…the feasibility study also projected that bidding for the project would occur in August or September of 2009, with a contract award no later than October and an occupancy date of May. The process has fallen at least four months behind that schedule. The bids were actually received on January 13.
Despite that delay, Assistant Department of Developmental Services Commissioner Diane Enochs told Fernald League President Marilyn Meagher earlier this month that the administration intends to have the Wrentham buildings ready for occupancy in time for the planned June 30 closure of Fernald, and is prepared to “work around the clock” to do so. In other words, the administration is prepared to compress or “crash” the construction schedule — a process that we believe is likely to increase the cost of the renovations well above the $1.88 million.
The work that must be done in the compressed time frame includes the replacement of the HVAC system in both buildings, installation of a new electrical system, replacement of much of the plumbing equipment and piping in the buildings, roof patching, replacement of doors and frames, some structural steel work, drywall instalation, floor finishing and painting throughout.
The irony is that DDS will apparently save some money by undertaking less renovations than what had initially been recommended in the feasibility study to make the buildings livable. The study contains a “code driven” cost estimate for the renovations that totaled $2.8 million. That estimate was dated April 20, 2009.
Among the items in that April cost estimate that won't be included in the actual work is the replacement of windows in the buildings, which would have cost $250,000. Instead, repairs will be done to those windows, which were originally installed in 1968. The windows are in such poor condition, according to the study, that “the wind howls through and the sashes clatter on a breazy (sic) day.”
The study also noted that replacement of the roofs was “desirable,” but was not included in the project “due to cost considerations.” The PVC roofs are described as “near the end of their useful lives.” DCAM has asked for alternate bids on roof replacement, and has estimated the cost at $234,000. Also being left out due to cost considerations are extensive replacements of kitchen cabinets, bathroom tile floors, and other interior finishes that had been labled “desirable.”
We've said before that the cost of the Wrentham renovations were among many costs that we don't believe the administration took into account in claiming that closing Fernald would save the state money. The final tally on those renovation costs has yet to be made. But none of that matters to this administration. Whatever the final cost will be, and whatever the final condition the Wrentham buildings will be in, the administration has one goal in mind — shutting Fernald on schedule.
and taking perhaps half the remaining population at Fernald (who will then be supported at the slightly lower per capita average of Wrentham), this is not a short-term saving. And $13 million already removed from the FY 2010 DDS budget on the reasoning of closing Fernald at the end of the year, when it becomes even more expensive, means that many other people served by DDS are paying the price of the governor’s fraudulent PR against comprehensive treatment centers for multiply disabled and aging residents.
<
p>I am increasingly moving over to the camp of cynics who said years ago that the whole business was a land grab, as gross in its way albeit on a smaller scale as what was done to Native Americans, or in urban renewal. The governor wants to grab $100,000,000 or two for the state budget, one time, maybe a sweetheart deal for a favored contractor, and he thinks he has this swell piece of acreage, open fields and wooded areas, near Rte 128. The only obstacle is a couple hundred people with mental retardation for whom the Commonwealth acquired this country farmland 150 years ago.
<
p>And so, like a motion picture villain, he commences to scheme how to get rid of the legitimate heirs and seize the gold.
<
p>–Mark
It is and always was a land grab. It has nothing to do with saving money or the “best interests” of our developmentally disabled citizen.
<
p>I think that villans name Snidley Whiplash.
<
p>
The villian’s name is Governor Deval Patrick, aided and abetted by Dr. Bigby and Elin Howe. These people were hired for a reason….to close down facilities for people with developmental disabilities. Elin Howe has made a career and a lot of money closing them down. So I know whom to blame. Deval. I can’t wait for his term to be over. He’s a wolf in progressive’s clothing, and corporate from head to toe.
In the cartoons it was Snidley Whiplash. In this story and on this issue it is indeed Governor Patrick.
And based on the value of the land, the way the families feel and that some of them are treated, Ssurette has a reason for that statement. I would like, Ssurette, for you to go into detail – and for Lynn to listen to that detail and understand why you feel that way, and treat it with respect.
<
p>Again, human beings and their needs are not a “one size fits all” equation. The needs of real people are NOT about ideology, and Ssurette’s viewpoint is NOT an attack on who you are and what you do, but rather the real experience that Ssurette has had with her beloved family member and the Fernald situation.
<
p>I have no skin at all in this game, and hear you both with pain and respect.
I don’t see Lynn’s comments here. What are they? I will be happy to respond.
<
p>I
And I noticed that “0” which told me of – or seemed to display – pain and anger. I do suggest that you do a post “telling your story” to whatever degree you are comfortable. The rest of us really don’t know what you have experienced, or why/how you came to the place and opinion you hold, not all the way at any event.
of a zero without a comment also speaks to being a hidebound idealogue, which LynPb had demonstrated admirably. There is nothing left for her to say. You’re absolutely right, Amber, one size should not fit all, but in LynPb’s world, it does. Her paycheck does all the talking.
<
p>I notice we all received spiteful zeros, except for you. I’d call it childish but would be a roaring injustice to children everywhere.
It is no wonder that it is an echo chamber here. You, Dave, and a few others continue to talk to yourselves.
<
p>If I was in this for a paycheck I would have quit years ago.
You haven’t discussed anything here. So far all you have done with your “0” ratings is insult people who care about what is happening at Fernald, the other ICFs and the effects the Governors policies are having on all of our developmentally disabled citizens.
<
p>My level of compassion and caring for the developmentally disabled is not based on where they happen to reside.
<
p>
I have tried to engage in discussion in the past. I have encountered nastiness from Justice and others. I’m not going to convince him/her of anything. His/her mind is closed.
<
p>I’m going to use my energy to provide high quality services to the people I serve.
<
p>This is my last post, comment, or rating on the topic.
<
p>Enjoy your discussions in the echo chamber.
has left the building. See ya, Lyn. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
has left the building. See ya, Lyn. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
People like you wish to look the other way and the issues don’t exist. The really sad thing is we’re talking about PEOPLE here. Not your cute lil puppy or a Haitian refugee hundreds of miles away, where you might send a check and figure you did your part. This is where my “Social Darwinism” comments realy are appropriate. Sorry folks, all sincerity intended.
Then I read further. my statement still stands for others.
Recognizing the extent and variation of human beings, and the wide variety of modalities needed by those human beings is critical and well worth stating, even in a forum where this poster, who is himself a disabled man, may be hit for saying it. I don’t agree with bill a lot of the time, but sometimes I do and I recognize his as an authentic voice, based in HIS experience that deserves respect.
<
p>Without violating my children’s confidentiality, Arlington failed us totally in that regard, and the community movement, without violating my client’s confidentiality, has failed some of them as well.
<
p>Lynn, what you do has great value, but so do other modalities and your modality just cannot stretch around every single kind of need and disability either safely, or well.
<
p>It is also true to say that what I do has great value, but I recognize that I cannot represent any and all clients or do every kind of law there is. Anyone, and any paradigm, has limites.
<
p>No modality, no matter how valuable, can meet all needs.
<
p>As soon as something, or someone, says it is good for and can cure everything I smell snake oil.
First, I am familiar with Lynn’s previous posts. I know she is a service provider with more than 20 years of experience. I respect her career choice, it is a difficult line of work. I do not for one minute doubt her commitment to the people she serves. I respect any opinion that comes from experience.
<
p>It is to bad that Lynn does not afford me or anyone who posted a comment on this diary the same respect. She gave everyone a “big 0”.
<
p>I know Lynn is familiar with Fernald and believes “most” can be served in the community. Thats her opinion and she is entitled to it. I KNOW my family member is one of the “few” not part of the “most”. Its not an opinion, its a fact.
<
p>For the last 30+ years, my family has met annually with the experts. The doctors, nurses, clinicians, social workers,various therapists, direct-care staff–all the people involved in establishing my family member’s Individual Support Plan and the best way to implement that plan. For all those years WE have come to the same conclusion. The best living situation that meets the particular needs of my family member is Fernald. NO MIRACLES have occurred that would change that determination. I wish there had been a miracle.
<
p>My family member is happy, healty, safe and has a good quality of life at Fernald. A life not just an existence.
It has taken most of the last 25 years to achieve this. How could anyone expect any guardian to stand by and watch that be destroyed.
<
p>In the midst of trying to empty out the place, we had our annual meetings and one as recent as three weeks ago and came to the same conclusion. Three weeks ago I received a letter acknowledging that my family members interests are best served in an ICF. There is the FACT not the OPINION. The DDS acknowledges that my family member is part of the “few” and not part of the “most”. I have been TOLD he is going to Wrentham. So much for that right of choice.
<
p>Since then I receive a letter every couple of days, phone messages every other day, offers of “group” moves and exerting pressure to commit to a move NOW when new accommodations are not available to see. Considering the timeframe of the renovations, it leave no time to objects to ANY item that is less than satisfactory. So, like I said, I guess we will just have to accept whatever the administration comes up with. So much for “equal or better”.
<
p>I have been to Wrentham…..the buildings being renovated are 50 years old. They are “institutional” in style, small, cramped, dark apartments. They are not the bright and cheery HOUSE my family member now enjoys with a nice yard for a cookout on a summer afternoon.
<
p>I am supposed to just accept this because a bureaucrat says he will save a couple of bucks–Dave from Harvard has disspelled that myth over and over again.
<
p>I think what I really resent most about Lynn’s comments, or should I say lack of comment in this particular case, is the condescending tone it infers. Does Lynn really believe that it isn’t every guardians greatest wish that their family member could live and thrive in the community. Does Lynn truly believe that any guardian would not opt for the community if it was possible.
<
p>Some things are wrong and they are always wrong. Closing Fernald and the Governors refusal to compromise in any way to come up with a moral and economical solution is just plain wrong. He couldn’t wait to reconsider his position when informed that zoo animals might be harmed. Says it all.
<
p>It is and always has been about the land–nothing more.
<
p>
that prevents my family member from living outside of an institution….accept his safety, health and happiness. This is not a game, any decision I make can have dire consequences. Any upset of routine results in life threatening, self-injurious behavior. He is happy, health and safe. Why would anyone take that risk because a bureaucrat say he know better. It falls into the category “you don’t fix what works”. Fernald works. I truly don’t get why this is so hard to understand.
You family member reminds me of one of my friends. Keep them in a consistent and safe routine, and all will be well.
If we took him to visit his loving grandparents, even in what seemed to be a peaceful visit, until he was almost 16 months, he stayed awake and screamed at night for almost 48 hours. We learned to have a very “conservative” lifestyle for a while.
For some structure and routine equal safety.
that someone understands. I wish I didn’t have to rant and rave and carry on like a crazy person to get the point across that the consequences of a move can be devastating for my family member and others residing at Fernald.
I can say I have been a part of a number of transfers out of Fernald over the last ten years (some recent, some longer ago). In each case there were concerns, from families, staff, and nurses. In each case the transfers have been wildly successful.
I know many who have made that move. I don’t question or criticize their decisions. It was there decision to make. I hope everyones decisions results in as good or even better than what they had at Fernald.
<
p>I do know that most would never have even considered a move before the Governor’s order to close the place.
<
p>Your familiar with Fernald. The residents are old (average age in their 60s). Most of the guardians are old (80s). Many do not have siblings to take up the guardianship. Come to an annual meeting of the Fernald League and take a look at the audience. Most of these moves, as successful as they maybe, were down out of fear. I’m 80 something, how long do I have left, whats to become my child when I’m gone. At least they will have a bed.
<
p>If a guardian, by their own choice, decides their loved one will be better served in another location, that is one thing. To be forced to make a decision based soley on fear and accepting what is available becaues it is available is something else.
ALL transfers are widely successful. Except the data doesn’t support this. Dr. David Straus’ mortality study found that people who are deinstitutionalized who cannot walk, talk or toilet themselves die at a 72% higher rate than their peers who stay in the facilities. If anyone would like a copy of it, I’d be happy to forward it to you.
<
p>One transfer of which I have personal knowledg is that of Robert Bentley, formerly of Dever, who was found dead with a diaper in his mouth 6 months after leaving the facility. Robert had spastic quadripalegia and little to no muscle control, but he could vocalize. It was widely suspected that someone was trying to shut him up, and his death was accidental. When the DMR investigated his untimely passing, they found that he had killed himself. A House Post Audit investigation was triggered by Mr. Bentley’s death, and it delivered a scathing report.
<
p>I concur with ssurette…this push to close the state ops has been about the land. It’s also a privitization effort designed to take jobs from decently paid union workers and putting the contracts in the hands of vendors. It’s a two-fer for our allegedly progressive governor.
<
p>
There is the guy who had a bath, not a shower for the first time in his life. There were no baths where he lived.
<
p>There is the guy who goes out to eat weekly even though we were told he could not go out into the community because he needed a one to one.
<
p>There is the guy who told a staff, I love you. This was a guy we were told was non verbal.
<
p>There is a guy whose mother didn’t want him to leave. She was afraid he was too aggressive. He holds a job, earns a paycheck, and spends it at Wendy’s.
<
p>There was the guy who couldn’t leave because his nursing needs were too great. He gets his services from community providers and is healthy.
<
p>Justice would like to tell you stories to condem anything but institutional living. Condem the places that let people like Robert Bentley suffer and die. Don’t condem all community placements.
<
p>I don’t work or live in a one size fits all world. I work with folks who can’t feed themselves, with folks who can drive to their jobs and everybody in between.
I have stated repeatedly that for people who can thrive in community settings, they can and should be supported there. So you are either stretching the truth or you’re lying.
<
p>For people who can’t – the medically fragile, the profoudly developmentally disabled, multiply handicapped – it’s not feasible. Not when they need 24 hour nursing, not when the fragmented service delivery system of the “community” can’t support them. You say nothing about the mortality statistics, Lyn, because you can’t defend them.
have. There is very little oversight in the Mass system, particularly with all the budget cuts.
<
p>All we are asking is for you to look outside the box of your own experience and at least try to understand that other people’s experiences is just as valid, just as truthful and just as humane.
might take your own prescription. I didn’t come out here handing out zeros, and I still haven’t. I did give the business to Deval Patrick, but the man deserves it for being such a disappointment on so many levels.
But:
<
p>http://wbztv.com/iteam/i.team….
<
p>Improprieties DO happen. It is just SO easy to fudge paperwork.
<
p>For disclosure: I am a former provider. Now I am a consumer. Lots of providers don’t like consumers who are of sound mind and can communicate well. Like me.
Thanks for adding your perspective that comes from both sides of the fence.
for weighing in on this. It’s really important for people to understand just how vulnerable people with disabilities can be in the face of an unscrupulous provider, a underfunded oversight board, and a lazy and complacent Department of Developmental Disabilities. Good times for the private providers….not so good for anyone else.
I’m know the house in the article you provided the link to. I drive by it twice a day on my way to and from work. From all outward appearances nothings seems amiss….but you don’t know what happens behind closed doors.
Have left and not come back?
At which large state-operated facility would that be, Lyn? That sounds factually incorrect. I am not aware of any facility without a bath. Ssurette? Mav? Moe? Are we wrong here?
I am not aware of that. I must admit I am only familiar with 3 of the developmental centers…Fernald, Wrentham and Glavin. All that I have seen are totally equipped. Huge showers for standing or sitting, huge bathtubs with lifts and generally both sets ups in every area to accommodate everyone needs. I have never been to Templeton, Monson or Hogan.
The issue Sssurette has is that the clinical conference/team meeting, whatever these evaluative meetings are called in this context…found that an ICF and the current living situation meet her loved family members needs AND the information which would give Sssurrette a sense of being listened to, and treated with respect – both for herself and her loved family member – has not happened as well as that she feels stripped of freedom of choice.
<
p>Without knowing diagnosis and needs, and being able to compare the diagnosis and needs that lead/led to Sssurette’s concerns to those involved in your successful transfers, it is not possible for Sssurette to take any comfort or nourishment from your statement – nor for you to evaluate whether the individual Sssurrette is protecting could flourish in any of the environments with which you are familiar.
<
p>Insufficient info. If I say I represent a minor who sexually assaulting another minor, with a six year language delay saying that is not a breach of confidentiality. No one could identify that client from just that information, but providers know whether or not their facility is worth considering as the information is sufficient for certain rule outs. Just as an example. I can sort of moderate to keep the focus on:
<
p>1. What conditions would rule out the facilities Lynn is familiar with [no facility can handle EVERYTHING after all].
<
p>2. What is the critical need [s] of Ssurrette’s loved one.
<
p>3. What would it take for Sssurrette to feel treated with respect, and truly involved in planning for her loved one, as well as to feel she has choice [s]??
My point I think is being lost in my details and ramblings. I don’t want to bog down the discussion further with the lengthy details of my family members various diagnoses and behavioral issues.
<
p>The remaining residents of Fernald are there because their guardians weighed all the options and factors.
<
p>There are numerous priceless intangibles that can not be quantified or replaced. Happiness being the first. Lets be honest here. Most of the people now at Fernald suffered through a miserable existence as children 40 and 50 years ago. Only after years of compassionate, non-abusive treatment by dedicated caring staff have they been able to achieve happiness in their lives. The safety of familiar staff, familiar cheerful surroundings and absolute routine is critical to maintaining the happiness and health they have struggled to achieve.
<
p>Fernald is not just some group of buildings. It is their home and it is their community. It is the only place where they feel safe enough to be happy and health. Long-term caregivers are family. These can not be replaced despite what the governor, commissioner or Lynn has to say.
<
p>Given the age of Fernald residents, I don’t think they have decades left to struggle with acclimating to some new environment and its just plain wrong to force this upon them.
<
p>
One cannot just pick a human being up and deposit that human being among strangers and consider that all is well.
Stems for a similar philosophy, that like a sack of groceries, you can pick a human being up from one family, plop them down with “better class people” and all of them will thrive.
<
p>One client lost his kids forever because he took to long to get an apartment, and would not turn his back on his childs mother, totally.
<
p>If I were not also appointed to represent kids whose adoptions unraveled, I might see this differently. But, really, trading long term caregivers for a new set is very risky.
Congratulations on finally receiving the “public documents”. I think it took less time to build the pyramids than it took for the state to provide you with the public documents you were entitled to.
<
p>After reviewing your comments, Its pretty obvious why they didn’t immediately provided it. There was a reason these tired old buildings at Wrentham were put out of service and the feasibility study clearly shows that. The cost to make them livable was impractical and it still is. It again shows their “cost savings” numbers game is a sham.
<
p>I have to comment on a couple of thing. These things are basic.
<
p>Since when is a good roof over your head just “desirable” and not a necessity? Since when did properly finished kitchens and bathrooms become just desirable and not necessities? Since when did windows that aren’t just holes in the wall become just desirable and not necessities? Apparently these are basic necessities for everyone else but Fernald residents. I guess they will just have to settle for whatever the administration comes up with. Just round them up and ship them out per the schedule.
<
p>Who would sink $1.88 million dollars into buildings with questionable roofs? Since the feasibility study estimates were “code driven” at $2.8 million, how do you meet “code” spending $1 million less?
<
p>The administration is pressuring guardians to agree to these living arrangements, now, sight unseen.
<
p>If I remember correctly, the bid calls for a 140 day completion time frame. If they started today, that puts the completion date around the first week of June if everything goes smoothly. What renovation project of an old structure has ever gone smoothly? Thats cutting it pretty close. If they meet their schedule, it will be first government construction project in the history of the world ever to be completed on time. If they make that schedule, you have to wonder what other “basic” corners were cut to meet the schedule.
Dave from Hvad and other defenders of 19th century institutions, often pose a simplistic dichotomy: Deval hates institutions and loves private vendors, or closing institutions is a way to privatize state services and prop up private vendors etc. I think the dynamic is much more complex.
<
p>For example, if closing Fernald is about feeding the private human service agencies then why are many leaders of human service vendors contributing to and raising money for Baker?
<
p>Diane Iagulli a leader of the DMR vendors has been a big cheer leader for Baker, financially and otherwise, as has Fred Miliso, the president of Mass ARC, the parent organization for vendors getting DMR money. If these industry leaders were so happy with Deval,Howe,Bigby then why would they be supporting Baker? Any one have any ideas?
Why are so many leaders in the human services supporting Baker?
Hedging your bet. No matter who wins, you’re in good with the winner. Except both are going to lose to Christy Mihos. My aide once asked Mr. Mihos about disability affairs. He replied “educate me”. People I know will be appointed by the Mihos administration. There is hope.
I don’t know anything about politics or politicians other than I don’t like either subject.
<
p>First, Deval’s main objective where Fernald is concerned is grabbing the 200 acres of prime real estate it sits on. PERIOD.
<
p>I don’t think anyone is pleased with this Governor. I believe the individuals and organizations you mentioned believed they were insulated from the budget ax because they actively campaigned in support of the Governor’s plan to close Fernald and ultimately all of our developmental centers. In the end they got slammed by the budget ax and in fact ended up with less then they had.
<
p>Perhaps those supporting Baker are trying to gain political favor from the person who just might be the next Governor?
<
p>I don’t know, you tell me?
You are employed by the Patrick administration. But if you are as good as you say you are, you’ll have no problem keeping your job. Or gaining a promotion.
were clapping and raising the roof over the hiring of Elin Howe. Go take a look at their websites, particularly Mass Arc. They knew that the hiring of this vendor advocate, who has made a career out of closing state run campuses was good news for them. Devel met her at the DOJ. He hired her for a reason.
<
p>billixi is right – they’re likely just hedging their bets. But, while we’re at it, please provide links or something that supports your understanding that these vendors are behind Baker.
<
p>And fredtsmurch, careful – your bias is showing. Fernald, Wrentham, Glavin, et al, are no more 19th century institutions than your group homes are 19th century workhouses.
the executive directors of ARC Mass and ADDP on local news clapping and saying “its a great day” after the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned Judge Tauro’s ruling. ADDP’s reaction was not a surprise. ARC Mass reaction wasn’t a surprise either but it should be. An organization whose origin (50+ years ago) was advocating for all the mentally retarded, clapping and calling it a great day when elderly, severely mentally retarded people get court approval to be thrown out of their life long homes. A bunch of phonies.
<
p>Elin Howe is and was a “hired gun”. I hear while she is orchestrating the dismantling of Massachusetts centers, she is also honchoing closures in other states. Talk about multi-tasking!!!!!
<
p>I agree with Justice4All–please stop using the term 19th century institutions. This term just continues to foster the negative image of our developmental centers. They are so much more than that. And as Justice4All stated our centers are no more like 19th century institutions that your group homes are like 19th century work houses.
were clapping and raising the roof over the hiring of Elin Howe. Go take a look at their websites, particularly Mass Arc. They knew that the hiring of this vendor advocate, who has made a career out of closing state run campuses was good news for them. Devel met her at the DOJ. He hired her for a reason.
<
p>billixi is right – they’re likely just hedging their bets. But, while we’re at it, please provide links or something that supports your understanding that these vendors are behind Baker.
<
p>And fredtsmurch, careful – your bias is showing. Fernald, Wrentham, Glavin, et al, are no more 19th century institutions than your group homes are 19th century workhouses.
was a key architect of then Governor Bill Weld’s move to close nine state public health, mental retardation and mental health facilities in Massachusetts in the early 1990s. Weld was the first governor in Massachusetts to advocate large-scale downsizing and privatization of human services, and the vendors loved him for it.
I’m surprised, glad but surprised, by the number of comments here. I didn’t expect Dave from Harvards update on the study regarding Wrentham renovations and some flaws identified in the study would lead to so many comments. Its great.