Historic Investment in DD Passes RI House

By Gina Macris

UPDATE: The Rhode Island House of Representatives approved developmental disabilities reform as part of a $14-billion state budget on a 68-3 vote June 9, sending it to the Senate.

The Rhode Island House of Representatives is expected to vote Friday, June 9, on a whopping $75 million for the state to reorganize its services for adults with developmental disabilities to comply with a federal consent decree deadline in a year’s time.

Total spending for developmental disabilities would jump from about $377.3 million to $469.1 million, an increase of about $91.8 million in an overall budget of $619.6 million for the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals. Developmental disabilities spending includes about $32.4 million for a state-run network of group homes, which is receiving an increase of about $3.1 million.

The reorganization includes a wage increase for frontline workers, from an average of $19 to an average of about $22 an hour, and expanded funding for more staffing to permit all daytime services to be offered in the community.

All adults receiving support from the Division of Developmental Disabilities — roughly 4,000 individuals — will be eligible for employment-related services in addition to other assistance included in basic individual budgets.

With several federal court orders in play, the House Finance Committee voted June 2 to send the massive investment in services for adults with developmental disabilities to the full House as part of an overall $14-billion state budget.

The new developmental disabilities system, which promotes the treatment of each participating adult as a unique individual, would replace an approach that incentivized group care in day centers and sheltered workshops and depressed the wages of caregivers for a decade.

In 2014, the state accepted a federal Department of Justice finding that its system for serving adults with development disabilities violated the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Rhode Island consented to overhaul that system within ten years, a transition requiring services to be individualized and made available in the community at large which, in almost all cases, is the least restrictive environment that is therapeutically appropriate.

But the state made only incremental changes until 2021, after Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the U.S. District Court found that a decade-long shortage of workers, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, was the single biggest barrier to implementation of the consent decree.

With average wages then hovering around $13.18 a year, McConnell issued an order in January, 2021, saying the state must raise the minimum wage for direct care workers to $20 an hour by 2024. But the needle did not move until the judge issued another order requiring the state to negotiate with private service providers and families operating their own programs to arrive at an interim pay increase in the forthcoming state budget.

The General Assembly raised the minimum wage to $15.75 an hour on July 1, 2021 and then to $18 an hour effective July 1, 2022. The budget up for the House vote tonight would raise the minimum wage to $20 an hour, the last step in complying with McConnell’s court order.

Other court orders resulted in a rate review of the entire developmental disabilities system and an initiative to attract new workers to better-paying and more career-oriented jobs in caregiving, among other things.

There appears to have been ongoing negotiations between the ,court and the state on the budget continuing as late as April, when Governor Dan McKee amended his original proposal and asked the General Assembly for more money to fund 100 percent community-based care instead of 60 percent. Until then, the plan was to continue offering 40 percent of services in group day care centers, an approach which is less staff-intensive than providing individual outings in the community.

Still to be answered is whether the state, through its private service providers, can translate the expanded funding into a smooth-running inclusive new system of services in time to meet the consent decree deadline of June 30, 2024.

The director of the trade organization for most private service providers has asked the public to urge their legislators to support funding not only for adults with developmental disabilities but also for vulnerable children.

The trade organization, the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island (CPNRI), is part of a coalition of organizations supporting an estimated 100,000 people eligible for various home and community-based services that have experienced the same labor shortages as the sector focused on adults with developmental disabilities.

Companion bills in the House and Senate would allocate $200 million of federal-state Medicaid funding to shore-up home and community-based services statewide during the coming year while the state’s health insurance commissioner completes a rate review similar to the one conducted for developmental disabilities. Those bills have not advanced.

The CPNRI director, Jenna Husted, applauded the “major investments in adults with disabilities and those that support them.”

“We are, however, concerned about the lack of investment in children with disabilities. Providers of children with disabilities are facing unique challenges and it is our responsibility to provide them the necessary support to thrive.

“We urge legislators to protect the major investment in adults with disabilities, and include investments for children with disabilities,” Husted said. “Together, we will become a more inclusive State.”

The House session is expected to begin at 2:30 p.m., according to the House Calendar.

RI BHDDH Seeks $20 Starting Wage For DD Workers

By Gina Macris

The state agency overseeing Rhode Island’s services for adults with developmental disabilities is asking for a $20 minimum hourly wage for direct care workers, effective July 1.

The hike was ordered by a federal judge in 2021 to go into effect by 2024, causing consternation in the General Assembly at the time. More recently, outside consultants concurred with the minimum $20 rate.

The request is part of an overall $430.1 million budget proposal for developmental disabilities that the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) has submitted to Governor Dan McKee.

McKee is to submit his spending and revenue plan for the state to the General Assembly on Jan. 19.

RI BHDDH

The BHDDH request for developmental disabilities would add $9.3 million to the current budget of $383.4 million to close a budget deficit in the current fiscal year, ending June 30. About $6 million of the shortfall comes from a state-operated network of group homes.

An additional $37.4 million would be needed to reach total funding of $430.1 million for developmental disabilities in the next fiscal year, beginning July 1.

Spending on developmental disabilities makes up nearly two thirds of the entire BHDDH budget, which is currently $597.1 million. For the next fiscal year, BHDDH is seeking nearly $621.4 million, an increase of of about $24.3 million.

Slightly less than half of BHDDH’s operating revenue comes from state tax dollars, with the rest funded by federal Medicaid money. The overall figures also include some other miscellaneous funding sources.

In a cover letter to the governor in November, BHDDH director Richard Charest said the “Division of Developmental Disabilities continues its commitment in complying with the terms of the 2014 federal consent decree and providing integrated employment and day services.”

A series of substantial wage increases is intended to help stem a worker shortage that prevents eligible adults from gaining access to services to which they are entitled, particularly during the the recovery from the COVID-19 lockdown.

Under pressure from the U.S. District Court, which oversees the consent decree, the General Assembly increased hourly wages from $13.18 to $15.75 in 2021, and then to the current $18.00, which became effective July 1, 2022.

Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. ordered state to hit $20 an hour by 2024. And the outside rate reviewers included the $20 minimum wage in preliminary recommendations made public last September. They also recommend a minimum rate of $22.14 in the fiscal year that would begin July 1, 2024.

As much as the state has been criticized by providers, advocates, and consumers and their families during the last decade for underfunding developmental disabilities, adding more money will not solve all the compliance problems the state has with the consent decree.

 Since 2014, the Department of Justice and the federal court system have sought to oversee a cultural shift in the delivery of services which will enable adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities to live regular lives in their communities, exercising choice about where they work and spend leisure time.

In a hearing in U.S. District Court in December, a lawyer for the Department of Justice said the state appeared unlikely to meet a deadline in mid-2024 for full compliance with the consent decree. Amy Romero of the U.S. Attorney’s office in Rhode Island expressed concern about a lack of individualization or “person-centered-ness,” and inadequate accessibility to services in a number of categories, including supports for teenagers making the transition to adulthood.

Romero’s criticism, as well as that of an independent court monitor, stemmed only partly from a chronic shortage of underpaid direct care workers who make up the front line of consent decree compliance.

How the state spends the money, including the degree to which services are individualized, is entwined in the rate review by outside consultants that has been underway for nearly a year. The rate review - itself court-ordered – has not yet been finalized. It covers not only the reimbursement rates to private service providers but the state administrative structures governing the spending.

Preliminary recommendations from the consultants indicated the state wants to continue the existing fee-for-service system, now 11 years old, with many of the same administrative features, including billing for daytime services in 15-minute units and a relatively limited number of individual funding options.

One big change is a proposal to make job-related supports available to all adults with developmental disabilities as an add-on to basic individual budgets.

Officials are working to finish the rate review by the end of January, according to a newsletter of the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) issued Jan. 13.

In the same newsletter, DDD announced that it will advertise eight new positions to help the state fully comply with the consent decree by mid-2024.

The expanded staff will “assist the Division in developing improved communication with the I/DD community and stakeholders, increasing our training capabilities, and enhancing our support for community access and the self-direction population.” (The self-directed population includes individuals and families who design their own programs – roughly a quarter of the caseload of about 4,000 individuals eligible for services.)

The newsletter offered no additional details about the new positions, nor were any immediately available from BHDDH.

The privately-run developmental disabilities system, which includes the self-directed group and private agencies running group homes and offering daytime services, is currently funded for $352.9 million, with about $173.4 million coming from federal Medicaid reimbursements. BHDDH wants $40.7 million more for the private system from both federal and state Medicaid funds, including about $2.9 million to cover a shortfall in the fiscal year ending June 30.

A parallel network of state-run group homes, currently funded for nearly $30.6 million, would need an increase of about $6 million to balance its budget for the current fiscal year, according to the BHDDH budget request. Funding for fiscal 2024, beginning July 1, would continue at the higher level, about $36.5 million.

The administration of former governor Gina Raimondo had tried to privatize the state group homes, but private operators made it clear they were in no financial position to take on the responsibility for additional residents. The plan also faced opposition from unionized state employees who staff the state system, called Rhode Island Community Living and Support (RICLAS). Governor McKee has made it clear he will continue to support RICLAS.

Judge Will Settle Argument Over Witnesses In Consent Decree Case

By Gina Macris

Sometime in September, the state of Rhode Island drafted a settlement agreement, aimed at avoiding upcoming federal court contempt proceedings, for continuing violations of a 2014 civil rights consent decree case affecting adults with developmental disabilities.

But as the state’s lawyers were planning to show the proposal to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), pre-trial legal sparring moved front and center, and the chances for any settlement to resolve the contempt charges remain unknown.

In an email chain made public in a court filing, the state’s lead lawyer told a counterpart at the DOJ on Sept. 30 that his team hoped to confer with DOJ lawyers in the following days about the proposed settlement.

Those emails also showed the two sides sparred over pre-trial procedures, coming to an impasse over the deposition of witnesses in the contempt hearing, scheduled to begin Oct. 18. A longstanding lack of funding and staff to carry out compliance with a 2014 consent decree would be a be a key issue in the contempt hearing.

The DOJ asked Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court to intervene, and compel the state to make available a total of 15 witnesses, including the House and Senate fiscal advisors, in time for the DOJ to depose all of them in accordance with a pretrial deadline already established in a court order.

McConnell has scheduled a teleconference with the lawyers for 4 pm on October 7.

In asking McConnell to intervene, the DOJ included a Sept. 30 chain of emails between DOJ lawyer Victoria Thomas and two state lawyers, Marc DeSisto and Kathleen Hilton.

In the emails, DeSisto and Hilton pushed back the start of depositions, in the process postponing a deposition that had already been scheduled with the state’s chief auditor in the Office of Management and Budget.

In addition, DeSisto and Hilton said they could not make the House and Senate Fiscal Advisors available for deposition at all. Sharon Ferland holds the House post and Stephen Whitney advises the Senate.

Hilton wrote: “Without more information as to the reasons you are seeking to call Sharon and Stephen as witnesses, we cannot make a determination on whether we could agree to make them available. There very well may be privileges that need to be preserved by way of a motion for protective order. Additionally, we do not have the authority to accept a subpoena on their behalf.”

DOJ’s Thomas replied: “We are seeking the testimony of Sharon and Stephen based on the Court Monitor’s opinion that they have valuable information relevant to the funding provision of the Consent Decree. We have now exhausted our good faith efforts to resolve this dispute and will be filing a motion to compel shortly.”

Earlier in the email chain, DeSisto had mentioned the proposed settlement:

“As we discussed in last evening's phone call,” he wrote to Thomas, “it is my hope that in the next few days we can confer regarding the terms of settlement. We are waiting for some feedback from Tony (A. Anthony Antosh, the independent court monitor) in this regard. Once we receive his input, we would like to have a settlement conference with you, maybe as early as tomorrow.”

Thomas replied:

“We are eager to see the State's written settlement proposal and to conference with you tomorrow. That said, while we remain hopeful that a settlement may potentially resolve our contempt motion, we must preserve our litigation rights.” Thomas continued to press for assurances on the depositions.

In its contempt motion, The DOJ has stated that, if necessary, it is prepared to present evidence that the state “failed even to ask its Legislature for a sufficient appropriation” and that it “failed to make efficient use even of the resources it had – for example, by failing to modify State rules and incentives that favor providers of less integrated services over providers of more integrated services.”

The DOJ has proposed an escalating scale of fines, from $500,000 on the first day of each of the first two months to $50,000 a day beginning on the 70th day. At that rate, the fines would add up to about $1.5 million a month.


DOJ Seeks Fines Up To $50K Daily For Rhode Island’s DD Consent Decree Noncompliance

By Gina Macris

The US. Department of Justice has proposed fines up to $1.5 million a month against the state of Rhode Island for failing to comply with a civil rights consent decree protecting adults with developmental disabilities during the last seven years.

The proposed fines are part of a preliminary filing in connection with a contempt hearing scheduled for mid-October by Chief Judge John J. McConnell of the U.S. District Court.

“The United States has sought for several years to work with the State regarding its noncompliance, to no avail,” said the DOJ lawyers.

In a memorandum to McConnell, the DOJ said that the state has fallen far short of numerical targets for providing services for integrating adults with developmental disabilities in their communities, both for employment and non-work activities.

Nor has the state kept its promise to provide adequate funding to maintain the number of agencies and workers needed to provide these services, the DOJ said. Then-governor Lincoln Chafee signed the consent decree April 8, 2014.

If necessary, the DOJ said, it will present evidence in October that state “failed even to ask its Legislature for a sufficient appropriation” and that it “failed to make efficient use even of the resources it had – for example, by failing to modify State rules and incentives that favor providers of less integrated services over providers of more integrated services.”

Those “rules and incentives” allude to Project Sustainability, a ten-year old fee-for-service reimbursement model that still allocates 40 percent of a recipient’s service hours to segregated, center-based care.

The DOJ said the court should “impose a reasonable fine on the state to incentivize it to rapidly come back into compliance with the Consent Decree, and to compensate for the state’s current underfunding of services.”

The proposed schedule of fines:

  • $500,000 on the first day of the month for the first two months after a judicial finding of contempt.

  • $50,000 a day, or about $1.5 million a month, beginning on the 70th day after a contempt order. The money would be deposited in a special fund to be used for consent decree compliance. The state should be prohibited from paying the fines out of any funding that otherwise would benefit Rhode Islanders with disabilities, the DOJ said.

McConnell has cleared the week of Oct. 18 through Oct. 22 to hear evidence in the contempt proceedings. The consent decree draws its authority from the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act, as reinforced by the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

To help remedy any contempt finding and lessen fines, the state could increase the number of supported employment placements and expand the service hours of integrated daytime activities in accordance with the consent decree, the DOJ said.

In a separate step, the DOJ asked McConnell to order the state to prepare a plan for funding and complying with the consent decree before its term ends June 30, 2024. Such a document could help remedy the contempt and, with the court’s approval, could be incorporated in the existing decree.

By its own account, the state has missed its employment targets by more than a third for people in two categories of the consent decree population. They are the “Youth Exit” group, adults who left high school between 2013 and 2016, and the “Sheltered Workshop” group, those who once worked for subminimum wages in sheltered workshops, which were eliminated in 2018.

The chart below, from the state’s report to the court for the quarter ending March 31, shows employment in relation to the latest consent decree targets for a 12-month period. While part of the slow growth during 2020 might be attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic, the state had been falling further behind in previous years.

In another category, only 55 percent of adults are participating in integrated non-work activities in the community for slightly less than ten hours a week, on average, and only a fraction have a combined schedule of employment and other activities in the community filling more than 20 hours a week, according to the latest report of an independent court monitor, cited by the DOJ. In the consent decree, the state agreed to fund services for a total of 40 hours a week.

The DOJ also cited the monitor’s assessment that the state lacks the workers and the funding necessary to provide the services to comply with the consent decree.

Consultants from Approach Group, a Boston-based firm, have calculated the worker shortage at more than a 1000 of the 2845 direct care staff it said are needed to support Rhode Islanders with developmental disabilities in the community.

Separately, Approach Group and three other consultancy firms participated in 18-month, $1.1 million analysis of the developmental disabilities system commissioned by the state that found fiscal instability in the private provider system, which the state relies on for compliance with the consent decree.

The organizer of the four firms, the New England States Consortium Systems Organization (NESCSO), submitted its final report July 1, 2020, to the state Department of Behavioral Health, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH), laying out various options for alternatives to the state’s fee-for-service reimbursement system.

But the state’s subsequent budget deliberations did not address the NESCSO report or the needs it identified.

Instead, it appeared that BHDDH and Governor Dan McKee’s initial budget proposal responded to a directive from the Office of Management and Budget for a 15 percent budget reduction across the board.

In the end, Judge McConnell ordered state officials and providers to negotiate a wage hike in an effort to attract more workers.

As a result, the General Assembly set aside $39.7 million in the current budget for raises of $2 to $3 an hour for front-line workers and their supervisors, effective July 1. McConnell also has ordered that entry-level wages climb to $20 by 2024 to make Rhode Island competitive with neighboring states in what is a nationwide shortage of caregivers.

While the state is facing the prospect of hefty fines beginning as soon as November, BHDDH is seeking further study of the needs of adults with developmental disabilities.

Despite NESCSO’s detailed analysis and presentation of options for systems change, BHDDH reported to the court in July that “efforts are underway to draft an RFP (request for proposals) for a Systems Rate Review.

“The focus of this Rate Review will be to take an in-depth look at how services are funded in the Adult DD System to determine if the funding is adequate; if the appropriate services are being funded; and to look at new services categories,” the state’s report to McConnell said.

To read the DOJ’s proposed contempt order, click here.

To read the DOJ’s motion for contempt, click here.

To read the DOJ’s arguments for contempt, click here.

For charts supporting the DOJ’s arguments, click here.

RI DD Budget Emphasizes Quality Improvement, But Services Remain Scarce

By Gina Macris

April 9 marks the beginning of the eighth year of a ten-year period during which Rhode Island has pledged to comply with a federal mandate ensuring that adults with developmental disabilities enjoy meaningful lives in their communities - just like everyone else.

In other words, Rhode Island has three more years to prove to the U.S. Department of Justice that the state no longer violates the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act and has done everything it agreed to do under a federal consent decree signed in April of 2014.

In budgetary terms, the state has just three more fiscal years to accomplish a complete and potentially costly overhaul of services for about 4000 adults with intellectual and deveopmental challenges.

With this timetable in mind, individuals with developmental disabilities, their families, advocates, the private agencies the state relies on to provide services, and a federal judge are all focused on Governor Daniel McKee’s budget proposal for the fiscal year beginning July 1, year eight of the march toward compliance.

Daniel McKee

Daniel McKee

McKee’s overall state budget recommendation, which allocates $294 million in state and federal funds for developmental disability services, is now in the hands of the state legislature.

Those associated with the developmental disability community hoped to find a higher allocation, but instead the governor’s budget called for an unexpected $10-million reduction in overall spending. Even more puzzling for many, including individuals and families who have gone a year with few, if any, services, was the absence of an hourly wage hike to attract workers back into the field.

The U.S. District Court, which is supervising the state’s effort to comply with the consent decree, has emphasized that a poorly-paid, unstable workforce and inadequate state reimbursement rates to private providers are the biggest issues standing in the way of compliance.

The budget’s $10-million reduction reflects a decline in the caseload, the state developmental disabilities director, Kevin Savage, told a public forum March 22.

Developmental disabilities officials have not produced any caseload figures to back up that claim, and publicly available data indicate the number of people eligible for services has increased and will continue to do so.

Kevin Savage

Kevin Savage

The governor’s budget also includes a $15 million set-aside for innovation and quality improvement efforts for the first of the final three years of the state’s compliance effort, indicating that officials are prioritizing administrative reforms required by the consent decree.

For example, some of the $15 million would be used to develop an alternate to the existing fee-for-service reimbursement model, according to officials of the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).

BHDDH officials also say they plan to address the wage issue in the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2022. They say that timetable could speed up if the state uses federal COVID-19 relief money from the American Rescue Plan, which was enacted just a few days before Governor McKee submitted his budget to the General Assembly.

“Investments in the DD system cannot only about the sufficiency of funding for the system,” BHDDH officials said in a statement issued March 23. “It must also be about how funds in the system are spent and how to use money to drive better outcomes for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities,” they said.

Judge McConnell

Judge McConnell

The state’s timetable for addressing the issue of low wages would arguably cut it very close for achieving compliance with the consent decree, given the definition of compliance the U.S. Department of Justice has presented before Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court.

DOJ lawyers have said that full or “substantial” compliance means that all the required changes have been up and running smoothly for at least a year before a particular agreement is set to expire.

In this case, Rhode Island will have to have all the required changes up and running smoothly by July 1, 2023 for the state to achieve compliance by June 30, 2024.

BHDDH officials have aimed at completing implementation by December, 2022, giving them just six months to fine tune everything before the clock starts ticking on that critical final year. The consent decree has provisions for extending federal oversight beyond 2024.

As for the here and now, the first court-ordered budget negotiation meeting on McKee’s $294 million proposal for the fiscal year beginning July 1 was scheduled for March 26 between providers, incuding the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island (CPNRI), and state officials.

Although Judge McConnell said in a court order in January that direct care worker wages should be raised to $20 an hour, he indicated in a subsequent order that he would accept solutions that are negotiated between the state, providers, and the developmental disabilities community.

McConnell wants the first of three monthly budget progress reports from the state on April 30 – in less than six weeks.

CPNRI is seeking increased reimbursement rates that will allow agencies to raise average direct care pay from $13.08 to $17.50 an hour. The starting rate for workers in the state-run group home system is about $18.50 an hour. BHDDH wants to shift responsibility for those in the state-run system to private service providers next year.

Tina Spears

Tina Spears

“Improving capacity and ensuring access to services starts with a well-trained, adequately compensated staff,” Tina Spears, executive director of CPNRI, said in a statement.

“We cannot continue to have the turnover rates (an average of 30 percent a year) the vacancy rates (an average of one in 5 jobs unfilled) and bare bones supervisor and management structures and produce measured outcomes,” she said.

In theory, CPNRI can support reforms to emphasize quality and outcomes, “but until we are able to invest in our workforce, it is not something we can engage in or support,” Spears said.

In a statement March 23, BHDDH officials said Governor McKee’s budget proposal is intended to be a “starting point” in the overall budget process.

A total of $21 million will be dedicated to improving quality and access to services and relieving administrative burdens, according to BHDDH and the Office of Management and Budget. The breakdown includes:

  • $7 million for financial incentives to providers to promote quality improvement efforts and improved access to services in communities.

  • $4 million for an outcome-based payment methodology that would serve as an alternative to the fee-for-service model that is now in place

  • $4 million for the Brown Policy Lab to provide technical assistance and detailed implementation plans to state officials, including funding for two fulltime positions.

In addition, there would be about $6.7 million made available for services that the state has been able to count as savings as part of its quarterly authorizations to individual consumers.

In current the fee-for-service system, any funds not used within a particular three-month period cannot be carried over to the next quarter. Because it’s difficult for individuals to have 100 percent attendance at all scheduled activities - even an afternoon reserved for a doctor’s appointment reduces reimbursement to providers - consumers end up leaving a certain amount of money unspent during a particular quarter.

The money appears in the budget, but through repeated experience, state officials have learned to count it as savings. That funding will now have to be made available as the state switches to annual funding authorization, which is required by the court to give consumers more flexibility in how they arrange their services.

BHDDH says the details of the other initiatives will be worked out with providers.

State officials say that providers can use part of the $4 million set aside for an alternate payment model to increase wages.

But Spears, the CPNRI director, said that option is unrealistic, because providers run the risk of the innovation grant ending without having continued funding to maintain the higher wages. And it’s not clear how many of the three dozen private providers would be able to participate in the development of the alternate payment model, she said.

Reacting to the state officials’ spending plans, Spears said, “At this point, CPNRI does not fully understand how this funding is structured, or how it would be deployed, “

She added: “CPNRI cannot support a budget proposal that does not fully fund services for individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities, nor do we support diverting funds from service delivery to invest in organizational transformation.”

Judge Signals Stepped-Up Oversight Of RI Olmstead Consent Decree

By Gina Macris

John J. McConnell, Jr.

John J. McConnell, Jr.

Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court is gearing up to order a soup-to-nuts overhaul of Rhode Island’s troubled developmental disability service system and he wants a detailed plan hammered out during the next year. 

Chronic problems exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic have pushed McConnell’s long-simmering concerns over the fiscal stability of developmental disability services “front and center,” as the judge put it during a public hearing in mid-May.

At that time, he asked an independent court monitor to recommend steps for ensuring the long-term survival of a reformed system that will be in full compliance with the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). The proposed directive resulted from the monitor’s recommendations.

The order, sent to lawyers for comment earlier this month, says the state must fix systemic problems that pose “fiscal and administrative barriers” to compliance with a 2014 civil rights consent decree, which calls for integrated work and non-work activities based on a 40-hour week of services.

The barriers to compliance include the major pillars of a fee-for-service system the General Assembly enacted in 2011 that incentivized segregating adults with developmental disabilities in sheltered workshops and day care centers, in violation of the ADA’s Integration Mandate, according to findings of the  U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). The Integration Mandate was re-affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1999 Olmstead decision.

Although the last sheltered workshops closed in 2018, some center-based day programs were still in operation before the pandemic hit.

Hearing Scheduled July 30

McConnell has given state and federal lawyers until July 30 to  tell him why his three-page directive should not move forward as a formal order, with a deadline of June 30, 2021 to develop a new system that meets the needs of the roughly 4000 individuals it serves.

Lawyers for the state and the DOJ have responded with an agreed-upon list of topics to be discussed at an upcoming hearing on the status of consent decree compliance.

The agenda, filed with the court July 23, said the state would address both long-term compliance with the consent decree and the immediate pressures posed by the COVID-19 pandemic on the developmental disabilities system.

Specifically, the lawyers said they would present information on:

  • Integrated employment and day services and the state’s phased reopening

  • Support for providers and families during the continuing COVID pandemic

  • Preparations for a potential second wave of the pandemic

  • The fiscal issues and administrative barriers identified by the judge and a plan by the state to resolve them in phases, beginning with quarterly funding authorizations, staffing ratios, and the requirement to bill for daytime services in 15-minute increments.

Finally, the agenda said the discussion would include the state’s plans for substantial compliance with all requirements of the consent decree by 2024, the year it expires.

The judge’s proposed order would involve the state’s Medicaid administration, the Governor’s office, and the General Assembly in developing solutions to problems in the developmental disability service system and would require progress reports every two months between August 30 and June 30, 2021.

McConnell also wants the state to collaborate with families and providers in developing their plans.

McConnell is expected to take up the proposed order during the remote video hearing on July 30, beginning at 2 p.m. The public may sign in to attend no later than 1:45 p.m. through video or telephone, with instructions posted on the court’s public access web page, here.

COVID-19 Forced Near Shutdown Of Day Services

The coronavirus has hit hard at gains made in the number of regular jobs worked by adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities and the time they spend enjoying non-work activities as part of their communities.

A spokesman for the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) indicated that about 35 percent of those who had jobs March 1 were still working at the end of May.

Non-work recreational and other activities also have been decimated, but no figures were available from BHDDH about the number of people who don’t have any daytime supports or can’t get the same number of service hours they had before the pandemic.

Parents expressed alarm about a lack of guidance on the resumption of services during a July 21 on-line forum hosted by the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island (CPNRI.)

Susan Willemsen, a parent, wrote in the chat box that accompanied the video meeting: “This is very scary, especially for the parents who need to work and your child does not understand the situation. It is very difficult to be home working 40 hours to survive and take care of a child who is 100% dependent on you. Trying to understand where we go from here.”

Tina Spears, executive director of CPNRI, said providers remain in a precarious financial position and called on the entire developmental disabilities community to press state and federal officials for more funding and priority status for group home operators to conduct on-site testing and gain access to personal protective equipment.

By all accounts, some three dozen private service providers licensed by the state to support adults with developmental disabilities were in tenuous financial condition before the coronavirus pandemic hit Rhode Island in March.

Coping with the pandemic has further exposed gaps in funding and service delivery, which in turn raise questions about the providers’ ability to survive long enough to benefit from a court-ordered restructuring without more immediate and urgent intervention. 

For example, the need for social distancing calls for one-on-one or small group staffing, preferably with the same clients consistently matched to the same support people. But the current funding structure typically will pay for six hours a week of one-on-one support, according to Spears.

Judge Spells Out Requirements

McConnell, meanwhile, indicated he wants change from the first moment an individual or family applies for services from the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD).

McConnell said there is a need to consolidate application procedures “for all pertinent RI services into one process.”  That includes streamlining the process for determining Medicaid eligibility and eligibility for developmental disability services, respectively, as well as any other state-funded supports a person might need.

Within the developmental disability service system itself, the judge wants the state to “review, address, and develop a strategy” for resolving problems in the following areas:

  • The process and timeline for determining DDD eligibility and individual budgets, as well as the process and timeline in which individuals select private provider organizations.

  • The process in which families and service providers appeal DDD’s decisions on eligibility, designated level of need, or funding level.

  • The requirement that providers document each staff person’s time, in connection with each client, in 15-minute increments during the day as a condition of reimbursement.

  • Reimbursements that are linked to specific staff-to-client ratios. McConnell didn’t spell out the details of how those ratios hinder integration, but one provider has offered a memorable example: The provider said the staffing ratios forced him to group together five clients with widely differing interests for job exploration in one community setting where he could supervise without help from another staffer. 

  • Funding authorizations for each client that last only three months at a time, with no ability to carry forward any unused portion of the budget beyond the designated fiscal quarter. That feature, combined with the fee-for-service structure of the billing services, means that unless there is 100 percent attendance by all persons at all times, the spending ceiling can never be reached. A consultant’s study several years ago found that providers billed for an average of 85 percent of funding authorizations.

    The requirement that people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, recognized as life-long conditions, must periodically re-establish their eligibility status for services.

McConnell also asked the state to come up with:

  • A clear definition of functions and activities for which funding is permitted, along with the associated rates for each.

  • Different funding levels for different activities that are “responsive to individual support needs.”

  • Guidance on combining individual budgets at the request of the people involved

With the state shutdown beginning in March, service providers shifted their attention to the safety of those in group homes.

A total of 10 group home residents have died from COVID-19, according to a BHDDH spokesman. As of July 21, 161 group home residents had tested positive and a total of 48 had been hospitalized at one point or another. Five people were in the hospital on July 21, the spokesman said.

Spears, the CPNRI director, explained during the virtual public forum that providers have faced unprecedented costs in securing personal protective equipment for staff, carrying out aggressive cleaning protocols and paying for overtime, while being unable to bill the state for many services.

Providers did get some emergency federal assistance channeled through the state, albeit less than what was originally promised, to continue operations through periods of the highest risk and to give temporary pay raises to staff. But those supports have now ended, Spears said, and there’s “no grand way or plan forward” for moving the system to a new normal.

Spears said a top priority is permanent pay hikes for staff, who have been chronically underpaid and have “a thousand reasons” during the pandemic to stay home.

State officials are waiting for Congress to decide on a second stimulus package before moving ahead to set the budget for the current fiscal year. The pace of budget deliberations is expected to pick up in early August, said State Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, who is first vice-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.

In a brief interview the day after the meeting, Spears said the imperative for moving forward with a plan for re-opening developmental disability services should flow from the state’s legal and moral responsibility, not the budget.

State officials can “sit in a holding pattern and worry about the budget all you want, but these are human lives we’re talking about,” she said.

Pandemic Pushes Worry Over RI DD System Survival “Front And Center” - Judge McConnell

By Gina Macris

Judge McConnell

Judge McConnell

The federal judge overseeing the reform of Rhode Island’s developmental disability system says the COVID-19 pandemic has sharpened his concern about the financial ability of the state and its service providers to meet long-term goals of the consent decree, which mandates integration of the target population at work and at play.

Other participants in a May 18 hearing in U.S. District Court in Providence echoed the judge’s concerns, but they also said the pandemic has created a great opportunity to cement changes that might not otherwise have come as quickly.

“The fiscal health and stability of providers has always been in the back of my mind,” said Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr., noting that his worry has come “front and center with this crisis.” Stability is “essential for the consent decree to play out and be seen as accomplished,” he said.

The state and federal governments in 2014 agreed to a civil rights consent decree mandating employment-related services to provide access to jobs in the community for people with developmental disabilities as well as supports to allow them to enjoy integrated non-work activities. The decree runs until 2024.

Kevin Savage

Kevin Savage

During the hearing, Kevin Savage, the state’s new Director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities, disclosed immediate financial concerns. He said that the state has not received approval from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for the second of three advance payments promised to keep private providers fiscally afloat during the height of the pandemic.

On March 26, the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) announced that a total of $15.4 million in federal-state Medicaid funding had been set aside for these so-called “retainer payments” during April, May, and June.

While the April payment has received CMS approval, the one for May has not, Savage said. A BHDDH spokesman later said that $5.1 million in advance payments to providers were made May 15.

Savage said it was “important that the state make that payment” to the providers.

The BHDDH spokesman later elaborated:

“When the retainer payments were first described and provided in Rhode Island, CMS had not issued technical guidance on these types of payments.” Since then, he said, CMS has limited retainer payments to a 30-day period, but that “the state is actively working with CMS to expand this time frame.”

CMS reimburses a little more than half of any Medicaid cost applied to the Division of Developmental Disabilities, but if the federal government ultimately does not approve the May 15 payment to providers, the state will be responsible for the entire $5.1 million.

As to the June advance payment, Savage said during the court hearing that the money will be re-cast as an increase in Medicaid rates that adds up to the same amount originally promised to providers.

He also disclosed that one provider decided to change the type of services it offers and the executive director resigned over the issue. Going forward, Savage said, he understands that particular agency would be “less focused” on the kind of individualized work his division wants to do, but he reserved further comment until he has had a chance to speak in depth with agency officials.

The hearing was streamed via the internet application Zoom, as have been previous U.S. District Court proceedings since the federal court building on Kennedy Plaza was closed in early March at the start of the pandemic. For the first time on May 18, however, the hearing was arranged so that the public could see the participants as well as hear them.

Victoria Thomas, a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice, said the DOJ is “very focused” on how those protected by the consent decree will get community-integrated services going forward.

The capacity of providers to deliver those services involves more than funding, she said. The state needs to make administrative changes to ensure a stable system of integrated services and supports.

A. Anthony Antosh, the independent court monitor in the case, pressed for two immediate administrative changes:

● Annual funding authorizations for service recipients to replace the quarterly allocations now in place.

● The end of prescribed staffing ratios according to five funding “tiers,” which are based on perceived levels of disability and do not necessarily reflect the amount of support needed for a task at hand.

Savage said the staffing ratios are written into Medicaid rules, and BHDDH could work administratively with CMS to eliminate them. The ratios were designed for center-based day care and providers have argued that the ratios do not work in an individualized community setting. Families and other advocates also oppose them.

Savage said the quarterly funding authorizations were enacted by the General Assembly and cannot be changed without its approval. The fiscal arm of BHDDH favors quarterly payments, he said.

Melody Lawrence, Director of Policy and Delivery System Reform at the state Executive Office of Health and Human Services, said the argument for quarterly authorizations is to “ensure that the resources go to those who need them most.”

McConnell questioned how often people’s service needs change.

“You are doing more frequent checks to make sure people actually need those services,” Lawrence replied.

Two experts have testified before a special legislative commission that Rhode Island is the only state with quarterly funding of adult developmental disability services, a feature which providers have said repeatedly makes it difficult for them to plan ahead or prepare for the kinds of long-term changes the consent decree demands.

The commission, led by State Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, recommended more than a year ago that the state switch to annual funding of individualized service plans. It is generally accepted among developmental disability professionals that barring unexpected events, like the death of a family member, the needs of individuals with intellectual and developmental challenges remain fairly stable and predictable throughout their lives.

Savage said that fiscal officials at BHDDH are committed to creating a funding model that is “easier and more straightforward” for providers and families to navigate.

Thomas, the DOJ lawyer, told Savage: “We’ve been hearing that quarterly authorizations create an administrative burden on providers. We like hearing that you want to reduce administrative burdens.”

McConnell asked Antosh to report to the Court by the end of June what the state has done to ease administrative burdens on providers.

Antosh indicated his report will also include a rundown on the changes the state must undertake to satisfy the consent decree by 2024.

Based on his comments in the hearing, he is likely to include recommendations for increased reimbursement rates to providers and provisions for universal access to internet technology for those receiving developmental disability services.

During the hearing, Antosh asked Savage in the short term to eliminate the scale of rates it pays for various daytime direct support work and instead pay the highest one – assigned to community-based activities - for all front-line staff work.

Savage reminded Antosh of the state’s budget deficit, which has been estimated at $234 million in the fiscal year ending June 30 and a whopping $800 million if the next budget cycle is included in the total. He said his division would start on a case-by-case basis by focusing on funding the needs of each individual authorized to receive supports.

Antosh said a lack of access to internet technology has emerged as a big failing during the pandemic. Group home residents need access to wireless networks, as well as to tablets and other hardware that could help them feel less isolated and in the long run could assist providers with remote wellness checks and the like.

A relative handful of people receiving BHDDH-funded supported employment services have been able to work from home, Antosh said, but more would like to try, according to survey results passed on to him.

Technology must be part of the long-term future for the developmental disabilities service system, he said.

The pandemic has curtailed most daytime services and providers’ ability to bill for them in the current fee-for-service reimbursement system. Most of the daytime activities that have occurred have involved outdoor exercise, Antosh said.

At the same time, providers have had to bear the burden of costly cleaning protocols and other unexpected expenses in group homes that are not automatically reimbursed by the state.

As of Tuesday, May 19, the coronavirus affected 47 congregate care sites, according to the BHDDH spokesman. A total of 115 people in congregate care have tested positive, including 5 who were reported hospitalized on Tuesday. An additional 98 people have been exposed to the virus because of where they live but were asymptomatic. And 7 more persons have died from COVID-19, the spokesman said.

Antosh, meanwhile, said the coronavirus crisis has highlighted the fragility of families as well as providers as they have scrambled to support loved ones with developmental disabilities.

Families often have had no support in caring for adult children or siblings who may need attention of one kind or another all their waking hours – and during the night as well.

Antosh said those who direct their own program of services have had difficulty finding staff to relieve them during the crisis. About 700 persons or families direct their own programs, and BHDDH relaxed its rules on hiring staff to allow any capable adult – including parents and legal guardians who might otherwise be out of work.

Savage said a long-standing prohibition against paying legal guardians to support adults who receive BHDDH funding will not be re-instated after the state of emergency is over.

Antosh said 80 percent of family members answering a questionnaire distributed by a coalition of community organizations reported a high level of anxiety.

Seventy percent said they were concerned about what might happen if their loved one needed to be hospitalized or if they themselves became ill and could not continue as caregivers.

(The state Department of Health recently advised hospitals to make exceptions to their no-visitation policy during the pandemic for those who needed assistance in communications and the support of a familiar caregiver to understand medical procedures.)

Outside BHDDH and the Rhode Island Department of Education, which is responsible for transition services for high school students with developmental disabilities, state officials have been “slow to realize how vulnerable this population is,” Antosh said.

But once they understood, officials in other state agencies have become very sensitive to the needs of those with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

He cited the hazard pay awarded to group home workers, a large order of personal protective equipment (PPE) delivered to providers two weeks ago, and another large order for family caregivers that arrived last week, and an increased focus on testing individuals and staff over the last several weeks.

Antosh said “all parties” have joined in discussions about “what re-opening looks like.”

File photos by Anne Peters

Search For RI DD Consent Decree Monitor Extended To Nov. 25; Antosh Among Candidates

By Gina Macris

A. Anthony Antosh, Director of the Sherlock Center on Disabilities at Rhode Island College, is among the candidates under consideration as the next independent court monitor responsible for overseeing implementation of a landmark civil rights decree requiring an overhaul of work and other daytime services for adults with developmental disabilities.

The search for a monitor is underway to succeed Charles Moseley, who retired Monday, Sept. 30.

In a July 23 letter to U.S. District Court Judge John J. McConnell, Jr., lawyers for the DOJ reported that they and officials of the state of Rhode Island “are gathering a list of candidates, with the goal on agreeing upon a candidate by the end of September 2019. We will file a notice with the Court once the Parties reach agreement, or in the event we reach an impasse. Dr. Moseley provided some suggested candidates, including Dr. Antosh, whom we are considering.”

In an email Sept. 30, Antosh has said that he is “aware my name has been floated. If appointed, I would be willing to serve.”

Judge McConnell has extended the search deadline from the end of September to Nov. 25. His order, dated Sept. 27, requires the state and the DOJ to give McConnell a progress report on the search every two weeks.

Antosh ***Photo By Anne Peters

Antosh ***Photo By Anne Peters

Antosh, as the long-time director of the Sherlock Center on Disabilities at Rhode Island College, has played an integral role in numerous education and training efforts related to the integration of people with disabilities in their communities, the principle at the heart of the consent decree and the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

He also has overseen a critical quarterly survey assessing the quality of life of Rhode Islanders with developmental disabilities that has played an important role in helping the state provide data to the consent decree monitor.

Antosh, a lifetime advocate for people with developmental disabilities, was a plaintiff in the lawsuit that succeeded in shutting down the Ladd School in 1994, making Rhode Island the first to de-institutionalize the population.



DOJ Urges End To City’s Obligations In Landmark Providence "Sheltered Workshop" Case

By Gina Macris

The U.S. District Court will hear a request by the City of Providence and the U.S. Department of Justice for early termination of a civil rights agreement affecting intellectually challenged students at Mount Pleasant High School who were once trained only to perform repetitive tasks in a sheltered workshop.

The hearing was scheduled for Sept. 26 after the DOJ formally signaled its support for the city’s request, saying the city and its school department have transformed services for students in keeping with the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

“Students are now integrated with their classmates and receive services to prepare them for integrated work in careers that match their interests and abilities,” said lawyers for the DOJ.

In accordance with the agreement, “the City will ensure that these changes are lasting,” the DOJ said in written arguments urging Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. to dismiss the case against the city.

The DOJ praised the city’s “rapid implementation” and “consistent adherence” to the provisions of the agreement, saying it has resulted in “substantial compliance” a year ahead of schedule. The government’s conclusion concurs with a recent report filed by an independent court monitor.

“This is a victory for all involved,” the DOJ said.

The DOJ lawyers pointed out that “this agreement was the first in the nation to address the rights of individuals with disabilities to receive integrated employment services instead of segregated workshop services.”

The DOJ did not address the city’s compliance in the context of the impending state takeover of the city’s school system. The request for early dismissal was made last winter - months before the appointment of a new state Commissioner of Education, who received a devastating outside evaluation of the school system from the Johns Hopkins Institute for Educational Policy.

The agreement, signed in 2013, is due to expire on July 1, 2020. It served as a prototype for a subsequent statewide consent decree signed in 2014 which obliges the state to provide transition services to students with developmental disabilities in all high schools across Rhode Island and to transform all work and non-work adult services to comply with the ADA’s Integration mandate, which has been affirmed by the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

An early dismissal of the city’s obligations under the 2013 Interim Settlement Agreement (ISA) would mean that the city would no longer have to prepare for frequent calls and periodic visits from the monitor and the DOJ lawyers, or to file detailed and time-consuming quarterly reports documenting its compliance efforts. But court retains jurisdiction for a year after the expiration date, according to the DOJ.

Granting the city’s request would not affect the state’s continuing obligations for former Birch students who were sent to the now-defunct sheltered workshop, Training Through Placement, which used the Birch Academy as a pipeline for workers. Nor would it curtail the state’s responsibilities for other adults with developmental disabilities throughout Rhode Island who must have access to integrated work and non-work services under provisions of the separate 2014 consent decree.

The two agreements have fostered an “Employment First” policy, which assumes that all adults with developmental disabilities can work at regular jobs in the community. The policy encompasses self-employment and customized employment, which involves cooperation by employers motivated to re-order established job descriptions to get important tasks done by reliable employees. (Exceptions to the “Employment First” policy are allowed on a case by case basis.)

The DOJ said an independent court monitor, Charles Moseley, has found in a recent report that the city has met or exceeded standards for 45 compliance measures in four categories:

• Career development and transition planning

• Trial work experiences

• Training, outreach, and education about integrated employment for school staff, students and families

• Interagency coordination

School personnel have prepared students to obtain competitive employment as adults through “person-centered” planning, which begins by highlighting each student’s individuality; as well as detailed career development plans and vocational assessments, the DOJ wrote.

Moreover, the city’s efforts have extended to former Birch students who left school as early as 2010. The city has undertaken “significant efforts” to locate them and provide vocational assessments, supported employment services and other assistance to help them find integrated employment. The city has reached nearly 50 former students.

“As noted by the court monitor, this ‘look back’ strategy to correct past discrimination showcased the city’s commitment to the objectives of the ISA,” according to the DOJ.

The government lawyers also agreed that the city provides high quality trial work experiences that are individualized and integrated in the community. The agreement requires that every student have two such internships, each one lasting 60 days, before leaving school.

The city “repeatedly went the extra mile to ensure students’ individualized needs were met” and has satisfied the monitor’s concerns about the few cases in which students lacked a second internship, the DOJ said.

Teachers and other professionals working with students participate in frequent training and have “consistently demonstrated their ability to implement the requirements and goals of the ISA, breathing life into the city’s Employment First Policy,” the DOJ said.

The lawyers cited improvements in the school department’s cooperation with state agencies, including regular consultation with a rehabilitation counselor from the Office of Rehabilitation Services and monthly meetings between the city’s special education director and state officials to review the progress of former students who are receiving adult services.

The city’s swift progress in implementing the agreement and “years of sustained reform” have resulted in a myriad of changes in policy, operations, and attitudes that will be “difficult to dismantle,” the DOJ wrote.

And the success of the ISA, “including considerable outreach and education to students, families, and the community, has spread awareness and the expectation that students with IDD are capable of working in integrated settings with services,” the lawyers wrote.

The DOJ noted that Birch students will continue to benefit from the state’s obligations under the 2014 statewide consent decree, which requires students with developmental disabilities in all Rhode Island high schools to receive transition services similar to those developed through the ISA. The statewide decree is to expire in 2024.

The Sept. 26 hearing before Judge McConnell is scheduled for 10 a.m.

Read the next article (below) for monitor Charles Moseley’s assessment of the city’s compliance efforts under the Interim Settlement Agreement.

In addition, click here for an article on a public discussion of the pros and cons of early termination of the city’s obligations.

Feds Consider Early Termination Request For DD Oversight At Mount Pleasant High School

By Gina Macris

A Providence School Department request that the federal government end its oversight of a special education program at Mount Pleasant High School is encountering some resistance and concern because of a more immediate development: The state is taking control of the entire “broken” school district.

Months ago, the city of Providence sought early termination of a landmark federal Interim Settlement Agreement, reached in 2013, in which the school department promised to make major changes in the way special education students at Mount Pleasant High School were being shuttled into a sheltered workshop program in North Providence.

The school system agreed to prepare students in the Birch Vocational Center at Mount Pleasant High School to take advantage of supported employment in the community and to participate in integrated non-work activities in compliance with the integration mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The U.S. Department of Justice and a federal court monitor are carefully considering the request and have solicited the opinions of various segments of the developmental disabilities community on the pros and cons of terminating the agreement now, a year before it is set to expire.

On July 23, the monitor, Charles Moseley, and Victoria Thomas, a lawyer for the DOJ, discussed possible early termination via conference call with members of the Employment First Task Force (EFTF), an advisory group on matters concerning the 2013 agreement and a broader, statewide consent decree signed in 2014.

On the same day, the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education voted, as anticipated, to empower the state Commissioner of Education to intervene in the Providence School District, taking temporary control, if necessary, of its budget, personnel, and governance.

Thomas said she was concerned about a recent report on Providence schools from Johns Hopkins University’s Institute on Educational Policy which found a deeply dysfunctional system where most students are not learning, principals are struggling to lead, teachers and students don’t feel safe, and some buildings are crumbling around them.

Mount Pleasant High School was one of 12 schools visited by the Johns Hopkins researchers.

At the same time, Thomas said, she personally has been “very impressed with the work Providence has done” with the Mount Pleasant special education students protected by the 2013 Interim Settlement Agreement. Over the last several years, Thomas has participated in many site visits at Mount Pleasant High, as has Moseley, who concurred with Thomas’ assessment. Having done similar visits in other states, Thomas said, she has been “blown away” by the quality of work done to put the needs and wants of students in Providence at the center of their individualized education plans.

“That doesn’t mean that everything is perfect,” Thomas said.

The Interim Settlement Agreement assumes that Mount Pleasant High School students will make a successful transition from school to adult services provided by the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals. And Thomas said some of the comments that have been received from stakeholders in developmental disability services indicate that the DOJ and the monitor “really need to look into adult services.”

The Providence school department’s involvement in the Interim Settlement Agreement is set to expire in July, 2020, as long as the city is in “substantial compliance” a year ahead of time and the changes made during compliance are found to be lasting.

If the DOJ and the monitor agree to “early termination and we’re wrong,” Thomas said, the oversight of the state’s efforts to integrate adults with developmental disabilities in their communities will continue as part of the overlapping statewide consent decree signed in 2014.

“We’re not leaving anyone behind,” she said. Moseley added that the monitor and the DOJ will continue to have access to data about the progress of the same students as they merge into the adult population.

State Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, who attended the task force meeting, expressed concern that even if implementation of the Interim Settlement Agreement has been going well at Mount Pleasant High School, the state of the school system around the program is in question.

Anne Peters, a parent who serves on the task force, asked whether continuing to monitor Mt. Pleasant High might be needed to protect the resources that have been brought to bear to change the prospects for special education students.

“I think we’re expecting quite the chaotic year” in Providence, she said.

“An excellent question,” Moseley said.

Several days before the meeting, Task Force leaders collected comments on early termination that made three main points:

  • There seems to have been significant progress at Mt. Pleasant, with special education students having meaningful work trials

  • Students still leave school unable to get the appropriate employment supports, like those from other communities, because providers are not accepting new referrals.

  • ·The Johns Hopkins report will put Providence under pressure to make many reforms and it would be ill-advised to take the spotlight off students with developmental disabilities for fear they would once again get left behind.

Neither Thomas nor Moseley said when the decision would be made on early termination. Moseley has indicated he plans to complete a report on whether Providence is in substantial compliance with the Interim Settlement Agreement before he steps down as monitor on Sept. 30.

Moseley To Step Down As Court Monitor of RI Olmstead Consent Decree, Citing Health Concerns

Charles Moseley

Charles Moseley

By Gina Macris

Charles Moseley, the independent federal court monitor overseeing implementation of two federal civil rights decrees affecting Rhode Islanders with developmental disabilities, will step down at the end of September because of what he termed “emerging health issues.”

Brian Gosselin

Brian Gosselin

In a related matter, Brian Gosselin, chief strategy officer at the Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS), has been named the state’s consent decree coordinator, a post he has filled on an interim basis twice in the last few years. Rhode Island has had five consent decree coordinators, including Gosselin, in five years.

The personnel changes were announced July 18 by EOHHS. Before Moseley resigns on Sept. 30, he said in his letter, he intends to complete his assessment of whether the city of Providence is in substantial compliance with the first of the two federal agreements, reached in 2013.

In it, the city stopped using the Birch Academy at Mount Pleasant High School as a feeder program for a now-closed sheltered workshop called Training Through Placement and instead pledged to help high school students with intellectual or developmental challenges make the transition to competitive employment in the community.

The 2013 “Interim Settlement Agreement” (ISA) is set to expire in 2020, but lawyers for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) have said the city must be in “substantial compliance” a year ahead of time. Moseley’s resignation letter indicated he is working on that assessment. The city, meanwhile, has asked for early release from the ISA.

Moseley has served as the federal court monitor since late 2014, a few months after the state and the DOJ settled a broader civil rights complaint saying that Rhode Island’s system for developmentally disabled adults relied too heavily on sheltered workshops and segregated day centers. Former Gov. Lincoln Chafee signed a consent decree with the federal government in which he pledged that the state’s system would be overhauled by 2024, making certain that those who wished to participate in work, learning and recreation in the larger community would be helped to do so.

The 2014 settlement marked the first Olmstead consent decree in the country targeting segregated day services for adults with developmental disabilities. The Olmstead decision of the U.S Supreme Court reinforced the Integration Mandate of the Americans With disabilities Act. Previously, the DOJ had enforced the ruling in connection with segregated housing.

Moseley is a former director of developmental disabilities in Vermont and a former associate executive director of the National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services.

A new court monitor would need the approval of the state, the DOJ and Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of U.S. District Court, who is overseeing the case. McConnell has made it clear that he relies on Moseley’s recommendations in steering the implementation of the consent decree.

In his letter, Moseley said the decision to step away after five years “is a very difficult one to make.”

He said he has enjoyed working with all involved and will miss the “in-depth discussions and negotiations that we have had in our ongoing efforts to achieve the goals and outcomes identified by the two agreements.”

Moseley, who lives in Vermont, has made site visits to Rhode Island several times a year, usually keeping out of the public eye, and has incorporated his observations, as well as data supplied by the state and the city, into quarterly reports to McConnell. He also has attended periodic status conferences on the case before McConnell.

“Implementing comprehensive systems change within the boundaries of the complicated developmental disabilities system is challenging,“ Moseley said. He praised a variety of state and city officials for “actively addressing the changes that must be made.” He also recognized the DOJ lawyers for their “constructive approach and unwavering focus” on individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

RI DD Rate Reviewers Asked To Fix Payment System That Still Promotes Segregated Care

By Gina Macris

This article was updated June 17 with a response from the Rhode Island Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals.

The Rhode Island state agency which funds services for adults with developmental disabilities has acknowledged for the first time that its underlying reimbursement system for private providers is structurally deficient for complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act as required by a 2014 federal civil rights decree.

While the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) has pursued services promoting greater independence for adults with developmental disabilities, “the underlying reimbursement system has lagged,” according to a statement of the scope of work outlined for a consortium tasked with reviewing reimbursement rates.

The rate structure “is grounded in past practices and cost bases associated with the provision of services in the sheltered workshop setting,” BHDDH officials wrote.

“In order to adequately meet consumers’ needs, providers have been paid supplemental funds to address the deficiency in the payment rates,” BHDDH explained in the contract.

BHDDH has a contract with the New England States Consortium Systems Organization (NESCSO) to update a rate structure that has not been reviewed for eight years and to suggest alternates to the current payment methods.

In describing the work ahead for NESCSO, BHDDH says it is:

“seeking to further promote the development of a service system and associated reimbursement arrangements that maximize the opportunity for persons with DD to participate to the fullest possible in community-based activities.”

In 2014 the U.S. Department of Justice found that the reimbursement system incentivized segregated care in sheltered workshops and day centers in violation of the Integration Mandate of the ADA, reinforced by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Olmstead decision.

The Obama administration began vigorously enforcing the Olmstead decision in 2009, but the consent decree in Rhode Island was the first settlement that addressed segregation in daytime services rather than housing.

The consent decree provides a decade-long period of federal oversight of the state’s efforts to change the system. Enforcement of the consent decree entered its sixth year April 9. It will take at least another year for changes in rates and payment methods to go into effect, with the approval of the General Assembly. Enforcement of the decree is set to expire in 2024, but the state would have to show substantial compliance before federal oversight ends.

While some improvements in services have been made, the contract with NESCSO indicates that BHDDH officials believe the reimbursement system has held back compliance efforts.

Staffing Ratios Hinder Needed Flexibility

The underlying problem, said the BHDDH director in an interview, is a rule that requires a ratio of 60 percent funding for community-based activities and 40 percent funding for center-based daytime care in each client’s individual authorization.

The contract language alludes to this situation in describing staffing ratios. It says two areas of “particular focus” are daytime rates paid for employment-related and non-work services. In sheltered settings, for example, there might be one worker for every ten clients. But in the community the number of clients for each worker would have to be much smaller.

Rebecca Boss, the BHDDH director, said the department seeks a “predictable rate structure not driven by very precise ratios” but rather by the needs and preferences of individual clients.

The supplemental payments intended to mitigate the deficiencies in the underlying system “are an increasing portion of overall payments, reflecting the inadequacy of the current rates,” the contract language explained.

According to department officials, that language was meant to refer to the historical trend, in which supplemental payments had increased to as much as $7.8 million in a three-month period.

Boss froze new approvals at the end of 2017, except for emergency health and safety considerations and a couple other narrowly defined exceptions, to try to curb a multi-million dollar deficit at a time when Governor Gina Raimondo seemed inclined to cut developmental disability services significantly.

According to records BHDDH turns in to the General Assembly every month, the supplemental payments from January through March of this year have declined to $3.6 million, about half the total for the same period in 2018.

Historically, supplemental payments have been awarded only when consumers, families, or providers have made successful appeals of individual authorizations. The appeals, which often have required considerable time and energy, must be made annually, or the authorization reverts to the original amount. The appeals process is but one facet of what many families and providers describe as an unstable system.

Kerri Zanchi, director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities, said supplemental payments are still a big part of reimbursements to private providers, and BHDDH wants NESCSO and its consultants to scrutinize them as part of the review process.

Study Commission To Hear from NESCSO

The rate review coincides with the work of a special legislative commission studying the current reimbursement system, called Project Sustainability.

On June 18, the commission will meet to hear presentations about employment and transportation issues from Scott Jensen, director of the Department of Labor and Training; and from Scott Avedesian, CEO of the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority.

On June 25, the executive director of NESCSO, Elena Nicolella, is scheduled to appear before the commission to give an update on the rate review now being conducted by four consultants under NESCSO’s supervision.

In the meantime, some commission members have given BHDDH their own statements on how they think consultants should approach the work and their ideas for a new system of services that allow consumers and their families to shape the way state funds are used.

A spokeswoman for providers has urged NESCSO and its consultants to gain a thorough understanding of what it costs for a private agency to provide services under the terms of recently-revised regulations for provider operations and quality certification standards.

These bureaucratic steps are part of the state’s efforts to comply with the consent decree and the federal Medicaid Home And Community Based Final Rule (HCBS). Like the consent decree, HCBS embraces the integration mandate of the ADA, but it is a nationwide rule applying to all community-based services funded by Medicaid.

Paradox In Unspent Funds For Employment

Tina Spears, executive director of the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island, warned that simply looking at the way providers utilize the current reimbursement model, which is based on segregated care, will not give the complete picture of the needs of the system.

She did not mention specifics, but a case in point is the performance-based supported employment program, which was funded by a $6.8 million allocation made by the General Assembly in the fiscal year that began July 1, 2016. That allocation still has not been completely spent.

Excluding a start-up period from January through June of 2017, the program spent $2.5 million the first year, from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. It’s expected to spend $4 million in the fiscal year ending June 30, according to a BHDDH spokesman.

Providers initially complained that they could not meet their costs with the series of one-time incentives offered by the program, which was built on same reimbursement system designed for center-based care.

Incentives and enhancements were made more generous during the second year, and negotiations are underway for a third year of the program.

In the meantime, Rhode Island’s last sheltered workshop closed last year and BHDDH says community-based, competitive employment has increased to about 29 percent of adults with developmental disabilities.

A study released by two nationwide associations of providers in January said Rhode Island’s rate of competitive employment was about 19 percent, but that figure dated from 2015. The “Case for Inclusion” ranked Rhode Island 32nd in the nation on its integration efforts. It was compiled by ANCOR - the American Network of Community Options and Resources, and UCP – United Cerebral Palsy.

Consumers Want More Control Over Money Assigned To Them

Kevin Nerney, executive director of the Rhode Island Developmental Disabilities Council, and Kelly Donovan, who receives state-funded supports, each called for a system that allows greater consumer control of state funding and greater flexibility in the way it is used.

The state should “ensure that funding is available across all imaginable living arrangements,” particularly in situations where a consumer owns or rents a property and a caregiver or family would like to move in. The caregiver or consumer should be allowed a stipend, as is permitted in many other states, to make this type of arrangement viable, Nerney said.

The state should also ensure that adults with developmental disabilities have the support of familiar staff while they are hospitalized to avoid the trauma of being in an unfamiliar environment where they can neither make themselves understood nor understand what is being said to them, Nerney said.

In addition, the state should adopt a way to assess the support a person receives from family or friends in deciding funding levels. While most of those receiving services from the Division of Developmental Disabilities live in the family home, that home may include a large healthy family, a single aging parent, or a grandparent with Alzheimer’s and a sibling who also has significant needs for support, Nerney said.

And he called for more funding for those hired by self-directed consumers and their families to write support plans necessary to qualify for state funding. The expectations for the plan writers have multiplied over the last 20 years but the fees remains the same at $500 for the initial plan and $350 for an annual renewal, Nerney said. There should be an allowance for self-directed families who need ongoing coordination of services, he said.

Kelly Donovan, who herself receives services from BHDDH gave a concrete example of what greater control and flexibility might look like.

She said people should be able to enjoy an outing without:

A: going home early because a staffer’s shift ends

B: taking everyone in your group home with you, even if one or more of them really didn’t want to come.

“People should be able to have their designated time to themselves and opportunities to be involved in community activities,” she said.

The public may submit comments or questions about the rate review process by email at BHDDH.AskDD@bhddh.ri.gov. Please copy and paste the email address into your email program, or get a link by visiting http://www.bhddh.ri.gov/developmentaldisabilities/community_forums_event.php

In response to this article, Randal Edgar, a spokesman for BHDDH, released the following statement on June 17:

The article published on June 12 on the Olmstead Updates blog presents a misleading picture of Rhode Island’s system of care for adults with developmental disabilities.

The headline claims this system “promotes segregated care.”

This assertion is false.

The article attempts to back up this assertion up by referring to language in a state contract with a consultant that is reviewing the rates paid to DD providers. But in referencing the contract language, the article misreads the intent of that language.

The contract language speaks from a historical perspective. It states that while the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals has pursued the development of “a services system that supports greater independence” for the DD population, “the underlying reimbursement system has lagged.” It goes on to say that the “basis for the development of prevailing rates is grounded in past practices and cost bases associated with the provision of services in the sheltered workshop setting.”

Acknowledging that the existing rates are grounded in past practices and need to be updated is not the same as saying the system as it operates today promotes segregated care, and in saying it does, the article ignores and/or minimizes many steps the department has taken to improve the care provided to adults with developmental disabilities. It should be noted that the reporter met with BHDDH officials for more than an hour but did not press this assertion and obtain their view of the contract language.

The article is wrong again when it states that department froze new approvals for supplemental payments in 2017 to help offset a budget deficit. The department reduced those approvals, applying more stringent standards, not because of a possible budget deficit but because this made sense from a policy standpoint.

Finally, the article gives voice to people outside the department, asking them to describe where the DD care system should go, without giving BHDDH officials a chance to share their vision. In the process, it conveys a false impression that BHDDH officials are not passionate about moving this system forward.

We are disappointed that the article did not present a more complete and accurate picture.

Separately, the public may submit comments or questions about the rate review process by email at BHDDH.AskDD@bhddh.ri.gov. Please copy and paste the email address into your email program, or get a link by visiting http://www.bhddh.ri.gov/developmentaldisabilities/community_forums_event.php

RI Parents: System Of Care Fails To Address Supervision of Adults With DD In Hospital Setting

Jane Sroka * all photos by anne peters

Jane Sroka * all photos by anne peters

By Gina Macris

Access. Quality. Safety.

Those are the three words chosen by officials of the Rhode Island Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) to sum up their overarching goals in serving adults facing intellectual and developmental challenges.

But at a public forum in Warwick Feb. 5, Jane Sroka, the mother of a man with intensive special needs, said the reality falls far short of those three goals when adults with special communications and behavioral needs are hospitalized.

The Medicaid dollars to which Sroka’s son is entitled through Home and Community-Based Services funded through BHDDH stop at the hospital’s door.

“My son needs 24/7 eyes-on supervision at all times. It’s huge. It’s life and death. That’s what it is,” she said.

In the hospital, Sroka said, “I was with him 24/7. He was awake 24/7. I was awake, 24/7. That was tough. It’s grueling on everybody.”

You’re talking about putting safety first? This is safety first,” Sroka said.

Not providing that round-the-clock supervision, in her son’s case, would have been dangerous, she said.

It’s not that the nurses don’t care, she said, but “if I wasn’t there, they wouldn’t have a clue about what to do or how to do it or when to do it, or whatever. It’s dangerous. And it has to change,” she said. She said she knows she is not alone.

Gail Peet had a similar story. She said her daughter, 47, who is non-verbal, became extremely agitated when a feeding tube was inserted.

After her daughter was transferred to a nursing home, Peet said, she asked the staff to put a binding around the feeding tube to prevent her daughter from ripping it out.

The nursing home refused, on the grounds that the binding would constitute a “restraint,” Peet explained after the forum. The next morning, the staff discovered that Peet’s daughter had indeed ripped out the tube, which had to be re-inserted, causing her the additional pain of a second procedure.

In neither Peet’s nor Sroka’s case did there appear to be a plan for in-hospital or discharge care that addressed complications that could arise from individuals’ particular challenges as persons with developmental disabilities.

Rebecca Beaton

Rebecca Beaton

And Rebecca Beaton, who uses a wheelchair and must make a great effort to shape each word, said she, too, needs 24-hour care if she goes to the hospital because she has a speech problem and not everyone understands her. A support person seated next to her at the forum repeated her words for clarity.

John Susa, former chairman of the Rhode Island Developmental Disabilities Council and the father of a man with extensive needs, said there used to be a pool of state funds — outside the federal-state Medicaid structure — that was once used only in emergencies involving adults with developmental disabilities. He suggested that officials re-visit that idea.

Kerri Zanchi, Director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD),, stood at the podium of a meeting room in the Warwick Public Library, taking notes.

Kerri Zanchi

Kerri Zanchi

Medicaid separates Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) from hospital services to avoid duplication, Zanchi explained.

“But I hear you,” she told Sroka and Peet, that the situations they described were not about duplicate services.

Zanchi raised the possibility that an upcoming initiative, the creation of a “Health Home,” might open an opportunity to provide the kinds of supports that Sroka and Peet needed in the hospital and nursing home. A Health Home is a Medicaid-spawned concept for the management of services, not a bricks and mortar facility.

“It is so important for the individuals we love and support to have that consistency and continuity of care,” she said.

Earlier in the forum, Zanchi had explained the Health Home as an entity that would manage a program of individualized services around the unique needs and preferences of a particular person served by DDD.

FROM OLMSTEAD TO HEALTH HOMES


Medicaid created the Health Home option to separate the design and management of services from the funding and delivery of services. The goal is to avoid any conflict of interest that might compromise the quality of care.

The states must provide so-called “conflict-free case management” by 2022 to comply with the Medicaid Home and Community Based Services Final Rule, issued in 2014 to align Medicaid with the integration mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

According to the 1999 Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, the integration mandate says individuals with disabilities must have access to the supports they need to live regular lives in the least restrictive environment that is therapeutically appropriate – and that environment is presumed to be the community.

In line with Olmstead, as well as a 2014 consent decree in which Rhode Island has agreed to desegregate its daytime services for adults with developmental disabilities, state officials and the developmental disability community have embraced the idea of “person-centered planning,” which puts the needs and preferences of individuals at the core of any service plan.

But at the forum, Mary Beth Cournoyer, the mother of an adult son with developmental disabilities and a member of the Employment First Task Force, suggested “whole life” planning as a more encompassing term.

“How do we build lives? It’s 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” she said. The Employment First Task Force to which she belongs was created by the consent decree to serve as a bridge between the community and state government.

Zanchi said state officials will meet with their community partners, including families and providers, to ask them to help draft the design for a Health Home for adults with developmental disabilities before the application is submitted to the federal Medicaid program.

She said DDD hopes to have a Health Home up and running in about 12 months.

NEW WORKPLACE LAW AFFECTING SOME DD SERVICES

The forum also brought to light apparently unintended consequences of the Healthy and Safe Families and Workplaces Act, which went into effect last July 1, guaranteeing all workers get time off to go to doctors’ appointments and attend to other important personal and family needs. Companies with 17 or more employees are required to give paid leave.

Sue Babin of the Rhode Island Developmental Disabilities Council said that those who direct services for themselves or a loved one are receiving conflicting advice from fiscal intermediaries about whether the law applies to support staff for adults with developmental disabilities.

And some individuals who are advised the law does apply and are granting time off to their support staff are having problems finding substitute workers, Babin said.

Zanchi suggested a separate meeting with families that organize and direct their own services to discuss the impact of the new workplace law and any other inconsistent advisories they may be receiving from fiscal intermediaries, who control the individualized budgets the state authorizes to be spent on services for particular individuals.

RATE REVIEW GEARING UP

In an overview of changes at DDD, Zanchi announced that the division is about to embark on a review of its fee-for-service rate model for reimbursing private agencies that provide most of the developmental disability supports in state.

To that end, BHDDH has selected an outside consultant for the remainder of the current fiscal year and the new budget cycle beginning July 1.

Zanchi declined to name the contractor until a purchase order for services has been signed by the state purchasing office. She did say, however, that the consultant was not Burns & Associates, the Arizona-based company that helped a previous administration devise Project Sustainability That is the name for the existing fee-for-service model that doles out payments for daytime services in 15-minute increments that must be documented by each worker for each client served.

Zanchi said $500,000 for the consultant was budgeted in the current fiscal year, and an equal amount is in the governor’s proposal for the next budget.

To expedite the rate review, the contractor was selected as a “sole source” provider, without the months-long process or issuing a request for proposals and reviewing bids, Zanchi said.

NEW YOUTH AND TRANSITION ADMINISTRATOR

Zanchi announced that Susan Hayward, a veteran social casework supervisor, has been named to the new position of Youth and Transition Administrator, to coordinate a smooth shift for high school special education students moving into adult services.

Employment opportunities and other transitional servicesfor teenagers and young adults are a prime concern of the independent court monitor overseeing implementation of the 2014 consent decree, as well as an earlier interim settlement agreement affecting only youth and adults in Providence.

The 2013 interim settlement agreement addressed violations of the integration mandate of the ADA that involved a special education program at the Birch Academy of Mount Pleasant High School being used as a feeder program for a former sheltered workshop in North Providence called Training Through Placement. The agreement is set to expire July 1, 2020, at the discretion of the U.S. District Court.

BHDDH officials presented a PowerPoint of information covered at the public forum. To view it, click here.

The advocacy group RI FORCE (Rhode Island Families Organized for Reform, Change, and Empowerment) recorded the public forum and has posted the video, in three parts, on its Facebook page. To connect to the video, click here.

RI Senate Finance, BHDDH To Seek More Funding To Protect Services And Rights Of Adults with DD

By Gina Macris

Governor Gina Raimondo’s proposed $18.4 million cut to developmental disability services for the next fiscal year would not allow Rhode Island to continue its compliance efforts in connection with a 2014 federal consent decree, Rebecca Boss acknowledged for the first time during a budget hearing before the Senate Finance Committee on May 3.  

Boss - RI CApitol tv

Boss - RI CApitol tv

Boss is the highest ranking official in the Raimondo administration responsible for adults with developmental disabilities in her position as the director of the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).  

Her admission came in response to the finance committee chairman, Sen. William J. Conley, Jr., who laid out a detailed and persistent line of questioning that revealed an authoritative grasp of the issues of the the consent decree and established him as a leading advocate for expanding the developmental disabilities budget.  

Boss said in initial remarks that based on an “updated data analysis of monthly caseloads and more positive revenue trends, we will be advocating for increased funding for BHDDH so Rhode Islanders’ needs are met.”

Conley - RI CAPITOL TV 

Conley - RI CAPITOL TV 

But Conley asked her to revisit a specific question about funding that had first been posed to her by U.S. District Court Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. during a hearing April 10. McConnell asked whether the proposed $18.4 million cut in reimbursements to private providers effective July 1 would affect the state’s ability to move forward with compliance efforts related to the consent decree.

At the time, Boss said BHDDH did not have enough data to give an answer.

Conley said the consent decree “does nothing more, quite frankly, than require the same standards that the U.S. Supreme Court established in 1999.”

The so-called Olmstead decision clarified the integration mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act, spelling out the rights of all individuals with disabilities to choose services that are part of their communities.    

Nearly 20 years after the Olmstead decision, Rhode Island is “still struggling to meet a constitutional standard of care,” Conley said.

“Four years after the consent decree was entered and after repeated court monitor reports, we still cannot answer the question as to whether or not we are providing sufficient resources, really, to provide justice and dignity to the people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in the state of Rhode Island.”

“While I understand you have to represent the voice of the administration, and everybody expects you to be a loyal soldier and team player, the budget that you are giving us doesn’t do that,” Conley said, addressing Boss.

Otherwise, Boss would have been able to clearly answer the judge that the loss of $18 million would not affect progress on the consent decree and would have been able to spell out how its goals would be achieved with the remaining funds, Conley said.

When Conley asked what the Senate Finance Committee could do to help BHDDH, Boss and the Director of Developmental Disabilities, Kerri Zanchi, both said members could advocate for more flexibility for the department to assign resources.

Boss said she agreed that the department needs more resources but wasn’t sure that the prescriptive nature of the consent decree was the best approach.

But Conley replied said that when the state isn’t meeting the standards, or doesn’t have the data to show its progress – a problem since 2014 – “the default position is prescriptive standards, because they need some kind of measuring stick.”

One measure is whether the “proposed budget would provide the level of services that are constitutionally mandated,” Conley said.

“What’s your answer today?” he asked, bringing the discussion full circle back to the judge’s question.  

Boss said, “With the revised analytics done, we could say today that the budget proposed would not continue the service delivery” in the current fiscal year.  The consent decree requires an increase in commitment during each year of implementation. equired by the consent decree.

While Boss did not offer a figure, Sen. Louis D. DiPalma, D-Middletown, the first vice-chairman of the committee, said developmental disabilities would need about $275 million to $280 million in federal and state funding during the next fiscal year, based on the original budget request the department made to the Governor’s office last fall.

DiPalma presented a chart showing that actual funding for developmental disabilities has lagged behind inflation since July 1, 2011, which marked the introduction of “Project Sustainability,” the current fee-for service reimbursement system that has come under increasing criticism for imposing restrictions on providers – and the state bureaucracy – in implementing the consent decree.

For example, the chart shows that the $239.8 million allocated for developmental disabilities effective July 1, 2010 would be the equivalent of $274.5 million allocated effective July 1, 2018, the start of the next fiscal year, with an adjustment for inflation according to the consumer price index.

Raimondo’s proposal, as it now stands, would allocate only $248.1 million effective July 1, counting only the federal-state Medicaid funding. (Other miscellaneous funds would add slightly more than $2 million to the bottom line.)

The Senate on May 1 gave final approval to a resolution creating a special commission to study the reimbursement system under Project Sustainability, including the use of a standardized assessment tool keyed to a funding formula that has never been disclosed. The commission has until March 1, 2019 to issue its report.

Sen. Walter S. Felag, Jr., D-Warren, Bristol and Tiverton, said he favors fully funding developmental disabilities.

He said it seems that in the last eight to ten years, there has been “tremendous pressure” to decrease these expenditures,” with particular challenges on residential costs from 2013 to 2017 as BHDDH has tried to move people out of group homes to less expensive shared living arrangements.  He questioned whether it has been all worthwhile.

Boss said there have been investments in developmental disabilities in that time, and Conley remarked that Boss and her staff are doing “tremendous work” with the resources they do have.

Beth Upham put a parent’s perspective on services. Her daughter, Stacy, a resident of a group home with an active calendar, “has a life we never could have given her,” she said.

She said she has met with Governor Raimondo, who has “promised she would support this community.”

But if the governor’s existing budget proposal is enacted, Upham said, “every person in the system will suffer. They will be sicker. There will be more hospitalizations. My daughter, my baby girl, will suffer,” Upham said.

“We have been fighting this system ever since she turned 21,” Upham said.

She asked, “why, for the last 15 years, has this community been targeted for cuts?”

'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. 

 

 

 

RI Revises Supported Employment; Providers And Families Invited To Information Sessions

By Gina Macris

The second year of a program to help Rhode Islanders with developmental disabilities find jobs will offer extra bonus money to encourage financially strapped private agencies to seek new clients, particularly young adults.

Zanchi     Photo by Anne Peters  

Zanchi     Photo by Anne Peters  

The state began the “performance-based” program last January to avoid federal court sanctions for failing to implement a 2014 consent decree aimed at giving individuals with disabilities greater access to regular jobs and integrated non-work activities.

“We’ve learned a lot in this first year,” said Kerri Zanchi, Director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD). Zanchi, the first developmental disabilities professional to head DDD in at least a decade, began work in Rhode Island shortly after the supported employment program kicked off a year ago.

Zanchi elaborated on the status of the program, in which private agencies provide supportive job-seeking and job-retention services, during a telephone interview Jan. 5.

She said that in the initial contract year, which ended in December, 22 private agencies offered supported employment services to about 440 adults with developmental disabilities, with about 150 gaining employment at minimum wage or higher.

In the coming year, Zanchi said, she hopes the opportunities for enhanced performance payments and other changes prove “more responsive to the needs of consumers” and that the number of providers will expand. 

DDD will host information sessions Monday, Jan. 8 and Friday, Jan. 19 for private providers seeking to renew their contracts or establish new ones and for so-called “self-directed” families, who take on the design and direct supervision of a loved one’s activities. Few of these families have been able to participate in the performance-based program during its first year, according to anecdotal reports. 

A key addition to the menu of performance payments to providers is a bonus of $600 for each new client who signs on for employment-related services, or $1,000 for young adults who left high school between 2013 and 2016. These bonuses are due once the new client has received 20 hours of employment-related supports.

The consent decree places particular emphasis on young adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities, because investigators for the U.S. Department of Justice believed they are at heightened risk for isolation and segregation as they move from high school to adult services.

The consent decree draws its authority from the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, which reinforces the mandate for integrated services in the Americans With Disabilities Act

The young adult group also is the only segment of the consent decree population – more than 3,000 individuals altogether –for which the state is significantly out of compliance with court approved targets for job placement.

A reluctance among established agencies to expand their client roster has resulted in limited choices for the families of young adults; prompting them to direct their own services. But that choice also has made it generally more difficult to access the supported employment program, according to various reports about families’ experiences during the first year of the program.

Providers have told state officials that in many cases they can’t take on new clients because of low reimbursement rates and high staff turnover, and because the bonuses of the initial cycle of the supported employment program did not pay for the costs both of training new workers, as well as providing the actual services.

The graduation rate for a tuition-free training program offered by the Sherlock Center on Disabilities at Rhode Island College is 40 percent, with students dropping out for a variety of reasons, most of them related to high turnover and short-staffing at the provider agencies.  

In the second year, providers can expect an increase of $460 for training each new job coach, from $350 to $810 per trainee, according to materials from the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH), which were released by Zanchi.

The information sessions will be at the Arnold Conference Center in the Reagan Building of the Eleanor Slater Hospital, 111 Howard Ave., Cranston, Monday, Jan. 8, from 2 to 4 p.m. and Friday, Jan. 19, from 9 to 11 a.m.

In 2016, just after a U.S. District Court judge ordered the state to come up with a new “reimbursement model” that would give adults with developmental disabilities access to regular jobs. Shortly after that, the General Assembly allocated $6.8 million in state funds to finance what became the performance-based supported employment program.

Besides the bonuses, the revised program includes increased allocations – a total of $8,000 a year per client, according to the latest BHDDH figures – for provider reimbursements for employment services.

Zanchi said that the original $6.8 million allocation will continue to fund the first six months of the second year of the performance-based program until June 30, when BHDDH expects to return an estimated $2 million to the state.

The return of the estimated $2 million in unused supported employment funds was part of a deficit reduction plan outlined by BHDDH director Rebecca Boss Nov. 30 to close an estimated $15.9 millionf departmental deficit, including $12 million in developmental disabilities.. But it is well-understood within BHDDH that from a fiscal perspective, supported employment must continue because it is a court-ordered service.  

BHDDH has requested new funding, with projected utilization based on the first full year of programmatic experience, for the state’s next fiscal year beginning July 1, Zanchi said.

She did not say how much BHDDH  will seek for supported employment. Governor Gina Raimondo is expected to submit her budget to the General Assembly later this month.

RI Rate Cuts To DD Providers Or Wait Lists For Services Loom Without More Funding For BHDDH

By Gina Macris   

Rhode Islanders with developmental disabilities would face “drastic measures” such as waitlists for services or reductions in the amounts the state pays private organizations providing these supports if their funding agency must resolve a sizeable budget deficit by the end of the fiscal year June 30.

Rebecca Boss                       Photo By Anne Peters

Rebecca Boss                       Photo By Anne Peters

Rebecca Boss, director of the agency, the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH), reached that conclusion in a Nov. 30  letter to the director of the state budget office and the finance committee chairmen of the House and Senate.

She pledged to keep working  “to minimize the anticipated disruptions and destabilization that would result from such measures on our vulnerable populations.”  In the last several years, the General Assembly has covered BHDDH deficits with supplemental funding.

The letter outlined a corrective action plan for reducing the deficit, an estimated $15.9 million in in state spending, including about $12 million from developmental disabilities programs and nearly $4 million from the Eleanor Slater Hospital. Without a state match, roughly the same amount in federal Medicaid dollars also would evaporate.

The corrective action plan described a variety of cost-cutting initiatives that at best, would address less than half the overall shortfall, but Boss’s letter did not add up the total savings. BHDDH officials were not able to respond immediately to several detailed questions about the corrective action plan. 

Corrective action plans are required whenever a state agency runs a deficit. But the BHDDH plan raises questions about its future ability to comply with a 2014 federal consent decree that requires Rhode Island to integrate adults with developmental disabilities in the community to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).

Integrated services, which require small staff-to-client ratios, are inherently more costly than the segregated, facility-based programming Rhode Island has used in the past, in which one person can keep an eye on larger groups of people gathered in one room.  An over-reliance on sheltered workshops and day centers put Rhode Island in violation of the ADA's integration mandate, which is spelled out in the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, according to findings of the U.S.Department of Justice.

Rhode Island has never been in complete compliance with the incremental integration goals of the consent decree and in the spring of 2016 came close to being held in contempt of court over lack of funding, among other issues. Since then, as long as the state has put additional money and professional expertise into efforts to improve services, it has avoided sanctions.

Most recently, during a U.S. District Court hearing Nov. 30 – the same day Boss turned over her corrective action plan – the judge in the consent decree case  repeatedly brought up his concerns about money to fund the services required by the consent decree. John J. McConnell, Jr. said he would be keeping an eye on the budget process, both at the state and federal levels.

The BHDDH plan proposes returning to the state a $2 million balance in funds that had been allocated to a performance –based supported employment program that responded to a court order to help more adults with developmental disabilities find jobs. In the plan, Boss said that BHDDH would continue to provide funding for supported employment. Anecdotal information from providers and families has indicated that, even with the performance-based program, employment services have not been available to all who wanted them.  

Boss, meanwhile, outlined other cost savings. She said correcting errors in the needs assessments of 46 adults with developmental disabilities will result in $400,000 in savings, once the individual funding authorizations for those persons are reduced.

Because of widespread complaints that the original assessment shortchanged individual needs, resulting in routine awards of supplemental funds, BHDDH adopted an updated version of the standardized interview about a year ago that was said to be more accurate.

The newer assessment contributed to higher per-person costs that are reflected in much of the $12 million projected deficit in developmental disabilities, Boss said. The 46 errors in assessment occurred because interviewers did not correctly utilize a certain group of questions in the new interview process, she said.  

At the start of the current fiscal year in July, with rising costs from the new assessment already apparent, BHDDH imposed stringent health and safety standards for awarding supplemental funds on appeal.

Of the $12 million projected deficit in developmental disabilities, $4 million is related to “various” cost-cutting initiatives in the current fiscal year which BHDDH does not expect to achieve, Boss said.

She did not describe these unachieved savings in any detail, except to attribute $500,000 to the department’s inability to move residents out of three of five state-run group homes that had been scheduled to close. The remaining two homes are special care facilities that are being consolidated and will close, Boss said. She has said such special care facilities do not comply with a new Medicaid Final Rule on Home and Community-Based Services.

In the last quarter of the fiscal year, beginning April 1,  BHDDH plans to cut the daily reimbursement rates for residents of group homes with relatively mild developmental disabilities, those assigned to the lowest two levels ( labeled A and B) of a five-tier funding scale. This measure is expected to save $200,000.

Additionally, BHDDH has a “continuing commitment” to reducing the population of group homes by 110 during the current fiscal year, which would bring an estimated savings of $900,000, Boss said. She did not elaborate.

In Rhode Island, the primary alternative to group homes is shared living, in which a person with a developmental disability lives with a family in a private home.

During the 27 months between July 1, 2015 and Sept. 20, 2017 the number of individuals in shared living increased by 92, according to BHDDH figures, from 268 to 360. The breakdown includes 40 in the fiscal year that ended July 1, 2016 38 in the fiscal year that ended July 1, 2017, and 14 in the first three months of the current budget cycle.

At the Eleanor Slater Hospital, all but $900,000 of the nearly $4 million shortfall can be attributed to salaries and benefits, including $2.1 million in overtime, Boss said.

The hospital has faced numerous problems, most critically a preliminary report from the Joint Commission in September that signaled Eleanor Slater would be denied accreditation because of unsafe facilities. The report prompted an increase in staffing so that patients are checked every five minutes.

BHDDH plans to move patients out of the substandard facilities, but that consolidation is behind schedule.

 

RI Olmstead Judge Says He'll Be Keeping Eye On State And Federal Funding For Disability Services

By Gina Macris

John J. McConnell, Jr., the U.S. District Court judge overseeing changes in Rhode Island’s developmental disability service system, has signaled that that future funding of the social services is very much on his mind.

During a hearing Nov. 30 in Providence, McConnell listened to the state’s summary of the latest progress and the work still to be done to achieve the goals necessary to transform Rhode Island’s segregated services for persons with developmental disabilities into an integrated, community-based model. The transformation would bring Rhode Island into compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court Olmstead decision clarifying the integration mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

After Kerri Zanchi, the state Director of Developmental Disabilities, had finished her prepared remarks, McConnell interjected the observation that the necessary services are all “contingent on funding.”

“Funding is a key issue,” both at the state and federal level, he said. 

 Zanchi, too, expressed concerns, saying the developmental disability community needs advocacy to make its case on budget issues.

Most recently in Washington, disability rights advocates have said that the proposed tax cuts now before Congress would result in reductions in spending through Medicaid, the federal-state program that pays for services required by a 2013 interim agreement and a broader 2014 consent decree between the state of Rhode Island and the U.S. Department of Justice.

In addition, the federal government’s re-direction of some vocational rehabilitation funding from Rhode Island to Texas has triggered a waiting list, effective Dec. 1, for future clients of Rhode Island’s Office of Rehabilitation Services (ORS), which is involved in implementing both the 2013 and 2014 agreements.

No one currently served by ORS will be affected, but by the time the court is scheduled to reconvene in April, the waiting list could include applicants for services who are covered by the consent decree or the interim agreement.

Meanwhile, Rhode Island’s implementation of the agreements has contributed to a projected cost overrun of almost $26 million in federal and state Medicaid funds for developmental disability services in the current fiscal year, and the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) is under pressure to find ways to cut costs.

McConnell said he hoped that state officials will take into consideration the requirements of the 2014 consent decree (and the more limited interim agreement) as they look for cuts in social services in the coming months.

He said he wanted it known that “the third equal branch of government is watching.”

State Details Compliance Efforts  

The Nov. 30 hearing concerned those who are covered by the so-called “Interim Settlement Agreement,” originally 125 former students at the Birch Academy at Mount Pleasant High School in Providence who at one time were funneled into jobs paying sub-minimum wage at the former sheltered workshop, Training Through Placement (TTP) in North Providence. 

The latest update puts the current number in this group at 91 individuals whose cases are still open at the state Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD), said Zanchi, the division director.

She summarized the state’s progress in working with them:

  • 51 have jobs in the community paying at least minimum wage
  • 21 are unemployed but job-hunting, with support 
  • 7 are currently inactive
  • 12 have chosen not to work but are receiving integrated day services from a total of 12 providers.

In a report to the court submitted the eve of the hearing, an independent monitor, Charles Moseley, framed the employment statistics differently.

He zeroed in on an order from McConnell in June that the state follow up on 46 unemployed members of the class protected by the interim agreement of 2013, including 34 who had never had a job in the community.

Among the group of 46, Moseley said the state had made 11 job placements as of the end of October. That is most of the goal of 15 placements that must be made by March 23, 2018. An additional 16 placements must be made by June 23, 2018, and target dates for the remaining 15 placements are to be determined, he said. (Some of them have indicated they don't want to work.)

'Underperformance' Of One Provider Hurt State

Much of the testimony, as well as Moseley’s comprehensive report, concerned Community Work Services, the successor to TTP, the sheltered workshop at the center of the U.S. Department of Justice investigation that led to the interim agreement of 2013.

CWS serves 57 of the 91 individuals covered by the interim agreement, according to Zanchi. (CWS’ own report to the monitor earlier in November put that figure at 59, with 5 of the 59 transitioning to other providers.)    

Of the CWS clients covered by the interim agreement, 25 belong to the group of 46 unemployed individuals the judge said needed special attention, according to Moseley’s report. The rest are served by other providers.

Zanchi said the “underperformance” of CWS “has directly contributed” to the state’s non-compliance with the interim agreement’s targets for employment and integrated non-work services. CWS is a subsidiary of Fedcap Rehabilitation Services of New York.

By now, the state was to have found jobs for all members of the former Birch and TTP group who made an informed choice to seek employment. 

Zanchi said the current CWS leadership has shown a “solid grasp of the significant change needed in their organizational structure” as well as the fact that it needs to reach performance goals “expeditiously.”

She emphasized that CWS’ “re-engagement of families” to support integrated services “cannot be understated.”

She shared the story of one young CWS client and the client's parents, who in a two-year span, had gradually shifted from adamant opposition toward warm embrace of the idea of employment. The client ow volunteers at the Rhode Island Community Food Bank and a local food pantry and meets with a job developer each week to explore part-time job opportunities, Zanchi said.  

CWS Nearly Lost License

In May, CWS had come under fire – and was close to losing its license to operate in Rhode Island – for substandard programming, according to Moseley.

Since then, there has been a nearly complete turnover of staff and management at CWS, which has drawn up a new blueprint for change in keeping with principles of “person-centered planning,” putting the individual’s needs and preferences at the center of customized plans for immediate services and long-term goals. 

CWS also has begun a pilot program called “Employment Without Walls” with 7 clients who are hunting for jobs. 

The CWS plan was included in a 59-page report to the court from Moseley. Also included in Moseley's report was an evaluation from William Ashe, a Vermont-based consultant, who worked with Moseley in conducting a three-day, on-site review of CWS in early October.

Ashe, who had first evaluated CWS in October, 2015, said that “CWS is very different from the organization that was visited some two years ago.”

At the same time, Ashe said that “It was my hope that more gains would have been made over these 24 months than has been the case, particularly in the degree of sophistication of the person-centered planning process.” He noted that CWS, led by program director Lori Norris, “appears committed to restructuring the services and supports that it provides to comply with the ISA (Interim Settlement Agreement of 2013) and state regulations.“

In an interview, Ashe said, Norris also touched on financial challenges, which plague all service providers in Rhode Island as they struggle to help BHDDH meet the requirements of the federal mandates and still remain solvent.

According to Ashe’s report, Norris said “her superiors at FedCap are committed to success and will assure the proper level of staffing support even if this resource level is greater than what the current billing authorizations will support.”

CWS’ probationary license ends Dec. 31 and BHDDH must decide whether the agency will continue operating in Rhode Island.

The Massachusetts operations of CWS, a Boston-based agency, are now headed by Craig Stenning, Rhode Island’s former BHDDH director, who is also listed as Fedcap’s Senior Vice President for the New England region on the Fedcap website.  

In his report, Ashe said Norris “was candid in her comments” during the October interview, “stating that the CWS program status at the time of her appointment (six months earlier) was very inadequate across most areas of performance.

“She described her efforts over this past six-month period to change the culture of CWS,” a drive that included a large turnover of staff.

CWS Tries Turnaround

After visiting KFI, a model program for integrated services in Maine, Norris told Ashe, she took several steps at CWS.

Norris, according to Ashe’s report, has:

  • Stopped renovations at the former TTP building, instead planning to abandon any reliance on a facility for integrated services as of Jan. 1. (The former TTP building had been ordered closed to clients by the state in March, 2017 because of unsafe conditions. CWS’ license was suspended for a few days until it found a substitute location in quarters owned by the Fogarty Center.)  
  • Discontinued the use of vans to transport clients, instead opting to arrange for staff members to use their own cars on the job.
  • Changed the job title of direct support staff to community advocate, saying she believes “this title better reflects the culture change she wishes to establish and more accurately conforms to the expectation for how she wants staff to approach their work.”
  • Adopted a flexible work schedule for staff, so that they are available evenings and weekends to support clients who work outside normal business hours.

 

Problems Extend Beyond CWS

Moseley, the monitor, noted in his report that the non-work services received by CWS clients do not meet the requirements of the interim agreement or the statewide consent decree for integrated activities. 

These activities are intended to “provide individuals with disabilities with opportunities to fully engage with people without disabilities in the mainstream” of social life as well as work, he said.

Practical and effective strategies for achieving these goals are not clear, not only at CWS but across the developmental disability service system, Moseley said.

To address the problem, the state Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) has articulated guiding principles and standards for integrated day services. Through the Sherlock Center at Rhode Island College, DDD also offers training in implementing successful strategies for integration, Moseley said, but he recommended the training be expanded.

Another, related problem is a mismatch between existing services for individuals and their long-range plans.

In a court-ordered review of individual records documenting current services and future plans, DDD found that in 58 percent of the cases, individuals’ ongoing activities didn’t necessarily help them achieve their goals, Zanchi told the judge.

As a result, DDD has taken steps to merge short-range and long-range planning into one streamlined and holistic process that encourages providers to think in terms of individualized services that can help develop skills and interests that will help a particular person realize long-term aspirations.  

In addition, Zanchi said, DDD has developed a separate written guide, or rubric, for reviewing the quality of these individualized plans.

Zanchi Praises 'Collective Vision'

Zanchi concluded that she is “confident that there continues to be many areas where progress is clear,” recognizing that “quality is still developing” in services available to adults with developmental disabilities.

Zanchi said the progress is the direct result of a “collective vision that is guiding the work and transforming services.”

“We are building a remarkable partnership with the true experts of the DD system,” she said, referring to consumers, families, providers, business partners, community advocates as well as DD and ORS staffers.

They are all “invested in this progress and are at our table to strengthen our system to achieve these outcomes,” Zanchi said.

Click here to read the monitor's report.

Future of RI Fedcap Agency Still Unclear; State Continues To Collect Evidence For Final Decision

By Gina Macris

With less than two months remaining before the state of Rhode Island decides whether to shut down a subsidiary of the New York-based Fedcap Rehabilitation Services, licensing officials at the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) are still collecting evidence that will have a bearing on the state’s decision.

The performance of Community Work Services (CWS), which also has come under criticism by federal officials, is expected to figure in a U.S. District Court hearing Nov. 30 about a 2013 settlement of disability rights violations involving CWS and its predecessor, the now-defunct sheltered workshop Training Through Placement (TTP.)

In an interview Nov. 3, the director of licensing for BHDDH, Kevin Savage, said that the probationary status of CWS, in effect for nearly a year, “has not been resolved.”  Licensing regulations place a 12-month limit on probation.

 A federal court monitor said during a court hearing in May that the number of former TTP clients who had found jobs had been “essentially flat” for the previous four years. A lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice also cited a lack of progress that was evident during a site visit earlier in the spring.  About half of individuals protected by the 2013 agreement – 62 individuals at last count – are currently served by CWS.

In an interview Nov. 3, Savage, the BHDDH licensing administrator, said that the most recent "monitor’s report is primarily about the programming, and the programming issue is not resolved.

“We’re reading the monitor’s reports and our own reports,” Savage said, and “we are not satisfied with the program resolution.”

Savage said that BHDDH will continue – “and I want the word 'continue' to be clear” – to look at “every aspect of what CWS does, including payment structures, including respite (care), and including how they work with families and participants – everything.”

Savage also said, “I think it’s okay to say we are accumulating evidence. They (CWS) know that, and I think it’s okay for the public to know that. The evidence speaks to whether they should be shut down, or whether they should not be shut down. Evidence does that.”

“Our goal, and our only goal, is to ensure that participants have the best service available that is possible,”  he said. “We’ve communicated that clearly to the providers we work with and the families we work with. Our job is not to protect businesses. Our job is to protect participants.”

CWS has been on probation since the beginning of 2017. BHDDH licensing officials shut down its operation at the former TTP building at 20 Marblehead Ave., North Providence, in March because of unsafe conditions - a problem separate from programmatic concerns - but the agency re-opened with state permission in different quarters a few days later.

In this and any other probationary case, Savage said, the public has the right to know the “final agency action.”  Adverse decisions may be appealed by the agencies in question, he said.

The performance of CWS is entwined in the state’s accountability to the federal court for satisfying the demands of the 2013 settlement agreement that protect special education students at Mount Pleasant High School, including the former Birth Academy, and former clients of TTP - a total of 126 individuals.

A broader agreement between the state and the DOJ signed in 2014 covers all adults with developmental disabilities who have at one time been segregated in either sheltered workshops or day centers - more than 3,000 people. .

In connection with the so-called  "Interim Settlement Agreement" of 2013, the federal court monitor, Charles Moseley, said in a report to the court in September that the state has missed two deadlines in an order issued by Judge John J. McConnell, Jr: They are

  •  A July 30 deadline for improving the quality of individual career development plans among CWS clients.
  • A June 30 deadline for verifying the accuracy of data reported by CWS on its clients’ progress.

So-called “career development plans” describe how current services and plans for the near future fold into blueprints for life-long work goals that are supposed to take into account both the needs and preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities.

The November 30 hearing is listed on the U.S. District  Court calendar in connection with the statewide 2014 consent decree, but the state's interim Consent Decree Coordinator, Brian Gosselin, said recently at a public forum on developmental disability issues that the session will deal instead with the more narrow Interim Settlement Agreement of 2013, which was last heard in late May. A separate hearing on the status of the statewide consent decree is expected to be scheduled for the end of January, six months after its most recent hearing in late July.

 

RI BHDDH Running Projected $34.6 Million Deficit; DD Services Account for $26 Million Of Shortfall

By Gina Macris

Rhode Island’s efforts to improve services to adults with developmental disabilities - spurred by ongoing federal court oversight – will result in cost overruns of almost $26 million by next June, the end of the current fiscal year, according to projections from the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).

The projected $26 million shortfall is the largest in recent memory for developmental disability services, which typically have run $4 to 6 million over budget during a fiscal year.

In the first quarter spending report to the State Budget Officer, Thomas Mullaney, Rebecca Boss, the BHDDH director, said there are two main drivers of the projected deficit:

  • Increased costs attributed to an updated assessment for clients of the Division of Developmental Disabilities, the Supports Intensity Scale–A, or SIS-A, which is generally regarded as more accurate than the previous version in capturing individuals’ support needs, particularly for those with complex medical and behavioral issues.
  • An increase in supplemental authorizations that represent successful appeals of funding levels awarded through fiscal calculations made from the results of the original SIS or the SIS-A.  

BHDDH has asked the state Budget Office to consider a supplemental appropriation for the current budget cycle to cover much of the shortfall, with Boss saying the increased spending is consistent with current caseload projections.

But BHDDH also proposes cutting about $5 million from supplemental appropriations before next June 30. Boss has ordered officials to deny requests from individuals with developmental disabilities for supplemental funding, except in emergencies related to health and safety, including the risk of hospitalization. She also made an exception for any “court-ordered services” which may occur.

The order to hold the line on supplemental funds is likely to have widespread impact on individuals and their families, who must make the same request for extra money annually if they believe they have been shortchanged by the SIS or the SIS-A.  Alternatively, they may request a re-assessment.

In her letter to Mullaney, Boss said BHDDH is working to address the current year’s projected deficit and is determining “potential courses of action which would meet client needs, be accountable to regulatory entities, and meet fiscal constraints.”

The Office of Management and Budget is working with BHDDH to “thoroughly review its options,” a spokeswoman for Mullaney said Nov. 9.

BHDDH requested $22 million for supplemental payments in the current budget, according to testimony before the General Assembly last spring.

But in a recent corrective action plan, the department said it authorized over $28.2 million in supplemental payments – more than 10 percent of all payments to private providers - during the fiscal year that ended last June 30. Actual expenditures exceeded $22.3 million.

“The past volume and approval of supplemental authorizations is unsustainable,” BHDDH said.

The plan sets a limit of $18.6 million for supplemental payments in the current budget cycle and reduces the ceiling to $14.4 million in the fiscal year beginning next July 1, with the assumption that the number of requests for supplemental payments will decline as more clients are assessed through the updated SIS-A. 

The corrective action plan also notes that requests for supplemental funds that are denied by BHDDH may be appealed to the Executive Office of Health and Human Services.

The projected $26 million shortfall in the Division of Developmental Disabilities represents the lion’s share of an overall $34.6 million departmental deficit, based on first-quarter spending, which Boss outlined in an Oct. 27 letter to Mullaney, the State Budget Officer.

The state is under pressure from the U.S. District Court to improve the quality of its daytime services for adults with developmental disabilities by moving its system from isolated day centers and sheltered workshops to supported employment at regular jobs paying minimum wage or higher. Rhode Island also must increase the availability of integrated non-work activities. These mandates are spelled out in two agreements with the U.S. Department of Justice, in which the state must correct correct an overreliance on segregated facilities that violates the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The original SIS, accompanied by a $26 million reduction in developmental disability funding, was introduced by BHDDH and the General Assembly in 2011 as an equitable way of distributing available resources, although advocates complained that it was nothing more than a device to control costs, at the expense of some of Rhode Island’s most vulnerable citizens.

In succeeding years, that dollar amount was restored, but the service system was fundamentally altered, resulting in wage cuts, higher worker turnover, and a dependence on lower–cost services in segregated facilities that can be supervised with fewer staff.  The U.S. Department of Justice began its investigation into these facilities - sheltered workshops and day centers - in 2013.

On an individual basis, persons with developmental disabilities, their families, and service providers routinely appealed the funding awarded through the SIS, and at one point supplemental payments became routine.

In the meantime, there were were so many complaints about the SIS that the department ultimately decided to shift to the SIS-A.

But 13 months ago, when BHDDH submitted projections that ultimately went into the current budget, it had no experience with the SIS-A. The revised assessment was introduced in November, 2016. By springtime of this year, however, Boss had enough data to tell legislators that the SIS-A was resulting in higher per-person funding allocations. And she reported that the overall numbers of individuals using  developmental disability services was on the rise.

For the future, Boss envisioned a shift away from supplemental payments as the revised assessment tool better responds to individuals’ funding needs.

Of the overall $34.6 million projected BHDDH deficit, nearly $8.7 million can be attributed to staffing and overtime increases at the Eleanor Slater Hospital for stepped-up patient monitoring in light of a recent warning that the facility may lose accreditation because aging buildings pose too many risks that patients may harm themselves. A risk assessment for the Eleanor Slater Hospital is currently underway, and the results will inform a request for supplemental funding to remedy concerns of the hospital accrediting agency, the Joint Commission, Boss said.

Click here for the BHDDH first quarter spending report.