National Disability Rights Network logo
NDRN Home
TASC
Meetings / Trainings
Contact Us
Site Map


  Home :: Resources : Annual Report : FY 2005

FY 2005 Annual Report

ED Letter | NDRN & the P&A/CAP System | Abuse and Neglect | Community Living | Housing & Transportation | Criminal Justice | Education | Juvenile Justice | Employment | Voting | In the States | Auditor's Report

Vision: The National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) has a vision of a society where people with disabilities have equality of opportunity and are able to participate fully in community life by exercising choice and self determination.

Mission: NDRN's mission is to promote the integrity and capacity of the P&A and CAP national network and to advocate for the enactment and vigorous enforcement of laws protecting civil and human rights of people with disabilities.

Guiding Principles:

EQUALITY, EQUITY, AND FAIRNESS: People with disabilities are full and equal citizens under the law. They are entitled to equal access to the opportunities afforded to all members of society. People with disabilities are entitled to be free from abuse, neglect, exploitation, discrimination, and isolation, and to be treated with respect and dignity.

MEANINGFUL CHOICE & EMPOWERMENT: People – regardless of age or type and level of disability – have the right to make choices with respect to daily routines and major life events.

SUPPORTS AND PARTICIPATION: Services and supports are shaped by the unique needs and preferences of each individual and assure opportunities for integration in all aspects of life. Services are age-appropriate and premised on the fact that people with disabilities continue to learn, grow, and develop throughout their lives. For children, such growth is best accomplished within families, and for adults, in integrated communities rather than institutions.

INDEPENDENCE: Services are based on equal access, peer support, and self determination, to be achieved through individual, professional, and systemic advocacy. Services must maximize leadership, independence, productivity, and integration of individuals with disabilities.

CULTURAL COMPETENCY: Services reflect, and are responsive to, the diverse cultural, ethnic, and racial composition of society. [back to top]

Letter from the Executive Director

This 2005 Annual Report of the National Disability Rights Network (NDRN)* and its affiliates throughout the country demonstrates the ongoing work of the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) and Client Assistance Programs (CAPs) to serve the advocacy needs of people with disabilities.

This year marked significant milestones in disability rights, including the 30th anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the 15th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

This year was also significant in the life of NDRN, which launched its new name to coincide with the 15th anniversary of the ADA, reflecting its renewed commitment to supporting the work of the P&A/CAP Network – collectively the largest non-governmental enforcer of disability rights – and strengthening the safety net each one of us needs.

Unfortunately, at the same time the disability community is seeing the safety net – established and strengthened by such critical laws – unraveling.

As this report clearly demonstrates, the issues facing people with disabilities continue to require aggressive legally based advocacy. While the Network continues to address long-standing problems, new issues constantly arise.

The catastrophic impact of the hurricanes in 2005 exposed the fragility of the service system for people with disabilities and the total lack of understanding, preparedness, and implementation of services for people with disabilities caught up in the disaster. NDRN and its affiliates were able to quickly mobilize to address these issues, and continue to be immersed at the national and state levels on the plethora of issues that have followed in the aftermath of the devastation.

The Network extended its focus this year to increase attention on issues in the criminal justice and juvenile justice arena, while continuing its important efforts in the areas of work, special education and the investigation of abuse and neglect, especially in the troublesome area of the use of seclusion and restraint. Even as the new Medicare Part D program was unveiled and failed to serve many people with disabilities, the Network was once again on the ground.

Through our public policy work and training and technical assistance, NDRN has been able to keep the P&A/ CAP System strong, independent, and funded, despite an increasingly worsening budget and political climate.

Throughout the country, there still is a disturbing ambivalence regarding the value of federal protections for people with disabilities. Continual attempts to roll back important gains of the last 30 years must be fought. At this critical juncture in the disability rights movement, NDRN and its affiliates remain as a critical vehicle to assure the full protection of rights and services for the disability community.

Sincerely,

 

Curt Decker
Executive Director [back to top]

The National Disability Rights Network & the P &A/CAP System

The National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) is the nonprofit membership organization for the federally mandated Protection and Advocacy (P&A) Systems and Client Assistance Programs (CAP). The P&A/ CAP Network is federally mandated to operate in every state and territory in the United States. In addition to the 50 states and territories – American Samoa; District of Columbia; Guam; Northern Marianas Islands; Puerto Rico; and the US Virgin Islands – there is also a federally mandated Native American P&A. Fifty P&A agencies are nonprofit organizations, while the remaining seven are part of state government. Collectively, the P&A/CAP Network is the largest provider of legally based advocacy services to people with disabilities in the United States.

Key components of this advocacy include investigating reports of abuse and neglect and seeking systemic change to prevent further incidents; advocating for basic rights, including the right to live in the community; and ensuring accountability in health care, education, employment, housing, transportation, and within the juvenile and criminal justice systems for individuals with disabilities.

The statutory programs that guide this work are as follows:

The continuous expansion of the P&A/CAP Network demonstrates not only the growing needs of children and adults with disabilities and their families, but also strong Congressional support for the Network and the critical work it does on behalf of constituents with disabilities.

NDRN also plays a leadership role in the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD), a Washington-based coalition of over 100 national organizations addressing the full range of needs of children and adults with disabilities and their families. Because people with disabilities have the same needs as other Americans, NDRN also participates in other coalitions whose actions help further disability policy goals.

Shaping Public Policy
NDRN bases its public policy views on the firm belief that people with disabilities have the constitutional right to fully participate in our democratic society. The main objective of the P&A/CAP Network is to protect and defend this constitutional right and the other rights that flow from it.

Development of Legislative Agenda
The foundation of the NDRN legislative agenda is built on the NDRN mission statement, principles, and current policies; guidance from the NDRN Legislative Committee; and input from P&A/CAP leaders across the country. Specific legislative goals take into consideration potential new initiatives, expected proposals from the White House and Congress, as well as appropriation and authorizing legislation that must be addressed during the year.

Monitoring Laws and Policies
NDRN also monitors and reacts to the implementation and enforcement of existing or new legislation having an impact on the lives of individuals with disabilities. Efforts include interacting with a variety of federal agencies and entities, either in person or through the regulatory process.

Impacting Significant Cases through Amicus Activity
NDRN authors and signs on to amicus briefs in cases involving issues of significance to the Network in terms of their impact on the lives of people with disabilities. NDRN accepts requests to participate in briefs from P&As, as well as others.

Membership Services
As the voluntary membership organization of the P&A/CAP Network, NDRN also facilitates discounted subscriptions to WestLaw and access to malpractice insurance providers for member groups. In addition to this and NDRN’s public policy and amicus activity, members receive reduced-rate subscriptions to LRP publications and services.

Training and Technical Assistance
Through the delivery of state-of-the-art training, technical assistance (T/TA), and networking, the Training & Advocacy Support Center (TASC) division of NDRN is designed to enhance the advocacy functions of the P&As/CAPs as they protect the rights of people with disabilities.

Guided by the needs of the Network, TASC provides a broad range of T/TA and networking to staff, Board, and Advisory Board members of the Network to build the capacity of staff and organizations as a whole. TASC conducts four national training events each year, two of which are open to the public. All materials and resources for the trainings are provided to participants on CD.

NDRN maintains a fully accessible web-based collection of resource materials (www.NDRN.org). The site also includes a password-protected section (www.NDRN.org/TASC) designed for the exclusive use of P&As/CAPs. [back to top]

Safety from Abuse and Neglect

The Case of Kaufman House
Many agencies tried unsuccessfully for over 20 years to shut down the Kaufman House, a service provider for individuals with chronic mental illness located in Newton, Kansas. It was only when the Kansas P&A, the Kansas Attorney General, and federal authorities teamed up that the wheels of justice started moving forward. Through the use of its access authority, the P&A was able to remove one of the biggest barriers to obtaining justice – the fact that the Kaufmans’ “patients” were under their constant watch, influence, and control. When the P&A got “BT” out of the Kaufman House and to safety, prosecutors had their first witness free from the Kaufman’s influence.

“BT” is a woman with severe, persistent mental illness who received therapeutic and residential services from her guardian Arlan Kaufman – owner of the Kaufman House – for 20 years. In addition to being her guardian, Kaufman had also been BT’s "therapist,” and had reportedly billed Medicare for the “therapy” in which BT reports her guardian sexually and emotionally abused her.

Kaufman House had been under investigation by the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) since 2001 and, through investigative subpoena, the OIG had obtained over 30 video tapes from the provider’s private home. The video tape evidence showed the provider insisting residents remain in the nude, instructing consumers to masturbate, and touching BT’s genitals. P&A attorneys filed and obtained an emergency preliminary order suspending the guardian’s authority, then used their authority under federal law to gain access to the group home to help BT move out. When confronted by the provider who heatedly objected, P&A counsel calmly asserted their access authority and presented a court order. For safety purposes, a Sheriff’s detective and local police escorted P&A attorneys to the group home to help execute the court order. The P&A helped BT obtain housing, health care, services, and supports in a new city.

Just five months after the P&A removed BT, they returned with the FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) as the Kaufmans were arrested. The P&A helped the remaining six residents move out of the Kaufman house.
Prosecutors and the media have since labeled the Kaufman House a “House of Horrors.” Following a six-week trial, a 12-person jury in the US District Court in Wichita, convicted Arlan and Linda Kaufman of involuntary servitude, forced labor, conspiracy, Medicare fraud, obstruction of a federal audit, and mail fraud. Following the verdict, the Kaufmans were immediately placed into Federal custody. Arlan Kaufman was sentenced to 30 years in prison, while his wife received a 7-year sentence.

P&A attorneys provided civil legal representation to 13 of the former residents of the Kaufman house – who are all persons with mental illness – during the intense trial in order to protect their civil rights and assert their rights as crime victims. The P&A continues to represent the victims of the Kaufmans’ abuses in civil actions to hold the Kaufmans accountable for their crimes. The P&A has also advocated at the state legislature for stronger protections to prevent such atrocities from ever taking place again.

Abuse and neglect unfortunately occurs in a variety of manners and in all settings. The Protection and Advocacy (P&A) System grew from outrage over media coverage of the inhumane living conditions at Willowbrook in 1975. Although Robert F. Kennedy had spoken out about the appalling conditions in the 60s, it was not until the public saw the conditions for themselves that change came about through the creation of the P&A System.

Thirty years later, the access authority P&As wield to investigate abuse and neglect in whatever setting it may occur is still critical to ensuring individuals with disabilities are treated with the dignity and respect they are due.

While one would hope there would be no more cases of abuse and neglect for P&As to investigate after 30 years, unfortunately abuse and neglect not only continues in institutional settings, but has also moved into the community in both its physical form and less obvious forms such as financial exploitation.

Today, P&As not only seek to eliminate abuse and neglect, but also the use of seclusion and both physical and chemical restraint. While the harm of physical restraints may seem more obvious – with restrictions to air flow while already in an agitated state resulting in far too many deaths and traumas – the use of chemical restraints has become all-to-frequent, with medication being used to overly sedate individuals, often without proper medical review.

From care facilities to criminal institutions, the use and abuse of seclusion and restraint procedures has become far too common – and far too costly – for individuals with disabilities.

Even in public schools, P&As across the country are increasingly encountering the use of “time-out rooms” and other restraint and seclusion practices being used on children due to lack of resources and training in more effective positive behavioral approaches. [back to top]

Supports for Community Living

This year saw the anniversary of the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which has made every facet of American society more open and accessible to people with disabilities. While barriers still remain, much progress has been made. Indeed, the very fact that what is yet to be done is so evident is a testament to the increased presence of people with disabilities in everyday life as a result of the ADA and similar legislation.

When the P&A System first came into being, it was to serve individuals with disabilities in institutional settings. As policy has progressed, community integration – as reinforced in the landmark Olmstead decision – has become the standard, with a move away from institutional bias.

Soon after the Olmstead ruling, many states developed plans for moving individuals with disabilities out of segregated institutions and into community settings with appropriate services and supports. Plans were developed in large part because the Supreme Court said that a "comprehensive, effectively working" compliance plan would provide states a defense to a suit for violating Olmstead requirements. Unfortunately, many state compliance plans are not "effectively working," and individuals with disabilities remain unnecessarily institutionalized for years. As a result of lack of enforcement of Olmstead requirements by the courts, as well as tight state budgets, recent years have seen the smallest rate of reduction in institutional populations in 30 years.

Frederick L. v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Public Welfare was a P&A suit brought on behalf of residents of a hospital challenging the state's failure to provide them proper community supports in violation of the ADA. The case went to the 3rd Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, which rejected Pennsylvania's claim that it had a defense because it had a "plan" for moving state hospital residents into the community with appropriate mental health supports.

The 3rd Circuit stated that:

To alleviate the concerns articulated in Olmstead, we believe that a viable integration plan at a bare minimum should specify the time-frame or target date for patient discharge, the approximate number of patients to be discharged each time period, the eligibility for discharge, and a general description of the collaboration required between the local authorities and the housing, transportation, care, and education agencies to effectuate integration into the community.

Funding cuts at the federal and state level of services and supports for community-based living have left countless people with disabilities either languishing in institutional settings or on waiting lists. Too many individuals further decompensate while on waiting lists for services, and may even end up “reinstitutionalized.” Unfortunately, with no community supports, they often end up in a correctional system woefully ill-equipped to meet the needs of a growing population with mental illness.

As US society continues to age, the demand for home-based services, as opposed to more costly nursing homes, will only continue to increase. P&As are one of the largest federal enforcers of Olmstead requirements, representing individuals seeking to move from institutions to the community, demanding that states develop appropriate community-based services for people with disabilities, and ensuring that Olmstead compliance plans meet basic standards and are followed.

One of the most valuable resources available for children and adults with disabilities to access health and long-term supports and services in the community is Medicaid. Available Medicaid community services, however, are too-often designed as "one size fits all;" if something is needed beyond a limited range of services, the only other option is institutionalization.

While studies show that it is usually less expensive to provide individually designed, community-based supports than it is to provide those services in an institution (and this does not even take into account the cost of broken families and loss of employment created by unnecessary institutionalization), the design of the Medicaid program makes it easier to obtain long-term health services in segregated institutional settings and nursing facilities rather than a person's own home or community.

P&As across the country work with individuals to identify and obtain Medicaid funding for the variety of supports that individuals need to live and work successfully in the community. The number of individuals seeking assistance to obtain Medicaid coverage of basic health care continues to increase at the same time as federal and state budgets for Medicaid are cut.

P&As continue to work at the policy and legal level to obtain a wider variety of Medicaid-funded community supports to make it possible for a child to live with her family and attend school, or an adult to rejoin the workplace after acquiring a disability. These activities strengthen the interconnected safety net of supports necessary for individuals with disabilities to live successfully in their communities and realize the full promise of Olmstead.

Increased time and resources are also being spent assisting individuals with disabilities who face loss of prescription drug coverage as a result of the new Medicare prescription drug program. P&As especially reached out to individuals with disabilities who receive both Medicaid and Medicare, and who received prescription drug coverage through Medicaid until being required to transition to Medicare coverage. [back to top]

Housing and Transportation - Critical Aspects of Community Living

In order for people with disabilities to successfully live and work in the community, there must be accessible housing available. Too often, people with disabilities run into both architectural and attitudinal barriers to their living in the community.

P&As across the country have helped people with disabilities already living in the community, as well as those beginning to live independently for the first time. P&As have helped people with disabilities obtain housing and stay in their homes by working with landlords to understand their obligations under the law to make reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. Such accommodations include not only architectural modifications, but also accommodations in housing providers' policies and rules such as "no pet" rules to ensure that people with disabilities are allowed assistance animals, as well as accommodations for behaviors that may result from an individual's disability.

The aftermath of the hurricanes that ravaged the Gulf Coast brought to light just how far we have yet to go in providing accessible housing for all. After months of advocacy on behalf of people with disabilities to receive accessible trailers that would enable them to maintain the independent lifestyles enjoyed before the hurricanes, the Louisiana P&A filed suit against the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for FEMA's continuing failure to provide accessible housing in mobile homes and trailers. Others, who do not necessarily need accessible, but affordable, housing are often still waiting in inappropriate institutional settings.

Indeed, as New Orleans looks to rebuild, many have called for it to become a model of accessibility. As in other cities across the country, advocates have called for new housing to meet "visitibility" standards and looked beyond current tenant needs to possible future needs, making accommodations standard from the beginning instead of having to make costly modifications later.

The lack of accessible housing is not only a problem in the hurricane-ravaged Gulf region, but across the country. Through its leadership role in the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD), NDRN was also instrumental in the release of a national study entitled Priced Out that verifies that low-income people with disabilities continue to experience a national housing affordability crisis, paying an average of 109 percent of their monthly Supplemental Security Income (SSI) to rent a modest one-bedroom apartment, and 96 percent to rent an efficiency at fair-market value. For their part, P&As work to help people acquire precious federal housing subsidies that help overcome this poverty barrier. They also continue to partner with other fair housing advocates in litigation to enforce the Fair Housing Act (FHA), working to increase the supply of accessible housing.

A consent decree was signed in the housing lawsuit Bailey v. Housing Authority of Baltimore City (HABC) in December 2004. Since that time, the Maryland P&A has focused on the implementation of the Consent Decree and the corresponding Settlement Agreement with the City of Baltimore. As a result of P&A efforts through the end of the fiscal year, HABC had created 234 fully accessible units in the public housing stock; 225 households were on a
waiting list for accessible units; 101 residents were transferred to accessible units; and 23 residents were transferred to units that are not fully accessible but have some accessible feature. There were 857 people on the newly created HABC waiting list for accessible housing, and dozens of reasonable accommodation requests had been made and granted.

Transportation is also a significant issue for people with disabilities – essential to meeting their health care, education, and other needs. In fact, inadequate transportation is cited as one of the most significant barriers to finding and/or maintaining employment.

Designed as the transportation safety net for individuals with disabilities, paratransit systems across the country are failing those they were designed to serve.

The Maryland P&A filed Smith v. Flanagan in October 2003 alleging that the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) and the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) failed to comply with the ADA by operating a paratransit service with illegal capacity constraints that
violated federal regulations prohibiting substantial numbers of significantly late, missed, and/or lengthy trips, and long telephone hold times.

After the lawsuit was filed, MDOT and MTA began devoting substantial resources to improve the service. In September 2005, MDLC clients, MDOT, and MTA reached agreement on hiring a consultant to analyze and review the MTA paratransit service. The consultant performed a week-long on-site assessment of the service and met with plaintiffs, MDOT, MTA, and the settlement judge to discuss findings and finalize a settlement agreement.

Perhaps even more challenging is the short supply or complete nonexistence of transportation for individuals with disabilities living in rural areas. The rural nature of West Virginia and the lack of adequate public transportation is a formidable barrier to training for employment. The West Virginia CAP successfully advocated for a client to have his van modified as a means of transportation to and from college. This client was able to participate in his rehabilitation program and, after graduation, seek employment independently. [back to top]

Criminal Justice - The "New" Institutions

As services in the community continue to unravel, this last year saw increased focus on a place individuals with disabilities should not be, but far-too-often find themselves – jail.

As society has worked over the decades to move individuals out of institutions and into community settings, too often a lack of supports has meant jails and prisons have become the "newest institutions" for an increasingly large number of persons with mental illness, cognitive disabilities, and/or physical disabilities. It is estimated that as many as 50 percent of people in prison have a mental illness or other type of disability, making the correctional system a truly costly and unfortunate response to a failing mental health care system.

From arrest through every phase of the criminal justice system, persons with disabilities encounter a system not designed to handle large numbers of persons with disabilities. Lack of access to community mental health treatment and other public services often results in people with disabilities being arrested and booked in jails where adequate treatment is unlikely. When competency is an issue, delays in transporting such individuals for treatment are commonplace. Those who are convicted and confined in penal facilities tend to serve longer sentences than others convicted of similar crimes, and prison conditions are harsher due to their disabilities.

P&A systems are actively involved in advocacy on behalf of these individuals to protect their rights, including:

  • Training law enforcement officers and others in prevention strategies to divert individuals with disabilities from being arrested and charged with criminal offenses;
  • Training defense attorneys and court personnel to promote diversion and to protect the rights of defendants with disabilities when competency is an issue;
  • Consulting with public defenders with regard to individual justice planning and alternatives to incarceration for those convicted of crimes;
  • Monitoring jails and prisons to protect prisoners with disabilities from abuse and neglect, including unnecessary solitary confinement in supermax facilities;
  • Individual advocacy on behalf of prisoners with disabilities to protect their rights under the United States Constitution and federal laws such as the ADA;
  • Advocacy for effective screening, assessment for and access to mental health services, and suicide prevention;
  • Discharge planning, parole, and aftercare services and benefits;
  • Collaboration strategies to promote model programs and best practices; and
  • Litigation advocacy.

P&As frequently serve in collaboration and on task forces to solve problems relating to people with disabilities (particularly mental illness and co-occurring substance use) in the justice systems. Collaborative partnerships are often the best way to advocate for people, given the expense, political atmosphere, and delays involved with litigation.
Some P&As have also been involved with legislative efforts:

The Massachusetts P&A wrote and secured legislative sponsorship for a Senate Bill that requires mandatory training for all police offices on how to interact more effectively with people with mental illness.

The Rhode Island P&A serves on a legislative advisory commission regarding persons with mental illness across the state, including criminal justice issues.

Several P&As are actively involved with monitoring adult correctional facilities. Monitoring can result in: special reports that identify deficiencies, coupled with advocacy to correct them; informal resolution of problems by contacting the person within the system who can correct them (often the ADA coordinator); cooperation with a Department of Justice investigation; or litigation.

Litigation remains viable on certain fronts. P&As typically are successful in lawsuits to gain P&A access to correctional facilities.

P&As have also been successful in ADA/Section 504 suits on behalf of individual clients denied accommodations in prisons:

The Minnesota P&A won at trial in a case involving a deaf prisoner denied American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter services;

The Maine P&A won at trial on behalf of two prisoners with mobility problems who were denied walkers to take showers;

NDRN submitted an amicus brief in the Goodman v. Georgia case before the Supreme Court. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that state prisoners can enforce their rights under the ADA, at least as it pertains to ADA violations that also violate the Constitution.

The Supreme Court rejected the state of Georgia’s argument that Goodman – a prisoner with paraplegia – could not sue for damages under the ADA because Congress had exceeded its powers in allowing for such remedies. While Supreme Court Justices certainly disagree about the extent of Congressional powers, the Goodman opinion stated that “no one doubts that … Congress [has] the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment…” [back to top]

Education - The Primary Safety Net

As is true with anyone, education holds the key to becoming a productive member of society. The year 2005 marked the 30th anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) – since reauthorized as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA). The past 30 years have seen a vast improvement in the area of education, including the very recognition that individuals with disabilities should be educated; the identification of best practices in the education of individuals with a wide range of disabilities; and the inclusion of such individuals in regular classroom settings. Unfortunately, we are now seeing the unraveling of this essential safety net, as well.

The two key tenets of the IDEA are that every child is entitled to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) possible.

State education associations have an obligation to monitor local school districts to ensure compliance with the LRE requirements of the IDEA. Previously, the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) was found liable for failing to properly monitor the compliance of the Chicago Board of Education. As a result, ISBE is devoting significant monitoring resources in Chicago, but continues to violate its monitoring responsibilities for school districts outside of Chicago.

The case of Kerry and Kristine M., though not a class action, offered the Illinois P&A an excellent opportunity to challenge the failure of ISBE to ensure that children with disabilities are educated in the LRE. The girls were segregated in a private school where they had no contact with children without disabilities and received virtually no educational programming or stimulation.

Upon appealing the case to federal court, the P&A added ISBE as a defendant alleging: failure to properly train hearing officers; failure to monitor school districts to ensure that children with disabilities are educated in the LRE; and use of a formula which rewards school districts for segregating children with disabilities in private schools.

Another disturbing trend regarding LRE has been the use of restraint and seclusion in educational settings. While children with some disabilities might benefit from properly administered temporary de-escalation techniques, the existence of seclusion rooms in schools has too-often been abused as a dumping ground for children with disabilities whose behaviors may manifest in a disruptive manner.

On the national level, bad court decisions and questionable policymaking threatens to further unravel the safety net education could provide countless children with disabilities. While the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act promised high academic standards for children of all abilities and accountability of schools and educators in helping students achieve these standards, the US Department of Education (DOE) is allowing more and more students to be exempted from testing that determines schools' Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). In so doing, teachers are not challenged to find creative ways of teaching students with disabilities, but are too-often allowed to teach only to the student's Individualized Education Program (IEP) which, depending on how it was crafted and whether there were strong advocates involved in the process, may be nothing more than "goals" based on what the student already can achieve. NDRN played an active role in providing comments to the DOE on various sets of proposed regulations due to be finalized this year.

In the courts, the Schaffer v. Weast Supreme Court decision put the burden of proof – unless state law directs otherwise – on parents when they initiate due process hearings, forcing parents (if they can even afford it) to shoulder expert fees and the like in order to prove their case. The Court did not say that parents are responsible in all cases, but because the state of Maryland, where the case originated, did not have a law specifying what party was responsible for the burden of proof, the Court declined to put the burden on the school district in all special education cases regardless of the party initiating the action. Unfortunately, states have already begun to take advantage of the ruling by passing laws that increasingly put the burden of proof on the parents, creating a largely insurmountable barrier to challenging inadequate educational services. As it did in Weast, NDRN will continue to offer amicus briefs on special education cases making their way to the Supreme Court in an effort to maintain and strengthen the essential safety net education provides children with disabilities.

Often P&As provide valuable advocacy and training before special education issues reach the necessity of a due process hearing or court action. P&As train parents on the ins and outs of special education law and advocacy – providing them with the tools to advocate for their child’s needs at IEP meetings. When needed, P&As often attend IEP meetings with clients and regularly are able to negotiate agreements between School Districts and parents without litigation. [back to top]

Juvenile Justice - The Dumping Ground

Children with disabilities are over-represented in the juvenile justice system, where their mental health and educational needs are not adequately met. Despite the fact that incarcerating children in correctional facilities is not an evidence-based practice, it is undisputed that large numbers of youth in the juvenile justice system have serious mental health disorders. It is estimated that as many as 75 percent of those in juvenile correctional facilities have a disability. These youth typically are not in the juvenile justice system due to serious violent behaviors, but generally follow one of the following routes in entering the correctional system:

  1. Referred by schools to juvenile court system, thinking the youth's behaviors reflect a need for intervention by the justice system;
     
  2. Brought into contact with law enforcement officials due to lack of appropriate resources and services to properly address youth's behaviors in the community; or
     
  3. Relinquished voluntarily to justice system by parents or guardians with a misguided belief that their "out-of-control" children will receive needed services.

P&As are actively involved in training law enforcement officers, prosecutors, probation officers, and other personnel in the juvenile justice system to help them understand the special needs of children with disabilities. Juvenile detention and correctional facilities typically are ill-equipped to provide the special education and mental health services of juveniles with disabilities. P&As are challenging barriers to diverting children with disabilities from incarceration because these children are likely to suffer irrevocable harm in correctional facilities.

Knowing that juvenile justice facilities can be dangerous and harmful places for children with disabilities, P&As strive to protect them by monitoring these facilities, investigating incidents of abuse, and advocating for systemic reforms. P&As also advocate for meaningful discharge planning to ensure services will be in place for successful reintegration for children with disabilities.

Early identification and intervention are key strategies for preventing children with disabilities from coming into contact with the juvenile justice system and diverting them instead to needed resources. P&As are involved in a continuum of advocacy services to transform the service delivery system for children with disabilities, including capacity building and collaboration among systems – primarily schools – serving children.

A promising practice in diverting youth with disabilities from the juvenile justice system is the use of a court liaison; some jurisdictions use a Special Education Liaison (e.g. Georgia) and some a Mental Health Liaison (e.g. Alabama). Both models have been successful. There are P&As who have advocated for these initiatives. The Illinois P&A even obtained a grant to hire an attorney to focus specifically on Special Education issues in the Juvenile Court system.

Some P&As have also been involved with legislative efforts:

The Colorado P&A reviewed and commented on juvenile competency legislation that requires professional evaluations of juveniles charged with crimes, mental health treatment, and treatment in the least restrictive setting, including outpatient treatment in the community. This legislation fills a void that existed and provides an orderly process to follow in competency cases. As a result of the P&A’s input, the criminal rights of juveniles with mental illness are now better protected in Colorado.

The Idaho P&A was very involved with the defeat a bill that would make “disruptive” behavior in school a criminal offense, subjecting students with behavior disorders and alternative to criminalization of school behavior. In defeating this bill, the P&A helped prevent another effort to further criminalize behaviors that are often symptoms of disabilities.

When all else fails, the IDEA also serves as a basis for litigation involving correctional facilities. A class action in New York, for instance, was successful regarding IDEA rights of prisoners. NDRN encourages P&As to become more involved with monitoring educational services in juvenile correctional facilities – the problems are egregious and ripe for litigation if not resolved collaboratively.

Most class action litigation against juvenile correctional facilities results in settlement. Hence, there are few reported decisions, but a long list of such cases that have settled. Given the easier standard (14th Amendment due process) that applies to incarcerated juveniles (as compared to the 8th Amendment standard that applies to prisons), coupled with the horrible conditions in juvenile facilities, legal advocacy is a worthy pursuit in this area. [back to top]

Employment - Ensuring Fiscal Security

Perhaps one of the most critical times in the life of an individual with a disability is the transition from school to work. If the proper supports are in place, people with disabilities are able to become active and productive members of their community. Unfortunately, it is too often the case that transition services are not in place – or needed services are underfunded – resulting time and again in individuals decompensating as they wait for much-needed services.

For individuals across the spectrum of disability, employment training and vocational rehabilitation (VR) are essential supports for entering and assuring successful participation in the workforce. These services are designed to help individuals reach their full potential and personal employment goals through continuing education, training, assistive technology, and accommodations.

Unfortunately, people with disabilities’ individual employment goals are too-often not supported due to denial of the proper training and education, or simply because someone makes a decision – without completing a proper assessment or suggesting a viable alternative – that the individual being served is unable to succeed in their goals. Yet experience has shown time and again that, given the proper supports, people with disabilities can achieve their goals and be highly productive members of their community.

In North Dakota, a mechanic survived a severe brain injury as an adult about 15 years ago. Since his brain injury, no one had evaluated him in an auto repair shop. Instead, he was asked to sort things into bins and assemble puzzles. The PATBI lawyer and PABSS advocate collaborated to perform a very informal demonstration evaluation in a repair shop, videotaping the person exhibiting physical skills that had not been seen in years. The treating physician was surprised to see the man’s performance and agreed further vocational work would be therapeutic.

Even with available transition and VR services, 15 years after passage of the ADA, individuals with disabilities still experience severe underemployment, as well as both inadvertent and intentional employment discrimination. Collectively, the P&A/ CAP Network is the largest non-governmental enforcer of the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and state fair employment laws, representing individuals in their quest for equal opportunity and strengthening the safety net that stable employment provides.

Even in cases where individuals are employed, the P&A/CAP Network is instrumental in obtaining necessary – and often simple – accommodations to assure the employee’s success:

The Montana P&A settled a wrongful termination case in federal district court against the Department of Homeland Security challenging its policy prohibiting individuals who wear hearing aids from working as contract security guards in federal courthouses. The government agreed to pay damages and attorney fees, and is reevaluating its hearing aid policy in light of Section 504 requirements to provide reasonable accommodations to the known disabilities of employees. The settlement represents an accommodation to federal employment policy, and benefits not only the client, who returned to work at the courthouse, but all persons with hearing loss impacted by the government's policy.

The New York P&A represented a Wal-Mart employee who had visual and mobility impairments. She had been threatened with termination if she was to accidentally fall and injure herself. She had fallen three times in her four years of employment because she did not see obstacles that had been left by other employees in her work station or path of travel. Nevertheless, Wal-Mart subjected her to progressive discipline for these accidents.

The employee filed a complaint with the State Division of Human Rights (DHR) against Wal-Mart, claiming that the progressive discipline for falling was discrimination based upon disability. The parties agreed to mediate the dispute before DHR, and Wal-Mart rescinded its threat to terminate the employee for falling and assigned staff to ensure that her work station and path of travel remain free of obstacles. [back to top]

Voting - Ensuring a Voice for People with Disabilities

There is perhaps no better measure of an individual's full inclusion in society than their right to freely participate in elections. In addition to ADA and IDEA anniversaries, 2005 was also the 40th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act that – among other provisions – applied a nationwide prohibition against the denial or abridgment of the right to vote based on literacy tests on a nationwide basis.

While discrimination in voting has been prohibited based on race and gender, there still exist many barriers to the full exercise of this democratic institution by individuals with disabilities.

During the 2004 November Federal Election, several residents of the Lufkin State School (LSS) were denied the right to vote with assistance from someone of their choice. A 24-hour residential facility for about 420 people, LSS is known among advocates as a leading state school in Texas regarding voter registration opportunities and voting rights education.

Several of the residents asked their Client Rights Officer (CRO) to assist them in voting because they trusted her to do so. During early voting, five residents voted with assistance from an LSS employee. On the last day of early voting, there was a local newspaper article in which an incoming chair for one of the parties stated that unidentified people made allegations that LSS employees were bribing state residents with ice cream if they voted the “right way.” The article also questioned residents’ competency and even the legality of their right to vote. Finally, the use of state employees and vehicles to take residents to vote was called into question.

LSS employees contacted the Texas P&A on Election Day, as they were taking more students to vote and knew they might encounter problems. The P&A sent them state and federal statutes allowing assistance of choice and stating their right to vote. The P&A also had attorneys look into the questions regarding the use of state employees and vehicles. It was determined that helping an individual vote was within the CRO’s job duties, and that the state van belonged to LSS residents, making it an appropriate mode of transportation.

The incoming party chair had instructed poll workers to contact him immediately when the LSS van arrived at the polling location and told them to “be on the look out” for possible attempts at fraudulent voting. The incoming chair and others arrived at the polls shortly after the LSS van. As the students were walking from the van to the polling place, their competency and the motive of the CROs was questioned by individuals gathering around the polls. Several individuals shouted questions and insults at the voters. Officials from the Sheriff’s department were called and escorted the voters into the polling place.

Inside, a poll worker informed the residents that they could not vote with the assistance of their CRO, but would have to accept assistance from poll workers instead. The CRO handed the poll workers the information they had received from the P&A. Not until the P&A contacted the Director of Elections at the Secretary of State’s Office, who informed the poll workers that the LSS residents could have assistance from any person of their choice, were the residents finally allowed to vote with assistance from their CRO.

All allegations of bribery and coercion regarding state school employees and residents were investigated and dismissed. The county party chair put out several editorials apologizing for the incoming chair’s behavior and for the intimidation and harassment of the state school residents. The party also announced that the individual would not become County Chair due to his inappropriate behavior during the Election.

Much of this year’s voting work centered around the provisions in the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) that require polling places to make available accessible voting machines.

As a coalition member of the National Network on State Election Reform, NDRN played an active part in developing Election Reform Priorities that included, among other things, priorities on increased accessibility for voters with disabilities and removing voting barriers for citizens with mental disabilities.

NDRN also played a key role in providing technical assistance to the states regarding the various machines available to them with varying degrees of "accessibility." While HAVA promised to strengthen the safety net for individuals wanting to exercise their right to vote, the strength of that is yet to be seen, with the January 1 deadline having passed and many states still lacking accessible voting machines.

At least half of all P&As across the country were part of the official HAVA planning committee in their states, with others actively involved in coalitions advising states as they moved forward in their HAVA planning.

For its part, the Michigan P&A took a two-pronged approach to addressing the issue of instituting accessible voting. By focusing on consumer outreach and education, while simultaneously working with state election officials, the agency ensured that the voices of key stakeholders were heard throughout the process, and that this open and honest dialogue ultimately lead to the purchase of an appropriate and accessible system.

The Colorado P&A – like many other P&As across the country – cosponsored an accessible voting machine fair at the State Capitol during the 2004 legislative session. The first day was targeted at members of the Legislature, while the second day was for the disability community. [back to top]

In the States

ALABAMA

Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program (ADAP) intervened in several guardianship proceedings where guardians of people with developmental disabilities sought limitations on the ability of individuals to make choices in their lives. In one case a guardian filed action to have a marriage annulled. Again, after ADAP intervened, the individual was allowed to remain married, and no longer has a guardian making decisions for her.

ALASKA

The Disability Law Center (DLC) had an increased physical presence in small, rural communities. One student was represented in a due process proceeding in a small, Native community located near the Bering Sea and accessible only by plane. Because of the P&A’s physical presence, the residents became familiar and comfortable with staff, and shared their experience with residents of two other localities. Subsequently, the P&A received calls from those communities.

AMERICAN SAMOA

The first island-wide outreach to all local villages in ten years was launched in 2005. Through coordination with Village Mayors and the Samoan Affairs office, the P&A was able to successfully enter villages to assist the unserved and underserved, referring clients to appropriate services. Emphasis was placed on raising awareness of the different programs available. Data collected will be used in a database to assist in planning and identifying accurate population figures.

ARIZONA

The Arizona Center for Disability Law filed a lawsuit on behalf of a 17-year-old student with Type 1 diabetes after he was told he could no longer carry his glucose testing equipment on campus, citing a district-wide "no needles" policy. The school wanted the student to visit the nurse’s office for testing, resulting in lost class time, not to mention the risk if the student’s blood sugar was low and he was unable to make it across campus. The case attracted media attention and was settled quickly.

ARKANSAS

The Disability Rights Center concluded a three-month investigation into the Arkansas State Hospital, bringing to light physical and verbal abuse of a number of patients at the only residential acute-care psychiatric hospital in the state. The investigators concluded that residents were in “immediate jeopardy” because there is “no coherent system of identification, reporting, investigation and remedial action with respect to patient abuse at the Arkansas State Hospital.”

CALIFORNIA

In July 2000, Protection and Advocacy Inc (PAI), along with several other organizations, sued San Francisco and various state departments on behalf of residents of Laguna Honda Hospital (LHH), a 1,200-bed nursing facility in San Francisco. The class action lawsuit, Davis v. California Health and Human Services Department, et al, alleged that residents' rights were violated by Defendants' failure to inform people of, assess them for, and provide them with appropriate community services.
As a result of a 2004 settlement, San Francisco created a new assessment and case management program for LHH residents. Individual cases since settlement exemplify how PAI has been able to assist class members in accessing these critical supports.

COLORADO

On September 15, 2005, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Couture v. Bonfils Memorial Blood Center, in which John Couture was terminated from his phlebotomy position after revealing his HIV status. The Legal Center argued that allowing an employer to remove or reassign an employee solely due to a characteristic related to disability subverts the very purpose of the ADA, which expressly prohibits discrimination based upon unfounded fears, myths, and stereotypes. Couture hopes the case results in greater protections for HIV-positive health care workers.

CONNECTICUT

A federal judge approved a settlement setting guidelines for treatment of offenders with serious mental illness at the state's super-maximum-security prison and Garner Correctional Institution. The agreement came more than two years after the state Office of Protection and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities sued the correction department, claiming inadequate treatment of prisoners with serious mental illness that, in turn, caused further mental health deterioration.

DELAWARE

An SSDI beneficiary was employed part-time and successfully attending college part-time with DVR support. He received mental health and seizure-related medications through a clinic operated by the State Division of Substance Abuse & Mental Health (DSAMH). DSAMH adopted a restrictive formulary and the beneficiary was denied medications. DVR threatened to discontinue his tuition subsidy since the worker predicted he would decompensate and be unsuccessful in college without the medications. The Disabilities Law Program (DLP) met with the DSAMH director and her attorney, requested administrative hearings, facilitated attempts to secure medications through DVR, and met with the psychiatrist to obtain interim prescriptions. DSAMH relented and repealed its formulary altogether. The problematic DVR response to the beneficiary's needs was then addressed. The beneficiary continued his employment and college attendance.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

University Legal Services (ULS) initiated a lawsuit against the DC government for its failure to provide safe, habitable living conditions for the consumers at St. Elizabeths Hospital. Among the conditions ULS seeks to redress are overcrowded, understaffed wards, the hospital’s over-utilization of physical and chemical restraints, inadequate treatment and discrimination against consumers with cognitive and physical disabilities, as well as co-occurring substance abuse. The lawsuit alleges that the District of Columbia has failed to protect consumers from harm in violation of the US Constitution.

FLORIDA

The Advocacy Center, on behalf of residents of four DD institutions, reached a settlement in Brown v. Bush, a right-to-community-services case. The settlement includes closing of two of the four institutions and providing residential and other community services to class members.

GEORGIA

The Georgia Advocacy Office intervened on behalf of a Vietnam veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) whose credit life insurance application to cover a truck loan was turned down because of his disability. While there are disabilities that may disqualify an individual for certain insurance, PTSD generally is not one of those.

GUAM

Guam Legal Services hosted a series of workshops intended to help parents of special education students know their rights, making it easier to navigate through the special education system. Among other things, the workshops focused on understanding special education evaluations and individualized education plans.

HAWAII

In 1998, the Hawaii Disability Rights Center (HDRC) filed a lawsuit on behalf of 700 people with DD indefinitely "waitlisted" for Medicaid waivers. In a 2000 Settlement Agreement, the State agreed to develop and maintain a waitlist that moved at a reasonable pace. In September 2003, HDRC again filed suit (HDRC v. State of Hawaii) alleging substantial violations of the first Agreement, as well as new legal claims. More than seven years after the original filing, HDRC and the State signed a second Settlement.

IDAHO

Idaho CAP assisted a woman who had contacted CAP with concerns that VR would not listen to her, and allow her to pursue the employment goal of jewelry making, which she felt was achievable. CAP represented the client at a meeting with VR and helped the client express her wishes to the counselor. After pointing out that the client had a right to pursue a career in a field that interested her, VR allowed the client to pursue her chosen field.

ILLINOIS

Nine Illinois residents with developmental disabilities sued Illinois state officials, seeking an order that would require the state to provide services within a smaller community setting, instead of segregating people in large private institutions. The class-action lawsuit, brought by Equip for Equality and other public interest agencies, charges that by warehousing persons with developmental disabilities in large institutions, the state deprives them of their fundamental right to pursue meaningful and productive lives.

INDIANA

Indiana Protection and Advocacy Services (IPAS) was contacted concerning a client residing in a county jail by his sister, who alleged a disruption of his medications and treatment. It was found that the local CMHC had refused to house the client due to lack of bed space, threats, and past refusals to cooperate with them in his treatment. After five months of awaiting transfer to a state facility, his parents – frustrated over the delay – allowed him to return to their home. While in the community, his symptoms worsened and, when taken to the local CMHC, his verbal threats to kill the psychiatrist resulted in his arrest and detention. IPAS was able to negotiate with the local CMHC to provide services to the client while he was in the jail. After further mediation and negotiation, a placement was obtained at a state hospital where appropriate programs addressing his needs were developed and continue to be provided.

IOWA

Within the past year, Iowa Protection and Advocacy Services, Inc. (IPAS) was responsible for the Department of Corrections banning the use of prone restraints in the correctional system. IPAS also assisted with upgrading the current MHI policies relating to seclusion and restraint, including the banning of prone restraints. Late in this fiscal year, IPAS met with the Director of Human Services and his staff. Based on the information gained from IPAS advocacy efforts, an administrative policy was created banning the use of prone restraints in all facilities in Iowa.

KANSAS

Disability Rights Center (DRC) attorneys provided civil legal representation to 13 of the former residents of the Kaufman house (see page 5 for full story) – who are all persons with mental illness – during the intense trial in order to protect their civil rights and assert their rights as crime victims.

KENTUCKY

Kentucky Protection & Advocacy and the Cabinet for Health and Family Services reached an agreement that increases funding for Medicaid services for people with DD and moves the state away from Medicaid's institutional bias toward a preference for community-based services. The agreement marks the culmination of the civil rights class action lawsuit, Michelle P., et al. vs. M. Birdwhistell, et al., filed by four individuals with disabilities who were living at home with aging caregivers.

LOUISIANA

Outreach was conducted at various disaster recovery centers, shelters and other locations to Katrina evacuees/ persons with disabilities. Advocacy Center staff prepared and disseminated information fact sheets and other resources to evacuees and persons with disabilities. Approximately 3,000 people were reached and thirty facilities visited.

MAINE

The P&A represented a man with mental illness who had been involuntarily committed to a private freestanding psychiatric hospital for up to 120 days pursuant to a court order. After listening to a tape of the commitment procedure, a staff attorney with the Disability Rights Center argued that the client had ineffective assistance of counsel at his commitment hearing, violating Due Process; the court agreed. This case articulated for the first time in Maine a right of effective assistance in involuntary commitment procedures.

MARYLAND

The Maryland Disability Law Center (MDLC) filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a statute authorizing indefinite commitment of persons found incompetent to stand trial, without review or consideration as to whether they may become competent in the near future. MDLC educated lawmakers on the constitutional deficiencies of the statute and participated on a workgroup chaired by a member of the judicial conference to propose amendments. Many courts also began conducting status reviews and, as a result, dozens of individuals were released from criminal commitment.

MASSACHUSETTS

Individuals who are blind or have severe visuals impairment – over 38,000 according to an estimate provided by the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind – are now able to use ATMs at Massachusetts’ three largest banks, resulting in a positive impact throughout New England. The Disability Law Center (DLC) accomplished all this through structured negotiations and no direct litigation.

MICHIGAN

Michigan school programs generally include what is called a “time-out” room. Children in the class spend time in that room (usually quite a small room, occasionally with a door) when they are having some behavior difficulty. In addition to this, behavior that is considered dangerous triggers physical restraint of the student by school staff or liaison (police) officers. Working systemically to address this type of restraint and seclusion, Michigan Protection & Advocacy Service, Inc. (MPAS) representatives completed work with the state referent group on rewriting the state model policy on restraint and seclusion in schools.

MINNESOTA

A woman who is blind had convinced most of her utility and credit card companies to send bills as email attachments or printed in Braille. When she bought a water softener, the company refused to provide information to the client either by email or in Braille. The company's customer relations person indicated that he did not think the ADA applied and it was not their problem if the customer could not read documents sent to her. After some negotiation and discussion, the Minnesota Disability Law Center (MDLC) found someone within the company who agreed to email a summary of the client’s statement each month.

MISSISSIPPI

People under the age of 60 who are living in a nursing home or who may be living there in the future and who express a desire to live in the community are included in Billy A v. State of Mississippi, which focuses on a person’s right to apply for waiver services and to be given an opportunity to live in a more integrated setting. The suit was settled and the state of Mississippi agreed to survey current nursing home residents about alternative living arrangements, giving those individuals priority to move into the community.

MISSOURI

Missourians with disabilities, assisted by Missouri Protection and Advocacy and other public interest law organizations, filed a lawsuit against the state Department of Social Services claiming that the Legislature's elimination of durable medical equipment (DME) from the state's Medicaid program violates federal law. Approximately 370,000 Missourians stood to lose DME that keeps them alive and helps ease pain they endure on a daily basis.

MONTANA

The Montana Advocacy Program (MAP) surveyed a number of polling places, finding that additional resources were needed to ensure that a larger number of polling places attained a greater level of accessibility for voters with disabilities. MAP entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of State’s office to implement and oversee a project with the principal goal being the physical accessibility of additional polling places in Montana.

NATIVE AMERICAN

The Second Annual Native American Self Employment Conference for People with Disabilities was held July 22, 2005. The Native American Protection and Advocacy Project (NAPAP) collaborated with others to reach the target population of Native Americans with disabilities faced with high overall unemployment; limited opportunities for employment; lack of accessible transportation; and limited physical access. Self-employment has been an important employment option for this population.

NEBRASKA

In 2002, Nebraska Advocacy Services, Inc. (NAS) filed a civil rights action on behalf of 16 women who are or were patients at the State’s mental health facilities. NAS alleged that the State did not protect the women from physical and sexual assaults by male hospital workers and patients while they were at the Regional Centers, and that the State did not provide the women with mental health programs designed to treat the effects of their past sexual abuse. During FY05, NAS filed for class certification in order to show the magnitude of abuse. It is estimated that over 1,000 women who have been or are currently patients were abused in some way at the Regional Centers.

NEVADA

In July 2004, Clark County declared a state of emergency regarding the number of individuals with mental health needs being treated in emergency rooms. The Nevada Disability Advocacy & Law Center (NDALC) wrote a report investigating the crisis and how providing sufficient community-based services can help alleviate the problem. As a result of NDALC’s effort, as well as many others, the mental health budget was increased by over 50 percent – unprecedented in Nevada.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

The Disability Rights Center brought suit on behalf of individuals with brain injury who have languished for years on a waiting list. DRC sued the Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of people asking for care under the acquired brain disorder program.

Last year, the state and federal cost for the 133 people diagnosed as brain injured in New Hampshire was $11 million, but only 5 percent was spent to reduce the size of the waiting list.

NEW JERSEY

New Jersey P&A (NJP&A) developed a training curriculum on IDEA and juvenile justice. In April 2005, NJP&A presented training for all Juvenile public defenders in New Jersey regarding the procedural protections under IDEA, and how those protections might ensure better outcomes for juvenile defendants with disabilities.

NEW MEXICO

Protection & Advocacy, Inc (PAI) experienced an explosive growth in the number of clients calling about cuts in the hours their personal care attendants were funded to work. PAI filed, and was successful in, challenging many such reductions in service. The growth of cases was such that the P&A even developed a basic “how-to” appeal packet. PAI continues to work on related problems, but it at least appears that client notice letters are now sent directly to clients and contain required notice information.

NEW YORK

Staff worked with the Capital District Coalition to make available wheelchair-accessible taxis in the Capital Region. The three largest taxi services were contacted to explain their obligations under the ADA. One company, Yellow Cab, said it will accept a pre-litigation settlement demand to make 10 percent of its total fleet accessible. This is significant because the ADA only requires taxi accessibility if the taxi service uses vans, and this agreement covers Yellow's entire fleet. A written agreement was completed, and efforts in aggressively pursuing two other taxi services continue.

NORTH CAROLINA

The Governor's Advocacy Council for Persons with Disabilities (GACPD) provided the State Board of Elections a Disability Etiquette training packet for polling place workers developed by the United Spinal Association, which included a PowerPoint Presentation, a one-page tip sheet for polling place workers on Election Day and a 56-page book entitled Disability Etiquette. GACPD offered to assist the State Board in developing disability sensitivity training materials for poll workers.

NORTH DAKOTA

A woman contacted the North Dakota Protection & Advocacy Project (NDPAP) regarding a student loan issue. She had attempted college several years ago, but was unable to finish due to severe depression. Her depression was under control and she wished to return to school. NDPAP assisted the woman in consolidating her previous loans to get them out of default. Once this was accomplished, the woman applied for financial aid and work study. She started college in August 2005 at and is doing very well studying to be a psych nurse. She received a scholarship, plus assistance from VR.

NORTHERN MARIANAS ISLANDS

Personnel met with staff from the CNMI Emergency Management Office (EMO) to investigate and review existing emergency procedures. At this time EMO had no procedures in place specifically for people with disabilities, however P&A staff was informed that culturally, EMO collaborates with family members of people with disabilities, as they are the primary caregivers for them. It was the P&A’s position that EMO develop written procedures to ensure that people with disabilities are afforded appropriate treatment in times of disaster.

OHIO

A physician source reported that an alternative school in Mount Vernon is allegedly being used as a daytime detention facility. Modes of punishment include forced long-distance runs, solitary confinement in a bathroom stall with no windows for four hours, and restraint with shackle. Parents are threatened with further punishment for their children if they report the abuse. Ohio Legal Rights Service (OLRS) visited the school, documented and reported concerns to the Ohio Department of Education, and negotiated on behalf of one student who later withdrew her complaint.

OKLAHOMA

The State of Oklahoma has eight Section 121 programs. In 2005, CAP visited with all the Tribal VR program and attended the 121 conference in Oklahoma City. To better facilitate communication between the 121 programs and CAP, a listserv was created by CAP on a free website to allow messages of common interest to be sent to each 121 programs by any member of the list. As of September 30, all of the American Indian Projects have at least one staff member using the list and several have counselors that use the list to resolve issues common to all.

OREGON

The Oregon Advocacy Center’s (OAC) work on the issue of inadequate treatment at the Oregon State Hospital. Problems at the hospital culminated in OAC filing a lawsuit on behalf of the patients. OAC documented problems and the impact they have on the treatment and safety of patients. An expert reviewed OAC’s documentation and hospital conditions. His findings described a facility with gross understaffing and overcrowding that was unable to provide adequate treatment and rights protection for the clients it serves.

PENNSYLVANIA

Bichle v. Tri-Lateral Investment Corp. alleged that the owner of a mobile home park violated the FHA by refusing to allow installation of a ramp at the front entrance to a trailer owned by the family of a young man with TBI who uses a wheelchair for mobility. After the family installed a temporary ramp, the defendant threatened eviction. After the lawsuit was filed, the defendant entered into a settlement agreement to allow installation of a permanent ramp at the front entrance.

PUERTO RICO

The Office of the Ombudsman for Persons with Disabilities has full time specialized personnel coordinating the provision of educational materials, outreach campaigns, radio and TV programs, educational trainings, and an annual conference. Outreach efforts have demonstrated statistical correlation with case intakes, increasing the number of clients seeking empowerment, especially in isolated geographical areas and distant towns and communities.

RHODE ISLAND

Client’s mother called the Rhode Island Disability Law Center (RIDLC) for assistance to ensure that her son’s IEP was appropriately implemented to ensure the most integrated setting possible. At the time, the boy was transitioning from elementary to middle school and his IEP called for a regular education classroom. A few days prior to the beginning of school, Client’s mother noticed that he was not placed in a regular education class. RIDLC negotiated with the Special Education Director prior to the start of school and Client was placed in a regular education setting in accordance with his IEP.

SOUTH CAROLINA

In 2002, P&A attorneys filed an action in federal court on behalf of four individuals and the local Disability Action Center regarding the Dial-a-Ride-Transit (DART) paratransit bus service. Settlement was first reached with the previous operators of the system. In May 2005, P&A reached a settlement of a class action lawsuit in which the parties agreed to create an Accessibility Advisory Committee and the current operating company agreed to provide ongoing ADA training for all of its staff.

SOUTH DAKOTA

South Dakota Advocacy Services (SDAS) assisted a student who is diagnosed as bi-polar and lives with her grandparents. During her 7th-grade year, her grandparents were unable to get her to go to school on a regular basis. As a result, the grandparents were charged with truancy and the girl was forced to retake the 7th grade and placed on conditional probation. During this time, she attempted suicide on two occasions and continued to miss school. She was later placed in a Juvenile Services Center (JSC) as a result of missing school.

The school district, Department of Corrections (DOC), grandparents, and SDAS staff mediated placement alternatives and delivery of services. SDAS was successful in getting her placement changed, advancing her to 8th grade, and getting her into an after-school program. After the case was closed, SDAS received a call indicating the girl received three As, two Bs, and a C in her classes. Without the assistance of SDAS, she would currently be at a structured placement within DOC.

TENNESSEE

Tennessee sought to reduce the number of adults covered by TennCare, the state's enhanced Medicaid program, and curb some benefits. Officials with Tennessee Protection and Advocacy worked with the administration to ensure all enrollees qualifying for private duty nursing care continued to have costs covered through the end of the year.

TEXAS

Advocacy Inc. and the Arc of Texas filed a lawsuit accusing the state of discriminating against 40,000 people with DD who have been on wait lists for as long as 11 years to get Medicaid-funded community-based services.

Although eligible people with mental retardation have a right to institutional care, as many as 28,000 families who opt to keep them closer to home face an indefinite wait for services, despite statistics showing that home care costs the state about half as much as in state schools.

UTAH

The Disability Law Center surveyed dozens of courthouses, city halls, libraries, parks, post offices, and other federal, state, and local buildings in rural communities to determine their accessibility. Twenty-six sites were found to be inaccessible and in violation of the ADA. The DLC’s successful negotiations resulted in improvements at each location.

VERMONT

Vermont Protection & Advocacy (VP&A) worked closely throughout 2005 with the Brattleboro Retreat, a private psychiatric facility, to motivate and support the Retreat’s effort to implement an initiative to drastically reduce the use of seclusion and restraint facility-wide. The Retreat recognizes both patients and staff are significantly traumatized by coercive interventions, and that all are best served by reducing their occurrence. VP&A continues to work closely with staff and administration at the Retreat in refining and improving both the development of new practices and policies and their implementation.

VIRGIN ISLANDS

A 9-year old child with TBI was barred from attending school due to his alleged disruptive behavior. As a result of P&A intervention, the parent was advised of her child’s rights under IDEA and was given information on TBI. The parent used this information to advocate on her child’s behalf. The child was reinstated to his school.

VIRGINIA

The Virginia Office of Protection and Advocacy sued the Lottery for contracting with businesses that violate federal law. Four plaintiffs filed suit asking the Lottery to stop doing business with places that are inaccessible to them. The suit, Winborne v. Virginia Lottery, was filed on the 15th anniversary of the ADA and alleges that the Virginia Lottery supports businesses that are not available to people with disabilities.

WASHINGTON

Washington Protection & Advocacy System was a founding member of Washington’s Parity Coalition, which grew over seven years to have 124 member organizations. The Coalition’s aim was to get a bill passed which would create parity for mental health coverage in Washington. After bills were defeated for several years, the Coalition was successful during FY05, and Washington joined over 35 states that have such legislation.

WEST VIRGINIA

A client had been in juvenile detention as the result of a petition initiated by the school. The advocate attended IEP meetings and worked with appointed attorneys to make them aware of special education laws and state policies. As a result of the intervention, the client was released from lock-up and is attending a private school which the parents chose.

WISCONSIN

Disability Rights Wisconsin took part in several activities to ensure the acquisition of accessible voting equipment, including: participating in, advertising and providing incentives for people with disabilities to come to vendor fairs; having a P&A staff member as part of the State’s Election Administrative Council; providing feedback to vendors on how to make their products more accessible; and providing the state on what to look for when analyzing the accessibility of a machine.

WYOMING

In Protection & Advocacy System, Inc. v. Freudenthal, the P&A prevailed in its assertion that the P&A was not precluded by HIPAA or by Medicaid confidentiality standards from accessing client records, provided that the P&A followed the requirements of its authorizing statutes. The litigation also addressed alleged abuse and neglect of patients with MI at the State Hospital. [back to top]

Independent Auditor's Report

We have audited the accompanying statement of financial position of the National Rights Disability Net-work, Inc. (NDRN) as of September 30, 2005, and the related statements of activities and cash flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of NDRN's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. The prior year summarized comparative information has been derived from NDRN's 2004 financial statements and, in our report dated December 30, 2004, we expressed an unqualified opinion on these financial statements.

We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the NDRN as of Sep-tember 30, 2005, and the changes in its net assets and its cash flows for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated December 16, 2005 on our consideration of the NDRN's internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit.

Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements, taken as a whole. The schedule of functional expenses on page 10* is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements.

The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by US Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.

BertSmith, & Co.
December 16, 2005
Washington, DC

NATIONAL DISABILITY RIGHTS NETWORK, INC.
STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
SEPTEMBER 30, 2005
(With Comparative Totals for 2004)
 
2005
2004

ASSETS

Current Assets
     Cash and Cash Equivalents
     Grants and Contract Receivable
     Other Receivables
     Prepaid Expenses

          Total Current Assets

     Fixed Assets, net
     Rental Deposits

          Total Assets

LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS

Current Liabilities
     Accounts Payable
     Accrued Expenses
     Capital Lease Obligations, Current Portion
     Line of Credit
     Deferred Revenue

          Total Current Liabilities

     Capital lease obligation, Long Term

          Total Liabilities

Net Assets
     Unrestricted
     Temporarily Restricted

          Total Net Assets

          Total Liabilities and Net Assets

 

 
$ 119,804
415,006
62,406
6,642

603,858

208,149
21,127

$ 833,134

 

 
$ 335,620
65,838
23,444
50,000
153,740

628,642

21,437

$ 650,079

$ 174,145
8,910

$ 183,055

$ 833,134

 

 
$ 208,342
334,622
24,083
4,175

571,222

149,232
21,127

$ 741,581

 


$ 191,393
88,599
21,934
-
134,284

436,210

24,626

$ 460,836

$ 249,704
31,041

$ 280,745

$ 741,581

[back to top]
 
 
National Disability Rights Network
900 Second Street, NE, Suite 211
Washington, DC 20002
Phone: 202-408-9514
Fax: 202-408-9520
TTY: 202-408-9521
General inquiries: info@ndrn.org
Website feedback: webmaster@ndrn.org