Health Care and DD Services
(Click on article underlined link for more information)
Pursuant to the Court Order entered on October 17,
2007 in the case of Access Now, Inc., et al. v. AMH CGH, Inc., et al., in
the District Court for the Southern District of Florida, below is the
Notice of Partial Settlement for the following:
1.
Desert Regional Medical Center (CA)
2.
Doctors Hospital of Manteca (CA)
3.
Doctors Medical Center of Modesto (CA)
4.
Twin Cities Community Hospital (CA)
Ekloff v. Rodgers:
On
June 22, 2005, the Arizona Center for Disability Law (Center) filed a class
action lawsuit against the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System
(AHCCCS), Arizona’s Medicaid system in federal court. Plaintiffs in
this case are children with disabilities who are recipients of state
Medicaid services and need incontinence briefs because of their
disabilities. Currently, AHCCCS will not cover incontinence briefs
for children with disabilities unless the child has experienced skin
breakdown, sores or infections. Our research indicates that Medicaid
programs in at least three quarters of the states cover incontinent
supplies when needed to prevent adverse medical conditions.
In
March 2006, the U.S. District Court entered judgment in favor of the
Plaintiffs in this case and ordered AHCCCS to do the following:
(1)
provide incontinence briefs to AHCCCS members under age 21 who are
incontinence due to a disability.
(2)
reimburse parents of these children for their out-of-pocket expenses for
privately purchasing needed briefs
Although
the State of Arizona appealed this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit, the parties reached a tentative settlement of the
case in June, 2006. A “fairness hearing” to determine whether the
proposed settlement is fair to the class was held in U.S. District Court in
Tucson, Arizona on Friday, November 17, 2006 at 1:30pm in the courtroom of
Judge Raner Collins. At that time, Judge Collins approved the
settlement (Consent Decree). This means that children will
disabilities will now have access to medically necessary incontinence
briefs from AHCCCS and the appeal in the 9th Circuit will be
dismissed. The Plaintiffs motion for attorneys fees is currently
pending in the United States District Court.
Click
below to download a copy of the Class Notice, the Consent Decree and
Proposed Settlement Agreement:
Class Notice
Proposed Settlement
Agreement
Consent Decree
Ball v. Biedess - Lawsuit challenging deficiencies in
AHCCCS’s provision of home and community base services to individuals who
need personal care.
ACDL secures important legal victory in home and community
based services class action lawsuit.
Just a
few days ago, our staff secured another ground breaking legal victory for
Medicaid beneficiaries. The decision in Ball v. Rodgers,
from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, confirmed the right
of low income elderly and people with disabilities to sue to enforce their
rights to receive reliable home and community based services in their home,
rather than be forced to go to nursing homes in order to get the care they
need.
Our
fight to ensure that every Arizonan has a meaningful choice to live in the
community is far from over. Our victory this week is just one step in
the process. The case now returns to the U.S. District Court in
Phoenix.
Read the
press release
on this recent development in Ball v. Rodgers.
Padilla v. Biedess & Thompson - Lawsuit
challenging AHCCCS denial of kidney dialysis to certain aliens living in Arizona.
Shultz v. Rodgers and Bates v.
Rodgers
- Administrative appeals to Superior Court, challenging the AHCCCS policy
of refusing to cover diapers as “medically necessary” for children who are
incontinent as the result of disability unless there are open sores.
TOP
Mental Health Rights and Services
(Click on article title for more information)
Vista Care
Investigative Report Released
The
Center has been investigating and monitoring allegations of abuse and
neglect at Vista Care, a residential treatment facility for adolescents in
Hereford, Arizona since 2003. At that time, the Center received a
call from a parent of a child receiving in-patient care at Vista Care alleging
that her son was physically abused by Vista Care. The Center
exercised our federal investigative authority to conduct an on-site review
and push state regulators to take appropriate action to correct serious
deficiencies. A corrective action plan was put in place and
additional oversight of the facility was undertaken by the state and by the
regional behavioral health provider, Community Partnership for Southern
Arizona (CPSA). In February 2005, the Center conducted a follow-up
site visit and found substantial improvements.
Unfortunately,
there has been a tremendous amount of turnover at Vista Care since the
February 2005 review. In addition, we have recently received a series
of complaints alleging improper use of physical restraints by untrained
staff, staff abuse of clients, and lack of appropriate mental health
treatment. Based on those reports, and additional information
uncovered by Center staff, we undertook another investigation into the
facility. In a report issued on October 9, 2006, the Center found
serious safety concerns involving peer-on-peer assaults, the mis-use of
emergency safety responses and continued treatment problems. The
Center issued 12 recommendations to Vista Care and are awaiting their
response.
Arizona Center for
Disability Law enters comprehensive agreement with the Arizona State
Hospital establishing its right to access to patients and records - The Arizona Center
for Disability Law as Arizona' s protection and advocacy system is
authorized under the federal Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with
Mental Illness Act to have access to patients and records of
facilities providing mental health treatment, such as the Arizona State
Hospital. Under the agreement just reached with the Hospital, the
ACDL will have access to the hospital at all times to investigate abuse and
neglect and at reasonable times to visit patients, provide training and
monitoring activities. This agreement ensures that the ACDL's will be
able to better protect the rights of individuals with mental illness who
are patients of this facility.
ACDL Investigates
Vista Care -
In early 2004, the Center initiated an investigation into conditions at the
Vista Care
Residential Treatment
Center in Hereford, AZ,
based on allegations that Vista Care staff had physically abused a client
and had provided clients with inadequate treatment. The Center conducted its first on-site
review at Vista Care in July 2004.
The on-site visit confirmed the findings of the state licensing and
behavioral health offices as well as the Center's broader concerns about
the care provided to youth at Vista Care.
In February 2005, the Center conducted a follow up site visit, file
review, and policy review. In March
2005, the Center issued a memorandum of its findings. Overall, Center staff were pleased to
find substantial improvements since the last site visit, major changes at
the local management level, and plans to hire better qualified clinical
staff. However, the Center believes
additional improvements need to be made.
For example, the Center believes Vista Care must revise policies
that interfere with family contact and develop an educational program that
better addresses clients' special needs.
Arnold v. Sarn - In a groundbreaking decision
in 1989, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled in Arnold
v. Sarn that “Arizona
has failed to meet its moral and legal obligations to our state’s
chronically mentally ill population.”
Unanimously, the Court held that individuals with serious mental
illness have a legal right to mental health treatment in the community and
that the State of Arizona and Maricopa County had failed to provide that
treatment. Since that time, the
Center as counsel for the plaintiffs, along with its co-counsel, has been
working to make the promise of the Arnold
case a reality in Arizona. Although some improvements to the system
and its funding have been made, the Center is continuing to work toward
ensuring that the defendants fully implement the court’s orders. This would ultimately result in
individuals with serious mental illness receiving the appropriate services
that will support their recovery.
J.K. v. Eden - Settlement of lawsuit promoting
development of appropriate services for children with behavioral health
needs.
TOP
Employment
(Click on article title for more information)
EEOC & Garcia, et al. v. Aztec Inn Properties,
dba Clarion Hotel-Randolph Park:
Consent Decree outlining the terms of a supervised court settlement
in an ADA
employment discrimination and retaliation case on behalf of five
individuals with developmental disabilities represented by Center
attorneys.
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School
District No. 205 of Maricopa County: Brief to the U.S. Supreme Court
written by Center attorneys to oppose review of the Ninth Circuit's opinion
that Arizona school districts are not immune from liability under the
employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
EEOC and Fass/Darnell v. Wal-Mart - Settlement
requiring Wal-Mart to change policies and practices to prevent
discrimination against employees and applicants who are deaf.
Arizona Center for Disability Law and Tucson
Medical Center Announce ADA Training Program and Model Policy - The Arizona Center
for Disability Law and Tucson
Medical Center
announced they are launching a training program at TMC to further educate
staff about the Americans With Disabilities Act and a newly developed
policy on medical examinations of new hires.
TOP
Education
Arizona Center for
Disability Law Settles Lawsuit Against Tempe Union High School District on
Behalf of Student With Diabetes
The Arizona Center
for Disability Law filed suit against the Tempe Union
High School
District (“District”) under the Americans
with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Staff Lead Effort to Reform Due
Process Hearing Rules
In 2005,
the Arizona Center
for Disability Law drafted legislation and successfully advocated for a
statutory change to the special education due process hearing system in Arizona. The bill, sponsored by Representative
Laura Knaperek (R-17) and signed by Governor Janet Napolitano, called for
the creation of a one-tier dispute resolution system for special education
litigation. The one-tier system will
streamline the appeals process and will allow for all hearings to be
handled by the impartial Office of Administrative Hearings. This change represents an important reform
and a great victory for families of children with disabilities.
Center files Petition with Arizona
Supreme Court to Allow Non-Attorney Advocates to Assist Families in Special
Education Hearings
The Arizona Center for Disability Law has
petitioned the Arizona Supreme Court to amend its rules to permit lay
representation at special education “due process” administrative hearings
as an exception to the unauthorized practice of law. We have proposed that the Court adopt
the following rule: “In any administrative proceeding pursuant to 20 U.S.C.
§1415(f) or (k) regarding any matter relating to the identification,
evaluation, educational placement, or the provision of a free appropriate
public education for a child with a disability or suspected disability, a
party may be represented by a duly authorized agent who is not charging a
fee for the representation.” To view
the petition or to comment, visit the Supreme Court’s website at http://www.supreme.state.az.us/rules/prrulsct.htm
Staff Secures Special Education
Administrative Victories for Families
The Arizona Center for Disability Law represents
families of children with disabilities in special education administrative
matters without cost. Follow this
link to review case results obtained by the Center for its clients. http://www.ade.state.az.us/ess/dispute/DueProcess/decisions.asp
Meyerson
Fellow Holds Free Special Education Clinics in Flagstaff
Northern
Arizona receives free special education advocacy assistance thanks to a
partnership between the Children’s Health
Center, the Arizona Center
for Disability Law, and the David and Minnie Meyerson Foundation. The “Meyerson Advocacy Project” is the
result of a generous three year grant from the Meyerson Foundation to the
ACDL to address the unmet legal needs of children with disabilities in
rural Northern Arizona.
The
Project hosts a Special Education Advocacy Clinic from 10:00 a.m. - 3:00
p.m. in Flagstaff
on the first Thursday and third Monday of each month. The Clinic is housed at the Children’s Health Center
on the west campus of the Flagstaff
Medical Center,
1200 North Beaver Street,
Flagstaff, Arizona 86001.
Please call the receptionist at 1-800-232-1018 or 928-773-2054 to schedule
an appointment with the special education advocate.
Staff Lead Effort to Create
Educational Power of Attorney
In 2003,
the Arizona Center for Disability Law drafted
legislation to allow adult students of disabilities to appoint a decision
maker for educational purposes. This
statutory change permits families to remain involved in a student’s life
without the need to obtain guardianship. Click
here for a copy of a form you can use.
IDEA
2004 BECOMES LAW
Dunajski
v. Keegan
- Court ordered settlement providing for an improved complaint mechanism to
the State when special education and related services are not provided.
TOP
Community Access and Housing
(Click on article title for more information)
Class Action Settlement in Commonwealth
of Massachusetts v. E*Trade Access, Inc.
National Federation of the Blind, persons similarly situated, and the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts have settled a class action settlement with
Cardtronics, Inc., concerning the accessibility of that's company's
Automated Teller Machines (ATM). Copy of the settlement agreement can be
found at the following link.
If you would like a Braille copy of either the notice or of the settlement
agreement please contact Legal Assistant Ashley Boothby of Fox &
Robertson P.C. (plaintiffs' lawfirm) at
1-888-461-9191
or aboothby@foxrob.com.
People with Disabilities to Receive Improved Paratransit
Service in Tucson Settlement Agreement
in class action lawsuit in federal court against the City of Tucson brought on
behalf of individuals with disabilities who use Van Tran, the City’s
paratransit service.
Center
Assists Client in Obtaining Home Modifications - The Center
represented an individual with partial quadriplegia who required a
modification to his driveway in order to provide safe ingress and egress to
his accessible van. He lives in a home which is subject to Conditions
Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) with strict exterior aesthetic
architectural guidelines. The CC&Rs require that modifications of
this nature must be reviewed and approved by the Homeowners’ Association’s
Architectural Review Committee. Citing, its CC&Rs, the client’s
first proposal for the driveway modification was denied purportedly because
the proposal would compromise the setback lines, landscaping schemes, and
drainage. The Center intervened and requested a reasonable
accommodation under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) on the individual’s behalf
and attended Architectural Committee meetings to negotiate lawful terms for
approval and criteria for Committee approval, which were sensitive to the
legitimate interests of the homeowners’ association, yet faithful to the clients
rights under the FHA. Based on this, the client was able to re-present his
driveway modification proposal and was granted approval for the needed
modification.
TOP
|
