DDS withholds information on investigation of its data on the census of state-operated group homes
In the wake of questions raised by COFAR, the Department of Developmental Services (DDS) appears to have conducted an internal investigation of its apparently contradictory data on the total number of residents in its state-operated group homes.
The Department, however, has declined to provide any records of that investigation to us, citing attorney-client privilege. An attorney for the Department, meanwhile, has not responded to a query I sent her on the matter on January 5.
As we reported last fall, a new set of census data provided by DDS in September has produced confusion over whether the total number of residents, or census, in state-operated group homes has been rising or falling. Data provided by DDS in previous years consistently showed the total census of the homes had been steadily falling.
However, the new data set from DDS in September indicates that the census of the state-operated homes actually rose during the same fiscal years DDS had previously said it was falling – 2020 through 2023. Moreover, the new data show the census continued to rise until as recently as last year. (See graph below depicting the two contradictory sets of data from DDS.)
The DDS state-operated group home network is far smaller than the privatized group home system, which is managed by DDS-funded corporate providers. However, we consider the state-operated homes to be critically important in maintaining the fabric of care in the DDS system.
DDS spends about $350 million a year in operating its state-run group homes, compared with more than $2 billion a year on the provider-operated homes. We are concerned that the Healey administration is allowing the state-operated group home network to die by attrition.
Due to the apparent discrepancy in the data, we filed a Public Records Law request with DDS on November 13 for documents pertaining to apparent changes made by the Department to its census data for state-operated group homes between Fiscal Years 2020 and 2023.
DDS responded to us on December 29, indicating that they had located 74 internal emails and email attachments that were responsive to our records request. But an assistant DDS general counsel stated that, “All responsive records, including emails and email attachments, are withheld on the basis of the attorney-client privilege.” Each email involved a communication between a DDS attorney and another DDS official or attorney.
Subject matter listed as ‘investigation’
A document provided by the assistant general counsel as part of the December 29 response provides brief descriptions of the subject matter of each of the emails that were considered responsive. For 36 of the 74 emails and attachments, the subject matter is described as “Communication re: investigation of PRR census data for counsel.” (my emphasis)
The document provides no explanation as to what is meant by “investigation” or what aspects of the census data were or are being investigated.
On January 5, I emailed the assistant general counsel, asking whether DDS has opened an investigation of the apparent changes made in its census data for state-operated group homes, specifically for Fiscal Years 2020 through 2023. I also requested an explanation for the contradictory nature of the two sets of data. To date, I haven’t received a response to my query.
Appeal denied
As the graph above shows, DDS provided contradictory sets of data in two responses to our public records requests in November 2023 and September of last year. The largest discrepancy in the data concerns Fiscal Year 2020, for which the 2023 DDS response listed the total census of the state-operated homes as 1,026, while the 2025 response listed the total census as 857.
The graph further illustrates how that difference of 169 residents in the two data sets for Fiscal Year 2020 established two contradictory trends in the data from that year onward. The solid red line representing the 2023 DDS response shows a downward trend in the census, whereas the dashed green line representing the 2025 response shows an upward trend.
As as result of that discrepancy in DDS’s responses, we filed an appeal with the state Public Records Division last September, asking asking the public records supervisor to direct DDS to clarify or reconcile its two sets of census data, or to explain in writing the reasons for the discrepancies so that the records provided would be comprehensible and complete.
On October 6, the Public Records supervisor denied our appeal, contending we hadn’t alleged a “clear violation” of the state’s Public Records Law by DDS.
On October 14, we asked the Public Records supervisor to reconsider her denial. We noted that by producing two conflicting sets of census data for overlapping fiscal years, DDS had failed to demonstrate that it had furnished the actual records it maintains as required by the Public Records Law.
On October 31, the Public Records Supervisor denied our request for reconsideration without responding to our argument about the failure to assist in meaningfully identifying the records we had received. She stated only that, “There is a presumption that public officials perform their duties in an honest and impartial manner.”
As a result of the denials of our appeal and request for reconsideration, we filed the November 13 public records request, asking for all documents pertaining to the apparent changes in the census data.
Administration’s secrecy reduces public trust
So far, the only thing we have learned from this whole exercise is that DDS may have conducted, or may be conducting, an investigation of some kind regarding that data. As usual, the Department appears to have found a way to prevent the public from learning what is actually going on.
This is particularly unfortunate given that the Department’s secrecy prevents the public from knowing a basic fact about the future of the state-operated group home system and by extension state-run services in general. Whether the census in the group home system is rising or falling has direct implications for the system’s viability in coming years.
Despite the September data that was provided to us, it seems most likely to us that the census in the state-operated homes has been steadily falling. We have heard that several homes have been closed in recent years, that staffing has been cut, and that it is difficult, if not impossible, to gain admission to those residences.
In July 2024, we reported that Governor Maura Healey had cut more than $400,000 from her proposed funding for state-operated group homes in the Fiscal Year 2025 budget. That cut resulted in final funding for the homes that was $2.4 million less than the governor’s initial proposal, despite an overall 4% increase from the previous year.
A year later, we reported that the Legislature had adopted a lower funding increase for the state-operated homes for Fiscal 2026 than what the governor originally proposed. The Legislature instead prioritized the larger corporate-run system, as usual.
These occurrences are not a prescription for a rising census in the state-run group homes. Yet DDS’s latest data say that is just what happened, without offering an explanation for it.
We continue to fail to understand why the administration feels it is necessary to withhold vital information like this from the public. We don’t see how anyone benefits from a policy that reduces the public’s trust in government.
COFAR blog 