Blue Mass Group is used by COFAR, a small group of individuals opposed to Governor Deval Patrick’s Community First and Community Integration program, to protest the Administration’s institutional reduction plan. Here is copy of an Op-Ed from today’s Telegram and Gazette explaining the other side of this issue.
Closing Glavin is right choice
By Gary Blumenthal
Published in the Telegram & Gazette, Wednesday, July 18, 2012
The Patrick administration’s decision to close the Glavin Regional Center in Shrewsbury is the right decision for people with developmental disabilities and for the taxpayers of Massachusetts. The Telegram & Gazette presented an unbalanced and inaccurate view in its editorial over the closing of such state institutions earlier last week (“Compassion and the state,” July 11).
Institutions like Glavin and its sister institution, the Fernald Development Center in Waltham, were built in days gone by as part of a state system that focused overwhelmingly on delivering services in larger congregate settings. Those institutions, at their height of usage, housed as many as 10,000 people with developmental disabilities. Over the course of the last 40 years, families have backed away from institutional programs and have instead chosen to embrace diverse community services that provide equal or better services and are offered in all 351 towns and cities across the commonwealth.
Today, less than 600 people are served in state institutions. The old system that housed 10,000 people still operates six expensive campuses with a continually declining census. Simply put, the commonwealth can no longer continue to afford funding these diminishing programs while struggling to meet the needs of tens of thousands of others in the commonwealth.
Gov. Deval Patrick’s plan is to close four of the six state institutions, and keep the remaining two available for families who do not wish to see their loved ones transitioned into local community settings. This plan has been endorsed again and again by leading disability advocates, policymakers, and legislators.
Despite housing only 26 residents, Glavin costs the state nearly $9 million each year. That is more than $342,000 per resident. Fernald is even more glaringly expensive, with only 14 residents and a cost to taxpayers of $10.6 million, making for a state expenditure of $750,000 per person.
Families are opting away from institutions because they realize the same level and quality of programs are available in their own town, and they know their loved one will have opportunities in the community that will enrich and expand their life. At the same time, leading policymakers support community-based programs because they offer high-quality supports without the expensive state-run price tag.
The cost of providing services for people living with developmental disabilities should not be the single determinant in the care they receive, but because of the disproportionate costs of operating these institutions, it becomes an important consideration.
The consequence of operating six expensive campuses is the concurrent underfunding of other critical areas of supports for people living with developmental disabilities and their families. Over the course of the last four years, more than 11,000 people have lost in-home therapies, respite and family support services, because the commonwealth has not been able to pay for these critical services. It is naïve and reckless to suggest that there is no connection between the state’s provision of very expensive services to a small segment of the disability community, and the ongoing slashes to the community-based programs budget.
The state and federal governments can no longer fund state-run programs when the exact service is available in a more individualized setting for substantially less money.
The editorial mischaracterized the community-based system as a “one-size-fits-all solution.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Residences, day habilitation programs, training sites and activity centers vary greatly in scope and culture from provider to provider. Community programs bring together supports and services tailored to fit the individual; unlike state institutional services found in Glavin and Fernald, which require costly, uniform operation.
The issues the commonwealth has experienced during the proposed closure of Glavin and Fernald have occurred in every state in the nation. In New England, all of our neighbors, except Connecticut, have shuttered every single expensive institution in order to serve more people in compassionate and effective community settings.
The closure of Glavin and Fernald Developmental Centers is inevitable. Both programs are paid for through Medicaid dollars from both the federal and state treasuries. As Congress debates the national debt and the staggering cost of Medicaid, it is apparent that states will soon see less money coming from the federal government.
The overwhelming membership of the disability community believes Gov. Patrick’s plan to close Glavin, Fernald, Monson and Templeton Developmental Centers is the right decision.
Gary Blumenthal is the president and CEO of the Association of Developmental Disabilities Providers. He is a former member of the Kansas House of Representatives, and serves on the National Council on Disability.
president of the Association of Developmental Disabilities Providers, misrepresents the advocacy work done by the Massachusetts Coalition of Families and Advocates (COFAR).
We are not “a small group of individuals,” but rather a statewide, nonprofit organization that is supported by contributions from family members of DDS clients and other advocacy groups. We receive no state funding, however, in contrast to the DDS providers, which comprise the membership of Mr. Blumenthal’s organization.
We have a mailing list of more than 2,000 people and a paid membership of close to 1,000, a growing number of whom have loved ones in the community system. Many of them are dissatisfied and that’s how they come to join us.
We do not “use” BMG, but post here in order to counter misrepresentations in the media about the DDS system. Mr. Blumenthal’s post contains many of these same misrepresntations and outdated myths about the Glavin Center and other state-run facilities in Massachusetts and elsewhere in the country.
We urge you to read our post about the battle to save the Glavin center to get the other side of the story.
I had to recommend this on general principles for showing the other side. Yes, I do sometimes feel that BMG has been used as a platform for one particular interest in this discussion.
Sadly, rather than responding to the facts that have led the Governor, legislature, most states, the overwhelming majority of the disability community, and the expert professional community to endorse closing/downsizing un-needed excess state institutions, COFAR and their PR agent, dave-from-hvad, prefer to attack the messenger. David Kassell’s attack above on “media misrepresentations” doesn’t answer any of the specific questions and policy considerations that have led to repeated decisions by the Governor, the Massachusetts legislature, and the expert community, along with the overwhelming endorsement of the disability community to endorse closing places like Fernald and Glavin. Though COFAR avoids this discussion progressive Democrats should encourage such a factual dialogue.
Neither I nor COFAR have done anything to “shoot the messenger.” I’ve said nothing personal about Mr. Blumenthal. He is the one making the personal comments and both me and COFAR. In this particular post and in his subsequent comment, he says:
1.COFAR is a “small group of indivdiuals” (translation: we are not a legitimate organization). (In the past, Mr. Blumenthal has written here that we are “hard core extremists.”)
2.BMG “is used by COFAR” (translation: unlike Mr. Blumenthal himself or other posters on BMG, we are somehow taking advantage of the unwary editors who run this site to disseminate our subversive messages.)
3. I am “a PR agent” for COFAR (translation: I don’t really believe what I’m posting. I’m just doing it for PR reasons.)
That’s the difference between us. I don’t make personal comments. Mr. Blumenthal does. It’s flattering to know that we’re so able to get under his and the ADDP’s skin.
Sorry you took offensive Dave. The point in my prior post is that COFAR, and you as their spokesperson, were criticizing the media and others for as you said above presenting misrepresentations and myths. Rather than discussing the actual issues such as:
1. equal services or better services being available at the two remaining state institutions or in community programs
2. excessive costs, such as $750,000 per person at Fernald and $342,000 per person at Glavin
3. the strong likelihood of Medicaid funding reductions as part of Federal Debt Reduction and the impact upon funding of human service programs
4. the loss of Respite and Family services for 11,000 people with developmental disabilities and their families because of the state’s fiscal problems
5. What responsibility do people who receive services and supports from the Commonwealth have for ensuring that limited tax dollars are spent wisely and prudently?
These are the issues that COFAR avoids when you instead say the press and others are presenting misrepresentations. These are the issues that a forum, such as BMG should explore, rather than one side only spin that COFAR has printed on its own blog and then used BMG, to reprint that spin.
If BMG is a platform for progressive Democrats to explore and discuss issues, I look forward to a factual discussion of these issues and not a defensive raw nerve reaction Dave.
I provided a link in my first comment to a previous post I had written on Glavin, which addresses all the discussion points you’ve raised in your post.
I’ve been kind of annoyed at the Fernald posts, honestly. I always felt they had an ax to grind – not that this is a bad thing – and I never really was on board with their issue. And I’m a bleeding heart liberal.
First, I feel that I know our Governor well enough to be able to trust him a bit, and if he’s shutting down something, it’s not because he’s some non-compassionate, corporate tool. There is a reason behind it, and it’s likely a decent reason. There are of course things I disagree with the Gov on but I’ve never felt dave-from-hvad’s posts had any real convincing arguments – in fact, after a while I just shut them out. I kinda resent the use of BMG to beat a dead horse, over and over, even when it’s obviously not getting any real traction from any of us regulars.
And I think your categorizations of the state and the Governor were always offputting.
You can always tell when someone is shilling, and dude, you’ve got it written all over your posts. It automatically puts me on “wary.” Your posts are totally either speaking to a small choir, or arguing with a small choir, and frankly, not worth my time.
This goes for both sides.
If you really want to talk to one another so badly, or argue with your opposites, go do it somewhere where you don’t clutter up the user post list.
I’m sorry you feel my posts read like they are shilling for somebody. I personally believe strongly in what I’m doing, and I think most people who know me will vouch for that.
Secondly, if you look at the posts I’ve done (you can find them on http://www.cofarblog.wordpress.com), I think you will find that I write about (and cross-post here on) a wide range of issues having to do with care of people with intellectual disabilities, not just the developmental centers. I’ve recently posted here about proposed DDS regulations on guardian rights, an ongoing criminal case involving the alleged abuse of an intellectually disabled man, the outcome of an investigation into the death of a resident of a DDS group home, ongoing cuts in the DDS budget, the need for better financial monitoring of DDS contractors and much more.
I’ve never accused the governor of being a corporate tool nor anyone else for that matter. I would challenge you to find any unsubstantiated statements or personal attacks in any of my posts.
The reason I post on BMG is to bring wider attention to DDS issues, which we think are generally neglected by the mainstream media. Admittedly, we bring our own perspective to this debate.
But I’m curious when you say my posts are not worth your time. Nobody is forcing you to read them.
As I said, I don’t know whether you are speaking for all, most, some, or only a few BMG readers. Based on your comments, I’m not going to stop posting on BMG. If a lot more people complain, that will be a different story.
all come across as press releases. Sorry, but I delete all the press releases from most orgs or politicians that hit my inbox. They are useless for purposes of getting truly informed about any issues.
You drone on and on the same way every single time. It’s not useful. I say this as a writer and someone who has done PR for a few orgs myself.
And yes, you are pretty harsh on the Patrick team. Like I said, there are times I am also in disagreement, but you’re like a broken freaking record.
And don’t be crass; not one place in my comment did I state anything about speaking for ANYone but myself. Geez.
And you take up room on the user post list, which as I said, is annoying. I DON’T read your press release posts. But as with some of the trolls around here, it’s annoying to have so much pretty much useless stuff taking up the space on the sidebar.
I’m just being honest; seeing your name on a post, my thought process is, “whatever, what a one trick pony. Dude needs his own blog or something. Go away already.”
If there was any reason in the world to connect to your issue, it’d have happened for me a long time ago, me being hugely liberal and very interested in making sure our state runs for the betterment of all our citizens. You have yet to convince me, your twice a week postings notwithstanding.
It’s as if you didn’t read my comment in response to you. Your second comment sounds like a broken record to me as well. Be specific. “You drone on and on the same way every time.” It’s a meaningless statement. “Your posts all come across as press releases.” Similarly, meaningless.
If you can’t convince me, a longtime (and when I say longtime, I mean from the Typepad era) reader and commenter here, and liberal to the core, then you’re not doing it right.
Your strategy is to carpetbomb BMG; it’s a sucky strategy that never works, whether you are an issues advocate, or a conservative troll.
You’re boring me.
I am not trying to “carpetbomb BMG.” As I stated before, I post on a wide range of issues of concern to people with intellectual disabilities and their families. All of my posts first appear on the COFAR website at http://www.cofarblog.wordpress.com. If I feel a post I’ve written or issue it concerns has political implications and may be of concern to a wider audience than our site typically gets, I cross post, usually here on BMG. That’s my strategy — it’s not to inundate BMG in the hopes someone will pay attention to me.
It’s true, I’ve written a lot of posts. But if you were to scan them, you would see they cover a lot of differnt issues. Also, as I said before, the mainstream media rarely covers these issues. Nobody other than us is writing about them.
Yes, I’ve been harsh on the administration in many cases because we don’t think they are pursuing the right policies on many DDS matters. I suspect they would be just as happy as Lynne if I were to stop posting on BMG. But at the risk of annoying the powers that be and moreover continuing to bore Lynne, I hope to continue to cross-post here on BMG for a while longer, and will assume that most BMG readers don’t have a problem with it.
my name in a comment that much again, you’ll look even sillier.
Dave. Dave. Dave.
Yawn.
I would prefer to not post lengthy arguments regarding disability policy on BMG. I read BMG as a lifelong Democrat, however I post on disability issues only as a response to COFAR using the site to present one side only which consistently has been critical of the Governor, DDS, and the majority decision of the Legislature to close excess state institutions in favor of using limited tax dollars more effectively. The positions presented by dave-from-hvad, despite their frequency of repetition, have been rejected by the Governor, developmental disabilities professionals, the Governor, the American Association on Intellectual & Developmental Disabilities, the National Council on Disability, the Administration on Community Living (U.S. Dept of HHS) and the Massachusetts Legislature, The Arc of the United States, the Arc of Massachusetts and the overwhelming majority of families, consumers and self advocates. COFAR’s spin suggests that all of these people are wrong and spreading false information. Unfortunately, as long as COFAR presents its slant as fact, it is important for the other side of the issue to be aired as well. Thus I feel motivated to respond. I do apologize to BMG readers who likely have tired of this predictable exchange.
we’re having, and then you proceed to get in your licks against COFAR. For the record, all of those organizations you’ve listed haven’t rejected our positions.
The AAIDD, in fact, (www.aaidd.org), is neutral, as far as I can tell, in the debate over community-based care. The AAIDD’s academic journal has published studies and commentaries on both sides of the issue. And their strategic plan (http://www.aaidd.org/media/files/2011-2012_strategic_plan.pdf) does not appear to me to promote either side of this debate.
I only respond to correct COFAR distortions. I have been a member of AAIDD for years, and attend their conferences and read their journals. AAIDD leadership support inclusion and best practice, not the outdated practices endorsed by COFAR . By the way Dave, answering the specific questions addressed above might help educate folks rather than your avoiding direct policy and practice questions..
The one person I can think of who does this is chrismatth, but maybe it would be a good idea for special interest diaries such as this subject.
In his role as spokesperson for COFAR, dave-from-hvad, has chosen to reprint their PR sheets on BMG as if it’s progressive Democratic news. I don’t like discussing these issues here either, but for years, Mr. Kassell has used BMG as to reprint COFAR spin verbatim, without challenge. Presenting one side of this issue, as if it’s fact, is a disservice to progressive Democrats who look to BMG for progressive discussions. Thus I and a few others respond with the other side in the interest of presenting balance.
is what this post is.