Early Intervention has called for a “stroller-in” to Governor Patrick’s office tomorrow, 3/1/10. Kids in strollers don’t vote – but their parents sure do. Here is what I am told that the Patrick Administration is considering:
Changing the Early Intervention eligibility standard (the delay a child would need to exhibit in order to receive services) from 30% to 40%. Currently, a child needs to exhibit a 30% delay. This has been increased twice in the past five years and is already more that what is required to receive special services in most school systems. Also:
Implementing a 50% delay standard for children with expressive language delays.
Raising parent fees approximately 7 times or 700% the current fee and as much as 1,333% for families between 301 and 400% FPG. In the midst of the state’s worst recession when families are already struggling to pay their essential bills, this will literally price families out of Early Intervention and have the same effect as eligibility changes.
I have been posting about “You can pay now, or you can pay later.” These changes are a terrible example of failing to catch problems early thereby avoiding huge costs and damage to children later on.
HERE are the details on the Stroller-in:
STROLLER-IN on Monday, March 1st at the Governor’s Office from 10:00 am- 11:00 am for families and all interested parties. If you cannot attend the STROLLER-IN or hearings, we encourage you to submit written testimony opposing the proposed changes (see template to assist with written testimony). Written comments may be sent until April 7, 2010.
To send that written testimony, as I plan to do:
Send letters to:
1. Governor Deval Patrick
State House Room 360
Boston, MA 021332. Attn: Ron Benham
DPECSHN
Massachusetts Department of Public Health
250 Washington St., 5th Floor
Boston, MA 02108 – 4619
The Early Intervention Consortium also is requesting that if you send a letter, you send them a copy at: Local Program Director, Martha Levine, President Ma. Early Intervention Consortium mlevine dot ne-arc.org , and Mary Ann Mullilgan, mamulligan dot governmentalstrategies.com
Early Intervention matters. I have been appointed to represent delayed infants and toddlers in state custody. Without the Early Intervention Therapists coming to those foster homes and training foster parents as to what to do, many of these children would be at risk for never living independently.
Similarly, when returned to their parent’s care, the parents are trained in how to do physical therapy, how to teach motor planning or language skills to kids where the therapies happen daily, several times a day in these homes, a level of treatment that is beyond what could happen in a clinic. For a child with Expressive language delay this is critical to any chance of “normal” development. this is also true of a dyspraxic children who do not receive such services face peer rejection, and the inability to do things like eating without vomiting that most of us take for granted. How do I know? My first born child was severely dyspraxic.
Truly, failing to provide Early Intervention for children with these issues constitutes such extreme failure to meet the needs of this vulnerable population as be not only reckless – but to constitute direct harm.
We are our children’s keepers, collectively. I cannot participate in the “Stroller-in” – I will be in court protecting a vulnerable family. But to all you legislators and staffers who read these posts:
FIRST DO NO HARM. PROTECT THE CHILDREN.
…oh I’m sure Patrick apologists will mention the band aid across the gushing wound of pension problems, or they’ll champion the ability of cities and towns to job the GIC, which has been a real whimper, or they tout the merging of the transportation departments, which in fact was proposed every year since 1992 and really is way to little way to late.
<
p>We’ve been nibbling around the edges of ending duplicative positions, reexamining the mission of departments and agencies (many of which were created 50 years ago, have outlived their purpose, but survive because of bureaucratic inertia).
<
p>And now for the penalties for our inability to make tough choices in tough times–cutting the damn programs that make the most sense. Early Childhood Intervention is the smartest investment we as a society can make. For every dollar spent we save tens of dollars in future taxpayer dollars dealing with a wide variety of social costs–and we make more money, buy creating a more stable citizenry that get better jobs and contributes to society instead of requiring social services.
<
p>This is the cost of our inability to make government more accountable and efficient.
Wasn’t the problem, instead, that candidate Patrick thought that Governor Patrick would get a lot more accomplished in the legislature — more accomplished in the legislature than is possible?
<
p>This is fundamentally a political problem. It’s continuous with progressives’ inability to dislodge Finneran: there’s no bright line between pro-reform and pro-inertia Democrats, no political organization, no labeling.
<
p>And what didn’t work early in the Patrick Administration was to have the former Patrick campaign organization lobby legislators. Instead, we need a larger progressive political organization independent of Patrick, supportive of him but not “his”.
<
p>If you want to get your program through, one thing that you do not do is patronize and insult legislative and clerical staffers. I first started hearing rumblings in mid-November ’06 that obnoxious Patrick folks were condescending and insulting to staffers and legislative clerical employees (for you second-wave feminists out there, they were particularly nasty to female staffers in general; female chiefs of staff in particular).
<
p>The first rule of successful lobbying – that many Mass progressives tend to observe in the breach – is always be respectful to the folks that do the work.
<
p>The institutional split between Corner Office and the Legislature dates from that: it’s personal, not ideological.