|
Hear from COFAR
Voice your opinion
|
|
|
"substantially provide services" which are described in the person's Individual Support Plan (ISP).
The services include residential and day programs, recreational activities, medical, dental, psychological services, respite care, crisis intervention services, adaptive equipment, guardianship services, and transportation. Further, "sufficient and adequately trained personnel" must be available to substantially meet the needs set forth in each class member's ISP.
Under Tauro's order, any changes to the regulations must leave in place at least the "substantial equivalent of the current definition of the ISP," the current "individualized nature" of the ISP, existence of an appeal process, and other protections. The state must also maintain and implement the basic principles of the ISP which include: 1) human dignity, 2) humane and adequate care and treatment, 3) self-determination to the person's fullest capacity, 4) least restrictive care, 5) the opportunity to undergo normal developmental experiences, provided that the person's safety and well-being are not unreasonably jeopardized, and 6) the opportunity to engage in activities and styles of living which encourage and maintain the integration of the person in the community through individualized social and physical environments.
And just as importantly, Tauro's order stipulated that the DMR (now DDS) must not approve a transfer of any class member out of a state facility into the community… "until and unless the Superintendent of the transferring school…certifies that the individual to be transferred will receive equal or better services to meet their needs in the new location, and that all ISP-recommended services for the indivdual's current needs as identified in the ISP are available at the new location."
NOTE: On the basis of Judge Tauro's 1993 order, COFAR has opposed attempts by the DMR/DDS since 2003 to shut down the Fernald Developmental Center in Waltham and the other remaining state facilities for the mentally retarded. For the latest information on the status of Ricci v. Okin and efforts to prevent the shutdown of remaining state facilities, go to the Red Alert Stop the Shutdowns page.
These protections for Ricci Class Members are now codified in DDS regulation 115 CMR 6.05: Special Eligibility
The regulation defines Special Eligibility as applying to any one listed as a Ricci Class Member (see above), and states that Class Members are entitled to:
- an assessment of eligibility
- a designation of area of service
- assignment of a service coordinator
- an Individual Support Plan (ISP and substantial provision of the services or supports recommended in his or her ISP for so long as such services or supports are needed and authorized by the individual and his or her guardians; and
- the least restrictive, most typical, appropriate residential environment, together with the most appropriate treatment, training and support services suited to that person's individual needs
Protections for persons who are not Ricci Class Members:
Persons under DDS care who are not Ricci Class Members are subject to DDS regulation 115 CMR 6.07: Prioritization of supports, which provides that their services are subject to the availability of resources, as determined by the Legislature. This can mean that those services can be reduced in times of budget...
|
|
 |
|
|