ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
Forty-ninth Legislature – Second Regular Session
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY AND HUMAN SERVICES AND
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET REVIEWS OF:
INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON LONG-TERM CARE
THE DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ADVISORY COUNCIL
THE DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
Minutes of Interim Meeting
House Hearing Room 3 -- 1:00 p.m.
Co-Chairman Barto called the meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. and attendance was noted by the secretary.
Members Present
Senator Linda Gray, Co-Chairman Representative Nancy Barto, Co-Chairman
Senator David Braswell Representative David Bradley
Senator Al Melvin Representative Steve Court
Representative Doris Goodale
Representative Phil Lopes
Members Absent
Senator Leah Landrum Taylor
Senator Rebecca Rios
Interagency Council on Long-Term Care
Gina Kash, House Majority Assistant Research Analyst, stated that the Interagency Council on Long-Term Care was established in 2001. It consists of 14 members and is required by statute to meet at least four times per year. The Council is charged with recommending methods to develop and implement a coordinated long-term care services delivery system, defining Arizona’s long-term care obligations by coordinating applicable state and federal mandates that relate to long-term care services and submitting a report of its progress toward implementing a coordinated long-term care services delivery system by November 15 to the Governor, President of the Senate and Speaker of the House.
Co-Chairman Gray asked if the objective for the Department of Health Services to place quality ratings of individual nursing homes on its website no later than July 2007 was completed, to which individuals in the audience nodded in the affirmative.
Co-Chairman Barto stated that
according to the sunset report, there would be no harm to the public if the
agency is terminated, which is what the Members will be voting on.
Co-Chairman Gray remarked that the Arizona Quality Counts Partnership is funded by federal funds and also performs some of the same responsibilities, so to continue with this agency would be a duplication of services.
Neal Young, Director, Department of Economic Security (DES), conveyed that the Council was necessary in 2001 because there was much fragmentation of services and clients were not being served in the best possible way. The Council has fulfilled its mission and spawned other activities that will continue to support long-term care.
Melanie Starns, Assistant Director, Division of Aging and Adult Services, Department of Economic Security (DES); Co-Chair, Interagency Council on Long-Term Care, reviewed the members of the Council. She related that the sunset was discussed in meetings. There are many issues involving long-term care requirements from the federal government that are being coordinated in which other partners are taking a broader role than the Council.
Co-Chairman Gray moved that the Committee of Reference recommend to the Legislature that the Interagency Council on Long-Term Care terminate on the statutory sunset date of July 1, 2011 and authorize Legislative Council to draft any technical and conforming changes. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 8-0-0-2 (Attachment 1).
Developmental Disabilities Oversight Committee
Gina Kash, House Majority Assistant Research Analyst, advised that the Developmental Disabilities Oversight Committee (DDOC) was established in 2006 to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the qualified vendor system of delivering services to persons with developmental disabilities (DD), take testimony and study the feasibility of modifications to the state’s system of delivering services to persons with DD, study available employment opportunities for persons with DD, make recommendations for improving those opportunities and submit an annual report of its findings and recommendations. The Committee consists of 15 members; since its inception, it has not met.
Co-Chairman Barto noted that Representative John McComish was appointed to the Committee, but no meeting was called.
Amber O’Dell, Senate Research Analyst, informed the Members that the House Members were appointed, but a Senate Co-Chairman was never appointed; no one ever called a meeting.
Bev Herman, Arizona Consortium
for Children with Chronic Illness; son, indicated that the legislation
establishing the Committee was originally sponsored by former
Representative Laura Knaperak. The Committee did some good things during its
early years and is an extension from a previous Committee; however, after the
extension, no interim meetings were held. The Committee worked on issues such
as privatization of case management and provider service rates. There are
always issues, but things are different now, and with the budget shortfall, the
Committee may not be too productive.
Co-Chairman Barto asked if any of the duties and responsibilities of the DDOC should be extended to existing groups such as the Developmental Disabilities Advisory Council (DDAC) or the Developmental Disabilities Planning Council (DDPC). Ms. Hermon suggested that the DDAC conduct an examination of what has happened since the DDOC was extended and whether other issues need to be explored. When Co-Chairman Barto questioned if there should be legislators on the DDAC, Ms. Hermon replied that legislators are generally appointed to Interim Committees, but any Committee can have legislators as Members; she is sure legislators would be welcome in any discussions.
Co-Chairman Gray moved that the Committee of Reference recommend that the Developmental Disabilities Oversight Committee terminate on the statutory date of July 1, 2011 and authorize Legislative Council to draft any technical and conforming changes. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 8-0-0-2 (Attachment 2).
Developmental Disabilities Advisory Council
Gina Kash, House Majority Assistant Research Analyst, conveyed that the Developmental Disabilities Advisory Council (DDAC) was established in 1976 and is composed of 12 members. The purpose of the Council is to ensure that programs of the Arizona Department of Economic Security’s (DES) Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD) are responsive, effective and meet the needs of individuals served through DDD, and provide oversight to ensure the policies and practices of DDD are cost-effective, outcome-oriented and maintain the principles of family support. The Council is charged with reviewing and making recommendations to the Assistant Director of the DES’s DDD, coordinating and integrating services to people with developmental disabilities (DD), managing the sale and lease of land formerly known as the Arizona Training Program at Phoenix and management of the Client Services Trust Fund.
Bev Herman, Arizona Consortium for Children with Chronic Illness; son, stated that the DDAC is a hands-on group composed of families who receive services. She opined that it would be a mistake to eliminate the DDAC and suggested that the administration be moved from DES to the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) since the DDAC is charged with overseeing many items done by DES/DDD. She indicated that the DDAC travels to different counties around the state and holds public hearings in the morning and evening. She voiced the opinion that the minutes should be more elaborate since people take the time to attend and testify.
She advised Co-Chairman Barto that she has not served on the Council, but she attended many meetings. One of the problems now is that no one has been appointed, but she recently talked to a member of the Governor’s Office who hopes to have people appointed by January 1, 2011.
In response to a query, Ms. Hermon explained that the Governor’s Council on Developmental Disabilities was changed to the Developmental Disabilities Planning Council (DDPC) through a bill sponsored by the Co-Chairmen. It is not under the auspices of DES and it is chaired by former Representative Steve Tully, the father of a child who receives services. It is a planning council that follows a federal format and the meetings run almost two days. It is composed of a much broader group of people than the DDAC, including representatives from the universities and organizations such as the Arizona Center for Disability Law. The members work in subcommittees because the DDPC is so large. It is funded by the federal government and receives no state dollars.
Ms. Hermon stated that when the institution in Phoenix was closed, the DD families were promised that interest from the money from the sale would be placed into a trust fund, but unfortunately, it became part of the state budget last year. There is still $200,000 left and the DDAC disburses those funds. The biggest items people ask for help with are dental services and diapers, as well as wheelchairs and other items that families cannot afford. She indicated that she does not believe the two groups are redundant nor should they be combined because there would be too many people involved.
Co-Chairman Barto noted that one
of the charges of the DDAC is to implement the state plan, which is also done
by the DDPC. She questioned if that could be construed as confusing.
Ms. Hermon surmised that the state plan that is done by the DDPC will be
transmitted to the DDAC, as well as other entities, because it will affect the
DDAC, but she does not believe the DDAC is taking a lead on the state plan.
When asked for recommendations, Ms. Hermon suggested the addition of another provider to the DDAC and reiterated the need for oversight or movement of the administration out of DES, or at least out of DDD, so there are no inherent conflicts.
Karen Van Epps, representing self, neutral on the proposal, related that she chaired the DDAC for many years. She pointed out that the responsibilities include reviewing the budget, but said that never happened. She submitted that the Council can be vital, but it depends on the members. When she was Chair, public forums were held in every DES district at least once per year because that is the only way to find out what is going on. The DDAC “piggybacked” when the Governor’s Council had area councils, which was very helpful, and the groups worked together. She said she does not want to see the DDAC discontinued, but very dedicated people are needed to keep it going. It has been an added burden to the DDD staff because of their other duties. She recommended the addition of more parents, people with disabilities and providers to the DDAC.
When asked about the Client Services Trust Fund, Ms. Van Epps explained that it was set up for the sale of the Phoenix institution and the $4 million was supposed to be used for people with disabilities; however, there is now $200,000 in interest in the fund because the rest was swept by the state. DDAC reviews and prioritizes requests, and a lot of money is spent on dental services and diapers. One of the things the Council did at the public forums was to make sure everyone knew about the trust fund. In response to a question, she clarified that DD is classified as autism, cerebral palsy, epilepsy and mental retardation, and a person has to be diagnosed before the age of 18 to be eligible for services.
Lynn Black, social worker, Arizona Bridge to Independent Living, conveyed that she has been the advocacy component of the DDAC for five years. It is invaluable to conduct public forums to find out about issues that are going on, and DD staff writes down names and makes sure issues are taken care of. The DDAC disburses trust fund monies two times per year, but that is just one aspect of its responsibilities. Regarding Ms. Hermon’s comment about moving administration to ADOA, she opined that is not wise because the DD hands-on staff run the Council, receive phone calls and hear about issues that are going on, and relate those to the DDAC members. She noted that because of budget cuts the DDAC is not able to advertise as much or travel to distant places for public forums as was done in the past. She recommended an increase in consumers on the DDAC, as well as an advocacy group person.
Co-Chairman Barto noted that one of the charges is to oversee the DDD budget and policies and questioned how that is done. Ms. Black replied that the DDD sends the policies by email to the DDAC members and asks for feedback. The DDAC members meet and talk about the individual comments. When there are follow-up questions, information is received from the agency in a timely manner.
Representative Lopes stated that it is laudable to have more consumers on the DDAC, but questioned whether there is concern about raising expectations for services or response times that cannot be met due to limited resources. Ms. Black answered that advocacy groups are starting to be more active in the state, which is good because when the parents of DD children pass away, with provider turnover so great, the consumers need to be empowered to ask for what is really needed. It is a concern, but if the state cannot pay, consumers need to learn about other avenues for help such as churches, neighbors or community resources, but unless the needs are known, they will not be addressed.
Margaret White, consultant, representing self, related her background experience. She opined that she does not believe there is any overlap between the DDAC and the DDPC. In reading the minutes for the DDAC, it probably has not been as effective as in the past, but that is partly due to funding. She said she supports continuing the DDAC. Two more providers may be helpful, but the mix of family members and consumers is good. Currently, there is a conflict between family members, parents and consumers about “who got the ship going” and now it is time for consumers to take over and parents to back off. She submitted that the DDAC could have a stronger role in making recommendations and providing input to DDD. It is doing good work, but sometimes the members’ hands are tied because of limited funding. She likes the idea of independence from DES.
Co-Chairman Gray
moved that the Committee of Reference recommend to the full Legislature that
the Developmental Disabilities Advisory Council be continued for 10 years until
July 1, 2021 with the following modifications:
1) expand the membership of the Council; 2) clarify and conform existing
language; and 3) add duties to the Council’s advisory role to assist and advise
the Division in targeted areas for improvement, innovation and cost
effectiveness.
Representative Lopes asked if
expansion with specific members will be taken care of later.
Co-Chairman Gray answered that will be addressed when a bill is presented.
Question was called and the motion carried by a roll call vote of 8-0-0-2 (Attachment 3).
Co-Chairman Barto thanked the Members for attending and the staff for their help all year.
Without objection, the meeting adjourned at 2:26 p.m.
_______________________________
Linda Taylor, Committee Secretary
December 21, 2010
(Original minutes, attachments and audio on file in the Chief Clerk’s Office; video archives available at http://www.azleg.gov)
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------
2
COR – SENATE PSHS & HOUSE HHS
December 16, 2010
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------