Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for services

[Guest guest]

What is CLASS ? And why is there such a long and slow wait list? We are new to all of this. There should really be a book called ALL THE ANSWERS TO AUTISM AND EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW!!!! , Tx.Sent via BlackBerry by AT&TDate: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:12:14 -0000To: <Texas-Autism-Advocacy >Subject: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for services Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed back in 2002? I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist for CLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up 3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead of us, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year, or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas dead last? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if anyone has a source.

[Guest guest]

Well - and what folks in AUSTIN need to be understanding -- is that if they don't put money into the service delivery system, it won't matter if your name comes up!!!!!!!!!!!

I was on CLASS waiting list for 8 years. I got off the list 2 years ago, and am STILL WAITING for service providers! Speech and OT services require medicaid providers - of which there is a waiting list for in my area because not all providers want the entanglements and insanity of paperwork to BE a medicaid provider. So, we are on a waiting list for that!

Attendant Care/Respite -- we have not had that fully either. Maybe 1/4 of the hours we were allotted that for. THERE ARE NO TRAINED PROVIDERS for that service!

Folks need to be hounding that point. It won't matter (especially for those with mobile children with disabilities) if your name comes up - there are no trained providers or service delivery personnel to meet that demand. ESPECIALLY if your child is Autism Spectrum.

I looked at the application test for an attendant worker for my child. NOT ONE question on that test was for anything other than geriatric care - or care for someone in a wheelchair or bedridden. That is the test on the application for someone to be hired to work with my son with Autism. I wondered why every person sent to my home for me to interview - was well over 50 years old and overweight. They were expecting to sit beside my son's bed and care for him that way, not MOVE and DO (and CHASE - LOL)!

Also - we need to be hounding them for more flexibility. If they can't provide a person, then they need to let us use the money allotted - to go toward a service that we find that may not be a "medicaid provider" -- but that does the same service.

I used to think, yeah yeah yeah, reduce the waiting list.... But folks, that won't matter if there isn't money put into the service delivery system first. Training for folks to work with individuals who are mobile with disabilities -- particulary autism. Incentives (like less paperwork and more reimbursement) for more service providers to be a medicaid provider, etc.

Sincerely,

Subject: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:12 AM

Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed backin 2002? I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist forCLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead ofus, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas deadlast? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, ifanyone has a source.

[Guest guest]

Wow - that is shocking and so disappointing. I thought the

way the wait list was reduced was through funding. But if those funds

are not adequate to provide services for the persons whose numbers

come up, and there are no appropriate providers on their list, then

what is the point?

Makes you wonder how much money was spent on the litigation that would

have been put to far better use in providing consumer-driven and

selected services directly to the community.

>

>

> Subject: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding

waitlists for services

> To: Texas-Autism-Advocacy

> Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:12 AM

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed back

> in 2002?

>

> I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist for

> CLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up

> 3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead of

> us, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,

> or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas dead

> last? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if

> anyone has a source.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Exactly - I'm wondering what IS the point.

And I would love for someone who has the time, to look into how much money the Case Management Agencies are making, and the Service Provider Agencies, on my son's "allottment of money" - while he is NOT receiving those services they have written on that golden piece of paper...

I can't see how there is NOT fraud in that. They wrote down that I can get these services, they are not providing them fully, but yet I AM SURE they are getting money for providing them.

Texas -- we have a problem in that....

Sincerely

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 12:39 PM

Wow - that is shocking and so disappointing. I thought theway the wait list was reduced was through funding. But if those fundsare not adequate to provide services for the persons whose numberscome up, and there are no appropriate providers on their list, thenwhat is the point?Makes you wonder how much money was spent on the litigation that wouldhave been put to far better use in providing consumer-driven andselected services directly to the community.> > From: mom2boysplano <emilyrhill@ ...>> Subject: [Texas-Autism- Advocacy] ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regardingwaitlists for services> To: Texas-Autism- Advocacy@ yahoogroups. com> Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:12 AM> > > > > > > > Can anyone let me know what the outcome was

of this lawsuit filed back> in 2002? > > I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist for> CLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up> 3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead of> us, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,> or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas dead> last? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if> anyone has a source.> > >

[Guest guest]

The reason is that it is the one no one ages out of. we have been on it in Dec 2006. Also MDCP but MDCP is one that you age out of it.

Stacie

Subject: Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:13 AM

What is CLASS ? And why is there such a long and slow wait list? We are new to all of this. There should really be a book called ALL THE ANSWERS TO AUTISM AND EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW!!!! , Tx.

Sent via BlackBerry by AT & T

From: "mom2boysplano" <emilyrhillhotmail (DOT) com>Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:12:14 -0000To: <Texas-Autism- Advocacy@ yahoogroups. com>Subject: [Texas-Autism- Advocacy] ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for services

Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed backin 2002? I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist forCLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead ofus, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas deadlast? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, ifanyone has a source.

[Guest guest]

I think that a review by medicaide federal agency found that Texas is

not doing things correctly in terms of fund disbursement. So the way

management funds that an agency (provider) gets for case management

is getting ready to change. Some of the problems you mention

will get resolved (somewhat), finding folks to work for the

rate that is currently set ($8.11) is very difficult, finding folks

who are well trained and know anything about autism is almost

impossible. This is an issue that needs to be addressed (raising the

rate for direct care workers). I believe DADS sets this rate and

they need to hear from consumers that use these waivers, the more

letters, testimonies they get the better.

Nagla

> >

> > From: mom2boysplano <emilyrhill@ ...>

> > Subject: [Texas-Autism- Advocacy] ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit

regarding

> waitlists for services

> > To: Texas-Autism- Advocacy@ yahoogroups. com

> > Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:12 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed

back

> > in 2002?

> >

> > I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist

for

> > CLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We

signed up

> > 3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead

of

> > us, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200

a year,

> > or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas

dead

> > last? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists

nationally, if

> > anyone has a source.

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

An effort was made to make it a class action lawsuit on behalf of

everyone on the waiting list, but that motion was denied. The case was

ultimately settled out of court, with the state setting targets for a

certain number of incremental slots each year to help clear the waiting

list, they cleared the 5 or 6 original plaintiffs (a couple of whom

reached the top of the list anyway while the lawsuit was in progress),

and some other small issues.

The problem is that many of our legislators like the status quo of

maintaining the state school system, while minimizing funds for

community services. In other words, they won't provide the funding to

clear the waiting lists. Though there are clearance targets in the

settlement, we have that darn US Constitution to deal with. It has

this thing called the separation of powers clause which prohibits one

branch of government (in this case, the courts) from telling another

branch (eg: the legislature) what to do, or what to fund.

There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so

incremental slots each the last two sessions, which they would not have

opened had it not been for the lawsuit. That's a good thing, aside

from the fact that more people need services each year at a faster

rate, so the waiting lists continue to grow.

Some legislators, such as Senators Zafarini and Lucio, understand the

problem. However, as pointed out, we keep reelecting their

compadres who won't free up the funds.

HCS is for people who have a mental retardation diagnosis. CLASS is

for people who have a diagnosis OTHER than mental retardation. HCS has

been around longer, and has more service providers. It also has a

residential component which CLASS doesn't have. Many people with

autism and MR diagnoses will register on both lists. You can only

receive services from one waiver at a time. They will often reach the

top of the CLASS list first and use the services they can (as

pointed out, this is often easier said than done). When they reach the

top of the HCS list, they may flip to HCS, particularly if they need

residential support.

A national organization called NOEWAIT has been formed to coordinate

the wait list elimination across all states. There Yahoo group is

NOEWAIT . It's administered by a gentlemen from Denver,

CO, named Denver Fox.

- Clay

>

>

> Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed back

> in 2002?

>

> I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist for

> CLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up

> 3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead of

> us, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a

year,

> or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas dead

> last? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if

> anyone has a source.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

In Louisiana they have a rally every year at the state capital. The

theme is ALWAYS " A waiting list is not a service " . I know one year the

result was about 3000 'slots' opening up about a week after the rally.

It might not work everytime, but is there any such effort in TX? It was

mainly coordinated through F2F type of organization there.

[Guest guest]

Thank you Clay!!!!!!!!

We will be moving from Pennsylvania to Houston soon and couldn't make heads or tails of why there is such a wait. We appreciate your explanation.

Take care,Ana

Subject: Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 10:33 PM

An effort was made to make it a class action lawsuit on behalf of everyone on the waiting list, but that motion was denied. The case was ultimately settled out of court, with the state setting targets for a certain number of incremental slots each year to help clear the waiting list, they cleared the 5 or 6 original plaintiffs (a couple of whom reached the top of the list anyway while the lawsuit was in progress), and some other small issues.The problem is that many of our legislators like the status quo of maintaining the state school system, while minimizing funds for community services. In other words, they won't provide the funding to clear the waiting lists. Though there are clearance targets in the settlement, we have that darn US Constitution to deal with. It has this thing called the separation of powers clause which prohibits one branch of government (in this case, the courts) from

telling another branch (eg: the legislature) what to do, or what to fund.There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so incremental slots each the last two sessions, which they would not have opened had it not been for the lawsuit. That's a good thing, aside from the fact that more people need services each year at a faster rate, so the waiting lists continue to grow.Some legislators, such as Senators Zafarini and Lucio, understand the problem. However, as pointed out, we keep reelecting their compadres who won't free up the funds. HCS is for people who have a mental retardation diagnosis. CLASS is for people who have a diagnosis OTHER than mental retardation. HCS has been around longer, and has more service providers. It also has a residential component which CLASS doesn't have. Many people with autism and MR diagnoses will register on both lists. You can only

receive services from one waiver at a time. They will often reach the top of the CLASS list first and use the services they can (as pointed out, this is often easier said than done). When they reach the top of the HCS list, they may flip to HCS, particularly if they need residential support. A national organization called NOEWAIT has been formed to coordinate the wait list elimination across all states. There Yahoo group is NOEWAIT@yahoogroups .com. It's administered by a gentlemen from Denver, CO, named Denver Fox. - Clay>> > Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed back> in 2002?

> > I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist for> CLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up> 3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead of> us, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,> or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas dead> last? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if> anyone has a source.> > >

[Guest guest]

Thanks . That answers more of my questions!

Take care,Ana

Subject: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: "Autism List" <Texas-Autism-Advocacy >Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:54 PM

Well, as usually happens, the plaintiffs named in the lawsuits all came off the list within 6 months of testifying, and their children began to receive services. . . . .but nothing much else happened. The squeaky wheels were oiled, and life went on as usual.

In other words, despite the cries of “frivolous” lawsuits, and curses at those most terrible of creatures—the trial lawyer--the state of Texas has repeatedly shown, in case after case, time and time again, same as it ever was, (did I say repeadtedly? ???) the state of Texas will only provide services when it is forced to do so by a lawsuit.

That’s what happened with the prison system.

That’s what happened with the MR system back in ’85.

That’s what happened with the school funding system when it created Robin Hood.This happened 4 years ago when Texas was ordered to go back and fix Robin Hood.

That’s what is happening with the state school system.

That’s what happening with the youth correctional system.

And more importantly the PEOPLE of Texas are willing to accept and RE-ELECT leaders who do this TIME AND TIME again.

Of course, no one ever put it better than good ole Molly Ivins. . .

“State governments have four basic area of responsibility: roads, schools, prisons, and what Governor Allan Shivers used to call ‘your eleemosynary institutions’. In Texas three of the four were so bad they’d been declared unconstitutional. The schools, the prisons, and the state homes for the mentally retarded and mentally ill were all under court order. On top of that, the state faced a huge deficit and clearly needed to restructure its entire tax system, an utterly regressive, jerry-built, patched-up fiscal disaster area designed to encourage ‘a healthy bidness climate.’ So what was the big issue in the [Governor’s] primary? The death penalty.?”Molly Ivins, Molly Ivins Can’t Say That; 1991

So what questions are YOU asking the state candidates who are asking for your vote????

S.

++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++

Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed back in 2002? I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist forCLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead ofus, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas deadlast? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if anyone has a source.

"Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit

from revolutionists and rebels - men and women

who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine.

As their heirs, may we never confuse honest

dissent with disloyal subversion. "Dwight D. Eisenhower

No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG.Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.7.0/1684 - Release Date: 9/22/2008 6:39 AM

[Guest guest]

" There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so

incremental slots each the last two sessions... "

What does it mean to add slots? I assume it means to fund them, so

2,000 are removed from the list every year that otherwise would not

have been? And if this is the case, then only about 200 are being

funded on CLASS each year without the incremental slots funded via

legislative action? In a state the size of Texas? And according to

's experience, even that paltry amount is woefully underfunded.

It seems like funding more slots via the legislature is not

accomplishing anything. If the DADS is setting such unreasonable

hourly rates for the providers, then how can anyone expect there to be

a decent pool of providers available to provide these services when

your number does come up? If I were a legislator the last thing I'd

want to do is throw more money at a problem with severe regulatory

problems and inherent flaws that must be fixed first (kind of like

throwing more money into the state institutions.) I'm really glad

Nagla mentioned that this issue is going to be addressed internally.

If done right, that waiting list will probably triple or quadruple.

Which I'm sure is huge incentive not to do it at all. It will expose

Texas on the national map of disability services to be even more

deficient that it already is.

I agree wholeheartedly that our Texas governmental agencies don't do a

darn thing unless they are sued into it. Clearly, though, sometimes

even that is an exercise in futility and monumental waste of funds and

effort. Our IDEA case is living proof of that.

We've had some great laws passed through some incredible effort on the

part of advocates and elected officials. I'd like to see those laws

actually put to work for us. HB 1919 is a huge victory, but not

subject to federally-regulated plans under ERISA which most seem to be

and is too restrictive in age (but it's a great start and we've got to

start somewhere.) We just got a request from our insurance company's

collection agency TO REIMBURSE THEM for speech therapy they

" mistakenly " covered, and at only 60% of $35 per session after a

$3,000 deductible. What kind of a sick joke is that?

Then there is the IDEA - Not monitored, not enforced, zero

accountability. Our Texas IDS's are taking full advantage of the

free-for-all.

A ten year waiting list for community services, referred to as

" interest " lists by DADS, and no mention of any wait whatsoever on

their website and FAQ section.

By far the most state institutions of any state in the country.

Yes, Texas, I'd say we have a problem, and it's not getting any better

playing by the same old set of good old boy rules.

[Guest guest]

and all,

That has been our same issue exactly here in the DFW area.

The CLASS program is designed for people with PHYSICAL disabilities, not for

those with autism. I have a friend who waited over a YEAR for home modifications

(which are provided for) because the home mod she wanted was a FENCE for her

backyard to keep her child from running. Because that was out of the ordinary

for the type of home modifications that CLASS is used to providing, it took an

entire year and a litany of approvals before they could get the fence.

Ridiculous!

I am currently the attendant for my over 21 child on CLASS

because I can’t find anyone qualified who ALSO will work for the fairly

low wage they allow us to pay, even on CDS (Consumer Directed Services…where

you hire your own people and the agency does the payroll and taxes). When we

tried to actually use a DSA (Direct Services Agency), they only sent us 2

people to work IN A YEAR as attendants, and the two they sent didn’t have

a clue what to do with my children…they only knew how to do basic nursing

care and clean house. I wanted someone to work with my children to help teach

and practice skills. They said they didn’t do that! And when I asked the

agency why they never sent anyone to the house for us to interview to hire as

regular attendants, they flat out told me “none of our workers want to

work with kids with autism”. Gee, thanks a lot!

This is yet another system that needs MAJOR changes. The

agencies that are supposed to administer CLASS and HCS are not listening to

what OUR population needs for our loved ones. We have to find a way to make

them listen. Any ideas?

nna

[Guest guest]

And, unfortunately, some families who do put their kids on

both waiting lists end up finding out that, after waiting for 8 or 10 years and

coming up to the top of one of the lists, that they actually do not qualify for

that list at all. That is what happened to us. My kids (especially my son) has

autism but not MR. So, when he came to the top of the HCS list (we found out

about that one first, and, frankly, the services are somewhat more appropriate

for most individuals with autism IMHO than what is available through CLASS),

since he didn’t have autism AND MR (or, at least an IQ score of 75 or

below), it was “too bad, so sad” for him, and we waited another 3

or 4 years for CLASS.

So…not everyone can actually qualify for both waivers.

If your primary diagnosis is MR, you cannot qualify for CLASS. If your primary

diagnosis is autism WITHOUT MR (or, IQ of 75 or below…only slightly

higher than the 70 normally associated with MR AND only IQ score counts, not

adaptive skill scores which is part of the FEDERAL DEFINITION of MR), then you

cannot qualify for HCS.

I just love having to learn everything the hard way. But,

maybe somebody else won’t have to if I share what we’ve already

been through.

nna

[Guest guest]

Excuse my venting, but my Guppy-Gills are once again flaring...

Why in the hell is it ok for a parent of a child OVER 21 to be the attendant care provider, but it's NOT for the parent of a child UNDER 21 to do the same?

I need to work to help pay for things needs. His diet food, his supplements, etc. I can't work because I don't have attendant care. I don't have attendant care because the agency can't provide it and I can't find anyone either. I can't use daycare because they won't take him.

Why can't, if the agency cannot provide the attendant care for the hours they put on that piece of paper, the parent be "hired" to "work" those hours - using the money earned to pay for those things needed for the care of the child -- which is why the parent needs to work in most situations!

How is that not a discrimination lawsuit that if the child is over 21 it's ok -- but not if the child is under 21 - IF the agency cannot provide a trained, qualified, person to do the work the parent does for free!

So instead, parents like me, and I have heard from many like me, who need to work, can't, and there is no benefit to the system. At least if we could work those few hours - that is tax money back into the system, etc.

I just don't get it!

Sincerely,

M. Guppy

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 8:35 AM

and all,

That has been our same issue exactly here in the DFW area. The CLASS program is designed for people with PHYSICAL disabilities, not for those with autism. I have a friend who waited over a YEAR for home modifications (which are provided for) because the home mod she wanted was a FENCE for her backyard to keep her child from running. Because that was out of the ordinary for the type of home modifications that CLASS is used to providing, it took an entire year and a litany of approvals before they could get the fence. Ridiculous!

I am currently the attendant for my over 21 child on CLASS because I can’t find anyone qualified who ALSO will work for the fairly low wage they allow us to pay, even on CDS (Consumer Directed Services…where you hire your own people and the agency does the payroll and taxes). When we tried to actually use a DSA (Direct Services Agency), they only sent us 2 people to work IN A YEAR as attendants, and the two they sent didn’t have a clue what to do with my children…they only knew how to do basic nursing care and clean house. I wanted someone to work with my children to help teach and practice skills. They said they didn’t do that! And when I asked the agency why they never sent anyone to the house for us to interview to hire as regular attendants, they flat out told me “none of our workers want to work with kids with autism”. Gee, thanks a

lot!

This is yet another system that needs MAJOR changes. The agencies that are supposed to administer CLASS and HCS are not listening to what OUR population needs for our loved ones. We have to find a way to make them listen. Any ideas?

nna

[Guest guest]

I would be very curious to know the following:

Total number of those who got off the waiting lists in the last couple years, AND, the number of those people who have adequate supports and services through that waiver program.

Who, of those people, HAVE attendant and respite care for the times they need it, and who, of those people, are getting the services and supports they have waited for all those years.

Adding more demand to the system by reducing the waiver list, does NOT solve the problem folks. They are just off one waiting list - and on to another!

Especially for those with autism --- the state must understand that need of trained workers and specialty providers (ABA) for that MOBILE population.

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 8:22 AM

"There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or soincremental slots each the last two sessions..."What does it mean to add slots? I assume it means to fund them, so2,000 are removed from the list every year that otherwise would nothave been? And if this is the case, then only about 200 are beingfunded on CLASS each year without the incremental slots funded vialegislative action? In a state the size of Texas? And according to's experience, even that paltry amount is woefully underfunded. It seems like funding more slots via the legislature is notaccomplishing anything. If the DADS is setting such unreasonablehourly rates for the providers, then how can anyone expect there to bea decent pool of providers available to provide these services whenyour number does come up? If I were a legislator the last thing I'dwant to do is throw more money at a problem with severe

regulatoryproblems and inherent flaws that must be fixed first (kind of likethrowing more money into the state institutions. ) I'm really gladNagla mentioned that this issue is going to be addressed internally.If done right, that waiting list will probably triple or quadruple.Which I'm sure is huge incentive not to do it at all. It will exposeTexas on the national map of disability services to be even moredeficient that it already is.I agree wholeheartedly that our Texas governmental agencies don't do adarn thing unless they are sued into it. Clearly, though, sometimeseven that is an exercise in futility and monumental waste of funds andeffort. Our IDEA case is living proof of that.We've had some great laws passed through some incredible effort on thepart of advocates and elected officials. I'd like to see those lawsactually put to work for us. HB 1919 is a huge victory, but notsubject

to federally-regulated plans under ERISA which most seem to beand is too restrictive in age (but it's a great start and we've got tostart somewhere.) We just got a request from our insurance company'scollection agency TO REIMBURSE THEM for speech therapy they"mistakenly" covered, and at only 60% of $35 per session after a$3,000 deductible. What kind of a sick joke is that?Then there is the IDEA - Not monitored, not enforced, zeroaccountability. Our Texas IDS's are taking full advantage of thefree-for-all.A ten year waiting list for community services, referred to as"interest" lists by DADS, and no mention of any wait whatsoever ontheir website and FAQ section.By far the most state institutions of any state in the country.Yes, Texas, I'd say we have a problem, and it's not getting any betterplaying by the same old set of good old boy

rules.

[Guest guest]

Singleton for Governor of Texas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: "Autism List" <Texas-Autism-Advocacy >Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:54 PM

Well, as usually happens, the plaintiffs named in the lawsuits all came off the list within 6 months of testifying, and their children began to receive services. . . . .but nothing much else happened. The squeaky wheels were oiled, and life went on as usual.

In other words, despite the cries of “frivolous” lawsuits, and curses at those most terrible of creatures—the trial lawyer--the state of Texas has repeatedly shown, in case after case, time and time again, same as it ever was, (did I say repeadtedly? ???) the state of Texas will only provide services when it is forced to do so by a lawsuit.

That’s what happened with the prison system. That’s what happened with the MR system back in ’85. That’s what happened with the school funding system when it created Robin Hood.This happened 4 years ago when Texas was ordered to go back and fix Robin Hood. That’s what is happening with the state school system. That’s what happening with the youth correctional system. And more importantly the PEOPLE of Texas are willing to accept and RE-ELECT leaders who do this TIME AND TIME again.

Of course, no one ever put it better than good ole Molly Ivins. . .

“State governments have four basic area of responsibility: roads, schools, prisons, and what Governor Allan Shivers used to call ‘your eleemosynary institutions’. In Texas three of the four were so bad they’d been declared unconstitutional. The schools, the prisons, and the state homes for the mentally retarded and mentally ill were all under court order. On top of that, the state faced a huge deficit and clearly needed to restructure its entire tax system, an utterly regressive, jerry-built, patched-up fiscal disaster area designed to encourage ‘a healthy bidness climate.’ So what was the big issue in the [Governor’s] primary? The death penalty.?”Molly Ivins, Molly Ivins Can’t Say That; 1991 So what questions are YOU asking the state candidates who are asking for your vote???? S. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++ Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed back in 2002? I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist forCLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead ofus, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas deadlast? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if anyone has a source.

"Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit

from revolutionists and rebels - men and women

who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine.

As their heirs, may we never confuse honest

dissent with disloyal subversion. "Dwight D. Eisenhower

No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG.Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.7.0/1684 - Release Date: 9/22/2008 6:39 AM

[Guest guest]

I agree..there is on need to add 'slots' when you won't be able to

use services. That was not the case in LA. I worked for a case

management company and I didn't witness anyone not being able to use

it once they came up on the list. Of course, LA is smaller and what's

being offered is slightly less to begin with. They also have a

program (a mini-waiver of sorts) for those on the various lists and

you would get a limited amout of respite hours or personal care hours

while you wait. This was the result of a lawsuit. But the service

provider issues(low pay/MOUNTAIN of antiquated paperwork) would have

to be resolved first for any movement on the list or lawsuit outcome

to mean anything...I have worked in situations where there was a form

to fill out for what EACH client was doing EVERY 15 Min (separate

hand written form for each 15 min period)they were there. It was

total madness..

, I can see your gills flapping LOL The parent/close family

member being paid as the caregiver issue is always a hot button.

>

> " There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so

> incremental slots each the last two sessions... "

>

> What does it mean to add slots? I assume it means to fund them, so

> 2,000 are removed from the list every year that otherwise would not

> have been? And if this is the case, then only about 200 are being

> funded on CLASS each year without the incremental slots funded via

> legislative action? In a state the size of Texas? And according to

> 's experience, even that paltry amount is woefully

underfunded.

>

> It seems like funding more slots via the legislature is not

> accomplishing anything. If the DADS is setting such unreasonable

> hourly rates for the providers, then how can anyone expect there to

be

> a decent pool of providers available to provide these services when

> your number does come up? If I were a legislator the last thing I'd

> want to do is throw more money at a problem with severe regulatory

> problems and inherent flaws that must be fixed first (kind of like

> throwing more money into the state institutions.) I'm really glad

> Nagla mentioned that this issue is going to be addressed internally.

> If done right, that waiting list will probably triple or quadruple.

> Which I'm sure is huge incentive not to do it at all. It will expose

> Texas on the national map of disability services to be even more

> deficient that it already is.

>

> I agree wholeheartedly that our Texas governmental agencies don't

do a

> darn thing unless they are sued into it. Clearly, though, sometimes

> even that is an exercise in futility and monumental waste of funds

and

> effort. Our IDEA case is living proof of that.

>

> We've had some great laws passed through some incredible effort on

the

> part of advocates and elected officials. I'd like to see those laws

> actually put to work for us. HB 1919 is a huge victory, but not

> subject to federally-regulated plans under ERISA which most seem to

be

> and is too restrictive in age (but it's a great start and we've got

to

> start somewhere.) We just got a request from our insurance company's

> collection agency TO REIMBURSE THEM for speech therapy they

> " mistakenly " covered, and at only 60% of $35 per session after a

> $3,000 deductible. What kind of a sick joke is that?

>

> Then there is the IDEA - Not monitored, not enforced, zero

> accountability. Our Texas IDS's are taking full advantage of the

> free-for-all.

>

> A ten year waiting list for community services, referred to as

> " interest " lists by DADS, and no mention of any wait whatsoever on

> their website and FAQ section.

>

> By far the most state institutions of any state in the country.

>

> Yes, Texas, I'd say we have a problem, and it's not getting any

better

> playing by the same old set of good old boy rules.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yeah, but it doesn't need to be a hot button. If the paperwork is the same, the oversight the same. A parent could abuse the system just like a hired attendant care worker could. There is no difference. In fact - parents are more honest - it is THEIR child.

There is also no difference between a parent providing the care - than a parent's parent providing the care. My mother can live with us for 3 months of the year, and get paid to provide the attendant care. But I can't? What is the difference? My typical son could provide the care, but I can't. What is the difference?

If I have to turn in time sheets, document, and report to the agency - what is the difference?

The difference is -- I'm trained, I'll work for peanuts, and I'll provide BETTER CARE. The money I earn will go toward that BETTER CARE for my son, which will aleviate the amount of money I need to request from the system TO CARE FOR my son.

Yeah it's a hot button issue all right -- a hot button issue of insanity!

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 10:24 AM

I agree..there is on need to add 'slots' when you won't be able to use services. That was not the case in LA. I worked for a case management company and I didn't witness anyone not being able to use it once they came up on the list. Of course, LA is smaller and what's being offered is slightly less to begin with. They also have a program (a mini-waiver of sorts) for those on the various lists and you would get a limited amout of respite hours or personal care hours while you wait. This was the result of a lawsuit. But the service provider issues(low pay/MOUNTAIN of antiquated paperwork) would have to be resolved first for any movement on the list or lawsuit outcome to mean anything...I have worked in situations where there was a form to fill out for what EACH client was doing EVERY 15 Min (separate hand written form for each 15 min period)they were there. It was total madness.., I

can see your gills flapping LOL The parent/close family member being paid as the caregiver issue is always a hot button. >> "There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so> incremental slots each the last two sessions..."> > What does it mean to add slots? I assume it means to fund them, so> 2,000 are removed from the list every year that otherwise would not> have been? And if this is the case, then only about 200 are being> funded on CLASS each year without the incremental slots funded via> legislative action? In a state the size of Texas? And according to> 's experience, even that paltry amount is woefully underfunded. > > It seems like funding

more slots via the legislature is not> accomplishing anything. If the DADS is setting such unreasonable> hourly rates for the providers, then how can anyone expect there to be> a decent pool of providers available to provide these services when> your number does come up? If I were a legislator the last thing I'd> want to do is throw more money at a problem with severe regulatory> problems and inherent flaws that must be fixed first (kind of like> throwing more money into the state institutions. ) I'm really glad> Nagla mentioned that this issue is going to be addressed internally.> If done right, that waiting list will probably triple or quadruple.> Which I'm sure is huge incentive not to do it at all. It will expose> Texas on the national map of disability services to be even more> deficient that it already is.> > I agree wholeheartedly that our Texas

governmental agencies don't do a> darn thing unless they are sued into it. Clearly, though, sometimes> even that is an exercise in futility and monumental waste of funds and> effort. Our IDEA case is living proof of that.> > We've had some great laws passed through some incredible effort on the> part of advocates and elected officials. I'd like to see those laws> actually put to work for us. HB 1919 is a huge victory, but not> subject to federally-regulated plans under ERISA which most seem to be> and is too restrictive in age (but it's a great start and we've got to> start somewhere.) We just got a request from our insurance company's> collection agency TO REIMBURSE THEM for speech therapy they> "mistakenly" covered, and at only 60% of $35 per session after a> $3,000 deductible. What kind of a sick joke is that?> > Then there is

the IDEA - Not monitored, not enforced, zero> accountability. Our Texas IDS's are taking full advantage of the> free-for-all.> > A ten year waiting list for community services, referred to as> "interest" lists by DADS, and no mention of any wait whatsoever on> their website and FAQ section.> > By far the most state institutions of any state in the country.> > Yes, Texas, I'd say we have a problem, and it's not getting any better> playing by the same old set of good old boy rules.> > >

[Guest guest]

Very well said. There is no one better-qualified or more certain to

ensure the best interest of a child is met, than the parent of that

child. Unfortunately, our state manufactures and relies on excuses to

maintain control of the process (aka the money) by cutting parents out

of it. Very much applies to our public school system exclusively

controlling the provision of FAPE to special needs students.

> >

> > " There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so

> > incremental slots each the last two sessions... "

> >

> > What does it mean to add slots? I assume it means to fund them, so

> > 2,000 are removed from the list every year that otherwise would not

> > have been? And if this is the case, then only about 200 are being

> > funded on CLASS each year without the incremental slots funded via

> > legislative action? In a state the size of Texas? And according to

> > 's experience, even that paltry amount is woefully

> underfunded.

> >

> > It seems like funding more slots via the legislature is not

> > accomplishing anything. If the DADS is setting such unreasonable

> > hourly rates for the providers, then how can anyone expect there to

> be

> > a decent pool of providers available to provide these services when

> > your number does come up? If I were a legislator the last thing I'd

> > want to do is throw more money at a problem with severe regulatory

> > problems and inherent flaws that must be fixed first (kind of like

> > throwing more money into the state institutions. ) I'm really glad

> > Nagla mentioned that this issue is going to be addressed internally.

> > If done right, that waiting list will probably triple or quadruple.

> > Which I'm sure is huge incentive not to do it at all. It will expose

> > Texas on the national map of disability services to be even more

> > deficient that it already is.

> >

> > I agree wholeheartedly that our Texas governmental agencies don't

> do a

> > darn thing unless they are sued into it. Clearly, though, sometimes

> > even that is an exercise in futility and monumental waste of funds

> and

> > effort. Our IDEA case is living proof of that.

> >

> > We've had some great laws passed through some incredible effort on

> the

> > part of advocates and elected officials. I'd like to see those laws

> > actually put to work for us. HB 1919 is a huge victory, but not

> > subject to federally-regulated plans under ERISA which most seem to

> be

> > and is too restrictive in age (but it's a great start and we've got

> to

> > start somewhere.) We just got a request from our insurance company's

> > collection agency TO REIMBURSE THEM for speech therapy they

> > " mistakenly " covered, and at only 60% of $35 per session after a

> > $3,000 deductible. What kind of a sick joke is that?

> >

> > Then there is the IDEA - Not monitored, not enforced, zero

> > accountability. Our Texas IDS's are taking full advantage of the

> > free-for-all.

> >

> > A ten year waiting list for community services, referred to as

> > " interest " lists by DADS, and no mention of any wait whatsoever on

> > their website and FAQ section.

> >

> > By far the most state institutions of any state in the country.

> >

> > Yes, Texas, I'd say we have a problem, and it's not getting any

> better

> > playing by the same old set of good old boy rules.

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Agreed...

But another point -- if the parent of a "child" over 21 can be the attendant care provider, how is that different than a parent doing that for a child under 21 under the same circumstances?

How is that not discrimination?

If the parent of a child over 21 doing that has to do the paperwork and accountability to the Case Management Agency - why would that have to be any different for a parent of a child under 21?

The amount of control doesn't change whether it's the parent or a stranger - if they are both subject to the Case Management rules and regulations.

What does change - is the level of care. It gets better if the parent is doing it.

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 11:10 AM

Very well said. There is no one better-qualified or more certain toensure the best interest of a child is met, than the parent of thatchild. Unfortunately, our state manufactures and relies on excuses tomaintain control of the process (aka the money) by cutting parents outof it. Very much applies to our public school system exclusivelycontrolling the provision of FAPE to special needs students.> >> > "There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so> > incremental slots each the last two sessions..."> > > > What does it mean to add slots? I assume it means to fund them, so> > 2,000 are removed from the list every year that otherwise would not> > have been? And if this is the case, then only about 200 are being> > funded on CLASS each year without the incremental slots funded via> >

legislative action? In a state the size of Texas? And according to> > 's experience, even that paltry amount is woefully > underfunded. > > > > It seems like funding more slots via the legislature is not> > accomplishing anything. If the DADS is setting such unreasonable> > hourly rates for the providers, then how can anyone expect there to > be> > a decent pool of providers available to provide these services when> > your number does come up? If I were a legislator the last thing I'd> > want to do is throw more money at a problem with severe regulatory> > problems and inherent flaws that must be fixed first (kind of like> > throwing more money into the state institutions. ) I'm really glad> > Nagla mentioned that this issue is going to be addressed internally.> > If done right, that waiting list will probably

triple or quadruple.> > Which I'm sure is huge incentive not to do it at all. It will expose> > Texas on the national map of disability services to be even more> > deficient that it already is.> > > > I agree wholeheartedly that our Texas governmental agencies don't > do a> > darn thing unless they are sued into it. Clearly, though, sometimes> > even that is an exercise in futility and monumental waste of funds > and> > effort. Our IDEA case is living proof of that.> > > > We've had some great laws passed through some incredible effort on > the> > part of advocates and elected officials. I'd like to see those laws> > actually put to work for us. HB 1919 is a huge victory, but not> > subject to federally-regulated plans under ERISA which most seem to > be> > and is too restrictive in age

(but it's a great start and we've got > to> > start somewhere.) We just got a request from our insurance company's> > collection agency TO REIMBURSE THEM for speech therapy they> > "mistakenly" covered, and at only 60% of $35 per session after a> > $3,000 deductible. What kind of a sick joke is that?> > > > Then there is the IDEA - Not monitored, not enforced, zero> > accountability. Our Texas IDS's are taking full advantage of the> > free-for-all.> > > > A ten year waiting list for community services, referred to as> > "interest" lists by DADS, and no mention of any wait whatsoever on> > their website and FAQ section.> > > > By far the most state institutions of any state in the country.> > > > Yes, Texas, I'd say we have a problem, and it's not getting any > better> >

playing by the same old set of good old boy rules.> > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

This is absolutely crazy.

We need to be pushing for a single universal waiver for the

developmentally disabled with a comprehensive, appropriate and

adequate menu of services the parents can select. None of this, off

one, now move to another, wait list showdown. No one is training us on

the differences of these lists, hoping more fall through the cracks or

age out so they can keep those numbers down for state PR purposes. It

is outrageous.

Why don't we get a single list going, and perhaps when the sheer

magnitude of the number of individuals waiting for services hits the

national radar, Texas will be shamed into appropriate action.

>

> And, unfortunately, some families who do put their kids on both waiting

> lists end up finding out that, after waiting for 8 or 10 years and

coming up

> to the top of one of the lists, that they actually do not qualify

for that

> list at all. That is what happened to us. My kids (especially my

son) has

> autism but not MR. So, when he came to the top of the HCS list (we

found out

> about that one first, and, frankly, the services are somewhat more

> appropriate for most individuals with autism IMHO than what is available

> through CLASS), since he didn't have autism AND MR (or, at least an

IQ score

> of 75 or below), it was " too bad, so sad " for him, and we waited

another 3

> or 4 years for CLASS.

>

>

>

> So.not everyone can actually qualify for both waivers. If your primary

> diagnosis is MR, you cannot qualify for CLASS. If your primary

diagnosis is

> autism WITHOUT MR (or, IQ of 75 or below.only slightly higher than

the 70

> normally associated with MR AND only IQ score counts, not adaptive skill

> scores which is part of the FEDERAL DEFINITION of MR), then you cannot

> qualify for HCS.

>

>

>

> I just love having to learn everything the hard way. But, maybe somebody

> else won't have to if I share what we've already been through.

>

>

>

> nna

>

[Guest guest]

It is blatant discrimination. Just as our Texas public schools'

mission is to allow a child to reach their full potential, unless they

are a child with a disability, who then must merely be offered an open

door.

> > >

> > > " There is a belief that the legislature has added 2,000 or so

> > > incremental slots each the last two sessions... "

> > >

> > > What does it mean to add slots? I assume it means to fund them, so

> > > 2,000 are removed from the list every year that otherwise would not

> > > have been? And if this is the case, then only about 200 are being

> > > funded on CLASS each year without the incremental slots funded via

> > > legislative action? In a state the size of Texas? And according to

> > > 's experience, even that paltry amount is woefully

> > underfunded.

> > >

> > > It seems like funding more slots via the legislature is not

> > > accomplishing anything. If the DADS is setting such unreasonable

> > > hourly rates for the providers, then how can anyone expect there to

> > be

> > > a decent pool of providers available to provide these services when

> > > your number does come up? If I were a legislator the last thing I'd

> > > want to do is throw more money at a problem with severe regulatory

> > > problems and inherent flaws that must be fixed first (kind of like

> > > throwing more money into the state institutions. ) I'm really glad

> > > Nagla mentioned that this issue is going to be addressed internally.

> > > If done right, that waiting list will probably triple or quadruple.

> > > Which I'm sure is huge incentive not to do it at all. It will expose

> > > Texas on the national map of disability services to be even more

> > > deficient that it already is.

> > >

> > > I agree wholeheartedly that our Texas governmental agencies don't

> > do a

> > > darn thing unless they are sued into it. Clearly, though, sometimes

> > > even that is an exercise in futility and monumental waste of funds

> > and

> > > effort. Our IDEA case is living proof of that.

> > >

> > > We've had some great laws passed through some incredible effort on

> > the

> > > part of advocates and elected officials. I'd like to see those laws

> > > actually put to work for us. HB 1919 is a huge victory, but not

> > > subject to federally-regulated plans under ERISA which most seem to

> > be

> > > and is too restrictive in age (but it's a great start and we've got

> > to

> > > start somewhere.) We just got a request from our insurance company's

> > > collection agency TO REIMBURSE THEM for speech therapy they

> > > " mistakenly " covered, and at only 60% of $35 per session after a

> > > $3,000 deductible. What kind of a sick joke is that?

> > >

> > > Then there is the IDEA - Not monitored, not enforced, zero

> > > accountability. Our Texas IDS's are taking full advantage of the

> > > free-for-all.

> > >

> > > A ten year waiting list for community services, referred to as

> > > " interest " lists by DADS, and no mention of any wait whatsoever on

> > > their website and FAQ section.

> > >

> > > By far the most state institutions of any state in the country.

> > >

> > > Yes, Texas, I'd say we have a problem, and it's not getting any

> > better

> > > playing by the same old set of good old boy rules.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Oh don't tease me.... can you imagine what would life would be like for our kids as adults if that were true?!?!

ARC/Advocacy Inc. Lawsuit regarding waitlists for servicesTo: "Autism List" <Texas-Autism-Advocacy >Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:54 PM

Well, as usually happens, the plaintiffs named in the lawsuits all came off the list within 6 months of testifying, and their children began to receive services. . . . .but nothing much else happened. The squeaky wheels were oiled, and life went on as usual.

In other words, despite the cries of “frivolous” lawsuits, and curses at those most terrible of creatures—the trial lawyer--the state of Texas has repeatedly shown, in case after case, time and time again, same as it ever was, (did I say repeadtedly? ???) the state of Texas will only provide services when it is forced to do so by a lawsuit.

That’s what happened with the prison system. That’s what happened with the MR system back in ’85. That’s what happened with the school funding system when it created Robin Hood.This happened 4 years ago when Texas was ordered to go back and fix Robin Hood. That’s what is happening with the state school system. That’s what happening with the youth correctional system. And more importantly the PEOPLE of Texas are willing to accept and RE-ELECT leaders who do this TIME AND TIME again.

Of course, no one ever put it better than good ole Molly Ivins. . .

“State governments have four basic area of responsibility: roads, schools, prisons, and what Governor Allan Shivers used to call ‘your eleemosynary institutions’. In Texas three of the four were so bad they’d been declared unconstitutional. The schools, the prisons, and the state homes for the mentally retarded and mentally ill were all under court order. On top of that, the state faced a huge deficit and clearly needed to restructure its entire tax system, an utterly regressive, jerry-built, patched-up fiscal disaster area designed to encourage ‘a healthy bidness climate.’ So what was the big issue in the [Governor’s] primary? The death penalty.?”Molly Ivins, Molly Ivins Can’t Say That; 1991 So what questions are YOU asking the state candidates who are asking for your vote???? S. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++ Can anyone let me know what the outcome was of this lawsuit filed back in 2002? I just called DADS to check on the status. Currently the waitlist forCLASS is 22,790 and is estimated to be running 7-8 years. We signed up3 and a half years ago in 2/2005 and there are still 16,000 ahead ofus, which would suggest they are moving at a rate of about 2,200 a year,or over ten years, post lawsuit. Wouldn't this still put Texas deadlast? Would love to see some figures on these waitlists nationally, if anyone has a source.

"Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit

from revolutionists and rebels - men and women

who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine.

As their heirs, may we never confuse honest

dissent with disloyal subversion. "Dwight D. Eisenhower

No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG.Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.7.0/1684 - Release Date: 9/22/2008 6:39 AM

[Guest guest]

You certainly won’t get any argument on this from me.

I can provide attendant care for one of my children, but NOT the other one…because

he is under 21! How is it not even CRAZIER that I am good enough for one of my

OWN children but not the other one?

nna

[Guest guest]

Good question, why can't parent's be the Care provider for their

individuals for when they are under 18 y/o?

A parent can be by the Care provide once the individual becomes an

adult at 18 y/o.

This is how I am able to be my son's Care Provider once my son had

turn 18 y/o, under an agency.

Now remember should you go through CDS, a parent is unable to be the

Care provider no matter what age as you are the employer now.

Sorry you are not having a good experience with CLASS on services

being implemented.

My son will no longer be under the CLASS program which ends of this

month, he will now enter the HCS program and I will be his

Care provider, entering another arena.

Under the CLASS program, I finally found several GOOD therapist to

work with my son, you name it ST, Recreational therapist, music

therapist, massage therapist, respite, etc. some of them he is

receiving already but the others have been waiting for an approval and

it is a no go now, which I could them your way.

I was pushing for some of the funds to also be used for ABA and

technology as some of the MHMR places have found a way to do this in

other cities.

My hours were going to increase due to him being withdrawal from

school as he suffers from underlying medical issues and PCS was going

to fill in the gap hours that the other agency did not cover.

All was going good here FINALLY, but now it is the next hurdle with

the HCS program.

I did utilized my pay for his special diet, some of the interventions

which were not covered by the CLASS Program. Pay is pretty low when

you are the Care provider but anything helps when you go this route.

Here is another headache, when your child is under 21 y/o receiving

the traditional Medicaid, take advantage of the dental services

because once they reach 21 y/o, Medicaid will no longer pay for dental

services. When an individual is under the CLASS program, they will not

qualify for the Star Plus Program.

If under the HCS program, this will only allow $1,000 for dental only.

If an individual needs to be sedated, this is not enough to cover the

general anesthesia method. Some dental office which I have confronted

will not even accept private health insurance for when one needs to

get sedated.

It is joining " when we can " to these DADS council meetings.

Calendar Year 2008 Meeting Dates

This where many of us have join forces with Community Now.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Community_Now/

Noewait

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NOEWAIT/

Irma

>

> Excuse my venting, but my Guppy-Gills are once again flaring...

> �

> Why in the hell is it ok for a parent of a child OVER 21 to be the

attendant care provider, but it's NOT for the parent of a child UNDER

21 to do the same?

> �

> I need to work to help pay for things needs. His diet food,

his supplements, etc. I can't work because I don't have attendant

care.� I don't have attendant care because the agency can't provide it

and I can't find anyone either.� I can't use daycare because they

won't take him.

> �

> Why can't, if the agency cannot provide the attendant care for the

hours they put on that piece of paper, the parent be " hired " to " work "

those hours - using the money earned to pay for those things needed

for the care of the child -- which is why the parent needs to work in

most situations!��

> �

> How is that not a discrimination lawsuit that if the child is over

21 it's ok -- but not if the child is under 21 - IF the agency cannot

provide a trained, qualified, person to do the work the parent does

for free!

> �

> So instead, parents like me, and I have heard from many like me, who

need to work, can't, and there is no benefit to the system.� At least

if we could work those few hours - that is tax money back into the

system, etc.

> �

> I just don't get it!

> �

> �

> Sincerely,

> M. Guppy

>

>

> M. Guppy

> My autism journey�isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's

about learning to dance in the rain....�

> Texas Autism Advocacy:� www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

> " There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to

compromise.� We cannot negotiate the size of an institution.� No one

should live in one.� We cannot debate who should get an inclusive

education.� Everyone should.� We cannot determine who does and who

does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own

futures.� All must. "