RSA-509 - Protection & Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) Program Performance Report

Idaho (DisAbility Rights Idaho, Inc.) - H240A170013 - FY2017

General Information

Designated Agency Identification

NameDisability Rights Idaho, Inc.
Address4477 Emerald Street
Address Line 2Suite B-100
CityBoise
StateIdaho
Zip Code83706
E-mail Addressinfo@disabilityrightsidaho.org
Website Addresshttp://disabilityrightsidaho.org
Phone208-336-5353
TTY 208-336-5353
Toll-free Phone866-262-3462
Toll-free TTY866-262-3462
Fax208-336-5396
Name of P&A Executive DirectorJames R Baugh
Name of PAIR Director/CoordinatorAngela Eandi
Person to contact regarding reportAngela Eandi
Contact Person phone208-336-5353
Ext.113

Part I. Non-Case Services

A. Individual Information and Referral Services (I&R)

Multiple responses are not permitted.

1. Individuals receiving I&R within PAIR priority areas384
2. Individuals receiving I&R outside PAIR priority areas18
3. Total individuals receiving I&R (lines A1 + A2)402

B. Training Activities

1. Number of trainings presented by PAIR staff29
2. Number of individuals who attended training (approximate)529

DRI staff attorney provided two, one-hour training via Power Point (PP) and discussion on the Court’s obligations under Title II of the ADA to 20 clerks, trial court administrators, and other court staff within the 5th Judicial District at the District’s All Clerk’s Training. A general overview of the ADA, esp. Title II, details on Title II’s requirements on effective communication, program access, and reasonable modifications, as well as case examples of DOJ investigations/settlement agreements involving ADA issues with courthouses across the country; DRI Legal Director gave a presentation via Power Point and discussion at Idaho State University (ISU) to 30 speech language pathologist students regarding Assistive Technology (AT) and funding options for AT including Medicaid; DRI staff attorney participated on a panel, discussing reasonable modifications, accommodations, and service animals in housing at the Boise-area Intermountain Fair Housing Training held at the Boise City Hall. DRI Attorney discussed issues identified and provided tips or best practices P&A used to address them. Appr 50 representatives from housing providers were in attendance and disability advocacy agencies such as Fair Housing council, State Independent Living Council (SILC); and Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities; DRI staff attorney who is the co-chair for the Idaho State Bar’s Diversity Section Love the Law Committee, a pipeline program to encourage students from minority, low-income, underrepresented, and diverse backgrounds to pursue a career in the law participated as a panelist on the “Building Diversity Pipelines” panel to 75 law professors, Judges, legal students, attorneys and state representatives speaking about the Idaho State Bar Diversity Section’s Love the Law! Committee and its efforts to promote diversity in the Idaho State Bar by encouraging high school and college age youth from underrepresented populations and diverse backgrounds to pursue a career in the law, including youth with disabilities; DRI Legal Director and another member of the Idaho Supreme Court Guardianship & Conservatorship Committee provided a training via PP and discussion to 50 attorneys at the Idaho State Bar Annual Conference discussing ethical considerations on representing individuals with diminished capacity, focusing on changes as a result of the guardianship committee; focus on alternatives to guardianship and what attorneys need to be advising their clients; 8 Transition trainings via PP provided to students with disabilities, teachers, providers and parents: 5 of these Transition trainings were provided to 141 students with disabilities, teachers, providers and parents at the annual Tools for Life Transition conference via PP and discussion: "Hot Topics in Employment: Rights of Workers with Disabilities" discussing rights of workers with disabilities under ADA, Section 504, and other laws. Hot topics included Reasonable Accommodations, sheltered workshops, fair wages and additional protections under WIOA; "Self-Advocacy-Making Dreams a Reality" providing definition of self-advocacy, characteristics of self-advocacy and skill development, providing examples for transitioning for decision making opportunities and increasing independence; “Transition IEP's” providing training on transition IEP plans, what is important to know, understanding rights, questions to be asking and students roles as well as others; Supported Decision Making- discussing Supported Decision Making as an alternative to guardianship and conservatorship allowing students with disabilities to participate in and self-direct decisions that affect their life. Guardianship packages were given including the Self Advocacy on Guardianship Manual, a sample Supported Decision Making form and a termination petition; and "You have the Power-Go Vote" given discussing voter rights for persons with disabilities and accessible voting options. Voter training also provided at the state ran Intermediate Care Facility for people with Intellectual Disabilities (ICF/ID) to seven (7) residents and five (5) staff. Information about Voter’s rights and accessible voting options presented. 10 registration forms, election calendars and absentee voting applications were given to facility Social Worker (SW) in case needed. The SW contacted DRI Advocate later requesting additional technical assistance to help two (2) residents vote in the presidential election. Voting training also given to 23 high school students & 9 teachers and/or Aids, Voter training was provided at the state ran Intermediate Care Facility for people with Intellectual Disabilities (ICF/ID) to seven (7) residents and five (5) staff. Information about Voter’s rights and accessible voting options presented. 10 registration forms, election calendars and absentee voting applications were given to facility Social Worker (SW) in case needed. The SW contacted DRI Advocate later requesting additional technical assistance to help two (2) residents vote in the presidential election. Voting rights and accessible voting options were provided to 23 high school students & 9 teachers and/or Aids, Transition training also given to 61 students, teachers and parents at 2 high schools and to Spanish speaking students and parents discussing transition IEP's, what they are, what they should look like, who is on an IEP team, self-advocacy tips and information, Idaho college’s disability centers and information, what kinds of services and supports or accommodations can be requested at the college level, community resources, what SS Work Incentives, VR & CAP services, SSI, SSDI, Medicaid & how to report earnings; and age 18 SS redeterminations; Three (3) trainings about the DRI/P&A, what we do, how we determine assistance and how we can help people with disabilities become employed was given to 15 students from the Idaho Commission for the Deaf and Blind; 10 students from the University of Idaho students participating in the Center on Disabilities and Human Development Program; and to 17 Idaho College Disability Services Directors via PP and discussion; Training about DRI, our services and procedures, and case examples given to show how are system works was provided to DisAbility Right Board members during orientation via PP and discussion. In addition to the 19 trainings noted above given in the community;eight (8) internal trainings developed and provided by PAIR staff were given to seven (7) Advocacy Department advocates and three (3) Legal Department members via PP and discussion on the following topics: Person Centered Planning, Home and Community Based Service Waivers; and Protecting Confidential Information/Personally identifiable Information; Attorney Work Product; Juvenile Detention Centers in Idaho; Overview of U.S. Veterans Administration; Duty to Report Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of Vulnerable Adults in Idaho; and the Historical Trauma in American Indian Communities.

C. Information Disseminated to the Public

1. Radio and TV appearances by PAIR staff2
2. Newspaper/magazine/journal articles9
3. PSAs/videos aired0
4. Hits on the PAIR/P&A website23,242
5. Publications/booklets/brochures disseminated1,340
6. Other (specify separately)9,975

Narrative

1. Radio and TV appearances by PAIR staff: DRI Executive Director (ED) was interviewed by KTVI news at a forum held to discuss discrimination and violence towards people with disabilities as a result of the assault of a student with a disability at the Dietrich High School where a black student with a disability was assaulted by three white football players; DRI ED was interviewed during press conference of a Close the Gap event to advocate for expanded Medicaid in Idaho. 2. Newspaper/magazine/journal articles: Disability Rights Idaho (DRI)'s Legal Director drafted an article for publication in the IDHW DD newsletter on supported decision making as an alternative to guardianship; DRI was featured in 7 newspaper articles statewide on the topics of people with disabilities using accessible voting options to vote: How Medicaid block-grant proposals will hurt Idahoans with Disabilities and an article on how threatened Medicaid cuts in services will result in people with disabilities dying; three articles on advocacy organizations holding forums to discuss discrimination and violence towards people with disabilities as a result of the assault of a student with a disability at the Dietrich High School where a black student with a disability was assaulted by three white football players; An article about DRI and its services was published in the Center on Disabilities and Human Development newsletter; and efforts of DRI to train people with disabilities o the ballot marking machine statewide was published in the Idaho Centers for Independent Living Newsletter. 4. DRI had 23, 242 PAIR/P&A hits on website, 5. Publications/booklets/brochures disseminated: 211 publications which included: SSA publications, power point copies, handout and posters; 294 booklets which included: Self Advocacy Guide to Guardianship, Willing to Work and Turning 18 manuals; and 835 Protection and Advocacy brochures (not including CAP). 6. Other: DRI had a total reach of 9, 550 views on its Facebook page and 425 Home page views.

Part II. Individuals Served

A. Individuals Served

Count individual once per FY. Multiple counts not permitted for lines A1 through A3.

1. Individuals still served as of October 1 (carryover from prior FY)3
2. Additional individuals served during the year22
3. Total individuals served (lines A1 + A2)25
4. Individuals w. more than 1 case opened/closed during the FY. (Do not add this number to total on line A3 above.)3

B. Individuals served as of September 30

Carryover to next FY may not exceed total on line II. A.3 above 2

C. Problem Areas/Complaints of Individuals Served

1. Architectural accessibility1
2. Employment0
3. Program access4
4. Housing2
5. Government benefits/services0
6. Transportation4
7. Education2
8. Assistive technology1
9. Voting0
10. Health care0
11. Insurance0
12. Non-government services0
13. Privacy rights1
14. Access to records0
15. Abuse2
16. Neglect7
17. Other5

D. Reasons for Closing Individual Case Files

1. Issues resolved partially or completely in individual favor17
2. Other representation found1
3. Individual withdrew complaint2
4. Appeals unsuccessful1
5. PAIR Services not needed due to individual's death, relocation etc.0
6. PAIR withdrew from case1
7. PAIR unable to take case because of lack of resources0
8. Individual case lacks legal merit5
9. Other0

Please explain

E. Intervention Strategies Used in Serving Individuals

List the highest level of intervention used by PAIR prior to closing each case file.

1. Technical assistance in self-advocacy12
2. Short-term assistance9
3. Investigation/monitoring5
4. Negotiation1
5. Mediation/alternative dispute resolution0
6. Administrative hearings0
7. Litigation (including class actions)0
8. Systemic/policy activities0

Part III. Statistical Information on Individuals Served

A. Age of Individuals Served as of October 1

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. 0 - 40
2. 5 - 221
3. 23 - 5911
4. 60 - 645
5. 65 and over8

B. Gender of Individuals Served

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. Females15
2. Males10

C. Race/Ethnicity of Individuals Served

For individuals who are non-Hispanic/Latino only

1. Hispanic/Latino of any race0
2. American Indian or Alaskan Native2
3. Asian0
4. Black or African American0
5. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander0
6. White22
7. Two or more races1
8. Race/ethnicity unknown0

D. Living Arrangements of Individuals Served

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. Independent10
2. Parental or other family home2
3. Community residential home6
4. Foster care0
5. Nursing home5
6. Public institutional living arrangement0
7. Private institutional living arrangement0
8. Jail/prison/detention center1
9. Homeless0
10. Other living arrangements1
11. Living arrangements not known0

E. Primary Disability of Individuals Served

Identify the individual's primary disability, namely the one directly related to the issues/complaints

1. Blind/visual impairment0
2. Deaf/hard of hearing2
3. Deaf-blind0
4. Orthopedic impairment10
5. Mental illness1
6. Substance abuse0
7. Mental retardation1
8. Learning disability1
9. Neurological impairment3
10. Respiratory impairment1
11. Heart/other circulatory impairment1
12. Muscular/skeletal impairment1
13. Speech impairment0
14. AIDS/HIV0
15. Traumatic brain injury1
16. Other disability3

Part IV. Systemic Activities and Litigation

A. Systemic Activities

1. Number of policies/practices changed as a result of non-litigation systemic activities10

2. Number of individuals potentially impacted by policy changes615,185

Describe your systemic activities. Be sure to include information about the policies that were changed and how these changes benefit individuals with disabilities. Include case examples of how your systemic activities impacted individuals served.

1. As a result of a systemic DRI abuse investigation between FY 2014-2016 involving residents residing in two (2) certified family home (CFHs), DRI concluded that several elderly PAIR clients had died in a short period of time under suspicious circumstances. Most of these deaths had not been reported directly to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) Licensing & Certification (L&C) CFH Division and the resulting investigations conducted were insufficient. During FY2016, DRI met with IDHW L&C staff and even though some improvements were reached, DRI determined that changes to the CFH rules were needed to mandate that all deaths in CFH were reported to IDHW and, when potentially suspicious, effectively investigate. L&C staff informed DRI that changes to the CFH would be proposed during 2017. During FY2017, DRI submitted petitions to IDHW L&C to include in its rulemaking drafts requiring mandatory death reporting to IDHW for CFH providers. IDHW added this rule into its proposed draft. This systemic change potentially impacts 3317 CFH residents (the current CFH bed count statewide) by improving CFH Division’s monitoring and oversight requirements. Statistics taken from the December 31, 2016, Community Care Advisory Council’s (CCAC) yearly report submitted to the Idaho Legislature. 2. In addition to DRI’s petition for rulemaking submitted to IDHW, DRI also reviewed the entire CFH drafted rule changes proposals and submitted comments within public comment timelines. IDHW L&C sent a written response to DRI showing that they adopted DRI’s proposed language for nine (9) sections; and without changing proposed language, L&C officially acknowledged that CFH settings should never employ mechanical or chemical restraints. DRI’s rule comments adopted included adding a definition of “ vulnerable adult”; requiring that a notice of pending investigations or charges must immediately be reported to the department for any family member or participant; added a requirement that the participant or his legal representative must sign any changes to their individual support plan; added a requirement that all personal funds and all medications belonging to the participant must be returned immediately upon discharge; defined the word “incident” so that providers are not left to interpret what they believe may qualify; and included a requirement that CFH providers cannot loan money to participants to better protect from potential financial exploitation. DRI decided to provide comment on the entire rulemaking draft, due to the fact that needed rule changes would have greatly benefited/protected client's in abuse & neglect cases DRI has previously investigated. DRI took advantage of this opportunity to provide comment in support of many of the rule changes and to advocate for additional changes in its efforts to better protect individuals with disabilities who reside in CFHs. 3317 CFH residents can potentially be impacted by these rule changes. 3. IDHW introduced a bill to create a “secure facility” for people dually diagnosed with developmental disabilities (DD) & mental illness (MI). This facility can also place individuals not currently ICF/ID eligible who are dually diagnosed. The original bill lacked minimal constitutional protections. Several rounds of negotiation resulted between DRI, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities (ICDD), State Independent Living Council (SILC) and IDHW resulting in HB 222. This bill substantially improved the language protecting the rights of residents. As a condition of the negotiations DRI, ACLU, ICDD, and SILC agreed not to oppose the revised bill as long as IDHW agreed to finalizing correlating rules before proceeding. House Bill H222 passed. UPDATE: At the beginning of October, 2017, DRI ED received a call from IDHW Licensing and Certification (L&C) Director stating that the Department will not go forward with proposing licensing rules for the “DD Secure” facility during the 2018 legislative session. She explained that she asked the new IDHW Director to withdraw the rules from the docket for this legislative session because she believed the process was too rushed; because there was not enough time for proper negotiated rulemaking; and since the Department needed to have more involvement from DRI and the IDCC on the front end. Negotiations are targeted to start in February 2018 allowing for time needed to bring the rules before the 2019 legislature. The “Secure DD facility” cannot open until licensing rules are in place. IDHW is proposing to build this facility on the Southwest Idaho Treatment Facility (SWITC) campus, the state run ICF/ID where people with disabilities (PWD), mostly dually diagnosed with DD and MI are placed when experiencing behavioral crisis. According to IDHW’s 2016-2017 Facts, Figures, and Trends at: http://healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/Portals/0/AboutUs/Publications/FFT2016_2017.pdf, the census at SWITC ranges from 25-30 placements yearly, in which all of SWITC residents are potentially at risk to be placed in this secured/lock down facility. 4. Guardianship Committee participation & legal cases/assistance: DRI’s efforts to promote the rights of people with disabilities who are, or may be, subjected to guardianship and conservatorship appointments is showing a systemic impact. DRI Legal Director (LD) continued as a leading member on the Supported Decision Making (SDM) subcommittee directing its activities during FY2016. SDM sub-committee began drafting a standard guardianship order template for limited guardianships; provided SDM training at the 2017 Idaho Supreme Court (ISC) annual conference and published articles in the Idaho State Bar magazine “The Advocate” authored by SDM subcommittee and dedicated to guardianship issues with emphasis on alternatives such as limited guardianships and the supported decision-making model of support. In addition to advocating for statutory change, DRI continued providing legal representation and assistance to setting an example to judges, attorneys, GALs, court visitor’s and the IDHW Evaluation Committee, family members, and providers. During FY2017, DRI provided legal representation to five (5) individuals with disabilities. One of these litigated cases was opened on behalf of a PAIR client whose rights are better protected after the court appointed DRI to serve as her guardian ad litem (GAL) addressing concerns with potential financial exploitation. This case was carried over from FY2016 and carried over to FY2018. One (1) of the five (5) cases litigated was closed after the client withdrew her complaint deciding to work with her co-guardians instead of terminating. In addition to the five (5) cases providing legal representation, two (2) additional legal cases were opened to investigate whether their cases met legal merit standards, then closed after merit could not be established. Another client received legal assistance without litigating resulting in his guardian being terminated. Two (2) case summaries are provided below in Part IV, Section B. Litigation/Class Action Section. This case summary is provided showing the impact of this systemic work: Legal assistance provided without need to litigate: An IDHW case worker (CW) contacted the P&A on behalf of a 17-year-old male at risk of sterilization by his grandmother who was his court appointed guardian. The report also included allegations of verbal abuse in which the reporter had overheard her say in front of client that “he is a very bad person and should not pass those genes on to children; you should never have been born; your dad is a bad person; and over my dead body will you make any kids”. Guardian had informed IDHW CW that she was going to schedule a surgery to get him sterilized before he turned eighteen (18). When client had surgery on an ascending testicle, the guardian tried to get the surgeon to do a vasectomy, but he refused. IDHW CW was afraid that she will keep trying to find a doctor (unaware of statutory protections) to perform the vasectomy. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE: A preliminary investigation was conducted verifying information received. DRI Legal Director then filed a complaint with Idaho Child Protection Services (CPS) against guardian regarding her attempts to sterilize grandson illegally, and allegations against the guardian that she was verbally abusive. OUTCOME: CPS removed client from guardian’s custody, client moved to an appropriate placement and the guardianship was revoked. This systemic activity could potentially affect over 7700 Idahoans with a full guardianship, conservatorship or both according to figures provided by the 2016, Idaho Supreme Court Guardianship Monitoring Coordinator, Nanci Thaemart. 5. During FY2015, a bill requiring that American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters be licensed was passed in the House and Senate but vetoed by the Governor. DRI collaborated with the Idaho Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing revising the previous drafted bill to include more clarification of what types of interpreter activities are covered including an exemption for the state court system. DRI monitored this bill and provided information to legislators on the need for licensing which passed. According to statistics from Cornell University’s 2016 Disability Status Report for Idaho there are 9490 people in Idaho who have with hearing disabilities who may use ASL as their primary language and who could receive improved interpreter services due to this legislation. 6. A bill to amend the termination or commitment and discharge of involuntary patients committed to inpatient facilities from a 30-day notice to a 7-day notice to the committing court and prosecuting attorney was introduced during FY 2017. This change will allow for an earlier release from an inpatient facility. The current 30-day requirement delays the legal process as well as extends the patient's stay even after discharge is appropriate. DRI analyzed, supported this legislative change, supported other advocacy organization’s backing, provided information to legislators and monitored this bill’s passing. Around 830 Idahoans yearly could potentially be released earlier after being committed and placed at Idaho’s state psychiatric hospitals, according to IDHW’s 2016-2017 Facts, Figures, and Trends publication. 7. DRI analyzed, supported and provided information to committees on a Senate bill designed to ensure that women of Idaho and their doctors have access to the most accurate and up-to-date information available regarding Cytomegalovirus (CMV) prevention, infection, and treatment. Funding of $60,000 this year and $30,000 per year after was allocated in the bill which passed with needed funding for implementation. According to the 2016 US Census and the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention located at: https://www.cdc.gov/cmv/overview.html currently half of adults by age 40 have been infected with CMV. In Idaho half of the female population presently equals 420,785 females in Idaho which potentially could be impacted by this legislation. 8. DRI has addressed barriers limiting access to the Medicaid Buy-In program Medicaid for Workers with Disabilities (MWD), for several years leading to improvements during FY2017. DRI AD met multiple times during FY’s 2016-2017 with staff from IDHW and an Idaho Representative identifying barriers and remedies. By the end of FY2017, IDHW completed streamlining the process with Disability Determinations Services at the Idaho Dept. of Labor; improved website access on both sites; and ensured training was provided to IDHW self-reliance staff to make sure applications were processed accurately. According to Cornell University’s 2016 Disability Status report there are 14,901 persons with disabilities (PWDs) actively looking for work in Idaho many who may need their Medicaid to continue after they find employment, or who may need Medicaid to continue to work once employed. 9. During FY2016, DRI ED and LD attended several meetings with Idaho Medicaid Division Administrator, Directors and staff presenting concerns and explaining how Idaho was violating Federal Early Periodic, Screening, Diagnostic and Testing (EPSDT) regulations. LD researched, and drafted a sample EPSDT policy that met EPSDT regulation compliance and provided a copy to Medicaid. During FY2017, IDHW Medicaid Division developed an EPSDT policy that mirrors the policy provided by DRI LD. The EPSDT policy was formally adopted in 2017 and implementation began in July, 2017. This policy, as written, effects every child on Medicaid in Idaho so that they will be able to receive the testing and screening needed to determine appropriate and effective treatment. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, there are 169,600 Idaho Children on CHIPS located at https://www.cbpp.org/medicaid-works 10. As a result of individual case work, Givens Hot Springs in Owyhee County Idaho, management agreed to incorporate ADA guidelines into their operations manual and to train their employees accordingly so that PWDs can access this place of public accommodation. According to the US Census for Owyhee County Idaho, there are an estimated 119 PWDs residing in this county who could have access to this Hot Springs if accommodations needed, from this policy change. Case sample provided: Client is a 71-year-old man with physical impairments due to bladder cancer resulting in his use of an ostomy bag and with physical impairments substantially limiting his ability to walk, stand & bend called P&A/DRI requesting assistance to address issues he is having with Givens Hot Springs & Pool in which an employee recently told him he would no longer be able to swim at their facility because he has an ostomy bag and they believe it will contaminate the pool. He had been swimming there with the bag for eight (8) years, but recently, a patron saw him with the bag and complained to employees, resulting in management/owner prohibiting him from further use. He said there were others using ostomy bags while swimming there, as well. His doctor sent the hot springs a letter, explaining the bag poses no risk of contamination and is safe and sealed, but they are still denying him access. P&A CASE SERVICE: DRI staff attorney provided client with rights information protections under ADA and the Idaho Human Rights Act (IHRA) and located & provided him information and materials specific to this issue from the www.ostomy.org. Client planned to take materials to the hot springs to educate them on ADA rights protections. OUTCOME: Client called back a week later to report that he had sent such materials to the hot springs owner, met with the owner to discuss, and the owner recanted his decision and allowed him to start swimming there again. Client reported there were others who swam there with ostomy bags, in addition to himself, so we helped not only him, but others like him, be able to continue swimming at the hot springs pool. Because issue resolved successfully, SR was closed. Shortly after informing DRI that issue resolved, client called P&A again explaining that he encountered discrimination issues with employees telling him that he could only use hot springs pool in the early morning hours, before they were open to the public. P&A SERVICES: Case Service- DRI staff attorney sent a letter to hot springs owner/management, informing them of their potential ADA Title III and Idaho Human Rights Act violations informing that if they didn’t immediately offer equal access to client, administrative complaints would be filed with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Idaho Human Rights Commission. OUTCOME: Hot springs owner responded to the letter stating that they would allow client access during normal business hours; and they allow him access in the morning, before business hours, if he would like. SYSTEMIC CHANGE: Hot springs management also agreed to incorporate the ADA guidelines into their operations manual and to train their employees accordingly. Because issue was concluded successfully in client’s favor as well as others with ostomy bags using facility, SR was closed. (Case summary also provided under the Fiscal Year 2017 PAIR Priorities and Objectives Section) 11 Litigation/Class Actions: Describe your litigation/class action activities. Explain how individuals with disabilities benefited from your litigation activities. Be sure to include case examples that demonstrate the impact of your litigation. DRI’s efforts to promote the rights of people with disabilities who are or may be subjected to guardianship and conservatorships appointments is beginning to show a systemic impact. Its guardianship priorities for several years have been designed to protect against abuse, to promote the rights of people with disabilities who are or may be subjected to a guardianship or conservatorship; and to promote the least restrictive appointments as well as utilize alternatives such as supported decision making. An objective was added to promote the implementation of the supported decision-making model as a mandated consideration in the statutes as well as encouraging the practice of utilizing this model. DRI provided legal representation to five (5) individuals with disabilities during FY2017. One of these litigated cases was opened on behalf of a PAIR client whose rights are better protected after the court appointed DRI to serve as her guardian ad litem (GAL) addressing concerns with potential financial exploitation. This case was carried over from FY2016 and carried over to FY2018. One (1) of these five (5) cases litigated was closed after the client withdrew her complaint deciding to work with her co-guardians instead of terminating. In addition to the five cases providing legal representation, two (2) additional legal cases were opened on behalf of people with disabilities (PWDs) to investigate whether their cases met legal merit standards, then closed after merit could not be established. Another client received legal assistance without litigating resulting in his guardian being terminated. Two (2) case summaries are provided showing the impact: A high functioning 18-year-old Caucasian male with ADHD, depression, anxiety, and Asperger's called DRI requesting assistance to prevent a guardianship appointment, after mother filed petition. P&A ASSITANCE: LEGAL REPRESENTATION- DRI attorney collected medical and school records including full scale IQ, and advised client and his father to get a Scales of Independent Behavior Revised SIB/R assessment which was completed. IQ and SIB/R results tested too high disqualifying client for Adult Developmental Disabilities Services. DRI Attorney filed report with the IDHW DD evaluation committee and the court. Mediation was offered but petitioner’s counsel declined. OUTCOME: Guardianship (GDN) not appointed after Petitioner’s counsel withdrew petition. Client is living independently from mother and developing self-advocacy skills. After mother refused to give him copies of his Social Security Card and birth certificate, he completed steps needed to get copies, passed his driver’s test and is pursuing employment. A 23-year-old Caucasian female with ADD/ADHD, reactive attachment disorder, bi polar disorder, conduct disorder, anxiety disorder, and developmental coordination disorder contacted DRI requesting assistance with terminating or modifying GDN and conservatorship (CNS). Client had graduated from high school and been receiving residential habilitation (res hab) services since she turned 18. Client had worked independently in the past and currently was responsible for making her own medical appointments. Client’s SSA funds were being managed by a rep payee. Client’s mothers had been her GNS and CNS since she was 18 and prior as a minor, since she was approximately one (1) year old. Although GDN/CNS indicated that they did not want to continue on as her GDN/CNS, they were not willing to step down voluntarily. Guardian ad Litem (GAL) would not recommend terminating/modifying GDN/CNS without medical evidence or a new evaluation by the DD Evaluation Committee supporting termination/modification. P& A SERVICES: Legal Representation- Initially, DRI coordinated with attorney for GDNs/CNS and GAL and all stipulated to having the Court order an updated GDN Evaluation committee evaluation. The Committee completed its evaluation but was in violation of the Court’s Order, which specifically required that the evaluation and report follow ICAR 54.5. DRI worked with IDHW Deputy Attorney General and a new evaluation and report is to be issued. OUTCOME: This case was carried over to FY2018 awaiting the Evaluation Committee report. UPDATE: During December, 2017, DRI and client appeared at a status hearing after the evaluation committee issued their report resulting in the court ordering termination of guardianship. This case will be closed during FY2018. During FY2017, DRI’s guardianship litigation and/or legal assistance significantly impacted four (4) PWDs directly. Potential systemic impact is also discussed above in Part IV. Section A. Systemic Activities

B. Litigation/Class Actions

1. Number of individuals potentially impacted by changes as a result of PAIR litigation/class action efforts4
2. Number of individuals named in class actions0

Describe your litigation/class action activities. Explain how individuals with disabilities benefited from your litigation activities. Be sure to include case examples that demonstrate the impact of your litigation.

DRI’s efforts to promote the rights of people with disabilities who are or may be subjected to guardianship and conservatorships appointments is beginning to show a systemic impact. Its guardianship priorities for several years have been designed to protect against abuse, to promote the rights of people with disabilities who are or may be subjected to a guardianship or conservatorship; and to promote the least restrictive appointments as well as utilize alternatives such as supported decision making. An objective was added to promote the implementation of the supported decision-making model as a mandated consideration in the statutes as well as encouraging the practice of utilizing this model. DRI provided legal representation to five (5) individuals with disabilities during FY2017. One of these litigated cases was opened on behalf of a PAIR client whose rights are better protected after the court appointed DRI to serve as her guardian ad litem (GAL) addressing concerns with potential financial exploitation. This case was carried over from FY2016 and carried over to FY2018. One (1) of these five (5) cases litigated was closed after the client withdrew her complaint deciding to work with her co-guardians instead of terminating. In addition to the five cases providing legal representation, two (2) additional legal cases were opened on behalf of people with disabilities (PWDs) to investigate whether their cases met legal merit standards, then closed after merit could not be established. Another client received legal assistance without litigating resulting in his guardian being terminated. Two (2) case summaries are provided showing the impact: A high functioning 18-year-old Caucasian male with ADHD, depression, anxiety, and Asperger's called DRI requesting assistance to prevent a guardianship appointment, after mother filed petition. P&A ASSITANCE: LEGAL REPRESENTATION- DRI attorney collected medical and school records including full scale IQ, and advised client and his father to get a Scales of Independent Behavior Revised SIB/R assessment which was completed. IQ and SIB/R results tested too high disqualifying client for Adult Developmental Disabilities Services. DRI Attorney filed report with the IDHW DD evaluation committee and the court. Mediation was offered but petitioner’s counsel declined. OUTCOME: Guardianship (GDN) not appointed after Petitioner’s counsel withdrew petition. Client is living independently from mother and developing self-advocacy skills. After mother refused to give him copies of his Social Security Card and birth certificate, he completed steps needed to get copies, passed his driver’s test and is pursuing employment. A 23-year-old Caucasian female with ADD/ADHD, reactive attachment disorder, bi polar disorder, conduct disorder, anxiety disorder, and developmental coordination disorder contacted DRI requesting assistance with terminating or modifying GDN and conservatorship (CNS). Client had graduated from high school and been receiving residential habilitation (res hab) services since she turned 18. Client had worked independently in the past and currently was responsible for making her own medical appointments. Client’s SSA funds were being managed by a rep payee. Client’s mothers had been her GNS and CNS since she was 18 and prior as a minor, since she was approximately one (1) year old. Although GDN/CNS indicated that they did not want to continue on as her GDN/CNS, they were not willing to step down voluntarily. Guardian ad Litem (GAL) would not recommend terminating/modifying GDN/CNS without medical evidence or a new evaluation by the DD Evaluation Committee supporting termination/modification. P& A SERVICES: Legal Representation- Initially, DRI coordinated with attorney for GDNs/CNS and GAL and all stipulated to having the Court order an updated GDN Evaluation committee evaluation. The Committee completed its evaluation but was in violation of the Court’s Order, which specifically required that the evaluation and report follow ICAR 54.5. DRI worked with IDHW Deputy Attorney General and a new evaluation and report is to be issued. OUTCOME: This case was carried over to FY2018 awaiting the Evaluation Committee report. UPDATE: During December, 2017, DRI and client appeared at a status hearing after the evaluation committee issued their report resulting in the court ordering termination of guardianship. This case will be closed during FY2018. During FY2017, DRI’s guardianship litigation and/or legal assistance significantly impacted four (4) PWDs directly. Potential systemic impact is also discussed above in Part IV. Section A. Systemic Activities

Part V. PAIR'S Priorities and Objectives

A. Priorities and Objectives for the Fiscal Year Covered by this Report

For each of your PAIR program priorities for the fiscal year covered by this report, please:

  1. Identify and describe priority.
  2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority.
  3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority.
  4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration.
  5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, were class actions.
  6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority.

Fiscal Year 2017 PAIR Priorities DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION 1. Public or private entities will not discriminate on the basis of disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2. Accessibility 3. Accept up to three (3) cases of discrimination against people with disabilities in violation of Title II or Title III of the ADA. 4. On behalf of a client, DRI attorney provided legally based technical assistance consultation to client’s attorney on writing an effective letter of support to county jail regarding right to access effective communication. DRI attorney is collaborating with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in District of Idaho assisting with an investigation into systemic disability discrimination actions against a Medicaid paid non-emergency transportation provider, Citi Link in Coeur d’ Alene, Idaho. 5. Eleven (11) cases were opened under this priority during FY2017 and one (1) carried over from FY 2016 but no class actions. 6. Two (2) case summaries provided on behalf of same client: Client is a 71-year-old man with physical impairments due to bladder cancer resulting in his use of an ostomy bag and with physical impairments substantially limiting his ability to walk, stand & bend called P&A/DRI requesting assistance to address issues he is having with Givens Hot Springs & Pool in which an employee recently told him he would no longer be able to swim at their facility because he has an ostomy bag and they believe it will contaminate the pool. He had been swimming there with the bag for eight (8) years, but recently, a patron saw him with the bag and complained to employees, resulting in management/owner prohibiting him from further use. He said there were others using ostomy bags while swimming there, as well. His doctor sent the hot springs a letter, explaining the bag poses no risk of contamination and is safe and sealed, but they are still denying him access. P&A CASE SERVICE: DRI staff attorney provided client with rights information protections under ADA and the Idaho Human Rights Act (IHRA) and located & provided him information and materials specific to this issue from the www.ostomy.org. Client planned to take materials to the hot springs to educate them on ADA rights protections. OUTCOME: Client called back a week later to report that he had sent such materials to the hot springs owner, met with the owner to discuss, and the owner recanted his decision and allowed him to start swimming there again. Client reported there were others who swam there with ostomy bags, in addition to himself, so we helped not only him, but others like him, be able to continue swimming at the hot springs pool. Because issue resolved successfully, SR was closed. Shortly after informing DRI that issue resolved, client called P&A again explaining that he encountered discrimination issues with employees telling him that he could only use hot springs pool in the early morning hours, before they were open to the public. P&A SERVICES: Case Service- DRI staff attorney sent a letter to hot springs owner/management, informing them of their potential ADA Title III and Idaho Human Rights Act violations informing that if they didn’t immediately offer equal access to client, administrative complaints would be filed with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Idaho Human Rights Commission. OUTCOME: Hot springs owner responded to the letter stating that they would allow client access during normal business hours; and they allow him access in the morning, before business hours, if he would like. SYSTEMIC CHANGE: Hot springs management also agreed to incorporate the ADA guidelines into their operations manual and to train their employees accordingly. Because issue was concluded successfully in client’s favor as well as others with ostomy bags using facility, SR was closed. 1. Public or private entities will not discriminate on the basis of disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2. Accessibility 3. Accept up to three (3) cases of discrimination against people with disabilities by public or private transportation providers in violation of Title II or Title III of the ADA. 4. DRI collaborated with the District of Idaho’s U.S. Attorney’s office assisting DOJ complaint investigations. 5. Four (4) cases were opened under this priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Client is a 22-year-old Caucasian female with physical impairments (loss of the use of her legs), neurological disorder (constant shaking of her head/hands), as well as depression, anxiety, PTSD, and schizoaffective disorder. She has been using a wheelchair now for a year due to the severity of her physical impairments. She had contacted DRI before seeking assistance with issues on Medicaid paid non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) services and was provided with the contact information to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) Medicaid transport program specialist, and to the Medicaid contract provider/Veyo manager to complain to in order to address issues with accessing NEMT services. She had tried addressing the issues she currently has with Veyo, the NEMT contracted provider, but was not getting her calls returned. Client needed assistance as soon as possible as she needed transport to an appointment (scheduled for the day after contacting DRI) to have stitches removed. P&A CASE SERVICE: Due to timelines, with caller’s documented verbal permission, DRI attorney contacted both the IDH Medicaid transport program specialist and the Medicaid Veyo manager via telephone and email, explaining client’s situation and requesting they intervene to resolve the issue in time for client to make her appointment on the next day. OUTCOME: IDHW medical transport specialist intervened and client was able to get transportation scheduled with Veyo for a ride to her appointment. Client was directed to follow up with the Veyo manager to resolve any further remaining issues and if not resolved, to call DRI back. Because client’s issue was successfully resolved, SR was closed and client didn’t call back requesting additional assistance. Systemic work completed: During FY2016, P&A/DRI received multiple calls from individuals alleging disability discrimination issues against Citylink (fixed route and paratransit provider) located in Coeur d Alene regarding paratransit eligibility issues & transport denials resulting in this priority being added to its FY2017 Statement of Priorities (SOPs). DRI represented some clients in appeal hearings, and assisted others with compiling supporting documentation, facilitating support letters from Idaho Vocational Rehabilitation and the Idaho Commission for the Blind (ICBVI) resulting in minimal relief as well as encouraged those that were still denied to file disability discrimination cases with the Department of Justice/United States Attorney's Office for the District of Idaho. During FY2017, DRI contacted the US Attorney's Office in Idaho and presented these issues. After consent received, DRI staff attorney facilitated consent releases to discuss their cases and provided collected documentation resulting in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Idaho investigating these complaints. This systemic case was carried over to FY2018 priorities. EDUCATION 1. Students with disabilities in Idaho public schools will not be subjected to disciplinary actions that violate their rights under IDEA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 2. Abuse 3. Provide assistance to parents to prevent or stop the use of unnecessary restraint and seclusion in public schools. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved. 5. There were no cases or class actions. 6. One (1) case summary. No calls were received on behalf of, or from, PAIR students regarding concerns of restraint and seclusion during FY2016 but individual abuse cases and systemic abuse cases were opened under PADD & PAIMI funding. A summary of systemic work completed is provided: DRI received several calls from parents from the same school district regarding concerns of inappropriate restraint of their children, some resulting in injury. DRI sent letters to all parents with students on IEPs asking that they contact them if they have concerns of R&S. DRI opened six (6) individual cases and in which abuse investigations are being conducted under PADD and PAIMI funding. Three (3) systemic cases have been opened to address concerns with school’s R&S practices. These cases are carried over to FY2018. This work will also benefit PAIR and PATBI students who are encountering inappropriate restraints in this district and potentially statewide, as well. 1. Students with disabilities in Idaho public schools will not be subjected to disciplinary actions that violate their rights under IDEA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 2. Abuse 3. File a complaint with the State Department of Education and, if appropriate, federal authorities regarding under-identification of children with emotional disturbance in violation of the “Child Find” requirement under the IDEA. 4. DRI collaborated with the Department of Juvenile Corrections and Idaho Federation of Families requesting data they had on behalf of students with SED and requested guidance from the National Disability Rights Network Educational expert, Ron Hager. 5. Priority not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: In 2015, Jeff D. v. Otter, a federal class action lawsuit filed on behalf of Idaho youth with serious emotional disturbances (SED) was settled and the implementation of the settlement is to occur within the next four years. Idaho was required to create a statewide process, across all child-serving systems, including the State Department of Education, to identify and screen youths for unmet mental health needs, as well as to provide appropriate mental health and educational services. One of the requirements of the Jeff D. class action lawsuit was for the state to estimate the expected range of its class members which were children with functional impairment and serious emotional disturbance (SED) who will qualify and access services in the new system of care to be developed. A Quality Management Improvement and Accountability (QMIA) Data and Reports Committee was formed which estimated 21,000 children in Idaho with SED. Additionally, the Idaho State Department of Education (SDE) has the responsibility to ensure that all public schools within its jurisdiction comply with “child find requirements” mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The SDE’s child count report for school year 2015-2016 reported a total of 1, 405 students statewide identified under the emotional disturbance category, significantly less that the committee’s estimate of children with SED in Idaho. DRI staff conducted research to show the disparity between the estimated class numbers and the SED’s Child Find reported numbers (as shown above); and national trends and work in this area completed by P&As, educational agencies and professionals addressing the issue of under-identification of students with emotional disturbances. Contact to the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections and to the Idaho Federation of Families with Mental Illness was completed to collect additional data. Guidance and technical assistance was requested from the National Disabilities Rights Network (NDRN) educational expert, Attorney Ron Hager. DRI began drafting its complaint but postponed completion due to suggested guidance to collect and include additional data. This systemic project was carried over to be completed and filed during FY2018. 1. Students with disabilities will have access to appropriate transition services to help the student prepare for post-secondary activities, (e.g. college, training, employment, adult independent living, etc.). 2. Access to appropriate transition services. 3. Provide advice, resources, strategies, or other short term assistance to parents and students with disabilities to ensure access to appropriate transition services under IDEA, Section 504, and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved 5. One (1) case was opened under this priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Client is a 17-year-old Caucasian female diagnosed with epilepsy whose guardian called the P&A requesting information about possible resources for client regarding disability accommodations and access for a service animal, as she is going to attend the University of Idaho this fall. P&A CASE SERVICE: The P&A reviewed client's information, and confirmed that the client and her guardian declined disability services through an IEP or 504 plan at her high school, at this time. The client wished to request accommodations at the U of I, as she recently visited the Mayo Clinic for further assessments regarding the increasing seizure activity due to her epilepsy. Her high school administration provided her requested accommodations informally. The P&A located and provided program information about the U of I disability services program and procedures for accessing services, including contact information. Service animal ADA information provided and legal protections were explained including information on filing a complaint, if needed. Referrals and information on Idaho Vocational Rehabilitation services (IDVR) and center for independent living services, provided and if difficulties occur in accessing these services, a referral to the Client Assistance Program (CAP) program operated by DRI provided in writing. Client was directed to contact P&A if difficulties arise. OUTCOME: As a result of the P&A's assistance, the client and her guardian have information and resources needed to advocate for post graduate academic adjustments and disability services access at the U of I. Client and guardian are aware that they can contact DRI, if additional assistance needed. 1. Students with disabilities will have access to appropriate transition services to help the student prepare for post-secondary activities, (e.g. college, training, employment, adult independent living, etc.). 2. Access to appropriate transition services. 3. Conduct transition workshops that provide information and educate on the benefits of competitive, integrated employment. 4. DRI had a display booth at the Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired (ICBVI) College/Career Transition Fair; Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities (ICDD) sponsored training given by DRI provided to Hispanic students with disabilities and their parents; DRI staff attorney is co-chair of the Idaho State Bar’s Diversity Section Love the Law! Committee facilitating and participating at three different events throughout FY2017. 5. 0 cases were handled under this priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: DRI participated at the ICVBI College/Career Transition Fair providing a display booth presenting information about DRI and transition services, the benefits of competitive integrated employment and how DRI can help reach employment goals to 37 students with visual impairment or blindness; DRI and ICDD in its collaborative efforts to outreach to Hispanic students and their families, facilitated a training sponsored by ICDD and given by DRI discussing the benefits of pursuing competitive integrated employment by utilizing Social Security (SS) work incentives. Training was given to 15 Hispanic students and 12 parents. Information provided included utilizing SS work incentives to allow students to work while on benefits to reach employment goals; how and when to report earnings to SSA; how IDVR can help in accessing workplace issues/needs; and age 18 SS redetermination issues and procedures when working towards an employment goal. DRI staff attorney is acting co-chair of the Idaho State Bar’s Diversity Section Love the Law! Committee, a pipeline program to encourage students from minority, low-income, underrepresented, and diverse backgrounds to pursue a career in the law. Events were hosted for high school and college-age youth from those backgrounds, where the students can interact with and learn from judges, attorneys, law professors, law enforcement officials, and court staff. As committee co-chair, DRI attorney facilitated monthly committee meetings and oversaw the following events planned around the Boise area: 225th Anniversary of the Bills of Rights Event. Students were invited to attend this day-long CLE held in Boise, to learn about the Bill of Rights and related caselaw in Idaho as well as hot topics re: the bills rights and civil liberties today. Approximately 48 students were in attendance; Turning 18 in Idaho Event. Students were invited to a half-day event centered on the Turning 18 In Idaho brochure created by the Idaho Law Foundation. The brochure summarizes the various laws that apply to individuals upon turning 18, including various topics like family law/custody, civil liability, and contract rights. Attorneys specializing in those various areas volunteered to lead a small group discussion on each of these topics, followed by a large panel discussion at the end. Approximately 70 students were in attendance; Constitution Day Event. A volunteer from LTL and a volunteer from ACE (Attorneys for Civic Education) went to a school to present to class(es) on the Constitution in honor of Constitution Day and to promote LTL and ACE. Two schools participated, covering approximately 160 students total. In addition to hosting events, this Committee offered scholarships to help pay the cost of LSAT test fees, LSAT test prep courses, and law school admission/application fees for the Idaho law schools. Students must be from diverse, minority, low-income, or underrepresented backgrounds to be eligible for such scholarships. Four (4) scholarships were awarded to students in Idaho during FY2017; As well as helping with planning the annual Tools for Life Transition Fair, DRI provided a training titled "Hot Topics in Employment: Rights of Workers with Disabilities" discussing rights of workers with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title I, Section 504, and other laws. Hot topics included the right to reasonable accommodations, often needed to attain & retain competitive integrated employment, and how to access them; the Work Innovation Opportunities Act (WIOA) which provides protections against IDVR and schools continuing the practice of developing individual plans of employment (IPE) and individual education transition plans that place transition students in sheltered workshops without first providing other working opportunities; and information on fair wages and the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) protections - provided to 23 students, parents and teachers. Power Point copies and DRI brochures disseminated. GUARDIANSHIP 1. Promote the rights of people with disabilities who are, or may be subjected to, unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 2. Free from unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 3. Participate on the Idaho Supreme Court committee on Guardianships and Conservatorships to represent the rights and perspectives of peoples with disabilities regarding guardianships or conservatorships. 4. DRI is a member of the Idaho Supreme Court Committee on Guardianships and Conservatorships and collaboration occurs on this committee with judges, attorneys, trial court administrators, Idaho Legal Aid services, Commission on Aging Administrator, and Mental Health Court & Veterans Court coordinators in efforts to improve Idaho Guardianship & Conservatorship protections. 5. 0 cases were opened under this objective since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: The DRI Legal Director (LD) continued her membership on the Idaho Supreme Court (ISC) Committee on Guardianships and Conservatorships (G/C). This committee is tasked with revising Idaho’s guardianship and conservatorship statutes to better protect Idahoans. Through this membership, she has promoted the rights of people with disabilities by influencing this committee to evaluate the Idaho Magistrate court’s practice of primarily appointing full guardianships and conservatorships, and advocating for courts to consider alternatives to full guardianships, such as limited guardianships and the supported decision-making model. DRI LD helped this committee submit for a WINGS grant from the American Bar Association for $30,000 to educate Idaho attorneys on statutory guardianship revisions and how to represent clients to include alternatives to guardianship during court proceedings. The grant was approved and will include giving 4 CLE presentations in Coeur d’ Alene, Boise, Twin Falls and Pocatello on ethics, supported decision making, judicial expectations from attorneys and the new court rules. She is also a member of the Committee’s Rules and Legislation Guardianship Subcommittee. During FY2016, this subcommittee amended statutory changes to the temporary guardianship sections for both adults and minors. The amendments were passed by the full committee and submitted to the Idaho Supreme Court for approval. HB 148 was passed in both chambers and signed by the governor to go into effect July 1, 2017. The recommended changes include providing for the appointment of co-guardians in certain circumstances. HB 148 also provides clarification on the appointment of a temporary guardian and withdraws language from the Court Visitor and IDHW Evaluation Committee report section and places it in court rule. LD proposed a motion that was seconded asking the committee to review, discuss, and recommend for approval the work group’s recommendations around court visitor reports and IDHW evaluation committee reports. The rules are designed to provide the court with additional, tailored information in order for the judges to craft specific orders based on an individual’s unique circumstances. The proposed rule was changed and went into effect July 1, 2017 to coincide with the legislative changes. Another attorney committee member and the DRI LD presented at the Idaho State Bar annual conference discussing ethical considerations when representing individuals with diminished capacity and what attorneys need to be advising their clients. Their presentation focused on changes as a result of the guardianship committee and the focus on alternatives to full plenary guardianships. 1. Promote the rights of people with disabilities who are, or may be subjected to unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 2. Free from unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 3. Advocate for the implementation and use of the supported decision making model as an alternative to guardianships. 4. LD is a member of the Idaho Supreme Court Guardianship and Conservatorship Committee’s Subcommittee on supported decision making comprised of attorneys and judges. This subcommittee was asked to publish an article for the Idaho State Bar Advocate publication. LD also was asked by the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) to publish an article on supported decision making. 5. No cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary. A summary of work completed is provided: During FY2015, DRI LD successfully persuaded the committee to convene a Supported Decision Making (SDM) Sub-committee and has continued as a leading member, successfully directing many of its activities. During FY2017, the Supported Decision-Making Subcommittee sponsored the June/July issue of The Advocate and submitted four (4) articles on limited guardianship and supported decision-making. The Advocate is the monthly publication by the Idaho State Bar. The articles published included an introduction "New Chapter in Idaho's Guardianships: Efforts of the Supreme Court Committee to Improve the Practice by Judge John Judge; "Supported Decision Making as an Alternative to Overbroad and Undue Guardianship" and a "Practice Tip: A Practical Tool for Lawyers". DRI LD was asked as a member of the SDM Subcommittee to draft an article on supported decision making for the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW). Her article was published in IDHW's Developmental Disabilities Division's first agency newsletter. At the Tools for Life Annual Transition Conference, LD presented a session on supported decision making as an alternative to guardianship and conservatorship. This presentation focused on allowing students with disabilities to participate in and self-direct decisions that affect their lives. Presentation was provided to 31 students, parents and teachers. Guardianship packages were given which included the Self Advocacy on Guardianship manual, a sample supported decision making form from Texas and a termination petition. 1. People with disabilities will be free from abusive or unnecessary guardianships or conservatorships. 2. Free from abusive or unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 3. Provide legal representation to up to four (4) people with disabilities to modify or terminate abusive or unnecessary guardianships or conservatorships. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved. 5. Two (2) cases were handled under this objective but no class actions. One (1) case is a carry over from FY2016 and will be carried over to FY2018 since DRI was appointed as client’s guardian ad litem (GAL). 6. Provide at least one case summary: Client is a 76-year-old Caucasian female with diabetes and related physical impairments (toes amputated due to diabetes issues), along with possible dementia. Client has called DRI in the past due to issues with guardian (GDN) and conservator (CSN) proceedings. She called again reporting that daughter obtained a GDN and CNS without her permission or knowledge and requested assistance to remove due to the actions daughter is taking on her behalf: selling her car without permission, not allowing contact with a former foster son, keeping personal belongings at GDN home without allowing client to have them, not involving client in medical decisions, etc. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE & preliminary investigation: DRI staff attorney had previously provided information and resources needed to file a complaint with the court against GDN, resulting in a hearing in January of 2016. DRI staff attorney met with client on multiple occasions, reviewing notes and copies of pleadings that client had kept concluding that the Judge determined that she did need a GDN and that daughter was appropriate to serve in that capacity. With client’s permission, DRI also communicated with GAL regarding case. After reviewing records and speaking with GAL, it became apparent that client would not have enough evidence to go forward with trying to terminate or modify her GDN and CNS. Although GAL does not agree with daughter as GDN, there is no one else to serve in that capacity and attempts to find a 3rd party professional guardian was unsuccessful as client has no funds to pay for such services. GAL does believe client needs a full GDN and CNS due to mental health issues and poor decisions regarding care, financial exploitation, etc. DRI staff also noticed that client’s memory appeared to be severely impaired, as client would frequently have issues articulating even simple sentences/concepts to staff, issues with remembering names/dates/times, and would call wondering who called her. DRI staff informed client that DRI did not have enough evidence to go forward with representation to terminate and/or modify the GDN and CNS, but referrals were provided to eldercare coordination/coordinators (both court sponsored and private) to help with mediating issues with GDN and CNS, hold GDN more accountable, and assist with involving client more in medical decisions. OUTCOME: Because case lacked legal merit, no further assistance could be provided. MEDICAID 1. People with disabilities will have access to appropriate Medicaid services. 2. Access to appropriate medical services. 3. Ensure implementation of the CMS information bulletin “Clarification of Medicaid Coverage of Services to Children with Autism”, dated July 2, 2014, through public policy or other system change activities. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved 5. 0 cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary. A summary of work completed is provided: DRI Executive Director (ED) is a member of the IDHW Committee on DD Service Access and in his absence, the DRI LD attends. Between the two of them, they attended (7) meetings during FY2017, allowing the opportunity to ensure implementation of the CMS information bulletin “Clarification of Medicaid Coverage of Services to Children with Autism”, dated July 2, 2014. They provided comments on the progress of the changes to the Medicaid children's DD service system, including comments regarding provider qualifications, service descriptions, eligibility, and assessment tools to be used. There will be a five (5) year transition to the new system in order to get enough trained providers. OUTREACH/TRAINING 1. People with disabilities will have increased awareness about the services offered by DRI and the Client Assistance Program (CAP). 2. Access to P&A advocacy. 3. Conduct outreach to transitions-age youth with disabilities, including transition-age youth in facilities. 4. DRI is a member of the Idaho Interagency Council on Secondary Transition (IICST) collaborating with the State Department (SED), Vocational Rehabilitation, Idaho Assistive Technology Project (IATP), the Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities (ICDD), providers and businesses to improve transition services and helped in planning the annual Tools 4 Life conference to transition-aged students. 5. O cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary. A summary of work completed is provided: DRI is a member of the Idaho Council on Secondary Transition and its primary purpose is to review Idaho’s performance in meeting the needs of transition age youth, address barriers to transition, and help coordinate the Tools for Life Transition Conference sponsored by the Idaho AT Project (IATP). During FY2017, the Council received information from IDVR on its second year of providing pre-employment transition services (Pre-ETS) required by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act. Sponsored programs included college camps at BSU, ISU, and Lewis-Clark State College; McCall Science Camp; IDVR’s summer work experience; and Idaho Parents Unlimited (IPUL)’s summer art program, all aimed at getting work or college experiences to transition age youth ages 16-21. Programs will be provided next year, with possibly more introduced. Idaho’s statistics for youth with disabilities participating in work, college or training after high school are slowly improving, but a full third of those reported were not participating in anything one year after high school; At the Tools for Life Transition Conference, DRI provided a display booth outreaching to approximately 200 students, teachers, providers and family members. Information was provided about DRI services; how DRI can assist transition students & planning; and information about SS Work Incentives benefits and how they can help beneficiaries achieve competitive integrated employment; In addition to the training session provided at the 2017 Tools for Life Conference titled “Hot Topics in Employment” (already noted above under the Education Priorities Section), DRI provided four (4) additional trainings on various transition issue topics: 1) "Self-Advocacy-Making Dreams a Reality" - clarifying the definition of self-advocacy, discussing characteristics of self-advocacy and skill development, and including examples of transition opportunities that encourage decision making and increased independence, to 55 students, parents, teachers and providers; 2) Transition IEP's -The Force Be With You - providing training on transition IEP plans, what is important to know, understanding rights, questions to be asking and students roles as well as others, given to 31 students, parents and teachers; 3) Supported Decision Making - discussing supported decision making as an alternative to guardianship and conservatorship allowing students with disabilities to participate in, and self-direct decisions that affect their life, provided to 31 students, parents and teachers. Guardianship packages were given out which included the Self Advocacy on Guardianship Manual, a sample Supported Decision Making form from Texas and a termination petition; and 4) "You have the Power-Go Vote" discussing voter rights for persons with disabilities and accessible voting options given to one (1) student; DRI presented transition training twice at a high school to 20 students and 9 teachers and aids. Questions and answers were discussed after the presentation. Students were encouraged to contact DRI for help with transition planning and if assistance needed to resolve disputes they have with IDVR; The PAIR/PATBI Coordinator is a board member of the Brain Injury Alliance of Idaho (BIAID). She and two (2) BIAID board members were asked to provide information about BIAID, its activities and its brochure that she drafted to help college students with TBI access post-graduate academic adjustments and disability services. Information about DRI & CAP services were provided to 17 statewide collegiate disability services directors. DRI brochures and copies of the BIAID brochure were taken to give to students with disabilities attending post-graduate institutions applying for academic adjustments & disability services. 150 CAP brochures were sent to the School to Work Transition Program in Coeur d’Alene. 1. People with disabilities will have increased awareness about the services offered by DRI and the Client Assistance Program (CAP). 2. Access to P&A advocacy. 3. Conduct outreach in the community to increase awareness of services offered by DRI and the CAP. 4. DRI participated in the Consortium of Idahoans (CID) sponsored Disability Awareness Day event at the Capitol. CID includes service providers, the ICDD, and the State Independent Living Council. DRI participated in a meeting with Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, ICDD, SILC, and the NW ADA Center staff at the Lt. Governor’s office addressing concerns regarding various state websites not currently accessible DRI participated at the Idaho Veteran’s Affairs Mental Health Summit. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: In addition to outreach efforts for transition-aged students and to the Fort Hall Indian Reservation (noted in above and below objectives), DRI conducted the following outreach increasing awareness of services offered by P&A: DRI participated by having a display booth at the CID sponsored Disability Awareness Day at the Capitol, outreaching to approximately 200 legislators, persons with disabilities, disability agencies and providers. Information on DRI services was provided and the Auto Mark voting machine was available as a demonstration tool for voting access; DRI met with Lt. Governor’s staff, and staff from the Idaho Commission for the Blind, State Independent Living Council, and the NW ADA Center to address concerns regarding the various state websites that were currently not accessible to individuals with disabilities. This meeting resulted in the formation of a collaborative work group to identify and assist with addressing changes necessary to the states’ program for addressing accessibility according to the WCAG 2.0 II guidelines as outlined under Title II of the ADA (access to government services/programs); Approximately 10 University of Idaho students participating in the Center on Disabilities and Human Development program visited the DRI office. Students were visiting disability related agencies in the Boise area. Information was provided on DRI and our services, the types of issues we see, the rise of abuse/neglect in facilities, and a brief demonstration on the ESS TouchMark Voting Machine was conducted. Two students were Hispanic/Latino, and the others Caucasian. All were between the ages of 18-23; DRI was given a tour at the Canyon County Juvenile Justice Detention Center (JJDC). The tour was conducted by the JJDC Administrator discussing the operation of this facility, how many minors it houses and information about its various programs and services provided and intake assessment procedures. Information about DRI & its services was provided and a request for DRI disability rights trainings was made; DRI attended a Fair Housing Forum sponsored by Housing and Urban Development. Purpose of the meeting was to plan the free Fair Housing Forum/Conference to take place in April 2018 (Fair Housing Month). Approximately 20 people were in attendance, including representatives from the cities of Nampa, Caldwell, and Meridian; Intermountain Fair Housing Council; various housing agencies; and the ADA Task Force.; DRI attended the Idaho Veterans Affairs (VA) Mental Health Summit. Information about DRI services was shared with veterans, VA staff and community providers. Approximately 150 VA staff, community providers and veterans attended; DRI met with staff at the Vet Center/Boise. Information was shared with VA staff about DRI and its services, the IATP (Idaho Assistive Technology Program) and its guidelines particularly regarding the lending library which allows individuals to ‘borrow and test’ assistive technology before having to actually purchase the items; DRI presented to teachers and students attending Renaissance High School and provided information about the P&A and its services. Information was also provided on how to access assistive technology available to students in the classroom and how to access available catalogues and school based learning systems for students with disabilities; DRI met with representatives from the Idaho Department of Labor as well as the DD Council to review a proposed website explaining access to the SSA disability program and work incentives. The review of the website included the creation of 6 short educational and informative animated videos portraying an individual with disabilities asking questions about how to apply for disability benefits, how to work while on benefits, and what alternative or accessible programs were available for an individual to use in order to accommodate their disability while working. These videos would later be developed and put on the IDOL ABLE to work website in early fall for public access. DRI met with members of the Region III Senior Services agency in Meridian Idaho regarding potential collaboration between agencies when providing community services to individuals with disabilities. Focus was on vulnerable adult programs and services (including SSA disability benefits) as well as promoting the Idaho Assistive Technology Project (IATP) as a resource for assistive technologies and services for the elderly in Idaho; DRI participated in an open forum community training/seminar with SILC discussing the recently appropriated A.B.L.E. act which allows individuals with disabilities prior to the age of 26 to enroll in a special savings program. This program will provide individuals with disabilities the opportunity to purchase certain items and services from this savings account without it impacting their disability benefits. In addition to 4987 CAP brochures provided to IDVR Regional offices state-wide upon request, 110 CAP brochures were sent to the Nez Perce Tribal Vocational office; and 340 CAP and 340 P&A brochures were sent to ISU Centers on Disabilities and Human Development. 1. Conduct outreach to unserved and underserved populations with disabilities. 2. Access to P&A advocacy. 3. Provide information about services offered by DRI and the CAP and other rights information to people with disabilities residing on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation. 4. Collaboration occurred with the Fort Hall Indian Reservation’s Vocational Rehabilitation office and the Tribal Council for Employment Rights (TERO) office for dissemination at the Bannock Fun Run Gathering. 5. 0 cases and no class actions were handled under the priority since no calls from PAIR clients who are members of the Fort Hall Reservation were received. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed under this priority is provided: DRI Advocate dropped off DRI & CAP brochures at the Tribal Vocational Rehabilitation office and at the Tribal TERO/EEOC Council who agreed to display at the VR table at an upcoming fun/run event. They also agreed to display at the vendors tables at the tribal casino hotel for upcoming event. DRI Advocate (who lives on reservation and is married to a tribal member) attended the Bannock Fun Run Gathering and distributed DRI brochures and CAP brochures at the VR & EEOC tables. She spoke with approximately 35 people, answered questions about who DRI is, what we do, and how we can help with services or resources outside of the reservation borders. The CAP program was explained, when asked about Vocational Rehabilitation Services. DRI Advocate hopes that the 'word of mouth' about CAP program and DRI services outside the borders will reach Native people with disabilities who may need, or want to access DRI services. DRI Advocate also met with the tribal VR administrator, the tribal advocate, and four tribal VR counselors. She spoke about CAP, the role of CAP, who DRI is, and what DRI/CAP do. CAP brochures were provided. The VR counselors asked about CAP employees, demographics, how experienced, as they feel that their circumstances are more than what CAP may be able to assist with. They explained that many issues had to do with "tribal politics". They explained that one consumer went to the council to resolve her issues with the tribal VR office. They said that since the council stepped in to resolve this client's issue, others now do the same. After this event, the Tribal Council directed its Executive Director to act in their place, which really is the true "CAP" role. Presently, issues are being micromanaged by the executive director, and tribal VR employees do not appreciate this conflict. Their jobs are constantly being threatened. They would like CAP to be involved, not the tribal council or executive director. It appears that tribal politics has compromised the tribal VR staff, in that whether or not the client's issues have merit, they are directed to follow suit of what the executive director is instructing them to do. This puts them in a very compromising position. The advocate encouraged the VR staff to inform their clients, as much as possible, about CAP. They can request her personally, if seeing a familiar face or Native person may help. However, the current process, dysfunctional that it may be, needs to be circumvented back to the CAP program. The DRI advocate and the VR administrator will communicate again, in hopes of rectifying the situation. Hopefully CAP can regain their role in the tribal VR program encouraging others to access additional P&A services. Hopefully, continuing discussions during FY2018 will continue to develop strategies to help resolve this situation. 1. People with disabilities will have increased awareness about the services offered by DRI to increase access to voting. 2. Access to voting 3. Conduct outreach/training in the community to increase awareness of DRI services, including voter training and information. 4. DRI collaborated with Living Independence Network Corp. (LINC) in conjunction with the Northwest (NW) ADA Center reviewing accessibility of polling locations. DRI PAVA/PAAT Coordinator, ICBVI, SILC, IATP Members from the Blind Commission, the State Independent Living Council, the Idaho Assistive Technology project and the NW ADA Center agreed to create a work group to address concerns identified during the 2016 federal election and to address concerns with the state IT and information stakeholders from the various state agencies during FY 2017. DRI collaborated with national S.A.B.E. program (Self Advocates Becoming Empowered) in promoting voting awareness, and participating in their exit polling of individuals with disabilities who voted in Idaho. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed under this priority is provided: Voter training was provided at the state run intermediate care facility for people with intellectual disabilities (ICF/ID) to seven (7) residents and five (5) staff. Information about voter rights and accessible voting options presented. Ten registration forms, election calendars and absentee voting applications were given to facility social worker (SW) in case needed. The SW later contacted DRI advocate requesting additional technical assistance to help two (2) residents vote in the presidential election. As noted above in the outreach to transition-aged youth priority, this voter training was provided at the Tools for Life conference to one (1) student and several participants were trained on the Auto Mark; During the transition training given to 23 high school students & 9 teachers and/or aides, training on voting rights and accessible voting options were also provided; DRI worked with Living Independence Network Corp. (LINC), a center for independent living (CIL), on reviewing accessibility of polling locations for the federal elections in November, 2016. DRI had previously filed a complaint with the Secretary of State’s office earlier in 2016, primarily focused on ADA county not being responsive enough about providing adequately trained poll workers at polling locations who were familiar enough with the new voting equipment to assist voters with casting their ballots. Ada County responded to the complaint by committing to better training of poll workers on the machines. They also introduced a strategic plan to review general accessibility of the polling locations throughout Ada County. Ada County contracted with LINC in conjunction with the NW ADA center staff to review all current active ADA County polling locations for accessibility. The outcome resulted in several “last minute” relocations of polling locations to provide adequate accessibility to voters with disabilities; DRI collaborated with the National Federation of the Blind to review the outcomes of the national elections held last fall and participated (via phone call) with the staff at the NFB to discuss the setbacks with regard to accessing voting machines and the lack of support blind individuals get at their polling places. Recent advances in technology support a more streamlined and efficient count of the votes but here in Idaho it was pointed out that the technical training aspect provided to poll workers who demonstrate the machines to potential voters is lacking. This was also discussed at a national level and it was determined this is a very real and ongoing issue throughout the country; DRI attended the Idaho Assistive Technology Council meeting (via phone) as a member of the council. DRI PAVA/ Coordinator provided information on recent voter feedback and problematic accessibility issues experienced across the state in 2016 election last November. Strategies were discussed with other members of the council on how best to approach addressing the concerns of voters with disabilities and providing meaningful and helpful information and materials to poll workers and county clerks on how to appropriately assist individuals with disabilities at the polls for next year’s (2018) federal election. Meeting also addressed on-going project with the state of Idaho’s website accessibility issue and the status of efforts to address the concerns to date. An agreement to focus on this issue was discussed and members signed on to make this a priority for the next several months. Members from the ICBVI, SILC, IATP and the NW ADA center were all in agreement in participating in a work group to address this concern with the state IT and information stakeholders from the various state agencies in the near future; DRI collaborated with the national Self Advocates Becoming Empowered (SABE) in promoting voting awareness, and participated in their exit polling of individuals with disabilities who voted in Idaho. The outcome was a comprehensive national report generated by S.A.B.E. outlining the problems that still exist within the voting experience for individuals with disabilities who wish to participate in the voting process locally and nationally. PUBLIC POLICY 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Analyze the effect on Idahoans with disabilities of closing the health insurance gap, and provide the information to policy makers and stakeholders. 4. DRI collaborated with the “Close the GAP Idaho”, CID, SILC and IDDC in efforts to address Idahoans with disabilities uninsured/in the insurance gap. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: The Idaho Healthy Plan was a name change for Medicaid expansion legislation in Idaho. DRI ED worked with “Close the Gap Idaho”, IDCC, SILC, and the endorsement of the Consortium of Idahoans for people with disabilities (CID) leading these groups in efforts to get Idaho Healthy Plan legislation passed during FY2017. ED complied recommendations concerning Medicaid block grants and the effect on people with disabilities in Idaho. ED provided oral testimony to the House Health and Welfare Committee showing the financial and economic effects to Idaho regarding lost federal Medicaid funding, the numbers of Idahoans who were underinsured and the effect to persons with disabilities in Idaho. Unfortunately, primarily due to federal election results during FY2017, any previous momentum gained during FY2016 convincing the legislature that those individuals with disabilities in the insurance gap needed to be insured were negated. Three (3) legislative bills providing minimal relief were drafted: Primary Care Access (H160) - provided $10 million in State funds to purchase access to primary care for people under the federal poverty level (FPL) who have chronic health conditions (to be defined in rules); Primary Care Access (S1082) — used catastrophic state trust (CAT fund) monies to purchase primary medical care for people with chronic health conditions, and “Life coaching” to help people get better jobs so they don’t need public assistance.; and Primary Care Access S1142aa — which also provided $10 million in State funds and included permission for the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) to apply for a waiver. DRI monitored these bills but did not take a public position since not necessary. OUTCOME: The sponsoring legislator for H160 withdrew his bill claiming that he couldn’t get it through his own committee; S1082 died in the Senate IDHW Committee; and S1142aa died in the Senate. Due to the current political climate, DRI did not carry over this priority but will consider adding in future Statement of Priorities (SOPs) depending on congressional election results for upcoming year(s). If the political landscape shifts during FY2018, DRI would still be able to address under the priority below which allows DRI to monitor and analyze emerging issues and legislation and their impact on people with disabilities, and provide this information to disability organizations and the Idaho legislature, however unlikely this presently appears as a possibility. 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Monitor legislative bills and proposed rules, analyze their impact on people with disabilities, and provide this information to disability organizations and others. 4. DRI’s monitoring of proposed legislation and rules that impact Idahoans with disabilities was passed onto other disability organizations such as IDCC, SILC, and the Consortium of Idahoans with Disabilities (CID), Idaho Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Americans Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Idaho and providers to consolidate like efforts when appropriate. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed under this priority is provided: This priority is included to address emerging issues regarding legislation and proposed rules not identified and included in the FY2017 SOPs. DRI ED monitored and provided information and analysis either in writing or orally to all member organizations of the Consortium for Idahoans with Disabilities (CID). This analysis helped in determining the best action for promoting the rights of PWDs in Idaho. The following lists legislation monitored and addressed during FY2017, in addition to those issues specifically included in the other PP objectives 1-Death Penalty legislation: DRI worked with ACLU, and disability advocates to draft a bill which would correct Constitutional deficiencies in Idaho’s Intellectual Disability Death Penalty statute, and prohibit use of capital punishment for defendants with serious mental illness. OUTCOME: Opposition from the Idaho Prosecutors’ Association made it unwise to introduce this bill this year. 2-End of Life/Medical Consent: This bill amends the Medical Consent Act and the Developmental Disabilities (DD) Guardianship statute. The bill clarifies that people with Developmental Disabilities have the right to consent or refuse consent to medical treatment unless that right is limited by a valid guardianship. DRI analyzed and supported this bill with ICDD, SILC and CID backing. This bill also revised the language on end of life decision making by guardians in Idaho Code 66-405. The new language is the same as the language used in child protection cases. This language has more interpretive history and is clearer, without being less protective. OUTCOME: The bill was passed after amended in the Senate and sent to the House. 3-Secure Developmental Disability (DD) Facility: IDHW introduced a bill to create a “secure facility” for people with developmental disabilities, mental illness and for those not currently ICF/ID eligible but involved in criminal proceedings. DRI analyzed the original bill and determined that it lacked minimal constitutional protections. Several rounds of negotiation resulted between DRI, ACLU, ICDD, SILC and IDHW in HB 222. This bill substantially improved the language protecting the rights of residents. As a condition of the negotiations DRI, ACLU, DD Council, and SILC agreed not to oppose the revised bill as long as IDHW agreed to finalizing correlating rules before proceeding. OUTCOME: H222 bill passed both houses. UPDATE: At the beginning of October, 2017, DRI ED received a call from IDHW Licensing and Certification (L&C) Director stating that the Department will not go forward with proposed licensing rules for the “DD secure” facility during the 2018 legislative session. She explained that she asked the new IDHW Director to withdraw the rules from the docket for this legislative session because she believed the process was too rushed and there was not enough time for proper negotiated rulemaking, and the Department needed to have more involvement from DRI and the IDCC on the front end. Negotiations are targeted to start in February 2018 allowing for time needed to bring the rules before the 2019 legislature. The “secure DD facility” cannot open until licensing rules are in place. 4-ASL Interpreter Certification: During FY2015, a bill requiring that American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters be licensed was passed in the House and Senate but vetoed by the Governor. DRI collaborated with the Idaho Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in revising the previously drafted bill to include more clarification of what types of interpreter activities are covered and including an exemption for the state court system. DRI provided testimony to the Idaho legislature on the impact of the proposed certification requirements for ASL interpreters; provided information on the consequences of having unqualified interpreters; the difficulty DRI has experienced with unqualified interpreters; and how a system of licensure would benefit the deaf and hard of hearing. The bill passed in both houses. 5-Hate Crimes: A bill to add “disability” to the categories of victims of hate crimes was sponsored by a senate legislator. DRI analyzed and supported this bill and provided analysis of proposed language to the sponsoring legislator. OUTCOME: The bill wasn’t introduced since committee chairs refused to give it a hearing. 6- Timely Notice of Release from Psychiatric State Hospitals: The intent of this legislation is to amend the termination or commitment and discharge of involuntary patients committed to inpatient facilities from a 30-day notice to a 7-day notice to the committing court and prosecuting attorney. This change will allow for an earlier release from an inpatient facility. The current 30-day requirement delays the legal process as well as extends the patient's stay even after discharge is appropriate. DRI analyzed and supported this legislative change, supported other advocacy organization’s backing, provided information to legislators and monitored the bill’s progress. OUTCOME: House bill H038 passed in both houses. 7- Telehealth Services: This legislation, if enacted, would allow for costs of telehealth services to be covered in the same manner, and to the same extent as if the services were delivered in person. This could improve access to mental health care in rural areas. DRI analyzed, supported and monitored this bill. OUTCOME: S1058 failed in the Senate. 8— Support Animals: Senate bill S1051 addressed the need for persons with mental or emotional disabilities to use dogs and other support animals as part of their treatment and which added support animals to the Idaho service animal statute. DRI ADA attorney specialist analyzed this proposed legislation. Her analysis concluded that it contained some language that might be more restrictive than protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) title III and sponsoring entities was not receptive to DRI input. DRI did not support the bill and monitored its progress. OUTCOME: Senate bill S1051 died in the Senate IDHW Committee. 9- Wheelchair-confined” (sic) Veterans Transportation: Senate bill S1031 proposed a statutory amendment changing the payments from a voucher reimbursement system to a payment authorization program. This change allows the Idaho Division of Veterans Services to enter into agreements with commercial transportation vendors or others to provide or administer transportation services to eligible wheelchair-confined (sic) veterans. DRI analyzed this bill and determined that it would increase and expedite veteran’s access to Veteran’s Affairs paid transportation but no formal support requested. DRI monitored progress in case support needed. OUTCOME: Senate bill S1031 passed both houses. 10-Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Information: The purpose of Senate bill S1060 is to ensure that women of Idaho and their doctors have access to the most accurate and up-to-date information available regarding (CMV) prevention, infection, and treatment. Funding of $60,000 this year and $30,000 per year after was allocated in the bill. DRI analyzed, supported and provided information to the committees on the potential benefits of the bill. OUTCOME: Passed in both houses with needed funding. 11-Prohibits “Conversion Therapy”: House bill H062 called the Youth Mental Health Prevention Act protects patients under eighteen (18) years of age or vulnerable adults from the harmful effects of conversion therapy and provides that a licensed, professional counselor shall not engage in the practice of conversion therapy. "Conversion therapy" means any practices or treatments that seek to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity. DRI analyzed, supported and monitored. OUTCOME: This bill was referred to the Ways and Means Committee, where it died. 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Participate with other stakeholders and disability groups on task forces, workgroups and councils that present opportunities to advocate on behalf of people with disabilities. 4. Collaborative efforts are described in the summary provided below. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, were class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided:

DRI Executive Director (ED) is a leading member of the Consortium of Idahoans with Disabilities (CID) guiding its public policy agenda; he continued his membership on Partners in Crisis which is a CID sponsored mental health policy group addressing and monitoring Idaho’s coordinated care system and its contracted provider, Optum presenting concerns to Idaho legislators. He remained on the Governor’s Children at Risk Task Force making recommendations to the Governor on policies affecting children in the child welfare system. He participates on many IDHW sponsored committees including: the IDHW Committee on DD Service Access addressing issues in the children’s developmental disabilities service delivery system; the Adult DD Services Collaborative Work Group providing recommendations under consideration by IDHW for revising its budget process; the Personal Assistance Oversight Committee addressing issues with HCBS Medicaid waivers. His membership on IDHW’s Medical Care Advisory Council (MCAC) expired, but he was replaced by a DRI staff attorney, to review state Medicaid policy and provide comments on proposed rules and implementation. ED is a leading member of the of the Idaho Health Care for All/Close the Gap Committee analyzing proposed legislation and significantly impacting and guiding this initiative as well as participating on a Medicaid Expansion Workgroup. He is a board member for the Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities (ICDD) helping in developing strategic planning and supporting their public policy initiatives. The ED participates on the Homes for Adults Residential Treatment (HART) Workgroup to monitor an IDHW pilot project created for the purpose of developing facilities that meet the needs of persons with severe mental illness. This facility type allows for the services and treatment to be provided by the facility and coordinated with community Medicaid paid providers. This work group is identifying and developing rules needed to be in place prior to any legislation passed incorporating a facility licensure. The ED and Advocacy Director (AD) both participated in a newly formed Community of Purpose coalition that resulted from the “We Choose All of Us” work group. The purpose of the group is to build a coalition of Idaho social justice organizations, making connections, and informing each other of our work. DRI has been involved in several meetings with the Idaho Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence, as a result. The Executive Director and Advocacy Director also participated as family members in the Community NOW! Project, although adults receiving services through the DD waiver and their families were the primary respondents. This project was sponsored by IDHW, the ACLU and the DD Council, resulting from the settlement in the KW v. Armstrong lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf of Idaho adults with developmental disabilities. This work resulted in a comprehensive report on recommendations to IDHW Medicaid for improving DD waiver services and revising the eligibility and budget allocation tool. DRI Legal Director (LD) is a leading member of, the Idaho Supreme Court (ISC) Guardianship Committee evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the Idaho guardianship statutes. She is also on the Legislative Rules Subcommittee which revised rules for temporary guardianship appointments during FY2017; and she continued leading action on its Supported Decision Making (SDM) Subcommittee. DRI Advocacy Director (AD) is a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights-Idaho Advisory Committee which drafted a report to the national US Commission on Civil Rights for presentation to Congress. She participated on this committee’s Disability Subcommittee which formed a stakeholders group which met to discuss Idaho’s lack of an Olmstead Plan, brainstorming ideas to help identify resources and remedies. The AD, as the CAP Coordinator, continued membership on the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council as the CAP representative reviewing Idaho Vocational Rehabilitation (IDVR) service reports, client outcomes, and budget data, providing input for improvement. At the request of Council members, future meetings will include more time for providing meaningful input into IDVR customers’ unmet needs to ensure IDVR’s compliance with the WIOA (Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act) regulations, especially with regard to transition-age youth. As the PAIMI Coordinator, she is also a member of the PAIMI Advisory Council (PAC) providing input on DRI goals and objectives; and participated in a National Disability Rights Idaho Network (NDRN) PAIMI Advisory Council Subcommittee to identify measures to enhance PAC involvement and guidance. AD is a member of the State Department of Education sponsored Idaho Interagency Council on Secondary Transition improving the transition of Idaho students with disabilities from high school to work and/or college. She also participated on the Tools 4 Life planning committee for its annual conference. All DRI licensed attorneys (including DRI AD) are members of the Idaho State Bar Diversity Section emphasizing improving diversity related issues such as cases involving racism, and the Bill of Rights. During FY2017, DRI staff attorney served as the co-chair on the Diversity Section’s Subcommittee called “Love the Law” acting as its Secretary and Co-Chair organizing activities focused at diverse, low income, and underserved youth. DRI Advocates participate on the Idaho Employment First Consortium organized by the IDCC including representatives from IDVR, Idaho Department of Labor (IDOL), IDCC, SILC, and IDHW. This collaboration is for the purpose of ensuring that employment is the first outcome considered for people with disabilities. DRI Advocates participate on the Justice and Advocacy for Vulnerable Adults Java Committee. JAVA is a state-wide professionals group associated with protecting the vulnerable adult population in Idaho from fraudulent activities, promoting state wide support for elderly with Alzheimer's and other issues effecting senior citizens and/or vulnerable adults. DRI Advocates also participate in the Suicide Prevention Action Network (SPAN) formatted to reduce suicide in Idaho through statewide collaboration, and to educate on best practices. DRI staff attorney participates on a regional Keeping Children Safe (KCS) Child Protection Services’ (CPS) Citizens Panel providing input on recommendations made by the panel to the governor also presented at the annual KCS panel conference in October. He was also the driving force behind the formation of the Idaho Restraint & Seclusion Stakeholders Workgroup which was a result of systemic work completed at State Hospital North’s Psychiatric Hospital identifying concerns with its R&S policies and practices. This workgroup is pursuing statutory and rule changes to better protect individuals in facilities from inappropriate and excessive R&S practices. DRI Senior Advocate and PAIR/PATBI Coordinator remains as a member of the Community Care Advisory Council (CCAC) advocating for quality care and rights protections for persons with disabilities residing in certified family homes (CFHs) and residential assisted living facilities (RALFs). During FY 2017, this Council focused on CFH rule changes, CMS HCBS regulation mandates to ensure community integration and protections under Idaho landlord/tenant laws; and monitoring progress for the HART pilot project. PAIR/PATBI Coordinator is on the Board of Directors for the Brain Injury Alliance of Idaho (BIAID) advocating for the rights of persons with brain injury and prevention. During FY 2017, she and two (2) other BIAID Board members presented to the to the Idaho Partners on Higher Education and Disability Services comprised of Collegiate Disability Services Directors discussing the BIAID brochure that she drafted titled” Accessing Accommodations & Disability Services-WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW”. Input for the brochure was provided and revisions as suggested completed. Primary focus for BIAID during FY 2017 was to complete its revision of its webpage and to make changes to membership. PATBI/PAIR Coordinator is a member of the TBI Advisory Council identifying TBI specific issues statewide. Collaboration with the Idaho TBI grant Lead investigator to assists with a needs assessment dissemination was completed which helps identify needs of people with TBI to better advocate on their behalf. DRI PAAT/PAVA Coordinator met with Lt. Governor’s staff, along with staff from the Idaho Commission for the Blind & Visually Impaired, SILC, and the NW ADA Center to address concerns regarding the various state websites that were currently not accessible to individuals with disabilities. Meeting resulted in the formation of the Idaho Access and Functional Needs Advisory Board formed to identify and assist with addressing changes necessary to the states’ program for addressing accessibility according to the WCAG 2.0 II guidelines as outlined under Title II of the ADA (access to government services/programs). He is also a member of the Idaho Department of Labor’s Workforce Development Council established to provide strategic direction and oversight of Idaho's workforce development system. The primary role of the Council is to advise the governor and the State Board of Education on strategies designed to yield high-quality workforce investment services for Idaho's businesses, job seekers and students. The monitoring advocate for State Hospital South, one of the state operated institutions, is a member of its Patient’s Rights Committee, providing rights information education and self-advocacy training. This membership also allows her to identify systemic or individual issues helping to guide her monitoring activities and individual case work. This participation allows DRI to identify and monitor systemic issues which need to be addressed and those that are emerging, many times preventing the need for litigation or adversarial remedies, as well as resource costly measures. It has allowed DRI to effectively advocate for disability legislation and comment on proposed rules that affect the disability community, address client’s choice and rights issues, the desire for meaningful integration; educate the community regarding the dangerous practice of restraint and seclusion in schools and the community; address whether persons with disabilities are receiving appropriate IDVR, DOL, and Social Security employment services and address employment barriers, all factors that greatly improve the quality of life for persons with disabilities in Idaho. Through this involvement, DRI is able to address the ever-changing issues of Medicaid and its budget and service cuts that greatly affect the access to, and quality of, health care. It allows DRI the opportunity to advocate on behalf of persons with all types of disabilities including those with DD, TBI, MI, the elderly, hard of hearing/deaf and blind/sight impaired, and those with physical and neurological impairments. It allows this P&A to constantly remind agencies and others of protections under various federal and state disability laws and that protection against disability discrimination. 1.Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Address systemic public policy issues in the Idaho Medicaid or managed care programs which arise during FY2017. 4. Collaboration occurred with CID in advocating for Medicaid legislation. Collaboration occurred with a state representative, IDHW and the Department of Labor in improving access to the Medicaid for Worker with Disabilities (MWD) program. 5. 0 cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: As a result of the Jeff D. lawsuit agreement, Idaho is required to develop and implement a sustainable, coordinated, and comprehensive mental health system that increases access to mental health services for children with severe emotional disturbance. House bill H 043 was introduced to expand Medicaid eligibility for children with SED in families with income up to 300% of the federal poverty limit (FPL). DRI provided information and analysis to the legislators explaining how the bill would improve mental health services for children in Idaho which passed in both houses. Idaho has traditionally based Medicaid payments for hospital-based and medical treatment care on the volume of services provided. New models, such as value-based reimbursement, are an approach that focus on quality improvement and greater affordability. This model ties reimbursement to medical treatment providers performance on specific quality measures. House bill H128 was introduced directing IDHW to pursue value-based payment opportunities up to and including full-risk, provider-based managed care for the Medicaid program. DRI analyzed, supported and monitored this bill which passed in both houses. DRI has been addressing barriers limiting access to the Medicaid Buy-In program, Medicaid for Workers with Disabilities (MWD), for several years leading to improvements during FY2017. DRI AD met multiple times during FY’s 2016-2017 with staff from IDHW and an Idaho representative identifying barriers and remedies. By the end of FY2017, IDHW completed streamlining the process with Disability Determinations Services at the Idaho Dept. of Labor; improved website access on both sites; and ensured training was provided to IDHW self-reliance staff to make sure applications were processed accurately. During FY2016, DRI ED and LD attended several meetings with Idaho Medicaid Division explaining how Idaho was violating Federal Early Periodic, Screening, Diagnostic and Testing (EPSDT) regulations. LD researched, and drafted a sample EPSDT policy that met EPSDT regulation compliance and provided a copy to Medicaid. During FY2017, IDHW Medicaid Division developed an EPSDT policy that mirrors the policy provided by DRI LD. The EPSDT policy was formally adopted in 2017 and implementation began in July, 2017. This policy effects every child on Medicaid in Idaho. DRI attended meetings with IDHW, legislators and stakeholders on the development of 1115 and 1332 waivers to increase Medicaid access for people with chronic health conditions and to stabilize the state insurance exchange. This process started this summer and will continue during FY2018. DRI ED was invited to a meeting with Idaho Medicaid administrators to discuss Idaho’s compliance with a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) inquiry into how “restrictive procedures” including restraint & seclusion (R&S) and aversive practices (behavior punishment), are tracked and reported by HCBS providers paid under HCBS Medicaid waivers. At this meeting, all agreed that there was a need to write new rules limiting restrictive procedures and the use of R&S. The rules being considered will only apply to for CFHs, RALFS, and residential habilitation (supported living) providers. DRI agreed to participate and will continue to be involved and provide input. Some research was completed by DRI staff attorney during FY2017. This project and subsequent meetings are scheduled to continue throughout FY2018. 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Inform policy makers of the benefits of adopting and implementing the Achieving Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act. 4.Collaboration occurred with SILC in efforts to get needed legislation passed and in support of SILC receiving funding to provide technical assistance on ABLE Act accounts from other states. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: The federal Achieving Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act allows individuals with disabilities prior to the age of 26 to enroll in a special savings program. During FY2016, DRI ED determined after meeting with state officials and an interested legislator that the development of an Idaho ABLE account system was not feasible. Since qualified individuals can open ABLE accounts through programs sponsored by other states, the Senator agreed to introduce a bill in 2017 that provides funding to provide assistance and training to access other state ABLE account programs and necessary asset exemptions from local and state means test programs. During FY2017, the Senator sponsored and introduced the bill. DRI ED educated legislators on the benefits of ABLE accounts, the need for ABLE Account assistance and explained why ABLE account monies must not be counted as assets for means tested programs. OUTCOME: The bill passed both houses ensuring ABLE account access for qualified Idahoans. DRI participated in an open forum community training/seminar with SILC discussing the recently appropriated ABLE Act. Eligibility requirements were discussed; and the assistance that SILC can provide to help qualified Idahoans access other state ABLE account programs was explained. Those items and services that can be purchased from this savings account without it impacting disability benefits were discussed in detail. RIGHTS IN FACILITIES 1. People with disabilities in facilities will live free from abuse. 2. Abuse in facilities. 3. Investigate instances of death of people with disabilities in facilities in which death was caused by physical assault; failure to treat, care or monitor the individual; seclusion; or physical, mechanical or chemical restraint. 4. Collaborative efforts with the IDHW Bureau Chief of Developmental Disabilities Services resulting in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) in which all deaths at DD facilities is reported to DRI. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since no reports on behalf of PAIR clients that died as a result of physical assault; failure to treat, care or monitor of the individual; seclusion; or physical, mechanical or chemical restraint were received during FY2017. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: A MOA between the IDHW DD Bureau Chief and DRI has been in place since FY2014 as a result of the Bureau Chief’s concerns that that facilities and providers that serve people with DD (PWDD) are not required to report deaths to IDHW. Even though the P&A has not received any reports of deaths for PAIR clients, this collaboration has resulted in DRI being better able address the lack of death reporting requirements in facilities that admit and/or treat PAIR clients. A priority was included in FY2017 to investigate requirements for residential habilitation/supported living providers and certified family homes (CFHs) and propose necessary rule change reported on in further detail below. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will live free from abuse. 2. Abuse in facilities. 3. Investigate requirements for residential habilitation, supported living, and certified family home providers to report deaths to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare and propose necessary rule changes. 4. Collaboration occurred between DRI and IDHW L&C during proposed rule making procedures. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: As a result of a systemic abuse case that involved residents residing in two (2) CFH, DRI concluded that several elderly PAIR clients had died in a short period of time under suspicious circumstances and that most of these deaths had not been reported to L&C CFH Division and that the investigations conducted were insufficient. During FY2016, DRI drafted and presented many of its concerns identified from its systemic investigation to IDHW L&C resulting in a meeting. During this meeting, DRI was told that most deaths in CFH’s eventually get reported to L&C and that preliminary investigations are conducted to determine if the death resulted from suspicious causes. Additional concerns regarding L&C investigations, certification and recertification processes were presented. L&C informed DRI that IDHW would be promulgating rule changes to CFH and residential habilitation provider (res hab) agencies (referred to as supported living) during 2017 to be completed/passed by Idaho Legislature by 2019. From this work, DRI added this priority to investigate requirements for res hab and CFHs to report deaths to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. Its investigation concluded that Idaho rules did not require mandatory reporting of deaths to IDHW; and that the Idaho Statute § 39-5303, Duty to Report Abuse, Neglect, and Financial Exploitation of Vulnerable Adults narrows reporting requirements. Only those incidents of suspected abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation of vulnerable adults must be reported to the Commission on Aging (unless suspected in a nursing facility which is to be reported to IDHW). Furthermore, it is facility administrators, staff, medical providers, social workers, teachers and others who make the determination if abuse, neglect or financial exploitation is suspected. After DRI completed its investigation, it submitted petitions to IDHW to include in its rulemaking drafts mandatory death reporting requirements to IDHW for both CFH and res hab providers. When IDHW determines that the death occurred under suspicious circumstances they will investigate. IDHW L&C notified DRI assuring that the items in DRI’s petition for CFH rulemaking were included in the draft. In addition to DRI’s petitions for rulemaking submitted to IDHW, DRI reviewed the CFH drafted rule changes and submitted comments within public comment timelines. On October 3, 2017, IDHW sent a response to DRI notifying that they adopted DRI proposed language for nine (9) sections, made a change consistent with DRI suggestions for another section so that all reporting requirements suggested by DRI were addressed; and without changing proposed language, L&C officially acknowledged that CFH settings should never employ mechanical or chemical restraints. Other DRI rule comments were adopted including adding a definition of “ vulnerable adult”; requiring that a notice of pending investigations or charges must immediately be reported to the department for any family member or participant; added a requirement that the participant or his legal representative must sign any changes to their individual support plan; added a requirement that all personal funds and all medications belonging to the participant must be returned immediately upon discharge; defined the word “incident” so that providers are not left to interpret what they believe may qualify; and included a requirement that CFH providers cannot loan money to participants to better protect from potential financial exploitation. Regarding res hab rules, IDHW L&C also agreed to incorporate into its rule making draft a mandatory death reporting to IDHW L&C requirement and when IDHW determines that the death occurred under suspicious circumstances will investigate. DRI also reviewed the proposed rule changes and submitted comments by the end of September, 2017. A response to these comments will not be received until FY 2018, so this priority has been carried over. DRI decided to provide comment on the rulemaking drafts, due to the fact that needed rule changes would have greatly benefited/protected clients in abuse & neglect cases DRI has previously investigated. DRI took advantage of this opportunity to provide comment in support of many of the rule changes and to advocate for additional changes in its efforts to better protect individuals with disabilities who reside in CFHs and for those that utilize res hab services. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will live free from abuse. 2. Abuse in facilities. 3. Investigate allegations of abuse of people with disabilities in facilities according to case selection criteria. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved. 5. Two (2) cases were handled under this priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Senior Solutions private paid guardian and a social worker (SW) at an Idaho vet's home (state funded) called P&A on behalf of a 58-year-old Native American women residing in the nursing facility unit. Client was residing at home with her husband, a veteran who had recently passed away. Callers were concerned because client reported that her husband and she decided to make her niece her power of attorney when previously the client expressly wanted no contact or association with her niece and was concerned about the money in her husband's trust. The callers reported that they believed that she needs a guardian and requested assistance. SW was concerned that the client cut her hair even though client told her it was because of her husband's tribal practice. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE & Preliminary Investigation: DRI LD informed callers that P&A could not provide help with getting a guardian, but would meet with the client to clarify her wishes and to determine possible assistance. LD also provided a referral to Adult Protection Services regarding concerns with suspected financial exploitation. Assigned advocate researched and collected information to provide regarding SSDI survivor benefit eligibility, vet's pension for survivor's information located as well as information regarding Native American tribal religious death ceremonies to show this as a cultural practice. Advocate met with client at the vet’s home. Advocate identified herself and provided information about P&A. Advocate asked client if she would meet with her to discuss a report/call DRI received on her behalf that DRI believed that she needed to know and client agreed. Advocate asked if she was aware that there were concerns of financial exploitation and that some vet’s home staff believed that a guardianship may be needed. Advocate explained that staff questioned her capacity in relationship to cutting her hair and provided information collected showing this was a cultural ritual. Client informed advocate that both she and her husband were Native Americans. Client informed DRI advocate that the SW should not have discussed her issues, that she had a right to make her niece her POA and that any disagreements in the past were resolved. She said she was going to file a complaint against SW. She informed advocate that niece had assisted with hiring an attorney on her behalf who provided information about her rights and advised that she could leave the facility at any time and choose who she wanted to help her. She said she didn't need our help since she already hired an attorney. She said that she and husband agreed that niece was the most appropriate family member to help her with choices she had to make. With client's approval, advocate provided written information about SSDI survivor's benefits, Native American cultural rituals, and VA pension survivor's benefits eligibility, if husband served during war time (which she stated that he had). Advocate referred her to P&A if she or niece had any disability rights related concerns or questions in the future and she suggested that she may wish to review the publications provided to help in determining benefits that she may be eligible to receive. OUTCOME: Information on rights and financial entitlements provided to help client and her POA in accessing benefits and pursuing discharge. A referral to the P&A was provided in case disability rights information and/or advocacy assistance needed in future and client was informed that her case would be closed. Follow up closing letter sent with Idaho VA Division of Veteran's Services contact information and a P&A brochure was enclosed so she had DRI contact information. Advocate determined that client was making informed choices, had legal representation to protect her rights and was provided with the resources to help her and niece advocate for discharge and benefit access. 1.People with disabilities in facilities will live free from neglect. 2.Neglect in facilities. 3.Investigate allegations of neglect of people with disabilities in facilities according to case selection criteria. 4.Collboration with the Senor Ombudsman occurred in efforts to extend the eviction notice and to assist with locating another placement. 5. One (1) case was carried over from FY 2016, and an additional five (5) cases were handled under the priority during FY 2017 but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A 56-year-old Caucasian female contacted DRI diagnosed with lung cancer, emphysema, and COPD requesting assistance with a five (5) day notice of eviction from a residential assisted living facility (RALF). Client received a notice of eviction stating she is breaking the rules by smoking her vapor inside the facility and has 5 days to vacate. Client said she paid for her November 2016 rent and is terminally ill. Caller said she is not smoking inside the facility and needs help as she is unsure of her rights. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE: After documenting client’s verbal consent to expedite case assistance due to time limitations, DRI advocate contacted the Senior Ombudsman who clarified that she was assisting client and believed that client had violated the facility policy. DRI advocate reviewed the rules for RALFs showing that under these circumstances the 5-day eviction notice violated the rules and concluded that client should have been given a thirty (30) day notice. DRI advocate then contacted IDHW Licensing and Certification (L&C) RALF Division Director and presented concerns regarding the rule violation. L&A RALF Director agreed and contacted the RALF Administrator. OUTCOME: Client was given a 30-day eviction notice allowing for more time to locate another appropriate placement. Since the Senior Ombudsman and the RALF SW was assisting with locating another placement/discharge planning, the case was closed. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will have their rights protected. 2. Rights violations in facilities. 3. Investigate allegations of rights violations of people with disabilities in facilities according to rights violation case selection criteria. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved, 5. Three (3) cases were handled under the priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Daughter of a 67-year-old female of two or more races and diagnosed with advanced Alzheimer’s contacted DRI reporting concerns regarding the care her mother received at the RALF she resides in as well as reported potential abuse from her mother’s husband. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE-Preliminary investigation & monitoring of outside agencies investigations: DRI advocate contacted daughter and collected additional information regarding concerns with RALF which were primarily that RALF was not monitoring husband’s visits and were not allowing daughter to advocate on behalf of her mother since they claimed that husband was her guardian as well as next of kin. Daughter alleged that he was sneaking in laxatives and milk of magnesia for client to drink to help with her bowl movements even though not medically prescribed since he appeared to have a fixation regarding fecal matter. There was an incident in which daughter saw husband in the bathroom with client wearing a glove searching in her rectum claiming that he knew there was a stool that needed to be removed even though this action was making client extremely uncomfortable. DRI advocate directed/suggested daughter to file a report with Adult Protection Services (APS) and with IDHW Licensing and Certification (L&C) against husband and verified with both agencies that investigations were being conducted. DRI conducted a review on the Idaho Repository to locate guardianship case file which showed that a guardian was not appointed on behalf of client resulting in clarification that client’s husband was more than likely her POA not her guardian and suggested to clarify this information with the facility. PA educated daughter on revoking POA and referred her to Idaho Legal Aid and ISB lawyer referral service for assistance and advise. DRI also provided suggestions to daughter on how to better advocate on her mother’s behalf at RALF, and provided information from the rules on family planning development and how to clarify legal status of husband: OUTCOME: Husbands legal status regarding guardianship of client clarified. APS and L&C conducted primary investigations regarding allegations of abuse by husband and neglect by facility. Daughter, her sister, and client’s husband participated at a Family Planning meeting. Even though husband denied administering medications not prescribed, facility nurse clarified that additional medication other than that prescribed would be considered a violation of rules and policies; that monitoring of visitation is occurring; and that appropriate bowel treatment was being provided. Daughter reported that she believed meeting successful and plans to advocate on mother’s behalf to move her to her home so she can care for her. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will have their rights protected. 2. Rights violations in facilities. 3. Conduct monitoring of up to nine (9) selected facilities, including facilities housing children with disabilities under the Juvenile Corrections Act. 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, were class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Besides monitoring PADD funded state-run Southwest Idaho Treatment Facility (SWITC), a licensed intermediate care facility for individuals with intellectual disabilities (ICF/ID), DRI monitored both state-run psychiatric hospitals, State Hospital South (SHS) and State Hospital North (SHN); one (1) licensed children’s residential care facility housing children under the Juvenile Corrections Act, and a residential assisted living facility RALF). Monitoring activities at State Hospital North (SHN) during FY2017 continued its focus on the systemic case opened addressing concerns identified with its restraint and seclusion (R&S) policy and practices. During FY2016, SHN agreed to revise its policy and provide additional training to staff on proper usage and the use of trauma informed care (TIC). This systemic case was carried over to F 2017 to continue monitoring these issues and to determine if the policy changes and training of staff were making changes in its practices. DRI staff attorney conducted two (2) monitor visits during FY2017 and continued its efforts addressing its concerns with R&S practices through revised policy review and compliance monitoring, negotiation, correspondence and filing a complaint with IDHW’s Bureau of Facility Standards, Idaho’s licensing and investigatory agency. DRI monitored SHN in November, assessed facility conditions, met with clients and residents, opened new systemic investigation cases, and reviewed records determining that many of the abusive and neglectful (A&N) R&S practices were still continuing even after SHN’s R&S policy revisions. These practices include the failure to: -Incorporate effective TIC practices; -Cease its use of safety room seclusion; -Debrief after R&S with patients and their treatment teams; -Release from R&S as soon as calmed; -Document and follow chemical restraint protocol; -Document alternative interventions prior to R&S; -Document rational for R&S usage; -Cease its use of restraint for non-emergencies; and -Cease its use of improper treatment override practices. Next, DRI consulted with an independent psychiatrist specializing in trauma informed care (TIC) and behavioral programming who agreed to review redacted records collected. This doctor concluded that SHN’s R&S policy was incomplete and that trauma informed care was lacking and person centered planning was missing. These findings were forwarded to SHN and its Deputy Attorney General (DAG). SHN response was not sufficient. Additional emails were sent requesting a response as to how the facility planned on addressing current concerns suggesting to meet to discuss concerns but no meetings were facilitated. DRI then filed a complaint with the Idaho surveying/investigating agency, the Bureau of Facility Standards (BFS), resulting in an unannounced recertification survey and investigation. BFS identified several deficiencies, some addressing R&S, requiring SHN to submit a plan of corrections (POC), eventually approved by BFS. DRI reviewed the survey/investigation results and the corresponding POCs and determined that not all of DRI’s concerns were investigated/addressed in this survey. A second DRI monitor was conducted meeting with clients and residents and additional systemic cases were opened. Throughout FY2017, eleven (11) more cases were opened in addition to the ten (10) previously opened between FY 2015-2016. Records were reviewed and DRI determined that many of its R&S concerns were still continuing and that SHN was not in full compliance with its POC approved by BFS. Recent hospital improvements reports were requested and a letter was sent to the SHN administrator, to BFS non-long-term care supervisor, and to the SHN IDHW Deputy Attorney General (DAG) outlining DRI’s current concerns demanding a response. Since negotiations with SHN has not resulted in substantial improvement, and since SHN is licensed as a hospital, DRI added a priority to its FY2018 priorities to collaborate with stakeholders to propose licensing R&S rules for hospitals. DRI monitored State Hospital South (SHS) three (3) times during FY2016. Monitors of all units were completed, conditions inside and outside were determined clean and maintained. The R&S rooms were observed but no concerns identified. Advocate met with residents and provided I&R services but no priority abuse, neglect or rights violations issues presented nor was any priority case assistance requested. DRI rights posters and contact information was posted and accessible on all units and brochures on rights in facilitates and about P&A disseminated. In addition to the monitor visits, the advocate is an ongoing member of the facility’s Patient’s Rights Committee. She met with this committee two (2) times during FY2017 providing the opportunity to educate about the P&A and its services as well as provide facility rights training. Conditions and issues of residents discussed but no case assistance requested. DRI monitored a private juvenile detention center licensed as a children’s residential care facility located in rural Idaho. Since students were in class, DRI was unable to meet with residents directly but did observe in classrooms. A tour was provided and all units observed as well as fenced outdoors area which included exercise equipment and a basketball court. All residents with autism or on the spectrum are housed on the same unit. Facility well maintained inside and out. Rights posters posted on all units. Grievance procedures explained and all units had complaint forms and a box to enclose complaint forms for privacy. Medication refusal policies discussed, admission agreements and restraint policy reviewed. This facility uses crisis prevention intervention (CPI) and all staff trained as required by state rules. Facility focuses on lesser restrictive behavior interventions and uses positive behavior programming so the use of CPI restraints is seldom required. DRI determined that the services provided met state rule requirements. Only concern requiring follow up was with the segregated units for children with autism and on the spectrum and follow up will occur. DRI picture poster explaining rights in facilities will be revised and sent. DRI educated staff on P&A services, left copies of brochures and its FY2017 Statement of Priorities and believes that staff are aware of services we can provide and will refer to P&A as needed. As a result of case assistance for a PAIMI funded client requiring investigation regarding an allegation of sexual assault, DRI monitored the resident’s facility placement, a residential assisted living facility (RALF) located in rural Idaho in an isolated location. By the time of the monitor, DRI had determined from the evidence collected that the allegations more than likely did not occur, primarily due to the fact that the accused was not residing at the facility when the alleged assault was reported to have occurred While at the facility, with client’s consent, administration showed additional records showing previous complaints filed with L&C and resulting investigations in which claims were not substantiated. Client had a history of delusional episodes and verification of medical diagnosis with historical summary was provided and reviewed. During its monitor, DRI observed all areas and was allowed to inspect some of the residents’ housing units, with resident consent. This facility is an old motel and resident units were motel rooms housing two (2) residents each, and (1) one unit housed a married Hispanic couple. Intercoms provided in each unit for prompt staff access. Transportation services and community medical treatment access explained. Met with administration reviewing policies and services programming. Recreational opportunities were reviewed, R&S methods were clarified and discussed but rarely used according to documentation shown. Scheduled menus were reviewed, rights listings were posted in lobby & cafeteria areas, and contact information to Adult Protection Services (APS), L&C as well as DRI were already posted. Even though this facility was old, it was well maintained inside and out. This facility is located approximately 15 miles from the nearest city but transportation services are provided on occasion by staff but primarily from Medicaid paid non-medical and non-emergency medical transportation providers. This facility is located within a rural township where family residential homes are located within sight as well as a post office, grocery store and café. DRI advocates visited with residents, provided information about its services, and disseminated brochures. No complaints or concerns were reported from residents and DRI assistance was not requested. No deficiencies or concerns identified. After this monitor, L&C certification surveys posted on line were reviewed and no deficiencies cited for several years. DRI determined that follow up monitors were not currently needed. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will have their rights protected. 2. Rights violations in facilities. 3. Identify and address unlawful denials of the Protection and Advocacy system’s access to residents in facilities and records subject to P&A federal access authority. 4. No collaborative efforts occurred. 5. 0 cases were handled under this priority since P&A did not encounter any incidents on behalf of PAIR clients regarding denials to access residents or records. 6. Provide at least one case summary:

B. Priorities and Objectives for the Current Fiscal Year

Please include a statement of priorities and objectives for the current fiscal year (the fiscal year succeeding that covered by this report), which should contain the following information:

  1. a statement of each prioirty;
  2. the need addressed by each priority; and;
  3. a description of the activities to be carried out under each priority.

Fiscal Year 2017 PAIR Priorities DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION 1. Public or private entities will not discriminate on the basis of disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2. Accessibility 3. Accept up to three (3) cases of discrimination against people with disabilities in violation of Title II or Title III of the ADA. 4. On behalf of a client, DRI attorney provided legally based technical assistance consultation to client’s attorney on writing an effective letter of support to county jail regarding right to access effective communication. DRI attorney is collaborating with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in District of Idaho assisting with an investigation into systemic disability discrimination actions against a Medicaid paid non-emergency transportation provider, Citi Link in Coeur d’ Alene, Idaho. 5. Eleven (11) cases were opened under this priority during FY2017 and one (1) carried over from FY 2016 but no class actions. 6. Two (2) case summaries provided on behalf of same client: Client is a 71-year-old man with physical impairments due to bladder cancer resulting in his use of an ostomy bag and with physical impairments substantially limiting his ability to walk, stand & bend called P&A/DRI requesting assistance to address issues he is having with Givens Hot Springs & Pool in which an employee recently told him he would no longer be able to swim at their facility because he has an ostomy bag and they believe it will contaminate the pool. He had been swimming there with the bag for eight (8) years, but recently, a patron saw him with the bag and complained to employees, resulting in management/owner prohibiting him from further use. He said there were others using ostomy bags while swimming there, as well. His doctor sent the hot springs a letter, explaining the bag poses no risk of contamination and is safe and sealed, but they are still denying him access. P&A CASE SERVICE: DRI staff attorney provided client with rights information protections under ADA and the Idaho Human Rights Act (IHRA) and located & provided him information and materials specific to this issue from the www.ostomy.org. Client planned to take materials to the hot springs to educate them on ADA rights protections. OUTCOME: Client called back a week later to report that he had sent such materials to the hot springs owner, met with the owner to discuss, and the owner recanted his decision and allowed him to start swimming there again. Client reported there were others who swam there with ostomy bags, in addition to himself, so we helped not only him, but others like him, be able to continue swimming at the hot springs pool. Because issue resolved successfully, SR was closed. Shortly after informing DRI that issue resolved, client called P&A again explaining that he encountered discrimination issues with employees telling him that he could only use hot springs pool in the early morning hours, before they were open to the public. P&A SERVICES: Case Service- DRI staff attorney sent a letter to hot springs owner/management, informing them of their potential ADA Title III and Idaho Human Rights Act violations informing that if they didn’t immediately offer equal access to client, administrative complaints would be filed with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Idaho Human Rights Commission. OUTCOME: Hot springs owner responded to the letter stating that they would allow client access during normal business hours; and they allow him access in the morning, before business hours, if he would like. SYSTEMIC CHANGE: Hot springs management also agreed to incorporate the ADA guidelines into their operations manual and to train their employees accordingly. Because issue was concluded successfully in client’s favor as well as others with ostomy bags using facility, SR was closed. 1. Public or private entities will not discriminate on the basis of disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2. Accessibility 3. Accept up to three (3) cases of discrimination against people with disabilities by public or private transportation providers in violation of Title II or Title III of the ADA. 4. DRI collaborated with the District of Idaho’s U.S. Attorney’s office assisting DOJ complaint investigations. 5. Four (4) cases were opened under this priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Client is a 22-year-old Caucasian female with physical impairments (loss of the use of her legs), neurological disorder (constant shaking of her head/hands), as well as depression, anxiety, PTSD, and schizoaffective disorder. She has been using a wheelchair now for a year due to the severity of her physical impairments. She had contacted DRI before seeking assistance with issues on Medicaid paid non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) services and was provided with the contact information to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) Medicaid transport program specialist, and to the Medicaid contract provider/Veyo manager to complain to in order to address issues with accessing NEMT services. She had tried addressing the issues she currently has with Veyo, the NEMT contracted provider, but was not getting her calls returned. Client needed assistance as soon as possible as she needed transport to an appointment (scheduled for the day after contacting DRI) to have stitches removed. P&A CASE SERVICE: Due to timelines, with caller’s documented verbal permission, DRI attorney contacted both the IDH Medicaid transport program specialist and the Medicaid Veyo manager via telephone and email, explaining client’s situation and requesting they intervene to resolve the issue in time for client to make her appointment on the next day. OUTCOME: IDHW medical transport specialist intervened and client was able to get transportation scheduled with Veyo for a ride to her appointment. Client was directed to follow up with the Veyo manager to resolve any further remaining issues and if not resolved, to call DRI back. Because client’s issue was successfully resolved, SR was closed and client didn’t call back requesting additional assistance. Systemic work completed: During FY2016, P&A/DRI received multiple calls from individuals alleging disability discrimination issues against Citylink (fixed route and paratransit provider) located in Coeur d Alene regarding paratransit eligibility issues & transport denials resulting in this priority being added to its FY2017 Statement of Priorities (SOPs). DRI represented some clients in appeal hearings, and assisted others with compiling supporting documentation, facilitating support letters from Idaho Vocational Rehabilitation and the Idaho Commission for the Blind (ICBVI) resulting in minimal relief as well as encouraged those that were still denied to file disability discrimination cases with the Department of Justice/United States Attorney's Office for the District of Idaho. During FY2017, DRI contacted the US Attorney's Office in Idaho and presented these issues. After consent received, DRI staff attorney facilitated consent releases to discuss their cases and provided collected documentation resulting in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Idaho investigating these complaints. This systemic case was carried over to FY2018 priorities. EDUCATION 1. Students with disabilities in Idaho public schools will not be subjected to disciplinary actions that violate their rights under IDEA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 2. Abuse 3. Provide assistance to parents to prevent or stop the use of unnecessary restraint and seclusion in public schools. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved. 5. There were no cases or class actions. 6. One (1) case summary. No calls were received on behalf of, or from, PAIR students regarding concerns of restraint and seclusion during FY2016 but individual abuse cases and systemic abuse cases were opened under PADD & PAIMI funding. A summary of systemic work completed is provided: DRI received several calls from parents from the same school district regarding concerns of inappropriate restraint of their children, some resulting in injury. DRI sent letters to all parents with students on IEPs asking that they contact them if they have concerns of R&S. DRI opened six (6) individual cases and in which abuse investigations are being conducted under PADD and PAIMI funding. Three (3) systemic cases have been opened to address concerns with school’s R&S practices. These cases are carried over to FY2018. This work will also benefit PAIR and PATBI students who are encountering inappropriate restraints in this district and potentially statewide, as well. 1. Students with disabilities in Idaho public schools will not be subjected to disciplinary actions that violate their rights under IDEA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 2. Abuse 3. File a complaint with the State Department of Education and, if appropriate, federal authorities regarding under-identification of children with emotional disturbance in violation of the “Child Find” requirement under the IDEA. 4. DRI collaborated with the Department of Juvenile Corrections and Idaho Federation of Families requesting data they had on behalf of students with SED and requested guidance from the National Disability Rights Network Educational expert, Ron Hager. 5. Priority not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: In 2015, Jeff D. v. Otter, a federal class action lawsuit filed on behalf of Idaho youth with serious emotional disturbances (SED) was settled and the implementation of the settlement is to occur within the next four years. Idaho was required to create a statewide process, across all child-serving systems, including the State Department of Education, to identify and screen youths for unmet mental health needs, as well as to provide appropriate mental health and educational services. One of the requirements of the Jeff D. class action lawsuit was for the state to estimate the expected range of its class members which were children with functional impairment and serious emotional disturbance (SED) who will qualify and access services in the new system of care to be developed. A Quality Management Improvement and Accountability (QMIA) Data and Reports Committee was formed which estimated 21,000 children in Idaho with SED. Additionally, the Idaho State Department of Education (SDE) has the responsibility to ensure that all public schools within its jurisdiction comply with “child find requirements” mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The SDE’s child count report for school year 2015-2016 reported a total of 1, 405 students statewide identified under the emotional disturbance category, significantly less that the committee’s estimate of children with SED in Idaho. DRI staff conducted research to show the disparity between the estimated class numbers and the SED’s Child Find reported numbers (as shown above); and national trends and work in this area completed by P&As, educational agencies and professionals addressing the issue of under-identification of students with emotional disturbances. Contact to the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections and to the Idaho Federation of Families with Mental Illness was completed to collect additional data. Guidance and technical assistance was requested from the National Disabilities Rights Network (NDRN) educational expert, Attorney Ron Hager. DRI began drafting its complaint but postponed completion due to suggested guidance to collect and include additional data. This systemic project was carried over to be completed and filed during FY2018. 1. Students with disabilities will have access to appropriate transition services to help the student prepare for post-secondary activities, (e.g. college, training, employment, adult independent living, etc.). 2. Access to appropriate transition services. 3. Provide advice, resources, strategies, or other short term assistance to parents and students with disabilities to ensure access to appropriate transition services under IDEA, Section 504, and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved 5. One (1) case was opened under this priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Client is a 17-year-old Caucasian female diagnosed with epilepsy whose guardian called the P&A requesting information about possible resources for client regarding disability accommodations and access for a service animal, as she is going to attend the University of Idaho this fall. P&A CASE SERVICE: The P&A reviewed client's information, and confirmed that the client and her guardian declined disability services through an IEP or 504 plan at her high school, at this time. The client wished to request accommodations at the U of I, as she recently visited the Mayo Clinic for further assessments regarding the increasing seizure activity due to her epilepsy. Her high school administration provided her requested accommodations informally. The P&A located and provided program information about the U of I disability services program and procedures for accessing services, including contact information. Service animal ADA information provided and legal protections were explained including information on filing a complaint, if needed. Referrals and information on Idaho Vocational Rehabilitation services (IDVR) and center for independent living services, provided and if difficulties occur in accessing these services, a referral to the Client Assistance Program (CAP) program operated by DRI provided in writing. Client was directed to contact P&A if difficulties arise. OUTCOME: As a result of the P&A's assistance, the client and her guardian have information and resources needed to advocate for post graduate academic adjustments and disability services access at the U of I. Client and guardian are aware that they can contact DRI, if additional assistance needed. 1. Students with disabilities will have access to appropriate transition services to help the student prepare for post-secondary activities, (e.g. college, training, employment, adult independent living, etc.). 2. Access to appropriate transition services. 3. Conduct transition workshops that provide information and educate on the benefits of competitive, integrated employment. 4. DRI had a display booth at the Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired (ICBVI) College/Career Transition Fair; Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities (ICDD) sponsored training given by DRI provided to Hispanic students with disabilities and their parents; DRI staff attorney is co-chair of the Idaho State Bar’s Diversity Section Love the Law! Committee facilitating and participating at three different events throughout FY2017. 5. 0 cases were handled under this priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: DRI participated at the ICVBI College/Career Transition Fair providing a display booth presenting information about DRI and transition services, the benefits of competitive integrated employment and how DRI can help reach employment goals to 37 students with visual impairment or blindness; DRI and ICDD in its collaborative efforts to outreach to Hispanic students and their families, facilitated a training sponsored by ICDD and given by DRI discussing the benefits of pursuing competitive integrated employment by utilizing Social Security (SS) work incentives. Training was given to 15 Hispanic students and 12 parents. Information provided included utilizing SS work incentives to allow students to work while on benefits to reach employment goals; how and when to report earnings to SSA; how IDVR can help in accessing workplace issues/needs; and age 18 SS redetermination issues and procedures when working towards an employment goal. DRI staff attorney is acting co-chair of the Idaho State Bar’s Diversity Section Love the Law! Committee, a pipeline program to encourage students from minority, low-income, underrepresented, and diverse backgrounds to pursue a career in the law. Events were hosted for high school and college-age youth from those backgrounds, where the students can interact with and learn from judges, attorneys, law professors, law enforcement officials, and court staff. As committee co-chair, DRI attorney facilitated monthly committee meetings and oversaw the following events planned around the Boise area: 225th Anniversary of the Bills of Rights Event. Students were invited to attend this day-long CLE held in Boise, to learn about the Bill of Rights and related caselaw in Idaho as well as hot topics re: the bills rights and civil liberties today. Approximately 48 students were in attendance; Turning 18 in Idaho Event. Students were invited to a half-day event centered on the Turning 18 In Idaho brochure created by the Idaho Law Foundation. The brochure summarizes the various laws that apply to individuals upon turning 18, including various topics like family law/custody, civil liability, and contract rights. Attorneys specializing in those various areas volunteered to lead a small group discussion on each of these topics, followed by a large panel discussion at the end. Approximately 70 students were in attendance; Constitution Day Event. A volunteer from LTL and a volunteer from ACE (Attorneys for Civic Education) went to a school to present to class(es) on the Constitution in honor of Constitution Day and to promote LTL and ACE. Two schools participated, covering approximately 160 students total. In addition to hosting events, this Committee offered scholarships to help pay the cost of LSAT test fees, LSAT test prep courses, and law school admission/application fees for the Idaho law schools. Students must be from diverse, minority, low-income, or underrepresented backgrounds to be eligible for such scholarships. Four (4) scholarships were awarded to students in Idaho during FY2017; As well as helping with planning the annual Tools for Life Transition Fair, DRI provided a training titled "Hot Topics in Employment: Rights of Workers with Disabilities" discussing rights of workers with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title I, Section 504, and other laws. Hot topics included the right to reasonable accommodations, often needed to attain & retain competitive integrated employment, and how to access them; the Work Innovation Opportunities Act (WIOA) which provides protections against IDVR and schools continuing the practice of developing individual plans of employment (IPE) and individual education transition plans that place transition students in sheltered workshops without first providing other working opportunities; and information on fair wages and the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) protections - provided to 23 students, parents and teachers. Power Point copies and DRI brochures disseminated. GUARDIANSHIP 1. Promote the rights of people with disabilities who are, or may be subjected to, unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 2. Free from unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 3. Participate on the Idaho Supreme Court committee on Guardianships and Conservatorships to represent the rights and perspectives of peoples with disabilities regarding guardianships or conservatorships. 4. DRI is a member of the Idaho Supreme Court Committee on Guardianships and Conservatorships and collaboration occurs on this committee with judges, attorneys, trial court administrators, Idaho Legal Aid services, Commission on Aging Administrator, and Mental Health Court & Veterans Court coordinators in efforts to improve Idaho Guardianship & Conservatorship protections. 5. 0 cases were opened under this objective since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: The DRI Legal Director (LD) continued her membership on the Idaho Supreme Court (ISC) Committee on Guardianships and Conservatorships (G/C). This committee is tasked with revising Idaho’s guardianship and conservatorship statutes to better protect Idahoans. Through this membership, she has promoted the rights of people with disabilities by influencing this committee to evaluate the Idaho Magistrate court’s practice of primarily appointing full guardianships and conservatorships, and advocating for courts to consider alternatives to full guardianships, such as limited guardianships and the supported decision-making model. DRI LD helped this committee submit for a WINGS grant from the American Bar Association for $30,000 to educate Idaho attorneys on statutory guardianship revisions and how to represent clients to include alternatives to guardianship during court proceedings. The grant was approved and will include giving 4 CLE presentations in Coeur d’ Alene, Boise, Twin Falls and Pocatello on ethics, supported decision making, judicial expectations from attorneys and the new court rules. She is also a member of the Committee’s Rules and Legislation Guardianship Subcommittee. During FY2016, this subcommittee amended statutory changes to the temporary guardianship sections for both adults and minors. The amendments were passed by the full committee and submitted to the Idaho Supreme Court for approval. HB 148 was passed in both chambers and signed by the governor to go into effect July 1, 2017. The recommended changes include providing for the appointment of co-guardians in certain circumstances. HB 148 also provides clarification on the appointment of a temporary guardian and withdraws language from the Court Visitor and IDHW Evaluation Committee report section and places it in court rule. LD proposed a motion that was seconded asking the committee to review, discuss, and recommend for approval the work group’s recommendations around court visitor reports and IDHW evaluation committee reports. The rules are designed to provide the court with additional, tailored information in order for the judges to craft specific orders based on an individual’s unique circumstances. The proposed rule was changed and went into effect July 1, 2017 to coincide with the legislative changes. Another attorney committee member and the DRI LD presented at the Idaho State Bar annual conference discussing ethical considerations when representing individuals with diminished capacity and what attorneys need to be advising their clients. Their presentation focused on changes as a result of the guardianship committee and the focus on alternatives to full plenary guardianships. 1. Promote the rights of people with disabilities who are, or may be subjected to unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 2. Free from unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 3. Advocate for the implementation and use of the supported decision making model as an alternative to guardianships. 4. LD is a member of the Idaho Supreme Court Guardianship and Conservatorship Committee’s Subcommittee on supported decision making comprised of attorneys and judges. This subcommittee was asked to publish an article for the Idaho State Bar Advocate publication. LD also was asked by the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) to publish an article on supported decision making. 5. No cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary. A summary of work completed is provided: During FY2015, DRI LD successfully persuaded the committee to convene a Supported Decision Making (SDM) Sub-committee and has continued as a leading member, successfully directing many of its activities. During FY2017, the Supported Decision-Making Subcommittee sponsored the June/July issue of The Advocate and submitted four (4) articles on limited guardianship and supported decision-making. The Advocate is the monthly publication by the Idaho State Bar. The articles published included an introduction "New Chapter in Idaho's Guardianships: Efforts of the Supreme Court Committee to Improve the Practice by Judge John Judge; "Supported Decision Making as an Alternative to Overbroad and Undue Guardianship" and a "Practice Tip: A Practical Tool for Lawyers". DRI LD was asked as a member of the SDM Subcommittee to draft an article on supported decision making for the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW). Her article was published in IDHW's Developmental Disabilities Division's first agency newsletter. At the Tools for Life Annual Transition Conference, LD presented a session on supported decision making as an alternative to guardianship and conservatorship. This presentation focused on allowing students with disabilities to participate in and self-direct decisions that affect their lives. Presentation was provided to 31 students, parents and teachers. Guardianship packages were given which included the Self Advocacy on Guardianship manual, a sample supported decision making form from Texas and a termination petition. 1. People with disabilities will be free from abusive or unnecessary guardianships or conservatorships. 2. Free from abusive or unnecessary guardianships and conservatorships. 3. Provide legal representation to up to four (4) people with disabilities to modify or terminate abusive or unnecessary guardianships or conservatorships. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved. 5. Two (2) cases were handled under this objective but no class actions. One (1) case is a carry over from FY2016 and will be carried over to FY2018 since DRI was appointed as client’s guardian ad litem (GAL). 6. Provide at least one case summary: Client is a 76-year-old Caucasian female with diabetes and related physical impairments (toes amputated due to diabetes issues), along with possible dementia. Client has called DRI in the past due to issues with guardian (GDN) and conservator (CSN) proceedings. She called again reporting that daughter obtained a GDN and CNS without her permission or knowledge and requested assistance to remove due to the actions daughter is taking on her behalf: selling her car without permission, not allowing contact with a former foster son, keeping personal belongings at GDN home without allowing client to have them, not involving client in medical decisions, etc. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE & preliminary investigation: DRI staff attorney had previously provided information and resources needed to file a complaint with the court against GDN, resulting in a hearing in January of 2016. DRI staff attorney met with client on multiple occasions, reviewing notes and copies of pleadings that client had kept concluding that the Judge determined that she did need a GDN and that daughter was appropriate to serve in that capacity. With client’s permission, DRI also communicated with GAL regarding case. After reviewing records and speaking with GAL, it became apparent that client would not have enough evidence to go forward with trying to terminate or modify her GDN and CNS. Although GAL does not agree with daughter as GDN, there is no one else to serve in that capacity and attempts to find a 3rd party professional guardian was unsuccessful as client has no funds to pay for such services. GAL does believe client needs a full GDN and CNS due to mental health issues and poor decisions regarding care, financial exploitation, etc. DRI staff also noticed that client’s memory appeared to be severely impaired, as client would frequently have issues articulating even simple sentences/concepts to staff, issues with remembering names/dates/times, and would call wondering who called her. DRI staff informed client that DRI did not have enough evidence to go forward with representation to terminate and/or modify the GDN and CNS, but referrals were provided to eldercare coordination/coordinators (both court sponsored and private) to help with mediating issues with GDN and CNS, hold GDN more accountable, and assist with involving client more in medical decisions. OUTCOME: Because case lacked legal merit, no further assistance could be provided. MEDICAID 1. People with disabilities will have access to appropriate Medicaid services. 2. Access to appropriate medical services. 3. Ensure implementation of the CMS information bulletin “Clarification of Medicaid Coverage of Services to Children with Autism”, dated July 2, 2014, through public policy or other system change activities. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved 5. 0 cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary. A summary of work completed is provided: DRI Executive Director (ED) is a member of the IDHW Committee on DD Service Access and in his absence, the DRI LD attends. Between the two of them, they attended (7) meetings during FY2017, allowing the opportunity to ensure implementation of the CMS information bulletin “Clarification of Medicaid Coverage of Services to Children with Autism”, dated July 2, 2014. They provided comments on the progress of the changes to the Medicaid children's DD service system, including comments regarding provider qualifications, service descriptions, eligibility, and assessment tools to be used. There will be a five (5) year transition to the new system in order to get enough trained providers. OUTREACH/TRAINING 1. People with disabilities will have increased awareness about the services offered by DRI and the Client Assistance Program (CAP). 2. Access to P&A advocacy. 3. Conduct outreach to transitions-age youth with disabilities, including transition-age youth in facilities. 4. DRI is a member of the Idaho Interagency Council on Secondary Transition (IICST) collaborating with the State Department (SED), Vocational Rehabilitation, Idaho Assistive Technology Project (IATP), the Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities (ICDD), providers and businesses to improve transition services and helped in planning the annual Tools 4 Life conference to transition-aged students. 5. O cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary. A summary of work completed is provided: DRI is a member of the Idaho Council on Secondary Transition and its primary purpose is to review Idaho’s performance in meeting the needs of transition age youth, address barriers to transition, and help coordinate the Tools for Life Transition Conference sponsored by the Idaho AT Project (IATP). During FY2017, the Council received information from IDVR on its second year of providing pre-employment transition services (Pre-ETS) required by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act. Sponsored programs included college camps at BSU, ISU, and Lewis-Clark State College; McCall Science Camp; IDVR’s summer work experience; and Idaho Parents Unlimited (IPUL)’s summer art program, all aimed at getting work or college experiences to transition age youth ages 16-21. Programs will be provided next year, with possibly more introduced. Idaho’s statistics for youth with disabilities participating in work, college or training after high school are slowly improving, but a full third of those reported were not participating in anything one year after high school; At the Tools for Life Transition Conference, DRI provided a display booth outreaching to approximately 200 students, teachers, providers and family members. Information was provided about DRI services; how DRI can assist transition students & planning; and information about SS Work Incentives benefits and how they can help beneficiaries achieve competitive integrated employment; In addition to the training session provided at the 2017 Tools for Life Conference titled “Hot Topics in Employment” (already noted above under the Education Priorities Section), DRI provided four (4) additional trainings on various transition issue topics: 1) "Self-Advocacy-Making Dreams a Reality" - clarifying the definition of self-advocacy, discussing characteristics of self-advocacy and skill development, and including examples of transition opportunities that encourage decision making and increased independence, to 55 students, parents, teachers and providers; 2) Transition IEP's -The Force Be With You - providing training on transition IEP plans, what is important to know, understanding rights, questions to be asking and students roles as well as others, given to 31 students, parents and teachers; 3) Supported Decision Making - discussing supported decision making as an alternative to guardianship and conservatorship allowing students with disabilities to participate in, and self-direct decisions that affect their life, provided to 31 students, parents and teachers. Guardianship packages were given out which included the Self Advocacy on Guardianship Manual, a sample Supported Decision Making form from Texas and a termination petition; and 4) "You have the Power-Go Vote" discussing voter rights for persons with disabilities and accessible voting options given to one (1) student; DRI presented transition training twice at a high school to 20 students and 9 teachers and aids. Questions and answers were discussed after the presentation. Students were encouraged to contact DRI for help with transition planning and if assistance needed to resolve disputes they have with IDVR; The PAIR/PATBI Coordinator is a board member of the Brain Injury Alliance of Idaho (BIAID). She and two (2) BIAID board members were asked to provide information about BIAID, its activities and its brochure that she drafted to help college students with TBI access post-graduate academic adjustments and disability services. Information about DRI & CAP services were provided to 17 statewide collegiate disability services directors. DRI brochures and copies of the BIAID brochure were taken to give to students with disabilities attending post-graduate institutions applying for academic adjustments & disability services. 150 CAP brochures were sent to the School to Work Transition Program in Coeur d’Alene. 1. People with disabilities will have increased awareness about the services offered by DRI and the Client Assistance Program (CAP). 2. Access to P&A advocacy. 3. Conduct outreach in the community to increase awareness of services offered by DRI and the CAP. 4. DRI participated in the Consortium of Idahoans (CID) sponsored Disability Awareness Day event at the Capitol. CID includes service providers, the ICDD, and the State Independent Living Council. DRI participated in a meeting with Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, ICDD, SILC, and the NW ADA Center staff at the Lt. Governor’s office addressing concerns regarding various state websites not currently accessible DRI participated at the Idaho Veteran’s Affairs Mental Health Summit. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: In addition to outreach efforts for transition-aged students and to the Fort Hall Indian Reservation (noted in above and below objectives), DRI conducted the following outreach increasing awareness of services offered by P&A: DRI participated by having a display booth at the CID sponsored Disability Awareness Day at the Capitol, outreaching to approximately 200 legislators, persons with disabilities, disability agencies and providers. Information on DRI services was provided and the Auto Mark voting machine was available as a demonstration tool for voting access; DRI met with Lt. Governor’s staff, and staff from the Idaho Commission for the Blind, State Independent Living Council, and the NW ADA Center to address concerns regarding the various state websites that were currently not accessible to individuals with disabilities. This meeting resulted in the formation of a collaborative work group to identify and assist with addressing changes necessary to the states’ program for addressing accessibility according to the WCAG 2.0 II guidelines as outlined under Title II of the ADA (access to government services/programs); Approximately 10 University of Idaho students participating in the Center on Disabilities and Human Development program visited the DRI office. Students were visiting disability related agencies in the Boise area. Information was provided on DRI and our services, the types of issues we see, the rise of abuse/neglect in facilities, and a brief demonstration on the ESS TouchMark Voting Machine was conducted. Two students were Hispanic/Latino, and the others Caucasian. All were between the ages of 18-23; DRI was given a tour at the Canyon County Juvenile Justice Detention Center (JJDC). The tour was conducted by the JJDC Administrator discussing the operation of this facility, how many minors it houses and information about its various programs and services provided and intake assessment procedures. Information about DRI & its services was provided and a request for DRI disability rights trainings was made; DRI attended a Fair Housing Forum sponsored by Housing and Urban Development. Purpose of the meeting was to plan the free Fair Housing Forum/Conference to take place in April 2018 (Fair Housing Month). Approximately 20 people were in attendance, including representatives from the cities of Nampa, Caldwell, and Meridian; Intermountain Fair Housing Council; various housing agencies; and the ADA Task Force.; DRI attended the Idaho Veterans Affairs (VA) Mental Health Summit. Information about DRI services was shared with veterans, VA staff and community providers. Approximately 150 VA staff, community providers and veterans attended; DRI met with staff at the Vet Center/Boise. Information was shared with VA staff about DRI and its services, the IATP (Idaho Assistive Technology Program) and its guidelines particularly regarding the lending library which allows individuals to ‘borrow and test’ assistive technology before having to actually purchase the items; DRI presented to teachers and students attending Renaissance High School and provided information about the P&A and its services. Information was also provided on how to access assistive technology available to students in the classroom and how to access available catalogues and school based learning systems for students with disabilities; DRI met with representatives from the Idaho Department of Labor as well as the DD Council to review a proposed website explaining access to the SSA disability program and work incentives. The review of the website included the creation of 6 short educational and informative animated videos portraying an individual with disabilities asking questions about how to apply for disability benefits, how to work while on benefits, and what alternative or accessible programs were available for an individual to use in order to accommodate their disability while working. These videos would later be developed and put on the IDOL ABLE to work website in early fall for public access. DRI met with members of the Region III Senior Services agency in Meridian Idaho regarding potential collaboration between agencies when providing community services to individuals with disabilities. Focus was on vulnerable adult programs and services (including SSA disability benefits) as well as promoting the Idaho Assistive Technology Project (IATP) as a resource for assistive technologies and services for the elderly in Idaho; DRI participated in an open forum community training/seminar with SILC discussing the recently appropriated A.B.L.E. act which allows individuals with disabilities prior to the age of 26 to enroll in a special savings program. This program will provide individuals with disabilities the opportunity to purchase certain items and services from this savings account without it impacting their disability benefits. In addition to 4987 CAP brochures provided to IDVR Regional offices state-wide upon request, 110 CAP brochures were sent to the Nez Perce Tribal Vocational office; and 340 CAP and 340 P&A brochures were sent to ISU Centers on Disabilities and Human Development. 1. Conduct outreach to unserved and underserved populations with disabilities. 2. Access to P&A advocacy. 3. Provide information about services offered by DRI and the CAP and other rights information to people with disabilities residing on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation. 4. Collaboration occurred with the Fort Hall Indian Reservation’s Vocational Rehabilitation office and the Tribal Council for Employment Rights (TERO) office for dissemination at the Bannock Fun Run Gathering. 5. 0 cases and no class actions were handled under the priority since no calls from PAIR clients who are members of the Fort Hall Reservation were received. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed under this priority is provided: DRI Advocate dropped off DRI & CAP brochures at the Tribal Vocational Rehabilitation office and at the Tribal TERO/EEOC Council who agreed to display at the VR table at an upcoming fun/run event. They also agreed to display at the vendors tables at the tribal casino hotel for upcoming event. DRI Advocate (who lives on reservation and is married to a tribal member) attended the Bannock Fun Run Gathering and distributed DRI brochures and CAP brochures at the VR & EEOC tables. She spoke with approximately 35 people, answered questions about who DRI is, what we do, and how we can help with services or resources outside of the reservation borders. The CAP program was explained, when asked about Vocational Rehabilitation Services. DRI Advocate hopes that the 'word of mouth' about CAP program and DRI services outside the borders will reach Native people with disabilities who may need, or want to access DRI services. DRI Advocate also met with the tribal VR administrator, the tribal advocate, and four tribal VR counselors. She spoke about CAP, the role of CAP, who DRI is, and what DRI/CAP do. CAP brochures were provided. The VR counselors asked about CAP employees, demographics, how experienced, as they feel that their circumstances are more than what CAP may be able to assist with. They explained that many issues had to do with "tribal politics". They explained that one consumer went to the council to resolve her issues with the tribal VR office. They said that since the council stepped in to resolve this client's issue, others now do the same. After this event, the Tribal Council directed its Executive Director to act in their place, which really is the true "CAP" role. Presently, issues are being micromanaged by the executive director, and tribal VR employees do not appreciate this conflict. Their jobs are constantly being threatened. They would like CAP to be involved, not the tribal council or executive director. It appears that tribal politics has compromised the tribal VR staff, in that whether or not the client's issues have merit, they are directed to follow suit of what the executive director is instructing them to do. This puts them in a very compromising position. The advocate encouraged the VR staff to inform their clients, as much as possible, about CAP. They can request her personally, if seeing a familiar face or Native person may help. However, the current process, dysfunctional that it may be, needs to be circumvented back to the CAP program. The DRI advocate and the VR administrator will communicate again, in hopes of rectifying the situation. Hopefully CAP can regain their role in the tribal VR program encouraging others to access additional P&A services. Hopefully, continuing discussions during FY2018 will continue to develop strategies to help resolve this situation. 1. People with disabilities will have increased awareness about the services offered by DRI to increase access to voting. 2. Access to voting 3. Conduct outreach/training in the community to increase awareness of DRI services, including voter training and information. 4. DRI collaborated with Living Independence Network Corp. (LINC) in conjunction with the Northwest (NW) ADA Center reviewing accessibility of polling locations. DRI PAVA/PAAT Coordinator, ICBVI, SILC, IATP Members from the Blind Commission, the State Independent Living Council, the Idaho Assistive Technology project and the NW ADA Center agreed to create a work group to address concerns identified during the 2016 federal election and to address concerns with the state IT and information stakeholders from the various state agencies during FY 2017. DRI collaborated with national S.A.B.E. program (Self Advocates Becoming Empowered) in promoting voting awareness, and participating in their exit polling of individuals with disabilities who voted in Idaho. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed under this priority is provided: Voter training was provided at the state run intermediate care facility for people with intellectual disabilities (ICF/ID) to seven (7) residents and five (5) staff. Information about voter rights and accessible voting options presented. Ten registration forms, election calendars and absentee voting applications were given to facility social worker (SW) in case needed. The SW later contacted DRI advocate requesting additional technical assistance to help two (2) residents vote in the presidential election. As noted above in the outreach to transition-aged youth priority, this voter training was provided at the Tools for Life conference to one (1) student and several participants were trained on the Auto Mark; During the transition training given to 23 high school students & 9 teachers and/or aides, training on voting rights and accessible voting options were also provided; DRI worked with Living Independence Network Corp. (LINC), a center for independent living (CIL), on reviewing accessibility of polling locations for the federal elections in November, 2016. DRI had previously filed a complaint with the Secretary of State’s office earlier in 2016, primarily focused on ADA county not being responsive enough about providing adequately trained poll workers at polling locations who were familiar enough with the new voting equipment to assist voters with casting their ballots. Ada County responded to the complaint by committing to better training of poll workers on the machines. They also introduced a strategic plan to review general accessibility of the polling locations throughout Ada County. Ada County contracted with LINC in conjunction with the NW ADA center staff to review all current active ADA County polling locations for accessibility. The outcome resulted in several “last minute” relocations of polling locations to provide adequate accessibility to voters with disabilities; DRI collaborated with the National Federation of the Blind to review the outcomes of the national elections held last fall and participated (via phone call) with the staff at the NFB to discuss the setbacks with regard to accessing voting machines and the lack of support blind individuals get at their polling places. Recent advances in technology support a more streamlined and efficient count of the votes but here in Idaho it was pointed out that the technical training aspect provided to poll workers who demonstrate the machines to potential voters is lacking. This was also discussed at a national level and it was determined this is a very real and ongoing issue throughout the country; DRI attended the Idaho Assistive Technology Council meeting (via phone) as a member of the council. DRI PAVA/ Coordinator provided information on recent voter feedback and problematic accessibility issues experienced across the state in 2016 election last November. Strategies were discussed with other members of the council on how best to approach addressing the concerns of voters with disabilities and providing meaningful and helpful information and materials to poll workers and county clerks on how to appropriately assist individuals with disabilities at the polls for next year’s (2018) federal election. Meeting also addressed on-going project with the state of Idaho’s website accessibility issue and the status of efforts to address the concerns to date. An agreement to focus on this issue was discussed and members signed on to make this a priority for the next several months. Members from the ICBVI, SILC, IATP and the NW ADA center were all in agreement in participating in a work group to address this concern with the state IT and information stakeholders from the various state agencies in the near future; DRI collaborated with the national Self Advocates Becoming Empowered (SABE) in promoting voting awareness, and participated in their exit polling of individuals with disabilities who voted in Idaho. The outcome was a comprehensive national report generated by S.A.B.E. outlining the problems that still exist within the voting experience for individuals with disabilities who wish to participate in the voting process locally and nationally. PUBLIC POLICY 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Analyze the effect on Idahoans with disabilities of closing the health insurance gap, and provide the information to policy makers and stakeholders. 4. DRI collaborated with the “Close the GAP Idaho”, CID, SILC and IDDC in efforts to address Idahoans with disabilities uninsured/in the insurance gap. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: The Idaho Healthy Plan was a name change for Medicaid expansion legislation in Idaho. DRI ED worked with “Close the Gap Idaho”, IDCC, SILC, and the endorsement of the Consortium of Idahoans for people with disabilities (CID) leading these groups in efforts to get Idaho Healthy Plan legislation passed during FY2017. ED complied recommendations concerning Medicaid block grants and the effect on people with disabilities in Idaho. ED provided oral testimony to the House Health and Welfare Committee showing the financial and economic effects to Idaho regarding lost federal Medicaid funding, the numbers of Idahoans who were underinsured and the effect to persons with disabilities in Idaho. Unfortunately, primarily due to federal election results during FY2017, any previous momentum gained during FY2016 convincing the legislature that those individuals with disabilities in the insurance gap needed to be insured were negated. Three (3) legislative bills providing minimal relief were drafted: Primary Care Access (H160) - provided $10 million in State funds to purchase access to primary care for people under the federal poverty level (FPL) who have chronic health conditions (to be defined in rules); Primary Care Access (S1082) — used catastrophic state trust (CAT fund) monies to purchase primary medical care for people with chronic health conditions, and “Life coaching” to help people get better jobs so they don’t need public assistance.; and Primary Care Access S1142aa — which also provided $10 million in State funds and included permission for the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) to apply for a waiver. DRI monitored these bills but did not take a public position since not necessary. OUTCOME: The sponsoring legislator for H160 withdrew his bill claiming that he couldn’t get it through his own committee; S1082 died in the Senate IDHW Committee; and S1142aa died in the Senate. Due to the current political climate, DRI did not carry over this priority but will consider adding in future Statement of Priorities (SOPs) depending on congressional election results for upcoming year(s). If the political landscape shifts during FY2018, DRI would still be able to address under the priority below which allows DRI to monitor and analyze emerging issues and legislation and their impact on people with disabilities, and provide this information to disability organizations and the Idaho legislature, however unlikely this presently appears as a possibility. 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Monitor legislative bills and proposed rules, analyze their impact on people with disabilities, and provide this information to disability organizations and others. 4. DRI’s monitoring of proposed legislation and rules that impact Idahoans with disabilities was passed onto other disability organizations such as IDCC, SILC, and the Consortium of Idahoans with Disabilities (CID), Idaho Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Americans Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Idaho and providers to consolidate like efforts when appropriate. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed under this priority is provided: This priority is included to address emerging issues regarding legislation and proposed rules not identified and included in the FY2017 SOPs. DRI ED monitored and provided information and analysis either in writing or orally to all member organizations of the Consortium for Idahoans with Disabilities (CID). This analysis helped in determining the best action for promoting the rights of PWDs in Idaho. The following lists legislation monitored and addressed during FY2017, in addition to those issues specifically included in the other PP objectives 1-Death Penalty legislation: DRI worked with ACLU, and disability advocates to draft a bill which would correct Constitutional deficiencies in Idaho’s Intellectual Disability Death Penalty statute, and prohibit use of capital punishment for defendants with serious mental illness. OUTCOME: Opposition from the Idaho Prosecutors’ Association made it unwise to introduce this bill this year. 2-End of Life/Medical Consent: This bill amends the Medical Consent Act and the Developmental Disabilities (DD) Guardianship statute. The bill clarifies that people with Developmental Disabilities have the right to consent or refuse consent to medical treatment unless that right is limited by a valid guardianship. DRI analyzed and supported this bill with ICDD, SILC and CID backing. This bill also revised the language on end of life decision making by guardians in Idaho Code 66-405. The new language is the same as the language used in child protection cases. This language has more interpretive history and is clearer, without being less protective. OUTCOME: The bill was passed after amended in the Senate and sent to the House. 3-Secure Developmental Disability (DD) Facility: IDHW introduced a bill to create a “secure facility” for people with developmental disabilities, mental illness and for those not currently ICF/ID eligible but involved in criminal proceedings. DRI analyzed the original bill and determined that it lacked minimal constitutional protections. Several rounds of negotiation resulted between DRI, ACLU, ICDD, SILC and IDHW in HB 222. This bill substantially improved the language protecting the rights of residents. As a condition of the negotiations DRI, ACLU, DD Council, and SILC agreed not to oppose the revised bill as long as IDHW agreed to finalizing correlating rules before proceeding. OUTCOME: H222 bill passed both houses. UPDATE: At the beginning of October, 2017, DRI ED received a call from IDHW Licensing and Certification (L&C) Director stating that the Department will not go forward with proposed licensing rules for the “DD secure” facility during the 2018 legislative session. She explained that she asked the new IDHW Director to withdraw the rules from the docket for this legislative session because she believed the process was too rushed and there was not enough time for proper negotiated rulemaking, and the Department needed to have more involvement from DRI and the IDCC on the front end. Negotiations are targeted to start in February 2018 allowing for time needed to bring the rules before the 2019 legislature. The “secure DD facility” cannot open until licensing rules are in place. 4-ASL Interpreter Certification: During FY2015, a bill requiring that American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters be licensed was passed in the House and Senate but vetoed by the Governor. DRI collaborated with the Idaho Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in revising the previously drafted bill to include more clarification of what types of interpreter activities are covered and including an exemption for the state court system. DRI provided testimony to the Idaho legislature on the impact of the proposed certification requirements for ASL interpreters; provided information on the consequences of having unqualified interpreters; the difficulty DRI has experienced with unqualified interpreters; and how a system of licensure would benefit the deaf and hard of hearing. The bill passed in both houses. 5-Hate Crimes: A bill to add “disability” to the categories of victims of hate crimes was sponsored by a senate legislator. DRI analyzed and supported this bill and provided analysis of proposed language to the sponsoring legislator. OUTCOME: The bill wasn’t introduced since committee chairs refused to give it a hearing. 6- Timely Notice of Release from Psychiatric State Hospitals: The intent of this legislation is to amend the termination or commitment and discharge of involuntary patients committed to inpatient facilities from a 30-day notice to a 7-day notice to the committing court and prosecuting attorney. This change will allow for an earlier release from an inpatient facility. The current 30-day requirement delays the legal process as well as extends the patient's stay even after discharge is appropriate. DRI analyzed and supported this legislative change, supported other advocacy organization’s backing, provided information to legislators and monitored the bill’s progress. OUTCOME: House bill H038 passed in both houses. 7- Telehealth Services: This legislation, if enacted, would allow for costs of telehealth services to be covered in the same manner, and to the same extent as if the services were delivered in person. This could improve access to mental health care in rural areas. DRI analyzed, supported and monitored this bill. OUTCOME: S1058 failed in the Senate. 8— Support Animals: Senate bill S1051 addressed the need for persons with mental or emotional disabilities to use dogs and other support animals as part of their treatment and which added support animals to the Idaho service animal statute. DRI ADA attorney specialist analyzed this proposed legislation. Her analysis concluded that it contained some language that might be more restrictive than protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) title III and sponsoring entities was not receptive to DRI input. DRI did not support the bill and monitored its progress. OUTCOME: Senate bill S1051 died in the Senate IDHW Committee. 9- Wheelchair-confined” (sic) Veterans Transportation: Senate bill S1031 proposed a statutory amendment changing the payments from a voucher reimbursement system to a payment authorization program. This change allows the Idaho Division of Veterans Services to enter into agreements with commercial transportation vendors or others to provide or administer transportation services to eligible wheelchair-confined (sic) veterans. DRI analyzed this bill and determined that it would increase and expedite veteran’s access to Veteran’s Affairs paid transportation but no formal support requested. DRI monitored progress in case support needed. OUTCOME: Senate bill S1031 passed both houses. 10-Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Information: The purpose of Senate bill S1060 is to ensure that women of Idaho and their doctors have access to the most accurate and up-to-date information available regarding (CMV) prevention, infection, and treatment. Funding of $60,000 this year and $30,000 per year after was allocated in the bill. DRI analyzed, supported and provided information to the committees on the potential benefits of the bill. OUTCOME: Passed in both houses with needed funding. 11-Prohibits “Conversion Therapy”: House bill H062 called the Youth Mental Health Prevention Act protects patients under eighteen (18) years of age or vulnerable adults from the harmful effects of conversion therapy and provides that a licensed, professional counselor shall not engage in the practice of conversion therapy. "Conversion therapy" means any practices or treatments that seek to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity. DRI analyzed, supported and monitored. OUTCOME: This bill was referred to the Ways and Means Committee, where it died. 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Participate with other stakeholders and disability groups on task forces, workgroups and councils that present opportunities to advocate on behalf of people with disabilities. 4. Collaborative efforts are described in the summary provided below. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, were class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided:

DRI Executive Director (ED) is a leading member of the Consortium of Idahoans with Disabilities (CID) guiding its public policy agenda; he continued his membership on Partners in Crisis which is a CID sponsored mental health policy group addressing and monitoring Idaho’s coordinated care system and its contracted provider, Optum presenting concerns to Idaho legislators. He remained on the Governor’s Children at Risk Task Force making recommendations to the Governor on policies affecting children in the child welfare system. He participates on many IDHW sponsored committees including: the IDHW Committee on DD Service Access addressing issues in the children’s developmental disabilities service delivery system; the Adult DD Services Collaborative Work Group providing recommendations under consideration by IDHW for revising its budget process; the Personal Assistance Oversight Committee addressing issues with HCBS Medicaid waivers. His membership on IDHW’s Medical Care Advisory Council (MCAC) expired, but he was replaced by a DRI staff attorney, to review state Medicaid policy and provide comments on proposed rules and implementation. ED is a leading member of the of the Idaho Health Care for All/Close the Gap Committee analyzing proposed legislation and significantly impacting and guiding this initiative as well as participating on a Medicaid Expansion Workgroup. He is a board member for the Idaho Council on Developmental Disabilities (ICDD) helping in developing strategic planning and supporting their public policy initiatives. The ED participates on the Homes for Adults Residential Treatment (HART) Workgroup to monitor an IDHW pilot project created for the purpose of developing facilities that meet the needs of persons with severe mental illness. This facility type allows for the services and treatment to be provided by the facility and coordinated with community Medicaid paid providers. This work group is identifying and developing rules needed to be in place prior to any legislation passed incorporating a facility licensure. The ED and Advocacy Director (AD) both participated in a newly formed Community of Purpose coalition that resulted from the “We Choose All of Us” work group. The purpose of the group is to build a coalition of Idaho social justice organizations, making connections, and informing each other of our work. DRI has been involved in several meetings with the Idaho Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence, as a result. The Executive Director and Advocacy Director also participated as family members in the Community NOW! Project, although adults receiving services through the DD waiver and their families were the primary respondents. This project was sponsored by IDHW, the ACLU and the DD Council, resulting from the settlement in the KW v. Armstrong lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf of Idaho adults with developmental disabilities. This work resulted in a comprehensive report on recommendations to IDHW Medicaid for improving DD waiver services and revising the eligibility and budget allocation tool. DRI Legal Director (LD) is a leading member of, the Idaho Supreme Court (ISC) Guardianship Committee evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the Idaho guardianship statutes. She is also on the Legislative Rules Subcommittee which revised rules for temporary guardianship appointments during FY2017; and she continued leading action on its Supported Decision Making (SDM) Subcommittee. DRI Advocacy Director (AD) is a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights-Idaho Advisory Committee which drafted a report to the national US Commission on Civil Rights for presentation to Congress. She participated on this committee’s Disability Subcommittee which formed a stakeholders group which met to discuss Idaho’s lack of an Olmstead Plan, brainstorming ideas to help identify resources and remedies. The AD, as the CAP Coordinator, continued membership on the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council as the CAP representative reviewing Idaho Vocational Rehabilitation (IDVR) service reports, client outcomes, and budget data, providing input for improvement. At the request of Council members, future meetings will include more time for providing meaningful input into IDVR customers’ unmet needs to ensure IDVR’s compliance with the WIOA (Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act) regulations, especially with regard to transition-age youth. As the PAIMI Coordinator, she is also a member of the PAIMI Advisory Council (PAC) providing input on DRI goals and objectives; and participated in a National Disability Rights Idaho Network (NDRN) PAIMI Advisory Council Subcommittee to identify measures to enhance PAC involvement and guidance. AD is a member of the State Department of Education sponsored Idaho Interagency Council on Secondary Transition improving the transition of Idaho students with disabilities from high school to work and/or college. She also participated on the Tools 4 Life planning committee for its annual conference. All DRI licensed attorneys (including DRI AD) are members of the Idaho State Bar Diversity Section emphasizing improving diversity related issues such as cases involving racism, and the Bill of Rights. During FY2017, DRI staff attorney served as the co-chair on the Diversity Section’s Subcommittee called “Love the Law” acting as its Secretary and Co-Chair organizing activities focused at diverse, low income, and underserved youth. DRI Advocates participate on the Idaho Employment First Consortium organized by the IDCC including representatives from IDVR, Idaho Department of Labor (IDOL), IDCC, SILC, and IDHW. This collaboration is for the purpose of ensuring that employment is the first outcome considered for people with disabilities. DRI Advocates participate on the Justice and Advocacy for Vulnerable Adults Java Committee. JAVA is a state-wide professionals group associated with protecting the vulnerable adult population in Idaho from fraudulent activities, promoting state wide support for elderly with Alzheimer's and other issues effecting senior citizens and/or vulnerable adults. DRI Advocates also participate in the Suicide Prevention Action Network (SPAN) formatted to reduce suicide in Idaho through statewide collaboration, and to educate on best practices. DRI staff attorney participates on a regional Keeping Children Safe (KCS) Child Protection Services’ (CPS) Citizens Panel providing input on recommendations made by the panel to the governor also presented at the annual KCS panel conference in October. He was also the driving force behind the formation of the Idaho Restraint & Seclusion Stakeholders Workgroup which was a result of systemic work completed at State Hospital North’s Psychiatric Hospital identifying concerns with its R&S policies and practices. This workgroup is pursuing statutory and rule changes to better protect individuals in facilities from inappropriate and excessive R&S practices. DRI Senior Advocate and PAIR/PATBI Coordinator remains as a member of the Community Care Advisory Council (CCAC) advocating for quality care and rights protections for persons with disabilities residing in certified family homes (CFHs) and residential assisted living facilities (RALFs). During FY 2017, this Council focused on CFH rule changes, CMS HCBS regulation mandates to ensure community integration and protections under Idaho landlord/tenant laws; and monitoring progress for the HART pilot project. PAIR/PATBI Coordinator is on the Board of Directors for the Brain Injury Alliance of Idaho (BIAID) advocating for the rights of persons with brain injury and prevention. During FY 2017, she and two (2) other BIAID Board members presented to the to the Idaho Partners on Higher Education and Disability Services comprised of Collegiate Disability Services Directors discussing the BIAID brochure that she drafted titled” Accessing Accommodations & Disability Services-WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW”. Input for the brochure was provided and revisions as suggested completed. Primary focus for BIAID during FY 2017 was to complete its revision of its webpage and to make changes to membership. PATBI/PAIR Coordinator is a member of the TBI Advisory Council identifying TBI specific issues statewide. Collaboration with the Idaho TBI grant Lead investigator to assists with a needs assessment dissemination was completed which helps identify needs of people with TBI to better advocate on their behalf. DRI PAAT/PAVA Coordinator met with Lt. Governor’s staff, along with staff from the Idaho Commission for the Blind & Visually Impaired, SILC, and the NW ADA Center to address concerns regarding the various state websites that were currently not accessible to individuals with disabilities. Meeting resulted in the formation of the Idaho Access and Functional Needs Advisory Board formed to identify and assist with addressing changes necessary to the states’ program for addressing accessibility according to the WCAG 2.0 II guidelines as outlined under Title II of the ADA (access to government services/programs). He is also a member of the Idaho Department of Labor’s Workforce Development Council established to provide strategic direction and oversight of Idaho's workforce development system. The primary role of the Council is to advise the governor and the State Board of Education on strategies designed to yield high-quality workforce investment services for Idaho's businesses, job seekers and students. The monitoring advocate for State Hospital South, one of the state operated institutions, is a member of its Patient’s Rights Committee, providing rights information education and self-advocacy training. This membership also allows her to identify systemic or individual issues helping to guide her monitoring activities and individual case work. This participation allows DRI to identify and monitor systemic issues which need to be addressed and those that are emerging, many times preventing the need for litigation or adversarial remedies, as well as resource costly measures. It has allowed DRI to effectively advocate for disability legislation and comment on proposed rules that affect the disability community, address client’s choice and rights issues, the desire for meaningful integration; educate the community regarding the dangerous practice of restraint and seclusion in schools and the community; address whether persons with disabilities are receiving appropriate IDVR, DOL, and Social Security employment services and address employment barriers, all factors that greatly improve the quality of life for persons with disabilities in Idaho. Through this involvement, DRI is able to address the ever-changing issues of Medicaid and its budget and service cuts that greatly affect the access to, and quality of, health care. It allows DRI the opportunity to advocate on behalf of persons with all types of disabilities including those with DD, TBI, MI, the elderly, hard of hearing/deaf and blind/sight impaired, and those with physical and neurological impairments. It allows this P&A to constantly remind agencies and others of protections under various federal and state disability laws and that protection against disability discrimination. 1.Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Address systemic public policy issues in the Idaho Medicaid or managed care programs which arise during FY2017. 4. Collaboration occurred with CID in advocating for Medicaid legislation. Collaboration occurred with a state representative, IDHW and the Department of Labor in improving access to the Medicaid for Worker with Disabilities (MWD) program. 5. 0 cases handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: As a result of the Jeff D. lawsuit agreement, Idaho is required to develop and implement a sustainable, coordinated, and comprehensive mental health system that increases access to mental health services for children with severe emotional disturbance. House bill H 043 was introduced to expand Medicaid eligibility for children with SED in families with income up to 300% of the federal poverty limit (FPL). DRI provided information and analysis to the legislators explaining how the bill would improve mental health services for children in Idaho which passed in both houses. Idaho has traditionally based Medicaid payments for hospital-based and medical treatment care on the volume of services provided. New models, such as value-based reimbursement, are an approach that focus on quality improvement and greater affordability. This model ties reimbursement to medical treatment providers performance on specific quality measures. House bill H128 was introduced directing IDHW to pursue value-based payment opportunities up to and including full-risk, provider-based managed care for the Medicaid program. DRI analyzed, supported and monitored this bill which passed in both houses. DRI has been addressing barriers limiting access to the Medicaid Buy-In program, Medicaid for Workers with Disabilities (MWD), for several years leading to improvements during FY2017. DRI AD met multiple times during FY’s 2016-2017 with staff from IDHW and an Idaho representative identifying barriers and remedies. By the end of FY2017, IDHW completed streamlining the process with Disability Determinations Services at the Idaho Dept. of Labor; improved website access on both sites; and ensured training was provided to IDHW self-reliance staff to make sure applications were processed accurately. During FY2016, DRI ED and LD attended several meetings with Idaho Medicaid Division explaining how Idaho was violating Federal Early Periodic, Screening, Diagnostic and Testing (EPSDT) regulations. LD researched, and drafted a sample EPSDT policy that met EPSDT regulation compliance and provided a copy to Medicaid. During FY2017, IDHW Medicaid Division developed an EPSDT policy that mirrors the policy provided by DRI LD. The EPSDT policy was formally adopted in 2017 and implementation began in July, 2017. This policy effects every child on Medicaid in Idaho. DRI attended meetings with IDHW, legislators and stakeholders on the development of 1115 and 1332 waivers to increase Medicaid access for people with chronic health conditions and to stabilize the state insurance exchange. This process started this summer and will continue during FY2018. DRI ED was invited to a meeting with Idaho Medicaid administrators to discuss Idaho’s compliance with a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) inquiry into how “restrictive procedures” including restraint & seclusion (R&S) and aversive practices (behavior punishment), are tracked and reported by HCBS providers paid under HCBS Medicaid waivers. At this meeting, all agreed that there was a need to write new rules limiting restrictive procedures and the use of R&S. The rules being considered will only apply to for CFHs, RALFS, and residential habilitation (supported living) providers. DRI agreed to participate and will continue to be involved and provide input. Some research was completed by DRI staff attorney during FY2017. This project and subsequent meetings are scheduled to continue throughout FY2018. 1. Participate in systemic advocacy that protects and promotes the rights of people with disabilities. 2. Protect and promote rights. 3. Inform policy makers of the benefits of adopting and implementing the Achieving Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act. 4.Collaboration occurred with SILC in efforts to get needed legislation passed and in support of SILC receiving funding to provide technical assistance on ABLE Act accounts from other states. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: The federal Achieving Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act allows individuals with disabilities prior to the age of 26 to enroll in a special savings program. During FY2016, DRI ED determined after meeting with state officials and an interested legislator that the development of an Idaho ABLE account system was not feasible. Since qualified individuals can open ABLE accounts through programs sponsored by other states, the Senator agreed to introduce a bill in 2017 that provides funding to provide assistance and training to access other state ABLE account programs and necessary asset exemptions from local and state means test programs. During FY2017, the Senator sponsored and introduced the bill. DRI ED educated legislators on the benefits of ABLE accounts, the need for ABLE Account assistance and explained why ABLE account monies must not be counted as assets for means tested programs. OUTCOME: The bill passed both houses ensuring ABLE account access for qualified Idahoans. DRI participated in an open forum community training/seminar with SILC discussing the recently appropriated ABLE Act. Eligibility requirements were discussed; and the assistance that SILC can provide to help qualified Idahoans access other state ABLE account programs was explained. Those items and services that can be purchased from this savings account without it impacting disability benefits were discussed in detail. RIGHTS IN FACILITIES 1. People with disabilities in facilities will live free from abuse. 2. Abuse in facilities. 3. Investigate instances of death of people with disabilities in facilities in which death was caused by physical assault; failure to treat, care or monitor the individual; seclusion; or physical, mechanical or chemical restraint. 4. Collaborative efforts with the IDHW Bureau Chief of Developmental Disabilities Services resulting in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) in which all deaths at DD facilities is reported to DRI. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since no reports on behalf of PAIR clients that died as a result of physical assault; failure to treat, care or monitor of the individual; seclusion; or physical, mechanical or chemical restraint were received during FY2017. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: A MOA between the IDHW DD Bureau Chief and DRI has been in place since FY2014 as a result of the Bureau Chief’s concerns that that facilities and providers that serve people with DD (PWDD) are not required to report deaths to IDHW. Even though the P&A has not received any reports of deaths for PAIR clients, this collaboration has resulted in DRI being better able address the lack of death reporting requirements in facilities that admit and/or treat PAIR clients. A priority was included in FY2017 to investigate requirements for residential habilitation/supported living providers and certified family homes (CFHs) and propose necessary rule change reported on in further detail below. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will live free from abuse. 2. Abuse in facilities. 3. Investigate requirements for residential habilitation, supported living, and certified family home providers to report deaths to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare and propose necessary rule changes. 4. Collaboration occurred between DRI and IDHW L&C during proposed rule making procedures. 5. 0 cases were handled under the priority since not case driven. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A summary of work completed is provided: As a result of a systemic abuse case that involved residents residing in two (2) CFH, DRI concluded that several elderly PAIR clients had died in a short period of time under suspicious circumstances and that most of these deaths had not been reported to L&C CFH Division and that the investigations conducted were insufficient. During FY2016, DRI drafted and presented many of its concerns identified from its systemic investigation to IDHW L&C resulting in a meeting. During this meeting, DRI was told that most deaths in CFH’s eventually get reported to L&C and that preliminary investigations are conducted to determine if the death resulted from suspicious causes. Additional concerns regarding L&C investigations, certification and recertification processes were presented. L&C informed DRI that IDHW would be promulgating rule changes to CFH and residential habilitation provider (res hab) agencies (referred to as supported living) during 2017 to be completed/passed by Idaho Legislature by 2019. From this work, DRI added this priority to investigate requirements for res hab and CFHs to report deaths to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. Its investigation concluded that Idaho rules did not require mandatory reporting of deaths to IDHW; and that the Idaho Statute § 39-5303, Duty to Report Abuse, Neglect, and Financial Exploitation of Vulnerable Adults narrows reporting requirements. Only those incidents of suspected abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation of vulnerable adults must be reported to the Commission on Aging (unless suspected in a nursing facility which is to be reported to IDHW). Furthermore, it is facility administrators, staff, medical providers, social workers, teachers and others who make the determination if abuse, neglect or financial exploitation is suspected. After DRI completed its investigation, it submitted petitions to IDHW to include in its rulemaking drafts mandatory death reporting requirements to IDHW for both CFH and res hab providers. When IDHW determines that the death occurred under suspicious circumstances they will investigate. IDHW L&C notified DRI assuring that the items in DRI’s petition for CFH rulemaking were included in the draft. In addition to DRI’s petitions for rulemaking submitted to IDHW, DRI reviewed the CFH drafted rule changes and submitted comments within public comment timelines. On October 3, 2017, IDHW sent a response to DRI notifying that they adopted DRI proposed language for nine (9) sections, made a change consistent with DRI suggestions for another section so that all reporting requirements suggested by DRI were addressed; and without changing proposed language, L&C officially acknowledged that CFH settings should never employ mechanical or chemical restraints. Other DRI rule comments were adopted including adding a definition of “ vulnerable adult”; requiring that a notice of pending investigations or charges must immediately be reported to the department for any family member or participant; added a requirement that the participant or his legal representative must sign any changes to their individual support plan; added a requirement that all personal funds and all medications belonging to the participant must be returned immediately upon discharge; defined the word “incident” so that providers are not left to interpret what they believe may qualify; and included a requirement that CFH providers cannot loan money to participants to better protect from potential financial exploitation. Regarding res hab rules, IDHW L&C also agreed to incorporate into its rule making draft a mandatory death reporting to IDHW L&C requirement and when IDHW determines that the death occurred under suspicious circumstances will investigate. DRI also reviewed the proposed rule changes and submitted comments by the end of September, 2017. A response to these comments will not be received until FY 2018, so this priority has been carried over. DRI decided to provide comment on the rulemaking drafts, due to the fact that needed rule changes would have greatly benefited/protected clients in abuse & neglect cases DRI has previously investigated. DRI took advantage of this opportunity to provide comment in support of many of the rule changes and to advocate for additional changes in its efforts to better protect individuals with disabilities who reside in CFHs and for those that utilize res hab services. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will live free from abuse. 2. Abuse in facilities. 3. Investigate allegations of abuse of people with disabilities in facilities according to case selection criteria. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved. 5. Two (2) cases were handled under this priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Senior Solutions private paid guardian and a social worker (SW) at an Idaho vet's home (state funded) called P&A on behalf of a 58-year-old Native American women residing in the nursing facility unit. Client was residing at home with her husband, a veteran who had recently passed away. Callers were concerned because client reported that her husband and she decided to make her niece her power of attorney when previously the client expressly wanted no contact or association with her niece and was concerned about the money in her husband's trust. The callers reported that they believed that she needs a guardian and requested assistance. SW was concerned that the client cut her hair even though client told her it was because of her husband's tribal practice. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE & Preliminary Investigation: DRI LD informed callers that P&A could not provide help with getting a guardian, but would meet with the client to clarify her wishes and to determine possible assistance. LD also provided a referral to Adult Protection Services regarding concerns with suspected financial exploitation. Assigned advocate researched and collected information to provide regarding SSDI survivor benefit eligibility, vet's pension for survivor's information located as well as information regarding Native American tribal religious death ceremonies to show this as a cultural practice. Advocate met with client at the vet’s home. Advocate identified herself and provided information about P&A. Advocate asked client if she would meet with her to discuss a report/call DRI received on her behalf that DRI believed that she needed to know and client agreed. Advocate asked if she was aware that there were concerns of financial exploitation and that some vet’s home staff believed that a guardianship may be needed. Advocate explained that staff questioned her capacity in relationship to cutting her hair and provided information collected showing this was a cultural ritual. Client informed advocate that both she and her husband were Native Americans. Client informed DRI advocate that the SW should not have discussed her issues, that she had a right to make her niece her POA and that any disagreements in the past were resolved. She said she was going to file a complaint against SW. She informed advocate that niece had assisted with hiring an attorney on her behalf who provided information about her rights and advised that she could leave the facility at any time and choose who she wanted to help her. She said she didn't need our help since she already hired an attorney. She said that she and husband agreed that niece was the most appropriate family member to help her with choices she had to make. With client's approval, advocate provided written information about SSDI survivor's benefits, Native American cultural rituals, and VA pension survivor's benefits eligibility, if husband served during war time (which she stated that he had). Advocate referred her to P&A if she or niece had any disability rights related concerns or questions in the future and she suggested that she may wish to review the publications provided to help in determining benefits that she may be eligible to receive. OUTCOME: Information on rights and financial entitlements provided to help client and her POA in accessing benefits and pursuing discharge. A referral to the P&A was provided in case disability rights information and/or advocacy assistance needed in future and client was informed that her case would be closed. Follow up closing letter sent with Idaho VA Division of Veteran's Services contact information and a P&A brochure was enclosed so she had DRI contact information. Advocate determined that client was making informed choices, had legal representation to protect her rights and was provided with the resources to help her and niece advocate for discharge and benefit access. 1.People with disabilities in facilities will live free from neglect. 2.Neglect in facilities. 3.Investigate allegations of neglect of people with disabilities in facilities according to case selection criteria. 4.Collboration with the Senor Ombudsman occurred in efforts to extend the eviction notice and to assist with locating another placement. 5. One (1) case was carried over from FY 2016, and an additional five (5) cases were handled under the priority during FY 2017 but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: A 56-year-old Caucasian female contacted DRI diagnosed with lung cancer, emphysema, and COPD requesting assistance with a five (5) day notice of eviction from a residential assisted living facility (RALF). Client received a notice of eviction stating she is breaking the rules by smoking her vapor inside the facility and has 5 days to vacate. Client said she paid for her November 2016 rent and is terminally ill. Caller said she is not smoking inside the facility and needs help as she is unsure of her rights. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE: After documenting client’s verbal consent to expedite case assistance due to time limitations, DRI advocate contacted the Senior Ombudsman who clarified that she was assisting client and believed that client had violated the facility policy. DRI advocate reviewed the rules for RALFs showing that under these circumstances the 5-day eviction notice violated the rules and concluded that client should have been given a thirty (30) day notice. DRI advocate then contacted IDHW Licensing and Certification (L&C) RALF Division Director and presented concerns regarding the rule violation. L&A RALF Director agreed and contacted the RALF Administrator. OUTCOME: Client was given a 30-day eviction notice allowing for more time to locate another appropriate placement. Since the Senior Ombudsman and the RALF SW was assisting with locating another placement/discharge planning, the case was closed. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will have their rights protected. 2. Rights violations in facilities. 3. Investigate allegations of rights violations of people with disabilities in facilities according to rights violation case selection criteria. 4. No collaborative efforts were involved, 5. Three (3) cases were handled under the priority but no class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary: Daughter of a 67-year-old female of two or more races and diagnosed with advanced Alzheimer’s contacted DRI reporting concerns regarding the care her mother received at the RALF she resides in as well as reported potential abuse from her mother’s husband. P&A CASE ASSISTANCE-Preliminary investigation & monitoring of outside agencies investigations: DRI advocate contacted daughter and collected additional information regarding concerns with RALF which were primarily that RALF was not monitoring husband’s visits and were not allowing daughter to advocate on behalf of her mother since they claimed that husband was her guardian as well as next of kin. Daughter alleged that he was sneaking in laxatives and milk of magnesia for client to drink to help with her bowl movements even though not medically prescribed since he appeared to have a fixation regarding fecal matter. There was an incident in which daughter saw husband in the bathroom with client wearing a glove searching in her rectum claiming that he knew there was a stool that needed to be removed even though this action was making client extremely uncomfortable. DRI advocate directed/suggested daughter to file a report with Adult Protection Services (APS) and with IDHW Licensing and Certification (L&C) against husband and verified with both agencies that investigations were being conducted. DRI conducted a review on the Idaho Repository to locate guardianship case file which showed that a guardian was not appointed on behalf of client resulting in clarification that client’s husband was more than likely her POA not her guardian and suggested to clarify this information with the facility. PA educated daughter on revoking POA and referred her to Idaho Legal Aid and ISB lawyer referral service for assistance and advise. DRI also provided suggestions to daughter on how to better advocate on her mother’s behalf at RALF, and provided information from the rules on family planning development and how to clarify legal status of husband: OUTCOME: Husbands legal status regarding guardianship of client clarified. APS and L&C conducted primary investigations regarding allegations of abuse by husband and neglect by facility. Daughter, her sister, and client’s husband participated at a Family Planning meeting. Even though husband denied administering medications not prescribed, facility nurse clarified that additional medication other than that prescribed would be considered a violation of rules and policies; that monitoring of visitation is occurring; and that appropriate bowel treatment was being provided. Daughter reported that she believed meeting successful and plans to advocate on mother’s behalf to move her to her home so she can care for her. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will have their rights protected. 2. Rights violations in facilities. 3. Conduct monitoring of up to nine (9) selected facilities, including facilities housing children with disabilities under the Juvenile Corrections Act. 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, were class actions. 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Besides monitoring PADD funded state-run Southwest Idaho Treatment Facility (SWITC), a licensed intermediate care facility for individuals with intellectual disabilities (ICF/ID), DRI monitored both state-run psychiatric hospitals, State Hospital South (SHS) and State Hospital North (SHN); one (1) licensed children’s residential care facility housing children under the Juvenile Corrections Act, and a residential assisted living facility RALF). Monitoring activities at State Hospital North (SHN) during FY2017 continued its focus on the systemic case opened addressing concerns identified with its restraint and seclusion (R&S) policy and practices. During FY2016, SHN agreed to revise its policy and provide additional training to staff on proper usage and the use of trauma informed care (TIC). This systemic case was carried over to F 2017 to continue monitoring these issues and to determine if the policy changes and training of staff were making changes in its practices. DRI staff attorney conducted two (2) monitor visits during FY2017 and continued its efforts addressing its concerns with R&S practices through revised policy review and compliance monitoring, negotiation, correspondence and filing a complaint with IDHW’s Bureau of Facility Standards, Idaho’s licensing and investigatory agency. DRI monitored SHN in November, assessed facility conditions, met with clients and residents, opened new systemic investigation cases, and reviewed records determining that many of the abusive and neglectful (A&N) R&S practices were still continuing even after SHN’s R&S policy revisions. These practices include the failure to: -Incorporate effective TIC practices; -Cease its use of safety room seclusion; -Debrief after R&S with patients and their treatment teams; -Release from R&S as soon as calmed; -Document and follow chemical restraint protocol; -Document alternative interventions prior to R&S; -Document rational for R&S usage; -Cease its use of restraint for non-emergencies; and -Cease its use of improper treatment override practices. Next, DRI consulted with an independent psychiatrist specializing in trauma informed care (TIC) and behavioral programming who agreed to review redacted records collected. This doctor concluded that SHN’s R&S policy was incomplete and that trauma informed care was lacking and person centered planning was missing. These findings were forwarded to SHN and its Deputy Attorney General (DAG). SHN response was not sufficient. Additional emails were sent requesting a response as to how the facility planned on addressing current concerns suggesting to meet to discuss concerns but no meetings were facilitated. DRI then filed a complaint with the Idaho surveying/investigating agency, the Bureau of Facility Standards (BFS), resulting in an unannounced recertification survey and investigation. BFS identified several deficiencies, some addressing R&S, requiring SHN to submit a plan of corrections (POC), eventually approved by BFS. DRI reviewed the survey/investigation results and the corresponding POCs and determined that not all of DRI’s concerns were investigated/addressed in this survey. A second DRI monitor was conducted meeting with clients and residents and additional systemic cases were opened. Throughout FY2017, eleven (11) more cases were opened in addition to the ten (10) previously opened between FY 2015-2016. Records were reviewed and DRI determined that many of its R&S concerns were still continuing and that SHN was not in full compliance with its POC approved by BFS. Recent hospital improvements reports were requested and a letter was sent to the SHN administrator, to BFS non-long-term care supervisor, and to the SHN IDHW Deputy Attorney General (DAG) outlining DRI’s current concerns demanding a response. Since negotiations with SHN has not resulted in substantial improvement, and since SHN is licensed as a hospital, DRI added a priority to its FY2018 priorities to collaborate with stakeholders to propose licensing R&S rules for hospitals. DRI monitored State Hospital South (SHS) three (3) times during FY2016. Monitors of all units were completed, conditions inside and outside were determined clean and maintained. The R&S rooms were observed but no concerns identified. Advocate met with residents and provided I&R services but no priority abuse, neglect or rights violations issues presented nor was any priority case assistance requested. DRI rights posters and contact information was posted and accessible on all units and brochures on rights in facilitates and about P&A disseminated. In addition to the monitor visits, the advocate is an ongoing member of the facility’s Patient’s Rights Committee. She met with this committee two (2) times during FY2017 providing the opportunity to educate about the P&A and its services as well as provide facility rights training. Conditions and issues of residents discussed but no case assistance requested. DRI monitored a private juvenile detention center licensed as a children’s residential care facility located in rural Idaho. Since students were in class, DRI was unable to meet with residents directly but did observe in classrooms. A tour was provided and all units observed as well as fenced outdoors area which included exercise equipment and a basketball court. All residents with autism or on the spectrum are housed on the same unit. Facility well maintained inside and out. Rights posters posted on all units. Grievance procedures explained and all units had complaint forms and a box to enclose complaint forms for privacy. Medication refusal policies discussed, admission agreements and restraint policy reviewed. This facility uses crisis prevention intervention (CPI) and all staff trained as required by state rules. Facility focuses on lesser restrictive behavior interventions and uses positive behavior programming so the use of CPI restraints is seldom required. DRI determined that the services provided met state rule requirements. Only concern requiring follow up was with the segregated units for children with autism and on the spectrum and follow up will occur. DRI picture poster explaining rights in facilities will be revised and sent. DRI educated staff on P&A services, left copies of brochures and its FY2017 Statement of Priorities and believes that staff are aware of services we can provide and will refer to P&A as needed. As a result of case assistance for a PAIMI funded client requiring investigation regarding an allegation of sexual assault, DRI monitored the resident’s facility placement, a residential assisted living facility (RALF) located in rural Idaho in an isolated location. By the time of the monitor, DRI had determined from the evidence collected that the allegations more than likely did not occur, primarily due to the fact that the accused was not residing at the facility when the alleged assault was reported to have occurred While at the facility, with client’s consent, administration showed additional records showing previous complaints filed with L&C and resulting investigations in which claims were not substantiated. Client had a history of delusional episodes and verification of medical diagnosis with historical summary was provided and reviewed. During its monitor, DRI observed all areas and was allowed to inspect some of the residents’ housing units, with resident consent. This facility is an old motel and resident units were motel rooms housing two (2) residents each, and (1) one unit housed a married Hispanic couple. Intercoms provided in each unit for prompt staff access. Transportation services and community medical treatment access explained. Met with administration reviewing policies and services programming. Recreational opportunities were reviewed, R&S methods were clarified and discussed but rarely used according to documentation shown. Scheduled menus were reviewed, rights listings were posted in lobby & cafeteria areas, and contact information to Adult Protection Services (APS), L&C as well as DRI were already posted. Even though this facility was old, it was well maintained inside and out. This facility is located approximately 15 miles from the nearest city but transportation services are provided on occasion by staff but primarily from Medicaid paid non-medical and non-emergency medical transportation providers. This facility is located within a rural township where family residential homes are located within sight as well as a post office, grocery store and café. DRI advocates visited with residents, provided information about its services, and disseminated brochures. No complaints or concerns were reported from residents and DRI assistance was not requested. No deficiencies or concerns identified. After this monitor, L&C certification surveys posted on line were reviewed and no deficiencies cited for several years. DRI determined that follow up monitors were not currently needed. 1. People with disabilities in facilities will have their rights protected. 2. Rights violations in facilities. 3. Identify and address unlawful denials of the Protection and Advocacy system’s access to residents in facilities and records subject to P&A federal access authority. 4. No collaborative efforts occurred. 5. 0 cases were handled under this priority since P&A did not encounter any incidents on behalf of PAIR clients regarding denials to access residents or records. 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority.

Part VI. Narrative

At a minimum, you must include all of the information requested. You may include any other information, not otherwise collected on this reporting form that would be helpful in describing the extent of PAIR activities during the prior fiscal year. Please limit the narrative portion of this report, including attachments, to 20 pages or less.

The narrative should contain the following information. The instructions for this form outline the information that should be contained in each section.

  1. Sources of funds received and expended
  2. Budget for the fiscal year covered by this report
  3. Description of PAIR staff (duties and person-years)
  4. Involvement with advisory boards (if any)
  5. Grievances filed under the grievance procedure
  6. Coordination with the Client Assistance Program (CAP) and the State long-term care program, if these programs are not part of the P&A agency

A. Sources of funds received and expended Federal $139,885 State 0 All other funds 0 Total from all sources $139,885 B. Budget for the fiscal year covered by the report Category FY2017 Actual FY2018 Budget Wages/salaries 79,245 105,492 Fringe Benefits 33,455 51,871 Materials/Supplies 6,742 8,741 Postage 654 817 Telephone 1,044 1,218 Rent 9,237 11,684 Travel 1,265 3,795 Copying 85 565 Bonding/insurance 676 1,093 Equipment 538 0 Legal services 0 0 Indirect costs 0 0 Misc. 6,944 8,253 Total (from all sources)139,885 193,530 Note: 2017 Actual Expenses includes carryover from FY16 (10/1/15-9/30/16) 2018 Budget includes carryover from FY17 (10/1/16-9/30/17) C. Description of PAIR staff Type of Position FTE % Yr Filled Person-Years Professional 1.08 100% 1.08 Full-time NA NA NA Part-time 1.08 100% 1.08 Vacant 0.00 0.00% 0.00 D. Involvement with advisory boards The PAIR Coordinator is a member of the Community Care Advisory Council (CCAC) advocating for quality care and rights protections for persons with disabilities residing in certified family homes (CFHs) and residential assisted living facilities (RALFs). This allows her the opportunity to advocate for PAIR clients since many reside in these placements, especially the elderly population. Unfortunately, these residents’ lives are greatly impacted when a facility is not providing care meeting their needs, resulting in involuntary discharge which is very disruptive and stressful. During FY’s 2016-2017, CCAC continued monitoring IDHW’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) actions to meet the mandated regulation changes. CCAC reviewed proposed IDHW Licensing & Certification (L&C) CFH Division’s proposed rule changes incorporating Idaho Landlord Tenant eviction protections requiring CFH’s to provide a 30-day termination/eviction written notice unless violations of safety to others, non-payment of rent and violations of admission/lease agreements occur. Additionally, IDHW L&C CFH Division proposed rules regarding terminations/evictions adding a section allowing for emergency temporary placements when a resident is in crisis needing medical inpatient treatment. This rule change will allow the resident the choice to return to the CFH if desired; and if the CFH still chooses to terminate his admission, providers will be required to provide a 30-day written notice of termination. Since these rules will not go into effect until 2019, IDHW CFH Licensing & Certification Division drafted and posted an Admission Agreement that providers may use which brings them into CMS/HCBS regulatory compliance until the proposed rules become effective. Lastly, IDHW proposed CFH rule changes added a mandatory death reporting and investigation requirement when a CFH resident’s death is determined to have occurred under suspicious circumstances, as a result of a DRI petition for rulemaking change. The PAIR/PATBI Coordinator is a member of the TBI Advisory Board in efforts to improve access to information and resources for persons with TBI and their families, and to advocate for improved delivery systems for persons with TBI in Idaho, including military veterans. These individuals are often funded under PAIR which can serve persons with TBI when PATBI funding is no longer available. No meetings during FY2016 occurred but the TBI implementation lead investigator confirmed that these meetings should occur during FY2017. DRI AD continued her membership on the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council (SRC) as the CAP representative reviewing IDVR service reports, client outcomes, and budget data to provide input for improvement. Focus during FY2017 continued addressing regulatory changes for Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) due to the Workforce Innovation Opportunity Act (WIOA); SRC members also requested that future meetings include more time for Council issues, and more meaningful input into Idaho Vocational Rehabilitation (IDVR) customers’ unmet needs. DRI’s PAAT Coordinator participated on the Idaho Access and Functional Needs Advisory Board reviewing prevailing concerns regarding AT access issues in Idaho. This participation allowed him to address general questions about services provided by DRI, primarily those services DRI provides under the PAAT grant it operates under. PAIMI Advisory Council for DRI requested training from the P&A to its new members regarding the needs and purposes of the council. The Council also shared information regarding emerging issues with the P&A on behalf of persons with mental illness in facilities and the community. Information was also provided to the Council members so they can better understand the P&A’s roles, services and obligations so it can better advice and guide DRI on how to meet the needs of persons with mental illness. A DRI staff attorney replaced the DRI ED as a member of the Idaho Medical Care Advisory Council (MCAC). MCAC members review state Medicaid policies and commen on proposed rules and implementation. The ED’s replacement is thoroughly trained on Medicaid and emerging issues. E. Grievances filed. Two (2) grievances was filed by PAIR clients during FY2017. 49 year old white male with physical impairments and PTSD contacted P&A requesting help with an eviction involving a verbal eviction notice he received because his service animals were noisy and often fought. Referrals to the Attorney General’s Office for landlord tenant rights information, Legal Aid and to the Idaho Fair Housing Council were provided. Client filed a grievance. AD returned his call collecting additional information and caller admitted that Idaho Fair Housing Council denied his request for assistance primarily because his lease had a clause about nuisance animals and clarified that his landlord provided him with a written 30-day Notice. She informed him that he may be able to get more time to move by making a request for reasonable accommodation in writing to your landlord based on your disability. She suggested that he request for an additional 30 days on the basis that his physical disability(ies) will make it difficult to meet the eviction deadline. She offered additional help with drafting his written request and to let her know if he wanted to pursue this avenue and needed her help. She also provided a referral to LOVE, INC. for help with repairing his roof and camper. Information on the next step of grievance process was provided in writing. Caller did not call back or file a complaint with DRI ED. 63 year old Caucasian deaf female contacted DRI asking for help with filing a complaint. Since assistance requested was not clear, several attempts were made to clarify her issue, facilitated through the Idaho Relay System. Eventually it was determined that she was asking for help in drafting a complaint with the FBI. Because this issue was not within 2017 FY SOPs, she was sent information and referrals to her local center for independent living (CIL) and to the Idaho Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Information on DRI’s grievance process is provided in all I&R letters and client filed a grievance with the DRI Advocacy Director (AD). AD contacted her gathering additional information regarding the assistance requested. Eventually, it was clarified that she needed to expunge her criminal record so she can pass criminal background checks which she believes is preventing her from being hired: and she wanted DRI to file this complaint. She alleged that law enforcement discriminated against her because of her disability and that they didn’t adequately investigate a charge of rape against her ex-husband. AD conducted research locating information on how to file a complaint with the FBI for alleged police/court violations of her civil rights. AD advised that it appeared that her claims could potentially fit under the FBI’s duty to investigate “Color of Law” violations. AD copied and attached information and legal regulations about this law located off of the Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division website and provided information on filing a complaint. Information on the next step of DRI’s grievance process was included in the closing I&R letter. OUTCOME: Client did not file a complaint with the DRI ED. Coordination with the CAP and the State long-term care program: Idaho’s Client Assistance Program (CAP), along with PAIR, are both housed in the same agency, Disability Rights Idaho, Idaho’s P&A system which also includes the PADD, PAIMI, PAAT, PATBI, PABSS and PAVA programs. Most of the staff work in two or more of these programs. Outreach, monitoring, public awareness and system advocacy activities are examples of how the P&A coordinates with CAP and the state long-term care programs. Clients eligible for services under CAP, PADD, and PAIMI for residents in facilities are served under those programs and are not considered eligible for PAIR. However, some PAIR clients with mental illness may be served under PAIR when the issues are not facility related and many clients served under PAIR may also be served under CAP and PABSS when needing assistance with getting appropriate vocational rehabilitation (VR) services and addressing employment barriers for Social Security beneficiaries. As noted above, DRI’s AD continued membership on the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council as the CAP representative and Coordinator reviewing IDVR service reports, client outcomes, and budget data to provide input for improvement. She also monitored IDVR’s efforts to incorporate and become compliant with the Work Innovative Opportunities Act (WIOA) regulation changed for state Vocational Rehabilitation Services. Disability Rights Idaho had a memorandum of agreement with the Idaho Long-term Care Senior Ombudsman (SO) program operated through the Idaho Commission on Aging. The agreement covered mutual referrals, exchange of information and confidentiality. During FY2013, the LTC Senior Ombudsman and P&A agreed to revisit and update this memorandum of agreement (MOA). During FY2014, the P&A drafted the MOA revision including both the SO and Adult Protection Services (APS) interchangeably in the same MOA. During FY2015, the P&A submitted this draft to the State Ombudsman (SO) Director for approval. She reviewed and informed PAIR Coordinator that the MOA was being reviewed by the Administrator of the Idaho Commission on Aging, the Ombudsman’s Supervisor but no response from the Administrator has yet been provided to DRI. During FY2016, the SO informed DRI that their program focused on implementing regulation changes to the SO and Adult Protection Services (APSs) programs more clearly separating the two (2) entities further limiting the information that they can share. Regarding the MOA with DRI, the SO suggested that DRI draft separate MOAs for each program; and she suggested that DRI meet with the newly appointed Administrator for the Commission on Aging (COA) separately prior to drafting the MOAs to better identify any barriers to collaboration, especially regarding confidentiality of records requirements. During FY2017, several attempts to contact the new COA Administrator were never returned. DRI’s AD and PAIR Coordinator has discussed possible strategies and the PAIR Coordinator plans on asking the SO for her input and suggestions for getting the COA’s Administrator’s cooperation. The PAIR Coordinator and the SO are both members of the CCAC and often collaborates on issues that may help improve the quality of care for PAIR clients residing in CFH and RALFS. As well as other council and committees, each agency refers to each other when appropriate. As a result of Community Care Advisory Council participation and collaborative efforts with the Commission on Aging’s Senior Ombudsman (SO) Program, DRI was added to the Senior Ombudsman’s grid which includes information on the agencies and entities in Idaho that serves the elderly population and those that address abuse and neglect. This grid is posted on the SO webpage and disseminated in RALFS and skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) throughout Idaho.

Certification

Signed?Yes
Signed ByJames R. Baugh
TitleExecutive Director
Signed Date12/20/2017