RI Governor Seeks Tens of Millions More For DD To Expand Community Services

By Gina Macris

This article has been updated

Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee has more than doubled the hike he is seeking from the General Assembly for developmental disabilities services in the next fiscal year. The overall funding increase is intended to expand opportunities for people to participate in community activities and increase the direct care workforce by offering higher pay.

A consultant for the state alluded to the funding hike during an April 27 hearing before Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the U.S. District Court, who heard a progress report on the state’s implementation of a 2014 consent decree intended to integrate adults with developmental disabilities in their communities. The amount of the increase was not mentioned in court but appears in updated documents on the website of the state budget office.

McKee originally earmarked $30.8 million to raise the minimum wage for direct care workers from $18 to $20 an hour to comply with a court order. The raises were to be part of a $385 million spending limit for private developmental disabilities services for the fiscal year beginning July 1.

On April 17, the state budget office raised the set-aside for raises to $75 million, including about $33.9 million in state revenue and about $25.8 million from federal funds in the federal-state Medicaid program. The budget amendmentes the new total for the private developmental disabilities system to $429.5 million.

The dramatic hike in funding anticipates a significant policy change that will allow private service providers to bill at higher rates on the assumption that all activities will involve supports in the community and will require more intensive staffing than center-based care.

Maintaining a regular gym schedule, attending an art or dance class, meeting a someone for coffee or going shopping are all activities most people take for granted, but those with developmental disabilities often need help with transportation and other supports to make these things happen.

The shift to 100 percent community-based services would eliminate the practice of budgeting for 40 percent of each client’s time in a day care center, which requires less intensive staffing but doesn’t offer people individualized or purposeful choices. A group cooking class, for example, may not succeed in teaching skills enabling participants to cook more independently at home.

The so-called “60-40” split between community and center-based care has been criticized by an independent court monitor overseeing the consent decree, who said the state must do everything it can to promote integration in the community to fully comply with the agreement.

The state’s consultant in a court-ordered rate review of Rhode Island’s developmental disabilities system explained the change in approach to daytime services during the April 27 hearing before Judge McConnell.

Stephen Pawlowski, managing director of the Burns and Associates Division of Health Management Associates, (HMA-Burns), said those who want center-based care may still choose it.

The recommendations of the HMA-Burns rate review, as well as the money to go with them, will need General Assembly approval before they go into effect July 1.

Feds Want Results

During the hearing, the independent monitor, A. Anthony Antosh, and a Justice Department lawyer, Amy Romero, applauded the administrative efforts of the state in recent months.

At the same time, they warned that full compliance with the consent decree will depend on results – more adults with developmental disabilities holding jobs and more community connections. And the deadline for full compliance is only 14 months away, June 30, 2024.

Romero, an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Rhode Island, previously raised concerns about the state meeting the 2024 deadline.

In the latest hearing, she commended the state for its efforts in the rate review process, but she also said the state must bring a sense of urgency to the push for more employment – one of the chief goals of the consent decree.

In frequent meetings with adults with developmental disabilities, she said, “meeting somebody with a job is the exception.”

“There are a lot of people out there who want to work and are not working,” she said. “It’s a missed opportunity with the employers themselves.”

The rate review would make employment-related supports available to everyone as an add-on to individual basic budgets.

Under the current rules, employment-related supports come at the expense of something else in the basic budgets. As a result, the number of overall service hours are reduced, because services like job development and job coaching cost more than other categories of support.

Since the consent decree was signed in 2014, the General Assembly has periodically earmarked separate funding for pilot employment programs in the developmental disabilities budget that don’t require individuals to give up service hours. The most recent one ended a year ago, shortly after the chief of employment services in the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) departed.

A new employment chief will start work May 8, according to a spokesman for the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).

Some adults with developmental disabilities have been able get around the restrictions of the basic budgets if they have a service provider who gets funding for job supports from the Department of Labor and Training, or if they can get help from the Office of Rehabilitation Services.

And some high school students with developmental disabilities have gone from internships to real jobs as they move on to adult developmental disability services, although they have been the exceptions.

A spokesman for the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) told the monitor, Antosh, that the agency is helping school districts plan revisions to transition services to put a greater emphasis on job-seeking.

Assessment Issues Remain

During the hearing, Antosh brought up another piece of unfinished business that poses a challenge for the state; figuring out how to apply the new rate structure so that everyone approved for services gets the supports they need.

The shift to community-based day services, by itself, will not achieve that goal, because of the way the assessment of individual needs is currently linked to funding.

Antosh said he continues to hear from families who are concerned about the accuracy of the assessment in its existing form.

The algorithm – or mathematical formula – used to turn the scores from the assessment into individual funding “needs to change,” he said. The assessment itself was not designed as a funding tool, but the developer, the American Association of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD), still allows many states to use it that way.

After Rhode Island began its rate review in early 2022, AAIDD announced it would spend the next year overhauling the assessment, called the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS).

The second edition of the SIS was not released until mid-March of this year, and the state won’t begin to use the revised assessment until June. After that, a sample of 600 assessments will be needed before officials can do the math in a systematic way to assign budgets.

With each assessment taking two to three hours per person, the process of collecting 600 sets of scores is expected to take about six months.

In addition, the way the second edition of the SIS is scored is substantially different than the first edition, said Pawlowski of HMA-Burns.

Heather Mincey, Assistant Director of DDD, said that going forward, the SIS will not be the only measure used to determine support needs.

The second edition of the SIS will come with supplemental questions to capture exceptional needs like behavioral and medical issues.

But Mincey said there will be an additional set of supplemental questions, as well as an interview with individuals and their families to determine if there is any support need the assessment missed.

Independent facilitators will work with the assessment results to help individuals and families plan a program of supports, and then the funding will be assigned.

Currently, the funding is assigned directly from the SIS scores, and services are planned to fit the budgets.

Antosh has said the existing approach does not allow for the individualization necessary to comply with the consent decree.

The individual facilitators, proposed by Antosh, would be trained in a “person-centered” approach that incorporates short-term and long-term goals into a purposeful program of services built around the preferences and needs of the individual involved.

The person-cantered approach is considered a “best practice” in developmental disabilities that preserves people’s right to lead regular lives in their communities in compliance with the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, which gives the consent decree its legal authority. The Olmstead decision reinforced the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The facilitators for person-centered planning have not yet been hired.

Mincey said the state is working with the Sherlock Center on Disabilities at Rhode Island College to develop a job description for the facilitators. They would not be state employees.

Governor’s Budget Amendments

In separate budget amendments on April 17, the Governor asked the General Assembly for additional funding to pay for the technology needed for them to do their jobs.

It calls for an information technology contract totaling $250,00 for so-called “conflict-free case management” to be implemented by the facilitators. All but $25,000 would be federal funds.

Antosh also asked Mincey what the state is doing to improve communication with families, who will have to absorb a considerable breadth of new information to take advantage of new opportunities in developmental disability services.

She highlighted the eight new positions being added to the staff of the Division of Developmental Disabilities who will focus on communication and training. All but one position has been filled, according to a BHDDH spokesman, Two have begun work, he added later.

Those new positions will cost $203,275 for the first full year, taking into account federal Medicaid reimbursements and savings from staff turnover in other positions, according to the governor’s original budget proposal.

The April 27 hearing serviced as an interim progress report as the state bears down on a court-ordered July 1 deadline to implement rate hikes and other administrative changes.

Antosh said he plans to write an evaluation of the state’s progress about mid-July. Judge McConnell said he will hold the next consent decree hearing about August 1. The exact date, later published by the court, is Tuesday, August 1 at 10 a.m, with public access available remotely.

The current developmental disabilities budget is $383.4 million, including nearly $352.9 million for the privately-run system and nearly $30.6 million for the state’-run group home network, which is not involved in the consent decree.

The governor’s revised budget for the current fiscal year would pare overall developmental disabilities spending to $377.3 million by June 30, including about $348.5 million for the private system and about $28.3 million for the state group homes, called Rhode Island Community Living and Supports (RICLAS.)

For Fiscal 2024, the total federal-state Medicaid funding would be $461.8 million for the private and state-run systems, according to the amended budget proposal. That total includes about $429.5 million for the private system and about $32.4 million for the state-run system.

Related content:

McKee’s original budget proposal is covered in an article here.

Pawlowski presented a PowerPoint on updated “rate and payments options” to the court that has been released by the state. Read it here.

Consent Decree Drives Proposed Hike In RI DD Spending

By Gina Macris

Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee would add more than $30 million to developmental disabilities spending to raise starting pay for direct care workers to $20 an hour, hike dozens of reimbursement rates to private service providers, and add ten new staff to help implement a 2014 consent decree.

The pay increase, costing $29.9 million in federal-state Medicaid funding, would be the third annual hike intended to help private agencies and the so-called “self-directed” population managing their own service programs. The wage increase would comply with a federal court order that dates back two years.

In 2021, when the starting wage for direct care workers was $13.18 an hour, Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. ordered the state to raise wages to $20 an hour by 2024, calling a lack of staff the single biggest barrier to implementing the day-to-day requirements of the consent decree, albeit not the only one.

In 2022, with pay raised to $15.75 an hour, the Rhode Island system added 106 new direct care workers from January through June.

On July 1, 2022, the starting pay increased again to $18 an hour, and the state, prodded by the court, launched a workforce initiative to recruit candidates for direct care jobs. In September alone, the system filled 146 vacancies, according to data collected by an independent court monitor.

Yet there were still 693 vacancies in some three dozen private agencies and as many as 1,000 job openings among self-directed consumers and families, the monitor reported in early November.

overview of proposed DD spending - RI Department of Administration

In all, McKee seeks a total of nearly $417.4 million for all developmental disability services in the fiscal year beginning July 1, including slightly more than $385 million for the privately-run system, the backbone of consent decree compliance. That figure for private agency and self-directed services represents a bump of about $32.2 million over the current allocation of about $352.9 million.

A parallel network of state-run group homes would get $32.4 million in the next budget, or almost $1.8 million more than the current funding level of $30.8 million.

The budget for the next fiscal year, July 1,2023-June 30, 2024, will finance the state’s final push to comply with the consent decree before the deadline on June 30, 2024.

The state agreed in 2014 that by mid-2024, it would eliminate sheltered workshops paying sub-minimum wages and move away from isolated day care centers. Instead, there would be a de-centralized network of individualized services enabling adults with developmental disabilities to become integrated in their communities.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has said that Rhode Island will likely miss the 2024 deadline if it moves at the current pace. The DOJ cited numerous factors contributing to a lack of services, particularly the individualized services in the community that are the cornerstone of the consent decree. A far-reaching federal court order issued Dec. 6 lists some 50 requirements that must be completed by the deadline on June 30, 2024.

McKee wants the new consent decree implementation staff on board as early as possible.

A spokesman for the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) said the department hopes to complete the hiring process by the fourth quarter, which runs from April through June. The cost for these added workers would be $203,275 for the first full year, taking into account federal Medicaid reimbursements and savings from staff turnover in other positions, according to McKee’s executive summary of the spending plan.

Eight of the ten positions will be permanently added to the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD), the BHDDH spokesman said.

The DDD jobs include:

• an “interdepartmental project manager”

• a “chief of staff for development training and continuous quality improvement”

• ·an “associate administrator for community services”

• five positions promoting community development as it relates to adults with developmental disabilities

The salaries will range from $66,162 to $95,552 a year, the BHDDH spokesman said.

Two other employees not attached to BHDDH will help implement an outside consultant’s recommendations for reimbursement rates for private providers.

Undertaking a rate review itself was part of a court order issued in October, 2021. Consultants disclosed preliminary recommendations last September that called for increases ranging from about 25 percent to 97 percent in dozens of reimbursement categories to private providers.

But McKee said in an executive summary of the budget that the consultant’s report is “currently under review and may further increase the recommended amount of financing” allocated to the private developmental disabilities system.

Among other actions, the Dec. 6 court order requires the state to identify successful pilot programs promoting integration that have been developed by private service providers during the past year and make those programs available to all those who want them, regardless of the way consultants have structured reimbursements to the private sector.

The consent decree has brought more transparency to budgeting by generating pressure on the General Assembly to include adults with developmental disabilities in the biannual caseload estimating conference, a public process used to project the state’s obligations for public assistance, like food stamps. Developmental disability costs were added in 2021.

The most recent caseload estimating conference, in November, projected there will be $8.5 million less in reimbursements to private service providers than budgeted for the current fiscal year because the population is expected to use fewer support services than initially budgeted.

McKee’s proposal takes the caseload estimating conference projections into account, as well as other related costs, in reducing developmental disabilities services by about $4.4 million, from about $352.9 million to about $348.5 million, in the current fiscal year.

The caseload estimating conference also highlighted the fact that consumers and families often must appeal individual budget allocations to get needed services – a feature of the current reimbursement system which the federal court has cited as a weakness.

Projections for the current fiscal year include $22.8 million in successful appeals, or $5.8 million more than budgeted. An independent court monitor has said consumers should not have to make lengthy appeals to get the individualized services to which they are entitled.

The consent decree draws its authority from the Supreme Court’s Olmstead decision, re-affirmed the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act, requiring public services for all persons with disabilities to help them lead regular lives in the their communities.

Developmental disabilities funding makes up about two thirds of the overall BHDDH budget, which is currently funded at about $597.1 million. McKee would raise the BHDDH total to about $619.6 million in the next fiscal year, with more than half the revenue coming from federal Medicaid reimbursements.

BHDDH Invites Public Comment On Rate Review

By Gina Macris

Beginning Sept. 28, the public will have a chance to comment on preliminary recommendations of a consultant’s long-awaited review of rates paid Rhode Island’s private providers of developmental disability services.

The court-ordered rate review is expected to address several barriers to the state’s compliance with a 2014 civil rights consent decree. The agreement requires the state to provide individualized services enabling adults with developmental disabilities to integrate with their communities in accordance with the Americans With Disabilities Act.

That goal means that, among other changes, the the state must offer more competitive rates to private service providers to enable them to greatly expand their direct care workforce.

The Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) has announced that its consultant will present its initial recommendations in two online meetings Sept. 28 and 29. The public will have until Oct. 21 to submit comments.

The two online presentations will be facilitated by officials of the Burns & Associates Division of Health Management Associates, (HMA-Burns) the healthcare consultant BHDDH hired to conduct the review. The public may attend both sessions, but each one will have a different focus, with the first including technical details of interest to service providers and the second aimed at consumers, their families, and other interested persons.

A BHDDH spokesman said there will be no pre-registration or meeting passcodes for either of the two events, to be hosted on the Zoom platform.

The schedule:

• Session #1: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 12:30pm – 3:00pm

• Link: https://healthmanagement.zoom.us/j/92956195995?pwd=eGl4eXNoTGRMNDI 4bThoemR2TC9UUT09

• Session #2: Thursday, September 29, 2022 1:30pm – 3:30pm

• Link: https://healthmanagement.zoom.us/j/91070802990?pwd=VnM1Q0dDbUNKYl NDRDYxS3J5TitpUT09

After Sept. 29, the public will be able to view recordings of the meetings, access rate review materials, and find instructions for submitting comments on the BHDDH website at https://bhddh.ri.gov/developmental-disabilities/initiatives/rateand-payment-methodology-review-project.

The recommendations of the rate review will be finalized after the conclusion of the public comment period.

The rate review was timed to enable the state to use it in formulating the annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023.

RI DD Rate Review: "Refresh" Or "New Analysis" of Project Sustainability?

By Gina Macris

Under court order, Rhode Island is conducting a comprehensive review of how it provides services for adults with developmental disabilities – a study that could have a profound effect on the quality of their lives.

Will the rate review go far enough to realize the goal of a 2014 consent decree – a system of services individualized enough to enable persons with developmental disabilities to become integrated in their communities?

In seeking a consultant for the rate review, the state said it wanted to “shift toward a system of community based supports that promote individual self-determination, choice and control.”

In the end, the state’s evaluation committee selected the firm that offered “more a refresh of a prior model than a new analysis,” Health Management Associates, the parent company of Burns & Associates (HMA-Burns). Under an independent corporate structure more than a decade ago, Burns & Associates helped the state create the problematic reimbursement system now in place, called Project Sustainability.

With completion of the study not expected until December, it’s too early to tell what the final recommendations might look like.

But the selection process suggests the state does not want to stray too far from the structure of Project Sustainability.

One of the three finalists for the rate review, Guidehouse Inc., said as much in its proposal:

“Guidehouse assumes in our proposed approach that BHDDH is not looking for an overhaul of those mechanisms now in place.”

While there have been some changes in Project Sustainability, a federal judge has found that that some of its features amount to administrative barriers to the system of individualized, integrated services required by the 2014 consent decree.

Those barriers, which are expected to be addressed in rate review, include

• A lack of individualized budgeting

• Exhaustive documentation of staff time with each client that detracts from services and is a costly burden for providers

• Staffing ratios that make integration in the community challenging

The state scored five bidders in two categories. Before cost could be considered, a four-member committee conducted a technical evaluation, valued at 70 percent of the overall score, which determined how closely the submissions matched objectives of the state’s request for proposals. Three firms, Guidehouse, Milliman and HMA-Burns exceeded the minimum of 60 points to be considered finalists.

HMA-Burns scored 61 points in the technical evaluation, one more than the 60 points necessary to qualify.

The evaluation committee found the HMA-Burns approach was “clearly defined, and the data approach is strong. However the methodology seems more a refresh of a prior model than a new analysis.” The proposal also “has a continuation of ‘buckets’ for funding rather than a robust approach to individual budgeting,” the committee said.

By comparison, the committee said Guidehouse, the top scorer, had an “engaging proposal, well written, visually engaging with good content.” There was also a “wide range of relevant experience, including recent experience assessing self-direction. (families and individuals designing their own service programs.)”

Among other things, the committee noted that Guidehouse had a “good understanding” of supplementary needs assessments that could lead to more accurate budgeting and reduce appeals that have resulted in the award of millions of dollars annually for supplemental services to which adults with developmental disabilities were entitled.

The cost proposals counted for 30 percent of the overall evaluation, but the committee did not score the originals from the three finalists. The original bids were:

• HMA - $339,680 - 1,516 hours

• Guidehouse - $499,350 - 2,235 hours

• Milliman - $1,203,181 - 4,628 hours

In its evaluation memo, the committee expressed concern that the bids reflected too much of a variation in the effort that would be devoted to the project. It did not interview the vendors, a common practice among public purchasing officials.

Instead, the committee asked for a second round of bids for a project that would encompass 3,000 hours, which the committee said would be sufficient to complete the rate review.

The results:

• HMA- $490,875

• Guidehouse - $670,290

• Milliman - $773,4000

After the second round of bidding, HMA-Burns tied with Guidehouse in the overall scoring but remained the lowest bidder. The final decision was made on the basis of cost.

ISBE MEANS A SMALL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE OWNED BY AT LEAST ONE PERSON WHO IS A WOMAN, MINORITY OR HAS A DISABILITY

During two meetings encompassing the evaluation process, the four-member committee awarded a single score in each category for each proposal through a collective group decision, or consensus, rather than individual scoring.

Individual, independent scoring is recommended as a “best practice” by the Center for Procurement Excellence. The Center is a non-profit organization that promotes education and training of pubic procurement officers and excellence in solicitation practices.

Members of the evaluation committee were Kevin Savage, Director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities; Anne LeClerc, Associate Director of Program Performance at BHDDH; Marylin Gaudreau, Data Analyst II at BHDDH, and Ashley Bultman, Senior Economic & Policy Analyst in the Office of Management and Budget at the Department of Administration.

In the end, the second round of bidding narrowed the range between the lowest and highest cost proposals but their relative positions didn’t change. Nor did the evaluation committee gain any additional information about the differing approaches.

In their cover letters with the second bids, both HMA and Guidehouse reiterated that they believed the work could be done in less than 3,000 hours.

Milliman, on the other hand, stated again that it believed the rate review would take more time. In fact, the letter said that if they were chosen, they would have to revise their technical proposal to conform with 3,000 hours’ work.

Gomes, the DOA spokesman, said purchasing rules gave the committee the choice of scoring proposals individually and interviewing the finalists, but he did not say why the committee did not do so.

Asked whether the evaluation process was designed to steer the project to a refresh of Project Sustainability instead of a new analysis of the system, Gomes said: “The goal of a competitive bid is to retain the best services at the most competitive price.”

“The request for proposals process evaluates both the technical aspects of the proposal and the submitted cost,” he said.

“When there is a wide discrepancy in the cost proposals, the Division of Purchases and agency initiating the procurement will provide an estimated level of effort (i.e. number of hours needed to complete the scope of work) and ask the respondents to submit a best-and-final offer.”

He said a “best and final offer process” is described in state Rules and Regulations 220-RICR-30-00-6(D) and state law R.I. Gen. Laws § 37-2-20(b) read in conjunction with state law R.I. Gen. Laws § 37-2-19(d) and (e).

Consultant with Link to RI DD System Chosen To Recommend Fixes

By Gina Macris

This article has been updated.

The parent company of the healthcare consulting group Burns & Associates, instrumental in setting up the Rhode Island developmental disability system that led to a federal civil rights investigation, has been selected to help fix the problem.

Burns & Associates is now a division of Health Management Associates (HMA), which has been awarded a contract for a rate review expected to shape the state’s ultimate compliance with a 2014 consent decree.

Rhode Island’s Director of Developmental Disabilities, Kevin Savage, shared the news in a remote meeting Jan. 25 with a community advisory group on developmental disabilities that was created by the consent decree.

Savage did not disclose the cost of the contract or other terms of the agreement, except to say that he expected the review would be completed by the end of 2022 as part of the state’s court-ordered “Action Plan” for compliance by June 30, 2024..

Savage said HMA “won it ethically and fairly,” meeting all requirements of the state purchasing division. There were four other bidders.

Savage did not say whether anyone from the Burns & Associates division of HMA will work on the rate review. (Clarification: He did say no person who worked on Project Sustainability in 2010 and 2011 would return for the new review.)

HMA will engage with the developmental disabilities community in drawing up its recommendations, Savage said.

HMA’s connection with its Burns & Associates division will bring a lot of baggage to to the rate review.

A decade ago, Burns & Associates worked a year on a review that gave state officials the foundation for a new fee-for-service system called “Project Sustainability.”

State officials promoted Project Sustainability as a way of bringing equity and flexibility to the developmental disabilities system. But consumers, their families, and providers said the bureaucracy was nothing but a smokescreen for budget cuts.

Years later, the president of Burns & Associates said that while flexibility was the goal, the final version of Project Sustainability was shaped by intense pressure on BHDDH to control costs.

Going into the work, “we did not know what the budget was” for Project Sustainability, said Mark Podrazik, president and co-founder of Burns & Associates, who is now a managing partner in Health Management Associates. “We were not hired to cut budgets.”

In the final version of Project Sustainability, the state undercut Burns & Associates’ recommended menu of rates by 17 percent to 19 percent and used the bureaucracy built into the new system for a second round of cuts three months later.

For example, Burns & Associates recommended a starting rate of $13.97 an hour for front-line workers, effective July 1, 2011. By October the actual hourly rate was $10.66.

In 2014, the U.S. Department of Justice found that the system incentivized segregated care through sheltered workshops and day care centers in violation of the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act, which enshrined the righte of individuals with disabilities to choose to live regular lives in their communities, like everyone else.

The DOJ investigation resulted in the consent decree, which requires the state to overhaul its system to provide individualized, integrated services by June 30, 2024.

In 2018, Burns & Associates co-founder, Mark Podrazik, returned to Rhode Island to testify before a special legislative commission studying Project Sustainability at the behest of the commission chairman, State Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown.

Podrazik said he agreed because DiPalma was very persuasive and because he wanted to set the record straight on his firm’s role in Project Sustainability.

Overall, Podrazik said, Burns & Associates believed the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) had neither the capacity or the competence implement Project Sustainability or to carry out the mandates of the 2014 consent decree.

“I think people were a little shocked” by the requirements of the consent decree and the question of who would implement the changes, Podrazik said of the DDD staff in place at the time.

Podrazik worked for the state monitoring the spending of Project Sustainability funding until January, 2016. His firm was paid more than $3 million in all.

In 2018, Podrazik told DiPalma’s commission that working on Project Sustainability wore him down. He has since switched to working with hospitals, he said.

This is a developing story.

For complete coverage of Mark Podrazik’s testimony before the Project Sustainability Commission, click here.

For a history of Project Sustainability, click here.