Where is the rest of the promised $85 million, or at least $45 million, for the community system? All the community system gets next year, after Fernald is shut, is a measly $2.7 million increase???
If I were a member of the Massachusetts Association of Developmental Disability Providers, which has wholeheartedly supported the facility closures, I'd be feeling a little betrayed right now. In fact, here's a quote, which was posted on the ADDP website, just prior to the release yesterday of the governor's budget:
The disability community will be closely monitoring the governor's House 2 recommendations for each of these (community) line items. These accounts have suffered greatly over the last several years, with reductions, and, when lucky, partial restorations. But in the future, the ability to maintain such service levels will be severely in jeopardy… Such budget cuts may likely imperil Community First, derail state (facility) closure plans, cause panic as families lose services, and may very well land the Commonwealth in court for violating its own agreements in several lawsuit settlements. (our emphasis)
This is not from us– it's from one of the governor's key political supporters. By the way, the ADDP noted, following the release of the governor's 2011 budget, that the budget actually appears to further reduce funding for a number of specific community line items in the coming fiscal year.
In our view, this administration has as big a credibility gap in this area as the budget gap it is dealing with.
I know you have been reluctant to voice an opinion on our contention that the administration is mismanaging the facility closures. But, you can’t deny the fact that even the human service providers are on record (see the ADDP quote in this post) as saying the administration’s plan to close the facilities is in danger of derailment.
Where is that money???? $85 million–no it is $45 million–no $11 million? And guess what you only get $2.7 million (a couple of bucks). It must be that new math.
<
p>The Governor and the Secretary of HHS are slight-of-hand artists. Good ones too. They managed to distract the ADDP and their buddies at ARC mass with their left hand leading them to believe they would get ALL the money, while the right hand was picking their pockets.
<
p>These organizations willingly sacrificed the futures of the severely mentally retarded and physically disabled residents of these facilities for a couple of bucks.
<
p>Sadly, their blind greed has called in question the future of all the developmentally disabled no matter where they happen to reside, community or facilities, all for that same couple of bucks.
<
p>If the consequencies weren’t so dire, I’d call it karma.
<
p>I think it time for a change in leadership all the way around. Everyones actions here are a disgrace.
<
p>And….I still don’t know where the money is.
The Executive and Legislature are immune.
It is becoming abundantly clear that maybe there is no money, and no monetary savings from closing facilities, either, and worse, where is the plan?
<
p>Plan: a detailed program of action.
<
p>The “plans” I have seen do nothing to provide for the needs of the severely disabled residents of the facilities. DDS Commissioner Elin Howe has said that the facility residents that she plans to evict will get equal or better services after they are yanked out of their homes, but where is the plan? How do you provide the same services to these disabled persons when their living arrangements are scattered all over the state as when they live in a centralized location? Community first? She means ‘vendors first.’ Scattering these folks in group homes isn’t necessarily “community.” Let’s call it what it is-purposeful isolation.
<
p>If she wants these residents to enjoy a better “community” experience, why doesn’t she take them out into the community now? There must not be a plan for that.
<
p>Elin Howe has said that the average yearly cost for a facility resident is about $180k. But she has also given figures that exceed that amount to support a person in a group home. Another reputable source estimates that the yearly cost for facility support can be as little as $40k.
No cost savings there.
<
p>Equal or better in the community? Is that possible? Sure, but that would cost more than now. Transportation costs alone would skyrocket. No cost savings there.
<
p>How about the 20-year, multi-million dollar lease arrangements for the group homes to house the evicted facility residents? That doesn’t sound like cost savings to me. That money doesn’t seem to be in the budget, either.
<
p>So-where is the plan? Where is the feasibility report on all this? Some of this is due at the end of June, but…
<
p>Why wasn’t the feasibility study and report completed prior to the decision to close the facilities for the mentally retarded? In the interests of transparency, why wasn’t this information provided to the Massachusetts taxpayers prior to the making of decisions that would alter the very lives of so many disabled residents, their families, caretakers, and others who support them?
<
p>If such information was available, it was dealt with in secret behind closed doors. And for that, the administration’s actions are beyond disgraceful, and seem deceitful.
<
p>Of course, the face they put on for the public is one thing. Patrick appeared on the news just yesterday and said he supports all residents of the state. But try to get a disabled person or anyone who knows them to believe that. That was so disingenuous.
<
p>
Dave, thank you for posting this disturbing development regarding the absence of any transition plan for the vulnerable residents Fernald Development Center, as the Patrick administration moves forward in its ill-considered policy to move all of these long-time residents to community-based care settings.
<
p>I have three questions I would appreciate it if you would address:
<
p>1) Does the absence of any state government plan to manage the transitioning of Fernald residents from their present institutional setting to community-base care settings possibly violate the consent decree signed by all the litigants, including the Commonwealth, several years ago, which returned full policy and program authority to DMR/Commonwealth, after decades of thoughtful and protective judicial oversight of DMR operations at Fernald and other institutional settings by Judge Tauro?
<
p>1A) Can you use the presumed lack of a transition plan to reopen the federal civil case against the Commonwealth?
<
p>2) Which House and Senate legislative committees currently have oversight responsibilities over DMR operations? Do you have the names of the relevant House and Senate committee chairs to contact to demand legislative hearings and a full audit and investigation about the absence of a transition plan and the missing transition assistance funds in the FY’11 budget?
<
p>3) Does the Fernald League for the Retarded have allies in human services community who are willing and eager to make this shameful and poorly designed effort of the Patrick administration to expedite the care transition of all of the remaining members of the most vulnerable population of institutionalized citizens a gubernatorial campaign issue this year?
<
p>Finally, if AG Martha Coakley needs a legal and political cause to make her case why she should be re-elected as Attorney General and help salve her recent political wounds, then I can’t think of a better case than intervening on behalf of the residents of Fernald to oppose the “community-base care plans” of the Patrick administration and its DMR before we have a community-based Titicut Follies on our hands in Massachusetts.
<
p>
I’ll try to respond to them:
<
p>1 and 1a. These are very difficult questions to answer. I personally believe that DDS is in violation now of the consent decrees. The problem is that after the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned Judge Tauro’s final ruling on Fernald in 2008, and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider our appeal, Tauro closed the case. It’s not clear to me what our next move is in that regard.
<
p>2. The relevant committee is the Children and Families Committee, currently chaired by Sen. Gale Candaras and Rep. Kay Khan. The problem here is that there are no true champions of the facilities in the Legislature. Other than a hearing the Committee jointly held with the Mental Health Committee last spring — which turned out to be largely a forum for the pro-closure advocates — I know of nothing they’ve done. No one wants to take on the administration on this issue.
<
p>3. Our major ally in the disability community on this issue is the Mass. Coalition of Families and Advocates for the Retarded, Inc. We’ve worked closely with them in trying to save the facilities.
<
p>4. Martha Coakley long ago threw in her lot with the administration on this one. Part of the problem is that the AG’s office has a legal mandate to represent the administration in the consent decree litagation. So, it was actually Coakley’s office that brought the appeal against Judge Tauro on behalf of DDS. Coakley was never on our side, and neither was Tom Reilly before her.
<
p>As you can see, it’s a lonely battle we’re fighting. The MSM does not care about this issue either. Thankfully, the blogosphere has given us a forum to bring these issues forward.
Kay Khan is one of my Newton representatives. Would you be willing to share the name and contact info for legislative aide for the Fernald League or the Mass. Coalition of Families and Advocates for the Retarded, Inc. so I and others can urge Rep. Khan and Sen. Candras, probably through her aide, to schedule a public hearing and private meeting with your organizations, to discuss the potential adverse ramifications of the Patrick administration providing insufficient funding and apparently no transition plan to launch and implement the Community First program.
<
p>I find it troubling, but potentially politically beneficial to Fernald advocates, that with the unveiling of the Patrick administration’s FY ’11 budget, the ADDP, which was expecting a tidy cash windfall from Community First program, now feels betrayed by the Patrick administration’s failure to request even the minimum level of funding necessary to begin the transition process smoothly. While I understand that your organization and the ADDP will always disagree with the public policy justification behind the community-based approach to the care of moderately and severely developmentally disabled, I believe you share a common goal of securing adequate funding for the development, implementation, and evaluation of Community First program, if and when it becomes fully operational. I would urge your organization and the Mass. Coalition of Families and Advocates of the Retarded, Inc. to try to ally yourselves behind, at least, the full funding issue concerning Community First.
<
p>On the media front, I would strongly urge you reach out to Dan Kennedy at Northeastern University. I feel confident in assuring you that Dan, who is heading the journalism program at Northeastern University, will not only be sympathetic to the Fernald League’s cause, he can put you in touch with a couple of his colleagues from the regional print journalism world.
<
p>As to the legal matters, I am sure your organization has already spent a considerable amount of its limited funds and considerable time seeking to overturn that ridiculous First Circuit decision overturning Judge Tauro. I wonder if your organization has the $$$ or the inclination to go back to your attorney, to ask him or her whether there is an existing civil legal procedure to re-open a consent decree, after a civil case has been closed. If such a civil legal procedure exists, then it might also be helpful to inquire whether the lack of a transition plan and adequate funding for Community First program would, in your attorney’s position, constitute violation of the consent decree, the terms of which should remain in force, even if judicial supervision of the civil case has concluded. I understand that reviving the federal suit against the Commonwealth would be a time-consuming, risky, and costly endeavor, but there might be some value, at least, in making these two inquiries with your organization’s attorney.
<
p>Has your organization or the Mass. Coalition of Families and Advocates for the Retarded attempted to reach out to prominent academics in this area, like Marty Krauss of Brandeis, to enlist their support for your efforts? Perhaps, you can get a prominent scholar/academic in the area to provide you with some research data that would support your reasonable contention that making the full-fledged, comprehensive transition to a community-based model, without an existing state transition plan including individualized evaluations of Fernald residents before and after they are transferred to community-based settings, places the health and well-being of Fernald residents in jeopardy.
<
p>I was led to believe that the state Attorney General had the discretion to decline to represent a state agency that he/she believed was acting contrary to state or federal law and/or in violation existing legal agreements between the Commonwealth and private parties. It’s unfortunate but not terribly surprising, that Martha Coakley and Tom Reilly, before her, have declined to research this issue and craft a legal response with the care, consideration, and thoughtfulness it requires.
<
p>I know it has been difficult to get your voice heard online above the din of the recently concluded U.S. Senate race and the health care debacle, but I think you will find that there are more than a handful of BMGers interested and willing to help you in any way we can. Please keep us informed about how we can exert our influence with the Legislature and the Patrick administration.
<
p>Finally, Governor Patrick and Secretary Digby, if the Commonwealth is longer able or willing to protect the health and well-being of its most vulnerable citizens, especially in a time of deep economic difficulty and uncertainty, then the Bay State should just end its 234 year experiment in self-government, admit failure, and merge with New Hampshire. At least in the Granite State, the citizenry and the state government make and enforce a political covenant of limited taxes=very limited services that seems to work, at least, for the healthy and working residents of “The Live Free or Die” state.
that Governor “Prince John” Patrick is engaging in a little “reverse Robin Hood.” He’s taking from the weak and redistributing it elsewhere. Probably to a population that can vote.
<
p>Eddie Coyle, thank you for your cogent and timely observations and your willingness to help. We’re going to need it.