:


On October 19th, the first of several battles was won. In her ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken issued a temporary injunction stopping the state from going forward on November 1st with its planned cuts “because they would result in substantial harm, damage and injury and likely violate federal law.” The Judge said that the state’s Functional Index rankings–which it would use to determine who to cut from the program– were clearly not based on need, that essential services could be withdrawn arbitrarily, and “people could lose something irreplaceable – the ability to remain safely in their homes.” 

Outside the Oakland courthouse.

Scores of disabled, elderly, and their homecare providers rallied outside the Oakland court room chanting and waving placards to show their outrage at the legislature’s decision to cut essential services. The courtroom was filled to the limit, and people were being turned away at the door.

Protesters against cuts to IHSS.

Advocates – including UDW – have been fighting hard to bring recognition to the fact that services being cut are essential services , and that their loss will literally be life threatening to many. Cuts based on Functional Index Scores and Rankings discriminate against the blind, developmentally disabled, and those with psychiatric disorders like Alzheimer’s who are often physically sound. Also facing cuts to essential domestic services, are seniors that are otherwise incapable of managing their own needs in order to live safely on their own. Many of these types of recipients would certainly have to go to nursing homes – at far greater cost to the taxpayers of California.

When the rights of the disabled and elderly were ignored by the legislature who voted to cut IHSS, UDW and other activists decided to take legal action. This lawsuit is asking that the state be told to “go back to the drawing board” and come up with a comprehensive and fair plan.

Story & detail on lawsuit filing
 

Judge Wilken’s Written Order (legal text of preliminary injunction)

NEXT STEPS & HOW YOU CAN HELP US WIN 

With huge budget deficits predicted again for California in the coming year (some are saying up to 10 billion),

the fight to stop cuts will continue, and it will be tough.

The next step in the legal action against cuts based on Function Index will be a trial or motion for judgment in the federal court in Oakland. The first hearing won’t come until early 2010, meaning the cuts might not occur during the current fiscal year, which ends June 30, 2010. 

This is not the time to sit quietly and wait! 

Homecare providers, their clients and family members should send letters indicating their concerns about changes to the IHSS program to their state Assembly members and State Senators in their district office.  Phone calls or visits to local legislators offices are also vitally important.
Find Your Legislators 

Another important step you can take is to speak to your community through the media. Remember that IHSS is funded by California taxpayers who often do not know about the program or how important it may be to their own families. Your friends and neighbors may not know that IHSS saves taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars a year compared to the cost of nursing home care. They also may believe the unfair and misleading campaign by the governor and his allies that characterized the IHSS program as being “rife with fraud.” Writing the editor of your local paper or commenting on websites of newspapers that carry stories about the program are both effective actions you can take.

How to write the editor of your local paper

Media stories in the news where you can comment

OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO IHSS BUDGET CUTS 

New requirements for providers and anti-fraud measures including fingerprinting and background checks are still in place.

Although a Federal judge has also temporarily blocked the governor’s earlier attempt to roll back IHSS wages to $9.50 an hour, the lawsuit which brought about the injunction is not settled.

See overview of lawsuits

Updated Summary of cuts affecting

IHSS providers & consumers


If you have an IHSS client that is employed or wants to work, the client may transfer some hours from their home to the workplace so you can care for them at their place of employment. The new improvements to the California Working Disabled legislaiton make it possible for consumers to work, save, and improve their circumstances without loosing Medi-Cal.
More information

Press Release
October 14, 2009
Arlette Moreno, World Institute on Disability



Three AFSCME members make the case for quality affordable coverage for all.

In his September address to Congress, Pres. Barack Obama pointed out that there are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get health care coverage and that 14,000 Americans lose their coverage every day. He also said that even among the insured, more and more Americans “have never had less security and stability than they do today.”

Candice Cheney is one of them. A psychiatric supervisor at the Central Louisiana State Hospital and president of Local 3074 (Council 17), she is among scores of men, women and children who suffer because insurance companies deny payment for care.

Struggling with a life-threatening disease, Candice fights for health care reform so that people like her will get insurance that fits their needs. As Pres. Gerald W. McEntee explains it: “AFSCME has committed unprecedented resources and energy to this effort. Premiums have grown four times faster than wages, and health care costs have become an obstacle in almost all of our contract negotiations. As a result, we often have to give up wage increases in order to maintain decent health care benefits.”

As Washington considers the President’s proposals to overhaul the health care system, the stories of Candice and two other AFSCME members add a human dimension to the fight for reform.

Candice Cheney

CANDICE CHENEY | A state worker in a psychiatric hospital, Candice desperately needs treatment for a life-threatening disease but was denied payment by her insurers. She is fighting for health care reform so that others with a similar condition will benefit from health plans that meet a patient’s needs. Photo: Kenneth Wilks


I Just Want to Get Well

As a high school student, Candice wanted to play softball and volleyball. Her mind was set but not her body. “I couldn’t even watch the games because I’d run out of breath just trying to climb up the bleachers,” she recalls.

Candice, 47, suffers with chronic, genetic obesity. She’s tried every medical remedy with no success. Four years ago, her primary care physician, Dr. Richard J. Holcombe of the Freedman Clinic, diagnosed Candice as “functionally disabled.” In 2007, he drafted a letter recommending gastric bypass surgery to reverse what he called “life-threatening morbid obesity.” The procedure, he wrote to the insurance company, “will be ultimately life-saving.”

As a state worker, Candice has been covered for 26 years by Group Benefits, her employer’s health insurance plan. According to the company website, Group Benefits is “a leader in improving and preserving quality of life.” But when Candice sought pre-approval for the $40,000 procedure, she was denied. A representative told Candice the surgery was not a medical necessity but a “cosmetic” procedure.

“What good is health care if I can’t get the treatment I need to be healthier and have a better quality of life?” Candice wonders with dismay. “But I can’t fight them. They’re too powerful.”

The effect of obesity on her health has been devastating. Linked to her condition are other medical risks: heart disease, a sleep disorder, high blood pressure, osteoarthritis and depression. “I’m doing everything right, controlling my diet and doing regular exercises,” Candice explains. “But I can’t take weight-reduction pills because of my heart or do aerobics because of my lungs and legs. I’ve hit a wall.”

Despite bouts of depression and a weakening heart, Candice remains strong in her resolve not only to save her own life but “to fight especially for those who feel there’s nothing else for them.”

When AFSCME’s “Highway to Health Care” bus stopped at Southern University in Baton Rouge this summer, Candice mobilized her members and gathered signatures from hundreds of college students who support health care reform. She has gone on local radio stations, spoken in churches and community meetings and made hundreds of phone calls to get others involved in the campaign. “I’m not going to stop until we win,” she declares.

Candice knows that President Obama’s initiatives may not have a personal and immediate impact on her. “But if somebody else with my condition will benefit, my own efforts to change the system would not have been in vain,” she says.

Candice’s brother suffers the same life-threatening disease. But his health plan covered weight-reduction surgery. “I hope that with these changes, patients with the same illness will be treated fairly and uniformly,” Candice says.

AFSCME supports the U.S. House of Representative’s reform bill which calls for “comparative effectiveness research” of various treatments to figure out what works best for each patient. If this research determines, for instance, that a certain procedure is more appropriate, it will force private insurers to adopt the same best practices. And it would fix inequities in treatment like those experienced by Candice and her brother.

“If we achieve all this through reform, then I would consider it a personal victory,” Candice says.

Candice knows gastric bypass surgery will significantly improve her life expectancy. “All I want is to have a better chance of enjoying good health and a longer life,” she says.

A Saving Grace

Amy Day and Rosemarie Nguyen are among California’s 300,000 home care workers. They provide personal care assistance to 400,000 elderly and disabled clients who prefer to have greater control of their lives by living in their own homes—or sometimes, the homes of the providers themselves. Care-giving is often difficult and stressful and involves heavy lifting and other back-breaking chores.

Many home care workers are low income. They have no health insurance and lack access to preventive care. As a result, they’re often in poor health and have chronic medical conditions that go untreated.

But Amy and Rosemarie consider themselves fortunate. They receive medical benefits from a county-paid health insurance plan negotiated into their contracts by their union—United Domestic Workers (UDW/AFSCME). Here are their stories:

Hanging on a Thread


Amy Day AMY DAY | “Sometimes I feel like my life’s hanging on a thread,” says Amy, who cares full-time for her 10-year-old son who has cerebral palsy. A single parent and chairperson of the UDW/AFSCME chapter in El Dorado County, she led the bargaining team that fought for medical benefits. “Our union contract is my only saving grace,” she adds. Photo: Jean Dixon

Ten years ago, Amy Day was diagnosed with placenta previa, a complication of pregnancy caused by the placenta being located in the wrong position. She wasn’t told of her condition during an ultrasound test. Instead of being prescribed the bed rest that is favored in such cases, she continued working. She even took a second job as a cake decorator to supplement her meager income.

Complications caused the early delivery of two-pound-nine-ounce Brendan, who was born with brain injuries that developed into cerebral palsy during infancy. For three years, Brendan underwent nine brain surgeries and numerous painful procedures. Now 10 years old and a fifth grader at a local elementary school, Brendan still requires a feeding tube and a shunt.

A single mother, Amy chose to be Brendan’s full-time caregiver. “I went through hell fighting for his life,” she says. “He needs me for his long-term care.” Amy has two other children: Lacey, 11, and Zander, 4. “I do my best to keep them all healthy,” she says. “But my own health is always on the back burner. Sometimes I feel like my life’s hanging on a thread. Our union contract is my only saving grace.”

Although Brendan’s medical needs are covered by Supplemental Security Income and Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program for low-income families, Amy feels a lot more secure now knowing that her family’s primary care, prescription drugs, hospitalization, dental and vision benefits are all included in a medical package negotiated into their union contract. As chairperson of the UDW/AFSCME El Dorado County chapter, Amy led the bargaining team that fought for the benefits for more than four years.

“My experience has convinced me that we need health care reform,” Amy adds. “If I lose my job and need to buy insurance on my own, I’d like the assurance that I won’t be denied because of a pre-existing condition.” Such conditions include sleep apnea, diabetes and heart disease. “It’s very important to me that we fight for the causes that make our lives better. I’m doing it for my children and all the disabled in our community.”

Rosemarie Nguyen

ROSEMARIE NGUYEN | “I joined UDW/AFSCME because of the health insurance,” says Rosemarie who had heart surgery the same year her husband died from kidney failure. Rosemarie is worried that if she loses her job, it would be tough for her to get health coverage. A health plan may automatically deny Rosemarie’s application because of her pre-existing conditions, such as diabetes and heart disease. Photo: J.T. MacMillan

More Choices

ROSEMARIE NGUYEN | “I joined UDW/AFSCME because of the health insurance,” says Rosemarie who had heart surgery the same year her husband died from kidney failure. Rosemarie is worried that if she loses her job, it would be tough for her to get health coverage. A health plan may automatically deny Rosemarie’s application because of her pre-existing conditions, such as diabetes and heart disease. Photo: J.T. MacMillan

Rosemarie Nguyen is clear: “I joined UDW/AFSCME because of the health insurance.”

When it comes to health care, she has traveled a rough road. In 2003, the same year her ill husband died, she had a heart attack and needed surgery. At the time, her family was covered by Medi-Cal. It offered some protection and helped her get enough care to get back on track.

Today, as she performs home care services for an 87-year-old cancer patient, Rosemarie herself suffers with a heart ailment,

  high blood pressure, diabetes, thyroid problems, asthma and glaucoma.

“That’s why I joined UDW/AFSCME,” she says. “I’m glad we have medical benefits through our union.”

But the truth is that her health care is a balancing act. UDW/AFSCME workers get health care insurance only if they work more than 80 hours a month. If her patient’s needs change, requiring less of Rosemarie’s time, she would have no coverage at all.

Like Amy, Rosemarie is concerned that if she loses her job, her pre-existing conditions—such as diabetes and a heart ailment—would make it tough for her to get new coverage.

“I am praying that President Obama’s proposals will pass,” Rosemarie says. “For the work we do, we need security and stability in our lives.”

 

 


 

 

Top of Page


Copyright © United Domestic Workers of America. All rights reserved.

Technical comments or questions may be addressed to Webmaster


Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California signed AB 1269 into law just a few hours before the legal deadline on October 11, 2009. Staff for the bill’s author, Assemblymember Julia Brownley (Santa Monica), informed the bill’s sponsor, World Institute on Disability, WID, shortly after the bill became law.

California residents who work and use Medi-Cal services reacted swiftly.

“The changes made by this law will finally allow thousands of Californians with significant disabilities to go to work without jeopardizing vital health care that is not available under employer-sponsored health insurance, or Medicare coverage,” declared Alana Theriault, Director of Benefits Planning for Abilicorp, a disability-focused employment company.

“AB 1269 improves Medi-Cal’s California Working Disabled Program by allowing disabled workers such as myself to be able to save our earnings and plan for our future like everyone else.  We now have 26 weeks in-between jobs during which we can stay on Medi-Cal through this program without penalty as long as we keep paying our premiums. I am especially happy that this program will no longer exclude disabled people on retirement benefits who will now have more opportunity to make a living in this difficult economy. Californians with disabilities have a real world employment support with this law,” concluded Ms. Theriault.

The Gray Panthers, AARP and other major senior organizations urged the Governor to sign AB 1269. Because of federal restrictions in spending guidelines, the new law takes effect shortly after Medi-Cal no longer receives federal Stimulus Act funds, about a year from now.

“Californians with a significant disability are taking big hits this year with major cuts to available social services,” stated Bryon MacDonald at WID. “Terrific California advocates, employees, business owners and non profit groups worked with WID for years on AB 1269. AB 1269 becoming law in difficult times for so many of us represents an indomitable spirit in the disability community that we shall not only survive these hard times, we plan to thrive in spite of them.”


A coalition of groups including UDW has filed suit in federal court in San Francisco seeking to block the cuts in IHSS scheduled to take effect November 2.  The lawsuit was filed on behalf of IHSS recipients and caregivers. Four public interest law firms – Disability Rights California, Disability Rights Legal Center, National Senior Citizens Law Center and the National Health Law Program were joined by the law firm of Altshuler Berzon LLP, which is representing SEIU locals (SEIU – United Healthcare Workers, SEIU – United Long Term Care Workers, and SEIU Local 521), California United of Homecare Workers (CUHW), and  United Domestic Workers-AFSCME.

These proposed cuts are based on a person’s Functional Index score.

The functional index is a number the IHSS social worker assigns a client which denotes the ability of the client to do a task (such as housekeeping). For instance, a functional index rank of “2” means that the client is able to perform a function (task), but needs verbal assistance, such as reminding, guidance, or encouragement. A “5” ranking would mean the client cannot do the task with or without assistance. A final overall functional index ranking or “score” is assigned to the IHSS consumer based on a weighted average of the client’s ability to perform or not perform the task. Not all tasks are ranked (such as yard abatement, heavy cleaning).

  • If a client is ranked below a functional index of 2, the client will no longer be eligible for the IHSS Program. http://www.udwa.org/images/spacer.gif
  • http://www.udwa.org/images/spacer.gifIf a client is ranked below FI 4 in any of their domestic or related services hours, they will lose those domestic and related services. For instance, if the client has a FI 2 in housekeeping and a FI 4 in meal preparation, the client will no longer receive the housekeeping services but will keep the meal preparation services.

The lawsuit has been filed in hopes of preventing the mailing of notices of action on October 19 to consumers who are being thrown out of the program or having their services reduced.  Attorneys are seeking an expedited hearing by the court prior to that date. The lawsuit alleges that the IHSS cutbacks will violate federal constitutional due process protections, the Medicaid Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

Press conference participants included:

Melinda Bird, Attorney, Disability Rights California

Lee Collins, Director, San Luis Obispo Department of Social Services

Donna Calame, Executive Director, San Francisco Public Authority

Ann Guerra, Director, Nevada/Sierra County Public Authority

The speakers argued that:

1.      FI scores are arbitrary and unscientific and were never intended to be used for across-the-board decisions on benefit cuts. Using these scores to determine eligibility is like using the first letter of a person’s name to determine who gets cut.  Until now, consumers have never been sent information explaining what their FI scores are and how they are determined.

2.      The NOAs scheduled to be sent out by the state on Oct. 19 are grossly inadequate and will not give consumers the information they need to understand why they are being cut and to determine whether or not to appeal.

3.      The 10-day-window in which consumers can appeal the NOAs is not enough time.

The lawsuit is asking that the state be told to “go back to the drawing board” and come up with a comprehensive notice that clearly spells out the situation and allows consumers more time to appeal.

All of the speakers argued that these cuts truly may have life-or-death ramifications because they are based on an average FI score rather than on each individual’s actual needs.  For example, a consumer with Alzheimer’s may be fully capable of cooking and cleaning for herself, yet may constantly forget to do such things as turn off the stove after cooking.  Using the state’s rationale, this person would be cut from the program. However, without assistance, that individual may be a danger to herself and others (by burning down her house, for instance.)   

NEWS COVERAGE & MORE INFORMATION

Legal Filing (PDF file)

For up-to-date information on the lawsuit, go to:

http://www.disabilityrightsca.org/advocacy/V.L.-v-Wagner/index.htm

Disability Rights California Press Release (PDF file)

Oakland Tribune, October 1, 2009

Advocates for disabled sue to stop IHSS cuts

"…Disability Rights California senior counsel Melinda Bird said Thursday that the cutbacks — part of the state budget cuts approved by the Legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this summer — will be based on IHSS patients’ “functional index rankings,” which she described as a nonscientific number assigned to patients for each task for which they might need IHSS help. People with an overall functional index score below 2 will no longer qualify for IHSS services, and people with a functional index ranking below 4 for any domestic or related service will no longer receive that particular service…"

Read Full Story

Los Angeles Times, October 1, 2009

Lawsuit seeks to block cuts to in-home care for the

elderly and disabled

"…The advocates are asking for an injunction before letters go out later this month to the 36,000 Californians whose aid would be eliminated and an additional estimated 97,000 who would lose some services. The cuts are set to go in effect on Nov. 1. Melinda Bird, senior counsel for Disability Rights California, accused the state of trying “to balance the budget on the backs of the poor and those with disabilities.” Officials plan to cut services to those with the lowest scores on a scale measuring recipients’ needs. But Bird called the scoring method “arbitrary, irrational and unfair.” Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles), who helped craft the budget, appeared somewhat supportive of the lawsuit…"

Read Story