Judge: RI Must Expand DD Budget Or Risk Olmstead Consent Decree Noncompliance

By Gina Macris

Judge McConnell

Rhode Island will not be able to meet a 2024 deadline for complying with a 7-year-old civil rights agreement unless it begins allocating money now to attract an adequately-paid, skilled workforce to serve adults with developmental disabilities in their communities.

So says Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court in a nine-page order issued March 16 clarifying what it will take to comply with a 2014 consent decree correcting Rhode Island’s violations of the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).

Five days ago, on March 11, Governor Daniel McKee submitted a state budget request to the General Assembly that does not propose any rate increase for direct care workers. These workers are employed by the private agencies the state relies on to carry out provisions of the 2014 Olmstead consent decree.

Under the current rates, providers are able to pay front-line workers an average of $13.08 an hour, or $1.58 above the state’s minimum wage of $11.50, McConnell said in the statement, which amounted to a tutorial on the issues affecting compliance.

The $11.50 rate went into effect last October, and McConnell pointed out there are bills pending in the General Assembly for additional raises.

“The functions and responsibilities of staff who provide direct support to adults who have intellectual and developmental disabilities are significantly more challenging than many minimum wage positions,” McConnell said.

In several states the pay of direct support staff is considerably higher than minimum wage, he said. Utah, for example, has set its direct care rate at 72 percent above minimum wage.

He drew a straight line connecting low wages, high turnover, and an inability of the provider agencies to find a well-trained, stable workforce capable of providing an array of services that will enable adults with developmental disabilities to live meaningful lives in their communities in accordance with the ADA’s Integration Mandate.

One in five jobs in private agencies are currently vacant, and agencies report an average annual turnover of about 30 percent, according to a survey by an independent court monitor conducted in February. In addition, 80 percent of adults and families who direct their own programs said they had difficulty finding staff, and 68 percent said they had difficulty retaining staff, according to the monitor.

McConnell’s latest statement underlined an order he issued Jan. 6 which requires the state to raise workers’ wages to $20 an hour by 2024 as part of a comprehensive overhaul of services from center-based group care to one-on-one or one-to-two staffing in the community.

He said the state must collaborate with service providers and advocates in the community to develop a three-year budget strategy for compliance with the consent decree and give him monthly progress reports at the end of April, May, and June.

The judge cited a 2020 report of the state’s own consultants that concluded the provider agencies are financially “fragile and profoundly undercapitalized.”

McConnell also felt it necessary to say that the “entirety of the State” is a party to the consent decree, not merely the state agencies identified in the document.

The McKee administration and the leadership of the House and Senate had no immediate comment on McConnell’s order.

The judge reminded the state that the findings of the U.S. Department of Justice in 2014 cited “multiple concerns” about the state’s failure to comply with the Integration mandate.

Among them were:

• A lack of resources

• Failure of the state’s rate-setting methodology and reimbursement model to promote integrated supported employment and day services

• The inflexibility of the state’s reimbursement model.

McKee’s budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 includes a proposed $15 million “transformation and transition fund,” but it’s not clear exactly what that money will pay for.

There are five committees already working under the supervision of the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals on proposed administrative reforms.

But McConnell has signaled he wants the planning complete by the end of June and the implementation to begin at the start of the new fiscal year in July.

He also noted that the integration mandated by the consent decree are also required by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services if the state is to continue qualifying for federal Medicaid reimbursement under the Home And Community-Based Services (HCBS) Final Rule. Like the consent decree in Rhode Island, that rule gets its authority from the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 1999 clarified the Integration Mandate of the ADA.

“Rhode Island is seven years into the Consent Decree,” McConnell said. (The eighth year begins April 9.)

“With three years remaining, there is significant work still to be completed,” he said in conclusion.

Click here to read Judge McConnell’s order of March 16.

Families Struggle While Federal Judge Awaits Progress Report On RI DD System Reform

By Gina Macris

Tonya LeCour, a teacher who is scheduled to return to work Sept. 1, also serves as the sole caregiver for a family member with developmental disabilities.

What will happen to her job if she can’t find daytime supports for the person who depends on her?

LeCour was among several participants who sounded similar concerns at a virtual forum hosted online by the Rhode Island Division of Developmental Disabilities Aug. 17, with technical assistance from the Rhode Island Parent Information Network.

The comments reprised the July 30 testimony of Carol Dorros, M.D., who told Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court of her experience caring for her adult son with developmental disabilities fulltime, and her inability to practice medicine, since the COVID-19 pandemic hit Rhode Island in March.

Those familiar with the developmental disabilities community say they believe there are hundreds of people facing wrenching stituations similar to those described by Dorros and LeCour.

Rhode Island is now days away from a court-imposed deadline of August 30 – the first of six such target dates – to outline its strategies for shoring up the developmental disabilities system in the short term and ensuring it complies in the long run with a 2014 consent decree seeking to enforce the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The court’s review comes against the background of strained state finances.

The state budget office has sent a memo to all department heads, including A. Kathryn Power, director of the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) to submit budget proposals for the next fiscal year that cut overall spending by 15 percent.

In a statement, a spokesman said “BHDDH, like all state departments, is working with its financial team and program managers to assess all options in meeting the 15 percent reduction in FY 22 spending, per the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) guidance.”

At the same time, the state Division of Developmental Disabilities has convened several “workgroups” to tackle the issues, and, according to McConnell’s order, is expected to submit a report Aug. 30 that will “describe the process or strategy” for addressing the problems, the timeline for resolving them, and the particular agency or agencies responsible for each item. ( Update: The report was submitted to an independent court monitor, A. Anthony Antosh, who said it was under his review the week of Sept. 6 and would be submitted to the court when the review is finished.)

The developmental disabilities issues are complex. They include include reimbursement rates keyed to staffing ratios that were designed for congregate care and do not translate well to community activities.

For example, the reimbursement structure may require a support person to take along five people with the same budget authorization on a community activity, whether or not their needs or interests fit into the purpose of the outing. Conversely, staffers may have to jump through hoops to come up with an activity that will appeal to all members of the group.

People receiving services may opt for one-on-one assistance, but that decreases the number of service hours during the week. A typical funding authorization for one person translates into about six hours a week of one-on-one help, according to calculations of the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island, a trade association.

In re-shaping the system, the state has at its disposal a recently-completed 134-page report from the New England States Consortium Systems Organization (NESCSO), which was hired more than 18 months ago at a cost of $1.1 million to conduct a comprehensive study that grew out of increasing demand for a review of rates paid to private providers of developmental disability services.

At the request of BHDDH, NESCSO’s consultants did not make specific recommendations but conducted an exhaustive assessment of the current y situation and presented options for change that the state might consider.

NESCSO described the financial position of the three dozen agencies providing services as “tenuous,” re-affirming interim findings made before the pandemic hit.

The report suggested that an increase in long-term employment among adults with developmental disabilities could save the state millions of dollars in the long run that would otherwise be spent on daytime supports.

However, increasing employment, a goal of the consent decree, would require an up-front investment in employment-related supports and retaining the staff necessary to carry them out.

NESCSO estimates that a 33 percent increase in wages, now an average of $13.18 for front line workers, will result in a 50 percent reduction in turnover, which ranges up to 58 percent in some agencies.

BHDDH has not made any public comment on the report.

In the meantime, service providers seem to be keeping a lid on the pandemic in group homes but are struggling to provide scaled-up daytime supports that meet safety guidelines under the current funding structure.

As of Aug. 25, a total of 164 group home residents had tested positive since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, three more than reported July 21. Of that total, 48 have been hospitalized and 10 have died, according to a BHDDH spokesman. The numbers indicate that the five people who were hospitalized in late July have all been discharged. The most recent death was reported in June.

During the Aug. 17 public hearing, Kevin Savage, director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities, said, “we don’t want to just go back to doing things the old way.”

He offered to speak privately after the meeting with several individuals, including LeCour, the teacher, and a woman whose sister was in a group home and having problems eating as a result of the social isolation brought on by the pandemic.

Linda Ward, executive director of Opportunities Unlimited, chimed in with the providers’ perspective:

“It’s not about re-opening (daytime services) but meeting a person’s needs one person at a time,” she said. Funding limitations may dictate that individuals get one day a week of services, she said.

And there’s no “community” to access except for a socially distanced one, Ward said. Moreover,

staff are concerned about exposing themselves and their families to the virus, she said.

“I know that’s not helpful to families desperate for supports but we have to do it one at a time,” Ward said.

Meanwhile, the state’s finances, battered by the COVID-19 pandemic, remain in flux. Much could change before the budget is finalized for the 2022 fiscal year, which begins next July 1. The state budget director, Jonathan Womer, says as much in his memo to department heads dated Aug. 7.

In terms of developmental disabilities issues, Judge McConnell has ordered officials in both the executive and legislative branches, who hold the state’s purse strings, to participate “as needed” in a year-long review of 16 specific issues of concern, and to help find solutions to them.

BHDDH has held initial meetings of five “workgroups” to address issues raised in the judge’s order. In its most recent developmental disabilities community newsletter, the agency put out a call for volunteers interested in working on one of the five committees.

“We are looking for individuals receiving services and family members to participate in their choice of one of five workgroups to add their expertise and input into the system reform,” the newsletter said.

Anyone interested may email Cindy Fusco at Cynthia.Fusco@bhddh.ri.gov.

The newsletter described the workgroups as follows:

1. Eligibility Process Workgroup: This workgroup will look at the process for determining the support needs of each individual and the need to consolidate the application for all pertinent RI services into one process.

2. Appeals Process Workgroup: This workgroup will look at the appeals process for individuals as it relates to eligibility, level of need, or funding level, including the L9/S109 (appeals) process for requesting additional funding.

3. Individual Budgets and Authority Workgroup: This workgroup will look at the process and timeline for developing annual individual budgets responsive to individual needs, allowable costs, and flexibility.

4. Fiscal Workgroup: This workgroup will look at authorizatons, rates, and billing units.

5. Contracts Workgroup: This workgroup will look at the timeline and process by which individuals contract with providers, billing procedures, and how to increase individual control over their services and how their budget is spent.

COVID-19 Hits DD Group Homes In RI

By Gina Macris

A total of 23 adults with developmental disabilities in Rhode Island group homes — not quite 2 percent of all the 1180 adult residents in congregate care in the state — have tested positive for the coronavirus, as of April 9.

All but four of the residents live in homes run by private service providers licensed by the state. The four exceptions live in group homes of the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH), a departmental spokesman said April 9. He said eight BHDDH employees also have tested positive.

Of the 23 group home residents with confirmed cases, 9 were hospitalized the morning of April 10, the BHDDH spokesman said. The hospitalizations represent about 39 percent of all adults with developmental disabilities in congregate care who have become ill with COVID-19. That figure is more than four times the 9 percent of the coronavirus-positive population statewide that has required hospitalization, according to figures released by the office of Governor Gina Raimondo April 9.

Tina Spears, executive director of the Communitiy Provider Network of Rhode Island (CPNRI), said the proportion of hospitalizations among residents underscores the general vulnerability of the developmental disabilities population, although she added that she has not heard that any of those hospitalized are in critical condition.

The BHDDH spokesman, Randal Edgar, said: “Many DD group home residents are older and have medical conditions that make them more vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic. BHDDH is very concerned about their wellbeing and that is why we are working around the clock to do everything we can to provide care and monitoring and make sure they receive any medical services that are needed.”

Among support staff in the private sector, no more than two dozen have tested positive, but that figure is likely to change from day to day, Spears said April 10.

More than half of the two dozen provider agencies belonging to CPNRI, a trade association, have no infections among staff or participants, she said.

So far, providers are coping, Spears said, but more specific planning is needed to shore up the resources of the private agencies, which are stretched thin in normal times.

State Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, said the state needs a formal Emergency Response Plan to address the care of individuals with developmental disabilities who become ill. He said he is trying to organize a collaborative effort to drawing up such a plan.

Among the unanswered questions: What happens in a surge of cases among group home residents, if too many staff also become ill and are unable to care for them?

All agencies have adopted aggressive cleaning protocols – sometimes as frequent as every four hours – and other strict precautionary measures, like body temperature checks, in cases where individuals are particularly vulnerable, but the providers are primarily acting on their own initiatives rather than as part of an official directive.

Efforts are made to quarantine group home residents who have tested positive and those who may have come into contact with the virus but have not been tested. In addition to stepped-up cleaning protocols, group home operators control traffic patterns within a facility and assign only designated staffers to the individuals under quarantine and those who have tested positive.

Staffers who may have come into contact with someone who has tested positive outside of their work assignment rare instructed to self-quarantine at home for two weeks.

On April 7, the office of Governor Gina Raimondo announced a 10 percent increase in developmental disability reimbursement rates for residential services. The rate increase, retroactive to April 1, is set to expire June 30.

The rate increase “recognizes the additional costs organizations are facing related to the COVID-19 crisis,” according Edgar, the spokesman for BHDDH.

“The Governor, EOHHS (the Executive Office of Health and Human Services) and BHDDH are committed to meeting the needs of our state’s most vulnerable residents and supporting our providers,” Edgar said in a statement.

“Our intention is to help provide stability to our state’s DD (developmental disability) providers through this rate increase as well as the recent “retainer payments” (advance funding) which went into effect last week,” the statement said.

Spears, however, said the rate increases apply only to a small portion of the rate structure, while the crisis has had an impact on all operations, including daytime programming, and has resulted in unprecedented costs that threaten the viability of the private provider system.

For example, some agencies have had to offer double-time pay to incentivize employees to work in group homes where there has been an infection.

“There’s no way” they will get coverage if staff are “not incentivized to take the risk,” she said.

But state officials “are working with us at this point,” Spears said. “We’ll take them at their word,” she said.

For weekly updates on COVID-19 from BHDDH, sign up for the newsletter of the Division of Developmental Disabilities by clicking here.

RI DD Providers Seek Rate Hikes To Cope With Unprecedented Costs and Risks To Workers

By Gina Macris

Rhode Island’s providers of developmental disability services can expect help from state coffers as early as this week to compensate for losses resulting from the coronavirus, but those emergency payments are no more than the private organizations would have received if they had been able to conduct business as usual, according to the General Assembly’s chief advocate for people with disabilities.

The state’s developmental disability agency announced March 26 that $15.4 million has been set aside for up front “retainer payments” to private service providers over the next three months, including $7.4 million in state revenue and the rest in federal Medicaid funding.

State. Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, says providers need more money, and a trade association representing them has asked for an hourly wage increase of $4.55 for caregivers of adults with developmental disabilities, who tend to be at greater risk than the average population for becoming infected with the coronavirus.

The hike, to an average wage of $17.73 an hour, would greatly narrow the pay gap between privately-employed direct care workers and those in state-run group homes, who now make a starting wage of $18.75, with state employee benefits, for the same work.

Meanwhile, the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island has become involved in discussions between state human services officials and the federal Medicaid program in an apparent effort to get federal relief for people and support staff in the developmental disabilities system, among other segments of the population that rely on Medicaid. The most concrete evidence of the Court’s involvement is an order issued by Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. March 27 which seals “until further notice” seven draft documents having to do with the state’s Medicaid plan.

DiPalma, learning of the titles of the documents in the court order, said in a telephone interview that the news they were sealed surprised him, because the documents were shared among leaders in the developmental disabilities community for comment a week ago in lieu of a public hearing, given the unprecedented emergency of the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing rules imposed by Governor Gina Raimondo.

The crisis threatens the viability of the private developmental disabilities system, which is the backbone of the state’s efforts to comply with a 2014 civil rights consent decree mandating integration of adults facing intellectual challenges in their communities. McConnell oversees implementation of the consent decree, which runs through 2024.

Daytime activities linked to compliance with the consent decree have shut down, and provider agencies have been forced to lay off staff because the employers can’t bill the state for the services. A spokeswoman for CPNRI, the trade association, could not immediately say how many layoffs have occurred.

Some agencies are estimating losses for the month of March up to $198,000, said the CPNRI spokeswoman, executive director Tina Spears. She said the losses are “destabilizing our ability to provide other critical services” throughout the crisis, with costs that exceed established funding levels.

Preliminary estimates from CPNRI members indicate their costs will exceed their annual budgets along a range from 2 percent to 20 percent, Spears said, although those figures will become clearer as each agency continues to track expenses.

On March 22, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services loosened its rules, inviting states to apply for relief through a variety of variances, including rate increases and up-front emergency or “retainer payments.” “Retainer payments” is a federal Medicaid term.

Spears, the CPNRI director, submitted the request for the $4.55 wage increase March 25 to the state’s acting Medicaid Director, Benjamin Shaffer. Spears represents about two thirds of the three dozen agencies operating in Rhode Island, but she said any wage increase should apply to all developmental disability service providers, and to families who hire their own staff for loved ones. Spears said Pennsylvania’s retainer payments have built-in rate increases up to 40 percent, while Connecticut hiked rates for group homes and other residential settings by 25 percent in its retainer payments. Day programs in Connecticut will get another 5 percent in the retainer payments.

Layoffs of day program staff in Rhode Island will put a big strain on the unemployment insurance of the agencies, most of which are self-insured, Spears said. While income from day programs has stopped, agencies still have the same fixed costs, as well as new ones, as their focus shifts to respond to the threat of infection in group homes and other residential settings.

Existing fixed costs include rent, leases on vehicles used in programs, insurance, utilities, professional services, software, leases on office equipment, telephone and communications costs, and other expenses, she said. Unanticipated costs include:

• Employees taking time off under the federal Family Medical Leave Act, because of a need for childcare and other family situations, requiring agencies to maintain health insurance for them.

• Steeper costs for providing direct care to clients, because higher-paid staffers are needed to augment the efforts of regular front-line workers. These other employees include supervisors, managers, clinicians and nurses. • Added costs for aggressive cleaning protocols, involving more time from outside specialty contractors and more work done by agency employees. Providers also have scoured the market for hand sanitizer, personal protective equipment, and other supplies.

At the state’s Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH), the outgoing Director of Developmental Disabilities, Kerri Zanchi, says she will stay on “for a little while longer” to support the coordination between operations and funding during the healthcare crisis. Kevin Savage, the new acting director, and Heather Mincey, who is in charge of division social workers, round out the division’s leadership.

Public Slams RI DD Funding Constraints

By Gina Macris

Funding for Rhode Islanders with developmental disabilities works against the individualized care that is at the core of the state’s vision for social services.

That was the assessment from families and developmental disability professionals who responded to an outside consultant’s call for public comment Nov. 5 about the rates and rate structure governing Rhode Island’s privately-run system of care.

Rick Jacobsen * All Photos By Anne Peters

Rick Jacobsen, a representative of the New England States Consortium Systems Organization (NESCSO), hosted an open-ended conversation with an audience of about 40 people during a public forum at the Barrington Public Library sponsored by the Rhode Island Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).

There is wide concern among families that “in many cases the funding doesn’t seem to be reflecting the support needs” of the individuals in question, said Claire Rosenbaum, who has a daughter with developmental disabilities and also works as Coordinator of Adult Services at the Sherlock Center on Disabilities at Rhode Island College.

Claire Rosenbaum

Rosenbaum said Individuals with varying needs seem to be assigned the same middle-of-the-road funding, according to what she has heard anecdotally in her position at the Sherlock Center.

Much of the discussion focused on the fee-for-service reimbursement system called Project Sustainability that the state implemented in 2011. The state uses a highly scripted interview process, called the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS) to determine the support needs of each adult approved for developmental disability services. Then a closely held algorithm is applied to the SIS score to come up with one of five funding levels for each person.

The core issue is “how you get from the (assessment) score to the level of funding,” said Cliff Cabral, vice president of Seven Hills Rhode Island, a service provider. That process is a “complete mystery,” he said.

Cliff Cabral

He pointed out that the developer of the assessment, the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, did not intend it to be used as a funding tool.

And Cabral noted that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has criticized the seeming conflict in having the same state agency both performing the SIS assessment and controlling funding for individuals’ services.

“The need to keep consumers’ resource allocations within budget may influence staff to administer the SIS in a way that reaches the pre-determined budgetary result,” the DOJ said in findings that led to a 2014 consent decree with the state to reform disabilities services.

BHDDH is having a series of community conversations about outsourcing individual service planning and case management functions to a third party to comply with federal conflict-of-interest rules, but some who have attended these sessions say they understand that the parameters of the discussion do not include an outside entity taking on the SIS assessment.

Asked for comment after the forum, BHDDH has issued a statement which said that the discussion around the third-party Health Home “has included an expressed interest in a fire wall between assessment and funding. In these discussions, which are informing the case management redesign, BHDDH has agreed to consider future assessment responsibility.”

If the assessment were put in the hands of a third-party, it would relieve the tension, said Mary Beth Cournoyer, who has a son with developmental disabilities.

In Novemeber, 2016, the SIS was updated and the interviewers were retrained. But at the Barrington forum, Claire Rosenbaum said the re-cast “SIS-A” is not very different than the old one. And parents, including Dorie Carder, whose 20 year-old son has developmental disabilities and a medical condition, reported that interviewers are still argumentative, challenging their perceptions of their children and trying to pull the answers to the questions in one direction or another.

Another problem cited at the forum involved appeals by familes and providers who disagree with the funding resulting from the SIS. Rosenbaum said the appeals require a “ton of staff time.” And she said they must be filed annually or every three months, depending on the situation.

Sue Joinson

Sue Joinson agreed, pointing out that the appeals also cost BHDDH social workers extensive time. Joinson, whose daughter has extensive medical needs, also has worked on appeals in her job as director of nursing at the Corliss Institute, a developmental disabilities service provider.

Dorie Carder, the parent with the 20-year-old son, said the first SIS she had was a “horrible experience.”

Dorie Carder

When she appealed the results, she faced off alone against a BHDDH lawyer and a social work supervisor, who challenged her on the medical details of her son’s case. Then, Carder said, she had to wait a year to get the results of the appeal. Still dissatisfied, she went to the Director of Developmental Disabilities, Kerri Zanchi, who ordered a new SIS interview that resulted in a better funding level.

Before the SIS was adopted in 2011, the state accepted a questionnaire called a personal capacity index, combined with a “situational assessment” of the individual in various settings, to come up with an overall evaluation of need, said Joanne Malise, executive director of Living Innovations, which specializes in supporting adults with developmental disabilities in shared living arrangements in private homes.

Connie and John Susa

At one point, John Susa, a parent and long-time advocate, turned the tables on Jacobsen, the consultant, and asked Jacobsen if he thought Rhode Island has a system where “the money follows the person”, meaning that funding is tailored to meet individual needs.

Jacobsen replied, “There are a lot of constraints that intervene with that” personalized funding.

The audience provided examples of the constraints:

• Agencies must bill for services in 15-minute increments for each person during the day and cannot bill for time if a client is absent for any reason, even though the agency must maintain the same level of staffing

• Transportation funding is limited to one round trip daily, not conducive to community integration

• Staffing for community-based activities is linked to specific ratios that depend on individuals’ funding levels, not to the desired destination of any one person.

• For families who direct a loved one’s individual program, money is forfeited if it is not used within the three-month period for which it is allocated, for whatever reason, including staff shortages or hospitalizations.

Joinson recounted how, on the one hand, her medically-fragile daughter’s social service allocation was unused while she was hospitalized, and on the other hand, her social worker pushed back against her attempts to get a residential placement for her daughter, saying that there wasn’t enough money and others had more pressing needs.

“He tried to make me feel guilty,” Joinson said of the social worker, but a residential placement is what her daughter wants. BHDDH is trying to limit high-cost group home placements and instead wants to increase the number of shared living arrangements in private homes, lower-cost options which families and providers alike say often do not work for those with extensive needs.

Meanwhile, Cabral, of Seven Hills, noted that most adults with developmental disabilities do not have families to advocate for them, leaving the agency to act as the family.

The agency cannot turn down the individuals the state refers for residential placement, but these referrals often need a high level of behavioral support that make them a bad fit with those already living in the agency’s group homes, Cabral said.

NESCSO’s consultants have spent months reaching out to service providers and Jacobsen said they still plan to do some site visits.

But Cournoyer urged Jacobsen and other NESCSO representatives do a “deeper dive” into specifics from the family perspective.

Jacobsen was asked what impact NESCSO’s recommendations would have on the system. He said NESCSO was hired to give BHDDH a range of options, from small changes to blowing up the entire system and putting a new one in place. But in the end, the “choice is not mine,” he said. Instead, BHDDH officials have reserved the right to decide which options to pursue - or not.

Whether NESCSO’s recommendations ultimately result in real improvements will depend on the advocacy of the community, he said.

Jacobsen said he spent 20 years working for Medicaid in Rhode Island and no one ever asked him “how to spend more money.” Quite the opposite, he said.

If BHDDH asks for more money, Jacobsen said, someone “beats them over the head.”

BHDDH was not represented during the discussion, which was recorded and posted on the Facebook page of RI FORCE, a family advocacy group. Asked to comment on the recording, the department provided this context:

“BHDDH has invested sizable resources into a rate review process to provide the needed analytics and options to support system transformation. The department is committed to quality, safety and access through its vision of individualized, person centered, self-determined and community-based supports.

We recognize that this vision requires system transformation. While the system has certainly made progress, the underlying reimbursement system remains grounded in past practices. The purpose of this rate review is to assess the costs of services and explore other models for reimbursement. This work must also extend to understanding the system as a whole for consideration of both structural efficiencies and complexities that could hinder or promote transformation. This work is in progress and this is why feedback and input from the community remains vital and welcomed.

While the department has demonstrated its responsiveness through modifications and investments within the current structure, we look forward to the completed analytics and options that NESCSO will deliver to support both near term and long-term changes.”