"Those who have the least get the least"...

... and what you can do about it. This is a prime example of the positive press coverage I'm looking for, especially the last paragraph which includes a call to action aimed at it's readers. I've included the same information for us in Sonoma county. Shown below are the contact details for Wes Chesbro our representative in the Assembly. I strongly encourage all my readers to read the article to get a better understanding of what is going in the homecare universe and then contact Assemblymember Chesbro.

Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro

Capitol Address
State Capitol
Room 2176
Sacramento, CA 94249-0001
(916) 319-2001

District Address
50 D Street Suite 450
Santa Rosa, CA 95404
(707) 576-2526

 

Homecare fraud: you're lucky if you can find it!

Recently there has been some press coverage about homecare fraud with nearly all of it being bad. If we didn't get bad press we'd get no press at all. It seems the nature and cost effectiveness of homecare is horribly misunderstood. If you follow the LameStream media's coverage of this attack on homecare you'd think that the disabled poor and those who care for them are criminals worthy of only the harshest treatment. Following the Governator's line of reasoning one might think were it not for homecare the State wouldn't have a budget deficit at all! Here's an example of the spoon-fed and lopsided thinking that makes my blood boil.

 

This is exactly what we don't need: division among the consumers (clients) as to who is eligible. Having met several homecare providers (workers) and their consumers I can tell you if a consumer is receiving homecare services it's vital to the well-being and happiness of the consumer. My wife is much happier living with me than living in a group home! Homecare is no road to riches for the providers and it saves the State far more than it would spend if it housed every consumer in a nursing home, group home or whatever dungeon they think the disabled poor should be warehoused in.

When legislators and journalists stop blindly accepting what someone else tells them is the irrefutable truth (the Gov tells the Legislature, and the journalists gobble up whatever they hear from Sacramento) and the State attempst to find the fraud, they find much less fraud exists than is reported by the media. In 2007, the Gov stated it was as high as 25%, but when investigated by his own administration it was found to be no more than 1%. Don't get me wrong: even 1% is unacceptable but the way the State is going about reducing fraud is Draconian, and obviously lopsided (which is putting it nicely). For those who choose to abuse the system and steal from both us the taxpayers and us the overwhelmingly majority of honest workers just trying to earn a living, I say hang them up by their ampersand caret asterisk toes in the middle of town.

The money spent to detect and stop fraud is ridiculous in both absolute dollars and when the amount of money recovered is divided into the amount spent finding the fraud in the first place. Here are some examples:

 

Did y'all get that: they spent $3 million to save $315,000! That's $157,894.74 per conviction! I thought the Zombies' dollar-to-vote ratio was out of control but this is ridiculous! A quick run crunching the numbers shows this was a prime example of the State's penny-wise but pound-foolish approach to handling our tax money.

Maximum number of hours that can be assigned to any one consumer: 283 (a 40 work week is 173 hours a month, 283 is ~1.6 times more)
Hourly wage for IHSS workers in Sacramento: $10.40
Months in a year: 12
A years worth of homecare work at the above given wage comes out to $35,318.40

Difference between cost per conviction and maximum payout for one consumer's worth of work (283 x 10.40 x 12=): $110,576.34.

I say (s)he who wastes more money gets required lifetime employment at McDonald's working the drive thru window!

So, yet again way more money is spent than is recovered, but at least the politicians can feel good about their efforts to root out the fraud. Sheesh, does it hurt to be this stupid?

This is not an isolated example of the State's overzealous attack on the poor and defenseless.

 

So as you can see the State is very concerned about the 0.2% (NOT 2%!) in over-payments in Fresno county, the State's leader in homecare fraud detection, prevention and conviction and the only way they can see to fix the problem and punish this despicable and very small group of scamming "caregivers" is to take us all down. Make the poor poorer (reduce us to minimum wage), punish the innocent (fingerprinting for all), surely that will solve all our problems!

So to combat this problem they've written the "improvements" below into law. As far as I know they have yet to figure out how to implement these new laws. What the State has in mind is indeed punitive:

• checks can't be mailed to P.O. boxes (which is a bummer because in my neighborhood, a P.O. box is an excellent way to prevent identity theft)
• fingerprints for both the provider and consumer put on each timecard (Who pays for the ink? Who is charged with matching 800,000+ fingerprints to people on a semi-monthly basis? What if a consumer doesn't have (accessible) thumbs? Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?)
• State required but not funded fingerprinting for both consumers and providers (and where were the Zombies when these proposal became law? Busy fighting with members, again!)
• unannounced home visits (Which seem to be in violation of  multiple homecare contracts about the consumer's right to chose whom, how and when someone enters their home.)

Seems like overkill doesn't it?

A few things need to be said about fraud:

• fraud is wrong, no matter the justification or significance
• those who commit fraud, both providers and (living) consumers must be punished
• the rest of us who aren't committing fraud need to be left alone, no fingerprinting at our own expense to prove our innocence
• the folks handling the timecards (counties) and the folks who cut the checks (the State) need some simple checks to be put in place, specifically:

• no checks for the consumers known to be deceased (except for consumers who passed away mid pay period)
• no checks for providers or consumers who are in jail

Had the counties and the State been checking for this all along who knows how much money could have been saved. Consider the lack of seething animosity that could have been avoided. The oft reported, but grossly exaggerated costs of IHSS fraud could simply never have happened but for that you'd need a state that cares for it's elderly and disabled poor, instead of taking every possible action to move us both ever-faster into the grave. Even when these fraudsters are caught it's a great expense to the State and the money is not always recovered.

Fortunately for us all the writing of a few bright minds makes it's way to the Op-Ed sections of our newspapers and blogs.

Indeed, this is a rare voice of reason is a sea of stupity.

Take Action: Surviving State Benefit Cuts

Courtesy of the IHSS Coalition website. I'm sure SEIU isn't doing much to help it's members fight the budget cuts. They had all their people fighting to keep 10,000 homecare workers under their thumb in Fresno while neglecting to care for the 65,000 home care of who will be subject to forced fingerprinting and background checks.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009  1-4pm
Livermore Library, 1188 South Livermore Ave.
Livermore, CA (Call the library for directions: (925) 373-5500‎.)

For more info or to RSVP, contact Community Resources for Independent Living by November 12 (to allow for any necessary accommodations). Phone: (510) 881-5743  Email: info@cril-online.org. 

This workshop will feature experts from Social Security, Disability Rights California, Bay Area Legal Aid and the California Health Incentives Improvement Project.  Topics will include overview of programs, filing appeals and working together as a community to fight for our rights.

CDCAN: Breaking News: SB 69 passes Assembly 60 to 0, bill heads to Senate, then Gov.

 SB 69 a bill to delay the implementation of the new sneaky and devastating requirements to IHSS (homecare) workers, had passed the California Assembly, now it's on to the Senate and finally the governor -- all 3 of which need to sign off on the bill to make the bill law and provide relief to IHSS providers (workers), consumers and the county governments that would have to orientate and process fingerprints for 838,000+ providers and consumers (clients).

Here's the email in case you have a few mins to spare. It's lengthy but quite detailed.

BREAKING NEWS:

ASSEMBLY PASSES SB 69 BY VOTE OF 60 TO 0;  WOULD DELAY NOV 1^ST IMPLEMENTATION OF IHSS WORKER REQUIREMENTS – BILL HEADS NEXT TO STATE SENATE

Bill Amended by Assemblymember Evans Faces Major Hurdle in Getting Approval from Governor – Assembly Budget Committee Sets November 5^th 09:00 AM Follow-up Informational Hearing on IHSS – Same Day as Olmstead Advisory Committee Meeting

SACRAMENTO, CALIF (CDCAN) [Updated 11/02/09  10:33 PM  (Pacific Time)  -  The Assembly after a long marathon session in both houses that focused on the state’s ongoing water crisis, passed a bill on a different crisis that impacts its most vulnerable population, approving amendments by Assemblymember Noreen Evans (Democrat – Santa Rosa) to SB 69 that would delay the November 1^st implementation of several new requirements for In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) workers.

The bill won support from both Assembly Democrats and Republicans – including support from Assembly Republican Leader Sam Blakeslee (Republican – San Luis Obispo).

The emergency “clean-up” legislation passed on a vote of  60 to 0.

It heads next to the State Senate, which resumed its floor session just before 8:30 PM this evening. While the State Senate is still in session as the Assembly approved SB 69, it is not certain if they will remain in session this evening long enough to take action on the bill.  Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (Democrat – Sacramento) indicated earlier this evening that the State Senate would return to session on Tuesday. 

Assemblymember Evans, nearly half of the state’s counties and a wide range of disability and senior advocates have said the November 1^st implementation of the new IHSS worker (provider) requirements  is causing widespread “panic and confusion” among California’s most vulnerable population.  Evans and supporters of the bill say a delay is needed to allow the State to complete information, guidance, materials and for the counties to prepare and train staff and to conduct outreach so the new requirements are implemented without harming the people it was intended to protect. 

Both the Assembly and State Senate were in caucus most of the afternoon and evening on how the Legislature will address the State’s water crisis.  The Assembly was in caucus for most of the time after it formally convened at 12 noon and reconvened its floor session after 4 PM  - an hour later than what was scheduled and then resumed its floor session just before 10:30 PM. 

New IHSS Requirements Part of Budget Deal

The new requirements, passed last July by the Legislature controlled by the Democrats and approved  by the Governor as part of the 2009-2010 revised state budget, included mandatory fingerprinting and criminal background checks, orientation, for all IHSS workers. 

Those requirements were included, along with unannounced home visits and fingerprinting of IHSS recipients (with specific exemptions), in ABx4 19, (the “x4” stands for 4^th special or extraordinary session) that legislative Republicans and the Governor said were needed to provide tools for the state and counties to combat fraud and abuse in the IHSS program. 

The bill however had an earlier effective date – when the bill was enacted (July 28, 2009) which the Department of Social Services pushed back to November 1, 2009. 

Last week at a joint informational budget hearing by the Assembly Budget Committee and the Senate Budget Subcommittee #3 on Health and Human Services, Schwarzenegger Administration officials, represented by John Wagner, director of the Department of Social Services and Eva Lopez, deputy director, said the State intended to move forward with the November 1^st implementation date, saying that it would be releasing final or clarified instructions and information that should address the concerns raised by the counties and advocates. 

The Department of Social Services is the state agency that oversees the IHSS program statewide, which will in 2009-2010, serve over 462,000 children and adults with disabilities – including developmental, persons with mental health needs, the blind, and low income seniors.  Over 376,000 persons provide the in-home services as providers (workers).

Counties – who have responsibility to administer the IHSS program locally -   and disability and senior advocates however raised major objections saying that the Schwarzenegger Administration is moving too fast without providing clear instructions, translated materials, answers to concerns and conflicting information, and necessary funding for counties to implement the new changes,   

Santa Clara County Joins Long List of Counties Who Say They Cannot Comply With New IHSS Requirements

Meanwhile Santa Clara County indicated it joined nearly half of the State’s 58 counties in sending an official letter to the California Department of Social Services indicating it cannot comply with the new requirements for IHSS workers by the November 1^st start date. 

In a letter dated October 28, 2009, Will Lightbourne, director of the Social Services Agency of Santa Clara County wrote that "…Santa Clara County will be unable to implement the new IHSS provider enrollment mandates by the November 1, 2009 deadline” citing several specific reasons.  Among the reasons listed was that the county “…has not received all of the necessary directives to comply with the required elements including fingerprint/background check process and provider orientation now has the county received necessary translated materials in languages including Vietnamese, Spanish and Russian representing our diverse provider population.”

Lightbourne echoing other county officials across the state wrote that his county is “…routinely stymied in discussions how to implement the various mandates due to draft instructive documents, contradictory instructions, and newly required forms still in draft form [all from the California Department of Social Services]. 

He concluded his letter saying that budget reductions to the Santa Clara County Public Authority will limit “our ability to comply” with the new law and that his county will be able to comply with the new IHSS requirements when “…Santa Clara County is provided with all the documentation, authorizations, and translated materials necessary, and the enrollment mandates [requirements] have been legally vetted…”

Los Angeles County, which has the most IHSS recipients and workers within a county in the state and probably in  the nation, sent a letter last week that flatly said it could not comply with the November 1^st implementation date.

For a copy of this and the other letters from counties to the Department of Social Services, go to the CDCAN website at www.cdcan.us

NEXT STEPS

·         Official text of the bill (SB 69) as approved by the Assembly this evening (November 2)  will be available on the State’s official legislative website later this evening and also on the CDAN website at www.cdcan.us. 

·         The bill heads to the State Senate, and then, if it passes there without any changes, heads next to the Governor.

·         The measure needs 2/3rds vote in both houses to pass as an urgency or emergency bill (a bill that takes effect immediately after it is approved by the governor) which means 27 votes in the 40 member State Senate.  Democrats hold 50 seats in the Assembly, with 1 independent and 28 Republicans and 1 vacancy (72^nd Assembly District).  Democrats control the State Senate with 25 seats to the Republicans 15. 

·         If the Governor signs the bill – which is not certain – the measure would take effect immediately.

·         The Assembly Budget Committee has officially scheduled a follow-up informational hearing on the IHSS crisis for November 5^th, Thursday morning at 09:00 AM, at the State Capitol in Room 4202, though the hearing date and time is subject to change. 

·         The scheduled hearing is the same day as the Olmstead Advisory Committee meeting, which is scheduled to begin at 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM at the Department of Rehabilitation building in Room 242.  The Olmstead Advisory Committee advises the Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency on the state’s implementation of the landmark 1999 US Supreme Court “Olmstead Decision” under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act.  The US Supreme Court decision required the states to take steps to avoid the unnecessary or unjustified institutionalization of persons with disabilities, mental health needs and seniors.  The  lawsuit was filed by two women with disabilities from Georgia – Lois Curtis and Elaine Wilson – against the then George State Commissioner Tommy Olmstead who headed its health and human services agency.

CDCAN: Townhall Telemeeting on IHSS Budget Cuts, Oct 21 Wed 1 to 2:45 PM

Here's an except from CDCAN's (California Disability Community Action Network) latest email. Sorry about the short notice I just received the email an hour ago. If you can make the time, call tomorrow and let the State know how you feel about the Draconian cuts to IHSS consumers' (clients') hours as a means of balancing the State budget.

CALIFORNIA BUDGET CRISIS

CDCAN Townhall Telemeeting Wed at 1 PM

Focus on IHSS Budget Cuts – Lawsuit Update

Also This Week: Medi-Cal Optional Benefits Federal Lawsuit Filed By Medicaid Defense Fund Will Be Heard Oct 22 At 11 AM in SF Before 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals

SACRAMENTO, CALIF (CDCAN) [Updated 10/20/09  09:59 AM  (Pacific Time)  - In the wake of a federal court ruling yesterday that stopped major cuts to In-Home Supportive Services that used little known assessment tools as a means to narrow eligibility and reduce services, a CDCAN Townhall Telemeeting is scheduled for Wednesday afternoon (October 21) from 1:00 PM to 2:45 PM featuring representatives and advocates for people with disabilities, mental health needs, the blind, seniors, and support workers to provide updates to that lawsuit, and also updates on other cuts and policy changes to IHSS that still remain. 

The free townhall telemeetings, since 2003,  have been a regular way for people who cannot easily leave their communities or homes due to health needs, supports, resources, transportation, to participate in public policymaking, to hear policymakers and others and to ask questions directly.  The townhall telemeetings can be accessed from any phone line, or by going to a participating local site that is dialing in. 

Depending on availability, someone from the legal team that represented IHSS recipients and workers in the lawsuit that stopped the IHSS budget reductions yesterday, may be on the townhall telemeeting to provide an update on the lawsuit.

CDCAN TOWNHALL TELEMEETING

OCTOBER 21, 2009 – WEDNESDAY  1:00 – 2:45 PM

TOLL FREE LINE:  877-551-8082   (no passcode)

 

Guest Speakers:

·         Lisa Barrows, Community Resource Coordinator, and Melanie Bazile, executive director -  STEP (Strategies To Empower People) a Sacramento based independent and supported living services organization

·         Deborah Doctor of Disability Rights California (formerly Protection and Advocacy Inc or PAI) and possibly someone from the legal team including Melinda Bird. 

·         Anne Guerra, executive director of the Nevada Sierra IHSS Public Authority (covers Nevada, Sierra and Plumas counties)

·         Janet Heinritz-Canterbury of the Los Angeles County Personal Assistance Services Council (IHSS Public Authority)

·         Christal Hopkins, disability advocate and IHSS recipient

·         Karen Keeslar, advocate and also representing United Domestic Workers, one of the unions representing IHSS workers

·         Debra Roth (or possibly Loretta Stevens), with SEIU, one of the unions representing IHSS workers

·         John Wilkins, disability rights advocate and IHSS recipient

Cut in homecare funding still set for November 1

That's right folks, despite Federal District Court Judge Claudia Wilken's restraining order on Wednesday, October 14, cuts to homecare are expected to take affect on Sunday, November 1, 2009. Check out the coments section of the SacBee (Sacramento Bee) to see the scathing public contempt for the IT contractor that can't back out the changes in a timely manor.