Tag Archives: DSHS

Please Ask DSHS and DDD These Questions!

This letter was sent to all Washington State Legislators and many other advocates.  I do hope that these questions are asked and that answers are received.

 

december 1 letter to legislator and others

 

The Department of Social and Health Services and the Division of Developmental Disabilities NEED to answer these questions and more.  The data that they continually present to our legislators is flawed and incomplete and doesn’t tell the whole story as it needs to be told in order to make policy decisions.

 

This is who we need to ask questions of:

DSHS – Aging and Disability Services Administration Tree

Susan N. Dreyfus, Secretary

Department of Social &  Health Services

Susan.Dreyfus@dshs.wa.gov

 

Don Clintsman

Division of Developmental  Disabilities

Aging & Disability  Services Admin

donald.clintsman@dshs.wa.gov

 

 

Janet Adams

Office of Quality Assurance and Self Directed Services

adamsje@dshs.wa.gov

 

 

Imprisonment for people, death to some – It’s coming down to that –

Our state is in a crisis – that’s not news to anyone.  Some of the crisis is self-made from some “advocates” who have pushed inaccurate information to our legislators.  The false information and reports based on inaccurate data were utilized in decision making – decisions that are now coming back to bite us.

There are some solutions but people will have to acknowlegde some mistakes that were made.  Here is just one solution – retention of Direct Support Staff -

We need to think of Quality of Life for our citizens with developmental disabilties.  Having staff turnover rates up up to 44% is not only disturbing but dangerous and expensive.  Do you know that if we changed and tweeked the system just a little, we could save over $28,000,000 and improve the quality of life not only for residents but also for caregivers?

Do you know that moving some residents to small community homes will be imprisonment for them?  Without staff to care for them or staff to take them to appointments and community outings, they will be imprisoned in their homes – is this the type of life that you would wish on anyone?

One can clearly see there is a huge problem: Not even taking into account the effect on residents and the loss of knowledge and skills in relating to residents when staff leave, the lack of continuity in care (all which add to stress and increased behavior issues in residents), all the other issues with staff turnover that are seen in the business world are seen here too.

On average it is concluded that it costs about the annual salary of the person to replace that person – so given that, how much money could be saved in retention of staff (increased wages would help and would clearly offset the cost of staff turnover) which would then improve the quality of life.

Group Home Direct Care Staff make roughly $10.00/hour (some more, some less range is $8.55 – 13.62 in 2010) so that calculates out to about $20,000 for each person – so for 2010 in group homes that comes to $2,100,000 dollars on just staff turnover!!!!

Supported Living is $28,900,000

Now those are some ridiculous numbers – One of the keys to this problem is to look at staffing and how to retain the staff – This is what will not only save money but  improve the quality of life for EVERYONE!!!

Now is the time to think about new systems  – think outside the box (sorry for the cliche)

 The data for this chart was obtained from the DDD Residential Programs Staffing Wage & Turnover Study, years 2008, 2009 and 2010

Type of Program 2008 2009 2010
Group Home 48.1 44.3 39.2
Supported Living 44.7 37.8 35.8
SOLA 18.9 14.9 14.4

We Cannot Afford to Allow DSHS to Waste More Money

The mismanagement of our Department of Social and Health Services never ceases to amaze me.  When I started researching the Washington State Auditor’s reports and realized how many millions of dollars DSHS was costing our state, I was appalled.  I am continually amazed at the department and the lack of integrity and mismanagement that is apparent throughout the services.  It’s not only dollars that are wasted but vulnerable people are being hurt.

With all the budget cuts, and many of those cuts affecting more and more people, some worse than others, it is time for DSHS to get a grip of their programs and manage them and the personnel responsibly.

October 7, 2011

Dear Colleagues, Partners and tribal and community leaders:

We wanted you to be aware of a story that is scheduled to run Monday night on KING TV, reported by Susannah Frame, on employees who spent lengthy stays on home assignment while under investigation for alleged improper or illegal conduct. One Department of Social and Health Services employee at the Special Commitment Center was on home assignment (paid administrative leave) for 3½ years.

Important things to know about this story:

1.       The SCC employee was involved in an ongoing state and federal investigation of contraband smuggling at the SCC and her employment was terminated early this year. Department leadership found that a home assignment of such long duration, regardless of the intervening complexity of the federal investigation, was unacceptable.

2.       Nearly a year ago, DSHS Chief of Staff Tracy Guerin ordered a change in policy on home assignments. Any home assignment of more than 48 hours must be approved by DSHS Chief of Staff or Human Relations Senior Director. The decision even to make a home assignment of 48 hours or less must be based on imminent safety or security reasons.

3.       As of Monday, the Department had one employee reported on home assignment and that person’s employment was to be terminated this week.

Thomas Shapley

Senior Director

DSHS Public Affairs

Thomas.shapley@dshs.wa.gov

360-902-8007

DD Advocates need to come clean with accurate information!

It is critical to drop the adherence to the ideology that “community” living is best and less costly than living in an ICF/DD for many of our high needs citizens with developmental disabilities.  This dogmatic approach is hurting everyone of us – disabled or not.  A continuum of care model takes variety into consideration in addition to cost effectiveness, safety and quality.  A continuum of care model is what needs to be looked at – a model which benefits everyone – disabled or not.

Please see this link for information Come Clean.  This roughly outlines some of these issues.  Resources and accurate data taken from DDD and DSHS management sources.

 

“Idiocy and Advocacy”

“idiocy-and-advocacy”

I didn’t make this up but it’s how I feel lately – see the link to The New York Times (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/idiocy-and-advocacy/?ref=opinion&nl=opinion&emc=tya1)

I’m really not surprised by the most recent “mistake” that was made by DSHS.  After reading through many Washington State Auditor reports which also outlined gross mismanagement of DSHS and millions of dollars lost due to that mismanagement, this newest fiasco falls right into line with the history of the department.

 

I have been trying to get answers to questions for almost 9 months now regarding reports that were written and “Fact Sheets” that were published based on inaccurate data and information.  I have written to the authors of the reports and many administrators and researchers within Developmental Disabilities and DSHS.  Not one of these people has responded to the questions I have regarding the inaccurate data that has been published.  Data which our legislators and public believe is true and data upon which some disastrous decisions have been made. 

 

Why won’t anyone within the department look at the questions that I’m asking?  The only response I have received is that they are “too busy” to answer me.  Conveniently “too busy” I assume since an answer would have to acknowledge a mistake had been made. 

 

It’s time to come to grips with reality, realize mistakes have been made and correct them.  The longer they are in denial, the worse the situation will get and it can’t get much worse. 

 

Developmental Disabilities Coalition for Washington State

Dear Advocate for our citizens with Developmental Disabilities,

We are gathering people and organizations to become members of our Developmental Disabilities Coalition for Washington State. We realized that the support is very fractured across the state and with this new coalition we will be able to communicate, educate and interact with others who maintain that a continuum of care for our citizens is critical.

DD Advocates support person-centered care which focuses on quality of life issues, health, safety and community for our loved ones.  We uphold the U.S. Supreme Court Decision Olmstead which guarantees choice to the individual.

This letter is going to all groups within our state who advocate for our citizens with developmental disabilities.  Please pass it on to new groups or interested people.  Also, please read the enclosed  Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Letter regarding their position on H.R. 2032, a bill which does not uphold the U.S. Supreme Court Decision Olmstead.

There is much work to be done particularly with the onset of more budget cuts.  This is not the time to continue a fractured advocacy movement. 

Please commit to the support of a continuum of care model and join our online group at

 dd-coalition@googlegroups.com

 

State Audits Show DSHS lost over 2 million dollars due to mismanagement

The Department of Social and Health Services is so mismanaged that they have lost over 2 million dollars in our public funds in just the past couple of years.

I want to know why the department is not scrutinzed and held accountable for thier lack of ability to manage payroll, contracts, benefit payments etc. yet say they do not have the budget for cost effective, crucial programs and services for our citizens with developmental disabilities.

Why is DSHS allowed to cut programs, why do some prominent agencies which masquarade as disability advocates, some of these even paid with our public funds themselves, advocate for closure of needed and desired programs while at the same time pushing for the undertaking of costly experiments with the lives of our most vulnerable citizens?

I am outraged by not only the lack of accountablity but the lack of integrity in the managment of DSHS and the integrity of some advocates (The Developmental Disabilities Council, The Arc Chapters, just to name two – there are more involved in this scandulous cover-up)

Our legislators and public are not told the truth about the costs nor are they told the truth about what is found in the data of many reports.  Not only is much of the data misrepresented but U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, such as Olmstead, are misrepresented by these agencies.

It is time that we, as grassroots advocates, make these issues known and upfront.  It’s a hard battle to fight but we need to do it for those who cannot do it themselves.

See this document for resources, facts, Washington State Auditor’s reports and other issues.  Many of these issues were defered and will be looked into this year, hopefully.

DSHS Audits and losses

DRW Validates Concerns regarding Safe and Quality care in the community for RHC residents

 

Mark Stroh, Executive Director of Disability Rights Washington (DRW) has written a letter to Governor Gregoire protesting her veto of Sections 7 and 11 of SSB 5459.  Even though DRW supported SSB5459, I am pleased to see their concern regarding the Governor’s veto of these two critical sections which were put in to assure safe and quality care for our residents. 

 

Without these two sections, there are no commitments to ongoing services, continued safeguards, quality assurance and independent oversight for the health and safety of our residents. 

 

Thank you to Disability Rights Washington for validating the concerns that we, as grassroots advocates for a continuum of care for our citizens, have been highlighting in our statements to the public and our legislators. 

Please Listen to Us!

I am attaching some very interesting documents.  What I would love to know is if the Department of Social and Health Services and The Department of Developmental Disabilities are listening to the people they are serving.

To me, from looking at the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) DDD Assessment Report dated January 31, 2009, it clearly outlines the numbers of people and the programs and services requested.

JLARC Final Report 013109 DDD assessment

This is what I find very interesting and confusing:

Program Requests:

ICF/MR – 20

Roads to Community Living – 1

Service Requests:

RHC or ICF/DD services – 40

Roads to Community Living – 1

Looking at what was requested by the people, it is clear that the people are requesting the ICF/DD services much more than the Roads to Community Living Services.  Why then, is the Department downsizing the ICF/DD’s and putting thousands of dollars into the RCL program?  Why is the State of Washington spending over $250,000 on a “Family Mentoring Project” for the Roads to Community Living when it is clear that the people involved are not even asking for this? Is this being a responsible steward of our public funds? Is this being cost effective?

It is time to listen to those who really receive the services and programs – not those who masquarade as their advocates.  The people have clearly spoken and they are asking for the services in the ICF/DD’s.

Please Listen to Them!

Number of Programs which DDD Clients Access:

Number of progrmas which DDD clients access

Other DSHS Services Received by DDD Clients:

Services Received by DD Clients in FY 2008

Formation of Washington State Task Force to Look at DDD Services

Attached below is my letter to Don Clintsman, Assistant Director, Division of Developmental Disabilities.  He had responded to a letter which I had written to MaryAnne Lindeblad, Assistant Secretary, Aging and Disabilities Service Administration, inquiring about the formation of the Task Force and the importance for a balanced perspective of the participants.

Dear Mr. Clintsman,

 

Thank you for responding to my letter to Ms. Lindebland.  It is hopeful to hear that the The Department of Social and Health Services and the Department of Developmental Disabilities finally understand the concept of and have adopted the term “continuum of care.”

 

We, as grassroots disability advocates have always stressed the importance of the continuum of care, realizing that each person needs to be looked at individually and their needs met according to their assessed support needs.  The only way to accomplish this goal and also accomplish it within a reasonable budget is to continue to offer the full continuum of care to all – regardless of their age group.

 

Once one realizes the critical importance of this continuum, I’m hoping that the budget figures and reports will more accurately be reported to reflect the true cost of care – especially for our most vulnerable citizens and those with high acuity levels in several areas. 

 

It has never been disputed that citizens with high acuity can be accommodated in neighborhood communities and it’s wonderful that this arrangement can work for many.  It is neither realistic nor safe to consider this the best option or even a viable option for many of our citizens who currently reside in the state operated residential communities or those who have requested admittance but have been denied access to these communities. 

 

Given the many constraints of resources – not only dollars – but people and housing, it only makes economic sense to utilize the concept of “scale of economies.”  This concept utilizes the fact that being able to serve more people with the same type of support needs and sharing some of those services within a community actually saves dollars.  Within these communities, the residents also receive their comprehensive health care – minimizing many transportation costs, emergency back up costs, and extra personnel costs used to transport residents to other appointments just to highlight a few examples of costs which are often forgotten.   The residents have much better preventative care and follow-up care, are not traumatized by being “taxied” around town for various appointments such as lab draws, xrays, dental exams, eyeglass fittings, etc. 

 

I will highlight one example of a woman in her mid 30’s.  She lives in a supported living arrangement, has cancer and many other health related problems.  She came through the department in which I work to have her port-a-cath changed due to mismanagement and infection.  This is very unusual to need a port-a-cath replaced, particularly if the first one has only been in a short while.   This woman presented in surgery, unaccompanied by a guardian, unable to comprehend all that was going on.  She had missed many of her scheduled doctor’s appointments related to not only her cancer treatment but preventative and follow-up care for other health issues.  It is stories such as this that I see as totally preventable when a person lives in a residential community with comprehensive care.  What budget does the cost of her care due to mismanagement of her health problems get attributed to?  This doesn’t even take into the account the effects of pain and suffering to this woman. 

 

I know from  looking at many sources which DDD and DSHS provide regarding costs of care, services requested and provided and even the cost of care for the 30 highest cost DDD residents  that you provided to me, the figures that have been used for cost comparison are extremely inaccurate with missing costs, cost shifting and data input errors.    Data that was used for these cost comparison reports was taken from reports with many inaccuracies – therefore, the data pulled is essentially useless if getting an accurate assessment of the cost was the goal.   

 

 

In addition to the issues of safety for our residents, we must also look at safety and training for the caregivers.  I will be looking into the L&I cost of “on the job injuries” to caregivers and charting from which type of facility the highest percentages originate from. 

 

Again, hearing that The Department has now adopted and supports a continuum of care, maybe we can really move forward with innovative systems which are cost effective to safely support our most vulnerable citizens. 

 

I will be following up this letter with data which supports the need for a continuum of care.  In addition to having accurate data, it is critical for some very prominent advocacy groups to realize that denying our citizens with the support needs which are available in the residential communities is not only denying these people their human and civil rights but will weaken the whole system by putting an undue financial burden on our state.  These actions which they advocate for will actually minimize the services to many who have less acute support needs.  The dollar can only be stretched so far without something giving.

 

 If one were to follow their example of “everyone needs to live in the community” I’m afraid that we will lose many of our beloved family members. 

 

Again, thank you for your follow-up letter and I will be communicating with the Task Force Members often once the committee has been decided.