All for Efficiency

In the first post I mentioned how efficient it is to adequately fund Human Services. Let me expand on that a bit.

Fully funding Human Services allows our palette of fabulous local non-profit agencies to reach, counsel, and support those in our community who need assistance in managing homelessness, hunger, substance abuse, mental illness, physical disabilities, domestic violence, etc. Our non-profits have the staff with the background, training, and facilities to best --and most efficiently-- help those in need. Especially if they have the funding they need...

I work at the Downtown library and on the occasion when a person with mental health and/or substance abuse issues runs afoul of our Rules of Conduct, there is often very little we can do but call the police department. So we do it. The police then take the person to jail where they are subsequently released back onto the street with little chance of receiving the help they need. The next day the same person may be right back in the library. We then lather, rinse, repeat.

In terms of pure efficiency in local government, this is a horribly wasteful and damaging way to ignore a problem. The issue is this: when it comes to discussing efficiency with those who have the incredibly hard task of allotting scare public funds, they like to be able to point to hard numbers. But the rub is that it is frequently hard to prove, in numbers, the cost of not funding Human Services. How many dollars per year do the police and/or fire departments spend addressing areas that they are not trained to deal with nor have the tools to provide a long-term solution? How much is drained from our public libraries when our public (rightly or wrongly) avoid our facilities out of fear of being confronted with an unpleasant situation? I don't know, and therein lies the problem; it is really hard to quantify.

While the cost of not fully funding Human Services is a hard number to pin down, the overall logic of the situation remains: if Human Services doesn't address the problem, it is a given that the the issue, be it domestic violence or homeless teens, won't go away on its own and other local agencies will be forced to deal, in one fashion or another, with the complexities. The costs don't just go away. In fact, there are good arguments to be made that the issues (and the total costs) just compound if not properly addressed.

So what I'm hoping to hear from you and have you pass on to the City Council, are cases where adequate funding did (or would have) save money, preserved dignity, and got a fellow human being back up on their feet.