Federal Court Protects Disabled Senior’s Life from NYS Department of Health

Federal District Court Judge David N. Hurd last week issued a temporary restraining order stopping the NYS Department of Health from throwing a 66-year-old disabled woman off the the TBI Waiver and ending her housing subsidy and demanding the woman pay them $24,000, all without explanation. Actions that would have likely put her life in danger by rendering her homeless.

According to documents filed in U.S. District Court Northern Region:  Francine Taishoff received a letter from the DOH in May 2011 informing her that she was no longer on the waiver as of 2008, her housing subsidy should have stopped in 2008, and she owed them $24,000 in back housing subsidy. Never mind that she’d actually been receiving waiver services when she received the May letter. Never mind that the  DOH had signed off on and approved her participation and housing subsidy over the years. The letter didn’t even bother to tell her why she was being thrown off the waiver and having her subsidy ended, nor did it tell her how she could appeal the decision.

And so, without explanation, the NYS DOH appears to have knowingly put a 66-year-old woman’s life at risk and billed her $24,000 in the process. A woman who suffered a stroke while in her twenties with a monthly income of $761 and $200 in food stamps.

It will be interesting to see if tragic events like this will make the state’s Brain Injury Association and Traumatic Brain Injury Services Coordinating Council come out and fight or, will both groups, particularly the Brain Injury Association who claims it’s an advocacy group, remain publically silent as they have in the past.

One group that did not remain silent was Legal Services of Central NY out of Syracuse. Two of their lawyers represented Ms. Taishoff: Christine S. Waters and Samuel C. Young .  Ms. Waters works along with the state’s Commission on Quality of Care, the latter being the state’s protection and advocacy agency for individuals with brain injury.

BIANYS Snubs Volunteers & Support Groups

The Brain Injury Association of New York State refuses to reimburse its volunteers for their out-of-pocket expenses, even if it means the end of some of its support groups.

Before I continue, it is important to note that the root of this rather bewildering stance on BIANYS’s part rests with its leadership; several sources say there are BIANYS board members and others in BIANYS’s ranks who not at all comfortable with fact the group is pretty much run  by two people, Judith Avner, its executive director and Marie Cavallo, its president.

No organization runs well under the thumb of one or two people.

The genesis of this essay goes like this. Beginning in 2008 I volunteered to facilitate weekly support groups in Albany for BIANYS.  BIANYS covered the necessary liability insurance and all was well. At the time, my round-trip commute to the Albany support group site was 50 miles and I was able to afford the gas. Late last year I had to move from my rental and as a result, moved to a place 75 miles from Albany. I had no intention of letting the distance stop me from facilitating the groups but the now 150-mile weekly round-trip (600 miles a month) became financially unwieldy and the group and I reached out  to BIANYS (Avner and Cavallo) for help with the mileage, i.e., the cost of gas. BIANYS reimburses its staff at a rate of 50 cents a mile. I was told things were tight financially and if they were to help this group with expenses maybe the other volunteers who facilitate groups across the state would expect to be reimbursed for their expenses as well (I am fighting off the urge to say, Well, duh.).

Group members then began an email campaign writing to BIANYS (meaning Avner and Cavallo), telling them how important the groups are to their lives, and suggesting that BIANYS help with half its normal mileage reimbursement rate which would mean $150 a month for the 600 miles rather than $300. Finally, Avner and Cavallo agreed to help for three months at which point they would review things.

Well, as the end of the three months I approached I wrote in and group members wrote in asking for to continued help, Avner was away, Cavallo said she didn’t have the authority to approve even one check to tide the group over until Avner returned. Avner’s return did nothing. Then the story changed.  Avner and Cavallo now said they did not have the authority to approve the help in the first place and would need to refer the matter to the board (I wonder if that ever actually happened). Finally some of the groups had to be cancelled.

Facing the lack of support from the BIANYS that still likes to claim these support groups as its own, group members agreed to cut back to only two groups a month. BIANYS – meaning Avner and Cavallo – were asked, via email, if BIANYS could help with just $75 since now we were down to two groups. Avner didn’t even bother to respond to the request and Cavallo’s response was non-committal. A second email request for $75 did not get a response from either one of them.

And this is the organization that claims to be the state’s leading organization on behalf of brain injury survivors? If you believe that, write me. I know a great bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in buying.

 

Saying no to BIANYS

I will not be speaking at the Brain Injury Association of New York State’s annual conference next month and quite a few people are asking why. 

While no one supports the BIANYS mission statement any more than I do, all of us, individual and group, need to be right-sized from time to time. All of us, simply because we are human beings, can lose sight of what is truly important and, as a result, our priorities get a bit skewed, albeit unintentionally in some cases. And that, in my view, is what has happened with BIANYS.

While there is no question that BIANYS is probably the most effective teaching voice in the state when it comes to brain injuries – it sponsors and co-sponsors events that provide enormous amounts of desperately needed information – its claim to being the state’s leading advocacy group for survivors of brain injury is simply not true. No individual and no organization can rightfully claim the mantel of advocacy yet remain publicly silent in the face of real threats to those they claim to represent.

You cannot claim the mantel of advocacy yet remain publicly silent when the state’s department of health issues a directive telling TBI Waiver case managers they cannot side with their clients at Medicaid Fair Hearings, a savage directive that all but assures the brain injury survivor will come out on the losing end.

You cannot claim the mantel of advocacy yet remain publicly silent when in 2008 it is revealed that Timothy J. Feeney, at the time the most powerful force in the TBI Waiver, is misrepresenting his credentials to brain injury survivors, their families and providers and then continue your public silence when the DOH essentially enters into another contract with Feeney  knowing full well he continues to misrepresent his credentials.

You cannot claim the mantel of advocacy yet remain publicly silent when the DOH looks to cut as many people from the waiver as possible and slash  waiver services at every available opportunity.

You cannot claim the mantel of advocacy yet remain publicly silent when the DOH all but ignores an alliance of TBI Waiver providers who are simply asking for uniform billing procedures and fair treatment, when the DOH’s utter – and I think intentional – mismanagement of the TBI Waiver has resulted in providers dropping out across the state, a reality that wounds the lives of many survivors of brain injuries.

It is hard, if not impossible, for brain injury survivors, their families, and the dwindling number of providers to  believe BIANYS is an advocacy organization when the aforementioned are under assault and BIANYS is nowhere to be found. It is true that BIANYS has a group of remarkably committed staff known as FACTS Coordinators who do advocate, but because they are paid through a grant from OPWDD, they are only allowed to advocate for those who sustained their brain injury before the age of 21 and their advocacy efforts do not extend to the arena of public policy and DOH directives.

I know, from nearly a half dozen sources, that nearly all the FACTS Coordinators were and are utterly disgusted with the Feeney situation, but their honorable and heartfelt opinions were not enough to lead BIANYS leadership to take a public stand

Having said all this, the rather monumental  flaw in the BIANYS advocacy claim is not my reason for saying no to their invitation to speak at this year’s conference. My reason for saying no revolves around the nature of the speech they asked for and their failure to support five BIANYS support groups. The circumstances surrounding the invitation to speak are somewhat suspect as well. When the lack of an invitation to facilitate a workshop at the conference began to get noticed, I was invited to speak the second day of the conference to motivate attendees to pull together and join BIANYS.

Many feel the absence of a workshop invitation being offered to me this year was a sign BIANYS is  distancing itself from me, primarily because I openly hold the DOH accountable for their treatment of brain injury survivors and BIANYS gets a sizeable grant from the DOH.  While BIANYS denies this, perception is often more powerful than fact. I know of no instance in which BIANYS has publicly disagreed with or challenged a DOH decision, leaving the perception that DOH is calling the shots on both fronts.

For me, an attending reality that revolves around a weekly Albany support group I voluntarily facilitate for BIANYS was the drop that overflowed the cup. When I moved last November from the outskirts of Albany to my current home I was not about to abandon the Saturday groups. However, my weekly commute went from 50 miles to 150 miles, 600 miles a month. Given that I am on a fixed income,  BIANYS was asked to help with mileage reimbursement. It is worth noting that volunteers are typically reimbursed for their expenses because most groups want to keep their volunteers and the reimbursement is a valid business expense.

BIANYS reimburses at 50 cents a mile which, if applied to 600 miles, would be $300 a month. BIANYS said it was low on funds and we suggested they cut the number in half and help us with $150 a month. Finally, after receiving a number of emails from group members, they agreed to $150 a month for a three-month period at which time, they said, they would re-evaluate the situation. Given the heads up that the three months was ending, followed by another email campaign from group members, BIANYS suggested that the matter be handed over to a workgroup for study. BIANYS leadership then announced they could not make the decision because it was a  matter that needed to be brought before the board of directors for review. They’d never said this before.

I sent them an email saying that in good conscience I could not stand in front of several hundred survivors, family members and providers and urge them to join BIANYS because BIANYS truly cares while at the same time knowing that BIANYS leadership was, supportive words aside, not inclined to help five support groups with mileage cost. The importance of support groups in the lives of survivors of brain injury, their families and members of the community is huge. There is something unseemly about claiming support groups as your own while at the same time not supporting them. I told BIANYS leadership  if they agreed to help these groups I’d be happy to speak at their conference.

They have not agreed to help and I will not be speaking.

On the positive side, BIANYS leadership and I will be meeting at my home sometime soon after the conference and it is my sincere hope that all these matters will be resolved and, if they are, I’ll be present and supportive for sure at the 2012 conference.

Next Book: Brain Injury

Since I suffered my brain injury in 1984 when I was shot and since I began working in the field of brain injury in 1995 I’ve witnessed the presence of the heartfelt commitment of the extraordinary among us as well as the presence of the greedy, self-serving, narcissistic and dictatorial.  I’ve written pages of notes about my experience and with the end of the memoir now in site, one of my next writing projects will be a tell-the-truth book about my experience in the world of brain injury.

Some will be pleased, some won’t. Some will be surprised, some won’t.  Some will be happy, some will be angry. Some will agree, some will disagree. How do I feel about all this? I don’t much care. My responsibility is to be honest and tell the truth to the best of my ability.

One of the things I will write about is what one might call the non-profit myth. The notion that if an agency, company or advocacy group is non-profit it means it really cares. Not so. To be sure, there indeed are terrific non-profits  like the Rochester-based CDR (Center for Disability Rights) headed up by Bruce Darling. CDR is all one could possibly hope for in a non-profit as both a service provider and  advocacy organization.

However, I’ve seen individuals in leadership positions in non-profit settings that are all about themselves. They  have arrived at the rather stupefying notion that the world revolves around them. They lay claim to the advocacy mantle when in truth they offer only lip service and consider their environments to be little more than petri dishes in which they can grow the bacteria necessary to further their self-aggrandizement. As a result, when it comes time to leap into the advocacy trenches and have at it, they are nowhere to be seen. Brain injury survivors and their loved ones along with quite a few healthcare providers know who stepped up to the plate and who didn’t when the New York State Department of Health decided to bring Timothy J. Feeney of bogus-college-degrees fame back into the fold. Brain injury survivors and their loved ones along with quite a few healthcare providers know who spoke up and who remained silent when the state’s DOH began to tell waiver providers they cannot support brain injury survivors at Medicaid Fair Hearings.

No organization of any kind, for-profit or non-profit, ought to be about or solely reliant on only one person or a handful of people.

I will also write about the for-profit myth, the myth that says anything that is for-profit is greed based. While this is often true, there are times it’s not. Until recently, Cortland, New York’s CCRP (Cortland Community Re-Entry Program), a for-profit that operated under the oftentimes problematic umbrella of Healthcare Associates, was one of the best if not the best Traumatic Brain Injury Waiver program in the entire state. The program crumbled when, after the untimely and tragic death of the head of Healthcare Associates, Anthony Salerno,  the running of the organization fell into disarray and CCRP fell apart, but not because it was a for-profit.

I may well write more about this upcoming writing project, but this is enough for now. Stay tuned.

 

NY State DOH Snubs Brain Injury Summit

Despite agreeing to continue attending the brain injury summits, the New York State Department of Health today was a no-show. The snub was  a blatant act of disrespect for the groups who did attend the second Brain Injury Summit: The Brain Injury Association of New York State, the New York State Commission on Quality of Care and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities, the Providers Alliance and the Kahrmann Advocacy Coalition. Moreover,  it further underscored the ongoing problem of poor communication on the part of DOH, a problem DOH Deputy Commissioner Mark Kissinger acknowledged the DOH has at the first summit this past September.

The snub served to further enhance the view that the DOH has very little respect for brain injury survivors. The DOH didn’t even have the decency tell people they weren’t coming. Keep in mind, this is the lot that gave the “keys” back to PhD-Wannabe Timmy Feeney.

The summit attendees did very much agree on a response. Given the response was a group design, it would be inappropriate for me to elaborate, other than to say the response is rooted in a genuine care and concern and commitment to assure that brain injury survivors and providers are given the kind of support and clarity they deserve.

I can also tell you that all in attendance were heartfelt and genuine in their commitment to help brain injury survivors grow their independence and, it must also be said, that all in attendance, this writer included, continued to express a willingness to work with the DOH.

However, if you’ll allow me a shot at pointing out the obvious, it is hard to work with anyone who doesn’t bother to show.

The third summit is scheduled for February 11, 2011.