2006 Legislative Summary

VERMONT COALITION FOR DISABILITY RIGHTS
2007 LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY


The 2007 legislative session is not over yet, with the General Assembly poised to return on July 11 in response to gubernatorial vetoes, but “the results are in” for most of the bills of interest to the disability community.  A glossary of acronyms appears at the end.  Feel free to call our office with questions or email us at: vcdrinfo@sover.net

EDUCATION

H.526 Education Quality and Cost-Control: As the Appropriations bill is known as the “big bill” of state government finance, this was undoubtedly the “big bill” of education. Curbing education spending and hence property tax growth was declared a common priority of the session by legislators and the Governor, although the means by which this would be accomplished consumed hours of negotiations, right up until the close of the session.  Needless to say, special education spending received a lion’s share of attention, and is specifically addressed in several sections of the bill.  

General education costs will be controlled via a cap that limits high-spending districts’ budget growth to the rate of inflation in the average spending district plus 1%; budgets with proposed increases up to this amount are voted upon as usual. Those districts can only exceed the cap via a 2-step process, in which the cap must be overridden by second vote. Critics of this 11th hour agreement note the majority of legislators had little time to consider the merits of the bill, that school budget growth may be effected by factors over which districts have no control, and that the ability to pass a budget that exceeds the cap is likely to be biased toward affluent more districts. Further, caps are likely to further pit general education against special education spending, if constrained growth necessitates cuts in areas serving all children, while special education costs are seen as uniquely protected.

However, that “protection” may be less than imagined. Special education costs will be monitored via an annual Special Education Review by the Commissioner of the Department of Education (DOE), to identify high and low spending districts. High spending districts are identified as those which spent at least 20 percent more than the statewide average of special education eligible costs per average daily membership, while low spending districts as having spent no more than 80 percent of the statewide average of special education eligible costs per average daily membership. High spending districts will be asked to justify their spending based upon greater than average demand or other characteristics. Districts that cannot justify spending levels will be required, to identify alternatives for delivery of services and develop a remediation plan.  High spending districts will have two years to demonstrate progress on the remediation plan. If the Commissioner determines satisfactory progress has not been made, 10 percent of the district’s special education expenditures reimbursement will be withheld in the ensuing school year. An additional 10 percent can be withheld in each subsequent year if DOE judges satisfactory progress is not achieved.  Districts may appeal to the State Board of Education with reasons the district believes it made satisfactory progress or to explain the reasons it failed to do so, before funds are withheld.      

We are concerned by this portion of the bill for several reasons. Support by a panel of experts to be provided to high-spending districts in an earlier version of the bill, has long since been removed.   There is nothing in the bill to ensure pressure to reduce special education costs does not result in less efficacious services and children do not loose as a result.  Low spending districts are reviewed to determine whether they may serve as models for other districts, but there is no obligation to verify whether they have met all requirements of IDEA.  Finally, withholding of federal funding will require compensation by state funding. This is hardly consistent with the larger goals of H.526 and may further exacerbate public perception of special education as the primary “drain” upon the property tax and increase pressures to cut corners in this area.  Certainly, in our small towns were “everyone knows who the special needs children are,” parents of children with serve disabilities already experience enough discomfort at town meetings and school budget discussions.

Attention to the property tax heightened awareness among legislators of costs shifts over the years that have occurred as a result of cuts to the Agency of Human Services (AHS) budget. The bill also includes a Provision of Special Education Services Study to examine how AHS, DOE, and the Department of Employment &Training should provide for special education services for eligible persons less than 22 years of age in school or out of school and for other human services-related services for elementary and secondary students.  The Vermont Parent Information Center and VCDR are named among the participants in this study, to be reported upon or before November 1, 2007. Additional legislative charges include a study on Medicaid funded educational services and a report on the fiscal requirements of state and federal mandates.

H. 534 Prekindergarten Education: This bill is a tangible result of the study on prekindergarten (pre-K) education from the 2006 legislative session.  It outlines a process for establishing voluntary pre-K programs through public school the formula for determining the number of children who will count toward the school’s average daily attendance (ADM) and   places a limit on the number who of ADM placements that will qualify for state funding. Of importance to disability rights advocates, the bill does not compromise inclusion by limiting pre-k programs to “at-risk” children, as had been proposed last year. In addition, the bill specifies that all children receiving early essential services can be included in the ADM count. A study to be performed by DOE and the Department of Children & Families is ordered that will describe the impact of the pre-K program upon child behavior and the ADM ceiling upon the state’s ability to fund the child care subsidy program and meet the needs of Vermont’s children. Results of the study are due to the legislature on or before January 1, 2010. Additionally, the Prekindergarten Education Study Committee established in 2006 is continued until March 1, 2008 to provide periodic oversight.

DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES & MENTAL HEALTH

H.274 Adult Foster Care: The bill establishes equitable treatment of providers of child and adult foster care with respect to the homestead tax. “Difficulty of care” payments to providers of home care for developmentally disabled adults will be exempted from counted as income toward property tax. The bill reverses the outcome of last year’s bill, which would have put in place a $6,500 cap on the exemption in 2008 taxes, a position strongly advocated by the administration.  The bill reestablishes what has in fact been the practice over the years, counter to the Tax Department’s claim that it is diminishing the property tax.  The Governor has let the bill become law without his signature, but has also indicated the administration will push to reverse the decision.

S.121 Relating to Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD): The Agency of Human Services (AHS) and the Department of Education must write a plan for a coordinated, lifelong system of care to address the needs of Vermonters with autism spectrum disorders.  An important strength of the bill is the range of stakeholders with which AHS and DOE are instructed to collaborate in developing the plan. Legislators were clearly impressed by testimony of parents of children with ASD.  The bill gives particular emphasis to the role of people with ASD and their families, who are to be represented across regions, diagnosis, and severity of symptoms. Representation by organizations providing support to families are also identified reflecting the vital role these have played in our state, where they have often been the primary source of information and referral to parents. It is not yet clear how this collaboration will be structured, but our understanding is that legislators intended it to be substantive and ongoing.

The bill also specifies collaboration with professionals with established expertise in ASD, which should include where necessary, professionals from out of state, to augment a recognized paucity of expertise in Vermont. This bill has broadly recognized a first step toward creating an improved, coherent set of services for this sizeable population. It will also establish groundwork needed for Vermont to benefit from anticipated federal legislation that would provide funding to states for services.  We appreciate the hard work of House and Senate Education Committee members and the unceasing advocacy of so many parents. The written plan is due to be presented to the Governor and Legislature on or before January 15, 2008.  


H:449 Transitional Youth:   This bill seeks to assist “youth in a successful transition to an independent adulthood, including the avoidance of homelessness, incarceration, and substance abuse.” The first section of this bill extends supports to youth aging out of foster care or who have recently left foster care. The Governor’s budget for FY’08 already contained funding for this purpose.  Youth are defined as individuals from 18 to 22 years of age.

There are a significant number of children with disabilities in foster care; this bill will be particularly beneficial to those who fall through the cracks for eligibility for Medicaid and other services. Participating youth are required to be employed or attend an educational or vocational program; however, youth with disabilities are exempted from this requirement.  Legislators specified that an array of age-appropriate services be provided, such as housing assistance, transportation, case management services, and assistance with obtaining and retaining health insurance or employment.  We applaud the comprehensive nature of this list and advocate that it be a model for transition supports to other populations.

This bill also provides that there shall be no Medicaid prescription co-payments for young adults from age 18 to age 21.  The administration had proposed regulations, which would have resulted in co-payments for this age group, and the legislation was needed to stop that administrative change.  Children under age 18 have no co-payments. Adults beginning at age 21 have Medicaid co-payments of $1, $2 or $3 depending on the cost of the drug.

Additionally, the bill charges the Secretary of Administration, in consultation AHS, the Department of Labor, DAIL, DOC, the Department of Children and Families (DCF), and DOE to study costs and benefits of providing transitional services up to age 22 for a youth who has a functional developmental disability and has been receiving state-funded services or services under an individualized education program (IEP) on or before the youth’s 18th birthday; or has been receiving state-funded services for severe emotional disturbance on or before his or her 18th birthday; to assist the youth in becoming a self-sufficient adult. Input from consumes, providers and representatives of disability advocates is to be summarized in the report. The assignment of primary responsibility to the Secretary of Administration and inclusion of a broad range of departments reflects legislators’ intention the study be comprehensive and coordinated, resulting in meaningful assessments of costs and benefits of overdue support to these populations. Special thanks to members of the House Human Service Committee for their thoughtful work and persistent commitment to the needs of youth with disabilities.

Finally, a number of initiatives not included in the final bill were documented in a letter from House Human Services and Senate Health and Welfare Committee members, addressed to letter to the Secretary of AHS, calling for a comprehensive examination of the needs of the transition-age population (ages 18-21).  Among the gaps sited in the letter to AHS are services youth who meet a functional, but not categorical, definition of developmental disability and to youth with severe emotional disturbance who are ineligible for adult mental health services, because they do not meet the clinical eligibility criteria for youth for adult CRT services.

H.137 Restoration of a Department of Mental Health and Commissioner of Mental Health: The bill establishes a Department of Mental Health, headed by a cabinet-level commissioner with educational and practical experience in the field of mental health. Advocates of the bill have argued the change will bring a much-needed level of focus and autonomous leadership to mental health and substance abuse areas. The department will be responsible for the Vermont State Hospital (VSH). The bill specifies that integration and coordination with the VT Department of Health (DVH) that were goals of the AHS reorganization will be maintained and further developed under the new department and orders an annual report on the progress of that collaboration.

S.124 Planning and Evaluating Options for Inpatient Psychiatric Hospital Services (Vermont State Hospital): Frustration with the administration’s progress and questions about the extent to which multiple options for replacing VSH have been adequately explored and fiscally analyzed, prompted the legislature to allocate $100,000 for consultants to perform an independent evaluation of the state's proposed plan and alternatives. The possibility of regaining certification and hence federal funding will be included in the consultant’s assessment; a preliminary progress report is due on or before September 1, 2007   and the final report no later than November 1, 2007. The Governor allowed the bill to be enacted into law without his signature.

S.128   Repeal of Sunset for Forensic Examinations at Designated Hospitals:  A July 1, 2007 sunset for forensic evaluations at designated hospitals was repealed; assessments will continue to be performed at facilities closer to Vermonters’ home communities, rather than restricting the function to VSH. Preexisting requirements that a) an individual must be demonstrated to require treatment by a mental health professional before an inpatient examination is ordered and b) defendants who are not ordered to return to court or are not in custody of the Department of Corrections shall be returned to the community are preserved.

S.97 Correctional Facilities: This bill generated considerable consternation among disability advocates, based upon a section that challenged the jurisdiction of the Human Rights Commission to investigate complaints of violation of Vermont’s Public Accommodations Act. The challenge resulted from a complaint filed by the family of a young man with cognitive and mental health impairments. That section of the bill was ultimately eliminated, while other parts of the bill direct overdue attention to the needs of inmates with severe mental illness (SMI). A joint Legislative Corrections Oversight Committee is charged with coordinating work with the consultants hired by S.124 to study the number and profile of inmates with SMI, policies from other states, the advisability of establishing a separate inpatient psychiatric facility for inmates, DOC policies for the administration of psychiatric medications, and the possibility of amending the SMI definition to include  “other mental impairments that significantly and negatively affect daily functioning, including all forms of developmental disabilities, mental retardation, traumatic brain injury, autism, and various forms of dementia.” The latter would extend superior protections of the SMI population to other groups with disabilities that similarly impact cognitive and behavioral function. The report is due on or before January 15, 2008.

HEALTH

S.7 Compassionate Use of Marijuana for Medical Purposes  (Medical marijuana):  The bill allows a greater range of seriously ill Vermonters to register to grow their own marijuana for relief of a disease, chronic condition, or treatment that is chronic, debilitating, and produces severe, persistent, and one or more intractable symptoms. It increases the number of plants that may be kept for personal use to two mature and seven immature plants, lowers the annual registration fee from $100 to $50, and describes in detail a medical verification form to developed by VDH for registration in the program. The Governor has allowed the bill to become enacted law without his signature.

H.44 Patient Choice and Control at End of Life (Physician-assisted Death): In what was a surprising outcome for many, the House defeated a bill to allowed physicians to prescribe a lethal dose of medication if requested by terminally ill patients with less than six months to live. As the bill was emotionally debated on the floor, an increasing number of legislators concluded that there were just too many unanswered questions to enact a law of such monumental significance and with irreversible consequences.

S.115 Increasing Transparency of Prescription Drug Pricing and Information: The Office of Vermont Health Access (OVHA) is charged with maintaining a pharmacy best practices and cost control program to include an evidence-based preferred drug list, a utilization review board, and strategies for negotiating with pharmaceutical manufacturers to lower the cost of prescription drugs for participants, including a supplemental rebate program.   A joint pharmaceuticals purchasing consortium will be offered on a voluntary basis to private insurers, with mandatory participation by state or publicly funded health programs no later than January 1, 2008. Manufacturers of prescription drugs dispensed under a state directed or administered health program will report quarterly to OVHA on pharmaceutical pricing criteria. As we went to press, this bill had not yet reached the Governor’s office and staff we reached declined to predict what action he will take.

H.531An Act Relating to Ensuring Success in Health Care Reform and H.229 An Act Relating to Corrections and Clarifications to the Health Care Affordability Act of 2006 and Related Legislation These two bills are the result of the health care reform initiatives passed in the 2007 session. They include many sections detailing how the Health Care Commission, the Blueprint for Health, technology initiatives and other aspects of the reform effort will work.  

H.531 includes a substantive change in coverage for Catamount Health (the new health care program scheduled to start on October 1, 2007) and the Vermont Health Access Plan (VHAP, the existing Medicaid expansion program for low income Vermonters). Coverage for Catamount and VHAP will now be retroactive to the date of application rather than beginning on the date the application is processed.  This can be a significant benefit for previously uninsured beneficiaries and their providers.  H.531 also provides that the Commissioner of the Department for Children and Families will study the costs and benefits of providing similar date-of-application eligibility for beneficiaries of the state-funded pharmacy programs.  H.531 also sets goals for coordinating outreach activities to identify people who are eligible for Catamount and public health care programs in Vermont and to help them enroll.

OTHER

H.523, An Act Related to Moving Families out of Poverty.  This bill, signed by the governor on May 17, 2007, is designed to update Vermont’s Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program (also known as “Reach Up”).  This is the program that provides cash benefits to very low income Vermont families with children.  The bill makes changes in the current TANF/Reach Up program to try to increase the number of Reach Up participants who are engaged in work activities, as required by changes in federal law.  It maintains several state-funded programs that do not meet federal funding requirements including assistance to parents enrolled in post secondary education programs and assistance to families with young children up to age 2.  There is also a section of the budget that changes funding sources for the Vermont Earned Income Tax Credit so that Vermont can get TANF credit for spending this money.

Several changes to the program design are of particular interest to parents with disabilities or parents of children with disabilities.  H.523 creates a new program called Reach First, which serves families when they initially apply for benefits and can give short-term assistance for up to 120 days. Reach First emphasizes giving families orientation to available services and in-depth assessment of their service needs before development of a family development plan.  H.523 also allows the state to set up state-funded programs which do not use federal TANF money for a number of vulnerable groups, including families in which the parents have disabilities; families in which one or more child has a disability and in which a family member is considered a work-eligible individual; and families in which the parents or caretakers have an application pending for Supplemental Security Income.


H.527 The State's Transportation Program: On a one-time basis, the bill adds  $156,800 in state transportation funds and $43,200 in federal funds to the public transit Elders and Persons With Disabilities Program (E&D), for critical medical care transportation services that are not covered by Medicaid.  The funds are to be held in reserve by the Agency of Transportation for emergency supplemental spending, and dispersed to transit agencies with grant agreements to provide E&D program services, only if a shortfall of E&D funds occurs as a result of an unanticipated level of need for critical care services, that would result in a shortfall of funds available to continue providing nom-Medicaid critical care transportation.   A critical care transportation study committee is established to review the current service system and develop recommendations for program stability and funding predictability for transportation to and from dialysis and cancer treatment medical services for Vermonters not eligible for Medicaid transportation services.  

While we are pleased by the legislature’s responsiveness to need in this area, we are very concerned that the original objectives of the E&D Transportation Program have not received equal attention, despite considerable testimony about unmet need and the fact that these have often been sacrificed to meet the demand for critical care transportation that is not covered by Medicaid.  We hope the study committee will make the protection of funding for basic transportation to allow Vermonters with disabilities to participate equitably in community life a priority in its work.

APPROPRIATIONS  (a.k.a. THE “BIG BILL” OR H.537 AN ACT RELATING TO MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT)
Sick Building Hazards: The Commissioner of the Department of Buildings and General Services and the Commissioner of the Department of Health will develop a protocol for identifying and addressing current and potential health hazards in state office buildings, and to keep legislators informed of sick building complaints; to be submitted January 15, 2008.  

Catamount Health Assistance; Global Commitment Waiver
If by July 31, 2007, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has not responded to the Global Commitment for request to fund Catamount Health Assistance with Medicaid funds, does not approve the request, or approves a lower income eligibility limit for Catamount Health Assistance, the Commission on Health Care Reform may recommend to a) proceed with all or some programs associated with Catamount Health, b) delay some or all programs, suspend new enrollment, or c) restrict eligibility to a lower income. The Emergency Board will make a determination based on the recommendation by August 30, 2007.

Chiropractic Coverage:  As of July 1, 2008, chiropractic coverage for adult beneficiaries in Medicaid and VHAP programs will be reinstated with rates comparable to payments to other health care providers.  

Dental: A number of dental initiatives proposed by the Governor were enacted. Most are advantageous for consumers. However, a rate increase in provider rates was enacted without a simultaneous increase in the cap on the benefits adults on Medicaid receive ($495 per year). This means that adults on Medicaid will now be eligible for fewer procedures/services per year. (Children on Medicaid are not similarly impacted, as there is not dental cap for this population.)

New Grievance and Appeal Rules for Global Commitment and Choices for Care: In response to new grievance and appeal rules for the Global Commitment and Choices for Care waivers, the legislature will monitor the implementation of rules, the number and types of grievances, internal appeals, appeals to the human services board, and the number of internal appeals that were reversed by an independent decision-maker.

Choices for Care (CfC) Long-Term Care Waiver: Last year’s Appropriations Bill instructed that savings due to the implementation of the CfC waiver be retained by DAIL and reinvested into providing home- and community-based services under the waiver.  Advocates objected early this session AHS announced it would be transferring approximately $1.8M in state funds to other areas of the budget as part of the Budget Adjustment Bill of FY’07.  OVHA contended the money was not savings, but a result of an over-estimate in the program’s first year budget.  Advocates countered that at least a portion of this “overage” was the result of keeping about 90 people on the waiting list for months, trimming of services to those receiving the waiver, and failure to invest in services consistent with the intention of the waiver.  While the legislature ultimately approved the transfer of funds, it sought to clarify what constitutes savings, ensure that populations to be covered by the waiver are served on a timely basis, and protect demonstrated savings against future diversion to another program.

DIAL is instructed to submit quarterly reports to the legislature about utilization of services and expenses under CfC, including comparison of actual to estimated expenditures and projected expenditures for the full the fiscal year.  Reports will also include the amount of savings generated from providing home- and community-based care rather than nursing home services. DAIL will also submit a plan that articulates the method for determining savings: how the savings will be reinvested in home- and community-based services, and numbers of people receiving each category of service.  Funding priority will be given to services for the high and highest needs group; remaining funds from the long-term care appropriation may be used for other long-term care consistent with the terms and conditions of the waiver.  Unspent appropriated funds shall be carried over to the next fiscal year.

Substance Abuse & Co-occurring Disorders
VDH will convene a task force to identify current substance abuse treatment services and how they may be integrated for a community- and recovery-based system January 15, 2008. The report will contain an analysis of predicted long-term savings, including those to DOC, and a strategy to develop a workforce of clinicians qualified to treat co-occurring mental health and substance abuse disorders.  

In response to inadequate FY’07 funding to programs for youth with co-occurring disorders, VDH is instructed to ensure full funding for mental health and substance abuse services for eligible children, youth and adults, and CRT program participants. A report to the legislature in January will identify spending to date and assess adequacy of funding to complete the fiscal year.

Success Beyond Six: AHS and DOE will convene a summer study in response to the impact of fiscal caps under the Global Commitment upon Success Beyond Six, which has provided a means of funding school-based community mental health services through Medicaid billing. The study is charged with determining practice guidelines and how spending will be managed.

Developmental Services, Mental Health & Substance Abuse funding: This is the final year of a three-year administrative commitment to a 7.5% increase to the areas of Developmental Services, Mental Health, and Substance Abuse.  As a result of a careful and highly cooperative process that maximized the use of available resources, projected caseloads were covered and a 4% increase given to providers. Special thanks are due to Commissioner of Finance Jim Reardon.

Mental Health:
In a late-session move, the legislature created an Advisory Council for Mental Health Services Transformation that replaces the current Futures Advisory Committee and broadens the scope to include all mental health programs, services, and supports, including inpatient psychiatric services.  Appointments made by the new Commissioner of Mental Health will include consumers and family members. The ambitious objective is to establish a holistic, comprehensive continuum of care, in which consumers are treated with dignity and respect, and services are client- and family-centered and -driven, accessible, and culturally competent. A sunset for the council is identified as July 1, 2009.

Total appropriations in the VDH budget for the Vermont State Hospital in FY ’08 are $20,861,837.

Traumatic Brain Injury Study Committee:
This study will include assessment of the nature and extent of need for support by Vermonters affected by traumatic brain injury, stroke, and substance-induced brain injury and analysis of insurance coverage for these conditions.  The committee is to include: 2 legislators, four representatives of AHS, a physician and a member of the psychiatric or mental health treatment community. VCDR applauds this much-needed initiative, but notes that representation by advocacy groups, consumers, and family members is conspicuous by its absence. We urge the study committee to invite full participation by these important stakeholders within its process. The report is due by December 15, 2007.

Home Access Program (HAP): DAIL, in cooperation with the Vermont Center for Independent Living, will report on the number of people with physical disabilities at significant risk of, or living in, nursing homes and other inappropriate settings, and the degree to which additional funding to HAP would allow individuals to live in the most integrated setting possible. HAP has been demonstrably under-funded for a number of years. As of January there was three-year waiting list of 195 people; the cost of eliminating that waiting list was estimated at $1.5M. The report is due on January 15, 2008.  

One-time Funding:
•    DAIL received $60,000 in one-time funding to establish a Caregiver Registry.
•    DOE received $400,000 to transfer to the DOC for its special education program.


ADVOCATE’S ACRONYM GLOSSARY*
*The magic decoder ring is available with submission of 2,000 coffee cups (empty, please) from the State House cafeteria.

ADM= Average Daily Membership

AHS= Agency of Human Services

ASD= Autism Spectrum Disorder

CfC= Choices for Care Long-term Care Waiver

CRT= Community Rehabilitation and Treatment Program

DAIL= Department of Disability, Aging & Independent Living

DCF= Department of Children & Families

DOC= Department of Corrections

DOE= Department of Education

E&D Transportation Program= Elderly & Disabled Transportation Program

HAP= Home Access Program

IDEA= Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (now actually Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act)

IEP= Individualized Educational Program

SMI= Severe Mental Illness

OVHA= Office of VT Health Access

Pre-K= Prekindergarten

TANF= Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (also known as Reach-Up)

VCDR= VT Coalition For Disability Rights (of course)

VDH= VT Department of Health

VHAP= VT Health Access Program

VSH= VT State Hospital