McKee: RI DD Services Need $510.6 Million

By Gina Macris

RI Governor’s FY 25 Budget Proposal-

In a budget plan largely driven by the federal court, Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee has proposed $510.6 million in overall developmental disabilities spending for the fiscal year beginning July 1, about $41.5 million more than the General Assembly enacted for the current fiscal year.

Roughly 55 percent, about $283.4 million, of the proposed developmental disabilities budget would be reimbursed by the the federal-state Medicaid program.

At the same time, McKee seeks to close a projected deficit of $28.3 million in the current budget of $469.1 million as the state tries to integrate adults with developmental disabilities into their communities to comply with a 2014 consent decree with the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Much of the shortfall reflects upward cost adjustments made by the Caseload Estimating Conference (CEC), a budget-planning panel which meets twice a year, advising the governor in November and the General Assembly in May.

McKee also would add $2.9 million to the current budget, and $1.1 million in the next one, for “conflict-free case management,” not only to adhere to Medicaid regulations but to comply with the consent decree. Almost all that funding would come from the federal government.

State social workers from the Division of Disabilities will be assigned to check in monthly with those receiving services and their families to determine if their needs are being met, according to a BHDDH spokesman.

It is not clear whether – or how - this arrangement meets the expectations of an independent court monitor overseeing the consent decree changes. The monitor, A. Anthony Antosh, hasn’t issued a report since last August. Antosh has called for “independent facilitators” to help each individual develop a purposeful program of services and to keep track of how the plan works out.

Developmental disabilities programs account for more than $7 out of every $10 spent at the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH), which would get a total of $706.3 million in McKee’s proposal. McKee’s proposed budget for all state spending in the new fiscal year is nearly $13.7 billion.

The latest proposal represents nearly a third more funding for developmental disabilities than the $339.3 million the General Assembly approved just three years ago, in the spring of 2021.

Much of the investment, in recent years, has been used to hike wages for caregivers and their supervisors, for education and training, and for the development of innovative approaches to supporting adults with developmental disabilities.

In three steps since July, 2021, the state has raised the pay for direct care workers by about 49 percent, from $13.18 an hour to a minimum of $20 an hour, in keeping with orders from Chief Judge John J. McConnell of the U.S. District Court, who has been monitoring the state’s efforts to meet the requirements of the consent decree since 2016.

McConnell found that, apart from the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, historically depressed wages had led to an exodus of workers that prevented the state from offering employment and other services in the community as promised in a 2014 consent decree.

Beginning last July, the $20 minimum hourly rate for workers has been wrapped into a new reimbursement system for private agencies intended to accurately evaluate the needs of individuals, allow them bigger spending limits to get employment and other supports, and to implement administrative changes promoting integration in the community.

The ultimate impact of higher funding on the lives of adults with developmental disabilities remains to be seen. A decade after the state adopted an “Employment First” policy as part of the consent decree, the governor’s figures say that 24.8 percent of the population protected by the consent decree is working in the community, far short of the target 73 percent.

In November, BHDDH told the CEC that private service providers still don’t have the number of workers they need to offer employment-related services and community-based supports for all who want them. A BHDDH report called the shortage “critical.”

 Still, the state’s eye-opening investment in historically underfunded services during the last few years has begun to show results. While a big staff shortage remains, private agencies are beginning to see improvement in their ability to attract new workers.

The recent pay hikes, along with support from a statewide workforce initiative, helped private providers add 274 direct support staff between January and September of 2023, BHDDH officials reported in November.

McKee’s proposal for Fiscal Year 2025, which begins this July, includes nearly $462.4 million in reimbursements to the three dozen private agencies, or subcontractors, who serve as the backbone of the service system the state relies on to carry out the requirements of the 2014 consent decree.

These reimbursements also cover the cost of one-person programs managed by so-called “self-directed” individuals or families. The number of self-directed programs has grown to more than a quarter of the caseload of about 4,000 persons, in part because of the staff shortage at private agencies. Individuals and families, however, report the same kinds of problems finding qualified caregivers as the agencies, especially when it comes to securing employment-related services.

A separate line in the budget would allocate $15.6 million for other costs related to private services, according to a spokesman for the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).

These expenses include the salaries of state social workers and administrators assigned to clients of the private providers, as well as human resources support, building maintenance, information technology support, and contracts for electronic records and for education and training provided by the Sherlock Center at Rhode Island College, the spokesman said.

The state also maintains its own network of group homes, which McKee would fund with $32.6 million in the next fiscal year.

All together, these budget categories add up to nearly $510.6 million.

No additional wage increases are planned for the fiscal year beginning July 1, except for those who provide in-home services to adults with developmental disabilities and were included in a comprehensive Medicaid rate review conducted by the Office of the Health Insurance Commissioner (OHIC). For the in-home workers, the governor’s budget seeks about $844,000. The final OHIC report, issued last September, said that the developmental disabilities workforce will be part of the next rate review in two years.

Proposed $10M Cut In RI DD Spending Overshadows Reform Plans

By Gina Macris

Thursday’s initial briefing on Governor Daniel McKee’s proposed budget for adults with developmental disabilities highlighted a $15-million set-aside to plan changes in the system, in response to a federal court order enforcing a 2014 civil rights consent decree.

At the same time, the budget legislation submitted to the General Assembly later in the day, on March 11, shows that overall spending on developmental disabilities would be $10 million less than spent this year.

McKee proposes adding $476,573 to the current developmental disabilities allocation for a total of nearly $304.5 million in federal and state Medicaid money and miscellaneous other sources of funding to close out the current fiscal year June 30.

The budget bill for the next fiscal year cuts overall spending on developmental disabilities to $294.4 million. That total includes $5 million in federal funds and $10 million in state revenue earmarked in the budget for the $15-million “transformation and transition fund” to plan reforms to comply with the consent decree.

The spending cut reflects projected savings from phasing out the costly state-run group home system. Residents would be moved to less costly group homes run by private service providers, according to the budget plan.

But the private agencies, who were in a precarious financial position even before the onset of the COVID pandemic a year ago, have been reluctant to take on additional clients in recent years because the amount the state pays does not cover the actual cost of services, according to repeated testimony before House and Senate finance committees, as well as testimony in federal court.

The state’s own consultants, the non-profit New England States Consortium Systems Organization, highlighted the providers’ fiscal problems and the way the demands on them strained capacity as part of an exhaustive 18-month study completed last summer for the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).

The core long-term problem, exacerbated by COVID-19, is an inability to find workers for jobs that carry a high degree of responsibility but provide an average starting wage of about $13.18 an hour, less than some fast food and retail chains and less than Amazon, according to testimony before Chief Judge John J. McConnell of the U.S. District Court.

McConnell, who enforces compliance with a 2014 civil rights decree requiring the integration of adults with developmental disabilities in their communities, has ordered the state to raise workers’ wages to $20 an hour by 2024 as part of a comprehensive three-year overhaul of the developmental disabilities system.

The state budget indirectly controls how much the private providers can pay their workers by setting reimbursement rates for various services, but no money in McKee’s proposal is carved out for a rate increase.

Nor does it appear the McKee administration anticipates the heightened level of spending in the next several years that would support the kind of investment needed to comply with requirements of the consent decree to accommodate clients’ desire to be part of their communities, at work and at play. The consent decree gets its authority from the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

McKee’s budget summary anticipates costs for developmental disabilities services will increase 4 percent annually through 2026.

A 4 percent annual increase would come nowhere close to fulfilling the court-ordered hourly wage of $20 an hour which, according to one estimate, would require an budget hike exceeding 45 percent.

The budget summary indicates the state aims to save a net $11.4 million by transferring the operations of the state-run group home system to the privately-run system by October 1.

The state-run system, called Rhode Island Community Living and Supports, (RICLAS) is currently allocated $29.7 million to care for 116 group home residents. The budget summary says transferring RICLAS operations to the private group home system would save $19.2 million in federal-state Medicaid funds in the RICLAS account in the fiscal year beginning July 1.

At the same time, a total of $7.8 million would be added to the private provider system to care for the former RICLAS residents. The budget for the next fiscal year would still leave about $9 million in RICLAS through June 20, 2022. A BHDDH spokesman could not immediately say how long the RICLAS phase-out would take.

The $19.2 million cut in RICLAS would eliminate the equivalent of 50 full-time jobs, mostly from attrition or transfer, the BHDDH spokesman said. RICLAS caregivers are paid a minimum of $18 and receive state employee benefits.

The last time BHDDH announced plans to move large numbers of people in residential care, in 2016, it achieved only a small fraction of the savings the Office of Management and Budget had calculated.

Of 100 persons projected to move from group homes to less costly shared living arrangements in private homes during the first six months of 2016, only 21 made successful matches with families.

Instead of projected savings of $19.3 million, the state recouped a few hundred thousand dollars in that six-month period.

Between March, 2016 and July, 2020, the number of people in shared living arrangements increased from 288 to 399. Since then, the number has decreased to 378, according to BHDDH figures.

The $15-million transformation and transition fund would support a policy and planning effort to carry out reforms required for compliance with the consent decree, according to the budget bill.

BHDDH informed Judge McConnell in February that the changes would take 18 to 24 months to implement, with a target date of December, 2022.

According to the budget language, the fund will be dedicated to:

• Help providers “strengthen” their operations to “support consumers’ needs for living meaningful lives of their choosing in the community”

• Allow providers the chance to participate in a performance-based payment model

• Reduce administrative burdens for providers

• Invest in “state infrastructure” to implement and manage these initiatives

• Prepare for a new way of approaching budgeting of the developmental disabilities caseload in the future.

Beyond the language in the budget bill, there were no details immediately available from BHDDH on what the transformation and transition fund will pay for.

$15 M for RI DD Reform Planned In Next Budget

By Gina Macris

Rhode Island Governor Daniel McKee unveiled a budget plan March 11 that includes $15 million for structural reforms to services for adults with developmental disabilities in the next fiscal year.

Overall, McKee’s has proposed an $11.17 billion budget for Fiscal 2022 which promises to resolve a statewide $336 million deficit while protecting those hardest-hit by the pandemic and helping small business. McKee said the budget “protects Rhode Islanders through an unprecedented public health crisis and lays the foundation for a durable recovery.”

At a noontime virtual briefing for reporters, A. Kathryn Power, director of the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities, and Hospitals, said $10 million of the developmental disabilities reform effort will come from state revenue and another $5 million will be funded by the federal government.

She said BHDDH wants to create a “stronger provider community that is fiscally sustainable.” The reform efforts will increase opportunities for employment and other services for adults with developmental disabilities, she said.

Chief Judge John J. MCConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court has ordered the state to develop a three-year plan for overhauling privately-run services comply with a 21014 consent decree which requires Rhode Island to integrate adults with developmental disabilities in their communities in accordance with the Americans With Disabilities Act.

The developmental disabilities budget contains a separate $4.5 million allocation for “alternative placements” for adults with developmental disabilities who live in a state-run group home system called Rhode Island Community Living and Supports.

A ten-percent increase for shared living caregivers also will be in the budget, as part of another group of expenditures intended to encourage more home and community-based services as an alternative to residential care.

Additional information was not immediately available on budget details affecting those with developmental disabilities.

Olmstead Monitor: RI Needs Overhaul Of DD System To Comply With 2014 Agreement

By Gina Macris

During the next three years, Rhode Island must completely restructure its services for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities and increase financial support accordingly to fully comply with a federal civil rights consent decree by the 2024 deadline.

A. Anthony Antosh

That is the conclusion of an independent federal court monitor, A. Anthony Antosh, in an Oct. 7 report to Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court.

At McConnell’s direction, Antosh says he’s also working on a dollar figure for the cost of compliance, using an outside $1.1 million analysis of existing services commissioned by the state itself.

The state agreed, under the consent decree in 2014, to end its reliance on sheltered workshops and group day care centers and instead put adults with developmental disabilities in the driver’s seat when choosing a path in life, with an emphasis on regular employment and participation in community activities.

The last sheltered workshop closed in 2018, but many of the other goals of the consent decree have remained elusive, and Judge McConnell has grown impatient with a lack of funding he says is necessary to lay the foundation for compliance by the time federal oversight is scheduled to expire in 2024.

John J. McConnell, Jr.

“If anybody couldn’t tell, I am obsessed with the issue of funding as essential for us to get there,” McConnell said during a virtual hearing in July.

“If we don’t come up with a way to systemically support the (service) providers, then the whole thing will be meaningless,” McConnell said.

He has said he is prepared to tell the state to “find the money” to comply with the consent decree. State officials who control the purse strings must participate in the redesign of services, the judge has said.

In the most recent monitor’s report, Antosh set the tone for his recommendations by saying that compliance is “not found in a narrow analysis of the benchmarks of the Consent Decree, but is rooted in defining the structural changes that need to occur in order that the goals of the Consent Decree can be achieved.”

In bold print, he highlighted the fact that the outside analysis of the existing system found that most of the private service providers are “fragile and profoundly undercapitalized.”

In a separate report, the state responded to a court order that it address 16 fiscal and administrative barriers to the integration of people with developmental disabilities into their communities as mandated by the consent decree. The summary is the first of six progress reports the state must make to Judge McConnell by next June on its planning effort for long-range reform.

In its report, the state set a deadline of March, 2022 to overhaul its fiscal system. The changes include the elimination of three practices that for years have been identified as problematic by families and providers:

• staffing ratios that discourage community integration, so that in some cases, one worker must supervise up to five people on an outing, whether or not those people want to be there.

• documentation of staff time in 15-minute increments, which providers say diverts significant resources that otherwise could be used for direct services.

• Allocation of a certain percentage of services for segregated facility-based activities.

Alluding to the budget uncertainties caused by the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, the state’s seven-page summary cautions that the planning efforts are “dependent upon the continuation of current state staffing and budgetary levels.”

Monitor’s Budget For Reform Coming “Soon”

McConnell has asked Antosh to analyze current funding and make a dollars-and-cents recommendation for the cost of implementing the needed comprehensive changes.

Antosh said that report will be completed “soon.” He said he has begun that work, relying primarily on data drawn from an 18-month study done by the New England States Consortium Systems Organization (NESCSO) for the state’s disability agency.

The 143-page NESCSO study presented a number of findings and options for change but made no recommendations, at the behest of the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals.

Antosh said there is a need for systemic restructuring of existing services and supports, which are now “essentially based on group activities that occur in a blend of facility and community settings.”

The situation is exacerbated by a difficulty in recruiting and retaining high quality staff and by the COVID-19 pandemic, which in emphasizing the health risks of large gatherings has “reinforced the diminishing value of facility-based group services,” Antosh said.

The pandemic also has led to a setback in the progress made in the area of employment for adults with developmental disabilities. In June, as the state was beginning to reopen, only 31 percent of those who previously held jobs were still actively employed, Antosh said. (Some on furlough have since returned to work.)

Among work crews hired for large scale commercial cleaning or laundry operations and the like, only about half were working, he said.

The statistics underline a need for “new and intensified approaches to job development,” he said. “What is needed is a new model for providing supports that is more individualized, community based, and uses funds and supports from an increased variety of sources,” including the state’s Department of Labor and Training, Antosh said.

Family Hesitation About Integration

While the gears of state government are focused on moving Rhode Island into compliance with the federal government’s mandate of integrating individuals with developmental disabilities into the larger community, more than a third of the families with an adult son or daughter who would benefit say they oppose or are not yet convinced that the push toward employment is worthwhile.

The pandemic aside, significant numbers of families also express opposition or hesitation about their loved ones’ increased participation in community activities.

For Antosh, who included survey results of families as part of his report, the statistics underscore the need for adolescents to experience work-related and social activities in their communities as part of their education and for families to receive more information about the breadth of available opportunities.

It is perhaps most telling that among families of high school students, who are more likely than their older peers to have had internships and community experiences as part of their education, only 3 percent were opposed to jobs for their sons and daughters and 10 percent said they weren’t sure. Two thirds of families of adolescents said they believed the young people should have jobs as adults. Other parents of high school students – about one in five- said their son or daughter had to deal with other challenges before turning to employment. This is typically the case for those with chronic health problems.

Source: Monitor’s Report To U.S. District Court 10-7-20

The 2014 statewide consent decree draws its authority from the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act, which was reinforced by the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court said that states must deliver services to all persons with disabilities in the most integrated setting that is therapeutically appropriate, and it presumed that setting to be the community.

In 2014, the U.S. Department of Justice found that the state violated the Integration Mandate by funneling high school students from segregated educational programs with low expectations to a lifetime of isolation in sheltered workshops and day care programs. In signing the consent decree, the state agreed to correct the violations by 2024. (A preliminary case against the state and the city of Providence in 2013 was merged into the statewide consent decree a year ago after Judge McConnell found the city and its school department had turned around a segregated high school program for students with developmental disabilities, leaving only the state as the defendant.

Antosh outlined several overarching features of successful implementation of the consent decree, including these:

• Each person will have the supports necessary to enjoy a self-determined, self-directed life based on work and non-work activities in the community.

• Private provider agencies will have the funding, staffing and other resources they need to meet the support needs of all persons receiving funding through the Division of Developmental Disabilities.

• Every adolescent and adult with intellectual or developmental disabilities will have the information and guidance they need to navigate a simpler and more efficient system of services.

• All adolescents and young adults leaving school will have had enough transitional work-related and non-work experiences in the community to make informed choices about jobs and careers, as well as a plan to direct their own programs or sign on with a provider organization.

Antosh recommended that the state develop a three-year budget strategy, beginning July 1, 2021, to “stabilize” developmental disability services and provide sufficient funding to implement the consent decree.

The monitor’s recommendations include a new, formal role for the Department of Labor and Training (DLT), which until now has not been a part of the multi-agency state team responsible for official responses to the court.

Antosh said DLT should immediately join BHDDH, the state Department of Education, the Department of Human Services, and the Executive Office of Health and Human Services in working on consent decree compliance.

DLT also should include all teenagers and adults with developmental disabilities in the workforce initiatives it administers, the monitor said.

By Jan. 1, 2021, the state should create an “Employer Task Force” to promote employment of those with developmental disabilities, Antosh said. The task force would identify relevant workforce trends and advise state officials and provider organizations about ways to reach out to prospective employers and offer employers incentives and support.

By April 1, 2021, the state must identify every possible source of funding that could support the consent decree and describe ways these sources can be “braided” to support the various requirements of the agreement.

As for private providers, the backbone of the service system, Antosh set a deadline of April 30, 2021 for them to develop action plans for the future. There are 36 provider agencies, most of them offering both day and residential services. In their plans, providers should redefine the support area that will be their focus, address consent decree issues, make budget projections and include internal quality improvement programs.

Just as the state has established five workgroups to address fiscal and administrative problems, Antosh recommended the state create additional issue-oriented work groups whose members are drawn from the ranks of state officials and community organizations, like the Employment Force Task Force.

One group would develop strategies to stabilize the workforce by increasing salaries, elevating professionalism through training, and creating a career ladder.

Other groups would address specific plans for:

• putting individuals at the center of mapping out long range and short-term goals for their future and strategies for achieving them

• ensuring young people have a smooth transition from high school to adult services,

• creating new models for providing services and supports for employment and community-based activities.

• enhancing the use of technology as a support strategy

• Developing alternative transportation options, including stipends that allow individuals to arrange their own rides

• Improving outreach to families, including those speak languages other than English and come from diverse cultures.

To read the full monitor’s report, click here. To read the state’s report, click here.

Photos by Anne Peters

New RI BHDDH Director Cancels Plan For "Health Home" Case Management Model

By Gina Macris

This article has been corrected and updated.

A costly and controversial proposal for privatizing the management of individualized services for adults with developmental disabilities in Rhode Island has been axed by the new director of the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH).

The director, A. Kathryn Power, acted out of concern that the state would face a “financial cliff” after an initial start-up period almost entirely funded by the federal Medicaid program, according to a BHDDH spokesman.

The managed care initiative, which Medicaid has labeled a Health Home, would have created a third-party entity to plan, coordinate and monitor services on a person-by-person basis.

“Director Power was concerned whether the Health Homes initiative represented the right direction for consumers and families, as well as the Department, given the temporary nature of the federal funding,” said the spokesman, Randal Edgar.

The Medicaid program offers 90 percent federal funding Health Homes for two years, but after that, the state would be responsible for nearly half the cost of maintaining the Health Home. On Feb. 28, a BHDDH spokesman said that long-term, the Health Home would have cost the state about $5 million a year.

Throughout the past year, the Division of Developmental Disabilities “conducted extensive stakeholder engagement around the design” of a Health Home for adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities, the spokesman said. “The scope and the projected enrollments were then used to guide the proposed rate methodology and cost analysis,” resulting in future costs estimated at about $5 million, the spokesman said. (It was incorrectly stated in an earlier version of this article that BHDDH had not calculated the long-term dollar amount that the state would have borne before Power cancelled the plans for a Health Home application.)

Power had been aware of community opposition to the Health Home idea. That factor, “coupled with her own experience of looking at the integrated health home model, led her to question the viability of this initiative,” Edgar said. Power returned to BHDDH after about 15 years in the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

She said BHDDH will continue to pursue a case management model to satisfy a Medicaid rule that states eliminate conflicts of interest in three functions:

• funding

• delivery of services

• case-management; the planning,coordination, and oversight of supports.

Currently the state controls a critical element of the planning phase, an assessment called the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS.). The score from the SIS is fed into a secret algorithm that determines funding for a particular person,

The SIS was designed by the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities to assist planners in compiling a program of services meeting the needs and preferences of particular individuals, an approach compatible with the Integration Mandate of the Americans With Disabilities Act. The Mandate, reinforced by the Olmstead decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, says that individuals with disabilities have the right to services and supports they need to live, work, and play in their communities.

Using the SIS to determine individual appropriations resulted in a cookie –cutter approach that incentivized a system of sheltered workshops and day care centers when it was begun in 2011 as a key feature of Project Sustainability, a fee-for-service reimbursement system for privately-run developmental disability services.

Two years later, the operations of one of those workshops attracted a civil rights investigation from the U.S. Department of Justice that has led to federal oversight of the developmental disability service system until 2024. The key goal: to correct violations of the ADA’s integration mandate.

The Health Home proposal would not have touched the link between funding and the SIS, which was singled out for criticism by the DOJ in 2014 findings that led to a statewide consent decree.

Opposition to Health Homes has come from the special legislative commission which recently concluded a study of Project Sustainability, the Developmental Disability Council, the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island, and many families also have raised concerns about the Health Home.

In general, the critics have said a Health Home would have created an expensive and unnecessary bureaucracy at the same time that the services themselves are underfunded. .

The wages of direct care workers and related staff remain below the levels offered by Connecticut and Massachusetts for the same work, generating high turnover. The agencies employing the workers teeter on the edge of solvency, according to a recently released report compiled by BHDDH consultants. Families who manage a loved one’s program themselves also have had trouble finding staff.

RI: Private DD Agencies Show “Concerning Level Of Financial Vulnerability,” Consultants Say

By Gina Macris

Many of the private agencies serving adults with developmental disabilities in Rhode Island teeter so close to the fiscal edge that they need cash advances from the state to keep their doors open from one year to the next.

“It is evident that the advance payments made by BHDDH constitute a crucial lifeline for many of the agencies,” said consultants to the state Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals.

A review of nearly three quarters of the state’s payments to private developmental disability service agencies showed that all but two among a representative sample of 16 large, mid-sized, and small organizations fall below a nationwide standard for financial health, the consultants said.

The consultants, working under the auspices of the New England States Consortium Systems Organization (NESCSO), were hired to expand the analytical capacity of BHDDH in reviewing the rates and payment structure for the privately-run developmental disability system.

While it is outside NESCSO’s scope to make specific recommendations, the consultants nevertheless concluded that there is a “concerning level of financial vulnerability for a substantial portion” of the private system, the backbone of state-funded developmental disability services.

The financial review represented some of the interim findings in an 18-month, $1.3 million contract between NESCSO and BHDDH that concludes at the end of June.

The report appears to be incorporated in an addendum to the BHDDH budget request for an additional $4 million in federal-state Medicaid funding beginning July 1 to help provide incentives for advancement to front-line workers by raising the salaries of supervisors, support coordinators, job developers and professionals an average of 8.2 percent. Direct care workers also would receive an additional 10 cents an hour.

The governor adopted the language of the BHDDH proposal “to provide an investment in the overall human resource infrastructure” of the provider network for adults with developmental disabilities. She nevertheless cut the $4 million request to $2.2 million. That recommendation includes $1 million in state funding and the remainder in matching federal Medicaid funds.

The raises are offset by $2.2 million in savings from caseload figures that the governor’s office says showed slower growth than BHDDH projected. The budget office projected a 1.5 percent caseload growth for the next fiscal year, or one percentage point less than BHDDH estimated.

The NESCSO fiscal report, meanwhile, said 71 percent of all BHDDH payments for privately-run services to adults with developmental disabilities went to 16 of the 39 agencies licensed to operate in the state. For the analysis, the agencies offered a total of 27 audited financial statements, some for 2018 alone and others for 2017 and 2018.

Of the 27 audit reports from those two fiscal years, 15 showed operating losses and 6 showed surpluses between 1 and 2 percent, according to NESCSO. Only 6 reports showed healthy income margins of 3 percent or more, prompting the consultants to comment on the “concerning level of vulnerability” for the system as a whole. The consultants noted that the audits covered all operations for the respective agencies and were not structured to allow a more detailed analysis of only those activities supported by BHDDH funding.

To the extent that agencies use other sources of income to subsidize developmental disability services, the providers themselves may feel that the analysis “does not fully represent the fiscal challenges of serving the I/DD (intellectual and developmental disability) population,” the consultants wrote.

The NESCO report analyzed two other indicators of financial health:

• liquidity, or the ease with which assets can be converted to cash

• solvency, or the ratio of assets to liabilities.

All but two agencies fell below the liquidity level considered healthy by the NonProfit Finance Fund, according to the consultants.

NESCSO used two measures to calculate liquidity:

• the number of months of cash on hand, with two agencies meeting the standard of three months or more

• working capital, which calculated as current assets minus current liabilities and then further refined to determine how many months of operational costs the working capital could cover. Three agencies met this standard.

The NESCSO consultants added that advance payments from the state, which show up on audits as liabilities, in effect function as sources of operating cash and working capital for the agencies. The report did not say how many agencies have received such payments, nor did BHDDH respond to a request for clarification.

The consultants’ report included a financial note they said was found in many audited statements. It reads:

“This amount represents approximately 45 days of funding for operating the residential and day programs. This amount is due to the State of Rhode Island if the company ceases operation of a residential or day program within the scope of the original advance funding agreement or if it is no longer licensed or certified to provide serves (services) to individuals with developmental disabilities. During 2017, the State of Rhode Island requested payment of these funds prior to the end of the fiscal year at which time additional funds were provided to the Company/Agency.”

Another way the state subsidizes the agencies’ operations is leasing properties to them for nominal amounts, the consultants said.

Although 17 of 27 agency audit reports showed assets that were two times greater than liabilities, the organizations are more vulnerable than those figures might indicate on their face, the consultants said, because a “critical portion” of the assets are property and equipment “intertwined in daily operations,” like group homes.

As an example, the NESCSO’s consultants cited the case of one agency, Bridges, Inc, The agency had assets that exceeded liabilities but also faced a second consecutive year of losses from operations in 2017. In that case, Bridges closed its doors in 20017 but transferred its entire business to Looking Upwards, another agency.

“That approach likely preserved capacity within the system but highlights the risk of loss of overall provider capacity,” the consultants wrote.

NESCSO Review of RI DD Reimbursement Won’t Generate Specific New Rate Recommendations

By Gina Macris

Elena Nicolella and Rick Jacobson All Photos By Anne Peters

The non-profit consortium hired to review the reimbursements Rhode Island pays private agencies serving adults with developmental disabilities will not produce a new set of recommended rates, its executive director said April 25.

Rather, consultants supervised by the consortium will review the impact of the existing system and present facts and data that will enable the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) to make more informed policy decisions, based on available funding and other factors, said Elena Nicolella. She is executive director of NESCSO, the New England States Consortium Systems Organization.

Nicolella addressed a special legislative commission studying the current fee-for-service rate structure, called Project Sustainability.

DiPalma and Kelly Donovan, A Consumer Advocate

For more than an hour, the commission chairman, Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, and other members of the panel peppered Nicolella and consultant Rick Jacobson with questions as they struggled to come up with a clearer idea of what NESCSO’s recommendations might look like.

The pair, aided by BHDDH officials, did flesh out the picture somewhat. But DiPalma, said Nicolella will be invited back in June to give an update on the work, which is underway.

“We will not be issuing recommendations on specific rates,” Nicolella said, explaining that is not within the scope of the work outlined in the contract between NESCSO and BHDDH.

The work will assess current rates quantitatively and qualitatively and analyze “the impact of the rate structure and payment methodology on people receiving services and the provider agencies and make recommendations for the future,” Nicolella said.

NESCSO will develop scenarios or “roadmaps” of what it would take for the state to achieve certain goals, putting the priority on the state’s obligation to meet the requirements of a 2014 civil rights consent decree with the federal government. That means the work will focus on day services and employment supports, at least initially, Nicolella said.

Some of the recommendations, however, will have implications for the entire system of services, she said.

Rebecca Boss, the BHDDH director, gave an example of one system-wide priority – creating a stable workforce.

She was asked after the meeting why BHDDH structured the work the way it did.

Boss reiterated that NESCSO would present “facts and data” in an analysis based on certain assumptions. She and Nicolella said the policy decisions would be up to BHDDH.

“If the decisions we make (at BHDDH) don’t meet expectations, it will be out there,” Boss said, emphasizing that the work will be transparent.

The assumption at the heart of Project Sustainability was that providers could do the same work with less money. A former BHDDH administration relayed that assumption to the General Assembly in an unsigned memo that contained a slew of reimbursement rate reductions that formed the basis for cuts enacted in 2011 to inaugurate Project Sustainability. The reductions averaged 17 percent.

Boss said “that’s not the kind of assumption we’re talking about.” Instead, the assumption for one analysis might be that industry-wide, providers should have health insurance for their employees, Boss said. Another assumption might be the amount it costs providers to cover employee-related overhead, she said.

In a separate conversation outside the meeting, Nicolella said the recommendations would be “driven by the data” and “not limited by the by the state budget.”

At the same time, NESCSO will “stop short of what was recommended last time,” she said, alluding to the specificity of rates proposed by Burns & Associates, healthcare consultants who worked on Project Sustainability.

In 2011, Burns & Associates recommended rates that would have paid entry-level workers nearly $14 an hour, but after the General Assembly cut $26 million from developmental disability funding, many workers ended up at minimum wage.

Since then, wages have increased only incrementally, resulting in high turnover and job vacancy. Providers say the reimbursement rates do not cover their actual employee-related costs, like payroll taxes, health insurance, and the like.

During the meeting, Nicolella assured a spokeswoman for providers that the rate review will look at the agencies’ figures. At least one agency, Spurwink RI, has laid out its gap in dollars and cents several times before the House Finance Committee.

At the commission meeting, Spurwink’s executive director, Regina Hayes, asked Nicolella and Jacobson whether the review would pay attention to compatibility with current law.

For example, she said, the Affordable Care Act requires employers to pay health insurance for workers who put in at least 30 hours a week. But Project Sustainability assumes that only those working 40 hours a week are entitled to health insurance, Hayes said.

Nicolella responded, “That’s exactly the kind of information we should be hearing right now, because it’s extremely helpful.”

She and Jacobson both said the assessment of the impact of the current system will include engagement with consumers and families,as well as providers. But neither of them could lay out a schedule or format for that type of engagement.

NESCSO is required to produce a series of reports for BHDDH between June and December, she said. It is the consortium’s intent to complete the work in time for BHDDH to make its budget request for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020, Nicolella said.

Nicolella explained that NESCSO’s only mission is to serve the New England states as they seek to research issues and solve problems in the fields of health and human services.

“We are not a consulting company. We don’t sell our services,” she said.

In this case, NESCSO is overseeing four outside consultants, including Jacobson, who are doing the actual work.

NESCSO’s board of directors includes health and human services officials from five of the six New England states, according to its website. Only Maine is not listed as a member.

Nicolella said Rhode Island’s designated board member is Patrick Tigue, the Medicaid director. (Nicolella herself is a former Rhode Island Medicaid director.)

The consortium’s two sources of revenue are state dues and proceeds from a national conference. The BHDDH review is a member benefit, Nicolella said. The contract encompasses not only the work on developmental disabilities but a review of rates for behavioral healthcare services and a model for outpatient services for patients of Eleanor Slater Hospital. But the state still must pay for the consultants’ work - $1.3 million over an 18-month period.

Healthcare Consultant Says "It's Past Time" For RI To Revisit Rates It Pays For Private DD Services

From foreground, on the right, Rebecca Boss, Louis DiPalma, Peter Quattromani, Kelly Donovan, Deb Kney, and Kevin McHale, all members of the Project Sustainability Commission. DiPalma is chairman. All photos by Anne Peters

By Gina Macris

Rhode Island is overdue in undertaking a comprehensive review of rates it pays private providers of services for adults with developmental disabilities, according to a top official of a healthcare consulting firm who helped develop the existing payment structure seven years ago.

Mark Podrazik

“It’s past time,” said Mark Podrazik, president and co-founder of Burns & Associates. He said the firm recommends an overhaul of rates once every five years. Podrazik appeared Nov. 13 before a Senate-sponsored commission which is evaluating the way the state organizes and funds its services for those facing intellectual and developmental challenges.

The commission chairman, Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, had invited Podrazik to help the 19-member panel gain a deeper understanding of the controversial billing and payment system now in place before it recommends changes intended to ultimately improve the quality of life of some 4,000 adults with developmental disabilities.

Burns & Associates was hired by the Department of Behavioral Healthcare, Developmental Disabilities and Hospitals (BHDDH) in 2010 to develop and implement Project Sustainability, a fee-for-service system of payments to hold private providers accountable for the services they deliver and give consumers more flexibility in choosing what they wanted, Podrazik said.

In answering questions posed by commission members, Podrazik made it clear that the final version of Project Sustainability was shaped by a frenzy to control costs. The state ignored key recommendations of Burns & Associates intended to more equitably fund the private service providers and to protect the interests of those in the state’s care.

Podrazik said that overall, Burns & Associates believed the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) had neither the capacity or the competence implement Project Sustainability at the outset or to carry out the mandates to companion civil rights agreements with the U.S. Department of Justice reached in 2013 and 2014.

“I think people were a little shocked” by the new federal requirements to integrate day services in the community and by the question of “who was going to do it,” Podrazik said of the DDD staff at the time.

DDD also had an antiquated data system that ill served Project Sustainability and the separate demands for statistics imposed by a federal court monitor overseeing the consent decrees.

Podrazik said the aged IT system was the biggest problem faced by Burns & Associates.

Asked whether funding changed to implement the civil rights agreements, Podrazik said he didn’t recall that there were any significant changes, if any at all. Burns & Associates ended its day-to-day involvement with BHDDH in Feb. 2015, when Maria Montanaro became the department director. (She has since been succeeded by Rebecca Boss, and there has been a complete reorganization and expansion of management in DDD. A modern IT system recently went online.)

Between the fall of 2015 and early 2016, Burns & Associates had a separate contract with the Executive Office of Human Services, which asked for advice on cutting supplemental payments to adults with developmental disabilities.

While Project Sustainability was supposed to give consumers more choice, the U.S. Department of Justice found just the opposite in a 2013 investigation.

DOJ lawyers wrote in their findings that “systemic State actions and policies” directed resources for employment and non-work activities to sheltered workshops and facility-based day programs, making it difficult for individuals to get services outside those settings.

“Flexibility” Functioned As Tool For Controlling Costs

At the meeting Nov. 13, Andrew McQuaide, a commission member and senior director at Perspectives Corporation, a service provider, suggested that features of Project Sustainability ostensibly designed to encourage flexibility and autonomy for those using the services functioned in reality as mechanisms to control costs.

Podrazik said, “In my heart of hearts, I think everybody wanted more flexibility,” but “then the financial constraints were imposed in such a way that the objectives could not necessarily be met.”

“We were not hired to cut budgets,” Podrazik said. Going into the project, “we did not know what the budget was” for Project Sustainability.

He said Burns & Associates recommended fair market rates for a menu of services under the new plan. For example, it proposed an hourly rate for direct care workers was $13.97. But BHDD refused the consultants’ advice to fight “aggressively” for this level of funding, Podrazik said. With the budget year that began July 1, 2011, BHDDH recommended, and the General Assembly adopted, a rate of $12.03 an hour, nearly two dollars less.

The state had the option to change the rate effective Oct. 1, 2011, and it did, dropping the hourly reimbursement for direct care workers to $10.66 to absorb last-minute cuts made by the General Assembly in the developmental disabilities budget for the fiscal year that had begun July 1. (Rates have increased slightly since then. The average direct care worker made about $11.36 an hour in early 2018.)

“I understood why the department (BHDDH) was doing what they were doing, because they were getting an incredible amount of pressure on the budget – so much so that they were getting their hand slapped when they were over,” Podrazik said.

“From the outside coming in, there was a lack of confidence that BHDDH could actually administer a budget that came in on target, so that there was an intense scrutiny to keep the budget intact. It did not help that that they were cut and that there were no caseload increases (in the budget) for multiple years,” Podrazik said.

“They were behind the eight-ball before anything was contemplated,” he said.

Louis DiPalma, Rebecca Boss

DiPalma, the commission chairman, saw the situation from a different perspective: “Someone will say the agency exceeded the budget, but if it was unrealistic from the get-go, you’re going to exceed that budget.”

As a legislator, DiPalma said, he has looked at developmental disability service budgets for ten years, and there hasn’t been one that was realistic.

“Right,” Podrazik replied, adding that funding for developmental disabilities had been declining from year to year in Rhode Island, even before Burns & Associates was hired for Project Sustainability.

Podrazik said he hasn’t been following developmental disabilities in Rhode Island during the last few years, but “somebody should look at the rates, if for no other reason” than “we’re in an economy that’s very different than it was in 2010.” He cited health care costs and a move toward “$15 an hour wages.”

“It’s a whole different landscape,” he said.

Consultants Recommended Eliminating Separate State-Run DD System

In 2011, with Project Sustainability facing a funding shortage even before it got off the ground, Burns & Associates recommended that BHDDH get more money to support the services of private agencies by eliminating – gradually – the state-run developmental disabilities system, called Rhode Island Community Living and Supports (RICLAS.)

At the time, average per-person cost for a RICLAS client ran about three times more than the average in the privately-run system. All the RICLAS clients could eventually be transferred to private providers, Burns & Associates advised the state.

“This recommendation was shut down immediately, with the reason being a protracted fight with the unions,” Podrazik said in prepared remarks.

Burns & Associates then recommended lowering the reimbursements to RICLAS. “This was also shut down,” Podrazik wrote.

“It was apparent early on that there were funds to be redistributed between RICLAS and the Private DD system, but there was no appetite to do so. It is unclear exactly where this directive was coming from within state government, but that was the directive given” to Burns & Associates, Podrazik wrote.

Providers Expected To Maintain Same Service For Reduced Pay

Commission members asked Podrazik whether anyone at Burns & Associates or state government believed that it was possible for private service providers to absorb the rate reductions written into Project Sustainability, given the fact that about half the agencies were already running deficits before the program was enacted.

McQuaide quoted from the memo that BHDDH sent the General Assembly in May, 2011, explaining its approach to implementing Project Sustainability.

“We did not reduce our assumptions for the level of staffing hours required to serve individuals,” the memo said. “In other words, we are forcing the providers to stretch their dollars without compromising the level of services to individuals,” the memo said.

McQuaide asked, "Did anyone actually think that was possible?”

“I don’t know,” Podrazik replied, but he remembered meetings in which participants expressed sentiments similar to the quotation highlighted by McQuaide.

Given the budgetary restrictions, Podrazik said, he favored reducing rates rather than cutting back on services or creating a waiting list for services.

Podrazik said Burns & Associates was hired to deal with certain problems; not to review services for adults with developmental disabilities top to bottom.

Assessment Used For Funding Became Controversial

Asked to change the assessment used to determine each person’s need for support, Burns and Associates recommended the Supports Intensity Scale, or SIS, and advised it should be administered by an entity “other than the provider or the state to avoid the perception of gaming the system,” he said.

The state went forward with the SIS, linked it to funding individual authorizations, or personal budgets for clients, and assigned the administration of the assessment to the state’s own social caseworkers.

The fact that the SIS is administered within BHDDH has been criticized by the DOJ and an independent federal court monitor. With federal scrutiny on BHDDH, and numerous complaints from families and providers that the SIS scores were manipulated to cut costs, the department switched to a revised SIS assessment and retrained all its assessors in November, 2016.

Funding Authorized Three Months At A Time To Control Costs

According to Podrazik, Burns & Associates recommended each client’s funding authorization – or personal budget – be awarded on an annual basis, to allow individuals to plan their lives and providers to look ahead in figuring out expenses.

But the state insisted on the option to change reimbursement rates on a quarterly basis as a means of managing costs more closely within a fiscal year. That was the feature of Project Sustainability which enabled BHDDH to impose two consecutive cuts on providers, once on July 1, 2011, and a second time on Oct. 1, 2011. Since then, rates have increased incrementally.

At the hearing, Podrazik illustrated the difference between a yearly authorization and a quarterly one in the life of a consumer.

“Maybe someone goes away for the month of August,” he said. If that person has a quarterly authorization, the money for services in August reverts to the state. But with an annual authorization, the funding can be used for the person’s benefit during another month of the year.

Podrazik agreed with a commission member, Peter Quattromani, CEO of United Cerebral Palsy, that quarterly authorizations compromise the flexibility intended to be part of the design of Project Sustainability.

Podrazik said he knows of no other state that makes quarterly authorizations for developmental disability services.

DiPalma, the commission chairman, asked if there was any thought given to the impact of a requirement that providers document how each staff person working during the day spends his or her time with clients, in 15-minute blocks.

Podrazik said, “I don’t think people thought the impact would be negligible, but the desire for accountability outweighed that, and I fully endorsed them.”

Project Sustainability decreased overhead costs to private providers but did not offset those cuts with allowances for hiring the personnel necessary to process the documentation.

When DiPalma thanked Podrazik for his time, Podrazik quipped that Rhode Island was “the last place I thought I’d ever be.”

“The Rhode Island project wore me down, so I’m working with hospitals these days,” Podrazik said.

He said he came back to Rhode Island because DiPalma was very persuasive and because he wanted to “set the record straight” on the involvement of Burns & Associates with Project Sustainability.