Blog Posts

Funding Supportive Housing --- States, the Feds, Counties & Municipalities

2/17/2022

The "LEGAL RESPONSIBLITY" for funding disability housing for those people with disabilities that are institutionalized or at great risk of institutionalization ---- rests with the STATE under Olmstead.
Why are the COUNTIES & MUNICPALITIES --- willing to fund SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ?
- The Counties and Municipalities are often bearing the BRUNT of the cost of HOMELESS people in their communities and people who are JUSTICE-INVOLVED.
- This goes a long way towards explaining why STATES have been so slow to fund SUPPORTIVE HOUSING TO SCALE ---
  - By and large, it's NOT the STATES that are bearing the COST of FAILURE to fund SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ---it's COUNTIES and MUNICIPALITIES.
  - That's why it's the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES that is behind the STEPPING UP INITIATIVE to get people with MENTAL ILLNESS out of COUNTY JAILS.

The TRUTH is a lot of funding for DISABILITY HOUSING comes from the FEDS --- BUT ---
- it is NOT an ENTITLEMENT like MEDICAID and it doesn't cover the NEED.
- the STATE provides some funding to SUPPLEMENT the FEDS --- BUT THAT DOESN'T COVER THE NEED --
  - And it's the STATES with the LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY to COVER the NEED for DISABILTY HOUSING & SERVICES or have a COMPREHENSIVE, EFFECTIVELY WORKING PLAN TO SO.

Further, these CONVOLUTED FUNDING SCHEMES and MISMATCHED INCENTIVES are not providing ACCOUNTABILITY to people with DISABILITIES who are institutionalized or at great risk of institutionalization.
- I'm not saying that Counties and Municipalities shouldn't fund SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, BUT
- When people with DISABILITIES start insisting on SUPPORTIVE HOUSING as their right --- it also brings to a head these MESSY FUNDING SCHEMES.

Most people with disabilities don't care who FUNDS SUPPORTIVE HOUSING so long as it is there when they need it --- BUT that is just not the case for THOUSANDS of COLORADANS --- it's also true for approximately 1 MILLION AMERICANS with disabilities across the country.
If we start moving those HOMELESS & JUSTICE-INVOLVED PEOPLE to Medicaid Nursing Homes --- I bet the FEDS & STATES will find some HOUSING VOUCHERS.

Examples of Olmstead Complaints with a Request for Declaratory Judgment

2/7/2022

NEXT THURSDAY --- UPDATED:

We're going to provide a DRAFT generic Demand Letter that could be used for any State.
With respect to Colorado --- we're going to be asking that the State communicate to STAKEHOLDERS directly in writing regarding the Budget request regarding some type of "OLMSTEAD COMPLIANT" effort.
- We've heard this is going to involve some housing vouchers and is going to be led by the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy & Financing & the Division of Housing
- We'd like to get specifics and we're sure that others would as well.
- We're going to be looking for commitments to:
  - Meausurable Goals
  - Reasonable Time Frames, and
  - Funding to Support the Plan --- PLUS
  - INCLUSION

Draft Demand Letter to a State on Disability Housing --- requesting a INCLUSIVE STAKEHOLDER GROUP to Develop:

Measurable Goals
Reasonable Time Frames, and
Funding Strategies

to bring DISABILITY HOUSING to SCALE. This includes issues of ACCESSIBILITY, HOMELESSNESS, INSTITUTIONS including Nursing Homes, Mental Institutes and people with DISABILITIES being released from Jails and Prisons.

In the alternative, seeking a DECLARATORY JUDGMENT that Colorado's current provision of DISABILITY HOUSING violates Title II of the AMERICANS with DISABILITIES ACT.

Ideally, such a letter would come from a wide range of Stakeholders. Further, the LEGAL FRAMEWORK and RESOURCES for such a DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION need to be FIRMLY ESTABLISHED.

Georgia: Georgia Network for Educational Support & Therapeutic Support Program

Issue a declaratory judgment that Defendant has violated Title II of the ADA by

(1) failing to make reasonable modifications to the GNETS Program to provide students with disabilities access to necessary mental health and therapeutic educational services and supports in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs, and

(2) providing students with disabilities services, programs, and benefits that are inferior and unequal to those provided to other students served in the general education environment.

US Dept. of Justice Complaint against the State of Georgia regarding Georgia's Network for Educational and Therapeutic Support Program.

New York: Adult Care Homes

DOJ Complaint against the State of New York regarding "Adult Homes"

C. Issue a declaratory judgment declaring that:
1. Defendant has violated title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by failing to make reasonable modifications to services, programs, and supports for persons with mental illness residing in, and at risk of entry into, Adult Homes to enable them to receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs;

MISSISSIPPI --- Programs & Services for Adults with Mental Illness

DOJ Complaint against the State of Mississippi to enforce the rights of adults with mental illness to receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.

C. Issue a declaratory judgment that Defendant has violated Title II of the ADA by failing to make reasonable modifications to services, programs, or activities for adults with mental illness to enable them to obtain the services, programs, and activities they require to reside in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs;

1. The United States brings this action against the State to enforce the rights of adults with mental illness to receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.

The State discriminates against adults with mental illness by administering and funding its programs and services for these individuals in a manner that has resulted in their repeated, prolonged, and unnecessary institutionalization in state-run psychiatric hospitals, and placed them at serious risk of such institutionalization, in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the “ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134

Olmstead, Declaratory Judgment & Stakeholder Groups

1/30/2022

I'm starting off with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 57 for DECLARATORY JUDGMENT in Federal Court.

As part of that, I'll create a brief checklist.

This is not all that needs to be considered. We will take this opportunity to create relevant checklists for ourselves and whoever might be interested.

In the case of FRCP 57 --- the rule itself is exceedingly brief, but there are NOTES of the ADVISORY COMMITTEE from 1937, 1948 and 2007.

The ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOTES from 1948 go to a statutory reference and the 2007 notes are stylistic.

So the SUBSTANTIVE ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOTES are from 1937.

There are a lot of ways to address Olmstead Enforcement --- one way might be to BREAK THIS DOWN.

It seems to me that provision of ASSERTIVE COMMUNITY TREATMENT to SCALE is NOT a Fundamental Alteration for purposes of Olmstead and is RIPE for a DECLARATORY JUDGMENT.

This is based on the of US Dept. of Justice Settlement Agreements requiring Assertive Community Treatment (ACT)
A 2010 US Dept. of Justice "Findings Letter" [Delaware] that bringing ACT to scale did not amount to a Fundamental Alteration of the State's Plan for Disability Service Provision.

In Olmstead Cases, a request for Declaratory Judgment is often paired with a request for Injunctive and Permanent Relief.

A request for DECLARATORY JUDGMENT alone is mainly providing CLARITY as opposed to ENFORCEMENT.

Further, there may be some important INCLUSION GOALS to creating something of a HYBRID Process:

Organizational Entity / Plaintiff begins with DEMAND LETTER to the STATE ---
If that fails, proceeds to seek DECLARATORY JUDGMENT.
If DECLARATORY JUDGMENT efforts are successful, requests State establish Stakeholder Work Group with membership of 1/4 to 1/5 people with relevant disabilities and lived experience to create plan within REASONABLE TIME FRAME to bring ACT and or equally effective treatment to SCALE with MEASURABLE (NUMERIC) GOALS.
DEMAND LETTER should also include request for STAKEHOLDER GROUP.

That process could be re-created for things like SCATTERED SITE HOUSING for People with Disabilities.

WHERE ARE WE GETTING THE STAKEHOLDER GROUP and the 1/5 to 1/4 percentage of members to be people with relevant disabilities and lived experience?

Inclusion of People with Mental Illness In Public Policy
- In the past, we have thrown out 1/4 of State stakeholder membership have "lived experience."
  This has been problematic in the context of:
  - criminal justice and mental health, and
  - the Colorado Mental Health Institute @ Pueblo.

See generally :

If the State refuses those demands, then seeking INJUNCTIVE and PERMANENT RELIEF could be the next step.

NOTE: We're NOT WARRANTING ANYTHING. THERE are NO GUARANTEES.

Forward>>

Funding Supportive Housing --- States, the Feds, Counties & Municipalities

Examples of Olmstead Complaints with a Request for Declaratory Judgment

Olmstead, Declaratory Judgment & Stakeholder Groups

Olmstead Law & Order Thursday

Archives

Categories