Regional Office Report on Disability Rights California’s Current Advocacy: Cases and Projects
(previously called “Director of Litigation
Report”)
Unnoticed Deaths of
The Investigations Unit has been investigating the death of two state hospital residents who were found dead in their beds several hours after the death occurred and despite facility policies of regular welfare checks. Both deaths indicate a failure to conduct the checks entirely or with sufficient thoroughness to establish whether the resident is even breathing and alive.
On March 18, 2008, H.J., a 54 year old resident of Napa State Hospital (NSH) in reported good health, was found dead in bed. His body was “in full rigor mortis” and was “cold to touch.” This indicates that H.J. been dead for between three and five hours.
NSH policy requires staff observe residents at least twice every hour throughout the night “to ensure the safety and welfare” of residents. NSH staff records indicate that staff were reportedly regularly checking on H.J. throughout the night, with the apparent last observation at 5:30 a.m. when he was observed “asleep and breathing.” This is incompatible with the condition of the body.
The cause of H.J’s death remains unknown. H.J. had no known medical conditions that would have caused his sudden death. No autopsy was conducted. The county coroner declined to conduct an autopsy because H.J. was under the care of a physician. Coroners may decline to conduct an autopsy when the deceased has been seen by a physician in the 20 days prior to death.
NSH records allege that that the coroner declined to conduct an autopsy because H.J. had an infectious blood condition. However, the coroner’s office informed Disability Rights California investigators that they routinely conduct autopsies on individuals with contagious conditions, and that this was not a factor in their decision to not conduct an independent investigation.
At approximately 8:00 a.m. Sunday, March 30, 2008, L.R.’s body was found in his bed at Atascadero State Hospital (ASH) with a towel wrapped around his neck. L.R., a 37 year old long-term resident, had been strangled by another resident. His body was cool to touch, rigor mortis had set in. The responding doctor did not attempt resuscitation because it was apparent that it would be futile. According to media accounts, facility records indicate that staff were checking on L.R. every 20 minutes, consistent with facility policy. ASH has refused to provide Disability Rights California investigators with records pending the conclusion of the criminal proceedings.
Disability Rights California is working with the Department of Mental Health to establish a consistent department policy regarding resident welfare checks, including during sleeping hours. Disability Rights California will follow-up with the Department regarding the thoroughness of each facility’s post mortem investigations and corrective action in these cases, including ensuring that staff conduct welfare checks as required to adequately establish the welfare of residents.
Abuse & Neglect Goals and Objectives: Goal 1, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Paul Duryea, Ricardo Jauregui, and Leslie Morrison.
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
Client is Assessed for a New Wheelchair
J.R. is a
J.R. obtained a power wheelchair. However,
soon after receiving it, he had to take the wheelchair in for repairs due to
battery problems. After several repairs, he realized that the chair was not
appropriate because it could not keep up with his needs. J.R. contacted Disability Rights California
for assistance. He wanted to know how to get a new wheelchair.
A Disability Rights California advocate contacted the durable medical equipment (DME) vendor who admitted it fitted J.R. for a chair that was appropriate for home use only. In other words, they had failed to follow the Charpentier process.
Under Charpentier, a dual eligible individual
(a person who has both Medicare and Medi-Cal) first obtains prior approval for
medical equipment and supplies from Medi-Cal by submitting a treatment
authorization request (TAR). When approved, the provider delivers the equipment and
bills Medicare. After Medicare pays (usually at a rate much lower than
Medi-Cal’s approved rate), Medi-Cal is electronically cross-billed for the 20%
co-payment that represents the beneficiary’s portion and pays that amount. The
provider then applies to Medi-Cal for any difference between Medicare’s and
Medi-Cal’s approved rates. If Medicare denies the request or fails to pay
within ninety days of billing, the provider may seek reimbursement for the
entire cost of the device from Medi-Cal. This process is important for dual
eligibles because they are not limited to Medicare’s medical necessity standard
that focuses on home use only.
Medi-Cal’s medical necessity standard is much broader and allows payment
of equipment that can be used in the community.
Here, J.R. could have gotten a wheelchair that was appropriate for his
needs outside the home rather than just appropriate in the home.
The advocate advised J.R. of his options, which included requesting a new chair. The advocate was able to help locate a vendor who suggested that J.R. obtain a mobility evaluation. J.R. was able to obtain a prescription from his doctor for a mobility evaluation and was fitted for a new wheelchair. The vendor has submitted a TAR to Medi-Cal. J.R. and the vendor are waiting for a response from Medi-Cal.
PABSS Issue team and Benefits: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Aleyda Toruno
Grant/Funding Source(s): PABSS
Client Obtains a
Specialized Wheelchair after Disability Rights
J.A. is a Medi-Cal recipient who lives in a
small rural community in the
A durable equipment vendor submitted a TAR to Medi-Cal requesting a Frontier X-5 power wheelchair. Medi-Cal agreed that J.A. needed a specialized wheelchair capable of negotiating a rural area but denied the Frontier X-5. Believing that the models offered by Medi-Cal were not adequate, J.A requested an administrative hearing.
The administrative law Judge (ALJ) determined that the Frontier X-5 was the only one capable of negotiating the rough sandy terrain in his rural home. However, the ALJ held that Medi-Cal had no obligation to take into consideration an individual’s home environment in selecting a wheelchair, and that is obligated to provide only durable medical equipment (DME) that is “standard for the community at large.” J.A. sought Disability Rights California’s help.
Disability Rights California filed a Writ of Administrative Mandamus (Writ) challenging the ALJ’s determination that a Medi-Cal recipient’s individual living circumstance is not a relevant factor in determining the type of wheelchair that may be medically necessary, and challenging the denial of the Frontier X-5.
The scope of Medi-Cal services “may include diagnostic, preventative, corrective, and curative services and supplies…for conditions that cause suffering, endanger life, result in illness or infirmity, interfere with capacity for normal activity including employment, or for conditions which may develop into some significant handicap.” Welf. & Inst. Code ' 14059. Medi-Cal covers Amedically necessary@ services, which is defined as services Areasonable and necessary to protect life, to prevent significant illness or to alleviate severe pain.@[1] Welf. & Inst. Code ' 14059.5.
Medi-Cal covers durable medical equipment
such as wheelchairs when medically necessary and prescribed by a doctor. Welf. & Inst. Code ' 14132(m); 22
The
decision to live in one’s family home is not merely a lifestyle choice. Medi-Cal is obligated to consider various
factors such as where the individual currently lives, the availability of
family or other care providers and whether the individual may be required to
move into an institutional setting if not able to live in his or her current
residence. Living at home is the
preferred medical outcome for those capable of living there with assistance. Blue v. Bonta (2002)
99 Cal.App.4th 980, 989.
After filing the Writ, Medi-Cal agreed to provide J.A. with a Frontier X-5.
Benefits
Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff:
Mike Kluk, Maria Iriarte
Grant/funding source: PAAT
Settlement Reached In Laguna Honda Class Action
(See Discrimination)
County Department of
Public Health Agrees to Reinstate Primary Care Physician and Treatment Plan
In July 2008, Disability Rights California and J.B. meet with medical administrative staff for the County about the allegations made in the complaint. The meeting was scheduled following Disability Rights California’s phone calls to and the filing of the complaint with the County District Supervisor. The County medical administration agreed to immediately reinstate J.B.’s treatment plan and assign a new primary care physician, with oversight by the medical center’s chief physician.
Benefits Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff : Timothy Poe
Grant/Funding Source: PAIR
Disability Rights
See previous
M.
is an 18-month-old child with disabilities, including oxygen dependence, as a
result of her premature birth. M. receives
In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS),
As a result, on July 18, 2008, Disability Rights California filed a Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandate to review and overturn the decision of the Department of Social Services denying M. sufficient IHSS services, including, but not limited to, time for medication administration and accompaniment to medical appointments, her feeding needs related to her medical condition, and time for paramedical assessment, observation and monitoring related to her oxygen dependence.
In addition, Disability Rights California filed a Writ of Mandate seeking an order from the Court that the Department of Social Services establish and disseminate standards clarifying that in assessing the needs of children for IHSS, including personal care services and paramedical services, services should be authorized to the extent that, as a result of blindness or disability, the child requires more services than a healthy child would.
The proceedings on the writ cases are pending.
Benefits Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A; Goal 3, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Maggie Roberts, Elizabeth Zirker, Kim Swain, and Elissa Gershon
Grant/Funding Sources: PADD, PAAT
J.K. is a nineteen year old, non-ambulatory, non-verbal individual with developmental disabilities and mental retardation. He currently lives with his mother, a single parent with health problems, and is entirely dependent upon her for his care.
J.K.’s mother contacted Disability Rights
California to help her obtain respite care services for her son from the
The
Benefits Goals and Objectives: Goal 3, Obj. A; Lanterman
Goal 3, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Michelle
Porche & Aleyda Toruno
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAAT
Disability Rights
R.M. had been in an automobile accident with multiple injuries including head trauma (frontal lobe) that put him in a coma for about eight days. He was found presumptively eligible for Medi-Cal in Hospital A. Following treatment and stabilization at Hospital A, R.M. was transferred to Hospital B for acute inpatient rehabilitation. Hospital B sought to cut short his inpatient rehabilitation and to discharge him prematurely and without linking him to any follow-up services. The premature discharge was related to the State budget and concerns about Medi-Cal payments beginning in July and complications from manifestation of his pre-existing bipolar diagnosis.
Disability Rights California sent R.M. and his mother, who was working with him as an advocate, a letter detailing his right to acute inpatient rehabilitation services needed because of a brain injury under the Medi-Cal program, including rights under Welf. & Inst. Code sections 14132(o), 14132.15, 14064, and 14132.8. The letter also detailed his right to appropriate discharge planning under 42 C.F.R. section 483.43 because Hospital B took Medicare and Medicaid money and therefore was required to comply with the Medicare hospital conditions of participation. Discharge planning includes “an evaluation of the likelihood of a patient needing post hospital services and of the availability of the services,” “an evaluation of the likelihood of a patient’s capacity for self-care or of the possibility of the patient being cared for in the environment from which he or she entered the hospital,” “appropriate arrangements for post-hospital care.” Section 482.43(b). In addition, “[t]he hospital must transfer or refer patients, along with necessary medical information, to appropriate facilities, agencies, or outpatient services, as needed for follow-up or ancillary care.” Section 482.43(d). The letter was faxed to Mr. M. at the hospital so that everyone at Hospital B could review it.
Hospital B continued acute inpatient rehabilitation for a few more days and then transferred him to a step down facility (sub acute) for continuation of rehabilitation and when discharged, linked him to follow-up services.
Benefits Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Objective A
DRC Staff: Marilyn Holle
Grant/Funding Source: PAIMI
S.S. is a nine-year-old
Last year, S.S.’s mother asked San Bernardino County IHSS to assess her child for Protective Supervision. The County did not find that S.S. needed Protective Supervision. S.S.’s mother appealed and an ALJ ordered the County to conduct a re-assessment. The County once again denied services. S.S.’s mother contacted Disability Rights California for help.
Disability Rights California staff reviewed
documents about S.S. that were made available to IHSS when they decided to deny
Protective Supervision. These included
school records such as Individualized Education Plans (IEPs),
During the two-day hearing, Disability Rights
California presented evidence such as school records and
This case not only benefited S.S. by obtaining the services he requires in order to remain safe in his home, but on a systemic level, it has given rise to Disability Rights California’s investigation via a public records act request to see about the frequency and extent of this unlawful screening practice potentially harming other minor clients in San Bernardino County.
Benefits Goals and Objectives: Goal 3; Obj. A
DRC Staff: Hillary Sklar
Grant/Funding Source(s): PADD
Disability Rights
Hyatt v. Northern California Presbyterian
Homes and Services, Inc., et al.
Case # C08-03265, United States District Court, Northern District of California, assigned to Magistrate Judge Edward Chen, awaiting assignment to a District Judge (filed July 7, 2008).
On
July 7, 2008, Disability Rights California
filed a case in the Northern District of California challenging the
policy of The Sequoias –
Ms. Hyatt is an 83-year-old resident of The Sequoias. She has lived there for approximately seven years. She has mobility disabilities which require the use of a walker; and a swallowing disorder which places limitation on her eating ability; and a vision impairment which makes it difficult for her to read a menu without an assistive device that she keeps in her apartment and is not portable. Ms. Hyatt is seeking injunctive relief against the owner of the facility and the food services company to require them to allow walkers in the dining room, including at the buffet tables.
This case has the potential to send a message to all CCRCs, as well as other types of congregate housing facilities, that residents who use walkers (and other assistive devices for mobility) have the same rights to access to the facility’s dining facilities as residents who do not (currently) have disabilities.
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Pamela Cohen, Fred Nisen and Stuart Seaborn
Co-Counsel: Susan Ann Silverstein and Barbara Jones from AARP Foundation Litigation
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIR
Settlement in Laguna Honda Class Action Preliminarily Approved
Mark
Chambers et al. v. City and
Case
No.: C06-06346 WHA, United States
District Court, Northern District of California, Judge William H. Alsup (filed
See previous DOL Reports, Issues 47, 48, 52. See also, previous DOL Reports for Davis v. CHHSA, Issues 20, 25, 27, 29, 32, 35, 36, 42, 45, 48.
On November
14, 2007, Plaintiffs and Defendant San Francisco in Chambers et al. v. City and County of San Francisco notified
federal District Court Judge William Alsup that they had reached a settlement
agreement. During the months following,
the Settlement Agreement was formally approved by the Board of Supervisors of
the City and
The action
was originally filed
The class, which consists of Medi-Cal recipients who reside at LHH, are on the waitlist for LHH, are within two years post discharge from LHH or are patients at SFGH and are eligible for discharge to LHH, was certified by the Court in July, 2007.
Summary of Settlement
Agreement
The
Settlement provides for expanded community-based living options for seniors and
people with disabilities in
Included in the agreement are:
· Provisions for community-based services for all named class members;
·
Commitment from
· The creation of a Diversion and Community Integration Program (DCIP) to provide an integrated approach for individuals referred for admission to, and diversion and discharge from, LHH, with the goal of placing those individuals in the most integrated setting that is appropriate to their needs and preferences;
· Provision of/Referral for Case Management and Wrap-Around Services;
· Providing Access to Affordable, Accessible Community Housing, including through development of a LHH Rental Subsidy Program which will subsidize scattered site, accessible, independent housing for approximately 500 class members who are eligible for community-based services;
· Enhancement of Mental Health/Substance Abuse Services;
· Provision for a smaller Laguna Honda Hospital with the goal that the facility is for short-term, rehabilitative treatment;
· Provision of Grievance Procedures for Class Members;
· Provision for Data Collection and Reporting to Disability Rights California and co-counsel on a regular basis;
·
Quality Assurance provided by Defendant
·
Monitoring of Implementation of the Settlement
by Disability Rights
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 1, Obj. A; Benefits Goal 5, Obj. A.
DRC Staff: Elissa Gershon, Kim Swain, and Elizabeth Zirker
Co-Counsel: Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
(DREDF), AARP Foundation Litigation, the
Criminal Charges Dropped Against Parent with a Disability who was Accused of Childcare Fraud
Carter,
et al. v. Allenby et al.
Case
No. GIC 879152,
See Previous DOL Reports Issues, 49, 51 & 52
A
Disability Rights California client, a woman with a mental disability, is one
of the plaintiffs who sued the California Department of Social Services and
Discovery is continuing on the portion of the case challenging the discriminatory policy, with hearing on the Writ of Mandate scheduled for October 17, 2008.
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 3, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Ann Menasche
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
M.L. Wins Approval of Section 8 Benefits
M.L. is a person with a psychiatric disability whose application for section 8 benefits was denied for failure to disclose a small annuity. The failure was not intentional and related to difficulties with memory and concentration related to his disability.
Disability Rights California contacted the San Diego Housing Commission, provided documentation from M.L.’s psychiatrist, and convinced the Commission to grant his application for Section 8 benefits as a reasonable accommodation.
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Ann Menasche
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
Disability Rights
T.M.,
a woman with mental and physical disabilities, was denied a necessary extension
on her section 8 voucher as a reasonable accommodation in order for her to
locate accessible housing in
Despite a diligent effort to obtain a suitable accessible apartment, T.M. was unable to do so by the deadline. She requested and was granted an additional extension from the Berkeley Housing Authority (BHA) until September 7, 2007. However, BHA failed in their obligation to inform the OCHA prior to the voucher’s original expiration date, of the lease-up status of the voucher.
Right before the new expiration date, T.M. located an apartment; however, she subsequently learned that the apartment charged $150 per month for parking, a sum that she could not afford. Neither was she able to walk the six block distance she would need to walk in order utilize street parking. The apartment also denied her request for free parking as a reasonable accommodation.
After the apartment fell through, T.M. requested and was denied an additional extension on the voucher from both the OCHA and the BHA.
Disability Rights California sent demand letters to both Housing Authorities and was ultimately successful in convincing the BHA to agree to reinstate T.M.’s voucher and to provide the two bedroom voucher that she needed as an accommodation for a live-in aide.
Discrimination Goal and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Ann Menasche and Pamela Cohen
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
Miller,
et al. v. City of
Case
No. SA CA 07-1002 AHS (ANX), United States District Court, Central District of
See Previous DOL Report Issue 51
On
May 20, 2008, while a decision on defendants’ motion to dismiss was still
pending, attorneys for the disabled residents of a group home in
Under the terms of the settlement, the City will allow the requested use as a reasonable accommodation, will terminate code enforcement proceedings against the owner of the group home, and will pay the plaintiffs $2,000 to allow them to purchase a new pool table. (The old one broke when the City forced them to remove it from the garage.) The City also agreed to recommend to the city council that they approve a reasonable accommodation ordinance establishing a process for requesting accommodation in land use. If such an ordinance is not approved, the City agreed to enact an administrative process satisfactory to plaintiffs.
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Ann Menasche
Co-Counsel: Christopher Brancart of Brancart & Brancart
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PADD/PAIMI
Disability Rights
E.B. contacted Disability Rights California seeking assistance in receiving medical treatment for his HIV positive condition. He is incarcerated at a county jail and was without any HIV medication for a number of months when Disability Rights California staff first visited him.
Disability Rights California sent an opinion letter to the county jail outlining the standard of medical care in a facility and demanded a meeting to address E.B.’s lack of HIV treatment. Following this letter, the county jail agreed to meet with Disability Rights California staff. Disability Rights California staff met with the head physician at the county jail to discuss this issue. Since that meeting, Disability Rights California has actively monitored E.B.’s situation. The county jail began prescribing him HIV medication within the last month.
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 3, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Sean Rashkis and Stuart Seaborn
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIR
Disability Rights
T.F.
is a woman with multiple physical disabilities, including a severe fluoride
allergy, who resides in a publicly-funded apartment complex in
After
receiving notice of the rent increase, T.F. contacted Disability Rights
California which researched HUD guidelines on medical-expense-related
deductions in the income calculation process.
Disability Rights California staff pointed out the broad language of
HUD’s guidelines and worked with T.F. as she sought a letter from her doctor
documenting her disability-related need to purchase and drink fluoride-free,
bottled water. With Disability Rights
California’s assistance, T.F. prepared a written request to the housing
authority documenting her medically based need for the bottled water (with the
letter from the doctor as an attachment).
Shortly after receiving T.F.’s written request, housing authority staff
reinstated her medical-expense deduction so that it included the cost of
purchasing fluoride-free bottled water and reduced her rent accordingly.
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Stuart Seaborn
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIR
Disability Rights
In Re Conservatorship of G.N.
G.N. is a man with multiple physical disabilities who requires 24-hour in-home care and has limited oral communication ability. He had been living independently in his own apartment with the assistance of home-care staff until being hospitalized for an infection that began in his foot and spread throughout his body. Once the infection was under control, the County attempted to place him on a conservatorship, claiming that his dependence on others for his care left him unable to take care of his needs and vulnerable to fraud.
G.N.
contacted Disability Rights California after the County Conservatorship
Investigator served him with notice of the hearing on his conservatorship. At G.N.’s request, Disability Rights
California prepared legal arguments about the standards for placing an
individual on conservatorship, which highlighted the fact that the County never
alleged that G.N. lacked capacity to make his own decisions. Disability Rights California provided these
arguments to the client’s court-appointed attorney, in the form of an opinion
letter. Disability Rights
After the G.N. and his court-appointed attorney presented this information, the County ended up deciding not to pursue the proposed conservatorship. Currently, G.N. is living in his apartment with the assistance of home-care workers.
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 1, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Stuart Seaborn and Suzanna Gee
Co-Counsel: Claudia Hollis, an advocate at FREED Center for Independent Living, and Albert Smith, Esq., Court-Appointed Attorney
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIR/PAAT
Favorable Settlement Reached in Housing Discrimination Case
Disability
Rights California joined Fair Housing of Napa Valley and the Law Firm of
Brancart and Brancart in a fair housing lawsuit centered around allegations of
disability-related discrimination at Redwood Retirement Residence in
Discrimination Goals and Objectives: Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Stuart Seaborn
Co-Counsel: Liza Cristol-Deman, Law Offices of Brancart
& Brancart and Fair Housing of
Grant(s)/Funding Source(s): PAIR
EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN & YOUTH
S.D. Re-Enrolled in
S.D.
v. B.P.U.S.D.
Case
No. OAH N2008030776, Office of Administrative Hearings, Mediator was
Office of Administrative Hearings Judge Richard Breen
S.D.,
a 19-year-old male, retained Disability Rights California after he had been
released from Juvenile Hall and was excluded from re-entry into
S.D.’s
prevalent behaviors could be traced back nearly seven years throughout his
education in BPUSD. Despite the obvious
need for positive behavior intervention, S.D. did not have a Behavior Support
Plan (BSP) or a Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA).
S.D.
was at a third grade level in reading and math at the time of the filing of the
Due Process complaint. He had been
completely out of school for nearly ten months after his Juvenile Hall release
causing him to regress both academically and socially. This was a direct result of the school
district failing to re-enroll S.D. upon his release from Juvenile Hall.
The
primary legal issue in S.D.’s case was the failure of the school district to
provide adequate behavior supports and failure to provide educational services
to S.D. after his release from Juvenile Hall.
Because of the District’s failure to provide these educational services,
S.D. was performing well below grade level in all areas of academics. The District is obligated under the
California Education Code to provide educational services to students with
disabilities. In addition,
On
June 9, 2008, both parties met in mediation.
A settlement agreement was reached whereby S.D. would remain in his
current school placement where he would be evaluated by an independent assessor
for a Functional Analysis Assessment.
S.D. was also to receive compensatory education services in the form of
Non Public Agency academic tutoring hours with a concentration on academics as
well as behavior intervention strategies.
S.D.
is currently enrolled in school and will receive compensatory education in the
form of academic tutoring by a Non-Public Agency that specializes in students
with behavior issues. This tutoring will
help S.D. to obtain his goal of graduating high school and passing the CAHSEE
exam.
Education
for Children and Youth Goals and Objectives:
Goal 1, Obj. A; Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC
Staff: Jennifer Williams, Keith Sakimura, and Connie Huang
Co-Counsel: N/A
Grant/Funding
Source(s): SPLC
K.M. Expulsion Decision Reversed and He Receives Independent Assessments
Office
of Administrative Hearings.
K.M.,
14-year-old boy, called Disability Rights California for counsel and advice
regarding the appeal of his manifestation determination and approach at his
expulsion hearing. Parents filed for Due Process previously in
November, 2006 in
Disability
Rights California assisted K.M. in preparing a Due Process complaint based on
the manifestation determination that K.M.’s incident leading to expulsion was
directly related to his disability and the fact that K.M. had failed to receive
any behavior support despite the 2006 settlement agreement and continuing
escalating behaviors. K.M.’s parents
filed the complaint in pro per.
K.M.
was facing expulsion for behavior problems that should have been addressed by
conducting a FAA and developing a BIP according to the 2006 settlement
agreement.
On
May 28, 2008, the parties met in mediation.
The parties agreed to stop the expulsion proceedings, conduct a FAA, and
develop appropriate behavior supports and services for K.M.
K.M.
is currently enrolled to start back in school in the fall. At that time, school observation will be conducted
in order to complete the FAA.
Education
for Children and Youth Goals and Objectives:
Goal 1, Obj. A; Goal 2,
Obj. A
DRC
Staff: Jennifer Williams and Keith Sakimura
Co-Counsel: N/A
Grant/Funding
Source(s): SPLC
M.C. Given an
M.C.
v.
Office
of Administrative Hearings.
M.C.
is a fourteen year old student who attended eighth grade on a comprehensive
high school campus. M.C. has diagnoses
of emotional disturbance, atypical depressive disorder, and attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder. Although he was
diagnosed with these disabilities early in life, he was not eligible for
special education until after being hospitalized for threatening to hurt
himself.
M.C.
had a history of high academic scores and compliant behavior in his
classes. He was fully mainstreamed in
all of his classes, and finished the seventh grade with an average of A’s and
B’s in his academic subjects.
In
the eighth grade, M.C. entered with a behavior support plan that included notes
that his behaviors were more severe in unstructured times, such as recess and
lunch. M.C. started exhibiting these
behaviors within the first month of school.
Behaviors included swearing and verbal defiance. Rather than following his behavior support
plan, school officials began detaining him in the principal’s office and
sending him home. This instituted a
pattern of discipline that became excessive, as the school sent him home and
suspended him for issues such as wearing a hat, swearing, and arguing.
When
M.C.’s parents contacted Disability Rights California, he had been suspended or
detained in the office for more than 25% of the school year. During those times, the District was not
providing him with school work to allow him to keep on track with his
peers. He was failing all of his classes
and viewed school as a negative place.
The District proposed retaining him in the eighth grade and placing him
at an alternate site. Although they had
proposed a Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA), M.C.’s parents were not
informed of what an FAA was, and did not trust the school to conduct one. Rather than filing for due process against
M.C.’s parents to sign the assessment plan, the District continued its pattern
of suspending him.
On
May 28, 2008, the parties met in mediation.
In exchange for Disability Rights California agreeing to dismiss the due
process proceedings, the District agreed to provide M.C. with tutoring at a
non-public agency for the summer to allow him to catch up to his peers,
placement during the 2008/2009 school year at a comprehensive high school
campus with a one to one aide, an FAA and an updated Behavior Services Plan
(BSP) while the FAA was being completed.
M.C.
has successfully completed his tutoring program at which his teachers said that
he “blossomed” and is working at an appropriate level to start the ninth
grade. He is currently enrolled to start
back in school in the fall. At that
time, school observation will be conducted in order to complete the FAA.
Education
for Children and Youth Goals and Objectives:
Goal 1, Obj. A; Goal 2, Obj. A
DRC
Staff: Lauren Giardina
Co-Counsel: None
Grant/Funding
Source(s): EA Children and
Young Adult Initiative
L.T. Allowed to Attend Accessible General Education Classes
No case, L.T. was client,
L.T.
is a six-year-old student who was enrolled in kindergarten. L.T. has a diagnosis of spina bifida, but has
not been diagnosed with any accompanying learning or behavior disabilities. L.T.’s parent initially contacted Disability
Rights California because she felt that her daughter’s diapering routine was
not sufficient. In addition, L.T. was
enrolled in a special day class at a school that was not her school of
residence, solely because she used a wheelchair. L.T.’s parent was told by the school (and
believed) that the only physically accessible classes in the school were
special day classes and that her daughter could not attend school in a general
education class. Further, although L.T.
mainly used a walker for mobility, the school required her to use a wheelchair
because it was easier to get her around.
The
school district failed to comply with State and Federal Requirements to educate
all children in the Least Restrictive Environment to the greatest extent
possible with their general education peers.
Furthermore, the district violated the federal regulation requiring
schools to place students in their school of residence unless the Individual
Education Plan (IEP) requires placement elsewhere.
On
June 26, 2008, the parties met at an IEP meeting. At that meeting, the district agreed that it
was not in compliance with LRE requirements.
The District agreed that for the 2008/2009 school year, it will place
L.T. in a general education first grade class with Resource Specialist Program
support to compensate for her transition from a special day class to a general
education class. The school will also
provide an aide at lunch and recess to assist her in participating in events with
her peers, and will ensure that she uses her walker at all times.
L.T.
is enrolled in school and will begin in the fall.
Education
for Children and Youth Goals and Objectives:
Goal 1, Obj. A
DRC
Staff: Lauren Giardina
Co-Counsel: None
Grant/Funding
Source(s): EA Children and
Young Adult Initiative
Settlement Discussions Ongoing; Discovery and Trial Preparation Continue
Capitol People First et al. v. Department of
Developmental Services et al. v. CASH/PCR
Case No. 2002-038715, Alameda County Superior Court, Judge Robert B. Freedman, filed January 2002.
See previous
Capitol People First was filed as a class action seeking community living arrangements for more than 7,000 Californians with developmental disabilities who are residents of the developmental centers or other large congregate facilities and people at risk of placement in such facilities.
In January 2008, the California Supreme Court denied the state defendants’ and interveners’ petitions for review of a Court of Appeal decision that was favorable to plaintiffs. This Supreme Court decision is a victory for plaintiffs; it means that the Supreme Court was not convinced that it needed to hear an appeal of the Court of Appeal’s decision.
In September 2007, in a resounding victory for plaintiffs, the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District had ordered the trial court to grant class certification. The case is now proceeding as a class action on behalf of the thousands of individuals who receive services from regional centers and are either living in state or private institutions, or are at risk of institutionalization. The ruling means that even people with significant disabilities have meaningful access to the courts to vindicate their rights to live as a part of rather than apart from the community.
Discovery in the case, which had been stayed while the class certification appeal was pending, is now proceeding. If the parties do not reach a settlement, the case is expected to go to trial in approximately March, 2009. Settlement discussions, with the assistance of Alameda County Superior Court Judge Brick, are currently ongoing with all defendants.
Background on the case, including legal documents and press coverage 2002-2006, can be read at www.pai-ca.org/advocacy/cpfvdds/index.htm.
Lanterman Goals and Objectives: Goal 1, Obj. 1.
Counsel for DRC: Barbara Dickey, Sujatha Jagadeesh Branch, Jonathan Elson, Elissa Gershon, Ellen Goldblatt, Will Leiner, Maggie Roberts, Dara Schur, and Kim Swain.
Outside Co-counsel: Chris O’Connor, Jeanne Sheahan, Bingham McCutchen; Michael Schwarts, Richard Mulloy, Nikki Wyll, Aaron Wainscott, DLA Piper
Grant/Funding Source(s): PADD, PATT, Equal Access, IOLTA Trust Fund
Training to
Disability
Rights California provided training in
Date of event: June 13, 2008
Location: Exceptional Parents Unlimited,
Lanterman Goals and Objectives: Goal 4, Obj. B
DRC Staff: Jonathan Elson, Leilani Pfeifer, Suzanna Gee, Will Schell, Phyllis Preston, and Loni Pfeifer
Grant/Funding Source: PADD
Mental Health Association of California et al. v.
Schwarzenegger et al.
Case No. RG07361190,
On December 13, 2007, Disability Rights California and several other advocacy organizations filed suit challenging the Governor's veto of the $55 million appropriation for the AB 2034 (Integrated Services for Homeless Adults) program. In April 2008, the court rejected the defendants’ request to dismiss the case and we have been actively pursuing discovery, including requesting thousands of documents and scheduling depositions. We hope to have the court hear the case at the end of January 2009.
Mental Health, Goal 3, Obj. A
DRC Staff: Dan Brzovic, Sean Rashkis, Andy Mudryk
Other Counsel:
Grant/Funding Source: PAIMI
Collaboration Between
Disability Rights
The
Election Protection has a
substantial, well organized operation in the
Discrimination (Voting Team) Goals and Objectives: Goal 4, Obj. B.
DRC Staff: Hillary Sklar, Kevin Bayley,
New Flyer on Signature Stamp Act
Disability Rights California drafted a one-page flyer on the new Signature Stamp Act. The Signature Stamp Act allows a person with a disability who is unable to sign their own name to vote by using a mark or a signature stamp to sign the voter’s affidavit.
Discrimination (Voting Team) Goals and Objectives: Goal 5, Obj. B.
DRC Staff: Fred Nisen
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights
A contingent from
Discrimination (Voting Team) Goals and Objectives: Goal 4, Obj. C.
DRC Staff: Fred Nisen, Maria Marquez
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights
Disability Rights California
continued its tradition of sponsoring an Election Day toll-free hotline for
Californians with disabilities to assure full and equal access to the voting
process. Disability Rights California
used funding from the Help America Vote Act (
In addition to assisting voters
in this election, Disability Rights California uses the information collected
from callers to document discrimination and access problems at polling places
throughout
Disability Rights California received calls from a
voter with visual impairments who experienced difficulty obtaining
transportation to and from his poll site.
Disability Rights California worked with the voter and made calls on his
behalf to
In addition, Disability Rights California continued
to investigate problems reported by
Discrimination (Voting Team) Goals and Objectives: Goal 4, Obj. B.
DRC
Staff: Hillary Sklar, ThoVinh Banh, Will Schell, Phyllis Preston, Fred Nisen,
Kim Swain, Crystal Padilla, Suzi Bernais, Melissa Tyner, Sofia Sami, Beverly
Familiar, Lauren Giardina, and Ivan Guillen.
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights California targeted information about Disability Rights California’s Election Hotline service to individuals with disabilities by having the information posted on the California Disability Community Action Network (CDCAN). This network reaches over 45,000 people with disabilities, seniors, their families, community based organizations and providers of supports and services. Disability Rights California also had the information about the Election Hotline posted on the State Council on Developmental Disabilities (SCDD) website. Information includes Disability Rights California’s toll free telephone number for voice calls and for TDD calls and instructions for individuals who speak languages other than English. Information also specifies specific barriers that individuals with disabilities may face and the purpose of the hotline to fix problems on election days so that individuals with disability may effectively exercise their right to vote.
Discrimination (Voting Team) Goals and Objectives: Goal 5; Obj. B.
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights
Disability Rights California conducted a voting
training on Radio Station AM 1430 in
Discrimination (Voting Team) Goals and Objectives: Goal 5, Obj. B.
DRC
Staff: Fred Nisen
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
“A&D
Individuals or married couples whose income is more than SSI levels, but who are still considered low income, may be eligible to receive Medi-Cal with no share of cost under this program. Under this program an individual who needs assistance with personal care and/or housekeeping tasks so they can remain safely in their homes can also receive these services with no share of cost.
AB 2726/3632
Assembly Bills 2726 and 3632 provides referrals to County Mental Health Services for children with special education needs beyond what schools can offer. These services are considered special education services.
“ADHD” or ATTENTION DEFICIT-HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER
Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurobehavioral disorder that affects 3-5 percent of all American children. It interferes with a person's ability to stay on a task and to exercise age-appropriate inhibition (cognitive alone or both cognitive and behavioral). Some of the warning signs of ADHD include failure to listen to instructions, inability to organize oneself and school work, fidgeting with hands and feet, talking too much, leaving projects, chores and homework unfinished, and having trouble paying attention to and responding to details. There are several types of ADHD: a predominantly inattentive subtype, a predominantly hyperactive-impulsive subtype, and a combined subtype. ADHD is usually diagnosed in childhood, although the condition can continue into the adult years.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)
Methods of resolving disputes without official court proceedings. These methods include MEDIATION and ARBITRATION.
AMICUS CURIAE
Disability Rights California is often asked to appear as an organizational “amicus curiae,” or “friend of the court” in court cases raising important issues for people with disabilities. Appearing as an “amicus” means that DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA submits a brief to the court raising issues as an organization, rather than on behalf of individual clients, because the issues are important to us as an advocacy organization or important to people with disabilities. When DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA appears as an amicus curiae, DRC Staff usually assists with drafting and revising the brief, and co-signs the brief with other interested parties.
ARBITRATION
When a person that isn't involved in the case looks at the evidence, hears the arguments, and makes a decision.
BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN
Plan made by a local educational agency (LEA) as part of an individualized education program (IEP), to change the behavior of students who harm themselves, assault others, or are destructive.
“BPAO” or BENEFITS, PLANNING, ASSISTANCE,
The Social Security Administration (SSA), as authorized by the
Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999, awarded cooperative
agreements to a variety of community organizations called Benefits Planning,
Assistance, and Outreach (
· Provide work incentives planning and assistance to SSA`s beneficiaries with disabilities
· Conduct outreach efforts to those beneficiaries (and their families), who are potentially eligible to participate in Federal or State work incentives programs; and
·
Work in cooperation with Federal, State, and
private agencies and nonprofit organizations that serve beneficiaries with
disabilities.
“
If the Social Security Administration (SSA) considers you statutorily blind, you can have your actual benefit amount
increased by up to 100% of all your work expenses, whether or not those
expenses are related to your disability. You can claim transportation expenses,
the cost of lunch at work, and even the taxes you pay because of earnings. If
your SSA Claims Representative agrees that your claimed work expenses can be
included in a
CALWORKs
CalWORKS is
“CDR” or CONTINUING DISABILITY REVIEW
Social Security Administration (SSA) reviews disability cases periodically to see if the person with a disability still meets SSA disability rules. SSA performs two types of reviews, a medical Continuing Disability Review and a work Continuing Disability Review. Under a work review, SSA looks at earnings to determine if an individual is eligible for monthly benefits. A medical review determines if an individual is meeting the medical requirements to collect disability. If the person does not meet the medical requirements, SSA may stop the disability benefits.
“CI” or COUNTABLE INCOME
Countable Income is the amount of your income that is included in calculations to determine your eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits.
CLASS ACTION
A lawsuit brought by one or more persons on behalf of a larger group where certain individuals (called “class representatives” or “named plaintiffs”) act on behalf of a larger group of people who have similar issues. The court has to determine whether a case can proceed as a class action. If so, certain specific procedures apply relating to how the members of the larger group can get notice of the lawsuit and participate in it.
CONSERVATOR, CONSERVATEE and CONSERVATORSHIP
Conservatorship is a legal proceeding in which an individual or agency (to be known as the “conservator”) is appointed by a court to be responsible for a person who needs assistance in activities of daily living (the “conservatee”). A Conservator of the person must ensure that the conservatee is properly fed, clothed, and housed. A Conservator of the estate is responsible for managing the conservatee’s money and other property. One individual may serve as either conservator of the person or conservator of the estate or both. Conservatorship applies to an adult, i.e., a person eighteen (18) years of age or older.
COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES (CASA)
These are specially trained volunteers who are appointed by a juvenile court to provide advocacy to children in the foster care system. CASA responsibilities include gathering information regarding the child; advocating for the child in IEP meetings and other forums; and making recommendations to the juvenile court about the child’s best interests.
“CYA” or
The California Youth Authority (CYA), a
DAMAGES
Money that the losing side must pay to the winning side to make up for losses or injuries. There are three kinds of damages: (1) "compensatory," meaning money to pay for the actual cost of an injury or loss; (2) "punitive" or "exemplary," meaning an amount of money that's more than the actual damages. Acts as punishment or deterrence for willful or malicious acts; and (3) statutory damages, which are specific amounts in the law awarded for specific legal violations.
DECLARATION
A statement that a person writes and files with the court. It tells the judge why the person should win the case. Sometimes, a person signs this under penalty of perjury.
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
A judgment of the court that explains what the existing law is or expresses the opinion of the court without the need for enforcement.
DEMURRER
A “demurrer” is a specific
kind of request filed with the Court in response to a lawsuit. A demurrer
alleges that even if the facts are true, there is no legal violation. The court
decides on the demurrer at a hearing after both parties present memos and
argument to the court.
DEPOSITION
Written or oral testimony given under oath in front of an authorized third person like a court reporter. Depositions take place outside of the court. They allow the parties to get a record of a person's testimony, or to get testimony from a witness that lives far away. They can help the lawyers prepare their court papers called "pleadings." (See also DISCOVERY.)
“DDS” or CA DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES
The California Department of
Developmental Services (
“DFEH” or DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT
The California Department of
Fair Employment and Housing is the state agency that investigates employment
and housing discrimination claims and is responsible for enforcing state fair
housing and fair employment laws, including disability rights laws in the
housing and employment context.
“DHS” or CA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
The California Department of
Health Services (DHS), which funds and oversees health services in
DISCOVERY
The gathering of information (facts, documents, or testimony) before a case goes to trial. Discovery is done in many ways, such as through depositions, interrogatories, or requests for admissions. It can also be done through independent investigation or by talking with the other side's lawyer.
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
When a court dismisses a case and will not allow any other suit to be filed on the same claim in the future.
DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
When a court dismisses a case, but will allow other suits to be filed on the same claim.
“DMH” or CA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH
The California Department of
Mental Health (
“DOE” or DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
“DSS” or CA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
The California Department of
Social Services (
DYSAUTONOMIA
(Familial) Dysautonomia
affects the autonomic nervous system, which controls involuntary actions such
as digestion, breathing, tearing, and the regulation of blood pressure and body
temperature. This condition also affects the sensory nervous system, which
controls activities related to the senses, such as taste and the perception of
pain, heat, and cold.
“EA” or EQUAL ACCESS
Disability Rights California
receives grants from the state Equal Access to Justice Program to serve
indigent people with disabilities on specified projects.
ELLIS ACT
The
EN BANC
Court sessions where all the judges of a court participate,
instead of the usual number. For example, the
“EPSDT” or EARLY AND PERIODIC SCREENING, DIAGNOSIS, AND
TREATMENT
The Early and Periodic
Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment Program (EPSDT) provides health care
diagnostic and treatment services to individuals under age 21. Under federal
law,
EXCEPTION PAYMENT
“Exception Payment” is a subsidy
above the amount usually allowed.
“EXR” or EXPEDITED REINSTATEMENT
This term is used under The
Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income
(SSI) programs to allow benefits for a person with a disability to be reinstated
quickly if they are no longer working. It provides for temporary benefits
during a period of evaluation, rather than requiring a new application for
benefits.
“EPE” or EXTENDED PERIOD OF ELIGIBILITY
This term is used under the Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs to
provide additional protections to people whose disabilities may only allow
periodic employment. Under these programs, if you stop working you may
automatically have your benefits restored without having to reapply.
FAIR HEARING
A hearing in front of an
agency or administrative law judge to review an agency decision. People have
certain rights in fair hearings such as the right to present evidence, to cross
examine and to have findings supported by evidence.
FAIR MARKET RENT (FMR)
The Fair Market Rent (FMR)
is the amount that the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) sets for rent.
Tenants have to pay extra if rents exceed the FMR, as they usually do because
the FMR’s are unrealistically low.
“FIFTH CATEGORY” REGIONAL CENTER ELIGIBILITY
A person is eligible for the
"fifth category" if he or she has a condition that is similar to
mental retardation and/or has treatment needs that are similar to a person with
mental retardation.
FORENSIC
A term used by both
“G-TUBE” or GASTROSTOMY TUBE
A Gastrostomy Tube (G-Tube)
is a tube that is placed on the stomach to vent for air or drainage, and/or is
an alternate way for feeding.
GUARDIAN AD LITEM
An adult appointed by a court who represents a minor child an individual who has difficulties in acting on his or her own behalf. Comes from Latin meaning for the "purposes of the lawsuit."
GUARDIANSHIP
A guardianship applies only to minors, i.e., person under the age of eighteen (18) years. The principal purpose of guardianship is to provide protection for a child who has no parent.
HABEAS CORPUS
A “writ of habeas corpus” is a judicial mandate to someone who has custody of a person ordering that the person be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is lawfully confined and whether or not the person should be released from custody. A habeas corpus petition is a petition filed with a court by a person who objects to the person’s own or another’s confinement, or to the conditions of confinement. The term comes from Latin.
“HHS” or HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
HHS is the
federal agency overseeing health and human services.
“HIPAA” or HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
The new federal Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) protects the privacy of
medical records and other confidential health information, and restricts access
to records except under specified circumstances.
“HOUSING CHOICE VOICHER” OR “SECTION 8”
Housing Choice Vouchers,
often referred to as Section 8 Vouchers, help subsidize rents for lower income
tenants, including tenants with disabilities. The local Public Housing
Authority (PHA) pays part of the tenant’s rent when the tenant rents from a
private landlord.
“HUD” or
The U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds and regulates many housing and
community development programs for lower income people and people with
disabilities, including Section 8.
“ICF-DD-N” or
INTERMEDIATE CARE FACILITY DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED-NURSING
Intermediate Care
Facility-Developmentally Disabled-Nursing (ICF-DD-N) are a category
of community facilities licensed by the California Department of Health
Services (DHS), which generally
“IDEA” or INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT
The Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is the federal statute that requires
school districts receiving federal funds to provide all students who have a
categorically defined disability with a free appropriate public
education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. FAPE includes
specialized instruction and related services that meet the state educational
standards and are implemented as called for in a student’s
individualized education program (IEP).
“IEP” or INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION PROGRAM
An Individualized Education
Program (IEP) describes the educational program that has been designed to meet the
unique needs of a child with disabilities. Each child who receives special
education and related services must have an IEP, which is an individualized
document developed in consultation with the parents, school, advocates,
students (as appropriate), and health professionals.
“IHSS” or IN-HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES PROGRAM
The In-Home Supportive
Services Program (IHSS) helps pay for services to eligible people to enable
them to stay in their own homes. To be eligible you must be blind or have a
disability or be over 65 and need these services so you can remain safely in
your home. IHSS is an alternative to out-of-home care such as nursing homes or
board and care facilities.
“IMD” or INSTITUTION FOR MENTAL DISEASE
An IMD is defined in the
Code of Federal Regulations at
IMPLIED WARRANTY OF HABITALITY
The right to get an
apartment in good condition.
IN-HOME OPERATIONS HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES (IHO-HCBS
WAIVER)
The new IHO HCBS waiver
combines several existing waivers, including the NF/AB waiver, to expand the
number of slots and services that waiver recipients who would otherwise be
institutionalized in a nursing facility, subacute facility or acute hospital
can receive in the community.
INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT (ICWA)
This is a federal law to protect the integrity of American Indian families. It acknowledges and implements the tribe’s right to intervene in state child custody proceedings.
INJUNCTION
An injunction or permanent
restraining order is a court order requiring someone to take specific actions
or ordering them to stop certain behaviors, based on legal obligations. It is
issued after both sides have been heard by the court in a hearing or trial. The
court order specifies the specific actions, people and time for compliance.
IN FORMA PAUPERIS
(IFP)
A
court says a person does not have to pay a filing fee because the person can't
afford it. In Latin, it means "in the manner of a pauper.”
IN PROPIA PERSONA (IN PRO PER)
In Propia is when a person represents himself or herself without a lawyer. This comes from the Latin for "in one's own proper person." (See also PRO PER AND PRO SE.)
INTERROGATORIES
Written questions asked by one party in a lawsuit, which the opposing party must answer in writing.
INTERVENOR
A person who voluntarily participates in a lawsuit or other proceeding brought by other people. The court must approve the participation of the intervenor.
“IOLTA” or
“IPP” or INDIVIDUAL PROGRAM
“IRWE” or IMPAIRMENT RELATED
This term is used under The Social Security Disability Insurance
(SSDI)
JUDGMENT (JUDGEMENT)
The judge's final decision in a case.
LANTERMAN ACT
The
LEVEL 14 GROUP HOME PLACEMENTS
Level 14 refers to a rate classification that reflects the staffing needs of an individual in Community Care Licensing Facilities. 14 is the highest rate available.
“LPS” or LANTERMAN-PETRIS-SHORT ACT
The Lanterman-Petris-Short
Act is one of the main
MANIFESTATION DETERMINATION
The manifestation
determination meeting is a meeting of the relevant members of the IEP team to
determine whether a child with a disability may be expelled or have his placement
changed for more than 10 consecutive school days. At the meeting, the IEP team
reviews the relevant information from the student’s file, including the IEP and
any information from teachers and the parents and then decides two things: 1)
was the behavior caused by, or did it have a direct and substantial
relationship to, the child’s disability, and 2) was the behavior the direct
result of the school’s failure to implement the IEP? If the team answers yes to
either question, the child cannot be expelled and a placement change would
require the consent of the parent or a hearing officer’s order. If the IEP team
members representing the school district believe the answer to both questions
is “no” and the parent disagrees, the parent can appeal to a special education
hearing.
Medi-Cal is
MEDICARE (See Medi-Cal)
Medicare is a federal health
insurance program which provides benefits for eligible people. There are two
parts to the program: "Part A" is hospital insurance and "Part
B" is medical insurance. Medicare does not cover everything, and is not
free for most people.
MOTION
An oral or written request made by a party to an lawsuit before, during, or after a trial asking the judge to issue a ruling or order in that party's favor.
“MSSP” or MULTIPURPOSE SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM
The Multipurpose Senior Services Program (MSSP), operated by the California Department of Aging, provides case management and a range of services to assist seniors with disabilities to live independently.
NURSING FACILITY WAIVER
The Nursing Facility Waiver allows someone who is otherwise eligible for nursing facility services to instead receive services in the community. It is called a "Waiver" because it waives certain federal Medicaid rules in order to provide different or more services than the State offers to other Medicaid (Medi-Cal) eligible people.
“OCRA” or OFFICE OF CLIENT’S RIGHTS
“ODD” or OPPOSITIONAL DEFIANT DISORDER
Oppositional
Defiant Disorder (ODD) is a type of
disruptive behavior disorder characterized by a recurrent pattern of defiant,
hostile, disobedient, and negativistic behavior directed toward those in
authority, including such actions as defying the requests or rules of adults,
deliberately annoying others, arguing, spitefulness, and vindictiveness that
occur much more frequently than would be expected on the basis of age and
developmental stage.
OPINION
A judge's written explanation of a decision of the court or of a majority of judges. A dissenting opinion disagrees with the majority opinion because of the reasoning and/or the principles of law on which the decision is based. A concurring opinion agrees with the decision of the court but offers further comment. A PER CURIAM OPINION is an unsigned opinion “of the court.”
“OPR” or OFFICE OF PATIENT’S RIGHTS
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
A court order that makes someone go to court to explain to the judge why he or she did not follow the rules.
“PAAT” or PROTECTION & ADVOCACY FOR
ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY
Beginning in 1998, DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA received limited funds under the Protection and Advocacy for Assistive Technology (PAAT) Act to increase access to assistive devices and equipment.
“PABBS” or PROTECTION & ADVOCACY FOR
BENEFICIARIES OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Under
the Protection and Advocacy for Beneficiaries of Social Security (PABSS) Act,
DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA provides advocacy assistance to Beneficiaries of
Social Security Disability or Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and to people
who are working and are beneficiaries of Medicare, Medi-Cal or In-Home
Supportive Services (IHSS) about securing or requiring employment.
“PADD” or PROTECTION & ADVOCACY FOR
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
In 1978,
DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA became the agency in
“PAIMI” or PROTECTION & ADVOCACY FOR
INDIVIDUALS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS
The Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness
Act of 1986 (PAIMI) extended Disability Rights California’s mandate to people
with psychiatric disabilities.
“PAIR” or PROTECTION
& ADVOCACY FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
The Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights Act of 1992
(PAIR) extended Disability Rights California’s mandate to people with physical,
learning and sensory disabilities.
“PASRR” or PREADMISSIONS SCREENING
“PATBI” or PROTECTION & ADVOCACY FOR
TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY
Protection & Advocacy for Individuals with Traumatic Brain Injury (PATBI) assures that people with traumatic brain injury receive appropriate services and supports within their own communities. Disability Rights California promotes the rights of people with Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) through advocacy assistance, education, and outreach to build TBI community awareness and support for inclusion. This program was established by federal grants from the Department of Health and Human Services.
“PAVA” or PROTECTION & ADVOCACY FOR
VOTING ACCESS
Part of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (
PRO
BONO
Legal work done for free. From the Latin meaning "for the public good." Private firms often work with DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA “pro bono” – without charge to clients.
PRO PER
People who present their own cases in court without lawyers (See also IN PROPIA PERSONA and PRO SE.)
PRO SE
People who present their own cases in court without lawyers (See also PRO PER and PRO SE.)
PROTECTIVE SUPERVISION
Protective supervision is supervision for individuals who, because of cognitive or mental impairments, need continuous supervision in order to prevent self-inflicted harm while living at home.
PURCHASE OF SERVICES (POS)
Purchase of Services (POS) dollars is money used by people served under the Lanterman Act. It allows the person with a developmental disability to directly pay service providers.
RIESE HEARING
A hearing to determine an individual’s capacity to refuse administration of psychotropic medication.
REGIONAL CENTERS
Non-profit corporations
which, under the provisions of the Lanterman Act, contract with the Department
of Developmental Services to provide service coordination to individuals with
developmental disabilities and assist people to obtain the supports they need.
There are 21 RCs in
SECTION 8
Section 8 is a federally
funded housing assistance program that provides to low income families. The
vouchers allow the family to rent any apartment or house where the landlord
will accept them, and pay a limited amount of money, generally 30% of the
family’s income. Section 8 is operated by local housing authorities and usually
has a long waiting list.
SELF-DIRECTED SERVICES
“Self-Directed Services” is a new model for providing services to people with developmental disabilities that allows them to manage their own budgets and gives them more control over providers.
“SELPA” OR SPECIAL EDUCATION LOCAL PLAN AREA
The Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) is an
administrative unit under
“SGA” or SUBSTANTIAL GAINFUL ACTIVITY
Substantial Gainful Activity is the term used by Social Security when evaluating earned income and “work activity” of individuals applying for or receiving disability benefits.
There
are two criteria that determine
This
is a monthly amount that is specified by Social Security for individuals who
are employed or self-employed.
“SRO” OR SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY
Single room occupancy hotels, or residency hotels, provide single room apartments with shared bathrooms for low income individuals. This is an important source of housing for people with disabilities who live on fixed incomes.
“SSI” OR SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME
Supplemental Security Income
(SSI) is a cash benefit program for low-income people 65 and over and for
people of any age, including infants and children, who are blind or have
disabilities. CAPI is a similar program for immigrants who do not qualify for
SSI.
STATUTE
A law passed by the United States Congress or a state legislature.
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
A law that says how much time you have to file a lawsuit after something happens.
STAY
An order by a court that stops any further action in the case for a certain period of time.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
When the judge decides a case without going to trial. The decision is based on the papers filed by both sides.
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO)
A Temporary Restraining Order (
“TBS” or THERAPEUTIC
BEHAVIORAL SERVICES
Therapeutic Behavioral
Services (TBS) is a Medi-Cal mental health service. It provides short-term
one-to-one assistance to children or youth under age 21 who have behaviors that
are too hard for their families or foster placement to handle, such as
tantrums, assaultive behavior or destruction of property. TBS can be provided
to children at home, in a group home, in the community, during evening and
weekends, and at other times and places as needed. The county mental health
plan develops a behavior intervention plan and assigns a trained behavior aide
to a child/youth for as many hours per day as needed. The county may also
authorize another mental health organization to develop the plan and assign the
behavior aide.
TRANSCRIPT
A record of everything that is said in a deposition, hearing or trial. Transcripts may be prepared from tape recordings or may be done by certified court reporters who use special equipment to make a word-for-word record of the proceeding.
“TWP” or TRIAL
A “Trial Work Period” under Social Security Disability law
allows people with disabilities to test their ability to work for at least 9
months without reducing their Social Security Disability Income. During the
UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
This law provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in
WRIT
A court order that says certain action must be taken.
WRIT OF MANDATE
A court order to a government agency, including another court, or to a private entity requiring it to follow the law by correcting its prior actions, ceasing illegal acts, or taking certain actions.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
ABUSE AND NEGLECT............................................................................................................. 1
Unnoticed Deaths of Two State Hospital Residents................................................................. 1
BENEFITS..................................................................................................................................... 2
Client is Assessed for a New Wheelchair.................................................................................. 2
Client Obtains a Specialized Wheelchair after Disability Rights California
Filed a Writ of Administrative Mandamus.................................................................................................................................. 4
Settlement Reached In Laguna Honda Class Action................................................................ 5
County Department of Public Health Agrees to Reinstate Primary Care
Physician and Treatment Plan 5
Disability Rights California Takes Legal Action to Secure Paramedical and
other IHSS Services for Minor Client.......................................................................................................................................... 6
Regional Center Assesses J.K.’s Need and Provides Nursing Respite Care
Services per Individual Program Plan (IPP).................................................................................................................................... 7
Disability Rights California Prevented Premature Discharge from Acute
Rehabilitation for Person with Traumatic Brain Injury............................................................................................................... 8
Disability Rights California Helps Child with Down’s Syndrome and Mental
Retardation Obtain IHSS Protective Supervision with Retroactive Hours and will
Investigate Potential Unlawful Screening Processes in San Bernardino County..................................................................................................................... 9
DISCRIMINATION..................................................................................................................... 10
Disability Rights California Files Lawsuit on Behalf of an 83-Year-Old
Woman with Disabilities Seeking Equal Access to Retirement Community Dining
Room.................................................................... 10
Settlement in Laguna Honda Class Action Preliminarily Approved....................................... 11
Criminal Charges Dropped Against Parent with a Disability who was Accused
of Childcare Fraud 13
M.L. Wins Approval of Section 8 Benefits.............................................................................. 14
Disability Rights California Assists TM with Getting Section 8 Voucher
Reinstated............ 14
Tentative Settlement Reached in Discrimination Case on Behalf of People
With Disabilities Residing in a Group
Home............................................................................................................................. 15
Disability Rights California Assists E.B. to Receive Needed HIV Treatment
at County Jail 16
Disability Rights California Assists T.F. to Secure Medical Expense
Deduction to Help Lower Her Monthly Rent in Publicly-Funded Housing Program............................................................................. 16
Disability Rights California Helps Man with Multiple Physical Disabilities
Challenge County’s Attempt to Place Him on Conservatorship.......................................................................................................... 17
Favorable Settlement Reached in Housing Discrimination Case........................................... 18
EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN & YOUTH............................................................................ 19
S.D. Re-Enrolled in School District and Receives Compensatory Education
Services......... 19
K.M. Expulsion Decision Reversed and He Receives Independent Assessments.............. 20
M.C. Given an Opportunity to Attend School......................................................................... 21
L.T. Allowed to Attend Accessible General Education Classes............................................. 22
LANTERMAN.............................................................................................................................. 23
Settlement Discussions Ongoing; Discovery and Trial Preparation Continue....................... 23
Training to Central Valley Disability Rights Advocates.......................................................... 24
MENTAL HEALTH..................................................................................................................... 25
Case Involving Challenge to Governor’s Veto of Integrated Services for
Homeless Adults Program Moves Forward..................................................................................................................................... 25
VOTING....................................................................................................................................... 26
Collaboration Between Disability Rights California and Election Protection......................... 26
New Flyer on Signature Stamp Act.......................................................................................... 26
Disability Rights California Participates on Forum Regarding Accessible
Voting in California and Mexico 26
Disability Rights California Sponsored a Voting Hotline for the June 3,
2008 Primary Election 27
Disability Rights California Posted Information about Disability Rights
California’s Election Hotline Phone Number that Reaches Thousands of
Individuals with Disabilities.......................................... 28
Disability Rights California Conducts Voting Training on Radio for
Vietnamese Community 28
GLOSSARY OF SELECTED TERMS...................................................................................... 30
F:\DOCS\Dara\DoL
Reports\43-Current DoL Issues From 2006-Current\53 Issue - Fall 2008\53 - ROR
Fall 2008 Public.doc
[1] The medical necessity standard is different for
children under 21 years of age and persons residing in nursing homes.