RI DD Services Get A "Status Quo" Budget, But Can It Keep Up With Client Needs And Consent Decree?

By Gina Macris

With Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo signing the $9.6 billion budget bill into law June 22, the service system for adults with developmental disabilities averts a crisis in the fiscal year beginning July 1, and instead continues the status quo.

That is to say, the system is still struggling to meet the needs of some 4,000 Rhode Island adults with developmental disabilities, including those who are seeking services for the first time.

Higher-than-expected revenue estimates in May enabled the House and the Senate to restore a number of reductions in the human services which Raimondo had proposed in January, including about $18 million in developmental disabilities.  On June 20, the Senate ratified the House version of the budget and sent it to the governor.

Until the state’s intent to restore the funds for developmental disability services became clear in mid-May, an independent federal court monitor had been preparing to make recommendations to U.S. District Court Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. for an order to ensure adequate funding..

It was the second time since a federal civil rights consent decree was signed in 2014 that a court order, or the threat of one, has surfaced during the budget-making season at the State House. There’s no reason to believe that the monitor won’t re-visit that idea next year if funding for developmental disability services fails to keep pace with the stepped-up demands of the consent decree, which requires the state to shift from segregated services to those offering integrated, community-based opportunities by 2024.

One goal illustrates the challenges. The state is to have part-time jobs by Sept. 30 for all young adults who left high school between 2013 and 2016 and who who want to work, but with three months remaining until the deadline, those with jobs number 235, or 55 percent, of a population of 425, according to figures released last week.

The budget does include $1.5 million in technical assistance for private providers of developmental disability services trying to adjust to integrated services for clients, according to Carmela Corte, the chief financial officer of the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH). Those are federal-state Medicaid dollars that will be taken from the allocation for direct services.   

A relatively small number of adults with developmental disabilities who choose to use their funding authorizations from BHDDH for in-home care will be able to pay workers 10 percent more, which amounts to about $620,000 in the budget, Corte said.

By The Numbers 

The General Assembly also adjusted the current budget to close out the fiscal year, adding about $15.6 million to cover an operating deficit as recommended by Raimondo, who acknowledged the shortfall deficit as a one-time event.

The overall numbers in developmental disabilities:

•     $272.1 million for Fiscal 2018, which ends June 30    
• ·   $271.4 million for Fiscal 2019, which begins July 1

Administrators, however, tend to work on a day-to-day basis with an “operating budget,” which includes only federal and state Medicaid funds available for providing direct services.

For the current fiscal year, federal-state Medicaid dollars are budgeted at $269.8 million.  For the fiscal year beginning July 1, the federal-state Medicaid total is $269.2 million.

No Raises For Frontline Workers

One big-ticket item missing from the next budget is a pay increase for employees of private service providers who work directly with adults with developmental disabilities.  The underpaid workforce is sure to be a major issue for advocates when the General Assembly reconvenes in January.

Incremental raises for these workers during three budget cycles have allowed them to keep just ahead of the minimum wage, in a range which puts private service providers in competition with the same pool of workers as fast-food restaurants and other retail businesses. 

Including the most recent raises, in 2017, the average direct care worker is paid about $11.50 an hour. The minimum wage, which increased from $9.60 to $10.10 on Jan. 1, is due for another bump, to $10.50, on Jan. 1, 2019.

Before the General Assembly cut $26 million from the developmental disabilities budget in 2011, the average pay at some private agencies serving adults with developmental disabilities averaged close to $15 an hour, with comprehensive health insurance and other benefits.  Career ladders afforded front-line workers opportunities for advancement.

Since then, the workforce has become unstable, with employers unable to fill one out of six jobs, according to the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island, a trade organization. Turnover ranges from about 30 percent to about 75 percent, depending on the agency. In some cases, workers leave direct care work for other jobs with similar pay but much less responsibility. In other cases, they leave for the same type of work at better pay in Massachusetts, which is scheduled to offer a minimum of $15 an hour for such work July 1.

Budget Questions At Public Forum

The issue of worker pay surfaced at a public forum hosted by the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) June 18 at the University of Rhode Island, with one parent lamenting the lack raises in the year ahead.

Kerri Zanchi                         Photo By Anne Peters

Kerri Zanchi, Director of Developmental Disabilities, and other staff of the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH), explained various aspects of the budget and outlined initiatives intended to help the service system in the long run.

Asked whether the “status quo” funding approved by the General Assembly would result in cost overruns in the coming fiscal year, Zanchi didn’t say.  Instead she emphasized that DDD must use its data “every single month” to support its projections and “really understand what our needs are going to look like.”  

But BHDDH projections of need for developmental disability services don’t figure in the semi-annual Caseload Estimating Conference that comes up with figures for Medicaid entitlement costs.

And the state Budget Office does not take actual costs into account in making recommendations to the governor, a spokeswoman said earlier this year.  Rather it uses “estimated growth rates in the cost of providing services,” according to Brenna McCabe. She did not say who makes the estimates or otherwise elaborate.

The new budget doesn’t allow for increases in individual funding authorizations – one of the chief causes of the cost overruns which prompted the BHDDH request for additional funding in the budget cycle now winding down.

The governor cited higher “acuity” in acknowledging that increased per-person costs fueled a projected $15 million deficit in developmental disability costs in the fiscal year ending June 30. That factor, however, was ignored in her presentation of Fiscal 2019 budget that begins July 1.

Ever since November, 2016, there has been an upward trend in individual authorizations, something  that is expected to continue for several years, until all clients have been evaluated at least once using a revised standardized interview that is considered more accurate than the previous one. Both the original interview, called the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS), and the revised one, called the SIS-A, were developed by the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.  

Budget Language Opens Door To Innovation

The budget contains language that responds in to a variety of concerns about who manages resources available to adults with developmental disabilities and how providers are paid. 

It gives BHDDH the required state legislative authority to apply for a so-called “Health Home” and an “Alternate Payment Method” to create pilot programs for changes in case management and provider reimbursement better suited to integrated, community-based services that are tailored to individual preferences and needs, as required by the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) hold that neither the states, as funding authorities, nor the services providers themselves can also be responsible for designing and managing individualized programs of activities without conflicts of interests.

States should have another disinterested party in the role of case manager, according to CMS.

The Health Home is the CMS name for the third-party case management organization that would oversee individual clients’ Medicaid and Medicare services, while the Alternate Payment Method allows states to explore changes to the usual fee-for-service reimbursement to private providers.

 Zanchi and Kimberly Reynolds, BHDDH administrator of financial management, explained the goals of the applications at the public forum June 18.

Reynolds described the Health Home as a “one-stop shop where individuals and families may get assistance in managing their services.  BHDDH has three health homes, mostly in the substance abuse and mental health areas.”

By way of background, Zanchi said that the idea for applying for a Health Home grew out of collective thinking in DDD during the last year about ways to put its clients in the driver’s seat in shaping their activities, or as she put it, developing “person-centered practice.”

For one thing, the system can’t be truly “person-centered” without case management that is free of conflicts of interest, Zanchi said.

She also said a pilot program for an Alternate Payment Method might generate solutions to problems faced by the current fee-for-service reimbursement system, which poses challenges to providers trying to get their clients into the community in meaningful ways.

The fee-for service system requires providers to bill in 15-minute increments, but only when a client is actually receiving services. It doesn’t allow providers to plan ahead, because reimbursement depends on day-to-day attendance at a particular activity, without exceptions for occasions such as client’s medical appointments, illnesses, or vacations.

As the state moves to a system with greater consumer control and consumer empowerment, Zanchi said, providers will need to be able to count on more staff to get their clients into the community.

Despite the consent decree, the reimbursement system is still geared to funding programs held in facilities like sheltered workshops and day centers, where one staff member can keep an eye on larger groups of individuals than is possible in the community.

Zanchi and Reynolds each said they want the public to participate in drawing up the applications for the Health Home and Alternate Payment Method.

“We have a lot of work to do in a very quick time frame, and like everything else we’ve done, we’re going to do it with our constituents,”  Zanchi said.

The state anticipates submitting the applications, receiving decisions, and beginning pilot programs by next Jan. 1, according to Zanchi. CMS would pay 90 cents on the dollar to support the pilot programs for a maximum of two years.

Flyers distributed at the meeting gave a schedule for public meetings on the applications, but the schedule was put on hold. Reynolds said she is the contact person for the Health Home. She can be reached at 401-462-3941 or at Kimberly.Reynolds@bhddh.ri.gov 

'Day Of Action' Planned At RI State House To Raise Disability Awareness - And Alarms About Budget

By Gina Macris

Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month, celebrated across the nation, will come to the Rhode Island State House in a “Day of Action” Thursday, March 29.

Adults who face intellectual challenges in daily living plan to celebrate their accomplishments. But they and their supporters also want to raise an alarm about the damage they say proposed budget cuts will cause to the services they need to live full lives.

The “Day of Action” is aimed at lobbying legislators over what advocates say is a looming crisis. Late in the afternoon, after the House adjourns, a subcommittee of the House Finance Committee is scheduled to hear Governor Gina Raimondo’s budget proposal.

The budget would eliminate $18.4 million in current costs from the private service system that supports most adults with developmental disabilities in Rhode Island, says Donna Martin, executive director of the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island (CPNRI), sponsor of the “Day of Action. “

On Thursday evening, Advocates in Action will host a meeting in Warwick that will feature adults with developmental disabilities encouraging their peers to speak up for their right to individualized services that is embedded in the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).  (Read related article here.) 

The individualized  approach is inherently costlier than the congregate care Rhode Island has depended on in the past in sheltered workshops and day centers. 

But the right to individual choice is mandated by the state’s 2014 Olmstead consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice. And the judge in the case, John J. McConnell, Jr. of U.S. District Court, has signaled from the bench that he will be watching budget deliberations.

Among service providers, some officials say privately that their agencies are teetering on the brink of insolvency as a result of several years of underfunding in which the state has failed to cover their costs and they’ve exhausted any reserves they might have had.

The budget, if enacted, would be “untenable,” said the CEO of one service agency, who asked not to be identified publicly.

Family members say the issue is not just about the service agencies.

David and Marcia Graves, parents of a woman with cerebral palsy, said in a statement that the spending cuts “will put the emotional and physical well-being of our daughter and others in jeopardy.”

A drastically reduced budget would make the difficult job of recruiting and retaining qualified direct care workers impossible, the Graveses said in a statement released by the CPNRI.

Raimondo’s calculations suggest that the governor’s office and the developmental disabilities agency, BHDDH, are not reading from the same page of figures.

Martin, the executive director of CPNRI, put it another way. She said that Raimondo’s budget, like the proposals of governors before her, does not address a structural deficit in developmental disabilities, instead continuing a cycle of chronic underfunding and deficit spending.

Here are the numbers:   

The developmental disabilities budget the General Assembly enacted last summer for the current fiscal year allows $256.9 million in spending.

 Raimondo would raise current spending to $272.2 million – an increase of $15.3 million to cover a cost overrun. 

For the fiscal year beginning July 1, Raimondo would drop the bottom line to $250.8 million. The difference would be $21.4 million, including $18.4 million that would come from private providers and $3 million that would come from state-operated group homes.

Viewed another way, Raimondo’s bottom line of $250.8 million is $6.1 million less than the currently authorized spending level of $256.9 million.

All the money comes from the federal-state Medicaid program, with the federal government providing a little more than 50 cents on the dollar.

Budget officials who briefed reporters on Governor Raimondo’s overall fiscal proposal in January emphasized her efforts to close a projected $200 million deficit in the next fiscal year while promising that Medicaid recipients, including those with developmental disabilities, will not see a reduction in services. 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which advises the governor, was asked how it approached BHDDH spending as it set a target for the next fiscal year.

OMB “makes adjustments based on estimated growth rates in the cost of providing services,” said a spokeswoman, but she acknowledged that those estimates did not take into account the current, actual costs.

The spokeswoman said that OMB worked from the $256.8 million budget enacted last year for the existing budget cycle and incorporated “personnel and entitlement adjustments,” like a slight increase in the federal reimbursement rate for state Medicaid expenditures, as well as “certain trend growth rates.”

From there, OMB applied a 10 percent reduction, as it has across the board for all state agencies, to deal with the state’s overall projected $200 million deficit, she said. (Raimondo still found money for new programs.)

One hurdle faced by BHDDH in presenting its case for funding that it is not represented at a twice-yearly meeting at which officials grapple with trends in Medicaid spending, even though the department's services are entirely funded by the federal-state program. 

In November and May, the State Budget Director meets with the fiscal advisers of the House and Senate in the caseload estimating conference to reach consensus on the latest Medicaid expenses and provide updated information for budget projections. 

The law setting up the caseload estimating confernce excludes both BHDDH and the Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), another agency funded by Medicaid. Companion bills pending in the House and Senate would require both BHDDH and DCYF to participate. 

The most recent caseload estimating conference was in early November, about three weeks after BHDDH submitted its budget to OMB. 

At the time, BHDDH had about a year’s experience with a revised assessment method that determines the individualized level of service authorized for adults with developmental disabilities. The result was an added $17 million in developmental disability costs, according to a report of the House fiscal staff.

Raimondo’s budget summary suggests that BHDDH has been reviewing the validity of the assessment. But BHDDH director Rebecca Boss said in an interview in January that “it’s probably a misnomer to call it a validation of the SIS-A.” She referred to the acronym for the assessment, called the Supports Intensity Scale –A.

The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, the developer of the instrument, “have a scientifically rigorous study that this is a valid tool,” Boss said.

“For us, it was validation of our implementation of the SIS-A, not necessarily the tool itself. It’s a validation of our implementation, and that’s probably a better way to say it,” she said.

BHDDH found 46 cases in which the assessment resulted in individual authorizations that were higher than warranted. Boss said those authorizations were corrected, and all the social workers who do the assessments were retrained in how and when to ask supplemental questions that might lead to higher funding.

“We’re not planning to discontinue using the SIS-A,” she said. “We are planning to make sure we are using it correctly.”

In other words, the prime driver of higher per-person costs for developmental disability services is not going away.

And it will take several years before all adults with developmental disabilities  - some 3700 receiving services - have all been assessed using the new SIS-A.

From 2011 until November, 2016, BHDDH had been using the predecessor to the SIS-A, which was enmeshed in controversy, with accusations by families and providers that assessors humiliated them and the state manipulated results to artificially depress funding authorizations. 

Successful appeals of individual funding allocations cost the state more and more money until the supplemental payments reached a total of about $23 million in the last fiscal year.

The U.S. Department of Justice has criticized the way the state used the original SIS in findings that led to the 2014 consent decree. Two years later, in May, 2016,  the SIS figured in a multi-faceted compliance order issued by Judge McConnell.

He said state policy must require all assessments to be conducted “in a manner that is consistent with individuals’ support needs, separate and apart from resource allocations.”

Six months later, the state inaugurated the SIS-A. Martin, the CPNRI director, said her membership tells her the SIS-A still poses some challenges to families, but it is far more accurate than the previous version.