client population, many applicants for public housing at the Sherman Housing Authority come from the area homeless shelter.

Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center

Clients take advantage of the many activities provided by the Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center. There is a “Kids Club” where children can do their homework and use the computer lab. On Tuesdays and Thursdays, there are arts and crafts classes, open computer lab times, and 217 resident meetings. Many residents use the community center to watch television. Children who

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

attend the after-school program receive snacks and the Community Center holds GED and ESL classes for adults. These classes are run by the Grayson County College.

Services Provided Outside of County Grayson is the most populous county in the Texoma region and includes service providers that facilitate assistance to Fannin and Cooke Counties. The executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority said that if it cannot provide assistance to clients, then those clients can seek assistance from the Bonham Housing Authority in Fannin County as an alternative option. Public housing is a critical need for low-income individuals in the region and many clients are willing to relocate outside of Grayson County just to find affordable housing.

A few of the organizations that are supported by United Way of Grayson County include Meals on Wheels, Workforce Solutions Texoma, the Red Cross, and Home Hospice. These organizations provide services to the entire Texoma region. They recognize the needs of the entire region, not just Grayson County.

Challenges Working with Clients The executive director of Sherman Housing Authority mentioned two challenges that occur when working with clients. As mentioned previously, some clients “burn bridges” with the Sherman Housing Authority, while others lack self-respect. Some clients lie on their applications about past places of residence and property destruction, which resulted in their applications being rejected. Meanwhile, others would “burn bridges” because they broke their lease agreements for various reasons and refused to ask for help. In the past, the executive director took a more relaxed approach to client applications, but realized that by loosening the guidelines the Sherman Housing Authority was no longer providing safe housing to clients. Furthermore, many clients exploited the fact that receiving public housing is a privilege and not an entitlement. In recent years, the executive director admitted that she has tightened the 218 guidelines for public housing application acceptance to address this issue.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

As mentioned previously, the executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority observed that many lack self-respect, which ultimately prevents self-sufficiency and keeps clients in poverty. As a result of this lack of self-respect, clients begin to disrespect their housing environment. She said she saw a trend of young mothers who possessed no practical skills and were unaware of social mores, such as coming to the rental office in appropriate clothing. She said these types of clients are the hardest to get to cooperate with the lease.

The executive director of the Sherman Housing Authority said that even if she had unlimited funding and collaboration to implement new programs for her clients, the challenge for her program would always be motivating people to attend. She gave the example of the GED certification program. While it is an excellent program, the executive director has always had difficulty in motivating people to attend. Now, the goal is to help children realize the opportunities that education provides and motivate them to pursue those opportunities.

From the perspective of the executive director of United Way of Grayson County, repetition of learned behaviors of poverty is typical of clients who face generational poverty. Clients who are in poverty are often people who keep doing something the same way and expect a different result. Clients learn behaviors and mindsets of poverty from their families. Often times, this manifests itself in the experience of growing up on welfare and government assistance. He said there is a stark difference between a family who expects welfare checks from the government to put food on the table and families who work to earn the food that they put on the table.

Caseload The caseload at Sherman Housing Authority increased in size due to the recent economic downturn. As a result, the wait list is longer than before. More people have lost their jobs and have turned to public housing. These new applicants include persons who worked in factories, which have closed. All of these new applications were previously unfamiliar with the public 219 housing system.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Changes in the Last 5 Years

The Sherman Housing Authority respondent said that funding and other policies affecting social services, including public housing, change with each presidential administration. As a result, the organization has lost many grants, including a direct prevention grant. They have not received this grant since the start of the Iraq War in 2003. Despite these changes in funding, the respondent said that the organization has delivered the same quality of services to clients and the organization still offers educational training programs such as GED and ESL classes.

As mentioned previously, the economic downturn has affected the caseload of the Sherman Housing Authority. The caseload has increased in size as a result of the economic downturn. The wait list is longer than before, with more people losing their jobs and having to turn to public housing as a result. These new applicants include individuals who have lost their jobs at plants, which are now closed. All of these new applications were unfamiliar with the public housing system when they applied.

In 2005, United Way of Grayson County had a traditional funding procedure, meaning that the organization funded entire agencies based on the number of clients that those agencies served. However, United Way of Grayson County reconsidered its use of this model because the number of clients served at an agency does not imply effective service delivery for clients, or whether children were prepared to go to school. For this reason, the organization shifted its funding to subprograms of agencies, rather than providing funding to entire agencies themselves. Essentially, United Way of Grayson County adopted a business approach to providing financial assistance to service agencies. The organization determined its desired outcomes through the use of specific tools. At that point, the organization contacted its donors and showed them the methodology the organization uses to provide agency funding.

220 Other changes in policies for United Way of Grayson County within the past five years included the introduction of online applications for agencies to receive funding and online submittal of

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

program reports. At first, the agencies involved strongly opposed the online process because of their reluctance to change. However, with time the agencies have come to accept the change and now they welcome it. This is especially true since many other grant applications are now online. Because of this, the agencies involved feel that they are ahead of the curve compared to other service providers in other regions.

Community Contribution There organizations interviewed have numerous examples of ways that they have contributed to the community. The Sherman Housing Authority’s Rosa Viola Hill Smith Community Center recruits volunteers from within the area. For example, students from Austin College volunteer at the Kids Club and help children do their homework. There is a church group that rakes leaves at elderly residents’ housing units. As mentioned previously, there is also a mandatory community service requirement for Sherman Housing Authority residents who work less than 30 hours a week. The exceptions to this requirement include clients who are in school, the elderly, and the disabled. Community service done by clients mostly involves attending educational programs at the Community Center. However, even though community service is supposed to benefit the clients, there is a lot of resistance to the requirement.

As mentioned previously, community contributions are an important part of United Way of Grayson County. The executive director said that in 2005, the organization changed the way it operated. In the past, the organization used a traditional funding model. In this scenario, United Way of Grayson County was the middleman between donors and agencies. However, the organization found that it had lost the true core of its mission: fundraising. Therefore, the new focus is getting donors to understand what United Way does and why it supports agencies primarily through fundraising.

United Way of Grayson County interacts with a wide variety of stakeholders. For example, the 221 executive director works with clients, but not in the way that service agencies traditionally provide assistance to their clients. Rather, the organization publicizes success stories from

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

individual clients in order to raise money for funding. Clients can tell their story and convince donors to help the people who are in need.

United Way is volunteer-driven organization. The Board of Directors is entirely made up of volunteers from a cross-section of the community and that takes into account the importance of representing differing ethnicity, gender, demographics, geography, salary and industry. The Board consists of 24 individual members.

Regionalism Regionalism is a tactic used by service providers to increase funding marketability. The executive director of United Way Cooke County said that the organization works with the County, but, despite his desire for regional cooperation, Cooke County has a very independent mindset. People in Cooke resent outside influence because they had been doing things in their own way for decades. The executive director said that the next big project for United Way is to provide service provider funding in Fannin County, as well. He felt that it is necessary for Cooke County to understand that the positive benefits of regionalizing.

Critical Needs Below are the top critical needs of Grayson County, according to the interviewees. Drug Rehabilitation Facilities

Funding to Maintain Level of Service

Housing

Information about services

Jobs 222

Client Motivation for Self-Sufficiency Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Youth Services and Activities

223

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.3.3 SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

A full list of the results appears in Appendix F.

Grayson - #1 Need (Open-ended answers) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1

0 PercentageofRespondents

All Service Providers Community Clients

224

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson - Top Five Needs (Open-ended answers) 0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 PercentageofRespondents

All Service Providers Community Clients

Client Top Needs by Hopefulness-Grayson Unsure Not at All Somewhat Very Hopeful Hopeful Hopeful

Employment 0.31 0.2 0.48 0.51 Financial Security 0.34 0.51 0.3 0.38 Housing 0.1 0.14 0.15 0.12 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 0.48 0.69 0.41 0.3 Transportation 0.3 0.37 0.33 0.38 Education 0.16 0.01 0.23 0.21 Food/Clothing 0.16 0.2 0.12 0.22 Info On Services 0 0.01 0 0.02 Childcare/Youth Services 0.1 0.07 0.13 0.19 Utilities 0.34 0.19 0.34 0.32 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 0.13 0.24 0.13 0.07 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0.05 0 0.02 0.02 Domestic 0.02 0 0.03 0.05 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.14 N Value 61 70 86 209 225

Rank #1 Rank #2 Rank #3 Rank #4 Rank #5

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

‘Very Important’ Services by Employment Status (Employed, Unemployed, Retired) - Grayson Service Type Employed Unemployed Retired (%) (%) (%) Employment (need a job) 73.8 63.6 49.8 Living Wage Employment (need better 69.7 53.5 45.8 paying job) More Education (for better 62 52.5 37.3 employment) Enrichment Programs for Youth 54.2 34.1 40.7 School Readiness 54.1 36.6 40.2 Affordable Childcare 60.1 36.5 38 Summer Childcare 52.1 32.2 36.7 Family Services 42.5 26.1 38.1 Use Public Transportation 41.8 29.7 40.9 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 50.2 50.6 46.8 Temporary Shelter 27.4 17 29.2 Rent Assistance 44.7 54.2 45.3 Utility Assistance 58.6 73.0 66.5 Improvements to Heating and A/C in 40.7 49.2 51.6 home Emergency Food Assistance 48.8 36.6 48.9 Emergency Healthcare 55.5 52.1 55.5 Preventative Healthcare 54.6 53.8 50.0 Health Insurance 57.3 61.3 58.6

226

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.4 TEXOMA (TRI-COUNTY)

2.4.1 CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS

Contextual analysis is a qualitative technique that is used to familiarize one’s self with the topic area that is being researched and is done before investing time and other resources in the collection of original data, secondary or already available sources of information about specific settlements or populations in which one is interested.44 The researchers used this technique in two ways. The first was to obtain a list of the most requested services received by the Texoma Area 2-1-1- call center that refers callers to service providers and agencies based upon the caller’s needs. This was simply a starting point for reviewing possible needs for residents of Texoma. The second contextual analysis involved examining the taxonomy of the 2-1-1 Texoma Resource Guide and noting the local agencies that provided each service. This analysis was used as a preliminary step in our study for two purposes. The first purpose was to identify the services and specific agencies in Texoma that are beneficial to low-income individuals and families. Many of these agencies would also be contacted later in the study for interviewing or surveying. The second purpose was to conduct a rudimentary analysis of the possible service gaps that exist in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties by noting what types of services outlined in the 2-1-1 service taxonomy are not locally available. The service-types that are part of the 2-1-1 taxonomy that did not list a local service provider are listed and outlined. An important distinction to remember is that no notes were taken on whether these services were of need locally, only that the service was not offered.

227

44 Peter Ward, Research Methods and Qualitative Analysis in the Social Sciences Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2-1-1 Taxonomy Statistical Report (2008)

The 2-1-1 Taxonomy Statistical Report is a record kept by the 2-1-1 Department at Texoma Council of Governments. 2-1-1 “provides information and referral services to persons of all ages who are seeking help from Health and Human Services agencies in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson counties.”45 Clients can call the 2-1-1 center at Texoma Council of Governments and receive information about various services in the regional area. The 2-1-1 Taxonomy Statistical Report is a breakdown of every type of service that was a documented request by a client in a year. The report is categorized by the amount of calls received for a particular service, which means that the report is ordered greatest to least based on call volume. The following list is a breakdown of the top twenty services that were requested in both 2008 and 2009. A corresponding list of available services offered in the tri-county area appears with every requested service.

1) Electric Service Payment Assistance: 2334- Total Calls 2333- Referred 1- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 1729 Fannin: 308 Cooke: 196 Service Providers: Public Utility Commission of Texas, Volunteers in Service to Others (VISTO), Lakeway Christian Resale Barn, Salvation Army of Grayson, Texoma Council of Governments (TCOG), Salvation Army Service Unit- Van Alstyne, Van Alstyne Ministerial Alliance, Ministerial Alliance of Whitewright

228 2) Prescription Expense Assistance:

45 Texoma Council of Governments. “2-1-1 Information”. . Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

684- Total Calls 664- Referred 20- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 603 Fannin: 35 Cooke: 26 Service Providers: DSHS- Texas Department of State Health

3) Food Pantries: 549- Total Calls 511- Referred 38- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 432 Fannin: 44 Cooke: 35 Service Providers: Bells- Savoy Community Care Center Food Pantry, Calvary Baptist Church- Manna House, Fannin County Community Ministries, INC. Food Pantry, Fannin County Food Pantry, Denison Helping Hands, New Beginnings Fellowship Church, Calvary Baptist Church Food Pantry, Volunteers in Service to Others, East Sherman Baptist Church Food Pantry, Fairview Baptist Food Pantry, Harmony Baptist Church Food Pantry, First Baptist Church of Tom Bean, Your Neighbor’s House- Food Bank, First Baptist Church of Whitewright Community Food Pantry

4) Rent Payment Assistance: 508- Total Calls 229 464- Referred 44-Unmet

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

County Breakdown: Grayson: 447 Cooke: 12 Fannin: 5 Service Providers: Lakeway Christian Resale Barn, Salvation Army of Grayson County

5) Medicaid: 503- Total Calls 467- Referred 36- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 378 Fannin: 49 Cooke: 40 Service Providers: HHSC- Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Gainesville Health Services- Cooke County, HHSC- Cooke County, Grayson County Health Department, HHSC- Grayson, Planned Parenthood- Grayson County, DSHS- Texas Department of State Health Services, DSHS- Fannin, HHSC- Fannin, HHSC- Cooke, HHSC- Grayson

6) Gas Service Payment Assistance: 361- Total Calls 353- Referred 7- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 277 Fannin: 46 Cooke: 30 230 Service Providers: None (At time of access date 06/09/10)

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

7) Community Clinics: 351- Total Calls 338- Referred 13- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 316 Fannin: 17 Cooke: 5 Service Providers: Bonham Community Health Service Agency, Greater Texoma Health Clinic, Bonham Community Health Service Agency, Community Dental Center, Wilson N. Jones Medical Center.

8) Food Stamps: 279- Total Calls 250- Referred 29: Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 214 Fannin: 27 Cooke: 9 Service Providers: None (At time of access date 06/09/10)

9) Pro Bono Legal Aid Volunteer Opportunities: 221- Total Calls 218- Referred 4- Unmet County Breakdown: 231 Grayson: 234 Fannin: 21

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke: 20 Service Providers: Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Fannin, Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Cooke, Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Colin, Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Grayson,

10) Section 8 Housing Vouchers: 221- Total Calls 218- Referred 4- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 203 Fannin: 12 Cooke: 3 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Fannin, Housing Authority for the City of Gainesville, Housing Authority of Grayson County, Texoma Council of Governments- Grayson

11) Housing Authorities: 213- Total Calls 206- Referred 7- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 170 Fannin: 27 Cooke: 9 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Fannin, Housing Authority for the City of Denison, Housing Authority for the City of Gainesville, Housing Authority for the City of Leonard, Housing Authority for the City of Sherman, Housing Authority of Grayson County, Housing Authority for the City of Whitesboro 232

12) Water Service Payment Assistance:

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

192- Total Calls 189- Referred 3- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 185 Cooke: 4 Service Providers: Volunteers in Service to Others (VISTO), Lakeway Christian Resale Barn, Salvation Army Service Unit- Van Alstyne, Van Alstyne Ministerial Alliance

13) Food Stamp Applications: 184- Total Calls 174- Referred 10- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 153 Fannin: 11 Cooke: 10 Service Providers: None (At time of Access Date 06/09/10)

14) Dental Care: 175- Total Calls 172- Referred 3- Unmet County Breakdown Grayson: 141 Fannin: 17 Cooke: 14 233 Service Providers: DSHS- Texas Department of State Health- State, Texas Dental Association- TXDDS Program, Bonham Community Health Service Agency, Sunshine College of Dentistry,

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Baylor College of Dentistry, TWU Dental Hygiene Clinic, Bonham Community Health Service, Community Dental Center, Hometown Dental, Kool Smiles.

15) Dental Associations: 171- Total Calls 171- Referred 0- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 149 Cooke: 14 Fannin: 8 Service Providers: DSHS- Texas Department of State Health- State, Texas Dental Association- TXDDS Program, Bonham Community Health Service Agency, Sunshine College of Dentistry, Baylor College of Dentistry, TWU Dental Hygiene Clinic, Bonham Community Health Service, Community Dental Center, Hometown Dental, Kool Smiles.

16) Holiday Gifts/Toys: 153- Total Calls 137- Referred 16- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 131 Cooke: 5 Fannin: 1 Service Providers: Bonham Fire Department, Denison Lion’s Club, Boys and Girls Club of Cooke County, Jaycee’s, Home Instead Senior Care

234 17) Area Agencies on Aging: 130- Total Calls

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

120- Referred 10- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 105 Fannin: 13 Cooke: 9 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson

18) Benefits Assistance: 120- Total Calls 120- Referred 0-Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 95 Cooke: 15 Fannin: 11 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Fannin, Texoma Council of Governments- Cooke, Texoma Council of Governments- Grayson

19) Adult Protective Services: 119- Total Calls 118- Referred 1- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 102 Fannin: 10 Cooke: 6 235 Service Providers: DADS- Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services- Fannin, Cooke, Grayson, Stanford House, Texoma Council of Governments- Grayson, DFPS- Texas Department

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

of Family and Protective Services- Austin, Fannin, Cooke, Grayson, Grayson County Women’s Crisis Line INC.

20) Home Delivered Meals 113- Total Calls 112- Referred 1- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 98 Cooke: 9 Fannin: 5 Service Providers: Tri-County Senior Nutrition Project, INC., DADS- Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services, Texoma Council of Governments (TCOG)

236

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2-1-1 Taxonomy Statistical Report (2009)

1) Electric Service Payment Assistance: 3060- Total Calls 2959- Referred 1- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 2423 Cooke: 277 Fannin: 259 Service Providers: Public Utility Commission of Texas, Volunteers in Service to Others (VISTO), Lakeway Christian Resale Barn, Salvation Army of Grayson, Texoma Council of Governments (TCOG), Salvation Army Service Unit- Van Alstyne, Van Alstyne Ministerial Alliance, Ministerial Alliance of Whitewright

2) Food Pantries: 743- Total Calls 720- Referred 23- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 619 Fannin: 52 Cooke: 49 Service Providers: Bells- Savoy Community Care Center Food Pantry, Calvary Baptist Church- Manna House, Fannin County Community Ministries, INC. Food Pantry, Fannin County Food Pantry, Denison Helping Hands, New Beginnings Fellowship Church, Calvary Baptist Church Food Pantry, Volunteers in Service to Others, East Sherman Baptist Church Food Pantry, 237 Fairview Baptist Food Pantry, Harmony Baptist Church Food Pantry, First Baptist Church of Tom

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Bean, Your Neighbor’s House- Food Bank, First Baptist Church of Whitewright Community Food Pantry

3) Food Stamps: 657- Total Calls 594- Referred 63- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 483 Fannin: 57 Cooke: 54 Service Providers: None (At time of access date 06/09/10)

4) Prescription Expense Assistance: 646- Total Calls 633- Referred 13-Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 587 Fannin: 28 Cooke: 18 Service Providers: DSHS- Texas Department of State Health

5) Rent Payment Assistance: 595- Total Calls 562- Referred 33- Unmet 238 County Breakdown: Grayson: 512

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke: 40 Fannin: 10 Service Providers: Lakeway Christian Resale Barn, Salvation Army of Grayson County

5) Medicaid: 469- Total Calls 429- Referred 40- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 329 Cooke: 53 Fannin: 47 Service Providers: HHSC- Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Gainesville Health Services- Cooke County, HHSC- Cooke County, Grayson County Health Department, HHSC- Grayson, Planned Parenthood- Grayson County, DSHS- Texas Department of State Health Services, DSHS- Fannin, HHSC- Fannin, HHSC- Cooke, HHSC- Grayson

6) Pro Bono Legal Aid Volunteer Opportunities 410- Total Calls 406- Referred 4- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 341 Fannin: 33 Cooke: 32 Service Providers: Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Fannin, Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Cooke, Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Colin, Legal Aid of Northwest Texas- Grayson, 239

6) Dental Care:

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

403- Total Calls 367- Referred 40- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 337 Fannin: 37 Cooke: 21 Service Providers: DSHS- Texas Department of State Health- State, Texas Dental Association- TXDDS Program, Bonham Community Health Service Agency, Sunshine College of Dentistry, Baylor College of Dentistry, TWU Dental Hygiene Clinic, Bonham Community Health Service, Community Dental Center, Hometown Dental, Kool Smiles.

7) Community Clinics: 381- Total Calls 367- Referred 14- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 339 Fannin: 23 Cooke: 5 Service Providers: Bonham Community Health Service Agency, Greater Texoma Health Clinic, Bonham Community Health Service Agency, Community Dental Center, Wilson N. Jones Medical Center.

8) Housing Authorities: 327- Total Calls 323- Referred 240 4- Unmet County Breakdown:

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson: 277 Fannin: 24 Cooke: 22 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Fannin, Housing Authority for the City of Denison, Housing Authority for the City of Gainesville, Housing Authority for the City of Leonard, Housing Authority for the City of Sherman, Housing Authority of Grayson County, Housing Authority for the City of Whitesboro

9) Gas Service Payment Assistance: 326- Total Calls 316- Referred 10- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 242 Fannin: 46 Cooke: 28 Service Providers: None (At time of access date 06/09/10)

10) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher 310- Total Calls 305- Referred 5- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 276 Fannin: 15 Cooke: 14 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Fannin, Housing Authority for the City of 241 Gainesville, Housing Authority of Grayson County, Texoma Council of Governments- Grayson

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

11) Benefits Assistance: 299- Total Calls 300- Referred 0- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 241 Fannin: 30 Cooke: 29 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Fannin, Texoma Council of Governments- Cooke, Texoma Council of Governments- Grayson

12) Water Service Payment Assistance: 281- Total Calls 273-Referred 8- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 260 Cooke: 11 Fannin: 2 Service Providers: Volunteers in Service to Others (VISTO), Lakeway Christian Resale Barn, Salvation Army Service Unit- Van Alstyne, Van Alstyne Ministerial Alliance

13) Area Agencies on Aging: 227- Total Calls 222- Referred 5- Unmet County Breakdown: 242 Grayson: 190 Cooke: 18

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin: 14 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments- Grayson

14) Adult Protective Services: 224- Total Calls 217- Referred 7- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 185 Fannin: 21 Cooke: 11 Service Providers: DADS- Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services- Fannin, Cooke, Grayson, Stanford House, Texoma Council of Governments- Grayson, DFPS- Texas Department of Family and Protective Services- Austin, Fannin, Cooke, Grayson, Grayson County Women’s Crisis Line INC.

15) Holiday Gifts/Toys: 224- Total Calls 223- Referred 1- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 210 Fannin: 9 Cooke: 4 Service Providers: Bonham Fire Department, Denison Lion’s Club, Boys and Girls Club of Cooke County, Jaycee’s, Home Instead Senior Care

243 16) Weatherization Programs: 188- Total Calls

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

185- Referred 3- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 159 Fannin: 14 Cooke: 12 Service Providers: Texoma Council of Governments

17) SSI (Social Security Insurance): 172- Total Calls 170- Referred 2- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 149 Cooke: 12 Fannin: 9 Service Providers: National Organization of Social Security, Social Security Administration- Texoma

18) Prescription Drug Patient Assistance Programs: 155- Total Calls 151- Referred 4-Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 136 Fannin: 10 Cooke: 5 244 Service Providers: DSHS: Texas Department of Health Services

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

19) WIC: 153- Total Calls 144- Referred 9- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 122 Fannin: 16 Cooke: 6 Service Providers: Outreach Health Services- Fannin, Cooke, Grayson County Health Department, Cooke, County Ministerial Alliance

20) Local Transportation: 151- Total Calls 150- Referred 1- Unmet County Breakdown: Grayson: 112 Fannin: 26 Cooke: 12 Service Providers: TAPS Public Transportation

245

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Examination of Gaps in Service

A vital part of the Community Needs Assessment (CNA) is to understand existing gaps between needed services and service providers. This report highlights services that are not available through service providers in one or more of the three counties. The needed services are broken down into different subcategories based on known needs in the three counties. The analysis is further broken down into services that are needed but not provided. The information was collected using two separate, but related sources: 2-1-1 Texoma, and The AIRS/211 LA County Taxonomy of Human Services. 2-1-1 Texoma provides a breakdown of services offered in the Texoma region. The services are divided up into general service categories and then further divided into sub-categories. However, the particular taxonomy of these divisions depends on the particular definition of the service being rendered. This definition is provided by The AIRS/211 LA County Taxonomy of Human Services.

*The Italicized items that appear in the text are courtesy of: The AIRS/211 LA County Taxonomy of Human Services. Accessed online on 15 June, 2010 http://www.211taxonomy.org/.

246

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

I.Housing IA. Affordable Housing

Home Barrier Evaluation/ Affordable USDA Rural Removal Home Housing Purchase Incentives Loan Programs Affordable

Rent Housing Home Payment Construction Assistance Loans

HUD Housing Approved Down Counseling Payment Agencies Assistance

1) Affordable Housing Incentives- Incentive program for builders and developers to build houses that are geared toward low-income individuals in terms of pricing and upkeep. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

2) Home Construction Loans- Programs that provide loans for people who want to build their own homes - Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

3) Housing Down Payment Assistance- Programs that provide cash grants or loans for people who want to purchase or build a home and need all or a portion of the amount that is required to make a down payment on the home or property. Included are conventional loans, deferred loans (in which payments are deferred until the home is sold) and forgivable loans (in which all 247 or a part of the loan is forgiven if the borrower resides in the home for a specified period of time). -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

4) HUD Approved Counseling Agencies- Agencies funded by the federal Office of Housing and Urban Development to provide pre-purchase and mortgage default counseling, home equity conversion (reverse mortgage) counseling and information about the HUD rent assistance program for current and prospective purchasers and tenants. - Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

5) USDA Rural Home Purchase Loan Programs- Programs offered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Housing Service that make home loans and loan guarantees available to rural families with an income below 80% of the median income level in the communities where they live and do not qualify for a conventional loan. Direct loans are made for the purchase of a new home or for new home construction including site preparation. The loan guarantee program guarantees loans made by private lenders. Under the terms of this program, families may borrow up to 100% of the appraised value of a home eliminating the need for a down payment, a barrier to home ownership frequently faced by families with low-incomes. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

6) Home Barrier Evaluation/Removal- Programs that provide assistance in the form of labor and supplies for people with disabilities who need to install ramps, elevators, stair glides or lifts; widen doorways; install grab bars in showers and bathrooms; lower kitchen and other cabinets; or make other modifications in their homes or apartments to make them accessible. Also included are programs that assess the accessibility of homes and apartments of people who have disabilities and make recommendations regarding necessary modifications. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

7) Rent Payment Assistance- Programs that make rental payments for people who are at risk of eviction without assistance. Rent payment assistance programs may have age, income, disability, need or other eligibility requirements. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

248

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

B. Up-Keep Assistance:

Home Rehabilitation Loans

Furniture/Home Up-Keep Low Cost Building Furnishings Donation Materials/Supplies Programs Assistance

Weatherization Programs

1) Home Rehabilitation Loans- Programs that provide loans for income-eligible people who want to repair or modify their homes or mobile homes to make them energy-efficient, attractive, safe and free of health hazards; or which help eligible individuals find loans for this purpose. Most loan programs cover major repairs, system upgrades and replacements (e.g., plumbing, heating or electrical systems) but not minor repairs. Included are conventional home rehabilitation loans, deferred loans (in which payments are deferred until the home is sold) and forgivable loans (in which all or a part of the loan is forgiven if the borrower resides in the home for a specified period of time). The forgiven part of a forgivable loan amounts to a contingent grant. If the borrower sells the home prior to the specified time period, all or part of the loan is due. A common variation is to have portions of the loan forgiven gradually over a period of years. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

2) Low Cost Building Materials/Supplies- Programs that provide access to building materials at below market costs. In many cases, the materials have been recovered from obsolete buildings by building deconstruction programs and made available for reuse by communities as an alternative to purchasing new materials. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties. The closest programs offering this service are Habitat for Humanity of Denton and Habitat of Humanity of Plano 249

3) Weatherization Programs- Programs that provide assistance in the form of labor and supplies to help people improve the energy efficiency of their homes and protect them from the Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

elements. The program provides ceiling insulation, attic venting, double glazed windows, weather-stripping, minor housing envelope repairs, low-flow showerheads, evaporative cooler vent covers, water heater blankets, pipe wrap, duct wrap, switch and outlet gaskets, caulking, and other related energy conservation measures. Weatherization programs may have age, income, disability or other eligibility requirements. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

4) Furniture/Home Furnishings Donation Programs- Programs that accept new or secondhand sofas, chairs, tables, beds, dressers, rugs and other necessary home furnishings, refurbish them if necessary, and keep them for use in their own programs, donate them to other community- based organizations for distribution to the people they serve, or sell them to raise money for agency programs. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

250

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

II. Unemployment:

A. Unemployment Assistance:

Utility Assistance

Unemployment Assitance

Disability Utility Bill Related Center Payment Based Assistance Employment

1) Utility Assistance- Programs that provide financial assistance for people who are at risk for having their utilities shut off; offer discounted utility services; provide disconnection protection; arrange for notification regarding pending disconnection; make available special services such as large print utility bills or levelized energy bill payment arrangements which support people's ability to make their payments; or supply wood, propane, butane or other fuel for heating or cooking purposes in situations where people have no other means of acquiring them. Utility assistance programs may have age, income, disability, need or other eligibility requirements. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

2) Utility Bill Payment Assistance- -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

3) Disability Related Center Based Employment- Programs that provide opportunities for 251 individuals with disabilities to learn and practice work skills in a separate and supported environment. Participants may be involved in the program on a transitional or ongoing basis, and are paid for their work, generally under a piecework arrangement. The nature of the work

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

and the types of disabilities represented in the workforce vary widely by program and by the area in which the organization is located. Individuals participate in center-based employment for a variety of reasons including severity of disability, need for additional training or experience, need for a protected environment and/or lack of availability of community-based employment. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

252

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

B. Employment Preparedness

Employment Unemployment Preparation Insurance Supported Benefits Employment Assistance

Training and Special Needs Employment Devlopment Programs Employment Comprehensive Pre-job Preparedness Job Assistance Guidance Centers

Disability Job Training Related Center Formats Based Employment

Job Readiness Job Corps

1) Employment Preparation- Programs that provide assistance for people who need information, guidance and/or training in specific job-related skills to make appropriate occupational choices and secure and retain positions that effectively utilize their abilities. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

2) Supported Employment- Programs that find paid, meaningful work in a variety of community-based settings for people who have disabilities and which assign a "job coach" to work side-by-side with each client to interface with the employer and other employees, and provide training in basic job skills and work-related behaviors, assistance with specific tasks as needed and whatever other initial or ongoing support is required to ensure that the individual retains competitive employment. Included are individual placement models in which a job coach works on-the-job with a single individual and group models such as enclaves (which are self- contained work units of people needing support) and mobile work crews, in which a group of workers with disabilities receives continuous support and supervision from supported employment personnel. In the enclave model, groups of people with disabilities are trained to 253 work as a team alongside employees in the host business supported by a specially trained on- site supervisor, who may work either for the host company or the placement agency. A variation of the enclave approach is called the "dispersed enclave" and is used in service industries (e.g., Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

restaurants and hotels). Each person works on a separate job, and the group is dispersed throughout the company. In the mobile work crew model, a small team of people with disabilities works as a self-contained business and undertakes contract work such as landscaping and gardening projects. The crew works at various locations in a variety of settings within the community under the supervision of a job coach. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

3) Training and Employment Programs- Programs that provide job development, job training, job search, job placement, specialized job situations and other supportive services for individuals and groups who are having difficulty finding paid employment. These programs especially target people who have minimal job skills, veterans, older workers, youth, ex-offenders, public assistance recipients, refugees/immigrants, members of minority groups and others who are vocationally disadvantaged. Included are government-subsidized programs and those offered through the private sector. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

4) Comprehensive Job Assistance Centers- One-stop centers that provide an array of employment and training services in a convenient, easily accessible location. Services may include job counseling, testing and assessment; résumé preparation assistance, interview training and other pre-employment guidance services; job matching and referral; unemployment insurance and job registration; labor market and career information; information on financial aid for education and training; and referrals for job training, transportation, child care, personal and financial counseling, health care and other human services resources in the community. -Unavailable in Cooke or Fannin Counties

5) Disability Related Center Based Employment-Programs that provide opportunities for individuals with disabilities to learn and practice work skills in a separate and supported environment. Participants may be involved in the program on a transitional or ongoing basis, and are paid for their work, generally under a piecework arrangement. The nature of the work and the types of disabilities represented in the workforce vary widely by program and by the area in which the organization is located. Individuals participate in center-based employment for a variety of reasons including severity of disability, need for additional training or experience, need for a protected environment and/or lack of availability of community-based employment. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

7) Job Corps- A nationwide, government-subsidized youth training program that provides remedial education, vocational training and useful work experience including on-the-job training for low and moderate-income, disadvantaged youth who have poor job skills. 254 -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

8) Job Readiness- Programs that provide individual or group training for people who want to learn the behaviors and techniques that are required for job retention. The training addresses regular attendance, punctuality, appropriate dress, adapting to supervision, employee rights and responsibilities and other similar topics. Included are job readiness programs for people who are seeking employment and post-employment programs that help people keep their jobs. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

9) Job Training formats- Programs that offer apprenticeships, training through business practice firms, classroom training, internships, on-the-job training, work experience or other formats for training that prepares people for specific types of employment. The training may feature formal instruction in an institutional classroom setting, hands-on experience at a job site under varying arrangements or a combination of the two as the means by which trainees acquire the skills required to perform the job. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

10) Pre-job Guidance- Programs that provide instruction for people who need to acquire the basic "soft skills" and tools that are required to successfully apply for and secure employment and retain a position once they have been hired. These programs provide information and guidance regarding preparing a résumé, writing job application letters, completing job application questionnaires, responding to job ads and taking employment tests; offer tips regarding appropriate dress, personal appearance and interview techniques; and address other similar topics. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

11) Special Needs Job Development- Programs that seek out and create job opportunities in various fields for individuals with special needs, limitations and abilities. Activities may include development of jobs that can be done in a home setting; development of markets for crafts and other items produced in the home; and identification of other work projects of benefit to the community that individuals with special needs, limitations and abilities are uniquely qualified to pursue. - Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

13) Unemployment Insurance Benefits Assistance- Programs that provide assistance for people who are having difficulty understanding and/or obtaining the full benefits to which they are entitled by law through their State’s Unemployment Insurance program. The programs may help people understand the eligibility criteria for unemployment insurance benefits, the benefits provided by the program, and the rights of beneficiaries; provide consultation and advice; help them complete unemployment application forms; negotiate on their behalf with unemployment insurance benefits staff; prepare a written appeal; and/or represent them in administrative hearings or judicial litigation. Included are organizations that offer a range of advocacy services 255 as well as legal aid programs, which offer more formalized legal assistance. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

III. Education and Literacy:

Early Literacy Development Programs

Literacy

Literacy Programs

A. Literacy:

1) Early Literacy Development Programs- Programs that promote pre-literacy and language development skills in children from birth to age five with the objective of preparing them to read. Program activities are both educational and social and focus on helping participants develop oral language skills, expand their vocabulary, develop the concept of a word, have exposure to printed words and connect them to stories, develop phonological and phoneme awareness (sounds associated with letters and words), and recognize letters of the alphabet and connect them to words. Specific activities that promote early literacy development include reading aloud, summarizing stories read, conversations and dialogue, learning new words, exposure to books, rhyming and singing, imitating sounds, identifying syllables, writing and naming letters, attaching sounds to letters, and recognizing words. Programs may be formal or informal, and may include parent participation. Classes are often held at schools, churches, libraries and community recreation centers. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

2) Literacy Programs- Programs that provide reading and writing instruction for individuals of all ages who are unable to read or write at a functional level. Some programs interpret literacy more broadly and also help people develop speaking, computation and problem solving skills with the objective of ensuring that they develop levels of proficiency necessary to become self sufficient and well-functioning members of society. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

256

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

B. Educational Services:

Outreach Program Special Tuition Education Assistance Advocacy

Dual Credit Programs Adult Basic Drop-Out Educational Education Prevention Services

Subject Alternative Tutoring Education

High School Continuing Vocational Education Training

1) Outreach Programs- Organizations that make an effort to increase the availability and utilization of community services by specific target populations by providing direct services for targeted individuals in their homes or other convenient locations or by making special efforts to ensure that a particular group is aware of available services and encouraged to participate. Included are programs that do outreach regarding their own services as well as those which encourage a target population to use a wide variety of services. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

2) Special Education Advocacy- Programs that work to ensure that children and youth with disabilities receive a free, appropriate, public education often by providing assistance for parents who need support in seeking and obtaining needed early intervention, educational, medical or therapeutic services for their children. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

3) Adult Basic Education- Programs, usually offered by community adult schools or as evening classes at local high schools that provide instruction in fundamental learning skills for adults who have never attended school or have interrupted formal schooling and need to raise their level of education to increase their self-confidence and/or prepare for an occupation. Emphasis 257 is placed on basic reading, language and mathematics to strengthen functional skills in communication, computation and personal-social interaction. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

4) Alternative Education- Educational programs at all levels within or outside the formal education system that provide innovative and flexible instruction, curriculums, grading systems, learning environments or degree requirements, a return to traditional educational values, or other alternatives to the ordinary system of instruction. -Unavailable in Cooke and Grayson Counties

5) Continuing Education- Programs, usually offered as adjuncts to community college, college or university programs that provide credit-granting and/or non-credit courses for adults who are seeking specific learning experiences on a part-time or short-term basis for personal, academic or occupational development. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson

6) High School and Vocational Training- Programs within the regular high school curriculum that provide an opportunity for students to learn basic skills in occupational areas such as shop, auto mechanics and business. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

7) Subject Tutoring- Programs that provide individualized or small group instruction for people who need assistance in learning one or more components of a prescribed curriculum. Tutoring usually supplements a regular school program and may be provided at school, in the person's home or at a community agency site. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

8) Dual-Credit Programs- Programs that allow qualifying high school students (generally juniors and seniors) to take more rigorous, college-level courses and to earn both high school and post- secondary credit for those they successfully complete. Dual-credit programs may be offered at a high school or local community college, or taught through distance education; and may include courses with a technical/vocational focus as well as those that are more academic. Dual-credit options must either be legislated by the State or established through a written agreement between the high school and the post-secondary institution -Unavailable in Fannin and Grayson Counties

9) Drop-Out Prevention- Programs that develop educational strategies and practices, including special instructional methods and materials, learning activities and diagnostic and assessment procedures which encourage children and adolescents to maintain an acceptable grade point average, avoid excessive absenteeism or disruptive behaviors which put them at risk for suspension or expulsion and remain in school through completion of their elementary and secondary education. Included are school-based dropout prevention and academic intervention programs which lead to improved performance in the areas of academic achievement, attendance, and discipline; and community-based programs, often staffed by representatives 258 from a variety of organizations including the school, the police, the probation department, family counseling agencies and delinquency diversion agencies, which monitor and/or investigate a young person's school attendance and jointly develop and implement interventions

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

which encourage the young person to remain in school or to return to school if already a dropout.

10) Tuition Assistance- Programs that provide cash assistance for people who need additional financial support to pursue an educational or vocational program of study. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

259

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

IV. Crime:

A. Prevention and Outreach:

Crime Prevention

Crime Criminal Prevention Justice Equipment Association

Prevention and Outreach

Citizen Criminal Police Law Academies

Gang Programs

1) Crime Prevention- Programs that help individuals and the general public protect themselves against crime or prevent its occurrence. -Unavailable in Cooke County

2) Criminal Justice Association- Organizations whose members are police officers, sheriffs, constables, marshals, probation officers, corrections workers, court-appointed special advocates, victim/witness advocates or other law enforcement professionals who have affiliated for the purpose of promoting mutual interests; interacting with their peers; and participating in professional development activities such as law enforcement conferences, seminars and issues forums. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

3) Criminal Law- Programs that provide legal assistance (generally advice and representation in criminal investigations, plea negotiations, trials and appeals) for people who have been charged with an offense made criminal by federal or state laws or municipal or local ordinances and punishable by death, imprisonment, fines, restitution or other specified sanctions; individuals 260 released on probation as an alternative to incarceration; or people who have been released on parole following a period of incarceration and remain in the legal custody of the correctional

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

system which has the authority to suspend and revoke the parole of any parolee for violations of the law or parole rules. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

4) Gang Programs- Programs offered by community and law enforcement agencies that attempt to reduce the incidence of gang violence by providing counseling, recreational activities and other preventive alternatives; and/or by establishing direct contact with gang members, mediating inter-gang disputes, facilitating inter-gang communication and mobilizing the community to support gangs in finding nonviolent ways to reconcile their differences. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

5) Citizens’ Police Academies- Programs that operate academies that provide opportunities for community residents to get an inside look at local law enforcement through a series of courses which focus on tactical operations, search and seizure laws, the use of deadly force, crime scene investigations, K-9 and special operations, domestic violence, juvenile crime, vice, firearms training and other related topics. Participants may also be given ride along experiences with on- duty police personnel. The purpose of citizens’ police academies is to increase appreciation for and understanding of local law enforcement through education and interaction with individual officers and to dispel suspicions and misconceptions. Most academy programs are for adults age 18 and older though some communities have youth academies for individuals age 14 to 18 and special academies for businessmen and women. -Unavailable in Fannin and Grayson Counties

5) Crime Prevention Equipment- Programs that operate personal property identification registries and/or supply devices that can be uses or installed on their property which help to deter criminal activity. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

261

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

B. Victim Services:

Crime Victim Support

Family Violence Child Abuse Legal Prevention Services Victim Services

Domestice Domestic Violence Violence Support Hotlines Groups

1) Crime Victim Support- Programs whose objective is to help victims of crime and their families recover from the trauma of their experience, get medical assistance when required, make their way through the legal system, have an opportunity to provide input to parole or clemency hearings, take appropriate steps, where relevant, to avoid becoming re-victimized, access the benefits to which they are entitled and rebuild their lives. -Unavailable in Cooke and Grayson Counties

2) Child Abuse Prevention- Programs, often offered in the schools or in other community settings, that attempt to protect children from physical, sexual and/or emotional abuse or exploitation through a variety of educational interventions which may focus on children of various ages, parents, people who work with children and/or the community at large. The sessions may offer suggestions for children and/or parents regarding ways of avoiding or handling an abusive or potentially abusive situation and/or information about the indicators and incidence of abuse, requirements for reporting abuse and community resources that are available to children who have been abused and to their families. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

3) Domestic Violence Hotlines- Programs that provide telephone crisis intervention services for 262 women and men who have experienced domestic abuse which may include steps to ensure immediate safety; short-term emotional support; assistance with shelter; legal information and

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

advocacy; referrals for medical treatment; on-going counseling and/or group support; and other related services. -Unavailable in Cooke and Grayson Counties

4) Domestic Violence Support Groups- Mutual support groups whose members are individuals who have been involved in physical or emotional abuse involving a spouse or other partner. The groups meet in-person, by telephone or via the Internet; provide emotional support, information and resources for those who participate; and may be structured for victims of domestic violence or those responsible for battering them -Unavailable in Cooke and Grayson Counties

5) Family Violence Legal Services- Programs that provide information, guidance and/or representation in court proceedings for individuals who have been abused in an intimate relationship and/or for people who are facing a misdemeanor or criminal charge for perpetrating abuse. Included are domestic violence law clinics and other legal assistance programs that represent victims of domestic abuse at restraining order hearings or in other civil or criminal actions involving charges against an abuser. Most also represent the person's interests in complexities that arise as part of the legal process such as restitution, payment of debts or child support, custody and visitation and property control. Some programs may also represent victims of domestic abuse who have been charged with a crime and/or handle cases involving accusations of child abuse filed by one parent against the other, abuse of an elderly person by an adult child or abuse of an adult child by a parent. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

263

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

V. Poverty:

Emergency Food

Summer Food Homeless Services Shelters Program

Assistance

Christmas Welfare to Baskets Work

Unemployment Insurance Benefits Assistance

A. Assistance

1) Emergency Food- Programs that provide a limited amount of food for individuals or families during times of personal crisis, or for people who have no food or cannot afford to purchase food at retail costs. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

2) Summer Food Services Program- Programs that operate during the summer when school is not in session and provide congregate nutritional meals (breakfasts, snacks, lunches and/or dinners) for children and youth. Summer food service programs are generally available to youth age 18 and younger who live in designated low-income areas; and may be federally funded or funded by other entities -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

264 3) Welfare to Work- Programs operated by state agencies or local jurisdictions that offer employment training and supportive services (such as child care, transportation costs, ancillary expenses and personal counseling) for people who are receiving public assistance through the

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TANF program in an effort to help them become self-supporting. Private organizations, often under contract with a public agency, may be involved in both the provision of training and on- the-job work experience (including volunteering in non-profit agencies). Public assistance recipients are required to participate in designated program activities a minimum number of hours per week in order to receive their monthly income support payment and supplemental payments for support services. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

4) Unemployment Insurance Benefits Assistance- Programs that provide assistance for people who are having difficulty understanding and/or obtaining the full benefits to which they are entitled by law through their State Unemployment Insurance program. The programs may help people understand the eligibility criteria for unemployment insurance benefits, the benefits provided by the program, and the rights of beneficiaries; provide consultation and advice; help them complete unemployment application forms; negotiate on their behalf with unemployment insurance benefits staff; prepare a written appeal; and/or represent them in administrative hearings or judicial litigation. Included are organizations that offer a range of advocacy services as well as legal aid programs, which offer more formalized legal assistance. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

5) Christmas Baskets- Programs, generally supported by donations from the community, that attempt to facilitate enjoyment of the Christmas season by low-income community residents through distribution of food baskets which usually contain a ham, turkey or other meat and all of the trimmings for a Christmas dinner (or vouchers to purchase these items) and occasionally gifts for children or other family members.

6) Homeless Shelters- Programs that provide a temporary place to stay (usually three days to two weeks), generally in dormitory-style facilities with very little privacy, for people who have no permanent housing. Also included are programs that provide motel vouchers for people who are homeless. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

265

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

IV. Other Related Issues:

A. Teen Pregnancy

Teen Family Planning Programs

Teen Pregnancy

Teen Teen Pregnancy Expectant/New Prevention Parent Programs Assistance

1) Teen Family Planning Programs- Programs that offer family planning services including pregnancy counseling, birth control and pregnancy testing which are especially designed to meet the needs and concerns of teenage individuals who are pregnant or are concerned about becoming pregnant or impregnating. -Unavailable in Fannin Counties

2) Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs- Programs that provide a variety of informational and supportive services which promote healthy teen attitudes and behaviors regarding sexuality with the objective of heightening their awareness of the consequences of sexual activity and helping teens to avoid an unwanted pregnancy. Topics may include peer pressure, parent/teen communications, male/female relationships, values clarification, self-esteem, human reproduction, birth control and sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS. The goal of many of these programs is to help young people develop the knowledge, autonomy and skills they will need to make the transition to adulthood in good sexual health. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties 266 3) Teen Expectant/New Parent Assistance- Programs that provide classes, workshops or other educational opportunities that prepare teens who are or are about to become parents to be effective in their parenting roles.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

-Unavailable in Grayson County

267

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

B. Child Abuse:

Child Abuse Prevention

Child Abuse

Family Child Abuse Reporting/Em Violence ergency Counseling Response

1) Child Abuse Prevention-Programs- Often offered in school or in other community settings that attempt to protect children from physical, sexual and/or emotional abuse or exploitation through a variety of educational interventions, which may focus on children of various ages, parents, people who work with children and/or the community at large. The sessions may offer suggestions for children and/or parents regarding ways of avoiding or handling an abusive or potentially abusive situation and/or information about the indicators and incidence of abuse, requirements for reporting abuse and community resources that are available to children who have been abused and to their families. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

2) Child Abuse Reporting/Emergency Response- Programs that accept and respond to reports of child abuse or neglect. Services include assessment of the initial referral, assignment of an appropriate response time, and consultation with the family to determine the nature of the problem and do initial case planning and emergency placement services if the child is removed from the family by the police. -Unavailable in Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties

3) Family Violence Counseling- Programs that provide individual, conjoint, family or group treatment for people who are experiencing physical and/or emotional abuse in the context of an intimate relationship. Included are programs that provide therapeutic interventions for perpetrators and/or for individuals who have been victimized. -Unavailable in Cooke and Fannin Counties

269

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

2.4.2 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS TRI-COUNTY

Organizations Interviewed Service providers who offer programs and services across the region included TAPS Public Transportation in Sherman, Workforce Solutions Texoma in Sherman, Texoma Homeless Coalition in Sherman, and the agencies of TCOG, which include Elder Rights, Section 8 Choice Voucher, Family Self-Sufficiency, and Utilities Assistance in Sherman.

The seven organizations and programs interviewed were contacted through a combination of snowball sampling and convenience sampling. Snowball sampling uses existing study participants to recruit future participants from among their acquaintances and convenience sampling which involves taking a sample from the part of the population that is readily available and well-situated. The first respondent was the Program Manager at TCOG Energy Assistance. The researcher worked directly under the Program Manager for the Community Needs Assessment, so that interview was selected through convenience sampling. The Program manager at TCOG Energy Assistance provided the researcher with a list of contacts. This led to contacts with other departments housed inside TCOG. The respondent at TCOG Elder Rights was the Elder Rights Benefits Counselor. The respondent at Section 8 was the Program Manager. The respondent at Family Self-Sufficiency was the Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinator. The respondent at Workforce Solutions Texoma was the Child Care Program Manager. The respondent at Texoma Homeless Coalition was the AmeriCorps VISTA. More information about these organizations can be found in Appendix A.

Conditions of Poverty

Education TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency offers home buyer education classes. Clients must possess a Section 8 housing voucher, so that TCOG has an idea of the type of client that the program is working with. The voucher means that TCOG is already paying a 6 month to 1 year lease for these families. Therefore, in order to be in the home buyer program, a family must be in the self-sufficiency program as well. The family completes a home buyer education class on the extensive process of buying a home as well as paying for that home once it is purchased. Other staff members teach classes on foreclosure and other relevant topics. According to TCOG Section 8, Family Self-Sufficiency also provides budgeting, couponing, and gift workshops.

TCOG Energy Assistance also offers assistance with job training through its Tuition Payment Program. It is funded by the Community Service Block Grant (CSBG). Clients who are interested in furthering their education at the local community college can get their tuition paid for by TCOG Energy Assistance. The entire household is eligible based on their income and the client must be accepted to the school. Clients can obtain medical-related certification such as pharmacy technician certification. TCOG Energy Assistance views job training as essential to the case management process.

TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency assists with school supply donations for children. School supplies are funded through the Family Self-Sufficiency Program in order to encourage both children and adults. The first day of school is often disheartening for children because they are often treated differently because they cannot afford school supplies. The supplies motivate children to work harder in school and the supplies encourage parents since their children are receiving help. This is a major expense as school supplies cost between $35-85 per child. Supplies are donated by partner organizations within the community. One year, insurance companies competed to see who could raise the most school supplies.

TCOG Section 8 helps facilitate a Survivor School training class sponsored by the Texas Department of Health and Human Services and Child Protective Services (CPS). The class includes a series of 10 workshops that cover parenting, budgeting, how to clean a house, and other skills.

271 EMPLOYMENT

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

As mentioned previously, the TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency program offers job training for clients. The program entails meeting with clients to establish goals for getting families off of social welfare programs and assisting those families with job training in order to help clients attain self-sufficiency.

As mentioned previously, TCOG Energy Assistance also offers assistance with job training through its Tuition Payment Program. Clients who are interested in furthering their education at the local community college can get their tuition paid for by TCOG Energy Assistance. Clients can obtain medical-related certification such as pharmacy technician certification. TCOG Energy Assistance views job training as essential to the case management process.

As mentioned previously, Workforce Solutions Texoma also offers job training. The Workforce Solutions Texoma Board wants to ensure that once a client goes through training, that client will find a job and make a living wage. The organization wants to support training that will be ultimately productive. For example, the organization will work with clients who want to become registered nurses, but not certified nurse assistants because certified nurse assistants do not make a living wage and there is high turnover for that profession.

Employment and Other Conditions (Employment/Health) TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency discussed the relationship between health and employment. Lack of dental care affects employment opportunities. As mentioned previously, there is no free dental care available in Grayson County with the exception of a free clinic that clients can visit once a year. Dental care is vitally important for individuals in search of jobs because employers are less likely to hire people who have an offensive dental situation. In addition, lack of dental care can cause pain, which can affect one’s quality of life.

272 (Employment/Substance Abuse)

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Another issue that TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency discussed is substance abuse, which can greatly affect one’s ability to work and maintain membership in different programs. At this time, there are more rehabilitation locations available, including the Four Rivers’ rehabilitation center which has helped significantly in meeting needs relating to substance abuse. The TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency coordinator said that many users take drugs out of boredom, to fit in, or as a means of coping with traumatic experiences.

Elderly TCOG Elder Rights helps elderly clients with Medicaid/Medicare problems, applications, and prescription drug plans. TCOG Elder Rights counselors also help clients find legal guidance, but they cannot provide legal assistance since benefits counselors do not practice law. Now, the program points clients to the Texas Hotline and Northwest Texas Legal Aid. These two groups provide financial planning and guidance, as well as advice on medical power of attorney and advanced directives.

The financial assistance that TCOG Elder Rights provides mostly involves medical bill assistance. The TCOG Elder Rights counselors send charity write-off letters to inform companies and hospitals that the client in question cannot afford normal, daily expenses and, thus, cannot afford to pay the medical bill. Most of the time, those bills are written off.

Elderly clients who contact the TCOG Elder Rights Benefits Counselors tend to be overwhelmed with handling medical bills and prescription drug plans. The counselors help elderly clients manage their money and take a plan of action to change the situation. For example, payments on prescription drug plan benefits may fluctuate from one year to the next and elderly clients may not know that they can change their prescription drug plans annually. One counselor helped a particular client saved hundreds of dollars a year by switching from Medicare to a Medicaid health plan. 273

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The TCOG Elder Rights benefits counselor for Grayson County had a total caseload of 400-500 elderly clients. Some of them contact him every month; some of them contact him once a year; and some of them the counselor has helped for nearly 10 years. Some clients he never sees face to face, but helps them via phone. There is no limit to how many people the counselors could help. There is also no limit to how much time a counselor could spend speaking with a client and there is no limit on how many times a client could call.

The TCOG Elder Rights counselors identified information as the most critical need for the elderly in the Texoma region. If Elder Rights had the funding to create an information sheet with every resource available for elderly clients to contact and then mail that information sheet to every address in each of the three counties, then that need would be met. Currently, if the elderly have a need and call, they get referred from organization to organization. Elderly clients get very frustrated when they have to “talk to one more machine” over the phone. Information resources for the elderly are not being made readily available to those who need it most. Medicaid policies change constantly. Elderly clients simply do not know what resources are available to them. Many elderly people in the region do not know that services such as TCOG Elder Rights even exist.

TCOG Elder Rights engages in outreach to the elderly by the services they provide. "Senior Beware" is a 5-7 minute television video that runs on the local Channel 12 news on the last Monday of every month. Many senior citizens watch Channel 12 news religiously because of its local coverage. Other methods of outreach include newspaper articles and public service announcements on the radio. However, many elderly people did not listen to FM, but AM radio. There are AM stations in Bonham and Gainesville.

Their outreach is somewhat effective. The TCOG Elder Rights program faces challenges in reaching every single household in the tri-county area. Fannin County has a newspaper called 274 the Fannin County Special that is mailed to every address within that county. Placing advertisements in this newspaper is an effective way to reach out to people. Three ways they

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

advertise with this newspaper are through the “Elder Rights in the Fannin County Special” – on the front page, next to the grocery advertisements, and the back page. This is effective because of the advertisements’ proximity to other newspaper sections that interest elderly. TCOG Elder Rights broadcasts TV and radio notices and visits senior centers. A few months ago, the counselors held training sessions for home healthcare and assisted living agencies to teach people how to enroll in Medicare Part D. The goal was to reach out to 50-75 people.

TCOG Elder Rights makes a number of referrals for their clients. The key is knowing where to refer elderly clients who are in need. Often, the Ministerial Alliance can help elderly clients. If there is a safety-related concern, clients are referred to Adult Protective Services (APS). APS can do what no other agencies are able to do. For example, if a patient's bill is unpaid because the Medicare payment has not arrived, APS will tell a nursing home not to worry.

TCOG Section 8 program sponsors a special program called Mainstream. The Mainstream program, in cooperation with MHMR, works with the disabled. At least 40% of Section 8 clients are disabled and/or elderly. Because of this fact, there is a high demand for Mainstream. The TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency program also sees a significant number of elderly and disabled clients.

TCOG Energy Assistance caters its case management model to the elderly. This model allows case managers to work with needs specific to the elderly. Elderly households should apply for food stamps and other eligible programs. Some elderly people do not take advantage of these services because they are embarrassed. But, the respondent noted that $15-25 can go a long ways in buying food every month. The program manager at TCOG Energy Assistance continued to comment on the situation of their elderly clients. Typically, older clients are homeowners with their mortgages paid off. But elderly female widows who have never worked outside the home receive minimum Social Security payments. Sometimes these payments are less than 275 $500 a month. Additionally, the elderly face obstacles in gaining self-sufficiency from society.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Elderly and Other Conditions (Elderly/Transportation) TAPS tells all schedulers to track the reasons why riders are on the bus. The largest portion of subsidized rides was medical-related. The medical rides involve all kinds of people since Medicaid serves all kinds of clients with the majority of riders being elderly and disabled. TAPS also assists elderly clients by working with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) centers. The operations coordinator at TAPS commented that many elderly and disabled people are trying to save money to buy their personal, reliable transportation. These individuals call TAPS and tell them they have their own transportation, so public transportation is no longer a necessity for them.

The director of TAPS also discussed her views on generational change regarding elderly riders. When the director started working at TAPS, most clients never had drivers’ licenses before because theirs was a generation that did not typically get licenses. However, there has been a drop in the number of senior citizens serviced by TAPS because these elderly individuals have gotten their drivers’ licenses, so there are more 70-80 year olds still driving. The staff at TAPS believes this has been a generational change amongst the elderly.

(Elderly/Employment) According to the Texoma Homeless Coalition, employment is a critical need in the Texoma region. The organization works with the Workforce Investment Act program at Workforce Solutions Texoma, which offers financial assistance for unemployed individuals to return to school. The Americorps VISTA commented on the state of the workforce. Some people in the community were not socialized for the workforce and were not educated about interviewing practices.

TCOG Section 8 commented on unemployment in Fannin County. A tremendous amount of 276 young people apply for assistance in Fannin County simply because the high paying jobs are not there. The types of clients that apply for assistance are mainly women with small children. Most

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

of them have never been married and they are raising children on their own. There is a large portion of the population in Grayson County that is the same way, but it is a major problem in Fannin County because there are so many other obstacles for individuals to deal with, primarily the lack of jobs.

HEALTH TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency discussed the relationship between health and employment. The lack of dental care affects employment opportunity. There is no free dental care available in Grayson County with the exception of a free clinic that clients can only visit once a year. Dental care is vitally important because employers are less likely to hire people who have a disagreeable dental situation. In addition, the lack of dental care can cause pain, which can affect the quality of one’s work.

Another issue that TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency discussed is substance abuse, which can greatly affect one’s ability to work and maintain membership in different programs. There are more places available now for rehabilitation, including the Four Rivers rehabilitation center which has helped significantly in meeting this need. The Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinator saw people abusing drugs simply out of boredom, to fit in, or as a means of coping with traumatic experiences. Unfortunately, there are no available services available to deal with these types of causes.

TRANSPORTATION TAPS offers subsidized rides for workers needing public transportation to get to their jobs. The operations coordinator said there were 57 people riding from Sherman to the Peterbuilt Plant in Denton, and that the route also picks up passengers along the way. There are also rides from Honey Grove and Bonham to the Trailblazer plant in Sherman. Employees took the initiative on establishing the routes. Employees have to buy a monthly pass for $80 a month and, with that 277 pass, they can ride to their workplace every day.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TAPS tells all schedulers to track the reasons why riders are on the bus. In all counties, the average rate of employment-subsidized rides was 30% and growing. Employment ridership had the largest percent increase in growth, especially because of the economic downturn.

The respondents at TAPS had a clear view of how unemployment affected their riders, as many of their riders have no jobs and no vehicles. TAPS get a call once in a while informing them that different plants are shutting down to save money. These plants are definitely cutting back local production. There are layoffs in all areas of business. The transportation coordinator even shared the fact that TAPS has employees that are underemployed. The drivers take these jobs because there few alternative options. TAPS employs a lot of retired and semi-retired people, as well.

YOUTH Section 8 commented on the lack of child care as it affects parents’ search for employment, particularly in Fannin County. Child care needs to be provided so that parents can search for work. Clients cannot afford daycare, which can cost over half of take home pay a week.

According to Workforce Solutions Texoma, the main barrier to undergoing vocational training or employment is child care expenses. This affects roughly 90% of the organization’s low- income families. The Child Care Program manager believed that the high cost of child care is the reason why many parents do not go to work. Parents felt that they work just to pay for the cost of child care. In this case, many parents would rather stay at home. The Child Care Assistance Program is specifically designed to help parents going to work or school with child care so they can meet their self-sufficiency goals.

As far as eligibility for the Child Care Assistance Program, each parent of a family must be either in training or working for a minimum of 25 hours a week. The interviewer had to clarify that 278 clients must be seeking continuing education or training, and the respondent added that applicants can also just be employed. However, especially with the economic downturn, many

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

parents are unemployed or underemployed, which the Child Care Assistance Program defines as working less than 25 hours a week. Parents cannot receive Child Care Assistance if they do not have a job. There will always be an unmet need because the program’s funding restrictions do not allow unemployed clients to receive child care. Furthermore, there is very limited funding to help clients who want child care while finding job training or being unemployed. However, if a client has a disability that only allows them to work for 10 hours a week and that client can get medical certification to prove his/her disability, then he/she may be eligible for child care.

Housing Affordable housing is a need mentioned by multiple agencies. TCOG Section 8 addressed the need for affordable housing and ethical landlords. Landlords who charge high prices are unreasonable because they have fixed rate mortgages that are only half of what they are charging tenants and keeping the rest as profit. If landlords decide to increase rent, Section 8 needs to see proof of taxes and insurance rates. TCOG Section 8 faces a problem with landlords consistently raising rent prices. TCOG Section 8 keeps track of rent price records for unassisted properties in the area so that the organization can ensure that landlords charge reasonable rent prices. TCOG Section 8 tries to keep Fannin landlords on track by reminding them that TCOG Section 8 cannot pay as much for Fannin County as it can for Grayson County.

The Texoma Homeless Coalition considered affordable housing to be the foremost need in the Texoma Region. There is very little affordable public sector housing in every community in the area. Even though agencies work with landlords, there is still limited affordable housing. For clients that make minimum wage, finding housing that costs only 30% of their monthly income is very difficult.

Regarding solutions for affordable housing, the Texoma Homeless Coalition offered some ideas. 279 The representative from Texoma Homeless Coalition attended a stakeholders meeting in Dallas that came into being from the Hearth Act that President Obama signed into law. The U.S. Inter-

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

agency Council on Homelessness went to service providers and asked what they needed. One of the best solutions at the meeting was to create an incentive tax program that gives the private sector motivation to build affordable housing, because he felt non-profits did not know how to build affordable housing. Non-profits can buy the houses for reduced prices, or they can be run by the private sector. Either way, the housing must be affordable.

TCOG Section 8 discussed the housing situation in Cooke and Fannin Counties. The Gainesville Housing Authority oversees Section 8 in Cooke County. TCOG Section 8 oversees the program in Grayson and Fannin Counties. TCOG Section 8 has expressed interest in taking over the Section 8 program in Cooke County, but has not actually made an offer yet.

The Program manager at TCOG Section 8 discussed discrimination in Fannin County. TCOG Section 8 brought the first fair housing coalition to Fannin County, but a few landlords try to discriminate against clients based on race. TCOG Section 8 has promoted fair housing and counseled landlords about fair housing laws. However, it seems that these particular landlords do not care what the law states. The TCOG Section 8 respondent said it took her 4-5 years before the organization could get more landlords in Fannin County that would abide by fair housing practices. Before this time, Section 8 housing was not available for African-Americans in Fannin. At that time, if there was a house with African-American tenants, it was often burned out. She said this problem was a prime example of backward thinking with no progress in mind.

The Section 8 Program manager pointed out that there are also towns in Fannin County, such as Leonard and Honey Grove, which have a large African-American population. This is the opposite of Bonham. It took a lot of work in Fannin County to change landlords’ backward mindsets and bring them more into compliance with the law. Today, there is much better response and TCOG Section 8 respondent is able to work with programs in Fannin County. The problem TCOG Section 8 faced was that there were many properties in South Bonham for rent, but no one was 280 willing to rent those homes. So, TCOG Section 8 used this situation as an opportunity to change the way landlords think, one landlord at a time.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TCOG Section 8 discussed the rent stock in Grayson and Fannin Counties. Around 60-70% of TCOG Section 8 clients rent homes in Sherman, Denison, and Bonham. The remaining 30% of clients live in rural areas. There is a tremendous difference between rent housing in Fannin and Grayson Counties. The housing in Grayson tends to be older, but most have been built since the 1970s. In Fannin County, most houses were built during the 1900s, 1920s, or 1940s. It is rare to find a brand new house. Inspections differ across housing authorities. TCOG Section 8 uses U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development standards. Grayson County Housing Authority uses a more specialized standard list because their housing stock is not as old.

The Texoma Homeless Coalition had mixed sentiments about its past interactions with TCOG Section 8 and public housing authorities in the area. When the Americorps VISTA asked whether TCOG Section 8 and the housing authorities recognized the need for transitional housing in the area, both organizations replied that they had no additional transitional housing spaces available. There was no mindset of “our community needs this now” with those programs. They seemed to just be doing their jobs.

A recent development in the Section 8 program is that other programs, such as Veterans Affairs (VA) and Mental Health Mental Retardation (MHMR) can also receive Section 8 vouchers from HUD. The Program manager thought that HUD is starting to spread the Section 8 vouchers out because they see a greater service need. Other agencies, however, do not have experience with distributing vouchers, so they call the Program manager for assistance. For example, the VA wants to transition veterans out of homelessness, but because the Program manager’s focus is Section 8, the Program manager cannot meet this particular need. But the VA calls the Program manager about once every 3 months for assistance.

281 Housing and Other Conditions

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

(Housing and Education) Family Self-Sufficiency runs home ownership classes. The Family Self-Sufficiency Program Coordinator teaches clients about credit and discusses client readiness for purchasing homes. The Section 8 Program manager teaches classes on budgeting, long-term planning, taxes, and energy efficiency. A staff member from TCOG Energy Assistance teaches about foreclosures and the consequences associated with purchasing a home.

(Housing and Emergency Assistance) As mentioned previously, TCOG Energy Assistance, along with the Grayson County Shelter and the North Texas Youth Connection, jointly applied for the homelessness prevention grant. TCOG Energy Assistance wanted to apply for funds but did not have designated targets for the funding. The Grayson County Shelter wanted to use the grant to help people at the shelter move out and live on their own. Since receiving the homelessness prevention grant funding, the three organizations have helped 25 families and spent $60,000 since September 2009. They will run out of money 2-3 months from this interview date. The funds received from the joint grant application resulted in TCOG providing short-term assistance, mostly to clients who were at risk of eviction. Some clients who were helped by short-term assistance are now in the same situation as before. Meanwhile, other clients affected include two recently released inmates who received rent assistance. They moved out of the shelter, and found both jobs and housing. The funding also helped a family from East Texas that recently moved to Sherman and was living in a dangerous environment. This family was able to find an apartment with the assistance of TCOG after the father found a job at Tyson.

(Housing and Homelessness) The Texoma Homeless Coalition supported the “point in time” count performed by the Texas Homeless Network on January 28, 2010. This count was done in order to get an estimate of the number of homeless individuals in rural areas and what those individuals’ needs are. The Texas 282 Homeless Network did a sheltered and unsheltered count. The sheltered count is typically higher because there are rarely “street homeless” in rural areas. The count collected 92

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

surveys, including reports from bigger shelters. Only 3 unsheltered homeless individuals were counted because on January 28 there was inclement weather. Out of 6 counties, only 3 counties participated. 90 sheltered homeless individuals were counted, with 20% of these individuals coming from outside of the service area. Therefore, 80% of people serviced were from the area. Children were not required to be countered, but the Texas Homeless Network respondent said that, at the time of the count, there were 6 children sheltered at North Texas Youth Connection.

There are no shelters for transitional housing in Cooke and Fannin Counties. In Grayson County, there are more shelters opening, such as Heaven's Helpers and Four Rivers. North Texas Youth Connection was able to get a transitional living program funded a year ago.

The Texas Homeless Network received funding from the Continuum of Care to create a Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) database for shelters and case managers to use. Implementing this type of program has been difficult to do in the Texoma region. For example, the Salvation Army does not use a HMIS database since it is a national organization. Because the Salvation does not use this database, it cannot apply for HUD/Continuum of Care funding.

The Texoma Homeless Coalition discussed “mom and pop” shelters in the Texoma region, or very informal shelters run by a few individuals. “Mom and pop” shelters just pop up and are often started by a Christian organization or Christian person. Individuals see a need and start a shelter with their own money and time. However, the “mom and pop” shelters’ informal startup process makes it difficult for them to work with other agencies, since they do not view themselves as agencies. Most shelters use tracking and file systems, except one particular shelter in a rural area. The shelter owner does not track clients and seems to be “anti-funding.” At one point, his shelter burned down and some people housed there died. As a result, 283 someone associated with a particular coalition wrote a newspaper article attacking the shelter. Ever since then, the shelter owner dislikes coalitions, including the Texas Homeless Coalition.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Although the shelter owner helped the respondent to count the homeless in his shelter, he will not track the clients that are housed in his shelter and he does not want funding due to religious reasons.

Case managers at most shelters give long-term assistance to the homeless. For example, at the Grayson County Shelter, case managers track clients’ needs and efforts towards self-sufficiency.

In its attempts to raise awareness about homelessness, the Texoma Homeless Coalition would try to get city government representation at Coalition meetings. City of Sherman policy states that due to lack of funding and staff, the city cannot directly aid the homeless, but will do whatever it can to assist non-profits that are charged with assisting the homeless. The Texoma Homeless Coalition representative spoke at a Sherman City Council meeting and a representative from the City of Sherman will start attending Texoma Homeless Coalition meetings in the near future.

(Housing and Transportation) TAPS Public Transit and area housing authorities work together to provide transportation for low-income clients in public housing.

(Housing and Veterans) The Texoma Homeless Coalition discussed veterans and homelessness. At the most recent Texoma Homeless Coalition meeting, a VA Hospital representative discussed veteran services. When veterans leave the Bonham VA Hospital they often do not have anywhere to go. There are no shelters with beds set aside for veterans in the Texoma area. However, the VA representative made it clear that if beds at shelters were set aside for veterans, then those shelters would be eligible for additional grant funding.

284 (Housing and Youth)

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Family unification is a special TCOG Section 8 program that works with CPS to place clients in housing immediately. Clients work with counselors in order to keep families intact. One of most integral parts of the program is permanent housing. CPS will not reunite a family if permanent housing is unavailable. Starting approximately 15 years ago, vouchers could be used towards family unification. The importance of this program is that ensuring that children are not displaced and relocated to live with other families, but rather able to stay with their own families. This unique program has helped to stabilize the entire TCOG Section 8 program.

Transportation TAPS is a growing organization with new buses and new sources of funding. An average week’s ridership amounts to about 700-800 people. During a typical week, there are 57 people riding from Sherman to the Peterbuilt Plant in Denton. This route also picks up people along the way. There are also rides from Honey Grove and Bonham to the Trailblazer Health in Sherman. As for the fixed routes, the Roo Route and the Viking Route have a weekly ridership of about 20 people, with an average of 100 people riding every month.

TAPS serves Grayson, Wise, Montague, Cooke and Fannin Counties. The organization provides rural ridership from Fannin County and the border of Grayson and Cooke County. It has been receiving more and more calls from little towns in Fannin County, such as Callisburg and Collinsville.

TAPS occasionally has to deny rides to clients since there is not enough demand in certain areas to facilitate transportation there. Clients in low-demand rural areas are the most affected by this problem. These clients may want the bus to arrive at a certain time, but TAPS usually cannot always accommodate. If clients have flexible pick-up times, then TAPS can usually get to their area.

285 TAPS targets low-income individuals by working with SNAP centers and the housing authorities. The interviewer asked if SNAP centers in small towns could receive TAPS services. The

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

respondent said that TAPS will help small town SNAP centers if they call. The respondent went on to say that he saw many elderly and disabled clients trying to save money to buy a car. When these riders purchase their own personal, reliable transportation, TAPS loses them as clients because public transportation is no longer a necessity for these individuals. TAPS does very little advertising to low-income groups because TAPS is already the sole provider of public transportation in the region. The interviewer agreed, saying the best marketing TAPS can do is drive its buses around the city.

Until 1993, TAPS was only available to senior citizens. However, once TAPS transitioned more towards providing public transportation in 1993, it started to attract different populations. Now the organization serves all kinds of people, even children. There is greater awareness of public transportation within the community. The Roo Route and Viking Route have increased the number of young college students who now think it is cool to ride the TAPS buses.

Changes in last 5 years for TAPS include new counties served. TAPS is not the designated transportation service for these regions, but now goes into Wichita County, Lamar County, McKinney, and Dallas. These rides generally facilitate trips to medical locations.

Service changes include a new computer system that allows TAPS to provide much more efficient transportation. Before, TAPS did not have the capability to facilitate many rides. There were only 2 scheduling dispatchers at the time. Plus, the old computer system could not automatically compute rides. Now, the new computer system takes all buses into account and schedules the entire operation. However, this system is not perfect and must be tweaked daily for hours at a time. A management change at TAPS has also been very beneficial. TAPS has 14 more buses than before. Overall, the organization has 92 buses. These new buses have made a significant difference because some of the older buses had very high mileage or were constantly in need of repair. 286

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TAPS partner organizations include United Way of Grayson County. TAPS subcontracts with Texoma Tours and predominantly works with United Way to do outreach in Wise County. Further examples of outreach include the Boot Scootin' Ball, the Peanut Festival, Frontier Days in Pottsboro, and the Grayson County Crisis Center’s Seeds of Hope. TAPS also transports many Grayson County Crisis Center clients.

TAPS has new plans to provide additional services in Grayson, Cooke, and Fannin Counties. The organization has also discussed adding a Grayson County-DFW ride and a Bonham-Sherman- Durant loop.

TCOG Section 8 identified transportation as a major concern in Grayson County. However, the TCOG Section 8 program manager believes that TAPS and Grayson County transportation are improving. Transportation is also major concern in Fannin County. Clients from TCOG Section 8 will choose to live in a home in a rural area, but then complain about gas prices when driving back and forth.

TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency believes that the lack of available public transportation is a barrier to self-sufficiency for clients. Even if families obtain a vehicle, the maintenance costs often makes personal transportation unsustainable due to the lack of family finances. There are programs that donate cars to needy families, but these programs are not available in the immediate area. The Low Income Protection Plan (LIPP) used to offer free car repair, but this program is no longer available. The program’s finances were not being utilized correctly and, therefore, its funding was redirected to pay overdue rent.

TAPS recognizes the importance of transportation for self-sufficiency. The TAPS operations coordinator found that second to having a home, transportation is the strongest indicator of self-sufficiency. Transportation can also help people gain self-sufficiency in many ways. For 287 people in abusive relationships, the abuser usually has control of the car, so the victim has to have access to public transportation if he/she wants to get out of that abusive situation.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Transportation and Other Conditions (Transportation/ Employment) TAPS offers subsidized rides for individuals needing public transportation to get to work. As mentioned previously, there are 57 people who ride from Sherman to the Peterbuilt Plant in Denton. This route picks people up along the way. In addition, TAPS transportation is available from Honey Grove and Bonham to the Trailblazer plant in Sherman. Employees took the initiative to establish these routes and can buy a monthly bus pass for $80 a month. With this pass, people can ride the buses to work every day.

TAPS tells all schedulers to track the reasons why riders are on the bus. In all counties, the average rate of employment-subsidized rides was 30% and growing. Employment ridership had largest percent increase in growth, especially because of the economic downturn.

The respondents at TAPS have a clear understanding of how unemployment affects their clients, as many of clients do not have jobs or reliable, personal transportation. Every now and then, TAPS is informed that different plants around the area have shut down to save money. There are layoffs in all areas of businesses. The transportation coordinator said that even TAPS has employees that are underemployed. The organization employs a lot of retired and semi- retired people, as well.

(Transportation/ Health) TAPS works with MHMR to transport patients and provides Medicare subsidized rides in some areas.

(Transportation / Veterans) TCOG Elder Rights said that veteran services in the Texoma region are lacking. The Elder Rights 288 benefits counselor in Grayson County felt that he can help veterans because he is a veteran himself. He referred clients to the local Veteran Services coordinator in Grayson County.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

However, the TCOG Elder Rights benefits counselor criticized the VA Clinic. He knows clients have been denied service due to technicalities, even though all veterans should be able to be seen at any location if they have a VA card. TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency program also sees a significant number of clients who are veterans.

Youth The Workforce Solutions Texoma Child Care Assistance program provides child care in the region. Admission to the program is income-based and there is a wait list. The program also helps mothers who go to school by providing child care for them on a case-by-case basis. According to the Child Care Program manager, the majority of participants are single parents. The program does have participants that are two parent families, but usually only one parent's education or skill level is high enough to retain a job and pay for child care.

Workforce Solutions Texoma has one case manager who is the clients’ primary contact for this particular program. That case manager helps clients set up child care and make decisions about their child care providers.

If the Workforce Solutions Texoma Child Care Assistance program is unable to supplement child care for a client, then he/she can be referred to child care providers who can supplement child care or provide discounts. Some churches may provide scholarships. If for-profit child care providers give discounts, they do not advertise it. There is a non-profit daycare in Gainesville that works with parents in need of child care assistance.

With regard to program policy changes, the only suggestion that the program manager has includes making child care available to families that have a parent who is completely disabled. The Program manager maintains the stipulation on parents having to work at least 25 hours per week or be continuing education in targeted fields. 289

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Workforce Solutions Texoma Child Care Assistance program encourages parents to join Head Start or Early Head Start, as stated in the Workforce Solutions Texoma Strategic Plan. The respondent said that one major problem with Head Start is that most school districts run a part- day program and this is a problem if parents work full-time. They do not want their 2-3 year old children bused somewhere else. Parents want their children to be in a single daycare. Parents attending college may be able to adjust their schedules to accommodate this dilemma or, perhaps a relative can pick up the child. But most working parents cannot accommodate this schedule. The respondent also pointed out another disadvantage of Head Start. Even if districts provide full-day early childhood programs, there are still school breaks such as spring break and summer break. During these periods, parents may not have anyone to look after their children.

TCOG Section 8 made several observations regarding youth in Fannin County. A tremendous amount of young people apply for assistance in Fannin simply because there are few high- paying jobs in the County. The clients that apply for assistance are primarily women with small children. Most of them have never been married and they are raising children as single parents. There is a large population in Grayson County that is the same way, but it is an even larger problem in Fannin County because there are fewer jobs and less public transportation available. Young women and single mothers in Fannin County take advantage of TCOG Energy Assistance. The TCOG Section 8 program manager constantly refers these clients to TCOG Energy Assistance.

Critical needs in Fannin County include child care for parents who are seeking employment and youth services. Child care must be provided in order for parents to be able to look for work. Clients cannot afford daycare for their children because it takes up most of their income to even do so. In terms of youth services, there should be a youth community center in every city in Fannin County. The towns in Fannin County have no movie theater, no skating rink, and no mall. An after-school program would greatly enrich the lives of children and parents all over the 290 county. The Program manager said that mothers worry a great deal about their children in this regard. Children ride the bus home from school and get home to an empty house. They can get

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

in a lot of trouble when there is nothing productive for them to do in the community during these periods of time.

In Grayson County, a difficulty faced by service providers is providing counseling to teenage clients. Teenage clients face all kinds of issues at school, not just drug-related problems, but violence as well. The respondent said that she has 1-5 junior high and/or high school aged clients that need help because they are acting out in a violent way.

The Program manager at TCOG Energy Assistance regarded youth attitudes as central to solving the cycle of poverty. One solution to end poverty is telling young women, especially single others, that how they feel does not matter as much as how they act. Poor people tend to think in a self-defeating manner. Many low-income people do not see a way out of their situation and think that their actions do not matter. As a result of this mental barrier, they do not work or want to work. There is a prevalent, unfortunate attitude that if people cannot attain a certain standard of living, then they might as well have no standard of living. Regarding this attitude, young people really need encouragement to take action, because no one else encourages them.

Youth and Other Conditions (Youth/ Education) As mentioned previously, TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency assists with school supply donations for children. School supplies are funded through the Family Self-Sufficiency Program in order to encourage both children and adults. The first day of school is often disheartening for children because they are often treated differently because they cannot afford school supplies. Having school supplies motivates children to work harder in school and the supplies encourage parents since their children are receiving help. However, this is a major expense as school supplies cost between $35-85 per child. Supplies are donated by partner organizations within the 291 community. One year, insurance companies competed to see who could raise the most school supplies. The community helps provide school supplies.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

(Youth/ Employment) According to Workforce Solutions Texoma, for approximately 90% of their low-income families, the main barrier to receiving vocational training or employment is child care expenses. The Child Care Assistance program manager believed that the high cost of child care is the reason why many parents do not work. They feel that they are working just to pay for the cost of child care. In this case, parents would rather stay at home. The Child Care Assistance program is specifically designed to help parents go to school and/or work with child care costs covered so that the parents meet self-sufficiency goals.

As far as eligibility for the Child Care Assistance Program, the parent of a family must be either in training or working minimum of 25 hours a week. The interviewer clarified that clients must be seeking continuing education or training and the respondent added that parents can also be employed full-time to be eligible. However, many parents are unemployed or underemployed, especially with the recent economic downturn. Unemployed or underemployed is defined by Workforce Solutions Texoma as working less than 25 hours a week. Parents cannot receive Child Care Assistance if they do not have a job. Some needs continue to be unmet because funding restrictions do not allow unemployed clients to receive child care assistance. Funding is limited for clients who would like child care assistance to find job training or because they are unemployed. However, if a client is disabled, but can work 10 hours a week and has medical certification to prove the disability, then that individual may be eligible for child care.

Unique Observations

Causes of Poverty The program manager at TCOG Energy Assistance has strong opinions about the causes of poverty. It is important to teach people a mentality of self-sufficiency at a young age. People can ask for help, but, ultimately, they need to be self-sustaining. It is not an issue of work ethic; 292 rather, it is a question of how people value themselves. Self-sufficiency and dignity go hand in hand. As a whole, our society would be very different if these facts were more readily Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

understood. The program manager sees either desperation or apathy in her clients and, in young people, there is no in-between.

TCOG Energy Assistance case managers recognize the challenges clients face in their struggle to escape poverty. Energy Assistance caseworkers focus on documentation and topics that families bring up. The case managers try not to make assumptions about clients’ circumstances. Rather, they believe it is important to get to know clients. The program manager felt that other service providers do not always have the same attitude. Several other service providers do not give clients time to be who they are without bias or judgment. There is a great deal of discrimination and many people are not served because of their appearance.

TCOG Section 8 discussed self-sufficiency efforts for clients. The program manager felt that she could relate to clients because of her own personal experiences. However, often clients are very easy to see through. She noted that it is surprising the things that clients do because they feel scared and desperate. However, the best way to address these fears is through counseling. The program manager firmly believes that there is much more that needs to be done to solve poverty. Ensuring that clients are pointed in the right direction is what most TCOG Section 8 staff spend their time on. When service providers are separate and dispersed, people get lost going from one office to the next. Despite this, the program manager believes that clients themselves are the problem. If a need is not being met, it is because the clients themselves are not following through to do what needs to be done. The program manager has not found a single agency in Grayson County that was unwilling to help, as long as clients are cooperative. Aside from the elderly and disabled, the rest of the clients are the ones who need to learn what their priorities are and how to handle them responsibility. Meanwhile, the program manager realizes that her job exists because of irresponsible people. She thinks that perhaps these clients have never been taught better and that they need someone to guide them.

293 The very goal of the TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency program is self-sufficiency. The purpose of this program was and is to get families off of social programs and show clients that there is a

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

better quality of life available to them. These programs give families the ability to buy and have the things that they need to survive. The main hindrance of self sufficiency for these families is a lack of transportation. Even if these families obtain a vehicle, the maintenance and upkeep often makes them unusable for families. There are programs that give donated cars to needy families, but these programs are not available in the immediate counties. A program called the Low Income Protection Plan (LIPP) used to offer free car repair, but has since gone out of business. TAPS has been helpful; however, the routes and pick up times for these buses are often not meant for people looking for and/or maintaining employment.

As mentioned previously, medical care is another self-sufficiency barrier. There is no free dental care available in Grayson County, except a once a year free clinic. Dental care is crucial and can affect one’s employment opportunities, as employers are less likely to hire people who have an offensive dental situation. Also, lack of dental care can cause pain which can affect quality of work.

Substance abuse also affects self-sufficiency. It can greatly affect one’s ability to work. Substance abuse rehabilitation is more readily available than in the past. Organizations such as the Four Rivers rehabilitation center have helped significantly in meeting this need. Often, people use drugs recreationally, because of peer pressure, or as a means of coping with trauma.

The TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency program coordinator believes that many people stay in poverty because it is a familiar situation. They have dealt with this type of lifestyle for generations and are afraid of the possibility of a new life. It is important for case managers to help these clients get motivated. The TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency program coordinator often sends encouraging postcards to clients. These clients need encouragement because they have lived in poverty for generations. Now, clients have a better understanding of the way their lives 294 could be and are working to make this change.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Service Provider Outreach TCOG Elder Rights provides outreach to the elderly with its "Senior Beware" video. This is a 5-7 minute TV advertisement that runs on the local news channel on the last Monday of every month. This is effective because many senior citizens watch the local news avidly. Other methods of outreach include local newspaper articles and public service announcements on the radio.

While TCOG Elder Rights’ outreach has been occasionally effective, the program is unable to reach every single household in the area. The Fannin County Special is a newspaper that is mailed to every address in the county and Elder Rights advertises in this newspaper. TCOG Elder Rights also runs TV and radio advertisements and visits local senior centers.

On April 5, 2010, TCOG Elder Rights’ counselors trained home health care and assisted living agencies to enroll people in Medicare Part D. The goal of this program was to reach out to 50- 75 people.

TCOG Energy Assistance engages in new client outreach by posting radio announcements and visiting senior centers.

TAPS works with United Way of Grayson County to do outreach in Wise County. Further examples of local outreach include the Boot Scootin' Ball, the Peanut Festival, Frontier Days in Pottsboro, and the Grayson County Crisis Center Seeds of Hope. TAPS also transports many Grayson County Crisis Center clients.

The Texoma Homeless Coalition has been trying to get city government representation at Coalition meetings to raise awareness about homelessness. While the City of Sherman cannot directly aid the homeless, it can assist nonprofits that are charged with helping the homeless. 295

Importance of Knowledge and Information

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TCOG Elder Rights counselors identified information accessibility as the most critical need for the elderly in Texoma. If the program had enough funding to mail an information sheet listing elderly resources to every address in each of the three counties, then the need for information accessibility would be met. At present, if an elderly person calls TCOG Elder Rights for information, those individuals are referred from organization to organization. Not to mention, elderly clients dislike dealing with automated voice recordings over the phone. Information about the resources available to the elderly is not sufficiently accessible. For example, many elderly people do not even know that TCOG Elder Rights exists and can assist them.

TCOG Energy Assistance also promoted the importance of distributing information to clients. With regard to energy usage, TCOG Energy Assistance gives practical advice to clients in the form of handouts from energy company websites.

Case Management Approach The Section 8 client intake begins by determining the client eligibility, which is based on income. Then, the client is put on a wait list by the date and time of application. If there are other special purpose programs they qualify for, such as Family Unification or Mainstream, then clients can enter these programs immediately. Clients undergo a one hour voucher briefing session to provide housing guidance. Clients are given HUD information and, then, they receive counseling on finding units and financial limitations. As a side note, most housing authorities do not have an intake process. Rather, they just tell clients how much assistance they will receive and tell them to go find a house.

TCOG Section 8 uses a “back door calculation,” which is based on the utility schedule, the area, and the payment standard. Using this calculation, TCOG Section 8 gives clients a general price range for homes they can look for. Section 8 developed a total sheet that they give to clients 296 and includes that individual’s maximum rent amount and other important figures. In the long- run, this saves everyone time because people can easily determine which housing units they

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

are eligible for. At that point, clients seek housing that meets HUD Standards, their financial limitations and request landlord approval. TCOG Section 8 housing contracts are for one year, which include inspection and recertification.

TCOG Section 8 verifies clients’ earned income and housing authority histories. The program has many sister agencies, such as the Grayson County Housing Authority, the Sherman Housing Authority, the Denison Housing Authority, and Texoma Housing. Before, HUD did not have a client database, so TCOG Section 8 was unable to verify client application information effectively. This was not a good practice. Eventually, the TCOG Section 8 respondent set up a faxing system for the local area. With this system, agencies can fax other local housing agencies to request client history reports. These fax reports list the client's name, Social Security Number, and any reasons why the client would not qualify.

Once a client is accepted into the program, he/she can even move to areas outside of TCOG’s jurisdiction, even though Section 8 has payment standard limitations. If TCOG Section 8’s budget numbers were incorrect, the program could get sanctioned by HUD. For this reason, TCOG Section 8 cannot provide assistance to out-of-region residents whose rent is high because the program is intended to help clients within Texoma.

Clients have one case manager who is the client's primary contact. The case manager helps clients set up child care and make decisions about child care providers. Other staff members in the Child Care Assistance program go through the technical process of contacting the providers. Workforce Solutions Texoma believes having one case manager as a client's primary contact is a good system. Ultimately, clients do not care who is paying for the child care; they just need the service. The case manager finds out clients’ child care needs and then contacts the appropriate personnel who know more about child care provision.

297 The TCOG Energy Assistance case management process identifies families that qualify for the program in terms of income and household makeup. The primary goal is to teach clients how to

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

save money on energy. Part of the case management model educates clients on basic household budgeting. Clients fill out a form detailing their household budget. Then, case managers calculate the percentage of income clients spend on utilities. Some families discover that they spend over 30% of their monthly incomes on utility payments.

This case management model allows case managers to work according to the needs of each unique household. Working families should take stay in touch with case management and continue to participate in the co-pay program. Elderly households should be sure to apply for food stamps and other programs they may be eligible for. Some elderly people do not take advantage of these services because they are either embarrassed that they are receiving assistance or because they think that the benefits might be not be worth the hassle. However, $15-25 can go far in buying additional food each month.

TCOG Energy Assistance case managers recognize the challenges clients face in their struggle to get out of poverty. TCOG caseworkers deal with documentation and address topics that families bring up. The case managers try not to make assumptions about clients’ circumstances. Rather, they believe it is important to get to know clients. The TCOG Energy Assistance program manager felt that other service providers sometimes place judgment on clients, without giving clients the time to be themselves. There is a great deal of discrimination and many people are negatively affected as a result.

The TCOG Elder Rights benefits counselor for Grayson County has a unique approach to case management. He loves helping people and enjoys being approachable. As a result, he often receives new referrals from clients he has helped in the past. The respondent valued his reputation for helping "satisfied customers."

Program Goals for the Next Five Years 298 TAPS plans to increase its service provision in Grayson, Cooke, and Fannin Counties. Of these plans, TAPS may add a Grayson County-DFW route and a Bonham-Sherman-Durant route.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The program goals for the Texoma Homeless Coalition include encouraging multiple agencies to apply for Continuum of Care funding. The Grayson County Shelter, in particular, should apply for this funding because it is starting to outgrow its location. It was also starting a transitional living program. There needed to be conference calling between organizations so that every county participates in meetings.

TCOG Elder Rights had two particular program goals. The first is to add a fourth benefits counselor to act as a floater between the three counties. Adding another benefits counselor would mean that always having a counselor at the telephone if one counselor happened to be away. The second program goal is to have employees on contract at every senior center in the tri-county area during open enrollment.

Inter-Agency Communication The North Texas Youth Connection was eligible to receive federal homelessness prevention grant and wanted to apply for these funds. However, the organization was unsure of what to do with the funds if it received them. The Grayson County Shelter wanted to use the funding to help clients at the shelter move out and live on their own. Ultimately, TCOG Energy Assistance, Grayson County Shelter and North Texas Youth Connection all submitted a joint application for the homelessness prevention grant. Since receiving the grant in September of 2009, they have helped 25 families and spent $60,000.

However, according to TCOG Energy Assistance, there is very little inter-agency communication. TCOG Energy Assistance refers all clients, especially the elderly, to 2-1-1. Regional coordination is primarily comprised of personal connections, such as a case manager connecting with a hospital through a friend. The case managers themselves were unaware of how clients are referred to TCOG Energy Assistance and 2-1-1. 299

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Texas Homeless Network VISTAs aims to build coalitions throughout rural areas of Texas to build collaboration with service providers and meet the needs of the rural homeless. The Texoma Homeless Coalition meetings are an example of inter-agency collaboration. The meetings facilitate agency collaboration and help to prioritize the needs of the community as a whole, rather than the needs of a particular agency. However, regional collaboration to address the needs of the homeless is inadequate overall. In this region, agencies do what is necessary to expand. Foremost, agencies want to take care of their own. Then, they take care of the community. This is probably due to job security concerns. So, if an agency is not doing well, then, most likely, it will not go out of its way to help other agencies or step outside its target population.

An example of successful inter-agency communication is Heaven’s Helper’s relationship with other shelter programs in the area. The director of Heaven’s Helper came to a Texoma Homeless Coalition meeting and asked for help to start a shelter. She talked with the directors of existing shelters and connected with their organizations. Now, the Heaven’s Helper director runs a substance abuse rehabilitation center and transitional housing for women.

Agency collaboration with across counties has proven difficult because of the time and transportation costs associated with meeting together. For example, the Americorps VISTA in Gainesville would like to start conference call meetings so that representatives from every county can more easily attend and participate.

REFERRALS TCOG Energy Assistance refers and receives clients from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the cities of Bonham, Gainesville, Sherman, and Denison, United Way, VISTO, 211, and APS. 300 Adult Protective Services and TCOG agencies refer patients to each other. APS works with CPS to reunite families; hospitals, for when people get discharged, they refer them to TCOG if they Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

find out they will have no electricity and/or heating when they return home; United Way; Utility companies; Veterans Affairs Centers/Hospitals; and Home Hospice.

The Child Care Assistance Program at Workforce Solutions Texoma gives clients who they deny child care referrals to other providers. Some churches may provide scholarships. There is a non- profit daycare in Gainesville that will usually work with parents in need. Other youth-oriented organizations named by the program manager include after-school programs such as Boys and Girls Club and Girls Inc.; CASA; Child Protective Services; and the Children's Advocacy Center.

TCOG Elder Rights refers clients to TCOG Energy Assistance, weatherization or 2-1-1. He also refers clients to the Ministerial Alliance and Adult Protective Services.

Changes in the Last 5 Years Changes in last 5 years for TAPS include new counties served. TAPS is not their designated transportation service, but they now go into Wichita County, Lamar County, McKinney, and Dallas. They are primarily medical rides.

Changes in services include a new computer system that allows TAPS be much more efficient and faster in their rides. Before, TAPS did not have the capability to process that many rides. They were scheduling with only two dispatchers, who were doing all the work. The old computer system would not automatically compute the rides. Now, the new computer system will take all the buses into account and schedule the entire ride. The system is not perfect, however, and they must tweak the system daily for hours. The management change at TAPS has also been very beneficial. In addition, TAPS has received more buses. They received 14 buses: 9 from McKinney, and 2 from Corsicana. They are now up to 92 buses. These new buses are essential because some of the older buses had very high mileage or were constantly inoperable, and were not dependable. 301

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

At TCOG Energy Assistance, stimulus funding helped to triple the energy assistance budget. Therefore, there are many new clients. Energy Assistance can now serve people if their income is 200% of the poverty level. Before, income eligibility was 125% of the federal poverty level. New clients are made up of working households that need help. In regards to the Heat/Cool Program beginning 2 years ago, the program can now spend a maximum of $5000 per household. It had been $3000 for many years.

At TCOG Section 8, there have been several major changes that have occurred in the last five years. Everything has expanded. There are more referrals and more agencies to refer clients to. Even though funding has remained consistent, there has not been an increase in funding. In the future, however, additional funding for vouchers will be available, which has not happened in eight years. Also, the program will no longer offer straight vouchers. With new grants, the government is tying in housing vouchers with other programs, such as Continuum of Care and Balance of State funding. She explained that HUD puts funding in a super notice of funding availability (super NOFA). When Section 8 receives the NOFA, they could apply for straight vouchers with no other programs attached to them. Now, there are other programs like Veterans Affairs and MHMR who can get Section 8 vouchers. Most likely, HUD is starting to spread the vouchers out; they are doing this because they saw a greater need in services.

Economic Downturn At TAPS, employment ridership had largest percent increase in growth, from 25% to 30% due to the economic downturn and increased employment and underemployment.

Especially with the economic downturn, many parents were unemployed or underemployed, or working less than 25 hours a week. Parents cannot receive Child Care Assistance if they do not have a job. That will always be an unmet need because their funding restrictions simply did not allow unemployed clients to receive child care. There is very limited funding to help clients who 302 want child care while finding job training or being unemployed.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Attitudes The TCOG Section 8 Program manager observed that there are some issues with dispersed, separate services, such as MHMR and juvenile agencies being separate services. People sometimes got lost going from office to office. However, the Program manager believed that clients themselves were the problem. If a need is not being met, it is because the clients themselves are not following through to do what needs to be done. The Program manager has not found anyone in Grayson County that was unwilling to do what needs to be done, as long as client is cooperative. The 60% of clients that are not elderly or disabled are the ones who need to learn what their priorities are and how to handle them responsibility. She realizes she has a job because of irresponsible people. She thinks maybe these clients have never been taught, and that they need someone to guide them.

The Family Self-Sufficiency Program Coordinator believes that many people stay in poverty because it is a familiar situation. They have dealt with this type of lifestyle forever and are scared by the possibility of a new life. It is important for case managers to help these clients get motivated. The Family Self-Sufficiency Program Coordinator often sends positive postcards so that the client stays motivated and has encouragement. They often need this encouragement because they have lived in poverty for generations and do not know any other way of life.

The Program manager at TCOG Energy Assistance had strong opinions about the attitudes of her clients. It is important to instill, early on in life, the attitude that a person can do whatever they set out to do. This will take hard work. A person can ask for help, but they ultimately need to do it on their own. This is not simply an issue of work ethic, but rather, it is a question: “How do I value myself?” It has to do with a person's dignity, not their hair, clothes or materials owned. Society would be much different if this were the case. Regarding her clients, the Program manager sees either desperation or apathy regarding their situation. In young people, there was no in-between. 303

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Program manager at TCOG Energy Assistance regarded youth attitudes as central to solving the cycle of poverty. She sees the solution for ending poverty is telling young women, especially single mothers, that it does not matter how they feel, but it is what they do that matters. Those in poverty think in a self-defeating manner. Because they do not see a way out of their situation and think anything they do does not matter, they do not work. There is a prevalent and unfortunate attitude that if you do not have a certain standard of living, then you have absolutely no standard of living. Regarding these attitudes, young people really need encouragement to take action, because no one else encourages them. People are written off if they have a hard period in life, and they write themselves off. Society should encourage people and treat people with respect.

Elderly people face obstacles in gaining self-sufficiency from society. Society treats them like they have hit their peak in earning income. No one tells them that they have done their best, and even when they have done their best, it is still not enough.

Community Contribution TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency assists with school supply donations for children. This is a major expense as school supplies cost about $35-85 per child. Supplies are donated by partner organizations within the community. One year, insurance companies competed to see who could raise the most amounts of school supplies. Therefore, the community is helping to pay for these school supplies. Another program is the winter coat drive which operates similar to the school supplies program. There is also a furniture and house items program that is geared towards families that are in the home buyer program.

For clients who are unable to receive child care through Workforce Solutions Texoma, the Child Care Assistance Program manager refers them to churches and non-profit daycares in Gainesville and other locations. : 304

Differences between Fannin and Grayson Counties

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The TCOG Section 8 described the differences between Grayson and Fannin Counties like night and day. These differences were readily apparent even when following the guidelines of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

For Fannin County, the payment standard for a two bedroom home is approximately $500. For Grayson County, the payment standard for a 2 bedroom is approximately $700. The problem is trying to keep Fannin County landlords on track with the fact that Section 8 cannot pay as much for Fannin County as they do for Grayson County. She said the economic structure in Fannin is so much lower than in Grayson. The high paying jobs are not there. In Fannin County, unemployment is higher, and the median income is lower.

Even the people in Fannin County are different. People are more laid back, and everything runs slower with less urgency. Fannin County is much more closely tied socio-economically and culturally to the American South than Grayson and Cooke Counties. The program manager brought the first fair housing coalition to Fannin County. People in Fannin County used to be very racial, and in some cases still continue to be very racial. For example, she would have a black client wanting to rent in south Bonham. Before, the landlord would say they did not want a black client. She was trying to promote fair housing and having to counsel with landlords about fair housing laws, but she did not want to step on the landlords' toes. She thought the landlords did not care what the law said because that was the way they did things. The respondent said it took her 4-5 years before they had good landlords. Before, there were no houses for African Americans. If a house had black tenants, it would often be burned out.

The program manager believed that this was an example of backward thinking, with no progression. It took a lot of work in Fannin to change their thought process and bring them more into compliance with the law, such as having to fill out many housing discrimination complaint forms. Now, there is much better response, and she is able to work with programs in 305 Fannin County. The problem they faced was that there were many properties in South Bonham to rent, but they could not rent them out. So they tried to change the way landlords think, one

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

landlord at a time. If a landlord asked what if people burn them out if they housed a black tenant, then Section 8 would ask if the landlord had insurance.

Many people in Fannin County like to live in rural areas. In Grayson County, there are a few people who live in the country, but not as many compared to Fannin County. She characterized all Fannin County residents as “country people.” The program manager at Section 8 was also from a small town in Texas, so she could somewhat relate to Fannin County, but ultimately she could not condone or fully understand their mindset.

Section 8 then discussed the rent stock in Grayson and Fannin Counties. Around 60-70% of their clients of Section 8 rented from Sherman, Denison, or Bonham. The remaining 30% live in rural areas. There is a tremendous difference between the two counties. In Grayson County, they have older properties, but most properties were built since the 1970's and later. In Fannin County, houses are often built during the 1900s, 1920s, or 1940s. You rarely find a brand new house. Inspections differ across housing authorities, though there has to be a broad spectrum. Section 8 uses U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development standards. Grayson County Housing Authority uses a more specialized list because their housing stock is not as old. However, they do have a house that was built in the 1800's in Ivanhoe.

TCOG Section 8 had several observations regarding youth in Fannin County. A tremendous amount of young people apply for assistance in Fannin County simply because the high-paying jobs are not there. The types of clients that apply for assistance are mainly women with small children. Most of them have never been married, and they are raising children on their own. There is a large population in Grayson County that is the same way, but it is a major problem in Fannin County because there are so many other obstacles, especially the lack of jobs and transportation. The youth in Fannin County, especially women and single mothers, do take advantage of TCOG Energy Assistance, with the Section 8 Program manager constantly referring 306 clients to Energy Assistance.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TCOG Energy Assistance described the challenges that women in Fannin County face in obtaining employment. Out of all the three counties, Fannin women, mostly single mothers, have the most difficulty in finding jobs. One way that Energy Assistance helps these women is by helping them gain nurse aid certifications.

Differences in Cooke County TCOG Energy Assistance found that the lowest percentage of their clients is located in Cooke County. Cooke County residents are very independent. Energy Assistance tried to reach out to Cooke County residents before, because they know people in the community do need these services. They linked up with two community resource centers to increase outreach in Cooke County. The residents themselves decided they did not need those programs. Sometimes, the community itself is a hindrance in providing needed services.

For Texoma Homeless Coalition’s outreach efforts, agency collaboration involving counties other than Grayson was difficult because some people did not want to drive all the way to Sherman. An example he gave was VISTO in Gainesville. The director did not always have time to attend meetings.

The Child Care Program manager at Workforce Solutions Texoma observed a higher percentage of Spanish-speaking families in Cooke County compared to the other two counties. There is a higher need for Spanish translators. These families were primarily coming from Gainesville. Workforce Solutions Texoma had Spanish speaking case managers and used a language line for translation needs.

Differences between Rural and Urban Areas TCOG Elder Rights faces special challenges working in rural areas compared to the needs of 307 more urban areas such as Dallas. There were 5 benefits counselors in the North Central Texas COG in Dallas. Between the 5 of them, they helped 186 people during open enrollment.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

However, in the same period, the counselor personally assisted with 211 cases in Grayson County. He never says he cannot help a client, and does not set any boundaries for himself. He pointed out that he probably could not do the Dallas counselors' jobs, and they could notdo his job.

The Texoma Homeless Coalition experienced differing attitudes in rural areas. Rural areas were more likely to have “mom and pop” shelters. They would just pop up, often started by a Christian organization or Christian person. These individuals simply see a need and start a shelter with their own money and time. This makes it hard for these shelters to work with other agencies, since they do not even see themselves as agencies. They had a “chip on the shoulder” attitude, as if they w erethe only ones who care in their area. They resent Sherman, the big city, getting all the funding. The respondent thought this was ironic since Sherman was not even a big city.

Critical Needs The following are critical needs for the Texoma region, which includes Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties:

Affordable Housing. According to Texoma Homeless Coalition, affordable housing in private sector is very low in every community in the area. when agencies try to work with landlords, there is still very limited affordable housing f or clients that make minimum wage, finding housing that is 30% of your income is very difficult.

More jobs. Texoma Homeless Coalition named this as a critical need for the region.

Transportation. The TCOG Family Self-Sufficiency Program described the main hindrance of self sufficiency for these families as the lack of transportation. Even if these families obtain a 308 vehicle, the maintenance costs often makes them financially unsuitable to the family. There are programs that give donated cars to needy families, but these programs are not available in the Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

immediate counties. A former program, LIPP, offered free car repair. However, the money in this program was not being utilized and therefore its funding was then directed to paying overdue rent. TAPS has been helpful in the aspect of transportation; however the routes and pick up times of these buses are often not effective in finding and maintain employment.

Dental care. According to Family Self-Sufficiency, there is absolutely no free dental care avail be in Grayson County with the exception of a once a year free clinic. Dental care is vitally important because it can affect employment as employers are less likely to hire people who have an offensive dental situation. Also, the lack of dental care can cause pain which can affect quality of work.

Substance abuse. According to Family Self-Sufficiency, substance abuse can negatively affect ability to work and maintain memberships into programs. Often, people use drugs out of boredom, to fit in, or as a means of coping with traumatic experiences. Unfortunately, there are no available services to deal with these causes, such as counseling or victim services.

Information about services. According to TCOG Elder Rights, information on what is available to the elderly is simply not getting to the elderly who need it the most. Medicaid policies were always changing by the minute. Elderly clients simply do not know what is out there for them. He knew that many elderly did not know a service such as Elder Rights existed. Currently, if elderly people have a need and call, they get bounced around. Elderly clients are angry when they have to talk to "one more machine." If Elder Rights had the funding to create an information sheet with every resource available to elderly clients and who to contact, and mail that information sheet to every address in each of the three counties, then that need would be met.

Child care for unemployed and underemployed parents. Especially with the economic downturn, 309 many parents were unemployed or underemployed. Parents cannot receive Child Care Assistance from Workforce Solutions Texoma if they do not have a job. That will always be an unmet need because their funding restrictions simply did not allow unemployed clients to Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

receive child care. There is very limited funding to help clients who want child care while finding job training or being unemployed. The following are critical needs for Fannin and Grayson Counties:

Affordable housing is a need, according to TCOG Section 8. There needs to be landlords that will not gouge prices. The respondent thought this was unfortunate because many the landlords have fixed rate mortgages, so their payment is only half of what they' are receiving in this market. There is a problem with landlords consistently raising that rent. It is hard to enforce “rent reasonableness,” She keeps records of unassisted properties in the area so that she can make sure that when client turns in a unit, she knows that rent is reasonable for that area.

The following are critical needs for Grayson County, according to TCOG Section 8:

Additional funding, particularly for programs by TCOG Section 8. There is never enough funding for housing and more vouchers.

Better transportation. It would be ideal to have a bus transit system with set stops.

The following are critical needs for Fannin County, according to TCOG Section 8:

Better job opportunities.

More businesses coming into area.

Better transportation, especially for rural areas. Clients will choose out a house in the rural area, and then complain about gas prices when driving back and forth.

310

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Child care. The main obstacle with child care is that child care needs to be provided so that parents can actually look for work. Clients often cannot afford daycare, which can be over half of take home pay a week.

Youth services. In Fannin County towns there is no movie theater, no skating rink, and no mall. An after-school program would be very beneficial for children and parents. When children go home on the bus by themselves and arrive in an empty house, they can get in a lot of trouble.

311

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

4. SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Survey Responses N=1621

Community 38%

Clients 57%

Service Providers 4% Elected Officials 1%

Respondents by Employment Status- Texoma 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Community and Client Respondents Only

Employed N=559 Unemployed N= 498 Retired N=445

312

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

#1 NEED

Cooke County Employment

Fannin County Employment

Grayson County Employment

#1 Need (Open-ended answers) 0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

PercentageofRespondents 0.05

313 All Cooke Fannin Grayson

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Taking into account all answers listed as a need, number one through number five, the following indicates which types of needs respondents listed the most often. Please remember that the order of importance is not taken into consideration.

Ranking Cooke Fannin Grayson Healthcare/Medical/ 1 Employment Employment Counseling Healthcare/Medical/ Healthcare/Medical/ 2 Employment Counseling Counseling 3 Housing Transportation Transportation 4 Food/Clothing Food/Clothing Food/Clothing 5 Utility Bills Utility Bills Housing

Top Five Needs (Open-ended answers)

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2 Percentageof Respondents 0.1

314 All Cooke Fannin Grayson

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Client ‘Hopefulness’ question:

Client Top Needs by Hopefulness-Texoma Not at All Somewhat Unsure Hopeful Hopeful Very Hopeful Employment 0.26 0.23 0.48 0.51 Financial Security 0.29 0.37 0.3 0.36 Transportation 0.24 0.29 0.33 0.34 Utilities 0.32 0.23 0.3 0.31 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 0.53 0.68 0.37 0.29 Education 0.12 0.02 0.22 0.21 Food/Clothing 0.2 0.2 0.13 0.2 Childcare/ Youth Services 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.19 Other 0.14 0.17 0.17 0.15 Housing 0.13 0.13 0.16 0.12 Misc Elderly & Disabled 0.16 0.27 0.11 0.07 Domestic 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.04 Poverty Mentality 0.04 0 0.02 0.02 Information about Services 0 0.01 0 0.02 Substance Abuse 0 0.01 0 0 Crime (not drug related) 0 0 0 0 N Value 111 128 141 337

Rank #1 Rank #2 Rank #3 Rank #4 Rank #5

315

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Importance of service or solution question:

316

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Most Important Services (% ranking service as 'very important') 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2

0.1 PercentageofRespondents

All Cooke Fannin Grayson

'Very Important' Services by Employment Status- Texoma 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

0 Percentageof Respondents

317 Employed Unemployed Retired

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

‘Very Important’ Services by Employment Status (Employed, Unemployed, Retired) - Texoma Service Type Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%)

Employment (need a job) 69.3 60.4 47.6

Living Wage Employment (need better 67.1 50.9 43.3 paying job)

More Education (for better employment) 55.3 51.1 35.2

Affordable Childcare 55.1 39 34.4

School Readiness 53.7 40.6 36

Health Insurance 52.6 60.6 57.9

Utility Assistance 51.0 69.0 63.4

Enrichment Programs for Youth 50.4 34 37.8

Emergency Healthcare 50.3 51.0 52.8

Preventative Healthcare 49.0 50.1 50.5

Summer Childcare 47.8 33.5 31.5

Use Public Transportation 43.7 30.8 36.4

Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 43.7 47.5 40.7

Emergency Food Assistance 43.5 39.9 45.2

Family Services (Crisis Center, Domestic 39.2 26.9 35.6 Violence Counseling)

Rent Assistance 37.8 51.5 40.6

Improvements to Heating and AC 36.7 48.2 48.0

Temporary Shelter 22.9 18.1 24.8

318

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

3. CONCLUSIONS

319

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Through the experience with applying various approaches to qualitative research, we have gained a new appreciation for the study of such a broad and complex subject. The interviews point out complicating factors that Texomans experience on a day-to-day basis. Identifying the top needs does not do the experience of poverty justice because often a household is experiencing multiple setbacks at once that compound the effects of one another. Finding just one solution for their condition requires more than one avenue of attack.

Given the opportunity to conduct additional research there are several opportunities that we would have liked to have pursued, including:

- While we limited the scope of this study to identify and quantify the critical needs and services for low income Texomans who seek self-sufficiency, we are left with more questions about the causes and barriers to attaining self-sufficiency. Discussions with key informants brought up unique observations and feedback on the possible causes of poverty in Texoma. These causes tended to center around substance abuse, family violence, and a multi-generational culture of poverty. These issues could have come up in the open-ended critical needs question, but did not very often because respondents were only asked to consider the most critical needs and services in their communities.

- Explore the possibility that there is a disconnect between local perceptions of poverty and the actual experience of poverty in our communities. There are several aspects of this study that seem to indicate this could be an issue in Texoma. By surveying clients, service providers, and community members extensively about the most critical services and assistance for low-income Texomans seeking self-sufficiency, there appeared to be noteworthy differences in responses. Community members and service providers indicated employment and education as not services, while clients tended to indicate direct services such as utility bill assistance and food assistance over employment and 320 education. Studies conducted in other parts of the country have indicated there is disconnect between general thinking about poverty and the individual experience. This

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

manifests in misperceptions on very basic trends in poverty such as the distribution of wealth as studies have shown Americans assume the distribution of wealth is more equal than it is in reality46.

- Investigate and identify differences societal causes of poverty, such as large-scale, socioeconomic factors, and individual causes of poverty, such as why a family can or cannot earn a family-supporting wage. The responses gathered in the primary survey questions do not lend themselves to interpreting the approach the respondent took in providing their answer. Again, if there is a disconnect between our perceptions of poverty that the experience of poverty, a specific look at this issue may lend interesting results.

With that said, the unmet needs and vital services identified in this study will be the basis of the Community Action Plan for services and expenditures through the year 2015. TCOG will continue to work with local jurisdictions and community organizations to create economic opportunities and improve quality of life for the Texoma Region. CSBG funds will support the Texoma Council of Governments and the offering of direct services (including education assistance and other supportive services) to low income Texomans to help alleviate causes of poverty in our region.

321

46 Norton, Michael I., and Ariely, Dan. Building a Better American: One Wealth Quintile at a Time. Accessed on October 12, 2010, http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf. Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

REFERENCE LIST

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Women’s Rights, “Domestic Violence and Homelessness” April 15, 2010. http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/dvhomelessness032106.pdf

Babbie, Earl. “Survey Research.” The Basics of Social Research. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth, 2005.

Carter, Keith and Lionel Beaulieu. “Conducting a Community Needs Assessment: Primary Data Collection Techniques,” Florida Cooperation Extension Service, June 1992. http://www.virtualcap.org/downloads/VC/US_Needs_Assessment_FL_Coop_Extension_Primar y_Data_Collection_Techniques.pdf

Grayson County Department of Juvenile Services. “Statistical Report 1/10/2007 to 12/31/2007”. April 10, 2010. http://www.co.grayson.tx.us/Juvenile/Juve_Administration.htm

HUD CHAS data and other housing information can be accessed on the HUD USER website, Data Set page: http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/pdrdatas.html

Lewis, Jane. Qualitative Research Practice. Ed. Jane Ritchie and Jane Lewis. London: Sage Publications, 2003.

Maintz, Julia. Blending Spaces: Actor-Network Interactions of An Internet-Based E-Learning Course. London: Transaction Publishers, 2008.

National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL), State and County Estimates, “State and County Estimates of Low Literacy”, March 15, 2010. http://nces.ed.gov/naal/estimates/index.aspx

The National Network to End Domestic Violence, Domestic Violence, NNEDV Policy Issues, April 15, 2010 http://www.nnedv.org/policy/issues/housing.html. Can also be found: Browne, A. 1998. "Responding to the Needs of Low-income and Homeless Women Who are Survivors of Family Violence." Journal of American Medical Women's Association. 53(2): 57-64.

The National Network to End Domestic Violence, NNEDV Policy Issues, “Violence Against Women Act”. April 15, 2010. http://www.nnedv.org/policy/issues/vawa.html

Norton, Michael I., and Dan Ariely. Building a Better American: One Wealth Quintile at a Time. Accessed on October 12, 2010, http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf 322

Project United. http://www.projectunited.org/

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Sherman Homelessness Coalition. “Homelessness Count” April 1, 2010.

Texas Department of Health and Human Services. Research and Statistics. April 15, 2010. http://www.hhsc.state.tx.us/research/index.html

Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA), “2009 State of Texas Low- income Housing Plan and Annual Report”, March 11, 2010. http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/housing-center/docs/09-SLIHP.pdf

Texas Department of Protective Services. Reports, Plans, Statistics, and Presentations. “2008 Data Book” http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/About/Data_Books_and_Annual_Reports/2008/databook/default. asp

Texas Education Agency, Academic Excellence Indicator System. School Report Card, March 30, 2010. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/2009/index.html

Texas Education Agency, Division of Accountability Research: Reports and Abstracts, “Secondary School Completion and Dropouts in Texas Public Schools, 2007-08 (July 2009)”. April 15, 2010. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/research/abs2.htm#Dropout

Texas Education Agency, Glossary for The Academic Excellence Indicator System 2008-2009, Glossary, March 3, 2010. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/2009/glossary.html

Texas Education Agency. “The Texas Kids Count Project”. Center for Public Policy Priorities, Austin, TX. Secondary School Completion and Drop-outs 2007-2008 Report. May 3, 2010. http://www.cppp.org/factbook09/select_indicator.php?fipse=48181

Texas Workforce Commission LCMI Department, Tracer: Labor Market and Career Information (LMCI), “Texas Economic Statistics” April 15, 2010. http://www.tracer2.com/

Texoma Council of Governments. http://www.texoma.cog.tx.us/

Texoma Homeless Network. http://texomahomelesscoalition.ning.com/

Texoma Workforce Board. “Workforce Texoma Strategic and Operational Plan Fiscal Years 2009-2010”.

United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics, “County Data” April 15, 2010. http://www.bls.gov/lau/#tables 323

United States Census Bureau, 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, “Cooke County: Selected Social Characteristics in the United States: 2006-2008, March 3, 2010.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts?_event=ChangeGeoContext&geo_id=05000 US48181&_geoContext=&_street=&_county=grayson&_cityTown=grayson&_state=&_zip=&_la ng=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010&_submenuId=factsheet_1&ds _name=ACS_2008_3YR_SAFF&_ci_nbr=null&qr_name=null®=null%3Anull&_keyword=&_ind ustry= . Fannin: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts?_event=ChangeGeoContext&geo _id=05000US48147&_geoContext=&_street=&_county=fannin&_cityTown=fannin& _state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010 &_submenuId=factsheet_1&ds_name=ACS_2008_3YR_SAFF&_ci_nbr=null&qr_nam e=null®=null%3Anull&_keyword=&_industry= . Grayson: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts?_event=ChangeGeoContext&geo _id=05000US48147&_geoContext=&_street=&_county=fannin&_cityTown=fannin& _state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010 &_submenuId=factsheet_1&ds_name=ACS_2008_3YR_SAFF&_ci_nbr=null&qr_nam e=null®=null%3Anull&_keyword=&_industry=

United States Census Bureau, State and Metropolitan Area Data Book, “USA Counties” March 1, 2010. http://censtats.census.gov/usa/usa.shtml

United States Department of Agriculture, School Meal Programs Overview, “National School Lunch Program” March 8, 2010. http://www.squaremeals.org/fn/render/channel/items/0,1249,2348_2363_0_0,00.html

United Way. http://www.unitedwaygrayson.org/

VISTO. http://www.vistohelps.com/

324

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

4. APPENDIX

325

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

APPENDIX A. OUTREACH DOCUMENTS

REPORT ON PROGRESS JUNE17, 2010 TEXOMA COG GOVERNING BODY Slide 1

2011- 2015 Community Needs Assessment

Report on Progress June 17, 2010

Slide 2

Why a Community Needs Assessment?

Objectives: 1) Identify possible gaps in services 2) Outline of community needs and satisfaction with current services and procedures. 3) Information and data as a resource for area agencies

-A CNA can be viewed in two ways -1) Process of citizen involvement to allow people not only to learn more about current political, cultural, and economic changes -2) Help local leaders- public, private, and non-profit- identify needs for new facilities or services -Assess public opinion about community goals and priorities -Provide information useful for current program evaluation -Increase citizen understanding of community problems and their effects on the community -Opportunity for TCOG to be responsive to citizen preferences, concerns, and needs.

-The Community Needs Assessment is a means of involving the public in problem solving and the process of developing local goals.

327

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 3

Research Overview

Primary research project that seeks to collect data that does not currently exist Key Informant Interviews Region- Statistical wide Research Survey

2011- 2015 Community Needs Assessment

Objectives- Who will be using this information and how, what information is already available (public resources) has driven research to focus on primary research  Key Informant and Community Survey

The Statistical Research and Key Informant Interviews are almost complete and the Survey will be distributed in late July.

328

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 4

Research Timeline

February- April

Statistical Research Key Informant Interviews

May-June

Analysis of Initial Findings Survey Design and Deployment Planning

July

July 12: Survey distribution to Service Providers and Clients. July 26: Elected Officials and Community

August

Collect Survey Responses

September

September 30: Submit 2011-2015 CNA Release Copies of Report to Partners and Texoma Agencies

Started with background research to build a context for information that already exists and may be of use to area agencies  Statistical Research

Key Informant Interviews with Service Providers provided information about the depth and history of issues in their communities

329

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 5

Statistical Research

Objective: 1) Contextual information & analysis for study 2) Data resource for area agencies

Review of public data: – Population – Income, earnings, employment figures – Education, school district drop out rates, literacy rates – Health Care, CHIP, Medicare, Medicaid enrollment figures.

330

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 6

Statistical Research Highlights

Insights into the Characteristics nature of poverty in of Poverty Texoma

Local changes in

demographics Changing Demographics Enrollment trends in

state and federal Changes in State and National Human Service human service Programs programs

Many of our local non-profit agencies are providing services in their communities that compliment state and federal programs.

As poverty guidelines are adjusted and local characteristics of poverty change, the occasion to adjust programs and local policies arise.

331

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 7

Key Informant Interviews

Objective: Gain valuable information from local organizations that have direct contact with low income individuals in Texoma.

Research Approach: Semi structured interviews with service providers.

332

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 8

Service Providers and Partners

• TCOG Area Agency on Aging, • TCOG Family Self Sufficiency Elder Rights/ Benefits • Abigail’s Arms Counselors • VISTO • Workforce Solutions Texoma • United Way Cooke County • North Texas Youth • United Way Grayson County Connection • Grayson County Social • Sherman Housing Authority Services Association • Texoma Area Paratransit • Texoma Homelessness System (TAPS) Coalition

333

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 9

Key Informant Interview Highlights

• Critical needs identified by interviewees: – Emergency and Transitional Housing – Transportation Themes: 1) Region-wide support for existing – Local Foster Homes services in Texoma’s smaller communities – Affordable Childcare 2) Critical services are sometimes 30 minutes to 1 hour away from client’s – Full-service Clinic home – Drug Rehabilitation Services

334

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 10

Survey Research

Human

Collect

August July 12 July

Services 24 July Elected Responses Clients Officials Analyze Service Community Results Providers

Survey Research will be broken up into 4 major target populations

Human Service Clients Service Providers Elected Officials

The goal is distribute targeted population surveys on these dates and analyze responses through the month of August.

Each target population will have similar surveys that attempt to capture their opinions and concerns about needs in their community and county.

Survey distribution will be appropriate for target population - Example: we are partnering with VISTO and Abigail’s Arms to administer the survey during their intake of clients for the week of July 12th and July 19th

335

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 11

County Population Targets

Service Public Clients Community Providers Officials (3,900) (2,000) Cooke: (200) Cooke: (250) Cooke: Cooke: 700 50 60 500

Fannin: Fannin: Fannin: Fannin: 700 50 70 500

Grayson: Grayson: Grayson: Grayson: 2500 100 120 1,000

Objective: Identify variables that may be preventing low income residents from achieving self- sufficiency

These are the estimated number of surveys based on target population size except for the community survey. Those are the minimum number of responses we desire.

336

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Slide 12

Components of a Successful Community Survey

Appropriate Coordination Public Survey Design with Community Outreach and Distribution Partners

Key to success will be appropriate design and coordinated distribution using community partnerships

Public outreach– getting the word out about the survey in order to get a desirable response rate

This will include working with partner agencies and public announcements at commissioners courts

337

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TCOG meets for first time after configuration BY KATHY WILLIAMS HERALD DEMOCRAT (Saturday, June 19, 2010)

Texoma Council of Governments' Governing Board elected Sherman City Councilor Cary Wacker as president of the redesigned organization during a meeting on Thursday. Texoma Council of Governments board amended its bylaws in April to bring it into compliance with state law, Texoma Council of Governments Executive Director Susan Thomas has stated.

The Governing Board also heard a detailed presentation from Community Development Planner Katie Cummins on the process of conducting a detailed community needs assessment. The board also elected Cooke County Commissioner Al Smith to serve as vice president and Grayson County Commissioner Johnny Waldrip as secretary-treasurer.

Thomas took some time Thursday to welcome the new members of the board and to explain the structure of electronic agenda packets and other information available on Texoma Council of Governments' website at www.texoma.cog.tx.us. The website also has been re-designed and will continue to undergo improvements in the near future. The information is available to the public as well as the board and contains schedules of advisory board meetings, details of how federal stimulus package money is spent locally.

Thomas also introduced the board to department and program directors present at the meeting. She said that at least one of these directors will report at each meeting to keep the board apprised of the agency's activities. The board heard Thursday from three staff leaders. First up was Cummins, who explained how different groups will be contacted to provide information for the Community Needs Assessment, the methodology of the assessment, and how that information will be used. 338

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cummins said that the assessment is designed to meet three needs: To identify possible gaps in services; to provide information and data as a resource for area agencies and to outline community needs and satisfaction with current services and procedures. TCOG staff researched the survey February through April and planned its design in May and June. The appropriate forms of the survey will go out to service providers and clients and elected officials and community members in July 2010. Texoma Council of Governments will collect and analyze the survey in August 2010 and release copies of the report in September 2010.

Certain federal agencies that fund Texoma Council of Governments member cities, school districts and counties, as well as other local non-profits, require such a needs assessment be performed every five years. Cummins said Texoma Council of Governments' conducting such a comprehensive and reliable needs assessment will save time and work for agencies such as United Ways of Grayson and Cooke counties.

"This is a potential resource for folks in our area who might have to spend a lot of time on the U.S. Census website to support their grant applications. The CNA will provide preliminary insights into the nature of poverty here, demographic changes and enrollment in programs and barriers to getting services to people who need them."

Thomas said that the federal agency asking for the study, Community Services Development Block Grant, "will assist communities in identifying, addressing and alleviating the causes of poverty. In addition to being a program requirement, it also will be a useful tool to help us identify needs and gaps ... and provide an in-depth qualitative analysis of the programs."

The Community and Economic Development Director, Ryan Gleason, spoke of a similarly named, but different federal program, Community Development Block Grant. The funds help cities and towns with projects that benefit low and moderate income families and 339 neighborhoods.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

This year, some of the federal stimulus money earmarked for small towns in this region, did not get requested. Gleason explained that the scoring system for the grants led to some confusion about whether they were worth the effort of applying. So he and others pleaded the case before state authorities to put more than $100,000 in unused money back into Texoma designation to give local cities another shot at the funding. This in addition to new allotments could get some $125,000 to $150,000 projects approved.

Gleason said that communities in the three-county region that have projects they would like to have funded through CDBG money should act quickly. Information for reaching Gleason is available on the website listed below.

Housing and Client Services Director Allison Cardile also talked about money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act stimulus package, in this case helping regional, small housing authorities weatherize their properties. The stimulus money has gone to local private contractors, who turn the money over hiring workers and buying supplies and material for the work.

She said, through another program nearly $2 million is going to help regional, small housing authorities perform "mini extreme makeovers" on public housing units.

The board also approved applying for a grant to hold a household hazardous waste collection event and to ask the three counties to contribute to the matching funds. Counties will get a request for up to $20,000. However, counties only match for the number of their residents that participate and no county has paid the maximum during past events. All three counties will pay an equal amount per participant.

340

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

341

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

342

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

APPENDIX B. KEY INFORMANT PROFILES

COOKE COUNTY

Abigail’s Arms is the only non-profit organization providing crime assistance in Cooke County. They serve any crime victim, not matter what their age, race, or sex. The services they provide include: 1) The Batterers Intervention Program, in which they work with perpetrators themselves. The shelter project manager said that the vast majority of perpetrator participants have a history of substance abuse. Before perpetrators can enroll in the Batterers Intervention Program, they cannot be using drugs and must go through treatment programs such as Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous. If these perpetrators are on probation, then they receive random drug testing. These are the only options for perpetrators with substance abuse problems in the county. 2) They recently formed a sexual assault response team. They currently take victims to Denton for crime assistance services, including forensic interviews. 3) Counseling for crime victims in the form of a part-time therapist, a victim’s rights therapist, and a liaison for judicial services. 4) They can assist crime victims by sending them a letter verifying that the client is in a domestic violence situation and need housing, then those clients can get crime victims compensation.

Abigail’s Arms works with the Crisis Center in Sherman, using it as an emergency shelter if they have a need for it. The Sherman Crisis Center shelter is their first choice because they receive the Regional Assistance Victims grant they apply jointly for with Fannin and Grayson Counties. They also use space from shelters in Denton, Ardmore, and Fort Worth.

343

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County United Way is the Cooke County branch of United Way, located in Gainesville. They support area agencies and run outreach events. They help fund 19 agencies. They have Impact Areas, such as Help Children and Youth Succeed. This is how they select agencies to fund. They adhere to the traditional method of funding, where United Way funds agencies rather than programs within agencies.

Eligibility criteria for agencies seeking funding from United Way include that the agency must provide health and human services. It must be a registered non-profit. Physical location of the agency does not matter as long as it provides a service in Cooke County. They must have a Board of directors. It must not fund anything political, for animals, religion, or municipal services such as volunteer fire departments.

The agency comes to United Way with an application, including the amount of money it is requesting. United Way will use their general account to support that agency’s salaries, programs, services, and supplies. For example, if VISTO was one of Cooke County United Way’s supported agencies, it would get a certain amount of dollars. That agency can use the money they receive how they want to. Cooke County United Way does not require agencies to specify how they will use that money.

United Way does fund agencies outside of Cooke County, such as Red Cross, Meals on Wheels, and the Substance Abuse Council. They may be located in Sherman and Denison, but they still serve citizens in Cooke County. For example, these agencies come to schools in Cooke County, and they also work with the county commissioner. They also support the Girl Scouts, which come from Fort Worth, as well as other agencies from Denton. The physical location of service providers is not a barrier to United Way funding. Another example is Home Hospice. Home Hospice is a tri-county hospice management that is run out of Sherman. Their grants cover Cooke, Fannin, and Grayson Counties. They run a hospice offer in Cooke County. 344

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

In addition to the service providers mentioned above, Cooke County United Way also supports ABBA, Habitat for Humanity, and Stanford House. Those agencies, along with the 19 United Way agencies, are the biggest in Cooke County.

Cooke County United Way works with TCOG’s Texoma 211 program to put together a resource book for Cooke County. This resource book includes services from the tri-county area as well as outside services from Denton and Dallas/Fort-Worth.

Volunteers in Service to Others (VISTO) operates and maintains Cooke County’s largest emergency food bank. It is a community action agency that provides emergency aid for clients’ rent, utilities, transportation, prescription medicine, and dental care.47 According to the executive director, VISTO was created to be the agency of last resort, but now they have turned into the agency of first response. They do not have a national branch. They collect data about their clients themselves, which they describe as a long process. There are 3 part-time workers at VISTO, working from 8AM to 12PM. They also spend their days raising awareness and fundraising. VISTO relies on monetary donations rather than federal money. In 2009 alone, VISTO assisted 10231 clients. A unique program called Pathways is jointly run by VISTO and Abigail’s Arms. It is a comprehensive program designed to bring victims out of crime and the cycle of poverty they are in. Clients attend workshops and meet with a life coach twice a month. Both clients from Abigail’s Arms and VISTO attend Pathways. Abigail’s described VISTO as being designed to avoid church-hopping and agency-hopping, which means clients going to different places to take advantage of different benefits. VISTO was created as a hub so churches did not have to provide services to clients, and point to VISTO saying, “That is VISTO’s job.” The executive director said that VISTO has a staff, but their resources are limited. They are the main resource for clients because they pay for rent, gas, bus tickets, food, and emergency shelter. VISTO goes through TCOG for utility assistance. VISTO also refers numerous clients back to Abigail’s Arms. 345

47 VISTO website, http://www.vistohelps.com/ Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Nearly 50% of their clients also are served by VISTO. VISTO is on Abigail’s Arms confidentiality release list automatically, because they know that they might have to refer clients to VISTO.

FANNIN COUNTY

Project United is a 501(c)(3) non-profit Community Development Corporation that aims to provide public services to low-income individuals and families. Its approach is to provide these services in such a way that encourages self-sufficiency and self-respect for clients, with the ultimate goal of economic growth and stability in the greater community.48 Project United is an outreach ministry of a church, but does not proselytize to the youth served. Project United operates in Honey Grove because the president, himself, grew up there as a child and had a special connection to the Honey Grove community in his desire to improve it. They serve youth and their families in Honey Grove Ladonia and rural parts of eastern Fannin County. There were two people interviewed: the president of Project United and a volunteer of Project United.

Services that affect client attitudes and thinking are vital to Project United’s service provision. Project United promotes group activities for children. These activities foster positive thinking and communication skills. During a presentation to all children attending the community center’s daily activities, the president urged the students to think about their ability to control their own actions. The president used games and slogans in order to draw the children into their activity. There are other services that the Project United provides that focus on positive thinking and communication skills. These services include various mentoring program for adults and children.

A major aspect of the Project United branch in Honey Grove is the creation of the community center. The respondent bought and renovated the old Honey Grove High School. Now, Project

United uses the community center as the base for its youth activities. The respondent said that 346 the community center provides services for youth and a centralized location where children

48 http://www.projectunited.org/aboutus.html Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

develop positive thinking and communication skills. And, as a result, the community center holds great importance for the community.

Volunteers play a major role in Project United. In Honey Grove, there are currently 20 volunteers and the organization is in the process of training 50 volunteers. The hope is to gain as many volunteers as students in order to have a one-on-one mentoring system, but the president admitted that this is a difficult task. Because the president is based out of Dallas, he knows many people in Dallas who want to volunteer at the community center in Honey Grove. However, he does not allow this to happen because he wants the community in Honey Grove to help itself.

Training volunteers involves educating them about topics such as mentoring and youth counseling. The president said that all volunteers should exert a positive influence on children. He instructs the volunteers on how to become positive role models and then charges those volunteers with mentoring children.

Additional volunteer also include teachers from Honey Grove schools, as the teachers come to spend extra time with their students during the after-school program.

GRAYSON COUNTY

Sherman Housing Authority is a public housing authority in Sherman, Grayson County. According to the website, its mission is to “ensure safe, decent, and affordable housing; create opportunities for residents' self-sufficiency and economic independence; and assure fiscal integrity by all program participants.” Eligibility for housing is based on client income categories. If clients do not have a regular source of income, then they must report their monthly income to the Sherman Housing Authority every month. Monthly income can include social security income, disability payments, and family contributions. Clients are rejected from 347 receiving public housing, not because they are unemployed or unable to pay their bills, but because they have destroyed property or broken previous lease agreements. In the past, the Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

executive director took a more relaxed approach to client applications, but realized that by loosening the guidelines the Sherman Housing Authority was no longer providing safe housing to clients. Furthermore, many clients exploited of the fact that receiving public housing is a privilege and not an entitlement. In recent years, the executive director admitted that she has tightened the guidelines for public housing application acceptance to address this issue.

United Way of Grayson County is a branch of United Way that is based in Sherman, Grayson County. According to its website, http://unitedwaygrayson.org , “United Way of Grayson County helps people overcome many of life's challenges while focusing on barriers to succeed. While the definition of success can vary from one to the other, for many, it simply means finding a job, affordable child care for low-income parents, literacy programs for under- educated adults, support and quality care for the disabled and senior citizens of our communities, and the list goes on. United Way goes beyond addressing the immediate crisis or problems facing Grayson County by taking action to improve systems of care. They diligently work with many partners' human service agencies, governments, supports, businesses, and labor to find the root causes of problems and situations that harm our community.”

While United Way of Grayson County does not provide services directly to clients, it can be considered a service provider as it provides services to other service providers in Grayson County, mostly through funding and organizational support. It also connects organizations and clients to resources such as information, referrals and funding.

TRI-COUNTY TAPS Public Transit is a registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization providing rural public transportation primarily to Grayson, Fannin and Cooke Counties. TAPS was created by an effort led by the Texoma Council of Governments (TCOG) Area Agency on Aging in order to consolidate funds and resources to achieve better service. Since 1986, TAPS has expanded to a 348 system of more than 60 buses and vans providing over 360,000 trips per year in six counties. TAPS can provide the following services to their riders in addition to normally fared rides: Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

1) Subsidized rides for employment or medical purposes, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for the region, and assistance for other organizations that TAPS is directly contracted out to, such as the Wise Regional Hospital.

2) Employees took the initiative to create Peterbuilt and Trailblazer Plant bus routes. Employees have to buy a monthly pass for $80 a month, but, with that pass, they can ride to work every day from residence to workplace. TAPS also runs a Texas Express service that goes to Plano daily.

3) TAPS tells all schedulers to track the reasons why riders are on the bus. Schedulers are usually pretty good at tracking ride reasons. In all counties, the average rate for employment- subsidized rides was 30% and growing. With regard to the average rate of ridership in all counties, employment was the reason for 30% of all rides and that number is increasing. Out of all subsidized rides, employment ridership has had the largest percentage increase in growth. Overall, the largest portion of subsidized rides is due to medical reasons. Clients include an array of people since Medicaid serves all kinds of clients. However, the majority of medical trip clients were elderly and disabled.

4) If clients call to schedule a ride with TAPS, but have no money, TAPS will often referred the client to CDBG programs because in some cases a client’s fare can be covered by this program. TAPS works with SNAP centers and area housing authorities in urban and rural areas.

The Texoma Council of Governments (TCOG) is a voluntary organization of local governmental organizations in Cooke, Grayson, and Fannin Counties. It was created under the authority of Chapter 391 of the Texas Local Government Code. The goals of TCOG are to develop better cooperation and reduce service duplication amongst area organizations. TCOG is organized into 349 four departments: Administration & Finance, Area Agency on Aging of Texoma, Government Services, and Client Services.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TCOG Elder Rights is part of the Area Agency on Aging. The program provides Elder Rights Benefits Counselors located in each of the three counties. They assist elderly persons 60 years of age or older with understanding public benefits, including awareness of benefits, determination of eligibility, filling out applications, and advocacy. They also serve disabled persons receiving Medicare and provide counseling to those less than 60 years of age. The TCOG Elder Rights benefits counselors serve Grayson, Fannin and Cooke Counties. The respondent interviewed at TCOG Elder Rights was the Grayson County benefits counselor.

TCOG Elder Rights does not provide funding to elderly clients in need of assistance. Rather, it provides counseling, information and advice to clients. On its website, the program lists several aspects of public assistance which it advises clients on: advocacy with landlords, advocacy at administrative hearings for denied benefits consultation, advocacy with creditors, food stamps, advanced directives, legal referrals to pro-bono/reduced-fee legal program, long-term care insurance, Medicaid, Medicare, Medigap insurance, public housing, Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, utility assistance, and veterans’ benefits.

TCOG Elder Rights helps elderly clients with Medicaid/Medicare problems, applications and prescription drug plans. The organization refers people in need of legal guidance and helps with medical bills and budgeting. The TCOG Elder Rights counselors send charity write-off letters, telling companies and hospitals that the client in question cannot afford their daily expenses and thus cannot pay their bills.

Section 8 Rent Assistance Program at TCOG provides rental assistance payments to private landlords in Grayson and Fannin Counties. Subsidies are available for one bedroom to four bedroom homes. Eligible participants are able to rent safe housing and pay no more than 40% of their income. Additionally, the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Homeownership Program 350 helps families achieve the American Dream of homeownership.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Family Self-Sufficiency is part of the TCOG Client Services department. The goal of the Family Self-Sufficiency program is to enable clients to achieve financial self-sufficiency. Clients are eligible if they are residents in the TCOG Section 8 housing program. Their services include training on homemaking, parenting skills and money management; home ownership counseling; and referrals for transportation, job training, child care, education, and substance abuse treatment.

The TCOG Section 8 Rent Assistance Program provides rent assistance payments to private landlords and subsidies are available for one to four bedroom homes. Eligible participants are able to pay no more than 40% of their income for safe rent housing. Additionally, the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Homeownership Program helps families achieve the American Dream of homeownership.

The TCOG Section 8 program has contracts with private landlords and holds the landlords accountable for tenant suitability. Clients have flexibility as to where they decide to rent housing and only the agency, HUD and the landlord know that the client receives Section 8 assistance. This helps to erase stigma associated with government assistance and allows clients the flexibility of being able to move anywhere they want, as long as the landlord agrees.

Section 8 does impose financial limits on clients. Before, clients were given a voucher from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and were told they could rent anywhere they wanted. However, as a result, people overextended themselves financially and because they did not know how to budget, they were unable to afford their housing. Clients did not consider how they would pay for the difference in rent, plus utilities. Consequently, there were constant terminations because clients could not pay their part of rent and utilities. Now, HUD has renamed this program to the Housing Choice Voucher program. In addition, HUD implemented a “40%” policy, meaning that Section 8 program managers have the right to deny 351 any residence to clients if those clients are paying more than 40% of their adjusted monthly

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

income for rent. This policy is beneficial in the long-run because there are fewer client contract terminations. Not to mention, clients budget their finances more responsibly.

TCOG Section 8 administers assistance in Grayson and Fannin Counties. The program recently added 28 new units, with a total of 617 housing units. Gainesville Housing Authority administers Section 8 in Cooke County.

TCOG Section 8 oversees two subprograms called Family Unification and Mainstream. Both are voluntary programs that are in high demand. Family Unification works with CPS and it is a special program that allows Section 8 to place clients in housing immediately with the goal of keeping families intact. One of most integral parts of the program is permanent housing. CPS will not reunite a family if there permanent housing is unavailable. Beginning around 15 years ago, vouchers could be used towards family unification. This program is important because if families are not reunited, then other people would have to take the children in. The creation of Family Unification helped to stabilize the entire Section 8 program.

The Mainstream program works with MHMR to help the disabled. At least 40% of the programs participants are disabled and elderly, so there is a huge demand for Mainstream.

TCOG Energy Assistance Program provides low-income families with utility payment assistance and other services in order to transition families out of poverty and off of public assistance. Services include the co-payment of utilities for a specific period of time and energy reduction education, as well as a case management program that provides assistance with the cost of expenses such as education, transportation, and child care.

TCOG Energy Assistance is a program within the Client Services department at TCOG. The Energy Assistance Program provides low-income families with utility payment assistance and 352 other services in order to transition families out of poverty and off public assistance. Services include the co-payment of utilities for a specific period of time and energy reduction education,

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

as well as a case management program that provides assistance with expenses such as education, transportation, and child care.

In 2009, TCOG Energy Assistance served 1,400 families in Cooke, Grayson and Fannin Counties. Over 60% of the assistance was distributed to families within Grayson County.

In terms of services, TCOG Energy Assistance will pay one monthly utility bill each calendar year and sometimes two monthly bills. Currently, the maximum TCOG Energy Assistance will pay is up to four bills per calendar year.

Energy companies such as TXU, Atmos and Reliant donate private funds to TCOG Energy Assistance. They can help pay one bill per calendar year or up to $300. This is outside of the usual four bills per year paid by Energy Assistance. Energy Assistance does not know how much companies will contribute year to year. The program has a contract with these companies and must report which clients the program pays bills for and the amount of the bills paid.

Clients that come to TCOG Energy Assistance participate in a case management process that works to identify families who qualify for the program in terms of income and household makeup. The program’s primary goal is to teach clients how to save money on energy. Part of the case management model that TCOG Energy Assistance has adopted includes educating its clients on basic household budgeting. Clients fill out a form detailing their household budget and, then, case managers show clients what percentage that their utility bills is taking away from income. Some families find out that they are spending more than 30% of their monthly income on utilities. The case management model allows case managers to work differently with each unique household, as well as elderly households. Working families need to make sure that they keep coming back to case management and participate in the co-pay program. Elderly households need to apply for food stamps and other eligible programs. Some elderly people do 353 not take advantage of these assistance services because they are embarrassed that they receive assistance or because they think that the benefits may not be worth the hassle.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TCOG Energy Assistance only gives energy usage advice if that particular family has high energy usage. People with a fixed income can ask TCOG Energy Assistance to examine their 12-month consumption rate. Overall, TCOG Energy Assistance gives practical advice in the form of handouts from energy company websites.

TCOG Energy Assistance can replace client-owned appliances in a home, but it cannot replace appliances in rented homes. Depending on the age of the home and the types of heating and cooling units, TCOG Weatherization can replace assessed units if they do not meet efficiency standards. Weatherization will pay up to $5,000 per household.

The other major service provided by TCOG Energy Assistance is the Tuition Payment Program, which is funded by the Community Service Block Grant (CSBG). Clients who need job certification or further education can receive assistance if their household income level makes them eligible. Clients must get accepted to the appropriate school and bring their budget to TCOG Energy Assistance. This Tuition Payment Program pays tuition directly to the school; it is not a reimbursement. Occasionally, the client's cost of books is reimbursed.

TCOG Family Self Sufficiency Program (FSS) is part of the HUD Section 8 Rent Assistance Program, which is part of the Client Services department at TCOG. The goal of the FSS program is to enable clients to achieve financial self-sufficiency. Clients are eligible for this program if they are clients of the TCOG Section 8 housing program. FSS services include training on homemaking, parenting skills and money management; home ownership counseling; and referrals for transportation, job training, child care, education, and substance abuse treatment.

The FSS coordinator meets with clients to establish self-sufficiency goals for families. Together, they discuss educational opportunities and job training. Factors that typically work against self- 354 sufficiency are lack of transportation, job training, and motivation. They establish an A to B plan

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

in order to achieve self-sufficiency. If, after a certain period of time, the families do not appear to be making improvements, they are removed from the FSS program.

As mentioned previously, TCOG FSS donates school supplies to children. School supplies are funded through the FSS Program to encourage children and adults. The first day of school is often disheartening for children because they cannot afford school supplies. The donated supplies motivate children to work harder in school and encourage parents since their children are receiving help. However, this is a major expense since school supplies typically cost between $35-85 per child. Supplies are donated by partner organizations within the community. One year, insurance companies competed to see who could raise the most school supplies. The community helps provide school supplies. Other donation programs include an annual winter coat drive and a house item and furniture program geared to help families that are in the home buyer program. The Hallmark program teaches children and parents how to give gifts inexpensively and provides cards and gift donations.

Finally, the cash assistance program is sponsored by HUD. In this program, the additional earned income of the family is increased by 30% every time the family's income increases. The family is then given access to this escrow account after graduation. One exception to this is if the family is in the home buyer program, which allows the family to use 50% of this money before graduation in order to prepare for buying a home.

The Texas Homeless Network is a non-profit 501(c)3 membership-based organization that is partially funded through the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs and the Texas Department of State Health Services. The Texas Homeless Network provides training and technical assistance to help service providers and communities better serve the homeless populations of Texas, with an end goal of preventing homelessness. The Texoma Homeless Coalition is the Texoma representative of Texas Homeless Network. A coalition is formed by an 355 alliance of service providers working to address homelessness in their community.

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

The Texoma Homeless Coalition is not a service provider because it does not provide direct services to clients. However, it is a key informant because the Coalition representative is very familiar with the issue of homelessness within the region. The respondent interviewed was the Texoma representative for the Texas Homeless Network, with the role of Americorps VISTA. The Texas Homeless Coalition focuses on rural homelessness, placing VISTAs in other rural cities such as Laredo, Odessa and Huntsville. The goal of Americorps VISTA is to raise awareness about rural homelessness and strengthen agency funding for the Balance of State Continuum of Care grant. Texas Homeless Network VISTAs build coalitions throughout rural areas of Texas to facilitate collaboration with service providers and, overall, meet the needs of the rural homeless.

The Texoma Homeless Coalition VISTA respondent was “housed” with the North Texas Youth Connection. His term started August 2009 and lasted until August 2010. The VISTA program for the Homeless Coalition lasts 3 years and its purpose is capacity-building. At the end of the 3 years, the VISTAs will leave, so that the staff already based in Texoma will be able to run the Coalition on their own. The goal of the VISTA program is to connect Texas coalitions with grant funding. The Texoma Homeless Coalition’s meetings are an example of inter-agency collaboration, bringing agencies to work together and prioritize the needs of the community as a whole rather than the needs of a particular agency. The Texoma Homeless Coalition covers Cooke, Fannin, Grayson, Lamar, Red River, and Delta Counties.

One of the services the Texoma Homeless Coalition provides is a count of homelessness in the area. A “point in time” count was done by the Texas Homeless Network on January 28, 2010 in order to get an estimate of the number and needs of homeless individuals in rural areas. The organization did a sheltered and unsheltered count. The sheltered count of homeless individuals was higher because there are typically few “street homeless” in rural areas. The point in time count netted 92 surveys, including reports from bigger shelters. Only 3 356 unsheltered homeless individuals were counted on January 28 due to inclement weather. Out of the 6 counties, only 3 counties participated. There were 90 sheltered homeless individuals

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

counted. Of these homeless respondents, 20% came from outside of the service area. Therefore, 80% of homeless respondents serviced were from the area. Children were not required to be counted, but, at the time of the count, there were 6 homeless children sheltered at the North Texas Youth Connection.

The other services provided include the Texoma Homeless Coalition meetings. The Coalition invites area service providers to discuss needs and gaps in services for the homeless. The Coalition also connects individuals and agencies to other agencies that are interested in addressing homelessness. Heaven's Helper is an organization that is a Coalition success story. Heaven’s Helper provides substance abuse rehabilitation and transitional housing for women. The Heaven’s Helper director came to the Coalition's meeting in December of 2009 and asked for help to start a shelter. The director already had a house available and wanted to know what she could do to help. She was put in contact with the executive directors of existing shelters. In February of 2010, The Texoma Homeless Coalition had 18 organizations represented at its meeting.

Workforce Solutions Texoma provides employment-related services to businesses, job seekers, and youth in Cooke, Fannin and Grayson Counties. Through the Business Services Unit, businesses receive services to find, train, and keep workers. Job seekers receive assistance to find employment or employment-related training at the local Workforce Centers located in each of the three counties. Youth can take advantage of a variety of services that encourage them to stay in high school, complete their GED, attend employment-related training, and find employment at their local Workforce Center.

The Child Care Assistance Program at Workforce Solutions Texoma provides child care for eligible clients. For 90% of low-income families that participate, the main barrier to vocational training or employment is child care cost. Many parents do not work, because they felt as 357 though they work just to pay the cost of child care. In which case, parents would rather stay home. Parents may spend up to 30-40% of their budget on child care. The Child Care Assistance

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Program works with parents going to school or with a job to provide child care for them. Ultimately, education and jobs are key aspects necessary for gaining self-sufficiency. Parents do pay part of child care costs, because it is a cost share program. However, for most clients, the Child Care Assistance program does not cover the majority of child care costs for families.

358

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

APPENDIX C. KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW CODES

The following is a list of the codes used to analyze the key informant interviews:

211, 911, Abigail's Arms, additional funding, Adult Protective Services, advanced directives, affordable housing, after-school program, age range, agency expansion, agency first community second, AIDS Resource Center, Alzheimer's Care, AmeriCorps, anti-funding, apathy, assisted living agencies, Atmos, attitude, awareness, blacks, Bonham, Boys and Girls Club, budgeting, bus route, case management, caseload, cash assistance program, cause of poverty, cause of unemployment, CDBG, changes in funding, changes in policy, changes in services, Channel 12, Child Care Assistance Program, Child Protective Services, childcare, childcare providers, Children's Advocacy Center, CHIP, Christian, city government, Clay County, client, client debt, client history, client intake, client participation, client responsibility, client survey, client terminations, communication, community center, community contribution, Community Needs Assessment, condition of poverty, Continuum of Care, Cooke County, co-pay program, cost-share program, counseling, county profile, Court Appointed Special Advocates, crime, criminal history, CSBG, customer service survey, Dallas, Delta County, Denison, dental care, Denton, desperation, differences between Grayson and Fannin Counties, differences between poor and rich, differences between rural and urban, differences in Cooke County, disabled, disadvantages of Head Start, discrimination, dispersed services, domestic violence, drivers, drugs, Early Childhood Intervention, earned income verification system, economic downturn, education, Elder Rights counselor, elderly, elected official, eligibility, emergency assistance, employment, encouragement, energy company, energy usage, event, event time, eviction, fair housing, family, Family Self-Sufficiency Program, family unification program, Fannin County, Fannin County Family Crisis Center, Fannin County residents, federal funding, financial costs, financial guidance, fixed income, flexibility of residence, foreclosure, Four Rivers, frequent service user, Gainesville, Gainesville Housing Authority, generational change, generational difference, generational poverty, Girls INC, Grandparents as Parents, Grayson County, Grayson County Crisis Center, Grayson County Pregnancy Care Center, Grayson County Shelter, Head Start, health, health insurance, Heaven's Helper, home buyer program, Home Hospice, home ownership class, homeless shelter, homelessness, homelessness prevention grant, Honey Grove, household 359 income, household profiles, housing, Housing Authority, hunger, income, increase in capacity, increased awareness, independent mindset, information, job security, job training, lack of businesses, lack of

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

documentation, lack of funding, lack of health, lack of jobs, lack of social services, lack of tracking clients, lack of transitional housing, lack of transportation, lack of urgency, Lamar County, landlords, layoffs, legal aid, Leonard, life skills, living within their means, low demand area, low income individual, mainstream program, McKinney, Medicaid, Medicaid policies, medical bills, medical powers of attorney, Medicare, mental health, MHMR, mom and pop shelter, Montague County, motivation, needs, Neighborhood Stabilization Program, new clients, news, newspaper, North Central Texas COG, North Texas Youth Connection, Northwest Texas Legal Aid, nurse aid, nutrition, obstacles to goal, old- fashioned, outreach, partner organization, permanent housing, person, person-race, person-gender, Peterbuilt Plant, pharmacy technician, place, planned services, Plano, population trends, positive attitude, poverty, poverty level, Pre-K, prescription drugs, private sector, program goals, program graduation, public assistance, public housing, public service announcement, racial, radio, recreation, Red River County, referrals, rehabilitation, relatives, Reliant, removal of clients from program, rent reasonableness, rent stock, retired, rural, rural attitude, rural homelessness, Salvation Army, school supplies, schools, second chances to clients, Section 8, Section 8 waitlist, self-defeating attitude, self- sufficiency, service provider, service provision, Sherman, Sherman Housing Authority, single moms, single parents, SNAP, Social Security, Spanish speakers, standard of living, stigma of government assistance, stimulus, subsidized rides, success story, Surrender House, suspicion, TANF, TAPS, target population, TCOG, TCOG Elder Rights, TCOG Section 8, TCOG Utilities Assistance, TCOG Weatherization, Texas Express, Texas Homeless Network, Texas Hotline, Texoma Homeless Coalition, Trailblazer Plant, transitional housing, transportation, Tuition Payment Program, TXU, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, underemployment, unemployment, United Way, US Department of Agriculture, US Department of Housing and Urban Development, utility bills, VA Clinic, Veteran Services, veterans, Veterans Affairs, violence, VISTO, Wichita County, Wise County, work ethic, Workforce Solutions Texoma, working parents, youth

360

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

APPENDIX D. SURVEY CODE GUIDE

Numeric Collapsed Codes Value Employment 1 Financial Security 2 Housing 3 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 4 Transportation 5 Education 6 Food/Clothing 7 Information on Services 8 Childcare/ Youth Services 9 Utilities 10 Misc. Elderly/ Disabled 11 Crime- Not Drug Related 12 Poverty Mentality 13 Domestic 14 Substance Abuse 15 Other 99 Omitted – unclear response 999 Table 5 List of Collapsed Codes Used in Response Analysis.

List of Mid Level Codes and Their Collapsed Codes Code from Valid Collapsed Code Mid Level Code Frequency Percent Labels 1.00 Employment- Disability 7 0.1 1 7.00 Employment- Better 10 0.2 1 12.00 Employment- Full Time 9 0.2 1 15.00 Employment- Good 3 0.1 1 16.00 Employment 359 7.4 1 17.00 Employment- Spouse 10 0.2 1 18.00 Employment- Benefits and Decent Pay 10 0.2 1 27.00 Access to good jobs 1 0 1 35.00 Employment- More money 100 2.1 1 361 56.00 Employment- Work Experience 2 0 1 57.00 Employment- Maintaining 5 0.1 1 58.00 Employment- Finding 14 0.3 1 59.00 Employment- Amount of work 16 0.3 1 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

64.00 Employment- Assistance Finding 6 0.1 1 71.00 Employment- Availability 12 0.2 1 89.00 Employment- Being unemployed 2 0 1 90.00 Better benefits 1 0 1 105.00 Business in the area 3 0.1 1 116.00 Employment- Cant work 14 0.3 1 120.00 Employment- Career 2 0 1 148.00 Denied Unemployment 1 0 1 165.00 Employment- No jobs 24 0.5 1 176.00 Economy 15 0.3 1 189.00 Employment- Advisement 11 0.2 1 190.00 Employment- Opportunities 8 0.2 1 195.00 Employment- Entry Level Jobs 1 0 1 208.00 Employment- Second 2 0 1 278.00 Living Wage 3 0.1 1 288.00 Employment- Meaningful 2 0 1 293.00 T.W.C. 1 0 1 2.00 Finances 24 0.5 2 3.00 Financial- Increased Income 2 0 2 9.00 Financial- Retirement 1 0 2 20.00 Social Security- Raise 13 0.3 2 47.00 Financial- Affordable Stores 1 0 2 66.00 Assistance- TANF 2 0 2 74.00 Financial- Credit 8 0.2 2 76.00 Barely making it even with help 1 0 2 77.00 Basic Needs 2 0 2 79.00 Being 57 years old and trying to get widows benefits 1 0 2 84.00 Financial- Necessities 22 0.5 2 104.00 Financial- Budgeting skills 4 0.1 2 114.00 Financial- Cant move water heater 1 0 2 115.00 Financial- No computer 1 0 2 147.00 Financial- Debt 4 0.1 2 157.00 Financial- Do not need to squander money 1 0 2 168.00 Financial- Dont know how to save 3 0.1 2 186.00 Emergency Assistance/Aid 2 0 2 196.00 Everything needs pricing 1 0 2 197.00 Financial- Expenses 5 0.1 2 198.00 Financial- Extra money 4 0.1 2 206.00 Financial- Counseling 4 0.1 2 362 207.00 Financial- Situation 3 0.1 2 210.00 Financial- Fixed Income 4 0.1 2 223.00 Financial- Money 234 4.8 2 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

233.00 Finances- Enough 1 0 2 258.00 Inflation 1 0 2 284.00 Financial- Lower Prices 1 0 2 4.00 Housing 169 3.5 3 19.00 Housing- Nice 2 0 3 30.00 Housing- Adequate 22 0.5 3 31.00 Housing- Adequate and Affordable 53 1.1 3 34.00 Heating and Cooling- Adequate 15 0.3 3 60.00 Housing- Repairs 64 1.3 3 91.00 Housing- Less rules 1 0 3 97.00 Housing- Better 7 0.1 3 108.00 Financial- Buying House 2 0 3 158.00 Housing- Do not own my home 10 0.2 3 245.00 Homeless 44 0.9 3 248.00 House Payments 13 0.3 3 249.00 Taxes 9 0.2 3 250.00 Housing- Disabled programs 2 0 3 285.00 Taxes- Lower 4 0.1 3 286.00 Housing- Maintaining Home 1 0 3 297.00 Housing- Publically Funded 1 0 3 316.00 Womens/Mens/Familys Shelter 11 0.2 3 5.00 Medical 398 8.2 4 28.00 Access to Medical Care 1 0 4 39.00 Medical Coverage- Adult 2 0 4 41.00 Insurance- Affordable Medical 9 0.2 4 43.00 Medical- Dental 23 0.5 4 44.00 Financial- Medical 81 1.7 4 54.00 Age/Health 2 0 4 96.00 Medical- Better health 2 0 4 98.00 Medical- Better medicine 2 0 4 124.00 Medical- Change in healthcare 1 0 4 130.00 Medical- Children 1 0 4 144.00 Counseling 17 0.4 4 149.00 Depress 1 0 4 159.00 Medical- Medicaid and Medicare 11 0.2 4 170.00 Droped blatter 1 0 4 187.00 Emergency Healthcare 2 0 4 219.00 Free Healthcare 8 0.2 4 231.00 Healthcare 136 2.8 4 235.00 Health 37 0.8 4 363 289.00 Medical- Assistance 19 0.4 4 290.00 Medical- Medication 50 1 4 303.00 Person hygiene 2 0 4 8.00 Vehicle- Second 4 0.1 5 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

10.00 Vehicle 62 1.3 5 11.00 Vehicle- Decent 14 0.3 5 23.00 Vehicle- Able to be responsible for 1 0 5 46.00 Financial- Affordable Transportation 7 0.1 5 49.00 Financial- Affording a car 1 0 5 70.00 Financial- Vehicle and Insurance Costs 80 1.7 5 72.00 Transportation- Availability 1 0 5 100.00 Government- Better roads 2 0 5 101.00 Transportation- Good/Better 9 0.2 5 103.00 Bus 1 0 5 117.00 Vehicle- Bad condition 9 0.2 5 160.00 Does not drive 2 0 5 166.00 Transportation 271 5.6 5 169.00 Driving 1 0 5 240.00 Help getting to work out of city people 1 0 5 14.00 Education- Degree 29 0.6 6 22.00 Education- Access to Higher Education 7 0.1 6 36.00 Training- Adequate 1 0 6 38.00 Education- Adult 3 0.1 6 45.00 Education- Affordable 2 0 6 68.00 Education- Assistance 5 0.1 6 82.00 Financial- School Supplies 13 0.3 6 94.00 Education- Good/Better/More 18 0.4 6 121.00 Education- Career Training 46 1 6 139.00 Education- Computer Training 6 0.1 6 150.00 Education- Deprived of better education 2 0 6 175.00 Education- Early Childhood 4 0.1 6 177.00 Education 127 2.6 6 178.00 Education- Life Skills 10 0.2 6 179.00 Education- Opportunities 3 0.1 6 180.00 Education- Tools 1 0 6 193.00 English as a Second Language 2 0 6 209.00 Education help and getting a better job 4 0.1 6 222.00 Education- Full Time 2 0 6 224.00 Financial- Education 2 0 6 236.00 Health- Education 1 0 6 266.00 Language Skills 3 0.1 6 269.00 Life Skills 1 0 6 364 272.00 Education- Literacy 4 0.1 6 21.00 Food- Ability to buy 1 0 7 42.00 Financial- Food 37 0.8 7

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

65.00 Food- Assistance 54 1.1 7 83.00 Food- Enough 5 0.1 7 95.00 Food- Better food from food pantry 1 0 7 137.00 Clothes 62 1.3 7 151.00 Diapers 1 0 7 167.00 Food- Food Stamps not enough 4 0.1 7 211.00 Food 300 6.2 7 214.00 Food Stamps easier 2 0 7 215.00 Food Supplements 1 0 7 237.00 Food- Healthy 12 0.2 7 251.00 Hunger 3 0.1 7 26.00 Access to Help 5 0.1 8 99.00 Better knowledge of resources available 1 0 8 232.00 Unemployment- Trouble Collecting 1 0 8 239.00 Help- Getting disability from SSI 2 0 8 29.00 Children- Activities 1 0 9 32.00 Child Care 171 3.5 9 37.00 Child Care- Adequate/Affordable 43 0.9 9 73.00 Child- Needs 11 0.2 9 125.00 Child/Children 9 0.2 9 127.00 Child support 13 0.3 9 128.00 Child/Family Services 4 0.1 9 129.00 Child care classes 7 0.1 9 194.00 Youth Enrichment Programs 2 0 9 217.00 Family- Free Activities 1 0 9 241.00 Child Care- Assistance 3 0.1 9 48.00 Financial- Bills 322 6.7 10 62.00 Financial- Bill Assistance 96 2 10 102.00 Bill 1 0 10 106.00 Butane 1 0 10 107.00 Butane and water heater 1 0 10 109.00 Cable 5 0.1 10 183.00 Elec 1 0 10 184.00 Electricity 15 0.3 10 192.00 Energy Efficient Homes 1 0 10 300.00 Water 7 0.1 10 305.00 Phone 8 0.2 10 25.00 Access in and out front door 1 0 11 50.00 Age- 85 1 0 11 365 51.00 Age- 75 2 0 11 52.00 Age- Seniors 8 0.2 11 53.00 Age 22 0.5 11

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

85.00 Being an older female 1 0 11 86.00 Disabled 40 0.8 11 87.00 Handicap 4 0.1 11 119.00 Care- Elderly 10 0.2 11 153.00 Discrimination against physical disability 1 0 11 181.00 Elder- Needs 4 0.1 11 182.00 Elderly 2 0 11 199.00 Falling 1 0 11 230.00 Child with Disability 3 0.1 11 238.00 Help- Housework 1 0 11 242.00 Assistance- Everyday Things 7 0.1 11 247.00 Housekeeping 5 0.1 11 273.00 Live alone 2 0 11 276.00 Living Assistance 1 0 11 309.00 Retired 3 0.1 11 145.00 Criminal Assistance 2 0 12 296.00 Police 1 0 12 304.00 Safety 12 0.2 12 92.00 Government Programs- Stricter 6 0.1 13 123.00 Change in attitudes to want to work 1 0 13 132.00 Classes to help build self esteem and respect 3 0.1 13 143.00 Coping skills 3 0.1 13 191.00 Encouragement 2 0 13 225.00 Get off Government Assistance 4 0.1 13 234.00 Having so much assistance 1 0 13 252.00 Self Sufficient 6 0.1 13 259.00 Motivation 10 0.2 13 264.00 Lack of Social Skills and Interests 1 0 13 81.00 Being a single parent 11 0.2 14 154.00 Dysfunctional homes 1 0 14 156.00 Divorce 1 0 14 161.00 Domestic Violence Assistance 1 0 14 200.00 Family- Priorities 1 0 14 201.00 Family Service Agency Assistance 1 0 14 202.00 Family Support 6 0.1 14 203.00 Family Training 3 0.1 14 204.00 Family- Father unwilling to help 1 0 14 256.00 Improved relationships 8 0.2 14 301.00 Not married 1 0 14 366 314.00 Too many kids 2 0 14 317.00 Young Mothers 3 0.1 14 318.00 Stability 3 0.1 14 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

93.00 Drug Enforcement 1 0 15 172.00 Drug and Alcohol Addiction 5 0.1 15 173.00 Rehabilitation 7 0.1 15 174.00 Drugs 4 0.1 15 280.00 Housing- Finding new 1 0 30 6.00 Dependent(s) 8 0.2 99 13.00 A garden 1 0 99 24.00 Access 1 0 99 40.00 Adults- Not legal citizens 1 0 99 55.00 Air 1 0 99 61.00 Area 1 0 99 69.00 Attention 1 0 99 75.00 Bad Luck 1 0 99 78.00 Being away from native people 1 0 99 80.00 Being female 1 0 99 88.00 Being on a schedule 1 0 99 113.00 Cant follow directions 1 0 99 118.00 Care 3 0.1 99 122.00 Cars and house are old and in constant repair 1 0 99 131.00 Christian Morals 1 0 99 134.00 Cleanining supplies 1 0 99 135.00 Cleanliness 1 0 99 138.00 Competition among undocumented for work 1 0 99 141.00 Cooking 1 0 99 142.00 Daily Tasks 1 0 99 146.00 Dances for people 21+ 1 0 99 152.00 Didnt understand 3 0.1 99 162.00 Dont Apply and N/A 27 0.6 99 163.00 Dont know 4 0.1 99 164.00 No help from family 4 0.1 99 171.00 Dropped foot 1 0 99 185.00 Emergencies 4 0.1 99 188.00 Emotional support from Family 1 0 99 205.00 Feminine products 1 0 99 212.00 Food and Jobs 1 0 99 213.00 Food- Daycare 1 0 99 216.00 Food/Housing 1 0 99 221.00 Friends 3 0.1 99 226.00 Government Red Tape 1 0 99 228.00 Good 2 0 99 367 229.00 Happiness 2 0 99 243.00 High society living 1 0 99 254.00 I dont work 4 0.1 99 255.00 Ignorance of others 1 0 99 Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

260.00 Internet 2 0 99 261.00 Keeping records up to date 1 0 99 262.00 Knowledge of Public Safety 1 0 99 263.00 Consentration 1 0 99 265.00 Land 1 0 99 267.00 Yard Care 6 0.1 99 268.00 Legal 2 0 99 270.00 Lifeline 1 0 99 274.00 Live in Cook Co. 1 0 99 275.00 Loneliness 1 0 99 277.00 Living in a small town 1 0 99 279.00 Location 1 0 99 281.00 Loss of loved one 2 0 99 282.00 Self Confidence 1 0 99 283.00 Love 2 0 99 287.00 Making a home 1 0 99 292.00 Get Organized 1 0 99 294.00 Government Assist Complaint 1 0 99 295.00 Guardianship 1 0 99 298.00 Thankful- God 5 0.1 99 302.00 Peace of mind 1 0 99 306.00 Poverty 2 0 99 307.00 Providing family and grandchildren 1 0 99 308.00 Respect 1 0 99 310.00 Public Pool 1 0 99 311.00 C.N.A. 1 0 99 315.00 Take pet to vet 1 0 99 319.00 Affordable Housing and Transportation 1 0 99 320.00 Communication 1 0 99 321.00 Food and Education 1 0 99 63.00 Assistance- Daily Living 2 0 999 67.00 Assistance 22 0.5 999 110.00 Financial- Insurance 87 1.8 999 136.00 Family 6 0.1 999 218.00 Child/Elder Care- Free 2 0 999 244.00 Home Assistance 28 0.6 999 271.00 Financial- Limited Income 2 0 999 291.00 Mentoring 6 0.1 999 299.00 Government Assistance 16 0.3 999 312.00 Time 8 0.2 999 368 999 66 1.4 Total 4831 100

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

APPENDIX E. SURVEY- DETAILED TABLES OF RESULTS

TYPES OF TESTS PERFORMED

1. Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) 2. #1 Need (Open-ended Answers) 3. All Respondents – Importance of Services (Rating Scale) 4. Community Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale) 5. Client Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale) 6. Service Provider Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale) 7. Elected Official Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale) 8. Service Provider Respondents; How do clients and low-income residents access information about available services? 9. Service Provider Respondents; Do low-income individuals in the community have adequate access to information? 10. Client and Community Respondents; Services Used 11. Client Respondents: Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self- Sufficient 12. Client Respondents; #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answers) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self- Sufficient 13. Client Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale – “Very Important”) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient ***(ONLY INDIVIDUAL COUNTY TABLES)*** 14. Client Respondents; Services Used by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient 15. Client and Community Respondents; Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Employment Status 16. Client and Community Respondents; #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answers) by Employment Status 17. Client and Community Respondents; Are you currently employed? 18. Client and Community Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Employed) 19. Client and Community Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Unemployed) 20. Client and Community Respondents; Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Retired) 21. All Respondents; Services Used by Employment Status (Employed) 22. All Respondents; Services Used by Employment Status (Unemployed) 23. All Respondents; Services Used by Employment Status (Retired) 24. All Respondents; Surveys Received – By Respondent Type 25. All Counties – All Respondents; Surveys Received – By County ***(ONLY “ALL COUNTY” TABLE)***

ALL COUNTIES (pages 368-389) COOKE COUNTY (pages 390-412) FANNIN COUNTY (pages 413-435) 369 GRAYSON COUNTY (pages 436-457)

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

TEXOMA TABLES

All Counties - All Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) Service Providers Elected (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Healthcare/Medical/Couns eling 66 52 42 57 47 Employment 37 50 41 100 44 Transportation 52 34 31 29 34 Food/Clothing 16 57 19 14 33 Housing 60 52 13 43 31 Utilities 11 35 30 14 30 Financial Security 14 12 34 0 24 Education 41 24 16 29 21 Childcare/Youth Services 32 27 13 29 19 Other 14 13 16 0 15 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 3 4 13 0 9 Domestic 7 4 3 0 4 Poverty Mentality 7 4 2 0 3 Info On Services 8 1 1 0 1 Crime (not drug-related) 3 3 0 0 1 Substance Abuse 7 2 0 0 1 . N 73 512 744 7 1336 Of all service providers who responded, 66% listed "healthcare/medical/counseling" as one of the 5 most critical unmet needs among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all community members who responded, 57% listed "food/clothing" as one of the top 5 needs facing low-income people in their community. Of all clients who responded, 42% listed "healthcare/medical/counseling" as one of the top 5 most critical needs that keep them from being self- sufficient. Of all elected officials who responded, 57% listed "healthcare/medical/counseling" as one of the top 5 most critical needs facing low-income individuals in the community. 370 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - All Respondents #1 Need (Open-ended Answers)

Service Elected Providers (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Employment 12 29 24 71 25 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 22 11 19 0 16 Financial Security 0 4 16 0 11 Food/Clothing 5 18 4 0 9 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 1 9 11 0 9 Housing 29 13 3 0 8 Transportation 7 3 7 14 5 Education 11 4 3 14 4 Childcare/Youth Services 0 1 7 0 4 Utilities 5 3 2 0 3 Other 0 4 3 0 3 Info On Services 1 0 0 0 0 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 1 1 0 0 0 Domestic 3 0 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 1 1 0 0 0

N 73 512 744 7 1336 Of all service providers who responded, 29% listed "housing" as the most critical unmet need among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all community members who responded, 29% listed "employment" as the top need facing low-income people in their community. Of all clients who responded, 24% listed "employment" as the top critical need that keeps them from being self-sufficient. Of all elected officials who responded, 71% listed "employment" as the top critical need facing low-income individuals in the community.

371 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - All Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Important Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 20.5 4.2 2.7 10.6 62 1435 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying 18.8 3.9 2.3 18.6 56.4 1400 Job) More Education (For Better Employment) 16.1 4.1 3.5 24.9 51.4 1402 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 22.6 4.8 5.8 24.9 41.9 1377 School Readiness (For Children) 21.7 4.8 4.6 24.1 44.8 1374 Affordable Childcare 24.9 5.8 4.1 19.6 45.6 1380 Summer Childcare 25.6 5.9 5.7 23.1 39.6 1362 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 21.4 6.8 9.8 26.7 35.3 1362 Use Public Transportation 21.4 6.8 9.8 26.7 35.3 1387 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 17.3 5.7 5.4 26.8 44.8 1397 Temporary Shelter 29.6 9.7 11.3 26 23.4 1357 Rent Assistance 15.2 4.7 5.4 30.4 44.2 1371 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 6.1 3.5 4.3 25.5 60.7 1453 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 14.5 4.2 9.1 29.2 43 1375 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 18 5.4 6.9 26 43.7 1397 Emergency Healthcare 13.1 5.3 5 25.1 51.5 1398 Preventative Healthcare 11.6 4.9 4.5 28.2 50.8 1391 Health Insurance 10.9 4.1 3.6 24.8 56.5 1374

Of all respondents, 62% ranked "employment" as "very important." 372 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) Unimportant (%) Important (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 3.2 2.1 0.5 11.6 82.6 568 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better 2.7 2.1 1.2 26.2 67.8 562 Paying Job) Affordable Childcare 2.5 2 1.6 32.9 61 557 More Education (For Better Employment) 2.2 1.8 2.5 33.3 60.2 558 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive 2.5 2.3 3.4 33.6 58.2 560 Environment and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 2.3 2.2 2.9 34.7 57.9 554 Emergency Healthcare 2.5 2.7 4.5 33 57.3 558 Health Insurance 2.8 2.3 4.1 35.6 55.2 533 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know 3.9 3 4.1 34.5 54.4 559 Where Next Meal Will Come From) Summer Childcare 2.9 2 2.8 38.5 53.8 545 Preventative Healthcare 2.3 2.5 3.6 39.3 52.3 560 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic 2.4 1.8 4.4 40.1 51.4 549 Violence Services, etc…) Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, 1.8 2.5 6.5 41.2 47.9 553 etc…) Use Public Transportation 4.2 2.5 9.4 37.9 46 552 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 4 1.7 5.9 44.5 43.9 544 Rent Assistance 3.3 2.2 6.7 49 38.8 539 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 2.2 2.6 10.3 48 36.9 542 Temporary Shelter 5.4 2.4 11.7 46.5 34.1 540

Of all community members who responded, 82.6% ranked "employment" as "very important" for reducing poverty in their community and helping people get off social services. 373 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Important Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) (%) (%) (%) N Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 9.6 4.3 3.1 13.6 69.5 816 Health Insurance 17.7 5.7 3.6 16 57.1 758 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 24.4 5.6 7.3 14.7 48 750 Preventative Healthcare 19.9 7.1 5.6 19.7 47.7 747 Rent Assistance 25.4 7.1 4.7 15.9 47 749 Emergency Healthcare 22.3 7.7 5.7 18.4 46 757 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying 32.9 5.6 3.3 12.3 45.9 754 Job) Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 28.4 9 5.3 13 44.3 770 Employment (Need a Job) 35.2 6 4.6 10.1 44.1 783 More Education (For Better Employment) 28.2 6.1 4.5 18.6 42.8 760 School Readiness (For Children) 38.4 7.1 5.8 14.5 34.2 737 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where 30.4 7.4 9.4 19.4 33.4 754 Next Meal Will Come From) Affordable Childcare 44.5 9.2 6.1 9.1 31.1 739 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive 40.1 6.9 8 16.3 28.6 735 Environment and Skill Building Summer Childcare 45.3 9.3 8 10 27.4 733 Use Public Transportation 36.3 10.5 10.6 19 23.6 754 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic 44.7 11.1 10.5 12.6 21.1 731 Violence Services, etc…) Temporary Shelter 50.5 15.8 11.4 9.7 12.5 734

Of all clients who responded, 28.6% ranked "enrichment programs for youth" as "very important" for helping them get out of poverty and off of public services.

374 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Service Provider Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Important Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 1.3 9.1 89.6 77 Affordable Childcare 1.3 1.3 1.3 22.1 74.0 77 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying 1.3 26.0 73.7 77 Job) Use Public Transportation 5.4 23.0 71.6 74 More Education (For Better Employment) 1.3 1.3 28.6 68.8 77 Preventative Healthcare 1.3 1.3 32.5 64.9 77 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic 2.7 33.3 64.0 75 Violence Services, etc…) Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where 1.3 2.6 3.9 31.2 61.0 77 Next Meal Will Come From) Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 1.3 1.3 37.7 59.7 77 Emergency Healthcare 1.3 2.6 36.8 59.2 76 Summer Childcare 2.6 37.7 58.4 77 School Readiness (For Children) 2.6 2.6 2.6 36.8 55.3 76 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 1.3 2.6 40.8 55.3 76 Rent Assistance 1.3 2.6 40.8 55.3 76 Health Insurance 1.3 2.6 1.3 39.5 55.3 76 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive 2.7 2.7 1.3 40.0 53.3 75 Environment and Skill Building Temporary Shelter 1.3 2.6 5.3 38.2 52.6 76 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 5.3 1.3 17.1 39.5 36.8 76

Of all service providers who responded, 89.6% ranked "employment" as "very important" for helping clients get out of poverty and off of public services.

375 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Elected Official Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Important Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 100 7 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 100 7 More Education (For Better Employment) 100 7 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 100 7 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 100 7 Emergency Healthcare 100 7 Preventative Healthcare 100 7 Use Public Transportation 14.3 28.6 57.1 7 Rent Assistance 14.3 28.6 57.1 7 Temporary Shelter 14.3 42.9 42.9 7 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 42.9 7 Affordable Childcare 28.6 42.9 28.6 7 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 14.3 71.4 14.3 7 School Readiness (For Children) 28.6 57.1 14.3 7 Summer Childcare 57.1 28.6 14.3 7 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 14.3 71.4 14.3 7 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 14.3 42.9 28.6 14.3 7 Health Insurance 7

Of all elected officials who responded, 57.1% ranked "public transportation" as "very important" for helping low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 376 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Service Provider Respondents How do clients and low-income residents access information about available services?

(%) Info from friends and family 74 Info from 211 (via telephone or email) 52 Info from internet 31 Info from fliers 27 Info from phone 24 Info from TV 22 Info from mail 14

N 85 Of all service providers who responded, 74% said their clients and low-income residents access information about available resources from "friends and family."

All Counties - Service Provider Respondents Do low-income individuals in the community have adequate access to information?

(%) Yes 50 No 50

N 84 Of all service providers who responded, 50% said that low-income individuals in the community do have adequate access to information.

377 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client and Community Respondents Services Used

Clients (%)* Community (%)** All (%) Medicare or Medicaid 69 39 57 Food Assistance 64 15 44 Utility Bill Assistance 41 9 28 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 30 5 20 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 10 6 9 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 14 1 9 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 5 2 4 Childcare 3 2 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 2 1 1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 3 1 2

N 917 616 1533

* services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all clients who responded, 69% said that they were currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from "Medicare or Medicaid." Of all community members who responded, 39% said that they had used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

378 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Hopeful Somewhat Very Hopeful Unsure (%) (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 26 23 48 51 Financial Security 29 37 30 36 Transportation 24 29 33 34 Utilities 32 23 30 31 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 53 68 37 29 Education 12 2 22 21 Food/Clothing 20 20 13 20 Childcare/Youth Services 7 7 12 19 Other 14 17 17 15 Housing 13 13 16 12 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 16 27 11 7 Domestic 1 1 4 4 Poverty Mentality 4 0 2 2 Info On Services 0 1 0 2 Substance Abuse 0 1 0 0 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0

N 111 128 141 337 Of all clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 51% said that "employment" was one of the top five most critical needs keeping them from being self-sufficient.

379 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Hopeful Somewhat Very Hopeful Unsure (%) (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 13 7 29 33 Financial Security 15 20 13 16 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 26 37 18 11 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 14 5 13 10 Education 3 0 3 6 Transportation 5 7 11 5 Childcare/Youth Services 10 14 6 4 Food/Clothing 7 4 1 4 Other 3 2 2 4 Housing 1 2 2 4 Utilities 3 2 1 2 Domestic 0 0 0 1 Poverty Mentality 1 0 0 0 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0

N 111 128 141 337 Of all clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 33% said that "employment" was the top most critical need keeping them from being self-sufficient.

380 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client Respondents Services Used by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Very Not at All Somewhat Hopeful Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Food Assistance 65 65 66 66 Utility Bill Assistance 48 63 42 31 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 33 44 20 29 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 5 1 13 14 Childcare 0 1 4 4 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 0 1 1 2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 2 4 2 3 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 3 5 3 7 Medicare or Medicaid 74 82 72 63 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 8 3 17 18

N 133 142 166 410 Of all clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 66% said they were currently enrolled in and receiving "food assistance"

381 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client and Community Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Employment Status

Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%) Employment 52 52 27 Financial Security 22 29 24 Housing 37 16 34 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 41 42 57 Transportation 33 38 27 Education 29 20 8 Food/Clothing 39 28 37 Info On Services 1 1 1 Childcare/Youth Services 30 16 9 Utilities 30 29 36 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 3 10 16 Crime (not drug-related) 2 0 1 Poverty Mentality 3 2 3 Domestic 6 2 1 Substance Abuse 2 0 0 Other 14 15 15

N 452 412 373 Of all clients and community members who responded, 57% of those who were "retired" included "Healthcare/Medical/Counseling" as one of the top five most critical needs either facing themselves or the community.

382 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client and Community Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Employment Status

Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%) Employment 28 33 15 Financial Security 8 13 13 Housing 9 3 9 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 13 14 22 Transportation 5 7 5 Education 6 4 1 Food/Clothing 11 6 13 Info On Services 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 1 5 8 Utilities 5 1 1 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 9 10 10 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 Domestic 1 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 Other 3 3 4

N 452 412 373 Of all clients and community members who responded, 33% of those who were "unemployed" included "employment" as the top most critical need either facing themselves or the community.

383 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client and Community Respondents Are you currently employed?

Frequency All (%) Employed 559 37.2 Unemployed 445 29.6 Retired 498 33.2

N 1502 Of all clients and community members who responded, 37.2% said that they were "employed."

N – number of respondents 384 Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Employed)

Completely Unimportant Important Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 16 2.7 2.7 9.3 69.3 525 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying 7.6 1.9 1.7 21.6 67.1 523 Job) More Education (For Better Employment) 6.6 1.4 1.7 30.6 59.8 517 Affordable Childcare 14.6 3.5 3.5 23.3 55.1 515 School Readiness (For Children) 12.7 2.3 4.3 27 53.7 512 Health Insurance 11.3 4.2 4.8 27.2 52.6 504 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 6.5 3.6 6.9 32.1 51.0 524 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive 13.6 2.9 5.2 27.9 50.4 516 Environment and Skill Building Emergency Healthcare 11.5 5.9 6.3 26.0 50.3 523 Preventative Healthcare 11.0 5.4 4.3 30.2 49.0 516 Summer Childcare 15.9 3.3 4.3 28.6 47.8 510 Use Public Transportation 16.9 7.6 12.4 30 33.1 516 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 14.6 5.3 4.7 31.8 43.7 513 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where 15.6 4.9 7.6 28.5 43.5 559 Next Meal Will Come From) Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic 15.9 5.6 8.2 31.1 39.2 515 Violence Services, etc…) Rent Assistance 12.7 4.7 7.8 36.9 37.8 510 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 12.8 3.3 12.2 35.0 36.7 509 Temporary Shelter 22.9 10 12.9 31.4 22.9 512

Of all clients and community members who responded, 69.3% of those who said they were "employed" also said that "employment" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 385 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Completely Unimportant Important Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) (%) (%) (%) N Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 7.3 3.8 2.4 17.4 69.1 453 Health Insurance 12.7 4.2 4.2 18.5 60.3 426 Employment (Need a Job) 20.6 3.9 2.6 12.3 60.5 456 Rent Assistance 17.5 5.3 4.6 21.0 51.8 438 More Education (For Better Employment) 18.9 4.7 5.2 20 51.2 445 Emergency Healthcare 16.4 5.5 6.6 21.0 50.6 439 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 25.2 4.8 3.2 16.1 50.7 440 Preventative Healthcare 14.0 4.3 7.2 24.2 50.2 442 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 18.7 5.2 7.3 20.9 47.9 422 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 21.1 7 6.3 18.2 47.5 446 School Readiness (For Children) 29 6.2 4.6 19.8 40.5 435 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 23.4 6.5 7.7 22.7 39.6 444 Affordable Childcare 34.8 7.7 5.7 13 38.9 440 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 30.7 5.3 7.4 22.3 34.2 430 Summer Childcare 35.3 8.1 8.3 14.7 33.4 434 Use Public Transportation 29.4 6.8 10.2 22.9 30.8 442 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 36.2 8.9 10.5 17.8 26.6 428 Temporary Shelter 40.6 11.2 12.1 18.2 17.9 429

Of all clients and community members who responded, 69.1% of those who said they were "unemployed" also said that "utility assistance" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 386 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Retired)

Completely Unimportant Important Very Important N/A (%) Unimportant (%) (%) (%) (%) N Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 5.1 3.5 3.7 24.3 63.4 374 Health Insurance 9.2 4.6 2.0 26.2 57.9 347 Emergency Healthcare 13.0 5.3 1.8 27.1 52.8 339 Preventative Healthcare 11.4 5.7 2.4 30.0 50.5 333 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 13.0 4.6 5.2 29.2 48.0 346 Employment (Need a Job) 30.9 7.1 3.7 10.8 47.6 353 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 17.0 5.6 5.9 26.4 45.2 341 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 31 6.9 2.7 16.1 43.3 335 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 19.5 5.9 6.2 27.7 40.7 339 Rent Assistance 19.1 5.5 3.4 31.4 40.6 325 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 29.9 7.9 5.4 19 37.8 331 Use Public Transportation 21.7 7.2 6 28.6 36.4 332 School Readiness (For Children) 29.8 7.7 4.9 21.5 36 325 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 29.4 7.5 4.4 23.1 35.6 320 More Education (For Better Employment) 29.6 8 4.7 22.5 35.2 338 Affordable Childcare 32.5 8.4 3.4 21.4 34.4 323 Summer Childcare 32.5 8.5 4.7 22.7 31.5 317 Temporary Shelter 32 9.1 9.1 25.1 24.8 319

Of all clients and community members who responded, 63.4% of those who said they were "retired" also said that "utility assistance" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 387 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Employed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 56 8 30 Utility Bill Assistance 23 6 14 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 22 2 11 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 4 7 6 Childcare 5 4 4 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 1 1 1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 2 1 2 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 9 2 5 Medicare or Medicaid 54 12 31 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 22 2 11

N 255 304 559 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all clients who responded, 56% of those who were "employed" were also enrolled in and receiving "food assistance" at the time. Of all community members who responded, 12% of those who were "employed" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

388 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 73 36 65 Utility Bill Assistance 37 15 33 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 34 11 29 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 18 15 18 Childcare 2 1 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 2 2 2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 4 0 4 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 5 2 4 Medicare or Medicaid 70 61 68 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 16 3 13

N 400 98 498 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all clients who responded, 73% of those who were "unemployed" were also enrolled in and receiving "food assistance" at the time. Of all community members who responded, 61% of those who were "unemployed" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

389 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Retired)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 58 13 37 Utility Bill Assistance 67 10 41 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 31 6 19 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 2 1 2 Childcare 1 0 1 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 1 1 1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 3 0 2 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 2 0 1 Medicare or Medicaid 83 69 76 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 1 0 1

N 239 206 445 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all clients who responded, 83% of clients who were "retired" were also enrolled in and receiving "Medicare or Medicaid" at the time. Of all community members who responded, 69% of those who were "retired" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" services in the past year.

390 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

All Counties - All Respondents Surveys Received - By Respondent Type

Frequency (%) Community 616 38.1 Client 917 56.7 Service Providers 78 4.8 Elected Officials 7 0.4

Valid N 1618 Of all surveys received, 56.7% were from "clients."

All Counties - All Respondents Surveys Received - By County

Frequency (%) Cooke County 198 12.6 Fannin County 929 27.6 Grayson County 432 59.2

N 1568 Of all surveys received, 59.2% were from "Grayson County."

391 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

COOKE COUNTY TABLES

Cooke County - All Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers)

Service Providers Elected (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Employment 43 54 41 100 49 Financial Security 0 12 27 0 19 Housing 71 54 13 25 35 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 71 39 41 50 41 Transportation 86 21 20 50 25 Education 29 21 11 25 18 Food/Clothing 29 55 15 0 34 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 14 13 10 25 12 Utilities 14 36 34 0 32 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 0 7 15 0 10 Crime (not drug-related) 0 1 0 0 1 Poverty Mentality 0 4 1 0 4 Domestic 0 3 1 0 2 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 0 Other 14 22 21 0 20

N 7 76 71 4 162 Of all Cooke County service providers who responded, 86% listed "transportation" as one of the 5 most critical unmet needs among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all Cooke County community members who responded, 55% listed "food/clothing" as one of the top 5 needs facing low-income people in their community. Of all Cooke County clients who responded, 41% listed "employment" as one of the top 5 most critical needs that keep them from being self-sufficient. Of all Cooke County elected officials who responded, 100% listed "employment" as one of the top 5 most critical needs facing low-income individuals in the community. 392 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County #1 Need (Open-ended Answers)

Service Providers Elected (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Employment 14 29 23 75 26 Financial Security 0 8 11 0 9 Housing 29 16 3 0 10 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 14 4 24 0 14 Transportation 14 4 1 25 4 Education 14 3 3 0 4 Food/Clothing 14 24 7 0 15 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 0 1 8 0 4 Utilities 0 0 3 0 1 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 0 8 14 0 10 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 0 0 Domestic 0 0 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 4 3 0 3

N 7 76 71 4 162 Of all Cooke County service providers who responded, 29% listed "housing" as the most critical unmet need among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all Cooke County community members who responded, 29% listed "employment" as the top need facing low-income people in their community. Of all Cooke County clients who responded, 24% listed "healthcare/medical/counseling" as the top critical need that keeps them from being self- sufficient. Of all Cooke County elected officials who responded, 75% listed "employment" as the top critical need facing low-income individuals in the community.

393 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - All Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 19.2 4 1.1 9.6 66.1 177 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 18.8 3.4 2.3 22.2 53.4 176 More Education (For Better Employment) 18.2 2.9 2.9 31.8 44.1 170 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 19.8 4.1 4.1 29.7 42.4 172 School Readiness (For Children) 20 4.1 4.7 29.4 41.8 170 Affordable Childcare 23.3 2.9 4.7 26.7 42.4 172 Summer Childcare 22.7 3.1 5.5 31.9 36.8 163 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 23 3 6.7 27.3 40 165 Use Public Transportation 18.9 4.7 14.2 29.6 32.5 169 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 14.4 4.8 9 33.5 38.3 167 Temporary Shelter 24.5 6.3 13.2 32.1 23.9 159 Rent Assistance 14.6 5.7 8.9 32.9 38 176 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 1.7 5.7 9.1 31.3 52.3 163 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 8.6 4.3 14.7 35 37.4 163 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 13.7 4.8 7.7 31.5 42.3 168 Emergency Healthcare 12.2 4.1 4.7 30.2 48.8 172 Preventative Healthcare 10.9 4.6 4.6 31 48.9 174 Health Insurance 12 4.2 4.2 25.3 54.2 166

Of all Cooke County respondents, 66.1% ranked "employment" as "very important."

394 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 6.3 2.1 0.1 11.6 78.9 95 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 6.3 1.1 1.1 33.7 57.9 95 More Education (For Better Employment) 4.4 1.1 2.2 42.9 49.5 91 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 5.4 2.2 4.3 37 51.1 92 School Readiness (For Children) 4.4 2.2 2.2 42.2 48.9 90 Affordable Childcare 5.4 1.1 4.3 42.4 46.7 92 Summer Childcare 5.8 0.2 4.7 47.7 40.7 86 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 4.7 7.1 43.5 44.7 85 Use Public Transportation 6.8 1.1 19.3 45.5 27.3 88 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 5.8 12.8 51.2 30.2 86 Temporary Shelter 6 1.2 18.1 48.2 26.5 83 Rent Assistance 4.7 2.4 14.1 49.4 29.5 85 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 2.2 2.2 14.3 49.5 31.9 91 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 2.3 3.4 16.1 54 24 87 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 3.3 5.4 8.7 41.3 41.3 92 Emergency Healthcare 3.2 3.2 7.5 43 43 93 Preventative Healthcare 3.2 4.3 6.4 47.9 38.3 94 Health Insurance 3.4 2.3 5.7 43.2 45.5 88

Of all Cooke County community members who responded, 78.9% ranked "employment" as "very important" for reducing poverty in their community and helping people get off social services. 395 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 39.4 7 1.4 8.5 43.7 71 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 38.6 7.1 4.3 8.6 41.4 70 More Education (For Better Employment) 39.7 5.9 4.4 17.6 32.4 68 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 42 7.2 2.9 17.4 30.4 69 School Readiness (For Children) 43.5 7.2 5.8 10.1 33.3 69 Affordable Childcare 50.7 5.8 4.3 7.2 31.9 69 Summer Childcare 48.5 6.1 4.5 12.1 28.2 66 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 49.3 5.8 7.2 7.2 30.4 69 Use Public Transportation 37.1 8.6 10 11.4 32.9 70 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 27.1 10 5.7 12.9 44.3 70 Temporary Shelter 52.3 12.3 7.7 12.3 15.4 65 Rent Assistance 30.6 11.3 1.6 8.1 48.4 62 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 1.4 9.5 4.1 8.1 77 74 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 16.9 4.6 10.8 12.3 55.4 65 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 30.8 4.6 7.7 18.5 38.5 65 Emergency Healthcare 26.5 5.9 14.7 52.9 68 Preventative Healthcare 23.2 5.8 1.4 11.6 58 69 Health Insurance 25 5.9 1.5 4.4 63.2 68

Of all Cooke County clients who responded, 63.2% ranked "health insurance" as "very important" for helping them get out of poverty and off of public services.

396 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Service Provider Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 100 7 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 14.3 85.7 7 More Education (For Better Employment) 42.9 57.1 7 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 9.1 42.9 57.1 7 School Readiness (For Children) 0 14.3 42.9 42.9 7 Affordable Childcare 0 100 7 Summer Childcare 9.1 28.6 71.4 7 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 9.1 14.3 85.7 7 Use Public Transportation 14.3 85.7 7 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 28.6 71.4 7 Temporary Shelter 14.3 14.3 71.4 7 Rent Assistance 42.9 57.1 7 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 28.6 71.4 7 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 42.9 14.3 42.9 7 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 42.9 57.1 7 Emergency Healthcare 14.3 28.6 57.1 7 Preventative Healthcare 14.3 14.3 71.4 7 Health Insurance 16.7 16.7 16.7 50 6

Of all Cooke County service providers who responded, 85.7% ranked "family services" as "very important" for helping clients get out of poverty and off of public services. 397 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Elected Official Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 100 4 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 100 4 More Education (For Better Employment) 100 4 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 25 50 25 4 School Readiness (For Children) 25 50 25 4 Affordable Childcare 25 50 25 4 Summer Childcare 50 25 25 4 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 25 50 25 4 Use Public Transportation 25 25 50 4 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 25 50 25 4 Temporary Shelter 25 50 25 4 Rent Assistance 25 50 25 4 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 25 50 25 4 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 25 25 25 25 4 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 100 4 Emergency Healthcare 100 4 Preventative Healthcare 100 4 Health Insurance 100 4

Of all Cooke County elected officials who responded, 100% ranked "employment" as "very important" for helping low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services.

398 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Service Provider Respondents How do clients and low-income residents access information about available services?

(%) Info from internet 0 Info from 211 27 Info from TV 9 Info from mail 0 Info from fliers 0 Info from friends and family 45 Info from phone 18

N 11 Of all Cooke County service providers who responded, 45% said their clients and low-income residents access information about available resources from "friends and family."

Cooke County - Service Provider Respondents Do low-income individuals in the community have adequate access to information?

(%) Yes 45.5 No 54.5

N 11 Of all Cooke County service providers who responded, 45.5% said that low-income individuals in the community do have adequate access to information.

399 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client and Community Respondents Services Used

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 62 12 33 Utility Bill Assistance 66 8 33 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 32 6 17 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 14 1 6 Childcare 4 0 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 4 2 3 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 1 1 1 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 1 1 1 Medicare or Medicaid 72 45 57 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 5 0 2

N 79 108 187 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Cooke County clients who responded, 72% said that they were currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from "Medicare or Medicaid." Of all Cooke County community members who responded, 45% said that they had used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

400 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Hopeful Somewhat Very Hopeful Unsure (%) (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 17 50 50 48 Financial Security 42 14 33 22 Housing 8 14 17 11 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 50 64 42 22 Transportation 8 7 33 26 Education 8 0 25 15 Food/Clothing 17 0 17 19 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 8 7 8 15 Utilities 33 29 8 41 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 8 21 17 1100 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 4 Domestic 0 0 8 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other 0 43 42 11

N 12 14 12 27 Of all Cooke County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 48% said that "employment" was one of the top five most critical needs keeping them from being self-sufficient.

401 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Hopeful Somewhat Very Hopeful Unsure (%) (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 0 14 25 41 Financial Security 25 7 17 7 Housing 0 7 0 4 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 33 50 25 7 Transportation 0 0 8 0 Education 0 0 0 7 Food/Clothing 17 0 0 4 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 0 0 17 11 Utilities 8 7 0 0 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 17 14 8 15 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 0 Domestic 0 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 4

N 12 14 12 27 Of all Cooke County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 41% said that "employment" was the top most critical need keeping them from being self-sufficient.

402 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale - "Very Important") by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Very Not at All Somewhat Hopeful Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment (Need a Job) 30.8 13.3 41.7 68 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 30.8 21.4 41.7 8 More Education (For Better Employment) 16.7 6.3 27.3 60 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 16.7 14.3 9.1 57.7 School Readiness (For Children) 33.3 14.3 9.1 57.7 Affordable Childcare 33.3 7.1 61.5 Summer Childcare 33.3 7.7 9.1 50 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 33.3 7.1 18.2 50 Use Public Transportation 25 28.6 45.5 33.3 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 66.7 40 41.7 38.5 Temporary Shelter 25 30 12.5 Rent Assistance 50 46.2 45.5 47.8 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 85.7 73.3 16.7 80.8 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 60 57.1 54.5 53.8 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 63.6 21.4 33.3 43.5 Emergency Healthcare 63.6 53.3 41.7 62.5 Preventative Healthcare 72.7 73.3 41.7 61.5 Health Insurance 72.7 73.3 45.5 75

N 14 16 12 30 Of all Cooke County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 75% said that "health insurance" was "very important" for helping them get out of poverty and off of public services. 403 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client Respondents Services Used by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Very Not at All Somewhat Hopeful Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Food Assistance 57.00 56.00 67.00 70.00 Utility Bill Assistance 79.00 87.00 67.00 43.00 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 21.00 38.00 42.00 30.00 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 7.00 6.00 17.00 23.00 Childcare 0.00 0.00 8.00 7.00 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 Medicare or Medicaid 71.00 88.00 67.00 73.00 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 0.00 6.00 0.00 10.00

N 14 16 12 30 Of all Cooke County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 70% said they were currently enrolled in and receiving "food assistance."

404 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client and Community Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Employment Status

Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%) Employment 62 52 38 Financial Security 10 21 21 Housing 44 25 38 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 31 40 48 Transportation 18 27 16 Education 21 17 13 Food/Clothing 33 44 32 Info On Services 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 23 13 4 Utilities 26 33 41 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 10 10 11 Crime (not drug-related) 0 2 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 7 Domestic 3 2 2 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 Other 13 27 23

N 39 48 56 Of all Cooke County clients and community members who responded, 41% of those who were "retired" included "utilities" as one of the top five most critical needs either facing themselves or the community.

405 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client and Community Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Employment Status

Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%) Employment 31 25 25 Financial Security 3 10 14 Housing 15 4 11 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 13 17 11 Transportation 3 4 2 Education 8 0 0 Food/Clothing 10 19 16 Info On Services 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 5 4 5 Utilities 5 0 0 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 8 15 11 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 Domestic 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 Other 0 2 5

N 39 48 56 Of all Cooke County clients and community members who responded, 25% of those who were "unemployed" included "employment" as the top most critical need either facing themselves or the community.

406 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client and Community Respondents Are you currently employed?

Frequency All (%) Employed 57 31.3 Unemployed 69 37.9 Retired 56 30.7

N 182 Of all Cooke County clients and community members who responded, 37.9% said that they were "unemployed."

407 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Employed)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 9.3 1.9 1.9 7.4 79.6 54 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 3.8 1.9 1.9 28.8 63.5 52 More Education (For Better Employment) 7.7 1.9 40.4 50 52 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 7.5 1.9 3.8 41.5 45.3 53 School Readiness (For Children) 9.6 3.8 34.6 51.9 52 Affordable Childcare 11.5 5.8 40.4 42.3 52 Summer Childcare 10.2 2 49 38.8 49 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 11.1 1.9 7.4 37 42.6 54 Use Public Transportation 11.8 3.9 23.5 43.1 17.6 51 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 7.5 3.8 9.4 49.1 30.2 53 Temporary Shelter 11.8 7.8 17.6 41.2 21.6 51 Rent Assistance 11.8 5.9 17.6 41.2 23.5 51 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 1.9 5.7 17.0 45.3 30.2 53 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 3.8 1.9 26.9 48.1 19.2 52 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 5.7 3.8 15.1 37.7 37.7 53 Emergency Healthcare 9.4 3.8 7.5 37.7 41.5 53 Preventative Healthcare 9.4 3.8 5.7 41.5 39.6 53 Health Insurance 10.0 4.0 6.0 36.0 44.0 50

Of all Cooke County clients and community members who responded, 79.6% of those who said they were "employed" also said that "employment" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services.

408 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 23.5 2.0 17.6 56.9 51 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 24.5 4.1 22.4 49.0 49 More Education (For Better Employment) 20.4 6.1 26.5 46.9 49 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 28.6 4.1 2.0 22.4 42.9 49 School Readiness (For Children) 28.6 6.1 2.0 18.4 44.9 49 Affordable Childcare 34.0 4.0 2.0 14.0 46.0 50 Summer Childcare 31.3 4.2 4.2 20.8 39.6 48 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 37.0 6.5 6.5 10.9 39.1 46 Use Public Transportation 34.0 2.0 4.0 18.0 42.0 50 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 20.8 4.2 8.3 16.7 50.0 48 Temporary Shelter 46.7 2.2 6.7 24.4 20.0 45 Rent Assistance 18.6 7.0 16.3 58.1 43 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 4.3 2.1 2.1 17.0 74.5 47 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 11.6 4.7 25.6 58.1 43 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 26.1 2.2 28.3 43.5 46 Emergency Healthcare 21.3 4.3 25.5 48.9 47 Preventative Healthcare 20.8 2.1 2.1 27.1 47.9 48 Health Insurance 22.2 2.2 2.2 11.1 62.2 45

Of all Cooke County clients and community members who responded, 74.5% of those who said they were "unemployed" also said that "utility assistance" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 409 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Retired)

Completely Very Unimportant Unimportant Important Important N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 25.9 8.6 1.7 6.9 56.9 58 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 26.7 8.3 1.7 20.0 43.3 60 More Education (For Better Employment) 25.9 7.4 3.7 29.6 33.3 54 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 24.1 7.4 5.6 20.4 42.6 54 School Readiness (For Children) 22.6 7.5 3.8 32.1 34.0 53 Affordable Childcare 25.9 5.6 5.6 27.8 35.2 54 Summer Childcare 27.5 5.9 7.8 29.4 29.4 51 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 24.0 8.0 34.0 34.0 50 Use Public Transportation 15.1 7.5 15.1 32.1 30.2 53 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 15.7 5.9 11.8 37.3 29.4 51 Temporary Shelter 24.5 6.1 16.3 30.6 22.4 49 Rent Assistance 16.0 6.0 8.0 38.0 32.0 50 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 8.2 9.8 31.1 50.8 61 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 7.4 9.3 9.3 35.2 38.9 54 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 7.4 9.3 9.3 31.5 42.6 54 Emergency Healthcare 3.6 5.4 5.4 30.4 55.4 56 Preventative Healthcare 3.5 8.8 5.3 28.1 54.4 57 Health Insurance 3.4 5.2 3.4 31.0 56.9 58

Of all Cooke County clients and community members who responded, 56.9% of those who said they were "retired" also said that "employment" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 410 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Employed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 37 2 12 Utility Bill Assistance 31 0 9 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 19 0 5 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 13 2 5 Childcare 6 0 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 6 0 2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 0 2 2 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 6 0 2 Medicare or Medicaid 50 2 16 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 6 0 2

N 16 41 57 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Cooke County clients who responded, 37% of those who were "employed" were also enrolled in and receiving "food assistance" at the time. Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 2% of those who were "employed" had also used "employment assistance" in the past year.

411 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 79 32 61 Utility Bill Assistance 68 18 48 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 41 18 32 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 24 0 14 Childcare 3 0 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 3 5 4 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 3 0 2 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 0 0 0 Medicare or Medicaid 68 73 70 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 3 0 2

N 34 22 56 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Cooke County clients who responded, 79% of those who were "unemployed" were also enrolled in and receiving "food assistance" at the time. Of all Cooke County community members who responded, 73% of those who were "unemployed" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

412 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Retired)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 52 11 26 Utility Bill Assistance 88 11 39 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 24 5 12 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 4 0 1 Childcare 0 0 0 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 0 2 1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 0 0 0 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 0 0 0 Medicare or Medicaid 92 70 78 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 4 0 1

N 25 44 69 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Cooke County clients who responded, 78% of clients who were "retired" were also enrolled in and receiving "Medicare or Medicaid" at the time. Of all Cooke County community members who responded, 70% of those who were "retired" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" services in the past year.

413 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Cooke County Surveys Received - By Respondent Type

Frequency (%) Community 108 54.5 Client 79 39.9 Service Providers 7 3.5 Elected Officials 4 2

N 198 Of all Cooke County surveys received, 54.5% were from the "community."

414 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

FANNIN COUNTY TABLES

Fannin County - All Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) Elected Service Providers (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Employment 31 60 40 100 46 Financial Security 13 8 28 0 22 Housing 50 49 14 0 26 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 50 49 43 0 45 Transportation 44 31 27 0 30 Education 63 37 16 100 25 Food/Clothing 31 54 20 0 30 Info On Services 6 2 0 0 2 Childcare/Youth Services 44 27 13 100 19 Utilities 13 30 27 0 27 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 0 6 14 0 11 Crime (not drug-related) 13 3 0 0 2 Poverty Mentality 0 3 1 0 2 Domestic 6 6 3 0 4 Substance Abuse 0 2 0 0 1 Other 0 12 18 0 15

N 16 90 219 1 330 Of all Fannin County service providers who responded, 63% listed "education" as one of the 5 most critical unmet needs among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all Fannin County community members who responded, 54% listed "food/clothing" as one of the top 5 needs facing low-income people in their community. Of all Fannin County clients who responded, 43% listed "healthcare/medical/counseling" as one of the top 5 most critical needs that keep them from being self-sufficient. Of all Fannin County elected officials who responded, 100% listed "employment" as one of the top 5 most critical needs facing low-income individuals in the community. N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Fannin County #1 Need (Open-ended Answers)

Elected Service Providers (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Employment 19 41 24 0 28 Financial Security 0 3 13 0 10 Housing 6 2 3 0 4 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 25 12 18 0 17 Transportation 0 0 6 0 4 Education 13 3 4 100 5 Food/Clothing 13 18 5 0 9 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 0 0 10 0 7 Utilities 19 4 2 0 3 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 6 12 8 0 9 Crime (not drug-related) 0 1 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 0 0 Domestic 0 0 1 0 1 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 2 5 0 4

N 16 90 219 1 330 Of all Fannin County service providers who responded, 19% listed "employment" as the most critical unmet need among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all Fannin County community members who responded, 41% listed "employment" as the top need facing low-income people in their community. Of all Fannin County clients who responded, 24% listed "employment" as the top critical need that keeps them from being self-sufficient. Of all Fannin County elected officials who responded, 100% listed "education" as the top critical need facing low-income individuals in the community.

416 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - All Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 23.9 4.2 3.1 16.1 52.7 370 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 23.9 4.2 3.1 16.1 52.7 355 More Education (For Better Employment) 19.2 3.1 4.7 20.3 52.8 360 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 29.2 3.2 6.9 24.1 36.7 349 School Readiness (For Children) 27.4 2.9 2.9 20.3 46.6 350 Affordable Childcare 31.8 4.8 4 15.9 43.5 352 Summer Childcare 33.4 4.6 6.1 21.3 34.6 347 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 32.9 6.6 8.4 22.8 29.4 347 Use Public Transportation 30.6 8.3 10.6 23.9 26.7 360 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 27 6.3 4.1 25.1 37.5 363 Temporary Shelter 38.7 11.4 11.1 21.7 17.1 351 Rent Assistance 23.6 5.9 6.2 26.4 37.9 356 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 13.1 3.7 4.5 24.4 54.3 381 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 21.1 5.3 7 26.1 40.4 356 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 25.1 7 7 21.2 39.8 359 Emergency Healthcare 20.6 7.3 5.1 22.3 44.6 354 Preventative Healthcare 18.6 7.1 4.8 24.6 44.9 354 Health Insurance 16 5.7 4.9 20.9 52.6 350

Of all Fannin County respondents, 54.3% ranked "utility assistance" as "very important." 417 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 1 2 13.7 83.3 102 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying 1 2 23.5 73.5 98 Job) More Education (For Better Employment) 1 1 29.3 68.7 99 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive 1 1 4.1 34.7 59.2 98 Environment and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 2 1 33 64 100 Affordable Childcare 1 2 1 32.7 63.4 101 Summer Childcare 1 1 1 48.5 48.5 97 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic 1 2 2 44 51 100 Violence Services, etc…) Use Public Transportation 7.1 2 13.3 42.9 34.7 98 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 6.2 1 2.1 50.5 40.2 97 Temporary Shelter 9.4 1 15.6 52.1 21.9 96 Rent Assistance 2.1 1 4.2 62.5 30.2 96 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 1 5.1 50.5 43.4 99 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 1 8.2 53.6 37.1 97 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know 5.1 1 3.1 38.8 52 98 Where Next Meal Will Come From) Emergency Healthcare 2.1 1 1 33.3 62.5 96 Preventative Healthcare 1 42.3 56.7 97 Health Insurance 1.1 2.2 34.4 62.2 90

Of all Fannin County community members who responded, 83.3% ranked "employment" as "very important" for reducing poverty in their community and helping people get off social services. 418 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 40.1 4.5 6.9 10.1 38.5 247 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying 35.6 5.5 4.7 12.3 41.9 236 Job) More Education (For Better Employment) 28.8 4.2 6.7 16.3 44.2 240 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive 43.7 4.3 8.7 16.5 26.8 231 Environment and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 41.9 3.5 3.5 14 37.1 229 Affordable Childcare 48.3 6.5 5.7 7.4 32.2 230 Summer Childcare 50.2 6.6 8.3 7.4 27.5 229 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic 50 9.3 11.9 11.1 17.7 226 Violence Services, etc…) Use Public Transportation 42.7 11.6 10.4 15.4 19.9 241 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 37.6 9 5.3 14.7 33.5 245 Temporary Shelter 54.3 16.7 9.8 6.8 12.4 234 Rent Assistance 34.3 8.4 7.5 12.1 37.7 239 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 19.2 5 4.6 14.2 57.1 261 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 31.5 7.6 6.7 13.9 40.3 238 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know 35.4 10 9.2 12.9 32.5 240 Where Next Meal Will Come From) Emergency Healthcare 30 10.5 7.2 16 36.3 237 Preventative Healthcare 28 10.2 7.2 16.5 38.1 236 Health Insurance 23.4 7.9 6.3 14.2 48.1 239

Of all Fannin County clients who responded, 48.1% ranked "health insurance" as "very important" for helping them get out of poverty and off of public services. 419 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Service Provider Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 20 80 20 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying 25 75 20 Job) More Education (For Better Employment) 25 75 20 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive 57.9 42.1 19 Environment and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 5 25 70 20 Affordable Childcare 25 75 20 Summer Childcare 50 50 20 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic 45 55 20 Violence Services, etc…) Use Public Transportation 35 65 20 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 30 70 20 Temporary Shelter 50 50 20 Rent Assistance 25 75 20 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 30 70 20 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 5 40 55 20 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know 35 65 20 Where Next Meal Will Come From) Emergency Healthcare 45 55 20 Preventative Healthcare 35 65 20 Health Insurance 40 60 20

Of all Fannin County service providers who responded, 80% ranked "employment" as "very important" for helping clients get out of poverty and off of public services. 420 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Elected Official Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 100 1 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 100 1 More Education (For Better Employment) 100 1 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 100 1 School Readiness (For Children) 100 1 Affordable Childcare 100 1 Summer Childcare 100 1 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 100 1 Use Public Transportation 100 1 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 100 1 Temporary Shelter 100 1 Rent Assistance 100 1 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 100 1 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 100 1 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 100 1 Emergency Healthcare 100 1 Preventative Healthcare 100 1 Health Insurance 100 1

Of all Fannin County elected officials who responded, 100% ranked "living wage employment" as "very important" for helping low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 421 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Service Provider Respondents How do clients and low-income residents access information about available services?

(%) Info from 211 33 Info from TV 14 Info from mail 10 Info from fliers 38 Info from friends and family 86 Info from phone 29

N 21 Of all Fannin County service providers who responded, 86% said their clients and low-income residents access information about available resources from "friends and family."

Fannin County - Service Provider Respondents Do low-income individuals in the community have adequate access to information?

(%) Ye s 66.7 No 33.3

N 21 Of all Fannin County service providers who responded, 66.7% said that low-income individuals in the community do have adequate access to information.

422 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client and Community Respondents Services Used

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 63 15 50 Utility Bill Assistance 34 5 27 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 29 5 23 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 7 6 6 Childcare 3 6 4 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 1 0 1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 3 2 3 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 4 2 4 Medicare or Medicaid 72 31 61 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 20 1 15

N 303 108 411

* services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Fannin County clients who responded, 72% said that they were currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from "Medicare or Medicaid." Of all Fannin County community members who responded, 31% said that they had used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

423 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Somewhat Very Hopeful Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 21 21 49 54 Financial Security 16 21 29 37 Housing 18 12 17 12 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 63 67 27 31 Transportation 21 23 34 29 Education 5 5 20 25 Food/Clothing 26 28 17 16 Info On Services 0 0 0 1 Childcare/Youth Services 3 7 12 22 Utilities 26 30 29 26 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 24 33 7 5 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 3 0 0 1 Domestic 0 2 2 4 Substance Abuse 0 2 0 0 Other 13 14 22 19

N 38 43 41 93 Of all Fannin County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 54% said that "employment" was one of the top five most critical needs keeping them from being self-sufficient.

424 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Somewhat Very Hopeful Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 11 7 39 30 Financial Security 13 7 17 15 Housing 0 2 2 5 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 26 33 10 11 Transportation 5 7 10 5 Education 3 0 5 6 Food/Clothing 8 7 2 4 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 18 23 5 3 Utilities 0 2 0 3 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 11 9 7 8 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 0 Domestic 0 0 0 2 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other 5 2 2 6

N 38 43 41 93 Of all Fannin County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 15% said that "financial security" was the top most critical need keeping them from being self-sufficient.

425 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale - "Very Important") by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Very Not at All Somewhat Hopeful Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment (Need a Job) 16.7 22.2 51.1 48.3 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 20 24.2 48.8 55 More Education (For Better Employment) 34.3 20.6 45.5 56.6 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 20.6 15.6 31 32.7 School Readiness (For Children) 25.8 21.2 40.5 47.3 Affordable Childcare 12.1 12.1 41.5 44 Summer Childcare 15.2 12.5 35.7 35.2 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 3 12.5 29.3 20.6 Use Public Transportation 11.4 25 26.7 20.7 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 22.9 37.8 34.9 37.9 Temporary Shelter 11.4 8.8 18.2 12.8 Rent Assistance 21.2 51.4 47.6 37.7 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 52.5 70.7 63.3 55.8 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 33.3 23.7 53.5 39.4 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 29.7 32.4 47.7 30.9 Emergency Healthcare 37.1 34.8 41.9 35.1 Preventative Healthcare 41.7 42.9 40.9 38.2 Health Insurance 54.3 44.7 51.2 51.4

N 46 46 50 132 Of all Fannin County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 56.6% said that "living wage employment" was "very important" for helping them get out of poverty and off of public services. 426 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client Respondents Services Used by Hopefulness about becoming Self-Sufficient

Very Not at All Somewhat Hopeful Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Food Assistance 61 78 70 64 Utility Bill Assistance 43 54 38 26 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 28 46 26 28 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 2 0 14 9 Childcare 0 2 2 5 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 0 4 0 1

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 0 7 2 4 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 2 4 4 6 Medicare or Medicaid 78 80 72 70 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 11 2 28 29

N 46 46 50 132 Of all Fannin County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 64% said they were currently enrolled in and receiving "food assistance."

N – number of respondents 427 Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client and Community Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Employment Status

Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%) Employment 56 49 25 Financial Security 23 27 16 Housing 29 17 28 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 37 42 64 Transportation 26 34 25 Education 34 17 12 Food/Clothing 33 25 35 Info On Services 1 0 1 Childcare/Youth Services 25 18 4 Utilities 26 25 36 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 3 12 25 Crime (not drug-related) 3 0 0 Poverty Mentality 3 1 1 Domestic 8 2 0 Substance Abuse 2 1 0 Other 17 12 20

N 115 113 75 Of all Fannin County clients and community members who responded, 49% of those who were "unemployed" included "employment" as one of the top five most critical needs either facing themselves or the community.

428 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client and Community Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Employment Status

Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%) Employment 32 34 15 Financial Security 10 12 9 Housing 3 3 3 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 12 17 24 Transportation 3 8 3 Education 6 4 0 Food/Clothing 13 4 8 Info On Services 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 0 8 17 Utilities 3 2 3 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 10 5 15 Crime (not drug-related) 1 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 0 0 Domestic 2 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 Other 5 4 4

N 118 113 75 Of all Fannin County clients and community members who responded, 32% of those who were "employed" included "employment" as the top most critical need either facing themselves or the community.

429 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client and Community Respondents Are you currently employed?

Frequency All (%) Employed 166 41.3 Unemployed 95 23.6 Retired 141 35.1

N 402 Of all Fannin County clients and community members who responded, 41.3% said that they were "employed."

N – number of respondents 430 Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Employed)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 26 2.7 5.3 10 56 150 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 15.5 2 2 17.2 62.2 148 More Education (For Better Employment) 12 1.3 2.7 24.7 59.3 150 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 24.7 2.1 5.5 22.6 45.2 146 School Readiness (For Children) 22.9 1.4 3.5 19.4 52.8 144 Affordable Childcare 24 3.4 4.1 18.5 50 146 Summer Childcare 26.4 2.8 4.9 25 41 144 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 27.8 6.9 11.1 23.6 30.6 144 Use Public Transportation 31.3 8.2 15.6 24.5 20.4 147 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 29.1 6.8 4.7 25 34.5 148 Temporary Shelter 37 14.4 12.3 24 12.3 146 Rent Assistance 23.3 8.2 7.5 32.9 28.1 146 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 17.4 4.0 7.4 28.9 42.3 149 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 21.8 5.6 8.5 30.3 33.8 142 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 27.1 8.3 9.0 22.9 32.6 144 Emergency Healthcare 21.1 7.5 6.1 23.1 42.2 147 Preventative Healthcare 19.7 7.5 3.4 27.9 41.5 147 Health Insurance 19.1 5.0 4.3 25.5 46.1 141

Of all Fannin County clients and community members who responded, 62.2% of those who said they were "employed" also said that "living wage employment" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 431 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 22.8 3.9 3.9 13.4 55.9 127 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 29.5 6.6 4.1 13.9 45.9 122 More Education (For Better Employment) 20.8 3.2 7.2 16.8 52 125 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 35 3.3 10 19.2 32.5 120 School Readiness (For Children) 32 3.3 1.6 15.6 47.5 122 Affordable Childcare 40.3 5.6 4.8 8.1 41.1 124 Summer Childcare 42.3 5.7 8.1 9.8 34.1 123 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 41.8 7.4 9.8 17.2 23.8 122 Use Public Transportation 32 9.4 9.4 21.1 28.1 128 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 27.8 7.9 5.6 19 39.7 126 Temporary Shelter 43.5 12.1 11.3 12.9 20.2 124 Rent Assistance 22.8 6.3 7.1 17.3 46.5 127 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 13.7 5.3 3.8 17.6 59.5 131 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 25.8 6.5 8.1 16.9 42.7 124 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 21.9 8.6 7.8 16.4 45.3 128 Emergency Healthcare 21.8 8.1 7.3 15.3 47.6 124 Preventative Healthcare 21.4 6.3 9.5 19.0 43.7 126 Health Insurance 16.5 6.6 6.6 13.2 57.0 121

Of all Fannin County clients and community members who responded, 57% of those who said they were "unemployed" also said that "health insurance" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 432 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Retired)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 43.3 6 6 10.4 34.3 67 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 39 6.8 5.1 13.6 35.6 59 More Education (For Better Employment) 36.7 8.3 6.7 16.7 31.7 60 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 35.6 6.8 6.8 25.4 25.4 59 School Readiness (For Children) 35.6 6.8 3.4 28.8 25.4 59 Affordable Childcare 42.1 8.8 3.5 22.8 22.8 57 Summer Childcare 41.8 9.1 5.5 27.3 16.4 55 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 37.5 7.1 1.8 23.2 30.4 56 Use Public Transportation 33.3 10 5 25 26.7 60 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 26.6 4.7 1.6 35.9 31.3 64 Temporary Shelter 43.9 7 10.5 26.3 12.3 57 Rent Assistance 31.0 0.7 3.4 32.8 31.0 58 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 5.3 1.3 1.3 27.6 64.5 76 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 15.4 4.6 3.1 32.3 44.6 65 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 32.3 3.2 3.2 24.2 37.1 62 Emergency Healthcare 20.3 8.5 28.8 42.4 59 Preventative Healthcare 12.5 10.7 26.8 50.0 56 Health Insurance 9.5 7.9 4.8 19.0 58.7 63

Of all Fannin County clients and community members who responded, 64.5% of those who said they were "retired" also said that "utility assistance" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 433 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Employed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 57 8 39 Utility Bill Assistance 15 3 11 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 21 5 15 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 4 5 4 Childcare 6 8 7 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 0 0 0

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 2 3 2 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 5 2 4 Medicare or Medicaid 62 15 44 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 28 2 18

N 104 62 166 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Fannin County clients who responded, 57% of those who were "employed" were also enrolled in and receiving "food assistance" at the time. Of all Fannin County community members who responded, 15% of those who were "employed" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

434 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 68 37 65 Utility Bill Assistance 34 6 31 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 39 6 35 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 12 19 13 Childcare 2 0 1 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 2 0 1

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 3 0 3 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 5 6 5 Medicare or Medicaid 74 37 70 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 25 0 22

N 125 16 141 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Fannin County clients who responded, 74% of those who were "unemployed" were also enrolled in and receiving "Medicare or Medicaid" at the time. Of all Fannin County community members who responded, 37% of those who were "unemployed" had also used "food assistance" in the past year.

435 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Retired)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 68 17 53 Utility Bill Assistance 64 7 46 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 21 3 16 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 0 0 0 Childcare 2 3 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 2 0 1

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 6 0 4 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 3 0 2 Medicare or Medicaid 82 66 77 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 2 0 1

N 66 29 95 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Fannin County clients who responded, 82% of clients who were "retired" were also enrolled in and receiving "Medicare or Medicaid" at the time. Of all Fannin County community members who responded, 66% of those who were "retired" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" services in the past year.

436 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Fannin County Surveys Received - By Respondent Type

Frequency (%) Community 108 25 Client 303 70.1 Service Providers 20 4.6 Elected Officials 1 0.2

N 432 Of all Fannin County surveys received, 70.1% were from "clients."

N – number of respondents 437 Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

GRAYSON COUNTY TABLES

Grayson County - All Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers)

Service Providers Elected (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Employment 46 45 41 100 43 Financial Security 17 13 38 0 27 Housing 75 53 12 100 32 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 79 55 41 100 48 Transportation 46 38 35 0 37 Education 25 22 17 0 19 Food/Clothing 8 58 19 50 35 Info On Services 8 1 2 50 1 Childcare/Youth Services 25 29 14 0 21 Utilities 8 36 30 0 32 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 4 4 12 50 8 Crime (not drug-related) 0 3 0 0 1 Poverty Mentality 4 4 2 0 3 Domestic 4 4 3 0 4 Substance Abuse 13 3 0 0 2 Other 21 12 15 0 14

N 24 337 442 2 813 Of all Grayson County service providers who responded, 46% listed "employment" as one of the 5 most critical unmet needs among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 45% listed "employment" as one of the top 5 needs facing low-income people in their community. Of all Grayson County clients who responded, 41% listed "employment" as one of the top 5 most critical needs that keep them from being self-sufficient. Of all Grayson County elected officials who responded, 100% listed "employment" as one of the top 5 most critical needs facing low-income individuals in the community. 438 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County #1 Need (Open-ended Answers)

Service Providers Elected (%) Community (%) Clients (%) Officials (%) All (%) Employment 13 26 24 100 24 Financial Security 0 4 19 0 12 Housing 54 15 2 0 9 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 17 11 19 0 16 Transportation 8 4 8 0 6 Education 4 4 3 0 4 Food/Clothing 0 18 3 0 9 Info On Services 4 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 0 1 6 0 3 Utilities 0 4 2 0 3 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 0 8 11 0 9 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 0 1 0 0 1 Domestic 0 0 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 1 0 0 0 Other 0 4 3 0 30

N 24 337 442 2 813 Of all Grayson County service providers who responded, 54% listed "housing" as the most critical unmet need among low-income individuals and families in the communities they serve. Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 26% listed "employment" as the top need facing low-income people in their community. Of all Grayson County clients who responded, 24% listed "employment" as the top critical need that keeps them from being self-sufficient. Of all Grayson County elected officials who responded, 100% listed "employment" as the top critical need facing low-income individuals in the community.

439 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - All Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 18.2 4.6 2.3 10.9 64.1 835 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 17.3 3.6 2 18.9 58.3 816 More Education (For Better Employment) 14.8 4.5 3.1 25.3 52.3 818 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment 20.5 5.7 5.8 24.2 43.8 809 and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 20 5.8 5.3 24.3 44.5 805 Affordable Childcare 23 6.9 4.2 19.6 46.3 808 Summer Childcare 23.5 7.1 5.9 22 41.6 801 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence 22.4 8 7.5 25.4 36.7 802 Services, etc…) Use Public Transportation 18.3 6.6 8.9 27.9 38.3 809 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 13.8 5.8 5.4 25.7 49.3 817 Temporary Shelter 27.4 10.2 11.2 26.2 25.1 798 Rent Assistance 11.9 4.2 4.1 31.5 48.3 806

Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 3.9 3.1 2.8 24.6 65.6 843

Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 13.1 3.7 8.5 29.1 45.6 804 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next 16.1 4.9 6.7 27.1 45.1 818 Meal Will Come From) Emergency Healthcare 10.6 4.7 5.1 24.8 54.7 822 Preventative Healthcare 9.2 3.9 4.6 28.8 53.4 812 Health Insurance 8.7 3.5 3.2 25.7 59.0 807

Of all Grayson County respondents, 64.1% ranked "employment" as "very important." 440 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 2.8 2.2 0.6 11.4 83.1 361 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 2.2 2 1.7 25.5 68.6 357 More Education (For Better Employment) 2.2 1.7 3.1 31.7 61.2 356 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment 1.9 2.5 3.1 31.8 60.7 359 and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 2.3 2 3.7 33.4 58.6 353 Affordable Childcare 2.3 2 1.1 29.9 64.7 354 Summer Childcare 2.6 2.3 2.6 33.9 58.7 351 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence 2 2.3 4.2 38.1 53.4 354 Services, etc…) Use Public Transportation 2.5 2.5 5.6 35.2 54.1 355 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 2.9 2 5.4 41.4 48.3 350 Temporary Shelter 4 3.1 8.9 44.9 39.1 350 Rent Assistance 3.2 2.6 4.9 46 43.4 348 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 2 3.1 4.3 36.9 53.7 352 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 2.6 2.6 9 45.4 40.5 346 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next 3.6 2.8 3.1 31.9 58.5 357 Meal Will Come From) Emergency Healthcare 2.5 2.8 4.5 30.2 60.1 358 Preventative Healthcare 2.8 2 3.6 36.1 55.5 357 Health Insurance 3.2 2.3 4.4 33.4 56.7 344

Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 83.1% ranked "employment" as "very important" for reducing poverty in their community and helping people get off social services.

441 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 31.6 6.5 3.8 10.7 47.4 449 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 30.6 4.8 2.3 13.4 48.8 434 More Education (For Better Employment) 25.9 6.9 3.2 20.1 43.9 437 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 37.2 8.5 8.5 16.2 29.6 425 School Readiness (For Children) 35.6 9.1 6.8 15.7 32.8 427 Affordable Childcare 41.5 11.2 6.8 10 30.5 429 Summer Childcare 42.1 1.3 8.7 10.8 27.1 425 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 40.8 13.2 10.4 14.2 21.5 424 Use Public Transportation 32.3 10.2 11.2 22.3 24 430 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 23.3 8.8 5.4 12.2 50.2 442 Temporary Shelter 48.2 16.1 12.8 10.6 12.3 423 Rent Assistance 19.4 5.8 3.5 19.1 52.3 434 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 5.6 3 1.9 14.4 75.1 466 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 21.7 4.6 7.2 15.5 51 433 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 27.3 6.4 9.6 23.4 33.3 436 Emergency Healthcare 17.8 6.4 5.9 20 49.9 439 Preventative Healthcare 15.1 5.6 5.6 22.6 51.2 430 Health Insurance 13.5 4.3 2.5 18.9 60.7 438

Of all Grayson County clients who responded, 48.8% ranked "living wage employment" as "very important" for helping them get out of poverty and off of public services.

N – number of respondents 442 Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Service Provider Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 4.3 8.7 87 23 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 4.3 21.7 73.9 23 More Education (For Better Employment) 4.3 26.1 69.6 23 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment 4.3 4.3 47.8 43.5 23 and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 4.3 4.3 43.5 47.8 23 Affordable Childcare 4.3 39.1 56.5 23 Summer Childcare 4.3 43.5 52.2 23 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence 4.5 31.8 63.6 22 Services, etc…) Use Public Transportation 18.2 18.2 63.6 22 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 4.3 4.3 43.5 47.8 23 Temporary Shelter 4.3 8.7 8.7 30.4 47.8 23 Rent Assistance 4.5 4.5 45.5 45.5 22 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 4.3 43.5 52.2 23 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 8.7 4.3 21.7 43.5 21.7 23 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next 8.7 8.7 26.1 56.5 23 Meal Will Come From) Emergency Healthcare 4.3 34.8 60.9 23 Preventative Healthcare 4.3 34.8 60.9 23 Health Insurance 4.3 39.1 56.5 23

Of all Grayson County service providers who responded, 87% ranked "employment" as "very important" for helping clients get out of poverty and off of public services.

N – number of respondents 443 Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Elected Official Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 100 2 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 100 2 More Education (For Better Employment) 100 2 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment 100 2 and Skill Building School Readiness (For Children) 50 50 2 Affordable Childcare 50 50 2 Summer Childcare 50 50 2 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence 100 2 Services, etc…) Use Public Transportation 50 50 2 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 50 50 2 Temporary Shelter 100 2 Rent Assistance 50 50 2 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 100 2 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 50 50 2 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next 100 2 Meal Will Come From) Emergency Healthcare 100 2 Preventative Healthcare 100 2 Health Insurance 100 2

Of all Grayson County elected officials who responded, 100% ranked "more education" as "very important" for helping low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services. 444 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Service Provider Respondents How do clients and low-income residents access information about available services?

(%) Info from internet 27 Info from 211 58 Info from TV 27 Info from mail 15 Info from fliers 31 Info from friends and family 73 Info from phone 19

N 26 Of all Grayson County service providers who responded, 58% said their clients and low-income residents access information about available resources from "friends and family."

Grayson County - Service Provider Respondents Do low-income individuals in the community have adequate access to information?

(%) Yes 44 No 56

N 25 Of all Grayson County service providers who responded, 44% said that low-income individuals in the community do have adequate access to information.

445 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client and Community Respondents Services Used

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 64 16 43 Utility Bill Assistance 42 10 28 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, 30 5 19 etc…) Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience 11 8 10 Works, etc…) Childcare 2 2 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy 1 1 1 Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 4 2 2 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 6 2 4 Medicare or Medicaid 67 40 55 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 11 2 7

N 516 387 903 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Grayson County clients who responded, 67% said that they were currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from "Medicare or Medicaid." Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 16% said that they had used "food assistance" in the past year.

446 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client Respondents Top Five Needs (Open-ended Answers) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Hopeful Somewhat Very H opeful Unsure (%) (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 31 20 48 51 Financial Security 34 51 30 38 Housing 10 14 15 12 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 48 69 41 30 Transportation 30 37 33 38 Education 16 1 23 21 Food/Clothing 16 20 12 22 Info On Services 0 1 0 2 Childcare/Youth Services 10 7 13 19 Utilities 34 19 34 32 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 13 24 13 7 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 5 0 2 2 Domestic 2 0 3 5 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other 18 14 12 14

N 61 70 86 209 Of all Grayson County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 51% said that "employment" was one of the top five most critical needs keeping them from being self-sufficient.

447 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Hopeful Somewhat Very Hopeful Unsure (%) (%) Hopeful (%) (%) Employment 16 6 26 33 Financial Security 15 30 12 18 Housing 2 1 1 4 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 25 37 21 11 Transportation 7 9 13 6 Education 3 0 2 5 Food/Clothing 5 3 0 3 Info On Services 0 0 0 0 Childcare/Youth Services 7 11 5 4 Utilities 3 0 1 2 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 15 1 17 10 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 0 0 Poverty Mentality 2 0 0 0 Domestic 0 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 0 Other 2 1 2 3

N 61 70 86 209 Of all Grayson County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 33% said that "employment" was the top most critical need keeping them from being self-sufficient.

448 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale - "Very Important") by Hopefulness About Becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Somewhat Very Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) Employment (Need a Job) 42.6 18.8 44.3 59.4 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 35.8 24.6 45.3 61.9 More Education (For Better Employment) 32.1 16.7 42.7 51.9 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 32.1 13.3 23.9 37.4 School Readiness (For Children) 34.6 13.6 28.1 39.6 Affordable Childcare 28.8 11.9 24.2 39.5 Summer Childcare 25 11.9 24.2 34 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 22 12.5 18.9 25.5 Use Public Transportation 34.6 29 16 24.3 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 62.5 56.5 43.6 49.3 Temporary Shelter 14 15.5 7.4 13 Rent Assistance 67.9 56.5 41.5 52.6 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 81 83.8 71.9 72.8 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 63 60 41.5 49.8 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 43.6 37.1 24.7 33 Emergency Healthcare 59.3 51.6 47.4 47.7 Preventative Healthcare 59.6 57.1 53.1 41.4 Health Insurance 66 54.7 59.1 55.3

N 71 79 102 237 Of all Grayson County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 72.8% said that "utility assistance" was "very important" for helping them get out of poverty and off of public services. 449 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client Respondents Services Used by Hopefulness about becoming Self-Sufficient

Not at All Somewhat Very Unsure (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) Hopeful (%) Food Assistance 68 59 65 66 Utility Bill Assistance 45 63 42 33 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, etc…) 38 43 16 30 Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience Works, etc…) 7 1 13 15 Childcare 0 1 4 3 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) 0 0 2 2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 4 3 3 3 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 4 5 3 8 Medicare or Medicaid 70 81 73 59 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 7 3 15 13

N 71 79 102 237 Of all Grayson County clients who responded and were "very hopeful" about achieving self-sufficiency within the next 5 years, 66% said they were currently enrolled in and receiving "food assistance."

450 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client and Community Respondents #1 Top Need (Open-ended Answer) by Employment Status

Employed (%) Unemployed (%) Retired (%) Employment 27 34 13 Financial Security 9 14 14 Housing 10 3 11 Healthcare/Medical/Counseling 13 13 23 Transportation 6 6 6 Education 6 4 1 Food/Clothing 10 4 1 Info On Services 0 0 14 Childcare/Youth Services 1 4 0 Utilities 5 2 6 Elderly/Disabled Misc. 9 12 0 Crime (not drug-related) 0 0 9 Poverty Mentality 1 1 0 Domestic 0 0 0 Substance Abuse 0 0 0 Other 3 3 4

N 288 239 238 Of all Grayson County clients and community members who responded, 34% of those who were "unemployed" included "employment" as the top most critical need either facing themselves or the community.

451 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client and Community Respondents Are you currently employed?

Frequency All (%) Employed 323 35.9 Unemployed 275 30.6 Retired 290 32.3

N 899 Of all Grayson County clients and community members who responded, 35.9% said that they were "employed."

452 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Employed)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Emp loyment (Need a Job) 12.3 2.9 1.3 9.7 73.8 309 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 4.5 1.9 1.3 22.6 69.7 310 More Education (For Better Employment) 3.6 1.3 1.7 31.4 62 303 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 9.5 3.6 5.6 27.1 54.2 306 School Readiness (For Children) 8.5 3.3 4.6 29.5 54.1 305 Affordable Childcare 10.8 4.2 2.9 21.9 60.1 306 Summer Childcare 12.1 4.3 4.6 26.9 52.1 305 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 11.4 5.9 7.2 33 42.5 306 Use Public Transportation 10.8 7.8 8.8 30.7 41.8 306 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 9 4.7 4 32.1 50.2 299 Temporary Shelter 18.5 8.6 11.9 33.7 27.4 303 Rent Assistance 8.0 3.0 5.3 39.0 44.7 300 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 2.3 3.2 3.9 32.0 58.6 309 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 10.6 2.6 10.9 35.1 40.7 302 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 12.2 3.6 5.3 30.0 48.8 303 Emergency Healthcare 7.7 5.8 6.1 24.8 55.5 310 Preventative Healthcare 7.6 4.9 4.3 28.6 54.6 304 Health Insurance 8.0 4.0 5.0 25.7 57.3 300

Of all Grayson County clients and community members who responded, 73.8% of those who said they were "employed" also said that "employment" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services.

453 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 19 3.7 2.6 11.2 63.6 269 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 23.8 3.5 2.7 16.5 53.5 260 More Education (For Better Employment) 17.6 5.4 3.8 20.7 52.5 261 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 28.2 6.3 7.1 24.3 34.1 255 School Readiness (For Children) 27.6 7.4 6.2 22.2 36.6 257 Affordable Childcare 32.3 9.2 6.9 15 36.5 260 Summer Childcare 32.9 9.4 9.4 16.1 32.2 255 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 32.8 10.3 11.5 19.4 26.1 253 Use Public Transportation 27 5.9 12.1 25.4 29.7 256 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 17.7 6.8 6.4 18.5 50.6 265 Temporary Shelter 37.9 12.3 13.4 19.4 17 253 Rent Assistance 13.5 4.2 4.2 23.8 54.2 260 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 4.5 3.0 1.9 17.6 73.0 267 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 16.3 4.9 7.3 22.4 49.2 246 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 23.3 5.7 8.8 25.6 36.6 262 Emergency Healthcare 13.0 4.2 7.7 23.0 52.1 261 Preventative Healthcare 9.2 3.1 7.3 26.5 53.8 260 Health Insurance 9.1 3.2 3.6 22.9 61.3 253

Of all Grayson County clients and community members who responded, 73% of those who said they were "unemployed" also said that "utility assistance" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services.

454 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - Client and Community Respondents Importance of Services (Rating Scale) by Employment Status (Retired)

Completely Unimportant Unimportant Important Very N/A (%) (%) (%) (%) Important (%) N Employment (Need a Job) 27.4 7.2 3.6 12.1 49.8 223 Living Wage Employment (Need a Better Paying Job) 29.7 6.1 2.4 16 45.8 212 More Education (For Better Employment) 28.2 7.7 4.5 22.3 37.3 220 Enrichment Programs for Youth (Positive Environment and Skill Building 29 8.4 5.1 16.8 40.7 214 School Readiness (For Children) 29.2 8.1 5.7 16.7 40.2 209 Affordable Childcare 31.3 8.7 2.9 19.2 38 208 Summer Childcare 30.4 9.2 3.4 20.3 36.7 207 Family Services (Crisis Counseling, Domestic Violence Services, etc…) 27.6 9.5 3.8 21 38.1 210 Use Public Transportation 19.5 6.5 4.2 28.8 40.9 215 Need Reliable Personal Vehicle 17.3 6.4 6.4 23.2 46.8 220 Temporary Shelter 29.7 10.5 7.2 23.4 29.2 209 Rent Assistance 16.4 6.5 2.3 29.4 45.3 214 Utility Assistance (Water Bill, Electric Bill, etc…) 6.0 3.0 3.0 21.5 66.5 233 Improvements to Heating and A/C in Home 13.0 3.6 4.9 26.9 51.6 223 Emergency Food Assistance (Do Not Know Where Next Meal Will Come From) 14.5 5.4 5.9 25.3 48.9 221 Emergency Healthcare 13.2 4.1 1.4 25.9 55.5 220 Preventative Healthcare 13.0 3.2 2.3 31.5 50.0 216 Health Insurance 10.4 3.2 0.9 27.0 58.6 222

Of all Grayson County clients and community members who responded, 66.5% of those who said they were "retired" also said that "utility assistance" was "very important" for helping either themselves or low-income residents in their community get out of poverty and off of public services.

455 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Employed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 58 9 29 Utility Bill Assistance 28 8 16 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, 24 2 11 etc…) Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience 4 8 7 Works, etc…) Childcare 5 3 4 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy 1 1 1 Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 2 1 1 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 13 3 7 Medicare or Medicaid 49 13 27 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 18 3 9

N 131 192 323 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Grayson County clients who responded, 58% of those who were "employed" were also enrolled in and receiving "food assistance" at the time. Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 13% of those who were "employed" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

456 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Unemployed)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 74 38 67 Utility Bill Assistance 34 17 31 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, 31 10 27 etc…) Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience 21 21 21 Works, etc…) Childcare 2 2 2 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy 2 2 2 Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 5 0 4 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 6 2 5 Medicare or Medicaid 69 62 68 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 13 5 12

N 232 58 290 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Grayson County clients who responded, 74% of those who were "unemployed" were also enrolled in and receiving "food assistance" at the time. Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 62% of those who were "unemployed" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" in the past year.

457 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County - All Respondents Services Used by Employment Status (Retired)

Community Clients (%)* (%)** All (%) Food Assistance 53 13 34 Utility Bill Assistance 65 11 39 Housing or Rent Assistance (Section 8, Housing Authority, 35 7 22 etc…) Employment Assistance (Workforce Solutions, Experience 3 2 3 Works, etc…) Childcare 1 0 0 Family Service Agency Assistance (Children's Advocacy 1 1 1 Center, Grayson County Women's Crisis Center Line, Family Crisis Center, etc…) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 3 1 2 Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) 1 1 1 Medicare or Medicaid 81 69 76 Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Assistance 1 0 0

N 144 131 275 * services currently enrolled in and receiving assistance from **services used in the past year Of all Grayson County clients who responded, 81% of clients who were "retired" were also enrolled in and receiving "Medicare or Medicaid" at the time. Of all Grayson County community members who responded, 69% of those who were "retired" had also used "Medicare or Medicaid" services in the past year.

458 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

Grayson County Surveys Received - By Respondent Type

Frequency (%) Community 387 41.7 Client 516 55.5 Service Providers 24 2.6 Elected Officials 2 0.2

N 929 Of all Grayson County surveys received, 55.5% were from "clients."

459 N – number of respondents Frequency – number of times an event occurs Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment

APPENDIX F. STATISTICAL RESEARCH DATA TABLES

460

Texoma Council of Governments | 2011- 2015 Texoma Needs Assessment