2018: Emergency bid fails; cuts take effect July 1, 2018 to waiver services

Access Press
7/10/2018 by Jane McClure

Kyle, activities coordinator, and Richard, a client at Mankato’s Harry Meyering Center, are among the many Minnesotans watching cuts to services.

Tough times are ahead for many Minnesotans with disabilities and their service providers. Efforts to stop a seven percent cut to waiver services fell short June 28, 2018. U.S. District Court Judge Wilhelmina Wright issued a 13-page ruling that allows the cuts to go forward, starting July 1, 2018 and continuing to December 31, 2019.

Wright ruled against a group of four people representing a larger group of plaintiffs as well as the service provider coalitions Minnesota Organization for Habilitation and Rehabilitation (MOHR) and ARRM. A hearing on an emergency injunction to stop the cut took place June 27, 2018 in federal court in St. Paul, with disability community and state government representatives presenting arguments.

Wright's ruling stated that the disability groups failed to demonstrate that the cuts would create irreparable or imminent harm. She said it is speculative to say that actions may occur if the cuts are implemented.

But funding cuts eventually will impact more than 32,000 Minnesotans who receive services through the Disability Waiver Rate System or DWRS. They will also affect as many as 100,000 direct service providers.

Having the emergency injunction and funding denied at the height of a direct care staffing hiring crisis dismays many service providers. All over the state, personal care agencies, group homes and other service providers are already struggling to hire staff. Cuts could mean cuts to services provided. Minnesota has already lost several service providers due to the funding and staffing situation.

“This was a complicated case, and ultimately we respect the ruling of the court,” said Julie Johnson, president-elect of MOHR. Legislators supported a fix but by combining that fix with other unrelated items, it got caught up in a political battle.

“Addressing this issue should have been a top priority for legislative leaders and the governor from the day it was announced,” said Sue Schettle, CEO of ARRM.

“More than 8,500 people affected by the first round of cuts will see an immediate hit July 1, 2018 to the supportive services which provide choice and options to live as independently as possible in their communities.”

“The great tragedy here is that Minnesotans with disabilities and the hardworking staff who support them have been allowed to become collateral damage of partisan battles at the state capitol,” Johnson said.

Technical and complex arguments were presented before the court June 27, 2018 with much focus on banded and unbanded services. The DHS website provides detailed explanations about banding, as well as a glossary. Banding limits changes in service payment rates that are caused by DWRS implementation, to ensure ongoing service access for people who receive services. It is meant to limit impacts to service providers and county and state budgets, and to allow time for additional comprehensive research and analysis to ensure service rates are based on provider costs. But people can be moved from banded to unbanded services, it was argued. The lack of a comprehensive state process to challenge the cuts, rather than individual appeals, was also a concern.

Wright responded by saying that state lawmakers could act to make changes in the next 18 months. She also said DHS could change its policies. “I’m just saying it’s not certain,” she said.

One argument the state made is that a reduction in rate doesn’t change the services authorized, and that the case isn’t about reduction of services to a particular recipient. Instead, the argument was made that providers can continue to provide services or opt to provide fewer services. The change is what DHS will pay for services.

That argument frustrated some services providers at the hearing. It also prompted a question from Wright, who said she was “perplexed” by the idea that funding doesn’t affect services.