Regional Office Reports on
Disability Rights
WINTER 2008 – Work as of September 30, 2008 – Issue
54
This report represents a summary of
the work Disability Rights California staff has reported from August 1, 2008 to
September 30, 2008. Many thanks to those
who provided the material to make this report possible.
Investigations Unit Trains Key
Stakeholders about Crimes against People With Disabilities
The
Investigations Unit (IU) gave a presentation to prosecutors, law enforcement
personnel, victims’ advocates, public guardians, and ombudspersons at the
Criminal Justice Institute's Symposium on Elder and Dependent Adult
Abuse. Although many of the symposium’s participants are actively involved
in addressing elder abuse, they are relatively uninformed about the particular
obstacles to prosecution of crimes against people with disabilities.
As part of
its training, the IU detailed the prevalence of crimes against people with
disabilities. The IU then discussed gaps
in the abuse reporting system, and how it contributes to the under reporting of
crimes against people with disabilities.
We also explained the various publicly funded service systems (particularly
Abuse and
Neglect Goal 4, Objective B
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PADD, PAIMI, PAIR
See previous DOL Report, Summer 2008.
Based on substantiated reports of abuse by the
Department of Public Health, the IU is continuing to investigate incidents of
abuse of residents of skilled nursing facilities to determine whether they were
reported under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act
(Mandated Reporter Act) and to obtain the outcome of any such reports.
Investigations thus far have uncovered deficiencies
in the abuse reporting process, including improper and untimely reporting of
abuse, lack of investigation by the Long Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO), and the
lack of criminal prosecutions by the District Attorney (DA).
Under the Mandated Reporter Act, the witnessing staff
members (caregivers and others) are required to report directly to either the
long term care ombudsman (LTCO) or law enforcement incidents of suspected or
reported abuse and neglect. WIC
§ 15600 et seq. Yet in all of the cases under investigation
by the IU, the witnessing staff member did not report the abuse themselves but
rather told facility administrators who, in most but not all cases, eventually
notified the LTCO. Mandated reporters
are required to report the incident themselves to ensure timely and accurate
reporting and to prevent facility administrators from under reporting abuse and
neglect or preventing incidents from being investigated by outside entities. The failure of the mandated reporter to
notify the appropriate investigating agency directly creates an unnecessary
delay that jeopardizes a thorough and timely investigation and potentially
exposes residents to subsequent harm from the alleged perpetrators.
In all but one case, the LTCO has refused to disclose
its investigative records to the IU. The
LTCO even refused to disclose whether an investigation was even conducted and
the outcomes of any completed investigations.
Facility records conclude that no investigations were conducted by the
LTCO and no recommendations were made by the LTCO to facilities for corrective
action. This is even more troubling as
LTCO offices reduce staff following the Governor’s decision to eliminate
funding for these programs in the final state budget.
The IU will be meeting with the State LTCO to obtain
more information about the role of the local LTCO in abuse investigations, the
standards for investigation, and the number of verified abuse and neglect
complaints referred to law enforcement or the DA. The IU will also explore how LTCO offices
anticipate responding to reports of abuse and neglect under the new state
budget.
In terms of law enforcement’s role, the IU concluded
that several of the most egregious cases were investigated, but found that the
local DA declined to file charges. The
IU is investigating the reasons for the DA’s decision and is exploring the role
of the Bureau of Medi-Cal Fraud & Elder Abuse in prosecuting elder abuse.
The IU continues to open new cases to gain a deeper
perspective of the issues surrounding compliance with and deficits of the abuse
reporting system. For example, the IU
recently opened two cases involving abuse of nursing home residents. One case involves a resident who was bloodied
after being punched on the mouth by a staff member. Another involves the alleged rape of a
resident by a staff member who was permitted to continue working with residents
while the facility conducted its own internal investigation.
Abuse and Neglect
Goal 1, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAIR
Final Settlement Approval in Laguna Honda Class Action
Mark Chambers et. al. v. City and
Case No.:
C06-06346 WHA,
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 September 18, 2008, Judge William Alsup granted
final approval of the settlement agreement in Chambers et al. v. City and County of San Francisco. In granting final approval, Judge Alsup
congratulated the parties and said that this settlement is one of the better
ones he has seen in terms of outcomes.
The action was
originally filed on October 11, 2006, by six residents of Laguna Honda Hospital
(LHH) and the
The Class, certified
by the Court in July 2007 consists of Medi-Cal recipients who meet one of the
following conditions: 1) reside at LHH, 2) are on the waitlist for LHH, 3) are
within two years post discharge from LHH, or 4) are patients at San Francisco
General Hospital (SFGH) and are eligible for discharge to LHH.
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. The goal of the DCIP is to
place those individuals in the most integrated setting that is appropriate to a
qualified individuals’ needs and preferences;
·
Provision of, or
referral for, Case Management and Wrap-Around Services;
·
Provision of
access to affordable, accessible community housing, including development of an
LHH Rental Subsidy Program that 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;
·
Reduction in the
site of LHH with the goal that the
facility refocus on 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 measures provided by the Defendant;
·
Monitoring of
implementation of the settlement by Disability Rights California.
Benefits Goal
5, Objective A
Discrimination
Goal 1, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Other
Counsel: Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
(DREDF), AARP Foundation Litigation, the
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAIR, PAIMI, PAAT
Assistive Technology (AT) Training—Collaboration
between Disability Rights
On September 16, 2008, a staff attorney from the
Benefits Goal
5, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAAT
Disability Rights
J.F., a person with a disability, lives in a rural
area and needs a scooter to get around in his community, including going to
doctors appointments. Medi-Cal declined
to purchase the scooter because it believed it was not medically
necessary. Disability Rights California
assisted the durable medical equipment vendor to resubmit a Treatment
Authorization Request (TAR) with information clarifying why the scooter was a
medical necessity. Subsequently,
Medi-Cal approved the TAR.
J.F. contacted Disability Rights California again
because he was having problems with the scooter. The vendor who had sold him
the scooter initially went to his home to see if the scooter could be fixed,
but thereafter, ignored J.F.’s calls for assistance. Under certain circumstances, Medi-Cal will
pay for repairs, but only for equipment it approves for purchase. Disability Rights California placed calls to
the vendor and also wrote a letter to the vendor to point out how it could be
reimbursed. Disability Rights California
later discovered that the vendor had gone out of business. Disability Rights California was able to put
J.F. in contact with another vendor in his area who is helping J.F. get his
scooter fixed.
Benefits Goal 2, Objective B
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAAT
Disability Rights
M.B. has a Plan for Achieving Self Support (PASS),
which allows a person to set aside income (other than SSI) and/or resources in
an account, to be used toward a feasible occupational goal. The items purchased through a PASS are
pre-approved by a PASS Cadre (A Social Security Administration representative
who specializes in PASS plans).
M.B. received a notice from the Social Security
Administration (SSA) that her PASS was being suspended because she could not
account for all of her PASS expenditures and that she had an overpayment of
$1,448.49 as a result. Although M.B.
submitted receipts to show how she spent some of the money in her PASS, she was
unable to account for all of the money spent.
One of her biggest expenses in her PASS is gas to travel to and from
school. M.B. asked an advocate at
Disability Rights California for help.
After reviewing M.B.’s PASS, the advocate determined
that the Cadre had not used the correct mileage reimbursement rate for
2008. The Cadre agreed to adjust the
mileage allowance. As a result of the
increase in mileage allowance, the overpayment was reduced to $649.09, which
M.B. agreed to pay back.
The advocate also counseled M.B. on how the mileage
reimbursement is calculated. She has
been using her debit card (connected to her PASS) to pay for gas every time she
filled up her gas tank. However, the
PASS plan only allows for mileage reimbursement for miles to and from
school. M.B. now understands that any money
spent on gas not related to going to and from school will not be considered a
PASS expenditure and will be prepared to avoid future overpayments.
Benefits Goal 1, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PABSS
R.M. is a regional center client with autism and
cerebral palsy who works for a local national retail store. He has an independent living skills (ILS)
worker who assists him at home and for a few hours a month at work as a job
coach.
The ILS worker contacted Disability Rights California
because SSA sent R.M. a letter indicating that, due to his earnings above
substantial gainful activity ($940 in 2008); he no longer qualified for Social
Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits.
When SSA decides whether a person’s earnings show
that a person has done substantial gainful activity, SSA does not consider any
income that is not directly related to a person’s productivity. When a person’s
earnings exceed the reasonable value of the work a person performs, SSA
considers the work to be subsidized and will only look at the portion of
earnings the person actually earned.
A Disability Rights California advocate contacted
R.M.’s immediate supervisor to find out what assistance R.M. is receiving on
the job. The supervisor explained that
R.M. requires supervision 100% of the time to stay on task and can do only one
task at a time with guidance and demonstration. R.M.’s supervisor prepared a letter to SSA
explaining that 45-50% of R.M.’s job is subsidized. In other words, the true value of R.M.’s work
is 45%-50% less than what he is actually paid.
This calculation put R.M.’s countable earnings below substantial gainful
activity.
With the assistance from his ILS worker, R.M. filed
an appeal. Thereafter, SSA determined
that R.M.’s earnings should not be considered substantial gainful activity due
to his employer’s subsidy and that he should continue to receive SSDI.
Benefits Goal 1, Objective
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PABSS
Disability Rights
N.B. qualified for 283 hours per month of IHSS
services under the Medi-Cal personal care services program based on
quadriplegia, stage 4 pressure sores, night sweats, and hypoglycemia. When she was reassessed, her hours were reduced
to 118 hours per month. Some of the time
authorized was increased by stipulation with the county. At hearing, the Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) ruled for the county in other areas of dispute.
N.B. has an assistance dog and requested IHSS time
compensated for the care of her assistance dog such as for brushing her teeth
and coat, cleaning her ears weekly, filling her food container, cutting her
nails every two weeks, bathing her once a month, washing her service animal
vest, and administering heartworm and flea medications. After the hearing, the record was left open
for briefing on why time should be authorized for caring for the assistance
dog. Disability Rights California
responded by asserting that: (1) the care needs of N. B.’s service animal
should be covered at least to the extent that services provided by the
assistance dog would be covered under the IHSS program, and (2) the care needs
are coverable under the service category for “[c]are and assistance with
prosthetic devices,” (3) the time for taking the service animal outside for
toileting is coverable under domestic services because of the health
consequences of feces and urine in the home, and (4)
covering assistance needed with durable medical equipment and prosthetic
devices but not covering care of an assistance animal violates federal
regulations and is tantamount to a denial of a Medicaid service “to an
otherwise eligible recipient solely because of the diagnosis, type of illness,
or condition.”
The ALJ failed to consider or address any of the
arguments presented and denied time for care of the assistance dog concluding
that “no authority exists in IHSS regulations to authorize time for dog
care.” Disability Right California is
considering litigation to challenge the denial of services for the care of a
medically necessary service animal in N.B.’s case and systemically.
Benefits Goal
3, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAIR
The Health Consumer Action Center (HCAC), a project
of the Legal Aid Society of Orange County, represented a child with severe
autism who needed Medi-Cal through institutional deeming because the child’s
private health care coverage was ending.
The Regional Center initially took the position that
a child could not qualify for the Developmental
Disabilities waiver (DD waiver) and institutional deeming until age 3
except in cases where there was “a clearly defined genetic syndrome or another
disorder that will unquestionably result in mental retardation and will
continue indefinitely”. Disability
Rights California provided a copy of the waiver itself, arguments about why the
waiver and statute had no age limitation for purposes of eligibility or any
basis for imposing a more stringent eligibility standard prior to age 3, and
Department of Developmental Services (DDS) waiver contacts for help to advocate
on the client’s behalf with the
Although the
Benefits Goal
3, Objective A
Lanterman Goal
3, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Other Counsel: Primary counsel and advocates were from HCAC
including Nancy Rimsha, Jami Teaghle, Rosalee McEntyre. Disability Rights California provided only
technical assistance to the child through HCAC counsel.
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
Disability Rights
A
Housing Authority (HA) had a policy of requiring people with disabilities to
re-request any needed reasonable accommodations every year. Disability
Rights California represented a client at a hearing who has a two-bedroom
voucher because of medical equipment. Her claim was denied because Kaiser
would not sign the non-HIPAA compliant form. Then, the HA wanted to
measure her equipment to see if the equipment would fit in a bigger one-bedroom
unit against the client’s wishes.
When the Executive Director of the HA was notified that Disability Rights
California was representing the client, she asked the Board to amend the
Administrative Plan to allow a physician to verify that an accommodation is of
a permanent lifetime duration, not requiring the accommodation to be requested
annually. At the hearing, the HA agreed not to measure the client’s
equipment at the on-site inspection and the Hearing Officer reversed the denial.
The HA also approved a lifetime accommodation for the client.
Discrimination Goal 2, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIR
Disability Rights
Disability
Rights California’s client is a woman with a physical disability that limits
her ability to stand, walk, and sit in an upright position. The client wanted to address her local City
Council regarding noise from a construction project across the street from her
home. However, because of her disability
she was unable to attend the City Council meeting in person. She submitted a request to address the City
Council via telephone. This request was
denied and the client contacted Disability Rights California for help.
Disability
Rights California wrote the City Attorney explaining that the client is a
qualified individual with a disability and that, under Title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals with disabilities must be afforded
an equally effective opportunity to participate in, or benefit from, services,
programs and activities. After receiving
Disability Rights California’s letter, the City Council reversed its decision
and allowed the client to testify via telephone.
Discrimination Goal 3, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIR
Disability Rights
Disability
Rights California was contacted by the California Health & Human Services
Agency’s Office of Health Information Integrity and was invited to participate
in beginning discussions about a new way of storing an individual’s health
records online. The new system would
store an individual’s health records on a centralized computer database
allowing access by multiple physicians, such as a primary care physician and an
emergency room physician. Disability
Rights California now participates in regular meetings and ongoing discussion
regarding how this new database will impact mental health records, privacy
rights, and concerns by mental health consumers.
Discrimination Goal 3, Objective B
Mental
Health Goal 5
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
Disability Rights
Disability
Rights California attended a stakeholder meeting on the Assisted Living Waiver
Pilot Project (ALWPP). ALWPP is operated
by the California Department of Health Care Services Long-Term Care
Division. ALWPP provides waiver slots
for individuals who reside in nursing homes, or are at risk of being placed in
a nursing home, and instead provides them an opportunity to reside in the
community with necessary personal care and nursing services. At the stakeholder meeting, Disability Rights
California asked whether facilities applying for ALWPP slots will be screened
to determine if there is physical accessibility to the facility for individuals
with mobility disabilities. The
Long-Term Care Division representatives assured the stakeholders that all
facilities receiving ALWPP waiver slots will be accessible to individuals with
mobility disabilities. Disability Rights
California will continue to be a stakeholder in future meetings and
discussions.
Discrimination Goal 3, Objective B
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIR
EDUCATION FOR Children & Youth
Former Juvenile Hall Youth Re-Enrolls in School and Receives Compensatory Education Services
R.C. v. B.P.U.S.D.; OAH N2008030776
Office of Administrative Hearings,
Mediator: Judge Richard Breen
R.C., a 19 year old student, retained Disability
Rights California after he had been released from Juvenile Hall and was
excluded from re-entry into
On June 9, 2008, a mediation agreement resolved
that R.C. would remain in his current school placement where he would be
evaluated by an independent assessor for an FAA. R.C. was also to receive as compensatory
education services Non Public Agency academic tutoring, with a concentration on
academics as well as behavior intervention strategies. The tutoring will help
R.C. to meet his goal of graduating high school and passing the CAHSEE exam.
Education for Children & Youth Goal 1, Objective A; Goal 2, Objective
A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): SPLC
C.M. v. A.U.S.D.; OAH N2008060050
Office
of Administrative Hearings, Mediator
ALJ Ralph Venturino
An 11 year-old student, C.M., retained Disability
Rights California after the school district held a manifestation
determination. The IEP team recommended
a change in placement to a non-public school despite the team’s agreement that
C.M.’s behavior was related to his disability.
During his educational career, C.M. had exhibited serious behavior
issues and the District had failed to conduct appropriate behavioral
assessments and ascertain what services were needed. The primary legal issue in C.M.’s case was
the failure of the school district to provide adequate behavior supports and
failure to provide educational services to C.M.
This resulted in the IEP team recommending that C.M. have a more
restrictive placement in violation of the Hughes Bill which requires school
districts to provide a Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA) and related
behavior services and supports.
Following two mediation conferences and continued negotiations, the
parties reached a settlement agreement on Sept. 29, 2008. The agreement
provided for placement in a Special Day Class and for an independent FAA and
independent psycho-educational report.
Education for Children & Youth Goal 1, Objective A; Goal 2, Objective
A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): SPLC, PAIMI, EA
X.C. & R.B. v.
At a September
2008 meeting in executive session, the
Under the settlement, the District
commits to removing architectural barriers and to take other steps to provide
program access for students with mobility, vision, and/or hearing disabilities
at its more than 30 schools and other district facilities.
The key provision for barrier
removal is a ten-year commitment by the
The architectural work and implementation of special
education recommendations will be monitored by third-party neutrals during the
multi-year settlement period through a series of reports and meetings, with the
first meeting scheduled for November 21st. The agreement also calls
for the mediation or arbitration of any disputes between the parties that may
occur in the implementation phase.
The settlement also addresses concerns that
Education for Children & Youth Goal 1, Objective A; Goal
3, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Other
Counsel: Melissa Kasnitz
& Kasey Corbit (Disability Rights Advocates)
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
Disability Rights
W.D. is a 60 year-old man
with significant intellectual disabilities. He is non-verbal, but enjoys
interacting with his family through walks, dinners, church attendance,
hand-holding, and physical games. With
less than 24 hours notice, W.D.'s regional center moved him from a congregate facility
close to his family to a congregate facility more than an hour away from the
family. W.D.'s family members who are
his limited conservators and authorized representatives, had purchased a three
bedroom, two bathroom house closer to them and where they had requested that
W.D. be able to live with Supported Living Services (SLS). The regional center refused the family's
request for SLS, and attempted to use it as an example of irrational decision
making, amounting to abuse by the family members. The regional center filed in probate court to
have the family's limited conservatorship removed and a more restrictive public
guardian's conservatorship order put in place.
On behalf of W.D., Disability Rights California wrote
a fair hearing request and represented at Office of Administrative Hearings
mediation in January 2008, resulting in
successfully having W.D.'s written IPP changed to reflect his interest in SLS,
and obtaining a regional center funded SLS assessment conducted by a mutually
agreed upon assessor. Disability Rights
California also obtained the support of the original regional center, which worked with W.D. and the family and
to get SLS services in place, and to put pressure on the second regional center
to transfer the case.
After a full year of difficult advocacy, W.D. was
finally able to move into his own home, close to his family, with SLS in July
2008. Upon W.D.'s transfer to his home
county, Disability Rights California then assisted him in having the probate
legal petition seeking to remove his family’s limited conservatorship
dismissed, and the case transferred as an ordinary, limited conservatorship to
the jurisdiction of his home county.
Lanterman Goal
1, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
Disability Rights
J.G. is a 23 year old young
man with complex, multiple, developmental disabilities, who spent years in
institutions before successfully transitioning into the community several years
ago. J.G. has attended an adult day
program, with 1:1 support funded by a regional center, since June 2006. In June 2007, a new director took over the
day program. Although reports from the
day program over the previous year had been overwhelmingly positive, showing
dramatic benefit to J.G. and complete control of previously existing behaviors,
under the new administration the day program terminated J.G., stating that his
need for 1:1 support, and his behavioral “profile” made him ineligible for the
program. Through negotiation by Disability Rights California in July 2007, the day program extended its termination date 60 days,
which J.G.’s mother and regional center spent looking for a program that would
not discriminate against him.
At the end of September,
the day program indicated it would not revoke or provide further extensions of
its termination. Fearing damage to J.G.
caused by being left without a day program because of its discrimination, Disability Rights California filed an action in federal court in September 2007, claiming violation
of federal and state anti-discrimination laws, and seeking a preliminary
injunction compelling the day program to reinstate J.G.
In a strongly worded judgment
and order granting preliminary injunction dated October 22, 2007, the Court
indicated that J.G. was likely to succeed on his discrimination claims, and
would suffer irreparable harm if excluded from his day program. Through alternative dispute resolution funded
by defendants in April and September 2008, Disability Rights California was
able to obtain a favorable settlement for J.G., revoking his termination,
defining a collaborative approach to provision of his services and
accommodations in his day program, and awarding damages and fees. The matter
remains open for filing of a stipulated dismissal in federal court with
retention of jurisdiction over the settlement agreement for one year.
Lanterman Goal
3, Objective A
Discrimination
Goal 2, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
Disability Rights
D.R. is a 46 year old woman
with Down Syndrome who was brought to Disability
Rights California’s attention by a
hospice social worker. Her mother had
made no legal or service provisions for D.R.
No one knew what, if any, regional center was involved. Senior services homecare providers who had
cared for D.R.'s mother while she was still at home were continuing, out of a
sense of obligation, to provide support to D.R. while her mother was in the
hospital, but had stopped receiving any payment for their services after D.R.'s
mother's death. They had called adult
protective services, who had proposed putting D.R. under a Lanterman Petris
Short (LPS) conservatorship and removing her. D.R. badly wanted not to leave the home where
she had spent most of her life.
Disability Rights California assisted D.R. in explaining her legal rights to Adult Protective
Services and by contacting a regional center for emergency crisis
intervention. D.R. was fortunate in that
she was apparently already in the regional center’s system, although her case had
been inactivated years before by her mother, who was unhappy with the regional
center. The regional center immediately
agreed to provide services to support her in her home, contracted with an
attorney to handle the probate implications of the property, issued retroactive
and temporary emergency payments to the homecare providers, and contracted for
an SLS assessment in order to provide more appropriate, ongoing support.
Lanterman Goal
1, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
J.D. is a sixteen year old
diagnosed with mental retardation, orthopedic impairments, and legal blindness
and is completely dependent on his caregiver. J.D. has been a regional center
client since before the age of three and has received little to no regional
services or supports. Disability Rights California directly represented J.D. at
his Individual Program Plan (IPP) and advocated for an assistive
technology assessment, additional respite hours, case management services to
assist in obtaining Medi-Cal services, a social/recreation program, and a
summer camp program when he is out of school. Disability Rights California will
continue to represent J.D. to ensure that he is provided with the regional
services he is entitled to under the Lanterman Act.
Lanterman Goal
1, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding
Source: PADD
Disability Rights
G.F., a 19 year-old who has
mild mental retardation, was convicted of a felony at the age of 12 and spent
years in and out of the state hospital as well as other treatment centers. G.F. was under the jurisdiction of the
Juvenile Court as a dependant minor and his case was supervised by the
Department of Children and Family Services.
G.F. was at risk of being
sent to a residential facility in
Lanterman Goal
1, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
Disability Rights
F.P. is a 19-year old with
mild mental retardation who had been in foster care for many years along with
his twin brothers and was a client of both the Department of Children and
Family Services (DCFS) and the regional center system. He and his brothers were sent to different
foster family homes. F. P. lost his
brothers after they were allegedly killed while under the care of DCFS.
Disability Rights
California represented F.P. in ensuring that the regional center was providing
him with appropriate supports and services in the community before his
emancipation. Disability Rights California advocated for regional center to
fund an adult group home near his family and provide F.P. with independent
living skills training, supported employment, socialization activities,
coordination with vocational rehabilitation, and funding for
transportation. F.P. found employment at
a local supermarket and eventually moved into his own apartment where he is
currently living independently and working to support himself. F.P. also has been able to reestablish a
relationship with his family members.
Lanterman Goal
1, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
Disability Rights California Helps Client Get community Placement and Supports
M.W. is a 19 year-old female who is a regional center
client with mild mental retardation and a psychiatric disability. M.W. was a
client of both the regional center system and Department of Children and Family
Services (DCFS). M.W. was placed at
Disability Rights
California represented M.W. and
advocated for the regional center to hold an Individual Program Plan (IPP)
meeting at
Disability Rights
California successfully advocated for
the regional center to provide an appropriate placement in the community with
services and supports such as sexuality training, behavior services,
counseling, day work program, and socialization activities. M.W. was placed in
a specialized group home where she is now part of the community and is able to
have contact with her siblings and other family members.
Lanterman Goal
1, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PADD
Katie A. Ruling Moves
Katie A. is a class
action on behalf of tens of thousands of
The judge took the
issue of therapeutic foster care under submission.
In a separate
development, the LA County Board of Supervisors' voted in October to approve
$62 million toward implementation of the Katie A entered settlement five years
ago. The goal is to provide mental
health screening and services to enable children to remain at home and avoid
placement in restrictive foster care settings.
On October 30, 2008,
the State Department of Mental Health (DMH) issued All County Letter 08-07 (ACM
08-07), “Clarification on Medi-Cal Billing for Specialty Mental Health Services
under the EPSDT Program for Children in the Foster Care and Child Welfare
System.” While a step forward,
Plaintiffs’ counsel seek further steps to ensure that all medically necessary
wraparound services are available and provided to children in need. Further briefing was due on November 17.
Mental Health Goal 3, Objective A
Disability Rights
Other Counsel:
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
The Emily Q. class
action was filed in 1998 to get home and community-based one-to-one behavioral
aides for children in mental institutions and group homes who could
appropriately live in more integrated settings.
In 2001, the
Judge Howard Matz has
found that the state and counties have not complied with their
responsibilities, and appointed a special master to oversee compliance. Special Master Richard Saletta submitted his
Second Quarterly Report around September 25, 2008. State defendants have consented to the
extension of the Special Master’s involvement to December 31, 2010. Focused review of accountability and
utilization rates will take place in ten California counties.
Mental Health Goal 3, Objective A
Disability Rights
Other Counsel:
Western Center on Law and
Poverty, the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, Mental
Health Advocacy Services of Los Angeles, and the Bazelon Center for Mental
Health law.
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
Disability Rights
S.M. received a Sixty
Day Notice of Termination of Tenancy on September 11, 2008. She called the San Diego Regional Office for
assistance in challenging the eviction, based in part on police response and
subsequent 5150 detention in a psychiatric hospital. Disability Rights California spoke with
S.M.'s mental health case worker, who has a limited role due to her caseload,
about eligibility and advocacy for intensive case management services. The county agreed to provide intensive case
management services to S.M. Disability
Rights California assisted S.M., her former case worker, and her new intensive
case manager to draft a reasonable accommodation request that the property
manager handle any future concerns by first notifying S.M.’s intensive case
management services, which agreed to assist in resolving any concerns. Disability Rights California submitted the
reasonable accommodation request with a cover letter outlining federal and
state fair housing law. The property manager agreed to accept S.M.'s
accommodation request and withdraw the Sixty Day Notice.
Mental Health Goal 1, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
In response to a
licensing complaint filed by Disability Rights California against Alpine
Special Treatment Center,
Mental Health Goal 1, Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
R.L. is an 11 year old boy who was subject to repeated instances
of restraint and seclusion over a four year period in a mental health treatment
program which was funded by a nonpublic agency.
Disability Rights California reviewed relevant records, including the
extensive incidents reports, and determined that the use of restraint and
seclusion on R.L. violated a number of laws and regulations. Disability Rights
California contacted the provider on behalf of R.L’s mother, who wanted the
providers to make changes to the day treatment program’s policies and practices
regarding the use of restraint, seclusion, and systemic behavior planning. The
day treatment provider has agreed to enter into structured negotiations with
Disability Rights California. A stated
goal of the structured negotiations is to reach consensus on a method for a
review of the facility’s use of restraint and seclusion, as well as its
behavior assessment and planning practices by an independent expert.
Mental
Health Goal
1, Objective A; Goal 3, Objective A.
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
See DISCRIMINATION
SECTION, infra
Disability Rights California has joined the Racial and Ethnic
Mental Health Disparities Coalition (REMHDCO) in working with other statewide
and community based service agencies to advocate for the inclusion of
stakeholders and other representation during the continued planning processes
of the MHSA. Coalition members seek to ensure that effective mental health
services will be available to underserved ethnically and culturally diverse
individuals with mental health needs. Activities of REMHDCO include drafting
and sending letters to the Oversight Commission of the MHSA, facilitating panel
discussions and participating in
Mental Health Goal 3,
Objective A
Disability Rights
Grant/Funding Source(s): PAIMI
Disability Rights
The Asian Pacific American Legal Center (APALC)
located in
To increase poll site access to voters with
disabilities for the November 2008 General Election and in the future,
Disability Rights California partnered with APALC for our mutual poll
monitoring projects. Disability Rights
California provided APALC with information about frequent voting rights issues
experienced by voters with disabilities including poll site access and
communication barriers. APALC shared
with Disability Rights California its materials on language access
barriers. In addition, APALC and
Disability Rights California agreed to share information after the election
from our respective poll-monitoring projects.
In doing so, we will greatly increase the number of accessible polling
sites in
Discrimination
Goal 4, Objective B
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights
On August 7th and August 8th,
2008, Disability Rights California staff provided trainings to two separate
groups of consumers in
Discrimination
Goal 5, Objective B
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights
See previous Reports, Summer 2008, Issue 52; and Fall
2008, Issue 53
In preparation for the November 4, 2008 General
Election, the
Disability Rights California staff met on an ongoing
basis with Election Protection leadership in conjunction with the National
Disability Rights Network and protection & advocacy systems in other states
in order to create an effective educational base and response system, which
included meeting with Election Protection’s California affiliates as well as
reviewing and providing a technical assistance chapter for Election
Protection’s California training materials and hotline manual with respect to
voters with disabilities.
By partnering with Election Protection, Disability
Rights California hopes to increase the number of voters with disabilities,
assist with voting rights issues such as inaccessible poll sites, as well as
privacy and independence barriers with respect to paper and electronic voting
systems. For the November General
Election, Disability Rights will staff Election Protection’s
Discrimination
Goal 4, Objective B
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
On August 27, 2008, Disability Rights California
conducted an outreach at
In addition, Disability Rights California also
individually advised an attendee with a psychiatric disability that although he
had a felony conviction, he is eligible to register to vote because he had
completed his parole. Staff also advised
another individual with a disability to re-register to vote because she had
moved.
As is Disability Rights California practice at
outreaches and trainings, all of the participants were provided with voter
registration materials. Disability
Rights California Election Day Hotline flyers containing our toll-free
telephone number were also distributed.
Loaves and Fishes staff members also posted information about Disability
Rights California’s election hotline.
Discrimination
Goal 5, Objective B
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights
Disability Rights California sponsored a toll-free
hotline for voters with disabilities who have difficulty accessing polling
places or casting ballots or have general questions about the voting
process. This is the fourth year that
Disability Rights California has operated the hotline.
The purpose of the
hotline is to fix problems on Election Day that are causing disenfranchisement
of individuals with disabilities. There
are many barriers affecting a person’s ability to vote such as limited access
to registration materials; wrong information from providers, conservators, relatives,
and facility staff about the person's right to vote; judges who take away a
person's right to vote when they should not; transportation problems getting to
and from the polls; poll access problems for people living in nursing homes and
other facilities; poll access barriers such as very limited or non-accessible
parking or curb ramps; doorways and aisles that are too narrow; voting
equipment placed on inaccessible tables or stages; poor disability access
trainings for poll workers; and poll sites said to be “accessible” when they
are not.
Disability Rights California distributed a press
release and flyers regarding the hotline and staff in the Bay Area,
Discrimination Goal 4, Objective B
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
“Get Out the Vote” Trainings
Provided to Clients and Staff of Four Central and
In anticipation of the
November 2008 General Election, Disability Rights California trained clients
and staff of the Independent Living Centers located in Bakersfield, San
Bernardino, Long Beach, and Garden Grove about voting rights and the importance
of civic participation. Materials
included voter registration forms as well as information about federal and
state laws applicable to voters with disabilities, the history of voting rights
laws in the United States, and ways to become involved in the community at all
levels – city, county, state, and nationally.
Discrimination
Goal 5, Objective B
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
Disability Rights
The client contacted Disability Rights California on
June 3. In both the February and June
elections, his polling place was an elementary school. The sample ballot said that the accessible
entrance was on
Initially, the poll worker asked the client if he
wanted assistance filling out the paper ballot.
He asked to use the touch screen machine. It was an AVC-Edge machine. However, the poll workers did not know how to
operate the machine to get the card.
Ultimately, the machine did not work properly as it only responded
infrequently to the client’s touch. The
client asked for assistance from the poll worker who had the same
difficulty. In the end, the client ended
up voting but was worried about similar troubles in future elections.
Disability Rights California assisted the client to
file complaints with the Alameda County Registrar of Voters and the Secretary
of State. As a result of the complaints,
the client was assigned to a polling place in November which he believes to be
accessible.
Discrimination
Goal 4, Objective A
Disability
Rights
Grant/Funding
Source(s): PAVA
The California
Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, asked Disability Rights California to once
again participate on the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) State Plan Advisory
Committee. Secretary Bowen distributed a
draft of her State Plan to members of the committee and has asked for comments
and suggestions.
Disability Rights
California is currently working with our voting rights coalition partners
California Association of Voting Advocates (CAVA) and the
Disability Rights
California’s comments are being designed to elevate accessibility to the same
level of importance as accuracy and security, as well as to hold the Secretary
accountable to the guidelines and promises of previous State Plans. Disability Rights California will recommend,
among other things, the inclusion of accessibility standards and procedures
throughout all aspects of the plan, including poll worker training, voting
machine testing, polling place observation, and complaint resolution
procedures.
Discrimination
Goal 4, Objective B
Disability
Rights
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, sub acute 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 intervener.
“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
Investigations Unit Trains Key Stakeholders about Crimes against People
With Disabilities.................................................................................................... 1
Investigations Unit Continues to Focus on Reporting of Abuse and Neglect
in Skilled Nursing Facilities......................................................................................... 2
Benefits.......................................................................................................... 3
Final Settlement Approval in Laguna Honda Class Action....................... 3
Assistive Technology (AT) Training—Collaboration between Disability Rights
California, Independent Living Resource Center San Francisco (ILRCSF), and the
AT Network on AT and the Laguna Honda Class Action Settlement................................. 6
Disability Rights California Staff Assist Client in Getting His Scooter
Fixed 6
Disability Rights California Assists Client with a Social Security
Administration PASS Issue............................................................................................................ 7
Social Security Administration Agrees that Client Continues to Qualify for
Benefits Despite Subsidized Income....................................................................... 8
Disability Rights California Staff Succeeds in Restoring IHSS Hours and
Asserts Coverage for Service Animal..................................................................... 9
Regional Center Toddler Under Age 3 Qualifies for DD Waiver &
Institutional Deeming.................................................................................................................... 10
DISCRIMINATION........................................................................................ 11
Disability Rights California Assists Client to Keep Her Two-Bedroom
Section 8 Voucher..................................................................................................... 11
Disability Rights California Assists Client to Obtain Reasonable
Accommodation from a City to Access a City Council Meeting..................................................... 11
Disability Rights California Invited by the State to Provide Consumer
Input on Mental Health Electronic Medical Records.......................................................... 12
Disability Rights California Comments on Accessibility to Assisted Living
Facilities in the Assisted Living Waiver Pilot Project.................................................. 12
EDUCATION FOR Children & Youth....................................................... 13
Former Juvenile Hall Youth Re-Enrolls in School and Receives Compensatory
Education Services................................................................................... 13
Student Wrongfully Excluded from School after Individual Education Program
(IEP) Team Determines Problem Behavior is Related to Disability................ 14
Hayward School
District, Students Reach Agreement on Disability Access to All Schools, Special
Education Program Review........................................ 15
LANTERMAN............................................................................................... 16
Disability Rights California Succeeds In Assisting Man to Move Closer to
His Family with Supported Living Services................................................................ 16
Disability Rights California Succeeds in Obtaining Interlocutory Judgment
and Settlement Reinstating Young Man Improperly Terminated from Day Program 17
Disability Rights California Assists Woman with Inactive Regional Center
Case in Obtaining Services to Stay in Home after Her Mother's Death.............. 18
Disability Rights California Assists Regional Center Consumer in Seeking
Services 19
Disability Rights California Helps Client Avoid Being Sent Out of State 20
Disability Rights California Helps 19 Year Old Stay Near Family........... 20
Disability Rights California Helps Client Get community Placement and
Supports 21
MENTAL HEALTH....................................................................................... 22
Katie A. Ruling Moves California Foster Children Closer to Needed
Home-Based Mental Health Services............................................................................. 22
Emily Q Court Requires Continued Expert Oversight of California’s
Therapeutic Behavioral Services (TBS) for Children................................................... 23
Disability Rights California Assists Woman Facing Eviction to Get Services
and Submit Reasonable Accommodation Request................................................... 24
DMH Issues Citation against Institute for Mental Diseases (IMD) based on
Complaint filed by Disability Rights California........................................................... 24
Disability Rights California is engaging in Structured Negotiations with a
Treatment Facility regarding its Use of Restraint and Seclusion............................. 25
Disability Rights California Provides Input on State’s Mental Health
Electronic Medical Records System Proposal....................................................................... 25
Disability Rights California works with other agencies through a Coalition
to Ensure that Individuals from Ethnically and Culturally Diverse Backgrounds
Have Access to Services Under the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)....................... 25
VOTING........................................................................................................ 26
Disability Rights California Partners With the Asian Pacific American
Legal Center to Increase Poll Site Physical and Language Access for Voters with
Disabilities 26
Disability Rights California Provides Multiple Trainings to Individuals
with Developmental Disabilities at a Day Program......................................... 27
Disability Rights California Continued Its Partnership With Election
Protection To Provide Assistance For Issues Facing Voters With Disabilities........... 27
Disability Rights California Provides Voting Rights Information to Individuals
with Disabilities Who are Homeless................................................................ 28
Disability Rights California Hosts Election Day Voter Hotline for its
Fourth Year 29
“Get Out the Vote” Trainings Provided to Clients and Staff of Four Central
and Southern California Independent Living Centers.................................... 29
Disability Rights California Assists Client to Vote at Accessible Polling
Place 30
Disability Rights California Provides Comments on the California Secretary
of State’s Revised Help America Vote Act State Plan............................................ 31
GLOSSARY OF SELECTED TERMS....................................................... 32