Name: Caroline Benedict-Drew
Position: Executive Director, Family Service
Background: Joined Family Service in 1987, after working for 10 years with Samaritans. Served as chairperson of Samaritans’ international Board of Directors.
Education: Trenton State College (Bachelors degree in social work and psychology)
Age: 54
Residence: Providence
Family: Married, four children
CAROLINE BENEDICT-DREW: ‘The work that Family Services does is part of a political spectrum. Some embrace support, others would like us not to be supported at all!’
Beyond Cash Donations: How New Forms of Giving Are Transforming Not-for-Profit Accounting
Evolving Funding Landscape for Not-for-Profits Not-for-profit organizations are being asked to do more with less,…
Learn More
PBN: Perhaps you could start by describing Family Service.
BENEDICT-DREW: We are a multi-purpose youth service agency. We are over 100 years old. Our roots are in traditional social work. However, over the last 25 years – and in particular, the past 10 years — our work has moved from the traditional social work model and added a comprehensive mental health model.
What prompted that move?
Need, for the most part. A lot of things occurred in the early to mid-1990s with regards to managed care. Managed care kicked in and there needed to be a continuum of service developed. What we find in our work is that you can’t really separate social services, human services, and the social welfare arm of the agency from mental health. They are inter-connected. And we have added to our array of service, a medical service. We are about to hire our first primary care physician.
What are some issues Family Service addresses now that it may not have been addressing decades ago?
I am not sure the issues have particularly changed. I think we better understand. When I started out in this business, issues were integrated. At the national level, we had a health, education and welfare department – called HEW. But we have since split those remissions at the federal level. We have become sub, sub-specialists. So what ended up happening, is that you could not treat the whole person. Money came that way – in categories. Categorical funding creates categorical care.
So you get money, but are told to use it in a specific manner?
Correct. So you can only treat the child with lead poisoning or you can only treat the mom who has early pregnancy risk – or the dad with alcoholism. But the family is really the institution that needs the full array of services. It needs one-stop-shopping. We see families that have so many providers — there is so much duplication of services.
With a national divorce rate over 50 percent, and single-parent families becoming more the norm, are you dealing with a different kind of family than you have in the past? If so, does that make for a more pressing demand on Family Service?
No. There are some myths about how the family has changed. Post World War II was the highest divorce rate, higher than today. The family has become part of a political platform. The problems we had yesterday, whether by yesterday we mean 100 years ago or a year ago, are not so different. We treat them differently. My argument has been that we have created problems by categorically funding problems. We have to get back to basics. We were all taught in school about the basics of child welfare and family welfare. It’s not rocket science.
There is the perception that an organization such as Family Service deals with a specific clientele of people – those more likely to be from poverty and unemployment. Is that true?
We mostly work with a disenfranchised, poor population. But while we can put on one side of the line certain poverty issues, a lot of issues cross that line. Substance abuse is a perfect example. Substance is across the board one of the biggest issues, and problems in families. Whether that family is poor or rich, it doesn’t make any difference. And it is still a major taboo. Sexual abuse is a major taboo. And it is across all socioeconomic classes.
You are a non-profit. Talk about your approach to running Family Service.
As the executive director of Family Service I have always believed that this is a business. We are public servants and we spend taxpayer dollars. I remind my staff of that weekly. We are in the public eye. We can’t do anything outside of this agency, as employees, that would put a mark on Family Service. The work that Family Service does is part of a political spectrum. Some embrace support, others would like us to not be supported at all. We have to understand the audience is the public and we are not loved for what we do. We have to make sure our tools are sharp and we run an exceptionally good organization.
How many employees do you have?
Two hundred, and we expect to hire another 30 by September. We have case managers, childcare workers, and we have a number of specialties – such as clinicians, psychiatrists, public relations, development, quality assurance – we just hired a director of research. Since 1987 we have only had one year with a deficit.
What is your annual budget?
Almost $10 million. We have been in a growth mode for the last several years.
Does that mean that there are more problems out there?
We run an exceptionally good organization. Funders look to us as a good place to invest their money. Departments of government believe we run one of the soundest organizations.
Have you been satisfied with the level of political support you have received?
Yes. I don’t believe anything comes your way unless it is built on quality.
How has managed care impacted your day-to-day operations?
A couple of years ago, when managed care was coming in and we were getting nervous about how we were going to approach this the top managers of this organization spent a couple of days talking about this ugly thing that was going to rear itself and take over our lives. We decided that we were just never going to lose sight of quality. And we were never going to sell out. That was key. We see large organizations all over the country that go through these mega-mergers – and it hurts people. We’ve lost sight of the patient at the hospital. That scares us. We shouldn’t chase that. As long as we are not chasing the almighty buck and we are client-centeredwe will do very well.
When you go home at night, what most frustrates you about all of this?
It is my disappointment in the inability for everyone to do the right thing around what seems to be so easy. Not fighting about the dollars that are out there, but talking about how are we going to spend this money wisely. We do a lot with DCYF and they just keep adding high-end, expensive programs. For some reason, we have not been able to come up with a plan – whether it is a Democrat or a Republican in office. We don’t plan for what I think is not complicated. I don’t think the health issue is complicated. The health issue gets complicated, child welfare gets complicated, mental health gets complicated, education gets complicated – but it’s really the will to spend money in that direction. We’re paying big time in the end. For that child that we don’t take care of during a high-risk pregnancyI get confused. We don’t have the money to help the mother who is going to have a low-weight baby – we’re going to pay for that later by hundreds of thousands of dollars. We’re going to pay long-term for the boy graduating from eighth grade who is going to go on to two years of high school and still not be able to read. The constituents who read your newspaper – I don’t understand why we can’t come together. It is not that complicated.
What is it that makes you feel good – keeps your energies going strong?
The clients. I haven’t met a client that didn’t want to do well. And the staff. This place is incredibly positive.
What is it about people who do this work – is it inside them, is it learned?
We try to create an environment that is positive. We love the kids. We love the families. I’m in other environments where sometimes people talk negatively about the kids – I don’t get that here. It comes from the top. We have spent time figuring out the difference between directing and leading. There is just such a difference. Everything we do is about leadership. So when you are walking down the hall, you are nice to everyone. You want to be nice. It’s not that I have to learn to be nice to everyone – that’s my pleasure.
That sounds like advice that cuts across all industries.
Absolutely.
