English
EspañolMarch 29, 2010. Los Angeles Times
Shane Goldmacher
All budget cuts are not created equal. And a new report from UC Berkeley says that some budget cuts — most notably to the state’s in-home aide program for the elderly and disabled — would cause a disproportionate share of job losses. A $1-billion cut to the state’s In Home Supportive Services program would cost California 215,900 jobs, according to the report, partly because of lost matching federal money.
Read Article
On the March to Save California.
Editorial. By Jim Miller, March 25.
Although the vast majority of responses to the March for California’s Future have been positive, there have been a few folks who were less than sanguine about our 48-day march to Sacramento. One day last week as we marched by a farm in the middle of the vast Central Valley, a stocky man in a tractor stopped as we passed by and asked us why were marching.
In a new Field Poll of California voters released on March 24, 77 percent oppose cutting programs that aid the elderly and disabled, while 71 percent are against cutting health care programs for low-income Californians.
Click here to read article – PDF
March 18, 2010. Capitol Alert
A state Senate subcommittee dominated by Democrats today rejected Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s plan to eliminate many social and health services, including the entire welfare and home health care assistance programs, if the state doesn’t receive billions of dollars in extra federal aid.
Subcommittee chairman Mark Leno, a San Francisco Democrat, denounced Schwarzenegger’s plans after hearing hours of testimony from program recipients and program managers about the effects of such cuts.
Leno declared “100 percent rejection” of reducing the In-Home Supportive Services program, which provides care for about 400,000 aged and disabled Californians. “How much destruction does Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger want to leave in his wake?” Leno asked rhetorically.
Read more, Sacramento Bee
A state Senate subcommittee dominated by Democrats today rejected Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s plan to eliminate many social and health services, including the entire welfare and home health care assistance programs, if the state doesn’t receive billions of dollars in extra federal aid. Subcommittee chairman Mark Leno, a San Francisco Democrat, denounced Schwarzenegger’s plans after hearing hours of testimony from program recipients and program managers about the effects of such cuts. Leno declared “100 percent rejection” of reducing the In-Home Supportive Services program, which provides care for about 400,000 aged and disabled Californians. “How much destruction does Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger want to leave in his wake?” Leno asked rhetorically.
Read more
Without any authority from the Legislature, the Schwarzenegger Administration is planning to purchase up to $5 million worth of military/security cameras to take pictures of the 450,000 seniors and people with disabilities who receive In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) homecare.
Last year, the Legislature approved the administration’s proposal that county social workers must fingerprint all IHSS consumers as part of a so-called anti-fraud initiative. However, the Legislature neither discussed nor approved photographing consumers. Nor has the administration provided any evidence of how much fraud would be stopped by photographing and fingerprinting these consumers; all IHSS consumers must be visited and assessed at home by county social workers before being approved for the program.
The “MorphoTrak” cameras are currently being used in Iraq and other military locations. According to their manufacturer, they are also recommended for, among other things, “border crossings, gang enforcement, and airport/maritime security.” The camera itself costs $4,200, plus hundreds of dollars more for docking stations and other equipment.
The County Welfare Directors Association of California and the California State Association of Counties took the Governor’s op-ed piece in the LA Times on July 3rd, 2009 and dissected it. They found some myths and busted them.
Monterey County Director of Social and Employment Services says there are a lot of contradictions in the request for reform, saying money was cut from the IHSS budget this year, but now more is being spent on trying to investigate fraud cases. Robinson says that money should be put to prevent fraud in the first place, like allowing case managers to spend more time with patients in person.
UDW Brothers and Sisters,
The UDW advocates with the California State Legislature and Administration on issues of importance to providers and consumers of California’s In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program. This report for the first year of the 2009-2010 legislative session focuses on California legislators’ votes on UDW’s priority bills.
The IHSS program provides personal care and domestic services to approximately 450,000 aged, blind or disabled individuals in their own homes. The purpose of the program is to allow these individuals to live safely at home rather than in costly and less desirable out-ofhome placement facilities. IHSS is the largest publicly funded non-medical program in the nation designed to help people with disabilities, the elderly, and blind—and with limited resources—live comfortably at home.
A review of the votes cast provides essential information to hold legislators accountable for their actions on IHSS issues that affect wages and benefits as well as the availability and quality of homecare services. The vote record can tell the entire story of a legislator’s attitude and actions on issues that are important to IHSS providers and consumers. Each year, legislators cast thousands of votes on thousands of proposed laws. There were 3,206 bills introduced in 2009. The Legislature sent the Governor a total of 1,431 bills and the Governor signed 1,087 of those measures. To gauge the accountability and performance of Assembly and Senate members, the UDW has produced this legislative report of votes cast on our sponsored and priority bills in 2009.
In Unity,
Jovan Agee, UDW Political & Legislative Director
We are relying on you this year, as we have in the past, to save the In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program, one of the most valuable, life-saving, cost-effective programs in our state. We are writing to you now because, sadly, we already know what Gov. Schwarzenegger will say about IHSS in his State of the State message tomorrow, and in his spending plan on Friday.
Ever since his first weeks in office, the Governor has targeted IHSS for cuts. Last year he proposed throwing more than 400,000 elderly, blind and disabled Californians–90 percent of all IHSS recipients–out of the program. Just last month he threatened to eliminate the program entirely.
You stood with us every year to preserve IHSS because you understand its importance to the more than 450,000 consumers and nearly 400,000 workers who are your constituents. You fought back last winter and spring against the governor’s proposals. But in July, 20 Democratic State Senators and 45 Democratic Assembly Members voted to eliminate or drastically reduce services for more than 100,000 IHSS recipients. In addition, 10 Democratic Senators and 12 Democratic Assembly Members voted to endorse the Governor’s extreme and mean-spirited “anti-fraud” campaign, which will cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars, despite the absence of any proof that widespread fraud exists in the program.
The 1999 US Supreme Court Olmstead decision affirmed the responsibility of states to ensure that people with disabilities, including seniors and children receive care in the most integrated setting. Even this administration acknowledges that the IHSS program keeps people out of more costly and less desirable out-of-home placement in nursing homes or other institutions. Despite that, unless you say no , the future of IHSS will be determined by a Governor who does not support services to keep people with disabilities and seniors living in their own homes.
Unfortunately, we have had to rely on the courts instead of the legislature to stop these illegal, immoral, and penny-wise, pound-foolish cuts designed to weaken and destroy the IHSS program.
This year, we need all of you to do what you know is right – and what you’ve done before: Stand up for the California consumers of IHSS, their families and the workers who provide their much-needed care. We expect you to stand up to the Governor. We expect you to demand that this year’s budget be debated and decided in a process which allows all members of the Legislature, as well as key stakeholders and policy experts, to observe and participate . We expect you to find more equitable funding solutions and policies. We expect you to make decisions on IHSS based on its merits
IHSS is a program with a proven track record of keeping Californians with disabilities and seniors in their own homes and saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in doing so.
It is time for you to be accountable. It is time for you to live up to your party’s platform, which says: “All people with disabilities must be able to sustain quality of life in the least restrictive environment possible and in accessible community settings”; and which promises: “Increased, stable funding and expanded service hours for In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) clients.”
Sincerely,
AARP-California
ACLU of Southern California
California Alliance for Retired Americans ( CARA )
Californians for Disability Rights, Inc. (CDR)
California Disability Community Action Network (CDCAN)
California Foundation for Independent Living Centers (CFILC)
California In-Home Supportive Services Consumer Alliance (CICA)
California Senior Legislature
Disability Rights California
Gray Panthers California
IHSS Public Authority of Marin County
Independent Living Services of Northern California
Marin Center for Independent Living
National Senior Citizens Law Center
Nevada Sierra Regional IHSS Public Authority
Northern California ADAPT
Older Women’s League California (OWL)
Personal Assistance Services Council of Los Angeles County
Quality Homecare Coalition
Resources for Independent Living
San Francisco IHSS Public Authority
Silicon Valley Independent Living Center (SVILC)
UDW Homecare Providers Union/AFSCME
| 1. |
FUNCTIONAL INDEX CUTS. These are cuts to consumer’s eligibility or authorized hours based on their Functional Index Score.
|
|
 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
REVISED PROVIDER ENROLLMENT FORM.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
CHANGES TO CLIENT REQUIREMENT, TIMESHEETS AND PROVIDER NOTFICATIONS
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
You may have received new enrollment forms (SOC 426) along with updates on the fingerprinting requirement, mandatory provider orientation, and other information in the mail.
Some of this information, which has been sent by the state to the counties, has been confusing, contradictory, incomplete or, in some cases, possibly illegal.
UDW is working with the counties and other organizations representing providers and clients to try to solve these problems.
In the meantime, the new provider enrollment requirements including background checks and fingerprinting are still in place, and have not been stopped by litigation.
YOU SHOULD THEREFORE FILL OUT THE NEW ENROLLMENT FORMS AND RETURN THEM TO THE ADDRESS PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS FROM YOUR COUNTY.
Although the law states current providers have until July 1, 2010 to comply it can take SIX WEEKS or longer after you have submitted all the documentation, for the county to process background checks etc. The payroll computer is set to terminate any provider that has not been completely processed by July 1, 2010.
IT IS THEREFORE NOW IMPORTANT TO ACT
WITHOUT DELAY.
There is one exception: If you are asked to sign a “Form 426″ which includes the question about whether you have ever been convicted “of a serious crime or misdemeanor” respectfully refuse to sign the document and refer the
county official to All County Letter (ACL) No. 09-78
More information and copy of ACL
LATEST LETTER (ACL) REGARDING QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ON CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR IHSS PROVIDERS
*Note: Current providers (those who are recognized in the state’s payrolling system from January 1, 2001 to October 31, 2009) are NOT required to attend orientation meetings in person. As a current provider you have the right to receive the orientation materials by mail. All providers must still go to their county office to sign and return the acknowledgment form in person, however not all counties are making this option clear.
Detail on each specific change to IHSS caused by state budget reductions are listed below.
If you have further questions, contact your local UDW officeor call our toll-free number: 1-800-621-5016.
Last year’s state budget mandated many changes in IHSS including cuts and new eligibility requirements. Not all of these changes have been implemented due to lawsuits brought forth by advocacy groups (including UDW). Detail below.
These lawsuits are still winding their way through the courts and each have separate schedules and hearing dates, but most will takes months or longer to be finalized. Although we are cautiously optimistic, the injunctions stopping cuts to IHSS must be considered temporary and may still be implemented.
This year, the governor’s proposed 2010-11 budget (unveiled January 8) is proposing many of the same cuts. Additionally he is proposing to completely eliminate the IHSS program if the federal government does not produce $6.9 billion in additional funding for California’s budget by July 15, 2010. If the federal government does provide the requested $6.9 billion in new funds, the Governor is still proposing to cut $77.9 million by reducing state funding for wages at a cap of $8.60 per hour and another $872.6 million through cuts in services to consumers with a functional index score below 4. The reduction of state contribution to wages and functional index based cuts are both issues being presently litigated by the courts.
THIS PROPOSED BUDGET MUST BE STOPPED AND WE NEED YOUR
HELP TO DO SO. GO HERE TO TAKE ACTION ON THE BUDGET .
March 18, 2010. Sacramento
The hearing will be focusing on the “trigger” cuts (the complete elimination of the program if $6.9 billion is not received from the federal government by July 15th).
Public Testimony Will Be Heard
We are asking those members that live near Sacramento to turn out for the hearing if you are able, and if you are not please send a letter to:
Senate Budget Sub-Committee #3
State Capitol, Room 5019
Sacramento, CA 95814
or by fax to (916) 323-8386
email to: Glenda.Higgins@sen.ca.go
One personal, hand written letter has more impact than hundreds of emails or faxes that are written by political organizations and signed by you.
IHSS Teleconference
March 17th by Department of Social Services
This is a chance for stakeholders to have their voices heard and questions answered.
Department of Social Services has scheduled for Wednesday, March 17th, from 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM, a statewide teleconference on the In-Home Supportive Services Program, Integrity and Fraud Prevention Stakeholder Process. The Toll free line is 1-800-700-7414.
Note: the Department of Social Services, due to the likely large number of participants, encourages people to call in prior to the scheduled start time. Persons having any questions about this teleconference should contact Michele Loftin , Manager, Program Integrity and Training Unit at the Department of Social Services at 916-229-3494 or email her atMichele.Loftin@dss.ca.gov
Topic of Phone Meeting: In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Program Integrity and Fraud Prevention Stakeholder Process
By: Doug Moore
In your Feb. 14 editorial (“Limit in-home care; don’t eliminate it“), you correctly pointed out that the In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) home re program is our state’s fastest growing social service program.
But you failed to explain why:
• It is humane. IHSS allows nearly a half-million low-income elderly, blind and disabled Californians to be cared for in the comfort and safety of their own homes by people they know and trust. It is obvious that most of them would choose that over nursing home care
• It makes economic sense. Allowing people to remain in their own homes means that they and their caregivers contribute to the local economy.
• It reflects the growth of the elderly population in California. As our citizens grow older, we need to adapt our public services to meet their needs.
• It is cost-effective. As you noted, it costs an average of $13,000 a year to care for someone through IHSS. Put that person in a nursing home, and it will cost taxpayers $55,000 a year or more. The non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) said in its recent report: “The elimination of IHSS or a dramatic reduction in eligibility would likely lead to offsetting costs that more than outweigh the savings from its elimination.”
• The federal government pays the state hundreds of millions of dollars a year in matching funds for IHSS. If IHSS is eliminated or cut back, we lose some or all of that money. And remember, Stanislaus County is reimbursed by the state and federal governments for all the money it spends on IHSS.
Surely we should be supporting such a humane, economically beneficial, cost-effective program rather than trying to reduce its effectiveness and value.
If you limit IHSS to only the severely impaired, how do you care for the Alzheimer’s patient who can cook and clean but needs supervision? Without home care, he or she is likely to forget to turn off the stove or wander away from home. There are thousands of such patients who now receive IHSS services. How do you keep them safe?
It is easy to claim that home care is a “family responsibility.” But that does not erase the reality that thousands of families rely on the limited income from IHSS wages and that some people are not able to work outside the home because their caregiving role is so demanding. Many have had to give up other jobs and even careers. Especially in this economy, how can you abandon them?
Finally, a word about fraud. We believe that fraud in any public program is wrong and should be punished.
However, despite the outlandish claims by Gov. Schwarzenegger, political ideologues and some ambitious district attorneys, there is no definitive proof that fraud in IHSS is widespread.
In Sacramento County, for example, a recent report cited a total of 19 potential cases of fraud out of some 42,000 IHSS recipients. Widespread? Hardly, and certainly not justification for eliminating the entire program.
Our state budget process is broken. We need to fix it. Depriving some of California’s most vulnerable citizens of care or throwing hundreds of thousands of low-wage home care providers out of work (while preaching “jobs, jobs, jobs”) is not the solution.
Moore is executive director of the UDW Homecare Providers Union/AFSCME Local 3930, which represents 65,000 home-care workers statewide and nearly 5,000 in Stanislaus County.
|
UDW members rally at hearing 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.”
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.
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. 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. 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. 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
|
|
It has come to our attention that some counties are asking providers to sign a new form SOC 426 (Provider Enrollment Form) that includes a question about whether the provider “has ever been convicted of a serious crime or misdemeanor.” COUNTIES SHOULD NOT BE USING THIS NEW FORM. In a letter to all counties (ALL-COUNTY LETTER NO. 09-78) last November, the Department of Social Services instructed the counties to: • STOP using IHSS provider enrollment forms or other documents requiring individuals to declare that they never have been convicted of a felony crime or serious misdemeanor and/or state that persons convicted of such crimes are not eligible to be IHSS providers; and • STOP disqualifying or finding individuals ineligible to be IHSS providers on the basis that they have been convicted of a felony or a serious misdemeanor at some point in their life and who are otherwise not disqualified. If you are asked to sign a Form 426 which includes the question about whether you have ever been convicted “of a serious crime or misdemeanor”, respectfully refuse to sign the document and refer the county official to All County Letter No. 09-78. |
As a client of IHSS I am really concerned about my home care worker getting exhausted or sick. When your very life depends on someone else’s care, you want them to be healthy and to have good enough circumstances so that they will be able to continue doing the work they do.
That is why I am writing to all of you – other providers – personally. I know there are many of you who are so busy surviving, that you don’t have time to get involved in anything else. But I was actually looking for some way I could help my home care worker to endure the stresses of the job, so we both joined the UDW bargaining committee. I was there while we bargained with the county for almost a year to get our very first contract in this county. That contract included raises and healthcare benefits for workers in Riverside. I know for a fact we would never have gotten the raises and healthcare coverage without the union – because the county fought us every step of the way. But in the end they agreed to raise wages, and introduce first time medical coverage. Prior to union representation homecare providers made $7.11 per hour. Due to continued union representation we are now at $10.25 and if the governor had not cut state funding our wages would have been higher under the present contract.
Before we got raises and benefits, I was literally scared my care provider was going to collapse under the load. Now I know he can visit a doctor if he needs to. And the raise has made it possible to occasionally get him time off for a couple of hours by hiring a second provider come in and provide respite – which all providers know is absolutely crucial when you’re on call 24/7. These union improvements have made a life and death difference for my provider and me.
Some of you may wonder if the union is just another organization that wants a piece of your life. Some of you may have lower wages than we do. My county (Riverside) was among one of the first to get representation, so I want to let you know that it worked, and that it is worth much more to us than what we pay in dues. Now, each time we neotiate a contract it builds on the last one and our situation improves. As a solitary voice I can write all the letters I want to the politicians, try to protest my hours getting cut, or ask for a raise for my provider. But it isn’t the same – a solitary voice can (and does!) get ignored. When we are represented by UDW, the policy-makers listen to us because they know that the union represents thousandsof people who vote – and that is who pays their salary – the voters, and taxpayers.
I wanted you to hear this from someone who lives with the same struggles you do – day by day survival – and has been fortunate enough to witness first hand, what happens when we get representation. Our lives get better. This union is worth supporting.
I sincerely thank you for your time and your consideration in reading this. I know how valuable and scarce time is for care providers – how little of it you get for yourselves – and how hard you work. Thank you on behalf of all clients.
|
Why we need our union
Chris Long, IHSS Public Authority Worker, UDW Bargaining Committee, Riverside County Independent Providers mail their time cards to county offices because the program is administered by the county. So UDW has to negotiate with the county for increased wages and benefits. Those of us who were involved in months of tough negotiations know there would not have been any increased wages or benefits provided by the county without collective bargaining by UDW. We simply cannot achieve this progress as individuals. But every union member and their clients should know that the “In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program” is run by the county because State law says they have to do it. Every union member and client should know that about 50% of the wages for home care workers comes from the State treasury and 50% of the money for our wages comes from the federal government. The county pays a small portion (approx. 17%) of the cost at first, but the county is paid back their share later on, out of state sales tax revenue. The money that comes from the state comes only as long as the politicians in Sacramento agree that “home care” is something they should spend tax money on. UDW doesn’t just bargain for wages and benefits they also talk to the politicians in Sacramento – Democrat, Republican and Independent – to convince them this is a good program and they should continue to pay for it with state tax dollars, in good times and in bad times. As individuals we would not be able to represent ourselves the way that UDW can when they speak for thousands and thousands of home care workers and thousands and thousands of their clients. As a group we can have a lot of influence because many of us are going to vote at election time. Your union dues support a lot of hard work when it comes to getting wage increases and making sure the money keeps coming from Sacramento. But it doesn’t stop there. What about the federal government’s share of If you work for a company like a grocery store and are lucky enough Without our union representing us in Sacramento and Washington, D.C.,
Read detail of the currently proposed cuts |
