SNAP Assistance to Halt in Oklahoma on November 1 Unless Shutdown Ends

Just over one month ago, notice was issued that the federal government had paused the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC), an annual fundraising effort that has contributed billions of dollars to charitable organizations since it was established more than 60 years ago. This became a temporary halt to allow efforts to continue this year, but notice was served that significant change would be coming. Usually beginning in September, members of the federal sector — including employees, retirees, and contractors — select charitable organizations in which to donate money or volunteer their time to support nonprofit work. This provides a level of support for organizations to build budgets for the upcoming year’s work. In 1957, President Dwight D. Eisenhower established the “President’s Committee on Fund-Raising Within the Federal Service” to review and modify the fund-raising program. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10927, which gave authority to the United States Civil Service Commission to organize nonprofit solicitations of federal government employees. Kennedy’s executive order was eventually replaced by President Ronald Reagan in 1982 when he created the modern Combined Federal Campaign under the United States Office of Personnel Management. Nonprofits must meet specific eligibility criteria set by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the CFC team. These criteria include the organization’s existence for at least three years, its ability to provide real services, and its commitment to engaging federal employees in philanthropy. Nonprofits must also apply through the CFC’s online application system and may need to apply annually. The CFC team manages the charity application process, ensuring that only eligible organizations can participate in the campaign. Around $9 billion has been given to approved charities since its inception, and CFC has allowed federal employees to donate to charities of their choice, peaking in 2009 with about $282 million in donations. The Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA) has received modest sums in the past from supporters through our numbers (federal - 58911 and state - 8041) for campaigns. Many organizations with higher profiles receive substantial sums which could significantly diminish their mission if this funding stream were eliminated. We certainly understand concerns overseeing the program form CFC. In a statement issued by President Trump’s OPM Director Scott Kupor, donations have declined in recent years, and administrative costs have grown to oversee the program, which in turn sends fewer funds to nonprofits that also have administrative costs. They also indicated CFC made sense pre-internet – when donors lacked more automated and efficient ways to direct dollars to their favorite charities. While these concerns are certainly valid, we at OICA feel this is a program worthy of retention. CFC allows employees to learn more about different nonprofit organizations through workplace events. It is a simple task to itemize deductions on Schedule A of Form 1040 when dealing with your own taxes. The above-the-line deduction for cash donations to qualified charities reinstated in 2026 will make sense for giving. Charities that rely on regular funding from employees will likely benefit more from employee donations, thus providing a sustainable and stable source of income for the nonprofit’s work, thereby reducing fundraising expenses for the nonprofit. Organizations with a strong sense of community and employee involvement in charitable activities may find it beneficial to support their employees' charitable contributions through a matching dollar program. Offering matching gifts can incentivize employees to contribute more, which can be a win-win for both the charity and the employee. In a difficult time for charitable nonprofits, we strongly encourage those decision makers at the federal level to weigh the cost and the benefit of CFC. We hope they can find a way to continue support through this process in a streamlined manner that does not diminish the work done for children and other services through charitable giving.

With the federal government “shutdown” of services continuing, one likely outcome will be that Affordable Care Act (ACA), or Obamacare, subsidies will end or be reduced. Should this happen, the burden for health insurance coverage will fall to the states to decide. Fortunately, one opportunity exists in Oklahoma which provides a way for employers, employees, and state government to elevate health insurance coverage for those in the workforce. In April 2004, Senate Bill 1546, authored by Sen. Ben Robinson and Rep. M.C. Leist, authorized the Oklahoma Health Care Authority (OHCA) to develop a program assisting employees of small businesses, 19 to 64 years of age with either (1) a portion of their private health plan premiums (Employer Sponsored Insurance), or (2) the purchase of a state sponsored health plan operated under the state Medicaid program (Individual Plan). The goal was to provide affordable health insurance for 50,000 low-wage Oklahomans in the workforce. The Oklahoma Health Care Authority administers the Insure Oklahoma program. The agency balances this fiscal responsibility with two equally important goals: 1) Assuring that state-purchased health care meets acceptable standards of care; and 2) Ensuring that citizens of Oklahoma who rely on state-purchased health care are served positively. The Affordable Care Act made a program like Insure Oklahoma redundant, but if the federal government rolls back provisions, this is a way in which health insurance can continue for those in the workforce For employer qualifications: · Have up to 250 (for profit) or 500 (non-profit) employees. · Be located in Oklahoma. · Offer a qualified benefit plan. · Contribute at least 25 percent of premiums for qualified employees. · Health insurance must be billed from the first of calendar month to the end of the calendar month (not mid-month). For the employee: · Be between the ages of 19 and 64. · Be an Oklahoma resident and meet citizenship guidelines. · Have an annual gross household income within the Employer-Sponsored Insurance income guidelines. · Not enrolled in Medicare or SoonerCare (Medicaid). · Contribute up to 15 percent of monthly premium cost for self, and up to 15 percent of premium cost for qualified dependents (not to exceed three percent of annual gross household income). While Democrats created this, Republican lawmakers saw the benefit of having healthy Oklahomans at work and modified several categories. In 2007, the program was expanded to include self-employed Oklahomans, certain unemployed individuals and working individuals with no access to small group health coverage. In 2009, this program was further expanded to include full-time college students within qualifying income guidelines who are ages 19-22, and increased the Employer Sponsored Insurance (ESI) to with up to 99 employees. Additional changes allowed coverage for dependent children for Insure Oklahoma members who fell between 186 to 200 percent of the federal poverty level, and the number of employees for a business was expanded to 250. Then the state authorized the ability to submit applications online. Expansion allowed non-profit organizations with more than 250 employees to be allowable. Current income thresholds provide a significant barrier. For a single person, the maximum annual income (MAI) is only $35,700 to qualify. For a household a two, the annual income cap is $48,228. For three, the MAI is $60,756; for four, $73,320; and for a family of five, $85,848. For this to apply to current income levels and keep workers insured, lawmakers would need to elevate the payroll threshold for coverage. I encourage our state leaders to look at this program or similar opportunities to do whatever is possible to help keep employed Oklahomans healthy and thriving. A healthier workforce means stability, productivity and allows parents to not deal with astronomical healthcare costs. 

Each year, the Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA) holds our Fall Forum to look at trends in child health, safety, and well-being. We invite advocates from across the state to hear from experts about critical topics. The attendees then share thoughts and ideas regarding how to seek improvement, which is then adapted into the “Children’s Legislative Agenda” for the upcoming legislative session. This document is presented to state and federal lawmakers for their consideration. Through the years, many topics have moved forward and were enacted into law to improve conditions for youth. One of the foremost indexes of child wellbeing is The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT Report. This analysis uses 16 data points, four each in four categories: Economic Well-Being, Education, Health, and Family & Community. Published annually over the past 35 years, this highly respected and reliable report indicates children’s needs and status at national and state levels. Below are the four measurements within the four categories. Economic well-being : Children in poverty, children whose parents lack secure employment, children living in households with a high housing cost burden, and teens not in school and not working. Education : Young children (ages 3 and 4) not in school, fourth graders not proficient in reading, eighth graders not proficient in math, and high school students not graduating on time. Health : Low birth-weight babies, children without health insurance, child and teen deaths per 100,000, and children and teens (ages 10 to 17) who are overweight or obese. Family and community : Children in single-parent families, children in families where the household head lacks a high school diploma, children living in high-poverty areas, and teen births per 1,000. You can see the report at https://assets.aecf.org/m/databook/2025-KCDB-profile-OK.pdf with a comparison of where our state ranked against the overall United States and also a comparison to previous years, which some areas did show improvement. Our 2025 Fall Forum began on Monday with a virtual gathering of advocates, with speakers including Jill Mencke, the Oklahoma KIDS COUNT Director, discussing current state data points. Elizabeth Kaup with the Oklahoma Commission for Children and Youth updated attendees on preventable deaths of children and youth in Oklahoma. We also heard from Martin Munoz of Utah Voices for Children, who provided a better understanding of what other states are facing and policy changes they have sought. Advocates submitted ideas for conversation which will be more deeply discussed at our in-person gathering in Oklahoma City on October 15 and 16. If you are interested in joining us, you can register at https://www.oica.org to attend the conference in-person or by tuning in virtually on Zoom. We will hear from experts discussing domestic violence, child death trends, foster care concerns, custodial rights, and accessible and affordable insurance when we reconvene. We are especially thankful to hear from former Lieutenant Governor and Cameron University President Jari Askins as our keynote speaker at our awards luncheon on Wednesday. As we prepared for this important Fall Forum, I was heartened to see lawmakers already looking to ideas for consideration in the upcoming legislative session. Speaker Kyle Hilbert brought forth a conversation on Facebook assessing how Mississippi has improved their fourth grade reading levels and expressed a desire for Oklahoma to possibly replicate some of those innovations. Thank you to Speaker Hilbert and those other lawmakers who propose legislation which benefits our youth. I want to conclude this week by congratulating Lindel Fields on his appointment to fill the vacant position of Oklahoma State Superintendent of Public Instruction. I have known Superintendent Fields for years through his work in CareerTech. I look forward to seeing the positive changes he will bring forward for our system of education, which has already started under his watch.

There are some days when I wonder if the person who first said, “May you live in interesting times,” was applauded for this statement or condemned. The world has certainly become an interesting place with state, federal and international issues bombarding each of us through the news outlets and on social media. The resignation of Oklahoma’s Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters certainly topped that weekly list. Walters will be leaving this elected role prior to the conclusion of his first term to take on the role of chief executive officer of the Teacher Freedom Alliance, a newly formed national organization that is described as an anti-teacher-union organization. He has indicated that he will assume this role on October 1, so he will leave the vacancy up for appointment by Gov. Kevin Stitt for the remainder of the term, which concludes in January 2027 following next year’s elections. As things move forward, and a new public education leader is selected, the Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA) will continue to be a voice for improvements through school health and well-being policies. A key part of what OICA coordinates through schools is the Kid Governor® program for fifth grade classrooms. For this year, we have more than 1,000 students signed up to receive the lessons provided by their classroom teachers. Using award-winning materials we provide, these lessons educate about the importance of voting when they turn 18, the role of officials, and how citizens can engage with ideas. These students represent more than 25 schools participating across the state. OICA will also work with 4-H to hold a one-day conference for 4th-6th grade students in their program to learn these lessons. Both programs will hold elections and select new youths to hold the position of Governor. OICA will continue to work with the families who participate in both programs to provide support to them so they will be able to share their vision with civic organizations and at our own events. At the other side of the educational spectrum, OICA is holding a fundraiser around the annual OU/Texas football game. We are selling limited-edition collector T-shirts promoting Oklahoma to beat Texas, not just in football, but also in child well-being. Under KIDS COUNT data, our state ranks 46th in overall child well-being, compared to Texas, which ranks 41st. That is too low for both states. When you break down other categories, both states have significant statistical categories which do not reflect well on how our children are raised. We hope this t-shirt sheds light on ways we can improve, and the proceeds from these “Arch Rival” shirts go to support programs like Kid Governor® and the work we do for foster youth, homelessness, and education improvements. We are proud to partner with WWLS, The Sports Animal, with this shirt and will set up at the Bevo Bash on October 10 while they broadcast live. If you would like to directly make a difference in the work that OICA does through policy, our annual Fall Forum will be held in October. The conference will kick off with a virtual day on October 6 to look at the aforementioned KIDS COUNT data, where we will compare notes with what other states are doing successfully. Attendees will then gather in-person in Oklahoma City on October 15 & 16 to hear from presenters and share ideas. Jill Mencke with the Oklahoma Policy Institute will present about child well-being data, and then we will hear from our keynote speaker, former lieutenant governor and Cameron University President Jari Askins about the importance of being engaged positively in the lives of youth. If you are interested in supporting our work through purchasing a t-shirt or by attending Fall Forum, go to https://www.oica.org to learn more.

Recently, Rep. Danny Williams, R-Seminole, along with Reps. Colin Duel-R, Guthrie; Gabe Woolley, R-Broken Arrow; Molly Jenkins, R-Coyle; and Stacy Jo Adams, R-Duncan, hosted an interim study on a unified statewide family court system to help improve outcomes for Oklahoma children in deprived cases. The study brought together advocates and judges to discuss specialized courts which would allow for attorneys and judges to have an increased level of expertise in both laws and best practices in determining rulings that would ultimately best benefit the children involved in cases. Removing a child from a home is a very traumatizing event, both for the young one and the parents. Many families struggle to afford a legal defense in making the case for why they should be able to keep their child rather than being sent to foster care or another avenue. Efforts were made a few years ago to implement a standard for “high quality legal representation” (HQLR) to help attorneys be able to afford to take on cases which would help lead to quicker reunification for families. The Oklahoma Office of Family Representation (OFR) reported that just a few years into implementation, HQLR now covers about half the counties in the state and nearly two-thirds by year end. The goal, if funding is provided by the state, is to have this in all counties by the end of 2026. The study also allowed lawmakers to hear from three judges, two from Oklahoma and one from Texas, on disparities in Oklahoma’s family court system. Specialized courts, like those operating in Texas and other states, could better serve children and families in the state’s care. Among the models reviewed was the Texas Child Protection Courts (CPCs), which are dedicated solely to handling Child Protective Services cases. CPC judges undergo specialized training in foster care, youth trauma, and CPS procedures, allowing them to manage caseloads more effectively. This is like other court systems already in Oklahoma handling drug cases, veterans’ issues, and most recently, proposed business courts. Texas began with four CPCs funded through a federal grant; it now operates 31 courts managing more than half of the state’s CPS dockets and are funded by the Texas Legislature. CPC judges are appointed by regional presiding judges and serve as either associated judges or former judges. Their decisions are subject to appeal by elected judges, ensuring a fresh look at each case. While this has increased the number of judges practicing law in a specialized area, Texas has found this has significantly decreased costs associated with multiple hearings by judges who are not specialized in this area, along with reducing the human cost of dealing with long-term trauma for children who are forced into the foster care system for extended periods of time. “By having judges who specialize in family and child welfare cases, we can make sure these matters are heard by someone who truly understands the system and the trauma many of these children have faced,” said Representative Williams. “We owe it to these children to build a court system that works for them." Additionally, Reps. Mark Tedford, R-Jenks, and Erick Harris, R-Edmond, will hold a conversation about parental equity in divorce proceedings. We have equally high hopes this study will lead to a reduction in drawn-out, expensive divorce and custody lawsuits which cause disruption in the lives of children. This study will be held on October 21 and is open to the public. The Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA) is very appreciative to the lawmakers for holding studies over this topic, along with OFR Director Gwendolyn Clegg, Associate District Judge Brett Butner, retired Associate District Judge Doris Fransein, and Texas Associate District Judge Robert Hofmann for presenting. Conversation about the issue is the first step in addressing the problems experienced in this area, and we believe this was a significant step forward. 

After the events of the past week, I am just feeling drained and honestly experiencing a bit of despair. Charlie Kirk, a 31-year-old political activist who had invigorated the conservative movement on college campuses, was assassinated by a young man in Utah. Despite what commentators and those joining in the fray online are saying, no motives have been revealed. The shell casings had language written on them which indicate leftist leanings, but those are also sayings used by far right leaning young people playing violent video games used to mock others. As the shooter was captured alive, I am sure we will learn more as he, his friends, and his family are interviewed, but the frenzy is indeed at a fever-pitch. There are those who want to point fingers at “the other team” to somehow not be labeled as a part of the reason that a sick person decided to silence a political voice who dared to speak out in public. On the same day, two high schoolers were shot by a third student at a high school in Colorado. While the Kirk murder dominated the news due to his star power and the fact that it was a political assassination, I was demoralized with how little people seemed to care that another school shooting had occurred in our nation. This especially struck me as a friend of mine has two children who currently attend that school. A few days ago, security.org published an article which did not improve my demeanor. According to them, a report released by K-12 School Shooting Database, a publication of the Naval Postgraduate School’s Center for Homeland Defense and Security (CHDS), shows a total of 118 active shooter incidents have been reported at K-12 schools in the U.S. since 1999. These shootings are defined by the CHDS as situations where the perpetrator killed or wounded targeted or random victims within the school campus during a continuous episode of violence. If you want to know the death total from those shootings, since 1999, 440 people have been killed and 1,243 injured in shooting events at these schools. If you want to delve into the compiled data, https://k12ssdb.org/all-shootings shows a breakdown of various data points. Any violent action against another human is a crime. When it comes to young people dying, whether it be a young father daring to speak about politics or students who should be safe in their school, it feels that much more of a tragedy. I am not going to get into the gun debate as I am a gun owner and strongly believe in the Second Amendment, but I also realize that something must be done to keep guns away from people who are going to use them for no other reason than to commit a crime. Last year, a Michigan judge sentenced parents of a convicted mass school shooter to 10 years in prison for “repeated acts, or lack of acts, that could have halted an oncoming runaway train” in not acting to stop their 15-year-old son from murdering four other students in 2021. Is this the perfect solution? No. Has someone else come up with something to stop these horrific acts? The answer is also, “No.” I do know that cuts to mental health support which we are seeing at both the state and national level will certainly not reduce these numbers. If you want to see better and live safer, now is the time to engage your policymakers at all levels and demand that these two latest shootings not just be the most recent in a long line of senseless tragedies that deprived families of their loved ones. 

T-Shirt Campaign to Help Raise Funds for Child Well-being

Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy CEO Joe Dorman (far right) listens as U.S. Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, addresses a recent meeting of the Rotary Club of Oklahoma City. In this week’s “For the Children” column, Dorman discusses “Civility Versus Hostility” in today’s political discourse. One of my goals with the “For the Children” weekly column is to keep people aware of issues involving child advocacy and policy updates so individuals and organizations can champion solutions to problems faced by youth. To me, it feels like many areas of conversation are growing harsher with distinct lines drawn over varying divides and other barriers. Politics is but one of those divides, but civility should prevail in discussion. Case in point: U.S. Sen. James Lankford, one of Oklahoma’s two federal senators who is also a Republican, spoke to the Rotary Club of Oklahoma City at one of our regular meetings. The senator discussed issues currently being considered in Congress, along with his views on policies. He took about 15 minutes of questions, including one from me about cuts brought forth to public broadcasting and changes to emergency management programs. He gave a very direct answer to my question explaining his position and concluded that we likely would have a different opinion, which he is correct. Afterwards, I thanked the senator personally and told him that I looked forward to our next visit, hopefully when I make it to Washington next month for an official visit about federal policy issues related to youth. Even though we do not see eye-to-eye on this and many other policies, I expressed appreciation on social media for him taking the time to speak to roughly 300 people in the club and for the work he has done to restore the ability for Americans to declare a deduction on their taxes for contributions to nonprofits. This is an issue that was created in 2017 that led to many not donating to receive a tax break, resulting in billions lost to charitable organizations overall. Unfortunately, I should not have been surprised at the ensuing posts from those who I have as connections on my pages. Most appreciated the civility in our dialogue, but others, including both liberals and conservatives, found reasons to post commentary that was not too flattering toward me for “not calling him out” and toward the senator for a variety of reasons. I grow as frustrated as anyone about various issues which I feel are important, but I know that name-calling and hostility are not going to move the needle. Others obviously have a different opinion and feel that it takes sharp action to either change a politician’s mind or motivate the public to vote someone out. While that might yield some success occasionally, I fear for what it does for our society to have young people see that as what feels to be the most taken pathway to make a difference in the world. And it is not just politics, as this attitude has creeped into our personal lives, dividing friends and family. If we are not willing to sit down and look those others in the eye and maturely discuss differences, problems will not be fixed. It will take individuals who are willing to “agree to disagree” on some points, ultimately finding compromise in areas which can be reached to fix many issues before us. This is how we encourage better behavior with future generations, and it starts at home, school, church, and other places as these children are learning from how we act as the adults in their lives. And while I certainly do not agree with every position a politician has, no matter who it might be, I am willing to appreciate the good that each of them does on individual issues. I will certainly continue to advocate for changing someone’s mind to hopefully come around regarding the rest, as I hope you will also, but remember, children are watching and learning with how we do this.

"For the Children" Column for Week of Sept. 1, 2025