Status Briefs  

March 3, 2010

 

Has Your Transportation Funding Been Reduced?
  Please let us know!

 

The pace on working on the State Budget in the Capitol is very slow. The combination of ongoing and staggeringly high budget deficit of more than $20 billion and the devastating impact of many of the cuts that have been made in the last 18 months has made it very difficult for members of both parties to wade in.

 

But it will speed up soon and we will have more to say. And we have an opportunity on March 17th, during CDSA’s upcoming Legislative Conference in Sacramento, to lay down some principles and positions for our Legislators to consider when addressing issues important to us and the people we serve.

 

But we also have any number of ongoing issues from last year’s budget that trouble our future. The dramatic cuts of nearly $500 million in General Fund; a combination of the 3% across the board payment cut, the 10% cut to supported employment and the additional $334 million in categorical cuts, has still not been implemented in many if not most regional centers.  The Governor’s Budget scores the savings in a block-grant fashion and there is no detail regarding how those cuts might have actually rolled out in the programs they were designed to reduce.

Anecdotally, we believe the cuts to respite and early intervention were far higher than anticipated. Cuts in other programs may never materialize. But before we can know what to discuss about future situations, we will be calling for transparency from the Department and oversight from the Legislature on just what is happening.

 

SUBJECT 1 – TRANSPORTATION

 

One of the more confusing areas of budget trailer bill language – the only statutory or regulatory authority that exists to implement any of these reductions – is the area related to “least costly vendor”. (See language below)

 

You may provide transportation as a part of your services.  We have heard from some members that their Regional Center has been taking actions in the area of Transportation that are directly impacting your transportation services and/or indirectly impacting other services due to cutbacks/changes in transportation.  So, we are asking you a couple of questions to get a sense of any impact across the State. Please respond to dhansen@hansenassociates.org

 

    1. Has your Regional Center implemented reductions to transportation services that have directly impacted your transportation program (such as re-routing, offering vouchers to others to provide the service, contract rate reductions, etc.)?  If yes, which Regional Center(s) and what have they done?
    2. Has your Regional Center implemented reductions to transportation services through the use of the “Least Costly Vendor” language?  If so, how have they been implementing it (on a specific service basis or on the basis of the bundled services necessary to support someone)?
    3. Have consumers lost service due to these changes?  Have you seen a reduction in other services (Day/WAP services) due to changes in Transportation?

 

Thanks in advance for your response. Please send your answers to dhansen@hansenassociates.org

 

 

2009 Budget Trailer bill language

 

(6) The regional center and the consumer, or where appropriate,
his or her parents, legal guardian, conservator, or authorized
representative, including those appointed pursuant to subdivision
(d) of Section 4548 or subdivision (e) of Section 4705, shall,
pursuant to the individual program plan, consider all of the
following when selecting a provider of consumer services and
supports:

 

(D) The cost of providing services or supports of comparable
quality by different providers, if available, shall be reviewed, and
the least costly available provider of comparable service, including
the cost of transportation, who is able to accomplish all or part
of the consumer’s individual program plan, consistent with the
particular needs of the consumer and family as identified in the
individual program plan, shall be selected. In determining the
least costly provider, the availability of federal financial
participation shall be considered. The consumer shall not be
required to use the least costly provider if it will result in the
consumer moving from an existing provider of services or supports
to more restrictive or less integrated services or supports.

 

CDSA CONFIDENTIAL