Disability Services Advisory Council (DSAC)

Transcription

1 Disability Services Advisory Council (DSAC) MEETING: Disability Services Advisory Council DATE: Friday, March 17, 2017 TIME: 10:30AM 11:45AM LOCATION: Lane Council of Governments 5th Floor, Buford Meeting Room 859 Willamette Street Eugene, OR CONTACT: Kate Scott, ; =============================================== DSAC Agenda Packet Documents: DSAC AGENDA PACKET.PDF OPI Advisory Council Handouts Documents: OPI ADVISORY COUNCIL HANDOUTS.PDF

2 MEETING: Disability Services Advisory Council DATE: Friday, March 17, 2017 TIME: LOCATION: CONTACT: 10:30AM 11:45AM Lane Council of Governments 5 th Floor, Buford Meeting Room 859 Willamette Street Eugene, OR Kate Scott, ; kscott2@lcog.org A G E N D A 10:30 a.m. 1. Call to Order Lana Junger 10:31 a.m. 2. Consideration of Meeting Agenda Lana Junger 10:33 a.m. 3. Consideration of last DSAC minutes Lana Junger 10:35 a.m. 4. Guest Presentation, Developmental Disabilities Services 11:05 a.m. 5. Announcements, Updates, Discussions a. Legislative Priorities Jody Cline b. Info share, O4AD OPI legislative handouts Jody Cline c. Resource info after loss of Medicaid/OPI Rachel Jacobsen d. Equity update Jody Cline e. Items from the floor -OVER-

3 11:20 a.m. 6. LCOG, Councils and Committee Reports a. Senior Services Advisory Council Marianne/Andy b. Long Term Care Committee Update Jody, Cmt Member c. Procurement & Monitoring Cmt Member 11:30 a.m. 7. Action Items a. Spring Advocacy Logistics Finalization Jody Cline b. Action items from the floor All 11:43 a.m. 8. Call for Next Meeting Agenda Items & Lana Junger Reminder of Next Meeting May 19th, 2017, 10:30AM 11:45AM 859 Willamette Street, 5 th Floor Buford Meeting Room Eugene, OR :45 a.m. 9. Adjourn Lana Junger

4 MEETING: S&DS Joint Council DATE: Friday, March 17, 2017 TIME: LOCATION: LUNCH: 11:55AM Check-in 12:00PM Meeting Called to Order, Adjourn 1PM Lane Council of Governments 5 th Floor, Buford Meeting Room 859 Willamette Street Eugene, OR Cobb salad with chicken and tofu Alpine Catering CONTACT: Kate Scott, ; kscott2@lcog.org A G E N D A 1. Call to Order, Introductions Marianne Malott 2. Consideration of the Last Meeting Minutes Marianne Malott 3. Presentation: Love Inc. 4. Legislative Update Jody Cline 5. Spring Advocacy Planning Jody Cline 6. Next meeting: May 19th, 2017 Marianne Malott 7. Adjourn Marianne Malott

5 MINUTES DISABILITY SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL Friday, January 20, :30 11:45 a.m. Buford Room Park Place Building 859 Willamette Street Eugene, Oregon MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS EXCUSED: GUESTS: STAFF: Lana Junger, Chair; John Ahlen Joe Basey, Marianne Malott, Ed Necker, Tina Powell, Peggy Thomas, Dennis Weirich, Lucy Zammarelli. Andy Fernandez, Sheila Thomas. Arthur Towers, Restore Justice for Survivors; and Lara Johnson, Corson & Johnson Law. Jody Cline, Brooke Emery, Amanda Souder. 1. Call to Order Ms. Junger called the meeting to order at 10:35 a.m. 2. Consideration of Meeting Agenda Ms. Cline said in the absence of Kate Scott she would present the Equity Update and any other items usually covered by Ms. Scott. Peggy Thomas said she would report on Procurement and Monitoring. The agenda was accepted by consensus with the changes in presenters. 3. Consideration of November 18 DSAC meeting minutes MOTION: Mr. Necker moved, seconded by Mr. Weirich, to approve the November minutes as presented. The motion carried unanimously. 4. Guest Presentation by Restore Justice for Survivors Mr. Towers described himself as an advocate for vulnerable Oregonians who got hurt. A May 2016 Oregon Supreme Court decision ruled that people who suffered severe injuries did not have to be fully compensated for their losses, a decision that Restore Justice for Survivors believed removed a lot of rights previously in place. Answering Mr. Necker s question, Mr. Tower said that previously the amount awarded for damages was determined by a jury but now an arbitrary cap was a one-size-fits-all approach that was particularly harmful in claims against large institutions. He shared a story about a woman who lost multiple limbs and received no compensation for the future quality of her life.

6 Disability Services Advisory Council January 20, 2017 page 2 Ms. Johnson added that victim advocacy groups generally were upset by the recent court ruling and she pointed out that claims already were prejudiced against people with disabilities who were not working at the time of the injury and this decision would make it even harder for them to get compensation. Ms. Thomas shared her story of becoming disabled in an accident at the age of 17. Mr. Tower commented that some people were injured by someone without the financial resources to compensate for the damages they had done but other times people were hurt by someone in an organization that did have the resources and Restore Justice was working to make the community safer and to hold accountable those with resources who were engaged in wrongdoing. Ms. Johnson added that as in Ms. Thomas s case, people were not receiving the type of compensation they deserved. Ms. Johnson and Mr. Tower were seeking the council s support for legislation that would remove the compensation cap in injury cases, increase it in death cases, restore authority for juries to make decision about injuries based on the facts presented in court, and provide incentives to companies engaged in unsafe activities to become safer. Mr. Ahlen asked about opposition. In the past opposition had come from the insurance and nursing home industries. Mr. Tower was struggling to understand why the court overturned an earlier opinion and provided the right to a jury trial but not the right to a jury verdict. Ms. Johnson said the ruling was hard to understand and did not cite to centuries-old English jurisprudence Ms. Cline explained that In order for DSAC to be listed as a supporting organization and for members to lobby legislators, especially Senator Lee Byer, the council first needed to vote to support the position and then to request and receive LCOG board approval. Mr. Tower indicated that no hearing dates had been set but were expected in late February or early March. Ms. Thomas volunteered to testify at those hearings and Mr. Tower observed that stories told by people like Ms. Thomas were the best way to persuade legislators to take the right action. Both Mr. Necker and Ms. Thomas were willing to talk to Senator Byer. Ms. Johnson commented that in addition to making benefits available to those who deserved them, allowing a civil case to go forward against a wrong doer also could provide funds to repay the state for its costs. Mr. Tower clarified that the court decision would apply to both public and private sector cases and that due to the Horton ruling the caps for damages against public agencies were higher than for private sector cases. Ms. Cline suggested the council add an item under Announcements to discuss the request further and decide how to proceed.

7 Disability Services Advisory Council January 20, 2017 page 3 5. Announcements, Updates, Discussions a. Update on ADL State Changes Ms. Emery spoke at the last meeting about changes coming to the definitions of Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) for people receiving services. She passed out a chart of Priority of Paid Services or Service Priority Levels (SPLs) and said that currently S&DS was serving people eligible for in-home or community-based care or who were in care facilities and required assistance in one or more of the four ADLs (Mobility, Eating, Elimination, and Cognition) at the 1-13 levels. In the past the thresholds for meeting eligibility had been fairly low. For example people only need assistance one time per month for eating or elimination. Effective April 1 the State had changed the definition of frequency for all four ADLs to assistance needed at least once per week and this would cause some people to lose eligibility. Ms. Emery clarified that about 5-10 percent of those now receiving services would be impacted and the plan was to provide one-time funding to help them in the transition. She said case managers could make a request for money to help people no longer eligible to transition back into the community by providing them with moving expenses or first month costs for an apartment. Ms. Emery had heard that OPI funding may be tapped for this purpose. Ms. Thomas seemed to prefer an across-the-board cut to reduce hours but keep people on services. Answering questions, Ms. Emery reported that eligibility had been reduced from SPL 15 to SPL 13 several years previously and the state did not want to do that again but overall had long needed to tighten up definitions that were being interpreted and applied differently based on county and individual case manager. Ms. Cline added the Adults and People with Disabilities (APD) state office had worked through its Rules Advisory Committee to look at various methods of ensuring need was measured consistently across the state to avoid people qualifying in one county then moving to another and being reassessed and told they did not qualify. Ms. Emery assured the council that someone not eligible due to the changes still had the right to apply and be reassessed if anything had changed for them. Mr. Weirich asked for suggestions of where people not getting services may go for help. Ms. Emery replied that S&DS would look at other resources like LILA and Love Inc and compile a list of resources to offer to people. There also would be coordination with the ADRC about these cases. She noted the change would be difficult for staff as well as clients. Acknowledging the difficulty of cutting services, Ms. Thomas suggested using the visiting nurse program for people transitioning from service and said people without others there to support them were more likely to become victimized by predators. Ms. Emery responded that people needed to be looked at as individuals to determine what they needed and how to get funding for it.

8 Disability Services Advisory Council January 20, 2017 page 4 Mr. Weirich suggested creating a new classification for people who no longer qualified and ensuring someone checked up on them. Ms. Emery commented that part of transitioning services was looking at who was involved in a person s life and what they could do. This need was something council members could communicate to Legislators. Ms. Cline added that only people on services had a Medicaid Manager but the Area Coordinators would be assigned to people who did not have the natural supports of friends and families and would do some check-ins but not provide the services. She opined that because OPI had a waiting list and had been slashed in the Governor s Budget, it should not be regarded as a safety net for this group of people. Answering a question about Elder Help expanding its services to people with disabilities, Ms. Cline said it was not likely because that program was funded by the Older Americans Act. She suggested looking for funding for something similar to Senior Companions that would work with people with disabilities who were younger than seniors. Ms. Emery pointed out another significant change had been that in the past needing assistance cleaning the toilet area after eliminating was included as a component of meeting the eligibility criteria but this had been removed. On the positive side Ms. Emery said totally bed bound had been replaced with total assist with ambulation and transfers now included repositioning a person who was bed bound. Another change had been to look at physical limitation and need without being bound only to a care setting. Ms. Malott commented that independent living facilities often required that residents keep their apartments clean and people who could not do that due to disability would be evicted or have to move to a nursing home. Ms. Emery responded that for such people who needed assistance S&DS would assign a home care worker or the person could go to a different level of care like assisted living or an adult foster home. Ms. Thomas raised an issue about no-cause evictions happening to people who could not maintain their units according to the standards of the building s management. Ms. Emery summarized that a comparison of current rules and what would change led to the conclusion that 5-10 percent would be affected by the change. Those no longer eligible or their care managers could create transition plans that could include teaching life skills, money management, fall prevention, use of public transportation, home modification, assistive devices, one-time moving expenses, and possibly rent and security deposits. Responding to a request from Mr. Weirich, Ms. Emery said at the next meeting the council could review and provide feedback on a list of resources to provide to people no longer eligible. She added that these changes were Phase I and would be effective April 1. Phase II would shore up definitions on cognition to make them more consistent so people could move from county to county and retain eligibility. It was unclear when this phase would be implemented and whether or how it would differentiate among levels of cognition.

9 Disability Services Advisory Council January 20, 2017 page 5 Ms. Emery concurred with Ms. Thomas when she commented about shrinking vacancy rates putting vulnerable people at greater risk. Ms. Emery said the critical and growing need for specialized and affordable housing was on everyone s radar. b. Equity Update (Equity Coalition/SAGE) Ms. Cline explained that SAGE stood for Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders and was the largest and oldest organization dedicated to improving the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender older adults. S&DS had decided to seek certification as a SAGE platinum agency which required having some trainings attended by at least 80 percent of its leadership and all staff also received training that helped people be more comfortable and competent working with this population. Certification allowed S&DS to use a logo on its website and other materials that led to people asking what it meant and giving staff an opportunity to talk about it. Ms. Zammarelli asked about the quality of the training and Ms. Cline responded that the only criticism had been it was too basic for some staff. This feedback was going to SAGE with the suggestion that it find out in advance what level of training an organization needed and in S&DS s case something more intermediate would have been better. Ms. Zammarelli reported the Lane Equity Coalition had received funding to continue for another year. The next meeting would be 5-8 p.m. on February 21 and would include a presentation on how to be an ally by Dr. Jorge Ramirez Garcia, an Oregon Research Institute scientist who specialized in the wellbeing of vulnerable populations. She encouraged council members to google Lane Equity Coalition to register for the free session. c. Restore Justice for Survivors Request MOTION: Ms. Thomas moved, seconded by Mr. Necker, to approve supporting the effort of Restore Justice for Survivors to advocate for passage of Senate Bill 487 and House Bill The motion carried, 8:0:1, with Mr. Ahlen abstaining. Ms. Cline said she would work with Brenda Wilson on the best way to present this to the LCOG Board of Directors who needed to approve it before DSAC could be listed as a supporting organization. She would report back at the March meeting. 6. LCOG, Councils and Committee Reports a. Senior Services Advisory Council Ms. Cline reported a long-term care ombudsperson gave a presentation and SSAC received updates on legislative issues, the Long Term Care Committee, Lane Equity Coalition, and SAGE. b. Long-Term Care Committee Update Ms. Cline said the last meeting was in December and due to holidays there was no January meeting so the February 3 meeting would have a full agenda. The group would

10 Disability Services Advisory Council January 20, 2017 page 6 continue defining its mission and scope, Christy Williams would talk about the S&DS customer service survey, and there would be a review of the PSU population forecasts. c. Procurement & Monitoring Ms. Thomas reported she had attended her first meeting of the committee where there was a review of the rules. She had been surprised at having to sign a non-disclosure agreement. Ms. Cline added the committee met every other month and a thorough update of the last couple of meetings would be provided at the next DSAC meeting. 7. Action Items a. Spring Advocacy DSAC Logistics Update Ms. Cline confirmed May 17 as the Day at the Capitol. LTD had agreed to work with S&DS on transportation. b. Action Items from the Floor At Mr. Basey s request, Ms. Cline reminded every one they did not have to go to Salem for the advocacy training because it would be via webinar on January 30 at 1 p.m. Those interested in participating should let Ms. Cline or Ms. Scott know. 8. Call for Next Meeting Agenda Items & Reminder of Next Meeting March 17, 2017, 10:30 AM 11:45 AM 859 Willamette Street, 5 th Floor Buford Meeting Room Eugene, OR Ms. Cline noted that the Joint Council would hear about legislative priorities from Nicole Palmateer Hazelbaker at the lunch meeting. She hoped to have more details and 04AD s legislative materials for the council s review at the March meeting. 8. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 11:49 p.m. (recorded by Mary Feldman)

11 MINUTES SENIOR & DISABILITY SERVICES JOINT COUNCIL Friday, January 20, 2017 noon 1:00 p.m. Buford Room Park Place Building 859 Willamette Street Eugene, Oregon MEMBERS PRESENT: Marianne Malott, Chair; John Ahlen, Joe Basey, Rosemary Beachy, Amy Bresler, Lana Junger, Marianne Malott, Ed Necker, Tina Powell, Diane Rogers, Peggy Thomas, Dennis Weirich., Lucy Zammarelli. GUESTS: STAFF: Nicole Palmateer Hazelbaker Jody Cline, Rachel Jacobsen 1. Call to Order/Introductions Ms. Malott called the meeting to order at 12:02 p.m. 2. Consideration of November 18, 2016, Meeting Minutes MOTION: Mr. Necker moved, seconded by Ms. Thomas, to approve the November minutes as presented. The motion carried unanimously. 3. Governor s Budget Review Ms. Cline introduced Nicole Palmateer Hazelbaker, Director of the Oregon Association of Area Agencies on Aging and Disabilities (04AD) and its lobbyist. Ms. Hazelbaker noted the Legislative session would begin February 1. Governor Brown had released her mandatory budget on December 1. It showed the Governor s priorities and how she planned to approach the requirement for a balanced budget but Ms. Hazelbaker emphasized that this was a recommended budget only that proposed significant reductions, including closure of the Junction City State Hospital and cutting OPI. Although the Legislature would craft its own version of the budget, because they worked on behalf of the Governor, state agencies were required to only address what was in her budget so could not advocate for the hospital or OPI funding. The Co-Chairs budget had been released the previous day and it put out a framework for what might happen in the absence of any new revenue if existing programs were moved into the next biennium. The result was about a $200 million deficit which would require about a 9 percent reduction. For 04AD this meant focusing on budget for the entire legislative session and not advancing new legislation or policy bills. It would react to health care issues, especially around CCOs, to preserve and protect existing programs and also would prioritize to provide security and stability so people could live with dignity and have choice. Because many entities would propose increases in their funding at the expense of these programs, Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker would work to ensure Legislators understood the value and impacts of programs for seniors and people with disabilities, and the importance of maintaining this piece of the overall budget. She noted that 96 percent of the individuals in the OPI program would be eligible for Medicaid if they chose that instead. The

12 S&DS Joint Council January 20, 2018 page 2 per person service costs for OPI were $350 which was 10 percent of the cost for nursing care instead. She foresaw additional cost savings for the State if people in OPI were less likely to go on the Oregon Health Plan. Ms. Thomas commented that providing low income assisted housing also was less expensive than nursing care. Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker hoped council members would remain engaged and would sign up for the newsletter at 04ad.org. Important bills the association was following and talking points would be posted and shared. Ms. Thomas asked to receive hard copies of this information and Ms. Cline agreed to provide them. Continuing Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker said Legislators needed to hear personal stories from people like the council members so they would better understand what services and supports meant to people at the local level and how proposed cuts would affect them. Answering Mr. Necker s inquiry about whether 04AD had positions on the bills of interest to Restore Justice for Survivors, Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker said she would look them up and let Ms. Cline know. Mr. Ahlen was curious whether people in OPI who did not access Medicaid would be eligible for different services or have other options if they switched to Medicaid. Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker was unsure but said Medicaid required divesting of assets and many people were unwilling to do that or to give up the independence that OPI allowed. Ms. Malott suggested the Junction City mental health hospital could be funded with savings from the closure of two other behavioral health facilities. Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker said the Co-Chairs budget did not call for closure of the hospital but reductions and there was concern about where people would go if the facility closed. Council members indicated people would end up in jail which was a higher cost for the State. Ms. Thomas told a story about a woman who used to visit the Mission frequently and Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker said those were the kinds of things Legislators needed to hear. Answering questions, Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker said allowable uses for marijuana tax revenue were established in the ballot measure, with part of it going toward local drug abuse diversion. Other successful ballot measures dedicated revenue to specific areas like career technical education and veterans services. Ms. Beachy had heard that proposing a budget that no one would be happy with was intended to convince Oregonians of the need for new revenue. Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker cautioned that a super majority was required to raise new taxes and that discussion about taxes was politically fraught. Ballot Measure 97 had demonstrated that Oregonians did not like new taxes. She added that state agencies were supposed to be apolitical and most advocacy for new tax revenue came from teacher unions, school boards, and similar organizations. Government agencies relied on the voices of advocates to educate the public about what different choices meant. Responding to Ms. Cline s request for guidance on framing the council s discussion about advocacy planning, Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker said each council needed to decide what was best for it and

13 S&DS Joint Council January 20, 2018 page 3 she always encouraged starting with facts. It was useful to have facts at a glance on a card illustrating how allocated funds were spent: * how many people in Lane County received services through Medicaid, OPI or OAA; * what programs were offered; * how many meals were provided; * because of OPI how many people were able to stay at home in the community or receive homebased care instead of going to a nursing facility; * demographics of the county and people being served (age, gender split, etc.) * how many people on OPI were eligible for but not receiving Medicaid; Knowledge about service priority levels was helpful. It was important to develop a story and use one or two to represent what local services helped people improve their quality of life. Honing in on a couple of messages, being focused and specific with all voices speaking together carried lots of weight and was impactful. Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker left the meeting at 12:33 p.m. 4. Legislative Priorities Update and Discussion This had been covered under the previous item. 5. Spring Advocacy Planning Ms. Cline passed out copies of the Fiscal Year Senior & Disability Services Information & Assistance booklet and said it described each program and included all the numbers mentioned by Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker. She also made available copies of the 04AD Advocacy 101 Handbook and asked those attending the upcoming webinar to bring the handbook with them. By consensus the group supported staff sending a copy of the brochure to each of the Lane County Legislators along with a letter signed by the chairs of the SSAC and DSAC that invited the Legislator to a future meeting and provided S&DS contact numbers. Ms. Cline confirmed the Day at the Capitol would be May 17 and as mentioned by Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker the priorities this year were not separate bills but were budget oriented and focused on preserving, protecting, and prioritizing the needs of seniors and people with disabilities. Members of DSAC had voted to support asking the LCOG Board for permission to support a couple of bills that would remove the cap on damages to individuals who had been injured as a result of others wrongdoing. Responding to Mr. Necker s question, Ms. Cline said as it had in the past the group needed to formally establish its priorities. Mr. Necker indicated that OPI, Equity and the budget were the main priorities.

14 S&DS Joint Council January 20, 2018 page 4 Commenting that she was dressed in black for a reason, Ms. Rogers wondered whether the priorities could change as a result of something happening at the Federal level. Ms. Cline responded that any significant changes were expected to be slow moving and not likely to have an impact during this legislative cycle but she allowed for the possibility that something could happen that would cause her to contact council members to tell them she had been wrong. No one could predict the impact or timing of the potential repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Ms. Zammarelli reported the Oregon Health Authority had indicated business would continue as usual and the waiver for the Federal contract for Medicaid was good for five years. The CCOs wold continue improving people s health with more screening and services people needed, costs would continue to decrease because of fewer hospitalizations and less emergency care. To her the big question was funding and Medicaid expansion but she expected significant reductions to require about a two year process and she was hopeful that Oregon would find a way to keep people insured to reduce the costs of not seeking medical attention when it was needed. Ms. Malott suggested contacting Representative DeFazio and Senators Wyden and Merkley about supporting a bill that would allow Americans to buy pharmaceuticals from Canada where she said they cost 50 percent less than in the US. Mr. Necker explained more about Equity by saying that the State operated S&DS in Lane County as a type B agency that was paid 95 percent of what the State paid its employees for doing the same work. Each session one of the priorities had been to advocate for local agencies being paid an amount similar to what the State paid itself. While still not equal, 95 percent was better than it had been in the past and this needed to be reinforced so it was maintained. Ms. Thomas said she had some ideas about having Legislators spend a day simulating life as a disabled person. Because some people could not get to Salem to meet with Legislators she suggested being s or conducting a postcard campaign. MOTION: Mr. Necker moved, seconded by Mr. Basey, to establish Equity as he had defined it, budget, and OPI as the S&DS advisory councils legislative priorities. Ms. Cline stated that DSAC had approved the Restore Justice for Survivors efforts on Senate Bill 487 and House Bill 2129 as a priority but SSAC needed to approve that for it to be an agency priority. Mr. Necker amended his motion to add the Restore Justice bills as a priority, contingent on the approval of the SSAC. Mr. Basey did not object and the amended motion carried unanimously. Ms. Thomas stressed the importance of working collaboratively with people already lobbying for the priorities like Ms. Palmateer Hazelbaker. 6. Next meeting: March 17, Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 12:55 p.m.

15 S&DS Joint Council January 20, 2018 page 5 (Minutes recorded by Mary Feldman)

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27