The Lost Art of LISTENING.

Before I launch into what will probably be my last post (though don't hold me to it), I want to introduce you to Raleigh Attorney Knicole C. Emanuel with Williams Mullen and her most excellently well written and legally sound Medicaid law blog. In my humble opinion, anyone who can so eloquently and factually draw a strong comparison and contrast between Shakespeare's "MidSummer's Night Dream" and the Medicaid providers' prepayment nightmare is nothing short of a poetic knight in shining armor (yes, chicks can be knights too - why not?)

Now, on with the show...

So, people keep asking where I've gone? Commenting that they've not heard much from me lately... Well, the truth is, that while I have been known to talk to myself on occation, there are some conversations that really need a active partner for successful dialogue. 

Frankly, I'm all talked out at the moment.

American author and journalist, Ernest Hemmingway was quoted as saying, "I like to listen. I have learned a great deal from listening carefully. Most people never listen."

Stephen R. Covey, author of The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Lessons in Personal Change said, "Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.” 

Therein lies the problem. Nobody's listening.

Everyone has something to say in this Medicaid quagmire - the MCO's and LME's have plenty to say, providers have even more to say, DHHS and DMA have their say, facilities and group homes have something to say, advocacy groups keep trying to have their say, consultants and lobbyists get paid the big bucks to keep saying stuff, and members of the North Carolina General Assembly always seem to have the final say... and don't even get me started on the recipients and their family members that most everyone seems to conveniently forget in all this. 

Nobody can keep the stories straight, not even (and often, especially) the media, becasue it appears the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing while everybody's busy with their own personal diatribes and ass-saving.

Everybody's talking but nobody's listening.

Nevermind all of the asinine bureaucratic dynamics at play in the dirty politics of the NC Medicaid system - the inappropriate friendships, roles, relationships, mothers / daughters / board members, ethical conflicts of interest, and who's scratching who's back. Yep, we know about all that.

There are way too many egos on the line here (not to mention the obscene amount of money invested), meanwhile we continue to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic while ignoring the real issues of human concious. That's right, I said it again.

I find that this is especially true of the current political climate in North Carolina... For the first time in just over 100 years, the Republican party has finally won back the driver's seat and they seem to be hell-bent on making up for lost time with issues far more "important" than the welfare of our state's most vulnerable citizens, with such utter nonsense as nipples, fracking, abortion / right to choose, ending size limits for K-3 public school classrooms, teaching about abortion risks in public schools while lifting smoking bans on college campuses, imposing rediculous voting restrictions and flat out denying many the right to vote, slashing unemployment benefits, requiring a 2 year waiting period prior to divorce (ironically dubbed the Healthy Marriage Act), vain attempts to negate the first amendment with a state religion, and arresting peaceful protestors, among other idiocy. 

Handbasket anyone?

What with all that debauchery going on, who has time to worry about the threat of homelessness to residents of NC group home facilities (yet again)? Or whether developmentally delayed recipients and their tired-ass exhausted families have the resources to make it through yet another day, or even if they do - if they are actually receiving the services they are entitled through all this slimey red tape? 

I mean really? Who cares? We're such a small minority of the State's population when compared with the number of citizens who have nipples, for Christ's sake.

And speaking of Christ... Conservative politicians love to use the Bible as a platform and foundation for their arguments and justifications and while I've been known to agree with certain positions, it should be noted that countless infamous American psychopaths (Charles Manson, Jim Jones, Fred Phelps, etc.) have also used the good book as sources of inspiration and justification... just sayin'.

My Christ is not wrathful nor boastful, not judgmental nor unknind, and is not dis-compassionate nor cruel toward fellow man nor the world we live in. In the documented lifetime of Jesus, he exhibited love and compassion to all, even those who sought to destroy him and especially for those who could not do for themselves. 

I believe Christ to be alive in the very essence of our collective being, our hearts if you will, a state of mind we all should strive toward. --A perpetual state of love and forgiveness... a state of grace and joy I witness every single day in my own special daughter, Isabel, and her special peers. 

Where the hell are our priorities?

It's way past time for the North Carolina "powers that be" to start listening more to the people, their constituents and voting public, who must live with, and at times suffer from, the repercussions of their actions and decisions. 

You do NOT know what is best for me and mine; that, I can guarantee you. And I'm certainly not in the minority there.

Perhaps if everyone suddenly, miraculously began to listen more, really listen, and made an honest attempt at understanding one another, as I believe the late Steve Jordan had hoped, we wouldn't require knights in shining armor to mitigate such a shameful Comedy of Errors... though sadly, nothing seems to grab attention these days (and further waste taxpayer dollars) quite like a good ole American law suit, eh?

Hang in there folks.

NC Medicaid Law BlogDisability Rights NCFirst in Families NC The Arc of NCNC Health News 

The NC Outpatient Mental Health Zeitgeist

-----Original Message-----
From: Geoffrey Zeger
To: ncadvocacy
Sent: Sat, Feb 2, 2013 4:34 pm
Subject: The NC Outpatient Mental Health Zeitgeist

NOTE: The following is somewhat long but is a reflection of the recent topsy-turvy, sinusoidal, and duplicitous events in the NC Outpatient Mental Health setting.......

During the summer of 2012, while I was standing outside of a clinic where I contract waiting for my next client, a car rapidly pulled up and out jumped 4 stony faced people with briefcases and a purpose in their steps as they entered the clinic.

It was an unannounced Medicaid audit.

Many clinicians and agencies knew these were occurring so it was not completely unexpected. At this particular free-standing private clinic which accepted Medicaid there was some anxiety (as any audit would produce) but we were pretty confident about our work - electronic medical records had fail safes for compliance, supervision occurred regularly, and the Clinical Coverage Policies for Medicaid were followed.

Over the next few months as the audit progressed a surrealistic Russian style bureaucratic nightmare occurred. Medical records were requested by the auditors and submitted by the clinic. CCME (Carolina Center for Medicaid Excellence) who was doing the audit would say 'we didn't get the records' and be elusive and dodgy. Medical records were re-submitted - hand delivered. Feedback from CCME was that the Treatment Plans did not meet standards. The Treatment Plans were being developed in line with the posted Clinical Coverage Policy and they were also in line with the recommendations of one of the LME/MCO's right over the county border but after much back and forth CCME continued to say they were not in compliance. CCME did not provide a clear indication of what compliance was nor did they provide a clear template for the Treatment Plans. (NOTE: The LME/MCO from the nearby county said the clinic's Medical Records per their site review were at a 92.5% accuracy!!!).

Staff at the clinic worked diligently to cooperate with CCME but every attempt at cooperation was met with a shift of the carrot on the stick. Conference calls were scheduled, emails were written, repetitive requests for clarification were pursued without any success or resolve.

The clinic was then put on a "pre-payment review" meaning claims for services rendered were not paid until the records were reviewed and approved. 'Pre-payment review' is an unguided process that could take 30 days - the approval of records is based on unclear standards so any clinical services rendered were like the lottery - maybe they'll get reimbursed if someone somewhere says documents meet some kind of unknown standards....or maybe they won't get reimbursed at all.

Eventually, so much unproductive hoop jumping occurred and time was wasted that a deadline for acceptance by the local LME/MCO came due. Because of the delays by the CCME, the LME/MCO which went live on 2/1/13 said to the clinic 'we can't enroll you' due to the 'pre-payment' status.

With only 3 days of lead time, over 100 clients - some of which were children in foster care or with PTSD or within the Juvenile Justice System - had to suddenly be terminated from treatment and referred to other agencies. Fortunately, the clinic will continue - contracted with the other county LME/MCO and accepting private insurance.

Was this top-down inefficient State bureaucracy? Was this effective Public Mental Health policy? Was there any consideration for how this would impact service provision and the clients? Was this purposeful - intended sabotaging of a clinic in order to reduce the number of providers within a community and save Medicaid dollars? Is this the CCME's way of insuring 'Excellence?'

I, and my colleagues who provide Public Mental Health services and who have weathered many pressures and changes, are not naive about accountability - we are ready to stand accountable and provide appropriate services with appropriate billing and documentation. I understand there are economic pressures at hand here but the current zeitgeist of audits, regulations and site reviews seems like a witch hunt and feels like a displacement for the past sins of others (http://www.inthepublicinterest.org/article/reform-wastes-millions-fails-mentally-ill). With the laser beam aimed at service providers - purposely geared to finding the smallest of errors in an effort to go 'GOTCHA' the zeitgeist is a culture of fear in order to insure accountability to DMA, CCME, DHHS, CMS, EDS, and the LME/MCO. Well what about accountability to our clients? Have policy makers forgotten about the clients in an effort to weed out the service provider playing field?

As a side note, it was rumored - and it may just be urban legend - that Medicaid auditors were paid based upon how much money they generated from the audit. If anyone has more information on this I would love to hear it - but at the community level it is understood that the contracted auditors were paid based upon how much money they were able to save Medicaid - how many claim denials they could find and how much money they were able to claw-back.

Wouldn't this contractual arrangement be considered a kickback?....'the more money you save or make us the more you will get from us?' Aren't kickbacks considered illegal within the Medicaid and Medicare system?

Clinicians, Clinics and Agencies believe that there has been an INTENDED consequence with the tightening of regulations (such as CABHA and Medicaid Waiver) - the intention is the eventual reduction of the number of private agencies that provide outpatient Mental Healthcare. Both, agencies that do enhanced services as well as core services, are being purposely circuitously and indirectly liquidated. When looking at lists of agencies that accept Medicaid over time, there was a 50% reduction of agencies after CABHA. With the implementation of the Medicaid Waiver the list has dwindled even further. Initially LME/MCO's have been accepting virtually all agencies that apply but it is anticipated that over the next year the bonsai tree will be trimmed even further with reviews of 'outcome measures.' More and more agencies will not be able to sustain. It is presumed that the final goal is to have a few large agencies contracted across the state.

Now, be advised that I have seen with my own eyes heinous service and billing improprieties in 2005 and 2006 and received backlash from profiteers when I called out inappropriate activities....so, I agree that it is necessary to set clear standards and hold providers accountable... HOWEVER, the zeitgeist is an over-rotation.

Let's see how the pendulum swing, tightening of the noose and reduction of reimbursements is working....

One of the larger agencies that has satellite offices in 15 counties in the central NC area just closed two of it's offices in 2 counties. In a different county where this large agency still has an office the pay for clinicians was cut, then cut again, then cut again, and a colleague of mine who works at this agency said that there were sweeping layoffis in her office. What is interesting is that many community clinicians believed this big multi county agency was one of the golden children that would sustain and still be standing while all the other 'mom and pop' or 'pop up' agencies were dissolved. Well, it seems like no one is immune anymore.

Another colleague of mine described how his multi county agency had radical re-structuring recently, specific Medicaid services were cut and the providers of those services were laid off, and there were across the board pay cuts.

Clinicians have no recourse either - 'if you don't like the pay cut then you can always try to find another job...wait...there are no other jobs since everyone else is closing so I guess you are stuck.'

On another side note, I recently head about a survey of private Psychologists who had been accepting Medicaid. The survey showed that over 40% of them intended to stop taking Medicaid clients due to the increase of regulations and requirements and reduction of reimbursements (all of which makes service provision cost and time prohibitive). Many of these surveyed Psychologists had over 8 years of experience - the intended consequence of reducing providers ALSO reduces your qualified and experienced professional base - these are the providers who know the clients and know the community and know the collateral resources.

I am aware of several private multi-county/multi-provider agencies that used to accept Medicaid clients but have stopped due to the cuts in rates and arduous regulations. What is interesting is that these private non-CABHA agencies provide excellent care, are preferred by clients, and ironically they bill a FRACTION of what CABHA agencies bill.

On February 1st a therapist from NC had an 'opinion' published in the Washington Post called:
"The risk of skimping on mental health funding"
Below is the link to this article which describes his frustrations with the Medicaid cuts in Southern Pines:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-risk-of-skimping-on-mental-health-funding/2013/02/01/5cdf8ad4-6ba6-11e2-ada0-5ca5fa7ebe79_story.html

Since you may have to do a free 'Register' with the Washington Post online to see the article, here is an excerpt:

For mental health providers in North Carolina, 2013 marks another year of cuts to Medicaid reimbursement rates, which have declined steadily since 2008. States are responsible for a larger portion of mental health services than they are for physical services, which means mental health is hit hard by state budget negotiations. More than $4.3 billionhas been slashed from state mental health budgets nationwide since 2009, according to the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors. South Carolina, Alabama, Alaska, Illinois and Nevada are among the states that have had the deepest cuts.

The director of our clinic in Southern Pines, N.C., in the center of the state, has told me that this year’s cuts are likely to force us to close. Our facility offers mental-health and substance-abuse counseling to 75 to 100 clients a week, half of whom are 18 years old or younger. Typically, they are referred to us from child protective services, doctor’s offices or the local domestic violence/sexual assault agency.

When the events at the service delivery level are brought to policy makers' attention, I deeply resent their disregarding platitude of "oh well....we know change is hard." Well, it has been change (2001 divestiture and privatization), and change (2005 slashing community support), and change (2006 ValueOptions authorization policy changes) and change (2010 CABHA), and change (2012 Medicaid Waiver) and change (2013 Medicaid rates rates slashed 40% effective 1/1/13 then returned to prior rate on 1/23/13 with delays of payment for 1/13) and change (2013 CPT code changes and Medicaid rate and service time reductions). You don't know how many times I have had to say to clients "....I am sorry but there are NEW Medicaid regulations which will effect you in the following way..." You don't know how many of my colleagues have said to me "....the agency where I was working closed....do you know who is hiring...."). 

Furthermore, I resent the proverbial 'pot calling the kettle black' when Community Agencies, Individual Clinicians, and Private Practices accepting Medicaid are being scrutinized and audited to the point of being inoperable ALL THE WHILE there is waste and mismanagement at the top - DMA mismanagement (http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2013/02/01/problems-identified-by-medicaid-audit-largely-result-of-nc-republicans-own-budget/), cost over runs with Computer Sciences Corporation (http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/06/17/2142627/state-contract-for-updating-computer.html), "structural flaws," and more (http://www.wral.com/audit-mismanagement-costs-nc-medicaid-system-millions/12048026/).

I hope McCrory means what he says ( “We want to make sure that the money that’s supposed to help people is going to them, not to the administrative cost.”) and that 'Medicaid Reform' will have a positive result. I hate to be a 'Negative Nick,' but my fear (based on experience) is that if you squeeze on one side of the tube of toothpaste it gets smooshed (yes...a real word) to the other side....in other words, the ATTEMPT to reduce administrative waste may actually make its way down to the community level in the form of service and provider cuts. We shall see.....

I continue to provide services to Medicaid clients and IPRS clients through contracts with agencies, but it is unclear how much longer I will be able to provide Medicaid services through my own private practice. More to be revealed.

Please forgive the long ramble. I haven't written for a while and a lot has happened. Feel free to write back with your experiences, thoughts, and or comments.

Geoffrey Zeger, ACSW, LCSW
(919) 286-[ redacted ]
[ email address redacted ]

IMPORTANT: The sender intends that this electronic message is for exclusive use by the person to whom it is addressed. This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication, or the use of its contents, is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender of your inadvertent receipt and delete this message from all data storage systems. Thank you.

Ongoing problems with NC's managed care transition, and how to address them

From The Arc of North Carolina

Ongoing problems with NC's managed care transition, and how to address them

In mid-2011, the NC legislature passed a bill that would dramatically change the way the state of North Carolina provides services for people with developmental disabilities, mental illness, and substance abuse (MH/DD/SA) issues. The state would shift from a fee-for-service system to a managed care system.

The Arc originally opposed the move to a managed care system and still has significant reservations about the design. However, the political reality is that managed care is here to stay, and The Arc is committed to ensuring that NC's managed care system effectively meets the needs of people with disabilities.

A year and a half after the initial move towards managed care, we are feeling the impact of the plan’s short-sighted design and hasty implementation. Across the state, many of the entities responsible for implementing the shift to managed care (generally referred to as LME/MCOs) are struggling to make the managed care transition and are behind schedule. The effects of these transition problems can be felt throughout North Carolina.

In Mecklenburg County, the state first found that MeckLINK, the LME/MCO responsible for MH/DD/SA services in the area, had not achieved the necessary milestones to switch to a managed care model by its February 1st deadline. The state then re-assigned the responsibility to implement the new managed care system in Mecklenburg to a LME/MCO already operating under the managed care system, Cardinal Innovations Behavioral Healthcare. This decision meant that millions of dollars of public money MeckLINK spent preparing for the new managed care system would be wasted, and Mecklenburg County would adopt the new managed care system several months later than planned.

On January 23, DHHS, now under the leadership of Governor McCrory’s administration, gave MeckLINK a new target date of March 1st, providing it meets its “readiness benchmarks.” This change occurred just eight days before Cardinal Innovations was to take over.

In the southeast corner of the state, Coastal Care, the LME/MCO responsible for MH/DD/SA services for 5 counties including New Hanover, will miss its deadline to convert to the new managed care system by February 1st. While this came to light recently and details are scarce, for whatever reason the LME/MCO is not prepared to switch to the managed care system on schedule, which will result in a significant loss in savings.

Large overruns and implementation controversies are nothing new to NC’s managed care transition. Starting in January 2011, Western Highlands Network, the LME/MCO that manages MH/DD/SA services in 8 counties in the western part of the state, ran a monthly deficit of over $500,000.

Not every LME/MCO has made headlines with its transition to managed care. Many have made the transition largely out of the limelight, but questions remain about their readiness and the effectiveness of current operations.

Obviously, there have been significant problems with North Carolina’s transition to a managed care system for MH/DD/SA services. Now is the time for state leaders to learn from these controversies and make reasoned decisions about the future of our system, and the people it serves.

The Arc believes problems with the state’s transition to managed care stem from an overzealous rush to find savings, rather than a thoughtful and deliberate approach to system design. The operationally arbitrary deadlines for management entities to convert to the managed care waiver are a key example. Converting to a managed care system is not easy- it is expensive and disruptive. We must be sure that LME/MCO’s are truly ready to begin before they turn the switch.

The struggles of LME/MCOs the state deemed ready to move forward to the new system, including Western Highlands Network, prove that the prior notion of what ‘ready’ means is insufficient and needs to be re-examined. Clearly, LME/MCOs must prepare business systems capable of dealing with the large volume of claims, payments, and calls they will receive. It is also important that they are prepared to implement any new services available under the managed care system, respond to people with disabilities and their families about their concerns, and have a well-trained provider network that understands the intricacies of the new system.

Our system’s focus should be on the needs of individuals it is meant to support and the providers working within the system, rather than dreams of short term savings. Getting it right the first time with a well-measured, steady approach will lead to efficiency, cost containment, and higher satisfaction among consumers, providers, and LME/MCOs.

The Arc believes we must adhere the following basic principles if we are to make this transition to Managed Care successful. 

Stability for individuals served and those who provide the services must be the highest transition priority. No LME/MCO should be allowed to shift to managed care if they are not ready. It should be clear that readiness means the ability to successfully support people with disabilities. 

Decisions about LME/MCO mergers and “assignments” need to be about competency and not about politics. 

Where competing goals exist, the state needs to be clear about which it values more. For example, ‘local public management and ‘administrative efficiencies’ are not always mutually exclusive, but in certain areas they may be. 

All interested parties, including The Arc, must be open to new ideas and approaches surrounding managed care. There is no dishonor in adjusting a plan to meet current circumstances. The needs of people with disabilities should dictate policy, not the established position or ego of any state agency, MCO/LME, private organization, or individual. A real partnership with stakeholders must be achieved if we are going to succeed.

Finding savings within state systems for people with disabilities is certainly laudable, but if the savings mean sacrificing the ability of the system to perform its mission, then they are counter-productive. As the saying goes, buy it right or buy it twice.

Comments

MCO's

We who are involved in all the changes sit back and watch and read all that is occuring. We hear that different MCO's get different PMPM amounts and do not understand why. We hear that LME's can not get it together in the outlined time frame. We watch and read about Western Highlands being half a million dollars in the red for months while the board did not realize it. We hear and wonder how MCO's like Western Highlands have the monies to hire agencies like the private group they hired at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars to tell them what they are doing wrong after this State hired Mercer to tell them that and still the Mercer organization is at Western Highlands looking at what they are or are not doing right over a year after they began operating while the private agency is there. Now we hear of Mercer going into other LME's to see if they are ready. Why? We watch Western Highlands fire their CEO and pay an agency thousands of dollars to locate a new CEO. We hear agencies not getting reimbursed in a timely manner over never ending changing requirements. We have watched as agency, therapists and psychiatrist have left Western Highlands and I am sure this is the same for other MCO's and wonder where this State is in thinking of the Best Interest of the individuals that they are to serve while spending monies on things that should have already been in place. What is wrong with this picture? Does anyone wonder why all these monies are being spent on requirements that were supposed to be in place instead of on the individuals that they are to serve. I have not heard of any direct care staff which are the back bone of all this getting anything extra for all their efforts. We are forgetting the reason all these MCO's were started, the individuals that they are Supposed to Serve.

What's New in December

December 2012 news, events, and updates.

• WRAL (SpED) Teacher of the Week
• Important Information regarding the Supports Intensity Scale from a provider / mother.
• Arc NC Action Alert.
• NCGA Meeting Notice: JLOC on HHS, 12/11.
• added to Google events calendar.
• From the Arc NC: Tillis Requests Special Session To Address PCS/Group Home Crisis
• Alliance Behavioral Healthcare Weekly Updates, 11/30

[ What's New Main ]

Weekly Update from Alliance BHC

Here is the link for this week's Alliance newsletter - http://www.alliancebhc.org/wp-content/uploads/November-30-2012.pdf

...and here are a few highlights to note:

1. Alliance Announces MCO Delay
Alliance has submitted a request to NC DHHS for a 30-day delay in its start date as a managed care organization responsible for the implementation of the Medicaid 1915 (b)/(c) waivers. The new start date will be February 1, 2013. To access a press release, click:  http://www.alliancebhc.org/news/alliance-announces-delay-in-managed-care-implementation

Cumberland and Johnston Timetable
Alliance will initiate management of IPRS and locally-funded services for Cumberland County on December 17. The start date for Johnston County has been shifted to January 1.

2.  NC Innovations Individual and Family Guide
The Alliance NC Innovations Individual and Family Guide 2013 is available in English and Spanish on the Alliance website. To access these and other NC Innovations information and resources, click:

http://www.alliancebhc.org/consumers-families/idd-resources/nc-innovations-1915-c-waiver

3. Innovations Plus Community Forum

Alliance Behavioral Healthcare is working with the NC Department of Health and Human Services to improve the system of services offered to people with intellectual and other developmental disabilities who have CAP-I/DD now and will transition to the NC Innovations 1915(c) waiver in early 2013. The goal of this program is to create a fairer system and to ensure that people get the right amount of supports for their needs.

Thursday, December 13, 2012, 6:00-7:30pm
Alliance Corporate Office, 4600 Emperor Boulevard Room 105, Durham

To learn more about Innovations Plus, please join us at this meeting.  Alliance and DHHS staff will make presentations along with guest speakers from the Human Services Research Institute, which is assisting us with the program. For additional information, contact your I/DD Care Coordinator or Suzanne Goerger at (919) 651-8474.

4. ...and as always, check out the newsletter for calendar dates of Alliance CFAC meetings and are listed below for your convenience, too:

Alliance CFAC Meetings
    Alliance Corporate Office 4600 Emperor Boulevard Durham
    First Monday in February, April, June, August, October and December at 5:30pm

Alliance Durham CFAC Subcommittee Meetings
TROSA 1820 James Street Durham
First Monday in January, March, May, July, September and November at 5:30pm

Alliance Wake CFAC Subcommittee Meetings
401 E. Whitaker Mill Road Raleigh
Second Tuesday in January, March, May, July, September and November at 5:30pm

Hope to see you THIS Monday at Alliance CFAC meeting at 6400 Emperor Blvd in Durham at 5:30pm!

10,000 Blog Views! and Counting...

This week, the blog reached 10,000 page views! North Carolinians (and others across the country) are watching - and inquiring minds wanna know...

At the time of the June 16th posting, the blog had reached 5,683 since February of 2012, when first launched. Since that time, the hits have more than doubled from viewers in at least 63 counties across the State of North Carolina and beyond. 

Once more, I'd like to point out that regarding total hits, the number (10,143 as of this posting) reflected to the right of the page (previously located at the bottom) is the correct total of page views since the initial launch of this parent / public information blog back in February of 2012. StatCounter was installed in May, so the data you see compiled via the blog's StatCounter statistics only reflects activity from May onward, mostly because I just haven't bothered to change it. 

Viewers include loads of parents / family members as well as provider agencies and professionals, LME / MCOs, universities and research groups, risk management groups, PR firms, law firms, advocacy organizations, and both state and federal government offices (*although due to the ambiguity of government IP data, it's impossible for a novice like me to know which specific offices nor even agencies are viewing)...

Some of the more interesting regular (and some once or twice) NC viewers include: Duke University, UNC Chapel Hill, UNC Charlotte, the Department of Veteran Affairs, the North Carolina Research and Education Network, Disability Rights NC, The Arc of NC (and various county chapters), NC Justice Center, NC Council of Community Programs, Crossroads Behavioral Healthcare (now Partners Behavioral Health Management), Daymark Recovery Services, Piedmont Behavioral Health, Sandhills Center, Saguaro Management and Accounting Services, Inc. (providing billing, human resources, program development and quality and risk management to human services companies), the Mental Health Association of Forsyth County, Raleigh's Campaign Connections PR firm, and numerous NC Government offices and agencies around the state.

And beyond North Carolina's borders: Kansas Health Institute, Virginia Commonweath University (VCU), Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, University of Georgia, Emory University, DC's American University, FHC Health Systems, Hospice of the Western Reserve in Ohio; Charleston, SC's New Hope Treatment Centers; HMS (a public government and managed-care contracting company); Deloitte, Marsh USA, and Alvarez & Marsal (each being US consulting / risk management firms with varying specialties); Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP,  Drinker Biddle, and Hunton and Williams (each are national / multi-state law firms); and yes, even the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid as well as a few hits from US Government offices in Washington, DC.

Yep, as election season launches into full swing (or sling as is oft the case), the world IS watching to see what North Carolina will do with it's special populations -- even if the usually less-than-enthusiastic main-stream media assignments and focus generally fall short in the real-life, human interest for "those people" and their families - because let's face it, nobody really wants to talk about what they don't understand, especially if it makes them sad... 

The 38th Vice-President of the United States, Hubert H. Humphrey, once said oh-so wisely, "The moral test of government is how it treats those who are in the dawn of life... the children; those who are in the twilight of life... the elderly; and those who are in the shadow of life...  the sick... the needy... and the disabled."

It's one of my favorite quotes and oh-so-fitting... and if you happen to be a quote-y kind of person like me and enjoy wise words, here's another for ya...

"Open your mouth for the mute, For the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy." --Proverbs 31:8-9

So rest assured North Carolina, Inquiring Minds DO Wanna Know.

And to all the blog followers, the advocates, the exhausted parents, supportive family members; loyal and dedicated direct care staff, Case Managers, and various professionals (our personal community villages) who go above and beyond every day to make our lives possible...  and to all the people of conscious who listen, who care, who try and try again - and who never, ever give up because you know what is right and just and because it's just not in your soul's design to believe that one life is worth less than another... I'd like to take this opportunity to say Thank You!

Oh, I mentioned 63 counties; here they are... Clicking on the County links below will take you to the corresponding State representatives page on the North Carolina General Assembly's website.

1. Alamance County 
2. Beaufort County 
3. Bertie County  
4. Brunswick County 
5. Buncombe County 
6. Burke County 
7. Cabarrus County 
8. Caldwell County  
9. Catawba County 
10. Cherokee County 
11. Cleveland County 
12. Cumberland County 
13. Dare County 
14. Davidson County  
15. Duplin County 
16. Durham County  
17. Edgecombe County 
18. Forsyth County  
19. Franklin County  
20. Gaston County 
21. Granville County  
22. Guilford County  
23. Halifax County  
24. Harnett County 
25. Haywood County  
26. Henderson County  
27. Hertford County  
28. Hoke County  
29. Iredell County  
30. Jackson County  
31. Johnston County  
32. Jones County  
33. Lee County  
34. Lenoir County  
35. Lincoln County  
36. Macon County 
37. McDowell County  
38. Mecklenburg County 
39. Monroe County *voter representation falls under Union County
40. Moore County  
41. New Hanover County  
42. Onslow County  
43. Orange County 
44. Pasquotank County  
45. Pender County  
46. Pitt County  
47. Polk County  
48. Randolph County  
49. Robeson County  
50. Rockingham County  
51. Rutherford County  
52. Sampson County  
53. Stanly County  
54. Stokes County  
55. Transylvania County  
56. Union County  
57. Wake County 
58. Watauga County  
59. Wayne County 
60. Wilkes County  
61. Wilson County  
62. Union County  
63. Yancey County  

To find out who your voting representatives are, visit the NC General Assembly search page.

For more on who's involved and how to advocate, see Speak Up!

From The Arc NC: Lessons from the Western Highlands Network overruns

From The Arc of North Carolina

Lessons from the Western Highlands Network overruns

[ view original posting ]

The cost overruns at Western Highlands Network (WHN), the first LME to become an MCO under a new law, are a serious issue. The solution to these overruns that the state and WHN has come up with is clear: further service cuts. Hopefully, these overruns are just a bump in the road and not the light of an oncoming train, indicative of a system-wide underestimation of managed care cost. Most likely it will be somewhere in the middle.

We can only hope that people with disabilities will not be harmed further by these overruns than they already have been by the shift to managed care. The Arc hopes WHN survives these problems and succeeds for the sake of the individuals they are in the business of supporting.

Regardless of the reasons for the problem, the State, meaning both the Administration and the Legislature, should be paying close attention. Though we do not yet know the specifics that led to these overruns, several things should be perfectly clear:

1. We need a real examination of the process. Regardless of why, no MCO should have such significant funding issues six months into operation. Some are understandably questioning the leadership of former CEO Arthor Carder, but it’s hard to believe anyone would question his commitment to the people WHN served, or the commitment of WHN’s staff. The fact that this MCO was allowed to go live without the tools to succeed is not only a mark on WHN, but more importantly a significant mark on the DHHS processes that deemed them ready.
2. We should not only examine the process that led to these overruns, but the 1915(b)(c) waiver model as a whole. It is no secret that The Arc does not believe this model is appropriate for people with IDD. The issues with WHN should cause public officials to question the model as well. As WHN looks for places to cut Medicaid rates, it becomes clear that the system prevents them from even considering state operated facilities [state institutions] for reductions comparable to community services. Managed Care was sold to legislators, and the public, on the assumption of MCOs’ ability to effectively manage all public resources. Clearly, that was not true then, nor is it now. This disconnect makes the state’s difficult transition to a new model of care even more difficult. If the 1915(b)(c) managed care model works for community-based services it should also work for state-managed facilities. This issue is just one of many model design questions that must be questioned.
3. State officials told the WHN Board that they should expect no additional state funds to make up for overruns. This begs the question: is the stated goal of “better access to services” just spin? When rate reductions, utilization reductions, and Medicaid paybacks are the primary tools used to eliminate deficits, it is difficult to take seriously that better access is a real goal. Better service access would more likely be achieved if the state were willing to adjust the capitation rate or infuse some money while WHN becomes better prepared to “manage.”

Though not enough details have been released yet to determine the specifics of the WHN overruns, we do know:

1. The only way “savings” will be achieved through this managed care model is through cuts. That should be clear as we review the differences in what WHN was paid and what they have said they needed to provide services. We know that Medicaid cost must be controlled but an honest discussion of how managed care achieves this is critical if people will have faith in this system.
2. The way “at risk” is used in this model is insulting to families, consumers and the people who provide the supports for them. Public MCO’s are not really “at risk” entities. They have raised no capital to fund their organizations; they receive generous administrative allocations separate from services funds, and have the ability to cut rates and services to consumers if they exceed budgets. Providers of services are the ones really at risk. With subjective decision making, constant rate reductions, no guaranteed “administrative” funds or excise payments to fund a MCO’s “risk” reserves, many providers will likely go out of business. Most importantly, people with disabilities and their families are the most at risk…at risk for another failed effort at reform jeopardizing their ability to live successful lives in the community.

I/DD Budget Cuts May Be Worse than Expected

From The Arc of North Carolina

I/DD Budget Cuts May Be Worse than Expected

[ original post here ]

In what is being described as a mistake, a budget transfer intended to move Guardianship funding from one division to another has created an additional 4.3 million dollar cut primarily to community services for people with I/DD.

Department officials and legislative leadership agreed to transfer $4.3 million in the Social Services block grant from the Division of MHDDSA to the Division of Social Services. The money was to be used by either Corporate Guardians or local DSS to provide guardianship services. The transfer was needed because, as LMEs transfer to MCOs, they will no longer be allowed to be guardian for individuals in their catchment areas.

Somehow the transfer of funding happened twice causing an additional cut of 4.3 million dollars to MHDDSA community services funding. Department officials tell us that this was never the intent and discussions with legislative staff point to a mistake, although we have no official confirmation. Unfortunately, the reduction has been included in the allocations to LME/MCO’s and several are taking immediate action to cut services. We are hearing reports that some programs face 20% reductions effective August 1st.

The Arc is calling on the DHHS to ask LME/MCO’s to hold off on implementing this reduction until all possibilities of fixing the problem have been exhausted. This reduction to an already fragile system is unwarranted and will harm individuals with I/DD.

The Arc is also concerned about how LME/MCO’s are implementing the one time $20 million reduction to community services. This cut is an extension of a reduction taken last year. While LME/MCO’s were encouraged to use fund balances to offset this reduction last year, we do not believe most did so. We are seeing a disturbing trend that has LME/ MCO’s passing on this entire cut to people with disabilities and their families. We believe a more responsive approach would be for LME/MCO’s to use fund balances to offset this reduction since it is a non-recurring cut. It does not seem appropriate for the Management Entities, who are charged with ensuring individuals have services, to use fund balances to become MCOs while the people they are created to serve lose services.

We will be tracking these reductions and will continue to encourage the State and LME/MCO’s to find alternatives to wholesale reductions for people with disabilities and their families.

Once we determine what steps the DHHS plans on taking, we will issue an action alert describing what actions people with disabilities and their families should take, if any, to influence these changes.

Related : 

• MCO Western Highlands Network estimates 3.5 Million Shortfall since January 2012.
• LME Smokey Mountain Center holds community forums regarding 3.4 Million Service Funding Reduction.
• Disability Rights NC Press Release : State fails to settle with DOJ but announces 8 year plan, 7/26.
• News and Observer article : LME Money Woes, from 7/18.

First LME to become MCO Facing Budget Overruns

From The Arc of North Carolina

First LME to become MCO Facing Budget Overruns

[ view original article ]

Western Highlands Network (WHN), the Managed Care Organization (MCO) that provides state funded services to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) in several western counties, recently reported that they are running a monthly defecit of $500,000 since they became a managed care organization in January 2012. WHN officials indicate they feel the State’s original capitation (reimbursemnt) rate was insufficient to cover the Medicaid cost of their program.

When questioned by members of the Disability Waiver Advisory Committee on July 24th, State officials responded that the budget deficit had been uncovered in a routine monitoring visit and that they would be attending the upcoming WHN board meeting. They offered no further explanation.

Apparently the State, along with the Mercer consulting firm, reviewed WHN in mid -July to determine what was causing the cost overruns. At this time, we do not have the results of this review, but we will report as we find more details.

The revelation of these cost overruns is concerning on many levels. Most importantly, we are concerned WHN will be forced to make significant cuts to services in an area that already has significant numbers of people with I/DD waiting for services. To correct this deficit, WHN plans to evaluate rates paid to providers and the amount of service provided to consumers. If this problem results in service reductions, it will be further evidence that Managed Care “savings” are really just another name for “cuts.”

If the capitation rate is too low, as WHN claims, and the state adjust it upwards, it will erode the “savings” North Carolina hopes to gain from the implementation of the Managed Care Waiver. Such a development would call into question why we would make such a massive change for little gain.

Another concern is how the state deems a MCO ready to proceed. According to state officials, all pending MCOs pass rigorous tests to assure that they are ready to go “live” as a managed care entity. The State contracts with Mercer to engage in this process, as do state officials charged with implementing the Waiver. If WHN was really ready to go “live” in January, it is hard to believe they could be losing money at such a pace.

The Arc believes the WHN staff and DHHS staff are sincerely attempting to find solutions to this serious problem. We hope that this issue is only temporary and that services will not be disrupted to the people this complicated system is intended to serve. However, we do believe this issue should prompt the DHHS and the General Assembly to truly examine the model and pace of this implementation. In an at risk Managed Care system, the only people truly at risk are the people it is intended to serve.

Arc NC's Legislative Summary

From The Arc of North Carolina
Legislative Summary regarding Developmentally Disabled Populations of North Carolina

[ original post ]


In this year’s legislative session, the General Assembly adjusted the budget, created policy direction in the budget, and passed important policy bills. The Arc worked on and monitored many issues of importance to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities as well as their families during the session. Below we have provided a brief recap of some of the most important issues.

Kindergarten Developmental Screening

Kindergarten Developmental Screening is part of the new budget bill (H950, which was passed by the General Assembly, vetoed by Governor Perdue, whose veto was then overridden, making the bill law). Section 115C-83.1 E orders the State Board of Education to ensure that every student entering kindergarten shall be administered a developmental screening of early language, literacy, and math skills within 30 days of enrollment. Section (e) states that the assessment shall be reliable, valid and appropriate for use with all children, including those with disabilities.

NC Teaching Corps to Include Disability Training

The new budget bill (H950, which was passed by the General Assembly, vetoed by Governor Perdue, whose veto was then overridden, making the bill law) establishes the North Carolina Teaching Corps, a training program for those who wish to become teachers via lateral entry (in other words, for those whose degree is not in teaching). The program is to include training on identification and education of students with disabilities, positive management of student behavior, effective communication for defusing and de-escalating disruptive and dangerous behavior, and safe and appropriate use of seclusion and restraint.

Personal Care Services and Short Term Rental Assistance to Adult Care and Group Homes

Personal Care Service (PCS) is a Medicaid funded service aimed at assisting individuals with disabilities with activities of daily living. Currently people who have Medicaid and live in a licensed residential setting receive one hour a day of this service.

The General Assembly choose not to follow the DHHS recommendation to create a 1915i option to address federal Medicaid officials’ concerns around Personal Care Services. The 1915i option is a relatively new Medicaid option for states to use. It allows for states to put in place Medicaid home and community based services without a Medicaid waiver. The Arc believes this option would best used to expand community based services for people with IDD.

Instead of following DHHS recommendations, the General Assembly passed language that will require DHHS to create a new Medicaid state plan amendment creating a comparable PC service for individuals living at home and in facilities. This impacts people living in Group Homes and Adult Care homes. The Arc has concerns that the new plan will eliminate PCS for some people (we are attempting to determine the scope), which could cause significant service reductions.

As part of H950, the Modify 2011 Appropriations Act, the State provided $39.7 million of non-recurring funding to provide temporary rental assistance to adult care homes. These funds will help pay rent at adult care homes for residents who are no longer eligible to receive Medicaid reimbursable personal care services (PCS), but for whom a community placement has not yet been arranged. Unfortunately, this fund will not assist residents who live in group homes and lose PCS. One of The Arc's top priorities for the interim will be to work with DHHS and the legislature to assure people living in group homes are not adversely affected.

Community Service Funding Cut

There was a $20 million non-recurring cut to community services funding. Approximately $345 million in State general funds remain in the budget for LME/MCOs to purchase community based services.

The Arc is disappointed in this cut. The original Senate budget had no cut in this area, and the original House budget had only a $10 million dollar cut. The change was made only two days before the final budget bill passed, giving little time for input from The Arc, other advocacy organizations, and families. We hope the General Assembly will restore this much needed funding during next year’s budget session.

Money for Transition to Community Living

As part of H950, the Modify 2011 Appropriations Act, the State allocated $10.3 million in recurring funding to speed up the transition of individuals with severe mental illness to community living arrangements, including establishing a rental assistance program. Some of the impacted individuals are dually diagnosed with a developmental disability as well. We believe this funding was allocated to respond to a potential negotiated settlement with the US Department of Justice (US DOJ) over North Carolina's use of Adult Care Homes as placements for people with Mental Illness, which it says violates Medicaid law.

Medicaid Shortfall Bills

There was a great deal of press surrounding the multi-million dollar Medicaid budget shortfall for the 2011-2012 fiscal year. The shortfall, initially estimated at $205,500,000, was addressed by S797 (Payment of 2012 Medicaid Costs/Inmate Medical Costs) early in the session. S797 drew funds from receipts, unanticipated federal bonus money, and Repair & Renovation Reserve Funds for the University of North Carolina System.

Unfortunately, in the last few weeks of the legislative session, it became obvious that there was an additional gap in Medicaid funding of approximately $94 million. To address this gap, the General Assembly passed H14, the Use R&R Funds for 2011-2012 Medicaid Costs Act. This bill appropriated $94 million from the Repairs and Renovations Reserve Account from the UNC System be transferred to the state controller. The controller was to manage Medicaid funding for the remainder of the 2011-2012 fiscal year.

LME/MCO Governance Bill(s)

HB1075 came out of the House subcommittee that studied the LME/MCO Governance issue led by Representative Nelson Dollar. It dealt with rules governing the makeup of LME/MCO Boards of Directors. The bill as proposed by the sub-committee, while not perfect, was a compromise reached with input from most stakeholders in the MHDDSA system. After the bill passed the House, Sen. Fletcher Hartsell added a controversial amendment to the bill would have allowed LME/MCOs that had been operational for three years to become “Behavioral Health Authorities.” This new classification significantly changed the method of accountability and operation of the MCO system. Most advocates, including The Arc, opposed these changes due to serious concerns on how the LME/MCOs’ new authority would impact people with disabilities and their families.

Ultimately, some legislative maneuvering resulted in a new bill (S191, LME Governance) that included the original Board member rules, excluded the Behavioral Health Authority amendment, and allowed for MCO's with over 1,200,000 people to create new board structures, if approved by the Secretary of DHHS.

Parents as Providers

As many of you know, there were quite a few changes made to rules surrounding parents as providers. These changes were by and large not changes in laws, but in administrative rules. The Arc is very concerned with these changes and will delve into the problems around this and related issues in the near future.

The following bills did not become law this past session

The Arc's Proposed Changes to H916
Though our proposal did not receive formal consideration, we were pleased with the broad based legislative support it received. We believe that the majority of legislators now understand why it is important to have an independent person working with families and individuals to write their Person-Centered plan. In a future addition of Policy Partners, we will discuss in more detail why this proposal continues to be a critical component if managed care is to be successful. For now, we want to thank you for your incredible advocacy efforts you undertook towards making these changes. Your voice was heard!

Eugenics Compensation Bill (Did Not Pass)

This bill would have set up a fund to reimburse victims of forced sterilization at the hands of the State. A large percentage of NC’s sterilization victims were individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities. The bill passed the House, but was not taken up in the Senate.

On a somewhat brighter note, a last minute compromise between the House and Senate provided funding for the Eugenics board to continue its work during the 2012-2013 fiscal year.

Incapacity to Proceed (Did Not Pass)

If a person with I/DD is arrested, they (like everyone else) go to jail while they await a bail hearing/trial. Often, people with I/DD are found to lack the capacity to proceed to trial, and are sent to an institution for treatment. Often, they eventually reach a point where they are deemed capable to proceed with their trial, at which time they are sent back to jail, and their trial is put back on the schedule. Once back in jail, the person with I/DD often regresses, is once again deemed incapable to proceed, and is sent back to an institution for treatment as the cycle continues. There are documented cases of individuals with I/DD arrested for a crime spending far longer (years even) bouncing back and forth between treatment institutions and jail before trial than they would spend in jail if they were tried and convicted.

H1048 would of made outlined clear steps to avoid this type of situation for both misdemeanors and felonies. This bill passed by an overwhelming margin in the House (114-0), but was not taken up in the Senate. Representative Pat Hurley has said she will file this bill again in 2013.

We are disappointed that the Senate chose not to put such an important and widely supported bill on this year’s agenda, and hope they choose to take it up in 2013.

Voter ID Bill (Veto was not overridden)

Originally, The Arc worked extensively with Representative David Lewis during the 2011 long session on what became known as the Voter ID Bill (H351, Restore Confidence in Government). We tried to address the many concerns that existed in the disability community around the topic of voter ID. While we came up with compromise language that would of addressed most of our concerns, unfortunately the compromise language was ultimately stripped from the version of the bill. This stripped down version of the bill passed the General Assembly and was vetoed by Governor Perdue in 2011.

While an override attempt of this bill was on the calendar throughout the short session, it never happened. The bill is dead for this year, but a new version of the bill is expected in 2013. We again will work diligently with the bill sponsors to ensure that the concerns of people with disabilities will be addressed.

From The Arc of NC

Despite overwhelming support from families and people with disabilities across North Carolina, it appears the NC General Assembly will not act on The Arc’s proposal to restore balance in our state’s Managed Care Organizations. Without action, individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities (I/DD) and their families will no longer have someone other than the Managed Care Organization write their person centered plan (plan of care), unless the MCO chooses to allow that option. Currently, no MCO in the state plans on offering this option. This means that plans of care for people with I/DD will continue to be developed by the same organization that determines how much funding an individual will receive.

Though our proposal faced long odds in the legislative short session, many legislators expressed support for the proposal. Unfortunately, erroneous information on the costs of our proposal given to legislators by certain MCOs, combined with the efforts of powerful lobbyists employed by some MCOs, proved too difficult to overcome. While there is still time for the legislature to act, it is unlikely any action will take place before their adjournment this week.

The lack of action will result in an additional ten thousand people with I/DD losing Case Management Services by January 2013, without the benefit of an independent broker working for them and not the MCO. Additionally, hundreds of private sector jobs will be lost while MCOs expand their workforce.

The legislature's lack of action is particularly disappointing since The Arc attempted to make our proposal fit what legislative leaders suggested. Though we believe a more robust private Case Management system makes sense for people with I/DD, we adjusted our proposal to the more limited two functions of Care Coordination. Legislative leadership needed a state budget neutral proposal, and our proposal would not increase the state budget. Our efforts were a sincere attempt to modify a model that is not a good fit for people with I/DD before the model was implemented statewide. The fact that legislators were unwilling to address these issues is very disconcerting.

While terribly disappointed in the outcome, we are pleased that so many spoke out for what is right for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Over 1100 North Carolinians from all parts of NC signed the petition to support this proposal with over 200 heartfelt comments about their situation. Hundreds of families called their elected representatives and participated in legislative meetings, making elected officials aware of the serious concerns they have about the future of our system.

The Arc encourages MCOs to listen to people with I/DD and their families in the coming months and contract with independent care coordinators to write plans and link to services, as is allowed under current law. Such a model, designed appropriately, will provide much needed support and be cost effective.

Regardless of the ultimate outcome of this legislative session, The Arc will continue its efforts to modify the State’s plan for Managed Care for people with I/DD. We believe legislators and administration officials, when properly informed, will see the flaws in the design of the current system for what they are and make appropriate changes.

We encourage families and consumers to continue to voice your concerns to legislators and the administration through all available channels. The Arc will begin publishing information on how best to influence the managed care Waiver implementation beginning in early July.

For now we want to thank all of you for your incredible advocacy this year! While not having our proposal adopted is disappointing, your actions significantly altered the debate around HB 916 in the legislature. Your voice will be needed more than ever as this transition moves forward.