CANI Get Free Money, Please?

We are very busy around here this week, painting walls, assembling wee-furniture, and organizing piles of stuff in preparation for the arrival of McBaby approximately 4 weeks from now. But, since Luke ran to the store for some more tape and another screw to replace the one for the crib we lost, I have a couple minutes to share the reading/thinking I've been doing lately.

Here's an article about the correlation between the reality show Supernanny and the attitude of entitlement among Americans today: the Supernanny State. If you read it, pay special attention to the quote by Thoreau at the end...

His words, like the entire article, make us consider the difference between helping people and enabling them.

It will appear I'm switching gears with this next link to an article on Credit Card Reform, but I'll try to bring it full circle. The lady featured, a Democrat, wants to pass legislation to reduce the "fine print" involved with credit card and loan applications in order to simplify the process for consumers. She argues that competition can thrive only if we understand what the various contracts say in the first place, in order to make the most informed decision possible.

Now, generally, I don't have a problem with this idea, even though I haven't heard from the opposition, yet. (It's possible there is more to the bill than "simplifying"--which keeps the Republicans from jumping on board. I'm interested in reading a Conservative's perspective on the issue before I support the legilsation.) However, at first blow, I like what this lady has to say. Who could be against straight-forward language to help us make better decisions, right?

But, I'm afraid this legislation only will help people like me make decisions more quickly--but won't actually reduce the occurrence of loan default or home foreclosure. I believe there is more to the financial crisis in America than simple "ignorance" or "misunderstanding" of the fine print. And I think CANI provides a pretty good example.

What's CANI?

CANI stands for Childcare Alliance of Northern Indiana, and it helps low-income families (almost always single mothers) cover the cost of daycare services. A percentage of the students in my classroom are able to attend thanks to financial assistance from CANI.

In exchange for filling out government paperwork, making a few phone calls, and proving they need help, mothers receive a plastic card, which they are supposed to swipe upon dropping off their child and picking him up from the daycare center. The electronic machine on the receptionist's desk functions like an old fashioned time clock, by keeping track of the number of hours the student spends in childcare. Then, the information is sent to the internet, where a representative of the provider (for instance, me) can make sure everything was recorded properly. Assuming all works properly, CANI will pay the provider of services (the daycare) directly for the amount of time recorded by the electronic time clock.

However, not all works properly every time. Sometimes parents are running late and forget to swipe the card. Sometimes, parents simply don't feel like doing it. Whatever the case, the time clock allows parents to correct errors and "catch up" their records up to 14 days after missing a sign-in or sign-out. But, this handy function only helps those who are...how do I say this?...reliable.

Rather than speaking in hypotheticals, let me just describe for you exactly what my job became--as the teacher--not too many weeks back. No, I wasn't spending hours creating lesson plans and teaching kids to read. Eventually, I found myself spending HOURS trying to "help" parents fulfill their card-swiping responsibilities, just so our daycare center could get reimbursed for our services.

Every Monday morning, I would look at the online records to discover that--look!--five or so children were not signed in/out AT ALL last week. Our records showed they came to school every day, but the CANI records showed they didn't attend at all. If left as it was, we wouldn't receive a dime for those services... So, I would write down every single date for which I saw a discrepancy, and give it to the parent in the form of a letter.

Dear ______,

Your child was not signed in/out for the following days, March 12-16. Please use your CANI card and adjust the records the next time you are in the building. We do not receive payment for services unless this is done properly.

Thanks.

So, parents would catch up the records for all five students by the next day.

HA! Just kidding!

Usually, the parents would corner me the next day (or several days later) and say, "I don't remember what time I brought him in or picked him up on those days. Could you remind me?" And, being a helpful individual, Miss Amanda would spend another hour or two writing another group of letters. This time, with the daycare records in front of me, I would compose something like this:

Dear _____,

Our records show your child was here the following days/times last week:

3/12/11 In at 8:30am, out at 4:30pm

3/13/11 In at 9:00am, out at 5:00pm

3/14/11 In at 8:30 am, out at 5:00pm

3/15/11 In at 8:00am, out at 2:00pm

3/16/11 In at 8:00am, out at 5:00pm

Please adjust these days/times with your CANI card as soon as possible.

Thanks.

I would write personalized reminder letters like this for all students with discrepancies. And I used very plain, straight-forward language, as you may have noticed... So, of course--now knowing what was expected of them--the parents would jump into action and fix the errors...

Except for the ones who lost their letters. (Eventually, I began photocopying all the letters I wrote each week, so I could keep the originals and make MORE copies when parents "couldn't find" the first one.) Also, there were times parents would take the line "as soon as possible" very liberally, and their "first opportunity" to swipe their cards would come AFTER the 14 day period offered by CANI for such corrections...

So, what does the daycare provider do then? CANI required my boss to fill out "discrepancy worksheets" for any days/times we provided services, but for which the parent never swiped their cards. Each day required a seperate form. So, there were times my boss filled out 10-12 worksheets to send to the CANI headquarters. And THEN they may be returned to her with a note that said, "You missed box 2" or "You used blue ink instead of black." (No, I'm not making this up! This is a government agency, remember?)

So, let's recap: an agency called CANI--in cooperation with the daycare I work for--agreed to offer financial help to deserving mothers, trying to feed their families or go to school or whatever. These women just need someone in their corner! So, help was provided in exchange for swiping a credit card twice a day. Unfortunately, when this became too tedious, parents simply neglected to swipe the card, andthe job of jumping through hoops and hunting down our money fell to teachers like me and to directors like my boss...

Needless to say, Miss Amanda became fed up. So, she spoke with her boss and said, "Enough."

I suggested we start a new policy, for which I was willing to write precisely one letter a week--one which I could photocopy five or so times and which required zero personalization. And, it ended up reading something like this:

Dear _______,

Today is Thursday. Your child's CANI card has not been swiped at all this week. You have until tomorrow (Friday) at closing time to fix the errors, or we will be forced to charge you personally for the time your child was here.

Thanks!

Now, I was a little less abrupt than that. And, my boss and I explained to each parent, face-to-face, why we needed to change policies. We told them, nicely, that we couldn't continue losing money and spending so much time dealing with paper work, so we were looking for a better way to keep parents accountable. And, for a few weeks, the threat of being charged personally ensured that EVERY child was signed in/out consistently!

Until...

I suppose it was bound to happen, but eventually, a couple of mothers decided to test our sincerity. Monday morning rolled around, and I discovered that the records of two students had NOT been adjusted before we closed on Friday. So, I told my boss about it.

I'd love to say she issued swift discipline, but--actually--I don't know the rest of the story. She mentioned calling the offending parents, and I'm not sure what happened after that. But, I don’t think they were charged. There are many sweet-natured people in the world who have a hard time assigning consequences, even after a story like the one I just told. So, it wouldn't totally surprise me if those mothers continue to receive chance after chance, all in the name of compassion and good will.

So, I ask you, Readers, as I look out the window expecting to see my husband pull into the driveway at any moment, what IS the root of "neediness" in our country, which Thoreau encourages us to attack?

Parents want to raise respectful, selfless children, but many of them, as the Supernanny article points out, would rather be "nice" to them than to discipline. Similarly, there are many people—like the lady in the second article—who are concerned with American debt the state of the housing market/credit card industries. Yet, we continue to bail out those who sign contracts they can't keep. And, though the fine print has complicated things, there remains people like me who pay their bills regardless and who only scold themselves if they signed a contract they didn't understand... Simply neglecting to pay isn't an option for a responsible person. Instead of giving me hope for a debt-free America, I believe a “reformed credit card system” only will help those who already intend to do honest business in the first place. But I fear even very plain, straight-forward language won't prevent irresponsible people from being irresponsible...

So, what should be our response, as individuals AND as a country, when people fail to uphold their end of a bargain? How far should we "nice" people go to "help" those who are in need?

And at what point does helping become enabling?