Relates to the creation of an innovative supportive housing program for persons with a developmental disability who wish and are able to safely reside in such…

• Democratic12
• Republican5

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Patricia Fahy says this is needed

In 1999, in the seminal case Olmstead v. L.C. (hereinafter "Olmstead"), the United States Supreme Court held that governments must provide community-based services to persons with disabilities when (i) such services are appropriate; (ii) the affected persons do not oppose commu- nity- based treatment; and (iii) community-based services can be reason- ably accommodated, taking into account the resources available to the public entity and the needs of others who are receiving disability services from the entity. As a result of Olmstead, as well as subsequent actions brought by fami- lies and advocates, state and local governments are required to ensure that persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, can live in the most integrated setting appropriate for their needs. Today, many persons with developmental disabilities live with a parent or parents, a family member, or other similar direct support personnel. However, many such persons wish to live more independently, and would do so if an option existed that included certain supports. For such persons, living with a parent or other direct support personnel is not the most integrated setting that is appropriate for their needs. Further, although family caregiving is appropriate in many instances, a system that relies primarily on parents and similar direct support personnel to provide a non-institutional living setting is not sustaina- ble. The parent or direct support personnel eventually becomes unable to continue supporting the person who has a developmental disability, due to the direct support personnel's infirmity, death, or other concerns. When that happens, the person with a developmental disability may need to move to a certified housing setting, commonly referred to as a group home, which is a more restrictive environment than an innovative housing program could provide. Often, available group homes are located far from the communities in which people have lived their entire lives. Although group homes may be appropriate for some persons with developmental disa- bilities, they are not appropriate for those persons with disabilities who wish and are able to live more independently. Currently, group homes, even for those who choose to live in that setting, do not number nearly enough to meet the need. A system that creates unnecessary pressure to place persons with devel- opmental disabilities in group homes directly contravenes the spirit of Olmstead. Perhaps more importantly, it works a double trauma upon the person with a developmental disability, who has no option but to move from their long-time home while, at the same time, grieving the loss of a parent or direct support personnel. Accordingly, there is a need to create new and innovative housing initi- atives that maximize independence for persons with developmental disa- bilities. This bill would provide more opportunities to provide inde- pendent housing options to persons with developmental disabilities, where such persons wish and are able with support services to take advantage of such opportunities. Indeed, in a recent letter, the Acting Deputy Administrator and Director of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS") stated that there is no cap or percentage used to determine whether housing for people with developmental disabilities satisfies the federal home and community-based setting rule, which is designed to ensure that Medicaid funded housing programs comply with Olmstead principles. CMS clarified that every state must assess each setting and "focus ... on the experi- ence of the individual in the setting." Persons with developmental disabilities can in fact live in close proximity in a safe, healthy and integrated residential environment, especially when that environment is chosen by the person and augmented with supports that maximize the person's independence and that are less intensive than the services provided in an institutional setting. Thus, to maximize

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.