Globe update report has devastating findings about DDS provider-run group home system. Is the administration listening?
In the second of two reports on the corporate, provider-based group home system in Massachusetts, The Boston Globe last week characterized the system as “hobbled by poor staffing and struggling with allegations of abuse and neglect.”
Last week’s article was a follow-up to a report in September by the Globe’s Spotlight Team, which had focused on widespread abuse and neglect in provider-run residential schools for children and teens with autism.
We think the Globe’s reporting raises some important questions, one of which is whether the Healey administration and the Legislature are listening.
The Globe’s reporting echoes assertions about abuse and neglect in the system that we have been making for years. Moreover, we think the Globe is on the right track in noting a key factor plaguing the system, which we have long emphasized, of underpaid and undertrained staff.
Last week’s Globe article stated that most of the parents of autistic children whom the paper had interviewed asserted that, “Massachusetts has never solved long-term systemic problems of low pay and inadequate training” in the system.
The paper noted that although “the state has directed millions of dollars to group home providers to help them recruit and keep staff, pay remains similar to that of some retail and fast food workers; $17 to $20 an hour is typical.”
The Globe further stated that “a number of parents who spoke with (the newspaper) requested anonymity because they were afraid that (as we have long reported) state officials or providers would retaliate against them or their child if they spoke out.”
Paper needs to examine the causes
We hope the Globe will investigate the causes of that culture of retaliation and intimidation of families who complain about inadequate care and even abuse and neglect of their loved ones; and that it will investigate the causes of the underpayment of staff.
Understanding the causes of the underpayment of staff might help explain where the millions of taxpayer dollars went, given the money, as the Globe implied, doesn’t appear to have been used to raise staff wages to any significant degree. It might also explain why direct-care workers in the provider system have historically been underpaid and undertrained.
We think an investigation of the causes will reveal that the corporate provider system has always been been about making as much money as possible for its executives while paying its direct care workers as little as possible. That appears to explain why the privatization of human services has never met the promise of both delivering high-quality care and saving money. It may also explain why continual efforts to raise the pay of direct care workers don’t seem to lead to that result (see Massachusetts Inspector General’s 2021 Annual Report, page 27).
State-run services ignored as potential solution
Last week’s Globe article referred to concerns raised by the Arc of Massachusetts and the Massachusetts Association of Developmental Disabilities Providers (ADDP) — both of which actually lobby for the providers — about the shortage of staff and a lack of available group homes.
But while organizations like the Arc and the ADDP publicly decry the poor care and abuse of clients and the underpayment and shortage of staff, they both oppose a key potential solution to the problem, which would be to open the doors of the Wrentham and Hogan Developmental Centers and provide state-operated group homes as options to individuals seeking residential placements.
The state-run Wrentham and Hogan Centers and state-operated group homes have better trained and better paid staff than the provider-run homes. Yet the state-run facilities are losing population even as the number of people waiting for placements is growing. That is because the administration is not offering state-run facilities as options to people seeking placements, and is even denying requests made by families to place their loved ones in them.
The Arc and the ADDP appear to offer no solutions to those problems other than to ask the state to direct more money to them. In our view, those problems will never be solved unless the state changes the incentives driving privatized care.
Real oversight needed
In addition to providing families with state-run facilities as options for residential care, the state needs to take steps to ensure that group home providers really do raise the pay of their direct-care workers. It could begin to do that by establishing true financial oversight of the provider system. Currently, that oversight is practically non-existent.
Successive administrations and the Legislature have been committed to the privatization of DDS care for decades. They have maintained an extraordinarily close relationship with the corporate provider system in that respect. As noted, the Globe pointed out that both DDS and the providers often retaliate against parents and family members who dare to complain about poor care in the group homes.
We hope the Healey administration will not allow the anti-family culture and the continuing underpayment of direct-care staff in the DDS provider system to continue. We also hope the administration will consider reversing the longstanding administration policy of allowing state-run residential facilities to die by attrition.
The breakdown of the DDS system caused by decades of runaway privatization and mismanagement is finally being reported by the Globe. We hope the Healey administration is listening.
Forwarded to Gov. Healy with my comments on DDS care.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have replied to some of these articles before but I will say it once again. I don’t know anything about Wrentham but Hogan should be closed down. My daughter who was sent there years ago had nightmares about it and because she could not communicate to us very well, all she could say is “No more Hogan” so I know more went on there than we know. They are famous for not allowing family to visit or very limited. She was sent there a second time because MGH could not keep her there, probably because of money. She was sent to Hogan by a temporary guardian because we would not give consent and they took our guardianship away for three months. Within a week, DDS was sending me a letter to sign over her disability check which my lawyer advised me not to. They pumped her full of drugs to control her and within 3 weeks she had a heart attack at age 29 and passed away with no history of heart issues. I called the guardian and she said “That was too bad, natural causes.” This woman saw her once that I know of. She was in it also for the paycheck. I pray for any person living in any of these places and their families. I hope no one else has to endure the pain of what we live with every day.
LikeLike
I have just finished reading this assessment of the Hogan facility. Wow, this is quite tragic and no one at any level of involvement should ever accept this level of care and treatment for their disabled family member. I do hope that there is an aggressive oversight process looking at Hogan to assure the full story is known.
My experience has been very positive with the Wrentham facility. I have a brother who has been at the Wrentham facility since 2010. He is profoundly intellectually disabled, blind and non verbal. He is 74 years old. My interaction with his Social Worker and the staff in direct and indirect support of all his needs has simply been excellent. These individuals are committed and at numerous times have taken the initiative to contact my self and the Co-guardian (one of his sisters) to convey information on various issues that they are dealing with to keep him healthy. Myself and 2 sisters attend the annual ISP meeting with the staff. This gives us a key perception in evaluating the staff and also lets the staff know that we support their significant care giving efforts.
Dave Kassel’s recent blog on the State of Massachusetts and its total failure to support severely disabled citizens makes one wonder why the politicians and others that are serving in appointed decision making positions should even collect a paycheck. The State absolutely needs to expand the use of a facility such as Wrentham, continue to train and grow the certified capabilities of the staff. And, yes! The staff compensation should be increased to support their very solid competency efforts in serving the severely disabled citizens of the State of Massachusetts.
Robert M. Pasek
Brother, Co-Guardian and Rogers Monitor
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s great the Boston Globe is exposing this. There is much more to be expose too. It’s time for a complete in-depth overhaul of the entire system, especially DDS with their corruption and abuse of power. They have become a tyrannical organization and the legislators need to make this their priority to investigate the many horror stories caused by DDS. Breaking laws, violating human rights and retaliating against people who complain or go against them with their arbitrary decisions. The fact DDS wants more control in trying to pass a law for SDM while all these problems going on boggles my mind.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There are numerous conflicts of interest in the system designed to give the DDS and their contracted providers ultimate power and control over this vulnerable population and their families. Removing these conflicts of interest would save taxpayer dollars and improve the system. This is as important, if not more, than raising the wages of DSPs.
LikeLiked by 3 people
The amount DDS has to spend in legal fees to avoid providing mandated services is probably pretty staggering.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Interesting point, Lara. There doesn’t appear to be an easy way to determine the amount that DDS pays in legal fees because the Department uses it own in-house legal team or in-house attorneys from the Attorney General’s Office. By the way, I think that dual role of the AG’s Office is one of the reasons the AG doesn’t do a very good job of ensuring that DDS complies with its enabling statute and regulations.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Would you please elaborate on these conflicts of interest.
LikeLike
I can give you one: DDS gatekeeps the ICF-IID facilities at Hogan and Wrentham. ICFs are Medicaid-funded programs that are not in any way subject to DDS eligibility under federal law. You just need to be a Medicaid recipient and be evaluated by the facility as having needs requiring that level of care.
However, DDS does not allow that. Eligibility for Hogan and Wrentham goes through DDS, not clinicians at the facilities. That is what I was told. DDS essentially treats the facilities as adult waiver housing and that isn’t what they are legally. I’m going to speculate as to reason here, but I think they are: 1. Trying to dismantle this level of care entirely, even though it’s still desperately needed. 2. Keep new families with profoundly disabled adult children out of Massachusetts.
For any other Medicaid-funded health service, U.S. citizens can pretty easily move throughout the country with their families. Medicaid has a 90 day retroactive coverage period. So someone with diabetes can move, get an endocrinologist or PCP, and set up delivery of supplies necessary to life and the provider knows their Medicaid coverage will kick in shortly. Someone who has mobility concerns can set up their services. Someone who needs a nursing home can find a facility with a bed, move, and worry about the paperwork later.
That is a gross over-simplification. But it’s a process that all parties are familiar with. Many families move Mom or Dad to be closer to the sibling with the best availability to oversee their care.
For individuals with Level 2 or 3 autism with moderate or severe intellectual disability, Massachusetts has set up the system such that these families would have to drop all their old Medicaid services in their former state, apply for MassHealth (1-3 months), apply for DDS eligibilty (currently being told 11 months), argue with either the school department or DDS for services, and BE WITHOUT NECESSARY SUPPORTS THAT ENTIRE TIME. You could be talking more than two years.
It is blatantly discriminatory and it’s being done with malice aforethought.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you for that helpful reply. I have long suspected that efforts to deny admissions to the ICFs were an attempt to escape federal oversight of care and services, but I had no idea! I have seen that agency promises to provide care that is ‘equal or better’ in the ‘community’ turned out to be manipulation. I think most of these disabled individuals qualify for nursing home care. And employees say they have to do what they are told.
It seems the bottom line here is that the DDS just doesn’t comply with the law and does whatever they want.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The entire system is rotten!
LikeLiked by 1 person
kafaiola, I have interacted with one gentleman in DDS who was very informative, but unable to assist with more than information. I’d been transferred to him by accident! 🤣
But other than that highlight, my experience has been universally awful.
I suspect there are still good people working in a bad system.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe it’s time for someone to bring all of the families together that are having these issues. There seems to be numerous problems with the agencies and the state. Strength in numbers!
LikeLiked by 2 people
my daughter lived in a group home in Hudson ma.she was just kicked out of her home because she was violent is what the reason was but she has had black eyes lithium poisoning abuse by the staff. staff sleeping on the job. And not wanting to do there job my daughter can’t sleep all day so she is a problem. The system is do broken but iam getting older and do not have a huge family what can I supposed to do. My daughter now has ptsd from the abuse
LikeLike