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.