State legislators have rejected an ambitious streamlining plan for statewide services to the needy that would have saved $8 million. The plan instead is being reduced to a pilot project in Honolulu to avoid layoffs—and brings attention to labor obstacles in modernizing state government.

Lillian Koller, the state director of human services, has been enthusiastic in wanting to replace what she has called “;a horse-and-buggy system that is labor-intensive, costly and slow”; in providing public assistance, including welfare, Medicaid and nutrition benefits. The plan would involve closing 31 statewide offices and laying off 228 state workers.

Heeding opposition by the white-collar Hawaii Government Employees Association, lawmakers rejected Koller's plan and limited it to a pilot project on Oahu because “;decreasing the number of workers available for face-to-face consultations will be devastating to the elderly and those with limited English skills.”;

That is one way of looking at the revamp plan—one patterned after a 2004 overhaul that earned national praise for service-delivery by Florida's Department of Children and Families in a report to the U.S. Department of Agriculture by Mathematica Policy Research Inc. The change cut annual costs by 25 percent and workforce by 36 percent, leading Koller to embark on a goal to replicate the Florida experience.

Under the Florida system, clients no longer have a single caseworker assigned to their case. Instead, clients interact with various staffers while during the same period completing applications by computer and meeting some requirements from home, reducing the time spent on assistance, according to Mathematica. The average time for interviewing clients was reduced from one hour to 15 minutes.

As for dealing with unusual factors, such as the elderly and those with limited English skills, Mathematica pointed out that “;Florida has sizable elderly and Hispanic populations, which may require more assistance completing applications and may experience more difficulty using technology.”; Obviously not an insurmountable problem.

Or could something else have been Hawaii's deal-breaker? Mathematica explained that in making layoffs in Florida, “;The state did not reduce staff solely on the basis of tenure. Instead, they used a comparative merit system to score and rank staff according to their performance, competencies in the new environment appraisals, discipline history and job functions. Staff members with the lowest scores were laid off, transferred or demoted.”;

Hawaii's pilot project, if enacted as lawmakers intend, is a step in the right direction (albeit scaled down) toward modern efficiency. Concurrently, in preparation for a systemic overhaul, Koller should find out how layoffs were attained in Florida, a right-to-work state, which has a labor contract with HGEA's sister American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees union.