DOJ: RI Likely To Fail DD Compliance In 2024

By Gina Macris

At the current pace, the state of Rhode Island will not meet a 2024 deadline for complying with a 2014 consent decree intended to integrate adults with developmental disabilities in their communities, a U.S. Justice Department lawyer said Monday.

Amy Romero put the state on notice that it needs to step up its game if it is to meet the deadline on June 30, 2024.

She addressed state and federal officials at the conclusion of a two-hour remote access hearing Dec. 12 before Chief Judge John. J. McConnell, Jr of the U.S. District Court.

Over the last year, DOJ representatives have met with more than 60 people who receive services for adults with developmental disabilities and have found some of the same problems that existed when the consent decree was signed nearly a decade ago, said Romero, an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Rhode Island.

She said she is worried about gaps in the system and the plight of people who fall through the cracks, including:

• A lack of individualization or “person-centeredness” that enables individuals to take control over their own lives.

• A lack of transportation

• The people who once had integrated programs but are now in day centers

• Group home residents who can’t get out into the community because of a lack of staff.

• People who can’t get the services they need

• Self-directed family programs that rely on untrained parents as staff

• Families who lack the services and information they need in the transition from high school to adult programs.

Romero also said the DOJ was concerned about the slow and disjointed roll-out earlier in the year of:

• The Technology Fund, which makes smartphones and other devices available for adults with developmental disabilities

• The Transformation Fund, about $12 million to help private service providers and self-directed individuals and families launch innovative pilot programs promoting employment and community activities.

Romero said compliance with the consent decree must be a coordinated state-wide effort. The bureaucratic “process can’t get in the way of progress,” she said.

The court hearing delved deep into the details of numerous unresolved issues highlighted both by the DOJ and by an independent court monitor, who last month submitted a report to the judge with some 50 recommendations.

The monitor, A. Anthony Antosh, said only a third of those who are supposed to be protected by the consent decree are getting the same level of services as they did before the Covid-19 pandemic.

Judge McConnell made it clear at the start of the session that each one of the monitor’s recommendations has been incorporated into the court order he issued Dec. 6. (see related article.)

The order, with a series of deadlines for specific tasks, is intended to serve as a “guiding path for the next two years at a minimum,” he said.

McConnell’s choice of words left the door open to the possibility of federal oversight beyond 2024, although the hearing did not address what might happen if the state misses the deadline for compliance.

Antosh, meanwhile, said the primary purpose of Monday’s hearing was to “publicly put on the record what needs to be done” for the state to meet the standards of the consent decree and to discuss how to meet these deadlines for each task in the order.

It has been apparent to him for a long time that the state cannot comply without “major systemic change,” Antosh said.

He put the state on notice that the ultimate level of compliance will be assessed through independent interviews with recipients of services and their families on the impact the consent decree has had on them.

Much of the responsibility for compliance has fallen on Kevin Savage, Director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities at BHDDH. Romero said Savage and his staff cannot do all the work alone.

Among other things, McConnell’s latest court order directs the state to scale up the successful transformation pilots so they are available throughout the developmental disabilities system for the budget year that begins next July 1.

The order also said the state must approve funding for unique needs of consumers without making them go through the standard appeal process.

Neither a mechanism for bringing innovative programs to scale or a method for funding unique needs without the usual appeals process was spelled out in a rate review conducted earlier this year to help BHDDH plan its budget request to the governor.

Preliminary recommendations from the rate review are posted on the consultant’s website (here) but a final report has not yet been made to the court.

Antosh said he had wanted the rate review completed by Dec. 1, but more importantly, he wanted the budget information from the rate review ready to be incorporated into the governor’s proposal to the General Assembly in January and implemented in July, 2023.

Savage, the Director of Developmental Disabilities, said BHDDH has submitted the necessary budget information to the Governor’s office, and “I don’t think there will be any problem with implementation for July 1.”

The rate reviewers are “behind in responding to community comments,” he said.

Antosh had other questions about how the rate structure would support the consent decree, including ways it would simplify billing.

Savage said the new rate structure will include a group of core services, with employment supports and transportation funded as add-ons. There will be greater flexibility in moving funds around to fit individual needs, and he will work on “individualizing” budgets, Savage said.

Savage said he didn’t know how the rate review simplified billing. The new system will continue requiring providers to bill in 15-minute units for each client but would eliminate another wrinkle which until now has also required them to put in the approved staff-to-client ratio for each person in a particular setting.

Savage said eliminating the documentation of ratios was thought to be more important than changing the 15-minute billing unit. In the end, changes must be weighed against Medicaid funding rules, he said.

“Some things you just have to live with,” he said.

Antosh called for more specific information on ways the rate review would support the consent decree and how outcomes would be measured for individuals receiving services.

He also said adults with developmental disabilities will have conflict-free case management separate from the statewide plan now under consideration, at least in the short term.

The case-management model will follow recommendations of a court-ordered work group, Antosh said, without providing specifics.

The state promised a monthly written report to the court. McConnell also signaled he would hear progress updates in open court every other month.

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

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

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

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

“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.”

Antosh Resolves Dispute Between RI and DOJ On Compliance With 2013 Sheltered Workshop Case

By Gina Macris

Federal court monitor A. Anthony Antosh has forged a resolution to a long-simmering dispute between the U.S. Department of Justice and the state of Rhode Island over the state’s compliance in connection with two civil rights decrees aimed at finding jobs for adults with developmental disabilities and otherwise integrating them in their communities.

The Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island announced that both the state and the DOJ have agreed to a detailed compliance road map crafted by Antosh in an order made public March 3.

In a separate order Feb. 28, the Chief Judge, John J. McConnell, Jr., announced he has elevated Antosh from interim to permanent status as monitor.

The judge’s March 3 order incorporated recommendations Antosh had previously submitted detailing the parameters for the state’s “substantial compliance” with a 2013 Interim Settlement Agreement (ISA), a total of 88 adults with developmental disabilities.

Antosh focused on 32 individuals who are either unemployed or working in non-competitive employment for a private developmental disability service provider. He enumerated a variety of services and supports which must be provided to these particular people, including new trial work experiences, more non-work activities in the community and a variety of specialized help to break down barriers like mobility issues, vision problems and behavioral challenges which hinder some people from getting around and looking for work.

Antosh extended the monitoring period from the ISA from July to December. To achieve compliance with the ISA, the state must show that 80 percent of the people in Antosh’s case studies are spending more time in the community, either for work or leisure. The ISA was originally scheduled to end July 1.

Antosh also said the existing funding does not go far enough, nor does it have the flexibility to meet the individual needs and preferences of persons protected by ISA, and by implication, a broader 2014 consent decree with a statewide reach.

The ISA and the statewide decree of 2014 both draw their authority from the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act, reinforced by the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

In addition to requiring funding for specific services, consultations and technology on a person-by-person level, Antosh called for a re-calculation of the state’s existing funding mechanism for reimbursing private providers working with adults facing intellectual challenges.

While such a review is well underway and is expected to wrap up in June, it appears that the earliest the General Assembly would be able to enact any significant changes to the existing funding model would be in 2021, when the statewide consent decree will be in the seventh year of a ten-year enforcement period.

Most, if not all, of the 88 persons protected by the ISA are former students of the Birch Academy at Mount Pleasant High School in Providence. Many of them were funneled from Birch to a now-defunct sheltered workshop called Training Through Placement in nearby North Providence.

In introducing his study of the unemployed ISA population, Antosh noted that most of the people he interviewed could not answer his questions about their interests, the jobs held by relatives or friends, or if there was any kind of work they would like to try.

The answers provided evidence that these individuals had had limited life experiences, “one of the most common characteristics associated with individuals who have an intellectual disability,” Antosh said.

He said that “people do not choose what they do not know about,” which means that the individualized, or “person-centered” process of planning for job searches and other activities is not meaningful unless the person has had a “sufficient number of experiences of sufficient duration.”

This rationale underscored a requirement that each of the currently-unemployed persons have one or two trial work experiences, depending on whether they had previously had any community-based jobs, and that the state find the money to add the supports for these activities.

Since last July, the state had maintained that, because it has policies, practices and resources in place to satisfy the requirements of the 2013 ISA, it had met the compliance standards of the agreement, even if some of the 88 individuals in the protected class didn’t actually have jobs in the community as required.

But Antosh disagreed. He said that because the ISA population is “so small and so focused, the question of substantial compliance is about whether each and every individual has received supported employment services” and other necessary assistance.

Antosh said his study could not find any evidence the state is complying with one overarching requirement in the ISA, that it provide services for a total of 40 hours a week, including work and non-work activities in the community. The same requirement carries through to the statewide consent decree of 2014.

The state had said, in effect, that its best efforts to find jobs for the ISA population satisfied the requirements of the interim agreement, even though 15 former Birch students had never been employed outside of a sheltered workshop. The state has pledged to continue working with these persons.

But Antosh analyzed the barriers to employment listed by the state in these cases and made recommendation for ways the state can mitigate them:

For example, the state should provide:

• Up-to-date communications technology for people who have difficulty expressing themselves verbally

• Consultations with physical or occupational therapists for people who could benefit from better wheelchairs or other strategies for positioning their bodies.

• Access to tablets and other technology for those who want to do job searches or just stay in touch with the activities occurring in their communities.

• Assistance to service providers to develop strategies for reinforcing positive behavior for those who struggle with behavioral challenges. He said he found no evidence that these strategies were being used with the people who need them.

• Opportunities for conversations between families of persons with developmental disabilities who have had experience with supported employment and those who are resistant to the idea. Antosh said those who are resistant have expressed a willingness to listen to other families.

As for the state’s role in job searches, Antosh prescribed an approach similar to the “Real Jobs” strategies used by the state Department of Labor and Training, which starts with a survey of the needs in the business community and then tries to match individual interests and aptitudes with those openings, offering training to prepare potential job applicants.

The state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) has indicated it is close to announcing the third iteration of a targeted supported employment program that will focus on some 200 adults with developmental disabilities who have never had regular jobs. It is not clear whether the plans for the newest version of the so-called Person-Centered Supported Employment Performance Program will correspond to Antosh’s approach, which is now required by the Court.

Antosh plans to track increases in jobs and community activities during reviews in May and November to determine if the required services are in place for each person and whether there is a positive change in their engagement with the community.

Assuming that the state achieves compliance in December, there would be another year’s probation, through the end of 2021.

Antosh does not expect everyone who is either unemployed or not competitively employed to have a job in short order. In his report, he estimated that 9 of the 32 people on his list can be employed in a year’s time and that another two can find jobs within two years.

Judge Calls For Plan To Overcome Barriers In Implementing RI Olmstead Consent Decree

By Gina Macris

The Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island has ordered an independent monitor to bring him a new plan for implementing a 2014 civil rights agreement that seeks to integrate people with developmental disabilities in work and leisure activities in their communities by 2024.

With the state falling short of its job-placement goals in two of three categories in 2019, as well as other developments in recent months, indicators are mounting that the current approach isn’t working.

In an order issued Feb. 3, Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. has charged the interim court monitor with gathering a wide range of data and information from multiple sources, including comments from people with developmental disabilities, their families and representatives of the community, as a baseline for discussions on the way forward.

McConnell gave the monitor, A. Anthony Antosh, until April 30 to complete the information-gathering process and until August 30 to complete the plan, in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Justice, state officials and community representatives who serve on the Employment First Task Force, a committee created by the consent decree as an advisory group to government.

The judge went so far as to specify what agencies and officials Antosh should seek out, including “any interested legislators re: consent decree policies and funding.”

The process appears poised to capture the recent recommendations of a special legislative commission on the state’s fee-for-service funding system, as well as an ongoing rate review being conducted by outside consultants at the behest of the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities, and Hospitals.

McConnell said he wants Antosh to identify:

• Policies, activities and funding needed to achieve substantial compliance by 2024

• Obstacles and barriers to full implementation

• Service gaps that might hinder full implementation

• Structural components for a compliance plan

• Criteria for substantial compliance

The standards for compliance have become a matter of debate between lawyers for the DOJ and the state in the context of a prototype for the 2014 consent decree, the so-called Interim Settlement Agreement (ISA) of 2013, which affects about 88 former sheltered workshop employees who once attended the Birch Academy at Mount Pleasant High School and later worked at the now-defunct Training Through Placement.

The city of Providence was released from federal oversight in connection with the ISA last September in unusually celebratory courtroom proceedings, with accolades from all sides on the way it has changed the culture at the Birch Academy and turned around the lives of students.

But the performance of the state on implementing the ISA has not received such rosy reviews, an indication it is struggling with the consent decree as well.

In the ISA, the city and its school department have been responsible for opening the doors to integration through inclusive classes and internship programs, while the state has been charged with picking up where the educational system leaves off, to match individuals with jobs and help them participate in activities of their choice in the community. The state’s role in the ISA mirrors its relationship to school departments throughout Rhode Island in the consent decree, except on a broader scale.

Statewide, the number of adults with developmental disabilities who s must be offered employment by 2024 currently totals 1,987, according to the state’s latest consent decree data. That number is a little more than half the population protected by the consent decree.

After five years and nine months of the decade-long enforcement period of the consent decree, a total of 894 people, or 45 percent of the target number, have landed jobs, the state said in a report that captures progress through December 31, 2019.

The state exceeded the cumulative goal for employment in 2019 by more than 100, but missed targets in two subgroups, named “youth exit” and “sheltered workshop,” labels chosen to reflect whether individuals were young adults who had recently left school or working in enclaves at the time the consent decree was signed.

The state has never met the job targets for the “youth exit” group, which also represents the segment of the population that is applying for adult services for the first time, often from agencies that are hard-pressed to meet the needs of existing clients, let alone take on new ones.

In a third group labeled “day program” to describe those in day care centers in 2014, the number of new jobs recorded through 2019 rose to 385, or 160 over the goal, enough to overcome the shortfall in the other two categories.

But the the pace of new jobs has slowed. There were only 14 new job placements statewide for the last quarter of 2019 and 74 for the entire year. The remainder of the new jobs were recorded in previous years.

State of RI graphic representation of cumulative employment totals by quarter in 2019 under terms of Consent Decree

State of RI table of cumulative employment totals, by quarter, in 2018 and 2019 under terms of Consent Decree

One group not counted in the target population for employment is “youth in transition,” a total of 1,201 high school students with developmental disabilities, or 32 percent of the entire class protected by the consent decree. Many of them are expected to enter the labor market in the next several years.

Last fall, within the limited scope of the ISA, Antosh’ predecessor as court monitor, Charles Moseley, found that the state has made considerable progress in improving the lives of former Birch students – but not enough to warrant the end of federal oversight.

McConnell asked Antosh to review materials developed by Moseley, which include a 70-page exhaustive assessment of the state’s performance in meeting dozens of specific standards in the ISA.

In a draft report, obtained by Developmental Disability News, Moseley said the state has made considerable progress in changing the lives of the nearly 90 people still protected by the ISA, – but not enough. He completed the report at the end of September.

Moseley said the state fell short in several key areas:

• The number of people it had connected with jobs

• The number of hours logged by the job holders, some of whom said they wanted to work more

• The degree to which non-work activities in the community promoted interactions with non-disabled people

• The specificity and sense of purpose in the written short-range and long-term goals and supports that are supposed to fit together in a cohesive career development plan tailored to the individual

In a notice to Judge McConnell submitted in late December, the DOJ said that while the state “made initial progress in implementing the Agreement’s provisions, recent monitoring has showed that the state’s efforts have stalled such that it may not independently act to achieve the requisite outcomes before the Agreement ends.”

In its reply, the state acknowledged that it had not found jobs for 15 members of the protected class but said the barriers included health and behavioral problems, family resistance, and other issues.

The agreement itself says that “substantial compliance is achieved where the State and City have implemented all of the provisions of the Interim Settlement Agreement for all individuals in the Target Populations.”

In the context of that language, the state lawyers maintained that implementation means it has “mechanisms and/or policies” in place to carry out any of the specific requirements of the agreement, whether or not a particular numerical target is reached, as long as the “Court is satisfied that the State is on track to reasonably reach the requirement.”

Those who don’t want jobs can file for an exception, or variance, with the monitor, but Moseley said he had not received any such requests from the 87 members of the protected class. The state’s lawyers said officials wanted to keep working with the 15 unemployed persons rather than have them opt out of the search for employment.

Moseley’s report goes into great detail in evaluating the state’s performance on dozens of standards, many of them bureaucratic, that are nevertheless important for creating a high quality system of social services designed to sustain itself after the consent decree is long gone.

Among other things, the standards cover multiple aspects of:

• quality improvement

• detailed data collection

• benefits counseling for job seekers so that they know how earned income will affect their government disability payments, if at all

• the clear communication of each person’s short-term and long-term objectives in detailed career development plans

• staff training

In several areas, Moseley said he did not find enough documentation or evidence to make an assessment, although the state says it has supporting materials to show it has met the standards in question.

For example, Moseley said he didn’t have enough information to determine whether the state is following proven, or “evidence-based”, practices in its approach to employment supports for adults with developmental disabilities.

He also said the state hadn’t given him enough documentation to show whether the private agencies delivering services have the wherewithal, or capacity, to serve adults with developmental disabilities as required by the ISA.

Both Moseley and Antosh are experts in the research on supporting adults with developmental disabilities.

Antosh wrote the proposal that established the federally-funded Sherlock Center on Disabilities at Rhode Island College and served as its director from its inception in in 1993 until October, 2019.

Moseley, a former director of Vermont’s developmental disability system, worked as a top official in the national association of state developmental disability directors before he became the court monitor. Moseley stepped down for health reasons at the end of September.

DOJ, RI Ask Judge To Settle Major Dispute Over Compliance With ADA Integration Mandate

By Gina Macris

A dispute has arisen between Rhode Island and the federal government over a key phrase in two court-approved agreements which require the state to provide people with developmental disabilities full access to jobs and community activities.

Both sides have asked U.S. District Court Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. to rule soon on what it means for the state to achieve “substantial compliance” with two companion civil rights decrees signed in 2013 and 2014.

The details of the dispute focus on the first of the two agreements, which is scheduled to expire in six months – July 1,2020 – and is known as the Interim Settlement Agreement (ISA).

This agreement applies only to students and former students of the Birch Academy, a developmental disabilities program at Mount Pleasant High School in Providence which once served as a feeder for a now-defunct sheltered workshop in North Providence called Training Through Placement (TTP).

The ISA sought to resolve a finding by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that large-scale segregation of developmentally disabled youth and adults at Birch and TTP violated the Integration Mandate of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The matter became the nation’s first “sheltered workshop” settlement.

How McConnell decides to define “substantial compliance” in the context of the ISA will also impact the broader 2014 consent decree, intended to protect all Rhode Island youth and adults with developmental disabilities from a lifetime of day care or low-paying piecework.

In the ISA, both the state and the city of Providence were defendants until late September, when McConnell ended federal oversight of the city. He received glowing reports of a transformed Birch Academy, which today sends students to productive internships that broaden their experiences and sometimes result in regular jobs.

But the state still has detailed obligations under provisions of the 2013 agreement to help former Birch students and former TTP workers find jobs.

On Dec. 23, the DOJ notified McConnell that “it disputes that the state will be in substantial compliance with the Agreement” by July 1 “without a course-correcting change in the State’s approach to compliance.”

The DOJ asked the judge to direct the interim court monitor, A. Anthony Antosh, to “begin working with the State immediately to develop and implement a plan for completing the (2013) Agreement’s highly achievable remaining outcomes and schedule a status conference with the Parties in January 2020 to address next steps.”

A week later, on Dec. 30, lawyers for the state challenged the DOJ, saying the federal government has not documented its specific objections or offered a “clear working definition” of substantial compliance for either the 2013 or 2014 agreements.

The state is already working with Antosh on a definition of substantial compliance, its lawyers said. The lawyers, Marc DeSisto and Kathleen A. Hilton, asked for a formal hearing in January on the issue of substantial compliance, rather than the informal status conference requested by the DOJ.

DeSisto and Hilton said they would be prepared to submit evidence and sworn testimony that the state is meeting its responsibilities under the terms of the ISA.

The agreement itself says only that “substantial compliance is achieved when the state and the city have implemented all of the provisions of the Interim Settlement Agreement for all individuals in the target populations.”

DeSisto and Hilton wrote that “in this context, ‘implement’ means that there are mechanisms and/or policies put into effect of sufficient means to carry out its (the state’s) requirements of the particular benchmark at issue.”

For example, there remain 15 individuals protected by the ISA who have employment goals but have never been employed in the community, DeSisto and Hilton said. The reasons include poor health or challenging behavior, family resistance, legal or forensic issues with the individuals, or extended absences from service programs.

(The state’s memorandum did not specify the total number of persons counted in the ISA, but past reports from the state and the independent court monitor put the total at a maximum of about 125, with fluctuations over time.)

The state could have requested “variances” to exempt these 15 individuals from employment and remove them from the ISA caseload, the lawyers said, but officials have no interest in pursuing this route.

Instead, the state wants to meet the individuals’ needs, “where they are at this time, and (work) on an individualized basis, towards the ultimate goal of employment,” DeSisto and Hilton wrote. They said the state has ”competence” to meet the employment goals, whether or not those goals are actually reached, suggesting that this “competence” demonstrates substantial compliance.

DeSisto and Hilton asserted that the state has achieved full compliance in 52 provisions of the ISA and substantial compliance in the remaining three provisions. But their memorandum to the judge does not describe those respective provisions.

The memo also referred to findings of the previous court monitor, Charles Moseley, who in August assessed the city’s compliance with the agreement but left the state’s compliance with numerous provisions “to be determined.”

DeSisto and Hilton indicated that Moseley followed up on his findings regarding state compliance in an Oct. 1 email with a new report attached. The lawyers included what appears to be an index of Moseley’s findings in three categories; substantial compliance, noncompliance, and “to be determined”, but they did not include the Oct. 1 report itself. Nor does that report appear separately in the court file.

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.